RELIGIOUS EDUCATION.

New Zealand Tablet, Volume XIX, Issue 6, 7 November 1890, Page 15

RELIGIOUS EDUCATION.

We take the following from a letter written by the Rev. Richard Coffey, an Anglican clergyman, to the Wellington Evening Press .• —

You speak as if the resognitioD of denominational schools in N ew Zealand would amount to a subsidising of schools for the teaching of relieion. This is nr>t a correct etatemeut. lhe State woul.l pay for the secular results, and leave tbe religious element alone. This latter would be in the nature of an extra subject. As a set-on: against this privilege, the State would noi be asked to erect buildings, and would not, 1 piesume, pay for school management. But is not the negation of religion a system, and is Dot the present New Zealand svb em maintained in the interests of Atheists, Materialists, and Secularists? Is it not, therefore, partially denominationalist ? Why should Christians be compelled to contribute to a system which taxes adnltß at least £3 per head ? Where is the liberty of conscience, which your school of thought have often ably advocated ? The present chairman of the London School Board has just published an article in the Fortnightly, in wbich he advocates a very fair sch< me. If his plan were atiopied, persons would be peimitted to pay at will a school rate to either board or denomination ; this would leave liberty, and would get rid of all iLJustice. In London the educational rate is lid in the pound, and nvn are giumbhng under the burden. In New Zealand the grant comes out of the consolidated revenue. Thus I pay, eg,, £3 a year towards a system which possibly educates the children of a man whose income is reckoned by thouhande.

May I say that the religion of reverence to the Creator, which you seem to think sufficient for co'o< ial youths, is an utter eham, a a thin theism, a delusion of Satan. Ii has been tried and found wanting. Fancy a schoolmaster or minister telling a >oung larrikin cot to insult Chinamen or smash windows because such would be a sign of irreverence, ard contrary to the te*chiDg of thenoblo negation

secularism. Mr. Forster, who carried the English Act, speaking in 1882, said " be was not one of those who regarded education as iverythiner ; it made people stronger, n>t better." Sir Robert Peel declared that " secubr education is o ily half an education, with the more iaportint half Ipft out." John Stuart Mill wrote, "If tbe country contains a sufficient number of pet sons qualified to provide education under good auspices, the same persons would be able and willing 10 give an equally good education on the voluntary system." Matthew Arnold's opinion is well kDown to have been in favour of religion as a factor of sound education. In New Zealand, forsooth, a set of conceited politicians have tbe temerity to put their opinions (so called) against such names.