RELIGION AND POLITICS

Otago Witness, Issue 3877, 3 July 1928, Page 23

RELIGION AND POLITICS

ROMAN CATHOLICS AND LABOUR DR CLEARY’S REFUTATION. AUCKLAND, July 1. St. Patrick’s Cathedral to-day Dr Cleary replied to Canon James’s statement that the Labour ' Party in voting against the Religious Exercises in Schools Bill “is obeying the orders o f its masters, the Roman Catholic Church. This is the price of Roman Catholic support at the polls.” An emphatic denial of any such bargain, Dr Cleary said, was made on behalf of. both the alleged parties to it. The Bible-in-Schcols League was offering as “ the price .” of support imaginary ‘’huge electoral majorities” of 70 to 84 per cent. It’s demand for a “ count of noses ” on intimate or other questions of religious faith or practice was described as a “ menace to religions peace and liberty.” Canon James’s {.Jack recalled another highly-.placed league authority’s announcement of a “ gloves off ” campaign during elect'on year for “ stirring up-strife in the community.” Dr Cleary repudiated any alleged bargain with, any political party, and, claiming an intimate knowledge of the official action oi the heads of his church in New Zealand, he said that their church, stood above and outside, all political parties, and this as a matter of long established law and discipline based on old-standing doctrinal and moral principles embodied arid emphasised in Leo XlH’s encycloical and in numerous other papal documents. A number of these was quoted to the following effect:— Roman. Catholics '/.are forbidden to involve the church in party strife ” on political and civil natters. Catholic voters- have an “ honourable liberty of action,” and are “ perfectly free to say and think what they like, having due respect for charity and justice.” All “who represent tlie interests of religion in any way or degree ” are required to avoid ’ even the simple appearance of holding with arid ' favouring political parties.”

An instruction dated Epiphany, 1920, ordered all writers of Roman Catholic journals to avoid political partisanship. When the. speaker (Dr Cleary) was editor of the New Zealand Tablet it was appointed by the Roman Catholic heir archy “ the sole organ of the Catholic body-in New. Zealand,” and one condition of that appointment required the paper to avoid either advocacy of or opposition to any political party. The speaker had exactly followed - Roman Catholic prim triples in : this, matter, both-, as editor and bishop.' He had, as the official spiritual head and teacher and ruler of his diocese, many times given instructions to his priests apd people on these subjects along th© church s lines. Tlie present Pope in 1923 had commended him in a letter for his strict editorial and episcopal avoidance of party entanglements. “ The Roman Catholic Church and its heads here,” he said “ have neither the right nor the power nor the desire to interfere with the free exercise of the Catholic voters’ perfect liberty to think and act as they please in political and civil matters.” Grave attacks on God-given sacred rights would naturally tend to knit politically-divided Catholics for the right, tul defiance of , these things, but even when enemies sought to cripple or destroy religion in various countries the church had not permitted to her representatives any alliance with political parties. In regard ; tp Canon James’s allegation of a bargain or compact for Labour voters, Dr Cleary concludedl speak with relevant documents and with an intimate inside knowledge of the action of our church’s heads in this Dominion, and I declare that his statement is contrary to. fact.”