IS THE 'LYTTELTON TIMES' "HIGHFALUTING "

New Zealand Tablet, Volume I, Issue 51, 18 April 1874, Page 6

IS THE 'LYTTELTON TIMES' "HIGHFALUTING "

WE would answer the question if we only knew the raeaniM of « highfaluting." Our friend the Otago Guardian ' £ TneZ had the courtesy to give us the definition we so ardently desired. But though we cannot answer this question we can affirm that our contemporary the < Lyttelton Times '' has been dreaming lately, In its issue of the 4th inst which we had not the pleasure of seeing till this week, our contemporary of Canterbury tells its readers that " there is a ver» considerable section " of Roman Catholics who are perfectly satisfied tfith the Ordinance-" Education"-" who cheerful ly pay their rates, and who are convinced their children are more likely to receive a better education by the maintenance of a thoroughly national, than by reverting tj a purely denominational system. They are convinced, as are the great majority of the people, th,it religious should be sepa rated from secular instruction, and that the provisions of the Ordinance on this and other points are essentially ju rf t " Without intending the least disrespect to the < Lyttelton limes, we »-eg to assure our contemporary that in the above extractthere is not one word of truth. Will the " Lyttelton limes name the Catholics who are in favour of the Canterbury system of education ? Will he be so good as to name the localities where this very considerable section of Catholics is to be found 1 We challenge the < Lyttelton Times ' to name even a few Catholics who are in favor of the Canterbury system of education. And until he does so we shall hold him guilty of deliberately calumniating his Roman Catholic fellow subjects. Further on in the leader from which wo have- iust now quoted, the < Lyttelton Times ' says « that a large percentage" of Roman Catholics " are opposed to any alteration in the leading principles, of the Ordinance. They are perfectly satisfied, and have no wish for a change." Where are them Roman Catholics to be found t We know the Colony as well at least as the < Lyttelton Tin**/' and the Catholics of the Colony a great deal better ; and we have no hesitation whatever hi saying that a greater untruth in reference to Koman Lathohcs has never been stated. If the " Lyttelton Times' had said that Roman Catholics, almost without a single exception, were sighing for an alteration in the leading principles of the Ordinance, were dissatiified and wished for a change, the Editor would have borne testimony to the truth A^ain, our contemporary says, speaking of Fathir Uarin s School m Xehon, "if Protestants were not afraid to send their children to this Roman Catholic School, conducted under the superintendence of a Roimn Catholic Priest why should Roman Catholics object to an unsectarian system of education 1 Why should they in short, cast upon Protestants who are in a lar^e majority, and mo*t of whom cheerfully accept the Ordinance, the slur that attempts will be made in the District Schools to tamper with or insult the peculiar religious opinions of any section of the community ! If 080 8 Mr Stafford says, no doubt correctly, P.otestants could send their children to a Roman C.tliolic School, and implicitly trust it* Roman Catholic doctors, why should Roman Catholic* uljsct to do the same in regard to schools thit are neither Protestant n-.r Human Catholic? Where is theip grievance?" This is certainly a very peculiar mode of re.wunng. The 'Lyttelton Times' is easily sttiafied with arguments. Because a few Protestants in Nelson send their children to Father Gaein's School, therefor* all Roman Lathohcs in the Colony should not object to- send their cbil! dren to Protestant, or godless achoola ! Again, because some lew liote.tatifcs trusting in Father Gabin's honour, which bus been will proved during four and twenty yeaw, voluntarily .send their children to his school in Nelson, th-refore fill the Catholics of Canterbury should not complain of beiuc compelled to send their children to godless schools ! Because forsooth, a few Protestants choose to have their sons educated in a Catholic School* therefore tnere is no grievance ia compelling Catholics to send their children to be educated in t-ohoola which they abhor because they are intrinsically dangerous to their faitli and m >rals, and in which, as they know only too well from experience, the teachera tor the mos-t patt will both tamper with and insult their " peculiar religious opinions."'

But, it may be asked, how many Protestants send their children to Catholic schools, or even to Godless schools taught by Catholics 1 Here, in Otago, as a rule, a teacher's catholicity is an insurmountable barrier to his appointment to any decent Government school. We had an instance, the other day, in a locality not a hundred miles from Dunedin. And, as to Canterbury, we venture to affirm that there is hardly a gchool committee in the entire province that would not reject the most highly qualified candidate for the office of teacher if he were a Catholic. The ' Lyttelton Times' says the Canterbury system of education is unsectarian. We most emphatically deny the assertion, and affirm that it is not only sectarian, but insiduously sectarian. It is administered by Protestants, the teachers are, it may be said, Protestants to a man, the books used in the schools are Protestant. There is not a single Catholic engaged in its administration ; the tone and atmosphere of the schools are Protestant. Catholics are mide to feel that, under the system, their position is one of galling inferiority. The histories used either contain gross calumnies about Catholics and their church, or are disingenuously silent in reference to most important facts. And yet we are told this is an unsectarian system ! The Protestants are in the majority ; they have schools to their heart — everything they want in fact. And Catholics, whilst compelled to pay for the maintenance of this system, must consider themselves highly favoured to be permitted to accept this mutilated and mongrel teaching. This is the justice and liberality of the colony of New Zealand ! They tell us, in fact, we the majority must have these schools, they are just what we require for our children ; what you Catliolic3 can get in them is good enough for you ; and if you get nothing for your money, we don't much care. You can go and maintain schools for yourselves at your own expense, but you must pay the school tax for the education of our children all the same. You had no hand in framing the law, in fact, we received all your suggestions with scorn. You bad no representatives in the Provincial Council when the Ordinance was enacted ; and, even if you had, we would have paid no attention to their reasons or remonstrances. We didn't even pretend to consult for your principles or consciences, you are nothing to us. We want a Rood, sound secular education, well dashed with Protestantism for our children, and if you won't avail yourselves of that, you are traitors and — such in effect is the language of the Canterbury legislation on education.