MR NORTH RETURNS TO THE CHARGE.

Otago Witness, Issue 2722, 16 May 1906, Page 15

MR NORTH RETURNS TO THE CHARGE.

CFhom Ova. Own Correspondent.) ( WELLINGTON, May 9. The controversy about lotteries at church ■ bazaars is getting- very jvarm. In to-night's Post the Rev. Mr North replies to Father Keog-h as follows: — ''The Rev. Father Keogh's ' vigorous reply * is vigorously evasive. r The art of making 'anything of anything 5 is highly developed by that gentleman. His sally regarding the geographical position of Dr Grimes is windwhipping. I had not; -the remotest "idea of Dr Grimes's whereabouts when I- read that sorry circulay- to which his name is appended, nor had I. when I first referred to the attitude of the Catholic Church towards gairibling. any intention of publishing the document. If private Catholics had followed the lead given them by the priest in charge of this diocese they would not ha\e challenged me for proof of jny assertion^ihat spiritual privileges are offered To successful salesmen of lottery tickets. They challenged me in spite of their leader's signal, and I am glad to suppose because' they abhor any such practice. No other course -was open to me than the production of the document Dr Grimes knows that I possess. lam so little of a bigot that I have not published ir in a secular paper before. Whether Dr Grime 3is at this or the other end of the world cannot effect, the validity of a document bearing- the seal of his Church, and his own imprimatur. I have reason to believe that. Dr Grimes's circular is not an isolated specimen. On challenge I have no doubt That local illustrations could be produced. The Rev. Father Keogb misleads almost beyond the bearing of plain men when ho | says. ' His Lordship invites his cor^espon- I dent to help the bazaar, informs him that the Popo so far approves the object of the j bazaar as to send two gifts for the stalls, and promises his prayers to all who assist , in the undertaking. Only that nnd nothing more.' The fact is. and Father- Keogh knows that the fact is. that his Lordship asked his correspondent to sell art union tickets, and categorically stated that the Pope sent two gifts, not for the stalls, but for the art union. The circular deals with nothing but lottery tickets, and explicitly promises successful salesmen religious privilege in the' shape— (1) of prayers for their friends now in purgatory, and (2) special intercession of a personal sort. If. this is not offering spiritual bribery as a reward for the successful soliciting of others " to ongagp in a certain form of gambling the English language can no longer be trusted to convey meaning from man to man. Yet Father Keogh said when he had washed the stain from the document it meant only a cerlain white thing, and ' nothing more.' Does it occur to him that a certain phrase of his is a two-edged sword, and tiiat the correct name for such conduct will readily occur to every right-minded member of the community? Now. since th* Pope not only once, but several tinw?3, as I am in a positioii to prove, has given gifts for the express purpose of lotteries, "the question of his infallibility is bound to occur. All moralists who are listened to by our nation agree that gambling is a vice. For one who claims infallibility in regard of morals to be publicly supporting a vicious practice is decidedly queer. Catholic definitions of infallibility, however carefully worded, cannot take the qu«*rness from the incident, though allowance may be made for Italian environment. The Rev. Father Keogh plays bluff vigorously by pretending that I denounce bazaars. He ponderously quotes a definition of bazaar. Now. I did not name bazaars in my denunciation. Gambling is entirely separable frcm bazaars in Protestant p*>acticc. That the two should bo co tangled up in Catholic practice that the Rev. Mr Keogh cannot hrar the one denounced without imagining that the othor is impugned, only makes the more scathing roy, indictment. I reiterate I \va« moved to protest not because Bishop Grmes wrote a certain letter, but because the Catholic Church throughout New Zealand stands in avowed alliance with gambling habits, and because gambling habits are menacing in the darkest possible way th<> welfare of this land, it Father Keogh desires to justify his Onurch one course is open to him. He must argue that gambling is right, and I am prepared to delate that issue with him on any public platform in this city. It will not serve the occasion to distinguish between gambling for ca<-h and for material prizes devoted to religious purposes. The jurisprudence of our country declines to recognise that the end justifies the means. 'If gambling is wrong (and it is in toto) evory Church outfit to absolutely separate itself from it. 4.11 Protestant churches have done or are doing so. The Roman Church is not only dumb concerning the giant evil, but is gambling e\ory year on a larger and larger scale. The secular press has challenged the Church to purge itEe!f of this reproach, if my vigorous critic will respond to^ that challenge how very well it would be.