Sectarian Rivalry

In Papua

Written for The Pacific Islands Monthly by Gordon Thomas THE Rev. A. H. Scriven, who was acting-Chairman of the Method ist Mission in Papua last year, in a report published in The Missionary Review for April, writes, inter alia: “A number of matters of considerable import ance were discussed. We were perturbed by reports that the Roman Catholics and Seventh Day Ad ventists were making determined attempts to break down the wonderfully wise arrangement of separ ate spheres for the various missionary societies, made with the approval of the government. It is reported that the present administration has abandoned this wise policy, which has preserved the natives of Papua from any semblance of sectarian strife; and we would urge on our Board the importance of seeking by all possible means the reinstatement of a policy that has worked so well in the past.”

If the report, to which the reverend gentleman refers, is correct, and the Papuan administration intends making an alteration in its policy regarding the separate spheres for missionary activities, it would be well if the Ad ministration were to take a lesson from its neighbour —Mandated New Guinea —where no such boundaries have been defined and where “sectarian strife” is particularly in evidence.

Should the Papuan administration desire sectarian bitterness, scheming intrigues, religious hates and crass hypocrisy to enter into the village life of the Papuans, then its desire will soon be fulfilled by allowing the various proselytising factions to compete for adherents in one and the same vine yard.

On the other hand, by continuing the old policy of one district one sect, then the Administration may be assured that the converted brother accepts his new creed in simple sincerity, nor is he confused with the intricate workings of theological controversies, conflicting doctrines and mystifying dogmas.

It is a mental impossibility for the average village native to form an indi vidual opinion on the spiritual advan tages of one sect over another. Any advantages that he may consider are merely those which hold a material appeal either to his purse or his stom ach. Sectarian strife and religious frenzies are fostered, in most cases, by the native teachers, who know only too well how great is the appeal to their proselytes for competition and an opportunity to display that half tamed prowess which is so lightly veneered with a coating of Christian ethics.

In fifty or a hundred years, when the present-day villager has perhaps reached that stage when he can an lyse for himself the spiritual advan tages of one sect over another, he might freely choose the religious de nomination that appeals to him. But the present day is no time to confuse his awakening mentality with the in tricacies of sectarian controversies.

Peace should be the keynote of Christianising the native not strife and intrigue.