1.—13b.

60

[j. CAi;<iili>E^.

the clamour and excitement wa« to force some Stair officials to make a pretence of performing the divinely imposed and solemnly accepted duty of many parents, who were belying their vows at baptism. Wonderful to relate, these enthusiasts for Bible-reading by proxy show by the utterances of their official leaders that they themselves would banish the Bible from the schools if they could not get sectarian dogmatic instruction in also. The Bible in Schools League would keep the Bible out of the schools, would leave it for the L r aols. would rob the children of their heritage, would ban the greatest English classic, would exclude the only basis For moral teaching, would leave the children under the blight of dogmatic secularism — the Bible League would do all this if they could not get in also the right to give denominational, dogmatic religious teaching into these State institutions, with the compulsory clauses of i he Act. to save them the trouble of gathering the children on a Sunday for that purpose. Bishop Julius said. " i wouldn't give my little linger for the liberty of giving undenominational teaching" (Christchurch Press, 27 7/14). The Bible-teaching to be given by the State teacher, we are assured, must be undenominational. For thai Bishop Julius would not give his little finger. Canon Garland declared that they insisted on "the scheme, the whole scheme, and nothing by the scheme" (/.///fiJ/nii Times, 11 lit I-). Bishop Sadlier declared that if it were not (or the right of entry he would not touch the movement (see Nelson Mail. 22/1/13). The Bible could remain under ban unless sectarianism is introduced with it. Tin Bible in National TAfe. Another alleged reason for the introduction t)f the Bible into State schools is its past influence on the English nation. But tins lags the question as to whether il was Bible in the schools that had an influence. The Bible's greatest influence was in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, when the influence of schools was small. It was the reading of the Bible by adults and their teaching of their children thai gave the Bible its influence. It was the people's book— almost their only book. They spoke in Bible Language, and us the " Cottar's Saturday Night shows It was from "scenes like these thai old Scotia's glory springs. This is passing away now in England and Scotland, and. as Canon Lvttelton. Headmaster oJ Eton, says. " There is no remedy for this evil except in the homes (" The Corner-stone if Education "). State-given religious instruction actually Intensities this decay of home religion, as m the case of New South Wales. The Deople lean mi the broken reed of olKcial. whittled-down secularized reading of the Bible without religion, 1)\" a teacher compelled to attempt the duly which only the parent and the Church can carry out. I he Bible-teaching thus given is as much like the real thing which so profoundly influenced British national life as workhouse fare is like the home dinner given at the family table. The children ask for bread, and the parent turns them over to the State, who gives them a stone. Ex-Inspector Holmes says of this kind of Bible- teaching, " 'I he question of religious education in elementary schools has long been the centre of a perfect whirlwind of controversial talk. The greater part of this talk is. to speak plainly, blatant cant. . . . Not one in a hundred has ever been present in an elementary school while religious instruction has been given. The Bishops of the Established Church wax eloquent in I he House of Lords over the wickedness of a (iodless education and tin , virtue of ' definite dogmatic teaching.' but it may be doubted if there is a Bishop in the House who has in recent years sat out a Scripture lesson in a Church of England school. It would be well if all who talked publicly about religious education could be sentenced to devote a month to the personal slmlv of religious instruction as it is ordinarily given in elementary schools. At the end of the month they would be wiser and sadder men. and in future would talk less about religious education and think more." Again, "In most elementary schools religion is taught on an elaborate syllabus which is iniDosed on the teacher by an external authority, and which therefore tends to destroy his freedom and his interest in the work. . . . But what-of the child's emotional faculties) Will not the beauty of the Gospel stories, will not the sublimity of the Old Testament poetry make their own appeal? They might do so. but what chance have they? Ido not suggest" that the religious instruction ... is always formal and mechanical. There are teachers wbo can break through the toils of the system. But tin , net result of giving formal and mechanical instruction in the greatest of all great matters is to depress the spiritual vitality of the children of England to a noint which threatens bhe extinction of the spiritual life of the nation " (" What is and What might be "). The scheme offered to New Zealand is even more formal anil mechanical than the one thus denounced by a believer in religious instruction of the right kind. At a meeting of Headmasters' Conference, held at Eton, a discussion look place on the teaching of the Bible in schools. Rev. Dr. Flecker (Dean Close School. Cheltenham) said that many honest and good men disliked the Scripture hour more than any other teaching i hey had to do. He could speak as to the depth of the ignorance of Scripture of boys who came to the public schools. He was quite certain that the state of thiiiL's was far worse than it was a quarter of a century ago (W'rek/i/ Times, 30/12/10). Eucational Authorities. The League often quotes educationists who urge the necessity for religious education. But it does not state the method by which this education should be given. Senior-Inspector Holmes could no doubt lie quoted as an advocate of religious education, yet he condemns in the most scathing terms the type of religious instruction of which the League's method is an extreme example. As a matter of theory it might be staled that religious instruction should be given in the schools, but religious instruction under unjust conditions is a moral impossibility or else a