(TO TRR EDITOR OP Till "sewarATOR:9 Si,—Allow me to point
an obvious answer to your objections in last week's Spectator to letting the children be taught the religion their parents wish them to learn. (1) If the parents are indifferent on the matter, then let the Cowper-Temple faith be taught to such, or let some such theological amalgam as Canon Beeching suggests be given them. (2) Free-trade in denominationalism under proper rules as to time, &c., is the only sound principle ; and if the denominations wax cold after a time, and get slack in using their opportunities of imparting religious instruction, surely the cry of "Church Teaching for Church Children" is one of the hollowest of shams. If the clergy or Church teachers do get indifferent or slack after the first year or two of freedom to teach Church children in all schools—Council as well as Voluntary schools— then all lean say is that we shall richly deserve to lose the right which has not been used. If the cry "Church Teaching for Church Children" is only for platform or electioneering use, then it is a hollow one. Many of the clergy take no pains to teach, or try to teach, the children in their primary or second-grade schools. School teaching by the clerical staff of a parish is a. most important part of ministerial work ; and it is to not a few of us older men a matter of grave regret that the Bishops do not insist upon attention being given by the clergy, senior and junior, to religious teaching in schools. It should be as much made of to the younger clergy and deacons as clubs and social activities, and should form a part of the training of young candidates for the ministry. You doubt if the clergy "have time for taking classes" in the religions instruction hours. Then let them make time. The care for religious training of our children is worth far more than some other outlets for clerical energies.—I am, Sir, &e.,
L. R. WEIDMAN.
Westend Vicarage, Hants.