CHURCH AND WAR.

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume XLI, Issue 13394, 30 May 1914, Page 8

CHURCH AND WAR.

There was a» largo -attendance 'at the meeting of the Social Democratic party last night to listen to .an address by the Rev. Dawson Thomas, on "Church and War." The reverend gentleman said that thei subject war a 'very •■'difficult one. and the few stray thoughts he l\svtl collected t'or the evening V>y «n means represented ' all that might be snid about it. A great deal of nonsense wif tnlked about; the Church's attitude towards war. by those who knew very little, about the censes of xrai'.aiid less about the Church. There were several kinds of war. Tbero was aggressive war, which might be illustrated in the individual, by -a boy trying to beat another bov for his marbles; and exemplified in nations where war was declared to gain some .selfish «nd, such as a port for trade. This.- might bo called commercial war. For this kind of war the Church had nothing but condemnation. On the other hand' there mi slit be times when aggressive war might ho necessary to prevent a nation from misusing itr. power. Ho was inclined to commend defensive war. He bad nothing but praiso for the plucky littlo schoolboy who defended himself against a bully, and he felt inclined tlo help him. And so with the -'nation attacked by an enemv. his sympathies' would be with the defending" nation, and if necessary ns \vhen a strong Power attempted for aggrandisement to crush, a smallerone, he thought another nation justified in hfelmng the weak." Ho paid that- some Socialists and Borne good Cbristfr-ra say Wo; no retaliation, but he thought that

were New Zealand ' ai tacked by Japan or China every man. n;> matter what his theoretical biii ; was., would do his best to shoot, sli-.iight.- Punitive war was allowable, and even necessary to avenge a wrong and preserve a right. For instance, were there no war against crime, crime would bo, rampaiit. Were there no punishment for stealing, no propertv would be safe. Fen r of avenging wrong- often results in wrong not /being done. Industrial war was another phase of the question. He would -.like 'to hear, what Labor had to say about it. It appeared to him that a. great manv of those ,who were loud in their- condemnation of national warfare, when it came to industrial warfare were not quito consistent. Thev showed by their methods of striking', the use of boycott, and their treatment of "scabr'-that they were by nr> means passive rosisters.

Dealing with tho' wholo question.. Mr Thomas said v 'Svar was a dreadful 'thing, but to quote .' Spencer's Fairy Queen. "Love fact's dreadfal things." They could not pass it by, which was the attitude of the Quakers, and ho believed a liindrance to the solution. The Church' had to face the question, and in doing so honestly attempted to do away with war by changing tlu> character of man, by/ eradicating the iceHty/ of. greed and hate existing in most, and so doing away with the cause of war. Arbitration and disarmament schemes were beautiful dreams that would never be fullv realised until the whole world were Christianised. The duty of the Church was, not to dogmatise upon ditfering opinions <jf policy, but to preach the (Tospel. Un politics she was neutral. In her domain of character building she was supreme. To, formulate tha character cf the nations, to win the world for Christ was the Church's aim, and not till that had been -accomplished would the prayer of Litany, repeated the wide world over in English Churches bo realised, "that it may please God to give to all nations unity, peace and concord."

A warm discussion followed, which was evidently relished by the Rev. Dawson Thomas, and lie received a hearty vots of thanks.

Xoxt week's subject is "Xapoleon as Labor Leader,"' the sneaker being Mr (». Bartlett.