Current Topics

New Zealand Tablet, 4 May 1911, Page 805

Current Topics

Education at Home and Abroad

Writing under this heading, our able contemporary America, in its issue of April 1, remarks: ' The address on Catholic education, delivered by Archbishop Redwood, of Wellington, New Zealand, and printed in this issue, should awaken a 'sympathetic interest in Catholics of the United States. The circumstances attending the. struggle of our fellow-religionists in that distant land, as well as in Australia, are practically the same as those existing here'. At the recent Education Conference in Sydney, Cardinal Moran presiding, the series of resolutions which were submtited for consideration and finally adopted amid enthusiasm, were presented by His Eminence as coming from the Catholic University of America. The same resolutions were afterward taken up and endorsed by Archbishop Redwood, as fitting exactly the conditions in New Zealand. While we are ahead of our Australian and New Zealand brethren in the matter of drawing up resolutions and supplying a programme, it may be that the more youthful commonwealths will point out the course of action that will make the resolutions practical. After all, the gunmaker is not always the best marksman, and a successful struggle held up as an example and an inspiration would be a handsome return from the South Pacific for our scholastic contribution to their campaign.'

The Trend of the Times We find interesting confirmation of the views expressed in our leading columns last week on the subject of Socialism in a recent striking utterance of the Rev. Father Robert Benson. The Catholics of the Midlands held their fiftysixth annual reunion in Birmingham Town Hall (England) the other day, and Father Benson, as president of the reunion, delivered an address on ' Signs of the Times,' or modern tendencies in politics, science, and religion. Father Benson is known not only as an able and brilliant writer, but also as a careful and thoughtful student of affairs; and his views on social and religious questions deservedly carry very great weight. After explaining that there was no Divine revelation as to what was perfect civil government of the country or of the world, and that as Catholics they were perfectly free to prefer a monarchy, an aristrocracy, a republic, or an oligarchy, Father Benson proceeded: Wherever they looked throughout the world they saw great movements at work. If they looked at Europe they saw underneath all views and cries of party a great wave heaving itself up beneath the troubled surface of history—a wave- which, if the past meant anything, was going profoundly to transform the history of the future. . . . What seemed to him, however, to be the supreme danger of this great movement was that there was no doubt as to the kind of shape this movement was going to take in the future. It was commonly known as Socialism. He was not going to discuss the economic doctrines of Socialism, for it was most difficult to find out what Socialism was; his point was that it was very remarkable that wherever Socialism made progress religion seemed to suffer. (Hear, hear.) ' There had never been a revolution accomplished, on the whole, more bloodlessly than that in Portugal, nor had there ever been a revolution so respectable(laughter) yet it was very remarkable that practically the first act of the revolutionists, inspired by the ideals of Socialism, was to turn upon the Church of God and to drive out every religious, man and every devoted woman, as far as was possible. (' Shame.') That same kind of thing was at work in France, where Liberty meant that one might do anything except be utterly true to one's own conscience; Equality that a neighbor was always equal to oneself, if not better; and Fraternity that one. was not allowed to belong to a brotherhood. (Laughter.) In England they saw the same thing, but in a lesser degree; it was less logical and less consistent than the French, and, therefore, less sensational. Though there were many calling themselves Christian Socialists, they found that, on the whole, Socialists in matters of education preferred a secular system, which was a beautiful and eloquent way of saying they did not want God. ,' Any experienced parish priest would tell them that the effect of Socialism on young Catholics was that it acted like a snare. Little by little, they gave up the Sacraments and obeying the laws of the Church, and, finally, they declared that Socialism was the kingdom of Cod and that religion was a falsehood invented by priests.' '-■■': '■'■'. * •'■■'•-.• 'The great mistake of Socialism was that it attempted to organise society apart from God. In other respects it was impossible to deny that the ideals of the Socialists were the very ideals of the Catholic Church. .As Catholics they desired that every man should have the power of living decently, and respectably, : they denounced any tyranny of

the rich over the poor, or of the poor over the rich; they denounced anarchy,, which was the tyranny of the individual over society, and they denounced Socialism, which was the tyranny of society over the individual. It was not with those perfectly Christian ideals of Socialism they found fault, but with the attempt to organise a world without God. Claiming that Catholics made the best citizens in the world, he defied anybody :to set up merely human society and worship it, for society on the whole was very unloveable and unlikeable, and if they deified it, sooner or later they would find their image of gold had feet of clay. Unless they had a religious motive behind every action they would find their work was not honestly done, and that their lives were not honestly lived.'

The Australian Referenda Considering the importance of the questions that were at issue, it was only natural that the recent Federal Referenda should have excited keen interest throughout Australia. In New Zealand the interest was practically confined to the_ press, the politicians, and the small but select circle of citizens who follow up all political questionsthe man in the street knowing little more than that some sort of a referendum was in progress. Our present purpose is merely to explain the nature of the questions on which the Australian electors have just been called upon to vote, and to state some of the reasons which help to account for the now published result of the referendumwithout going into the pros and cons of the subject on our own account further than to express, on broad grounds of principle, a decided preference for the affirmative side in the controversy. Broadly speaking, the two referenda proposed alterations of the Federal Constitution in the direction of enlarging and extending the powers of the Federal Parliament, and thus making it a really national Parliament. The first referendum proposed that the Federal Parliament should have power to make laws regarding: (a) the creation, dissolution, regulation, and control of corporations; (b) the wages and conditions of labor and employment in any trade; : industry, or calling, and the prevention and settlement of industrial disputes, including disputes in relation to employment on or about railways the property of any State; and (c) combinations and monopolies'in relation to the production, manufacture, and supply of goods or services. The second referendum proposed first to give the Federal Parliament the power to declare that any industry or business constituted a monopoly, and secondly to give that Parliament the power ' to make laws for carrying on the' (aforesaid) industry or business by or under the control of the Commonwealth, and acquiring for that purpose, on just terms, any property used in connection with that industry or business.' Briefly, the first referendum dealt with the "regulation of the wages and conditions of labor not only of the general body of workers but also of the State employees (railway hands, etc.) and with conciliation and arbitration legislation; the second referendum dealt with the evil of Trusts. * The referenda were brought down by the present Labor Government of the Commonwealth and to those who' have regard for the ideals and aspirations of nationhood the arguments in favor of the affirmative seem to be overwhelmingly conclusive. The electors, however, by an absolutely unmistakable majority have decided against the referenda. According to articles in our Catholic exchanges —written before referenda day— two influences were at .work to produce the result which has actually eventuated, viz., the attitude of the daily press, and the free use of the financial resources of the ' No ' party. In regard to the first point the Melbourne Tribune says: It is a daily occurrence to find in the morning papers from 5 to 7 columns of reported speeches on the Liberal side, and in the midst of these a space of from one inch and a quarter to two inches devoted to a speech on the other side of the question— space in which the position cannot even be stated, much less argued. The Labor case is represented by its opponeuts, not by its exponents, and a case so represented is of course very easily demolished. We are merely stating a fact, not arguing on a side, for the probabilities are that, if Labor commanded the daily papers, it would treat its opponents exactly as itself is now being treated. The chief fact in the situation is thisthe Government proposals will not be lost or carried on their merits, but according to the. greater or lesser influence of the daily newspapers of the Commonwealth.' And a correspondent writes to the Catholic Press to the same effect: ' To-dav there is not one of the dailies in Sydney or Melbourne that will allow much . correspondence to appear which is likelv to be of any service in forwarding the case for the referenda .' This is' the real new tyranny of the hour that effectively silences the voice of opposing opinion.' Regarding tho second point, the Sydney Freeman's Journal remarks'! ' It is difficult to understand the objections of once-ardent Federalists to the conferring of supreme powers on the Federal Government in distinctly national affairs. Such

a change of attitude and of opinion must be ascribed to the influence of the money power so much alarmed at the prospect of Federal interference as to be now pouring out its money like water in the hope of defeating the referenda on Wednesday. When it is stated that a door-to-door canvass (by men and women) has been made of every electorate— nay, of every hamlet Australia; that antireferenda speakers are tumbling over each other in every part of the Commonwealth; and that all the available motor cars and cabs have been engaged by the No-No gentlemen for 26th April, the profits may be imagined of the combines out of the monopolies they own, and out of those they propose to own.' In the light of the above explanations, the claim now made by the Australian dailies—that the vote represents a recoil of feeling in the electorates against the present Government be taken with a very liberal discount.

The Miracle of Ireland In the course of a brief but brilliant article on St. Patrick, contributed to the Catholic Times of March 17, Mr. Hilaire Belloc developes two leading thoughts—both of them old, but both placed in a new and altogether admirable setting. The first is the truth that the personality of the great saint is a living force in Ireland to-day. almost as it was in the days of his flesh; and the second is what may be comprehensively described as 'the miracle of Ireland.' Reversing Mr. Belloc's order we will take tho last first, and the meaning of the expression we have used will be easily gathered from the writer's elaboration of his idea. ' We know,' says Mr. Belloc, 'that among the marks of holiness is the working of miracles. Ireland is the greatest miracle any saint ever worked. It is a miracle and a nexus of miracles. Among other miracles it is a nation raised from the dead. The preservation of the Faith by the Irish is an historical miracle comparable to nothing else in Europe. There never was, and please God never can be, so prolonged and insanely violent a persecution of men by their fellow men as was undertaken for centuries against the Faith in Ireland: and it has completely failed. I know of no example in history of failure following upon such effort. It had behind it in combination the two most powerful of the evil passions of men, terror and greed. And so amazing is it that they did not attain their end, that perpetually as one reads one finds the authors of the dreadful business now at one period, now at another, assuming with certitude that their success is achieved. Then, after centuries, it is almost suddenly perceived and in our own —that it has not been achieved and never will be.' * Mr. Belloc goes on to note the remarkable coincidences which seemed to combine against the faith of Ireland—all of which, however, completely failed. 'What a complexity of strange coincidences combined, coming out of nothing as it were, advancing like spirits summoned on to the stage, all to effect this end! Think of the American Colonies; with one little exception they were perhaps the most completely non-Catholic society of their time. Their successful rebellion against the mother country meant many things, and led to many prophecies. Who could have guessed that one of its chief results would be the furnishing of a free refuge for the Irish? The famine, all human opinion imagined, and all human judgment was bound to conclude, was a mortal wound, coming in as the ally of the vile persecution I have named. It has turned out the very contrary. From it there springs indirectly the dispersion and that power which comes from unity in dispersion, of Irish Catholicism. Who, looking at the huge financial power that dominated Europe, and England i- n particular, during the youth of this generation, could have dreamt that in any corner of Europe, least of all in the poorest and most ruined corner of Christendom, an effective resistance could be raised Behind the enemies of Ireland, furnishing them with all their modern strength, was that base and secret master of modern things, the usurer. He it was far more than the gentry of tho island who demanded toll, and, through the mortgages on tho Irish estates, had determined to drain Ireland as he has drained and rendered desert so much else. Is it not a miracle that he has failed? Ireland is a nation risen from the dead ; and to raise one man from the dead is surely miraculous enough to convince one of the power of a great spirit. This miracle, as I am prepared to believe, is the last and the greatest of St. Patrick's.' ".'- :''■'■ ■••-.-.*-: _ And with a few brief strokes this gifted writer brings vividly, out the living and abiding influence of the great saint's personality in the Ireland of to-day, Not only.was there a St. Patrick in history, but there is a St. Patrick . on the shores of his eastern sea and throughout all Irelan.l to-day. It is a presence that stares you in the face, and physically almost haunts you. Let a man sail along the Leinster coast on such a day as renders the Wicklow Moun-

tains clear up weather behind him, and the Mourne Mountains perhaps in storm, lifted clearly above the sea down the wind. He is taking some such course as that on which St. Patrick sailed, and if he will land from time to time from his little boat at the end of each day's sailing and hear Mass in the morning before he sails further northward, he will know in what way St. Patrick inhabits the soil which he rendered sacred. . . . When I was last in Ireland I bought in the town of Wexford a coloured picture of St. Patrick which greatly pleased me. Most of it was green in color, and St. Patrick wore a mitre and had a crozier in his hand. . He was turning into the sea a number of nasty reptiles: snakes and toads and the rest. I bought this picture because it seemed to me as modern a piece of symbolism as ever I had seen and that was why I bought it for my children and for my home. There was a few pence change, but I did not want it. The person who sold me the picture said they would send the change in candles for St. Patrick's altar. So St. Patrick is still alive.'

Another Tract ,' 'lrene' (North Island) writes to us: 'Having accidentally come into possession of the enclosed true (?) story I hope you will find space in the columns of the Tablet to analyse its truth.' The enclosure is a small tract, entitled 'The Adventures of a Bible,' by the Rev. J. H. Townsend, D.D., and bearing the now familiar imprint, E. Whitehead, Main street, Palmerston N.' The publication is of the usual Bibe-conversion story type—only somewhat more so. Instead of only one benighted Catholic being snatched as 'a brand from the burning,' in this veracious narrative there are three—and all high-grade converts at that. The first is a Dublin lady (Mrs. Blake) who, intending to go to a fashionable society entertainment in one of the many rooms at the Rotunda, went by mistake into a Protestant mission service a circumstance that seems hardly complimentary to the mission service. Here she heard some verses read from the New Testament which impressed her. At the close of the service she 'asked the gentleman whose words he had been reacling ' — and ended by borrowing the preacher's Bible. In a few days the light shone into her understanding, the burden long weighing'on her conscience rolled away into the open grave, . . . and the joy of peace was in her heart.' Before she had time to return the Bible, however, the priest paid her a visit and for a time things were only middling with the lady. In this scene with the priest, the reverend Munchausen who penned the pamphlet is seen at his very best; and for the diversion of our readers we transcribe a sentence or two. With ' an embarrassment in her manner, and at the same time a restful calm in her eyes,' the lady had made a clean breast of things. ' With downcast eyes she spoke,' says the narrative, ' but when she glanced up her spirit froze with terror at the look of the man before her. It was black with rage! Never before had she seen such fury depicted on a face. "Give me that Book!" he said hoarsely. "It isn't mine!" she cried, vainly attempting to stop him. "Give it to me," was the reply, "or your soul will be damned eternally; that heretic has nearly got you into hell, and neither he nor you shall ever read the book again." Seizing it as he spoke, he thrust it into his pocket, and, giving her a fearful look, strode out of the room.' The ' look ' must have been a particularly deadly affair, for we are informed in frequent italics how it haunted the lady. The lady sat as if paralysed—she heard the hall door shut, and something in her heart seemed to shut also and to leave her alone in her terror. That awful look searched her through and through; only those who have been born and brought up in the Church of Rome know the nameless horror which their idea of the power of the priesthood can inspire. Then, too, she thought of the gentleman who had lent her his Bible; his address was in it, but she could not remember it and knew not where to write. This was very grievous, but oh! that look it was branded on her memory.' However, in spite of ' that look,' the priest panned out not so badly. Instead of burning the Bible he read it; 'found forgiveness for his sins by that Book'; and died happy, within a fortnight. And the good work did not end here. A nun, who in some mysterious way seems to have been in charge of ' Father John's' presbytery, with woman-like curiosity, ' could not resist looking into the Book ' after the priest's death. It was enough—she ' was fascinated and read more and more,' and in no time she too was converted. There was really no reason why the chain of conversions should ever stop; and the Truthful James who wrote the story mustlike a certain historic characterhave been surprised at his own moderation. ' \ * ' Amusement and amazement are the two feelings which will fill the minds of Catholics on reading this extraordinary literature—amusement at the grotesque notions of Catholic persons and practices possessed by the writer, and amazement that any sane Protestant should be found

capable of swallowing such twaddle. In the case of this particular production, we happen to be able to give definite evidence, of the author's utter inability to substantiate the truth of this ridiculous story. A little more than a year ago this identical tract—which emanated, not from Dublin, but ; from Tunbridge : Wells, England— being circulated in that neighborhood, and was being sent anonymously, in sealed envelopes, to leading Catholics. In this way it came into the hands of an intelligent layman— James A. Walsh, of Batley— and that gentleman took prompt action. He at once applied in writing to the author of the tract—the Rev. J. H. Townsend, D.D., St. Mark's Vicarage, Tunbridge Wells — more definite details regarding the events referred to in the story. The Batley News, Mr. Walsh wrote, says that Mr. Townsend is willing to furnish these details to any inquirer, and he, therefore, asks for — ' 1. The date of the alleged occurrence. 2. The name of the priest mentioned in your story. 3. The name and locality of the convent in Dublin.' The reply he received from the Rev. Townsend was as evasive as it was brief. It ran: ' Dear Sir, —I am in receipt of your letter, and in reply beg to state that I know nothing of the newspaper to which you refer; therefore, of course, I am not bound by any statements which it may have made about me.' , * '■■.•"••.-■: Naturally Mr. Walsh was not satisfied with this communication, and he said so in the following plain terms: ' Reverend Sir, —I have to thank you for your note received this morning, but I cannot regard such a reply as satisfactory. You commence your story by informing the reader that it is true, and that the date of the occurrence appears in an old note-book in your possession. Could you not have supplied me at least with this meagre information However, I did not expect it, and am, therefore, not disappointed. The Batley News to which I referred in my previous letter says: "It is a story the accuracy of which the writer vouches for, and is prepared to prove to anyone who will communicate with him." I leave you to settle the matter in your own time with the editor of the Batley News, That does not concern me at all; but the fact that your tract was forced upon me by being sent anonymously in a sealed envelope does concern me, and in requesting you to furnish some evidence of the truth of its contents I am only asking for what, under the circumstances, I am entitled to. As I suspected, you are palbably unable to supply any proof, and I have no hesitation in characterising your "story" as something far worse. It is a reckless and disgraceful fabrication! —Yours truly, etc.' That is strong language, but it is justified; and Mr. Walsh's verdict on this precious production may safely be allowed to stand.