PUBLIC SCHOOL RELIGION
[To the Editor of THE SPECTATOR] _
Sta,—Mr. Veagh's indictment is substantially correct : and the fault has been largely attributable to Christians. But his solution is designed to perpetuate the root of the trouble.
I refer to his fantistic concept of " Christian ideals, but nothing doctrinal." Sinee its creation, the Christian -church has been inseparably linked with the Gospel which it preached. Mr. Veagh is entitled to prefer, ideals which do not: derive directly from the Go-spel : but to deicribe the product. Christianity is a misuse of terms.
As Mr. Veagh suggests, the majority of intelligent, people do not accept the Gospel. Consequently he would regularise the present practice-of fostering ideals independent of Christian dogma. But since ideals must haire a term of reference;theSe ideals are dependent instead' on nationality and social position.
The consequence is apparent in the universities. The vast majority are ignorant of the content of the Gospel : their religion is one they cannot impart outside their own social stratum : there is no bond of union between them and the Christian Church overseas ; and finally, if they reject the prejudices of their class and nation, they discard also their religion—and fondly imagine that they have rejected a Christianity they never knew. - • •
I would therefore suggest, as; part of the solution, that if the schools wish to call their, religion Christian, they Should provide adequate instruction. - - At least it is intolerable -that boys should receive the Christian sacrament of confirmation without thorough teaching from a suitable and competent person with a theological training.-=Yours faithfully,
Peterhouse, Cambridge.
DONALD UPTON.
Previous page
