SUNDAY HOCKEY AT MOUTOA.

Manawatu Herald, Volume XXXIV, Issue 1088, 27 August 1912, Page 3

SUNDAY HOCKEY AT MOUTOA.

(To the Editor.)

Sir. —Your correspondent “A Player” imagines that I was “hard hit” by his first letter. Perhaps he is wondering what effect the second has had ! An Irishman is reputed to have said in reference to an opponent, “He struck at me and missed me,” and, “he struck at me again and hit me in the same place.” The application of these sayings to “A Player’s’' letter is self evident. If he imagines that I have been very much damaged, he is quite welcome to the consolation that such imagination gives him. Your correspondent in bis first letter drew my attention to the fact that the hockey match, of which I complained, had been reported, and as it was pointed out to him that the name of the day on which it was played had been omitted, he, now that the matter has been made public, and cannot be denied, declares that we were not discussing that point at all. Evidently he remises that he has no defence. The matter was desired to be kept quiet, but now that their Sunday playing has been revealed, “A Player” makes a virtue ot necessity and tries to make us believe that they (the players) did not mind the fact becoming public property. Your correspondent has chosen to write anonymously. I am not against “anonymous” newspaper correspondence, as I believe that sometimes it may serve a very useful purpose, but a man who writes under a “nom de plume” ought to “play the game,” as he possesses a greater advantage over one who signs his name. I would advise “A Player” when he writes iu this way not to make an attack upon a man who does sign his name. I would also remind him that “abuse” is not argument. He is shooting from behind a hedge. Let him come out into the open and I am sure that A. H. Yates (in reference to whom your correspondent was most unfair) will be quite able to account for him. He think.. I ..i LI. Yates must be suffering horn sunstroke. Such an impression ouly lays himself open to the retort, “Sol te quoque percussit.” “A Player” would rather spend Sunday in the way that he thinks best, rather than “make believe.” No one asked him to “make believe” 1 Why not spend the day as God has commanded and be a sincere and true Christian ? He states emphatically that Sunday hockey and other games are right and that no Scripture will convince him. I am not surprised at this. The law of God will rarely convince a man who wants to go his own way. He takes bis authority from his own inclinations. I take my authority from the Eternal Word. I state just as emphatically that these Sunday games are wrong, and if “A Player” were true to the voice of conscience he would admit that he knows them to be wrong. Your correspondent would like to infer that we are afraid to rebuke “society people” because of Sunday play, and only attack “working men.” If he has never seen such a rebuke in the press, then his acquaintance with the press must be somewhat limited. I would inform “A Player” that the church knows no distinction between rich and poor, or between “society people” and “working men,” and that those who desecrate the Lord’s Day are all open to rebuke whatever their social position may be. I am not out to defend Sunday golf and bowls at Wellington, but to attack Sunday hockey and football at Moutoa. Can “A Player” tell me of Sunday hockey and Sunday football matches at Wellington? Sunday play is just the “thin edge of the wedge,” and “working men” who desecrate the Lord’s Day may be surprised some day to find the Sabbath taken from them, and that they 1 have to work seven days a week instead of six. That there is snch a danger, aud that all “working men” do not view the Sabbath question alike, the following local which appeared in the Otago Daily Times of June sth proves ; “At a meeting of the Dunedin Branch of the Locomotive Association, on Monday, the following motion anent the granting of an additional Sunday train on the Port Chalmers line was unanimously carried: ‘That this body of locomotive enginemen bitterly resents the increasing of Sunday train service. The irregularity ol their hours by day and night, and the attendant responsibility of superintending the application of motive power, irrespective of their natural wish to conserve the remnant of their home life, demand one day’s relief a week. Further, that the Council of Churches be appealed to to combat ■the prevalent tendency to encroach upon the exalted traditions of the Sabbath Day, for such practices are obviously inimical to the delineations of Christianity.’ ” I would especially draw your correspondent's attention to the last sentence. Perhaps in the future “A Player,” and others like him may be appealing ‘o the churches to win back for them the priceless treasure of the Day of Rest. He ean rest assured that the Evangelical churches will not allow the Sabbath to be taken away without making a very strong resistance to any such attempt. Surely “working men,” who benefit so much by having the weekly day of rsst, ought to respect the religious convictions of those who believe in the sanctity of the Sabbath, and to cease from Sunday games. I trust that “A Player” will have the good sense to see that he is defending a bad

cause, and will take his place amongst the “retired Sabbath hockey players.’’ In reference to the report of the last Sunday football match sent in by your “own correspondent,” no one will be deceived by the expression of regret that accompanied it. It deserves to be kept for future reference. It is but a sign of the paganism to which a section of the community is hastening. Many of these people do not want the church at all until they are in trouble, and then they are glad enough to take all the sympathy and assistance that they can get. If your correspondent, “A Player,” will make himself known to me when he comes to church I will be pleased. I am, etc., T. COATSWORTII. Foxtou, August 26th, 1912.