CLERGY AND WAR.

Lyttelton Times, Volume CXVII, Issue 17428, 15 March 1917, Page 2

CLERGY AND WAR.

TO THIS EDITOR. ; Sir, —Wcftild you kindly allow me to further trespass on your valuable columns, so that I may make a final reply to the Rev J. J. North? Ho says he cannot hope to convince me that he has no ulterior motive. That is so, for’ reasons I will give to your correspondent and to your readers. Firstly, lie: was one of the first and most prominent agitators for equality’of sacrifice. This was well and . good, and he got the public support and sympathy thatsuch a worthy ideal deserved. But he inversely used, such support"and sympathy to protect his '.brother, ministers from the operation of the ballot. In his' address at Oxford Terrace Church he endeavoured to impress the congregation aud the public' of the grave position in which tfie Government had landed itself by its partial administration of the Military Sendee Act. He laid stress on the possibility of civil disturbance and said the best way to prevent this was to exempt all the clergy. In other words, he .threatened, the Government of the grave consequences that would follow' if its jmaladministratiOn did not cease, and in order to stave off. these grave consequences he invited it to bribe lpm into inaction by exempting all the clergy. Thus the cloak of equality of sacrifice was discarded, and wo saw before us the real object of his agitation viz., the exemption of the clergy. When questioned through your columns as to his'attitude, he played the part of an artful contortionist, -until he could not twist further, and then he tried to extricate himself from his unenviable position by jading my letter to one side. ,' 1 : Here are a few of bis conflicting statements-(1) “If conscription is to remain in force it must be equitable.’’ (2) “I neither ask nor expect differentiation of treatment.” (3) “ I will nob lift a .finger to secure exemption for the clergy as such.” Surely it can be claimed that a person giving utterance to the above sentiments disapproves of exemption for the clergy. But here are some other sentiments which fcll from the same lips in almost the same breath, and they make it (to say the least) somewhat difficult to , define his attitude(l) “ There must be no differentiation of treatment of. the clergy.”-: (2)- “ I will lift all my fingers to secure equality of sacrifice for them.” Then did he not sav that the best way to give this equality of sacrifice was to exempt all the shepherds of the Christian flock? Here we have an approval dud a disapproval of exemption for the clergy, and both are. from the Rev J. J.- North ; and vet in face of this inconsistency he expresses surprise because he cannot convince me that be has no, ulterior motive. .

No doubt he means that ho only favours total exemption in preference to part exemption. With this-T do agree, because if exemption Is wrong (as the reverend gentleman has admitted) further exemption is not- going to right that wrong. Tire only way to right it is to. refuse any special exemption. , ... If Mr North was anxiems to avoid distinction between the clergy and laity,'why did he not- agitate for the. abolition of certificates from the Minister of Munitions to the Appeal Boards on behalf of' the clergy? In this way equality of treatment for the. clergy - could" have been secured along with equality of sacrifice for'the .community. This method of attaining his object would liavo been much more commendable than-that adopted by him. These certificates outrage British justice and fair play. Surely, if .» clergyman’s position is such a-s will warrant a special certificate, it would be ..good, enough, to warrant exemption being granted by (the’ board. ~ So why : all this unnecessary overlapping? No doubt the Government lias blundered in this direction, but not incompatibly, as the ..Rev North insists. -It it had L-een assisted instead of hampered by him and his Nonconformist friends, I believe the Government would have retrieved its blunders, and instead of' public indignation being rife at the present time, there would . have been k wave of public satisfaction. .The' Government .would hare been wiser o have the oleipr horn the, operation of the ’Act; a together than to have adopted this half-measure, ft the clergy are determined to shirk their resnonsihilities, let them do .so’ openly. We" don’t want, an empty display from th \Ye other classes will not adopt Mr North’s attitude bv hanging back because some others, have done so In conclusion, might I remind your readers, lest they are wrongly .impressed, that I am not a Roman C-atno.ic, nor do I belong- to the Anglican Church but I am a .Nonconformist, and further, I have been brought up ?o the Baptist faith. In reply to those. correspondents who cite the P^creuce of exemption for clergy m tne oldei European countries,' I wmild, remind them that our dominions do follow the lead in democracy, but they g uo ' iho lead, and we don’t want to reverse the tables.—l >«, »*?•• H0 p BrBL ..

TO TK* EDITOR.; Sir —Your correspondent, Mr Miller, in last Saturday’s “ Times,, m reply to my criticism of the Rev 'Hiompson s sermon, seems to fear that if the ministers and priests left the Dominion 1 would immediately drift into •materialism.' Well, I don’t share with him in his fears. Though I am not contending that thev should all go, but a fair equitable proportion of all the denominations 1 without that favouritism which has been shown tow aids a. certain denomination >aml its teachers. But should a fair proportion, or tor that matter all the able-bodied men ‘go, would materialism naturally follow? I think not. Indeed, I think possibly good might, follow. It the streams were dried up, people perforce go . to the pure fountain heaci. Religion primarily and in essence is r.ot a ■something between man and man, but between God and man. it is a rebinding to God from whom he had broken loose. Through God s oSer of mercy in the gift of His -on, man by tlie Gospel (a copy , of which everybody, I suppose, in this fair land ppssesses) may obtain full knowledge of the terms on which and salvation can be obtain eel and held. Many inhere are, thank God, who have accepted and . are in full possession and enjoyment, thereof through _ faith m and obedience to Jesus Christ. There needs no priest to come m between the soul and its God. “Jesus Christ^ the only mediator, between God and man, _ end hv prayer he can go direct to God through Him. No other, person has any right to com o’ in between, even the apostle Paul dared not do so either in T>erson or in the beguiling words of man’s wisdom, so that their faith and hope should not rest in man but in the Living God.” . “Yes that’s all right so far,” says soke, “ but what of the proper conducting of the services of the various churches?” Well, of course, as they at present exist things would notyrun quitie so ‘ smoothly ns hertitofor©. nor is anything else running quite so smoothly just now. There is talk of reconstruction everywhere. God seems to be upsetting men’s little arrangements, and is even touching the ohurches. At the front, they don’t want sectarian dogmas or ecclesiastical sophistries. ■ It is the Bread of Life

and Wafer of Life for which they hanger and thirst—'Christianity; not churchianifcy) The ministers and priests thero have laid aside their old party names and musty creeds and are fra> temising with one another in their work and even praying for each other. And if something could, he done hero to draw Cliristians together on the basis of the Divine order—churches ordained by God as at the beginning—it would give materialism •» set-back far.; more than all the churchianity of the present day order could ever dream of doing. . \ The primitive churches were' composed of humble-minded believers in Christ (with no higher dignataries requiring reverence) who liad repented of siiji, and been baptised (immersed) into the names of Father; Son and Holy Spirit, and were endeavouring to hye holy, godly and useful lives. : Their officers were men chosen from among; themselves, called, elders and deacons (plural), the fonner attending to the spiritual needs, of (tlio congregation, while the deacons attended to the temporal. Christ) was thqir head, and by His name they were called. Thpir ministers or evangelists were not always stationary, many churches not havijig any, but they worked together prompted by love to God and man and consequenlly, “ grew in favour with God and all the people,” If wei could but pull down and reconstruct on this the Di- - vine model, how grand it would be for ourselves arid our heroes on their return to find a true church home, knit together in one great brotherhood I—I am, etc., '

W. CROWE.