The Death of Queen Mary.
The death of Queen Mary, the grandmother of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth, at Marlborough House, her London residence, on the night of Tuesday, the 24th day of March, 1953, has brought bereavement and sorrow once more into the Royal Family of our nation. Queen Mary came to the Throne with her husband, King George V., in 1910 and reigned with him for 24 years. As has been stated from all quarters, she was in appearance and bearing a dignified and regal personage, who faithfully and ably assisted her husband in the discharge of his duties in the high office of Kingship. Queen Mary had a share of personal trials and sorrows which are the portion of the exalted as well as those who are humbly situated in the providence of God. After the death of her husband, King George V., her son, now the Duke of Windsor, abdicated from the throne of his father shortly after his accession and before the time for his Coronation. His reason for so doing, and other facts connected therewith, must have given Queen Mary deep, personal embarrassment, regret, and grief. Then during the last war her handsome son, the Duke of Kent, was killed in an air crash on the hills of Caithness. And only in the early part of last year her son, King George VI., died suddenly and unexpectedly, although ill for a period beforehand. Her youngest son, delicate Prince John, died in early boyhood. Yet throughout the period of these grievous afflictions she did not retire into obscurity but took a public interest in national affairs, and apparently was deeply interested in her family and grandchildren. She was buried beside her husband, King George V., in the St. George’s Chapel, Windsor, on Tuesday, the 31st March, 1953. It is appointed unto all men once to die, and thus Kings and Queens and the humblest subjects in the realm must inevitably meet the last enemy, which is death. Nothing but a true union to Christ Jesus by a holy and precious faith, and a consequent dying in the Lord Jesus, can take the sting out of death for Queen or peasant; as there is no heaven for any sinner of the Adamic race but in and through the one Redeemer, the Lord Jesus Christ. We extend our sincere sympathy to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth and all the members of the Royal Family, and trust that this occasion for another period of mourning will have a sobering influence upon the nation during the Coronation.
French Roman Catholic Nuns and Priests Arrested.
Two Jewish boys, Robert and Gerald Finlay, aged 10 and 11, whose parents died in a Nazi concentration camp in 1944, were then handed to a French Roman Catholic foster-mother to take charge of them. While a legal battle for their custody was going on in a French Court, she is alleged to have baptised the boys as Roman Catholics and to have moved them from one religious school to another. The boys vanished after a Court ordered their R.C. foster-mother to hand them over to two aunts. Sixteen persons were arrested in connection with the disappearance of the boys, including two Mothers Superior, one the head of a Marseilles convent, and six R.C. priests. The boys were said to have been handed over to a Marseilles priest by the Mother Superior there. Then priests took them to a college in Bayonne and the boys disappeared from this college early in February last. Police lost the trail of the orphans at the Spanish frontier and it is reported that inquiries have spread to Portugal. These facts were made known by the press and B.B.C. in this country, at the beginning of March. The comment was made that there was a good deal of public indignation in France over the case, and opinion was also expressed that the Church (that is the Church of Rome) had no right to do such a thing. Our readers can judge for themselves what to think of this case as far as it has been reported. In the light of it, it is high time that outside authorities, with government backing, were given power to enter and inspect convents in Great Britain. And we are of the opinion, in recent times, that the Roman Catholic Church is not by any means being sheltered in this country by some sections of the press, and that is all to the good.
The Part of a Nun Acted in Church of Scotland Play.
In many of the Church of Scotland congregations, part of the congregational organisation is a dramatic society or group which presents plays of diverse kinds principally during the winter months. These activities are of course entirely foreign to the gospel and spiritual purposes for which the true Christian Church exists, and are from root to branch worldly and vain and calculated to minister only to the carnal desires of unconverted sinners. What a low ebb the visible Church of Christ has reached when such activities are authorised and encouraged. A special case came to our notice in the public press, when recently there appeared a large photograph of two young women, one dressed in the full garb of a nun. The photograph depicted a scene from a play, “The Sacred Heart,” an expression commonly used among Roman Catholics. The play was being presented at the Church of Scotland Barony Church, Dysart, Fife, by the Barony Church Dramatic Group. Ministers, office-bearers, and members of said congregation seem, in our view, to have no understanding whatever of Presbyterianism or Protestantism, which the Church of Scotland is supposed to stand for. If the nun in the play had a part which commended her and her religious order, then young Church of Scotland women witnessing this would be liable to be influenced to think well of the unscriptural Romish and unwholesome business of convents and nuns. The Church of Scotland young people are not required to be subtle and maybe unthinking propagandists for these unholy orders of Rome. Priests and perverts from Protestantism may be obliged to advertise nunnery, but what can we say of professed Protestants engaging in this undermining work.
Opposition to a Statue of Virgin Mary.
The following appeared in the Glasgow Bulletin of 18th March, 1953:—VICAR V. PARISHIONERS—The Rev. Richard Hilditch, vicar of St. Mary’s, Tyne Dock, Co. Durham, seeks permission to put up a statue of the Virgin Mary in his church. A petition opposing the application, lodged by some of his parishioners, was received yesterday at Durham Diocesan Registrar’s Office. The registrar will convene a consistory court, at which the Chancellor of the Diocese, Mr. H. B. H. Hylton-Foster, Q.C., will hear the dispute. The objectors complain that the application is a move to “Romanise” the church. The vicar said yesterday: “That is not so. A number of other Anglican churches have identical statues to which no objection has been taken.” It seems that some in England are still opposed to the idolatry, darkness and effrontery of men who act boldly in face of objections in seeking to place factory-made dolls purporting to be likenesses of the Mother of our Lord in Church of England buildings. What a low, dark, childish, vain form of religion it must be which requires a silly statue and idol to assist and bolster it!
The Altered Views of Dr. C. E. M. Joad.
The regular contributor to the columns of The English Churchman, Legis, makes the following brief comment in a recent issue on the latest book by Dr. C. E. M. Joad, the philosopher:—”In his latest book, The Recovery of Belief (Faber and Faber), Dr. C. E. M. Joad retracts the materialistic opinions he formerly held in common with Bertrand Russell, Bernard Shaw and other unbelievers. It is interesting to see that he asks whether there may be a Second Coming by which God will put things right. Dr. Joad says, ‘Certainly the stage seems set for it.’ In the author’s view science has no contribution to make to the religious interpretation of the universe. When scientists leave their own sphere and try to explain (i.e. away) the supernatural in the light of science they are apt to go astray.” This revelation of such a change in thought and outlook on the part of Professor Joad is highly interesting. We understand that he was one of the most dogmatic advocates of evolution in this country prior to the last war, and was given to ridiculing the Bible and Christianity in the light of the evolution theory. He appears to have discovered the folly and evil of scientists in trying to explain away the supernatural in the light of science. If such brilliant men intellectually as Professor Joad were truly converted and led by the Spirit of God their witness against “science falsely so-called” would be damaging indeed to the reputation of irreligious scientists. (Since writing this note, Dr. Joad has died.)