The foundation stone of the new Church of St Michael and All Angels at Anderson’s Bay was laid on Saturday afternoon by Dr Richards, Bishop of Dunedin, with the help of the Grand Lodge of Ancient Free and Accepted Masons of New Zealand. The children of the Sunday school, with the organist (Miss McAdam), were stationed on the platform. The proceedings opened with the singing of "O God, our Help in Ages Past." Architect’s plans were placed in a casket in the foundation with a document giving the history of the church, the Church Envoy for June, 1924, a copy of the day’s ceremony and copies of the Otago Daily Times and Evening Star. The church service and the ceremony of laying the stone were carried out by Bishop Richards. Very little has been left on record of the early history of the Church of England in Anderson’s Bay. It appears that in 1871 a church of wood was built at Shiel Hill. Regular services were conducted there mostly by lay readers, with an occasional visit from a clergyman from Dunedin. For some reason at present shrouded in mystery this building was removed to Woodhaugh Valley, and re-erected under the name of Holy Innocents. It still stands and serves the residents of that district. In 1893 the church committee purchased the old Government school in Silverton. It was opened as a place of worship under the old title of St Michael and All Angels on October 1, 1893, in the octave of the Patronal Festival. At the beginning of 1924 the vestry saw its way to call for tenders for a modern building, seating from 150 to 200 people. On March 30 services were held in the old building for the last time. The work of demolishing was begun during the following week, services being held in the schoolroom till the opening of the new church.
Sex and circumspection
The view expressed by the deputation representing the White Cross League, which has interviewed the Minister of Education, that instruction in sex hygiene in the upper classes of primary schools and in the secondary schools and training colleges should be inaugurated by the medical officers of the Education Department, with possibly, in cases of emergency, the assistance of outside practitioners, was doubtless the outcome of earnest deliberation.
But though the desirability of instruction to young people in matters relating to sex hygiene is unquestionable, it is far from easy to evolve a satisfactory scheme of instruction in practice. As Mr Parr observed, the quarter from which teaching of this kind should properly come is the parent. If parents as a class only faced their responsibilities there would be no need for deputations from White Cross Leagues or for the consideration of the question as to how teachers or departmental officials might make up for the parental neglect. The Minister of Education very properly rejects any idea that the average teacher in primary or secondary school should be called upon to impart sex instruction. There is, moreover, the point raised by one of the department’s medical officers, that parents might object to instruction of this kind being imparted, especially in the case of the primary schools, in any circumstances whatever. That there is an obvious answer to such objectors does not perhaps help very much. Certainly the question which has been raised is one that can scarcely be approached too circumspectly by the Education Department. — editorial — ODT, 2.6.1924
Compiled by Peter Dowden
