Current Topics

New Zealand Tablet, 25 May 1911, Page 949

Current Topics

A Versatile Monarch An esteemed Dunedin contemporary has been aptly directing attention to the versatility of King George. It appears that just prior to his acceptance of a copy of. the Authorised Version of the Bible and his eloquent remarks on the subject of the Tercentenary —which, by the way, the Dunedin Presbyterians wish to have placarded on the walls of our neutral State schools —his Majesty had given his patronage to a music hall entertainment. A little later the cable informs us that he visited Newmarket and inspected his racing stables; and that while witnessing the racing he received a great ovation. Saturday's cables, announce that his Majesty has just scored his first win on the turf. The Pall Mall Gazette recently issued a 'Sports and Pastimes' Supplement, containing an article headed ' The King's Racing Inheritance,' in the course of which the following information is given degree appropriate that our Turf should have the King at its head. This is to be the King's year, and before the season is many weeks old we hope to seeindeed, we shall see — Majesty's colors on our racecourses. King George has not heretofore allied himself very closely with racing, though from time to time he has attended some of the more important meetings. He has been an occasional visitor at Newmarket. We have seen him at Liverpool the guest of the Earl of Derby; at Goodwood a member of the Duke of Richmond's house party; at Epsom and Newbury, and, of course, at Ascot. Indeed, the impression that his Majesty derived but little satisfaction from the pursuit of racing was probably altogether erroneous. Whether or not, the situation is now changed. The King inherited from his father splendid racing and breeding studs. A fortnight after the late Monarch's death it was officially announced that—' King Edward, having bequeathed his racing and breeding stud to the King, it is his Majesty's intention to carry on these establishments on the same lines as in the past.' It would be difficult to exaggerate the sense of satisfaction which that intimation occasioned in racing circles.' * ' We know what Heaven or Hell may bring, But no man knoweth the mind of the King,' sings Kipling, in his rough way. The Pall Mall Gazette's statement that ' the impression that his Majesty derived but little satisfaction from the pursuit of racing was probably altogether erroneous,' will set people wondering what was the actual 'mind of the King' regarding the episodes mentioned above. Which of the three functions really appealed to him — music hall, the turf, or the tercentenary? Possibly this is one of the cases where ignorance is bliss. It is, at any rate, safe to. say that the King who can satisfy turfites and tercentenarians with equal ease is a man of no ordinary parts. American Schools: A New Religion The ease with which allegedly ' neutral' State schools can be 'secretly, silently, and surreptitiously,' yet withal effectively secularised, and made the medium for carrying on a distinctly materialistic propaganda, is. strikingly illustrated by the statements contained in a pamphlet just published by the Honorable Bird S. Coler, of New York. Mr. Coler has long been prominent in the public and political life of New York; and his brochure is a protest against the admission of a new religion into the public schools. In answer to the questions, What new religion ? Has not all religion been excluded from the schools? Mr. Coler replies: ' No; for it is true in psychology as it is in physics that nature abhors a vacuum. The old religion I» being excluded, but a new religion is rushing in to take its place. It is variously called. By some it is known us Agnosticism, by some Atheism, by some Socialism." Mr. Coler classes them all under the head of Socialism. ' For though,' remarks America, commenting on the book, there are excellent men in the socialistic movement who would resent being called Atheists or Agnostics or Ethical Culturists, and who maintain that Socialism is a mere matter of political economy and has nothing to do with religion, yet the fact is undeniable that Socialism is based on a theory of material civilisation from which God is excluded.' This new religion, which is affirmative, dogmatic, and intolerant, is, according to Mr. Coler, making straight for public school control, and has already, under the guise of humauitarianism, reduced many of its theories to a concrete expression. * As far back as 1887 the Princeton Review informed its readers that the Superintendent of Public Schools in Chicago refused a work on political economy ' because the

first sentence damned it for public schools.' The first sentence was: 'All natural wealth is due to the beneficence of God.' But in respect to the encroachment of atheistic Socialism New York,-Mr. Coler tells us, has outrun Chicago; and this exclusion of even the name of God from the textbooks of the public schools is now, he declares, becoming the rule. The teacher in our public schools may deal with the faith of the Egyptians, with the Olympian deities of the Greeks, with the Manitou of the Indians, but Christmas is taboo, Easter is a subject prohibited. No one believes there was ever a Mercury with wings on his heels, but that my be taught in schools. Everyone knows that there was a Jesus of Nazareth, but that must not be mentioned.' The gulf between present-day developments and the old ideals of the Republic is well brought, cut. ' If that be right,' continues the writer, 'the logical thing to do is to cut the name of God out of the Declaration of Independence, to publish without it the Farewell Address of the Father of his Country, to leave some significant blanks in the sublime sentences of Lincoln over the dead of Gettysburg. We are forming a nation of atheists.' These are not the words, as America points out, of a priest' or a Catholic layman; they are the earnest and unbiassed utterance of a Christian public man who sees the danger, and raises his voice in warning while yet there is time. The Luther Legend . The Luther legend the effect that, when a Catholic monk, he did not know there was such a thing as a Bible in existence until he accidentally ' discovered ' one chained to the wall of his monasteryhas been so thoroughly riddled by learned historians that it may be-permitted to us to hope that it is at last reasonably dead. At least it is satisfactory to note that scholarly and representative Protestants have themselves frankly abandoned it. The current issue of our Dunedin contemporary—the Christian Outlook —contains a quotation in point from a series of articles on Luther which are being contributed to the Century Magazine by Professor Arthur M'Giffert, who • occupies the chair of Church History in Union Theological Seminary, New York. Our contemporary explains that the Union Seminary occupies a peculiar position, in that, while a Presbyterian college, it is not controlled by the General Assembly of the American Church, being privately endowed and that consequently its theological trend is somewhat more liberal than the conservative position held by - the American Church. Our contemporary quotes as follows from Professor M'Giffert: ' Luther's studies embraced the writings of the Church Fathers and particularly the Bible, to which he was becoming more and more attached. He tells us that it was in his twentieth year that he first saw a complete copy of the Scriptures, in the University Library at Erfurt. He had hitherto supposed that they embraced only lessons read in the public services, and was delighted to find much that was quite unfamiliar to him. His ignorance, it may be remarked, though not exceptional, was his own fault. The notion that Bible-reading was frowned upon by the ecclesiastical authorities of that age is quite unfounded. To be sure it was not considered part of a Christian's duty, as it is in many Protestant churches, and few homes possessed a copy of the Scriptures, but they were read repularly in church, and their study was no more prohibited to University students of that day than to those of this, and was probably as little practised by most of them as it is now.' * That is interesting as a Presbyterian vindication of the Catholic Church from the charge of hostility to the reading of the Scriptures; but Professor M'Giffert is still too generous in his concession to the old traditional version of the alleged Luther episode. The legendto which the name of D'Aubigne gave such extensive currencythat Luther did not know what a Bible was until he made his discovery,' has been left literally without a leg to stand on, by the researches and testimony of the learned Anglican, Dean Maitland. 'To say nothing of parts of the Bible,' he writes (Dark Ages, p. 506), ' or of books whose place is uncertain, we know of at least twenty different editions of the whole Latin Bible printed in Germany only, before Luther was born. These had issued from Augsburg, Strassburg, Cologne, Ulm, Mainz (two), Basle (four), Nuremburg (ten), and were dispersed through Germany, I repeat, before Luther was born; and I may add that before that event there was a printing-press at work in this very town of Erfurt, where more than twenty years after, he is said to have made his discovery.' And yet . . . we find a young man who had received ' a very liberal education,' who ' had made great proficiency in his studies at Magdeburgh, Eisenach, and Erfurt,' and who, nevertheless, did not know what a. Bible was, simply because f the Bible" was unknown in those days.' " On Maitland's exposure of the absurdity of this story, D'Aubigne tried to escape responsibility by fathering the tale on to some early ' authority '—which authority, by the way, on being

consulted, by no means sustained D'Aubigne's statements. The historian of the Dark Ages finally dismisses both him and his ' authority'. with the following broadside: "M. D'Aubigne seems to think that whatever has been once said by ignorance, fraud, or folly, may be said again with impunity. He gave an 'authority '—why, so did Robertson, and Henry, and Warton, for various absurd falsehoods, as has appeared on turning to those authorities; but some things are so plainly false, that one does not need to look at the authority on which they are stated. Ii M. D'Aubigne had said, that by some singular infelicity the Saxon Reformer had been educated in an atheistical manner, and until he was twenty years old had been studiously prevented from coming to the knowledge of the fact that the Bible existedthat he had been kept by his father in the woods, never taught to read, or allowed to go to church, or converse with Christians —if M. D'Aubigne had told- us even this, strange as it is, upon respectable contemporary authorities, it would of course be our duty to look at them; but when the story is told of a young gentleman whose religious education had been particularly attended to, and who had of his own free will been working hard at Occam, Scot, Bonaventure, and Thomas Aquinas, it is too much. We do not need to look at the authority. We can only lament the pitiable ignorance of the writer who could repeat such nonsense." (Bark Ages, p. 547). The Press and Home Rule 3 Our New Zealand Conservative press still keep prosing away about the difficulties in the way of Home Rule. In reality, they are all in favor of the principle of Irish selfgovernmentat least, in a vague and inarticulate sort of way, they convey that impression being Conservative papers, with a proper regard to their traditions, they are not in a position to take a strong line on the question. Consequently, we are treated to a series of milk-and-watery, non-committal, yes-no deliverances, irresistibly suggestive of the aphorism that speech was given us to conceal our thoughts'. The latest to fall into line is our esteemed coiltemporary, the Otago Daily Times. The Dominion professed to be worried about the financial aspect of the problem the Christchurch Press was afraid Mr. Redmond was aiming at separation; the Otago Daily Times— far as we can gather anything definite at all from its article—is uneasy in its mind about the fate of Protestants and of Ulster under Home Rule. In the name of all that is reasonable, what stronger or more explicit pledges and guarantees could be asked for than those that have been given by Mr. Redmond. Here are his own words as uttered in the House of Commons during the debate on the Address-in-Reply on February 15:—'As to intolerance, he asserted with emphasis that no man who knew history could bring a charge of intolerance against the mass of the Irish people, and he would not accept a solution of the problem which they had to solve if under it oppression or injustice could be perpetrated. "What," he asked, "was Parnell's answer? Whilst he denied, as I do, indignantly, the possibility of such a thing, he said : be effective. I understand the supremacy of the Imperial Parliament to be —that it can intervene in the event of the powers which are conferred being abused. We, Nationalists, can accept this Bill under an honorable understanding not to abuse these powers. We pledge ourselves in this respect for the people of Ireland not to abuse these powers, but to devote our energies and influence to prevent them being abused; but the Imperial Parliament will have at its command the powers which it reserves to itself, and it will be ready to intervene in the case of every grave abuse of that kind." 'I say (continued Mr. Redmond) to those few men who are not content to rest in confidence on the history of the Irish people, and on their justice, but who want some assurance, that nothing of this kind could happen. I point to the continued supremacy of the Imperial Parliament, and I say that the oppression of Protestants is just one of those things which the supremacy of this Parliament would be used, and should be used, to put down.' If such an assurance as that does not satisfy the critics, what would? ■;;'■': " ■.-•-•■* "Apropos of Ulster, the Otago Daily Times seems disposed to favor the suggestion of Mr. Balfour—first seriously put forward, we believe, by the Spectator— Ulster should have a separate Parliament all to itself. Such a proposal is based on an imperfect knowledge of the facts—the truth being that Ulster, taken ,as a whole, is very nearly half Catholic, and that an Ulster Parliament, on any ordinary basis of representation, would certainly contain a majority of Nationalists. So long ago as June, 1884, the London Times pointed out that: ' The truth is that Ulster is by no means the homogeneous Orange and Protestant community which it suits the Orangemen to

represent it. In some counties the Catholics are in a large majority, and it must be acknoweldged, we fear, that the Nationalists have a much stronger hold on many parts of Ulster than it is at all satisfactory to contemplate.' And in a recent article in Reynolds' Newspaper, after quoting population statistics from the Official Census returns for 1901, Mr. Redmond says: ' From this it appears that, so far from Ulster being Protestant, it is, taken as a whole, 44.1 per cent. Catholic. Five out- of the nine counties are overwhelmingly Catholic. In two out of the four counties where the Protestants are in a majority, the Catholic minority is over 45 per cent. and, in two others, the Catholic minority is over 31 per cent., in the one, and over 20 per cent, in the other; whilst, in the city of Belfast, the Catholic minority is over 24 per cent, of the population. Protestant Ulster is, therefore, practically circumscribed to the counties of Down and Antrim and the city of Belfast, where the Catholic minority averages from over 20 to over 31 per cent, of the population; and South Down and West Belfast each returns a Catholic Nationalist member of the House of Commons.' - 'ln the face of these facts,' he continues, can Ulster truthfully be termed a Protestant province ? We hear much of the necessity of a separate Parliament for Ulster, with the object of protecting Protestants. Surely, if any Protestants might claim protection in Ireland, it is not those in Ulster, but in the south and west, who are in such a small minority. But would an Ulster Parliament fulfil its object? Why, unless the entire basis of representation be changed, such a Parliament must inevitably contain a majority of Catholics or of Nationalists.' Mormonism in England There was a time when Mormonism was considered mere matter for joke and burlesque; and readers of Artemus Ward will remember the genial showman's entertaining description of 'A Visit to Brigham Young.' In a privit conversashun with Brigham,' he says, 'I learnt the f oiler in fax: It takes him six weeks to kiss his wives. He don't do it only onct a year and says it is wuss nor cleanin house. He don't pretend to know his children, there is so many of 'em, tho they all know him. He sez about every child he meats call him Par, and lie takes it for grantid it is so. He sey he 'don't have a minit's peace. His wives fite aiming themselves so much that he has bilt a fitin room for their speshul benefit, and when too of 'em get into a row he has 'em turned loose into that place, where the dispoot is settled aeeordin to the rules of the London prize ring. Sumtimes they abooz hisself individooly. They have pulled the most of his hair out at the roots, and he wares many a horrible scare upon his body, inflicted with mop handles, broom-sticks and sich. Sumtimes when he went in swimmin they'd go to the banks of the lake and steal all his close, thereby compellin him to sneak home by a sircootius rowt, drest in the skanderlua stile of the Greek slave. I find that the cares of a married life weigh hevy onto me," sed the Profit, "and sometimes I wish I'd remained singel." * But to-day the Mormon propaganda is a sufficiently serious matter—at least in England—and Protestants there are naturally and rightly raising their voices in vigorous protest against the recruiting work that is being carried on by the agents of the sect. The following incident, recorded in the London press, is a sample of the sort of thing that is going on. Three years ago a Mr. George Wylde married an American girl of twenty-six. After he had lived with her in London for six months, he accepted an appointment at head waiter in a Hong Kong hotel at £9 per week. Having left his wife, who was in a delicate state of health, at home, he kept up an affectionate correspondence with her, and sent her £3O per month, hoping that in the course of time he would be able to take and work a restaurant in London. About a fortnight ago he returned to the metropolis only to find that his wife had disappeared from the house in Maida Vale, Edgeware road, having gone off with the Mormons and taken with her his little boy, who was born during his absence. The husband is now about to. pay a visit to Utah in quest of them. If he meets with the particular Latter Day ' Saint' who. has thus wrecked his home, the long-haired one will probably strike trouble. * ";""- - '■ The Mormon campaign has reached such dimensions that the subject has been brought under the notice of Parliament, and the Home Secretary is making official inquiries into the matter. In the meantime some of the Mormon leaders have published a defence of their propaganda One of them Mr. S. Norman Lee, in a letter addressed to a Liverpool paper, states that they do not advise emigration; that the sect has no emigration fund, and does not assist anybody to leave the country; that there are no secret Mormon rites, but that, on the contrary, all their rules and books are. offered for sale to the public-that

the Mormons decided on October 6, 1890, to discontinue the practice; of bigamy, and that it has been, discontinued since then. According to the Liverpool Catholic Times, however,* accounts, published by the press, of interviews with women who have been approached by .Mormon missionaries do not harmonise with these assertions. 'They are, says our contemporary, ' to the effect that inducements both to emigration and bigamy have been held out by Mormons in quest of recruits; and that they truly represent what actually takes place is strongly maintained by Mr. Hans P. Freece, who has come to this country on behalf of the International Council of Women of the United States to call attention to the proselytising efforts of the Mormons.' - ; "-V ■\. '<*■.,.'., .'..'■■■ * .'.".'. '■• ' " : y The present agitation against Mormonism in England is being carried on by members of the Protestant denominationsnot because Catholics are not in entire sympathy with it, but because so far it has been found that the Catholic womanhood of the country is proof against the propaganda. To Catholics who are well grounded in the Church's teaching regarding the sacredness of marriage, the polygamous programme of Mormonism makes no appeal. Some time ago, in an article dealing with the success of the Mormon missionaries in winning great numbers of domestic servants to their ranks in the eastern cities of America, the New York Sun paid this splendid tribute to the sturdy faith of Catholic girls: *ln no instance yet heard of has a Catholic been influenced, even by the glowing promises of an independent home and a husband.' And Irish Catholics, in particular, appear to have a rooted and instinctive antipathy to the cult. 'ltis a noteworthy fact,' said a secular paper on one accasion, ' that in Utah there is not one Irish Mormon.' Whereupon a Catholic contemporary commented in this wise: ' A black diamond, a white swallow, a red snowflake are sometimes met with, and a yellow aster is not unknown, at least to novelists. But an Irish Mormon! Never!'