CONSCIENTIOUS OBJECTOR

Taranaki Daily News, 24 July 1929, Page 6

CONSCIENTIOUS OBJECTOR

VIEWS OF PRESBYTERIANS.

INTERESTING DEBATE.

Christchurch, July 22. The Christchurch Presbytery met today to discuss the question of the Church’s attitude towards conscientious objectors. On behalf of the public questions committee, the Rev. T. W. Armour submitted the following resolution: — “The Presbytery of Christchurch draws attention to the claim of the Presbyterian Church that it is one of the most loyal churches and that during the late war it did not seek to shelter either its ministers or students, from the implications of citizenship; further, the Presbytery expresses its deep satisfaction with the steps taken by Cabinet to meet the Church’s claims with reference to conscientious objectors to military service. The Presbytery, however, feels compelled to call attention to the fact that the proposed preference treatment of Presbyterian divinity students »as never asked for by the Chureh, and that it is quite contrary to the principles of the Presbyterian Church to have her divinity students regarded as a privileged class in the matter of military, service. The Presbytery, therefore, supports the Assembly’s public questions committee in its appeal; (1.) That exemption be granted all persons whose conscientious objections to military service and training are certified by trustworthy witnesses without discrimination betwen denominations; (2) that alternative nonmilitary service be prescribed .as provided by the Act; (3) that in view of the admission that the penalties imposed on Richards and Miller rested on an unduly harsh interpretation of the Act, His Excellency the GovernorGeneral be respectfully approached with a view to the exercise of his prerogative . in reviewing the sentences.”

Mr. Armour, in moving the resolution, expressed gratification at the fact that the Christchurch newspapers had shown such a clear understanding of what was to many a difficult, question, and had recognised the justice of the Church’s contentions regarding military training. The Presbyterian Church was a fair Church and a logical Church. Differences between nations were inevitable, and nations must have some defence. However, there were bound to be differences as to what those defences should be. “In the eyes of the law,” he added, “we have not had fair treatment, and we will be well within our right to adopt' the resolution.” The Rev. W. McAra said that he thought the last part of the resolution should be cut out. The students had got themselves into disrepute, and it' looked as if an attempt had been made to bring the Church into disrepute also. The Rev. F. J. Tylee agreed with Mr. McAra.

The Rev. .Theo Paterson did not agree that the last part of the resolution be cut out. Mr. Armour said that the State was unwise if it dealt with the question from mere logic. It had to appeal to something finer than that. The motion was seconded by the Rev. E. Swinard, and carried. There were two dissentients.

It was also decided to send a copy of the resolution to the Prime Minister, the Minister of Justice, and the members of Parliament whose electorates are within the' bounds 1 of the Presbytery.