No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 16 September 2015
It is ironic that it should have been the leader of the church with the greatest proportion of working-class members who took up the most hostile stance to the General Strike of 1926. While Francis Bourne (1862–1935), Cardinal Archbishop of Westminster, won the plaudits of the Establishment for his unambiguous denunciation of the strike, that cautious septuagenarian Randall Davidson, Archbishop of Canterbury, found himself cast in the unlikely role of the workers’ friend after his illstarred attempt to conciliate the two sides. Sheridan Gilley has highlighted another contrast: while in 1926 Bourne found himself sharply opposed to labour, in a 1918 pastoral letter he had been insistent that the Church should reach an accommodation with the ‘modern labour unrest’. While Gilley implies that his General Strike condemnation was uncharacteristic, Buchanan suggests that this was closer to expressing his ‘real political views’ than his 1918 statement. This article aims to provide a closer examination of the shift in Bourne’s attitude, and to consider the broader episcopal response to social and political questions during these fraught years.
1 The authoritative study of the churches’ responses to the General Strike is Mews, pp. 318–37. Bourne’s pronouncement is discussed in Oldmeadow, II, chapter thirty-one; Davidson’s rôle is discussed in Bell, II, chapter eighty. Also useful for Christian attitudes to the General Strike are Oliver, J., The Church and Social Order: Social Thought in the Church of England, 1918–1939 (London 1968)Google Scholar, chapter four; an excellent study is Brown’s, S. J., ‘A Victory for God’: The Scottish Presbyterian Churches and the General Strike of 1926’, Journal of Ecclesiastical History, 42 (October, 1991), pp. 596–617 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Kent, J., William Temple: Church, State and Society in Britain, 1880–1950 (Cambridge, 1992)Google Scholar, chapter three; Bennett, B. S., ‘The Archbishop of Canterbury in Politics, 1919–1939: Selected Case Studies’ (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Cambridge, 1992)Google Scholar, chapter three; Machin, G. I. T., Churches and Social Issues in Twentieth-Century Britain (Oxford, 1998), pp. 35–41 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
2 Gilley, S., ‘The Age of Equipoise, 1892–1943’, in McClelland, V. A. and Hodgetts, M., From Without the Flaminian Gate: 150 years of Roman Catholicism in England and Wales 1850–2000 (London, 1999), p. 44 Google Scholar.
3 Buchanan, T., ‘Great Britain’, in Buchanan, T. and Conway, M. (eds), Political Catholicism in Europe, 1918–1965 (Oxford, 1996), p. 259 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
4 As Gilley points out, Bourne’s reputation was not advanced by Oldmeadow’s ‘singularly unctuous and over-defensive biography’, ‘Age of Equipoise’, p. 34.
5 E. Norman, Roman Catholicism in England From the Elizaethan Settlement to the Second Vatican Council, p. 109; Hastings, A., A History of English Christianity 1920–1985 (London, 1986), p. 144 Google Scholar; Gilley, ‘Age of Equipoise’, p. 34. See also Buchanan’s comments in ‘Great Britain’, p, 249.
6 Rome, Archives of the Sacred Congregation of Propaganda, 102 (1904), rubr. 54., Bishop Cahill to Cardinal Gotti, u/d.
7 Oldmeadow, II, p. 168.
8 Leslie, S., The Passing Chapter (London, 1934), p. 205 Google Scholar. This was Lady Kenmare’s description.
9 Cashman, J., ‘The 1906 Education Bill: Catholic Peers and Irish Nationlists’, Recusant History, 18 (October 1987), pp. 422–39Google Scholar; McClelland, V. A., ‘Bourne, Norfolk and the Irish Parliamentarians: Roman Catholics and the Education Bill of 1906’, Recusant History, 23 (October 1996), pp. 228–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
10 For the history of the CSG see Cleary, J. M., Catholic Social Action in Britain, 1909–1959 (Hinckley, 1961)Google Scholar. See also Keating, J., ‘Roman Catholics, Christian Democracy and the British Labour Movement 1910–1960’ (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Manchester University, 1992)Google Scholar; Doyle, P., ‘Charles Plater and the Origins of the Catholic Social Guild’, Recusant History, 21 (May 1993), pp. 401–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Wraith, B., ‘A Pre-Modern Interpretation of the Modern: The English Catholic Church and the “Social Question” in the Early Twentieth Century’, in Swanson, R. N. (ed.) The Church Retrospective (Studies in Church History, 33; Woodbridge, 1997), pp. 529–45Google Scholar.
11 For reference to Bourne’s shy reserve see Mathew, D., Catholicism in England 1535–1935: Portrait of a Minority: Its Culture and Traditions (London, 1938 edn.), p. 241 Google Scholar; Ward, M., Insurrection versus Resurrection (London, 1937), p. 150 Google Scholar; Oldmeadow, II, p. 345; Ward, M., Unfinished Business (London, 1964), pp. 90–1Google Scholar; Sheed, F., The Church and I (London, 1974), pp. 82–3Google Scholar; Norman, Roman Catholicism in England, p. 109; Hastings, English Christianity, p. 145; McClelland, ‘Bourne, Norfolk and the Irish Parliamentarians’, p. 228.
12 For the episcopal career of Amigo see Clifton, M., Amigo: Friend of the Poor (Leominster, 1987)Google Scholar. Clifton deals with the question of the division of the dioceses in considerable detail. Another account can be found in Foster, S., ‘A Bishop for Essex: Bernard Ward and the Diocese of Brentwood’, Recusant History, 21 (October 1993), pp. 556–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Oldmeadow’s account (II, pp. 123–39) is useful though partisan.
13 See Aspden, K., ‘The English Roman Catholic Bishops and Politics, 1903–1943’ (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. University of Cambridge, 1999), pp. 95–9Google Scholar. An extended version of this thesis is to be published as Fortress Church: the English Roman Catholic Bishops and Politics, 1903-c. 1962 (Leominster).
14 Oldmeadow, II, p. 124.
15 ‘H[is]. E[minence] has lately been saluted as a “cheerful Cardinal” in contrast with “a gloomy dean”‘: Address entitled ‘Christ or Chaos’ given by Frederick Keating at Manchester on 24 November 1921, A.A.L., Keating Papers, Series 7 IV A/8. The ‘gloomy dean’ referred to was Dean Inge of St Paul’s. Bourne’s reputation for optimism spread to Rome. Merry del Val, former papal Secretary of State, remarked to Fr J. Broadhead of Ushaw College: ‘Yes, indeed, you are right: it seems strangely incongruous to speak of joy in these days . . . the flood of evil on every side is very distressing and I am at a loss to understand what Cardinal Bourne means when he speaks as if the world were better after the war from a religious standpoint. I am afraid the evidence is all the other way at present and it is no good closing our eyes to the facts’: Ushaw College Archives, OS/J 54, Merry del Val to Fr Broadhead, 5 Apr. 1920.
16 For instance, Bourne pressed temperance at the low week meetings of 1910, 1911 and 1915: A.A.W., Meeting of the Bishops, Acta.
17 Bell, II, pp. 951–2.
18 Lambeth Palace Library, Randall Davidson Papers 520, fol. 327., Bourne to Davidson, 4 Feb. 1920.
19 Bourne, Francis Cardinal, The Nation’s Crisis (London, 1918), p. 13 Google Scholar. This pastoral letter drew heavily on a manuscript prepared by Leslie Toke of the CSG, entitled ‘The Social Unrest’. Bourne had approached Fr Plater for his assistance in the drafting of his pastoral letter, and Plater in turn drew on Toke’s manuscript. A copy of ‘The Social Unrest’ is held in the Catholic Social Guild Archives, Plater College, Oxford.
20 Ibidem, p. 13.
21 Norman, E. R., Church and Society in England 1770–1970 (Oxford, 1976), p. 241 Google Scholar.
22 Bourne, Nation’s Crisis, p. 7.
23 Ibidem, pp. 11–12.
24 Ibidem, p. 13.
25 Ibidem, pp. 5–6, 13.
26 Ibidem, p. 14.
27 Ibidem, p. 16.
28 Downside Abbey Archives, Gasquet Papers, File 889, Stuart Coats to Gasquet, 27 Oct. 1918
29 Doyle, P., ‘The Catholic Federation 1906–1929’, in Sheils, W. J. and Wood, D. (eds), Voluntary Religion (Studies in Church History, 23; Oxford, 1986), pp. 461–76Google Scholar. There is evidence to support this in the Casartelli papers, which includes student correspondence, held at Ushaw College.
30 Catholic Times, 18 Dec. 1908.
31 Catholic Federation (July 1914).
32 See, for example, the encyclical Il Fermo Proposito (1905), a translation of which can be found in Carlen, C. (ed.), The Papal Encyclicals 1903–1939 (Raleigh, 1981)Google Scholar. References to papal encyclicals in this article are taken from Carlen.
33 As noted in Coventry, J., ‘Roman Catholicism’, in Davis, R. (ed.), The Testing of the Churches 1932–1982: A Symposium (London, 1982), p. 17 Google Scholar.
34 Birmingham Archdiocesan Archives, D Series, Casartelli to llsley, 29 Apr. 1920.
35 Bossy, J., The English Catholic Community 1570–1850 (London, 1975), p. 334 Google Scholar
36 Western Daily Mercury, 7 July 1913. (From a cuttings file held at the Plymouth Diocesan Archives.) Quoted also in Larkin, E., ‘Socialism and Catholicism in Ireland’, Studies, 74 (Spring 1985), p. 81 Google Scholar.
37 Keating stressed his ‘lowly birth’ to the Prefect of Propaganda when his name was being mentioned in connection with Northampton. It was generally regarded as advantageous for the bishop to possess sufficient private wealth in this most impoverished of dioceses. Rome, Archives of the Sacred Congregation of Propaganda Fide, 443 (1908), rubr. 140, Keating to Cardinal Gotti, 16 Jan. 1908.
38 A.A.S., Amigo Papers, Correspondence with Bishops, Keating to Amigo, 31 Mar. 1917.
39 Northampton Diocesan Archives, Keating Papers, FV. 1(G), Keating to Cardinal Gasparri, u/d but 1919.
40 Ibidem, Amigo to Keating, 28 Aug. 1919; A.A.W., Bourne Papers, Hi.2/128, Canon Moyes to Canon Jackman, u/d but probably late 1919. See also the correspondence in A.A.S., Amigo Papers, ‘Political 1919’. It was not until 1924 that Bourne pronounced in favour of the Labour Party, significantly in the year that it formed its first (minority) government. There is a discussion of the question of Catholics and Labour Party membership in Doyle, P. J., ‘Religion, Politics and the Catholic Working Class’, New Blackfriars, 54 (May 1973), pp. 218–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
41 Salford Diocesan Archives, File 161, Casartelli to Knox, 9 Feb. 1917.
42 A.A.S., Amigo Papers, Correspondence with Bishops, 23 Nov. 1918.
43 See Waller, P. J., Democracy and Sectarianism: a Political and Social History of Liverpool 1868–1939 (Liverpool, 1981)Google Scholar.
44 Heenan, J. C., A Crown of Thorns: An Autobiography 1951–1963 (London, 1975 edn.), p. 230 Google Scholar.
45 Tablet, 5 Apr. 1919.
46 Catholic Federationist, Mar. 1923.
47 A.A.W., Acta, Meeting of the Bishops, 10 Apr. 1923.
48 A.A.W., Bourne Papers, Bo.5/76a, Bourne to an anonymous C.O.P.E.C. supporter, 5 Dec. 1922.
49 See e.g. Salford Diocesan Archives, File 159, Casartelli to F. W. Aspinall, 15 Sept. 1912; Ibidem, File 161, Casartelli to Thomas Burns, 20 Aug. 1916.
50 Downside Abbey Archives, Bede Camm Papers, Vol. II (C), Cary-Elwes to Dom Bede Camm, 29 Dec. 1924.
51 A.A.W., Bourne Papers, Bo.5/76a, Ada Streeter to Bourne, 16 Dec. 1923.
52 Norman, Church and Society, p. 300.
53 Archives of the English Province of the Society of Jesus, Francis Devas Papers, Francis Urquhart to Francis Devas, 2 Jan. 1917.
54 A.A.W., Bourne Papers, Bo.5/76a, Francis Urquhart to Bourne, 20 Dec. 1923.
55 Ibidem, Bourne to Fr O’Hea, 7 Jan. 1924; Bourne to Fr O’Hea, 21 Jan. 1924.
56 Ibidem, Keating to Bourne, 19 Jan. 1924.
57 For the Malines Conversations see Lahey, R. J., ‘Cardinal Bourne and the Malines Conversations’, in Hasings, A. (ed.), Bishops and Writers (Hertfordsire, 1977), pp. 81–105 Google Scholar; Dick, J. A., The Malines Conversations Revisited (Leuven, 1989)Google Scholar; Barlow, B., ‘A Brother Knocking at the Door’: The Malines Conversations 1921–1925 (Norwich, 1996)Google Scholar.
58 Birmingham Archdiocesan Archives, Ad Clerum, 12 Feb. 1924.
59 Clifton Diocesan Archives, Burton Papers, Casartelli to Burton, 28 Feb. 1924.
60 A.A.W., Bourne Papers, Bo.5/76a, Fr O’Hea to Boume, 12 Apr. 1924.
61 Proceedings of C.O.P.E.C.: A Report of the Meetings of the Conference on Christian Politics, Economics and Citizenship (London, 1924), p. 212 Google Scholar
62 Plater College Archives, Fr Parkinson to an Oscott priest, 21 Apr. 1924.
63 Keating’s name was being mentioned in connection with the see of Birmingham in 1917, but he dismissed such talk in a letter to Amigo: ‘I have no ambition but to be left alone. Northampton suits me down to the ground: no “curia” to interfere between me and my clergy: no seminary to empty the till and add to my cares: no endless confirmations, ordinations and visitations: but just enough to keep me from rusticating at home and the whole of England from my surplus energy! Does the old goose envy his domesticated relative? Therefore don’t talk to me of Archbishoprics and such like vanities. Not being consciously a prodigal, why should 1 want to “go back”?’, A.A.S., Amigo Papers, Correspondence with Bishops, Keating to Amigo, 3 Dec. 1917.
64 ‘When he was transferred to Liverpool disease had already impaired his frame’: Cathedral Record (July 1931).
65 Cathedral Record (June 1933).
66 A.A.L., Keating Papers, Series 4 I A/1, Keating to Mr Leyland, 13 Jan. 1924.
67 Quas Primas, 197, p. 276.
68 A.A.L., Keating Papers, Sermon given at St Charles’, Series 7 IV A/77; see also Ibidem., A/88, for notes for a sermon given at SS Peter and Paul’s, Bolton, on 11 Oct. 1925.
69 Conway, M., Catholic Politics in Europe 1919–1945 (London, 1997), p. 42 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
70 Ubi Arcano Dei Consilio, 192, p. 228.
71 A.A.L., Keating Papers, Series 2 I D/1, Archbishop Keating’s Lenten Pastoral Letter of 1923.
72 von Arx, Jeffrey Paul, ‘Catholics and Politics’, in Mc, V. A.Clelland and Hodgetts, M., From Without the Flaminian Gate (London, 1999), pp. 245–71 Google Scholar.
73 Minutes of a meeting of the clergy of central Liverpool held in St Mary’s Hall on 24 Jan. 1928, A.A.L., Keating Papers, Series 5 1 B/3.
74 Quoted in Mews, p. 326.
75 Bennett, B. S., ‘The Archbishop of Canterbury in Politics, 1919–1939: selected case studies’ (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Cambridge, 1992), pp. 84–5Google Scholar.
76 Oldmeadow, II, pp. 220–30. Mews is similarly of the opinion that Bourne’s connection with the appeal was ‘fairly vestigial’: Mews, p. 330.
77 The M.P. was Sir Joseph Nail: Bell, II, pp. 1312–13.
78 McClelland, V. A., Cardinal Manning: His Public Life and Influence (London, 1962), p. 148 Google Scholar.
79 Hutton, A. W., Cardinal Manning (London, 1892), p. 210 Google Scholar
80 See also Mews, p. 333
81 Cambridge University Library, Stanley Baldwin Papers 52, Political 3, Memorandum from Sidney Herbert to Bourne, 15 Dec. 1925. Sidney Herbert, Baldwin’s permanent private secretary, was known to support the Bill.
82 Lancashire County Record Office, Blundell Family Papers, DDB1 (Ace. 7725) Box 7, Francis Blundell to Sir William Joyson-Hicks, 1 July 1926; Cambridge University Library, Stanley Baldwin Papers 52, Political 3, Bourne to Stanley Baldwin, 30 June 1926.
83 A.A.W., Bourne Papers, Bo.1/108, Francis Blundell to Bourne, 18 July 1926.
84 Cambridge University Library, Baldwin Papers 52, Political 3, Mr Topping (representative of the Lancashire and Cheshire Conservative Association) to Mr Maclachlan (chief organising agent for the Conservative Party), 22 Jan. 1926; Ibidem memorandum from Mr Maclachlan to Mr Wicks (Baldwin’s permanent private secretary), 28 Jan. 1926.
85 Oldmeadow, II, p. 218.
86 A.A.W., Bourne Papers, Bo.5/77, Stanley Baldwin to Bourne, 10 May 1926.
87 Ibidem, Dom Bede Camm to Bourne, 15 May 1926.
88 Quoted in Bell, II, p.1316.
89 Quoted in Bennett, ‘Archbishop of Canterbury’, p. 108
90 P.R.O., HO 045/19390, 173661/39a, Sir William Joynson-Hicks to Stanley Baldwin, 1 July 1926; Ibidem, 173661/20, Home Secretary’s memorandum to the Cabinet.
91 Francis Blundell to Sir William Joynson-Hicks, 1 July 1926, L.C.R.O., Blundell Papers DDB1 (Acc.7725) Box 7.
92 A.A.W., Bourne Papers, Bo.1/108, Francis Blundell to Bourne, 18 July 1926.
93 Williamson, P., Stanley Baldwin: Conservative Leadership and National Values (Cambridge, 1999), p. 282, 290Google Scholar.
94 P.R.O., CAB 23/53, Cabinet minutes, 23 June 1926.
95 Quoted in Mews, p. 332.
96 A.A.W., Bourne Papers, Bo.5/77, Bourne to Alice Walkden, 28 May 1926.
97 Ibidem, Anon, to Bourne, u/d. For the response of the English bishops to the Anglo-Irish War of 1919–21, see Boyce, D. G., Englishmen and Irish Troubles: British Public Opinion and the Making of Irish Policy 1918–22 (London, 1972), pp. 77–9 Google Scholar; Mews, S., ‘The Hunger Strike of the Lord Mayor of Cork, 1920: Irish, English and Vatican Attitudes’, in Sheils, W. J. and Wood, D. (eds), The Churches, Ireland and the Irish (Studies in Church History, 25; Oxford, 1989), pp. 385–99 Google Scholar; Aspden, ‘English Roman Catholic Bishops and Politics,’ pp. 60–95.
98 Christian Democrat (June 1926).
99 For instance, Edward Towers in his article ‘The Ethics of Strikes’ published in the Ushaw Magazine (March-December 1926, pp 99–108) stated: ‘Neither is any reference made to the recent disputes which have once more brought the question of strikes before the country (p. 99).
100 Ibidem, (July 1926).
101 Ward, Unfinished Business, pp 189–90.
102 A.A.L., Keating Papers, Series 4 I A/6, Keating to Fr McNabb, 14 May 1926. I would like to acknowledge the great efforts of Dr Meg Whittle, archivist of the Liverpool archdiocesan archives, in preserving and cataloguing Keating’s papers.
103 Catholic Times, 18 May 1926.
104 A.A.L., Keating Papers, Series 4 I A/6, Keating to Rob Georgeson, 13 May 1926.
105 Hastings, English Christianity, p. 189. Hastings claims that Keating took a very different view to Bourne, citing his statement that ‘the poor must live; and if private enterprise cannot provide the worker a living, it must clear out for a system that can’. This statement was not, however, made at the time of the General Strike but a month later. Although it could be argued that the June statement was consistent with his long-held social views, it seems to me more an outburst of frustration at the intransigence of the mine-owners than a declaration of support for the General Strike, and perhaps also an attempt to salve his conscience for his earlier hesitancy
106 A.A.L., Keating Papers, Series 4 I A/6, Keating to Fr Mcnabb, 14 May 1926. In the House of Commons on 6 May, Sir John Simon, a Liberal M.P. and notable lawyer, had declared the strike to be an illegal proceeding. There were many dissenting legal voices, among them Sir Henry Slesser who insisted that there was nothing illegal about a sympathetic strike as long as criminal acts did not accompany it.
107 Ibidem, Series 7. III Documents (Sermons and Addresses), Notes for a sermon on the ‘Reign of Christ’, 16 May 1926.
108 Liverpool Catholic Parishioner (June 1926).
109 A.A.L., Keating Papers, Series 4 I A/6, Keating to Lord Stourton, 21 July 1926. Keating was referring to the Sankey Commission set up in 1919 to consider the issues of wages and hours and the question of nationalisation. Although it deferred the question of nationalisation it declared that: ‘Even upon the evidence already given, the present system of ownership and working in the coal industry stands condemned, and some other system must be substituted for it, either nationalization or a method of unification by national purchase and/or joint control’, Farman, C., The General Strike (St Albans, 1972), p. 31 Google Scholar.
110 Plymouth Diocesan Record (June 1926).
111 Quoted in Clifton, Amigo, pp. 110–11.
112 A.A.S., Amigo Papers, Correspondene with Bishops, Thorman to Amigo, 9 June 1926.
113 Mews, p. 333.
114 A.A.S., Amigo Papers, Correspondence with Bishops, Henshaw to Amigo, 11 June 1926.
115 Norman, Church and Society, p. 340; Kent, William Temple, p. 134; Catterall, P., ‘Morality and Politics: The Free Churches and the Labour Party Between the Wars’, Historical Journal, 36 (September 1993), pp. 667–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Bebbington, D., ‘The Decline and Resurgence of Evangelical Social Concern 1918–1980’, in Wolffe, J. (ed.). Evangelical Faith and Public Zeal: Evangelicals and Society 1780–1980 (London, 1995) pp. 175–97Google Scholar
116 Machin, Churches and Social Issues, p. 39