The Evening Star: WITH WHICH ARE INCORPORATED The Evening News, Morning News, and Echo. SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 1892.

Auckland Star, Volume XXIII, Issue 31, 6 February 1892, Page 4

The Evening Star: WITH WHICH ARE INCORPORATED The Evening News, Morning News, and Echo.

SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 1892.

For tho cause that lacks asßistanoe, For tho wro_& that nocds resistance, For the future la the distanco, And the gocd that we can do.

The Anglican General Synod in Wellington spent its time yesterday in unearthing the dry bones of that wornout theme, the national system Of education. The Primate in his opening address had already stated he could not offer '" any new suggestion" on the subject, but that did not prevent the various clerical speakers from once more running up the whole gamut of imaginary grievances with which they have so long familiarised the public. The Anglican authorities, so far as a resolution can bind them, have once more ranged themselves deliberately side by side with the Roman Catholics and have solemnly affirmed " That in the opinion of this Synod it is desirable that the Education Act should be so amended as to contain provision for grants in aid of the maintenance of schools set on foot by any religious denomination, provided the secular instruction given in such schools shall come up to the required standard and satisfy the Government inspectors, and further that the Legislature be Petitioned to the foregoing effect." The attitude taken up, therefore, by the two most powerful religious organisations in the colony with regard to the system of secular education is still one of hostility. From its introduction, both Catholics and Anglicans have been resolutely opposed to it, and time does not diminish the virulence-of their opposition. They are determined, by direct or indirect means, to undermine and finally to overthrow the Education Act altogether.

So far as the advocates of the secular system are concerned, it is better that they should be confronted with open foes than exposed to insidious and covert attacks" by half-hearted friends. The Roman Catholics, by maintaining schools of their own and by endeavours to obtain grants in aid for their denominational establishments, do all in their power to weaken the national system. In their action there is nothing inconsistent. From the time when the present Education Act was introduced, they have never ceased to protest. The ecclesiastical authorities cannot fail to see in the secularisation of schools a weapon of immense power taken out of their hands. To do them justice, they have acted up to their convictions. Immense sums have been expended in the colonies in establishing Catholic schools. The laity have contributed largely, and in many places the clergy have sacrificed a considerable portion of their incomes in order that schools in which religious instruction can be imparted should be maintained. The severance of religion from secular teaching has been made a matter of conscience, and all the vast influence of the Catholic clergy over their flocks has been employed against the national system of education. So far, therefore, as consistency constitutes a claim to respect, a certain tribute of admiration cannot be withheld from the Roman Catholics even by those who are least disposed to attribute their action wholly to pure and disinterested motives. The Anglican body in this respect does not compare advantageously with its rival. No denomination has more persistently clamoured against the free and secular system of education, and none has given less practical evidence of being in real earnest. The Church ot England is numerically and in point of wealth the most powerful religious body in the colonies, but she has shown herself utterly unable to compete with the State in the establishment and maintenance of schools. There must be some reason for this. We do not think we need go outside the discussion in the Geueral Synod to find it. It is evident from the whole tone of the speeches that the Anglican people, as a body, if not perfectly satisfied with the existing system, have no desire to exchange it for one practically under the absolute control of the clergy. Archdeacon Harper indulged in a good deal of general talk about the value of church schools, and the willingness with which people would avail themselves of such privileges ; but he did not attempt to bring any proof, and in fact was giving utter-' ance to his own sentiments, not to those of the people. The more practical mind of Mr Fitchett grasped the situation when he said that in spite of what Synods had done they did not succeed in carrying the bulk of the people with them. Even Christ's College, he reminded the Synod, with its exceptional advantages, had failed in its competition with the State schools. Bishop Julius probably expressed the general sentiment of Anglicans when he followed with the remark that he was " heartily sick of resolutions and discussions which led to nothing at all."

The general effect produced upon one's mind is that the members of the Synod had no reasonable ground of complaint. It they could have brought any specific charges against the national system of education, they would undoubtedly have done so. As they only indulged in vague talk about the State's showing "antagonism to religion by monopolising the children's energies and time," and in other equally lucid statements, *we may reasonably conclude they had no specific grievances to trot out. Indeed, there is a professional tone all through the debate, and the subject seems to have been entered upon more to save appearances than from any real conviction of substantial grievances or any expectation of influencing Parliament by the Synod's action; We do not suppose for< a moment that the friends of the national system have anything to fear either from Catholic or Anglican opposition. The arguments.used by the Catholics for grants-in-aid are specious, but they will not bear examination. On no principle of equity could the State grant aid to one religious body and refuse it to others. To admit the principle of grants-in-aid contained in the resolution of the General Synod, would be to lay the axe to the root of the national system. It would imply an immense waste of means and energy. Rival schools at St. Paul's, St. James's, and Pitt-strest would compete with our city schools. Every means would be tried to exalt the denominational at the expense of the national schools. This would be bad enough, but the perpetuation of unholy sectarian rivalries would be infinitely worse. The State school is the one place where the children of citizens meet on a common footing, and learn that they are associated in a common brotherhood.

We regard it as a misfortune that from what we think is a mistaken sense of duty the heads of our chief religious bodies cannot discuss the important subject of the education of the young except in a spirit of ecclesiastical pique that causes them to fasten only on defects instead of candidly admitting: the many excellencies of the secular system. However unwilling we may be to admit it, the unpleasant fact remains that Synods arid Conferences instead of strengthening the hands of the teachers do everything they can to thwart the efforts of the Legislature and to stir up discontent against a system of education deliberately accepted by the country.