CONSCIENTIOUS OBJECTORS.

Ohinemuri Gazette, Volume XXX, Issue 4009, 27 August 1919, Page 3

CONSCIENTIOUS OBJECTORS.

STRIKING ADDRESS BY MR. L. M. ISITiV M.P.

"I regard this not as an unrighteous but a most seemly action," declared Mr L. M. Isitt, M.P,, when unveiling a roll, of honour at the Durham Street Methodist Church, Christchurch. "I make this statement because men are making attacks on the Christian Church." Mr Isitt contended that however hideous war might be, circumstances occurred which made it the duty, of every able-bodieJ man to defend his country. Some of the pacifists declared that when W3 unveiled a roll of honour in .ChrisCchureh we were dishonouring God, negativing ,the teachings of Christ, and glorifying war. He questioned whether the Germans would bring a more unfair charge against their enemies than this that we were glorifying war.- He questioned whethnr there was a man on this blood-stain-ed earth in these past five years who would glorify war. When wei paid a tribute to the doctor who gave up his life during an epidemic in order feu save others, were we glorifying disease? When we glorified those who had made the supreme sacrifice on the battlefield ,to save us from evil, we did not glorify wan Again and again from the pulpit, the platform, and the floor of the House he had said war was-a supreme folly. It disgusted him that after all. these years of civilisation the nations of the earth could find no otheri way of settling .their differences than by murdering each other. He would' allowthat the formation of the League of Nations was a great and glorious step "in the right direction. But it was his direct conviction that so long as things remained as they were it'would be worse for a nation to give in than to resist, as it, was sometimes worse to live* than to die. If evevv nation but one saw the folly of war, and that one nation determined en armed force to destroy the other nations, he could see no other way* to meet armed force than by armed resistance. And he declarlod this was the position in regard to the last way. All that a nation could do Britain had done to avoid the struggle. Be- j fore" God, he said, he. believed that when at the last Britain drew the j sword, she dnew it unwillingly, she was disinterested, and she drew !t from the. highest motives.. We were told by the pacifists all sorts of things. They were ..an extraordinary combination of religionists and antireligionists, loyalists and disloyalists, shirkers and honest doubters, the last-mentioned of whom had shown their courage by the way they had endured hardships in support cjf their convictions. And they met us with a strange jumble of arguments almost difficult to classify. But that evening he only wished to deal with one. They said war was hateful and wicked. W.said we agreed with them. Then they came to this conclusion: If our 1 enemies sought to destroy us and outrage our women and children, even if they aimed at world conquest, if we were followers Of Christ we must dis band our armies and navies, meet the opposition with love and meekness, and leave the issue to God. Well, that was a big proposition, and personally he had so little doubt as to what the result would be that he would need a voice from Heaven and an unmistakeable manifestation from the Living God before he believed the message. We had no such message from the Living God. We had an interpretation of Scripture from me.i who, like ourselves, were weak and inconsistent. Our belief in God shouVl go hand-in-hand with our commonsense. We believed the broad teachings of Christ, that a Christian must never give way to revenge. He must show forbearance, and forbearan.ee so long as there was a chance of it doing its work. But nowhere could he find ,an utterance of Christ that should warrant any Christian ma.i standing by while some ruffian outraged a child. He (Mr Isitt) would risk losing the inheritance of Heaven and enduring the ..sufferings of Hell before he would do that. He did not believe Christ would allow him to hand over the chastity of his daughter into the hands of the Hun. Could they imagine the feelings of a man who gave them such instructions and advice? What parent would not sooner seek the life of his own daughter than hand her over to the fate that thousands of Belgian women had suffered. So when this interpretation was put upon the Divine Will by men who had not distinguished themselves by special sound and ordered judgment, an interpretation that smothered every chivalric instinct he had in his heart, that reduced his manhood to such a thing that he would be leprous to the end of his days, and man and God despise him, he challenged such an interpretation. Such men were most grievously inconsistent. They took one of the utterances of Christ and asked us. to follow it throughout our lives, and they failed to obey another utterance of His.

They failed to obey His command to give their all to the poor and live u\ poverty. "If I 'pinched' the. watch from his packet he would not say, 'Stop, you left the chain..' I say again they are inconsistent in regard to the question of righe'tou'sness. Do they here in Christchurch meet hare with love and seek to stay oppression ? Is it not a fact that some of the most prominent advocates of pacifism in press and platform are the most eager to place Labour laws on the-statute book and make the employer pay a living wage ? So far so good. But is that consistent ? Is that meekly yielding ? Why do they seek to place on- the statute book stern laws which subject to fine and imprisonment men who seek to sweat their employees ? Surely there is no consistency here? Why don't they meet these men instead and point but how much finer it would be for employers to serve their men than sweat them ? Because they know il is futile. Here comes in the illpgic of the whole position, ff it is unChristlike and wrong to resist the murderers and thieves and ruffians of a foreign nation, it is equally wrontf to do it in regard to our own natioii. Why, before the war, did not these people seek .to- do away with our mapistrateh, our gaols, our police, etc. ? Why did they seek to enjoy the fruits not of love and moral s\iasion, but of force ? Because they know that if we abandoned our* legal restraint, anarchy would prevail and life woulr. become one long- hell of wretchedness and suffering."