Current Topics

New Zealand Tablet, 9 February 1911, Page 231

Current Topics

A Pointed Parable There is high precedent for speaking in parable; and under the clarifying influence of an apt illustration many an intricate and tangled question has been unravelled and made clear as day. A happy instance in point has just been furnished by the Very Rev. M. J. O'Reilly, President of St. Stanislaus' College, Bathurst, in the course of a controversy with the Sydney Morning Herald. Father O'Reilly is dealing with the well-worn and off-hand argument of those who say: ' The State has provided a thoroughly efficient and well-equipped system of schools. It is there for the Catholics, as for others, if they choose to avail themselves of it. It they do not choose to do so, that is their own affair.' This idea—the same in substance though differing in —had been expressed by the Herald in these terms: ' Has it (the Catholic section of the people) the right to separate itself from the rest of the community in the education of its children, and then demand that the community at large shall support wholly or in part its separate schools?' And Father O'Reilly meets this venerable ' argument' with a neat and simple illustration.

( In order to render this position as clear as may bo,’ he says, ‘I will make the following supposition: —Let us imagine, then, that the time has come for supplying every child in the State with a free breakfast. A measure authorising the necessary expenditure has been piloted through Parliament. A clause, inserted while the Bill was in committee, provides that the principal feature of this breakfast shall be a pork chop. The peaceful citizens of the community are astonished, as they sandwich their morning paper between coffee and hot rolls, to find that the Jewish Rabbi objects to this truly philanthropic measure. He points out in a letter to the Herald that the members of his faith have a religious loathing for pork in any form. The grounds of this dislike, he contends, are no business of the general public. The fact is, that it exists. And, as Parliament had no other end in view when putting the Children’s Breakfast Act on the statutebook than the supply of free breakfasts to the children, he concludes by proposing that, if the Executive finds any difficulty about procuring a substitute for the pork, it can hand over the cost per capita of the pork to the Jewish citizens, on the understanding that it shall be devoted to the general purposes of the Act. The State will thus have given effect to its benevolent design, and the feelings of the Jewish citizens will be considerably spared. A few irreconcilable bigots are immediately up in arms, and aver that the adoption of the Rabbi’s suggestion is tantamount to a State endowment of the Hebrew faith. The Christians of the State are invited to band themselves for a new crusade. But the hard-headed common-sense of the people refuses to take the men seriously, and the Jewish child faces the school day on a mutton, instead of a pork, allowance.’

The parable hardly Deeds any application. ' Muiaio nomine,' says Father O'Reilly, ' de ie fabula narratur.' The days of "Catholic ascendancy" will be back again, forsooth, if the Catholics are allowed the money for their mutton-chop, which they have -already contributed to the State Exchequer, and which is only the equivalent of what the rest of the community get for their pork. Or, rather, it is far less than an equivalent, because even with a capitation grant for results the Catholics would still have to build and equip their own schools, though they contribute their just proportion to build schools for their fellow-citizens as well.' A Jesuit * Dynamiter ' Very few people— at this distance—were deceived by the transparently false cable about the Jesuits throwing bombs at Lisbon during the recent revolution; and even the man in the street was shrewd enough to see that the story was got up as a mere pretext for taking violent measures against the Order. The charge has been so completely refuted that it may seem like slaying the thrice-slain to

further demolish the bomb-throwing story; but as one of the ‘ dynamiters,’ has been heard from in person it may interest our readers to have his very definite and explicit statement on the subject. It was given in the columns of the Scotsman of November 16 last. A correspondent Mr. Stuart E. McNair, of Coimbra, Portugal written a letter to the Scottish paper containing the usual tissue of false charges and misstatements regarding the Jesuits. Whereupon Father Camille Torrend, S.J., took up the cudgels; and by the time. he is finished there is very little left of Mr. Stuart E. McNair. Writes Father Torrend: ‘I myself am one of these famous “dynamiters” and “bomb-throwing Lisbon Jesuits”; I was at Lisbon during the Portuguese revolution ; nor is my name quite unknown in Portugal, and especially in Coimbra, where Mr. McNair resides. However, to make assurance doubly sure he may himself make inquiries about me at the Biological and Botanical Departments of the Coimbra University. I now challenge Mr. McNair to produce a single scrap of reliable evidence to prove that any Jesuit as ever seen firing on the mob or throwing bombs, or that bombs of their manufacture were ever discovered at Quelhas or Campolide., I sincerely hope In? will be good enough.,to accept this challenge, and will not, like the Mundo and Seculo, which invented and propagated these calumnies, take refuge in silence. He must know (especially if he has read the Times of October 27) that before leaving Lisbon I challenged these newspapers to produce any such evidence. I also begged them in the name of . journalistic honor to publish my indignant protest as a French citizen and no dynamiter or assassin, but hitherto my protest has passed unheeded. The only reference made to it by the editor of the Mundo (October 23) was to the effect that he could not answer so violent a challenge, that as a Jesuit I had no right to stay in Portugal, much less (save the mark!) to challenge him! I feel sure such a method of argument cannot commend itself to Mr. McNair. By the way, it might be good for this gentleman, when framing his answer, to remember that on October 5, that is to say actually two days before the attack he speaks of (October 7, at 8 p.m.) all the Jesuits at Campolide and Quelhas had been arrested. Of course, this may not be conclusive evidence at all, especially if Mr. McNair is one of those who believe that these same insinuating Jesuits had escaped through the 3-inch bore sewers of Campolide I (See Saturday 'Review of November 5; Tablet, November 5).

Father Torrend has also something to say regarding the alleged unpopularity of his Order. When an exresident of Lisbon— a Mr. Riper—was declaiming at Timaru a few months ago about the ‘ execration ’ in which the Jesuits were held in Portugal, we confidently affirmed that the statement could only apply to the Anarchist revolutionary element of the Lisbon populace and that the feeling referred to was certainly not entertained by the better classes of the Portuguese people. On this point Father Torrend’s statement indicates that matters were precisely as we had supposed. Mr. McNair asserts,’ he continues, ‘that his “knowledge” of the Jesuit propaganda in Portugal for the past twenty years enables him to understand the execration in which that Order is held by the common people.” Does he mean by the common people to refer to the uneducated classes and to the anarchical and hooligan sections of Lisbon and of some of the other Portuguese towns, who are at the mercy of a vile, cheap press?—a press that is carrying on a slanderous ’ propaganda against religion and religious. If so, he is quite right. But among the better educated and more refined classes, whose feelings Mr. McNair does not describe (although presumably he is one of them), this bitter feeling is far from prevalent. Now for one little testimony out of many to our sadly blackened character. Mr. McNair lives at Coimbra. : Let him go to the University and ask for the well known magazine Mgeological Notes, which is edited at Cincinnati by C. G. Lloyd. He will there find on page 157 what this celebrated scientist has to say about the work of Jesuits generally, and of the Portuguese Jesuits in particular; how, although himself a Protestant he is convinced that no man possessed of any but the most superficial knowledge can withhold his admiration from the Order. May I conclude by hoping that Mr. McNair will now make a serious effort to get beyond his present

very superficial knowledge of the Jesuits in Portugal, and will try to judge them and their work from other sources than the cheap anti-clerical press, which has incited the common people to the persecution of defenceless nuns and to the murder of royalty.—l am, etc., Camillb Torrkno, S.J. Fondateur de l'lnstitut des Sciences Naturelles .au College do Campolide; Membre Correspondant de l'Academie Royale des Sciences de Lisbon et de la Royale Academic d'Agriculture de Turin.' For Catholic Teachers Catholic newspapers, the world over, devote a vast amount of space in chronicling the doings and the successes of our Catholic schools, and an immense amount of energy and a large amount of such brain power as they possess to fighting what is known as ' the battle of the schools.' We do the work with the most hearty good-will, recognising the unspeakable value of the Catholic school and the magnificent sacrifices made by their devoted teachers. But we have a question to ask of Catholic teachers respect to which they may, we venture to think, not unprofitably make some little examination of conscience. What have the Catholic schools done, or what are they doing, for the Catholic paper? The question will doubtless bo received at first with a little shock of surprise; for it has probably never entered into the minds of the majority of our teachers to suppose that anything of any value could be done amongst the children in such a matter. But there are two ways, at least, by which the Catholic —with distinct gain and benefit to itself — be made to aid in the apostolate of the press and to assist in stimulating interest in the Catholic paper. ' The first is that which has been recently indicated— emphasised an American Bishop. ' A few days ago,' writes the editor of the Catholic Advance, of Wichita, Kansas, who is a priest, '.we overheard a Bishop speaking to one of his priests. "Why do Catholics not support the Catholic press?" asked his Lordship. Replying to his own question, he continued: "Because they don't know anything about it. The necessity of reading Catholic papers is scarcely ever mentioned in Catholic schools. It is almost impossible to find a priest who.- preaches regularly on the duty of reading and supporting Catholic papers." Looking directly at his companion, the Bishop demanded: "Father, how often have you spoken to the children about reading Catholic papers?" "I don't know, Bishop," was the ready answer, but it failed to satisfy the zealous Ordinary, who was very much in earnest.' The editor confesses that he, too, as a priest, ' felt guilty.' Continuing, he says: ' Lessons in the duty of supporting Catholic papers must be given by the ones who realise its importance. We have often wondered why those who compile catechisms invariably, omit the chapter on "Support of the Catholic Press." What better incentive to a pure life can we find than filling the heart and mind with knowledge and admiration of the great things done by faithful Catholics throughout the world?'

The second method is one which for some time past has been warmly recommended by American Catholic papers, and which has been actually tried in a number of Catholic schools in the United States with conspicuous success. The plan is to introduce the Catholic paper into the school and Once or twice a —use it for reading-lesson purposes, the reading, of course, being accompanied with explanation and discussion. As we have said, the idea is in successful operation in numbers of American Catholic schools. We learn, for example, from the San Francisco Monitor which paper, by the way, is one of the most thorough-going and vigorous champions of the proposal—that in the archdiocese of New Orleans, in many of the schools, there is a ‘ Morning Star Day ( The Morning Star being the official Catholic paper of the diocese) devoted to readings from that paper while in others of the Catholic educational institutions the Morning Star is brought into the classrooms twice a week for readings and discussions. Why could not this be amongst the more advanced classes— our larger city schools in New Zealand? That there is ample need and scope for some such means of keeping the children in touch with Catholic life and Cath-

olic affairs few will deny. How many of our children, for example, could give any sort of coherent or intelligent account of what has happened in Portugal, or of the why and how of that upheaval? • How many of them could tell what Catholic event of note has just taken place in Sydney? But let them bo questioned regarding, say, Crippen or Ethel Le Neve, and in all probability one would get a full and detailed reply. That is clearly not as it ought to be; and if the children are to have access — in these days it can hardly be preventedto the pofsonously sensational and sometimes anti-Catholic articles which appear in the secular papers, at least some attempt should be made to provide them with the antidote. Our teachers rightly aim at. being thoroughly up-to-d„ate in all their methods. Who, then, among them will be the first to introduce the N.Z. Tablet to their Sixth Standard pupils? Theje is ample range and choice of subject. One day the story could be selected for reading purposes, another day the devotional column, another day an article of Irish interest, another day the leader, and so on. The proposal is not feasible, of course, in all our schools; but those of our teachers who could adopt the plan and omit to do so are neglecting a great opportunity for good. Presbyterianism and the Waldenses A West Coast correspondent has forwarded us a cutting from a Kumara paper, our intended reference to which was crowded out of last week's issue. It contains a contributed report of the ordination of a Presbyterian elder at Stafford and of an address delivered on the occasion by the Rev. J. C. Jamieson, Moderator, in the course of which the speaker said: It was an error to describe the Presbyterian Church as the Scotch Church, the oldest branch being the Waldensian Church of Italy, which was doing active work long before the times of Kalvin or Kure (?Knox), or Luther. This Church had received twenty Roman Catholic priests into its membership in two years, including two Roman Catholic college professors.' This appears to be the only reference to the Catholic Church contained in the address; and we know Mr. Jamieson well enough to know that he would be the last man in the world to make intentionally or consciously offensive remarks about the Catholic or any other religion. Of the two statements, however, to which he has committed himself the first is one of those facts which ' isn't so '; and the second— far as it is a fact—has attached to it an explanation which is not particularly flattering either to the Waldensians or to Presbyterianism. The suggestion that the Waldensian Church was the original Presbyterian Church, in the sense in which Presbyterianism is now professed by Mr. Jamieson and the newly ordained Stafford elder, is completely negatived by authentic history. 'The Waldenses,' says the writer of tho article on 'Presbyterianism' in Chambers' Encyclopedia, 'were perhaps anti-episcopal. But Presbyterianism as we know it first asserted itself at or after the Reformation.' ' The Presbyterian form of Church government,' says Prof. C. A. Briggs, D.D. (Article 'Presbyterianism' in Encyclopaedia Britannica), 'began at the Reformation, and attained development only in the Churches commonly called Reformed." ' As a matter of fact, amongst the original doctrines held by the Waldenses were a number which the Reformation— Presbyterianism— inaugurated for the express purpose of combating. 'They believed in the necessity of confession; and taught that a bad priest could not absolve but that a good layman could. They believed in the Real Presence in the Blessed Eucharist. They held that it was unlawful to take an oath; and condemned all princes and judges, being persuaded that it is not lawful to punish malefactors.' Any such connection as-may now exist between the Waldensians and the Protestant bodies was purely an after-thought on the part of the Reformers, and an after-development. At the Reformation some of the Protestant leaders, who perceived the use that might be made in controversy of the alleged existence of a sect which had maintained a pure religion and resisted the authority of Rome for many centuries, made overtures to the Waldenses, and in 1530 the deputies of the latter, Masson and Morel, met the Reformers, CEcolampodius and Bucer, at Basle. These last urged the deputies to renounce some of the more extravagent of their tenets —e.g., that a Christian might not lawfully take an oath,

that ministers might not lawfully hold property, and that the ministrations of wicked pastors were invalid; and, on the other hand, to hold with the Protestants, that the Body of Christ was not in the Eucharist, and that confession of sins was unnecessary. But the complete adoption by the Waldenses of Protestant doctrine did not take place till 1630 —almost a full century after Presbyterianism had. been definitely established in Scotland by John Knox. * "With regard to the statement about the thirty priests, it is noteworthy that the two years within which the alleged transfer is said to have taken place are not specified, nor are either the names or the addresses given of any of the priests concerned. We have no doubt that Mr. Jamieson made the assertion in good faith on the strength of some paragraph he had read somewhere; but bare bald statements of the kind, entirely unaccompanied by any evidence »f their truth, are absolutely valueless. So far as our reading goes, the recent additions to the members of the Waldensians from the ranks of the Catholic priesthood referred to by Mr. Jamieson are nearer three than —have all been cases of priests who were not permitted to remain in the Church by reason of their Modernist views. They did not leave the Church of their own motion were forced out by the determined measures taken by the Pope to protect his people against the poison of a false faith. To such converts the Waldensians are very welcome. Then the two ' college professors ' who are included in the thirty converts. One of them, at least, we know Prof. Bartoli—and we have already given his full story and career to Tablet readers. He had been a member of the Jesuit Order. ' About 1904,' says our accurate and reliable contemporary, America, after suffering from sun-stroke and an attack of typhoid fever, Father Bartoli returned to Rome. ... would appear that his sun-stroke had made him restless and intractable, and he could no longer adjust himself to the observances of a Jesuit community. .; . Unwilling to comply with the rules of the Order, he was, for some time, in a dubious position, regarded by some as a Modernist, although protesting strenuously that he had nothing to do with Modernism, and that he was determined to . reenter his religious Order. . . . When refused re-admis-sion by the Jesuits, he made a tour of Italy. . . . Lately he has been advocating Waldensian views, not because they are Protestant, but because they are, according to him, of Italian origin, and peculiarly suitable for Italians, although their founder was a Frenchman, and the first members of the sect were known as " The Poor Men of Lyons." Sunstroke, intractableness, and a suspicion of Modernism, are the features that stand out as the main factors in this conversion. And even in spite of all these untoward influences, he would still have remained in the Church if only the Jesuits would have readmitted him to his Order. If the story of the ' conversion ' of the other professor is in any degree similar, verily their accession to Protestantism is very little to be elated about.