The Freethought Review. WANGANUI, N.Z., DECEMBER 1, 1883. CLERICALISM AND SCHOOLS.

Freethought Review, Volume I, Issue 3, 1 December 1883, Page 8

The Freethought Review. WANGANUI, N.Z., DECEMBER 1, 1883. CLERICALISM AND SCHOOLS.

Thomas Paine thought one good schoolmaster worth considerably more than one 1. v.ndred priests, and the civilised world since has been fast approaching the opinion of " the rebellious staymaker of Thetbury." And it must have been somewhat the same enlightened and liberal spirit which actuated our legislators in New Zealand when they instituted our present school system of free, compulsory, and secular education. It is one of the most statesmanlike acts which the politicians of this colony can lay claim to, and one which shows that they were determined to keep abreast of our Australian neighbours, and of the foremost and most progressive nations of Europe. " The faith once " delivered to the saints," and other old-world rubbish, has thereby become relegated to the limbo of forgetfulness, so far as the authority of Parliament is concerned, and the world will be a better and happier place for the change. As might naturally be expected, the ecclesiastical mind of New Zealand has been sorely exercised in consequence, and the Education Act of 1877 has been greatly reproached by them. So frequent and uproarious have been the complaints of these clerical gentlemen that Parliament recently permitted several representatives of the churches to state their grievances before a committee. The result of this enquiry has been printed by the Government, and nothing could be more effectual than a perusal of this report to show how completely these clergymen failed to prove that they suffer any injustice at the hands of the State in the present mode" adopted to educate the children of the State. There was an utter nonconformity of opinion, of course, among these gentlemen, and the bewildering character of the claims put forward by Bishop Hadfield, Bishop Redwood, and the Rev. Mr. Bavin would be alone sufficient to dismay the most generous and intrepid politician .in this colony, and that is saying a great deal. What an ecclesiastical trio to legislate for ! Why the occupant of a seat on the Ministerial benches, who might consider himself capable so to amend the Education Act as to. satisfy all parties, would at once be considered a political Jonah, and his colleagues would throw him overboard for a great deal longer than three days. Although, at first sight, it may appear both liberal and wise that the Government should have allowed the representative expression of opinion in the manner named, it cannot be urged that these clergymen could claim it as a right by virtue of their office. Fortunately, we -have no State church ; and unfortunately, too, although we are a heavily-taxed people, the national exchequer does not receive a single penny upon the enormous property held by the churches in this colony. The inverse of the proposition-"no taxation without " representation " — should be made to apply to clergymen and their churches as well as to others. The sole reason urged why those clergymen should have been heard before a Parliamentary Committee against the Education Act, that they are recognised in the clerical office under the " Registration of Marriages Act," does indeed seem a pitiful one, and is the last vestige, and that but a partial one, of the past adulterous connexion between Church and State. What right have these ecclesiastics, then, other than as citizens, to oppose the school system of the colony ? In the case of Bishop Redwood, we have the authority of Mr. J. Sheehan, M.H.R., that the communicants of his church would be willing to send their children to the State schools if the priests would allow them. The Right Rev. Bishop is, of course, a true disciple of one who did more than any other of the Roman Catholic Church to dispel the dark ignorance of the middle ages, and therefore speaks with some little authority. But, unfortunately, faithful followers of Ignatius Loyola, to use the words of Thomas Carlyle, "think they " can best serve God by taking the devil into partner-

" ship." The result is that the very country in which this order of men started their first school (Germany) had to expel them in the name of liberty and good government; aye, and even in Catholic France that fiery fiend of freedom, Leon Gambetta, had to give them notice to quit. Legislators of New Zealand, beware ! and let experience teach you wisdom. Nor does it come with good grace from Bishop Hadfield, as the colonial representative of the Church of England. So inefficiently did this church employ its vast wealth — the richest corporation in the world !—in the education of the people during three hundred years, that the Education Act of 1870 had to be passed to make public provision for what it had so long neglected to accomplish. And as to the Rev. Mr. Bavin, who spoke as the President of the Wesleyan Church in this colony, he but represented a very harmless sect in the matter of education—

"Who never did a foolish thing Because they never did a wise one."

This gentleman, however, gave his views before the committee in a far more liberal and well-intentioned manner than either of the other clerics. But if the Wesleyans only desire what the Rev. Mr. Bavin urged, then there is no earthly reason why they should not avail themselves of present opportunities. It is very evident that if the Education "Act becomes altered to the desires of these clerics, we shall then suffer all the evils of sectarian strife, which is such a drawback to the efficient working of the School Board system in England. Y.