Not only does it imply a curious miscomprehension to state that the
rule of the clergy has been autocratic and oppressive, but it has been
his Church which has formed for the Boer his most valuable exercise
ground in Republican Government, and his relations to it and to his
clergy exemplify markedly his curious inborn gift for self-government.
Not only have his pastors been men of the people, rising up from among
them and from no selected class, and imposed on him by no authority
from without; but in every case each particular congregation selects
its own leader, and frees itself of him when proved undesirable. The
submission with which, in a still largely oligarchically governed
country like England, a single individual is allowed to select, by
his own autocratic will, son, brother, or dependant, and place him in
control of a church and parish with all its inhabitants for a lifetime,
is a condition unintelligible to the free South Africa Boer, and one he
would not tolerate for an hour.
On the other hand, while he would not tolerate, and still less submit
to, or respect, or regard as valid, any authority imposed on him
from without, having once for himself selected an individual in whom
he reposes full confidence, he is peculiarly willing, not merely to
support and follow him, but to submit to his administration of the
law, provided it is a law which he has at first agreed to recognize;
and this is equally true whether the case be that of a pastor,
field-cornet, commandant, or the president of a state. It is this
inborn peculiarity which yields to the Boer his remarkable aptitude
for Republican Government, and prevents him from being amenable to any
other form of rule.
It is often objected, when one questions the wisdom of that unwritten
law which ordains that, in the English Army, out of an empire of
countless millions, all its officers should yet practically be selected
from a comparatively small knot of wealthy families known as Society,
and that such a process must hopelessly cripple the army; that the
English nature is so addicted to oligarchic rule that the bulk of men
born in England could never be made to respect, follow, or submit to,
one of themselves; that the fact that a man was born in their street,
shared the conditions of their daily life, and belonged to their own
class, would cause them to look down upon and despise him. Whether
this be true of the English or not, with the Boers exactly the reverse
is the case. It is precisely the man of the people, growing up among
them, sharing their life and social condition, whom, when he has won
their confidence and they have selected him to his post, they are
willing to follow and support with a whole-heartedness seldom accorded
to rulers or leaders of men.[75] They submit to the man because they
regard him as the incarnation of their own will.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account