Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

SECULAR EDUCATION IN VICTORIA

Over forty years ago denominational education was replaced by secular education in Victoria by practically the very people who are now agitating for the Bible in the State schools. The non-Catholic denominations, who assisted in secularising the public school system, would like to forget their action on that occasion, arid have even gone so far as to deny that they aided the secularists to bring about that result. Mr. Benjamin Hoare, who is one of the most active Catholics in Victoria, shows in a letter to the Argus this was not the case, and that the supporters of secular education would not have succeeded in having that system imposed on Victoria were it not for the support of the non-Catholic denominations. Mr Hoare says: ‘ The Scripture superintendent denies that the nonCatholic churches joined themselves with the secularists to pass the Education Act of 1872. He supports his denial by showing that a certain conference of the heads of churches met in July, 1872, and tried to get Scriptural lessons provided for in the secular Act. He impugns the accuracy of my pamphlet, ■ The Great Betrayal.

‘ His argument does not touch the question at all. As a matter of history, the fight for a secular Education Act began in earnest in 1867. But it was not until 1871 that the country was appealed to on the specific question of religious education versus secular education. The election was fought on those lines,’ Sir Charles Gavan Duffy being the Premier, and Mt. Francis the

leader of the Opposition, Sir Charles Duffy refused secular education; Mr. Francis demanded it. The Catholics were solidly against banishing religion from the schools. The non-Catholics were in an enormous majority for it. Sir Charles Duffv was defeated in Parliament and in the country. Mr. Francis came in with a majority. The issue proves the truth of my contention.

‘ The Catholics were then a little more than 23 per cent, of the people. The non-Catholics were a little less than 77 per cent. The secularists pure and simple certainly did not number more than 20 per cent., leaving 57 per cent, of Protestants and Jews. There was, therefore, a junction of 20 per cent, of secularists with the great body of the non-Catholics, and in 1871 the people overwhelmingly voted for the new policy o f secular education as opposed to denominational education.

I There is no evading the force of a fact like this. They returned a Parliament which enacted this:—“ln every State school secular instruction only shall be given, no teacher shall give any other than secular instruction in any State school building.” ‘ They did it, as the late Mr. T. Howard Fellowes declared in Parliament, under “an Orange banner, blazoned with ‘No Popery’.” Mr. Higinbotham said some time after: “I believe that many Protestants support a State system of education chiefly with the object of preventing the-establishment of Roman Catholic schools throughout the colony. In so doing they appear to me to act unwisely, as well as unrighteously, and to endeavour to crush Catholicism under the heel of authority is a vain effort which will surely fail.” ‘ To deny now that Christ was driven out of the State schools by the non-Catholic Churches is to deny a broad fact of history. Nor can some Church conference held after the event touch the fringe of the matter. The deed was done; and Bishop Moorehouse told them that the blame rested “upon the Christian people of this country.” It rests there still.’

This article text was automatically generated and may include errors. View the full page to see article in its original form.
Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/periodicals/NZT19120829.2.69

Bibliographic details

New Zealand Tablet, 29 August 1912, Page 43

Word Count
588

SECULAR EDUCATION IN VICTORIA New Zealand Tablet, 29 August 1912, Page 43

SECULAR EDUCATION IN VICTORIA New Zealand Tablet, 29 August 1912, Page 43