Rome and Moscow by Viscount Alexander.
When the House of Lords continued their debate on the Reply to Her Majesty’s Speech, Viscount Alexander of Hillsborough, Deputy Leader of the Labour Opposition, spoke on the 15th June, 1955, and among other matters dealt with defence and foreign affairs. In the course of his speech he made some very unusual statements for the House of Lords. These dealt with the Roman Catholic Church and a possibility of collaboration between that Church and the Communists of Moscow. As we have heard hints of this in the recent past without any facts to support such suggestions, we are the more keenly interested to read in Hansard (the printed account of debates in the Houses of Parliament) what this Labour Peer had to say. We have Hansard before us and quote verbatim the words of Viscount Alexander as follows:—
“I am bound to say that I view with some concern the separate visit by Dr. Adenauer to Moscow . . . In my view, it is fundamental that the Western Union must be kept together upon the general basis on which it was formed . . . Why am I so concerned about it? Here, perhaps, I am on difficult ground, where one has more or less to rely upon personal recollection of history. In the course of more than 40 years of political experience I have seen many great national and international dangers arise, and sometimes I have had to sit down years afterwards and try to discover how those had arisen. When I consider the attitude of the Romish Church, so different from any other religious organisation in the world, with its own position as a temporal power, with its ambassadorial representation in
nearly every national Chancellory, and when I start to trace what has happened in the past, I begin to wonder what is going on at the present time. The mind goes back to the days after the First Great War, and to the position taken up for a time by the social revolutionary, Mussolini. He made contact with a cardinal in Milan, and there was next something of an agreement between him and the Romish Church which ultimately ended with the Lateran Treaty of 1929—and then came Abyssinia and after that the Fascist Axis.
“When one looks at history . . . one sees what has been the work of these secret societies within this Romish control which have so much to do with policy. I pick up a copy of the Universe, the Roman Catholic paper, and I see a report from Rome which says that it is necessary for them to deny in the Osservatore Romano—the official Vatican newspaper—that there is a secret society working within the Vatican. They then go on to comment upon the fact that it is wrong to suppose that the Curia, the general body of the Roman Catholic priesthood, has anything to do with these outside influences—trying, in fact, to give the impression that there is no great schism in this matter at the moment.
“Then I see, in another edition of the Universe, that a Jesuit priest has returned from Russia—so-called ‘released’—with word that, in spite of all that has been said on both sides, Russia is returning to God. I am just wondering whether there is some move going on for the kind of Axis that these people set up: first Mussolini, then the Lateran Treaty and Abyssinia; then they got Von Papen to lead the Roman Catholic Party in Germany over to the side of Hitler, with Von Papen himself ending up, during the war, as the German Ambassador to Turkey. I do ask the representative of the Foreign Office to take particular note of the present situation and to regard it very carefully, because I believe that perhaps the greatest need of all at the present time is that we should come to something like the kind of change which came to Europe with Martin Luther” (italics ours).
“We, at the present time, need a real new learning to deal with the situation confronting us, and a return throughout the world to standards which would be in accordance with the vows on the Protestant faith that we in this House take, and that Her Gracious Majesty takes when she ascends the Throne . . . We believe that to be free you must be free in every respect.
“As your Lordships can well imagine—and I am sure the Noble Marquess, Lord Salisbury, will agree with me—I am not suggesting, on these matters which I have put before your Lordships, that I have anything to do except to ask Her Majesty’s Government to see that this matter is very carefully examined. I say that in the light of history and of facts which, I had time, I was going to quote from
Vatican newspapers, as reproduced in the Universe. I very much hope that Her Majesty’s Government will very carefully watch this new line-up, as it may well prove to be, between Moscow and Rome. (Italics ours.) If anything else were needed to confirm a Conservative Administration upon that point, it might perhaps be found by examination of the Encyclical Letter, for the beginning of May of this year, 1955, which will be found to state (I am speaking from memory) that capital is not conformable to nature and, indeed, not in accordance with God’s Law. It seems to me that the major Moscow moves have been made after the issue of that Encyclical Letter.
“I hope that I have not sprung a tremendous surprise upon the House about this matter, but it does not hurt us at any time to try to examine our own immediate, intricate and puzzling problems, in the light of what we have been able to perceive from events. I would end by saying to Her Majesty’s Government, whatever else I may say, however much I may criticise, that I am most anxious that they shall secure the greatest possible success in getting this general settlement between the nations on the basis of a free people, and not one which is either under the dictation of an overwhelming Power or under a kind of dictation from a Power which claims to be both temporal and spiritual.”*
We may mention to our readers that it is also reported in Hansard for the 15th of June, 1955, that as the Marquess of Salisbury, the Leader of the Government, expressed himself as unable to believe in the danger which Viscount Alexander anticipated, the Viscount said he would raise the matter again and perhaps bring even more impressive proof.
(* This last phrase refers to the Pope, who claims both temporal and spiritual power over the world.—Editor.)
The Question of Death Penalty Raised Again.
In the House of Commons, on July 21st, some members referred to unseemly conduct on the part of a section of the public outside the prison where a Mrs. Ruth Ellis had been hanged for murder. Thereafter Mr. Emmanuel Shinwell (Soc., Easington, Durham) asked the Home Secretary, Major G. Lloyd George, if he would consider introducing legislation on the abolition of capital punishment. The Home Secretary replied that there had been no change of public opinion which would justify the Government introducing a Bill to abolish hanging. Mr. Shinwell later said: “Has not the time arrived when the Government might consider the propriety of legislation which would be more consistent with the morality of a civilised country.” Here we have a plea on the basis of morality, the morality not of a Christian nation, but a civilised nation, to abolish the death penalty
in the case of such as deliberately and with intent to murder do kill their fellow. A Christian nation ought to be guided by the Word of God and the principles enunciated there in their legislation; and we still hold to what we have already written in these notes: that is, that the death penalty ought to remain in our legislation, in the light of God’s Word, viz., “Whoso killeth any person, the murderer shall be put to death by the mouth of witnesses, but one witness shall not testify against any person to cause him to die. Moreover ye shall take no satisfaction for the life of a murderer which is guilty of death; but he shall be surely put to death” (Numbers xxxv. 30-31). And as we have pointed out, in the way of Scripture support on this question, from the New Testament, on a previous occasion, the Apostle Paul declared before his Jewish accusers: “If I be an offender, I refuse not to die” (Acts xxv. 11). There clearly underlies this apostolic statement the implication that there were offenders whom Paul recognised as worthy of death, and that the death penalty was viewed by him as appropriate in such cases. We may well deduct from this that he therein indicates the view of the Apostolic Christian Church. We repeat here that the death penalty is said to fail as a deterrent to others to commit capital crimes; but, then, the death penalty is in the first instance a punishment inflicted for a crime committed. The modern view of the fact and nature of sin is lax indeed, as men measure it by human standards and not by the divine light of Scripture, and thus the punishment ought to be tempered accordingly, in the estimation of some.
Protestant Schools Closed in Colombia.
In an article which appeared in The English Churchman of 24th June, 1955, it is recorded that “the Evangelical Confederation of Colombia has just recently issued an extensive summary of the status of education in Colombia, and the changes which have taken place in the past two years. The figures show that more than 160 Protestant schools in Colombia have been closed since 1948, while at the same time only 44 per cent. of Colombian children between the ages of seven and fourteen were enrolled in any school during 1953. Only half of those enrolled finished the school year . . . It is estimated that 44 per cent. of Colombia’s adult population is illiterate. Yet Colombian officials, under pressure from the Roman Catholic Church, have carried on a six-year campaign in which more than 160 Protestant schools have been put out of operation completely . . . The Roman Catholic Church has officially condemned Protestant schools as a threat to public morals and national unity.” This is what the Roman Catholic Church will do in any country where it has the power. Even educational enlightenment is feared by the Roman Catholic Church.
Facts About the General Election.
(1) ROMAN CATHOLICS HEAVILY DEFEATED AT GENERAL ELECTION.
Despite a bold all-out effort to increase R.C. representation in the House of Commons, we are pleased to announce that no less than 34 Romanists were defeated: 23 R.C. candidates, however, were successful but, as one R.C. journal admits, “It’s virtually No Change for Catholic M.P.s.”
It can safely be taken for granted that every one of the new R.C. Members will be pledged to support excessive R.C. demands for special privileges in the field of education, and Protestants everywhere will need to remember that “The price of liberty is eternal vigilance.”
—From The Protestant Standard.
(2) PARLIAMENT AND THE LORD’S DAY.
The following is an analysis of the attitude of the Members of the new Parliament as a result of our General Election campaign. Members are classified under three heads:—
| | F—Favourable. | U—Unfavourable. | NC—Non-Committal. | |
|—————|—————|—————–|——————-|——-|
| | F. | U. | N.C. | Total |
| Conservatives | 310 | 3 | 32 | 345 |
| Labour | 86 | 111 | 80 | 277 |
| Liberal | 6 | — | — | 6 |
| Sinn Fein | — | — | 2 | 2 |
| Total | 402 | 114 | 114 | 630 |
It is only fair to state that of the 402 classified “Favourable,” 191 made slight qualifications.
We found that—with very few individual exceptions—the Conservative and Liberal Parties had no Sunday meetings, but that—again with few exceptions—the Labour candidates made Sunday the chief electioneering day.
—From Joy and Light—The Lord’s Day Magazine, London.