THEOPENING OF THE ATHENAEUM ON SUNDAYS.

Otago Witness, Issue 1159, 14 February 1874, Page 7

THEOPENING OF THE ATHENAEUM ON SUNDAYS.

The Rev. Dr Roseby delivered a lecture last Sunday on the above subject. He chose for his text Matthew, chapter xii., and verse 8 :—": — " For the Son of Man is Lord also of the Sabbath Day." The following is a brief outline of his arguments. He said that the people were aware that there was a proposal made to open the Reading Room of the Athenaeum on Sundays. The Athenaeum was not a private club, but was a public institution just as much as the High School or the Otago University. It is sustained by public money, and in the last resort is under State control. It was, therefore, a public institution, and amenable to public criticism. In these days, it was the duty of a Christian minister to speak out when questions bearing on the religious and social well-being of the people were discussed ; and especially to deal with matters of public interest, leaving to the Press matters of purely secular concern. He knew there were many timid people within the Church, and a mass of unbelievers without the Church, who desired to confine the minister within the four walls of his church, and who did not desire to see him interfere in anything that did not directly bear on theology. But he differed, totitm coeluni, from these. Everything that touched on things sacred became subject to his animadversions ; and thus Christian ministers who did not point out the tendency of public institutions and public questions were not good watchmen, but rather belonged to that class of whom it had been said they ■were " dumb dogs that cannot bark." A Christian ministry was not a thing of gown and bands. A Christian minister was just a brother to aid whatever touched the higher part of man ; and being endowed with certain gifts and graces, he is set apart to minister to his brethren. He is also like a Boldier. He may have to soil his clothes in the work of his Master, and meet with opposition, if not opprobrium. Nay, he may Buffer defeat ; but he is not to dread the turmoil of the battle, nor avoid the risk of a soldier in bis defence of the truth. Such was his justification, if that were needed, for alluding to the opening of the Athenaeum on Sundays.

He had jnst to state that (1) It concerned the public conscience that the sacredness of Sabbath rest be not publicly violated by_ a State institution. He did not intend to discuss the question as to whether there was a national conscience or not. It was true that in one aspect the conscience was a personal thing. But still he used the phrase " national conscience," and it was not a meaningless phrase. The community was au entity, and this entity possessed a character. We spoke of a meritorious community, we read of a moral nation— of an irreligious people ; and, indeed, we spoke of a community in much the same way as we spoke of a person. It was recognised that a nation had a standard of moral principle. For example, we said England acted nobly in the Geneva Convention, and bo on. To the student of the Holy Scriptures the phrase was not new. The Bible testified to such a thing as a public conscience. And in this community he knew that there was a general conviction that it was the will of God that the seventh part of our time should be set apart for worship. It was true that there was a difference of opinion as to the source of this command. Some held that it rested on the Fourth Commandment; some went back to Eden, and asserted that it was the primeval law given to Adam ; and some found in the New Testament a reaffirmation of the institution of the Sabbath. But whenever or however the command was given, all were agreed as to the Divine obligation of the Sabbath. He therefore averted that it was a wrong thing for the State itself to violate this divine obligation. It was the first duty of a people to reverently obey the Lord God. And whenever the question did arise, the duty of a nation, of the State, was as plain as that of an individual. Of course he believed that the State had no right to interfere with a man's conscience. A man mijrht worship how or where he likpd. But, admitting this, still the State had no right to encourage or legalize contempt for God s Word. Possibly, on religious grounds the State could not interfere with the opening or keeping open of public houses on the Lord's Day. These were private houses, he could oppose them in political grounds. But this was a question of the State's action. He did not believe in a State church, but neither did he believe in the State facilitating irreliffion ; and least of all did he believe in the State competing with the churches and tendinjr to lessen the attendance in the churches, and the opening of the Athenaeum would tend to do both.

He would next assert (2) That it concerns the public interest that the sacredness of the Sabbath be maintained. The highest interest of the community is bound up with man's moral and spiritual nature, it was true that there was a class— the Utihta. rlans— -who believed in nothing that could not 1-e put in a pint pot or tested by avoirdupois weight, or felt m the breeches* pocket. It was this same selfishness that was exhibited recently at the deathbed of a millionaire, where he ordered the Bible to be put away until he made enquiries as to the lambing at one of his northern stations. It was the godleas course of a Nebucadnezzar that led men to follow an oxen kind ot life. But these men had a mean view of man's destiny. As a writer had well and truly said, those things that eDabled peg to etfifi wsre »wty wwadwy. $om

spoke as if food *and raiment were all that were useful. Indeed, utilitarianism would make men mere vegetables. It were as if the planter of a vineyard thought of the fruit and not of the vines ; or as if the hewer of wood thought more of the wood cut than of the waving pine forest that clad the summit of the mountain ; or the drawer of water, who looked at his drop, and thought not of the mighty river.

Therefore it was that he looked upon this question as one of great importance. Let men only treat religion lightly, and the community will become debased. He knew of no rise in wool, no increase in grain, no quantity of cold that would compensate a country for tne absence of religion. It was true that it had been said that there should not be any appeal to the feelings. He intended to appeal to both the judgment and the feelings. But he thought he ought to appeal to the feelings — to the finest feelings of man's nature. Indeed, in many things, the feelings of the heart were a surer guide and more to be relied upon than mere logic choj>ping. Who, indeed, were those who were blessed ? — Blessed are they who have not seen and yet have believed. The highest interests of a community were bound up with religion, and he deprecated anything that would injure the religious sentiment. Was it wise — looking at the matter from a purely expediency view — to lay irreverent hands on the better part of man ? And the opening of this public institution would shock the religious spntiments of many. There is a great difference between a public and a private act, and it was this public act they protested against.

The next statement he made was (3) that even from a material point of view it was not for the interest of the community to open the Athenaeum on Sundays. There were certain countries in which the sacredness of the Sabbath rest did not exist. And though it might be said that this did not create Sabbath unity, still the goal of the progressionists here was seen in those countries. What was Austria ? What Spain ? What France ? What Italy ? The better for the desecration of the Sabbath ? Was it not seen in those countries that the workmen had to do seven days' work for six days' pay ; that men were made mere beasts of burden ; and that the children had not a parent's care. And what followed ? Drunkenness and indolence, aud social and political convulsions. These were the results of the want of Sabbath rest. The unbroken physical toil of the workmen had its fruits, and the lirebrands of society — the demagogues, and the democrats and sociaVbts, could appeal. Perceiving their appeal would be listened to by those who had no rest. To lose the Sabbath was to lose God ; and what sadder sj>ectacle could be seen than France ? Poor France, trying to build the pyramid on the apex instead of the base — trying to found a nation without God.

Fourthly, he had to observe that the opening of the Athenaeum would be such a violation of the public conscience, and such au injury to the material well-being of the community. It would necessarily involve a degree of Sunday labour. There might for a time be some temporary arrangement made whereby the officials of the Institution would not require to attend, but in the end the employes would have to be present. Themanagcr, having a sense of responsibility, would have to see to the security of the Institution. It had been said that this was a small matter. It was the characteristic of folly to look at things in themselves merely, but it was the characteristic of wisdom to view things in their tendencies ; and what was the tendency of opening the Athenaeum on Sundays ? The same arguments that justified the opening of the Athenaeum, would also sanction concerts ; and after that, the Queen's Theatre, and the fruit shops, and the pastry cooks ; and then public-houses would be thrown open. And where, then, should we stop of the Parisian Sunday ? It had been tried insidiously to exclude religion from the discussion of the proposal ; and it had been said that the Athenaeum would be used aa an alternative to the public-house ; but was it a real alternative ? Would it not rather be au auxiliary to the publican ? for the reading-room would become the meeting place of boon companions, who, after the wearisomeness of reading, would retire to the tap-room or the commercial room. True, they had been urged to open the Athenaeum, so that religious reviews and magazines might hi read — such as the Sunday at Home— in preference to Bell's Life iv the tap-room ; but those who proposed it had other aims in view. They desired to sec the Athenaeum reading-room preferred to the church. They wished to see the Graphio or the Economist read in preference to men praying and listening to sermons, Many of the men did not attend church, though they sent their children to church ; and there were many who perhaps did attend church, that were the readingroom opened, would altogether leave off attending divine worship. Was it wise to summon a man from his knees whilst praying to his God, to read the Graphic or the Economist 1 Were this proposal carried, the Sabbath would be made like »n ordinary day ; and were not six days sufficient for business? Were six days not a sufficient sop to the Colony's bane — irreverence? Must he havo shares, and wool, and flax talkod about on Sundays? This proposal was only the beginning of the. end. It was the object of the proposers of the opening to establish a public precedent ; and those mon wore wise in their generation. Actually one man had said at a public meeting — spitting it in the face of a minister, aa it wore—that eternity was a myfch, i and. God ft fr§asV A»<J oni? could

not listen to the howl of triumph of the mere youths who carried the resolution and not see that there was something more at stake than the question of opening the Athenaeum. There was a critical issue before the public, and this must be his excuse for speaking so strongly as he had done. He took his stand, not by an Institution that was on its trial, but rather by one that had been tried. And though it was reiterated that the opening was a small matter ; well, so was the flag of the regiment. It was a mere piece of red cloth, but the battle raged round the standard and the standai'd bearer. And so about the Sunday. It was a venerable institution — a Di\i ne institution — and he stood by it. Just as if he was standing busido au old tree that hnd been the resting place at noon for the young, aud for the old at even time, he would say to the woodman — " Woodman, spare that tx'ee."