The Evening Star SATURDAY, MARCH 30, 1872

Evening Star, Issue 2843, 30 March 1872, Page 2

The Evening Star SATURDAY, MARCH 30, 1872

To form an association in which all the members shall think exactly alike on the purpose for which they have combined, is, from the constitution of the human mind, an impossibility: some cannot fail to know more of the subject than others : some may be mere theorists, some practical, while a few combine in themselves more or less knowledge of both theory and practice. If the association is intended to effect some common object such as is contemplated by that formed for the promotion of National Education in New Zealand, its principles must combine as many points of agreement and as few of difference as possible. Ihe object of that association is stated in Mr Downie Stewart’s address to be to secure the passing of an Education Act, “ such as shall prove the bulwark “of liberty, the safeguard of our political institutions, and a stimulus “ and guide to enlighten social ad- “ vancement for generations to come.” We confess we were somewhat surprised at this announcement. We had no idea that any Act of the Legislature could have such astounding results, All we had hoped for in our most sanguine moments was that an Act should be passed in which the principles of civil and religious liberty should be secured in schools, by the total exclusion of the denominational element; that, in fact, no religious sect, either in the form of a church or the majority of a school committee, should have the power to dictate whether or not what is generally esteemed religious instruction should or should not form part of the curriculum of a day school. Our hope was therefore that any association formed would have recognized, as the only, principle capable of universal application, National system, from a which religious instruction in day schools receiving State support, should be altogether excluded. Without this, the objects of the Association cannot be universally accepted. So long as the following clause disfigures the principles of the Association, sectarianism, under the specious form of Bible reading, cannot be excluded \ and we need not tell our readers that sectarianism and denominationalism are exchangeable terms, meaning precisely the same thing. Your petitioners do not seek that the reading of the Bible in schools should be either enjoined or prohibited by the Legislature; but they are of opinion that the decision of that question should be left to the School Committees, subject to the provision of a time table conscience clause.

It ia very plain, to anyone who will take the trouble to think upon the matter, that by the terms of this clause the majority are to be empowered to rule the minority in a matter with which society has no right to interfere. Even in every-day concerns, the decision of the majority is a very clumsy way of deciding what is best. The slightest acquaintance with the working of the principle of ruling by majorities, must convince that it is not only liable to abuse, but should be alone applied to circumstances that affect men in their relations one to another, where by common consent the minority, for the sake of the peace and well-being of society, submit to the arbitration of the whole. The affair is, however, altogether different where earthly matters are not involved. Then man stands in a different position. Society cannot help him if wrong, nor support him if right. Each man stands as an individual. JSTo church can relieve him of his risk—no school committee take upon itself the responsibility of his faith. But a conscience clause assumes something of this responsibility. It is another phase of the doctrine of “ toleration,” which claims the right to let a man do what no Church nor State has religiously, morally, or socially the right to prevent; to worship or bring his children up to worship Gon according to his conscience. We can imagine the Most Reverend the Roman Catholic Bishop of Dunedin reading with some

amusement the address of the Associa- 1 tien, criticising its literary merits, and rising from his episcopal chair, saying j when ho roaches the conscience f clause, “ First pluck out the beam ) “ from thine own eye, and then ‘ “ wilt thou see clearly to pluck 1 “ out the mote that is in thy bro- “ thor’s eye.” We can imagine him < saying with some glee “Now I have “ them. If they seek this, in common “ fairness, the legislature must concede “ deuominationalism, for what they “ ask is neither more nor less. The “ words are fair, but they point to ex- “ aetly the system followed in our own “ convents.. We Homan Catholics do “ not need a conscience clause; we con- “ cede the whole matter without it. And the Bishop would be right. In the Roman Catholic convent in Dunedin, the conscience clause is practically in operation. Supposing any of our eccentric citizens ot the Protestant taith —for there are a few—snould imagine that his daughters would receive a hotter education at the Convent than at the Cirls’ Provincial School, and he went to the Lady Abbess, explained that he was a Protestant, and wished his child to live and die a Protestant; therefore he hoped, if placed under her tuition, no attempt at proselytisra would bo made. He would not be told that they had a conscience clause at the Convent, but that in the course ol school instruction religion was never mentioned, because the school was a mixed one ol the children of Roman Catholic and Protestant parents He would be informed that special provision for giving religions instruction to Roman Catholic children was made, for they attended half an hour before school commenced, so that there was no mixing up of the secular and religious training. We do not ask the most Reverend the Bishop to reconcile this fuention with the claims lie puts forward, but we do ask : the Association for the Promotion of National Education in Now Zealand,” whether the Roman Catholics ol Dunedin have not in this respect shown themselves practically in advance of the 1 Protestant churches: there is plainly no reason why religions teaching should not be separated from secular, and every reason that it should if liberty of conscience is to be preserved.