[To THE EDITOR OP THE " SPECTATOR.") Sna,—The Spectator of
June 9th has just reached me, and I know that the letter of Mr. Ellis on the subject of • " The Clergy and Military Service " expresses a generally accepted view of men out here. It is a well-worn topic of newspaper controversy, but the need for action in this matter is so urgent that I hope you will allow the widespread dissatisfaction once again to be ventilated in your columns. Last year we were told that the spiritual work at home was too important to allow priests to serve abroad except in the capacity for which they were ordained. This argument was accepted rather dubiously at the time, and now it will no longer bold water. Not only do we find the clergy released from their parishes to do secular work of national importance in England, but they are allowed to come out here to help in the Church Army huts, and to do work which could be done as well, if not better, by a professional grocer. All honour to the men who are doing this work! They are indulging a very natural desire to be in the thick of things, and in many cases they have a very rough time; but if they can be spared from parochial work, how can the authorities still claim exemption for them from military service? They must take their stand once more by the slol plea that it is wrong for an ordained priest to carry arms; and this argument, if pressed to its logical conclusion, would prevent a priest from striking a blow if he saw a girl being brutally treated by drunken men in the streets. Also, it does rot touch the position of regimental stretcher-bearers, who have done such heroic and peculiarly Christian work in the front line. I feel convinced that the voice of the Church will fall on deaf ears after the war unless her official representatives are allowed to share in the hardships and dangers of their fellow-countrymen.
Previous page
