Part 31 (1/2)
In our day it has happened on a scale without parallel. Their sufferings are appalling and entirely undeserved. It should be our aim to a.s.sist them in all ways in our power; for their need is desperate. <237> But there is more in their claim than a plea for sympathy. One of the tests of a people's civilisation is its capacity to treat well a defined minority.
To fail in this is to revert to the ethics of the wolf-pack; and to succeed is the evidence of moral stability.
In the case of the Jews our task is the easier because the moral principles which we profess are largely drawn from that sacred literature which we share with them. We should be standing together in loyalty to those principles against all who repudiate or ignore them. Anti-Semitism is evidence of a barbarous outlook and a religious apostasy.” [521]
In the same month, the Free Church Federal Council sent a letter to the Chief Rabbi, Dr. Hertz, expressing ”the deep feelings of indignation and sympathy with which the Free Churches of this country regard the cruel persecution from which the Jewish race is suffering through the tyranny exercised by the Axis powers”. The message continued:
”We a.s.sure you of our continued prayers to Almighty G.o.d that its sufferings may speedily be brought to an end, and that all peoples may once again enjoy freedom of wors.h.i.+p, preaching and teaching according to conviction without incurring civil disability or penalty in any form.” [522]
On October 29, 1942, an audience of 10,000 a.s.sembled in the Albert Hall to voice their protest against ”the ruthless policy of extermination decreed by the n.a.z.is and their satellites against the Jewish population in all territories under their sway”. The Archbishop of Canterbury was in the chair.
”Speaking about the deportations from France, the Archbishop mentioned the fact that children from two years upwards are now also being deported. 'There is something familiar about that,' he said, 'but when the earlier n.a.z.is ma.s.sacred the Innocent of Bethlehem it was on those of two years and less that destruction fell; and that in a smaller number.'...
The Archbishop concluded by saying that:
”he was grateful for this opportunity to share in the effort to express our horror at what has been and is being done, our deep sympathy with the sufferers, our claim that our own Government should do whatever is possible for their relief, and our steadfast resolution to do all and bear all that may be necessary to end this affliction.” <238>
Dr. I. S. Whale, Moderator of the Free Church Federal Council, speaking in the name of the Free Church, declared that anti-Semitism in all its forms was ”an outrage against that sanct.i.ty of law which is one of the most precious gifts of ancient Israel to modern Christianity”. Bishop Matthew spoke on behalf of the Roman Catholic Church. The following resolution, moved by the Archbishop of Canterbury, was unanimously adopted:
”This meeting, representative of British public opinion and of the United Nations fighting in the cause of freedom, places on record its profound indignation at the unparallel atrocities which have been and are being committed daily by the German Government and its satellites against the unarmed citizens of countries under the n.a.z.i yoke.
It records its horror at the deliberate policy of extermination which the n.a.z.is have declared against the Jews wherever they are to be found, and extends its profound sympathy to the families of the unhappy victims of a systematic terror carried out by wholesale ma.s.sacre, the murder of innocent hostages, the inhuman separation of children from their parents and other unspeakable cruelties and atrocities.
This meeting expresses its heartfelt admiration for the heroism and gallantry of the fighting forces of the United Nations now leading us to victory, and desires to convey its deep sense of grat.i.tude to those people in the occupied territories who, despite the terror, have done so much to help and succour their Jewish fellow-victims.” [523]
On November 10, 1942, the Archbishop of Canterbury, inaugurating a new Parliamentary session, drew once more the attention to the extermination of the Jews, that ”horror which is going on almost at our door”. Contrasting ”what is still our standard of living” with the ordeals of the afflicted, ”packed in cattle trucks... sixty in each...given little food” so that ”on one occasion they all died of starvation”, he inquired ”whether it is thought possible that we may be able to do something to bring relief to these sufferers”. He mentioned as a s.h.i.+ning example ”the amazing generosity”
of the Swiss whose ”frontier has been technically closed but actually open”
and suggested that Britain should give aid to the Swiss in support of refugees who can make their way there. He also recommended the granting of visas to those able to reach Britain: <239>
”I hope that we should not in such a case waste our time in considering whether we have done as much or more than other nations for people who are in this kind of distress; the only question which really matters is whether we have done all we can...
Again I hope we shall not waste time by considering whether these people fall into the categories drawn up to regulate such matters. Categories are nothing but administrative headings, and can be altered, if we wish, to include some who do not fall under them...” [524]
The Archbishop of Canterbury again urged the Government, in a letter to ”The Times” [525], to admit to Britain ”any refugee who might succeed in escaping”.
c. Retribution for the Persecutors; Intercession for the Persecuted
At the beginning of December, 1942, the Archbishop of York delivered a speech in the House of Lords. The Archbishop said:
”Men, women and children are being ruthlessly put to death by ma.s.sacre, poison, gas, electrocution, or being sent long journeys to unknown destinations in bitterly cold weather without food or drink. Children that die on the way are cast out from the open trucks to the side of the railway. Such is. .h.i.tler's new order.”
The Archbishop called upon the Government
”...to state solemnly that when the hour of deliverance comes, retribution will be dealt out not only on the cold-blooded and cowardly brutes who order these ma.s.sacres, but also on the thousands of underlings who appear joyfully to be carrying them out.” [526]
The ”Solemn Statement” requested by the Archbishop of York (and many others) was published on December 17, 1942, simultaneously in London, Was.h.i.+ngton and Moscow, with the a.s.sent and support of all the Allied Governments and of the British Dominions. The text was as follows: <240>
”The attention of the Governments of Belgium, Czechoslovakia, Greece, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, the United States of America, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, the Union of the Soviet Socialist Republics, and Yugoslavia, and of the French National Committee, has been drawn to numerous reports from Europe that the German authorities, not content with denying to persons of Jewish race in all the territories over which their barbarous rule has been extended the most elementary human rights, are now carrying into effect Hitler's oft repeated intention to exterminate the Jewish people in Europe.
From all the occupied countries Jews are being transported, in conditions of appalling horror and brutality, to Eastern Europe. In Poland, which has been made the princ.i.p.al n.a.z.i slaughterhouse, the ghettos established by the German invaders are being systematically emptied of all Jews except a few highly skilled workers required for war industries. None of those taken away are ever heard of again. The able-bodied are slowly worked to death in labour camps. The infirm are left to die of exposure and starvation or are deliberately ma.s.sacred in ma.s.s executions. The number of victims of these b.l.o.o.d.y cruelties is reckoned in many hundreds of thousands of entirely innocent men, women and children.
The above-mentioned Governments and the French National Committee condemn in the strongest possible terms this b.e.s.t.i.a.l policy of cold-blooded extermination. They declare that such events can only strengthen the resolve of all freedom-loving peoples to overthrow the barbarous Hilarity tyranny.
They reaffirm their solemn resolution to ensure that those responsible for these crimes shall not escape retribution, and to press on with the necessary practical measures to this end.” [527]
The Bishop of London, Dr. Fisher (later on to be the Archbishop of Canterbury) voiced in the House of Lords ”the whole hearted support for the statement which is forthcoming from Christian circles”. Referring to the appeal made by the Archbishop of York, the Bishop said:
”It would be a satisfaction to the Archbishop and others if it were made clear that retribution will be exacted not only from those who devised and ordered these proceedings, but also in due degree of responsibility from those who carried out joyfully and gladly the orders which were given to them.
The deeds were so repugnant to the laws of G.o.d and to every human instinct of decency that whoever took a share must receive due retribution for them.
He hoped that it would be made clear that we and all our Allies would offer free asylum gladly to all who could escape.”
The Bishop also urged that: <241>