WARFARE OPPOSED.

Star (Christchurch), Volume LXVI, Issue 20330, 13 June 1934, Page 8

WARFARE OPPOSED.

Attitude of Christchurch Presbytery. OBJECTION TO PROPAGANDA. Opposition to war and general objections to war propaganda were contained in a report on the question of war received at this morning’s meeting of the Christchurch Presbytery from the Public Questions Committee. The report, most of which was adopted after a few alterations, included a number of resolutions to be sent to the General Assembly’s Public Questions Committee in reph'- to an inquiry as to the Presbytery’s mind on the matter of The Rev J. A. Allan, in presenting the report, said that the position at present was critical and people were asking if the Church could do or say anything. Many church people seemed to have, slipped back to a despairing view. The first sub-section of the report, which was carried with a few dissentients, read as follows:—“That we approve the Assembly’s committee’s action in protesting against war propaganda in secondary schools by officers of the fighting forces.” During the discussion several speakers criticised Rear-Admiral Burges Watson for speaking to secondarv schoolboys on the imminence of war and the need for preparation. The Church’s Duty. The second sub-section pointed out that it was the duty of all connected with the Church to create an atmosphere in which advance might be possible towards disarmament and lasting peace and that the Church should affirm its support to the ideal of world government as embodied in the League of Nations. In addition, it stated that the suffering and destruction of war were contrary to the humane spirit of the Gospel, that war would fall on civilians, particularly on women and children, and that it must be made a burden on the conscience of the Church for Christians to bear arms against one another. The Rev T. W. Armour said that there was no immediate prospect of a big war. People who talked abnit Japan and Russia, and so on, should be pafd no more attention than a man swearing in the street. Mr Allan said he wished he could adopt Mr Armour’s optimistic outlook. If he had had the tame view he would not have bothered to draft the report. “ Stern Negative Necessity.” An additional clause was approved to the effect that while the Presbyterv was opposed to the view that Christians might never take part in warfare, it thought that only through stern negative necessity should Christians take part in war, which was recognised as an intruder in God’s world and must be driven out and destroyed. The clause was moved by the Rev A. C. Watson, who said that it was his view that, while war was an evil thing, yet when Christians had a choice of two evils that choice had to be for the less evil. Mr Armour declared that he was opposed to war, but was by no means a pacifist. Further, the report suggested that the Assembly’s committee might consider that the instruction in the use of weapons of death should be eliminated from the drill taught in the schools of the Church and that the World Alliance for International Friendship through the churches be introduced into New Zealand. These matters were held over for discussion until the next meeting.