Eire Repeals the External Relations Act.
The South of Ireland, that is Eire, was until recently still linked to the Crown of Great Britain, by what is called the External Relations Act. Eire politicians began about October last to declare in their speeches that this last link with the Crown would soon be eliminated. This has been the desire of Southern Ireland leaders for long. An indication of their attitude to the British Throne is to be found in a reply which De Valera, former Prime Minister of Eire, gave to a question put to him at Cardiff on the 26th of October, 1948, viz.: “I never gave allegiance to the King, so I could never be a traitor.” It was thought, that even in Government circles, the view was that when the Act would be repealed, Eire citizens in this country and throughout the Commonwealth, would therefore become aliens or foreigners, but would have an opportunity to assume British nationality. A meeting was held in November, in Paris, between officials of Great Britain, the Commonwealth countries and Eire, on this vexed question. But we were surprised to learn, from statements made in the House of Commons, by Mr. Attlee, the Prime Minister, that although Eire had cut adrift from the Crown and the Commonwealth, and is to become an independent Republic, that her citizens are not, after all, to be regarded as aliens here and throughout the Commonwealth. Mr. Churchill criticised this arrangement severely. In this comment, we are interested in politics up to a point, as they reveal to those who look below the surface a little, the disregard for, and opposition to, the Protestant Throne of Great Britain on the part of the slaves of the Vatican and the Pope, who rule politically in the Dublin Government. Our own Government appears to have been influenced in the background, to agree to the citizens of Eire having all the privileges of Britishers, while their country is in point of fact and in law, a foreign country. We must remember for the future, that the Roman Catholic politicians of Eire, in repealing the External Relations Act, have in view the further question of Protestant Ulster and her inclusion in an all-Irish Republic. Our Government have given assurances to the leaders of Ulster of their support for Ulster’s determination to remain as a legal and loyal part of Britain, owing allegiance to the British Crown. Ulster needs support and encouragement against the intrigues of Rome. Free Presbyterians should give no countenance to politicians, of whatever party, who may glibly support the doing away of partition in Ireland. This is what Mr. John Costello, the Eire Premier, said recently respecting the Repeal of the Act referred to: “It may eventually win for us British assistance in ending the partition of our country.” What brazen-faced arrogance is evidenced here, on the part of a man who has been in the very forefront of the work of cutting off Eire from the Crown and British Commonwealth. Now we must be expected to assist to put Ulster under Pope and priest. Let us not forget that these politicians are working for their religion.
Communion Services to be Broadcast.
It is intended by the British Broadcasting Corporation, in conjunction with the Church of England, the Roman Catholic Church and also other Churches in England, to broadcast communion services periodically. This new and extraordinary feature was introduced at Christmas. It is said that there have been repeated requests for such services by communicants unable to leave their homes through illness or because they are invalids. The enterprise is both profane and pointless when the scriptural nature of the Lord’s Supper is taken into account. “The Lord’s Supper is a sacrament, wherein, by giving and receiving bread and wine, according to Christ’s appointment, his death is shewed forth,” etc. (Shorter Catechism, Question 96). There can, obviously, be no such thing as “giving and receiving bread and wine,” by means of the wireless, which lies at the very heart of the nature of this sacrament. The next absurdity of educated, yet spiritually ignorant, religious leaders in our land, may well be an attempt to broadcast the sacrament of Baptism. To listen over the wireless to the words used in the administration of the sacrament, as a substitute for the sacrament itself, is and surely must be, entirely without meaning to those who love the Lord Jesus Christ in sincerity, and who have been enabled to “discern the Lord’s body.” It seems that many religious leaders of our day are determined to go ahead perverting the Gospel of Christ; but they will have to give an account of their stewardship one day, to the great Head of the Church.
Bibles in Spain.
When Generalissimo Franco, after the German defeat, was trying to put a more liberal facade on his regime, one of his steps was to publish a Charter of Spanish Rights, in which a limited guarantee of religious freedom was included. Since neither the Generalissimo nor the Roman Catholic hierarchy in Spain has any use for liberalism, which the Primate only three months ago was damning comprehensively, it is natural that the degree of freedom granted to the Protestants was even on paper very slight indeed. Protestant baptism, marriage, and burial remained illegal; the Protestant schools remained closed. But the Charter did guarantee freedom of worship so long as it was conducted in private, and as a result some of the chapels, which like the schools had been closed by the Nationalists in 1939 and their effects often handed over to the Catholics, were able to re-open as private meeting-houses. They could not advertise their presence in any way, no external signs were allowed, and they had to be omitted from street directories and telephone books. Licences had to be obtained for services, and the Catholic Action paper, Ecclesia, has made the situation quite clear:—”It would be an error were anyone to believe that the Charter of Spanish Rights is a legal justification for the opening of chapels, the publication of reviews and pamphlets, or the distribution of Bibles which are not Catholic, or any propaganda of this kind. Any weakness of the authorities in preventing such propaganda would be against . . . our fundamental laws. . . .” The Generalissimo’s concessions were never very generous.
Mr. Björn Hallström, a Swedish journalist who visited Spain illegally last year in order to study this situation, has now published a small book (Secret Journey Through Spain) which gives many instances of how the law is in fact applied. He saw a Methodist minister who had served ten years in gaol for his religious opinions; a Methodist soldier who was threatened with imprisonment if he failed to genuflect during his compulsory Catholic church parade; a Baptist who was beaten by the police and fined £75 because he did not genuflect when a religious procession went by. Protestants are excluded from State employment; the illegal, unabridged Bible is sold on the black market; the police watch services in the private chapels, and Catholics have been known to break them up without being penalised. For not only is any toleration of the Protestants unwelcome on religious grounds; there is also an ideological motive to set the face of the authorities against them. It was the Republic which introduced religious freedom to Spain, and the Protestants were thus naturally disposed to become “compromised”, with the Government in its resistance to the Nationalist rebellion. By definition, in the authorities’ eyes, they must be on the wrong side, and their aim, as the Archbishop of Zaragoza claimed in a recent Pastoral, be to strengthen the infidels, the bad Spaniards, and the internal foes of the nation. The present regime cannot afford to make any concession to those sections of society which have cause to resent it; and its failure to do so means that their resentment cannot die. This is the Spanish vicious circle, and it makes equal nonsense of all Franco’s attempts at liberal gestures.—The Manchester Guardian, 13th November, 1948.
Persecution in Spain.
The following report has been sent us by Mr. A. T. Tasker, England, and is a verbatim translation of a report sent to him, by an unnamed friend, from Spain. It speaks for itself:—”On the 16th of October, 1948, the young soldier of the Marines, D. Jose Morado, died in Ferrol del Caudillo. On the 12th of May, 1945, this popular and cheerful young Christian refused to kneel in adoration of the Host, respectfully alleging that he was an evangelical Christian. For this reason, he was barbarously beaten by his colonel and trodden on. The next day he was told off to dig a ditch and was not allowed to rest for a moment until he began to bleed at the mouth. He was taken in a lamentable state to the hospital of the military prison. “A few weeks later he was taken from his bed to appear before the military court which condemned him to a year’s imprisonment in the military prison. As a result of this experience, he went out of his mind for some time, but eventually recovered his reason though not his health, and now God has liberated him from his sufferings by taking him to heaven. I ought to add that the Evangelicals took up the matter with the higher authorities in Spain, and the captain general of Corunna expressed his disagreement with the sentence, while the secretary of General Franco wrote a friendly letter to the leaders of the Evangelical Church who were interested in his case, expressing his sympathy. In spite of this, owing to the pressure of the Spanish bishops, nothing has been done to avoid similar tragedies, nor to punish the authors of the outrage—on the contrary, persecution is increasing in every way, making it more difficult for our Spanish brethren, and the Roman Catholic papers, such as Ecclesia of Madrid, are rejoicing publicly because new measures of oppression are going to be taken against the evangelical Spanish Christians.”
The Lord needs not the tongue to be an interpreter between Him and the hearts of His children. He that hears without ears can interpret prayers, though not uttered of the tongue. Our desires are cries in the ears of the Lord of hosts.—Manton.