EXEMPTION OF THE CLERGY

Evening Post, Volume xciv, Issue 73, 24 September 1917, Page 3

EXEMPTION OF THE CLERGY

TO IHB EDITOR. Sir, —Now that "Anglican Layman" wouldl .pin me down to words ascribed to me in a journalist's severely summarised version of the manuscript of my much offending address od "National Service and the Sabbath Question," perhaps it will save itime if I confess my past sins (as enumerated by "Anglican Layman"), and express penitence, in the hope that he, a Christian, will follow the example of Jesus in the matter of j forgiving and forgetting my past offences, and indicate to myself and your readers wherein consists my offence in regard to the issue raised by me in your columns, a week ago, Mr. Editor. Calculating on his Christian charity in forgiving and forgetting my past sins, I ask: Would he kindly, and as oharitaibly as" possible, indicate where, and why, I offend in suggesting that no discrimination be made between clergymen and laymen in the matter of military service, so that I may turn from the j error of my convictions, andl be saved from myself? / Am I right in stating that the clergy of certain churches, claiming direct apo^bolic descent from Jesus, ask to be exempted from military service? Is that disputed? Their high calling and function, it is (as has been hitherto generally believed) to follow the example of Jesus and to inculcate, not only the propriety, but also Ithe necessity, of following that example on all men! Is that disputed ? ( Do they not insist that it is the duty of the true disciple of Jesus—the bona fide variety of Christian— to sacrifice himself for others? Is that disputed? Well, Shakespeare, in a classic passage, modernises an idea that is as old as priesthoods:—"Tis a good divine that follows his own instruction"! Ho introduces this observation with: "If to do were as easy,- as to know what were good to do, Chapels had been churches (or perhaps Cathedrals, to express it in Mackenzian "heavy tragedy") and .poor men's cottages princes' palaces." ' The modern representatives of apostolic Christianity seem to have reversed the Gospel of Jesus, so far as they themselves- are concerned! They would "live" for, not Jesus-like, "die for itheir fellow men! Is that disputed? They, it would seem, expect mere laymen, even old sinners like myself, with all our sins upon our head, Ito do the fighting for and, if need be, the dying for "them" as well as for our fellow-men generally. Is that disputed? . Nay more ; they expect (if not demand) that married men with email children be called to fight and die for "them" and for our fellow-men generally, while ablebodied unmarried exponents of the Gospel of the self-sacrificing Jesus enjoy the privilege of staying at home to pray and to proclaim the "obligation" on the laity of following the example of Jeeus? Is that disputed? Ah! Still more remarkable, is their contemplating with admiration and Christian equanimity the Government's gracious condescension in not "conscripting," and not "inviting," but rather generously and! magnanimously "permitting" boys of nineteen to fight and, if heed be, to die for young clergymen and others who are graciously permitted to leave the good fight of faith and of their fellow-men to others? Ib that disputed? Now, Mr. Editor, I speak, in this matter, not a3 a ventriloquist, but as a cordiloquist (if I may be allowed to coin a word suggested by a great Anglican divine's contrast between ventriloquy and cordiloquy). Here is the position in which I am likely to find myself, if the war continues for another year:—l shall, in all probability, have three sons (out of a family of seven, surviving, upon whom I have spent every shilling ever earned) taken from the university or college to fight for their King and Country. If they fall in battle I shall not be entitled to a single copper in compensation for the money expended on them 1 Had I expended my hard-earned money in "raising" bullocks instead of boys, I would (thanks to an indulgent National Government) be on the high way to fortune as a meat-exploiter! Had I invested in land instead of a family, I should be on the high-road to fortune as an exploiter of human food generally, and possibly human-beings as well! Had I, instead of bringing up and educating a family, saved money and invested it hi the "good will" of a "pub," I might, with some reason, be regarded as entitled to compensation, if my business hours were reduced! If again,, I had saved all the money expended on my family and* invested it in the War Loan I (and any "mine" their might be) would enjoy comparative wealth for the rest of our livesat the expense of, and by the exploitation of poeterity! But, as my wealth consists of the lives of my family, it becomes a mere pawn in the hande of the National Government! That is what ray labours of a life-time stand for. Can that be disputed? Nay, more, my good old friend, Sir Joseph Ward, whose battles I fought in the British press before I ever saw New Zealand or met Sir Joseph, expects me to contribute to the revenue of this .Dominion in. direct taxation exactly the same amount as a bachelor or celibate with precisely the same annual income. Is that a square deal? Is it not rather a shameless imposition and a cruel injustice? However, as I am preparing for publication ("six months after the war I") a small treatise on " The Family as the Pawn of the State," and possibly another on "Laymen as Pawns of Apostolic Churches,"l promise not to inflict myself again on you for the present in these connections. I suppose I must consider it a privilege that my boys should be called upon to play the.Christ for young able-bodied unmarried clergymen. Is it conceivable that Jesus would stand by and contempUte with equanimity the fathers of young children, or mere youths sacrificing their lives for Him? Is it? We have been hearing of the certainty of a world-wide revival of religion—the Christian religion—after the war. In view of the attitude of the apostolically accredited Churches on the question of their duty and obligation in the matter of military and national service, it may well appear a miracle if what calls itself the religion of Christ (in certain circles) is not after the war completely extinguished. It is sad beyond expression.—l am, etc., HUGH MACKENZIE. 23rd September.