THE EDUCATION QUESTION AT HOME AND HERE. To the Editor of the Daily Southern Cross.

Daily Southern Cross, Volume XXIV, Issue 3403, 12 June 1868, Page 4

THE EDUCATION QUESTION AT HOME AND HERE. To the Editor of the Daily Southern Cross.

Sir, —I *m glad to see that to respectable and worthy a man as your correspondent " L. J." has been studying the Lenten pastorals of the English Catholic jjishops, in whosejriews I coincide^ on the important Subject of education, as he justly says. He misapprehends Arctibiahop Manning, however, and the 'rest of the Roman Catholic iJuhops. indeed, id is the' glory of Catholics that every one who asiails theif^rinoiples invariably begins by misrepresenting themj' .Archbishop Manning would be 'the last man in theworld 'to stifle free inquiry into any 1 subject, secular 1 >or • religions. The religious principles which he now holds', and which he teaches and defends with so much zeal. and ability, were adopted by him in consequence of Iree inquiry, humanly speaking, for he was reared in his youth and early manhood under j principles, of a widely different' kind, having been bora of / Protestant parents, and for long held a distinguished place among the luminaries of the lEbtabHshtd Church of England. It unfortunately happens that a considerable number in all oountriee profess the religion which they hold more from habit, imitation, aod prejudice, or interest* than j from personal conviction of its truth. It is .not so with Archbishop Manning and -many or 'those who have adopted the principles he now 1 holds. That eminent person, and Catholics generally.are not the only Englishmen who have an insuperable objeotion to public education conducted on the purely secular or non-religious syhtem. The great mass of the English nation par ticipate in that objection; at least, 1 judge so, from what was said the other day in the Bouse of Lords by the Pake of Marlborough, on his giving notice of the intention of Government to move in the question of public education. He said Government would not attempt to introduce compulsory rating for educational purposes; that such a plan was distasteful to the .English people, because it necessarily implied that the Government system of education was to be purely fleoular, I think the duke was quite right. The people of England are naturally ardent lovers of liberty ; but they *r« also by nature a | religious people. A respect for religion forms a prominent feature in /their oharaoter. It has been so fr«m the' days of St. Augustine down to the days of Archbishop Manning. < .'JLhey will not therefore now consent to a system of public instruction in schools from which religion is systematically, we may almost say' contemptuously, excluded. A nation of philosophers- may do this ; -the religious Christian people of England would nerer consent to it. "L.J." thinks the Bible forbids the clergy to assume the direction of public instruction. But surely they were divinely- appointed "toteaohall nations." Not indeed to teach them human science or learning, but something far more important;. There were schoolmaster! in the time of th« Apostles, doubtless, with whom they > did. not interfere as superiors, heathen teacheis or Jewish. Bat will he undertake to show us that any Christian teachers of youth in the Apostolic age repudiated the interference and authority of the Apostles, or those acting for them, as a general rule? : . If religious instruction and discipline are to form essential parts of every system of i public education, as I think they ought, and as the great bulk of the English and Irish people think they ought, then assuredly it follows, •as a necessary and inevitable consequence, that the clergy must take the direction or assume the supremacy in th« management of public schools.' How else are > the influence and the purity of the Christian religion to be secured and maintained? It does not follow that the clergy must undertake the entire duty of schoolmasters and impart instruction in ' secular knowledge, though they often hare doneio, and often may do so again, when necessary. "L.J.," following the common herd who assail the Catholic clergy, asks, with a sneer, what was the state of education in Europe during the time when their influence 1 was supreme ; that is, in the socalled "dark agea"— previous to the advent of the great luminary Martin Luther, I presume he means. I would not 'like to see' what he calls "the dark ages" return again any more than "L.J.," if that were even possible —as it is not. Yet some things which prevailed in those ages I should like to See back again. We know, for example, that in those ages, in the time of our Edward lIL at least, a degree of plenty, cheerfulness, and contentment prevailed in the cottages of the English labouring-men, to which in our day they are in a great measure strangers. Where plenty, comfort, cheerfulness, and contentment prevail, virtue will not be absent. The English poor were then treated by the religious with such humanity, tenderness, amtcareairthey.do not often meet with in our modern almshouses. The, late official investigations into the management of these abodes of disease, cruelty, and vice rereal a state of things which was little to be expected in England during the nineteenth century. We shall have the same abuses over again here, or worse, when we geb a poor-rate, as we may soon have if our present rulers have their own way. As to the state of knowledge and science in the middle, or so-called dark, agei, that was not so defective as "L.J." imagines; though great advances have since been made in that respect as all know. Architecture, astronomy, and classical knowledge are usually considered important branches of science and learning among civilised men — not to speak of other branches. Yet the so-called dark ages produced architects who could plan, and artificers who could er«ct, such noble structures as Westminster Abbey, York Min*ter, and other like buildings, which now adorn so many parts of England, and are the envy of our best architects and builders at this ' day. The middle or dark ages produced a Copernicus, a Galileo, and a Pope Paul 111. — men whose attainments in mathematics .and science are well known. What though they met with opposition, or even persecution, at the hands of those who were less learned than themselves — that proves little against the general body of the clergy, Under whose autpices those vary seminaries had been founded and' J maintained which produced such eminent philosophers. Copernicus himself was a priest, educated by the liberality of .a , clerical relative, and he dedicated his 'immortal ' work, "On the Bevolution of the Heavenly Bodies," to Pope Paul 111. He tells the reason in his dedication why he selected such a atron. It was because he kriew that the attainment* , of his Holiness in mathematics constituted him the best judge of the merits of such' a work. It surely was no ordinary compliment, even for a Pope, to hear His attainments in any branch of human learning •thus commended by a dirine genius such as Coperjnicus. But even Popes are not infallible in matters of human science. Some of them have disapproved lof Copernicus's views' j others have adopted them. To the mathematical and astronomical attainments of a Pope Christendom is now indebted for the correst method of computing time. It betrays ingratitude and ignorance, or illiberality and prejudice, in any one therefore now to reproach the Catholic clergy generally as enemies to learning and science, either in the past or present times. The so-called "dark ages" also produced classical scholars, .like Erasmus. This great man at . one period of his life joined the enemies and calumniators of the Catholic clergy; but he afterwards bitterly regretted having done so, when he saw further before him, and died a. devout Catholic. Where did even the magnanimous Luther himself acquire his stores' of learning but in seminaries founded by the. wealth, or under the 'patronage, of those very Popes and Cardinals whom he so coarsely traduced, and threatened' with vengeance? "L.J." alludes to some receatiiegulations made by the present Pope on the subject of female education. Let him produoe the official document" itself, or a copy of it, ere he judges of its nature and intention. Neither Catholic priests nor laymen regard "ignorance as ,the mother of devotion" in man, woman, or child, but the mother of heresy and infidelity too often, and the mother of vice almost always. , \ This is a long letter ; and if you publish it many of your readers may not have {the patience to go through it. But the subject is very important, more especially at this time, and cannot be discussed in anything like a satisfactory way by short off-hand notes, such as that of " Doctrina," which may mislead, rather than inform, their readers. This writer attempts to impress the public on this side of the globe with the same groundless belief which Mr. Horsman, the celebrated member for Stroud, tried to force on the people of England on a late occasion in Parliament. He wishes it to be believed that the Catholic laity actually require to be protected— that is the «rord, " protected " — against the -influence or domination of their clergy, and that the Parliament, or the press, or public opinion must afford the needed protection. But the truth is, it would be better for the Catholic laity if 'the influence of their clergy over them were tenfold or a hundredfold greater than it is now. There wonld'thea not be so much vice of all kinds, or religious indifference among us, as there unhappily now is. We should have more money in our purse to spare for the education of our children and other necessary works of piety and charity, and more heart to spend it in that way. I appeal to every lay Catholic 1 n ader of this letter, and ask him to lay Ms hand on' his heart and say whether I am right or not in what I now write. They who. seek to diminish or destroy the influence of the Catholic clergy over the laity are not the* real friends ,' either of G.od or the Queen. 1 I could «ay much more, but I forbear, as

I your patience mint be exhtuited. One thing, however, I cannot pass over — Mr. John Bright's remark about the prevalence of groat popular ignorance under the very shadow of the Queen's palace. " Dootriua" tries to excuse or palliate this. In doing this he wrongs the English poor. The clergy of the Established. Church enjoy among them an annual revenue of about £4,000,000 sterling, English money, to enable them to supply the spiritual, and in part the corporal, necessities of the English poor, or rather the English people generally. How much of that ample sum is misapplied to purposes of luxury and vanity by the dignified and other clergy of the English Church, their wives md families, 1 need not tell': it is too well known. Even this large sum is but a fragment — a very small fragment— of what the pious bounty of our Catholic ancestors had provided for the service of the English poor, as well as for the honour and glory of God. Who got the lion's share and now enjoy it, is no secret. But a day of reckoning approaches. .Redress will be bad, not by violence, but by law. The wrongs of ages are about to be redressed, says the London {Times, and it' is true. The Premier of England, Mr. Disraeli, pays— and I believe says truly— that the crisis for England rather than for Ireland is new at hand.</ The Established Church in Ireland, to all human appearances, is doomed to remain established no longer. The fate of the Established Church in England cannot be long a'matter of doubt. The same , power which i shall dis-establish the one will not be slow to disestablish the other. Then, indeed, the crisis for England, 01 rather for Christendom and the world, will come. We, the children .of England in, this colony, cannot long remain insensible to such a crisis, nor unaffected by its influence. All creeds will tben,, have fair play, a clear stage, and no State, favour throughout the wide range of Victoria's!, empire. From liberty— true liberty — the Catholic Chujch. has nothing to fear, but, on the contrary, muph to hope. Her most powerful enemies are ever the greatest despots — ever the most merciless oppressprs of the unprotected and the weak. , Those Catholic sovereigns, some of whom have professed, to.be her most sincere friends, have sought too often to patro* nito 'only that they might enslave her, *ud oppress her children. What she wishes is liberty, independence, and perfect freedom' of action. J She .will not stoop to purchase this by a slavish subserviency either to princes or people. She is and ever has been emphatically the poor .man's Church — the most con r> , siste'nt and incorruptible guardian x>f the.poor, man's interests. Ido not say, that all civil rulers, in her communion have acted in that character* .God knows they- have often been, in defiance of , theig principle^ and professions, the worst, of oppressors. ..Even some individual Popes have listened to the dictates, of ambition, avarice, or revenge, rather than to the voice of the Church which, they ruled, and to the law of God, whose ministers they were. The enemies of the Church everywhere, but especially in England, have not been slow to take advantage'of this circumstance. Yet these bad Popes have been few in number. compared with those who have adorned their high station, and edified the world by the most heroic Christian yirlnes, or devoted themselves to the, defence of public liberty, and the encouragement of science and learning. The most influential enemies of the Catholic Church have unquestionably been the ministers of, that establishment in England and Ireland which is now tottering to its fall. Their enmity wag the le*sb pardonable, because their learning and professed love of liberty were the greatest.' The faults of ignorant men may be excused in such a ease, but not the faults of those who knew, or ought to have knows, .better. — I have, &c , - . , ■ J.W«