OPEN BRETHREN

Dominion, Volume 34, Issue 111, 4 February 1941, Page 8

OPEN BRETHREN

Eleven Appeals Against Armed Service BIBLE QUOTED Conscientious Objectors Before Board Citing Bible passages to support their belief that they should not bear arms, 11 members of the Open Brethren appealed against armed service on the ground of conscientious objection before the No. 4 Armed Forces Appeal Board in Wellington yesterday. Mr. J. S. Burt, Auckland, represented them. Two expressed willingness to serve in'a medical or other non-combatant military unit and their appeals were adjourned sine die till suitable noncombatant service was arranged for them. The others said they would accept non-combatant service in any civil capacity. Decision in their cases was reserved. The board comprised Mr. Stilwell, S.M., chairman, Mr. P. Coyle and Mr. A Parlane. The Crown representative was Mr. C. 0. Bell. Mr. Burt, for the Open Brethren appellants, thanked the board for its very fair and courteous hearing. Mr. Burt said that the Open Brethren were Christians throughout the world who sought to carry out New Testament teaching simply as taught by the Apostles without any form of organization and without an ordained ministry. Because of that fact there were no formal constitution, definite canons or rules. Brethren regarded the teachings of Scripture as the only guide for them in private, public and church life. They had no formal textbook or official publication dealing specifically with the attitude of Open Brethren toward war because they respected the liberty of conscience of every member to decide for himself before God what he should do. There were certain welldefined views among the Open - Brethren regarding war, and because it was appreciated that with conscription certain questions would arise, a memorandum had been placed before the Prime Minister, indicating the general attitude and belief. It had been signed by reputable and representative Open Brethren, in Auckland, for instance, by Mr. Robert Laidlaw and Mr. William Dobert Wilson. There were more than 200 assemblies of Open Brethren in New Zealand, and it was the fifth largest religious body in the country. Their attitude was not critical of Government policy, nor was there any question of politics or any attitude of easy complacent pacifism. They wanted to serve in some way their conscience would allow. To some it was a matter of great moral courage to come to the board and claim exemption. Each appellant had made a separate statement of his position. All had years of association with the Open Brethren and their character could be vouched for. Against Military Work. William Magnus Smith, clerk, aged 22, said he had been associated with the Open Brethren since childhood. As a Christian he could not serve in the armed forces or take part in anything under military control or aid the military forces. To take part in war was contrary to Scripture and the life of Christ. He believed in the Divine sovereignty of God. Christianity had never been told to defend itself or its adherents. He would undertake any civil work not under military control or for the benefit of the military forces. Mr. Bell asked appellant if he would leave his present employment if the firm were to supply army lorries with tyres. Appellant replied that he would not. It would merely be in the normal course of business. But if, for instance, the firm became engaged in munitions manufacture, lie would leave. It was a matter of degree. He believed all wars to be part of God's Divine plan, and as he was not conversant with God’s plan he could not take part in the. war. ' Mr. Bell: You say Christians were never told to defend themselves. Did not Christ drive the moneychangers from the temple by force. If the war was to defend Christianity, would you fight?—No. Last War Imprisonments. The next appellant was Terence Mace Tilyard, whose father, John Clement Tilyard, coppersmith, was a co-appellant on the grounds of public interest and hardship. Tilyard senior said he was one of the elders of the Open Brethren and was secretary of the Vivian Street Gospel Hall. He was doing some army work under subcontract. Mr. Beil: You are prepared to make a profit out of the war through such work but not to fight?—lt is all in the course of business. Co-appellant said a considerable number of Open Brethren went to prison during the last war because of their conscience. Others did non-combatant service without taking the military oath. The majority who did go to the war were in non-combatant units; few took up arms. He believed there would be no cessation of wars till Christ personally assumed the reins of government. .Co-appellant said there were only six coppersmiths in Wellington and not more than 12 journeymen among them. He was carrying on with his son (appellant) as journeyman and two apprentices. Appellant said lie was 21. lie had been medically classified C 3. He would do any civil non-combatant work. It was against Christ’s commands to take life. Mr. Bell: Are there any circumstances you can visualize in which you would defend yourself, your parents or dear relatives? —No. If you saw someone attacking your mother would you not assist her—Not in a military way. I would have to wait for such a situation to arise. Mr. Bell said he would not object to a sine die adjournment in this case. Erne'st Whyte Alexander, departmental manager, said he was prepared to assist with civil non-combatant work. Would Not Resist Invasion.

Charles Athol Prentice, warehouseman, said he could find no command of Christ justifying him in taking part in war. Christ was the Prince of Peace. _ If his firm began to make military nutforms he thought he would leave. Mr. Bell: You are prepared to accept the peace of the country ami enjoy it, but not to keep that peace by fighting for it? —That is so. _ The appeal of George Eric Scanibury, radio technician, was adjourned because of his absence from Wellington. Edwin Rex Marshall, clerk in an engineerinff firm, said he did not think he would continue in his present work if the firm undertook work directly assisting the armed forces. Mr. Bell: You appreciate that you are enjoying all the amenities of this land and letting other people fight to preserve them? —Yes, I have had that put to me many times. You would not fight even it the land was invaded? —I would stand between my mother and auvone trying to attack her and would try to protect her without using violence. If all were lige you what would be the position?—l suppose we would be overYour aim is heaven, and it does not matter if you earn it under British, German or Chinese rule? —Yes. that is so. Dennis Hugh Banckham, grocer, said he did not mind what he did. even up to the front line, as long as he did not have to take up arms in any form. Mr. Bell: You do not want to do active killing?—Yes. Mr. Burt said that this was the root trouble with most appellants. The regll-

lations did not. specifically provide for appellants such as this. It _ had been brought to the Minister’s notice and his replv was that the men must be treated as conscientious objectors. Appellant said that if New Zealand were invaded he would, as subject to the law of the land, be prepared to assist in repelling the enemy. The chairman thanked appellant for his candour. Praying for Deliverance. For James Hamilton Greenhorn, evangelist, aged 40, Mr. Burt said that he had been engaged in evangelist work in the West Coast-Nelson district for some years and not secularly engaged. Had he ■belonged to another denomination he would be an ordained minister. Deferring to the statement of appellant Mr. Bell asked: “I take it you have put in hours of praying for victory?”—For the deliverance of our people. Is that equivalent to praying for the victory of the English-speaking people?— Yes. How do you expect them to be victorious if you do not make some effort besides praying,—lf we return to God He will deliver us. If each convert to the Open Brethren you make accepts the same position as the majority apparently do then each fresh one reduces the number available for fighting?—l believe that by prayer every hand can be strengthened. What are you prepared to do?—lf you have a corps prepared to pray the thing through I offer mv services. The chairman: Would you do anything in a civil capacity if required?—l believe I would. Diehard James Currie, railway clerical cadet, was heard next. He said he would undertake any non-combatant service which would not conflict with Scripture. Mr. Bell: You would be reaping the benefit of other people’s exertions, by war, when the war was won?—l believe we have God to thank for everything. I say that without wanting to detract from the courage of the men in the forces. God chooses all sorts of instruments to do His will. He could choose the army? —Possibly. The chairman: What is your reaction to this? Suppose the Government decided that it wanted you to act as a roof spotter for aircraft. Would you rely on prayer in a case like that?—l don’t think I could be a spotter. It would be the same as shooting the enemy planes down. Willing To Serve. Athol Gordon Stewart, Customs clerk, stated he could not as a Christian go out to kill other men. He would feel personally responsible if he plunged into eteryitn persons who had not had the chance of salvation. He would do medical or clerical work or any service not assisting in the destruction of life. The chairman : You have no objection to serving with the medical corps?—No. Alfred Edward Colin Grant, Customs clerk, said he was willing to undertake any duty, military or civil, where he was not required to bear arms. The chairman: That is a frank statement. The appeals of Grant and Stewart were adjourned sine die till such time as suitable non-combatant duty in H.M. Forces was allocated them. Charles Dobert Gray, civil servant, said he would do hospital or ambulance work. Stanley James Ireland, baker’s labourer, said he made his profession of faith with the Open Brethren in October, 1939, having attended meetings before that. Before that lie was a regular attendant at the Presbyterian Church. He would do non-combatant service under civil control. Mr. Bell: The only allegiance you give New Zealand is the right to reside here and earn your living, but not defend it? —Yes.