The Grey Book Part 10

Lang) had to leave to officiate at the christening of His Majesty's grandson.

He asked the Archbishop of York to take his place in the chair. Without a word of explanation, however, his absence might be misunderstood.

"Speaking simply for himself, he felt bound to say that he did most strongly protest against the persecution of the Jews...

He was sure that the continuation of the present modes of persecution must seriously affect the good will with which the people of this country desired to regard the German nation."

The Bishop of Chichester then moved: "That this a.s.sembly desires to express its sympathy with the Jewish people and those of Jewish origin in the sufferings which are being endured by many of their number in Germany, and trusts that Christian people in this and other countries will exert their influence to make it plain to the rulers of Germany that the continuance of their present policy will arouse widespread indignation and prove a grave obstacle to the promotion of confidence and good will between Germany and other nations".

He said he moved the resolution with great reluctance, as one who had a profound admiration for Germany, as one who had many friends in that country, and desired the closest co-operation and the firmest mutual understanding between Germany and Great Britain.

He was compelled to move his resolution because, as a human being, he saw a wrong done to humanity in one great area of German life and action.

As a friend of Germany he saw the hoped-for friends.h.i.+p between two kindred countries tumbling into ruin through the prosecution of a policy against a section of its population, which was unworthy of a great civilized nation.

He appealed to the rulers of Germany to desist from a course which shocked Christian opinion in this country in a way to which the nearest a.n.a.logy was the oppression of the Jews in Russia by the Tsarist Government exactly 30 years ago. The hards.h.i.+ps suffered by baptized persons of Jewish origin made a peculiar claim upon their Christian sympathy and compa.s.sion. There were two points of attack: <73> the casting out of the Jews from all cultural and professional life, together with the precariousness of their position in business, and the defamation of the Jews throughout Germany. The Nuremberg laws pa.s.sed last September were supposed to give protection and security within limits to the Jews, yet suffering of individuals increased and the personal attacks grew bolder.

No doubt they saw in The Times not so many weeks back that prayer was asked in all German synagogues for protection for the Jews against slander, with the result that the Chief Rabbi suffered imprisonment for one day and other Rabbis suffered punishment. He was sure that great ma.s.ses of German people themselves abhorred the policy of persecution. They, too, must feel as we felt, that it was a great scar across the fair fame of Germany.

The Bishop of Southwark (Dr. Parsons), in seconding the resolution, said they had hoped that the days of the Ghetto had pa.s.sed for ever.

Now the Jewish people in Germany apparently were being forced back into conditions which reminded them all too vividly of the Ghetto. Their whole position, if it could not be compared with that of slaves, could be compared with that of helots. An article in The Times had described the whole policy as a "cold pogrom".

Mr. S. Carlile Davis, the German Vice-Consul at Plymouth, in opposing the resolution, said that every member of the a.s.sembly would agree that they should all express sympathy with those who suffered from persecution, envy, hatred, malice, or any uncharitableness...

The Jewish question, so far as it affected Germany, was purely a race question, and it was nothing new in Germany. It was not for us to dictate to any people how they should handle a race question...

The Bishop of Durham (Dr. Henson) submitted that they had in the resolution brought before them by the Bishop of Chichester one of those matters which required from them as a great representative a.s.sembly of Christian men a clear p.r.o.nouncement of their convictions. One thing which they ought to emphasize was the solidarity of civilization...

The Jews were just as mixed a race as the Germans - they could hardly be more.

This nonsense about race - as if there were some poison in the ancestry of Judaism which must be guarded against - was sheer hallucination and nonsense.

We knew in this country that the Jews could be as prominent in good citizens.h.i.+p as any other section of His Majesty's subjects.

We, who were the children of Christendom, could not exclude from our minds the vastness of the obligations under which we stood to the Jewish people.

Our Divine Lord, according to the flesh, was a Jew. His Apostles were all Jews. The Sacred Book, which we used was a Jewish Book. It was preposterous, base and almost incredibly mean that we, the children of Christendom, should turn on the ancient children of G.o.d, to whom religiously, spiritually and morally we owed almost everything we value. <74> "The least we can do," Dr. Henson concluded, "is to make it clear from our hearts that we loathe and detest this att.i.tude which is obtaining in Germany, and protest against the continuance of this brutal oppression of a small minority of Jewish citizens in Germany." (Loud and continued cheers.)...

Mr. G.F. Lefroy (Exeter), in opposing the resolution, said that Parliament itself would not dream of pa.s.sing it. He moved, as an amendment, that only the first portion of the resolution should be moved, confining it to the words "That the a.s.sembly desires to express its sympathy with the Jewish people and those of Jewish origin in the sufferings which are being endured by many of their numbers in Germany".

On being put to the vote, Mr. Carlile Davis's motion for the previous question and Mr. Lefroy's amendment were rejected by very large majorities. The Bishop of Chichester's motion was then carried, with few dissentients. [184]

Some of the Bishop of Chichester's words mentioned above could create misunderstanding, for instance, that he "had a profound admiration for Germany". Dr. Bell's record regarding the fight against anti-Semitism (as well as in many other respects) is outstanding. [185]

One should note the policy of deception practised by the Germans: "The Nuremberg laws pa.s.sed last September were supposed to give protection and security within limits to the Jews...". [186] That seems incredible, and yet it provided a pretext for people who wanted to do nothing.

In the discussion on the above mentioned resolution, one Mr. Lefroy, in opposing the resolution, said: "Parliament itself would not dream of pa.s.sing it. Therefore, why should the a.s.sembly pa.s.s it?" Apparently it escaped the attention of Mr. Lefroy that a Church a.s.sembly is not a Parliament, and that a Church body often can and ought to say things publicly, even though a Parliament is not prepared to do so, or perhaps for that very reason.

However, the Bishop of Durham's speech, in the same meeting of the Church a.s.sembly, is an outstanding example of how a Christian leader could and should speak.

<75> The Chief Rabbi, Dr. J.H. Hertz, wrote to the Bishop of Chichester:

"Your words will come as a ray of hope to hundreds of thousands whose annihilation seems to have been decided upon by the n.a.z.i rulers." [187]

At a meeting of the London Diocesan Conference [188] held in Central Hall, Westminster, in 1936, the following resolution was submitted for discussion by permission of the Bishop of London:

"This Conference, while fully aware of the difficulties that must arise from the presence in certain districts of large populations of people of other religious beliefs and social habits, a.s.serts that the Jew and the Christian are equal children of G.o.d, and therefore calls upon all Christians to stand firm against any and every attempt to arouse anti-Semitic feeling for political or any other needs." [189]

The Bishop of Chichester was very active in promoting help for Christians of Jewish origin. [190] This subject is, however, beyond the scope of this book.

In the summer session of the Church a.s.sembly, in June 1938, Dr. Bell pleaded that the needs of Jews and Christians alike should be remembered.

"The Bishop of Chichester moved: That this a.s.sembly records its deep distress at the sufferings endured by 'non-Aryan' Christians, as well as by members of the Jewish race, in Germany and Austria, and urges that not only should everything possible be done by Government aid to a.s.sist their emigration into other countries but also that Christians everywhere should express their fellows.h.i.+p with their suffering brethren by material gifts as well as by personal sympathy and by prayer."

He said he did not want to speak of political matters in a country with which they desired to be friends, nor to attack the leaders.h.i.+p of the great German State. He asked the a.s.sembly not to make any protest against a system, but to record its deep distress at the suffering of Christians and Jews... <76> What could members do? First of all they must not forget it, but let it be printed on their memory and never rest while the distress was unhealed. They must remember the needs of Jews and Christians alike. It was wrong to separate the Jews and leave the Jews to the Jews and the Christians to the Christians.

They both made a deep appeal by their sufferings to all humanity and above all to the Christian Church.'...

First of all they could pray for the sufferers; prayer from the heart availed and was a great bond of fellows.h.i.+p. Next they could feel deeply for and with them until something was done. Thirdly there was material help...

He asked for their (the a.s.sembly's) help and for the help of their const.i.tuents all over England and he asked for the awakening of conscience. They would not forget and he could not forget that their Master was a Jew, a non-Aryan. They thought in their hearts that if they saw their Master in sorrow they would wish to help him, but it was right to remember the parable that their Master uttered of judgment and what He said when He rebuked certain disciples: 'For I was an hungered and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty and ye gave me no drink: I was a stranger and ye took me not in: naked and ye clothed me not: sick and in prison and ye visited me not.' When the disciples in defending themselves asked what he meant, the Master added: 'Verily I say unto you, in as much as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me'.

He was convinced that their att.i.tude in England and in the Church of England to the needs of those suffering non-Aryan Christians and members of the Jewish race was the test of their att.i.tude to their Master himself. It was because of that that he felt so deeply and that he asked them to give their prayers and sympathy and their material help.

The motion was carried. [191]

The Bishop of Chichester followed this move with a plea for more vigorous Government action in his maiden speech in the House of Lords, on July 27, 1938.

He began with a strong condemnation of the n.a.z.i persecution:

"I cannot understand - and I know many Germans - how our own kinsmen of the German race can lower themselves to such a level of dishonour and cowardice as to attack defenceless people in the way that the National-Socialists have attacked the non-Aryans. <77>

He then pleaded with the Government to follow up the initiative of President Roosevelt by increasing its facilities for training younger refugees in Great Britain, by providing greater scope for settlement in the Colonies, and by persuading the Dominions to open their doors more widely.

The Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs a.s.sured him that the Government would do what it could. But Dr. Bell remarked a few weeks later in his Diocesan Gazette:

"It is almost as hard to understand the seeming apathy with which the fate of the Jews and the non-Aryan Christians is being regarded by the people of the British Empire...

These non-Aryans can no longer be called 'refugees' for they have as yet no country of refuge. We emphasize the responsibility of the British Empire in this connection, because the British Colonies and the British Dominions cover the larger part of the whole available globe. It seems to us impossible, both on the grounds of charity and on the grounds of statesmans.h.i.+p, that the doors can remain forever shut." [192]

Resolutions adopted by the Presbyterian Church of England exposed the danger of anti-Semitism existing in England in those days.

In 1937, the General a.s.sembly stated:

"The a.s.sembly notes with concern the attempts which have been made to create racial antipathy against the Jews, with whom the a.s.sembly expresses its sympathy.

The a.s.sembly expresses its conviction, that in a nation professing Christianity, no discrimination on grounds of race must be recognised.

The a.s.sembly urges that the freedom accorded by law in this country to citizens of any faith to live in peace and pursue their lawful callings shall be specially safeguarded.

The a.s.sembly resolves to send a copy of this resolution to the Board of Deputies of British Jews, and to the Home Secretary." [193]

In May, 1938, the General a.s.sembly adopted the following Resolution:

"The a.s.sembly urges its faithful people to encourage every effort to overcome the evil spirit of anti-Semitism which thing we hate." <78>

There was hesitancy in the minds of some about the word 'hate', when the Convener moved this resolution, but the a.s.sembly overwhelmingly approved of it. [194]

The General a.s.sembly of the Church of Scotland certainly did not mince words.

It declared in 1936:

"The General a.s.sembly learn with profound regret that the past year has brought no alleviation of the sufferings caused to the Jewish people by the inhuman political, social and economic persecutions prevalent in Central and Eastern Europe.

They protest against the religious intolerance, the narrow nationalism and race-pride on which anti-semitic hatreds are based.

They call on the Christian people of Scotland, in loyalty to the law of Christ and their own high traditions of liberty and toleration, to rid their minds of all narrow anti-Jewish prejudice, and to broaden out their obedience to the Gospel ever commanding peace and goodwill to all men.

The General a.s.sembly again commend to the liberality of their faithful people appeals made on behalf of refugee Jews from Germany and other lands, specially remembering the Christians of Jewish race who are involved in the terrors of persecution." [195]

In 1937, the General a.s.sembly declared:

"The General a.s.sembly renew in Christ's name their condemnation of the unabated brutality still being dealt to the Jewish minorities in Central and Eastern Europe, and lament that the protesting voice of the Christian Church has been so barren of result.

They deprecate the attempts in certain parts of England to create antipathy against the Jews." [196]

The statement adopted in May 1938, reads as follows:

"The General a.s.sembly renew their protest against the virulence and cruelty of the attacks still being directed against helpless Jewish minorities in Central and Eastern Europe, and they affirm that no Church can be truly Christian and anti-semitic at one and the same time." [197]

The first reaction to the horrors of the "Crystal Night" pogroms was a letter of the Archbishop of Canterbury to "The Times":

"I believe that I speak for the Christian people of this country in giving immediate expression to the feelings of indignation with which we have read of the deeds of cruelty and destruction which were perpetrated last Thursday in Germany and Austria. <79> Whatever provocation may have been given by the deplorable act of a single irresponsible Jewish youth, reprisals on such a scale, so fierce, cruel and vindictive, cannot possibly be justified.