BIBLE IN SCHOOLS

Bay of Plenty Times, Volume LIX, Issue 10614, 11 July 1931, Page 3

BIBLE IN SCHOOLS

Statement by Archbishop

O’Shea.

“FIGHTING IRRKLIGION.”

Wellington. July 11

Archbishop O’Shea has made a statement in regard to the Religious Instructions in Schools Bill. With the exception of Archbishop Redwood, who is absent from Ne<v Zealand he said he himself was the only survivor of the bishops who formulated the Roman Catholic conditions on the question, consequently he should know better than anyone living what those conditions were, and the interpretation to be placed on them. They were, briefly, that Catholic teachers and Catholic children should be exempt from the Bible in schools scheme and that Catholics should not be called on to pay anything toward the cost of carrying it out.

When the league’s proposals were submitted, said Archbishop O'Shea, both Archbishop Redwood and himself agreed that they complied with the conditions which had been published over and over again by the Catholic bishops. “When the bill now being brought before Parliament was drafted it was submitted for perusal by our legal adviser, Mr P. J. O’Regan, who lias reported that as it stands the bill does not violate any of the conditions that have been laid down by Catholic leaders, and accepted last year by the Bible in Schools League’s executive. Consequently, as repeatedly promised, Catholics will withdraw their opposition to the present bill.’’ Archbishop O’Shea said he was speaking not only for himself, but I for the Metropolitan. Archbishop Redwood, who had already made a pronouncement to the same effect, and he was sure the Catholics of the Dominion, following the lead of their venerable Archbishop, would not approve of unreasonable opposition to the enactment of the proposals in the present measure to provide for non-Catholie children in public schools some knowledge of God and religion. It would be in their own best interests to light the spread of irreligion by every legitimate means for irreligion did not make' for charity, for the welfare of any country. Archbishop O’Shea added that Catholics did not mean to surrender one iota of their just claim on the | State, for a subsidy to their own reI ligious schools for the secular results achieved in them. That, however, was a matter between the Government and themselves. It was understood by them that the Bible in Schools League, as a league, was neutral leaving to individual members entire freedom to act in whatever way their convictions directed. He concluded: “It would be a strange thing if we, who have so consistently denounced secular education as an evil thing and a danger to the country, did not welcome what I believe to be an honest attempt to counteract some of the harm it is doing.” The Dominion executive of the Bible in Schools League on Thursday settled finally the form of the Religious Instruction in Pu'blic Schools Enabling Bill for presentation to Parliament. On the sub-committee’s recommendation it was unanimously decided to entrust the measure as a private members’ bill to Mr H. Holland, member for Christchurch North, who introduced the bill for the league on former occasions. It is not the desire of the executive that it should be viewed in any way as a party measure.