THE POPE AND THE WAR
[To Me Editor of THE SPEIVATOR.1
Sin, —Is not your admirable journal taking up a rather unnecessarily self-righteous attitude as regards the pm- noancements of ecclesiastical dignitaries on the Italo-Ethiopian affair ?
Last week you contrasted the Pope's silence on the quest' with the "courageous utterances of the Archbishop of Canter- bury. It does not, surely, require a high degree of courage to be firm with Mussolini from the fastnesses of Lambeth. In view of the present state of public opinion in this country, it might take a good deal more courage to adopt the opposite line. Whereas, there must have been a definite amount of (-mirage involved in the silence and darkness ot the Vatican. alone in the midst of an illuminated bell-ringing and feverishly rejoicing city.
The Pope. as one of his most eminent followers has said. is one poor, weak, old man, among millions of strong-willed, headstrong people who are neither old nor weak. In that situation he has shown a measure of courage, though doubtless not as much as could be wished for in the Vicar of Christ. Our own emlesiasties are. in this matter, in the happy liosit ion of being able to voice their righteous indignation amid the almost unanimous plaudits of their countrymen no doubt a desirable thing to do at times, but one that does not call for any particular courage. When the position was otherwise. when to resist a war-minded nation would have required great courage, at the time of the Boer War or in 1014, did our religious leaders display as MUCII readiness to do so even as the Pope has recently displayed ? Is it not the ease that, broadly speaking and with individual exceptions, all Churches have always blessed the wars of their respective nations ; but that the Chureh of Rome has sometimes been compelled by its international character to take up a .1t more deprecatory rititude to the wars even of' devoutly Catholic countries than
hayc Churches whose membership is effectively confined to one country ? When have the bells of St. Paul's been silent while London was mallieking over a victory ?
As to your indignation with the Catholic Herald for .stating
that England "intends to use Poison-gas next time," is it not a little absurd, in view of the admitted fact that we are at present engaged both in making it and in experimenting on its more effective use ? Why, if we do not contemplate, in any circumstances, having to use it ? Let me say that I am not either a Catholic or a member of any Church. (I was trought up in a small, dissenting sect.) Moreover, like the majority of English people, I consider that Italy has just consummated one of the great crimes of history. But to exhibit the usual English complacency and self-righteousness, without any grounds for either, does not seem to me a desirable way of meeting the situation. To sum up, Sir, let us not be absurd. The Archbishop of Canterbury has fortunately had no occasion to display courage in this matter. And we do intend to use poison-gas "next time."—I am, Sze.,
[It was not the Popes silence of which we wrote—a dignified silence could have been understood—but his virtual con- gratulation of the forces of aggression on their achievement. As to poison-gas, it is obvious that experiments in protection against gas cannot be carried out without experiments in the manufacture of gas. That the British Government intends to break the 1925 poison-gas convention we decline to believe. Great Britain, like most signatories, reserved the right to employ gas against an adversary employing it first.--En. The Spectator.]
Previous page
