BIBLE LESSONS IN SCHOOLS

Dominion, Volume 23, Issue 256, 25 July 1930, Page 8

BIBLE LESSONS IN SCHOOLS

Roman Catholic Opposition Withdrawn

PRINCIPLES NOT SURRENDERED

Safeguards for Rights of Conscience

Roman Catholic opposition to the proposals of the New Zealand Bible in State Schools League has been withdrawn and the movement approaches a very interesting stage with this understanding achieved. The proposals of the league executive which have been accepted by the Catholic clergy are to be placed before the governing bodies of the churches comprising the league. A Bill termed the Religious Instruction in State Primary Schools Enabling Bill embodies the accepted proposals and the league will strongly recommend its support by the churches. The reports from the churches must be received before the Bill takes final shape so that it is not expected to place the matter before Parliament until next year. Archbishop Redwood as representative of the Roman Catholic Hierarchy of New Zealand said yesterday: “We are not opposed, and have never been opposed, to the desire of a large section of our non-Catholic fellow-citizens to have religion taught to Protestant children in the public schools.”

For many years the Bible in State Schools’ League has been endeavouring to Introduce Bible-reading and simple religious exercises into the State schools. Opposition was mainly from Roman Catholics on account of the fear that the consciences of Catholic children and teachers would not be protected. The league had Itself insisted on the protection of conscience, and following a conference of representatives of Protestant churches last March negotiations were opened for the withdrawal of Catholic opposition. It was felt that Protestants and Roman Catholics alike approved the close association of religious teaching with general Instruction. The official announcement of the executive of the league made yesterday states that the following proposals were accepted by the Roman Catholic leaders:—

That an interpretation of the league’s earlier conscience clause exempts, ipso facto, all Roman Catholic teachers and pupils from participation in the Bible lessons. That Roman Catholic taxpayers be freed from paying any portion of the additional expense that may be involved in the introduction of the Bible into the schools. That during the time set apart for religious instruction, exempted pupils be given lessons in secular subjects. These proposals were embodied by the league in the following clauses: — Scope of Exemptions. “Notwithstanding anything in the foregoing provisions of this Act, all Roman Catholic teachers, and all the children of members of the Roman Catholic Church, shall be exempt, ipso facto, from participation in the religious observances and religious instruction provided for in this Act “In addition, no child shall be required to attend the religious observances at the opening of the school br the religious instruction given, as herein provided, if the parent or guardian of such child notifies the teacher in writing that he has conscientious objections thereto. “Should any teacher, other than those exempted under the provisions of the foregoing sections, inform Ins school committee that he desires to be exempted from participation in the religious observances of instruction, or in both, exemption shall lie given; and should there be, as the result of exemptions given under this or the preceding sections, an insufficient number of teachers to conduct such religious observances or give such religious instruction, then in all such cases the school committee, after consultation with the head teacher, may authorise and appoint for the purpose one or more persons as required from outside the school staff. “During tho time given to religious instruction, any children who may be exempted shall receive separate instruction in the secular subjects, except that the board shall bo empowered to make other arrangements whenever the parent or guardian of any child thus receiving such secular instruction objects to the conditions under which such instruction must be given.” Not a Charge on Catholics. The statement of the executive of the league continues. “The principle was also affirmed in the conference' of representatives of the Protestant churches, and approved by the executive of the league as follows: —If the introduction of religious observances or instruction involves any additional cost, the Roman Catholics shall be exempt from paying any share of this additional cost.’ “Regarding the question of State aid, the league throughout has been quite definite in the decision that negotiations must be carried on without committing it in any way to the Roman Catholic claim. The negotiations have been conducted from the beginning without involving any surrender of principle on either side. The following statement in the league’s official letter to the Roman Catholic hierarchy makes this clear:— We understand that though the present taxation involved under the

secular system is and will continue to be viewed by your church as unfair in its incidence as related to Roman Catholic taxpayers, yet this view of present taxation will not affect your consideration of such religious instruction in State school? as we may suggest, coming as it does within the scope of the meaning conveyed by Bishop Cleary’s words, “Catholics would be satisfied with even a partial settlement irrespective altogether of the question of grants.” This position the Roman Catholic hierarchy has approved. “In the negotiations, opposition has been manifested on both sides to all unjust discrimination or intolerant spirit involving suffering for conscience sake. Equality in citizenship with respect to conscientious conviction is mutually approved and supported.”

CATHOLIC ATTITUDE Statement by Archbishop, The following statement was issued by Archbishop Redwood yesterday:— “Catholics, I need not say, are strongly opposed to a purely secular system of education because we consider it incomplete and inadequate. Therefore have we set up in New Zealand our own system of religious schools. If in the past we have felt it our duty to combat the proposals of tho Bible-in-Schools League, this was not because we were opposed to the principle of religion in the school, but only because of the methods adopted by the league on former occasions. “The Catholic Bishops, while always insisting that any complete and fair solution of the education question in this country should include State aid to Catholic schools for the secular results achieved, and while in no way.surrendering the claim to receive from the Government for this purpose an equitable share of the money contributed by the Catholic taxpayer toward the cost of public education, have many times during the last twenty years or so expressed their willingness to meet the Bible-irt-Schoois League and consider whether even a partial solution of the question of religions instruction in the State schools could not bo arrived at. We have stated publicly' over and over again, not only in joint statements made by the Bishops of New Zealand, but frequently through the late Bishop Cleary, who was the official representative of the hierarchy whenever this question came Up that altogether apart from the question of State aid to our schools, we were willing and anxious that some religion should be taught to Protestant children in the schools. It was provided Only that the rights of conscience of Catholic teachers and pupils and of all others concerned were adequately protected, and that Catholics were not obliged to contribute anything toward the cost of such Protestant teaching. “God Speed the Proposals.” “Recently representatives of the Bible-in-Schools League have approached us with the desire to come to some kind of agreement on the matter. The proposals are the outcome of our conversations. If a Bill containing the exemptions and safeguards for the consciences bf Catholics and of others already mentioned is introduced into Parliament it will not be opposed by us. “Of course, I repeat that,' in adopting this attitude, we do not for a moment mean to give up our just claim that Catholic schools are entitled to receive for the secular instruction given in them, a fair share of the money contributed by the Catholic taxpayer toward the cost of educating the children of the Dominion. This claim we can not in conscience surrender. “But any proposals for religion in the schools that fulfill the conditions we have so often insisted on for the protection of the consciences of Catholic teachers and pupils as well as of all others who cannot accept the proposed religious teaching, and which will exempt Catholics likewise from contributing toward the cost of such teaching,, will not be opposed by us. To use the words of the late Bishop Cleary, ‘the more (religion in the schools) there is, the better we shall like it,’ and ‘we will wish our non-Catho-11c friends God speed in carrying out their proposals.’ ”