The New Zealand Tablet. Fiat Justitia. SATURDAY, DECEMBER 6,1873. BIBLE READING IN SCHOOLS, AND SCHOOL BOOKS.

New Zealand Tablet, Volume I, Issue 32, 6 December 1873, Page 6

The New Zealand Tablet. Fiat Justitia. SATURDAY, DECEMBER 6,1873. BIBLE READING IN SCHOOLS, AND SCHOOL BOOKS.

A letter signed " Parent "in the ' Daily Times ' of the Ist inst, calls attention to the following clause of the Education Ordinance of 1864: — "'in every school established under the provisions of this Ordinance the Holy Scriptures shall be read daily, and such reading shall be either at the opening or the close of the school, as may be fixed by the teacher ; and no child whose parent or guardian shall object to such instruction shall be bound to attend at such times." " Parent " then calls on the community to see that this provision of the law be enforced. It is not enforced, it appears, in some Government schools at present Personally, we have no knowledge on the matter, but common rumour has it that it is so. There is no doubt whatever that teachers are bound to read the Bible eitler at the beginning or end -of school ; that the selection of the time is left to the master or mistress, and that neither the committees nor the Education Board has any authority whatever to interfere. The law is clear and emphatic ; and in plain unmistakeable words gives the teacher the power to choose a time for Bible readiEg either at the opening or the close of school. The law does,, not say who are obliged to assist at this reading, but it implies, by an exception it makes in reference to children whose parents object, that all children whose parents do not object shall be compelled to attend. This province, therefore, assumes to itself the right to interfere in religious matters and to coerce consciences. "What right has the province to say that religion — a religion of its own fabrication — shall be taught to all in its schools, except such as shall be exempted at the request of parents ? Let us suppose — and this not unfrequently happens— thai parents are ignorant of this law, or forgetful of it, or inattentive to it, what then ? Their children are to be compelled to do what their religion and consciences, if they are Catholics, forbid them to do. Is not this tyranny, ard tyranny, too, of the most odious and criminal character ? Again, suppose — and this is a possible, though we admit a merely possible and very improbable case — that a teacher is a Catholic, the law compels him either to do what he believes to be highly criminal in him or perhaps to starve. He must cither violate his conscience or resign his situation, probably his only means of livelihood. Is not this tyranny, odious and atrocious? Thirdly : The community is taxed to maintain this tyrannical system. Catholics arc compelled to contribute means to make Catholic children slaves and hypocrites, and Catholic teachers also slaves and hypocrites, unless indeed they abstain altogether from having anything to do with Government schools. Is not this tyranny? What right have Protestants to call on Catholics to pay for the religious instruction of their children ? Teachers are paid out of funds contributed by all in common ; and if they are to teach the Bible to Protestant children, is not the eommuuity at large paying for such teaching ? One of the objections most commonly made against giving aid to denominational schools arises from the unwillingness of Protestants to contribute towards the religious instruction of Catholics, though Catholics ask nothing of the sort ; they only demand aid in order that they may be able to impart secular knowledge ; they will give the religious instruction themselves, and at their own expense. And yet these Protestants compel us to do the very thing which they affirm would in their own case be a grievance and an. injustice. When denominational schools are spoken of, they object to a ghost of a shadow; but as to their own schools — for the Government schools in the Province and most other Provinces- in New Zealand are essentially Protebtant — they entertain no scruples whatever, in forcing us to pay not for the ghost of a shadow, but

for the real substantial Protestant instruction of their own children in the Bible. They say, in effect, we cannot raid denominational schools in, which little children are. taught to know and love Grod, to observe his commandments to work out their salvation under the guidance " of Catholic Church, though the aid asked is solely on account of the instruction imparted in reading, writing, and arithmetic ; such a proceeding would violate our Protestant principles and consciences ; but on the other hand our Protestant principles and consciences not only do not forbid, but actually call on us to compel poor Catholics to contribute, to the instruction of our children in tlie Protes.tanfc religion ; the teachers paid by Us all in common must not on any account give the least -'Catholic instruction but they must teach our children the fundamental principles' of Protestantism. You Catholics say this is monstrously unjust and tyrannical ; we do not care, it is good for us"it saves our pockets ; it is a sweet gratification to our prejudices, to be able to trample on Papists, and we are able to trample on them. We are the majority, and, fools that you are, it is thankful you ought to be that we allow you to reside in the country at, all. Sometime last year, we are informed, a gentleman, who hails from the north of the Tweed, told Bishop Moran that he and his people, as they objected to the system of education established here, "ought to clear out of this Province." English and Scotch 'historians, and writers are never done telling us that Protest-" antisin has freed men from bondage, religious and civil, and that the world is indebted to it for the liberty it enjoys. "Well, behold here in the education system of Otago a striking illustration of this liberty, and of the justice accorded to Catholics ! - It is not many days since a letter appeared in one of the daily papers of this city, in which the writer deprecated the exclusion of the books at present in use in our common schools, on the ground that non- Catholics should not be deprived of tnese books to please Catholics, and that no matter what might be dote as to books, Catholics would still remain opposed to these schools. It must be borne in mind that these books contain passages that are untrue and most insulting to Catholics. We are called in them idolatrous, superstitious, blood-thirsty, <&c. } &c, &c. The writer of the letter alluded to did not see the impropriety and injustice of compelling Catholics to pay men and women to teach his children these abominations. He thinks it a hardship that his children are to be deprived of such teaching, partly at least, at the expense oi Catholics. He thinks it only natural and becoming that we should pay teachers to impress on the minds of his children ; that we are everything that is criminal, miel, and irreligious. He is at liberty of course to buy any boots he pleases for his children, but it is going too far to demand that we shall pay people to teach his children everything in these books ; that is untrue, injurious, and insulting in reference to us. He thinks it is monstrous for the community to cast out these offensive school books, stuffed as they are with lie's as to Catholics, because they are offensive to Catholics, but he sees no impropriety in-asking us Catholics to take an active part in inculcating these lies and thus helping in our own degradation and injury.