Visions of Angels.

Horowhenua Chronicle, 18 September 1915, Page 2

Visions of Angels.

HOW 7 THE SI Oil Y AROSE

The mystery of the angelic hoists who were said to have come to the aid of the British troops 011 the 'retreat from Mons appears now to have been cleared up. The story, it seems, appears to have originated in the exuberant fancy of a journalist. Mr Arthur Machcn writes to the "Evening iNiews" to say that it is merely an echo of a fanciful tale which lie contributed to that journal many months ago. Mr Machcn says.— Some time in last September J •was thinking of the terrible and heroic retreat from Mons. It is many years since I have told a tale, but somehow there was a fire in 'that history that burned in me. and made me wish that I could celebrate it in some pooi' fashion. And so the ta'le of tho 'Bowmen' came into my head. Very, very briefly it is the story of the British troops at the point of agony and despair, hopelessly outnumbered in men and guns. One of our soldiers invokes the help of the champion of England, St. George. St. (Joorgu brings up the spiri.v. o' L .bo Agineourt bowmen in array, the German host is annihilated bv their ghostly arrows. That i--> ail. It was quite a simple, ordinary little legend of the battlefield, and J wrote it and dismissed it, and wished I could have made it better. I may say, once for all that I had heard 110 kind or sort of rumour of any spiritual intervention during the retreat from Mons, nor any faintest echo of such rumour: TIIO Bowmen,' >as printed in tho 'Evening News.' was invention as much as any story can be invention. Everybody would have it tlia.tr the tale was true The clergy said so. Tlie Army said so The occultists said so. All sorts of vague authorities—'an officer,' 'a soldier,' 'a correspondent'—were quoted to show tlnat the incident of spiritual intervention or something very like it had actually happened. The names of these witnesses were not given." Before the above explanation was given tho "Guardian" (Anglican) warned its readers against accepting such stories too readily. It said: "While we desire io accept tIiOKO touching narratives with the utmost respect, we are bound to say that there is at present no better reason for oredulity than there was for crediting the presence of Russian troops in England." In a letter to the "Guardian," the Rev. C. W. Eiumett writes:— Your warning against a hasty acceptance of tho current- stories of an"gelic intervention in the war is 'welltimed. Tt may be pointed out that the call for caution is based, not 011 a sceptical incredulity, but on religious grounds. The point at issue is not the reality of the Divine government ol the world, but the way 111 which God works. What is the answer to ihoso who ask why tliey should not at once believe such stories when they are so great a help to faith at a time when it needs all the support it can findH Tho believer, as well as the scorner i.s a: times inclined to demand " a sign from heaven." and to look for some visible and tangible proof of God's control of human affairs. Ido not say that "the will to believe" does in fact, in this case, represent a retrogression, but there is clearly a possibility that it may, and if it does, whatever tho immediate gain to faith by the hasty acceptance of tho stories, in the end religion must suffer. There is always a, spiritual loss in adopting any misleading and equitable view of God and His working—this, indeed, is tho essence of idolatry—and it is religion, not scepticism, which urges caution. . . It need hardly be said, however, that tho considerations urged in this letter apply equally against a scornful rejection of evidence in cases of this kind. Tho case for sifted evidence is very important. On the other hand, if God does, in fact, work in this way. our conception of Him will lie inadequate and misleading if we refuse to allow for ft. But if these narratives are in fact giv-jn to the public as a proof of our particular view of God, there must be no false sentiment against a strict testing and presentation of tho evidence on which they rest.