BIBLE IN SCHOOLS AND MISREPRESENTATION.
Sir,—A letter from Mr. 0. W. Williams that appeared in your columns last Saturday is worthy of notice, as containing an appeal for fair play in the discussion at present going on about the introduction of Bible-teaching into our State khools. I think with that gentleman that it little serves the publio weal to make charges of misrepresentation, etc., unless, indeed, it can be shown that such misrepresentation has an important bearing on the matters at issue, and that the misrepresentation is either wilful or reckless. But in referring to the address given by Mr. J. Caughley some weeks ago at the Town Hall, these remarks seem out ot place. Mr. Caughley spoke of misrepresentation, but he did not end there; he went on to quote examples. Now, before anyone should say Mr. Caughley discussed the matter in a wrong way, such person should show how it was a wrong way. Tor instance, Mr. Caughley spoke of something which appears to have been reiterated by Canon Garland at various, 1 will not say public, meetings, but at various Biblc-i'n-schools meetings, where no one is allowed to challenge questionable or inaccurate statements. The statement in question, made by Canon Garland, was that a large number of liomau Catholic priests in New South Wales have availed themselves of the powers given by an act of Parliament to give religious teaching iu tiio State schools there. Mr. Caughley said he had sent communications to a dozen newspapers in our different towns, to show that the statement "was incorrect, and that all Canon Garland had done was to insert a sort of hulf-retract-tion in your columns alone, taking no notice of journals published in other towns. I understand, Sir, that Mr. C'aughley's communication (lid- not reach yon, so there was little reason in publishing the retraction, such as it was, in your columns alone. Here, then, it is claimed, js misrepresentation serious, and, if not wilful, at least reckless, and something which, when printed, should be answered by a complete and widespread withdrawal of tlie statement. I venture to think, before Mr. Williams should say Mr. Caughley showed a wrong spirit, he should show either that ihe alleged facts are not really such, or that Cation Garland, although misinformed, had exc-i-ci.-fd a proper judgment in endeavouring (n arrive at tho truth of what lie said. Wo must alwa.vs bear in mind that f'anon Garland is tlie paid agent of the league, that he dovotes his lime to furthering the league's cause: therefore, it is far less.excusable for him to be making incorrect statements. than for others wiio have, (heir various businesses to attend to, and cannot devote much of tlieir time to this one matter. But that the statements made at Bible-in-schools' meetings bristle with misrepresentation is patent:. Do the.v not. continually seek to represent their opponents as other than pious Christians! 1 When a littlo inquiry will show that many of their stoutest opponents hold exactly the same theological opinions as they do themselves, thai these opponents are church members, church officers, and sometimes minsters of religion, and often more esteemed for uprightness of life, than the Uiblc-in-sehools' people. I have had occasion, through your i-mir-tcsv. Sir, to use your columns to call at. tcn'tion to a serious misrepresentation by Canon Garland to the eft'cct that tcaehcrs
in our Slate schools must nut mention (he name of God to their pupil?. 1 have not heard of his repeating that statement since that time, liut I contend, Sir, that when an important change, such as Ihe one wo are discus.-ing, is being advocated widely, and in a way that does not allow of public discussion, and that when, in support of this change, untrue, statements are made, we are serving the public weal by letting the public know that misrepresentations arc being made.—l am, etc., CIIAS. J. COOKE. Kelburhe, June 4, 1913. [Our correspondent is himself in error concerning Canon Garland'o alleged inaccurate statement referred to by Mr. Caugliley, and does Canou Garland serious injustice. The inaccuracy which Canon Garland frankly corrected in our columns related to a tabulated statement showing the number of pupils receiving religious instruction in 2\ew South Wales. The error arose through the confusion of the number of pupils enrolled with the number instructed. Canon Garland not only took the earliest opportunity to correct the mistake through our columns, but, ns has already been stated on frequent occasions, he iiad all the printed matter containing the erroneous table called in and destroyed, and fresh circulars issued with the heading of the table corrected, so as to make the position quite clear. Some of the opponents of the Biblc-in-Schools' League' might with advantage copy Canon Garland's frank and straightforward methods.]
Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/DOM19130611.2.10
Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka
Dominion, Volume 6, Issue 1773, 11 June 1913, Page 3
Word count
Tapeke kupu
794BIBLE IN SCHOOLS AND MISREPRESENTATION. Dominion, Volume 6, Issue 1773, 11 June 1913, Page 3
Using this item
Te whakamahi i tēnei tūemi
Stuff Ltd is the copyright owner for the Dominion. You can reproduce in-copyright material from this newspaper for non-commercial use under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International licence (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0). This newspaper is not available for commercial use without the consent of Stuff Ltd. For advice on reproduction of out-of-copyright material from this newspaper, please refer to the Copyright guide.