Girard0118 - Revision history

Merv at 00:15, 29 August 2022

2022-08-29T00:15:04Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:15, 29 August 2022
Line 76:		Line 76:
	=== Notes ===		=== Notes ===
	<references/>		<references/>


			{\|border=1; style="width:100%"
			\|+
			\|-bgcolor=lightblue
			\|align=center \|[[Girard0117\|'''Previous Letter''']]\|\| align=center \| [[Contents#1841\|'''List of 1841 Letters''']] \|\| align=center \| [[Girard0119\|'''Next letter''']]
			\|}

Merv at 01:50, 19 March 2020

2020-03-19T01:50:35Z

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 ==11 December 1841 – Father Jean-Baptiste Petit-Jean Letter to Father Jean-Claude Colin, Kororareka==
@@ Line 78: / Line 76: @@
 === Notes ===
 <references/>

Merv at 01:49, 19 March 2020

2020-03-19T01:49:35Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:49, 19 March 2020
Line 53:		Line 53:
	;[25]: Firstly it was our intention to put all of these questions on the same sheet of paper so that we could have the response to all straight, under our eyes. Our adversaries did not want this; they preferred them in the way of short notes. Thus we wrote the first question. To save time, they transcribed it themselves. This question so simple, to know if it is permitted to portray great men, a question to which any man with common sense could reply to straight away, created a commotion within the enemy camp. Straightaway our alleged missionaries consulted each other, Mister Burrows presided over them. Really they seemed a lot like children carried away by all sorts of doctrines. They wrote their reply, Mister W. presented it; we point out to him that we insisted on his signature and that it was missing. He hesitated to give it – the congregation laughed- he pulled out his pencil- we tell him that he must use a plume and ink, he finally resigned himself to give that fatal signature- and immediately after it was legalised by the magistrate. Here is the question in Maori with its translation, followed by the reply signed by Mister W., all of it is true to the original.		;[25]: Firstly it was our intention to put all of these questions on the same sheet of paper so that we could have the response to all straight, under our eyes. Our adversaries did not want this; they preferred them in the way of short notes. Thus we wrote the first question. To save time, they transcribed it themselves. This question so simple, to know if it is permitted to portray great men, a question to which any man with common sense could reply to straight away, created a commotion within the enemy camp. Straightaway our alleged missionaries consulted each other, Mister Burrows presided over them. Really they seemed a lot like children carried away by all sorts of doctrines. They wrote their reply, Mister W. presented it; we point out to him that we insisted on his signature and that it was missing. He hesitated to give it – the congregation laughed- he pulled out his pencil- we tell him that he must use a plume and ink, he finally resigned himself to give that fatal signature- and immediately after it was legalised by the magistrate. Here is the question in Maori with its translation, followed by the reply signed by Mister W., all of it is true to the original.
	;[26]: E tika ana kia hanga wakapakoko hei ritenga wakamahara ki nga mea noa o tenei ao, pera me te tuhituhinga i te kanohi o te rangatira wakapakoko rakau kowatu rino. Is it permitted to make portrayals as ways to remember things common to this world such as the portrait of kings, figures made in wood, stone or bronze? Response: Kite mea hei mea noa te wakapakoko he mea noa ano — Kite mea ia hei mea wakamahara tapu he mea he rawa rawa.		;[26]: E tika ana kia hanga wakapakoko hei ritenga wakamahara ki nga mea noa o tenei ao, pera me te tuhituhinga i te kanohi o te rangatira wakapakoko rakau kowatu rino. Is it permitted to make portrayals as ways to remember things common to this world such as the portrait of kings, figures made in wood, stone or bronze? Response: Kite mea hei mea noa te wakapakoko he mea noa ano — Kite mea ia hei mea wakamahara tapu he mea he rawa rawa.
	[If common things are used to represent common things – yes; but if used to represent something sacred that is very very bad.]		:[If common things are used to represent common things – yes; but if used to represent something sacred that is very very bad.]
	;[27]: I refrain from judging a response which condemns the simple remembrance of Holy things when it comes to us by way of statues or paintings which are natural signs of these matters. Signs of convention are permitted, such as writing, to use these to be reminded of pious objects, but painting and sculpture which are natural marks; one cannot use them at all without great sin. God expressly forbid it. To help us to remember all sacred objects, although we may use these two arts, painting and sculpture, this should not be regarded as a legitimate use for such profane things. Finally, our adversaries would without a doubt look upon it as permitted to create deep in one’s heart through imagination an intellectual image of a pious object. But they would condemn, they would charge anathema the skilful hands which wanted to change a block into a statue, or animate a canvas to depict a faithful image of any type of holy subject. Finally, I said that I did not want to judge our adversaries, I was content to lead them to the artists’ tribunal. I leave them there to their judgement. I carefully keep the aforesaid question and answer signed by Mister W., aided by all his colleagues of about six or seven, and notably by the minister of Kororareka, the same signature authenticated by the magistrate. I keep them, these papers, we can look at them and consult them when we want; I keep them as a symbol of the perverse protestant doctrines and the inevitable consequences of a principle once adopted that is bad to honour Jesus Christ and the saints by way of representation. This is quite characteristic of the Minister who did not show any good faith. Whilst he and his colleagues were deliberating and preparing an answer to the first question, a person from the assembly who had not grasped the precise meaning of the question, asked what it was about, and the Minister replied with I do not know what kind of smile: ―They asked us if it is permitted to worship images. At that instant, he was called to order severely by an Englishman called Mr Watertown, and that left only the confusion of his lie.		;[27]: I refrain from judging a response which condemns the simple remembrance of Holy things when it comes to us by way of statues or paintings which are natural signs of these matters. Signs of convention are permitted, such as writing, to use these to be reminded of pious objects, but painting and sculpture which are natural marks; one cannot use them at all without great sin. God expressly forbid it. To help us to remember all sacred objects, although we may use these two arts, painting and sculpture, this should not be regarded as a legitimate use for such profane things. Finally, our adversaries would without a doubt look upon it as permitted to create deep in one’s heart through imagination an intellectual image of a pious object. But they would condemn, they would charge anathema the skilful hands which wanted to change a block into a statue, or animate a canvas to depict a faithful image of any type of holy subject. Finally, I said that I did not want to judge our adversaries, I was content to lead them to the artists’ tribunal. I leave them there to their judgement. I carefully keep the aforesaid question and answer signed by Mister W., aided by all his colleagues of about six or seven, and notably by the minister of Kororareka, the same signature authenticated by the magistrate. I keep them, these papers, we can look at them and consult them when we want; I keep them as a symbol of the perverse protestant doctrines and the inevitable consequences of a principle once adopted that is bad to honour Jesus Christ and the saints by way of representation. This is quite characteristic of the Minister who did not show any good faith. Whilst he and his colleagues were deliberating and preparing an answer to the first question, a person from the assembly who had not grasped the precise meaning of the question, asked what it was about, and the Minister replied with I do not know what kind of smile: ―They asked us if it is permitted to worship images. At that instant, he was called to order severely by an Englishman called Mr Watertown, and that left only the confusion of his lie.
	;[28]: I believe I can assure you that this conference was a complete success for religion. What made the biggest impression on the Maori was this constant refusal by these alleged missionaries to sign questions that were addressed to them and about their own doctrine. But the following day, the same missionaries did not believe themselves to be defeated. The progression towards error has a subtlety and guile similar to that of the serpent. The following day when our natives were returning to Hokianga, after having sung whilst embarking: Ka taka te W…, W. fell; beyond the bay they came across an agent of these missionaries who wanted them to accept a small brochure entitled the errors of the Roman Catholic Church. All of his books stayed with him along with the shame for having offered them. It is precisely on the side of Pahia that what I have just spoken about took place. Here is how one of our natives gives an account in a simple manner, of the conference, in a letter that he wrote at the request of a Frenchman, who had recently arrived from France and who today resides in Sydney; out of curiosity he wanted to send a letter written by a Maori to his parents or friends in France. Here it is; the results of his thoughts and his plume. No one dictated it to him and I have just transcribed it here for no other reason than to give an example of the Maori epistolary style.		;[28]: I believe I can assure you that this conference was a complete success for religion. What made the biggest impression on the Maori was this constant refusal by these alleged missionaries to sign questions that were addressed to them and about their own doctrine. But the following day, the same missionaries did not believe themselves to be defeated. The progression towards error has a subtlety and guile similar to that of the serpent. The following day when our natives were returning to Hokianga, after having sung whilst embarking: Ka taka te W…, W. fell; beyond the bay they came across an agent of these missionaries who wanted them to accept a small brochure entitled the errors of the Roman Catholic Church. All of his books stayed with him along with the shame for having offered them. It is precisely on the side of Pahia that what I have just spoken about took place. Here is how one of our natives gives an account in a simple manner, of the conference, in a letter that he wrote at the request of a Frenchman, who had recently arrived from France and who today resides in Sydney; out of curiosity he wanted to send a letter written by a Maori to his parents or friends in France. Here it is; the results of his thoughts and his plume. No one dictated it to him and I have just transcribed it here for no other reason than to give an example of the Maori epistolary style.

Merv at 01:48, 19 March 2020

2020-03-19T01:48:22Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:48, 19 March 2020
Line 43:		Line 43:
	;[14]: Towards the end of October, I had yet another remarkable consolation to minister to two French sailors aboard the ''Héroïne'' which was anchored at Kororareka. One of them died almost immediately afterwards during the voyage from the Bay of Islands to Akaroa. One cannot help moaning about the fate of French sailors who die at sea aboard ships without having the comfort and help of a priest. Christian parents are sad to see their children serve aboard warships deprived of all assistance from religious ministers both in life and in death; numerous sailors request to have a priest and the eyes of those dying search to no avail a priest who could help them to die peacefully. The protestant nations teach us humiliating lessons on this subject. I do not dare to hold the French nation responsible for this, this nation so generous, so sensitive; I am satisfied to complain deep within my heart and to yearn for a better order together with the good people.		;[14]: Towards the end of October, I had yet another remarkable consolation to minister to two French sailors aboard the ''Héroïne'' which was anchored at Kororareka. One of them died almost immediately afterwards during the voyage from the Bay of Islands to Akaroa. One cannot help moaning about the fate of French sailors who die at sea aboard ships without having the comfort and help of a priest. Christian parents are sad to see their children serve aboard warships deprived of all assistance from religious ministers both in life and in death; numerous sailors request to have a priest and the eyes of those dying search to no avail a priest who could help them to die peacefully. The protestant nations teach us humiliating lessons on this subject. I do not dare to hold the French nation responsible for this, this nation so generous, so sensitive; I am satisfied to complain deep within my heart and to yearn for a better order together with the good people.
	;[15]: The 26th and 27th October were celebrated by a formal conference with Anglican missionaries. This conference came about through a Protestant book thrown at a catholic chief by a minister from Kororareka and given back to the same minister by the same chief who did not want it. It was held in the absence of his Grace. The day was left to the priests to choose, they desired to wait until the work of the natives had progressed so that the congregation would be more numerous. Mister W.<ref> Henry Williams and William Colenso, missionaries for the Church Missionary Society, spoke for the Protestant side of the debate on the 26th and 27th of October 1841. Henry Williams, minister and head of the Anglican mission in New Zealand should not be confused with his brother, William Williams, who was also an Anglican minister, and who participated in a theological debate with another Marist missionary, Claude-André Baty, in December 1841, William Williams was between Wairoa and Turanga according to his journal. </ref> and his colleagues thought that it should be held as soon as possible. In cooperation with these gentlemen, we decided on the courtyard of the house at Kororareka mission as the location for the conference. Mister W. decided later on to change it. It must, he said, be on neutral ground, and so we accepted a large plain, opposite the protestant temple but as it happened, rain interrupted us on the second day of the meeting, we offered again the house of his Grace and the assembly was moved there. Mister W. and the minister from Kororareka came and asked for a copy of the true vine. It was agreed that we would deal with two questions, that of the church as well as that of images. We asked that everyone spoke English in the conference which would then be translated into Maori. Mister W. argued that the conference being for the benefit of the Maori, it was better to use exclusively their language. On the set day, two or three hundred people, as many whites as Maori, arrived at the place of the conference. The Christianity of Hokianga had sent thirty of its delegates with father Servant. A few officers from the English Navy could be seen in the assembly. The first day, the president‘s seat was held by the Magistrate. It is impossible for me to describe this conference in detail. Here are some details that we examined together. 1° Mister W. who spoke first, constantly refused to clearly explain to the natives the essential function of the board which was to write and sign its assertions if the opposing group asked them to. 2° The protestants insisted on starting with the question of images even though the question of the church would have been easier for the natives to understand and certainly decisive and fundamental. The question of images, whilst simple, can however end up obscure and confusing in the native‘s eyes, who do not yet have clear ideas about relative worship, words such as adoration, honour etc.		;[15]: The 26th and 27th October were celebrated by a formal conference with Anglican missionaries. This conference came about through a Protestant book thrown at a catholic chief by a minister from Kororareka and given back to the same minister by the same chief who did not want it. It was held in the absence of his Grace. The day was left to the priests to choose, they desired to wait until the work of the natives had progressed so that the congregation would be more numerous. Mister W.<ref> Henry Williams and William Colenso, missionaries for the Church Missionary Society, spoke for the Protestant side of the debate on the 26th and 27th of October 1841. Henry Williams, minister and head of the Anglican mission in New Zealand should not be confused with his brother, William Williams, who was also an Anglican minister, and who participated in a theological debate with another Marist missionary, Claude-André Baty, in December 1841, William Williams was between Wairoa and Turanga according to his journal. </ref> and his colleagues thought that it should be held as soon as possible. In cooperation with these gentlemen, we decided on the courtyard of the house at Kororareka mission as the location for the conference. Mister W. decided later on to change it. It must, he said, be on neutral ground, and so we accepted a large plain, opposite the protestant temple but as it happened, rain interrupted us on the second day of the meeting, we offered again the house of his Grace and the assembly was moved there. Mister W. and the minister from Kororareka came and asked for a copy of the true vine. It was agreed that we would deal with two questions, that of the church as well as that of images. We asked that everyone spoke English in the conference which would then be translated into Maori. Mister W. argued that the conference being for the benefit of the Maori, it was better to use exclusively their language. On the set day, two or three hundred people, as many whites as Maori, arrived at the place of the conference. The Christianity of Hokianga had sent thirty of its delegates with father Servant. A few officers from the English Navy could be seen in the assembly. The first day, the president‘s seat was held by the Magistrate. It is impossible for me to describe this conference in detail. Here are some details that we examined together. 1° Mister W. who spoke first, constantly refused to clearly explain to the natives the essential function of the board which was to write and sign its assertions if the opposing group asked them to. 2° The protestants insisted on starting with the question of images even though the question of the church would have been easier for the natives to understand and certainly decisive and fundamental. The question of images, whilst simple, can however end up obscure and confusing in the native‘s eyes, who do not yet have clear ideas about relative worship, words such as adoration, honour etc.
	;[16]: So therefore these protestant gentlemen began to demonstrate that we are idolatrous; and that idolatry is the worst crime of the Roman Church. To prove this crime against us, they had to demonstrate that we worship images, but all they had as proof consisted of producing the first commandment of the Decalogue in which God forbids making images in order to worship them, which is what the Roman Catholic church precisely adheres to when presenting to the faithful images of Jesus Christ or of the Saints, which the church expressly forbids to worship, but allows them to pay veneration relative to the original, that is to say the person who is represented. The protestant missionaries went further. They maintained to find in the Decalogue a rule that it was forbidden formally to make any type of representation. An unreasonable interpretation and full of ridicule by which one puts themselves in contradiction with the Lord himself who strictly commanded to make two golden cherubim as well as to raise a bronze serpent in the desert, a prophetic symbol of the crucifixion of the saviour of the world. Observe the attitude or bad faith of our adversaries. They translated the word		;[16]: So therefore these protestant gentlemen began to demonstrate that we are idolatrous; and that idolatry is the worst crime of the Roman Church. To prove this crime against us, they had to demonstrate that we worship images, but all they had as proof consisted of producing the first commandment of the Decalogue in which God forbids making images in order to worship them, which is what the Roman Catholic church precisely adheres to when presenting to the faithful images of Jesus Christ or of the Saints, which the church expressly forbids to worship, but allows them to pay veneration relative to the original, that is to say the person who is represented. The protestant missionaries went further. They maintained to find in the Decalogue a rule that it was forbidden formally to make any type of representation. An unreasonable interpretation and full of ridicule by which one puts themselves in contradiction with the Lord himself who strictly commanded to make two golden cherubim as well as to raise a bronze serpent in the desert, a prophetic symbol of the crucifixion of the saviour of the world. Observe the attitude or bad faith of our adversaries. They translated the word worship by the Maori word ''Koropiko'', which in its literal sense represent the action of bowing down. When in order to translate the word to worship properly, one must add to the literal meaning of ''Koropiko'' another figurative meaning to express worship, the worship that we show evidence when we bow down as one does in the Greek word π ρ ο ς κ σ ν ε ω.<ref> προσκσνε'ω according to ''Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament'' means ‗to fall upon the knees and touch the ground with the forehead as an expression of profound reverence‘ in the N.T it means ‗by kneeling or prostration to do homage (to one) or to make supplication.‘ Thayer, Joseph, ''Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, '' Zondervan publishing house, United States,1976</ref> Therefore here is what their translation and their argument is reduced to. God forbids that one bows down in front of images, and as the Catholics bow down in front of images; therefore the Catholics go against God‘s law. I leave it to those people who have common sense to judge this syllogism. To make their reasoning clearer, they mimicked the ceremonies that we do in front of images; they bowed down in front of any painting and said: this is what the Catholics do which is what God has forbidden. You should never bow down to images. One could say that they presented in front of the whole assembly a true histrionic scene, one of the protestant missionaries suddenly burst out in a theatrical scene, pulled out from his pocket some crosses and several medals linked together and held them out slightly high up, he threw himself onto his knees to worship them; this did not produce any feeling except pity. Mister W., held a small statue of the Holy Virgin and showed it to the people: this is he spelt out, what the bishop has said is his God. To prove that the Holy Virgin is invoked as our God, look at what argument was used: In the “Hail Mary” we say in Maori for more clarity: Holy Mary, mother of Jesus Christ our God. These words, our God, refer to Jesus Christ, without doubt; not at all, as the protestant missionaries made the link to the Blessed Virgin and persisted in saying that she is our God. When such an explication goes against common sense and is a mistranslation. In fact there are four ways to vary in Maori the pronoun “our” depending on the peoples or the things to which it refers. The pronoun “tatou” or “our” indicates here inevitably that Jesus Christ is also the God of Mary.
	worship by the Maori word ''Koropiko'', which in its literal sense represent the action of bowing down. When in order to translate the word to worship properly, one must add to the literal meaning of ''Koropiko'' another figurative meaning to express worship, the worship that we show evidence when we bow down as one does in the Greek word π ρ ο ς κ σ ν ε ω.<ref> προσκσνε'ω according to ''Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament'' means ‗to fall upon the knees and touch the ground with the forehead as an expression of profound reverence‘ in the N.T it means ‗by kneeling or prostration to do homage (to one) or to make supplication.‘ Thayer, Joseph, ''Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, '' Zondervan publishing house, United States,1976</ref> Therefore here is what their translation and their argument is reduced to. God forbids that one bows down in front of images, and as the Catholics bow down in front of images; therefore the Catholics go against God‘s law. I leave it to those people who have common sense to judge this syllogism. To make their reasoning clearer, they mimicked the ceremonies that we do in front of images; they bowed down in front of any painting and said: this is what the Catholics do which is what God has forbidden. You should never bow down to images. One could say that they presented in front of the whole assembly a true histrionic scene, one of the protestant missionaries suddenly burst out in a theatrical scene, pulled out from his pocket some crosses and several medals linked together and held them out slightly high up, he threw himself onto his knees to worship them; this did not produce any feeling except pity. Mister W., held a small statue of the Holy Virgin and showed it to the people: this is he spelt out, what the bishop has said is his God. To prove that the Holy Virgin is invoked as our God, look at what argument was used: In the “Hail Mary” we say in Maori for more clarity: Holy Mary, mother of Jesus Christ our God. These words, our God, refer to Jesus Christ, without doubt; not at all, as the protestant missionaries made the link to the Blessed Virgin and persisted in saying that she is our God. When such an explication goes against common sense and is a mistranslation. In fact there are four ways to vary in Maori the pronoun “our” depending on the peoples or the things to which it refers. The pronoun “tatou” or “our” indicates here inevitably that Jesus Christ is also the God of Mary.
	;[17]: Now this is how they reacted when dealing with the question of the church. They asserted that Saint Peter was a pope and that all popes were bad, that they were dead branches. To destroy the idea of succession which is shown when one considers the tree of the true vine the series of popes, everything relating back to Peter, even to Jesus Christ, one of these cunning men made a simple change to the true vine that he had borrowed and had drawn a thick black line just above the head of the image of Jesus Christ to separate this divine saviour from Peter his apostle and successor. We would have liked to take back this true vine now corrected and changed. We offered to give him a bigger one and we argued that that one belonged to us and should be returned as it was only on loan. But it appeared that Mister W. was very attached to his work, and he threatened to call off the session if his sheet of paper was not returned. This is what was carried out and only then did he regain his composure. One of our opponents pointed out twenty or twenty-four so called errors of the Roman Catholic Church, among others that we taught that the bread was the body of Jesus Christ. I asked him to sign his written document and hand it to me. Oh no, it is one thing to produce slander it is another thing to sign them. What did our man do, he hid his paper under the table, tore it into two and kept the sheet where the main points of his argument were written; he only offered us the one which had an outline, the summary of the questions. To the ranting of our adversaries, we could only oppose this word: Sign this document. This was perfectly sufficient to bring them down; it was there that we saw them voice all their vehemence and all their evidence. Mister W. was called to order by the president who turned towards him, saying: ''Tena ra ko koe'', ―farewell‖, he pronounced these words with a certain manner and tone to provoke general laughter. To the following question, to know if Luther was the first Protestant, if he had not committed a good number of scandals in particular against the virtue of chastity, Mister W briefly replied: not at all, that is not true, who has seen Luther? This is a man beyond the seas, and myself I am in New Zealand. I do not know anything about it, I do not know Luther; he is not in my book. And nevertheless, he stubbornly refused to hand in by form of written document what he had presented. They still wanted to criticize the Roman Catholic Church for having images. And there and then, we showed the assembly a book of prayers from the English Reformed Church. We asked Mister W. if he recognised it, then we opened it and all of the Maori could see with their own eyes a mass of engravings which represented pious scenes; we saw among others one or several people kneeling down in front of a crucifix. So then of course these men blushed. We reminded them again of the crosses mounted on the churches of England in Sydney and in London, etc and in the settlement of Sydney. Therefore they had images; therefore they went against God’s commandments who after all in their interpretations forbid making even the slightest representation.		;[17]: Now this is how they reacted when dealing with the question of the church. They asserted that Saint Peter was a pope and that all popes were bad, that they were dead branches. To destroy the idea of succession which is shown when one considers the tree of the true vine the series of popes, everything relating back to Peter, even to Jesus Christ, one of these cunning men made a simple change to the true vine that he had borrowed and had drawn a thick black line just above the head of the image of Jesus Christ to separate this divine saviour from Peter his apostle and successor. We would have liked to take back this true vine now corrected and changed. We offered to give him a bigger one and we argued that that one belonged to us and should be returned as it was only on loan. But it appeared that Mister W. was very attached to his work, and he threatened to call off the session if his sheet of paper was not returned. This is what was carried out and only then did he regain his composure. One of our opponents pointed out twenty or twenty-four so called errors of the Roman Catholic Church, among others that we taught that the bread was the body of Jesus Christ. I asked him to sign his written document and hand it to me. Oh no, it is one thing to produce slander it is another thing to sign them. What did our man do, he hid his paper under the table, tore it into two and kept the sheet where the main points of his argument were written; he only offered us the one which had an outline, the summary of the questions. To the ranting of our adversaries, we could only oppose this word: Sign this document. This was perfectly sufficient to bring them down; it was there that we saw them voice all their vehemence and all their evidence. Mister W. was called to order by the president who turned towards him, saying: ''Tena ra ko koe'', ―farewell‖, he pronounced these words with a certain manner and tone to provoke general laughter. To the following question, to know if Luther was the first Protestant, if he had not committed a good number of scandals in particular against the virtue of chastity, Mister W briefly replied: not at all, that is not true, who has seen Luther? This is a man beyond the seas, and myself I am in New Zealand. I do not know anything about it, I do not know Luther; he is not in my book. And nevertheless, he stubbornly refused to hand in by form of written document what he had presented. They still wanted to criticize the Roman Catholic Church for having images. And there and then, we showed the assembly a book of prayers from the English Reformed Church. We asked Mister W. if he recognised it, then we opened it and all of the Maori could see with their own eyes a mass of engravings which represented pious scenes; we saw among others one or several people kneeling down in front of a crucifix. So then of course these men blushed. We reminded them again of the crosses mounted on the churches of England in Sydney and in London, etc and in the settlement of Sydney. Therefore they had images; therefore they went against God’s commandments who after all in their interpretations forbid making even the slightest representation.
	;[18]: Mister W. what is more made a crime out of the Roman Catholic Church’s celibacy; he declared that it was a crime for us not to marry, our priest and in particular our lord Bishop. And to refute this, we did not make much use of Saint Paul to defend virginity. He could have replied like another Anglican missionary replied recently to a Catholic priest who quoted Saint Paul on virginity: that there was only Saint Paul who said it. We therefore preferred to make use of the Book of Common prayers from the Church of England, where we find written word for word that religious ministers are free to remain celibate or to enter into the state of marriage, following what they believe to be the best option to do God‘s service. We do not believe that their books leave them free to choose between celibacy and marriage. Because we rarely see any evidence of the freedom to remain celibate; they are all persuaded that it far more of an advantage for their sanctification and more convenient for God‘s glory that each of them have a wife.		;[18]: Mister W. what is more made a crime out of the Roman Catholic Church’s celibacy; he declared that it was a crime for us not to marry, our priest and in particular our lord Bishop. And to refute this, we did not make much use of Saint Paul to defend virginity. He could have replied like another Anglican missionary replied recently to a Catholic priest who quoted Saint Paul on virginity: that there was only Saint Paul who said it. We therefore preferred to make use of the Book of Common prayers from the Church of England, where we find written word for word that religious ministers are free to remain celibate or to enter into the state of marriage, following what they believe to be the best option to do God‘s service. We do not believe that their books leave them free to choose between celibacy and marriage. Because we rarely see any evidence of the freedom to remain celibate; they are all persuaded that it far more of an advantage for their sanctification and more convenient for God‘s glory that each of them have a wife.

Merv at 01:47, 19 March 2020

2020-03-19T01:47:54Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:47, 19 March 2020
Line 44:		Line 44:
	;[15]: The 26th and 27th October were celebrated by a formal conference with Anglican missionaries. This conference came about through a Protestant book thrown at a catholic chief by a minister from Kororareka and given back to the same minister by the same chief who did not want it. It was held in the absence of his Grace. The day was left to the priests to choose, they desired to wait until the work of the natives had progressed so that the congregation would be more numerous. Mister W.<ref> Henry Williams and William Colenso, missionaries for the Church Missionary Society, spoke for the Protestant side of the debate on the 26th and 27th of October 1841. Henry Williams, minister and head of the Anglican mission in New Zealand should not be confused with his brother, William Williams, who was also an Anglican minister, and who participated in a theological debate with another Marist missionary, Claude-André Baty, in December 1841, William Williams was between Wairoa and Turanga according to his journal. </ref> and his colleagues thought that it should be held as soon as possible. In cooperation with these gentlemen, we decided on the courtyard of the house at Kororareka mission as the location for the conference. Mister W. decided later on to change it. It must, he said, be on neutral ground, and so we accepted a large plain, opposite the protestant temple but as it happened, rain interrupted us on the second day of the meeting, we offered again the house of his Grace and the assembly was moved there. Mister W. and the minister from Kororareka came and asked for a copy of the true vine. It was agreed that we would deal with two questions, that of the church as well as that of images. We asked that everyone spoke English in the conference which would then be translated into Maori. Mister W. argued that the conference being for the benefit of the Maori, it was better to use exclusively their language. On the set day, two or three hundred people, as many whites as Maori, arrived at the place of the conference. The Christianity of Hokianga had sent thirty of its delegates with father Servant. A few officers from the English Navy could be seen in the assembly. The first day, the president‘s seat was held by the Magistrate. It is impossible for me to describe this conference in detail. Here are some details that we examined together. 1° Mister W. who spoke first, constantly refused to clearly explain to the natives the essential function of the board which was to write and sign its assertions if the opposing group asked them to. 2° The protestants insisted on starting with the question of images even though the question of the church would have been easier for the natives to understand and certainly decisive and fundamental. The question of images, whilst simple, can however end up obscure and confusing in the native‘s eyes, who do not yet have clear ideas about relative worship, words such as adoration, honour etc.		;[15]: The 26th and 27th October were celebrated by a formal conference with Anglican missionaries. This conference came about through a Protestant book thrown at a catholic chief by a minister from Kororareka and given back to the same minister by the same chief who did not want it. It was held in the absence of his Grace. The day was left to the priests to choose, they desired to wait until the work of the natives had progressed so that the congregation would be more numerous. Mister W.<ref> Henry Williams and William Colenso, missionaries for the Church Missionary Society, spoke for the Protestant side of the debate on the 26th and 27th of October 1841. Henry Williams, minister and head of the Anglican mission in New Zealand should not be confused with his brother, William Williams, who was also an Anglican minister, and who participated in a theological debate with another Marist missionary, Claude-André Baty, in December 1841, William Williams was between Wairoa and Turanga according to his journal. </ref> and his colleagues thought that it should be held as soon as possible. In cooperation with these gentlemen, we decided on the courtyard of the house at Kororareka mission as the location for the conference. Mister W. decided later on to change it. It must, he said, be on neutral ground, and so we accepted a large plain, opposite the protestant temple but as it happened, rain interrupted us on the second day of the meeting, we offered again the house of his Grace and the assembly was moved there. Mister W. and the minister from Kororareka came and asked for a copy of the true vine. It was agreed that we would deal with two questions, that of the church as well as that of images. We asked that everyone spoke English in the conference which would then be translated into Maori. Mister W. argued that the conference being for the benefit of the Maori, it was better to use exclusively their language. On the set day, two or three hundred people, as many whites as Maori, arrived at the place of the conference. The Christianity of Hokianga had sent thirty of its delegates with father Servant. A few officers from the English Navy could be seen in the assembly. The first day, the president‘s seat was held by the Magistrate. It is impossible for me to describe this conference in detail. Here are some details that we examined together. 1° Mister W. who spoke first, constantly refused to clearly explain to the natives the essential function of the board which was to write and sign its assertions if the opposing group asked them to. 2° The protestants insisted on starting with the question of images even though the question of the church would have been easier for the natives to understand and certainly decisive and fundamental. The question of images, whilst simple, can however end up obscure and confusing in the native‘s eyes, who do not yet have clear ideas about relative worship, words such as adoration, honour etc.
	;[16]: So therefore these protestant gentlemen began to demonstrate that we are idolatrous; and that idolatry is the worst crime of the Roman Church. To prove this crime against us, they had to demonstrate that we worship images, but all they had as proof consisted of producing the first commandment of the Decalogue in which God forbids making images in order to worship them, which is what the Roman Catholic church precisely adheres to when presenting to the faithful images of Jesus Christ or of the Saints, which the church expressly forbids to worship, but allows them to pay veneration relative to the original, that is to say the person who is represented. The protestant missionaries went further. They maintained to find in the Decalogue a rule that it was forbidden formally to make any type of representation. An unreasonable interpretation and full of ridicule by which one puts themselves in contradiction with the Lord himself who strictly commanded to make two golden cherubim as well as to raise a bronze serpent in the desert, a prophetic symbol of the crucifixion of the saviour of the world. Observe the attitude or bad faith of our adversaries. They translated the word		;[16]: So therefore these protestant gentlemen began to demonstrate that we are idolatrous; and that idolatry is the worst crime of the Roman Church. To prove this crime against us, they had to demonstrate that we worship images, but all they had as proof consisted of producing the first commandment of the Decalogue in which God forbids making images in order to worship them, which is what the Roman Catholic church precisely adheres to when presenting to the faithful images of Jesus Christ or of the Saints, which the church expressly forbids to worship, but allows them to pay veneration relative to the original, that is to say the person who is represented. The protestant missionaries went further. They maintained to find in the Decalogue a rule that it was forbidden formally to make any type of representation. An unreasonable interpretation and full of ridicule by which one puts themselves in contradiction with the Lord himself who strictly commanded to make two golden cherubim as well as to raise a bronze serpent in the desert, a prophetic symbol of the crucifixion of the saviour of the world. Observe the attitude or bad faith of our adversaries. They translated the word
	worship by the Maori word ''Koropiko'', which in its literal sense represent the		worship by the Maori word ''Koropiko'', which in its literal sense represent the action of bowing down. When in order to translate the word to worship properly, one must add to the literal meaning of ''Koropiko'' another figurative meaning to express worship, the worship that we show evidence when we bow down as one does in the Greek word π ρ ο ς κ σ ν ε ω.<ref> προσκσνε'ω according to ''Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament'' means ‗to fall upon the knees and touch the ground with the forehead as an expression of profound reverence‘ in the N.T it means ‗by kneeling or prostration to do homage (to one) or to make supplication.‘ Thayer, Joseph, ''Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, '' Zondervan publishing house, United States,1976</ref> Therefore here is what their translation and their argument is reduced to. God forbids that one bows down in front of images, and as the Catholics bow down in front of images; therefore the Catholics go against God‘s law. I leave it to those people who have common sense to judge this syllogism. To make their reasoning clearer, they mimicked the ceremonies that we do in front of images; they bowed down in front of any painting and said: this is what the Catholics do which is what God has forbidden. You should never bow down to images. One could say that they presented in front of the whole assembly a true histrionic scene, one of the protestant missionaries suddenly burst out in a theatrical scene, pulled out from his pocket some crosses and several medals linked together and held them out slightly high up, he threw himself onto his knees to worship them; this did not produce any feeling except pity. Mister W., held a small statue of the Holy Virgin and showed it to the people: this is he spelt out, what the bishop has said is his God. To prove that the Holy Virgin is invoked as our God, look at what argument was used: In the “Hail Mary” we say in Maori for more clarity: Holy Mary, mother of Jesus Christ our God. These words, our God, refer to Jesus Christ, without doubt; not at all, as the protestant missionaries made the link to the Blessed Virgin and persisted in saying that she is our God. When such an explication goes against common sense and is a mistranslation. In fact there are four ways to vary in Maori the pronoun “our” depending on the peoples or the things to which it refers. The pronoun “tatou” or “our” indicates here inevitably that Jesus Christ is also the God of Mary.
	action of bowing down. When in order to translate the word to worship properly, one must add to the literal meaning of ''Koropiko'' another figurative meaning to express worship, the worship that we show evidence when we bow down as one does in the Greek word π ρ ο ς κ σ ν ε ω.<ref> προσκσνε'ω according to ''Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament'' means ‗to fall upon the knees and touch the ground with the forehead as an expression of profound reverence‘ in the N.T it means ‗by kneeling or prostration to do homage (to one) or to make supplication.‘ Thayer, Joseph, ''Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, '' Zondervan publishing house, United States,1976</ref> Therefore here is what their translation and their argument is reduced to. God forbids that one bows down in front of images, and as the Catholics bow down in front of images; therefore the Catholics go against God‘s law. I leave it to those people who have common sense to judge this syllogism. To make their reasoning clearer, they mimicked the ceremonies that we do in front of images; they bowed down in front of any painting and said: this is what the Catholics do which is what God has forbidden. You should never bow down to images. One could say that they presented in front of the whole assembly a true histrionic scene, one of the protestant missionaries suddenly burst out in a theatrical scene, pulled out from his pocket some crosses and several medals linked together and held them out slightly high up, he threw himself onto his knees to worship them; this did not produce any feeling except pity. Mister W., held a small statue of the Holy Virgin and showed it to the people: this is he spelt out, what the bishop has said is his God. To prove that the Holy Virgin is invoked as our God, look at what argument was used: In the “Hail Mary” we say in Maori for more clarity: Holy Mary, mother of Jesus Christ our God. These words, our God, refer to Jesus Christ, without doubt; not at all, as the protestant missionaries made the link to the Blessed Virgin and persisted in saying that she is our God. When such an explication goes against common sense and is a mistranslation. In fact there are four ways to vary in Maori the pronoun “our” depending on the peoples or the things to which it refers. The pronoun “tatou” or “our” indicates here inevitably that Jesus Christ is also the God of Mary.
	;[17]: Now this is how they reacted when dealing with the question of the church. They asserted that Saint Peter was a pope and that all popes were bad, that they were dead branches. To destroy the idea of succession which is shown when one considers the tree of the true vine the series of popes, everything relating back to Peter, even to Jesus Christ, one of these cunning men made a simple change to the true vine that he had borrowed and had drawn a thick black line just above the head of the image of Jesus Christ to separate this divine saviour from Peter his apostle and successor. We would have liked to take back this true vine now corrected and changed. We offered to give him a bigger one and we argued that that one belonged to us and should be returned as it was only on loan. But it appeared that Mister W. was very attached to his work, and he threatened to call off the session if his sheet of paper was not returned. This is what was carried out and only then did he regain his composure. One of our opponents pointed out twenty or twenty-four so called errors of the Roman Catholic Church, among others that we taught that the bread was the body of Jesus Christ. I asked him to sign his written document and hand it to me. Oh no, it is one thing to produce slander it is another thing to sign them. What did our man do, he hid his paper under the table, tore it into two and kept the sheet where the main points of his argument were written; he only offered us the one which had an outline, the summary of the questions. To the ranting of our adversaries, we could only oppose this word: Sign this document. This was perfectly sufficient to bring them down; it was there that we saw them voice all their vehemence and all their evidence. Mister W. was called to order by the president who turned towards him, saying: ''Tena ra ko koe'', ―farewell‖, he pronounced these words with a certain manner and tone to provoke general laughter. To the following question, to know if Luther was the first Protestant, if he had not committed a good number of scandals in particular against the virtue of chastity, Mister W briefly replied: not at all, that is not true, who has seen Luther? This is a man beyond the seas, and myself I am in New Zealand. I do not know anything about it, I do not know Luther; he is not in my book. And nevertheless, he stubbornly refused to hand in by form of written document what he had presented. They still wanted to criticize the Roman Catholic Church for having images. And there and then, we showed the assembly a book of prayers from the English Reformed Church. We asked Mister W. if he recognised it, then we opened it and all of the Maori could see with their own eyes a mass of engravings which represented pious scenes; we saw among others one or several people kneeling down in front of a crucifix. So then of course these men blushed. We reminded them again of the crosses mounted on the churches of England in Sydney and in London, etc and in the settlement of Sydney. Therefore they had images; therefore they went against God’s commandments who after all in their interpretations forbid making even the slightest representation.		;[17]: Now this is how they reacted when dealing with the question of the church. They asserted that Saint Peter was a pope and that all popes were bad, that they were dead branches. To destroy the idea of succession which is shown when one considers the tree of the true vine the series of popes, everything relating back to Peter, even to Jesus Christ, one of these cunning men made a simple change to the true vine that he had borrowed and had drawn a thick black line just above the head of the image of Jesus Christ to separate this divine saviour from Peter his apostle and successor. We would have liked to take back this true vine now corrected and changed. We offered to give him a bigger one and we argued that that one belonged to us and should be returned as it was only on loan. But it appeared that Mister W. was very attached to his work, and he threatened to call off the session if his sheet of paper was not returned. This is what was carried out and only then did he regain his composure. One of our opponents pointed out twenty or twenty-four so called errors of the Roman Catholic Church, among others that we taught that the bread was the body of Jesus Christ. I asked him to sign his written document and hand it to me. Oh no, it is one thing to produce slander it is another thing to sign them. What did our man do, he hid his paper under the table, tore it into two and kept the sheet where the main points of his argument were written; he only offered us the one which had an outline, the summary of the questions. To the ranting of our adversaries, we could only oppose this word: Sign this document. This was perfectly sufficient to bring them down; it was there that we saw them voice all their vehemence and all their evidence. Mister W. was called to order by the president who turned towards him, saying: ''Tena ra ko koe'', ―farewell‖, he pronounced these words with a certain manner and tone to provoke general laughter. To the following question, to know if Luther was the first Protestant, if he had not committed a good number of scandals in particular against the virtue of chastity, Mister W briefly replied: not at all, that is not true, who has seen Luther? This is a man beyond the seas, and myself I am in New Zealand. I do not know anything about it, I do not know Luther; he is not in my book. And nevertheless, he stubbornly refused to hand in by form of written document what he had presented. They still wanted to criticize the Roman Catholic Church for having images. And there and then, we showed the assembly a book of prayers from the English Reformed Church. We asked Mister W. if he recognised it, then we opened it and all of the Maori could see with their own eyes a mass of engravings which represented pious scenes; we saw among others one or several people kneeling down in front of a crucifix. So then of course these men blushed. We reminded them again of the crosses mounted on the churches of England in Sydney and in London, etc and in the settlement of Sydney. Therefore they had images; therefore they went against God’s commandments who after all in their interpretations forbid making even the slightest representation.
	;[18]: Mister W. what is more made a crime out of the Roman Catholic Church’s celibacy; he declared that it was a crime for us not to marry, our priest and in particular our lord Bishop. And to refute this, we did not make much use of Saint Paul to defend virginity. He could have replied like another Anglican missionary replied recently to a Catholic priest who quoted Saint Paul on virginity: that there was only Saint Paul who said it. We therefore preferred to make use of the Book of Common prayers from the Church of England, where we find written word for word that religious ministers are free to remain celibate or to enter into the state of marriage, following what they believe to be the best option to do God‘s service. We do not believe that their books leave them free to choose between celibacy and marriage. Because we rarely see any evidence of the freedom to remain celibate; they are all persuaded that it far more of an advantage for their sanctification and more convenient for God‘s glory that each of them have a wife.		;[18]: Mister W. what is more made a crime out of the Roman Catholic Church’s celibacy; he declared that it was a crime for us not to marry, our priest and in particular our lord Bishop. And to refute this, we did not make much use of Saint Paul to defend virginity. He could have replied like another Anglican missionary replied recently to a Catholic priest who quoted Saint Paul on virginity: that there was only Saint Paul who said it. We therefore preferred to make use of the Book of Common prayers from the Church of England, where we find written word for word that religious ministers are free to remain celibate or to enter into the state of marriage, following what they believe to be the best option to do God‘s service. We do not believe that their books leave them free to choose between celibacy and marriage. Because we rarely see any evidence of the freedom to remain celibate; they are all persuaded that it far more of an advantage for their sanctification and more convenient for God‘s glory that each of them have a wife.

Merv: /* Father Petit-Jean to Father Colin, 11 Dec 1841 [extracts] */

2020-03-19T01:47:04Z

Father Petit-Jean to Father Colin, 11 Dec 1841 [extracts]

Show changes

Merv: Initial text

2009-02-24T23:50:05Z

Initial text

New page

==Father Petit-Jean to Father Colin, 11 Dec 1841 [extracts]==

''Translated by Holly Wasson, University of Waikato, 2008. Edited by William Jennings, University of Waikato''

;[33]: I have also to inform you of a tragic event which came to pass on one of the islands of our bay (Bay of Islands). On Saturday 20 November five people were killed. The only house there was burnt to the ground. The culprit has been caught and here are some details: an elderly manservant of this house had his head split with an axe while sleeping outdoors. A widow and a small child, along with another young girl that she was caring for, were killed in the house; their bodies roasted by the flames. Another boy of this same widow, around six or seven years old, was caught while running away and in spite of his cries and tears he was thrown onto the rocks from a great height; the sea then swallowed him up, without his body ever being found. This catastrophe has plunged the Europeans into shock and consternation. We are also seized by horror and compassion for this unfortunate widow. We openly share the bereavement, especially since the husband of this woman, named Roberton, had shown a particular kindness for the Catholic mission. These crimes were carried out at around 3’o clock in the morning; the fire immediately following the murders. Three weeks earlier, having just visited native tribes, surprised by the night and unable to reach Kororareka, I went to this island in my boat and accepted the hospitality at the home of this kind lady. I remember that we had a brief conversation. She confessed that she was of the sect of the Quaker’s. I asked her if her children were baptised and she replied in the affirmative. She had recently received the news of the death of her father-in-law. Who can possibly contemplate the troubles, leading to complete destruction; that have fallen upon this family? Mr Roberton had six brothers. They all drowned before him and he himself suffered the same fate in the Bay of Islands; and now at about the anniversary of her husband’s death, his widow has been killed with all of his children, and the house, near completion, by Mr Roberton has been reduced to ashes. The island is becoming a deserted place that people are afraid of and horrified by. I can not help make the following reflection. The ungodly world sees only fate here; those who are ignorant use the same language without understanding it. But the children of God, the people of morality know that everything that happens in this world only does so by the will of God, whose justice or mercy is in everything. We can see when he tests those who he loves. A doctor from Kororareka testified or certified that beneath this woman was found an open Bible, hardly damaged, and concluded that this person, having died with a Bible in her hand, died the most beautiful death possible. This doctor told me that he noted the chapter that she was occupied in reading immediately before her murder. As for myself, my hopes in the mercy of God on this widow are founded on other considerations, my very reverend father. I will confess to you frankly that I was desperately worried to learn if the murderer was a Catholic or a Protestant. It is remarkable that none of the witnesses heard by the Kororareka jury, determining the circumstances of the murder, mentioned the New Testament covered in blood found on the murderer, that the jury itself has not said a word, while it is certain that they have received the book from the hands of the Natives.

;[34]: As you know, commonly speaking, the Protestants and others blame the Catholic Church for crimes committed by its ministers or even its members. It is exactly in this sense that the Protestant missionaries have aimed their attacks against the Holy Roman Catholic Church during the debate; there, they made sure to recapitulate all of their old slander; thus it was said that the Roman Church was a cruel church, whose customs involved the use of thousands of tortures, thousands of humiliations against the dead and the living, that it had slaughtered peoples, that it had bled them with a knife, that it had burnt and sawn. And thankfully the good Lord permitted that the murderer is not a Catholic. He is a young man of around 19 years of age, a protestant Maori. I have heard that he had spent two or three days on the island to do some work for the woman immediately before carrying out his attack. The urge to pillage or the desire for some petty vengeance are perhaps obvious motives that have provoked him to kill, but it seemed to me, to have been decided by his natural ferocity. It seems that this monster has not been encouraged by anyone.

;[35]: Our intention is not in any way to make the protestant missionaries responsible. Since when have masters answered for the conduct of their disciples? Only I will take a lesson from this unfortunate circumstance, an opinion that I will direct to all the Protestants who think similarly. It was not necessary to hastily throw the Bible or the New Testament into the hands of newcomers, but to prepare them to receive this prestigious book by the reading other books more basic, more intelligible, less valuable and that one fears less of seeing profaned. Thus, during this public mourning, I say it with sorrow and with a profound shame, one finds covered in blood the Maori gospel of the murderer. Although this young man had paid his ministers the sum of 5 francs, I have difficulty believing that a sordid interest had been the underlying motive for him to procure this New Testament. I repeat it, it is an injustice to blame the protestant missionaries for the conduct of this disciple, and we push it away from our thoughts.

;[36]: But it is not so of our natives. The protestant missionaries by false reasoning have spoilt the judgement of this people in the matter of religion. They repeated unceasingly that in our church one kills, one burns, one bleeds; this language has even been repeated with complacency by some reputed, honourable Europeans in assemblies of very numerous Maori. But the Maori people not having seen with their own eyes these past facts or distant facts, attributed in great number to the Roman Church, observed very attentively what happened in on their land and under their eyes; in a short space of time there have been 3 or 4 different murders committed against Europeans or Maori in Bay of Islands by Maori missionaries; and now, some weeks after the debate among the disciples of the Lord, the most horrible assassination that one had witnessed and known of in these recent times has occurred. Here is what a Catholic chief named Rewa told me: the murderer is not of our church, we Catholics, we live, we console each other… If the murderer had belonged to the bishop, we would have been sick, inconsolable, if the murderer had been one of the members of this church that bleeds, that burns, the Catholic Church would have been hurt. Since it did not happen that way, and the bad action having been committed by a member of the church that is innocent of everything, that has never spilled blood; it is up to them to redeem themselves from embarrassment, to them the shame, he added. They said in the debate that the Roman Church kills and burns and in less than a month since this speech, one of their own in a single day, in a single action, cut throats, burned, killed. I have heard with my own ears the wife of a Maori speak with great ignorance and also superstition, in keeping with the pantheon of gods devised by them. I heard her say: be wary of the God of the protestant missionaries; it is a God who kills. It is a fact that several Maori have given back their books to the Protestants.

;[37]: I am going, by way of questions; propose a reflection on this tragic accident. Is it not the case that God allows to pass, an event or even crimes; that greatly affect whole populations, as punishment of an earlier offence? Yes, without a doubt. But, this crime was committed recently at Kororareka. Which crime does one speak of? To derisively call the Virgin an idol. That, of a bloody irony and insult against the medals of the Virgin and the noble sign of the cross, when in during the debate this wanderer that I will not describe, shaking the crosses and medals, knelt down before them. God usually takes vengeance in this world to glory his outraged mother and the cross of Jesus Christ falls again with all its weight on those who are vile and contemptuous.

;[38]: We will be able to record in the annals of New Zealand that the atrocious crime that I have just related was committed on 20th November, a Saturday, the day consecrated to the Virgin, the day before the presentation of Mary, the first feast since the debate. The crime of a member of a religious group is always a deep shame for that group, especially in the case of a horrible atrocity. We fear therefore, we Catholics, of being from now on humiliated on this ground by some infamy of a new boldness directed at Catholics among us. But rather, we hope that heaven, satisfied by such expiations, will not ask another price for our crimes and will spare us from such terrible lessons.

;[39]: White or Maori, Protestant or Catholic, if the common link of a shared faith is rejected, let us at least have charity and compassion for each other. And let us prepare to learn of the truth, in humbling ourselves deeply to the hand of the Lord who considers us profoundly. When, in some part of the world, incidents happen similar to the one we have just seen, each person interprets in his own manner according to the beliefs by which he is motivated. Ignorance, passion, truth and faith dictate different judgements. [40] The thoughts and the reflections that I have ventured, I believe I formed them according to thoughts of faith. If I was wrong, I beg forgiveness from God and man and declare that I had no other intention apart from edifying myself and all those among the hands of which were able to fall, by setting an example of the usual appropriateness of the legitimate ministers of the Roman Catholic Church. My very reverend father, although I am aware of your concern to pray for us all, always I commend myself to you in such a way, so that I am not an obstacle to the conversion of souls and to the building of the Society of Mary. My great consolation is to pray the Lord that he soothe the sorrow so vast and so bitter and that everyday increases more. I am with a very deep respect, my very reverend father,
:::: your submissive and respectful child
:::: Jean Baptiste Petit-Jean
:::: Marist priest, missionary, apostle
:Please give news of me to my brother-in-law, Auguste Paillasson.