RaisingtheStakes
At the opening of a new convent and school in Paraparaumu on the 14th of
November 1954, Archbishop McKeefry made an unusual departure from the normal etiquette used on these occasions. During his speech he told the assembled crowd
We are tired of being fobbed off and I say that should another war come, and if it was to be fought overseas, then - my thought at the moment is - I would feel inclined to call on our own men to stay home whilst those who deny us justice can do the fighting overseas.
He claimed ‘certain vociferous groups’ denied Catholics justice by appealing to the threat of disunity or fragmentation if the secular education model were tampered with. Such opponents were less strident in times of war and he hoped ‘the discrimination shown at the moment will be equally evident if bullets begin to fly in time of war’. McKeefry went on to say, in qualifying his comments, that if the country were attacked then he would expect ‘our people’ to be ready to fight and die.1
The speech was specifically about justice for the Catholic school system. Using such a startling emphasis to convey the message was a major risk. McKeefry had been invested as Metropolitan for New Zealand some four days beforehand, attended by two of the three bishops of New Zealand’s Catholic hierarchy. It is likely that he would have spoken to the others, or at least James Liston, since the collegiality of the hierarchy was dependent upon the principle of few or no surprises. McKeefry had been a former student of Liston at the seminary in Mosgiel and became a protégé of his. He had continued to work closely with Liston while Archbishop O’Shea’s
coadjutor and would continue to do so during his own episcopacy.2 He was aware that his words would have an impact. And, as the most senior Catholic cleric in New
1 "Justice for all children. Archbishop McKeefry states Catholic case."
Zealandia, 18 November 1954.The reference to opponents being less strident in times of war relates to censorship that was introduced by the Fraser government during WWII, see Taylor, The New Zealand People at War: The Home Front vol. II, The Official History of New Zealand in the Second World War, 1939-1945.
(Wellington: Historical Publications Branch, Wellington, 1986).
2 Reid.
Zealand, was assuming a leadership role.3 The decision to speak in these belligerent terms would seem to have been his alone.
The rhetoric used by Catholic speakers often alluded to war service and sacrifice. Earlier in the year, Bishop Edward Joyce of Christchurch, when opening new school buildings in Greymouth, linked the Catholic claims to fallen servicemen, ‘pupils of State and Catholic schools alike’.4 Aside from the military analogy, McKeefry hinted at the potential that could be harnessed with the unified Catholic vote. One of the official guests was the Member of Parliament for Otaki, Mr. J. Maher, who had been returned to Parliament in the previous day’s election. McKeefry suggested to Maher that any analysis of the National Party’s diminished majority should recognise the ‘prolonged denial’ of Catholic claims as a factor.5 This remark was clearly a reminder, aimed at both main parties, that the bishops at least believed there was potential for political protest from Catholics over this issue.6
The pugnacious tone of the speech not only reflected a sense of frustration about the lack of political progress, but also signalled a change of approach. It had been 77 years since the Bowen Act had created the national system of primary education and the desire to right the injustice had not ceased. The Church though was buoyed by a sense that, ultimately, victory would be theirs.7
The strategy of patient and understated advocacy on the issue of state aid was
having no discernable results; justice was being denied. ‘Freedom’ was an appealing and understandable catch cry for the National Party to promote their electoral
chances.8 ‘Justice’ had a similar pulse for Catholics, who had been confronting the
3 McKeefry, Archbishop Peter. "Letter to J.F. Keane of Rotorua." In
WAA Education: State Aid, #298. Wellington 1954. In replying to a correspondent, McKeefry said he took a 'calculated risk' when making the statement.
4 "West Coast Schools Building Programme."
Zealandia, 25 February 1954. Joyce, Bishop Edward. "Statement given to Press Association." In ACDA, Lis 58/2. Auckland, 1952.Catholic schools produced good citizens -'Two world wars had proved beyond doubt the loyalty of King and Country which was taught in Catholic schools. Proof of this was to be seen in Catholic schools rolls of honour from one end of the country to the other.'
5 "Justice for all children. Archbishop McKeefry states Catholic case." 6 Ibid.
7 Akenson, Donald H.
Half the world from Home: Perspectives on the Irish in New Zealand 1860-1950. Wellington (N.Z.): Victoria University Press, 1990. p176. Akenson makes the point that the Church's 'collective history' gave the prelates the sense that they would win eventually. He cites examples from Ireland, Northern Ireland and Canada where government systems of non-denominational schooling were modified to meet Catholic demands.
8 Returned servicemen knew that the war had been about freedom and understood the National
Party’s argument for ‘freedom’, especially the removal of controls and ‘inquisitive State pimps’. Mein Smith, Phillipa. A Concise History of New Zealand. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2004. p177. Gustafson. The First 50 years. A History of the New Zealand National Party. p54.
issue, one way or another, since 1877. McKeefry was prepared to use the strong language of his statement knowing the possible risks, but confident of raising the issue to a point where the Government could not ignore it. According to Tony
Spencer, this ‘showed yet again how strong was the long tradition of Catholic hostility to the Government' established by Bishop Moran after 1877.’9
Other factors contributed to this change in attitude. Catholic Action, especially in its post war context, encouraged the laity to become more involved with their
community, applying Christian values to the everyday actions of a Catholic living in the world. Clerical oversight was still a key ingredient, but the laity, or at least those who were actively involved, were being asked to participate in the apostolate of
challenging secularism and reconnecting religion with everyday life.10 Catholic Action was not going to provide any sort of vanguard of Catholic militancy, but the bishops were confident of strong lay support for the renewal of their campaign for ‘justice’.11 Reaction was swift and tinged with shock at the directness of the language.
McKeefry was a quiet, albeit directly spoken but retiring man who did not find working in the public glare comfortable.12 As reports of the speech were printed, editorials
and letters to the editor showed that public opinion was not only roused by the statement itself, but elicited strong views on the issue of state aid. Editorials were almost uniformly critical. The Daily Telegraph in Napier wrote that the issue of state
aid had ‘been given a new disturbing quality’ by McKeefry;13 Wellington’s Dominion
was of the view that many Catholics would have been shocked by the threat of direct action in the event of another war and the public be less inclined to forgive the
‘implied challenge to the State’;14 the Christchurch Press saw the Archbishop’s
remarks as likely to incite ‘sectarian controversy’ and the issue of state aid did not equate with ‘the great and vital issues that have persuaded New Zealanders to go to
9 Spencer.
The Organisation of Catholic Education in New Zealand, Interim Report. p205. In 1966 Tony Spencer was invited by the Catholic bishops to undertake a study of the organisation of Catholic education in New Zealand. He arrived in 1967 to undertake the fieldwork; unstructured interviews with the bishops, political leaders, teachers’ union leaders, the heads of religious orders and other key participants and opinion leaders in the Catholic and State education systems. He visited 26 Catholic schools and 20 matched State schools. He produced his interim report initially in 1972.
10 "The New Zealand Catholic Youth Movement."
The Catholic Action Chaplain. A Quarterly for Priests 1, no. 1 (1955).
11 Sweetman.
A Fair and Just Solution? A history of the integration of private schools in New Zealand. p31.
12 van der Krogt, Christopher. "'McKeefry, Peter Thomas Bertram 1899 - 1973'." In
Dictionary of New Zealand Biography. Wellington: Ministry for Culture and Heritage, Wellington., 2000; updated 2007.
13 "Archbishop McKeefry's Resort to Pressure."
Daily Telegraph, 14 November 1954.
14 "Archbishop McKeefry's Speech."
war’;15 the Otago Daily Times considered the remarks deplorable, that a ‘sense of
bitterness has been engendered’ and that relations between Catholics and the rest of the community would suffer.16 For the Evening Post, the threat of war ‘could only
come from one quarter,’ i.e. Communist Asia, and, in those circumstances, it was inconceivable that Catholics would not go to war.17
An exception was the Southland Daily News. McKeefry’s remarks, the article stated,
should have been accepted as a means of drawing attention to the strength of
Catholic feeling on the subject. There was an obligation on the state to face up to the problem, given that the assistance already provided meant the state has already accepted some responsibility, ‘especially when it involves a substantial and permanent minority in the community.’18 The same paper had written one year earlier that it did not foresee any danger to the state education system in the provision of financial assistance to private schools.19
Letters to the editor had a much broader scope. Many were condemnatory while others supported the Archbishop. There were, though, a number of letters that were more moderate, which while not necessarily supporting the Archbishop, put milder interpretation on the remarks. Catholics wrote in to the newspapers agreeing with the Archbishop and arguing that justice was denied.20 As with any controversy of
substance, letter writing debates kept the issue alive for many days.21 Letters from those signing as returned service personnel, including those identifying as Catholic, seemed to be particularly upset at the military connotations and notions of loyalty, while other correspondence ranged from education and religion in Spain, voting patterns of Catholics to the defence of the secular education system.
McKeefry received support. It was mainly from Catholic individuals and
organisations, although one correspondent said while he had no religious affiliation,
15 "Religion and the Schools."
The Press, 18 November 1954.
16 "An Archbishop's Lapse."
Otago Daily Times, 17 November 1954.
17 "Regrettable Resort to Wrong Methods."
Evening Post, 16 November 1954.
18 "Church Schools and State Aid (reprint from the Southland Daily News of November 16, 1954)."
Tablet, 24 November 1954. The editor of the Southland Daily News was Mr. R.M. Hutton-Potts who was also the managing director. The paper was regarded as liberal as opposed to the other Invercargill daily, the Southland Times which represented more conservative opinions.
19 "State Schools not endangered; Southland paper appeals for justice.".
Tablet, 18 March 1953.
20"Letters to the Editor."
Daily Telegraph, November 1954. "Letters to the Editor." Waikato Times, November 1954. "Letters to the Editor." Evening Star November 1954. "Letters to the Editor." Dominion, November 1954.
21 "State Aid for Catholic Schools."
Evening Star., 29 November 1954.The Editor then closed correspondence on this issue.
he admired free speech and thought McKeefry was ‘very considerate and
gentlemanly not to make a political issue of this before the election, had you done so it would have had a very telling effect.’22 The fact that McKeefry had chosen to wait until the 1954 General Election polling day was over before making his remarks was largely overlooked by the newspaper articles. His timing was deliberate in that he chose not to have the matter become a party political issue.23 The Parish Priest from Papanui congratulated him on his ‘magnificent call to arms’ and observed that the articles in the Press were reminiscent of Howard Elliott.24 On the other hand Bishop
Joyce wrote to McKeefry that he thought the leading articles in the local papers had been restrained.25
Catholic papers strongly defended the Archbishop. Zealandia attacked the Herald of
the 16 November for articles headed ‘Stay at Home Call to Catholics in Event of War’ and ‘An Archbishop bargains with Loyalty’. These, Zealandia claimed provided an
incomplete précis of the Paraparaumu speech. Any perception that Catholics’ loyalty was in question clearly was of particular concern, and Zealandia argued that such
emphasis was ‘dangerously like an attempt to deprive Catholics of their right to speak their minds on this matter through fear of ‘disloyalty’ accusations’.26 The paper
exhorted Catholics to guard against the grounds of the state aid debate shifting from ‘justice’ to ‘loyalty’.27
‘Catholics freely and sincerely accept the laws of the Church and the principles upon which they are based’, wrote the Tablet in challenging the opinion of the Federation
of School Committees Associations. Parental rights were ignored by the Federation, especially when it came to choice, and the way the Federation spoke of ‘State aid to private schools’ was tantamount to equating it to state charity that could be given or withheld at the whim of the government. For the Tablet, ‘the Federation does not
speak the same language as we do.’28
The extent of the protest did not seem to unduly faze the hierarchy, which rather suggests they had some knowledge of the tone of the speech. In fact McKeefry’s
22 "Letters to McKeefry." In
WAA Education: State Aid 1958-1960 #298. Wellington, 1954.
23 "Regrettable Resort to Wrong Methods." McKeefry’s speech was made on the Sunday after the
election held the previous day. Provisional results showed the National Government returned to office.
24 "Letters to McKeefry."
25 Joyce, Bishop Edward. "Letter to Liston." In
ACDA Lis 187. Auckland, 1954.
26 "Justice and Loyalty."
Zealandia, 18 November 1954.
27 Ibid.
28 "Some Adroit Side-Stepping."
rhetoric had been growing more direct. At the opening of a school in Titahi Bay on 24 October 1954, he spoke of the ‘dead hand of 1870’ on education, arguing that the system which still regulates education in 1954 and is imposed on two million people was brought in on the votes of only 27,000 electors.29 This speech was much more candid than, for example, the cautious approach of Liston when opening a school in Owairaka in April of 1954.30 Certainly the upcoming election prompted the bishops to issue a statement on the occasion of the opening of the Mary Potter Hospice in
Christchurch by the Governor General on the 7th November. The statement
reiterated the Catholic position and claim. Copies were sent, as a matter of courtesy, to the Prime Minister and Leader of the Opposition. The main points were- a) that
the right to choose the kind of education is recognised by the Declaration of Human Rights; b) all parents are free to exercise this right; c) Catholic parents have a duty of
conscience to give their children an education that is not divorced from their religion;
d) parents who send their children to private schools receive no educational benefit
from the taxes they pay; e) Catholics are not claiming assistance for the teaching of
religion in schools, rather for the teaching that would be given in state schools at the state’s expense. The statement asked the incoming government to set up, at an early date, a ‘Committee of Members’ to deal with the matter.31
This statement from the hierarchy did not attempt to imply, either directly or indirectly, that Catholic voting might be influenced. But the Catholic newspapers were less restrained. An editorial in Zealandia, entitled ‘Election Forethoughts’, while not
endorsing any political party, appealed to the ‘Catholic duty’ of helping to form ‘healthy public opinion’. 32 It advocated the direct questioning of candidates on their attitudes to religion in public life and particularly their ideas about ‘educational justice.’ Such an emphasis, it argued, would make incoming parliamentarians more
29 "'Dead hand of 1870' on Education."
Zealandia, 4 November 1954. Official guests were Walter Nash and the Catholic M.P. Henry May. The Prime Minister and the Minister of Education sent apologies. The Parish Priest raised the issue of State aid, but neither politician spoke of it. Nash rather spoke of the Church's opposition to Communism. McKeefry also praised State school teachers as doing fine work in a system of 'many and grave shortcomings'.
30 "Owairaka School Opening."
Zealandia, 22 April 1954.The builders and volunteers were thanked, especially for completing the project at less than half the estimated contract price. M. P. John Rae spoke of the 'evil and powerful philosophies afoot' and praised the Church's stand on Communism. Liston reminded the audience that the first schools were religious schools, the devotion of religious teachers and lay people who had ensured a sound Christian system in the Catholic schools.
31 "Bishops' Statement."
Zealandia, 18 November 1954.
32 "Election Forethoughts (Editorial)."
attuned to the ‘injustice which we bear.’33 Because neither main party had a policy that favoured the Catholic position, Catholics were asked to quiz their local
candidates and vote accordingly.
Catholics might be aggrieved but, for the moment, their political redress lay in
convincing a sufficient number of politicians of the overwhelming merits of their case. The 1954 election campaign had been relatively tame, with none of the inflammatory issues of 1951. Housing and the cost of living dominated and the meetings of both leaders, at least initially, attracted little interest. Labour and National had drawn closer together politically and for the electorate distinguishing between them was difficult.34 State aid and the Catholic case was not an issue that troubled the wider electorate and the Catholic hierarchy and press were not prepared to allow it to become a party political issue.35
McKeefry’s Paraparaumu statement brought the issue of state aid to the wider public in a dramatic way that invigorated the issue.36 But the campaign was at the point of stalling because it needed more than just the pressure from the bishops. Speeches at school openings had little national or, more importantly, political impact. The agenda on these occasions was predictable and almost routine. Local Members of Parliament were, if they spoke of the matter at all, able to make vague promises that hinted at some sort of progress on the issues of state aid. Occasionally new
education policy or subsidies could be announced. Displays of good will were de
rigueur together with the at times patronising reassurance that the Catholic
community were good citizens.37
33 Ibid. Neutrality for Church newspapers was a thing of the past by the 1970s as the Integration