HARD SAYINGS

Dominion, Volume 8, Issue 2494, 22 June 1915, Page 3

HARD SAYINGS

WAR & CHRISTIAN ETHICS ADDRESS BY BISHOP SPROTT. Some of the "hard sayings" of tho Gospels with reference to the uso of force with the object of overcoming evil were discussed in a thought-provok-ing address delivered by the Anglican Bishop of Wellington (Dr. Sprott) at .Victoria Collego on Saturday night to members of the Students' Christian Union 'and their friends. There was a large attendance, and the Bishop's address was followed with the closest attention. The subject was "War and Christian Ethics." Tho Bishop began by saying that the great need of tlie present time was action with the object of bringing the war to a successful issue as scon as possible. But though action was the principal need of the moment, yet the war had raised a number. of important questions for the consideration of Christian people. Tho Bishop went on to say that history showed that war had been productive of great good to the human race in many' ways. War— and certainly the present war—had inspired acts of tho noblest and purest sacrifice. It did not. however, follow that war was a good thing in itself. Those who argued that because war had dons good in the world it was therefore in itself good wore on t vorv slippory decline. By the same kind of reasoning _ all. the evil in tho world might bo justified. The Bishop went on to explain the justification o) : defensive war on the lines which he thought would be generaly adopted in the university test books on ethics. He adversely criticised tho attitude of those who defended aggressive war on the eround that it was in accordance with the evolutionary principle of tho survival of tho fittest in the struggle for existence. Modern warfare was not eugenic. Modern weapons did not nicely discriminate between the vigorous and the weakling. As a matter of fact tho most vigorous and daring were more likely to he killed than the weak and feeble. The Bishop then proceeded to deal with the attitude of Christian ethics to war. He referred to some of those difficult sayings of Christ about nonrp.sistance, such as "resist not evil"; "if a' man smite thee on one cheek, offer also the other" ; "if a man take your cloak, give him your coat also." Some people urged that these sayings could not be taken literally, but must be regarded as general rules. There were exceptions to all general rules which had to be modified so as to make them applicable to particular cases. Every moral situation was unique. No two moral situations were exactly alike. They were always complex and often involved a conflict of duties. We were often compelled to choose the lesser of two evils. The solution of these problems of conduct was the business of casuistry. This form of ethics had got a bad name, and if anyone told him (the Bishop) that his address was a. piece of casuistry from beginning to end that would not be ■ great and enthusiastic praise. People were often more prone to explain away a duty they really knew in their heart of hearts than to discover the right course to pursue. The casuistical explanation of the non-resistance savings of Christ had resulted in the majority of. people making no attempt to observe them at all.

The Bishop thought these sayings must be dealt with in some other wav. Many healthy-minded people revolted against thera because they were regarded as inculcating merely a passive prohibition of the use of physical force. As a- matter of fact, not- only physical force, but every form of compulsion was in question. But Christ did not teach mere doing nothing—limp indifference and apathy. He advocated action—,i new use for the fighting spirit; the attacking of evil at its root in the evil will, and conquering it by Christian love. But as regards the present war there was not a nation in the world so completely dominated by the Spirit of Christ as to be in a position to act in strict accordance with the principles laid down in the Sermon on the Mount. But evil must always be resisted, and if we could not use the highest weapon we must use the next best. So we had to fall back on physical force. Tile evil- had to he fought somehoir. The mere outward fact of non-resistance would be no good unless the right spirit was behind it. If some weak, miserable, spiritless person gave ud his coat to a man who had taken his cloak, the aggressor would only treat him with contempt; but. if the coat was freely given up by a strong, vigorous man well able to kick the thief out of the door, and who was evidently actuated by a sincere desire to give the wrongdoer another chance, the act might well have a good effect. If Britain had not gone to war her inaction would not have overcome the evil which had to he faced. If we had said to Belgium, "We are very sorry, hut we have been reading the Sermon

on the Mount, i>nd can't pivo you any help; you must take it lying down"— what a howl of derision our words would have ovoked throughout the world. Why? Simply because as si nation wc have not yet reached that highest standard of Christian conduct that might havo justified us in taking such a stand. Wo would not have shamed our enemies. Other nations would have regarded our attitude as sheer hypocrisy. They would have said we were too much concerned ill racing and gambling and sport, too decadent and degenerate to stand by our pledged word. Therefore, as wo could not light with tile very highest weapon, we had to resist evil with the best weapons we possessed. Tho Bishop paid a high tribute to the youth of the Empire who had gone forth to fight for their country—to suffer, and die if needs be —convinced that they were standing up for Britain's word, the _ recognition of public law, and. the rights of small nations. No Christian man need hesitate as regards the duty of doing his utmost to bring this war to a successful issue, though ' he could not help feeling sad for tho desolate homes and broken hearts and disappointed that there was no nation so completely lilled with the Spirit of Christ as to be able to overcome the evil by the moral powsr of the Christlike life —by love, pity, and mercy. The Bishop concluded bv expressing tho hope that after the war some more reasonable method would be found of settling international. disputes, so that the world would not be again deluged in the Wood and tears of the noblest of our race. (Applause.)

Mrs. E. Stacey, of Seatoun, returned to New Zealand from England by the Remuera yesterday. •ELECTROLYSIS.—This is the only treatment knowj to science for the permanent removal of superfluous hair; but .much depends upon the skill of the operator and the battery used. Miss Milsom qualified under Milame Barclay, New York, the .leading American Specialist. The operation is painless and leaves no scar on the face. The battery used by Miss Milsom is the very latest and most up-to-date in Australasia. No paste, powder, or liquid advertised can remove permanently superfluous hair. Had such" a discovery proved successful, Miss Milsom would have used these preparations many years ago. All treatments for falling and gTey hair, delightful face treatment. Hair work of every description. Manicuring, Clipping. Miss Milsom, Barnett's Building, 91 Willis Sheet, i doors past "Evening Post." Telephone Sl-i.— Advt.

Mrs. Rolleston has just received one of the finest shipments of English Hair that has yet been imported in 'the Colonies. Her Hairwork Department is in chaTge of a Sydney' Artist, who has an expert staff of assistants. All orders are guaranteed for shade and durability. Advice free. English prices and designs. 256 Lambton Quay. Tel. 1599.—Advt.