The Irish Agreement.
After long debate and the humiliating spectacle witnessed by the British people of the King’s Ministers in conference with Irish rebels, a so-called agreement was come to and heralded as one of the miracles of the twentieth century. At the time of writing this note the British Parliament has accepted the terms of agreement, but the Dail Eireann, the Irish rebel gathering, has not made known its mind. The attitude taken up by the more reputable organs of public opinion in England and Scotland was humiliating. It looked as if a special campaign was set on foot to compel Ulster to yield. All the blame was to be laid on her if she would not submit to men who love the Protestantism of the North as much as the devil loves holiness. The loud shouting was premature, for even though the Agreement be accepted by the Sinn Feiners at present, that does not say there will be peace between this country and Ireland. Ireland’s woes and sorrows are deeper than can be cured by politicians. The Gospel of the grace of God is the best remedy for her sorrows, and we pray for the day when Ireland, in a higher and truer sense than she was in the past, may again be the Island of Saints.
The Washington Conference.
Momentous decisions have been come to at the notable Conference called together by President Harding. Were it nothing but the check that is to be put on building mighty battleships the Conference would not have met in vain. The mad race in building these tremendous engines of destruction is to be slackened. Another notable outcome of the Conference is the Four Power Pact, in which Great Britain, America, France, and Japan enter into a joint agreement providing against disputes in the Far East. This is all to the good. But the nations must learn to look higher than statesmen to obtain a lasting peace, even to Him who is the Prince of Peace, and who has received all power in heaven and earth.
Jews and the New Testament.
Jewish leaders are greatly exercised, says the Christian, by reason of the circumstance that the Rev. A. A. Green, minister of the Hampstead Synagogue, has introduced the New Testament into the Hebrew and Religion Classes of the congregation under his charge. The critics find little satisfaction in the fact that the young people who are thus being made acquainted with the Gospel story, are of a well-educated type, including some who hold university degrees. They reply that such a course of action is essentially prejudicial to Jewish culture. In a letter to the Jewish Press, the Chief Rabbi has explained that similar action has been taken at other times, in order that Orthodox Jews may be in a position to defend their attitude in regard to Christianity. This, however, does not seem to satisfy the critics, one of whom bluntly says that Christians fully recognise—he might have used a stronger term—that the teachings of the New Testament “are absolutely opposed to the very existence of Judaism.”
The Jews in Palestine.
What are the Jews doing in Palestine? asks the Manchester Guardian Weekly. Representatives of the native population are now in London, pleading that the land must not be given to the Jews. Yet we accepted the mandate to administer the country on the understanding that we would assist the Jews to establish in it his national home, and at the same time see that the rights of the Arabs and other native races were not interfered with. The task has been a trying one. There have been strong anti-Zionist demonstrations, rioting, and even bloodshed. But it is interesting to note how the Jews have quietly gone on with their plans, and how they are rapidly establishing themselves in the land. When war broke out there were some 45 Jewish colonies in Palestine. To-day there are 72, owning between them 130,000 acres of land. Hundreds of Jews have settled in the country, and they have expended vast sums in agricultural and other enterprises. Since 1918 the Jews alone have spent over £2,000,000 in the country.
The Bible in the Schools of England and Wales.
The report recently issued by the Committee appointed by the President of the Board of Education (England) to inquire into the teaching of English in schools contains an interesting paragraph, in which the neglect of Bible reading in our time is referred to, and which the Committee regard as a grave and serious loss to education and culture, apart altogether from the higher and more important religious considerations. “At the present time,” says the Report, “the Bible is probably less widely read and less directly influential in our life and literature than it has been at any time since the Reformation.” All who love God’s Word cannot but deeply regret that this is the truth. And it is something that men, masters of our common mother tongue, should recommend it a place in the national school curriculum, not only for its pre-eminent literary value, but its high moral standard. It is not for us to praise the literary pre-eminence of the Authorised Version with its noble and dignified diction and rhythmic cadences, which linger as music in the ear; that had been done by the great masters of the English language. But while we give due place to this, we must always keep before our young people in the school and in the home that the Bible is infinitely more than a classic occupying the first place—it is the Word of God, and must be recognised by us in school and home as such if it is to have its true place.
Bible Reading.
In connection with the Report referred to above, the Glasgow Herald (24th November, 1921) had a leader, interesting as appearing in the secular press, from which the following may be quoted:—”Sir Henry Newbolt’s Committee were not concerned with the moral and spiritual effect of modern neglect of the Bible, which they urge should be ‘universally read, far more than it is at present, both in universities and schools.’ The mere fact that the Bible is admitted to be a ‘classic’ may be productive of lip-service to its literary merits, but does not ensure its being read. The only way of becoming familiar with it, either as literature or as a guide to life and conduct, is personal study, and those who acknowledge its divine authority will welcome the reading of it as literature, in the confidence that its influence will not be circumscribed by the motives which may lead to its perusal. The suggestion of the Committee that the text of the Bible should be much more frequently and regularly read in schools than is done at the present day in England may usefully be extended to Scotland, and it is welcome for many reasons. Its adoption would be a real advance in education and general culture, it would afford an impetus to private reading, and it would emphasize the great elements in religious faith which are common to all the Christian Churches. In Scotland, where so large a part of the national life is attributable to the influence of the Bible, we cannot regard without concern any serious neglect of its pages, and, though the Committee was dealing with England, we cannot flatter ourselves that their remarks are inapplicable on this side of the Tweed.”