THURSDAY,DECEMBER 22, 1904 THOSE 'SPECIMEN LESSONS.'

New Zealand Tablet, Volume XXXII, Issue 51, 22 December 1904, Page 17

THURSDAY,DECEMBER 22, 1904 THOSE 'SPECIMEN LESSONS.'

**§§§? " — * — vl lljil j Executive has just been k-— 'Xi , playing the little comedy of the ajiciont ■&7 jj^A. •&* Greek who strolled t?hroug)h the marketplace JJt^^K °f Athens exhibiting a brick as a sample of lie h° usc nc wished to sell. Tihey have t ' &h?y published a small pamphlet containing tlhrec y^ ' specimen lessons ' from tiheir proposed textbook—one for the junior grade, one for the intermediate, anti one for the senior. By themselves the three ' specimen less'oas ' wauld give a-bo'ut the aame idea of their text-book -t-hat three bricks- w(oufd of tihree 'dwellings. W'lien a conjuror wishes to m\as>k a vi</al nnovement i-n a,n illusion he contrives to direct Ihe attention of his amtiience elsewhere. This ruse seems to be well known to the prestidigitateurs of the Bible-in-sdhaols CSdnfcrence. In as catchy and triicksome a preface as we have over rea^d they make a great skng-siong ahciut the notes appended to tiheir s'arnple lessons. But the misuhievous character of the contem/ptible bit of political conjuring whioh t/hey are endeavoring to play ijpon the people of New Zealand appears really elsovfhere,. namely, in the 'list of contents ' which is arfppanddd bo tilie sample les&ons. Hut the Bible-iin-s'di'ools leajders qug/lit to be aware that the average elettior, and lihe oaaual reader generally, will at) most glance lightly over the ' list ' and will thus fail to detect the

real significance of the illusory scheme which they are trying to force upon the Colony. So far as the gdneral public are concerned the little pamphlet published by the Bible-in-sxlhools leaders will fail tio effect its av>owed purpose of sutpfelying ' the demand for information ' and will nrave, instead, a 'delusion and a snare.

Ln the course of their trick-referemces to the footnotes, the clerical illusionists of the Wellington Conference take loquacious pride in the pica that they Vio not ' inOulcate a-ny theological or dogmatic belief.' In fact tlhey solem/nly asseverate tfhei'r fixed determination to bolt and bar out all manner of ' religious teaching ' from the public schools. The first of these two statements may be taken Cor what it may pr-ove to be w'otrth. The second must be taken in a Piokwidkian— we had almost said Pecksmi man— sense. By the very nature of the case ' religious ' and dogmatic teaching, express or implied, runs through and through t|ie whole of the proposed text-book. The text-book: itself is, in brief, a rqprfnt of the compilation drawn up four years a^o by the (exclusively ProtestaTit) ' Commission on Religious Instruction in State Schools.' Their express d,uty, as set forth In their title and mandate, was to draw up a scheme of ' religious instruction ' for the pmblic schools of Victoria. Olir Bible-in-s<:Wools agitators repriht their p/rogramme of lessons in its entirety, and yet have tihe hardiHood . to serenely declare that ' religious instruction mi State schools ' is the last thilng in tlheir tlhc^ugflits a;tid. wholly foreign to tiheir intqntlons !

Biut tilic most discreditable thing abofut the proposed textbook is tihe wholesale chicanery witih which— wder prtotests of fair-play and honor-bright— it is sexug^ht to nija|ke it subserve 'sject?,rian interests i»i public schools UhSat are frequented by children of all mlajnjner of crcedal convictions. (1) Fnom begihniri/g to en)d tihe Sjcrilpture los&ions are takon from the Protestant AJutihonsdd Versian of tihe Bible — witth all its errors of ommibbicnn, addition, afrJd nristra'nslatio-n upon its head. (2) The Protestant division of the Ten Commiaindmeints is used, and Uhe Protestant form of the Lord's Prfeyer, dewpite its rejection by the whole voice of Protestant sdhjola.rab.jp, is- set dlovn for tihe daily use of flmpils. (3) The WelhingtMn Oonferelnce has, witih open eyes, shared ■tgio sjuame of tneir Victorian ownfreres in outlawing the basic truth of Christianity— ttfat of th<e Incarnation and Yirgfti-lHrth of the Saviour of the WorJd— from the .sacred narrative. Tlhough twice challenged, tihey have failed, thus Ear, to furnish any explanation or excuse for so wjantidn an outrage against religion and against Uhe integrity of New Testament history. ' Men are at liberty, 1 siaid tjhe prominent Presbyterian 'divine, Dr. Rqfuto/ul, ' ias individual men, to take w'h-atev'er view tJlhey qho'o.se of this or that historical 'period. They take that liberty abundantly. But a Commission of representatives of the Victorian Oliurches called itfppn tio ap•pnoaoh in honest godd fai.th tihe New Testament narrative, and settling itself to tell our children the story of our Liord's bfrth and infancy, has no right to act thus. It is a wanton arid a deadly wrang to the bona fides of tihe story artd to the central faith of the Protestant Utourcfhes themselves. It is, I need scarcely say, a direct blow to all that is most sjacred and most reverently cherished in the faith a'wd the religioh of Catholics.'

(4) Rut that is not all. In the pr-onosed text-book Pr!otos)ta>ut t'eaohiag is .suggested t<hro)ug>H(Vit fn a perskstont ajn.d manifestly deliberate way. Here are slome of flhe unworthy ruses lo which o'lir Bible-ijn-s<: ; haols ]^arty have resorted in their attempt to sectarranise t/he public scHlojoLs : (a) Emphasis i'n£ K>bsicure texts -wiiich have been twisted into a Pr'ote.stant cointcovorsial meaning, ajid ipaMsflne; over clearer and explanatory texts w)hßch toll in a Catholic sense ; (,b) garbling the sacred teacftiilig or 'narrative in a wholesale way in the s:ect/arian Lntercstt— s'up'pressing, for instance, a great part

of tjbg stlory of the Last SilpAper and the remarkable worlds regardimg the Eudharist contained m the sixth chapter of St. John's Gospel ; omitting all reference to the power l of forgiving sins ; setting aside all that refers to the Qliurch, its constitution, its teaching 'authority, its fnfcief'ecti'bility, and its infallibility i n teiadhing ; throwing overboard each and all of what are known as the ' Petirine texts ' — those whiQh point in s^o remarTcable a way to tihe prerogatives of the Prince of the A'postlos — afld emi;ltoasasi\ng, by repetition, the denial of St. Peter in the days before he, befng converted, received tihe oommissiotfi Ho ' confirm his brethren ' anid to feed the lambs and the sheep of Christ's flock, (c) Protestant teaching is, moreover, suggested in the Bible-in-scliools text-b"oak by the use of unauthorised healdings, italics, capital letters , etc. ; and it has been trtily observed that ' in what is omitted, as well as in the general tone of what is expressed, the lessons are m>a'tle as Pr;otestamt as tlhey coul>d well be made in the ciroumstiances.' Amd t|hc ' modest petition ' of the Bible-in-schools clergy is "tjhis ; that this soheme of ' religious instruction,' drawn. u<p by Protestants, out of a Protestant "\ersion of the Bible, for tine use of Protestants, should be miade tihe official esuaTblistied creed 'of oiur public schools, and that Caflhiolic, Jewish, Puotestia.nt, and non-reli-gioinist objectors shauld be compelled to cdntrityute towards its n^aint'On'a.nce or lie M gaol till I*hey rot.