BISHOP CLEARY ON BIBLE IN SCHOOLS "PROSELYTISM."

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LV, Issue 251, 13 March 1913, Page 6

BISHOP CLEARY ON BIBLE IN SCHOOLS "PROSELYTISM."

Fo tlic Kditor. ' Sir. A coned -tatemeni of mini l was : lin ;t form init li-cil 'ln- iiif l ) denied in your is»ue of February 21!. 1 staled leMu.i.'ly that the rev. organiser of. the Bible-in-Sehools League boasted before ' the Presbyterian As.-euibly that Koniau Catholic eliildren, with hardly ' an except ion. read Serfpture lessons in !hi' sehools" of Xew South Wales. The quoted word-; are from verbatim reports in tiie Dominion of November Iti and the l'resliyterian Outlook of -January 21. I 'Jiave before tne numerous similar statements by the organiser. 1 This (I saidl means, "in other words." that these eliildren "have been successfully proselytised into violation of the faith and discipline of the Chureh of their baptism. ' Thi- is also quite corrects Catholic faith is opposed to the sectarian doctrines of "private judgment"' and of the moral right of the | Government to teach religion—or (as the law terms it) to import '"religious instruction" ?ind ''general religious teaching."' Catholic ecclesiastical law is also against Catholics reading or explaining unapproved P.ible versions, or taking part in the Xew South Wales sectarian instruction and worship described in a League pamphlet by liev. A. Don. The League has adopted, in aggravated form, the conscience clause devised by astute Irish proselytisers for the declared purpose of "weaning the Irish from the abuses of Popery." That conscience clause legally embodies the following cunning falsehood: That all parents—Protestants, Catholics. Jews. etc. —who fail to protest "in writing" against this State "religious instruction." thereby demand or approve that "religious instruction" for their children in the public school.-! And. without consulting parents, the Government, requires the children to accept this "religious instruction." That disreputable Irish conscience clause is, on the face of it. clearly intended to capture for sectarian instruction. among others, the children of objecting parents who (as formerly in Otago) are unaware of the right of with- . drawal; the children of objectors who , cannot write, or who merely neglect to put off writing, or who are naturally shy about exhibiting their bad spelling and bad writing :o critical teachers, or who belong to the fairly numerous class who would write a letter (so to speak) only at the point of the bayonet. The Irish proselvtisers' conscience clause is also plainly intended to capture children who (even with written protests) forget or neglect .0 deliver them, or who (in the usual childish wayl, "do as the rest do." or who (in one-roomed schools) have either to attend "religious instruction"' or to stand outside, exposed, perhai>>. to rain, sleet or snow. Tf parents want State "religious instruction" thev may be presumed to ask for it". There is no evidence that Catholic parents in Xew South Wales either asked for or approved such "religious teaching."' That false and cunning conscience clause provides legal machinery for proselytising the children of non-approving as well as approving Catholic, Jewish and other parents. No wonder indignant Xew South Wales Catholics are year by year so eagerly demanding more and ever more Catholic schools to save their children from proselytism by Act of Parliament. There, as here. Catholics are strong advocates of Biblical and religious instruction ill the public schools—but not on the Lea "lie's unjust terms. —I am. etc., HKXRY W. CLKARY, D.D.. Bishop of Auckland. March 0.