Page 3 Advertisements Column 1

Wanganui Chronicle, Issue 20085, 20 May 1914, Page 3

BIBLE IN STATE SCHOOLS LEAGUE OF NEW ZEALAND.

What is the Bible in State Schools League? The League is a Union entered into by the Chui'ch of England, 41 per cent.; Presbyterian Church, 23 per cent.; Methodist Church, 9 per cent.; and the Salvation Army 1 per cent.; in all 74 per cent, of the population. In addition, many Baptists, Congregationalists, Lutherans and members of the Church of Christ are members of the League. ' What is the Object of the League? To restore to the National system of Education the Bible and its teaching by a method (known as the Australian system) which has existed in New South Wales since 1866, in Tasmania since 1868, in West Australia since 1593, in Norfolk Island since 1906, and in Queensland since 1910; and WHICH IN THOSE STATES HAS PROVED A BULWARK OF THE NATIONAL SYSTEM, SAFEGUARDING IT AGAINST ANY ATTEMPT TO DESTROY IT IN FAVOUR OF DENOMINATIONAL EDUCATION. The fact of its permanence in two States for nearly half a century and since its introduction in adjoining States is proof that it gives satisfaction to the vast majority of the people. What is the League's Proposal? "Lessons read in school hours by the children themselves from Scripture Books provided by the Education Department; State School i teachers supervising the reading, but not giving sectarian or dogmatic teaching: Visits during school hours by ministers or accredited teachers from the Churches, instructing the children in the faith of their fathers: Conscience clause by which the parent has complete control of the child's religious instruction in the public school." The League is not asking for every detail of the system, but for THE PRINCIPLE THAT EVERY CHILD SHALL HAVE THE RIGHT TO OaIBAD THE BIBLE AND HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY OF DEFINITE : RELIGIOUS TEACHING BY HIS OWN CHURCH, BOTH IN SCHOOL HOURS, the parent—not the teacher .or Church —to decide how much, if any, religious instruction the child shall have. As the details in applying this principle vary in the Australian States, so they can fee varied in New Zealand to fit local conditions. Why is a Referendum Sought? Because IN A REFERENDUM EVERY OPPONENT WILL HAVE AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY WITH SUPPORTERS OF A DIRECT VOTE. .The subject is one which is of immediate concern to every parent, and of hardly less concern to every voter. It is a question which can be settled ! best by a Referendum inasmuch as members of Parliament would be affected by a number of other issues having no concern with the question of religious instruction. Direct settlement at the ballot box of this question allows it to be decided on its own merits without any other question becoming involved. The precedents of the settlement of the question-by Referendum are numerous; Switzerland (the home of the Referendum). South Australia.-Victoria, and Queensland having regarded it as the most suitable way of ascertaining the will of the people on the matter. The question Bible or no Bible; religior.s instruction or no religious instruction, is distinct from political and party issues. Why Should I support the League's Proposal? Because the CHURCHES REPRESENTING THE VAST MAJORITY OF THE PEOPLE HAVE COME TO AN AGREEMENT IN THE COMi MONJNTERESTS OF THE CHILDREN, and a great proportion of the electors have endorsed the action of those Churches by signing individually their agreement with the pronosal. Plainly, therefore, THE 'LEAGUE'S PROPOSAL IS THE ONLY ONE LIKELY TO BE ACCEPTABLE TO THE MAJORITY OF TH£ PEOPLE OF THE DOMINION. Why Should There be Religious Instruction in State Schools? Because education is not complete, which does not make provision for the teaching of morality,, and morality cannot be taught without a religious foundation. The religious foundation for a Christian country is found in the.BibleWhy should the State School System Include Religious Teaching? There, is no more reason why the State should exclude Bible lessons and ministers' visits from the State Schools than from our Industrial Schools, our hospitals and our prisons, where the State allows religious instruction to be given. The State recognises the Christian religion in every phase of its life from the King and the Governor, down through Parliament, with the Judges, in the making of laws, in the celebration of. mat riage, in the Defence Force, and in the gaols—it is excluded from the primary schools only. ■ . . . " . \ Will the Bible be an Innovation in the Schools? Not so. It had its place in the provincial systems of education tip to 1877. Provision for Bible reading and prayer was made by Mr. Bowen, ■Minister of Education, in his National Bill in 4 877, when the provinces were abolished, but the clause was struck out against Mr. Bo^^njs wish, without any direct consultation, of t thei-people. Only in New .Zealand and two other English-speaking States in the Empire is the Bible excluded' from the primary schools. THE INNOVATION IS THE EXCLUSION OF THE BIBLE from the curriculum. Our schools are thus non-Ctiristiari. Anti-National and Anti-British. WE WANT this blot removed and THE BIBLE RESTORED. ' - . Is the Bible a Necessary part of Education. Yes, certainly, if we purport to give the children an education in English. How can. they understand the* history of their race or their literature, without a knowledge, if only from a literary point of view, of that Book without which the history of England could not be written; and without which her literature, her poets, her historians, her Acts of Parliament, her great writers and even her newspapers to-day would be unintelligible?

Is it True that the League Proposes Mutilating the Bible? Certainly not. The same principle is followed out in every Church of selecting the most suitable passages of Holy Scripture for public use. The Roman Catholic Church 4tself shows a clear example in this respect, using choice portions of Scripture ;'for reading at Mass, and similarly selecting portions to be read daily by its clergy. The charge of mutilation of the Scriptures brought against the League could equally be ! brought against every Church, and the Roman Catholic Church in particular. . Is the State Teacher to be Asked to Teach Religion? Only in the sense in which he is teaching it now. The official syllabus of 1912, page.4B, specifies iim early 100 particulars the moral duties of life, tlliese %re JLpvbe ta-ugat by examples taken/.from history, biography, poetry, fiction and by anecdote, allegory and fable. The ■ League's proposal would add the Bible to the curriculum. ..Teachers are askett<*to treat, the, Bible lessons in the. same way as - they.-treat ajjy other historical or literary lesson;'and sis they .already dp •,- leita lessens oa^tohamet. Confucius and casual references to the Chris-. /*„■ tian refigion aad.tfi'e Bible; wtiien appear in the school literature. For tens, of years thousands'of teachers have been giyjng. Bible lessons to,tens--of thousands of, children in Australian Not one case has ever, been on record of any teacher raising 'difficulties about these- lessons ; J even when as in the case of Western Australia, Norfolk Island and Queensland, the system was introduced after the education system had been In existence for some years. It is incredible that the teachers of New Zealand would find difficulties where their colleagues do not. Are Teachers Unfit to Give Bible Lessons? THIS CHARGE IS MADE BY OPPONENTS OF THE LEAGUE. On ' the other hand the League is prepared fully to-trust the teachers of New Zealand as worthy of the same confidence as the teachers of New South Wales, Tasmania, Western Australia, Norfolk Island and Queensland, where no such charge of unfltness is ever heard of. Will this System be Unjust to Roman Catholics? It would be unjust if the proposal denied them the same opportunities as any other Church. Roman Catholic priests and other accredited teachers will have the same right as any other Church of going into the schools and teaching their own children in school hours. In New South Wales an average of 1,000 visits a year by them is a proof tfeat they can avail themselves of the opportunity. In New South Wales the Education Department reports that the number of children withdrawn from the Bible lessons under the State School teachers is so small as to be negligible for statistical purposes, consequently it follows that parents of 31,940-Roman Catholic children in the State Schools find no difficulty in their children reading the Bible lessons. There can be no injustice in offering the Roman Catholic parents in New Zealand that of which Roman Catholic parents elsewhere avail themselves. j Will the League's Proposal Lead to State Aid to Denominational Schools?

It will not, because the Roman Catholic Church—which demands State aid both where there is no religious instruction and also where it exists—is effectually prevented in the latter case from forming with anyother Church a combination which could obtain State aid. Practically all the Church save the one desiring State aid are so satisfied with the system of religious instruction which the League advocates, that they have definitely dropped the policy of State aid for their schools; perferring to support the National system of education when it includes the system advocated by the League. That the clergy of every denomination, including the Roman Catholics, will have the right of entry into the State Schools for the purpose of giving religious instruction to their own children leaves do just ground of complaint, inasmuch as the responsibility of refusing to teach children lies with the Church that declines, not with the State. It then cannot legally be pleaded that the children are "brought up without religious instruction, as is now urged by THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH WHICH CLAIMS WITH ALL ITS STRENGTH STATE AID UNDER THE PRESENT SECULAR SYSTEM. Who Own the State Schools? The people of New Zealand, who pay for them. Therefore the Peop t r have the right to say what shall be taught in the People's schools. The Referendum will allow the People to be master in their own house. Why did not the League Adopt the Nelson System? It is clear that the Church, after practical experience of the Nelson system, did not regard it as satisfactory or permanent solution of the problem of religious instruction in State Schools. It has been tried for many years, and many of those working it declare it to be inadequate as a national solution of the problem. The system advocated by the League is accepted as finally satisfactory by practically all the Churches, save one, m Australia. Why is the Kelson System an Inadequate Solution of the Problem? Because as it excludes all those ministers of religion who will not agree to give undenominational teaching, it is manifestly unfair to suggest it as a'national system of religious instruction when it would not be open to all equally. The Australian system is open to all denominations equally, special privileges b.eing accorded to none. Where ministers prefer to teach their own children only they cau do so, though where they prefer to arrange with other ministers for common teaching they can do so. But instead of the latter method being compulsory and the only available way, as m the Nelson system, it is optional under the League's proposals. . • Does the Nelson System Reach all the Children? Very far from it. Out of 181,444 children in average attendance in XSew Zealand, the warmest admirers of the Nelson system only claim