Education on a Religious Basis the Duty of the State.

To the Editor of the "Otago Daily Times."

Sir,—I endeavoured in a former letter to call attention to that clause in the Education Act of 1877 which governs the instruction to be given by the schoolmaster in the State schools, and enacts that "the teaching shall be entirely of a secular character."

I endeavoured to show that the teaching given under this new clause means instruction in the knowledge of this world, to the absolute exclusion of instruction in the knowledge of God; and that the State, whilst recognizing its duty of seeing that all the children belonging to it are educated, and undertaking to educate all those children who are not otherwise educated, makes the egregious blunder of giving them a one-sided education, and instructing them only in secular knowledge, leaving altogether out of sight that which is the very complement of a good education, that which is the only sound basis of a thorough education and a healthy moral training—I mean religious Christian teaching.

Answer has been made to this, "that the people of New Zealand are better than their profession," and that, as a matter of fact, much religious teaching is now given in the free State schools, in page 40 spite of the clause which directs that the teaching should be "entirely secular."

In reply to this, I would say that if this is so, it is a wholly wrong state of things; and however creditable it may be to the hearts of the people, as showing that they desire that their children shall have some religious teaching, it is anything but creditable to the moral sense of the community, least of all that it should be tacitly assented to by any of those in authority. Such a state of things tends to lower the moral standard of all, and encourages teachers and children to believe that a law which enacts that which is disagreeable may be evaded with impunity, if not even meritoriously.

If the law is a good one it ought to be obeyed; those in authority ought to see that it is carried out, and teachers should feel that they are bound to observe the laws laid down for their direction, so long as they hold office, however disagreeable or oppressive they seem to be.

If the law is not a good one, let it be altered; and I think that it will not be long before people will demand with no uncertain voice that the Education Act of 1877 shall be altered to the extent that some religious teaching shall be allowed in the course of instuction given in the State schools.

Most people will agree that instruction in religion is indispensable for the training of the young, and as the very foundation for the good morals and well-being of the nation. Are we then satisfied, as individuals and as a community, that the rising generation should be watched over and educated by the State in all knowledge relating to this world, but left to pick up their religious teaching as best they can—the State relying for their getting religious instruction upon the very parents whom it cannot trust by themselves to provide secular education for their children, and therefore take the education of the children to a great extent out of their hands, or else throw it upon the Church? Let us consider how far these two agencies upon which the State may be assumed to rely fulfil the duty—expected of them, and desired from them, for the safety and well-being of the State—of imparting religious instruction to the children.

With reference to home teaching, I would ask each individual parent, How much definitive religious teaching do you give regularly to your children? And the answer too often is, "I do not like to interfere in my children's religious belief." Take the families you know; how many parents, if they would, are capable of teaching their children religion; and how many do? Some "have no time"; others do not feel "fit to talk about such things." In many cases the parents are out or at work the whole day, and have little time or energy to spare, when they and the children get home in the evening, to teach the children religion. I am not sure whether, if the parents wished to impart religious instruction themselves, it would be all that could be desired; in page 41 some cases rather the other way, where the children see the lives of their parents spent in indifference to religion, and in a self-indulgence sometimes of a gross kind. In these cases any teaching of theirs would be nullified.

In cases where the parents may be too much occupied or not feel able to impart religious instruction, they might be, and I believe in most cases would be, not only willing, but anxious that their children should receive that religious teaching which they themselves do not feel able to give, from the schoolmaster the clergyman of their denominations, or from any other person whose duty it might be to impart it; but if children have to depend for religious instruction upon home teaching, very many, perhaps most, will get none at all.

With reference to Church teaching, I would ask those who are acquanted with Sunday-schools whether they are prepared to allow the children of New Zealand to depend absolutely for their religious training upon the hour, more or less, spent in Sunday-school weekly. In the first place the children, whilst compelled to attend the daily instructions in the public school, are not compelled to attend the Sunday-school and to come under religious instruction at all. In many places there are no Sunday-schools, and where there are Sunday-schools the attendance at them is irregular. Sometimes the parents take the children for a walk on Sundays; frequently they go to visit a neighbour and take the children who are detained and do not come to Sunday-school; occasionally, being late in arriving, they do not like to come in, and consequently play truant. But, taking Sunday-schools as they exist, many children do not attend at all, and many of those who do attend come so irregularly that practically what they learn is very little.

In many cases the Sunday spent by the parents differs but little from ordinary days, except in freedom from work, and church- going forms no part of the day's duties.

In these cases, if children get no religious instruction at the day-schools they will get none at all, and it becomes a serious matter for the country to consider whether it is not desirable that children should receive some religious instruction, and whether, as a matter of policy, the State system of education for the young ought not to include some thorough religious teaching.

Let the education of the community be compulsory and general, but let it be religious and not Godless—religious in the sense of having general Christian teaching, as opposed to sectarianism on the one hand and Godlessness on the other.

Let the instruction given by the State be founded upon a religious basis, as is fitting in a Christian nation, as individuals themselves would mostly desire. Let the schoolmaster be instructed to open school with prayer, and to instill the principles of religion and morality into the children as the foundation of education. Let this instruction be absolutely colourless if you will, as far as denominationalism goes, so as to embrace all Christians. Let the page 42 prayer be one agreed to by all religious bodies, or confine it only to the Lord's prayer : only, as Christians in this country are twenty times the number of other people, let us insist on an unsectarian religious Christian teaching being given as the foundation of the course of the State system of education by the schoolmaster, taught, if you will, on the ground of expediency, and allow all who do not wish to receive this instruction to withdraw during the time set apart for this purpose, or have them set to some other work, and, in effect, I believe that the number of these would be extremely few. But in a Christian nation do not let a twentieth part of the whole population who are sectarian in their infidelity, or diversity of religious belief, dictate to the immense majority of Christian people that there shall be no Christian teaching whatever in the State schools. Protect them by all means in their infidelity or diversity of belief if they wish it, and let them decide whether or not their children shall come under religious teaching, but do not let a small number of non-Christians dictate to the community who are, with the exception of a twentieth part, Christians, that in opposition to all their principles of faith, their children shall not be educated on a religious and Christian, but on an "entirely-secular basis."

Let the various denominations have permission to teach their own children at an hour to be agreed upon, when the parents wish it, and let that hour be fixed by agreement between the Board, the schoolmaster, and the minister of the denomination.

Do not let us have upon our Statute-book a law containing a clause positively insulting to the Almighty God, by excluding from our children, so far as the State is concerned, all knowledge of Him, and which exercises a tyranny of the most extreme kind over the parents of New Zealand. The law, as it stands at present, takes possession of children for the greater portion of the time for direct education in their lives, and says that they shall be educated, and in a manner in which the State chooses to dictate; that religious teaching shall be forbidden, and the parents shall not be permitted to exercise any discretion, or to have any voice in deciding whether their children shall be taught upon a religious basis, or receive any religious teaching whatever.

I believe that the people of New Zealand would desire, if asked, that their children should be educated upon a religious and Christian basis, giving permission to non-Christians, and those who objected, to withdraw their children during the time for religious instruction. And I believe that individuals of every denomination would wish that the minister of their denomination should have the privilege of attending the school and instructing their children during a portion of the school time, if their children and other people's children were protected from being taught without their consent by the minister of any other denomination.

It is the duty of the Parliament of this country to protect every denomination in the free exercise of its own religion; and if, there page 43 fore, any denomination desires that its children shall be instructed in religion as well as in secular instruction daily, it is the duty of the Legislature to protect their denomination in the imparting of religious instruction to its young people.

If the State decides to continue the present Education Act, and to exclude the Bible and religious instruction, on the ground of justice to all sects, it then becomes the bounden duty of all Christians, of whatever denomination, to understand the situation and to face it boldly. They ought to say to themselves, the State compels me to educate my children, and to comply with certain regulations as to efficiency, &c., but if I send my children to the State free school I shall send them where they will be brought up upon no religious basis, where there is no regular religious teaching, and where religious teaching is absolutely excluded.

Let them say to themselves, "I will not have this. I value my religion, and I determine that my children shall be brought up in the fear and love of God; and they shall be. I am willing to make any sacrifice to carry this out, but I will not have my children growing up without religious instruction."

Let men be determined on this, and set God before them, and insist on His recognition.

If necessary for this purpose, let them combine and raise schools amongst themselves, which shall be under Government inspection, which shall comply with the requirements of the State, but in which, as being supported by their own voluntary contributions, religious instruction may be given. Let all Christians feel it to be a matter of principle with them to secure religious instruction for their children.

The teaching of reading, writing, and arithmetic alone, without any religion whatever, is sectarian action, and so the State subsidises one sect of infidels to the disadvantage of other sects. This is not fair, and is not the boasted equality amongst sects, for they protect one sect and tyrannise over and persecute other sects, who are forbidden to practise their religious worship during a considerable portion of the day, and are compelled to contribute to support a system the prevailing tone of which is opposed to their religion.

The State ought to protect religion, and those parents who desire that their children should be taught by the minister of their denomination ought to be enabled to have their wishes carried out.

It is not desired, though it would be for the good of the community generally, that any child should be compelled to come under religious instruction. The fullest liberty should be allowed to all, and parents or guardians allowed to decide whether or not their children should be taught by the minister of the denomination.

If all the denominations felt the responsibility that rests upon them to see that their children do not grow up without any religious teaching, and combined to demand that facilities should be given for each denomination to give religious instruction during page 44 school hours to the children of their persuasion, the pressure brought to bear upon the Government would carry all before it, and the present "entirely secular" system would quickly give way to a system in which "knowledge of God" was not only not ignored, but was imparted by direction of the State by those whose duty it is to teach it, and under safeguards imposed by the State itself. "Secular education" is, by its one-sidedness, incomplete, for the exclusion of the knowledge of God, who takes so great a part in the ordering of the world and all things in it, is excluding all instruction upon the great cause, and reasoning only upon the minor effect. "Truth is one, and its harmony must be sought by a collocation of facts in every department of knowledge," and if religious knowledge be excluded, then the harmonious whole cannot be attained to in our State schools, and the education given there will have a vital defect, for "God is truth," and if all knowledge of Him be denied, the key of truth is lost.—I am, &c.,

Prophetes.