A SERIOUS NATIONAL1 DIS-SERVICE

Dominion, Volume 35, Issue 50, 22 November 1941, Page 8

A SERIOUS NATIONAL 1 DIS-SERVICE

For the second time within a fortnight a church assembly has publicly criticized the treatment of conscientious objectors by the Armed Forces Appeal Boards of this country and expressed sympathy with young men who “are suffering” or “are victims of our system of national service. In Timaru on November 10 the Presbyterian General Assembly, after a discussion held in private, voiced such a criticism, couched in general terms. On Thursday of this week the Methodist Synod of the Wellington district placed on record a similar resolution, after an open discussion. The Synod’s resolution was equally sweeping. It averred that many men “of obviously deep and genuine Christian conviction” had had their appeals dismissed by the boards and it also protested that such men were being attacked in newspaper editorials. The Rev. Mr. Tozer, who moved the motion, named The Dominion as having made such an attack. . Frequently in this column reference has been made, in plain terms, to the large number of young men who are seeking—often with garbled arguments, fantastic excuses and neurotic outbursts—to escape military service. No suggestion has been made that all conscientious objectors are insincere, but the warning has been given —and can unhesitatingly be repeated—that. conciliatory and ultrasympathetic methods of dealing with objectors,, and also witi defaulters, are encouraging the slacker and the shirker to pose as men of genuine religious scruple. Church. resolutions of piotest and sympathy, which ignore the existence of this unhealthy . and damaging masquerade, add to the encouragement of it. What is more, these resolutions disregard the urgent, vital need for unity of feeling, action, and sacrifice in a time of unprecedented peril, and actually tend to substitute for such unity an atmosphere of doubt and discord. A serious national dis-service has been done by those who have engineered the expression of such views in the form of formal, apparently considered, resolutions. It will be widely regretted that the authority of the churches concerned has been so used, instead. of being employed—if a genuine majority of considered clerical opinion believed this desirable —to promote a study of the objectoi and defaulter problem in the light of the plain facts confronting the community—the reality of its peril, the coming dearth of manpower and the increasing number of young men who are refusing New Zealand the service on which her fate depends. Fortunately there are no indications that the views underlying the resolutions are other than those of a minority. The Methodist Synod of Otago and Southland has expressed concern with “the continued indiscretions committed by some ministers and leaders of our Church while attending military appeal boards,” and urging the enforcement of a discipline which will prevent public misunderstanding of the attitude of the Church in the present national crisis.” This is & a timely move. The Wellington Synod has presented the public with the deplorable spectacle of a body of churchmen accepting a motion expressing loyalty to the Throne and confidence in the steadfast adherence of' Methodism to the Allied cause, by only 15 votes to 13. Those members who voted against the motion, the chairman of Synod has stated, are not unpatriotic. Then what are they, Where do they stand? What is their influence —and the worth of their views on the question of conscientious objection? There is a clear responsibility confronting the Church—indeed, an urgent need—-to clear up the public uncertainty, and any misunderstanding, which has been created.