LITMIR.BIZ

Скачать книгу

      ²⁵ P.G., ibid, p6.

      ²⁶ Ibid, p11.

      ²⁷ Ibid, p55.

      ²⁸ Ibid, p65.

      ²⁹ Ibid, p66.

      ³⁰ Ibid, p83.

      ³¹ PG: Teaching for Lads (Edward Arnold, London, 1917), p29ff.

      ³² PG: How to Deal with Lads, p67.

      ³³ Ibid., p114.

      ³⁴ PG: Teaching for Lads, p125.

      ³⁵ Ibid., p132.

      ³⁶ PG: How to Deal with Lads, p110.

      ³⁷ Ibid., p146.

      ³⁸ PG: How to Deal with Lads, p167.

      ³⁹ PG: Teaching for Lads, p160ff.

      ⁴⁰ PG: How to deal with Men (Edward Arnold, London, 1911), p4.

      ⁴¹ PG: How to Deal with Men, p10.

      ⁴² Ibid., p14.

      ⁴³ Ibid., p34.

      ⁴⁴ Michael Hennell: Deans and Canons at Manchester Cathedral 1840-1948 (published privately, no date), p36.

      ⁴⁵ PG: Studies in the Devotional Life (Wells, Gardner, Darton, London, 1913).

      ⁴⁶ PG: Studies in Popular Theology (Wells, Gardner, Darton, London, 1913).

      ⁴⁷ PG: Studies in the Cross (Wells, Gardner, Darton, London, 1914).

      ⁴⁸ Hennell, op.cit.

       CHAPTER THREE: WORLD WAR ONE AND AFTERMATH

      Sheen noted that the crisis of the First World War was an occasion of the emergence of prophets. He linked William Temple and Peter Green as examples. Of Green, he says: “From one point of view it was remarkable as he occupied no commanding platform.”⁴⁹ This view must be questioned as Alan Wilkinson in The Church of England and the First World War⁵⁰ made wide use of Green’s Artifex articles in the Manchester Guardian. Green devoted two of his weekly articles to the pastoral opportunities provided for servicemen about to leave home. He advised clergy how they ought to conduct themselves with prayers with service families and recommended the reading of letters from the front to be used as intercessions in Church. He recognised the pastoral sensitivity needed in dealing with the grief of those who had lost loves ones in foreign lands and he conducted funeral services with full military honours in the Parish Church. Although he cared for individuals, he was critical both of the nation and the Church in their attitudes to war. On the 3^rd December 1914 in Artifex he wrote, “the cause of religion is suffering very terribly from the almost total failure of the Church to make any effective protest against the spirit of hatred and falsehood” and commenting on the anti-German hysteria he wrote that it was necessary “to believe as little evil and as much good of them as we can.” He held this view because it was good policy as well as good ethics, and condemned the prevalent spirit of self-righteous hatred. When the people were short of food because of U-boat activity he preached on “Blessed are the peacemakers” and as an illustration told of the returned soldier who rebuked a civilian for calling Germans “swine.” However, having perfected his German to read the works of the philosopher F.W. Nietzsche, whom he considered to be mad, Green had gained an insight into the German mind, and he was moved to write in Artifex on 28^th October 1915 of “the deep-seated and apparently ineradicable strain of bestial savagery in the German character” when Edith Cavell was shot in 1915. Nevertheless, Wilkinson wrote that Green exposed and ridiculed hearsay atrocity stories, “from the independent stand he took in articles and sermons he received constant criticism and sometimes was at odds with his Cathedral chapter.”⁵¹ Green’s attitude is well illustrated in an essay in The War and the Kingdom of God edited by G.K.A. Bell.⁵² Green’s essay ‘The Humiliation of War’ posited that Christ’s teaching was not an interim ethic and that Jesus never showed more understanding of man than in his teaching about non-resistance. Green stated: “I profoundly disbelieve in the possibility of any good coming of war, and I regard all talk about war itself as being a moral purge, and a wholesome discipline, and a school of character, and all the rest of it as being either profoundly immoral and anti-Christian, or mere moral platitudes.”⁵³

      He argued the only way to reconcile the belief that to go to war was right with the belief war is always wrong was to recognise that it is not always possible to act rightly. He believed that because of human sinfulness “there was no right course open any longer.” It was not possible, in his view, to isolate the final act of German aggression in war from the forty years which led up to it, and there was ample cause for repentance from all sides. The Church had failed to summon the nation to a searching self-examination leading to a deep penitence for the sins which led to war, had failed to support peace movements, the reduction of armaments and international arbitration, and had acquiesced in terrible social inequalities. Above all the Church had failed to put into practice Christ’s teaching on non-resistance and evangelical poverty.

      These statements would seem at first sight to be at odds with his attitude to the National Mission of Repentance and Hope, called by the Archbishop of Canterbury, Randall Davidson. As there had been at the beginning of the war an upsurge in Church attendance, which declined as the war progressed, Davidson had appointed a committee of twelve to advise him on a National Mission. Green was amongst the twelve, indicating his national standing, under the chairmanship of Armitage Robinson, who reported a lack of enthusiasm as follows, “It was extremely difficult to make any progress in the face of the Bishop of Oxford (Gore) and Peter Green was sure that the influence of the clergy on the community was nil!”⁵⁴ Wilkinson added “Those Anglicans like Gore, Scott Holland and Peter Green whose primary allegiance was to the Catholic Church, transcending nationality, felt the scandal of war more acutely than those whose primary allegiance was to the Church of England as the national church.”⁵⁵ Green wrote in Artifex: “The nation is not on its knees seeking God, but a corporation on its defence taking care of its endowments.”⁵⁶

      He went on to say that the Church was not a creditable organisation with the lifestyles of bishops constituting a scandal, (an observation he was to repeat in 1920). Green called on the Church of England to surrender its wealth and privilege, including the spiritual privilege, in order to allow Free Churchmen to receive Holy Communion and to preach in its churches. Green was doubtful about a national mission on the grounds that it was impossible for the whole nation to be ripe and prepared at the same time. A mission had failed at St Philip’s in 1911 as the Parish was not prepared and it did more harm than good.

      Throughout the war he maintained a constant correspondence with his lads serving in the forces. He quoted examples of their faithfulness and bravery in his post-war books. He undertook the Chaplaincy of the Salford Royal Infirmary and went every night to say ward prayers.

      Sheen commented: “Perhaps Peter Green’s best known war controversy was over the case of the Hon. Violet Douglas-Pennant towards the end of the war.” Green took up her cause when she was dismissed without reason from being Commandant of the Women’s Royal Air Force. Green confronted the Government through the correspondence columns of the Manchester Guardian claiming miscarriage of justice. The outcome was that a Select Committee of the House of Lords considered the case, which was rejected, but Green had shown his determination and courage in support of the individual.

      In support for women generally he declared the enfranchisement of women to be the spiritual issue of the day in Artifex for 12th March 1914. He wrote an article in the December 1918 edition of the Diocesan magazine recommending the Manchester Branch of Women’s Suffrage and offering to supply speakers for meetings of the Mothers Union, the Girls Friendly Society and Mothers’ meetings.

      As the war drew to an end Green was convinced that the allies should make a generous peace.

Скачать книгу