A SUGGESTED FORWARD MOVEMENT ON THE EDUCATION QUESTION

New Zealand Tablet, Volume XXXV, Issue 4, 24 January 1907, Page 11

A SUGGESTED FORWARD MOVEMENT ON THE EDUCATION QUESTION

To the Editor.

Sir,— As -one never knows when the editorial fiat may go forLli that ' IMs - correspondence must cease, 7 it is as well perhaps that I - should reply at once to the ' -discordant note '= blown, a week or two .ago, by our anonymous friend ' Tuba. 1 In order to find matter for criticism, it has been necessary to bring before the public, as mine, a very different set of issues from those actually raised in my original letter, and for my own part 1 confess to a strong suspicion that tihe letter under review was written more < with the object of provoking further controversy than for the purpose of setting forth ' Tuba's \ whole ' credo ' on t-his .question. As many of your readers, however, may take ' TubaJ seriously,, I propose to treat the letter as being written in sober earnest and to assume— what indeed I honestly believe— that, in spite of 'his cynicism, my critic is anxious as any man could be to ''see Catholics get justice on this matter. - 1. ' Tuba's ' first criticism is that it . would be use- ' less to formulate' in Vriting the claims of the Catholic body, as this has been done so ' often- before, 'and the Protestant answer ' may be presumed.' The sugestion that each of the bodies -represented should submit a- written statement of .its demands- was put forward by me as being a sort of' prelinjmary business formality, desirable in order to party precisely where" the mother, stood,* "and was||one of those details which— as I repeatedly indicated in my letterwere not essential" to my proposal, but might be omitted or modified as might be deemed wise. is true, as ' Tuba ' says, that Protestants have often had the opportunity of reading a- written statement of Catholic claims. They have not, however, had" the opportunity of hearing " the reasons for those claims set forth fully and forcibly by, the living voice. Moreover,we " are not even asking that our Protestant" friend's should agree with our principles and views on tihe'Education question. Our views would be stated with as much fulness as the circumstances would allow, with a view to showing the reasonableness of our position, and in the hope of inducing the Protestant bodies to ask as much, as we ask ourselves. But what we really 'want to know 4s not whether they will accept our views and principles, but whether, if we agree to help them, they will agree to help us- in getting what we each want on this question. That is an issue which has never been definitely placed before them, and their answer, therefore, • may not be presumed. 2. According to 'Tuba,' 'Mr. Scott thinks it possible to draw up a statement containing pure Catholic doctrine, acceptable to members of the Protestant Synods.' To those who know me, and to those, who have-read my letter with any care, it will be unnecessary -to say that I never for a moment imagined anything so foolish. From start to finish of my letter there is not a word about -Catholic doctrine—l am not dealing with doctrine, but with definite concrete demands regarding our schools. If I had ever supposed that it was possible to harmonise Protestant and Catholic doctrine, I would probably never have left my Protestant Church to become a Catholic. Nor do I even suggest that we could frame a statement of- demands that would be, in se, acceptable "to the Protestant Synods. What I do say is that there is at least a possibility that they might accept our statement in the sense of being willing to help us to obtain our demands, if we agree to aid them in gaining theirs. 1 Tuba ' may honestly differ from me in my opinion' on this /matter, but surely nothing can be 'gained by misunderstanding- and mis-stating my position. 3. Still apparently laboring under the delusion that I had suggested' some sort of doctrinal agreement, ' Tub^a ' seeks to draw a parallel between my proposal and the effort - towards doctrinal agreement which was made by leading men in France and Germany nearly three centuries ago. 'Oh this point I remark : (a) The parallel docs not hold, inasmuch as the European movement was purely doctrinal, and my suggestion, as I 'have already explained, is simply for a practical agreement on a common course of political action, (b) The ' European movement was inaugurated at a time when Protestant bigotry was air its height,, and when

controversy was conducted in -the coarsest- and most acrimonious spirit: '.Tubas' suggestion that because an attempt to bring about aii agreement faiied 'then 'a fortiori' it will - tail now, is therefore, entirely wrong. The ' a fortiori ' is quite the other, way about. (,c) Although the European movement was not • directly successful, it rendered, substantial service to the Church — precisely the Kind of service which! maintain the proposed' conference would render here, even though it failed in its direct object, in the first place the movement had a very important educative effect. Qn this point I quote Alzog, who is universally recognised as a standard authority, on the .subject.- On p. 47, vol. iv. of his ' Church History '; referring to this movement -he says.-: 'If the efforts of these great men were unsuccessful, they at least made clear> to both parties the only possible baJ.s of a union, 'brought )x>ih to understand each other better, and to entertain more t'.vindly- feelings ; and- in this, way- relieved the Church of many of the charges falsely brought against her. A like effect was produced by the compendious but masterly Exposition of the Catholic Doctrine by Bossuet, in which, while clearly setting forth the Catholic teaching, to did full justice to the objections and prejudices -of the Protestants, proving to them by" irrefragable arguments 'that in separating themselves from the Catholic Church the great buik of them, took the step in ignorance, rather than with a full knowledge of what they were doing."

Then, besides -Helping to dispejl Protestant- prejudice the movement resulted in certain more tangible gains to tlve Church. 'In consequence," continues' Alzog, " many of the German princes,^ seeing and acknowledging their mistake, to the great joy of Holy Mother Church, returned to the unity of faith. Among these were Ernest, Landgrave of IJesse ; John Frederick of Brunswidk, thjen. reigning Duke of Hanover ; . Fredric Augustus 1., Elector of Saxony ; and Charles Alexander, DuiYe o>f Wurtem,berg. Others, again, like Christian' Augustus, Duke of Holstein, and the scholarly Anthony Ulric had the gf eat joy of bringing their entire households with them.'

The moral of all this is obvious, and "Tuba's ' appeal to history only gives added point" to -my contention that the proposed conference, even if it failed in its immediate object, would be certain indirectly to ■do substantial good.

4. '■'Tuba ' considers that ' this embassy sent to our opponents would be a sorry admission of weakness.' We live in a- country where one adult one vote is the ruling principle, and in which the question of State aid to Catholic schools will be decided by mere count of heads either in. the House or in the constituencies. Catholics form one-seventh of the population, and this ' embassy sent to 'our- opponents ' would be an admission of the simple arithmetical fact that one vote is not equal to six, and that one of the simplest ways "of getting equal in. voting power would be to transfer some of the six to our side: 1 Tuba, ' may call this, if he will, a ' sorry admission of weakness ' — most people, 1 am. satisfied, will regard it as mere elementaiy common sense. To lie down and let ourselves be walked over is surely a much sorrier admission of weakness.

5. ' Tuba ' supposes the suggested conference to have been successfully held and the Protestant clergymen^ tobe engaged in preaching State aid to private schools, and then asks : ' Do you really believe that New Zealanders will be guided by their clergymen *in politics? Is there any parson in New ' Zealand capable of commanding two votes on any question ?'" This sounds suspiciously lii'xe playing to the gallery. Unless ' Tuba's ' district is different fiom every other district in the Colony, he must know well that there is many a parson who is capable of commanding many more than two votes. Are there not many parsons capable' of commanding not only two but many hundreds of votes on, say, the prohibition question ? Suppose there had been not a single parson in the Colony during the past ten years would the Prohibition movement have reached anything like the dimensions it has now attained ? Would the anti-gambling and anti-totalisator movement have been able to influence legislation in the way it has recently done if New Zealand had been without parsons for the last few years ? I do not say that the parsons have the same degree of influence on the education question. In the Presbyterian Church, of which I have " personal knowledge, I know that s there are a great many people who do, not care a snap of their fingers for their minister ; but I know, too, that there is a substantial proportion who are really concerned at the secularism of the present system and would certainly; follow their ministers -if .the latter

gave a clear and united lead. I have no desire to * magnify the parsons' influence. 1 only say that they have some influence, and that, whether it be little 'or gieat, it is better that it should be with us than against us. - - ,

6: ' New Zealandcrs,' ' Tuba '"continues, ' will vote at the next election as they have always, voted, for " telephones, roads,, railways, and bridges. . . The results of this famous conference will be annulled- by the

ranK secularism pervading the politics of the country.' So, then, already it has come to> this, that ' rank secularism pervades our politics,' and that we are producing a type of being who is at bottom (to .use the expressive phrase of a writer in the ' Dublin Review ' ) only ' a digesting tube open at "both ends.' Does not 1 Tuba ' see that this' furnishes the strongest possible reason why we should at once be up • and doing ? If his statement is correct, our chance of redress is receding farther and farther from us, and_unless .we move quickly it will soon- be useless for us to move at all.

7. It is not necessary for me to interpose "in ..defence of Dean Burke 1 s assertion that at present politi-

cal agitation on the education question is dead. Had ' Tuba ' appended his name to his communication, the Dean would doubtless have dealt with it himself -and "Tuba' would have met the fate which rash - critics of

Dean Burke usually meet with. Tuba contends that agitation is not dead, -because we are still buildingCatholic schools. I only desire to point out— what indeed is self-evident — that building schools .is not.

ipQiitical agitation. 'Building schools 1 is, of 'course,* strong evidence ,of the earnestness and sincerity of- our convictions; but it is- quite obvious that our- only' chance of securing State aid is by influencing- Parliament—An other words, by political agitation. It is quite tjrue,, as ' Tuba ' says, that we are building schools, and— we are paying for them-. The MLon is lying down with the lamb, but the lamb is inside,, and unless -he gets a move on and does something to 'disturb the lion's digestion there is nofr the slightest prospect of any improvement. We may build Catholic schools till they are as plentiful as blackberries and Government . after Government will look placidly on without ever feeling the slightest qualm of conscience in regard to the way they are treating - us. The one. and only thing which will influence a N.Z. Government is the pressure of votes at election time and in the House.

8. Assuming that the State is willing to subsidise private schools, ' Tuba ' asks on what conditions would the subsidy be granted. The only condition which I have ever heard suggested from any authoritative source is that payment should be made on the basis- of the standard passes obtained — in other -words, that x a capitation grant be made for all olir children who satisfy the State Inspector's requirements" in respect to secular education. 1 . have myself- suggested that, if— it were the only means by which we'' could obtain the grant, it might be worth considering whether we could make some slight: concessions— concessions, in name rather -than in fact— on the lines of Mr. Balfour's Act of 1902. That was a purely personal opinion, and' if is. one which at the present time it is altogether premature to- discuss. Only iet us advance the question to_the stage at which the State expresses its willingness to 1 ;help- us, and the authorities of 'our Church can bo very safely left to look after the ' conditions.'

9. I fear ' Tuba ' has a very inadequate idea of -the heavy strain which the double tax imposes upon our people. As I go round amongst the people, lam lost in admiration" at the heroism of many Catholic mothers—at the way in which, in the middle of an almost life, and death struggle to mate ends meet, they manage to keep the flag flying and pay their school fees regularly, even when the - quiver is very full.. But there is

"another .side to the picture. There are the heroes who ' don't ' pay, and there are the -heroes who, flouting priest and bishop and all the ■ laws of the Church, ..coolly send their children to the State_ school,. I am told by priests . that in the large city parishes there are scores of Catholic children being sent to the State schools. If ' Tuba ' had to pay a portion of his salary—as many priests have to do— to keep a Catholic school going, and had to ramble round after the parents who send their children to the Government schools, he would not view the . situation 'Quite so calmly. ' Tuba ' thinks that -my proposal is like some motoring appointments which suppose a phenomenal combination of favorable conditions. I may say that I have never for a moment supposed that all the details of my scheme would ever be given effect to, precisely as they are -set out on paper. They were suggested merely as a possible method of procedure to

.show at. least one way in which the scheme might be carried out. 1 agree entirely with the writer in last ' week's issue that ' public movements cannot be planned .neat, complete, and square at the outset, with rules and regulations to be carried out like a railway' time-table. They follow the lines of natural, growth rather than of architectural plans,' and the most I have ever ■ hoped for is that my proposal might be found to contain the germ from which something good may be 'evolved. After all, though we may differ - greatly as to details, what we all really desire 'is the good of the Church ; and if we put our heads together it will surely be a strange tiding if some practicable scheme of action cannot be devised. Meanwhile I would like to ask "Tuba ' three questions, which I hope he will be so good as to -answer: (a) 'Is it, or is it not, desirable that oui\ Catholic schools should receive payment from the State for the hard work that is done for the -State. (b) If it is desirable, has ' Tuba ' any, sehieme.^to suggest whereby this desired result can- be" brought about? And (c) If he has not, why throw obstacles in the way of an experiment -being tried which is" not in conflict with any Catholic principle, which must do some good, and which may do, a great deal. There are two other points of general interest and importance which I would like to touch on before this discussion- closes, but as they are not connected with anything in ' Tuba's ' communication, or with anything that has already appeared in your columns, I would crave the editorial induigence to deal with -them in another- and final letter.— l am, etc., January M. " J. A. SCOTT.