Penistone, Stocksbridge and Hoyland Express, etc. — 1915-03-20 (Penistone, South Yorkshire, England)

CIIRISTIVCITA. .  Sir.—The eorrespoivjenee between Mt. Fox ond•1lr. WittdroaA th • "Christianity and the iVar," in yelir columns, is interesting. am showing that the Church is without guidaate• m this and other matters of dispute between various members and sections of the Church; itherwisk two m#ll, Rqually AinOtre, and -raying to the same God, would not be holdag diametrically opposite views. This has Appened time and again in tho history of Cliareh. and yet the Church claims to have Divine guidance .on everything she Speaks union. But who is right. Mi.. Fox or air. Windress. as to Christian teaching on this matter? Well, after all. Christ is the real Court of Appeal, not Sir John Seeley or any other man. Sir John knows no more about it than anyone else. The evidence is open to all. In the Sermon on, the Mount, the chief esposition of Christ's leeching, we find Him trying to reform the wor:d through the indilidual. He lays down no naLional policy. arid what he does, say on the matter is very little. "Love your eneinies, turn nit other cheek tia the smiter. resist not evil, it any man will go to law with thee, and take away thy coat. ISt him have thy cloak also:" 'rave are His commande, and the doctrine of ror-rre,stance is taught here so clearly that the late Count Tolstoi founded a whole poliey cf non-rosistanee on it. But, it may be arguod, this is for the individual and not for nations. Well, are not natious made up of individuals, and if the unit is to act as above, how can the national policy differ? How can we show love to an enemy by blowing his head off with a 13in. gun, or disembowelling him with a bayonet? Surely a curious mode of shesring affection? SupPax' A man slays his enemy in war, and afterwards goes to his widow. saying "Madam. I ninth tegreif having killed your husband. As an individual and a -Christian. I loved him, hut as a national unit it was my Painful duty to remove him, beoause the nation to -which he belonged held different views on national policy to mine," I can imagine the widow saying with infinite scorn. "Go. murderer, to the Hades from which you camel" Now all this difficulty arises from deifying a limn who lived 2000 yeare age, and accepting his teachitig as authority for all time: and then. when practical difficulty arises, as at present, trying to explain the teaching away. The fact ;is. New Testament teaching is not up-to-date, and as an Anglican Bishop said some years ago, the Sermon on the Mount is not practical to-day. Ch'rist was an idealist, and knew nothing of national policy. He spoke with the limitations of the Galik,an peasant. and his followers ecre aubiect to the same or similar limitations. Pail the Early Christians believed in force, they would hnve tried- to raise armies to conquer Dome, but they went quietly to their death, believing that by so doing they were laying the foundation of the Kingdom core surely. And results seem to have justide.l their action. For whse the Chinch became poweriul, and resorted to armed form, its  niritual power waned intmediately, and its history since has been one long record o!' :iersecation and bloodshed. until recent gencratiJas brought criticisvl from within end without, and Lraught ohm:: a change of poliey. Mr. Windross cannot both eat his cake and have it. Either early Christianity was right and the war is wrong, or else the war is richt and early Christianity wrong. he can have his choice.--Vours, etc., S nrrn. Chapeltown.  (No •Chriot tan clouhta that war ia wrong. This war, so far AA we ar; conorri. JA a eru.-tade agai)At -the spirit of war.—Ed. "Pentmu Express.")  SI , Sad inliclies sisk: 611C1Isaitalrit t° ferOftI, g