BIBLE IN SCHOOLS

Gisborne Times, Volume LXXIII, Issue 11768, 15 October 1932, Page 5

BIBLE IN SCHOOLS

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL DEBATE. INTRODUCTION OF CONTROVERSIAL BILL RESENTED. GOVERNMENT SHOULD INTRODUCE AIEASURE. AIR. McTNTYRE’S OPPOSITION. (Press Association.) WELLINGTON, Oct. 11. Continuing the debate in tho Legislative Council on the Religious Instruction in Schools Enabling Bill, the Hon: W. AI. Alclntyre said it was indiscreet for a private member to introduce a Bill of such a controversial nature. Legislation of a national character and of a national policy /should he introduced by the Government, which was composed of God-fearing men, who were just as anxious to protect the welfare of the children as anyone else. There‘ was an onus on the promotors of the Bill to prove that the moral and intellectual standard of New *■ Zealand children was inferior to those taught under other systems. Though they had inferred ;tliat, they had, not proved it.

AMENDMENT PROMISED AND VOTE AGAINST MEASURE.

The Hon. C. ,1. Carrington said that a. child in order to be safeguarded against the perils of the world needed the protection of religion, bu.t the Bill was a poor safeguard for a child. "Undenominational teaching .was a. distinct danger to Christianity. The real solution for sound religious education in the State schools was the Nelson system, aud the Bible-in,-Schools League would accomplish more than it could by the Bill if it put its energies behind tlie Nelson system. The only fair solution of the education question. should he State aid to private schools. He had decided to support the Bill until that morning when he realised the great difficulties which had to be overcome. The passage of the measure would impose grave disabilities on a teacher, and he intended to move in the commiU.cc stage Io make provision lor the right oi' appeal by teachers who considered they had been victimised. Even an amendment would not overcome the difficulties, and he intended to vote against the measure.

NECESSITY FOR AJORF RELIGION.

Sir W. R'all-Jones said there was necessity in the world lor more obedience to the teachings of Christ. If Christ’s teachings had been followed. there would have been no war. and present troubles would not have followed. He did not object to a more simplified system of religious instruction than was proposed in the Bill. The debate was adjourned till Wednesday. on the motion of Colonel Sniii b.

C ATHOL 1C HI ERAR CH Y’ S ATTITUDE.

BILL WAS APPROVED UNDER All SAP PREHENSION.

AJ FAS UR E NOW OPPOSED

(Press A .-.social ion.) WELLINGTON. Oct. Hi

A comprehensive statement of the position of the Catholic Church in regard to the Religious .Instruction in State Schools Enabling Bill, now before the Legislative Council, has been namled to the Evening Post by A rhbishop Redwood. Metropolitan of New Zealand, for publication. Archbishop Redwood says the New Zealand hierarchy of the Catholic Church consists of the Metropolitan and liic Bishops of Christchurch, Dunedin and Auckland, Bishops Brodie. Whyte, and Liston. When the Bible in Schools representatives met the Catholic bishops in conference- their proposal's received sympathetic consideration, and they were asked to reduce their legislative programme to writing, and submit it at a later date for the hierarchy’s perusal and comments.

When this programme was submitted to Archbishop O’Shea, Archbishop Redwood was absent from New Zealand, and .Archbishop O’Shea, without consulting the three bishops, wrote approving the suggestions made. The Bishops of Christchurch, Dunedin and Auckland were not aware that the Bible in Schools representatives had submitted a programme to Archbishop O’Shea, who assumed the concurrence of- the bishops in his approval. When the statement of the Bible in Schools committee referring to Archbishop O’Shea’s approval as that of ,the Catholic body appeared in the press, the named bishops, for the first time, knew of Archbishop O’Shea’s approval. In turn, each ol the bishops dissociated himself publicly' from concurrence.

Later, on his ryturn to New Zealand, Archbishop Redwood summoned a meeting of the hierarchy, and in a considered statement, signed by Idle four members of the hierarchy addressed to the Parliamentary committee then taking evidence on last year’s Bill, gave joint disapproval of the contents. This statement, which is quoted in full, is a repetition of ;thc statement of the hierarchy in 1925.

BISHOP LISTON’S PROTEST. MISSTATEMENTS CORRECTED. (Press Association.) AUCKLAND, Oct. 11. The following statement in regard to the Legislative Council debate on the Religious Instruction in Schools Enabling Bill was made by Bishop Liston, Roman. Catholic Bishop of Auckland, to-night: “Sir James Allen is reported ;to . have sai'd in the Legislative Council on Wednesday that the major- ■ iby of the Catholic hierarchy was in favor of the measure., If Sir James is correctly reported, liis

statement is contrary to fact. The Archbishop of Wellington and the Bishops of Christchurch, 'Dunedin and Auckland are in charge of tlio Catholic Clmrcli in New Zealand and they have in public pronouncements jointly and severally recorded their emphatic protest against (many Bills produced by supporters of the Bible-in-Sshools movement and, if Sir James lias made -jibe statement attributed -to him, I trust lie will now correct it publicly. The Hon. L. M. Isitt is reported to-liaVc said thajt Catholics, in agreeing to the Bill, had promised not to press lor State grants.’ Lo,t it be said that Catholics will gladly. 'follow the guidance of their Bishops in this matter and that fhese Bishops have- not agreed to tho Bill and have made no promise in 'public or in private to anyone/’.