THE PROPOSED WESTMINSTER PROCESSIONS.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXX, Issue 6624, 14 September 1908, Page 4

THE PROPOSED WESTMINSTER PROCESSIONS.

It is somewhat szzrprising to learn that the proposal of one religious denomination in London to do what other denominations and also what representatives of bodies that cannot bo called religious at all are constantly doing without danger to the public peace should be objected to as likely to make discoz’d in the city. It makes one, wondez* if this is really an ago of religious toleration. The answer does not appear doubtful to anyone who walks away thoughtful from a Salvation Army exhibition of “Knee Drill" in the street. In similar fashion -no ozze doubts that a people w hich listens to anarchists azid socialists and Mormons holding forth under tho shade of trees in broad parks on pleasant Sunday afternoons is people which tolerates tho opinions of its neighbour. So, when the atheist takes his stand on a platform and calls upon tho crowd, round him to trample metaphorically on the beliefs of all who differ from them, and when the printing press sends forth zmrestricted and unnoticed by the vigilant people, who are trembling for the public safety, and weeping over tho public conscience, pamphlets in which all religious belief is treated as a childish mental attitude, then public opinion which is familiar with the sight of the Sunday Church goers passing one another on their different ways to worship in their different fashions, comes to the conclusion that religious toleration has been established in the land. Therefore, it is a shock to find such a large number of objections to tho proposed Roman Catholic Westminster procession. The expressed grounds for these objections help us to a conclusion on the main question. One of these is an objection to tho nature of the rite, and the other is a warning that there aro people enough to make dangerous hostile demonstration. The objectors then may be divided into two classes those who oppose tho procession because they dislike the belief represented, and those who are convinced that some of the objectors on that score are ready to make good tbeir objections by violence. Both distinctly admit by their action that they are not in favour of religious toleration. Both therefore deny the views generally held in consequence of the freedom enjoyed of public action by so many agitators.

Tho questiozz is, however, not .academic. Tho immediate consequences of, such action as is contemplated axe mozas important than the

question itself. It may bo difficult for the average citizen to understand why tho sight of anybody’s worship should infuriate somebody else to tho breaking of the King’s peace. But it is not a case of converting persons so afflicted to hotter views. It is a case for preventing bloodshed, riot, violence and bad blood. It is not tho business of tho administrators of the law to convert anyone to any views; it is their duty to prevent civic strife. If tho evidence placed before the Government supports the warnings of tho men who have taken this matter up then it will bo the duty of the Government to see that there is no procession of the kind proposed. Such a precautionary measure, the evidence of its necessity being good, would be in tho interest not only of the general public, but also of tho parties most concerned, because the memory of the celebration would thou be free from bitterness of any kind. It is not the object, wo take it, of tho Roman Catholic authorities to make an unfavourable impression, or to do anything which shall delay making of the good impression which they desiro. Tho only people who have anything to loss by the stoppage of tho procosion aro the people who are opposing it. Inasmuch as their opposition is a determination to prevent in one instance that which is permitted in all others, they ought not to win. But inasmuch as their objection covers an clement of danger, tho case for not giving an opportunity for tho danger is very strong. That which prevents tho procession then’-should it bo stopped —reflects on tho position of those who aro represented by the petitioners. But that is a thing which concerns nobody outside their ranks. What docs concern most people is that a decision should be necessary proclaiming that tho icign of peace in tho religious world is as far off to-day as it was in tho timo of Queou Elizabeth, when persons who refused to go to tho churches favoured by the orthodox wore treated with a severity which succeeding generations have called barbarous. From this point of view the Roman Catholics aro right in waiting for an official forbiddanoo. When they got it, should they do so, they will probably obey with words which will not be readily forgotten. Should, on the other hand, tho Government decide not to prohibit tho procession, tho Catholics will have to consider seriously whether they ought not to abandon an exhibition which may do more harm than good from every point of view.