The Evening Star SATURDAY, JANUARY 27, 1872.

Evening Star, Volume IX, Issue 2791, 27 January 1872, Page 2

The Evening Star SATURDAY, JANUARY 27, 1872.

It is a very strange thing that many men who expect to be believed when they explain their own ideas, think it necessary to be continually trying to throw discredit upon the statements of other people. Especially strange is it when those who are thus trying to raise themselves by pulling down others are of the clerical order. We do not consider this of so much moment when the charge and counter charge are confined within the limits of particular churches. The public arc not interested in the views that one section of a church entertains with regard to another—whether parson A thinks parson B is speaking “that which is “ not true,” or whether parson 0 considers them arcades anibo. The public may perhaps have their own ideas as to them all, and stand amused at the contrast between the men in the pulpit preaching kindliness and courtesy, and the wranglers in the council of the church, excelling the fiercest political partisans in keenness of crimination and recrimination. But matters become very different when these fallible and excitable clerical gymnasts venture outside their churches and essay to interfere with social arrangements. Then the bitterness and reckless denunciation which amused lookers on when it was only a stand-up fight amongst themselves, naturally arrays every other class against them. Like an excited Malay, they have set themselves to “run a muck,” and the whole of the rest of society are interested, to say the least, in repelling the unwarrantable attack. In just this position, Dr Morax has placed himself. He has issued. a pastoral letier which has found its way in rxieuso into an up country paper, and has thus been made public property : and in that letter the learned Doctor takes upon himself to characterise those who advocate a system of purely secular education in the following terms: —

Efforts are now being made to substitute a purely secular system for the Presbyterian system of education at present existing throughout this diocese ; and Catholics are invited to aid these efforts. . You must be on your guard against secularism in education, Roth systems are antagonistic to Catholicity, for whilst the Presbyterian system would weaken and ultimately destroy your Catholic faith, the secular system is calculated, and intended by its chief patrons, to uproot all Christian and Divine faith, and erect on its ruins stark infidelity. Of the two, therefore, the latter is more objectionable, and should, therefore, meet from us the most severe condemnation, and the most determined opposition.

As this is palpably a misrepresentation, and as such misstatements are not confined to ministers of the creed which Dr. Moran professes to hold, it is high time that the position the clergy ought to occupy with regard to the laity should be defined. Their office, if faithfully fulfilled, is the highest to which man can aspire. Leaving out of the question, as not pertinent to the argument, their privilege as expounders of man’s relationship to another state of existence, the sole question with which we have to deal is, how far they are to be allowed directly to meddle with social arrangements : and on "rounds connected with their own usefulness and human liberty, we unhesitatingly say not at all. If they perform their duties faithfully, they will have quite sufficient influence without becoming mixed up with questions of detail: and the more they secularise their own office, the Jess influence will they be able to exert. No clergyman can mix himself up with politics without becoming a marked, and an abused man. It is true that the morality lie has to inculcate is the standard by •which the right or wrong of all law must be estimated. It is also true that in proportion to the neglect of men to refer laws to that standard, they are found defective in their adaptation to human progress. But that is no reason why the clergy should be entrusted with the administration as well as with the exposition of those laws. If they do their duty in their churches, the laity understand the moral code, which alone is applicable to social arrangements, as well as they do themselves; and because of their practical habits in the business of life, are infinitely better fitted to carry it out. Moreover, no clergyman can divest himself of the peculiar doctrines of the church to which he is attached, Like Dr Moran, he is apt to undervalue every other creed, and to desire to spread those dogmas which he either believes, or professes to believe, by every possible means. This utterly unfits him for participation in arrangements affecting persons of different religions. His spiritual tenets pervade every opinion that he holds, on every subject • and thus, if he be faithful to them, he cannot be impartial towards others. Acknowledging it to be his bounden duty to teach what he believes, it is not less the duty of society to secure to every individual the freest exercise of thought. But this cannot be attained except by separating secu-

lar from religious teaching. If all were of one faith, the question of secular education would not arise ; but since men differ in theoretical theology, and since every man has the right to have his opinions respected equally with every other, the oply way out of the difficulty is to divide education into secular and religious. The secular of right belongs to the laity : it is of this world, and fits a man to get his living, to attain to honor, distinction, and affluence —all of which we maintain to be very good and desirable ends. The religious education wc are quite content to remit to the clergy, ami feel well assured if they would give themselves heartily to the work, instead of striving to put it upon other people’s shoulders, both they and mankind would very much improve by tho change,