WOMAN'S FRANCHISE.

New Zealand Times, Volume LV, Issue 2043, 28 October 1893, Page 6 (Supplement)

WOMAN'S FRANCHISE.

A SEIIMON BY THE EEV T. H. SRROTT, INCUMBENT OF ST. PAUL’S.

At the request of several subscribers the editor of the New Zealand Mail has decided to print an admirable discourse on the Woman’s Franchise question, delivered by the Rev T. H. Sprott, incumbent of St Paul’s, two or three Sundays ago.

There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female ; for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.—Gal. hi., 28.

I wish to speak as wisely as I can tonight to the women of the congregation about the new privilege and the new duty to which they have been admitted. It is too late now to discuss the wisdom or the folly of our legislators in admitting the women of the Colony to the franchise. But I have no objection to tell you ray own opinion upon the question. With the principle of tho enfranchisement of women I have been for years in entire accord, though, perhaps,- I might have liked it better if so vital’a change could have been brought about by slow and careful steps. The principle itself I believe to be the logical out-come of that continuous advance, in all appropriate matters, to more and more close equality with man, which has marked the history of women through all tho Christian centuries, and which has had its main origin in that Christian sentiment of equality before God, of equal rights and equal responsibility, of universal brotherhood, of which our text is the formal expression, ‘ There can be (for with such greater emphasis should the words be rendered) there can be neither Jew nor Greek, there can be neither bond nor free, there can be no male and female, for ye are all one man in Christ Jesus.’ I recently pointed out to you that the civilization of Christendom is a very complex thing, that other forces besides historical Christianity have been at work to produce it. We cannot therefore pick out at random any one element therein, whether of good or evil, and pronounce offhand, ‘ This we owe wholely and solely to Christianity.’ But if there be any one element of which we could, with a large amount of justice, make this pronouncement, it is the advance of women. For though the complete state of servitude as a daughter, a mother, a wife, to which old Homan law had condemned woman, was already considerably modified under Stoic influence when Christianity appeared upon the scene, and although among the Teutonic and Celtic tribes which overran the Empire woman held a more revered position than among the Eomans, yet there can be no doubt that Christianity vastly stimulated the Stoic and Teutonic tenSonoies, and also contributed vast influentes of its own.

More especially do I regard the enfranchisement as the logical outcome of what has been done for women with little ot no protest during our own times. In 1848, F. D. Maurice and other members ot the English Church, being Professors of King’s College, London, inaugurated the higher education of women by founding Queen’s College, London, ‘in order to offerto women the same kind of education, equally solid and equally comprehensive, as was given by the same teachers to young men.’ The principle lias long since been universally accepted and acted upon. Then the demand was made, voiced by Miss Elizabeth Garrett, for tho opening up to women of employments hitherto restricted to men, notably the medical profession. This too was conceded and acquiesced in. ’ Though the sphere of practical religion and benevolence had always been in a measure open to the activity of women, yet here, too, within our own time, a marvellous advance has been made, both as to the subjects with which it is thought women may fittingly deal, and as to the methods of dealing - with those subjects. Here again few complain of the greater liberty allowed. Finally in our own time certain municipal rights have been extended to woman, and nobody now complains. New I must confess that looking at this fourfold advance—in education, in employment, in religious activity, in civil rights —an advance in which the whole British race has practically acquiesced—l can see no difference in principle, I can see no logical halting place short of that entire enfrarohisement which is now an accomplishel fact in New Zealand, and which will soon, no doubt, be adopted throughout the Empire. I ara not going to undertake to-night to predict what will be the final effects upon Society of this great reform, but as I believe it to be the logical result of the fundamental principles of Christianity, and. as I believe that woman is capable of playing a part in the culture and moral improvement of the race, compared with which man’s will be found poor and insignificant, I cannot but believe that the ultimate results will prove entirely beneficial. But be that as it may, the enfranchisement of women is so far as we are | concerned a fact, and. even the most sceptical will admit that we ought to made the best of it. I wish therefore with all deference to give a few words of advice to my female parishioners. And first let me make clear the point of view from which I give this advice. I give it as a citizen and servant of the Kingdom of Christ. I accept in their fullest aid widest extent His own deolara tion on the eve of the Ascension—‘ All

authority is given unto Me in heaven and in earth,’ which means, I take it, that His authority extends over every province of human life over business, pleasure, science, literature, and art, over the family, the school, the state —over tho state, I say. I believe that therefore it is the business of all who call themselves Christians', laity as well as clergy, unreservedly to strive to make Christ’s gospel the rule of human life in all these departments, our business to make it the rule of our lives in Society and the State. Now plainly if this be outgeneral duty, it is further our duty to use all the opportunities within our reach of doing this. Hitherto you women have only been able to do it indirectly so far as the state in concerned. You have now the opportunity of doing it directly. The first thing, then, I would say is that it is the duty of every woman to exercise this new privilege which you have gained. If we are Christians we cannot believe that human history is a mere haphazard medley of unintelligible changes in which nations and classes and men rise and fall, advance and recede, without purpose and without aim, irresistibly compelled thereto by some dark and mysterious necessity.— 1 No better than a moving row Of tragic shadow shapes, that come and go Bound with the sun-itluminaled lantern held At midnight by the master of the show ; Impotent pieces of the game he plays Upon his chequer-board of nights and days ; Hither and thither moves, and checks, and -lays, And one by one back in the cupboard lays.’

Then indeed we might in stupid or cynical carelessness hand over our duties and our rights to any one who would be willing to undertake the useless burden—but no Christian can ever hold this view. To us history, is the gradual unfolding of a counsel of infinite wisdom and beneficence in the work out of which men are called to be, not puppets, nor yet mere critics, but intelligent fellow workers with God—a counsel which has for its goal the universal Sovereignty of Jesus Christ through the perfected victory of truth and love—surely then, if this be indeed the meaning of human history, the responsibilities which rest upon us are only bounded by our powers and opportunities, .-.■..i But next; as Christians, servants of Jesus Christ, charged to having all departments of human life into subjection to His laws, we must use our influence to make our political life true and pure and honest and just. Perhaps you think lam mocking you in coolly proposing that task to you women. What, you may ask, are you ignorant of the corruption, the liberty, the slander, the misrepresentation, the intrigue, which by, common report, it would almost seem by common consent, are inseparable from politics. Well, all I can say is that every Christian is bound to regard these things with the same sterness that he would regard them in private life. All I can say is that if we acquiesce in these things, if we tolerate them, still more if we make light of them, we simply crucify the Son of God afresh; we dethrone Him, wo jeer 'at His claims to Sovereignty, if we regard them as matters of course and'inevitable;

Again, as Christians, Citizens of the' Kingdom of Christ, we must use the franchise and use our political influence to secure, as far as human fallibility will allow, those men as rulers, who shall discharge their trust according LO the will of God.”(! il know I touch here upon a much disputed point. I know it is sometimes said thkt, provided we can get men who will execute our wishes, wo have no concern'with their personal character. I know that the attempt is sometimes made, to. separate the ■ workman from the work ; that it is thought that the work may' bo done faithfully and honestly, while the worker himself is unfaithful and dishonest.’ I know that ■ sometimes we are triumphantly reminded that great social, political, even religious reforms have been brought about by men who were themselves crafty and crooked, shifty and selfish—l know all this and yet I am not convinced of its truth —I cannot help regarding this notion of an official virtue as belonging to a very low code ol morals indeed—l exceedingly doubt whether experience on a large scale at all bears it out. X more than suspect that if you closely examine any of the great reforms which have been executed by evil and unprincipled men, you will find two things to have been the case—(l) that such met. were not in any sense the originating causes of the reform, but mere instruments or media of-forces, which for the time they . happened to represent—not seldom unconsciously—and which they could not resist, and (2) that the evil influence of their characters will be apparent in some limitation of ’the good effects of the reform. Such at least is my opinion and I could wish" irtested by the facts of history. But on the other hand do not go away with the notion X imagine goodness of character to bethesolequalificationtobe looked for in a legislator. I cannot forget that good men have not seldom made bad rulers and been the cause of much misery. You want intellectual power as well—at the same time time we must remember that goodness is a wonderful streng-thener and purifier of the intellect. In fact we want the combination of the two. Our legislators should be chosen from the best and wisest of our citizens. Lastly, as Christians, citizens of the Kingdom of Christ, we must seek to lessen the bitterness and fierceness of political conflict. ” Parties in politics I suppose under present circumstances there must be. Those who think alike on great questions naturally srravitate towards each

other, and find in such union strength to execute their purposes. But surely in British politics we have now reached the very insanity of partisanship, when it seems to be ‘ the whole duty of one party in the state to persuade the nation that the other party if entrusted with power, will misunderstand the public interest, will prove incapable of their duties, are sure to be actuated by prejudice,-, self-interest, ambition.’ Surely it is time that politicians were taught that there are other duties for them to perform besides that of incessantly, in season and out of season, in parliament, on the platform, in the press, vilifying their opponents. May not you women do something at least to mitigate this state which is fast becoming throughout the empire a menace to the public weal —may you not do something to remind us men that people may differ from us in important matters without therefore being knaves or fools, or both—may you not do something to remind us that among men of the same blood, fellow citizens, fellow-Christians, deadly conflict is inexcusable? May you not do something to bring about that better state. ‘ When each Bhall fihd his own in all men’s [?ood, ■ r And all shall work in noble brotherhood,’ Such, then, my friends, are some of the things I htyvo-wished to say to you in this crisis “o'fm'our history. What particular measures women should seek to promote Ido not presume to say. What I am concerned about is the spirit in which you should enter upon your new privileges—that it should; be a spirit, conscientious, earnest, religious, unselfish, pure, loving —a spirit of which the aim shall be nothing less than this—to make New Zealand a city and Kingdom of God. ;■

In the preparation of this sermon I have been largely indebted to Bishop Barry.