Page images
PDF
EPUB

and ordering of their common affairs beforehand, do not only observe an holy rest all the day from their own works, words, and thoughts about their worldly employments and recreations, but also are taken up the whole time in the public and private exercises of His worship, and in the duties of necessity and mercy." It is true that in the seventh section of the twenty-first chapter, and in answer 120 in the Larger Catechism, there is an expression referring to God's creation of the world in six days, and of rest on the seventh, but even this is far more moderately expressed in the Catechism itself, and both of them together are not nearly so strong as is implied when every English clergyman reads the Fourth Commandment with the reasons for its observance, not from Deuteronomy, but from Exodus, in the Communion Service. There are many

reasons

derived from history, from geology, from poetry, which justify, or may be held to justify, the English clergy in a wise liberty in reading these passages, but we cannot forget that if there be any bondage in the matter, the bondage of reading the Fourth Commandment is heavier than that which exists for any member of the Church of Scotland.

It

There is yet another omission. is one which leaves open the whole field of Biblical criticism; it is one which leaves the case of Dr. Robertson Smith entirely outside the Westminster Confession. The words of the Confession are these :

"Under the name of Holy Scripture, or the Word of God written, are now contained all the Books of the Old and New Testaments, which are these

"All which are given by inspiration of God to be the rule of faith and life."

"The Old Testament in Hebrew (which was the native language of the people of God of old), and the New Testament in Greek (which at the time of the writing of it was most generally known to the nations), being immediately inspired by God, and by His singular care and providence kept pure in all ages, are therefore authentical; so as in all controversies of religion the Church is finally to appeal to them.'

There is not one word to say who is the author of any particular book -whether one or many-at what age any book is written-whether it is historical or parabolical—with what object it was written. It is the same

with the Thirty-nine Articles. When the question arose first in England with Essays and Reviews and the Bishop of Natal, there was much astonishment to find that the authorized standards of the Church of England had nothing to say about the points in dispute. The mass of the clergy and less educated laity almost stamped and gnashed their teeth to find it so. Eleven thousand clergy protested against the decision, and a distinguished body of laymen, including the very highest in the political world, thanked those who voted against the decision. But they beat the air in vain, for the Church and the law were alike impervious to their cries. Not one word could they produce of a decision or a shadow of a decision on any disputed point of criticism, and in point of fact it was decreed by the Supreme Court of Appeal that there was none.

So it is in the case of Dr. Robert

son Smith. Let any agree or disagree with his book. But there is not one syllable in it that conflicts with the Westminster Confession. And therefore, as far as the statements of the Church of Scotland and of the Free Church are concerned, he is absolutely free to say what he likes, and if the Free Church Assembly has deposed him from his chair, it might just as well have deposed him for having travelled in Arabia, or for being a good mathematician. And his remedy is in his own hands. He is accused of having broken his contract. He has not broken his contract, and he knows that he has not broken his contract. It is the Free Church Assembly which has broken the contract. Whether he desires to enforce the contract which has been thus broken is not evident. But if he does the Court of Session could certainly interfere. It would interfere if he had been deposed for the

[blocks in formation]

"The favor libertatis, which is an attribute of law, would plead in this case very strongly. A man who could enter the Church under the statutory Creed might be repelled by any doctrinal utterance which the Church had added to it; and, according to some of the cases decided, such an injury, especially if it lead in result to distinct loss of status or money, is a sufficient ground for the civil courts being set in motion in the matter at the instance of the party aggrieved.

"Besides, not only does the addition to a Church's Creed shut out numbers from it, but it imperils the safety of those who are already inside. At present the Westminster Confession, as established by law, seems to be a protection against the accusation of heresy to all who do not contravene it. The erecting of another permanent Confession alongside of it, or subsidiary to it, would enlarge the area of opinions condemned by authority and liable to censure. The more the matter is considered, it seems plain that the Church can no more add to the Confession of its faith than it can subtract from it."

"1

"What would be the answer of Crispus and Gaius and the other elders of the Church of God which is at Corinth' before Gallio? Unless they had wholly lost the spirit of their Apostle, who said, 'I stand at Cæsar's judgment-seat, where I ought to be judged,' but who thought himself happy to stand there in presence of King Agrippa, because he knew the king to be expert in all customs and questions which are among the Jews,' they would have accepted the challenge with the utmost alacrity. And their defence as Jews would be not only that they worshipped the God of their fathers,

believing all things which are written in the law and the prophets, but that they alone clave to the promise to which their twelve tribes, instantly serving God night and day for so many ages, had hoped to come, and that it was their opponents who had apostatised from the central hope, for the cherishing of which the nation existed and the synagogue was built. The proconsul could hardly refuse to decide a simple question of property. Yet the question of property (or use) in this case could not well be settled without deciding first the whole great question of Church identity, which Paul argues in many a fiery

page.

[ocr errors]

It is possible that the Scottish people do not care sufficiently for such matters to insist on justice being done. It is possible that the injured parties may be so afraid of the effect on their Church or their party that they will not invoke the civil court. But if they do, there is no doubt that the Assembly must bow to the law, and the law must decide in favour of the Westminster Confession, which has pronounced no opinion as to the question at issue, and which therefore acquits Dr. Robertson Smith.

A. P. STANLEY.

Westminster, July 13, 1881.

NOTE.-I take this opportunity of mentioning that the lettersigned "Anglicanus," which appeared on the subject of Dr. Robertson Smith in the Times, was not mine. I have not for some years written under that name, which has been taken by some one else.

1 The Law of Creeds in Scotland, by Alexander Taylor Innes, pp. 189-190. 2 Ibid. p. 331.

THE "MILITÄR WOCHENBLATT" ON THE ARMY OF GREAT BRITAIN.

THAT the condition of our Regular Forces at the present moment, whether as regards their composition, their organisation, or their training, is not only most unsatisfactory, but affords grounds for grave apprehension in the event of their being required to take the field in any quarter of the globe, is admitted by nearly all military men. It is idle, however, to expect self-reform in a profession whose members must necessarily and rightly regard unquestioning obedience to authority, and silent acquiescence in orders, as virtues to be sedulously cherished. Moreover, plain speaking, both in the naval and military profession, involves such risk to the speaker, that on questions of reform, sailors and soldiers alike are more or less reticent. Until therefore Englishmen generally can be induced to regard the efficiency of the national forces, for the maintenance of which they pay so heavily, as a question of personal interest to themselves, and about which they have a right to be heard; and until public opinion can be relied on to aid the Government in adopting drastic measures, it is hopeless to expect much improvement in the present state of the Army.

If there be a time when true patriotism lies in concealing the weak points in the national armour, so there is a time when true patriotism lies in their exposure. So long as our possible foes believe us to be stronger than we are, it is in accordance with the dictates not only of common sense, but of the lessons of military history to accept the reputation of strength, even if we are conscious of weakness. Such a reputation frequently forms no small part of what is known as "prestige"; and prestige alone not seldom carries the day. So long as an army enjoys prestige among other nations, even unworthily, it would be little short of criminal to undeceive them;

but the moment prestige is gone, it is ostrich-like, it is suicidal, to ignore the fact of its disappearance. A nation which claims to be great will, recognising the fact, set at once to work to meet the danger. How then stands the army of Great Britain as regards prestige at the present moment? Were an English officer to answer the question unfavourably, he might by many be regarded as a pessimist, a grumbler, a croaker, for the English people have a belief in the power of money to achieve any result; they believe it will buy anything, even military success; they point triumphantly to the past and are willing to adopt the same procedure in future; they cheerfully pay the bill for our irregular wars, shutting their eyes wilfully to the lamentable, discreditable way in which the army has perhaps "muddled on to eventual success. But the occasion may arise when money will prove powerless, and time be wanting for "muddling on." We purpose therefore to lay before the readers of this Magazine a view which has lately been put forward on this subject by a foreign military critic. Some of our contemporaries have from time to time published the opinions of foreign writers who seem to have studied the question closely, but such criticisms were the productions of irresponsible individuals. The criticism we append appeared a short time ago in the Militär Wochenblatt, a semi-official German military periodical, to which we have, it should be pointed out, nothing analogous in our own newspaper literature. The Wochenblatt is, we believe, circulated among all the regiments in the German army, an army in which there are also two other military periodicals specially intended for the non-commissioned officers. It is warmly supported by the

Ministry of war, and the writers of its articles are often men holding responsible positions. That a criticism so humiliating as the following to the self-respect of the British nation should be allowed circulation in a semi-official publication, is a fact the significance of which must strike all who read it. Whilst on some points the critic may be unjust and may have made exaggerated statements, yet there is on the whole quite enough truth in the criticism to compel us to regard its publication with anxiety; but we at the same time cherish the hope that a perusal of it will contribute in no small degree to convince Englishmen of the urgent necessity of immediate reform in military matters.

"It is an undeniable fact that the English army is not in a satisfactory condition at the present moment. The defeats it has recently suffered in South Africa and in Afghanistan must convince the most prejudiced Briton of the truth of this assertion. We do not think we are going too far in saying that, in its present condition, the armies of the Continent have very little to fear from it, at all events not in the first four months of a war-and in the present day wars are decided in four months.

"Doubtless, if a foreign power were to consent to announce to the English Government on the 30th March, for example, We will attack you on the 1st August,' it would meet with an uncommonly vigorous resistance, and would perhaps be defeated; but, until war actually threatens, the English Government will neither make up its mind to spend the necessary money, nor display the necessary energy so urgently needed. Nor will the officers either lay aside their traditional far niente, nor the men be educated (ausgebildet) in practical military exercises. It is, indeed, a wonderful fact that the English, who are looked upon as a practical nation, have an army which can only be called a most unpractical military tool.

"Anybody who lives a few months

in England and mixes with the officers of the army will be convinced of this; a number of them know generally very little of military matters, and even take a certain pride in the fact, considering it their object not to become efficient soldiers, but to do as little duty as possible. Officers like their regiment to march well in line, and to be full of well set-up soldiers, but the real education of the men is a matter of indifference to them. We have repeatedly heard it said: 'Our colonel is ruining the regiment, he lets the men drill in loose order, and practises out-post duty and shelter trenches, instead of letting them have a steady march past.' Luckily, however, for the officers we have named, and not less so for the Boers, there are not many such active regimental commanders in the English army.

"Since this spirit prevails among the officers the men naturally take their cue from them. They also look down with contempt on every military exercise which serves no parade purpose. Thus, as soon as an attack is practised they get out of the hands of their leaders, and neglect the most elementary rules of this style of fighting. We cannot resist the conviction that skirmishing, such as we had an opportunity of seeing at Aldershot, does more harm than good. The soldiers pay little attention to natural cover, and do not even try to conceal themselves, but choose in preference the most comfortable spots. Their superiors, however, never think for a moment of altering this state of affairs. The only good skirmishing we saw in England was done by the Volunteers, whose method of fighting in extended order is far superior to the Regular Army, and who invariably perform their duty with great zeal, and very often with great skill.

"As regards the general staff it undoubtedly numbers in its ranks many officers of high mental capacity, thanks to the Staff College, which has contributed greatly towards raising the standard of their education and training. Nevertheless, the most extra

296 The "Militär Wochenblatt" on the Army of Great Britain.

ordinary mistakes occur as soon as the smallest task is undertaken out of the ordinary routine.

"The gross blunders in connection with the occupation of Cyprus are fresh in every one's memory. We are afraid that neither an Army-Corps nor even a division can be sent out of England without the greatest confusion; for even when a regiment moves from one garrison to another, it not unfrequently happens that a portion of the baggage or some of the men go to the wrong place.

"It is easy to discover a partial explanation of this want of manage ment. At the annual inspection of regiments a number of parade movements are called for, and an inspection of the interior economy. With regard to the latter, however, as a rule nothing whatever is done. The inspection report is favourable or the reverse, according as the parade movements have been well or badly performed. Is it not, then, natural for commanders of battalions to devote their time to those exercises by which their efficiency is gauged, and not to occupy themselves with those which are never called for at inspections, though they may be acknowledged to be of far greater importance in modern warfare?

"This is only one example of the manner and style of doing duty; we could instance many more, but refrain for fear of appearing unfriendly.

"We have expressed our opinion freely and openly about the present condition of the English Army, before touching on the recent reforms, because we believe that until a totally different tone pervades their method of doing duty, and a desire for real soldiering takes the place of playing at soldiers -until then, we say, it is of small importance whether captains are retired at the age of forty or fortythree, or whether the militia uniforms are assimilated to those of the line or not.

"It may be inferred from the foregoing remarks that we are persuaded that it is not so much that the Card

wellian system is bad in itself, but that the way in which it has been carried out is faulty; we fancy, too, that this is the opinion of the present War Minister, since his projected reforms for the Regular Army are more apparent than real.

"We need not trouble ourselves much with that which concerns the officers, and will only remark that it seems that the hardships of compulsory retirement are rather to be postponed than abolished. The main point of the reforms is undoubtedly the alteration which has been made in the period of service. Instead of the previous service of six years with the colours and six years in the Reserve, a man is to enlist in future for seven years with the colours, to be extended, if he is on foreign service, to eight years. Therefore, in India a man will always have to remain eight years with the colours.

"These alterations in the period of service have arisen, no doubt, in consequence of the strong predilection which exists in the army for long service, a predilection which has recently found an able champion in Sir Frederick Roberts, the conqueror of Candahar. We doubt whether, in all probability, the result will in the end be very different, the more so as the War Minister, Mr. Childers, has announced that the men in regiments serving in England would be encouraged to pass from the active army to the Reserve after only three or four years' service, provided, of course, that there was no prospect of their proceeding shortly on foreign service. We consider this provision judicious, but it will hardly meet the taste of the old school. It is, however, undoubtedly certain that without this provision the Reserve would become very weak numerically, and that the English Army would make a considerable step backwards towards the state of affairs in 1869.

"The next point in the reforms to which we will turn is that the minimum age for enlistment has been raised from eighteen to nineteen years,

« EelmineJätka »