PRESBYTERY SAYS NO.

Timaru Herald, Volume CXXV, Issue 17946, 3 May 1928, Page 13

PRESBYTERY SAYS NO.

ALLIANCE APPLICATION REFUSED.

“TOO MANY APPEALS.”

The question whether members of the New Zealand Alliance should be given permission to make appeals through the Presbyterian Churches of South Canterbury for funds to further their prohibition work, was the cause of a spirited discussion at Tuesday’s monthly meeting of Timaru Presbytery. Mr W. R. Mackesy, Area Secretary for the New Zealand Alliance, waited on the meeting, and outlined the work the Alliance was doing in the district. In view of the fact, however, that their financial position in South Canterbury was not what it might be,, the Council had deputed him. to put before the Presbytery the question of an appeal being made through the pulpits for financial assistance from the congregations. It was necessary, if the work was to be carried on the way it should be, to make the appeal. It was proposed that the appeal take the form of a card appeal, each subscriber to put down on the card the amount he or she was prepared to give. He hoped that the Presbytery would do all in their power to assist a work which they had so well supported in the past. Mr Mackesy then retired.

The convener of the Temperance Committee (the Rev. W. F. Nichol). moved that the appeal receive the support of Presbytery, and be recommended to the Sessions for approval. Mr Nichol said he had always been against card appeals. On one Sunday evening, however, he reluctantly allowed a representative of, the Alliance to take the pulpit, and the discourse was a very fine one, the congregation responding liberally. It was the desire of right-thinking people to do all possible to hasten the coming of God’s Kingdom, and by the abolition of drink, a big hurdle would be surmounted. He had nothing against a bard appeal, and was of opinion that accredited representatives of the Alliance should be allowed to make the appeal through the pulpit. The Rev. H. R. Fell: “Is the appeal to be made by the Alliance members?” The Moderator (the Rev. / C. G. Wilcox) said that that phase of the question had not been mentioned. The Rev. H. R. Fell said he was opposed to any appeal being made by the Alliance, and above all he would be against any application being made for an Alliance representative to give an address from the pulpit. He had had one experience of an Alliance representative in his pulpit when he was in the north, and that experience he would never forget. He would never throw open his pulpit again, unless it were under great pressure. Church people were incensed by so many appeals, and he would not vote for the motion. The work of organisation of a congregation was no small task, and he did not see why the New Zealand Alliance should go to a congregation, distribute cards, and thus take. advantage of that organisation to.'improve their financial position. All over the district, said Mr Fell, the Alliance had Committees, and surely there was no reason why those Committees could not make a general appeal in their own districts. “People come to church to worship, not to have cards thrust at them on which to write down promises on. While I am a strong supporter of the cause of prohibition, I will not support the motion.” Mr A. G. Crossman endorsed Mr Fell’s remarks, stating that the church had to put up with too many appeals. In Christchurch the churches were asked to contribute towards the relief of unemployment. Why weren’t appeals made to the picture shows? The Alliance had organisers who were well paid, and why didn’t those men do some of the asking? It was anything but fair to make so many assessments on the church. The Rev. H. R. Fell said that in some districts the church was responsible for the raising of 90 per cent, of the funds for the Alliance. It was just another burden on “the poor old willing beast.” The Rev. W. F. Nichol said that the church should stand by anything which was to better the community. The manner of making an appeal might not be an ideal one, but something would have to be done. The Rev. A. Alexander said that if the church took up the matter, why did not those who did not go to church contribute? There were a great number of prohibitionists who did not attend church. He had had a representative of the Alliance in his pulpit at Albury, and he would refuse any other representative who wished to make an appeal. The Rev. F. R. Charman said he had had a representative of the Alliance in his pulpit, and he had heard no complaints about the message o: the way it had been delivered. The Alliance was doing a big work and there should be no splitting straws. Mi; Fell: “I object to that remark. If I don’t believe an appeal should not be made, I’ll certainly say so.” The motion was then put and lost, only five members voting for it.