THE BIBLE-IN-SCHOOLS.

Southland Times, Issue 17427, 20 August 1913, Page 2

THE BIBLE-IN-SCHOOLS.

To the Editor. Sir, —As an old resident of Nelson, where I was a State school teacher for many years, I am surprised to find that the system obtaining there for giving religious Instruction in the schools is preferred by some to the Australian system now under consideration. The serious defects of the Nelson system may be stated shortly, with the corresponding advantages of the Australian system. Rejnember that I am writing with knowledge secured as a State school teacher who did everything possible to make the Nelson system work well. THE NELSON SYSTEM. (1) It is only schools in the large centres of population which can reap- any benefit under the Nelson system. Country children, far from Sunday school or church, are perforce left out; that is children who need religious instruction most are debarred from it by the Nelson system. i (2) The instruction is given outside school hours, thus penalising the children. As a teacher I would never attempt to make arithmetic compete with the playground. The Nelson system makes religious instruction of less importance than arithmetic, and gives the child the alternative of playing games outside or coming in for the lesson. (3) Permission has to be obtained first from the Education Board, which, moreover, does not give it for the express purpose of religious instruction. But, supposing the Board does allow the school to be officially opened at a later hour, then the local school committee has to be approached, and where the Board has given the necessary permission the committees have frequently refused. The result is that the question is likely to be a disturbing one to committee meetings, and also at elections of committees, of which, moreover, people are members who have no children going to the school*, and some of whom have children going to the other schools. (4) The Nelson system provides for right of entry for ministers only, and ignores the State school teachers, excluding them as if they were unworthy of giving, or unfit to give, simple Bible lessons. It emphasises sectarianism in its worst form, because it is a method in which Roman Catholics cannot cooperate with other ministers, nor can Jews or Unitarians. (5) In my personal experience I do.not think I ever had a clergyman coming to my school under the Nelson system. ‘(*6) I found that the children who attended the classes taken by voluntary workers from the churches were children from more or less religious homes. Parents who were careless about the religious welfare of their children took no interest In the classes: their children remained outside playing. THE AUSTRALIAN SYSTEM. (1) Under the Australian system every child benefits; the little child in the back-blocks who never—or hardly ever has an opportunity of hearing the Bible in church can read the Bible lesson in school and leam that there Is such a Book. (2) The instruction is given during school hours, and thus makes the recognition of religious instruction a part of the national system of education. (3) The teacher is not debarred from using the Bible as a means, of strengthening. and a basis for, moral teaching. The child docs not see the teacher treated as if he were unworthy to have anything to do with the Bible, and with the highest moral enforcement which can be given. It should be remembered that the teacher is the chief authority in the child's school life. (4) The Bible lessons In the teacher’s hands are completely unsectarlan. They widen the mental outlook of the child, and set up a happy relation between him and the teacher which nothing else can do. (5) The Australian system, while providing for denominational teaching as a right, also allows the grouping of children into classes under one minister, provided the consent of the parents is obtained; thus, the Nelson system is included. but is not the only method, nor is undenominational teaching by ministers made compulsory by law. Those ministers who are willing to work the grouped classes can do so. and those who are not willing cannot be forced to do so.—l am, etc., M. C. H. GASCOIGNE. New Plymouth, 16th August.