BIBLE IN SCHOOLS

Hokitika Guardian, 24 June 1931, Page 3

BIBLE IN SCHOOLS

STATEMENT BY BISHOP UAODIE. : (By Telegraph—Bei Brest Association) CHRISTCHURCH, June 23. Rt. Rev. Bishop Brodie, ot Christchurch, has distriuutcd, i.as a circular letter to the clergy of his diocese, a letter which he has< sent to the Rev. Mr Blamires the Secretary of Bible-in-Schools League.

The letter runs: “My attention has been called to the fact that, the representatives of the Bible-in-Selioois League have stated publicly, that the Catholic Heirarchy has decided not- to oppose the legislation tlie League proposes to introduce. As a member ot the Catholic Hierarchy, and having been a party to ail ol the negotiations between the Catholic Hierarchy and Rible-in-Schools-League, 1 wish to remind you that no agreement of ' any kind has been entered inly by the two organisntions mentioned. ’' Bishop Brodie refers to the various conferences at which tlie representatives of his Church have discussed the subect with the representatives of the Bible-in-Schools League, and he states positively, concerning every meeting that the Catholic Hierarchy did not accept the proposals ot the Bible-m-Sohools League.

THE LEACUE’S REILLY. A DIFFERENCE SUGGESTED. ' MASTER TON, June 23. Repvling to a statement attributed to Bishop Brodie in thin Press Association message from Christchurch, the Rev, 'dr Blamires (Secretary of tlie Bible-in-Schools League) states that the only official conference of representatives i fieially appointed by his League to confer with the Roman Catholic Hierarchy, which was attended by Bishop Brodie was on April 29, 1930, after negotiations which had been opened •p with Archbishops Redwood and O’Shea, and definite proposals been nlaced before them promising protection of conscience to Catholic teachers and 'pupils, and that if any additional expenditure was incurred in the introduction of Bilile. lessons, the Roman Catholic taxpayers would ’ not he saddled with this additional expenditure. The Catholic Hierarchy at tfie conference referred to decided to send a reply in writing. Accordingly, on May 12, 1930, Archbishop O’Shea reolied, saying: “After having given .nreful consideration to the proposals • oiltained in your letter of April 14( and to what took place at our conlerence wit li yourself and other repre- - ntiltives of the Bible-in-Sclioois Laegue on 29th ultimo, the Catholic Hierarchy hereby affirm their approval of the proposals and clauses set out in the above letter, and discussed at,

our inee.ing.” Mi: 13.1 am ires .said, that fiaxl.been the. position ■ consistently maintained by Archbishop O’Shea over since in his negotiations representing the Catholic Hierarchy, with the League. His acceptance was clear, and definite, and was duly notified in a statement ' p .b----lisliod independently, hut together, In Wellington papers by Archbishop Redivood for Catholic Bishops and by the League ■ Executive on July 25th, 1930:; Since that there lias been no intimation of any \Yithdrawal until this state, ment now made by Bishop Brodie. Mr Blamires added: “With differences of opinion between the Roman Catholic Archbishops and Bishop Brodie, the League has nothing to do. Tt will honourably fulfil its pledges to protect the consciences, not only of Roman Catholics. Imt of all who may desire exemption, and must leave 'tot Roman’ Catholic lead, “s .the settlement of their own differences.”