BIBLE IN SCHOOLS

Stratford Evening Post, Issue 4, 25 July 1930, Page 5

BIBLE IN SCHOOLS

UNITING THE CHURCHES ROMAN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. WELLINGTON. July 2i. An official statement has been issued by the executive of Bible in Schools League on the return negotiations between the Roman Catholics and Protestants as a result of which it is expected that'the Roman Catholic opposition to the proposals will be, at least, lessened on the important points. The statement states that, after the conference or representatives of the Protestant churches held in Wellington last March to consider matters relating to the Bible in schools question, a letter was forwarded to their Graces Archbishops Redwood and O’Shea. Quoting Bishop Cleary’s words: “We only want two tilings —protection of the consciences of our children and protection of the consciences of our teachers,” and enquiring if this represented the Roman Catholic position. The outcome was the opening of negotiations with the object of meeting difficulties that had previously prevented the opposition of Roman Catholics from being withdrawn. The difficulties were frankly faced in conference and correspondence, with the result that th? proposals made by the League executive (empowered by the conference of churches to continue negotiations), have now been accepted by the Roman Catholic leaders. These proposals are as follow: — (1) That an interpretation of the League’s earlier conscience clause exempts, ipso facto, all Roman Catholic teachers and pupils from participation in Bible lessons; (2) That Roman Catholic taxpayers be freed from paying any portion of additional expense that may be involved in the introduction of the Bible into schools; (3) That during the .time set apart for religious instruction, exempted pupils bo given lessons in secular subjects. These have been embodied in clauses for the inclusion in a Bill. The principle was also affirmed in the conference of representatives of Protestant churches and approved by the executive of League as follows: “If the introduction of religions observances, or instruction, involves any additional cost Roman Catholics shall be exempt from paying any share of this additional cost. “These clauses etc. represent the proposals made by the League executive and accepted by the Roman Catholic Hierarchy, which will be forwarded to the governing bodies of the churches 'comprising the League, They are embodied in a new Bill which will bo considered by those churches with a strong recommendation foi acceptance by them. The report of these churches will bo received before the Bill takes final shape and it is understood that the Bill cannot, therefore, bo placed before Parliament until 1931. Regarding the question of State aid the League, throughout, has been quite definite in the decision that negotiations must be carried on without committing it in any way to Roman Catholic claim. The negotiations have been conducted, from the beginning, without involving any surrender of the principle on either side. ”

' “These negotiations have happily resulted in a complete agreement between the League and Roman Catholics on the above proposals,” concludes the statement. J ’ ROMAN CATHOLIC VIEW. WELLINGTON July 24. In a. statement, issued to-night. Archbishop Redwood says; “Wo have stated publicly, over and over again, not only in the joint statements made by tlie B.shops of New Zealand, but frequently through the lato Bishop Cleary, who was rdio official representative of Hierarchy, whenever this question came up, that, altogether apart from the question of ,State aid to our schools, we were willing, and anxious, that some religion' should bo taught to Protestant children in the schools. It was provided only that the rights of conscience o f Catholic teachers and pupils, and of all others concerned, wore adequately protected and that Catholics wore not obliged to contribute anytuing toward the cost of such Pro!estant touching. ’» “Recently representatives of the Bible in Cchools League have approach od us with the desire to come to some agreement on the matter. The propos als are the outcome of our conversations, If the Bill containing exemptions and safeguards for consciences or Catholics, find of others already mentioned, is introduced into Parliament, it will not he opposed by us. Of couisc, f repeat that, in adopting this attitude wo do not, for a moment, mean to give us our just claim that Catholic schools are entitled to receive, for seen bii* instruction given in thorn, a fair share of the money Contributed by the Catholic taxpayer toward the cost of educating the children of the Dominion. This claim wo cannot, in conscience, surrender, but any proposals for religion in the schools that full’d the conditions wo have, so often insisted on for the protoeton of consciences of Catholic teachers and pupils as well as of all others who cannot accept the

proposed religious teaching, and which vviii exempt Catholics likewise from coiitrfibutiug toward the cost of such teaching, will not ho opposed by us. To use tin; words of the late Bishop Cleary ‘‘the more (religion in schools) there is the better we shall like it, ’’ and “we will wish our non-Cathol'c friends God-speed in carrying out their proposals. ’'