CIVIL LAW

Wairarapa Times-Age, 28 November 1941, Page 2

CIVIL LAW

SPIRIT OF ANTAGONISMFOSTERED BY SOME CHURCHMEN. MAN POWER TRIBUNALS NOT FAVOURED. (By Telegraph—Press Association.) WELLINGTON, This Day. “It is becoming only too evident that there are some religionists who are doing a real dis-service, both to their denominations and to the State, by fostering a spirit of antagonism to the civil law,” said Dr. O. C. Mazengarb when, during an address to the Honorary Justices of the Peace Association in Wellington yesterday, he made reference to. the attitude which had been taken up by some on the issues of pacifism and conscientious objection.

“There is no real conflict between divine law and civil law,” he said. “The conflict arises only when people seek to interpret the unrevealed law of God in a way which conflicts with our duties as citizens of the world. But even when such a conflict occurs, the obvious course surely is to ask the legislature to amend the law so as to bring it into harmony with the presumed will of God.

“One Church body recently adopted a resolution lauding conscientious objectors and criticising the magistrates. Another praised as ‘moral courage’ an attitude which might more appropriately be dubbed as public exhibitionism. A third assembly of churchmen recently affirmed its loyalty to the Constitution by the narrow margin of two votes and at the same time voted strongly in favour of the pacifists. “I feel sure that these reverend gentlemen do not realise the dangers into which they are running. Unless churchmen confine themselves to their true province, they may easily bring about a situation which they may live to regret. Any movement which whiteants the law is quite capable of whiteanting the Church itself. This has already happened in Europe. In New Zealand today Ministers of the Crown have become obliged to wrestle with problems which they helped to create by nurturing pacifists in the days that have gone. So also these men of the Church who have been preaching the doctrines of pacifism and espousing the cause of military objectors may easily split their congregations over the necessity of obedience to the civil law, and drive a wedge between Church and State.

“Not much notice was taken of the theoretical discussion of pacifism in Trades Halls and in some Bible classes in days of peace, but the stern reality of the present conflict has supplied the best proof of its impracticability,” continued Dr. Mazengarb. Personally I don’t regard these manpower tribunals with favour at all. There is a simpler and better way of dealing fairly and kindly with men who don’t want to fight. The newspaper reports of the proceedings before these tribunals show that there is urgent need for a change in the law. But while the law is there, these clerical critics and others similarly minded should respect it, and not criticise the tribunals who have had imposed upon them the unpleasant duty of endeavouring to penetrate into the real minds of men.”