The Church

The position of the Church is in many ways similar. The bishops, like the generals, are sitting pretty. Not materially; the Spanish Church is not rich in the sense that its members are highly paid, though the extensive clerical building programme suggests considerable capital resources, some of which may come from outside Spain. The satisfac- tion of the bishops stems from their political power and from the realisation that in almost every activity the. hand and influence of the Church are prominent. The then Foreign Minister summed up the position accurately when he said of the Concordat in 1953 that it systematised 'an almost ideal regime of relations between the Church and the State, as befits the system of perfect collabora- tion between the two powers that the National Movement established in our country.' The poli- tical succesS of the Church is not matched by any comparable religious success, but this does not seem to disturb the hierarchy, no doubt because they shut their eyes both to the fact and to its cause.

Spanish bishops have been brought up to be- lieve that the separation of Church and State is heretical; and any who have come to doubt the truth of this dogma have had their doubts stilled by remembering that they were appointed by General Franco:, under the Concordat the Caudillo in effect appoints the bishops. (There is, of course, nothing new in this; the custom goes back to Ferdinand and Isabella.) Further. they well remember the Civil War and are grateful to Franco for his protection then. During the war all but three--the Bishops of Vitoria and Calahorra, and, significantly, since it was in his archdiocese that some of the worst church burn- ings and priest-murders took place, the Cardinal Archbishop of Tarragona, Vidal Barraquer- signed a declaration supporting him. After the war Franco refused to allow the Cardinal Arch- bishop to return to his diocese on the ground that he must be a Red.

The hierarchy consider the present form of government in Spain to be that which, in a well-

ordered world, all Christendom would have. Some of them are socially progressive. The Bishops of Zaragoza and Malaga and the ex-Bishops of Cordoba are the most prominent examples. The Bishop of Zaragoza has issued some fiery pastoral letters; last year one of them said : 'In twenty years no one has done anything to cure the social problems of Spain, and in consequence the workers are condemned to permanent discontent.' The Bishop of Mdlaga has greatly helped the poor in his diocese and has been prominent in Catholic working-class activities, while the ex- Bishop of Cordoba managed to do much for workers' housing. But even bishops who are inclined to be socially progressive are politically reactionary.

The political views of the average Spanish bishop are about as enlightened as those of Pio Nono and the Syllabus of Errors. Their opinion of universal suffrage is similar to that of Sir Roy Welensky and Dr. Verwoerd: To them demo- cracy, anarchy, Socialism and Communism are roughly synonymous, and equally anathema. One prelate told me that he was against democracy because he was against swings of the pendulum. Evidently he did not regard civil wars and military revolutions as swings of the pendulum. Holding the views they do the hierarchy presumably ascribe the periodic catastrophes that overtake their Church to the peculiarly sinful nature of the Spanish worker—an uncomfortable thought in view of the centuries of the Church's power in Spain—or to particularly bewildering acts of God.

The younger priests have no such illusions. Many of them would not disagree with a word written here. They know that when the Church 'Not only do we consider a republican regime of parliamentary democracy imprac- ticable in Spain, but also in other countries as for example in England. . . . This regime if it should last long would be the death of her powerful Empire.'

General Franco, July, 1937.

'We have created a democracy and natural organisations which are in harmony with the people.'

General Franco, November 4, 1959.

becomes closely, involved with the State it neces- sarily gets blamed for the latter's shortcomings, and that people who oppose Franco, therefore, tend to oppose the Church as well. They ascribe the Church's misfortunes over the last 150 years to two causes: to its having been closely bound up with the State and to its nearly always having sided with the rich against the poor. They would like to see the Concordat torn up and the Pope, not the Spanish Government, ap,point the bishops. They would like the relationship between Church and State to be such that the Church can freely criticise the Government; and they would like to see the end of the Church's control in education.

In short, they want a Church Spiritual and not a Church Temporal. Only then, they believe, will there be a prospect of a genuine religious revival in Spain. Living so much closer to the people they are in a better position than the bishops to see how far the de-Christianisation of Spain has gone and to assess the true position of the Church—a difficult thing to do since in many places people go to mass not for religious reasons but in order to keep in with the Church and the regime. Militant atheism in the middle classes seems to have given way to a somewhat tired toleration. On the other hand, anti-clericalism amongst the workers has been growing in the last few years. One survey by Catholic Action of a workers' suburb showed 89 per cent, of those ques- tioned admitting to being definitely anti-clerical and 7 per cent, going to church regularly. A few years ago the Archbishop of Valencia estimated that 17 per cent. of the population of his diocese" were practising Catholics. In the middle and upper classes, of course, and in the Basque provinces the proportion is much higher.

The war memorials and the inscriptions on churches demonstrate the difficulties and the mistakes of the Church, though it cannot be blamed for the Valle de los Caidos. This church built inside a mountain near the Escorial was intended to be the burial place of those who fell in the Civil War on the Nationalist side and also, it is claimed, of those who fought for the Republic. In fact it is the burial place of neither side, since the relatives even of the Nationalist dead did not want their remains uprooted, and the relatives of the Republican dead never con- sidered it. Probably out of the million or so who died in the Civil War fewer than a thousand lie in the Valle de los Caidos. It has an unfortunate entrance arcade which looks like a Victorian rail- way viaduct, but the inside is impressive through sheer size, and the only slight hint of The Loved One is the canned monkish music which is chanted out of every corner. Much the best feature of the place is the enormous cross, more than 450 feet high, on the top of the mountain.

There are several reasons for confidently dis- missing as bogus the claim that the Va,Ile de los Caidos is meant to be a gesture of reconciliation. There is little point in reconciling the dead if you do not reconcile the living as well; and there have been no attempts to make the symbol a reality in any other part of the life of the country. The use of political prisoners for part of its con- struction was not a tactful way of indicating re- conciliation. Nor was it exactly conciliatory of the Caudillo to talk at its opening about his 'Crusade' and to add that during it 'there was much provi- dential and much miraculous.' He did not say whether the miracles were Mussolini's and providence was Hitler or vice versa. The war memorials throughout the country, even in Cata- lonia and Valencia where the great majority of the dead were Republican, mention only those who fought on the winning side and record that they fought 'For God and Spain.' It would have been a more effective as well as a cheaper act of reconciliation to add the names of their opponents to these memorials. Still, even if the Caudillo had been sincere, the sad fact is that in Spain today the Cross is not a suitable symbol of reconciliation.

Since many convinced Christians fought against Franco, the inscriptions on the memorials For God and Spain' are a little unfortunate, even allowing for the many terrible atrocities com- mitted by the Republicans against priests and churches. When the Generalissimo finally con- quered the Basque provinces he shot fifteen priests who had supported the Republicans. Presumably they had been fighting against God and Spain. On a high proportion of the cathedrals there are glaring inscriptions to Jose Antonio Primo de Rivera. The uninitiated would think he was the patron saint of Spain or the founder of the Spanish Chureh. In fact he was the founder of the Falange, the Spanish Fascists. The bishops were so powerful at the end of the war that if they had wanted to they could surely have refused, as indeed did Cardinal Segura at Seville, to have their cathedrals defaced by these inscriptions. Ironically, Jose Antonio believed in the separa- tion of Church and State.

Where the Vatican stands is not altogether clear. The new Pope, much more liberal than his predecessor, is generally assumed to be uneasy about the present position and to be not exactly a wholehearted admirer of the Caudillo. One has some doubts as to whether General Franco has in his study a signed photograph of John XXIII in the place where during the war there stood 'Can you assure us that no part of the national territory will be given up to any Foreign power or used as a base for military, naval or air purposes?'

'We would no longer be nationalists if we gave up one single square inch of our terri- tory.'

General Franco, July 14, 1937. (in an interview with the Liverpool Daily Post.) three conspicuous autographed photographs: Pius XII in the middle, flanked on one side by Hitler and on the other by Mussolini. (When the chances of an Axis victory had begun to look dim the two latter were discreetly removed.) But John XXIII is thought to be much under the influence of the Curia. What may be loosely called the Holy Office Cardinals—Pizzardo, Ottaviani and Tedeschini--are widely said to sup- port (or have supported) the Spanish hierarchy, and the Assistant Secretaries of State Dell'Acqua and Samorre to oppose it, while the Secretary of State, Cardinal Tardini, appears to waver ;n the middle. The transfer from the Holy Office last month of the eighty-two-year-old Pizzardo and the death last week of the eighty-six-year-old Tedeschini will not have strengthened the hands of those who favour the continuance of the present situation. There is little doubt that the Vatican has urged a measure of disengagement, but nothing that could be called a reversal of previous policy seems yet to have taken place. Rome would in any case have to be wary. The obedience of the Spanish Church is liable to be tempered by the suspicion that the Pope and the Vatican may be insufficiently Catholic. Perhaps nothing decisive can be expected at least until after the Council.