AFFIRMATION OR OATH?
Stu,—Mr. St. John Ervine's protest and plea on this matter will, I am sure, win the approbation of many of your readers. But his closing sentence is amazing. He writes: "It is high time that the Society of Friends, those oathless people, busied themselves in ridding us of this cumbersome and puerile obligation." Why should they? The Society of Friends are an oathless people because throughout their history they have taken a brave and consistent stand on the matter, and were willing to pay the price for the freedom they now enjoy. As in many. other matters, they have in this set a noble example to the rest of the community. If other members of the community are irked or morally outraged by the "cumbersome and puerile obligation" surely it is their duty to follow that example and take steps to secure the removal of the evil. They have the power to do it if they will, and they will be in no danger of having to suffer cruelly for their temerity, as the early Quakers did. But to cast a reproach at the Society of Friends because they are not busying themselves to rid us of the evil is most unjustifiable. It is by implication, if not intentionally, a notable tribute to that small though distinguished community, but also by implication, if not intentionally, it is a confession of moral supineness and political ineptitude on the part
Previous page
