Sunday Schools.

Waiapu Church Gazette, Volume IV, Issue 1, 1 July 1913, Page 2

Sunday Schools.

Report of Examination of Sunday Schools m the Diocese, held by the Bishop m December, 1912.

Purpose of the Examinations.

The purpose of the examination held at the end of last year was fourfold— (l) to gauge the standard of religious knowledge obtaining generally throughout the Diocese ; (2) to show the inadequacy of our present means and methods of instructing the children m religious knowledge ; (3) to try and rouse Church people to a deeper sense of their duty to the children, by a revival of home teaching, more efficient Sunday schools, and more readiness 'to. sacrifice comfort and ease m order to strengthen the staff of Sunday school teachers ; and (4) to. show the need for endeavouring to restore Bible reading and religious instruction into the State schools. The examination has certainly enabled me to gauge the standard

and extent of religious knowledge possessed by the children m the Diocese, and I desire to thank the clergy and superintendents m the Diocese for loyally acceding to. my request and making the best provision possible for the holding of the test examination. Hukarere, Te Aute, and Heretaunga Schools were examined, and children from all parts of the Diocese except Gisborne, Waerenga-a-hika, Woodville, Opotiki, Whakatane, and Tauranga. It is to be regretted that any Parish should have failed to give the Bishop the information which he sought. It is useless to try and live m a fool's paradise with regard to the value and results, of our present Sunday school methods. We need to arouse • m ourselves a Divine discontent with the present results of Sunday school work, instead of muddling along and trying to persuade ourselves that we are doing all that we can reasonably be expected to do m the matter. Many of our present Sunday school methods are useless, and positively harmful. Reform is urgently needed, and the knife needs to be applied with a strong and courageous hsnd to lop oil many of our out-of-date and foolish conventionalities which have grown up around the sacred duty of teaching our children the principles of the faith. The majority of the children know practically nothing, a nd so long as we encourage them to look upon Sunday school as a sort of joke or yenance, as the case may be, for obtaining a treat or treats, they will continue to know nothing. There is too much bribery associated with Sunday schools, and, to be brutally honest, we dare not stop it, lest we should lose our children. Surely it is far better to have a small but real Sunday school than a large one kept up by all kinds of enticements. Purpose of a Sunday School. The real object of a Sunday school is for training baptized children for Confirmation. (See the Exhortation to Godparents at the end of the Service for- the ."public baptism of children.") But at the same time it is no real substitute for the duties of Godparents, and certainly not for the duties of parents. The work of a Sunday school is to supplement the natural duties of parents and 'the assumled duties of Godparents, and not to relieve the parents or Godparents of those duties. Th,e

Sunday school is the Church's organization for instructing children entrusted to her by parents and Godparents for the fulfilment of their own responsibilities. The Parish Priest has, of course, a duty to the children over and above the duty committed to Godparents, as is clearly laid down m the Rubrics at the end of the Catechism. The modern, {Sunday school is, through force of circumstances, m many cases the only practical way m which he can fulfil his responsibility to the children, although it is not intended to be any substi-. tute for the Parish Priest's duty to publicly instruct and catechize his children. The Parish Priest's relation to the {Sunday school is • precisely the same as his relation to the Church, and he cannot esescape from the duty and responsibility of directing and controlling the teaching and management of his school. Wherever possible, it is the duty of the Parish Priest to instruct his own Sunday school teachers, and it is certainly the duty of the teachers to be absolutely loyal to the Parish Priest, the responsible head of the school. Suggestions. If the money spent upon prizes and treats was used for the purchase of Sunday school plant, viz., books, blackboards, maps, kindergarten material, etc., we should take a necessary step m the way of reform. The mere parrotlike repetition of the Catechism is positively harmful. It is most important that the children should be wordperfect m the Catechism, and equally important that they should have some clear knowledge of the meaning of the words. The portion of Catechism to be explained should if possible be written on a blackboard, so that the children can see the actual words written. The elder children should also be rerequired to write out at home answers to the Catechism questions, and be taught very carefully the parts of the " Duties " corresponding to and explaining each Commandment, and the parts of the 11 Desire " explaining the various petitions m the Lord's Prayer. The following, quotations from answers m the Diocesan examination will show clearly where the dangers of mere repetition lie. "A child of God" for "the child of God" was almost universal and a serious mistake, " God the Father or

mighty." " Promise m vow." "Lusks," or "lux," for "lusts. "Dews " for " Jews." " Judases chariot " and " Judas the Scariot" for " Judas Iscariot " were, of frequent occurrence. " Vants and pomety " for " pomps and vanity." " Sdnfurlus "for " sinful lusts." " Holy Coast " for " Holy Ghost," and the numerous variations m the spelling of " Pontius Pilate " were further specimens of the result of mere memorizing. Hundreds of children wrote " guiltriess " for " guiltless," and the words " Epiphany " and " Ascension " came m for very rough handling. The same criticism applies to a large extent to the New Testament paper. Fully half the children m the Diocese informed me that .Mary Magdelene was the mother of Jesus Christ, and "confused Nazareth with Lazarus and Bethany with Bethlehem, and very many gave the startling information that Christ was the " Prodigal Son." Not five per cent of the children knew why Sunday was kept as a Day of Worship, and none of them appeared to know the meaning of the words " Christmas," " Lent," " Easter," " Whitsunday," or the part of the " Desire " which explains the words, m the Lord's Prayer, " Lead us not into temptation," viz., " And that it will please Him to save and defend us m (not from) all dangers ghostly and bodily-" Presumably m most cases the best of the children entered for the examination, and it is therefore appalling to think of what the average standard of religious knowledge must be m our Sunday schools and m the children of the Dominion, and the ignorance is by no means limited to the " backblocks." Where capable teachers can be obtained, it would be wise m the larger schools to have the children m two or three standards or classes and teach them more after the metrods of the day school. A competent teacher can teach twenty or thirty children just as well as five or six, if the environment is suitable, and proper appatus is provided. The great trouble about Sunday school work is that . the Church does not take the matter seriously, and is contented to mvddle on with its antiquated and useless methods. In spite of the difficulty of inspiring small girls (and sometimes big ones), m their Sunday frocks

and hats, with, any sense of discipline, it is yet of vital importance to every Sunday school to have as strict a discipline as m the day schools, even if it means providing accommodation for the Sunday hats. An undisciplined 1 school is positively harmful to the children, and without discipline teaching is a physical and moral impossibility. The practice of giving, to the elder children one or two questions to. be answered m writing at home is to be commended, and will help the teacher to realize how far his teaching is effective. There is a danger is some schools of teachers sermonizing instead of (teaching. The children need to know the facts of the Bible, especially the New Testament first of all, and pious exhortations alone cannot take the place of faithful teaching. Catechizing over, and over again on the lesson given; is more important than sermonizing. The Gospel consists of facts, not opinions or views, and the; teacher should whenever possible show how the seasons of the Christian year faithfully " preach " the Gospel by bringing before vs 1 the successive facts m the incarnate life of Jesus. The teaching of the New Testamerit is often neglected because it is easier to teach stories from the Old, but such a practice is not to be commended, and the custom (if habitual) of reading story books to the children is altogether to. be condemned. The secret of all successful Sunday school teaching depends upon the self-sacrifice of the teacher. He can only teach if he himself knows the lesson, and far more about it than he will need to impart. The lesson must first be assimilated by the teacher, for no teaching is really effective which does not come through the living personality of the teacher. The man or woman whose life is not m harmony with his or her teaching is bornd to be a failure. There must, of course, be constant intercession for the children on the part of the teachers, and regular visitation of the parents, of the children where possible. In order, further, to obtain the sympathy and co-operation of parents, it is very desirable that Sunday school reports of the children's attendance and progress should be sent to the parents at least halfyearly.

Argument for Bible Teaching m State Schools. The result of the examination has clearly demonstrated the absoiute need for tlie teaching of the Bible m our State schools if many of our children are not to grow up m heathen ignorance. It is quite impossible lor the best teachers even to do any really effective wont when the children have little or no foundation knowledge on which to build. It therefore behoves every Christian man and woman to support enthusiastically the Bible m State Schools League, and endeavour to give to our children some knowledge of the subject of subjects, m which at present there is such a lamentable ignorance. General Report of Sunday Schools. Marks obtainable — Senior New Testament paper 220, Senior Catechism paper 194, Junior New Testament paper 175, Junior Catechism paper 175. In the report NT stands for New Testament and C for Catechism. Dannevirke. Good entry of Seniors and Juniors. Best papers m Senior C by P. Stevens (85) and Leah Duly (77), and m Senior NT by Leah Duly (85). In Junior C Muriel Tyson (55) and Kitty Burke (55) were best, and Phyllis Bateman (53) m Junior NT. Ormondville. Three Seniors, viz., Nelly Smaill, Lena May, and, Ellen Benbow gained respectively 121, 115, 113 m j\ r T, all good papers. No Catechism. Dorothy Price (60) best Junior. At Mak.otuku Ruby Palmer was the best Senior with 55 for C and 62 for NT. Te Karaka. Ivy Powell was the best Junior with 101 for C and 75 for NT. Catechism fairly well done generally. Patutahi. Junior C good, especially Maude Rawnsley (96), Keith Woodward (95), and Jessie Bilham (90). Te Puke. Entries good. Bessie Palmer 53 for NT and 69 for C, Rosie Fox 68 for NT and 4-5 for C the best Seniors, and Emily Morton 67 for NT and 63 for C the best Juniors.

Wairoa. E. Webber 88 for C the best Senior, and A. Jenkins 92 for C ; V. Milsen 88 for C and 93 for NT the best Junior. Frasertown. Catechism of Juniors remarkably good. Elsie Phillips (114), Iy. Forsyth'(HO), Clara Beckett (106), and I. Beckett (105) all above the average. 1,. Forsyth (86) best m NT. S. Augustine's, Napier. Gfood entry. Kathleen Cox, with 123 for C and 120 for !NT, best amongst the Seniors. Good papers m C by Olive Elmes (125) and Ruby Morrison (100), and m NT by Stella Frenwick (97). Amongst the Jniors, Frank Kerr, with 129 for C and 93 for NT, and Hazel Cox, 130 for C and 90 for NT, were good. Catechism good generally. Tologa Bay. Junior papers better than Senior. C. Fitzgerald best amongst Juniors m NT with 66, and D. Reid m C with 64. Havelock North. M. Ridgway, 79 for C, best Senior. Jack Rich, with 105 for NT and 90 for C, best Junior. Pamela Chambers, 117 for C, did very good paper. . S. John's, Napier. Amongst the Seniors, Charlie Sorrell (80)" did the best paper m C and 'NT ; Whiteley (78) ; and Archie Judd (69) m the Junior Division. Archie Judd (42) was best Junior m NT. At Bluff Hill School, H. Harston (84) did best paper m NT. Hastings. Excellent entry. P. MartinSmith, 88 for C and 72 for NT, best amongst the Seniors ; E. Westlake, 82 for C and 75 for NT, and H. Brooke-Taylor, 96 for C and 48-----for NT, were best amongst the Juniors. At Mahora the entries were good. •■ Fred. Laurie was first amongst the Seniors. Waipiro Bay. Edith Durant (80) and Adeline Wright (77) were best m C amongst the Seniors ; Edith Durant (73) best m NT. - Waipawa. Olga Carlyon, 142 for C and 143 for NT, did remarkably good papers. Grace Cowx, 124 for C and 115 for NT, also v«ry good. Eva

Walton, 82 for C and 57 for NT, next best Senior. Pukehou. Good entry. Seniors good. Nora Pugh, 100 for C and 94 for NT ; Joyce Williams, 80 for C and 116 for NT ; Eileen, Pugh, 97 for C and 93 for NT, all good. No* NT papers for Klsthorpe. Rotorua. Eric Young, amongst Seniors, with 79 for NT and 48 for C, best, and Mavis 1 Carr, with 69 for C, amongst the Juniors. At Mamuku, Catherine Ramson, amongst Juniors, gained 66 for NT and 81 for C. Taradale. Good entry. Very neat papers. Best paper amongst Seniors by N. Seer (111), followed by J. Halliwell (83), J. Fearn (82), 1,. Halliwell (86), G. M. Bennett (76), and E. Clarke (73). Best paper m C by J. Halliwell (82). Amongst Juniors, h. Clarke, with 98 for C and 90 for NT, was good. V. Jones (112) did very well m C. Porangahau. Elsie Drower (116) did very good paper m C. No NT. Waipukurau. Madge Curd, 87 for NT and 114 for C, best Senior ; Mary Grosnenor, 81 for NT and 80 for C, very fair. Juniors weak. S. Andrew's, Napier. Nola Elliott best Junior with 45 for NT and 57 for C. Best Senior was Doris Turvill, with 38 for NT and 47 for C, Private Tuition. One entry. Aroha Ruddock, 68 for NT and 57 for C m Junior division. List of scholars m order of merit who obtained 130 marks and upwards for both papers m the Senior division and 103 marks and upwards m the Junior division : — Seniors. NT. 0. Tl. 1 OlgaCarlyon, Waipawa 143 142—285 2 Kathleen Cox, S. Augustine's, Napier . . . . 120 123—243 3 Grace Cowx, Waipawa . . 115 124—239 4 Olive Elmes, S. Augustine's, Napier . . . . SI 125—206 5 Madge Curd, Waipukurau 89 J14 — 203 6 Joyce Williams, Pukehou 116 80—196 7 Nora Pugh, Pukehou . . 116 80—146 8 Eileen Pugh, Pukehou . . 95 97—192 9 Ruby Morrison, S. Augustine's, Napier . . 73 100—173

10 Stellar Fenwick, S. Au- NT. 0. Tl. gustine's, Napier . . 97 71-^-168 11 J. Halliwell, Taradale . . 83 82—165 12 Mary Grosvenor, Waipukurau 81 80—161 13 P. Martin Smith, Hastings 72 88—160 14 J. Fearn, Taradale . . . . 82 75—157 15 L. Halliwell, Taradale . . 80 70—156 16 Mary Nelson, S. Augnstine's, Napier .. .78 77—155 17 JN. Seer, Taradale ..111 42—153 *17< Edith Durrant, Waipiro 73 80—153 19 G. M. Bennett, Taradale 76 64—139 20 ( Mary Arnold, S. Augus- \ tine's, Napier . . . . 75 64—139 20/ Eva Walton, Waipawa 57 82—139 22 Mena Robinson, S. Augustine's, Napier . . 61 76 — 137 23 N. Kirkham, Hastings . . 59 76—135 24 P. Stevens, Dannevirke . . 85 49—134 25 E. Webber, Wairoa . . 45 88-133 26 Leah Duly, Dannevirke .- 77 53—130 Juniors. 1 Frank Kerr, S. Augustine's, Napier . . . . 93 129—222 2 Hazel Cox, S. Augustine's, Napier 90 130—220 3L. Forsyth, Frasertown 86 110—196 4 Jack Rich? Havelock N. 105 90—195 SL. Clarke, Taradale . . 90 90—188 6V. Milsen, Wairoa . . 93 88—181 7( John Etheridge, S. Au- \ gustine's, Napier . . 9S 78—176 7 ( Ivy Powell, Te Karaka 75 101—176 9V, Jones, Taradale .. 55 112—167 10 Pamela Chambers, Havelock 47 117—164 1 1 Alma Mayhow, S. Augustine's, Napier . . . . 76 87—163 12 D. Beckett, Frasertown. . 57 105—162 13 Mollie Smith, S. Augustine's, Napier . . . . 75 84—159 14 E. Westlake, Hastings . . 75 82—157 15 Millie Diamond, S. Augustine's, Napier . . 68 88—156 16 Elsie Phillips, Frasertown 39 114—153 17 A. Jenkins, Wairoa . . 59 92—151 18 Catherine Ramson . . 66 81—147 19 H. Brooke - Taylor, Hastings 58 96—144 20 A. Burr, Taradale . . 55 83—138 21 Clara Beckett, Frasertown 30 106—136 22 Keith Woodward, Patutahi 40 95-135 23 ( Alba Storkey, S. Augus- ) tine's, Napier . . 66 66—132 23 j Hazel Rolls, S. Augus- \ tine's, Napier . . 76 56—132 25 Emily Morton, Te Puke 67 63—130 26 Gwendoline Rownsley, Patutahi 44 86—129 27 Maude Rawnsley, Patutahi 31 96—127 28 ( Archie Wilkinson, Patu- ) tahi 45 80-125 28 1 Aroha Ruddock (private ' tuition) ..' ..68 57—125 30 Jessie Bilham, Patutahi 34 90—124 31 G. McCutcheon, Taradale 34 82—116 32 Fred Rolfe, S. Augustine's, Napier . . . . 36 76—112 33 ( Archie Judd, S. John's, \ Napier .. ..42 69—111 33 ( Agnes Bilham, Patutahi 29 82—111 i Gordon Rich, Haveloek 73 30—103 A. Heyward, Hastings 39 64—103 3. Henry, Hastings .. 47 -56—103

The? report on the day schools has been sent to the schools. Some of the papers from Hukarere and Te Aute were excellent, and obtained high marks. A. W. WAIAPTJ, Examiner.