Catholic View on Bible-in-Scnools

Sun (Auckland), Volume 1, Issue 46, 17 May 1927, Page 8

Catholic View on Bible-in-Scnools

REPLY TO CANON JAMEs SAVED THE STATE MILLIONS

The Rev. Doctor Buxton, Ad minstrator of St. Patrick’s Rom. Catholic Cathedral Parish, repli " to statements made by the R.’’ Canon James regarding the pr £ posed Religious Exercises i„ Schools Bill. In placing the Roman Catholic viewpoint before the community Dr. Buxton takes exception to any inference that Roman Catholics might be ignored in the settlement of the question because they have only five per cent, of their children in the State schools

“Canon James seems to forget ti history of the introduction of sera lar education in our State school* and the consistent part Catholics hav ’ played in creating, maintaining at !j continually extending their school system,” said Dr. Buxton. ° “FREE, SECULAR. AND COMPULSORY”

He explained that 50 years ago most of the primary schools of Zealand were of a denominational character, wherein religious training was conducted by members of th e various faiths, and these schools re. ceived grants-in-aid from the common purse. The Act of 1577 did away with all such Government assistance and established the free secular and compulsory system we have today. The Catholics of the 70’s, convinced that God must be welcomed as the Headmaster in each school, opposed the introduction of the secular system. On the Act becoming lav, Catholics declared that if the Govern! ment would not return to them a due proportion of the taxes spent on edacation generally, to which Catholics contributed their share, they would again have to dip their hands into their pcckets, and, unaided by the State, piovide a system of education in accordance with their consciences. “I would emphatically state,” declared Dr. Buxton, “that Catholics have never claimed State assistance for anything but the purely secular teaching given in their schools. Catholics could not, as a matter of pri* ciple, ask members of other belie*

to contribute towards religious instruction in Catholic schools. To ash this from the State would be a violation of Catholic principle,'since all citizens contribute proportionately to the maintenance of education generally. STATE EDUCATIONAL GRANT

“All New Zealand is aware that Catholic opponents of the 1877 measure made no idle boast. To-day,

not only do Catholics contribute over £350,000 per annum toward the State educational grant for the maintenance of the secular system of wliich they conscientiously disapprove for the reasons given, but the education of 22,000 Catholic New Zealanders saves the State, on its own admissions, upwards of £240,000 annually. Catholics do not object to the State system —including its secularity—for those who conscientiously can accept it. They also, as citizens who pay some of the bill, take an intelligent interest in the State system and iu the maintenance of a high standard of national education. And as Catholics they are also concerned, since many of their children must necessarily in isolated districts partake of

the present system. “Catholics have thus contributed to

the maintenance of the State system, and have created and maintained their own without cost to the State. Now, Canon James says in effect, that because Catholics have saved the State a sum running into millions of pounds, and, accordingly through their maintenance of Catholic education up to Government standard, only five per cent, of Catholic children remain in State schools, the opinions of the Catholic body, the consciences of Catholic children, and the unanimous objections of the members of the State School Teachers’ Institute, must be trampled on with impunity, he said. “We Catholics believe in the fairmindedness of the people Zealand,” said _»r. Buxton. ’’i'uty years ago we started onr own efficient system of education, becatse the secular provisions of the newlyestablished State system were uumceptable to us. Now the State is asked by some of the members ot some denominations to introduce at general expense a form of so-called Religious Exercises which are manifestly denominational. „ “The principle underlying the l k ‘‘ Act they are ready to cast to ue winds. And the cost of the P r °P° s ?” religious exercises in schools will M as denominational a grant as any P vlously made before the passing the 1877 Act. Will Canon James ana his friends go a step further and as that all types of conscience be equally respected, not by a worthless science clause, but by the r^co ”L tion by grants-in-aid to all Chnstmn schools wliich are efficiently dome State work? Or will Catholics an other conscientiously object!** nominations be given the ‘pnvusg of going without’?” “WHAT COULD BE MORE UNJUST?” Dr. Buxton drew attention to tj® words of Mr. John Caughley, Director of Education, and a P roin . ent Presbyterian elder, in his deuce before Parliament last sesaio**“What could be more unjurt than for a Government to esta lish a purely secular syste ' thus making Catholics face W - to them was the necessity ® providing for religious educatio and then after all their exp ?” . ture was irrevocably conus'to grant at State cost relig lo instruction suitable to Prote . . ants and to reply to a demano State-aid from Catholics they had separated themse from the State system.”