SABBATH DESECRATION IN MELBOURNE.

Evening Star, Issue 3466, 1 April 1874, Page 3

SABBATH DESECRATION IN MELBOURNE.

( Argus , March 3.)

If we may accept the opinion of } the Melbourne Presbytery, the land has been utterly defiled by a flagrant desecration of what it is pleased to call the Sabbath, and'a committee has been appointed, consisting of some of the choicest desciples of Puritanism, to make inquiries into the subject, and to wait upon the Chief Secretary as a deputation for the purpose of bringing their discoveries under his notice. The facts appear to be as follows ;—A special train left Williamstown oh Sunday last for the purpose of conveying some 400 of the railway , employes to Mount Maced on, where a picnic was held. The Rev. Mr Clark, who brought the matter forward, had been given to understand that the hon. the Commissioner of Railways had sanctioned this atrocious procedure. The rev. gentleman may probably congratulate himself on having been right for once in his life, for without the authorization spoken of, it ,is certain that the, excursionists would have seen little of Mount j Macedon on the day in question, But hot only did the trmh run, but it carried “ four brass bands, which were playing all the way up to the mount.” This we have no doubt was the very purpose for which they were engaged. Booths also were erected, another proof of the exceeding sinfulness of the carnal mind, “ and drinking was going on in violation of the law," We would point out, however, that drinking is not in itself an illegal act, and if the picnickers had then* own joint stock supply of liquor, they could consume it freely without contravening any statute. We are also told that “ the people were in dancing during the day,” and° gravely warned that if such a proceeding be sanctioned by a Minister of the Crown then we must be prepared to say farewell to the morality of the rising generation. Dancing on Sunday we admit to he a matter of taste or education, but fcow the exercise can be more fatal to £

“morality” on Sunday than on Monday, or how its deleterious effects are increased by ministerial patronage, surpasses our powers of comprehension. Dr Cameron considers this excursion to Mount Macedon “one of the greatest outrages ever carried out under the sanction of a Government.” When we remember what Governments have done at times, we are at a loss to know whether to condemn the rev. presbyter’s prejudice or to pity his ignorance. But without going into this question, we can safely say that, to our minds, far greater outrages on decency are committed eveiy week by ministers of religion when they dare to dictate to people outside the congregations which voluntarily submit to their guidance how they shall spend their time or settle their affairs with their Maker. What other day in the week have the laboring classes got on which to rest and amuse themselves, clear their lungs from the dust and smoke of city life, and inhale the fresh invigorating air of the country % I)r Cameron admits that while interfering with the recreations of the working man in what appears to us a most improper and unwarrantable manner, the Presbytery should not overlook his need of “ some relaxation,” “They could, however,” says this learned divine, with that sound practical sense which so eminently distinguishes his cloth, “have a week day given them for the purpose, rather than that the Sabbath should be desecrated.” We would point out, however, that Sunday is the only day on which the railway employes can be spared in large numbers. It is not a mere question of sacrificing a day’s wages on either side j the work of the large and important department with which they are connected could not proceed in their absence. Luckily for the men, while the churches robbed them of one day’s pay by their success in putting a stop to the running of Sunday trains, they at all events furnished them unintentionally with the necessary opportunities for united pleasure excursions. We venture to submit that the Presbytery’s theology is as bad as its conduct is illiberal. Mr Gillies and the majority of Christians hold that “ the Sabbath was made for man”—for the benefit of toil-worn humanity, while Messrs Clark, Cameron, and Co. persist in maintaining that man was made for the Sabbath. Mr Gillies sees a number of workmen whose health, morally, intellectually, and physically, he feels will be improved by a country jaunt, and knowing that Sunday is the only day available, he puts it to what we venture to say is one of the best purposes to which it can be turned. The churchmen, however, who know so much better than our Saviour, wish to step in and forbid that amusement and that change of scene which are essential parts of real recreation, and do not hesitate to condemn the custom of walking in the corn-fields on the Sabbath day which was once sanctioned by such high authority. We would remind them that the ordinances that were against us under the old dispensation have been blotted out, and so St. i aul commanded the Colossians to let no man judge them “in meat or in drink, or in respect of any holiday, or of the new moon, or of the Sabbath days,” which were a shadow of things to come. Is the Melbourne Presbytery prepared to pit its opinion against that of St. Paul on this or any other point 1