By the RIGHT HON. VISCOUNT ALEXANDER of Hillsborough, C.H. LL.D.
THE suggestion for an address on this subject arose out of a recent speech I made in the House of Lords in reply to one by His Grace the Duke of Norfolk in criticism of the visit of the two Russian statesmen—Marshal Bulganin and Mr. Kruschev—to this country, and implying that only Roman Catholics were concerned with a Christian way of living in a consideration of this subject and that religious freedom must form the foundation of a lasting peace. The speeches received wide publicity in the press at home and abroad and judging by the many letters of thanks I received there is undoubtedly considerable concern about it.
There is probably no word so much on the lips and in the hearts of people everywhere as this blessed word—freedom. All the nations in the world seem to be striving towards it; most of the nations are professedly fighting for it (some with honesty of purpose, ready to die for their freedom, others for freedom to impose slavery on nations weaker than themselves).
Freedom is the universal slogan and the banner under which even the destined slaves are lured to fight for their own ultimate bondage! It is, too, the keynote of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights which was adopted by the United Nations Organisation at its momentous session on December 10, 1948—nearly eight years ago now. The voting was 48 member states in favour; none against; eight abstaining, namely: Soviet Russia, five nations in the Soviet bloc; South Africa and Saudi Arabia.
This Declaration of Human Rights consists of Thirty Articles and the first two set the tone of the complete document, and of the subsequent Covenant in the form of a Treaty, legally binding on those member states which signed it. They are as follows:—Article 1: “All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.” Article 2: “Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind; such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth, or other status.”
Religious freedom is set forth in Article 18: “Everyone has the right of freedom of thought, conscience, and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief, in teaching, practice, worship and observance.”
* We publish this article from The English Churchman, of June 15th, 1956, because of its subject matter, and because Viscount Alexander is taking a stand in the House of Lords for Protestantism.—Editor.
Freedom as interpreted by Rome.
In the light of my rejoinder to the Duke of Norfolk it may be of interest to take a brief glance at the subject of religious freedom as understood by the Roman Catholic Church, in a few of the countries of the world where that faith is predominant.
Malta. The relationship of the Government and people of the George Cross Island of Malta with that of Great Britain and the British Commonwealth has lately been discussed in the House of Commons on the basis of a Round Table Conference Report which recommended, inter alia, integration of the Island with Great Britain by the election of three Maltese Members of Parliament.
The proposals for this more intimate association received a large measure of acceptance and were it not for the unwelcome attitude of the Roman Catholic hierarchy in Malta and the obstacles it places upon the free expression of Protestant beliefs would probably receive unqualified support in the end.
But Malta as we have already mentioned is predominantly a Roman Catholic country and its future along the lines of the proposed integration can only be contemplated with some misgiving. In response to representations on this subject from Protestant bodies and individuals Her Majesty’s Government, through the Colonial Secretary, has affirmed that demands for religious freedom must apply equally to all denominations.
Spain. In Spain, the home of Roman Catholicism, there is only very limited freedom, despite the promise of General Franco. Some Roman Catholics, who seem to favour mutual toleration as between themselves and Protestants, forget the declarations of succeeding Popes as to these ideas. One could take up all the time available with quotations bearing on the attitude of the Papacy. Three will suffice. Mgr. Ronald Knox in his book The Belief of Catholics writes: “A Catholic State will not shrink from repressive measures in order to secure domination of Catholic principles.” The late Mr. Hilaire Belloc, in Survivals and New Arrivals denounced the idea of human toleration and looked forward hopefully to the return of persecution. The Catholic Encyclopaedia states: “The Church . . . has been and still remains intolerant of all religions. She regards dogmatic intolerance not alone as her incontestable right, but also as a sacred duty.”
Seizure of Protestant Scriptures.
The Times correspondent in Madrid on May 2 reported the seizure of the whole of the Scripture stock held at the local depot of the British and Foreign Bible Society, which has been established there for a century. On May 3 in the House of Lords the Marquess of Reading, Minister of State, informed me in reply to a question addressed to the Government that the report was true. On hearing
that the British Embassy in Madrid had called for an enquiry I thanked the noble Marquess, and I was supported by Lords Hankey and Stansgate.
Commenting on this incident on the following Sabbath (May 6) in a sermon at Farm Street Roman Catholic Church the Jesuit Father Joseph Christie sought to minimise this confiscation of Scriptures by remarking that—”of course, it is well known that Spanish editions of the Bible are freely on sale in Spain for all to purchase. A nation which produced the first polyglot edition of the Bible in 1502 and two vernacular translations before the Reformation would find in the remarks of the noble Lords an amusing example of English Protestant provincialism. . . .”
One might reply in a similar strain by suggesting this as a typical ‘jesuitical’ plea, designed to mislead the public; for it is a well-known historical fact that Roman Catholics did not produce a version in English at the Reformation and that they tried by every possible means to prevent the circulation of William Tyndale’s copies, and that this worthy translator and martyr, who was forced to do his work on the Continent, had to adopt numerous subterfuges for shipping his English Bibles into this country.
South America. Those of you who, like myself, read The English Churchman regularly will have been well posted in recent years as to the religious persecution of Protestants in this large continent, notably in Colombia. I need not add to these, but the latest press release I have seen, by courtesy of the Evangelical Alliance overseas department, is so shocking I cannot refrain from quoting it. “Since 1948 Colombian Protestants have suffered the following severe losses: 48 buildings destroyed by fire or dynamite; 75 believers killed because of their religious faith; more than 200 schools closed by the government.”
We may well ask—how does this dreadful state of affairs square up with Colombia’s signature to the Declaration of Human Rights? For a graphic and first-hand account of the conditions and conflicts in this part of South America I can recommend two books published by the Christian Literature Crusade: Action Stations Colombia by Pat Symes and Colombian Conflict by William C. Easton, fellow missionaries there. What is so heartening about these thrilling accounts is that despite the terrible sufferings they endured the Gospel of the Grace of God has been so effectively carried far and wide.
Freedom as interpreted by Protestantism.
To worship God in spirit and in truth for “God is a spirit and they that worship Him must worship him in spirit and in truth” (John iv. 24). To study and propagate the saving truths of the Holy Scriptures. To pray and work for an ever wider community in which religious freedom is enjoyed by all men everywhere.
One is often asked to define Protestantism. This is what a prominent Jesuit priest, Father Lester, said of it in the Universe Roman Catholic newspaper for March 19, 1923: “We have said it before and we say it again—Protestantism is not a religion, it is a disease.” From this uncharitable view let us turn to the description of the late Rev. J. A. Wylie at the commencement of his well-known history: “Protestantism strictly viewed is simply a principle. It is not a policy. It is not an empire, having its fleets and armies, its officers and tribunals, wherewith to extend its dominion and make its authority obeyed. It is not even a church with its hierarchies and synods and edicts, it is simply a principle. But it is the greatest of all principles. It is a creative force. Its influence is all embracing. . . . It thus becomes the creator of all that is true and great . . . the founder of free kingdoms and the mother of pure churches. . . .”
I had the privilege last year of listening to a sermon by a Baptist Missionary from the Congo, in which he gave a scholarly review of the early Church at Thessalonica and confirmed in my mind how much those early Christians were united in love and good works to each other and had no need of priests. Elders, no doubt leaders. “We beseech you brethren to know them that labour among you and are over you in the Lord and admonish you, and to esteem them very highly for their work’s sake and be at peace among yourselves” (I Thess. v. 12, 13). And as I thought about it I could see that the “New Learning” I heard about at school which came from Luther and Tyndale and others was not about something new, but meant they had discovered from the Word of God itself the true facts of the early church, before authoritarianism, false doctrine, and idolatrous forms of worship crept into the churches which we now describe as unreformed, and that the “New Learning” and the Reformation were indeed a return to the earliest faith and principles of the Apostolic Church. They could not but challenge the teachings of the Roman Church. The Open Book was their Authority, the free access to God was their right, their only High Priest was the Saviour of the World, the Lord Jesus Christ, entered into heaven itself “now to appear in the presence of God for us” (Heb. ix. 24).
Protestant friends, religious freedom depends upon a real knowledge of the Word of God. “And you shall know the truth and the truth shall make you free.” In these days we must indeed be vigilant to defend the faith that brings freedom to men and women. What are we doing to help? Are we faithful ourselves? Do we read the Bible with prayer for the help of the Holy Spirit? May God help us to be faithful in these matters and at all times, in all seasons and places, to be inspired by His Word and His grace to witness for the truth as it is revealed to us in the Lord Jesus Christ.
Based on an address delivered at the 129th Annual Meeting of the Protestant Reformation Society on May 31 this year.
Of Providence.
Confession of Faith, Chapter v. Section 1.—God, the great Creator of all things, doth uphold, direct, dispose, and govern all creatures, actions, and things, from the greatest even to the least, by his most wise and holy providence, according to his infallible foreknowledge, and the free and immutable counsel of his own will, to the praise of the glory of his wisdom, power, justice, goodness, and mercy.