The Star. WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 11, 1901. RELIGIOUS INSTRUCTION IN SCHOOLS.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 7200, 11 September 1901, Page 2

The Star. WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 11, 1901. RELIGIOUS INSTRUCTION IN SCHOOLS.

The question of religious instruction in schools, like the poor and the sea-serpent, remains with us always with a fidelity that is absolutely pathetic. From time to time religious bodies throughout the colony have ur.ged the necessity of providing religious instruction of some kind in our "public schools, but, up to the present, what is described by a section of the community as '• our Godless system of education " continues to flourish with the pertinacity of the green bay tree. By ! the majority of our colonists the education system of New Zealand is regarded as the best in the world, a thing to be jealously guarded, and not to be tampered with in any way, even , though no change in the fundamental principles is involved. In regard to the question of religious instruction, one of the greatest obstacles in the way in the past has been tlia'c its advocates have been' unable to agree among themselves as to what they really desire. A large section of the community would probably be found who would welcome provision being made for simple Bible-reading, without any objectionable expounding, in the State schools. But while this would satisfy many, there are others who desire to go still further, and to introduce Bible-teaching in our schools. There seems, however, to be very little definite understanding among them as to the limits of such teaching. Ifc is here that the first ground for objection arises. While the reaftng of extracts from the Scriptures would prove acceptable to many, questions of doctrine and creed' obtrudo themselves when the proposal takes the widen scope of Bible-teaching, and these are insuperable stumbling-blocks. The interest in the subject is not so keen as the leaders of the proposed reform would wish, and the state of the public mind is evidently recognised, as the report of the Education Committee of the Christchurch Presbytery, presented at yesterday's meeting, bears witness. The import, indeed, consisted mainly of expressions of regret at the apathy of the public, and of the need that existed for resolute earnestness an arousing interest in the subject. There was little about it which could 1 foe discussed, and the Presbytery, realising this, referred it back to the Committee, with ifhe view to some practical steps for organisation, being suggested. This leaves the matter an a wither -hopeless position, notwithstanding the remark of Dr Withers, that "really not much had: been done so far to bring the question before the lay l mind in a practical manner." The position seems to us to be rather that the subject has been so thoroughly exploited that the lay mind- has reached the conclusion that a solution satisfactory to all creeds is impossible, and 'have accepted that position. We have no sympathy with the suggestion that a pledge book should be instituted, to record the names of all who pledged themselves to vote at the polls for the introduction of the Bible. This is purely sentimental politics. The signatures in such a book, in any case, would be confined to those of persona who would vote in the desired direction without the stimulant of a written promise. Even Dr Elmslie's suggested union of the churches, with the ddea of forcing legislation on the subject by sheer weight of practical suasion at the hustings, is as impracticable as it is undesirable. If the churches cannot reach the children through the multifarious channels already open to them, they cannot reach them thwnigh -the- Statute Book. But the public temper will never peranit the endangering of our system of free and unsecular education.