CHURCH AND INDUSTRY.

Taranaki Daily News, 9 April 1921, Page 9

CHURCH AND INDUSTRY.

METHODIST CHURCH CONFERENCE. STATEMENT OF MR. MOSES AYRTON. (Contributed by the N.Z. Welfare League.) The Methodists assembled in Wellington, held an afternoon meeting to consider public questions in the Town Hall on Sunday, March 6. Our attention is drawn to a statement of Mr. Moses Ayrton, one of the delegates and at t'he same time national secretary of the N.Z. Labor Party. It is reported that Mr. Ayrton was chosen to present the problem of the Church in relation to industry. “He presented modern methods as being those of large scale production, thereby creating two opposing classes; the body of men who hire workers and pay wages, and anothei body who receive wages in return for labor. These two classes were of neces-’ sity antagonistic in aim, and being rapidly and increasingly organised, the danger lay in a conflict Which might even become a revolution.” He said “the problem of to-day was to re-adjust the relationship of these classes, and this could not only be done by change of motive, which, instead of being that of profit, should become that of service for others.” He contended that “the church by emphasising the doctrines of redemption, forgiveness and righteousness, as applied to social relationships should create an atmosphere whereby it would become possible for representatives of both ofders to mutually discuss and endeavor to secure a solution to industrial problems on a basis acceptable to all.” '‘Quarrelling,” he added, “only accentuated the difficulties sane thought might save the situation.”

Now, as regards the sentiment of this statement, we are in entire accord with it, but with respect to some of the affirmations which t'he statement contains, we entirely disagree with them. Let us say that we are pleased to note that the speaker regarded industrial conflidt which might even become a revolution as a danger, tho’ h how a person belonging to a political party which stands for evolution can so affirm passes our understanding. Air. Ary ton’s generalised statement that modern methods mean large scale production needs considerable qualifying to be an exact Btaitement of all the facts, particularly as applying to a producing country such as New Zealand, where there is so much scale production in evidence. The statements that large scale production “creates two opposing classes” and that these two classes were of necessity “antagonistic in aim” we cannot accept as being a true and correct defining of causes or existing conditions. Wre that the real and exact truth of the industrial situation then it would be mere mockery to invite any church to create an atmosphere which would bring together the representatives of two classes who are “of necessity antagonistic in aim.” It is true that as buyei and seller respectively, employer and employed have distinct interests. Such is the case with all buyers and sellers, but these interests are not necessarily antagonistic. We should further remember that the relation of buyer and seller is not the only relation that exists between employer and employed. There is the relation of partners in a joint enterprise which cannot be made a success without benefiting both, or fail without both suffering thereby. Then there is the relation that both have to the public as servants which can best be fulfilled by accentuation of the partnership between them. Their aims are not antagonistic except when they are misdirected. It is that fact whidh gives a foundation of sense and reason to the idea of 'bringing them together for mutual consultation. When Air. Aryton advises that the motive of industrial relations should be that of service and not profit we agree with him providedthe precept is applied justly and without distinction, to employer and employee alike, to the capitalist and laborer together. With respect may we present our view of t'he relations of the church to industry As industry is but a department of human life the church can, in our opinion, do most good by insisting upon the spiritual relationship. It should require (that industrialism shall have a soul ana a clean soul at that. Being the servant of Him who is named “the way, the truth and t'he life.” t'he churcJi should demand of men that in their industrial relations they shall reverence the truth at all times both in speech and action. Veracity, veracity, veracity should be the call of the church upon those who in any way are takingpart, particularly of leadership, in industrial affairs. The text of “what shall it profit a man if he gain the whole world and lose his own soui?” should be made to apply jiot merely to the individual singly, but to organisations and movements of men.

The vast importance of character in the persons of those who are entrusted with the leadership of great bodies of mon is a theme which the churches should deal with. The corrupting of a movement that professedly stands for humanity by transforming it into a soulless materialistic battle ground of class auid personal hatred should be dealt with not as-an issue of economics, but as being what it is, a denial of the' law of Christian ethics. Yes, there is much the churches cando to better our industrial relationships by insisting on the importance of right moral standards and fearlessly unholding what is right, and denouncing what is wrong in the face of one or of thousands without class or party consideration. The sentiment of producing an atmosphere is not sufficient to affirm the law. It is rather, as we see it, the duty which the churches should carry out. If this spiritual work is not carried out, the materialism of to-day may lead to overwhelming disaster.