ADDRESS BY CANON CARLAND.

Dominion, Volume 6, Issue 1599, 16 November 1912, Page 2

ADDRESS BY CANON CARLAND.

POSITION OF ROMAN CATHOLICS, REPLY, TO BISHOP CLEARY. The Rey. Canon. Garland, who.was received with applause, all the members of tho Assembly rising as he approached the platform, said:— Moderator, Rev. Fathers and' Brethren, —I cannot imagine after what lias been: my experience of the Presbyterian Church in Australia that the Presbyteriaai Church of New Zealand could take up any other position than that which was taken by the Presbyterian General Assembly of Austra- ; lia, and which the Rev. Isaac. .Jolly has iivtimnted so forcibly, and which I claim is inoontiwertibly in aceordaace with tho best traditions of the Scotch Clnlrch; I propose to confine myself on this occasion just to one point of objection which has b:en taken, and I enter into it with the 'deepest feelings of regret and pain. ! It- is no pleasure to me to find myself iii'antagonism with any section of- the Christian Church. There is much which you, as Presbyterians, have in common with the Roman Catholio Church; there is nnllsli which I have, perhaps, as an individual, more than some here in common with the same Church. I have ljeen through a campaign in which they opposed us, mid I have convo out of it retaining the personal and individual friendships of many Roman Catholics who opposed us. But there are times and occasions when whatever one's regrets may bo; however difficult', it may be to put one's feeling# on one side,'truth end justice awd the defence of liberty demand tlio sinking of our personal feelings. At the same time I shall endeavour to avoid any breach of charity, any reflection upon doctrines, and of faith .dear to. bthw people, and odiriltw mywlf to the oaaa la Mint Wk«a toiwine tho..

campaign in New Zealand I carefully disclaimed any jnwiitioii on wy part, ur on tti.u part or t.lU»o associated with mo, to nttncit (lie doctrines of any Church which did not huppen to join with us, and when 1 was publicly invited lo enter into a controversy in tho press Avitli liishoj) Clear)', by. liiin, 1 declined, so the position to-day is tlint wo lire defending ourselves against nu attiiok, not maltiaa ait assault. The National System. Now, it might bo imagined from the statements mado by the representatives of tho Roman Catholic Church that it is now for tho first time that Church has. found itself opposed to tho national system of education, and that but foftjiov fact that the. .Presbyterian and Anglican 'and Methodist Churches, anil the Siilvatiou Army, having combined together to battle for the restoration of tho religious liberty and parental rights, tho Eoman Catholic Church was quite satisfied with what was going on; but unless I am misinformed, Alio prelates of that Church tyivo called'tho national system of oducailiuiija. Godless- system; and I would ask tho * question, who has heen building schools to t.ompdo with the national sys'tcm; who has boon denouncing the national system of education, and Using every mea'ns to diminish the attendance at the State scliools, and withdrawing tho children from tho State schools—a withdrawal which, if sufficiently successful, would havo wrecked that national system 'i Then,. having done all by policy, Try the expenditure of money, and by tho great influence of its denunciation to ruin the (national school system, that same G'hui'iil jraw seeks to prevent, those who Accept the natiomil system, those who send their 'children 'to it, those who we prepared tc'stflml by it—seeks to. prevent them in tho people's schools adding just tho ono thing that is. needfnl to make tho national schools perfectly acceptable to tho lyhole people!. Who is it that Deserves Consideration? And may I jwint out how far some.of lis havo gono. There were those of us— I will not particularise them, for though they were in a minority, they Wero not co'nfliled to ono Church—there were thosu of us who iiij days past believed honestly that the onlyi system gf education was dc-nominationub-schools;. supported by the : State; and those of us who believed that hn\'Oj. distinctly and definitely abandoned tliat. policy, cviid pledgo ourselves to s.upport.'liie national system provided religious instruction' is restohKt td it. Now, I ask who isi it' that demand and deserve coti■sideration -from the people .of New Zealand—'thoso who have done their best to shatter tho national system; those who havo done their utmost to discredit it; those who have withdrawn their children in thousands from it; or those who havo filinlc, their; former policy and preference, ni)d_ who are to stand by the national., system, and who say we prefer that, .with religions instruction restored, to any other eystom that can Ik devised ? 1 (Applause.) ' -'•■■■ ■ : What Right? Now Bishop Cleary, and I mention him with no disrespect, for I have every respect for his office and person, but as. ho. seems to be the.leader of tho attack'l havo no alternative but to mention him—' complains that his Church has spent large, frams of money on education. I will ask him, wiio asked them to do it? Did'the Parliament of New Zealand ? Did the people of New" Zealand P Did the people of New- Zealand ask him to . spend money to educate the'children?. No! The people of New . Zealand have; said ,■ we ask our- : [ selves, as . a . people .to educate our own ..children, ..Then,j.jf.lie was not asked to mosey, if ;he was'not asked t^ducsfe , right, moral 'Or legal,'"lifts' ho'- to demand. payment' for service,? which were riot required? And I gtt,.|tirther, when lie says ; it is a claim for compensation that it is an injustice, and when he makes tho Statement that lifi has Saved the State • ait immense amount of money, , in -.the cost of'education, I say lie makes a statement that does not bear examination. Supposing the children in these denominational schools were distributed amongst the S'tate'/schools•• already existing, do - you think, it would bo necessary to. have a ,gr«(ttumauy.!pore 'and to 'Dro/Kj!i??AtKr«St warty ? - NQ f they would be in the--great, majority .o% casss aJj®orl>ed in. the existing machinery of ,the'schoblsi'arid..there would be Soap-, ; pr«ia'ble'i'nereas'a.' : in 'the State education expenses. But't go further, I am not speaking^.'of..private schools; remember, 1 in ' any sense,' I am speaking of those schools which set up a claim—a right, ta theyi'ttHege it, to obtain State aid. When | he -says, it- has done so good for the Stii:o, I question whether .that system of',education is a friend to .the. State at. it. competes with thS'Sta'te. Tho Other Side of the Ledger, I would further point out that the Roman Catholic Clulrcli, or the Roman Car tholic people, I believe', to speak more accurately, di) get i benefit, from the State system 'of education. The schools (ire ipen to'their children at any time, and I in many many cases, I do not know how j mtoy tens of thousands, they are accepting the'free education, which the Stato offers. Is that no benefit t They share also with the rest .of the community in the general benefit of the education which the community. receives: the benefit of living in- iin educated community and not an" igriotqA't ' oric.' 'And surely supposing .'there-'were-iio'-State schopls, and suppas- ■ . tog the.ltomair:.Cathi>lic 'Church Showed the sanie keen interest in education which ' it. sliow9 wheh there is a State school— (applause)—what would be. tho cost to the Roman Catholic Church? About five or. sii. times what it is-to-day. Well, it" is. saved that cost, and it seems to me that' that should be put pn the-other side of tho ledger. ■ Bishop Cleary's Question. Now, Bishop Cleary asked, and I will read the quotation": "By Sv-liat moral right ...wouldthe. league compel. Roman . Catholics or other,, objectors, to pay for the State ondowment'qf an : <ifficinl school religion at! variance.with'.theij conscientious religious convictions?'* ' I would point out that they have already accused tho .State .school system of being so Godless at present that for tlieir children's sake whenever they can they get them to. leaya it. ; They' are paying for that. education which tliey denounce as Godless'; and is there any. injustice in asking thsin to pay for asystem to whioli they pay to-day, but from which one of their main objections will be entirely.removed? As',a'.matter of fact, there is a''great deal of _ moonshine about tho talk of their- ■ tieing'; asked to pay:: for this; they • aro not going to be asked'.to pay anything. ■There, was no -.increase. in the ..'edii'', cation. .. tate; in -Queensland in "1910, •or in Wostem . Australia; bocause .the religious instruction will bo given at the cost of the..Churches in sending tlieir ministers and their, religious teachers;' they will bear this whole of the cost, and will bear it willingly. Bishop Cleary also states that "in 1903 the Catholic (Eomari). claj-gy were giving proportionately aboii't twice as_ much religious instruction:-in the public schools as tho other clergy." Just emphasise that: In 1903—*-ho does' not say what is being done to-day—the Eoman Catholic clergy, proportionately, were given about .twice as much religious instruction in the nublic schools as the ; clergy of all tho .'other Churches, If so, j then tliey were going to the schools for tho purpose of saving religious instrucr tion, Are we, then, doing the Eoman Catholics any injustice wlien we ate seek- j ing greater facilities to do flie tiling of I which tliey will do, according- to BishopCleary, twice ns niueh as all tho other Churches put together. The Text Books. . Then Bishop Cleary makes a long stater ment about the Irish Text Books, and 1 : assure you it is only consideration for you which prevents, me dealing with it on tho present opportunity. I will .only make ono remark: The Bible-in-Stnt-e-Schools League has neither, asked for, nor does it desire, the Irish Test Books. It has distinctly. :and publicly stated that, and if Bishop. Cleary desires to bo fair, ho will mako'no further allusion to .{hem. .Secondly, we do not.advocate any book, wo are simply asking, and we a.re not going to bo diverted from this, that the principle shall be affirmed tbiit there shall 'bo Scripture lessons, and when that is of- . firmed books will, quickly take care of themselves, ns they did in Western Australia and in Queensland. Now, thero is another statement, that we want to place a mutilated Bible in the schools. I, am ■ delighted to . hear Bishop Cleary defond what he believes to be tho interest of tho Bible; and of tho whole Bible, but' I want to point out that if we are erring in seeking to put selections, chosen selections for the children, wo are erring in company of h : s Church. Day by day, \vkon Holy Jfas.i in celebrated, what do tto do but read selections of Scripture...

In the Anglican Church they do the eamo in reading the lessons for tho day, and the same thing in practice is done in the non-liturgical churches where selections aro read. ■ Cardinal Moran CLuoted, Now, on the uso of the Scriptures ' in schools, in contradiction to JJishop Geary, may 1 quoto a still higher authority. In his own Church, and ono that even more than Bishop Geary, if that is possible, Was an enemy to national education. Bis Eminence the lalo Cardinal Moran—and I. am going to read verbatim so that (hero may be no mistake—on April 8, 1904, in Sydney, at tho Educational Conference,. a gathering of tho heads of the Churches and educational experts: ' and presided over by tho Minister for. Public instruction, said: "1 havo very Jew words to say. But listening to tho many inter, esting addresses matlo yesterday, and today, it occurred to me tUat one filing Was wanting in them. It is the desire ,of all, as far I can ee&, that titir system of education should in its. various detail and all its' departments, bo worthy ' of ..our State and worthy of the Comttiftnivealth. Now, it appears to mo that tlm.Scripture lessons read in the schools are not .worthy of Australia,' nor 'worthy of this State, for this reason: They aro but garbled extracts from, we will say, the Old and Now Testament, and. 1 would venture to suggest, as a vast improvement (both for tho teachers and the senior pupils), that the four Gospels should bo substituted in thcif stead." Then ho goes on to say, "For my part, I would bo most willing to supply all our Catholic children with, the iour Gospels according to the corrected Douay version, •the same as will bo read in our religious J schools." Bp, you see that Cardinal Moran, who. takes exception, to the selection made, as he had the right to do, yet admits tho principle that the children should havo a selection, and is willing to provide at his own expense the four.Gospels, and that is the very principle of Scripture lessons under tho supervision of State school teachers to which . Bishop Geary is taking exception. "A Very Significant Fact." Moreover, in the Now South Wales' schools,' according to the most , tecent statistics I 1 have- been able to obtain, over 32,000 Roman Catholic children we.r.e in. daily attendance. That is a larger number than, attend the convent, denominational and Roman Catholic schools in New Zealand,; aud 'a very significant fact 1' may mention as showing that "the parents are not afraid'Of what their Church may say of t'heltf.sending their children to the State schools, is that ,we are tc'ld officially by tho Under-Secretary that the withdrawals from the teachers' Scrip-. tufe lessons are so small as to be negligible for statistical purposes, and therefore it follows that ail those 32,000 Roman Catholic children, with hardly an exception,' read the Scripture lessons in the schools.. Does that look as if . the Komaii Catholic parents fouM this - an impossible system in connection with our national education. In addition to that 1 niay point out that taking the average for Jive or six years, from .tight hundred to a thousand visits were paid every year by Roman Catholic clergymen to the State schools in New South Wales alone, for the purpose of giving definite religions teaching to their children, and also that the lionian Catholic school teachers are, I believe, in. a larger proportion in the State schools than '27 per cent, cf the' population, their proportion of population in the whole Stnte>; and therefore I think I have answered Bishop Geary, when he' states that our proposals will make it im- . possible for his' Giiireh, his teach'ors, or his children to go into-the schools, and to use the Stnte school I system. If Bishop Clean: wishes to damage our proposal,. I challenge him to produce for our investiga--tion instances of children or teachers who, having corao under tho national school 6ystein, have lost their faith in the Roman' Catholic Church, There is jio room for proselytism in this system, and it- -dc-es hot eiist. ... V Position of Roman 'Catholic Teachers. Now, another statement made by the Bishop is that \ve_. force Catholic teachers, by law; under'' pain of disniissa'l, to set at defiance the discipline • of their. Church, .and to ' wolato. sundry- prmeiples of pwto' tice." 'Now,. no''^iich ; p'h'r£so of 'suggestion has ever been, given' by us; on the contrary,'We havei'oVer and Over again stated that we are prepared to trust absolutely and unreservedly the Roman _• Catholic, teachers in Stat® schools. In New South Wales, Tasmania, Western Australia,,and •Queensland,. these toachefs handle these' lessons, and not. one has ever refused or made diSiculties. and 1 have nlready indicated, it is stated, and I believe it to be tho truth, that they are ih greater .proportion in the schools than in the population. The league's attitude towrds' ltoman' Catholic teachers has. been on« of confidence and trust. Over and over agaii) in Austfalia' has testimony been borne to'their honour and to their Mveren.ce in giving these lessons, The Penal Code. Now, another thing Bishop Geary said was that the league-would .revive some of the most dangerous principles of the Penal Code.- Jl'ny I. for your information, say he was referring to Ireland. Now it may bo very clever to draw a red herring across the scent, but he may credit US' Willi, sufficient' intelligence to knowthat we are not going to be Ifid away by any red herring he chooses to draw; but even $d, 1 may stop to say that we are out of sympathy with the Penal Code of the old days, and we suggest .noiie of its principles. What did that code prohibit? It prohibited the eelebration of or assisting.'at Itoly Mii 69. It prohibited the teaching and instruction of Roman Catholic children in. tho faith of their fathers. It prohibited the presence,. in the. country of ecclesiastics of that Church, whether male or female;.aiid it prohibited the possession or erection of sacred buildings, churches, or convents. How can he say that we ave reviving some, of 'the ' most dangerous principles of-that- Penal Code? 1 would like Bishop Cleary when ho suggests that to look at some Catholic countries, to . look at France, at Italy, at Spain. When sonic of th& religions Orders ai'e driven _ out of these l Catholic countries, tho British JJmpire, including New .Zealand, welcome's them, and gives th«m a home; wlien in other'countries no Rk)man ccclcsiastic is allowed to enter'tho schools for any j?urnose whatever, in the British Empire »nd in New "Zealand' as a part af it. they are allowed to have' their'own schools, and we as a league are -seeking -to gain ; for; them- access ite the State schools eitually. with And Bishop .Cleary "has ~ the honesty- to suggest that *\ve are seeking to revive some the most dangerous principles of tho Penal Code! I for ono regret that there ever was a Penal Code, but I would remind him, since he<.suggests it, that we could talk, of- similar things, of the Wassac.ro of St. Bartholomew in when there were those who laid do.wn their lives cheerfully in defence of tho very principle we are advocating—the open Bible for 'themselves atid their children; or we could remind him of the Spanish Inquisition, under which the mere possession of a Bible was' a. crime to be punished by torture and death. And the principles of that Inquisition are, I venture to submit, the same , principles advocated bv Bishop Cleary that the Bible shall ntft be opeii ■ to our children, except under his control, and that we shall have no liberty of conscience unless, he first is ready to agree to itj. (Applause.) "The Most Painful Thing." I now come to what I cannot help saying is the most painful thins I have te deal with., and in-dealing .with it I Waiit not to misunderstand the good Bishop. In a' statement published in tho Auckland. "Star" of Novembor 11 Bishop Geary states, or is reported as stating, "But in-, formation received from Tasmania led tho speaker to doubt that the, quoted Word's were roallv written by tho Director of Education there." I will read tho quoted words, "The Director of Education, Tasmania, writes under date of September It, litoe. As far as I can ascertain, no difficulty arose from the system adopted in 1808. The system existing 111 Tasmania is accepted by all denominations as a happv solution of the religious, difficulty." Bishop Cleary doiibts if those words w'ere ever written by the Director of I'Mucation. May I point out what that doubt means. It means that he is reflecting upon tlio?'e churches here that are combined in this movement, that have published this state, ■nient, and Upon the churches in Australia that are combined in this movement and published this statement, 11 u is bringing an accusation of dishonesty and dishonour against the Bishops, tho Moderators, and the presiding head? of other denominations which are responsible in Australia and in Kaw. Zealand for tho jrablieation of this

statement. Now may I Tead, ..in answer What I hold in my hand—an original document--(npjilauseJ-*-bearing' the Signature of tho secretary tor tho Director of Education. It state:>-l Will read I'ho v'firj' words—'"As fai* its I can ascertain no difficulty arosa from tho system adopted ill 1868. The system <aisfctog in Tasmania accepted by nil denominations as a. happy solution of the religious difficulty." Mfltf 1 say that when Bishop Geary departs from' faiL l controversy lie must feel -that lie hai> h vn'j wcafc wiMi, mid the members of these churches whose leaders have thus had their honour and truthfulness assail-, ed will know how to deal with Bishop . Geary,When they come tp the poll on the matter. The Referendum. My last point relates to Bishop Geary's objection, to the referendum.; Jle says, he does not believe .in counting heads, llless iuy soul, what does, he believe in? . Dwa ho believe in ..Parliainent?, • Aild-, jY.hats' ;ia. Parliament but -.-..ta ■■ Counting:of.,'heads?.,,,. What else is it? .Perhaps Bis.ho'piCt.rarji would prefer instead. of eonsnlhr.it tie •people of New Zenlaftd We.~shoU.ld. ejfnsjdfr'.' the Bishops, aid .abide by their- decision. Brit even that would bo. <v counting"of heads. Ho says he does not like the referendum! He reminds mo <if "I do not like thee, Br. Fell, , .Tlie reason why I cannot fall,' * . But this I .know and know right well, • I do not like thee Dr. Fell." And that is because lie knows that "Br. ■ Ml," in the person of tho people of New Zealand, will, if tliev are not Mocked, if they once get the muzzle taken oft 'them, that Bishop Clcary is seeking to impose upon them, declare themselves for religious liberty and freedom of conscience, and an open Bible. ' Finally,. I ask, what is to bo the condition not only in this matter but in all matters? "What is the principle under which we are to live, is it that the -minority is to prevail and nilo over the majority? Are wo to have | "Row© Bulc" or "Ifoino Rule"? (Applause.) Are we, tho .people of New Zealand., to be masters in our own house, or . are our own affairs to be-subject to. the. • dictation of a small minority, even, thoirgh it has tho estimable Bishop at its head. Shall i)ot the people of fk.w Zealand say what tliey will have in their own schools; what tliey will do in their own house?. The Keystone. . Are we, Presbyterian's, Anglicans, Metho* (lists, Salvation Army, and other Christian ' ■individuals, are we satisfied to wait Until we Mine- round to his View; of the. situation, and get State-aided denominational schools? Our ansvt'ef is that w'c are satisfield with our system,, and that wo will stand by and support the national sys- • tern. We are prepared to stand by it; we do not condemn it and seek to shatter it'; wo are only asking that one thingi tho; keystone should lie added, that it may stand firm forever, and jt'is we who ought to be considered in this matter; 1 venture to say that, with the help of God absvo, and.with the help of the prayers of the faithful through this fair land, .and . with, tho help'of the Christians, standing shoulder to shoulder; and asking for this thing for the common good, for the pood of our children, ajid_ of all the churches, no power of' force will be able to; prevent your obtaining such a measure of justice, such a. matter, of liberty, of. freedom :of conscience, which will moreover, once and for all satisfy the majority' of "the churches, and practically all. .and' evenone of them here and elsewhere, removing all danger of disturbance of the national system of education, and making a happy solution of a very difficult, problem. (Loud and prolonged .applause.) ' The MOdefator thanked Canon Garland ' for his address - and tho motion - was carried. .' Need for Hard Work. The Rev. Dr. GibS;.said"' the- pi-eyidM movement which had . been abandoned some five vears ago,; had failed, because of the apathy of .the clergy and elders, and this movement would fail, likewise Unless a different spirit were shown by them. There would be need for whole- • hearted sympathy with the movement, for hard work,, and for a considerable sum of mOfiov, perliaps annually. .He inov-, ■ ed: "'That the Assembly thanks, the Rev. Canon GarlaHdt for his able and instructive address,, and appoints a, Sunday no- . on whieh'ministers .shall, bring the subject of conpregationsV and; if 'possible arrange'for retiring collections in. aid .of the . movement on j the second Sunday in. DecernThe Rev. T.' : Tait '"said'; he approved of' the proposal for a referendum as the -' only fair means of settling the question, ■' and given tho referendum, friends of the • ■proposal would • have 'to take their coata off and' sweat for. it. : The motion was 'carried. .. _ On the motion, of. the I\ev. U . }■>. Davies, . Seconded by ■ the Dr. Gibt>, i.t was ' .solved that the Bible-in-Schools League" be asked tc approach the Government with a request that the Australian system of religious instruction be submitted to the people of Zealand by re- . fefendum. ■