The Evening Star THURSDAY, MARCH 26, 1874

Evening Star, Issue 3461, 26 March 1874, Page 2

The Evening Star THURSDAY, MARCH 26, 1874

We do not know whether the finding of mares’ nests forms part of the recognised duties of clergymen belonging to the Roman Catholic denomination, or if it is merely for the love of the sport that they engage in the search for these interesting lusus natural; but it is certain that some of them have carried it on with considerable vigor and no small success, , The Rev. Father Cole-, man, a short time ago, uneartHed a notable specimen of this class of curiosi-; ties at Tokomairiro, but unless we are grievously mistaken, his ecclesiastical .superior has come upon one that promises to far exceed in scientific and ..general; interest, that discovered by his subordinate. The Most Rev, Dr. ■; Moran told his hearers at St. Joseph’s, on Sunday last, that the Presbyterian minister bf a certain place, not a hundred miles from Dunedin, “assisted by a few of his brethren, had made a house to house visitation, calling upon: the householders to exert their influence upon the committee, and also calling upon the committee not to elect the applicant in question,” viz: —si, young inaii of unexceptional character, who had a certificate of a high order from authorities in the Colony whence he came, but who had an Irish name, and was hence concluded to he a Catholic—“as it would be a dreadful thing to have an Irish Papist teaching in their school.” His lordship went on to say that the consequence of this was that the young man referred to, though not a Catholic, withdrew his application, disgusted at such conduct, and that eventually a gentleman was elected who had no certificate of qualification at all. This strange story may possibly contain a grain or, two' of truth, and we do not doubt for a moment the bona Jides of the reverend prelate who told it; at the same time we think it highly probable that on examination it will turn out to be the case, as it has been before with similar interesting discoveries, made in, the same quarter, that a rather fervid imagination has had no small share in it its present form—in short, that it will prove to be ! a mare’s nest. Be this as it may, there can be little doubt that the Bishop is quite correct in saying, in the early part of his address, that the educational system of Otago is Protestant, and therefore denominational.,,. As long as there is work assigned to the teachers under any educational system which would necessitate the violation of the religious principles of of any large denomination, who happened to be teachers,-so; long might .such a system, without any overstraining of the word, be called denominational. Now, as the Bishop says, no conscientious Roman Catholic could become a teacher under our system,, because in doing so he would bring himself under an obligation to read the Bible in the school, and, this he could not do without a “ denial of Catholicity.” This is unquestionably - quite a real grievance, and it would be only fair to remove it. Here again, however, there, would be another difficulty. How is it to be removed?. The Bishop would probably be ready with a reply to the. effect that the system should be altered sd as to allow the Catholics to manage ■ their own schools in their own,way, a capitation grant or an allowance of a similar nature'being paid to them. “Thus,” he would say, “Catholics would no longer have to pay takes so that they might have Presbyterian .teachers, and have the Bible read to every child who might not be withdrawn.” But then there is a portion of the community, quite as large as the Catholic section of it, who are what are called voluntaries, who conscientiously object to State aid to religion in any shape or form. Are these to be made: to pay taxes for the support of teachers, part of whose duty is to teach religion, for the performance of which, among others, they are paid by the State? In whatever way we consider this great question of the education of the masses, we are driven to. the conclusion that the secular system is the only Jair one. To the denominational system there are very many valid positive objections; to the secular system there are, at the most, only negative ones. The secularist may say to the denommationalist that he has done the things; that he ought not to have done in making a large portion of the community pay for what they conscientiously’ disbelieve in; while the denommationalist can at the utmost say that the secularist has left undone the things that he should have done—that his system does not give the children any religious instruction whatever. Moreover, the reply to such objections is not far to seek. The secularist can say that it is perfectly true that he does only what he can justly do for all, but that ho has placed no hindrance in the way to prevent children being taught religion; that he would, on the whole, if it were possible, wish them to be taught that subject in schools, but that it has become so muddled up by the contentions of rival sects that it is impossible to found any religious '.system about which all can agree ; and that the denominationalists must really take this work of religious

instruction in hand themselves, because a.ny attempt on the part of the State to carry on religious teaching—not to speak of the aforesaid injustice of any such attempt—would, by causing many small, inefficient schools to take the place of a few large and efficient schools, so deteriorate the education of the country, that it would be hardly worth the State’s while to have anything to do with it.