THE BIBLE-IN-SCHOOLS SCHEME

New Zealand Tablet, Volume XXXII, Issue 41, 13 October 1904, Page 3

THE BIBLE-IN-SCHOOLS SCHEME

A PROTESTANT VIEW The following is the conclusion of the pamphlet issued by tiie International 'Pratt Society, entitled ' Rehgicln and the State Schools,' dealing with ttie Buble-in-M.liuols bi heine, and the first portion of whifch appeared in our last issue :—: — Need of Religious Instruction. As to the need of religious instruction fthere can be no question. Manifestly such instruction is essential to a complete education, for man has a religious, as well ai9 a physical and an intellectual nature. Moreover, a true religious education is the most im>portapt) of all educations. ' The fear of the Lord is the beginning! of wisdom ; a good understanding have all they that do His commandments.' ' Fear God, and kee>p his commandments ; for this is the whole diuty of man. 1 'By the fear otf the Lord men depart from evil.,' ' This is life eternal, that they might ,know Thee tjie only true God, and Jesus Christ, Whom Thou hast sent ' (Ps. ni. 10 ; Eccl. 12, 13 ; Prov., 16, ,6 ; John, 17, 3.) The study of God's word is the most important of all studies'. ' Search the Scriptures,' says Christ, ' for m t|hem/ ye think ye have eternal life ; and they are they which testify of Me.' •By grace are ye saved through faith ; ' but ' faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by tihe word of God.' ' Prom a child thou hast known the holy Scriptures, which are a/ble to m&ke thee wise unto .salvation through faith which is in Ch)rist Jesus.' ' Wherewithal shall a young map cleanse his way 7 by taking heed thereto according tto Thy word.' ' Thy word have I hid in my heart, that I might not sin against Thee ' ' Sanctify them through Thy truth.' Now ye are clean through the word which I have spoken unto you.' ' The words that I speak unto you, they are spirit and they are life.' ' Whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises ; that by tihese ye might be partakers of the divdne nature. 1 The word of God furtiitfhes the foundation of all true education, for it leads to God, the source of all true wisdom 1 and knowledge. In it a-e revealed the most lofty and most sublime and soul-int?piring themes w'huh the mind can contemplate. Its opening words present the most stupendous truths, four great imensities and totalities. 'In the beginning.' Who can go back of the beginning ? ' God.' Who can think of a greater ' l Created.' What greater act could a God clo 7 ' The heaven and it he! earth.' What is there outside of these 7 No other 'book begins thus. No other preseintsi, at) its outset, and m so few words, such; grand av n .d awe-inspiring themes 1 . No other study will sb ennoble and strengthen every faculty of the mind as the study of the Scriptures. Where and by Whom Should Religion be Taught. To! teach religiion successfully, the teacher himself miust ba religious lie must know 'God, and the way to Gold, even Jesus Christ, Who is the W 7 ay, the Truth, r.nd the Life. No one can safely lead another along a path which he himself has not trod, or conduct him to heights which he himself has not attained. The teachen of religion must himself he religious. But for the State to require all teachers of State schools to be religious', would be for it to make a religious test a qualification for positions of trust and emolument under it. This would discriminate against non-professors of religion, and so be class legislation. It would make professors of religion a preferred and select class in the eyes of the law. It would, in reality, be putting a State premium upon a religious profession, atnd thus induce many to make a profession of religion who knew no tiling of it at heart or by actual experience, and so promote hypocrisy and meanness. Clearly, therefore, the State cannot consistently require of its teachers the qualification essential to the giving of religious instruction. But the question is asked, If religion is not to be taught in the State schools, where are the yomng to learn of God and His word ? A large projportibn of them, it is assorted, will grow up in ignorance of religion if leligicn is not taught in these scmaols. If it bo replied that they should learn religion at home, in the church, and in the Sabbath school, the objection is at once raised that many of their homes are not religious, and when they are it is often the case that their parents do not have time or inclination to instruct them, anid that thousands of ohildren never attend church or Sabbath school. Such objections are common.

Tihe question for all to consider, if correct conclusions are to be arrived at in this matter, is, not what is, but what ought to be. No matter how ' secular ' the State schools may be at the present time, if icligion ought to be taught in them, if this cajn be shown, tihen that deities the controversy at once ; that is the place to have it taught. The State should than select a religion, adopt it, and devote its first and thief energies to the promotion of it. But those who have lead history, will doubtless think twjrp before they consent to all this. Those also who have any true sense of the impoi tance of then children receiving correct ideas concerning religion, and not a mixture of trutih and tradition, inspiration and infidelity, will be very loth to consent to allow the State to select the religion which tlheir children are to be taught. On the contrary, if the home, the church, amd the church school are the proper places for the children, and all, to learn of God and Ihs word, if this can be stoown, then it matters not what the home may be, or how disinclined the parents may be to teach religion, or how little time they thiiiik they have for such work,' or how few children attend church and the Sabbath school, these are, nevertheless, the places for such teaching. Where, then, we ask again, and by whom should religion be taiight ? The Family. First, let us inquire as to the family. Should religion bo taught in Uio home ? Is it the duty of parents to instruct their children in the way of the Loid, to teach tfhem a knowledge of God and His word. It is tip be supposed that those who talk so imuch about religion being taught in the State schools behove the Bible. What, therefore, does this say as to the duty of parents on this point ? Will they let it sfpeak, and themselves receive instruction fiom it ? To fathers- and mothers it says :—: — ' These words which I command thee thit> day, shall be iri thine heart. And thou shalt teach them diligently unto thy children, and shalt talk of them when thou sittest in thine house, and when thou walkest by the way, and when thou liest down, and whein thou ripest up.' (Deut, 6 : 6,7.) Now, it matters not what parents do, or what they ao .not do in this direction ; here is what God has sard they ought to do. The instruction here is explicit and unequivocal— too plain to be misunderstood — it is the djuty of parents to teach their children the word of God at) home. Religion should begin at home. Those who believe the Bible cannot consistently plead lack of time, ability, or inclination as an excuse for parejnts not thus teaching their children. God makes no unreasonable or impossible demands. It is the business of parents to take time, to inform themselves, and to become inclined. And if every parent did this, what would be the result —All, from the least to the greatest, would know the Lord, and be familiar with ITis word, regardless of what was taught m the State schools, or whether there was ever such a thing as a State school in existence. There was religion before theie weie State schools-, and it can 'be taught and thrive without their assistance still. If parents would take up this duty, many, blessings would come to them. In their own homes they might ' have a littile heaven to go to heaven in.' *It is, therefore, with poor grace that those who profess to believe God's word, and who appear so anxious for the young to leceive religious instruction, plead as an excuse for asking that this sort of instruction bo givein in the State schools, that parents do not (have time to teach religion to their children at home. It would be far more consistent fa- them to teach what the Bible- says on this point, and to instruct parents in regard to their duties in this matter, tlhan to thus enccAixage them in their irreligion and neglect of duty. What more important business than this cam parents ongatgo in ? What more solemn responsibility rests upon them than to bring up their children in the nurtiuro and admonition of the Lord 7 It is the business of the Church and of Church loaders to teach what the Bible says, to ' preach the Word,' and to urge Bible instruction along Bible lines and in Bible Ways, ami not tiry to invent some new way of saving souls, some short route or wholesale method of getting popple to heaven, while they are neglecting known duties, and Grading and shirking untransferable responsibilities. This 1 will never do. Some Who are in grossest error make efforts to have their children taught and brought up in the religion which they profes-s, whicih put totshame those who have had far greater light and privileges, but have not enough energy or love for their chil'drc<n or their religion tio start a church school, or to maintain one after it is started, but must needs appeal to the State to

perform this most important of all duties—ttie, impaxtiing of religious instruction to t/he young, > - Many seem to imagine that civil governments are -a Mnid of second Providence to deal with .everything whereas their chief duty is to protect humaji righte The education of children belongs to, and cannot be taken away from their parents. The State has no. rjteht to tell any father or mother what they are to do 'with their children. The Duties of Parents. • . • i And this matter of parents instructing their children in tho way and word of the Lord solves the whdle problem. If parents would do as God commands them to do, their children would grow up with a knowledge of God and His laws, and there would be nothing left for the State, the State school, or any otfaer civil institution to attempt to do, and make a< dismal failure in tjhe attempt, in the way of giving religious instruction to the young. But if the family refuses to do its duty, and the Church confesses itself a failure, and the Church school says it is unequal to the task of instructing the young in religion, then the case is hopeless. There is no remedy. The Stale need not try ; for the State is made up of the aggregate of the families and parts of families in it, and it is a moral impossibility that it should be better than the people composing it. A fountain cannot rise higher than its head. If the duly and divinely qualified institutions for teaching religion— the family, the Church, amd the Church school*—therefore fail, it is useless to call on an institution which is in n(o way qualified or authorised to do the work to remedy the dilhculty. It will never do it. Certain failure is a foregone conclusion. The great trouble with the world to-day, (the reason thoro is so much ungodliness, corruption, and sin in tihe world, is because parents have ceased to be religious and tiruly pious themselves. Piety and the fear of God have, ceased to form a part of their home awl every-day hie. They have, therefore, either neglected the spiritual interests of their children altogether, or relegated it to others. Temporal concerns have been allowed to crowd out religious culture and eternal interest^. In too many homes prayer is neglected. . Parents feel they have no time for morning and evening -worship. They cannot sipare a few moments in which to give thanks to God for His abundant mercies,— for the blessed sunshine and sihowers of rain, which cause vegetation to flourish, and for the guardianship of holy ajigels. They have no time to offer prayer for divine help, ajnd guidance. and for the abiding presence oL Josvjs in tne household. They go forth to labor as the ox or the horse goes,, without one thought of Goti or heaven. They have souls so precious that, rather than permit them/ to be hopelessly lost, the Son of God gave His life to ransom them ; but they have little more appreciation of His treat goodness than have the beasts that perish.' (' Christian Education,' p. 221.) Parents do not follow Christ's instruction to ' first the kingdom of God, and His righteousness.' They maJve tempo "al and transitory interests, r? iuir Uia« religion, the first business of their lives. They are not themselves obedient to God's commands, and as a result the s,pitit of disobedience is early seen in their children. Failing themselves to walk 'in God's statutes, they, do not command their households to keep the way of the Lord. The law of God is not made the rule of life. The children as they grow up and make homes for themselves feel under no" obligation to teach their children what they themselves have never been taught. This is why there are so many godless families,, and why depravity is so deep and widespread. Not until parents themselves walk in the law of the Loird with perfect hearts, are they prepared to comma nd their children after them. A reform in this iespect is needed,— a reform which shall be deep and broad. Paarrnts, ministers, and all, need to reform. They need God in their households. If they, would see a different) state of things, they must change the order of things in' the home,— the foundation of society, and the well-spring of life. They must bring God's word Lntlcr their families, and make it their daily counsellor. They must teach their children that it is the voice of Godi addressed to them, and that it is to be implicitly obeyed. They must patiently instruct their children, and kindly and untiringly teach them how to live so as to please God. Every house should be a hotise of prayer, every home a heaven an earth, every family a ctairch of God, every father a priest of his own household, to lay on the altar of God the morning antf evening sacrifice, while the wife and children unite with him in thought, in prayer, and songs of praise. Therefore, we say, leave religion and religious, instruction where t'hev belong, to the individual, tfoe family, the Church, and the Church school supported en-

tirely byi private contribution. Keep Ohu.rdh and State forever separate. The business of teaching religion God has committed to the Church, not to the State. The State may educate the children to make them citi/ens, but not saints. Moral instruction has been ' conwai tied to ottiier hands. The demand that the State shall teach religion augurs no good. It is a backward step. It indicates a -retrogression on the part of the family and the Chu,rch,— that those who profess to be followers of Christ are forgetting Christian principles, and walking in falsq ways. The turning of the hearts o£ the fathois itq the' children, and the he'ddts of the cliildicn to their fathers (Mai. 4 : 5, 6) is the only true remedy for the situation.