THE BISHOP OF CARLISLE ON RELIGIOUS EDUCATION.
[TO THE EDITOR OF THE 'SPECTATOR."]
SIR,—Might not your admirable article in your issue of February 17th, entitled "The Bishop of Carlisle on Religious Education," be of use in tire present crisis if reprinted and circulated as a leaflet, with perhaps the omission of the opening paragraph ? The supreme interests of the children of England —as well defined by King Alfred a thousand years ago—to be taught "to know God, to be men of understanding, and to live happily," are in danger of being sacrificed to those who object to what is rather unfortunately called "undenominational " religious instruction. It ought to be called "fundamental" or "primary" religious instruction, which surely is what should be given, and perhaps all that need be given, in the primary schools of a Christian land. Are we not only to deprive our children of an inalienable right and an inestimable privilege, but also to add a new and poignant abaft to the armoury of the unbeliever, who will say that we who profess the Christian faith cannot agree upon even its first and most elementary doctrines ? It is not so in point of fact, for even those who most passionately denounce " undenominational " teaching have all the doctrines its advocates desire to teach in the foremost place of their own creeds and formularies. It is for them to say why they are so afraid the children should be taught them, without the additions they are perfectly free to supply if they will. It is by no means so great a wrong not to teach a child all his parents wish him to learn, as to teach him more than they wish him to learn. Clearly, every parent has a right to demand that the State shall not teach his child what be does not wish him to believe; but does it follow that he also has a right to demand that the State shall teach him, at its own expense, all that he wishes him to believe ?—I am, Sir, Scc., D. A. [We shall be glad to give leave to any one who desires to reprint the article in question, or any part of Spectator.]