Greymouth Evening Star. AND BRUNNERTON ADVOCATE. TUESDAY, AUGUST 13, 1935. CHURCH AND STATE.

Greymouth Evening Star, 13 August 1935, Page 4

Greymouth Evening Star. AND BRUNNERTON ADVOCATE. TUESDAY, AUGUST 13, 1935. CHURCH AND STATE.

J7REEDOM of worship and re

ligions tolerance is, happily, "eneral in New Zealand, and il therefore comes as a surprise to many to learn that some Church leaders in this country are anxious about the increasing encroachment ■ by the State on individual rights. Commercial and similar organisations often protest against the growth of State control of business enterprises, and it is indisputable that the liberties of the individual are dwindling. Whether this is' necessarily bad for him. or her, is a matter for argument, b’or the State to invite a “holy war" by intruding on religious freedom, would undoubtedly be foolish. Bishop Wes; Watson preaching at (’hristehttreh on Sunday last, with the Governor-General as one of the; congregation, uttered a warning] against a tendency which he claimed to cxim even in \ew Zealand. for the Stale to de\ clop into' ihe supreme authority over the

Illlllils consciences of i' - lIII'IU- ! Ifis. II" li iHI -•< I that -."Hi" 11 • r« • i nt' niari vrihiiii niay nci-ess.-irv to check this t utclti'Z". In Hritain, limn- is -imilar • I copal pert nrbal mn abi'iii tin y I’i J;i 111 a I'fa ii S' a le. ’Hi" I’, t -I;<>t l ■ ] I hirhaiii I >r. I L-nsh-v I E-nson i < i'""i it 11 t o rut i : ' ’ Th" mm I"rii ; Sial-- m-a.ibh th" .-har.-i"!"i- it-. J "Ji/"ii ie. ti\iii!.r th" rail','" amt j ■har.i"t■■!• nt' th" "i!m-at ion which ' all uiii-t <iirvels their' :hi •m,* ht x by keeping i-iinirol of ;

o-n instrument bv which know- bl !

| Imli/e is conveyed and opinion for- f> nnda’ed t he Press, tiie plat form.' *’ %l the theatre, rhe nnichin--rv for I a

broadcasting—and imposes on the Church the type of its doctrine and rhe mode of its worship. Never throughout the long history of mankind, as he travelled the difficult road from aboriginal savagerv to

the heights of civilisation, has rhe individual been menaced by a des-

potism so searching, so übiquitous, and so severe. " Most of this censure springs from what has happened in Germany. Itiissia, and other lands where Dictators prevail.- but the Bishop adds: “We in England have hitherto enjoyed comparative immunity from the dangers and conflicts which have befallen our fellow-believers on the continent. But many facts indicate that our insularity is passing away, that we can no longer stand outside the prevailing European tides of thought and practice.” According to an article, reprinted on another page of the “Star.” to-day. the threat of State control of religion in Britain, is regarded so seriously that the forthcoming Church Congress meeting is to make a debate on this topic a main item of the proceedings. To some degree, the Anglican Church, in Britain, is State-controlled, Parliament being able to say aye or nay on occasion, as was demonstrated by the Commons' rejection of the revised Prayer Book. Such measure of control is part of the price paid for Establishment, a svstem that.

of course, is non-existent in New Zealand. History has shown the futility of the State attempting to direct religion, for any initial success has been comparatively shortlived. There is no real cause to think that anv British land is in

immediate danger of another such attempt, but no harm is done by Church leaders directing public attention to the need for that eternal vigilance which is the price of liberty of worship.