Should Such a Faith Offend? Bishop Barnes and the British Eugenics Movement, C
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
RADAR Research Archive and Digital Asset Repository Should such a faith offend? Bishop Barnes and the British eugenics movement, c. 1924-1953 Patrick T Merricks (2014) https://radar.brookes.ac.uk/radar/items/c63959ce-9451-4fc8-8943-7c25dc2b4f8a/1/ Copyright © and Moral Rights for this thesis are retained by the author and/or other copyright owners. A copy can be downloaded for personal non-commercial research or study, without prior permission or charge. This thesis cannot be reproduced or quoted extensively from without first obtaining permission in writing from the copyright holder(s). The content must not be changed in any way or sold commercially in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders. When referring to this work, the full bibliographic details must be given as follows: Merricks, P (2014) Should such a faith offend? Bishop Barnes and the British eugenics movement, c. 1924-1953 PhD, Oxford Brookes University WWW.BROOKES.AC.UK/GO/RADAR 1 SHOULD SUCH A FAITH OFFEND? BISHOP BARNES AND THE BRITISH EUGENICS MOVEMENT, C.1924-1953 THESIS SUBMITTED FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY PATRICK T. MERRICKS DEPARTMENT OF HISTORY, PHILOSOPHY AND RELIGION, OXFORD BROOKES UNIVERSITY AUGUST 2014 2 ABSTRACT This dissertation explores the eugenic ideology of E.W. Barnes in its conceptual evolution and practical application from 1924 to 1953. As the Bishop of Birmingham and one of the prominent members of the Eugenics Society, Barnes used the pulpit as a platform to promote eugenic reform both before and after 1945. Above all, he believed it essential for Britain’s biological and spiritual progress to address the alleged widespread mental deficiency in the population through eugenic measures, namely: birth control, sterilization and euthanasia. Barnes’ unique blend of Modernist Christianity and biological determinism received national media attention. Responses to his creed were highly polarized, oscillating between praise and moral reprehension. It is surprising that historians of religion and eugenics have largely overlooked Barnes and his considerable contribution. Towards rectifying this neglect, this dissertation represents a new insight in the growing literature on both the British eugenics movement in general and the attitudes of the Anglican Church towards eugenics in particular. By engaging with these two broad spheres of thought, Barnes’ ideas offer a lens through which one can view the somewhat blurred lines between ‘traditional’ religion and ‘secular’ eugenics in the 20th century. Rather than constituting mutually antagonistic approaches, eugenic and Christian interpretations of social improvement were seen by a number of eugenicists at the time as complementary. If the path towards human biological improvement was charted by eugenicists, then according to Barnes, Christianity held their moral compass. After the fall of Nazism, the British eugenics movement found itself discredited and marginalized. In the eyes of many, eugenics was complicit – or at least guilty by conceptual association – in the National Socialist humanitarian atrocities, which were becoming widely known. Remarkably, while many eugenicists chose to distance themselves from negative eugenics after the Second World War, Barnes endorsed sterilization and euthanasia all the more fervently. While many responded with vehement criticism, opposition to his suggestions was not universal, and many continued to agree that, among other things, it was a national responsibility to prevent the ‘mentally deficient’ from reproducing. In analysing the development of Barnes’ eugenic ideas between c. 1924 and 1953, this dissertation has also opened new avenues of research, in particular the examination of ideas relating to eugenics and religion in Britain and the extent to which eugenic concerns continue to permeate biomedical debates today. - Patrick T. Merricks, August 2014 3 CONTENTS INTRODUCTION 5 CHAPTER I 45 FROM SCIENCE AND RELIGION TO RELIGION AND EUGENICS, C.1920-1925 CHAPTER II 89 TOWARDS NEGATIVE EUGENICS, C.1926-1929 CHAPTER III 142 “GOD AND THE GENE,” PART I, C.1930-1932 CHAPTER IV 199 “GOD AND THE GENE,” PART II, C.1933-1935 CHAPTER V 244 PACIFISM AND POPULATION, C.1936-1945 CHAPTER VI 291 E.W. BARNES VS. THE ‘SCRUB’ POPULATION, C.1945-1953 CONCLUSIONS 348 BIBLIOGRAPHY 365 4 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This dissertation is dedicated to my grandparents, Kenneth and Heather Hammond, and parents, Tim and Hilary Merricks. I also thank some good friends for their kind support: Marius Turda, Tudor Georgescu, Roger Griffin, Pete Mills, Stephen Byrne and Simon Wilson. 5 INTRODUCTION We all desire to improve the stocks of which our race consists. […] We know that many children born had better not exist, and I have been converted to a belief in euthanasia and to acceptance of the principle of sterilisation of those carrying unwholesome genes. 1 - E.W. Barnes, 20 February 1945 In the final months of the Second World War, the Archbishop of Canterbury, Geoffrey Fisher, received a private letter in which the author revealed a passionate sympathy for sterilization and euthanasia. The letter was written by one of the most remarkable figures in the British eugenics movement: Ernest William Barnes (1874-1953), the Bishop of Birmingham from 1924 to 1953. Barnes became one of the most prominent and outspoken eugenic campaigners, arguing for the introduction of eugenic measures to solve the ills of society and regenerate modern Britain. Though a member of the British Eugenics Society from 1924 until his death in 1953, and at times gaining a significant amount of publicity, historians have largely ignored Barnes, in part, reflecting Frederick Hale’s assertion that research “on the history of specifically Christian responses to eugenics in the United Kingdom [...] remains in its infancy.”2 In Britain, the three decades that spanned Barnes’ tenure as Bishop of Birmingham saw a number of dramatic social and political changes, including universal enfranchisement, 1 Ernest W. Barnes, ‘Reply to Fisher RE: Artificial Insemination,’ (20 February 1945), The Papers of E.W. Barnes, Special Collections Library, University of Birmingham, 9/21/10 (Hereafter: EWB X/YY/ZZ). 2 Frederick Hale, ‘Debating the New Religion of Eugenics: Catholic and Anglican Positions in Early Twentieth- Century Britain,’ The Heythrop Journal 52 (2011), 456. 6 mass unemployment and social unrest, all-out war and austerity, then post-war reconstruction, the birth of the welfare state and National Health Service, and the beginnings of mass immigration. During this period, Barnes developed his worldview (along with several other Anglican Church leaders of the time) in line with the scientific revolutions of the late 19th and early 20th centuries. For Barnes, this allowed the replacement of seemingly out-dated and ‘superstitious’ religious ideals with the cult of human enhancement through eugenics. Barnes saw eugenics as a means to fulfil God’s divine, evolutionary plan for humanity, drawing both on theories of modern science – particularly evolutionary biology – and Christianity to develop his own distinct ideology. Barnes was unusual for a Churchman, openly supporting a number of ‘modern’ viewpoints not conventionally associated with the Anglican Church, including pacifism, evolutionism, racism, sterilization, birth control and divorce. He also cultivated relationships with prominent eugenicists, including the birth control enthusiast, Marie Stopes, in the 1920s, and the Secretary of the Eugenics Society and supporter of artificial insemination, C.P. Blacker, in the post-war period. As Bishop of Birmingham, he delivered lectures at prestigious events, such as the Modern Churchmen’s Conference in 1924, attended the 1930 and 1948 Lambeth Conferences, and took part in several Convocations, one of which resulted in the Church of England relaxing its attitude on divorce in the 1930s. He also presented several papers to scientists and doctors – including members of the British Medical Association (BMA) and British Association for the Advancement of Science (BAAS) – celebrating the advancements made by modern science while urging the need for reconciliation with religion; which, in his view, represented a moral compass for social progress. Meanwhile, in an attempt to bridge the gap between the Church and eugenics, 7 Barnes delivered the Eugenics Society’s flagship ‘Galton Lecture’ on two occasions, in 1926 and again in 1949. Although he identified with the eugenics movement for thirty years – even supporting a law on sterilization in the early 1930s – Barnes only began directly advocating the introduction of eugenic measures after the Second World War. For many, this was all too soon after the defeat of Nazi Germany, which had employed eugenic principles to a shocking degree, permanently discrediting the eugenics movement. Barnes openly preached eugenics, then, at a time when the horrific crimes of the Holocaust were gradually being brought to the attention of the general public, which made for a fascinating and polarized debate. During the late 1930s and particularly after 1945, Barnes used his religious and public prominence as a platform to promote the eugenic cause. It was topics such as over- population, racial integration, mental deficiency, the differential birth rate and, significantly, sterilization and euthanasia, from which Barnes gained most responses, both positive and negative. The aim of this dissertation is to provide an unprecedented analysis of Barnes’ ideology, contextualized within