"CHURCH PARADES"
Snt,—I read with interest the able article on church parades by Rev. J. N. Duckworth in your issue of May 3rd, and I have heard of . his gallant work amongst P.o.W.s. If, however, his article was *Men with a view to helping to secure freedom of worship for soldiers by abolishing compulsory church parade I am afraid that he, and the soldiers that he knew, must be prepared for a big disappointment, for this abolishment will have exactly the reverse effect. Compulsory church parade is' in fact, the only means of guaranteeing freedom of Worship in tile Army. During my thirty years' ;civic: the Royal Army Chaplains'. Department just ended, I found that men's duties continually interfered with their attendance at voluntary services. Doctors,. sports officers, education offi- cers, &sides the ordinary executive officer and the harassed. N.C.O., were at all times on the prowl seeking the body of the unfortunate fully- licensed private soldier. But no one could touch him once he was ordered on church parade.
A man ordered to go to church must really sink his dislike at this procedure if he truly values his religious freedom and that of his comrades. If he does not wish to practise his religion he should not be recorded as possessing that religion. He should put himself' down a's " deist " or " atheist " or what he will. I generally found .that when this was pointed out to a man he saw the .parni and lost his resentment. I do trust that some of our religiously-minded .M.P.s will see it, too, before it is too late. If the measure is passed it -will be a disaster 'of the first magnitude to freedom Of worship in the Army-4reedora which is the
birthright of every British citizen.—Yours, &C., STANLEY IIINCHLIFFE. The Rectory, Ladock, crrampound Road, Cormonli.' ,
Previous page
