WAR ON RELIGION.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXVII, Issue 20560, 10 May 1930, Page 8

WAR ON RELIGION.

PERSECUTION IN RUSSIA. ARCHBISHOP'S STATEMENT. POISONOUS PROPAGANDA. [FROM OCR OWN CORRESPONDENT.] LONDON. April 4. A detailed statement of tho results of his inquiry into tho religious situation in llussia was made in tho House of Lords, on April 2, by the Archbishop of Canterbury. He moved for papers. Tho matter, ho said, was so grave that it ought to be kept outside party controversy. 110 made no complaint that the Government had given him very liltlo information, and, while he asked for papers, he would not bo surprised if it was beyond the power of the Government to supply them. It seemed to bo impossible -to expect any satisfactory report from tho Embassy in Moscow, said tho archbishop, and experience had proved how useless were inquiries assisted by the Soviet Government. He had reason to know that persons who were suspected of being in communication were placed in great embarrassment, if not danger. He had been assisted in his inquiries by four responsible men, two closely acquainted with llussia, and two public men used to weighing evidence. They had conducted most elaborate researches, lie had also a mass of independent information. Eradication of Religion. Tho campaign was directed against every form of theistic religion. Tho eradication of religion from tho soul of tho people, thr archbishop said, remained tile essential part of tho policy of the great oligarchic power in llussia. By the end 01 1928 and the beginning of 1929 there was a marked renewal of the intensity of anti-religious propaganda. Tiie chief field selected was tho school. In March, 1929, tho Minister of Education drew up a detailed plan of anti-re-ligious teaching in tho schools, and every effort was made to see that tho teachers were absolutely godless. Also tho system of food tickets was inaugurated, but tho disenfranchised were excluded. The regulations were most skilfully contrived to destroy the corporate life of any Church. liecently in Leningrad the Jewish Synagogue--was in need of repair. Its authorities asked for funds —religious author! ties were not allowed to hold funds. They were immediately imprisoned, bomo of them were over 70, and tho synagogue was turned into a " Culture House." Liy Article 17 all charitable work built around religious associations was prohibited, and it was impossible for members to teach their own children except in their own homes or by the admission of not moi v e than three persons from outside. What was t;mght was derided in tho schools. i Hungry Child's Lesson. in a school a hungry child was asked: "Ate you hungry? Then ask God for bread." The child was made to pray and no bread came. The picture of Lenin "was produced, and immediately a portion of bread was put in the child's hands. Freedom was allowed only for attendance at acts of worship at such places as might be permitted, and subject to the most rigorous control. Within last year the speaker said he had received reports of twenty cases from tho official press. No. discrimination was made of tho degrees of guilt—and all religion was treated as prima facie evidence of counter-revolutionary tendencies. In the twenty cases seven persons •were sentenced to bo shot, and 112 persons to imprisonment of .from two to ten years. Baptist pastors and offi;ers were disenfranchised, refused food tickets, subjected to special taxation, forbidden to teach their children except in the house, forbidden to print •or circulate their Bibles,, and their meeting houses were being largely closed. 110 was told that the arrests of Baptists and other evangelical Christians in 1G29 extended to hundreds, mostly by administrative action, without trial. Treatment of the Jews. About the Jews: he had received full information from the chief rabbi. They, too, were under the same disabilities. The publication o:f any literature in tho Hebrew language was forbidden. In one place 200 Jewish children 'were put in prison for a fortnight because they declined to betray the names or whereabouts of their teachers. In the Ukraine, out of 1400 synagogues by the end of last year 506 had been converted into clubs factories, cinemas, and nesthetical centres. There was a peculiar vigour of persecution against the Zionists bocause they were described as agents of British Imperialism. " Sooner or later," said Dr. Lang, " our Government must convey to tho Soviet Government that if relations are to be diplomatically satisfactory they must pay some heed to public opinion in this country which, in this matter, I believo to be singularly clear and united." The time and the mode of the representations the archbishop left to the Government, but his warning rang out strong and plain. The Government's Reply. Lord Parmoor, the Lord President, rather tried the patience of tho peers in challenging the accuracy of tho archbishop's evidence. Tho question, he said, was how we could use such influence as wc possessed to remove these horrors and ; bring about a different state of feeling in Russia. The Government had no intention whatever of severing diplomatic rclations-'or of weakening the opportunities which might be afforded bv those diplomatic relations of exercising influence. Ho did not hold out. any hope of any immediate change, although he was glad to say some change had been going on. But in the meantime the terrors of this movement, still undoubtedly prevailed Tho attitude of any State toward education was a purely internal concern and no representation on such an issue could be justified. Two conditions had to be satisfied before the Government could take action: (1) There must be overwhelming and I accurate proof that great wrongs were ' being committed; (2) that the wrongs were so grave in their character and ex* tent that they been me the roncern of the whole civilised world. There could be no severance of Britain's friendly diplomatic relations if she hoped to influence the Soviet Republic. T.loiion Carried Unanimously. Lord Ponsonby said he doubted whether the House of Lords was the proper place to bring up a matter of this sort if it was to lie kept on the high plane of a. purely religions protest. When the speech of the Primate was analysed, it was reduced to the outcome of a certain type of thought, belief, and policy of the Soviet Government, and that we could not interfere with. What wo could interfere on was proof of wholesale bntclierv." The archbishop, in reply, asserted that Parliament was the proper place fox the .discussion of such a subject, and he claimed that his position as a spiritual peer gave him the rigfit at all times to raise issues affecting the moral and religious life of our own country and, indeed, of the world. The motion was agreed to without a