By December 5, 1918, there
was increasing resistance towards the actions of the Hamilton Board of Health’s
closing orders, particularly as regards early store closing hours and the edict
against the holding of church services.
If anything, the early store
closing order had the effect, it was claimed, of creating crowd conditions. As
regards, the church service issue, a Hamilton priest had already been charged, convicted
and fined because he flaunted the closing order and opened his church’s doors
to worshippers.
The Hamilton newspapers were
not slow to pick up and amplify the hostility which was rising sharply against
the board of health and towards the Hamilton physicians who were advising the
board.
An example of how the
Spectator was framing the debate as to whether the closing order should be
lifted appeared as follows:
“ Knutty
Points
“Ask
Us – We Don’t Know”
If it is dangerous for
clerks to wait on customers after 4 o’clock in the afternoon, how is the
overworked Proprietor immune?
ANXIOUS
Our Hoyle is silent on this
point. Ask the doctors. – Ed.
_____________________________________________
Is it worse for one man to
serve fifty customers in his store after 4 o’clock than to have the assistance
of his clerks and disperse the crowd more quickly.
BEWILDERED
Common sense seems to
approve of retaining the clerks, but the doctors have decreed otherwise. – Ed.
__________________________________________
Is the ‘flu’ germ more
active after 4 p.m. than previous to that hour?
I WONDER
Once again, we are stumped.
Will some doctor please explain? – Ed.
_________________________________________________
Why, in the name of all that
is sane and proper, if the ‘flu’ is more deadly than small pox, haven’t the
cases been isolated and placed under quarantine?
IVA
KAUFF
If uva cough, Iva, your
doctor should be able to answer that question. – Ed.
_______________________________________________
Please tell me why members
of the board of trade and other business men can spare time to go to the city
hall and beg the ‘people’s representatives’ to do things, but cannot do their
duty by serving as city representatives?
TAXPAYER
Will business men please
answer? –Ed.
____________________________________________________
Is it safer to stand on a street corner for an
hour, waiting for a car, than to ride on a crowded one?
A. HOOFER
The doctors say it is. So
there. – Ed.1
1
“Legality of Ban to Be
Tested By Pastor of St. Ann’s Church : Rev. Father Englert Will Conduct
Services Next Sunday – Claims Vested Rights Have Been Violated : Epidemic on
Wane, 175 New Cases and Two Deaths Being Reported – Many ‘Flu’ Cases Just
Common Colds”
Hamilton Spectator. December 05, 1918.
(Note
the ‘names’ of some of those ‘quoted’)
The
matter of the churches having been ordered to close the doors to their public
worship spaces was regarded with much resentment and potential rebellion :
““The legality of the
proclamation of the board of health prohibiting church services is to be
challenged again on Sunday, by Rev. Father Englert, pastor of St. Ann’s Roman
Catholic church, who announced this morning that mass would be said, as usual.
“ ‘Not in defiance of the
authorities, but to uphold the vested rights of the Canadian people,’ he added.
“Expressions of opinion, in
view of the prosecution of Rev. Father Tarasiuk, in police court yesterday,
were secured by the Spectator today from clergymen of various denominations.
Though the majority held that Almighty God was being relegated to the
background by those responsible for the proclamation, and that, if all the
clergy co-operated, the ban could be punctured. Rev. Father Englert was the
only one to announce that he would not comply with the restrictions.
“ ‘It is time for the
churches to defend their rights,’ said the pastor of St. Ann’s. ‘We would not
be true Canadians unless we upheld our vested rights. All Christians should
stand up against the agnostics and materialists, who would deny the protection
of God in time of trouble. We are not defying the law, there being two
instances, of which we have record, where the supreme court of the United
States upheld the church under similar conditions.’ ”1
JJThe priest of St. Joseph’s
Roman Catholic Church was firm in his opinion of the church closing order :
REV. FATHER LEYES
“ ‘It is rather late in the
day for me to express an opinion.’ Said Rev. Father Leyes, pastor of St.
Joseph’s Roman Catholic church. ‘The church has taken its stand. We are all
behind Father Harasiuk. As regards the danger of infection at church services,
I can only point out that there have been four deaths in this parish, nine
deaths in St. Patrick’s and none in St. Ann’s. Of the many Poles who have had
this malady, not one who attended mass since the proclamation of the ban has
been afflicted.
“German kultur and German
materialism were responsible for this awful war. The German’s put God in the background,
just as those responsible for this proclamation have done. Hasn’t Almighty God
said, ‘Without Me you can do nothing?
“Rev. Father Leyes added
that the low death rate showed that the recrudescence was a particularly mild
form of the influenza, and it was known that the medical men reported plain,
ordinary, everyday colds as influenza.
“ ‘Even the doctors are
divided as to the efficacy of the ban in preventing the spread of the malady,’
he said. ‘We have shortened our services and, personally, I do not know of one
instance of influenza being contracted in church.’ ”1
One of the most assertive members
of the clergy to oppose the closing order was Rev. Robertson :
“ ‘Dr. Roberts and the
majority of doctors are not in favor of the closing of the churches,’ said Rev.
W.P. Robertson, who asserted most emphatically that there was a tremendous
strong feeling against the health board’s ruling.
“‘ Dr. Roberts himself has
stately explicitly that he is against this order, and that it is of no use
whatever in stamping out the epidemic. The size of the buildings and the fact
that sick people do not attend services is a strong reason for keeping open the
churches.
‘ ‘Every clergyman who
visits the sick and meets doctors at the besides is daily receiving expressions
of sympathy from the medical men, and all are to the effect that the closing of
the churches is absolutely no good.
“ ‘My only reason for not
defying this order is the fact that, in view of the alarming disregard for law
and authority which is spreading all over the world, I think that the churches
should not employ strike methods.
“ ‘I am now in touch with
the M.H.O., and an effort will be made to have services for limited
congregations, by doubling the number of services and lessening the number of
worshippers at each service. Dr. Roberts, from whom I have just come, stated
that he was thoroughly in favor of the idea.
“ ‘Last Sunday, I held five
services in the homes of my parishioners, and shall continue to do so.’
Rev. Robertson, along with
his fellow Anglican minister, Rev. Canon Daw of the Church of St. John the
Evangelist, went downtown to the Hamilton City Hall where the board of health
offices were located. There they spoke to reporters:
“That it
would be a blot on the escutcheon of Hamilton if, as was contemplated,
policemen were stationed at church doors next Sunday, to prevent attendance at
church services, was asserted by Rev. W.P. Robertson, of St. Thomas Anglican
church this morning. With Rev. Canon Daw, Rev. Mr. Robertson had waited on
health officials to express their opposition to the ban.
“
‘Surely,’ continued Mr. Robertson, ‘if the proprietors of stores can prevent
crowding, the pastors of this city can be credited with as much ability in that
line and permitted to do likewise.’ ” 1
An
very agitated member of the Hamilton clergy, Rev. Kenrick of St. Philipp’s
Church sent a devastating letter to the Spectator, strongly expressing his
opinions on the matter :
‘It was
with burning hearts that many of this city read in yesterday’s papers that, in
a supposedly Christian country, a Christian priest was haled into the police
court by the authorities of this Christian city and fined to the utmost limit
of the law by the representative of a Christian king for standing at a
Christian altar and conducting Christian worship in a Church.
‘Permit me
to observe that in forbidding the Christian people of this city to worship in
their churches the board of health has closed one only of the many possible
avenues of contagion. Street cars are still running and are admittedly still
sources of infection whether five or fifty people are in them. Stores are still
doing business, and, on Saturday afternoon at least, some were packed to
suffocation. On one car on that day, thirty-one strap-hangers were counted. But
I have not heard that any storekeeper or car conductor has been prosecuted.
That privilege was reserved for a minister of religion. And it is highly
significant of the spirit of materialism and agnosticism which is abroad, that while it was recognized
that the factories were fruitful sources of danger, it was decided that it
would disorganize the community too much if they were shut down. The churches
(too often sparsely attended and then usually only once a week and therefore,
merely as public places, negligible as sources of infection – they might be
banned because the disorganization of the religious life of the people was a
matter of no moment to the men who are in control of the situation.
‘Let it be
clearly recognized that the closing of the houses of God is symptomatic of the
increasing indifference and hostility on the part of many people towards Christ
and His kingdom. We were told in the police court yesterday that the law knows
nothing of religion. Certainly the hard knocks dealt out to religion at the
hands of the authorities during the last four years seem to bear out this
remarkable statement. But it is to be doubted whether any board of health would
have dared to use its power as it has now done did it not think that the
people, accustomed to conscription, orders-in-council, and the edicts of
controllers who have controlled everything except the takings of profiteers
would meekly submit. All honor to that church which has deliberately refused to
bow down before an enactment which is an infringement of the liberties of all
Christian people. But, I ask, are the non-Catholics of Hamilton going to allow
the battle to be fought on their behalf by the minsters of one body only, while
the rest take their punishment lying down, or pursue a pusillanimous policy of
wait and see?
‘It has
been said that in resisting orders of the board of health, we are encouraging
the breaking of the law. But the subject who is truly loyal to the chief
magistrate will neither advise nor submit to arbitrary measures, and after all,
the lawbreakers are those who have passed and put into operation a statute
which is a direct infringement of the liberty of worship, guaranteed to all of
us without interference under the constitution of Canada.
‘Members
of the Church of England are familiar with the words so often quoted in the
church service ; Then stood up Phineas and prayed and so the plague ceased.’
But, the position of the agnostics and materialists who are denying to us the
right to pray is that Go has nothing to do with the matter; that prayer is
ineffectual, and that they will fight the epidemic by purely physical means.
‘The
clergy and religious people of the city believe in the Omnipotence and
immanence of God. They believe in prayer, that believe that corporate prayer is
more effectual than that which is offered by individuals, and that the vast
majority of Christians believe that the highest act of prayer is that which is
offered at the altar on the Lord’s day.
‘Those
who, in the exercise of their Christian rights are proposing to continue to
worship God according to the dictates of their conscience are acting in the
true spirit of the apostles, who when they were threatened and commanded no
more to speak in the name of Christ, answered, ‘Whether it be right in the
sight of God too hearken unto you more than unto God, judge ye, for we cannot
but speak the things we have seen and heard.’ 1
Finally,
the Spectator carried the following letter which carried some humor and mild
sarcasm:
“ ‘Seeing
that the board of health has closed our churches, depriving thousands of the
sacraments of the church and the comfort and support derived from public
worship,’ writes Anglican Catholic in a letter to the editor, ‘the Bible
student must now add a proviso to many clear passages in God’s word:
‘Some
suggestions:
‘The Lord
is in His holy temple – except during an epidemic of flu.
‘I will
come into Thy house in the multitude of Thy mercy – except during an epidemic
of flu.
‘ My soul
longeth, yea, even fainteth, for the courts of the Lord’ – except during an
epidemic of flu.
“Preach
the word. Be instant in season and out of season’ – except during an epidemic
of flu.
‘Not
forsaking the assembling of ourselves together’ – except during an epidemic of
flu.
‘They
continued steadfastly in the apostle’s doctrine and fellowship and breaking of
bread and prayers.’ – except during an epidemic of flu.”1
No comments:
Post a Comment