MILITARY TRAINING.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXIII, Issue 19455, 11 October 1926, Page 8

MILITARY TRAINING.

Sir, —"Practical Idealism," states thai I have omitted to mention the fact that "men have fought for truth, goodness and beauty." This is not correct. If he will re-examine my previous letter he will find mentioned in the brief category there given of tilings for which men have fought, at least two—freedom of conscience and national freedom —which everyone admits are ideally right. The present discussion is not concerned with an endeavour to justify war waged for a bad end. "Practical Idealism" would uo doubt agree with mo that a war for an. unjust purpose should be condemned- Our disagreement is on the point of whether a cause which is in itself right shonld be backed by armed force. We who are Christians are not passive in face of the agony and degradation of men—we are vitally concerned with everything that tends to the establishment of justice and righteousness in all our social and international relationships. Let me grant for the sake of argument that justice is more than peace. Can "Practical Idealism" demonstrate how a just settlement can be reached by allowing two armies to smash each other in pieces on the battlefield ? The victory will be decided by the number of guns, the discipline of troops, the skill of generals or, perchance, an epidemic, and will have no bearing on the justice or otherwise of the matter in dispute. Surely in this twentieth century we have got beyond the "trial by combat" theory of medievalism. The weak and helpless are not saved in or by war. Children perish by the sword, bv famine and pestilence in appalling numbers and at the end of it all inherit an impoverished world. The events of a few years ago have surely not yet faded from memory. We can put our "muscles and brains" to better purpose than making ready another shambles. No sane Christian man will stand passively by while the militarists of the world coolly carry on with preparations that can only result in another generation of the world's youth being flung into the furnace of war. "Practical Idealism" would apparently make a good world by exterminating all those who would make it a helL Such an attempt would hardly be practical, even if it were ideal. The Christian method on the other hand is to make bad people good—something which is completely beyond the power of the sword. Jesus was by no means imbued with certain popular views concerning war, expressed in some parts of the Old Testament—as witness the teaching in the Sermon on the Mount. His position is plainactive goodwill to every man and a positive refusal to return evil for evil. We must strongly love our enemies, give them food and drink, pray for them, bless them—and in the end die by their hands unresisting rather than act in any way not dictated by the law of love. It was thus He died* at the hands of His enemies. There was no necessity for this except his consistent adherence to His essential principle. The Christ spirit does not deny the proper use of the sword. namely, that it should be beaten into a ploughshare.. "Practical Idealism" says that such pronacanda as mine will paralyse the man behind the gun. Not at all. He is paralysed now by vagrie fears. An understanding of Christ's meaning will break the fear. He will refuse any longer to crouch behind a gnn and walking erect will go fearlessly with outstretched hand toward his brothers of all the world. 0. E. BmtTON*.