BISHOP CLEARY AND N.S.W. BOOKS.

Dominion, Volume 7, Issue 2215, 30 July 1914, Page 4

BISHOP CLEARY AND N.S.W. BOOKS.

Sir,—As reported in your ; columns, the Kev. J. Patterson declared it "an absolute untruth" to say that the' New South Wales-Government Scripture lessons 'were picked in order to injure a . certain church." Those mutilated lessons were "picked" in Ireland by the Rev. Dr. Oarlile and Archbishop Whately (both ardent proselytisers) for uso in the "National" schools of that country, and were there used until the nation sickened of them. Archbishop Whately referred to those lessons a3 "the great instrument of conversion" of Roman Catholics; "that they would be favourable to Protestantism"; that, by them, "the minds of large numbers of Roman Catholics have' been prepared, and aro now being prepared, for the reception of Protestant doctrines} The education supplied by the National Board," ho added, "is'gradually undermining the -vast fabrio of the Irish Roman Catholic Church." He njso said of . the Irish "mixed" system of education: "If we give it up; we give up the only hope of weaning the Irish from the abuses of Popery. But I cannot venture openly to profess this opin--1011. I canuqt openly support the! Edu» cation Board as an instrument of conversion. I;have to fight its battle with one hand, and that my best, tied behind me." These extracts are taken from Archbishop Whately's "Life and Correspondence," by his daughter, London. 1868, pp. 273 to- 275. Archbishop N liately, according to Butt, controlled Irish education for ,27 years.He d<v fended open proselytism, in' tho national schools, before the Select •Com- . mittee of the Lords in 1854, as Rev." Dr. Carlilc had, in effect, done before the Select Parliamentary Committee of 1837. r have in my possession some 200 printed pages of detailed testimony (mostly from official sources) as to tho cunning and tyrannous methods of pro- , selytism that went- oil in Ireland in conncction with the Carlile-Whatcly manuals. The League has the right to oross-examine me hereon before the Parliamentary Education Committee. These New South Wales manuals are stated by the Rev. Mr. Patterson to have "had. tho definite imprimatur of the Roman .Catholic hierarchy of Ireland." This statement is not in accord with fact. Even-if such a "definite imprimatur" were given, if would be improperly given, and would not render thoso i sectarian productions one whit less objectionable fromthe viewpoint of Catholic prinoiples, and of the .specific Index legislation- of June 10, 1757, which applies everywhere, throughout our Church. As a matter of fact, manuals of the New South Wales typo were, in N priiiciple or directly, condemned by the Irish Bishops oil January 26, 1826,- on February 14, 1840, by the Synod of Thurles in 1850, and by tlie Synod of the Province of Dublin in July, 1853. Tho Rev. Mr. Patterson, states that; "on the title, pago of the book was a big cross with the words 'Nihil obstat.' " But that is no. "imprimatur, "whether "definite', 1 or indefinite. " If, however, tho Rev. Mr. Patterson will be good enough to give mo .the means of investigating even this statement,; it will be investigated promptly.--I await his reply. For the information of your readers,~l"iriay state that an "imprimatur" is, among Catholic's, merely a permission to-print, and ' thflt it does hot necessarily.carry, .witli it' any positivcf approval of 'tbo'mat-' ter. so.priiited.-r-I am, etc., : HENRY. W. CLEARY, ' . Bishop ,of Auckland. July 28. •