NEW ZEALAND TABLET.

Thames Star, Volume VI, Issue 1797, 6 October 1874, Page 2

NE W ZEALAND TABLET.

The following article is from the Bruce Herald.—

Our contemporary, the New -Zealand Tablet, exists for the propagation of intolerance, and, as a portion of its efforts to fulfil its mission, frequently demands tolerance of its doctrines. Perhaps we \ shall be met by our contemporary with a denial of the first part 6f our statement, and an assertion that all the Tablet demands is a freedom for -Roman Catholics to exercise their faith Indeed, the Tablet „ is continually asserting that such is itr aim and object. Well, <we.have ; neither time nor inclination to split hairs on this point, and will therefor© freely concede that the? Tablet has frequently saidf as much as this, that it weeks to coerce no- . body, and only requires the enjoyment of freedom of conscience. But, unfortunately, whilst assertimg this, it asserts a;great many other things besides, which will go to prove thaVwhat the Tablet would call the enjoyment of freedom for the .Roman Catholic conscience means denial of freedom of conscience for anyone else. For instance, its issue of Saturday, the 15thAugust, has an article, on Catholic teaching as to Church and State, in which it says, " The Church—the guardian and interpreter of the National and Divine Law—possesses th« right to control all. the acts of the State, without exception, which necessarily belong to her under the point of their morality." ' Beyond this the Tablet quotes certain recent utterances of the Pope and of Cardinal Antonelli as to the relations of Church and State, and lays down the doctrine that where a State mates laws that the Pope disapproves of and considers contrary to morality, it ''becomes a duty for the Holy Father to declare that such iniquitous laws can not only not bind the children of the church in conscience, but that it would be a crime on their part to obey them. And, as if this were not a sufficient assertion of the right of the Roman Catholic Church to control the - state, our contemporary adds: "Wego - further even than this, and maintain that it is not alone in consequence of the morality of acts that the civil power is subordinated the Church. We contend that from its very nature and end*jshe civil power is but in dependence and subordination to the Church." Probattf the Tablet will reply that we have no right to assume that by the word Church is meant that of the Roman Pontiff, ■* but we do not desire to delay over such subterfuges. Nona other than the Roman Catholic Church can be or is meant, and the article is a simple assertion, not of the right of men to disregard immoral laws, but of the Roman Catholic Church to point out what laws are moral or immor- ■ ral, and to countenance rebellionaflainst such as it chooses to interdict. I^uhristian clergyman would, we imagine, advocate obedience to laws which in themselves directly enforced immoral conduct, but it is within the pale of the Catholic Church alone that we can find a professing Christian „ who would advocate disobedience to laws made by a Christian state, simply, because those laws were not to his liking. In short, in plain English, what the Tablet wants is a state that shall make laws under the approval of the Roman Catholic Church* and as history has shown us what such statei are lik« we need not say much about them. It will be enough to ask if under a slat* such as that of which the Tablet would approve, and which has btfora now

r existed, we could suppose toleration in ' such matters either- civil or religious. For though the Tablet - speciously uses she word " moral" in order to . shew the test by which 1 the Roman. Catholic Church would judge laws, we all know too well that this is tantamount to -saying that what that Church approred of would be moral, what it did not approve of, would not be j moral. We are not arguing these questions as against the Roman Catholic religion, because it happens to be the Roman Catholic religion. If any other religious sect will ■?* up such intolerable pretencei, we shall be only too happy; to dispose of thtin. The reason why we are compelled to notice the practice of the Tabfetj is because in it alone, of the religious organs in this Colony, do we find .these tyrannical views. In other publications; which profess to ipepresent Christian" bodies, we find certainly an occasional narrowness of opinion, ;but at the same time we find a broad desire ior freedom of jßonscience,—a recognition. of the laws of the country, and a Christian charity and toleration for the ..opinions of thosewho differ from them, although th«y, .-have ; neither received the appro V-Pteyj^ the Pope, or of Dr.';.'; iSLoxxtim The fact is that the Tablet mistake! the people of New Zealand. VS^d are out of the times ; "When :h«aTen was yet the Pope's •■•x- ---: elusive trade, ; And kings Were damned as fast ai now ,shey*r<» made." ; ... [ 'No one desires to coerce Roman Catholics. Other Christian denominations lire and prosper, as all men should wish they may prosper, under civilised' rule. It seems strange that the ministers and members of such churches as the! English* Presbyterian, Wesleyah, and others, should be able to get along here * •without continually raising .questions of; Church tfnd State, or crying out for tolerance,' j&nA . yet that the Roman Catholics are always, as represented by the Tablet, suffering front oppression. The ■'reason' is, we suppose, that the former all take their proper parts as good and Christian citizens in making the laws under which we lire, and in doing so, are! heedless of sectarian prejudice, whereas the latter would have merely such laws as th« Pope would permit, and consider any oth«r system intolerant. ■ :