Canadian Christian Responses to the Nazi Persecution of the Jews 1938-1939

University of Calgary PRISM: University of Calgary's Digital Repository

Graduate Studies Legacy Theses

2011 "Will No One Heed Their Cry?" Canadian Christian Responses to the Nazi Persecution of the Jews 1938-1939

Durance, Jonathan J.

Durance, J. J. (2011). "Will No One Heed Their Cry?" Canadian Christian Responses to the Nazi Persecution of the Jews 1938-1939 (Unpublished master's thesis). University of Calgary, Calgary, AB. doi:10.11575/PRISM/14217 http://hdl.handle.net/1880/48767 master thesis

University of Calgary graduate students retain copyright ownership and moral rights for their thesis. You may use this material in any way that is permitted by the Copyright Act or through licensing that has been assigned to the document. For uses that are not allowable under copyright legislation or licensing, you are required to seek permission. Downloaded from PRISM: https://prism.ucalgary.ca

UNIVERSITY OF CALGARY

―Will No One Heed Their Cry?‖ Canadian Christian Responses to the Nazi Persecution of the Jews 1938-1939

Jonathan J. Durance

A THESIS

SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES

IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE

DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS

DEPARTMENT OF HISTORY

CALGARY, ALBERTA

SEPTEMBER, 2011

The author of this thesis has granted the University of Calgary a non-exclusive license to reproduce and distribute copies of this thesis to users of the University of Calgary Archives.

Theses and dissertations available in the University of Calgary Institutional Repository are solely for the purpose of private study and research. They may not be copied or reproduced, except as permitted by copyright laws, without written authority of the copyright owner. Any commercial use or re-publication is strictly prohibited.

The original Partial Copyright License attesting to these terms and signed by the author of this thesis may be found in the original print version of the thesis, held by the University of Calgary Archives.

Please contact the University of Calgary Archives for further information: E-mail: [email protected] Telephone: (403) 220-7271 Website: http://archives.ucalgary.ca

ABSTRACT

The Kristallnacht pogrom in early November 1938 demanded a response from people across the globe. Historians assessing the Canadian Christian response to the refugee crisis that resulted from this persecution have characterized it as inexcusably silent, an assessment this thesis challenges. Using the records of non-ecclesiastical organizations and published texts in leading newspapers, this thesis catalogues the development of a sustained, variegated protest movement between Kristallnacht and the beginning of the Second World War. It was a movement of concerned Christians led by clergy and prominent lay people who forcefully protested the government‘s inaction and actively sought to intervene on behalf of Jewish refugees. While these involved Christians found the lack of official denominational action reprehensible, their involvement modifies the silence theory and points to a privatization of the religious expression in Canadian culture which upheld the belief that Christianity was a necessary moral and social compass for Canada.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to thank my graduate program advisor, Dr. David Marshall, whose wisdom and experience were essential in helping me see issues more clearly. His guidance in my reading course and his support during my other course work helped me successfully finish a gruelling first year in my two year program and his encouragement, insights, and corrections were invaluable during the writing of this thesis.

I would also like to thank the other members on my examining committee, Dr.

Douglas Shantz and Dr. Paul Stortz, for their valuable comments and insights. Despite his inability to attend the defense due to a family emergency, Dr. Stortz made the effort to provide me with his comments and suggestions. I would like to say a special thank you to Dr. Francine

Michaud as well for allowing me to be her Teaching Assistant and being a friend during my two years in the department. Without the financial assistance of the Social Sciences and

Humanities Research Council of Canada, the Alberta Government, and the University of

Calgary, I would have been unable to enrol in the program or pursue the thesis. I am profoundly grateful for their generous financial contributions that allowed me to stay focused and complete this project.

My family also played a critical role in the writing of this thesis. Both my mother and father read the thesis carefully for errors, but my father, George Durance, in particular, spent many hours reading and made numerous recommendations that greatly strengthened this thesis. Above all, I want to thank my dear wife, Ruth Anne, my constant companion, faithful friend, and life‘s love, who always believed and who stood unwaveringly beside me.

iii

DEDICATION

For the one who said I could do it, Ruth Anne

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Abstract……………………………………………………………………………………...ii Acknowledgments…………………………………………………………………………..iii Dedication………………………………………………………………………………...... iv Table of Contents…………………………………………………………………….……...v

Introduction: The Canadian Contextualization of Kristallnacht….………………………….1 Ch. 1: Outrage and Indignation…………………………………………………………….24 Ch. 2: Organizational Foundations in the CNCR...... 54 Ch. 3: The Politics of Protest……………………………………………………………….86 Ch. 4: Opposition and Perseverance……………………………………………………….115 Conclusion: The Tragedy of Expediency and Fruit of Resolution………………………...138 Bibliography………………………………………………………………………….…….146

v 1

Introduction

The Canadian Contextualization of Kristallnacht

The ―night of the broken glass‖ occurred on November 9 and 10, 1938. It was a night filled with violence, bloodshed, looting, and destruction. Jewish property was confiscated and their holy places desecrated. Rather than just another occurrence in a long series of antisemitic incidents in Nazi Germany, it was an event that helped to define the Nazis‘ Jewish policy and permanently change the world‘s perception of the dangers faced by Jews in Germany during this period.

The incident that preceded the outbreak of violence on the night of November 9 received international attention, including in Canada where the story appeared in newspapers across the country. On November 7, a young Jewish man named Herschel Grynspan attempted to kill the Legation Secretary of the German embassy in Paris, Ernst vom Rath.1 The chain reaction created by his action proved to have wide-ranging and disastrous consequences for the Jewish people, primarily because leading members of the Nazi party saw in it an opportunity to implement a change in Germany‘s policy towards Jews. Reich Minister

Hermann Goering, for example, believed the attempted assassination provided him with a way to resolve an economic problem he faced. His commitment to fulfill the Four-Year Plan led him to believe that he required new revenue and the prospect of seizing Jewish assets seemed ideally suited to his purposes.2 Ironically, Goering‘s manipulation of the events surrounding

1 See Peter Longerich, Holocaust: The Nazi Persecution and Murder of the Jews (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010), 110 for a description of the precipitating events. 2 Ibid., 107.

Kristallnacht exacerbated his problem. So many Jews were deported as a result of his actions that a labour shortage developed, which served to further jeopardised the plan.3

Propaganda Minister Joseph Goebbels also sought to make the most of Grynspan‘s attempt to assassinate Vom Rath. His desire to become involved in the Nazi party‘s ―Jewish policies‖ led him to foster a virulent public response to Grynspan‘s attack.4 Goebbels helped to turn what could have remained a localized incident into an occasion for an antisemitic frenzy that engulfed the country. Fostering a negative Jewish sentiment in Germany at this time was a relatively easy task for Goebbels. Alan Steinweis believes that the number of

German ―participants‖ on that night of violence was ―significantly larger than is often assumed‖ and that the ―circle of participants‖ should include the many Germans who merely heckled from the sidewalks, doorways, and storefronts.5 What these Germans witnessed and participated in was the death of dozens, the destruction of tens of millions of Reichmarks worth of property, and the arrest of 30,000 Jews whom the Nazis deported to the Dachau,

Buchenwald, and Sachsenhausen concentration camps.6

The atrocities committed during these two days were tragically significant for all involved, but the long-term repercussions made the event an ominous marker on the road to the Holocaust.7 Steinweis argues that the Nazis‘ greatest objective in manipulating the events surrounding Kristallnacht was to ―compel the Jews to leave Germany, preferably with as little

3 George Mosse, Toward the Final Solution: A History of European Racism (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1985), 213. After the fact, Mosse argues that Goering ―saw millions of marks worth of usable property destroyed.‖ Furthermore, this damaging economic consequence is testimony to the depth of brutality unleashed by the pogrom. 4 Ibid., 212. 5 Alan E. Steinweis, Kristallnacht 1938 (Cambridge Mass.: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2009), 3-4, 7. 6 Mosse, Toward the Final Solution, 212; Steinweis, Kristallnacht 1938, 1; Longerich, Holocaust, 113. Steinweis notes that at least 300 more died in the concentration camps shortly after the events and should be included in the Kristallnacht death toll. 7 Longerich, Holocaust, 113. Longerich argues that, in many ways, Kristallnacht ―solved‖ the ―Jewish question‖ through the ―social death‖ of Jews still living in Germany. The possibility of a Jewish community in German now seemed impossible.

3 of their wealth as possible,‖ and it was this unmistakable message that was communicated to the international community.8 As Sharon Gewirtz notes, for those who were previously sceptical about the regime‘s intentions in regards to the Jews, ―it was only the horrors of

Kristallnacht which provoked the realization‖ that there could be no Jewish community in

Nazi Germany.9 The evidence of hundreds of burned synagogues, thousands of smashed windows, and numerous acts of individual violence against the Jews made it impossible for the global community to ignore the acts of atrocity the Nazi‘s and their followers were perpetuating on the Jewish people.

This was certainly true in Canada where a large Christian population came to understand with clarity how badly the Nazis and their adherents were treating the Jews. It also became clear to them how little they were doing personally or corporately as a country to help the Jews. For some historians, this passivity and inertia remained unaltered in spite of

Kristallnacht, and this has led them to condemn Christians outside of Europe for failing to act in accordance with their stated beliefs. Robert Ross, for example, characterizes the Christian response to the Holocaust as the complicit ―silence of the Christians.‖10 Judeo-Christian scholar Hyam Maccoby broadened the indictment when he claimed that the underlying antisemitism in Christianity created a pervasive and permissive passivity. To him, the cry heard before every Christian massacre of the Jews throughout history was ―Who killed

Christ?,‖ which left Christians unable or unwilling to protest the persecution of the Jews in

8 Steinweis, Kristallnacht 1938, 3-4. 9 Sharon Gewirtz, ―Anglo-Jewish Responses to Nazi Germany 1933-39: The Anti-Nazi Boycott and the Board of Deputies of British Jews,‖ Journal of Contemporary History 26, no. 2 (April 1, 1991): 265. 10 Robert Ross, So It Was True: The American Protestant Press and the Nazi Persecution of the Jews (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1980), 105; Alan Davies and Marilyn Nefsky, How Silent Were the Churches?: Canadian Protestantism and the Jewish Plight During the Nazi Era (Waterloo: Wilfrid Laurier University Press, 1997); Deborah Lipstadt, Beyond Belief: The American Press and the Coming of the Holocaust, 1933-1945 (New York: The Free Press, 1986), 1. Lipstadt notes the complicit nature of the American Protestant press and the ―heavy burden‖ they bear as a responsible partner in the deaths of thousands of Jews that could have been saved.

Nazi Germany.11 Ultimately, the problem for historians is the apparent conflict between the

Christian affirmation of love, mercy, forgiveness, generosity, and compassion, and their inaction in the face of compelling circumstances. This analysis has led historians to consider

Christians residing in self-proclaimed Christian countries, such as Canada, as culpable and lacking in integrity because of their failure to act in accordance with their stated beliefs and professed theology.

This thesis questions the adequacy of the ―silence‖ theory in the Canadian setting by examining the response of Christians during the most blameworthy period between the events of Kristallnacht and the beginning of the war. Once the war commenced, the mobilization of human and material resources to oppose an array of Nazi injustices captured the attention of the country, and efforts to avert the Holocaust and save refugees became comingled with the war effort. But, during the critical ten month period leading to the war, the Christian response outside of French speaking Canada was multifaceted, often genuinely aligned with Christian teaching, typically a matter of individual conscience rather than denominational socio-political action, and ultimately a bitter disappointment as the protest movement and the initiatives it sponsored failed to change anti-immigration policies or eradicate the underlying strains of antisemitism.

Historic Context of the Thesis: Anti-Immigration and Antisemitism in Regional Canada

Evaluating the Canadian Christian response to the Holocaust is fraught with all the usual difficulties associated with studies of complex social phenomena in Canada. Regional, sectarian, and ethnic differences abound, making layers of interpretation possible, even necessary. From colonial times until the twentieth century, the European settlers who had

11 Hyam Maccoby, ―The Origins of Anti-Semitism,‖ in The Origins of the Holocaust: Christian Anti-Semitism, ed. Randolph Braham (New York: Columbia University Press, 1986), 14.

5 come to dominate the country were transmitters of a received social mythology – a mythology shaped by an old culture rich with folklore and prejudicial assumptions. The resulting social structures, together with their guiding suppositions, shaped how subsequent generations viewed race and ethnicity. While the emergence of observable acts and attitudes of antisemitism did not occur until the mid-nineteenth century when Jewish settlers began to settle in the Montreal area and French settlers had first contact with Jewish people, the local

French-speaking population imported a prejudicial ―theology and folklore‖ from France.12

Gerald Tulchinsky explains that this early antisemitism, grounded as it was in the culture and religion of the French settlers, mutated into xenophobia as time passed. According to

Tulchinsky, this meant that the Jews ―were squeezed between the upper and nether millstones of nationalism and continentalism, between French resistance to change and British disdain for a way of life and institutions which appeared to hinder economic growth.‖13 Historians, such as Tulchinsky and Brown, describe 19th and 20th century Quebec as an area of the country that lived in uneasy tension with an outside world that offered little contact with

Jewish people.

Passive antisemitism took on a more concrete and visible presence in Quebec during the interwar period as the effects of urbanization, economic stagnation, and increased immigration intersected with the fears of a French minority threatened by the wider issues imposed by an English-speaking majority world. This fear led priests, politicians, and intellectuals to actively oppose Jewish immigration.14 The growth of intolerance in Quebec

12 Michael Brown, ―From Stereotype to Scapegoat: Anti-Jewish Sentiment in French Canada from Confederation to World War I,‖ in Antisemitism in Canada: History and Interpretation, ed. Alan Davies (Waterloo: Wilfrid Laurier University Press, 1992), 39-40. 13 Gerald Tulchinsky, Canada’s Jews: A People’s Journey (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2008), 35. 14 Ibid., 233, 237; Esther Delisle, The Traitor and the Jew: Anti-Semitism and xtreme Right- ing Nationalism in Qu e from to (Montreal: R. Davies Pub., 1993), 32-33. Esther Deliesle refrences the Union Nationale party, the priest Lionel Groulx and his Institute d’histoire de l’Am rique fran aise, L‘Action nationale,

6 was not directed specifically at the Jews, but at all foreign individuals, cultures, and, more significantly, religions. William Kaplan‘s intensive historical-legal study of the treatment of the Jehovah‘s Witnesses during this period leads him to conclude that the federal government was willing to punish pacifistic Jehovah‘s Witnesses simply because the sect threatened the religious stability and cultural homogeneity of Quebec. This led to numerous arrests and the forced removal of children from their Witness parents‘ custody.15 The story of the Witnesses leading up to and during the Second World War illustrates the strength of the negative sentiment in Quebec towards non-Catholic and non-Francophone religious and ethnic groups; it also illustrates why the anti-immigration policy and antisemitic philosophy and ideology found such a receptive home in Quebec.16

Historians Esther Delisle, Tulchinsky, and Pierre Anctil have well documented and compellingly argued the existence of ecclesiastic and lay Christian anti-immigration and antisemitic trends in the interwar period in Roman Catholic Quebec. This thesis will rather explore the assertion that the Christian response in Anglo-Canada was inappropriate and unconscionable and suggest that this interpretation needs nuancing.

Outside of Quebec there was an array of interracial issues that paralleled those in

Quebec, including nativism, antisemitism, and anti-immigration policies and attitudes.

Stephen Speisman, for example, argues that in Ontario the effort to recreate the ideals of

Le Davoir, and the Jeune-Canada movements as a minority voice, but a significant political and ideological driving force in Quebec during this time. All of them were anti-immigration and many of them outright antisemitic. 15 William Kaplan, State and Salvation: The Jehovah’s itnesses and Their Fight for Civil Rights (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1989), 62. 16 Pierre Anctil, ―Interlude of Hostility: Judeo-Christian Relations in Quebec in the Interwar Period, 1919-39,‖ in Antisemitism in Canada: History and Interpretation, ed. Alan Davies (Waterloo: Wilfrid Laurier University Press, 1992), 140.

British civilization brought ―significant social exclusion‖ for the Jews.17 Ignorance also played a role in fostering prejudice in Ontario, just as it as it did in Quebec, as those who had little or no contact with the Jews considered them especially undesirable.18 In western Canada, and particularly in Alberta, the numerical insignificance of the Jewish settlement did not prevent nativist and antisemitic views from forming. The economic difficulties of the early twentieth century created a climate of unrest and suspicion, which leads historian Howard Palmer to argue that the antisemitism in Alberta was founded on ―hostility to banks, and a tendency to believe in conspiracies by evil forces bent on oppressing the common people.‖19

There is little argument that nativism and antisemitism predated Confederation, yet it is also true, as Palmer states, that the experience of immigrant groups throughout Canada‘s history has been an ―overwhelmingly positive experience.‖20 When compared to other countries and other times, the degree of antisemitism in Canada was small and would likely have been lost in the shadow of other prejudices except for the event that informs any discussion of antisemitism in the 20th century: the Holocaust. In Canada‘s case, non-virulent forms of antisemitism based on ignorance, xenophobia, and economic uncertainty led to a strong anti-Jewish immigration policy that prevented any substantial Jewish immigration between the mid-1930s and into the Second World War.21

Historic Context of the Thesis: Canada’s Official Immigration Policy in the 1930s

17 Stephen Speisman, ―Antisemitism in Ontario: The Twentieth Century,‖ in Antisemitism in Canada: History and Interpretation, ed. Alan Davies (Waterloo: Wilfrid Laurier University Press, 1992), 114. 18 Ibid., 118. 19 Howard Palmer, ―Politics, Religion and Antisemitism in Alberta, 1880-1950,‖ in Antisemitism in Canada: History and Interpretation, ed. Alan Davies (Waterloo: Wilfrid Laurier University Press, 1992), 171. Feelings of a financial conspiracy almost always corresponded with antisemitism and an hostility towards Jews, even if they were not present in the community. 20 Howard Palmer, Patterns of Prejudice: A History of Nativism in Alberta (Toronto: McClelland and Stewart, 1982), 5. 21 Irving Abella and Harold Troper, None Is Too Many: Canada and the Jews of Europe, 1933-1948 (Toronto: Lester Publishing Limited, 1991), x-xi; Gerald Dirks, Canada’s Refugee Poli y: Indifferen e or Opportunism? (Montreal: McGill-Queen‘s University Press, 1977), 44.

The principal expression of antisemitism in Canada in the 1930s was its immigration policy. In order to clarify the role this policy played in the Christian response to Jewish suffering in Germany, it is important to understand the political environment in which

Christians lived during this period. Irving Abella and Harold Troper argue that the relatively dramatic increase in the Jewish population in Canada during the early twentieth century led to an increasing concern about the immigration of Jews because ―more than any other immigrant group, [they] were rejecting the rural role assigned to foreigners in favour of the urban life.‖22

For Canadian officials involved in the immigration and domestic settlement process, the

Jewish pattern of immigration represented a ―defiant exception‖ to an immigration policy based on frontier advancement.23 For this reason, the government passed an Order-in-Council in 1923 that ranked immigrants as ―preferred,‖ ―non-preferred,‖ and ―special permit,‖ which resulted in most Jews requiring a special permit to enter the country.

This conspicuous and prejudicial categorization of Jews greatly hindered their immigration as the decade of the Great Depression began.24 H. Blair Neatby contends that one of the defining characteristics of the 1930s was that it represented a period when Canadians became obsessed with the concept of their identity, which led to a time of increased government activity in many sectors of society, including immigration.25 Abella and Troper‘s claim that government officials increasingly saw Jewish immigration as a threat to the public‘s preferred definition of Canada – a country rooted in the philosophy of an Anglo-Saxon, rural western frontier – may be an oversimplification, but Gerald Dirks argues that at least part of

22 Abella and Troper, None Is Too Many, x; Tulchinsky, Canada’s Jews, 93.Tulchinsky points out that the Jewish population increased in the Montreal area alone by 300% a decade around the turn of the century. Far higher than any other immigrant group in the region. 23 Abella and Troper, None Is Too Many, x. 24 Tulchinsky, Canada’s Jews, 221. 25 H. Blair Neatby, The Politics of Chaos (Toronto: Macmillan of Canada, 1972), 5; Dirks, Canada’s refugee policy, 44.

Canada was inundated with ―xenophobia which at times gave rise to antisemitism.‖26 In his book on the response of the Canadian Protestant Churches to the international crisis of the interwar period, Robert Wright explains that for many Protestants the ―notion of Canada as an

Anglo-Saxon and Protestant nation‖ was ―deeply entrenched.‖ 27 The government reflected the concerns of many of its citizens that Jews tended to be ―clannish, aggressive and cosmopolitan‖ in ways that did not match their vision of Canada.28

This idealism about the identity of Canada and Canadians played itself out in tangible government policy. In the case of immigration, which is most relevant to the Jewish tragedy of the 1930s and 1940s, it is possible to trace the growing rigidity in the government‘s thinking to the months preceding Kristallnacht. Documents such as a communiqué sent by the Director of Immigration for Canada to the Commissioner of European Emigration on June 6, 1938 make this point. In this document, which the Prime Minister later circulated to his entire

Cabinet as a reference piece, F.G. Blair, the Director of Immigration, communicated that

Canadian immigration had become significantly stricter in the 1930s to the point where

Canada was now limiting immigration to farmers with capital, wives and children with heads of family in Canada, and fiancées.29 Sensitive to international pressure from Great Britain and the United States, Mr. Blair went on to point out that Canada had, in fact, ―extended special consideration‖ to Jewish immigrants and that 35% of Canada‘s Order-in-Council exceptions went to Jews, which put Canada at a higher rate of Jewish immigration per-1000 than the

United States between 1931-1937.30 Mr. Blair admitted that after 1937 Canada‘s immigration

26 Dirks, Canada’s refugee poli y, 44. 27 Robert Wright, A World Mission: Canadian Protestantism and the Quest for a New International Order, 1918- 1939 (Montreal: McGill-Queen‘s University Press, 1991), 224. 28 Ibid. 29 Documents on Canadian External Relations [DCER], vol. 6: 1936-1939. Ed. John A. Monro (Ottawa: Department of External Affairs, 1972) 797. 30 Ibid., 797.

10 had declined dramatically, but he still presented a picture of a Canada historically open to refugees and predisposed to help.31

It was an important document for Prime Minister Mackenzie King because it allowed him to portray Canada in a positive light compared to the United States. Whatever the policy‘s merits may have been in regards to Canada‘s international standing, its implications for the real world of immigration numbers left members of the External Affairs department facing a dilemma. Between July 6 and 13, 1938, a month after the release of this communiqué, Canada participated in the Évian Conference, which President Franklin D. Roosevelt convened to discuss a solution to the refugee problem that was worsening as Germany annexed Austria and threatened Czechoslovakia. Concerns about image and status in the Canadian delegation are almost palpable in the correspondence of attendee H.H. Wrong, Canada‘s delegate to the

League of Nations. He wrote to O.D. Skelton, the Undersecretary of State for External Affairs, that it seemed to him that the Évian Conference was ―going to be a most unpleasant affair.‖32

Mr. Wrong was worried primarily about the publicity surrounding the conference. A few days later, Mr. King clarified Mr. Wrong‘s orders when he informed him in a telegram that ―while it will be necessary to differ from United States if they press for definite undertaking to receive quotas or for permanent organization it is not desired that Canada should take the lead in this opposition‖ to immigration.33 Canada anchored its foreign policy in the months leading up to Kristallnacht on the principle of non-commitment and intentional neutrality. To complicate matters, Canada also wished to promote itself as a country that was particularly willing to serve the needs of the international community.

31 Ibid., 798. 32 Ibid., 806 (June 11, 1938). 33 Ibid., 810 (June 21, 1938).

Mr. King‘s and the Department of External Affairs‘ concerns about the Évian

Conference proved to be unfounded because the American goals were strikingly similar to

Canada‘s. For the Americans, Évian created a forum that allowed them to leave the impression that the world was moving toward a solution to the refugee crisis without committing to specific quotas.34 Even though the Évian conference did not expose Canada‘s latent duplicity and was therefore not embarrassing, it exposed the core modus operandi of the

King government. Image and appearances were important while domestic pragmatic realities meant that noble intentions, Christian or otherwise, were to be modified and muted by expediency.

The dilemma, which resulted from this complicated, conflicted position, worked itself out in the Prime Minister personally. Throughout this period, Mr. King became increasingly sympathetic to the plight of the Jewish people in Germany. A few days before Kristallnacht,

Grynspan‘s shooting of vom Rath captured Mr. King‘s interest. Mr. King felt that the killing was ―a very natural instinct for a child who loved his parents and [who was] driven to destruction by brutal treatment.‖ He also recognized, quite correctly, that such an action was

―certain to be seized upon by the mob in Germany as an excuse for working vengeance on the

Jews.‖35 While this demonstrates Mr. King‘s fine sense of intuition, it also shows his personal sensitivity to the Jewish plight, which became even more evident following Kristallnacht.

The various factions and departments within Prime Minister King‘s government both created and reflected an anti-immigration atmosphere in the country in the months leading up to Kristallnacht. Abella and Troper describe the Department of Immigration, under Mr. Blair, the cabinet, and, ―to a lesser degree,‖ the Department of External Affairs as the ―unholy

34 Abella and Troper, None Is Too Many, 16. 35 William Lyon Mackenzie King, ―A Real Companion and Friend: The Diary of William Lyon Mackenzie King, 1893-1950,‖ Library and Archives Canada, n.d., November 10, 1938, www.collectionscanada.gc.ca.

12 triumvirate‖ that moulded Canada‘s immigration policy.36 Christians willing to protest and take action on behalf of the Jews found themselves operating in this inhospitable environment.

The Prime Minister‘s personal diary and the Department of External Affairs‘ Documents seem to indicate that there was potential for change in their perspective, but their ―Christian‖ sense of moral obligation proved to be of secondary importance to political and social exigencies.

Sympathetic Christians had reason to hope for change, but they learned to face the realities of a politically and socially conflicted Canada.

Historiographical Context of the Thesis: An Overview

The established Christian churches in Canada – both Protestant and Catholic – had their social roots firmly imbedded in European culture. Consequently, the churches played a conscious and unconscious role in transplanting ideas of both non-discrimination and antisemitism. In other words, voices of discrimination and tolerance found their antecedents in the European heritage. Esther Delisle shows in her controversial PhD thesis that in the French speaking regions of Quebec, the Roman Catholic Church continued to perpetuate misconceptions about Jews into the 1930s and helped to foster an aggressive anti-immigration attitude.37 She demonstrates convincingly that extremist right wing nationalists, many of whom were priests or lay people associated with the Roman Catholic Church, used the rhetoric of antisemitism and nativism to preclude the possibility of Jews playing any meaningful role in French Canadian society.38 In his study of antisemitism in Quebec during

36 Abella and Troper p. 50. 37 The forward to Delisle‘s book notes that Laval University nearly refused to give her an examination and that it took two years for the examination committee to finally convene. Her thesis was accepted. 38 Delisle, The Traitor and the Jew: Anti-Semitism and xtreme Right- ing Nationalism in Qu e from to 1939, 40, 136, 138; Tulchinsky, Canada’s Jews, 237. One of the more poignant, but typical, examples Delisle uses is a quote from André Laurendeau who says that ―We cannot open our doors to ‗useless mouths, strangers...who do not even try to settle, social revolutionaries, creatures who refuse to assimilate into any race and who, by virtue of their religion, interests and traditions, constitute a state within a state.‘‖ Tulchinsky also argues for this coalescence of ―priests, politicians, and intellectuals‖ against immigration of Jews.

13 the interwar period, Pierre Anctil found additional evidence that led him to define this

―Catholic brand‖ of antisemitism as ―Judeophobia,‖ which he also argues had nineteenth century antecedents.39 While the documentary evidence for the complacency and even complicity of the Catholic Church in French speaking Canada is relatively clear, the situation in English speaking Canada was different.

Because of a relatively harmonious cultural and religious perspective in English speaking Anglophone North America and because of a shared geographical detachment from the European crisis, it is useful and advisable to consider American research, as well as

Canadian, when assessing the Protestant response to the pre-Holocaust events of the 1930s.

Four historians have provided the most thorough research into the nature and extent of the

Christian Protestant response in North America and all argue that Kristallnacht was a significant moment for the Christian community, even though they assess the response from three distinct points of view. In their book, How Silent were the Churches? Canadian

Protestantism and the Jewish Plight during the Nazi Era, Alan Davies and Marilyn F. Nefsky survey Canadian Christian responses to the Jewish plight in the 1930s and into the Second

World War. To them, the importance of Kristallnacht for Christians lay in fact that the pogrom was what they term one of the four ―milestones on the road to Auschwitz,‖ along with the

Aryan Laws of 1933, the refugee crisis in 1939, and the initiation of the Holocaust itself.40 In the end, though, Davies and Nefsky conclude that ―no sustained universal outcry on behalf of the beleaguered refugees ever erupted from either the Christian or the Protestant rank and file, unless the coast-to-coast post-Kristallnacht rallies are regarded in this light. Neither Christian

39 Anctil, ―Interlude of Hostility,‖ 158; John English, Citizen of the World: The Life of Pierre Elliott Trudeau (Toronto: Alfred A. Knopf Canada, 2006), 48-49. English notes these sentiments in Pierre Elliott Trudeau‘s nationalist experiences as a youth. For example, in 1938 he supported the ―buy from your own‖ movement and was frustrated at efforts to create electoral boundaries that would allow for Jewish representation. 40 Davies and Nefsky, How Silent Were the Churches?, 13.

14 nor Protestant Canada spoke with a collective voice.‖41 Few Christians, in their minds,

―understood the true dimensions of the evil‖ and the Christian community, therefore, was hindered by an inherent ―negativity towards Jews and Judaism that embedded itself in classical Christian theology.‖42 Davies and Nefsky‘s source material leads them to support the idea that churches and Christians in general were largely silent, although they qualify this silence by recognizing the immediate response to Kristallnacht may have been an exception to the general pattern. Their qualification is one of the reasons that the Kristallnacht response warrants further investigation. For them, it was an aberration followed by further silence. This thesis provides a more nuanced analysis of their fundamental question about the churches‘ response by using new source material.

American historians William Nawyn and Robert Ross have also studied the North

American Christian response to the Jewish plight leading up to the Second World War, although their works focus almost exclusively on Christian Protestants in the United States. In his book Ameri an Protestantism’s Response to Germany’s Jews and Refugees -1941,

Nawyn expresses his belief that Kristallnacht was the ―single most important event affecting response in the mainline denominations, particularly in the official and press categories. It seems to have awakened the churches to the magnitude of the Nazi attack on the Jews as nothing else did.‖43 Nawyn contends that before Kristallnacht, the Protestant churches‘ primary response constituted ―verbal comment,‖ but ―subsequent to that event rhetoric became muted and action became prominent.‖44 He also points out that much of this protest

41 Ibid., 128. 42 Ibid., 131. 43 William Nawyn, Ameri an Protestantism’s Response to Germany’s Jews and Refugees, 1933-1941 (Ann Arbor Mich.: UMI Research Press, 1981), 79. 44 Ibid., 187.

15 arose ―perhaps more out of general humanitarian than specifically religious sentiments.‖45

Even though he suggests Kristallnacht inspired some meaningful Christian response, Nawyn‘s conclusion aligns with Davies and Nefsky‘s thesis, for he feels that, overall, ―rhetoric predominated over action‖ in the Protestant Christian community.46 According to Nawyn, it was obvious that Protestant Christians in North America understood the pogrom of 1938 to be unusual and worthy of notice and protest, but he feels they still had an inadequate response when one considers the bigger picture of suffering and injustice.

Robert Ross, in his book So it Was True: The American Protestant Press and the Nazi

Persecution of the Jews, assesses the response of the Protestant Christians as expressed in their press even more critically than Davies and Nefsky or Nawyn. Like the other three historians, he believes that after the events of Kristallnacht there was no doubt in the minds of

American Protestant Christians that the Jews were suffering horrible persecution in Germany.

He points out that in 1938, for the first time, references in the Protestant press to the Jewish plight outnumbered references to the persecution of the church in Germany, yet he claims that the ―silence of Christians‖ theory remains accurate.47 In claiming that there was silence while also arguing that the Protestant press was openly opposed to the Nazi regimes‘ Jewish policy after the events of 1938, he appears to contradict himself. However, for him there ―occurred another kind of ‗silence‘ that was more disturbing in its consequences, the ‗silence‘ embodied in the lack of intervention on behalf of the persecuted Jews and the almost total failure of such interventions as were attempted.‖48 When Ross makes these generalizations he has in mind the response of the Protestant press to the entire period of Nazi oppression and persecution right

45 Ibid. 46 Ibid., 190. 47 Ross, So It Was True, 105. 48 Ibid., 258-9.

16 into the heart of the Holocaust tragedy. For Ross, the silence of the Christian church is the silence of specific deeds and measurable consequences, not the silence of articles written in

Christian journals. In Canada, the response to Kristallnacht supports Ross‘ contention that something changed in 1938, but this thesis will challenge Ross‘ conclusion that there was

―another kind of silence‖ by showing that there was an active movement to change the

Canadian government‘s policy on the issue of refugees.

These representative studies demonstrate that the scholarly community sees a negative disconnect between stated Christian beliefs in North American churches and their actions on behalf of the persecuted Jews in the decade preceding the Second World War. Historians such as Davies, Nefsky, Nawyn, and Ross acknowledge the initial, significant response in the

Christian community to Kristallnacht, but, as Davies and Nefsky argue, this response was most likely an anomaly or too feeble an effort to warrant a significant caveat to the silence theory.

All of these accounts treat the Holocaust as a unitary phenomenon. As a result, the typical analysis of Kristallnacht and the response in the ten months preceding the war are overshadowed and obscured by the larger phenomenon of the Holocaust. Instead of focusing on the failure of the denominational churches to modify the government‘s position, this thesis investigates the voices of those who spoke out against this silence and sought to make a meaningful difference and then seeks to understand how their protest relates to the silence theory.

Historians have examined and found the response of subgroups other than Christians to be similarly deficient and complex. Two studies that examine the responses of the Canadian academic community to the refugee crisis provide a helpful comparison to the response in the

Christian community. In his article on the Canadian Society for the Protection of Science and

Learning at the University of Toronto between 1935-1946, Paul Stortz recognizes that Canada had one of the ―worst records‖ for helping refugee professors. However, he explores the issue by assessing the ways in which the University of Toronto professors responded to this emergency.49 By focusing on those who attempted to respond, he is able to contextualize the failure by factoring in the ―smouldering moral tension of basic altruism versus personal and professional predispositions and practical considerations‖ associated with the allocation of university resources.‖50

In contrast to Stortz, David Zimmerman looks at the ―academic refugee crisis‖ in a comparative study of other country‘s responses. He concludes that while Britain, American, and Western European scholars ―rallied to support scholars in need of assistance, there was no such movement in Canada.‖51 Zimmerman bases his assessment primarily on the fact that the academics provided no meaningful assistance. For him, the causes were attributable to widespread ―institutional Anti-Semitism‖ and, therefore, Canada‘s relative failure, when compared to similar nations, was a corporate failure, which meant that there was little point in investigating what individuals may or may not have done.52 In some ways, Zimmerman‘s research and analysis parallels the work done by Davies and Nefsky, and, particularly, Abella and Troper. On the other hand, Stortz‘s analysis seeks to understand the role of those who broke the silence in the academic community and to explain their motives and limitations.

This thesis follows a similar approach in that it seeks to look more closely at the apparent

49 Paul Stortz, ―‗Rescue Our Family From a Living Death‘: Refugee Professors and the Canadian Society for the Protection of Science and Learning at the University of Toronto, 1935-1946,‖ Journal of the Canadian Historical Association 14, no. 1 (2003): 234. 50 Ibid. 51 David Zimmerman, ―‗Narrow-Minded People‘: Canadian Universities and the Academic Refugee Crises, 1933-1941,‖ Canadian Historical Review 88, no. 2 (June 2007): 298. 52 Ibid., 292.

18 silence during a critical timeframe to see if the response was not more variegated than the prevailing theories of passivity and group silence suggest.

Sources and Methodology

The three monographs reviewed above rely primarily on denominational journals for their source material. While the use of these journals has merit, their value is limited by the fact that they cannot account for some of the most important public and spontaneous responses following Kristallnacht. Unlike the monthly or quarterly denominational journals, newspapers reported the day-to-day news of the churches, which included sermons, meetings, and events. Consequently, the newspapers provide a more informative popular assessment of the Christian reaction than the carefully prepared articles and screened documents found in denominational journals and business meeting minutes. In the 1930s, newspapers were the most significant source of information for Christians and non-Christians alike, and were the most likely medium Canadians would have turned to for any story of importance. Peter

Desbarats, in his book Guide to Canadian News Media, describes the 1930s in the words of media historian Paul Rutherford as ―the golden age of print journalism.‖53 Moreover, Patrick

Brennan argues that by the late-1930s journalists increasingly reported on the policies and personalities in the government bureaucracy. He explains that ―it was ‗professional‘ to report public policy accurately, comment on it intelligently, and, in the process, exercise influence on the government and the public alike.54 As a result, no adequate understanding of the Christian response and its engagement with the government is possible without careful consideration of newspaper accounts over a protracted period.

53 Peter Desbarats, Guide to Canadian News Media (Toronto: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1989), 53. 54 Patrick Brennan, Reporting the Nation’s Business: Press-Government Relations During the Liberal Years, 1935-1957 (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1994), x.

In order to obtain a national, yet regionally sensitive perspective on the Christian response to Kristallnacht this thesis examines The Halifax Herald, The Gazette (Montreal),

Ottawa Evening Citizen, The Globe and Mail, Toronto Daily Star, Kitchener Daily Record,

Winnipeg Free Press, The Leader Post (Regina), The Calgary Herald, Edmonton Journal and

The Vancouver Province over the period November 1938 until September 1939. These daily newspapers proved to be a rich source of relevant information, for every paper gives insight into the Christian response and, on numerous occasions, the reports they printed were front- page news or featured in a prominent column.

All the newspapers published individual responses in the form of letters and editorials, and released public statements made by Christian leaders across the denominational spectrum.

Furthermore, during the months leading up to the war, each newspaper provided evidence of how Christians dealt with the increasingly negative news regarding the plight of the Jews in

Europe. Deborah E. Lipstadt writes in Beyond Belief: The American Press and the Coming of the Holocaust 1933-1945 that Kristallnacht represented an end to the media‘s optimistic perspective on the Nazis‘ treatment of the Jews.55 An examination of these regional newspapers supports Lipstadt‘s assertion that there was a new tone of sobriety, but it also reveals an optimism that forceful protest could affect the Nazi government and certainly influence the Canadian government‘s policy on immigration.

Studies of the Christian response have traditionally focused on formal ecclesiastical bodies and found them ―silent.‖ However, the Christian popular response is not found in denominational institutions and journals, but rather in the informal Christian platforms that dominated the social landscape, such as the Women‘s Missionary Society, the YM/WCA, and forums like the League of Nations Society, women‘s clubs, Rotary clubs, and, especially, the

55 Lipstadt, Beyond Belief, 53.

Canadian National Committee on Refugees and Victims of Persecution (CNCR). These were the platforms Christians used to communicate their ideas and convince an apathetic or otherwise preoccupied public. Research based on the denominational records, such as Davies‘ and Nefsky‘s work, focuses on individual clergy members, such as Rev. C.E. Silcox of the

United Church and Rev. W.W. Judd of the Anglican Church, and thus fails to take into account the work done by lay Christians and the venues in which they chose to demonstrate their convictions. The life and work of Cairine Wilson, Canada‘s first female senator and a devout Presbyterian, best illustrates how valuable lay Christians were in the cause of aiding

Jews in the period leading up to the war. In her biography of Senator Wilson, Valerie Knowles explains that unlike many of her generation, Senator Wilson ―never turned her back on formal

Christianity‖ and, therefore, ―believed deeply in personal responsibility and the concept of stewardship.‖56 Franca Iacovetta also attributes Senator Wilson‘s ―staunch‖ Presbyterianism to her view that politics were ―a way of performing God‘s work on earth.‖57 Her religious faith led her to believe that she was to fulfil God‘s objective ―by supporting humanitarian causes, including world peace, the resettlement of Jewish refugees, and the medical and social work of the League of Nations.‖58 Senator Wilson is the most public and outstanding example of this lay Christian response, but her actions were not isolated: they represent a broader lay

Christian response to Jewish persecution that historians who focus on official denominational records have not adequately considered.

56 Valerie Knowles, First Person: A Biography of Cairine ilson: Canada’s First oman Senator (Toronto: Dundurn Press, 1988), 164. 57 Franca Iacovetta, ―‗A Respectable Feminist‘: The Political Career of Senator Cairine Wilson 1921-1962,‖ in Beyond the Vote: Canadian Women and Politics, ed. Linda Kealey and Joan Sangster (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1989), 65. 58 Ibid.

Access to the CNCR‘s official records and Senator Wilson‘s papers in Ottawa not only gave me insight into how prominent Christian lay people like Senator Wilson responded, but they also provided new insight into the roles of clergy involved in the CNCR, such as Rev.

Silcox, Rev. Judd, and Mr. Raymond Booth of the Society of Friends. This archival work also enabled me to examine the Christian engagement in organizations such as the Hope of Israel and the Canadian Council and the World Council of Churches. From the government‘s perspective, the Director of Immigration‘s papers, the House of Commons Debates, the

Documents on Canadian External Relations, and Prime Minister King‘s meticulously prepared personal diaries all provided me with insights into the way groups and individuals interacted with the federal government and how it, in turn, responded. These sources, taken together with the public record published in the newspapers, represent a fresh and advantageous interface of source material. The story that emerges is one of a multifaceted Christian response, including an active and vocal component that is not adequately represented in denominational documents.

My research methodology enabled me to differentiate categories of response. One of the shortcomings of the ―silence‖ theory, is that historians who have focused on those in leadership have grouped Christians together, thereby showing a remarkable disregard for the diverse nature of the Christian movement. The first theme that becomes apparent following the initial outburst surrounding Kristallnacht is the theological and ideological differences that existed among those Christians who responded. These differences stemmed, primarily, from the divide between more ―liberal‖ and more ―conservative‖ expressions of Christianity.

Significant groups and individuals in both traditions saw the need to help the Jews. For some, the motivation was a Christian humanitarian idealism that focused on the brotherhood of all

22 human beings and the fatherhood of God. For others, support arose primarily from an eschatological and theological conviction that the Jews were God‘s chosen people and the religious relatives of Christians who worshiped the same God. In both cases, whether it was about humanitarianism or a sense of kinship, the responses were distinctly Christian and definitely not ―silent.‖

A second theme threaded throughout the period is the belief among many Christians that the attacks on the Jews and Judaism were, in fact, an attack on Christianity or, at the very least, a foreshadowing of a threat to Christianity. British historian Tom Lawson advocates this conclusion in an article he wrote on the Anglican response to the Holocaust. Writing specifically of Anglicans and their response to Kristallnacht, he argues that,

For Anglican‘s at least, Nazi anti-Jewish intent appeared to be an element of an ongoing, and more general, campaign against the Christian faith. The metaphors employed to describe the pogrom by the ecclesiastical press invoked images of a savage and pre-Christian era. The Anglican episcopate concurred, and situated Kristallnacht within the boundaries of the continuing Nazi affront to Christian civilization.59

There is evidence in the Canadian sources used in this thesis that Lawson‘s contention is valid for Canada as well: Canadian Christians likewise viewed the Nazi attacks on the Jews as a manifestation of a godless Nazism that posed a threat to Christians in Germany and across the globe. After the initial response to Kristallnacht, defined primarily by theological and ecumenical differences, this rather self-centred belief inspired many Christian to call on their elected officials to act on behalf of the Jews as the war approached.

The sources used in this thesis are particularly relevant for a study that seeks to discover how Christians as individuals and groups, rather than churches and organizations,

59 Tom Lawson, ―The Anglican Understanding of Nazism 1933-1945: Placing the Church of England‘s Response to the Holocaust in Context,‖ Twentieth Century British History 14, no. 2 (June 1, 2003): 125. Italic emphasis is his own.

23 responded to the Jewish plight. As Tom Kushner notes in his paradigm challenging work The

Holocaust and the Liberal Imagination, ―the now dominant approach also excludes the relationship between the ‗ordinary‘ individual in the liberal democracies and the Holocaust.

Concentration on high-level decision making can lead to the assumption that the persecution of the Jews in the Nazi era had no bearing on the lives of ordinary people in countries such as the United States and Britain.‖60 He sees this tendency as a failure to realize the breadth of engagement that occurred in all levels of liberal societies, including Canada.

The Christian response was a popular response that went beyond the denominational leadership. The sources best positioned to assess this are not the notes and proceedings of high-level church meetings but the newspapers and the surviving organizational documents of non-ecclesiastic groups such as the CNCR. The response was a multifaceted one with different motives and different messages that endured in the face of expediency, antisemitism, ignorance, and apathy. Consequently, it is inappropriate to state categorically that Christians were disengaged in the face of Jewish suffering and persecution or that the ―Church‖ as a community of believers was silent.

60 Tony Kushner, The Holocaust and the Liberal Imagination: A Social and Cultural History (Oxford: B. Blackwell, 1994), 17.

Chapter 1

Outrage and Indignation

Many thousands of Canadian Christians came together in cities from across the country to protest German atrocities and to campaign for government action in the wake of the

Kristallnacht pogrom of November 1938. Meetings held from Halifax to Vancouver brought

Jewish rabbis, Christian laity, and Presbyterian, United Church, Anglican, and Catholic ministers together in a remarkable demonstration of unity to challenge their country and the world to help the Jewish people. These protests were motivated by concerns for the progress of ―civilization,‖ the ―brotherhood‖ of humanity, and the preservation of a special bond between Judaism and Christianity. These three motivational themes represented two shifts in the historic Canadian Christian response to Jewish persecution. First, the protests represented a shift towards direct engagement with those suffering and action against both the federal government‘s isolationism and the Christian community‘s inaction. Second, the spontaneous, disorganized criticisms expressed in the meetings set the stage for the later development of an organized Christian response that went beyond the confines of denominational strictures to create new venues and platforms for clergy and lay Christians to speak out and meaningfully assist Jewish refugees. These fundamental changes during the three week period following

Kristallnacht were more than just another stage in the unconscionable ―silence‖ of the

Christian community: they were the harbinger of meaningful change as a disparate group reached out to the Jewish community and declared solidarity with it in meetings, sermons, and letters that featured passion and protest.

Synopsis of the Media’s Response to Kristallnacht

Canadian newspapers began reporting the details of Kristallnacht on either November

10 or 11 – Thursday or Friday – and the number of articles multiplied over the weekend and into the following week. The Globe and Mail, for example, had a large capped letter title on the front-page of the November 10 paper, which declared, ―REICH SWEPT BY ANTI-

JEWISH TERRORISM,‖1 and the Toronto Daily Star carried a front-page article on

November 12.2 By the following week, the Jewish plight and the implications of the pogrom received regular attention on the front pages of newspapers across Canada.

The first evidence of a specifically Christian response to Kristallnacht came during the first weekend following the events in Germany. This initial response was mostly in the form of verbal statements included in Armistice Day services on November 11 or in Sunday sermons on November 13, which referred to the pressing nature of the crisis in Germany. For example, the Vancouver Province reported ―many preachers in Christian churches made protests against Germany‘s treatment of a ‗non-Aryan‘ race,‖3 while The Leader Post in

Regina noted that a few pastors referred to the situation in their Armistice Day sermons.4

During the following week, either in special evening meetings or in letters to the papers, newspapers reported several statements from Christian clergy and lay people. The Dartmouth and Halifax Ministerial Association‘s protest statement was the only major Christian response reported in the nine papers used in this thesis. The Halifax Herald featured the meeting at which the statement was issued on its front page and the journalist covering the meeting reported that the Ministerial Association sent a formal letter of protest to Prime Minister King.

The newspaper went on to report that the association called on all Christians in Canada to rise

1 ―Reich Swept by Anti-Jewish Terrorism,‖ The Globe and Mail, November 11, 1938, 1. 2 ―Germans Banish Jews from Business with Fine of $400,000,000,‖ Toronto Daily Star, November 12, 1938, 1. 3 ―City Jews Pray for Persecuted,‖ The Vancouver Province, November 14, 1938, 1. 4 ―Remembrance Day in Saskatchewan,‖ The Leader Post,‖ November 14, 1938, 13.

26 up and give particular attention to the Jewish plight on Sunday, November 20. Other newspapers supported this call by mentioning the upcoming event and publishing advertisements about it.5

On Sunday, November 20, the Christian community heeded the call. Through the organizational efforts of the Jewish Council of Canada and the League of Nations Society,

Christian clergy and Jewish leaders came together to protest and pray in most major Canadian cities. Protesters numbered 5,000 in Halifax, 4,500 in Montreal, 2,500 in Hamilton, 20,000 in

Toronto, 1,200 in Kitchener, and 1,700 in Vancouver.6 The newspapers also reported protest meetings in Kingston, Niagara Falls, London, Kirkland Lake, Winnipeg, and Lethbridge. In all, the Toronto Daily Star claimed at least 60 meetings took place across Canada.7 Based on media coverage and attendance, there can be no doubt that the government and its officials knew about these meetings. For example, not only was the Toronto rally front page news, but the entire third page of the Toronto Daily Star was dedicated to the rally. The paper printed pictures of various clergymen at the meeting and featured a half-page picture of the Maple

Leaf Square Gardens so full that a reported 3,000 people were forced to meet in an overflow site.8 The Vancouver Province reported a similar problem when the Lyric Theatre could only fit 1,400 of the 1,700 that wanted to attend, which left 300 standing outside.9

Not only was the sheer number of Canadians gathering together for Sunday prayer and protest notable, but many of the meetings led to direct contact with government officials. The

Ottawa Citizen and the Edmonton Journal reported that ―Sheafs of telegrams came to the

5 ―Treatment of Jews is Denounced,‖ The Halifax Herald, November 18, 1938, 1. 6 Alan Davies and Marilyn Nefsky, How Silent Were the Churches?: Canadian Protestantism and the Jewish Plight During the Nazi Era (Waterloo: Wilfrid Laurier University Press, 1997), 132-135. 7 ―Jews Sob at Gathering as 20,000 Voice Protest,‖ Toronto Daily Star, November 21, 1938, 1, 15. 8 ―Speakers Warn that Protestants and Catholics also are Threatened,‖ Toronto Daily Star, November 21, 1938, 3. 9 ―1700 Vancouver Folk Vote to Invite Jewish Refugees to Canada,‖ The Vancouver Province, November 21, 1938, 5.

27 government this morning urging that it do something by opening the doors to Jewish refugees.‖10 While the content of these statements and speeches will be addressed further below, the Kitchener statement of protest, which was one of those sent to the Prime Minister, illustrates the rhetoric expressed in these protests:

Our hearts go out in prayer for the persecuted, maligned, wretched Jews in Germany, to all those who are reduced to poverty and slavery and who are driven into exile from their centuries-old homeland because of religious and racial differences. No expression of sympathy without the alleviation of suffering can suffice in this tragedy. We therefore appeal to the government of Canada and to the people of Canada, that the doors of this great freedom-loving country, which helped many exiles to find happy homes within its shores, be opened to an appreciable number of German and Jewish refugees. Let Canada be a haven of refuge to all those whose treatment is a blot on our civilization, to all those who are hunted, slaved, and morally massacred. May God help them!11

This excerpt from the Kitchener protest was particularly poignant given the significant

German population in a city formerly named Berlin. It also makes it clear that the protesters wanted Canadians to feel more than just sympathy; rather, they demanded action on the part of their elected representatives. The references to God were not merely rhetorical flair either, for the chief speaker at the event was Rev. C. E. Silcox, a prominent clergyman in the United

Church. Furthermore, many other local Christian clergy and lay people appended their names to the statement.

The organized meetings were not the only platform for protest during the second weekend after the deplorable events in Germany. There were numerous accounts of pastors preaching sermons on the topic both during the weekend of November 20 and throughout the following week. For example, The Vancouver Province reported that Dr. Clem Davies

10 ―Sheafs of Wires Reaching Ottawa in Protest Against Nazi Pogroms in Germany,‖ Ottawa Citizen, November 21, 1938, unknown page number, ―Pleas for Jews Rain on Ottawa,‖ Edmonton Journal, November 21, 1938, 1. 11 ―‗God Help Us Here if Nazis Rub out Christ, Warns M.P.,‖ Toronto Daily Star, November 21, 1938, 19.

28 planned to speak on the plight of the Jews ―prior to evening worship‖ on Sunday,12 and the

―Realms of Religion‖ section of the Globe and Mail listed several reports of pastors who preached or had information sessions regarding the Jewish persecution.13

A few notable cities had no recorded meetings on November 20. Most prominent among these were Calgary and Edmonton. Although it is possible that protests occurred which the newspapers did not deem newsworthy, this seems unlikely given how carefully the other events were covered. Interestingly, both cities had substantial meetings the following Sunday,

November 27, and, unlike the protest meetings of the weekend before, the Christian community appeared to take complete responsibility for organizational matters. Like the newspapers that reported the meetings on the previous weekend, The Calgary Daily Herald and the Edmonton Journal identified and quoted numerous sermons preached on the weekend and noted the numerous Christian clergy and lay people who were in attendance at the protests.

Throughout the three weeks following the events in Germany, all eleven newspapers provided undeniable evidence that Christians played a leadership role in the nation-wide protest movement. From public venues, such as the mass rallies and group telegrams sent to the Prime Minister, to more private venues, such as church pulpits and prayer meetings, laypeople and clergy from within the Christian community sought to galvanize a Christian response. An examination of their statements of protest reveals three discernable patterns of response.

Perspective One: A High View of Civilization

12 ―Discuss Plight of the Jews,‖ The Vancouver Province, November 19, 1938, 18. 13 ―Realms of Religion‖ The Globe and Mail, November 19, 1938, 11.

The least sectarian argument evident in the response of Christians to Kristallnacht was the belief that the events in Germany were an affront to twentieth century civilization and the

Enlightenment concepts of justice, liberty, and reason. Christians promoting this view were usually adherents of a more liberal theological tradition in Canadian Protestantism and generally members of mainline Protestant denominations. These Christians felt any attack on civilization endangered Christianity because, as they understood it, the two were synonymous.

Newspapers across Canada recorded Christian clergy and laity voicing serious concerns over the derivative effects the events in Germany would have on Christianity across the globe.

They also felt that Nazi barbarism undercut their belief that society was becoming progressively better and more civilized through the beneficent influence of Christianity.

This line of reasoning appeared throughout the three-week period of protest that ended the month of November. In the first week following Kristallnacht, The Halifax Herald, The

Globe and Mail, and The Toronto Daily Star published articles espousing this point of view.

In fact, one of the first reported protests of any kind expressed this Christian understanding of

Kristallnacht in The Halifax Herald on November 15. The writer of the letter voiced concern for the Jewish people and regret at the persecution they were suffering because ―Christendom expects something better in these modern and ‗enlightened‘ times.‖14 For the writer, the oppression of the Jews in Germany was an attack on Christendom because it was Christendom that had fostered modern culture and philosophy. These Christians viewed Germany as a member of an unofficial league of Christian nations that had turned its back on enlightened,

Christian principles. This writer and others argued that, as Christians and leaders of the civilized world, they had an obligation to do what they could to oppose the forces of decline, which National Socialism represented.

14 ―Barbarous,‖ The Halifax Herald, November 15, 1938, 8.

The following day in The Globe and Mail, Rev. Dr. R. G. Stewart of St. John‘s

Presbyterian Church and moderator of the Toronto and Kingston Synod launched an attack on those involved in the German atrocities. The actions of the Nazis, which he claimed were ―just too horrible for words,‖ led him to accuse the German people of being completely uncivilized.15 He asserted,

We are dealing with the same Hun of 1914-1918. I am not so sure the people of Germany are not largely to blame for this mass persecution. They have the kind of government they sought and no government could endure without support from a large section of the people. It is a movement of roughnecks and barbarians.16

Rev. Stewart‘s statement foreshadowed more jingoistic rhetoric derived from the recent memory of the First World War. The protest meetings the following weekend carried similar references to the War and the barbarous ―Hun.‖ As John Webster Grant notes, in the First

World War the clergy went ―beyond such traditional roles‖ as moral support for protest and, while some refrained from this provocative language, others felt the battle against evil still prevailed in Germany and had never ended.17 For these clergy, the barbaric actions during

Kristallnacht were confirmation that the crusade needed to continue and that they were not afraid to use the nationalistic language associated with the Great War.

The Toronto Daily Star had published similar statements a day earlier. In a tone analogous to Rev. Stewart‘s, Rev. Msgr. Michael Cline, rector of Holy Name Catholic

Church, declared that ―such a cult of robbery and bloodshed is proof positive that Hitler is a victim of dementia Teutonica. He opposes and scorns the most fundamental of natural and

Christian virtues, discipline, justice and the charity exemplified in the parable of the Good

15 ―Nazi Campaign against Jews Condemned,‖ The Globe and Mail, November 16, 1938, 5. 16 Ibid. 17 John Grant, The Church in the Canadian Era: The First Century of Confederation. (Toronto: McGraw-Hill Ryerson, 1972), 113.

Samaritan.‖18 In the eyes of Rev. Cline, a rejection of ―Christian virtues‖ was a rejection of all that was reasonable and natural, all that comprised modern civilization.

These three articles in the Herald, Globe, and Star represent the beginnings of a

Christian response based on a fear that Christian civilization was threatened by the Nazi and

German barbarism, which was on display in the Kristallnacht pogrom. The initial concerns reflected in the articles intensified during the protests on the weekend of November 20. For example, Rev. B. Robinson from Fairmount-St. Giles United Church in Montreal added his voice to those concerned for the survival of civilization when he declared he could ―scarcely believe that such a thing could happen in our 20th century civilization.‖19 In his mind, it was only fitting ―that all over the world meetings of protest are being held:‖ the issue was simply that important to Christians.20 The former moderator of the United Church of Canada, Rt. Rev.

Peter Bryce, also employed this rhetoric when he stated at the Toronto protest on November

20 that ―the United Church believes that antisemitism is one of the greatest foes of freedom for all people (applause), and is a scandal to civilization.‖21 For Rev. Bryce, persecution of the

Jews was a clear sign that a government or culture was retreating from civilization. He specifically reminded the audience that ―it could not have been worse in the middle ages.‖22 In defence of Canada‘s supposed Christian civilization, though, Rev. Bryce pointed out the considerable efforts the United Church had made to address the issue of antisemitism in the

Christian community at its last General Council.23 The inclusion of the United Church‘s stance was important for Rev. Bryce because he wanted to distance himself and Christianity

18 ―Nazi ‗Savagery‘ Upon Jews held Shocking, Abhorrent,‖ Toronto Daily Star, November 15, 1938, 33. 19 ―Anti-Semitism Hit by Nazi Atrocities,‖ The Gazette, November 21, 1938, 5. 20 Ibid. 21 ―Jews Sob in Sorrow 20,000 Torontonians Protest Persecution,‖ Toronto Daily Star, November 21, 1938, 15. 22 Ibid. 23 Ibid.

32 from the forces of barbarism, which Rev. Robinson and he saw in ascendancy. An attack on

Jews was not merely an attack on Christian principles of ―justice and right,‖ as Rev. Bryce concluded, but an attack on civilization itself; it was imperative, therefore, that Christians protest and call the country to action.24

While Rev. Robinson and Rev. Bryce were speaking in Montreal and Toronto,

Christians on both coasts of the country were preaching similar messages at the same time. At the Vancouver protest meeting, Rev. G. H. Villett echoed the militaristic and Anglo-centric rhetoric of Rev. Stewart and Rev. Cline in the preceding week. He felt Canada should not only be a participating member of the world‘s civilized countries, but a leading example of it:

‗The duty that faces us today is as compelling as it was in 1914,‘ he said. ‗Surely we are not going to ask Africa or Alaska or South America or Australia or some other place to do the work. We ought not to stand by for a moment and let England bear the burden. We should offer to do our share.‘25

Once again the rhetoric and memory of the First World War was evoked to challenge

Canadian isolationists to respond. In C.P. Stacey‘s seminal work on Canada‘s foreign policy, he argues that isolationism, which carried significant weight in Prime Minister King‘s government and, more specifically, in the Department of External Affairs, generally avoided

―what may be called the moral questions raised by the rise of Hitler.‖26 An example of this aversion was evident in the words of contemporary University of Toronto professor F.H.

Underhill: ―We must … make it clear to the world, and especially to Great Britain, that the poppies blooming in Flanders fields have no further interest in us.‖27 On the other hand, for

Rev. Villett and Rev. Stewart the sacrifices on the fields in Flanders were the compelling

24 Ibid. 25 ―1700 Vancouver Folk Vote to Invite Jewish Refugees to Canada,‖ The Vancouver Province, November 21, 1938, 5. 26 Charles P. Stacey, Canada and the Age of Conflict: Volume 2: 1921-1948 (Toronto: Macmillan, 1981), 232. 27 Quoted in Robert MacKay and E. B. Rogers, Canada Looks Abroad (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1938), 269.

33 motivation for why they felt they must not back down now and let their mother country ―bear the burden‖ alone.

Reactions published in east coast newspapers on the same day were similar, but they came from the pulpit instead of a lectern. Baptist minister Rev. M. O. Brinton of Halifax declared in his sermon, ―Christianity and Anti-Semitism,‖ that the events in Germany went against the ―ideals of British justice demanding equal rights to all and special privileges to none and our Protestant heritage demanding freedom to worship God according to our conscience.‖28 He went on to say that the idea that ―such atrocities and barbarities could exist in a supposedly civilized country‖ were unfathomable to him.29 For Rev. Brinton and Rev.

Villett, the persecution of the Jews was not just an attack on twentieth century civilization, but an attack on enlightened, ―British‖ civilization. Unlike the isolationists, who, Stacey argues,

―passed over the suppression of liberty in Germany, the progressive extinction of liberty in the countries which Hitler overran, the campaign against religion, the all-pervading cruelty and violence of the regime, [and] the obscene and murderous persecution of the Jews,‖ these clergymen utilized the rhetoric and the loyalties of the First World War to make their arguments more relevant and more personal for an Anglo-Canadian society dominated by a

British cultural heritage and legal system.30

Rev. Canon Cooper of St. James Anglican Church gave a speech at the same

Vancouver protest meeting attended by Rev. Villett. While his address reflected the same sentiment found in the messages of the ministers from Halifax, Montreal, and Vancouver, he was even more explicit in drawing a connection between Christianity and modern democratic civilization. For him, ―the Christian and the democrat stand beside the Jew in the face of a

28 ―Persecution of Jewish Race Deplored from Church Pulpits,‖ The Halifax Herald, November 21, 1938, 14. 29 Ibid. 30 Stacey, Canada and the Age of Conflict, 232.

34 hostile world.‖31 Karl Homuth, an M.P. from the German dominated region of Kitchener, also expressed a similar sentiment when he recognized ―that democracy stands threatened on every side. If [the Nazis] are successful—in spreading paganism and refusing God—then God help us in Canada and the British Empire.‖32 The desires and the task of the Christian and the democrat were one because, as a representative of both democracy and Christianity, Canada was obligated to stand with other humans opposing an evil ―hostile world.‖ He spoke for the solidarity of all humans in opposition to that which was inhuman.

Christians who adopted this ―obligation to civilization‖ perspective in their response to

Kristallnacht also tended to focus on Canada‘s specific role in the global struggle for Christian civilization. In a letter published a few days after the first protest rallies of November 20, a person wrote in the women‘s section of The Globe and Mail lamenting the current state of affairs and Christian Canada‘s response:

Here we are in Canada. Oodles of idle land; natural resources in unknown quantities; land to spare for all the homeless ones of earth; a Christian (so-called) country; ready to criticize every one who either goes to war or remains at peace; quite satisfied that ‗we‘ are all right, and letting the other fellow get along as best he can.33

From this woman‘s perspective, a ―so-called‖ Christian Canada must answer for the bounty

God entrusted to it and not squander his gifts of land and resources.34 Canada, in her view, had a specific role to play as an integral and specially gifted part of Christendom. Like Rev.

Robinson and Rev. Bryce, she wanted to distinguish Canada from the barbarism of the Nazis:

Oh! If only Canada would do something really big and generous—something that would show that we are not a dog-in-a-manger, I would forgive some of her picayune

31 ―1700 Vancouver Folk Vote to Invite Jewish Refugees to Canada,‖ The Vancouver Province, November 21, 1938, 5. 32 ―Canada Should Shelter Jews,‖ Kitchener Daily Record, November 21, 1938, 3. 33 ―Refugees,‖ The Globe and Mail, November 24, 1938, 12. 34 Ibid.

politicians for their pettiness, and hope that some day we might build a Dominion that would not have Mammon for its one and only god.35

She felt the ―really big and generous‖ thing Canada should do was to stand up and be different, to reject the uncivilized and unchristian god of greed and material gain. Along with

Rev. Robinson, Rev. Bryce, Rev. Villett, and others, this anonymous woman quoted in The

Globe sought to shame isolationist Canadians into action, arguing that other Christian nations should not outdo Canada. Like many, she believed that to not act was tantamount to abandoning Canada‘s British and Christian heritage.

From Halifax to Vancouver and from Christian clergy to Christian laity, there was a consistent theme of protest in the Christian community during the weekend following

Kristallnacht and continuing through until the end of November. It was a protest that arose because people felt Kristallnacht represented an attack on Christian civilization. That is, on a modern, democratic civilization that was deeply rooted in a Christian and British heritage.

Therefore, Canada could not afford the luxury of isolationism, nor could it forget the reason so many were sacrificed on the fields in Belgium and northern France.

Perspective Two: Brotherhood of Humanity

Closely connected to the first perspective was a second form of Christian response that found its source of inspiration in the idea that God had created humans equal and unified.

Christians who promoted this point of view believed that if an individual or group suffered, all individuals and groups suffered. They also felt that the Jewish suffering was an affront to civilization, but they went on to emphasize the humanitarian aspects of the tragedy and the manner in which it stripped basic human dignity from the Jews. For them, the way to save the

Jewish people was to embrace solidarity with them as humans and to fight for their protection

35 Ibid.

36 as one would fight for his or her own personal safety and freedom. Unlike those Christians who were motivated to protest primarily because they saw Kristallnacht as an attack on civilization, these Christians saw Nazi Germany‘s actions as a direct challenge to universal humanitarian principles, which they believed were inherently Christian in nature.

A good example of this perspective appeared in print on Thursday, November 24. A group of Christian leaders met at Emmanuel Church in Toronto to carry out their own protest following the Sunday rally on November 20. The Toronto Daily Star captured the sentiment of the meeting:

‗The tragedy of the Jews in Germany is not a purely domestic affair,‘ Rev. Canon W. Davison of the Church of St. John the Evangelist, said. ‗When the Germans ask us to mind our own business we should reply ‗this is indeed our business; I am my brother‘s keeper.‘ We do not want simply to denounce. We are called on as human beings to play the part of the Good Samaritan to the stricken and suffering Jews in Germany.‘36

Rev. Davison emphasised the humanitarian cause and referenced a Biblical antecedent, but he also inferred that his message was a universal one and not just a Christian one. Put another way, the Christian principle of humanitarianism embedded in the story of the Good Samaritan referenced a universal truth, not a religious tenant exclusive to a particular faith. He believed the attack on people in any nation was the concern of all people, for human beings were responsible for each other‘s welfare. This led Rev. Davison to demand that Canada ―help in providing a solution for this persecution.‖37

Other clergy echoed Rev. Davison‘s sentiments in statements during the three weeks following Kristallnacht. Speaking only a few days after the pogrom, Rt. Rev. Bryce declared,

―The whole human family has been outraged in all its finer instincts of justice and right.‖ At the same meeting, Archbishop Derwyn T. Owen demanded that the ―sympathy of the whole

36 ―Swift Aid to Jews in Germany Urged,‖ The Gazette, November 25, 1938, 1. 37 Ibid.

37 civilized world should go out‖ to the Jews.38 The following day the Toronto Daily Star again quoted Rt. Rev. Bryce expounding that ―solidarity of the human race and the essential brotherhood of the people of the world‖ were crucial presuppositions to be embraced if antisemitism was to be repelled in Germany.39 A week after the initial protests on Sunday,

November 20, Rt. Rev. Ralph Sherman, Anglican Bishop of Calgary, called for a ―broad humanitarianism‖ because ―it is the duty of Christians like us to take the stand against narrow nationalism and for broad democracy.‖40

At the November 20 protest meeting in Winnipeg, Rev. Canon Heeney delivered a message from Anglican Archbishop M.T.M. Harding. In it, Archbishop Harding reminded his audience that ―the Jewish people had made tremendous contributions to human welfare, and the whole passion of humanity rises in protest against the violent outrages against their race in

Germany.‖41 At the Toronto meeting, M.P. Samuel Factor, the first Jewish MP from Ontario and, not surprisingly, a strong critic of Canada‘s refugee policy, also advocated this reasoning:42

All Canadians—Protestants, Catholics and Jews alike—have reacted to these hideous accounts from abroad with a feeling of personal hurt. The Jew, throughout the ages of persecution, has maintained his faith in the God of all mankind. This faith in the sovereignty of eternal justice and the ultimate triumph of eternal truth stands as the common heritage of man.43

Like many others, Archbishop Harding and Mr. Factor saw the issue as an humanitarian one and, therefore, an issue that humanity must see and address. Mr. Factor recognized the situation as an opportunity for Christians and Jews to work together, a situation where they

38 ―Nazi ‗Savagery‘ Upon Jews held Shocking, Abhorrent,‘‖ Toronto Daily Star, November 15, 1938, 33. 39 ―Better to Die Fighting than Linger in Hell says Toronto Rabbi,‖ Toronto Daily Star, November 16, 1938, 16. 40 ―Calgarians Hit Nazi Pe...‖ The Calgary Daily Herald, November 28, 1938, 12. 41 ―Indignation: Aid to Persecuted Jews urged at Mass Meetings,‖ Winnipeg Free Press, November 21, 1938, 1. 42 ―Judge Samuel Factor was M.P. 15 Years,‖ Toronto Daily Star, August 22, 1962, 25. 43 ―Jews Sob in Sorrow 20,000 Torontonians Protest Persecution,‖ Toronto Daily Star, November 21, 1938, 15.

38 could stand on a stage together and declare that solidarity was an ―eternal justice‖ and the

―common heritage of man.‖ It seems that in his mind, Protestant Christians were simply part of the larger mosaic of humanity, which ascribed to the innate nobility of the human race and the power of justice, those twin forces for good that would inevitably rescue the Jewish people.

Although the English Canadian newspapers focused on the Protestant reaction to

Kristallnacht, it is worth noting that humanitarian indignation also found expression in the

English Roman Catholic Church. The Halifax Herald reported on November 21 that

―congregations at the Masses were requested ‗to pray fervently that God will assist [the Jews] in their affliction and also that God in His mercy may convert their tyrant persecutors to more humane ideals or in His justice may take from those persecutors their power of enslaving and crushing their fellow-men.‘‖44 The immorality of suppressing and harming one‘s fellow man was the motivator behind this Catholic charge and the prayer was that the tyrant would turn to

―more human ideals.‖

Such reasoning reflected the influence of a form of social gospel ideology that was a significant socio-political force during and following the Depression. The socialistic language of solidarity and the brotherhood of humanity sounded familiar to these Christians and it was a natural corollary, in their minds, to apply these ideals to the Jewish suffering and to call for a populist Christian response. In their analysis of the situation, Davies and Nefsky pointed out that the United Church, the largest church in Canada and the one whose opinions the newspapers most frequently published, ―incorporated a ‗social passion,‘ which meant a passionate concern with human issues.‖45 Furthermore, the influences of Wesleyan theology

44 ―Persecution of Jewish Race Deplored from Church Pulpits,‖ The Halifax Herald, November 21, 1938, 14. 45 Davies and Nefsky, How Silent Were the Churches?, 19.

39 caused the United Church to focus on the ―perfecting of society as well as the perfecting of the individual.‖46 John Webster Grant suggests that during the 1930s, and particularly during the latter years of the decade, the major Protestant churches ―had always regarded social welfare as an area of direct concern‖ and that they were frequently ―pressing governments for action.‖47 More specifically, Robert Wright argues that in 1938 many Christians believed that the best answer to the ―evangels of fascism and Nazism‖ was ―Social Christianity.‖48

Christians who adhered to this line of reasoning felt it was their role and responsibility to help the government transform society into a more civilized, humanitarian state.

Consequently, they strove to influence the government to defend the defenceless, and to be an instrument of justice throughout the world. To these Christians, Canada had to become a beacon of truth and a haven for all those whom Nazi barbarism had hurt. Confident of the justice of their cause and optimistic about the irresistible forces for good that would accompany the ―solidarity of humanity,‖ they pressed vigorously for government action.49

Their appeal to the cause of humanity was not an exclusively Christian message, but it was their Christian message, for, as Rev. Davison stated, ―we are called on as human beings to play the part of the Good Samaritan.‖50

Perspective Three: A Distinctive Christian Response

The third Christian perspective found its basis for protest in Biblical principles and

Christian virtue. Unlike the other two Christian responses, this response did not rely on a cultural, transcendent, or extra-Christian point of view, but rather on specifically Christian

46 Ibid. 47 Grant, The Church in the Canadian Era, 147. 48 Robert Wright, A World Mission: Canadian Protestantism and the Quest for a New International Order, 1918- 1939 (Montreal: McGill-Queen‘s University Press, 1991), 229; William Nawyn, Ameri an Protestantism’s Response to Germany’s Jews and Refugees, -1941 (Ann Arbor Mich.: UMI Research Press, 1981), 34. Nawyn notes similar rhetoric in the Protestant response in the US. 49 ―Better to Die Fighting than Linger in Hell says Toronto Rabbi,‖ Toronto Daily Star, November 21, 1938, 21. 50 ―Swift Aid to Jews in Germany Urged,‖ The Gazette, November 25, 1938, 1.

40 actions that these Christians felt the Bible demanded of them. Unlike the ―attack on civilization‖ and humanitarian centric responses, those advocating this approach did not see the attacks on the Jews as merely a challenge to Christian civilization or a violation of the common bond between individual humans, but as an attack on Christianity itself. For, in their minds, the struggle against Nazi barbarism was part of a great cosmic conflict between the forces of evil and the forces of good, that is, Christianity. The only way to ameliorate sin‘s impact on the world, as seen graphically in Kristallnacht, was for Christians to oppose it vigorously.

The first appearance of such a response in the newspapers investigated in this thesis came from Rt. Rev. Dr. John W. Woodside, moderator of the United Church of Canada.

Shortly after the events in Germany, he warned that ―Hitler was putting the Christian church

‗on the spot,‖ and that his actions were ―denying the fundamental tenants of Christianity.‖51

He declared, without equivocation, that Nazi Germany‘s active persecution of the Jews was fundamentally a Christian problem and one that Christians must answer. Anglican minister

Rev. F.H.W. Wilkenson took up the cause of Christianity and its fight against the evils of Nazi

Germany in a sermon he delivered a few days later on Sunday, November 20 in Montreal. In the sermon, he provided his congregation with a description of the distinction between the

Christian virtues that God requires of people and the actions of the Nazis in Germany.

‗People sometimes forget that the world is governed by moral principles as much as it is by physical ones,‘ he added in reference to the persecution suffered by Jews recently. He wondered if what is happening in this connection in Europe may not lead to the ‗outbreak of a plague.‘ There is a side to the ‗love of God‘ which he termed the ‗wrath of God in the face of evil. Not only should there be an expression of sympathy for the suffering but any action to help relieve this by the Canadian Government should be supported by Christians there.‘52

51 ―Christian Church is ‗Put on the Spot,‘‖ Ottawa Citizen, November 14, 1938, 3. 52 ―Immorality Label Pinned to Germany,‖ Gazette, November 21, 1938, 5.

Rev. Wilkenson‘s reference to the wrath of God poured out on evil is representative of a morally stark universe where good and evil stand in irreconcilable opposition to each other.

All people living in this cosmic reality had a choice to make and the Germans had chosen poorly. In order to avoid God‘s wrath, ―Christians should do all in their power to strengthen the hands of those aiding people who are suffering in other parts of the world.‖53 Rev.

Wilkenson‘s and Woodside‘s expressions of protest were indicative of an eternal focus in which Canada‘s spiritual wellbeing as a Christian country was threatened.

Some of the strongest statements in favour of a particularly Christian response to their morally depraved foe came from lay Christians. On November 22, a woman wrote to The

Globe and Mail to express her appreciation for The Glo e’s discussion on the Jewish refugee crisis and to voice her support for the newspaper‘s position on the issue. In particular, though, she wanted to emphasise that her husband and she were ―interested in world affairs and as

Christians we felt we could not shut our eyes to the persecution of the Hebrew race.‖54 This woman‘s desire to protest what had happened and to demand assistance for Jews found its roots in her Christianity. While she may have believed the principles she stood for were universally shared by humanity or civilization, she felt it was her Christian faith and the fact that it was the Jews being persecuted that forced her to take action. A week earlier, another woman, Marie Brunger, submitted a similar letter which the Winnipeg Free Press published in the editorial section of the paper. She wrote,

Have the churches failed, and have the Christian people failed to do their duty? What is the matter with the world? It is a disgrace to Christianity that the people from whom Christ came should be persecuted in any country when we remember Christ‘s words: ‗All that ye have done to others, have ye also done to me,‘ we must realize that these words also mean ‗All that ye have done to the Jews have ye also done to me.‘55

53 Ibid. 54 ―Racial Intolerance,‖ The Globe and Mail, November 22, 1938, 15. 55 ―Says the Christians Should Help Persecuted Jews,‖ Winnipeg Free Press, November 12, 1938, 14.

Ms. Brunger pressed her point further by going beyond simply condemning the inaction of

Christians and their lack of concern for the Jews. She made it clear that Canada was no better than the Nazis ―if refraining from persecution is all we do,‖ for Christians must ―try to right the wrong that is being done.‖56 In her opinion, the church should cease to send missionaries or build churches ―as long as Jews are without a country‖ and, particularly, as long as a supposedly Christian people persecuted them.57 Ms. Brunger‘s condemnation of the church was harsh, but it came from her deep concern as a devout insider. Undoubtedly, she would have agreed wholeheartedly with the moderator of the United Church of Canada who stated that Hitler was putting the church ―on the spot.‖58

Both the anonymous woman from The Globe and Ms. Brunger held the belief that there was a brotherhood principle operating between Jews and Christians, which transcended the relationship Christians had to other human beings. They shared this conviction with a number of other Christian responders, who, seeing the need for a distinctly Christian response based on their adherence to Christ‘s teachings and Scripture, focused on the special relationship Christians had with the Jews. On one hand, these responders saw the Christian responsibility to help the Jews in 1938 as reparation for the historical persecution of Jews at the hands of Christians and Christian nations. On the other hand, they also believed that solidarity with the Jews was natural because of the Biblical idea that Jews and Christians were theologically and historically linked. In other words, they felt the Christian community needed to protest not only because people were suffering and Christ required his followers to be compassionate, but also because it was the Jewish people who were being persecuted. Ms.

56 Ibid. 57 Ibid. 58 ―Christian Church is ‗Put on the Spot,‘‖ Ottawa Citizen, November 14, 1938, 3.

Brunger, in her letter to the Free Press, reminded Christians that Jews were ―the people from whom Christ came,‖ and ―it is a disgrace to Christianity that‖ Christians let the Jews be persecuted in ―any country.‖59

Purely from the perspective of the number and length of newspaper articles, this viewpoint appears to have been particularly prevalent and persuasive. The first published

Christian response, on November 12, expressed a strong sense of solidarity with the people of

Jewish faith. During a sermon at St. James Anglican Cathedral in Toronto, Rev. Dr. James

Parkes was so confident in his idea of Christian-Jewish solidarity that he claimed ―the simple truth is that the talk about ‗different religions‘ is a downright contradiction of terms.‖

Furthermore, he did ―not believe that there is a fundamental difference between Jew and

Christian in either theology or ethics.‖60 Numerous other clergy and lay people also expressed either their belief in a special relationship between Jews and Christians or their desire to see

Christians and Jews grow closer together through this crisis.

At the Toronto protest rally of November 20, Rev. E. Crosley Hunter expressed his belief that there had never been ―an hour when Jew and true Christian have been closer together than now.‖61 Rev. Hunter‘s emphasis on the closeness that existed between Christian and Jews found support among other clergy who referred to the Jewish people as ―brethren.‖

For example, Rev. Davison, who called on Christians to be the Good Samaritan, said that

Christian support must be particularly strong in the case of ―our Jewish Brethren.‖62 The

November 17 meeting of the Halifax and Dartmouth Ministerial Association concluded with a letter to the Prime Minister assertively stating ―that we wish to express sympathy with our

59 ―Says the Christians Should Help Persecuted Jews,‖ Winnipeg Free Press, November 12, 1938, 14. 60 ―Contends that ‗Good Jew‘ May be ‗Good Christian,‘‖ Toronto Daily Star, November 12, 1938, 1. 61 ―Jews Sob in Sorrow 20,000 Torontonians Protest Persecution,‖ Toronto Daily Star, November 21, 1938, 15. 62 ―Swift Aid to Jews in Germany Urged,‖ The Gazette, November 25, 1938, 1.

Jewish brethren in this City and throughout the world.‖63 Sympathy was for a brother, not simply a suffering stranger. The organizers went on to request that all Christians across

Canada give special prayers for the Jews and called for Christians in Halifax to gather the following weekend to participate in a Jewish organized protest meeting.64 It is apparent from

Rev. Hunter‘s and the Ministerial Association‘s recorded texts that there was an optimism that the crisis would eventually result in improved Christian-Jewish relations.

This sense of Judeo-Christian connectedness appears to have found its roots in an understanding of the historic relationship between the two religious groups. The basis for the connection was the fact that Jesus was Jewish and that the Christian Bible emerged from the

Jewish story. Two keynote speakers from the major Alberta protest meetings in Edmonton and

Calgary on November 27 found this argument most compelling. Rev. Dr. Warwick Kelloway of Knox United Church in Calgary exclaimed that:

We stand on this platform because we would like to undo some the injustices done against the Jewish race throughout the centuries by Christians, but not in the Christian spirit. This false racialism, this neo-paganism, stands for everything which the Christian church does not stand for. Therefore, the Christian church must stand unrelentingly against state totalitarianism.65

Rev. Kolloway spoke plainly about the role Christians had played in previous Jewish persecutions, and he used this negative fact to galvanize Christians to action. He went on to point out that ―our Master Himself was a Jew‖ and that Christians must not only speak out but take action to help the Jews.66 That his outspokenness about these matters caught the public‘s eye is confirmed by his own reports of letters he had received with swastikas on them,

63 ―Treatment of Jews is Denounced,‖ The Halifax Herald, November 18, 1938, 1. 64 Ibid. 65 ―Calgarians Hit Nazi Pe...,‖ The Calgary Daily Herald, November 28, 1938, 12. 66 Ibid.

45 warning him to discontinue his open support for the Jews ―or else.‖67 In Edmonton Rev. A.D.

McMinn of McDougall United Church expressed his ―deep sorrow and mortification‖ at the atrocities carried out against the Jews in nations ―which profess to believe in Him who was the light of the Gentiles and the true glory of His people, Israel.‖68 He goes on to explain that ―in all their suffering, we suffer‖ because there is a ―spiritual brotherhood‖ between Jews,

Protestants, and Catholics.69

In Rev. Kelloway‘s and Rev. McMinn‘s minds, Christians were drawn to action for two reasons. First, Christians felt they needed to make right their past mistreatment of the

Jews and second, they saw a significant theological connection between the Jews and themselves, which made it impossible for them to remain bystanders. Moreover, Christianity was also suffering at the hands of Nazism for it was in a supposedly Christian country that these atrocities were being perpetrated.

In Winnipeg, Rev. Canon W. F. Barfoot spoke to his congregation at St. John‘s

Cathedral about a connection to the Jewish plight that stretched back to the origins of

Christianity. The Free Press recorded that Rev. Barfoot, ―drawing a close parallel between the persecutions of Christians in the days of Imperial Rome and present day persecutions by dictators,‖ felt that ―the persecutions in each case resulted from dictators‘ fear of Christ and

His Teachings.‖70 This ―spirit of the anti-Christ,‖ as he referred to the evil that inspired these persecutions, was the same one that persecuted the ancient Christians and it was, therefore, necessary for Christians to literally fight and die to protect these people.71 Rev. G. P.

MacLeod, the minister at Shaughnessy Heights United in Vancouver, also reminded his

67 Ibid. 68 ―1,200 in City Voice Protest Against Reich‖ November 28, 1938, 3. 69 Ibid. 70 ―Dictators‘ Fear Causing Persecution, Barfoot Declares,‖ Winnipeg Free Press, November 22, 1938, 20. 71 Ibid.

46 congregation of Jewish persecution in this present age while recalling the Jews‘ long history of faith and suffering:

The Jews were passing through a time of great persecution, denied their religious rights, and even pagan idols were set up on their altars in Jerusalem, and sacrifices performed to show contempt. But the people were called to remain firm to the claims of God, above the claims of state. The image, with its feet of clay, showed its deterioration from the head of gold, the deterioration from the spiritual to the material so that it could stand. The promise of God to all his people stands good today, and because of that the people will be delivered.72

The newspaper only records this portion of his sermon on Sunday, but it seems clear that he understood that the God of the Jews to be the God of Christians, for they were ―all his people.‖ In other words, Rev. Barfoot and Rev. MacLeod encouraged their congregations to recognize that God‘s promise to protect the faithful applied to both the Jew and Christian alike; God was not making a distinction between them, nor should Christians. Furthermore, in their discovery of common heritage, these clergy felt there should be a shared hope for deliverance and confidence that uniting these two religious groups could affect political and social change.

During this period, one of the clearest expressions of the intimacy between Jews and

Christians came from the English Catholic community. Not surprisingly, the Nazi persecution of the Catholic community in Germany led to a feeling of comradeship in experience and religious heritage. Archbishop William Duke spoke at the Vancouver protest meeting on

November 20 and stated that ―in a very special way Catholics can sympathize with their

Jewish brethren because Catholics have also been persecuted in Germany.‖73 Continuing with this theme, Rev. James P. Treacy, priest at St. Cecilia‘s Church in Toronto, wrote a letter to

The Globe and Mail to express his belief that people were finally becoming aware of how

72 ―Canada Could Assist Jews,‖ The Vancouver Province, November 28, 1938, 5. 73 ―1700 Vancouver Folk Vote to Invite Refugees to Canada,‖ The Vancouver Daily Providence, November 21, 1938, 5.

47 cruelly the Nazis were treating everyone they deemed a threat to their ―Fascist race policy.‖74

On the issue of Christian solidarity with the Jews and a Christian repudiation of the Nazis,

Rev. Treacy could not be more pointed:

For us Catholics, anti-Semitism is a befouling of the womb that bore us, for, as Pius XI says, we are all ‗Semites spiritually.‘ The Son of God, our Lord Jesus Christ became a Jewish man in the incarnation. His Mother, the Blessed Virgin, was Miriam of the House of David. The twelve apostles from whom our bishops derive apostolic succession were Jews. The first pope, St. Peter, from whom the popes claim spiritual headship, was a Jew. Paul, the Vessel of Election, was of the tribe of Benjamin. The early church had become so thoroughly Jewish in its outlook and membership that it required a vision from God to persuade St. Peter to admit the Gentiles. We are all part of the Olive Branch of Israel, and as Catholics we must not only sympathize with them in their suffering but, following the example of our Holy Father, Pope Pius XI, emphatically repudiate the tyrannical excesses perpetrated against the Jewish race.75

Rev. Treacy went on at some length to link Jews and Christians together in the struggle against Nazism and he was not the only person to mention Pope Pius XI and the Roman

Catholic fight against fascism. Throughout this period Protestants, Catholics, and Jews utilized the Pope‘s name and rhetoric. Frank Coppa argues that unlike his controversial successor Pius XII, on whom many historians affix the ―silence‖ label, Pius XI was increasingly anti-fascist and, in particular, opposed to its antisemitism.76 His untimely death two months after Kristallnacht left his most scathing criticism of fascism and antisemitism unpublished, which, Coppa argues, was why Mussolini was relieved at his death.77 In Canada, though, Roman Catholicism was dominated by a nationalist, antisemitic French Canadian culture that followed the philosophical footsteps of the second Pius more closely. According

74 ―Deplores the Persecution of Jewish Race, The Globe and Mail, December 9, 1938, 6. 75 Ibid. 76 Frank Coppa, The Papacy, the Jews, and the Holocaust (Washington D.C.: Catholic University of America Press, 2006), 178, 217-18. He notes that people like John Cornwell‘s Hitler’s Pope: The Secret History of Pope Pius XII and Susan Zuccotti Under His Very Windows: The Vatican and the Holocaust in Italy are too harsh and ignore too much evidence to the contrary. In his mind, more balanced arguments can be found in Martin Gilbert‘s The Righteous: The Unsung Heroes of the Holocaust or the edited volume Pope Pius XII and the Holocaust. He believes that ―silence‖ is incorrect, but Pius XII was still responsible for many missed opportunities. 77 Ibid., 178-9.

48 to Terence Fay, French Canadian Catholics found fascism to be ―the less noxious of the two totalitarian systems.‖78 Fay argues that this led French Canadian Roman Catholicism to be susceptible to the fascist propaganda of Vichy France, which ―emphasized the values of national revolution including religion, family, work, and education.‖79 However, to the degree that Rev. Treacy‘s letter and the few other references to Roman Catholics at the protest meetings are a reflection of the English Roman Catholic position on the Jewish persecution in

Germany, the Catholics, at least in Toronto, seemed even more likely than Protestants to affirm a special bond with the Jews. Fay notes that the splintering of the Canadian Catholic

Church‘s position on the Jews increased during this period as French, English, Irish, German,

Italian, Ukrainian, Polish, and Hungarian Catholics had distinctly ―different feelings‖ about the European situation.80 Regardless of the larger crosscurrents at play, Rev. Treacy, like Rev.

Parkes, represented a group of Christians in Canada who believed they had a spiritual connection to the Jews that obligated them to take a leading role in condemning any persecution of the Jews.

In summary, the prominence that Christian leaders and lay people gave to the Jewish-

Christian special relationship is a distinguishing feature in the newspaper source material. The relationship comprises the largest segment of the protest literature during this initial protest period. These Christians were against all forms of persecution and injustice, as were

Christians who protested on the basis of humanitarian principles, but they also felt that there was a unique, Christian significance to the persecution of the Jews. A self-declared part of this

78 Terence Fay, A History of Canadian Catholics: Gallicanism, Romanism, and Canadianism (Montreal: McGill- Queen‘s University Press, 2002), 221. 79 Ibid., 238-39. During the war nationalist publications such as Le Devoir argued the connection between Vichy France and Quebec. There was a hope that the ―degeneracy of the Third Republic‖ had finally been thrown off. 80 Ibid., 240.

49 was guilt from past Christian pogroms, but the main argument came from an historical and theological connection that Canadian Christians felt they had with the Jewish people.

Political Response and Conclusion

Observing the Christian response in these ten Canadian newspapers over the three weeks following Kristallnacht revealed three distinct but interconnected forms of Christian response. In each case, the response was Christian, but in each case, the nature of the responses varied in accordance with the underlying reasons for the response. Because of these obvious similarities and contrasts, any satisfactory assessment of the Canadian Christian response to the Jewish suffering at the hands of the Nazis must be flexible enough to embrace the widely varying motivational factors and sources.

The first two forms of Christian response demonstrate a particular interest in transcendent, Christian-inspired principles. Those who were concerned that Nazi Germany‘s persecution of the Jews was an attack on civilization felt that the Nazis were reversing years of work done by Christians to make civilization better and more ―modern.‖ They believed liberties won in the Reformation and progress gained in the Enlightenment were at stake, and all Christians who valued democracy and justice needed to join forces to defeat Nazi barbarism.

A correlate of the emerging civilization theory was a socially minded Christian philosophy that believed all human beings were members of a brotherhood. Christian protestors advocated for a banding together of all those likeminded in their love of humanity and hatred of the Nazis. The Christians who protested because of their concern for civilization and the common brotherhood of humanity saw solidarity with the global community,

Christian or otherwise, as the only means to achieve a victory.

The third category of response also demonstrated continuity and correlation. The central concern for these Christians was their belief that Kristallnacht was, in truth, an attack on Christianity and God‘s people. The Christians who argued for action on uniquely Christian virtues, historic circumstances, and theological precepts focused on the need for Christians to act differently in a world that was inherently evil. The actions of Nazi Germany were a challenge to Christianity itself, and God would hold Christ-followers accountable for their action, or lack thereof. Those who espoused action based on a special Christian-Jewish relationship did so because they felt there was a specifically Christian response to

Kristallnacht that arose from the fact that the Nazis were persecuting the Jews. Because they were a people who had historically been and were currently being hurt by Christians, and because they were considered spiritual brethren, the Jews deserved unreserved, sacrificial

Christian support.

All of these underlying motivational factors inspiring protest assumed that protest could and should lead to a change in the government‘s stance on refugees. Optimism and confidence marked this early stage of protest. While the focus of this thesis is not on the government‘s policies, an examination of Prime Minister King‘s personal perspective three weeks following Kristallnacht makes the point that this optimism was present even in certain parts of Mr. King‘s government. A brief look at the Prime Minister‘s diaries shows that the events of November 9 and 10 strongly affected him. The first reference he makes in his diary comes during a funeral for a Jewish friend of his, which caused him to lament on the negative

―position the race is in … I feel Canada must do her part in admitting some of the Jewish refugees.‖81 Mr. King‘s initial response was to take action, albeit cautiously. He recognized

81 William Lyon Mackenzie King, ―A Real Companion and Friend: The Diary of William Lyon Mackenzie King, 1893-1950,‖ Library and Archives Canada, n.d., November 13, 1938, www.collectionscanada.gc.ca.

51 that ―it is going to be difficult politically, and I may be able to get the Cabinet to consent, but will fight for it as right and just, and Christian.‖82 Mr. King was not deluded that overcoming political barriers was going to be easy, but his Christian convictions about the moral dilemma facing Canada appeared to show a resolution to overcome such obstacles. A few days later, after talking with President Roosevelt about the refugee issue in Washington D.C. while attending a meeting dealing with trade issues, Mr. King confided in his diary that ―I feel myself very strongly that it may come to a time where if one is Christian at heart, it is felt that

Christian principles be put in practice in official affairs as well as personal, if we are to be true to our convictions regardless the cost.‖83 Evidently, he felt the country shared his moral conviction, which he defined as Christian, and that his moral convictions included a core morality that he believed should not be violated. In this position and at this time, he was convinced that his political sensibilities would have to yield to a more fundamental urge to do what was right and to extrapolate from the personal to the general.

The Prime Minister‘s time in Washington also revealed his sensitivity to foreign pressure. In response to an expressed American desire to alleviate the refugee situation, he recorded that ―more than ever we, in Canada, cannot afford to close our doors to people who are being persecuted.‖84 For Mr. King, Canada could not stand by ―while great countries like

Britain and the United States, on whose co-operation our existence depends, are doing what they are, and have more crowded areas.‖85 Mr. King saw Kristallnacht for what it was: an opportunity to act in a way that the United States and Britain could not. On a personal level,

Mr. King appeared to have changed from his position leading up to the Évian Conference in

82 Ibid. 83 Ibid., November 17, 1938. 84 Ibid. 85 Ibid.

52 that he felt he might be ready to lead Canada towards a change in its policy towards refugees and immigration.

But by November 22, the Prime Minister was already beginning to accept that, despite his personal convictions, the mounting international pressure, and the domestic protests, he would have to choose between personal moral preference and national unity. During a Cabinet meeting on November 22, he came to realize that ―it was not an apportune [sic] time to bring up the refugee question,‖ but he did speak ―of it so as to be able to cover the ground in a preliminary way and make my point of view known.‖86 His ―point of view‖ was that Canada could not ―afford to be indifferent to humanitarian consideration, that we would have to make some provision for those who had been obliged to flee from their counties.‖87 This rhetoric mirrors the Prime Minister‘s thoughts following his friend‘s funeral and his meetings in

Washington, but he was not the only person at the cabinet meeting making his feelings known.

Some of the ministers from Quebec were similarly predisposed to express their opinions about the refugee problem. Following the meeting, the Prime Minister wrote in his diary that he ―found all [of his] Quebec friends, Rinfret, Cardin and Lapointe, quite gloomy though I think other members of Council agreed.‖88 Despite the fact that Ernest Lapointe and several other Quebec ministers said little at the meeting, Mr. King was acutely aware of their presence and their position on the issue. Two days later at another meeting of Cabinet, Mr.

King asked the Council even more pointedly ―to try and view the refugee problem from the way in which this nation will be judged in years to come if we do not play our part … in helping to meet one of humanity‘s direst needs.‖89 Once again, King ―did not get any real

86 Ibid., November 22, 1938. 87 Ibid. 88 Ibid. 89 Ibid., November 24, 1938.

53 response from this appeal, most of those present fearing the political consequences of any help to the Jews.‖90 These November 22 and 24 meetings exemplify the muting effect that the

Quebec members of Cabinet could have on the debates. The antisemitism harboured in

Quebec society stretched back into the eighteenth century and continued to influence its politicians. When Mr. King had dinner with Lapointe on November 29, he recognized that

―the Jewish [issue] was anathema‖ and that there could be no support from his Quebec lieutenant in pushing through a reform to Canada‘s policy regarding the immigration of

Jewish refugees.91 The following month would reveal how these forces played out, but in

November, at least, there appeared to have been a thawing of some of the isolationist tendencies in the Prime Minister‘s position, as well as in the position of some of his English cabinet ministers. Mr. King sensed the government would have to weigh carefully the desire for national unity versus the realities of personal moral sentiment, international pressure, and a surprisingly strong domestic protest in Protestant English Canada.

By the end of November, two important facets of the Canadian Christian response to the Jewish plight in Europe were apparent. In the first place, it is clear that the response to

Kristallnacht in November was significant and urgent. Yet, this response lacked the force of coherence: the meetings, sermons, and letters all suffered from disorganization and a lack of focus. Secondly, it is possible to see an optimism about the prospect of change in Canada. Mr.

King‘s personal feelings, international foreign pressure, and the strength of the domestic response created confidence that good would emerge from this evil. The first wave of sympathy, led and inspired by Christians, appeared poised to roll back the forces of opposition.

90 Ibid. 91 Ibid., November 24, 1938, November 29, 1938.

Chapter 2

Organizational Foundations in the CNCR

The motivational factors that inspired the Christian responses to Kristallnacht in

November remained relevant into December, but during this time they led to the development of a more mature, organized response that was even more marked by the absence of official ecclesiastical involvement. The newspapers continued to be an effective public forum for many Christians who wished to express their concern. Consequently, they remain a rich and valuable source for an assessment of the nature of the Christian response to Jewish persecution in Europe.

The birth of the Canadian National Committee on Refugees and Victims of Political

Persecution (CNCR) during this period is particularly noteworthy as it represented the realization that the energy generated by the mass protest needed to be channelled through an organizational structure before its force dissipated. An analysis of CNCR‘s organizational records, which detail their first meetings and activities, reveals an emerging frustration with the lack of an organized Christian response as well as a strengthening conviction that only through an engagement of the Canadian government could Christians provide meaningful help to the Jewish people. Mirroring this coalescing and formalizing Christian response, was a discernable firming up of the government‘s internal attitude toward the issue of Jewish refugees and a general increase in vocal political opposition towards immigration. Finally, as the month‘s end approached, Christians utilized the Advent and Christmas seasons to highlight Christ‘s Jewish origins and the disparities between the peace promised by Christ and the horrors inflicted on the Jews.

The emotional intensity of the November outburst was unsustainable; in its place came the first hint of rigidity and polarization. The opening salvo for the battle of the Canadian public‘s heart and mind left the country divided between those who believed Canada needed to restrict immigration in order to preserve its Christian and British socio-cultural heritage and those who believed English speaking Canada needed to open up its immigration policy in order to preserve its Christian and British spiritual principles. There were many Christians on both sides of the evolving arguments. Some Christian politicians took leading roles in the movement to focus the country‘s attention on national economic self-interest at the expense of what their critics claimed were Christian principle and virtue. Other politicians and a significant, vocal group of Christians pursued what they believed was a Christian ethic and

Christian vision of Canada even though they felt abandoned by their denominations. For them,

Canada‘s roles and obligations in the world were too important for them to be silent, regardless of the official position of their respective denominations.

CNCR: The Setting

The creation of the CNCR in early December followed two important, well-publicized radio addresses broadcasted on the CBC. The Rev. Dr. James W. Parkes delivered the first address on December 6. At the invitation of the Protestant-led Committee of Jewish-Gentile

Relations of Toronto, Rev. Parkes came from England in November to speak about the refugee situation in Germany and Christian efforts to combat antisemitism.1 Rev. Parkes was a widely travelled and fairly well known activist in England who played an important role in debunking the Protocols of the Elders of Zion in a famous trial in Bern, 1934-1935.2 David

1 ―Refugee Problem Held Very Acute by Dr. J. Parkes,‖ Ottawa Evening Citizen, December 6, 1938, 4. 2 Cesarani David, ―Mad Dogs and Englishmen: Towards Taxonomy of Rescuers in a ‗Bystander‘ Country - Britain 1933-1945,‖ in Bystanders to the Holocaust: A Re-Evaluation, ed. David Cesarani and Paul A. Levine (London: Frank Cass, 2002), 46.

Cesarani argues that he was one of the first Christian thinkers in the twentieth century to analyze antisemitism in his book The Jew and His Neighbour, and, due to this awareness, he played a significant part in helping save Jewish children before and during the war.3 Rev.

Parkes initially came to Canada to give several sermons and help organize support for the

Jewish refugees, but Kristallnacht dramatically changed the nature and import of his trip as he became a significant player in the Kristallnacht protests and a founding member of the CNCR.

This development is not surprising given the fact that it was Rev. C.E. Silcox, who was the head of the Committee of Jewish-Gentile Relations and also a founding member of the CNCR, who invited Rev. Parkes and later sought to utilize Rev. Parkes‘ experience and charismatic speaking style to promote the CNCR. So warmly did the founding members of the CNCR receive Rev. Parkes‘ radio address on December 6 that they appended a transcript of it to the first set of minutes to help explain the organization‘s raison d'être.

Rev. Parkes‘ message reflected some of the prevailing themes found in the Canadian

Christian response in November and foreshadowed the ones that would become most compelling to Christians in December. He began his address by laying blame for the ―Jewish question‖ on Christianity itself. He explained that the Christian majority had excluded Jews from almost every ―normal‖ occupation and ―often persecuted them bitterly on religious grounds.‖4 He went on to debunk the idea that Jews had taken control of the country‘s economic interests because of Christian persecution:

An examination into Canada‘s Directory of Directors reveals that it is conceivable that [Jews] may influence our fashions, but not that they may control our future. And while a bachelor like myself may marvel at the ever-increasing extravagance of feminine

3 Ibid., 45-6. 4 Library and Archives Canada [LAC], Canadian National Committee on Refugees [CNCR], Manuscript Group [MG] 28, vol. 43, box 6, file 24, ―Minutes of the First Meeting and Interviews with Members of the Dominion Government,‖ 6/7 December 1938, Appendix VI (b).

head-gear, and lament the monotony of masculine raiment, no one could pretend that the control of such things constituted a national menace.5

Rev. Parkes‘ wry sense of humour about Canada‘s ignorance of Jewish influence in the country demonstrates his recognition that antisemitism existed in the country.

Rev. Parkes went on to argue that the ―totalitarian‖ attacks on the Jews were an attack on ―democratic traditions of public life, on the liberty of our press,‖ and on the ―spiritual liberty of our churches.‖6 Connecting the church with democracy and the ―traditional way of life,‖ he echoed the sentiments of those Christians in November who felt the attack on the

Jews was an attack on civilization. For Rev. Parkes, an attack on democracy and Anglo-

Canadian freedoms was inherently an attack on the churches. Moreover, Christians carried responsibility for what happened to the Jews, which meant Christians in Canada could no longer stand by and watch the mistreatment of the Jews in Germany and assume it meant little to them.

Two days after Rev. Parkes‘ gave his address, on December 8, the recently retired

Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, Earl Stanley Baldwin of Bewdley, addressed the

United Kingdom in a radio address that the CBC broadcast across Canada. Later, when the

CNCR was formally established, the founding members appended the script to their inaugural minutes, just as they did with Rev. Parkes‘ radio address, because there was a consensus that

Mr. Baldwin‘s remarks captured the essence of their cause.

The address received broad media coverage from newspapers across Canada, although many chose to summarize and paraphrase his thoughts rather than print the full text.7 Lord

Baldwin‘s line of argument included the same overt appeal to Christian sentiment that one

5 Ibid. 6 Ibid. 7 ―Baldwin Sees Nazis in ‗Inhuman‘ Blast,‖ Toronto Daily Star, December 9, 1938, 1; ―Sees Refugees as Challenge,‖ Kitchener Daily Record, December 9, 1938, 22. These are just a few of the examples.

58 finds in Rev. Parkes‘ address. Historian Philip Williamson explains in his biography of Lord

Baldwin that he was ―profoundly religious‖ in a way that ―was not an intellectualised religion but a ‗very simple, very deep faith.‘‖8 Moreover, his faith was ―profoundly Protestant‖ in its

―emphasis on individual conscience, duty, and moral values.‖9 It is, therefore, not surprising that his sentiments aligned with those of Rev. Parkes and the CNCR, who also saw the need for individual Christians to take action to combat the silence of the official churches‘ response and the inaction of the governments.

Lord Baldwin began his address by acknowledging that he was speaking on behalf of the religious communities in the British Isles, while also making it clear he felt the issues were equally relevant in all the countries of the Commonwealth.10 For him, the Jewish refugee crisis was a challenge to Christian charity, for ―somehow our Christianity is not worth much if we cannot in some way help in alleviating the mass suffering.‖11 In other words, like Rev

Parkes, Lord Baldwin saw the attacks on the Jews as creating a crisis of belief for Christians.

If they really believed Christ‘s teachings, they would be unable to remain uninvolved and uncaring. Furthermore, Lord Baldwin insinuated that the eternal wellbeing of the country and its Christian population would be determined by how Christians, corporately and individually responded to Kristallnacht and the mounting refugee crisis in Europe.

Lord Baldwin‘s attempt to arouse his Christian public to action did not rely on persuasion alone: he sought to shame Christians into responding. In order to justify his cause,

8 Philip Williamson, Stanley Baldwin: Conservative Leadership and National Values (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999), 277. 9 Ibid., 278. 10 Ibid., 330. Williamson notes that in the mid-1930s onward Baldwin had made ―religious liberty and spiritual values a larger part of his public reaches, sustained by his own sense of being ‗increasingly led‘ and by friends who thought the ‗world requires not only a statesman but also a good man who does not hesitate to speak in plain terms of Christianity‘‖; LAC, CNCR, MG 28, vol. 43, box 6, file 24, ―Minutes of the First Meeting and Interviews with Members of the Dominion Government,‖ 6/7 December 1938, Appendix X. 11 LAC, CNCR, MG 28, vol. 43, box 6, file 24, ―Minutes of the First Meeting and Interviews with Members of the Dominion Government,‖ 6/7 December 1938, Appendix X.

59 he pointed out that there were many Christians of Jewish ancestry who were also suffering at the hands of the Nazi and that, to date, Jews and Jewish organizations had provided almost all the assistance for these Christians.12 In order to rectify this, he proposed the creation of the

Lord Baldwin Fund for Refugees, which the CNCR would later endorse and seek to fund. The former Prime Minister also believed, as Williamson noted in his biography, that personal intervention on the part of Christians could overcome a country‘s reticence and failure to act.

Lord Baldwin concluded his fairly lengthy radio address with another challenge to Christians by reminding them that it was no coincidence that ―this calamity has occurred almost on the eve of Christmas, the festival when Christians celebrate the birth of the Prince of Peace.‖13 In his thinking, Christians would surely draw a connection between themselves and the one whom they claimed to follow, and conclude that they too should become peacemakers.

The significance of Lord Baldwin‘s and Rev. Parkes‘ speeches is threefold. First, they make the point that Christians were in the forefront of those publicly protesting the treatment of the Jews and seeking to help them. These two messages, broadcasted nationally and given prominent coverage in most leading newspapers, carried a distinctive Christian message and appeal. Second, they support the idea that Canadian Christians were attuned to the international Christian community in general, and the British community in particular. As

David Zimmerman notes in his article about the nature of the Canadian academic community‘s response to the Holocaust, Britain responded much faster to the Jewish refugee crisis than Canada did, a point which Canadian Christians sought to utilize as a galvanizing tool.14 Third, they foreshadowed the rhetoric and attitudes that many Canadian Christians

12 Ibid. 13 Ibid. 14 David Zimmerman, ―‗Narrow-Minded People‘: Canadian Universities and the Academic Refugee Crises, 1933-1941,‖ Canadian Historical Review 88, no. 2 (June 2007): 298.

60 adhered to in the following weeks and months. These speeches represented a growing belief that the churches had largely failed to respond to the suffering of Jews and of refugees in general. Moreover, it is significant that one of these addresses was made by a layman and the other by an itinerant clergyman. While the official denominational agencies of the churches floundered or remained silent, individuals took action, and the most significant action they took was to found the Canadian National Committee on Refugees.

CNCR: A Christian Organization?

The League of Nations Society (LNS) was the official progenerator of the CNCR, but the true inspiration for its creation came from a small group of people, including the President of the LNS, Senator Cairine Wilson, a few clergy, such as Rev. Parkes and Rev. Silcox, and other Christians and Jews. For Senator Wilson, her contribution to the creation and administration of the CNCR would become, according to her biographer, Valerie Knowles,

―the most important campaign of her life,‖ a life filled with many firsts for women in

Canada.15 It also happened to be the most important campaign on behalf of the Jews following

Kristallnacht. Yet, before addressing the mission and actions of the CNCR, it is essential to clarify why this organization should be included in an assessment of the Christian response to

Jewish suffering.

At its inception, the CNCR did not have official ties to any of the denominational churches in Canada. For this reason, historians, such as Davies and Nefsky and Abella and

Troper, who focus primarily on the denominational church response, paid little attention to the

CNCR. Davies and Nefsky do not go as far as Abella and Troper, who dismissed the CNCR as a group of ―well meaning but impractical idealists to be patronized but not taken seriously,‖

15 Valerie Knowles, First Person: A Biography of Cairine ilson: Canada’s First oman Senator (Toronto: Dundurn Press, 1988), 195. As noted in the introduction, Cairine Wilson was the first female senator and a prominent defender of individual rights for both men and women.

61 but they devote little space to the Committee in their book.16 Instead, Davies and Nefsky utilize the CNCR as a litmus test for denominational support of the Jewish refugee crisis. For example, they acknowledge that the United Churches‘ Board of Evangelism and Social

Service, which was then under the guidance of Rev. Silcox, endorsed the CNCR in 1938, but they do this merely to point out that the United Church and Rev. Silcox were showing some interest in the Jewish plight.17 They do not fully investigate the CNCR because of its inability to substantially change the government‘s position before the war and because they tend to treat the church as an institution rather than a movement of individuals committed to following Christ (i.e., Christians). They admit that the definition of what constitutes the church is a difficult one to answer, but their decision to organize their book around denominations, their reliance on denominational source material, and their leader-centric analysis, makes it clear that their preference is to see Christians as ―groups‖ organized into hierarchies rather than free thinking individuals.18 In spite of this perception of the Church and

Christians, they point out that a categorical characterization of the Christian response as silent is inappropriate because there was ―sometimes [a] contradictory attitude‖ found in the range of responses they observed.19 Yet, their examples of people speaking out for Jews is restricted to three prominent ―special envoys‖: Rev. W.W. Judd, Rev. Silcox, and Rev. Raymond

Booth.20 While these men played leading roles in setting up the CNCR and fostering help for

Jewish people, the Christian response goes far beyond this, as a closer examination of the

CNCR reveals.

16 Irving Abella and Harold Troper, None Is Too Many: Canada and the Jews of Europe, 1933-1948 (Toronto: Lester Publishing Limited, 1991), 284. 17 Alan Davies and Marilyn Nefsky, How Silent Were the Churches?: Canadian Protestantism and the Jewish Plight During the Nazi Era (Waterloo: Wilfrid Laurier University Press, 1997), 39. 18 Ibid., 123. 19 Ibid., 124. 20 Ibid., 128.

There is no question that the CNCR was not a denominationally run organization, nor was it tied organizationally or legally to any church. It was, however, an organization founded on Christian principles, by Christians, and for the purposes of steering and channelling a

Christian call to action. This Christian dimension is evident in the founding documents. As noted above, the CNCR designated Rev. Parkes‘ and Lord Baldwin‘s addresses as foundational documents. The founding members also added another Christian document to their inaugural collection, which the Social Service Council of Canada (SSCC) had published in March of 1936 entitled ―Canadian Christians and the German Refugees.‖ The SSCC was a coalition of Christian social services formed in the 1920s that sought to promote a federal level Christian social policy. 21 In 1935, Rev. Silcox, also a founding member of the CNCR, took the leadership of this organization and turned its attention to the Jewish refugee crisis.22

The document begins by claiming to ―speak for Canadian Christians‖ by offering ―unqualified protest against the treatment‖ of the Jews.23 In an effort to clarify why the Canadian churches remained silent in the face of the Jewish plight, the paper sites three determining concerns: the potential for aggravating the situation in Germany, the existence of antisemitism in Canada, and the concern that reports were exaggerating the condition of ―non-Aryans.‖ While partly justifying this early silence, the SSCC argued that ―further silence is impossible‖ and that ―as

Christians, we have learned that in Christ there is neither Jew nor Gentile.‖24 Like Rev. Parkes and Lord Baldwin, the SSCC, under Rev. Silcox, recognized a failing in the church response

21 Nancy Christie and Michael Gauvreau, A Full-Orbed Christianity: The Protestant Churches and Social Welfare in Canada, 1900-1940 (Montreal: McGill-Queen‘s University Press, 1996), 77-8. 22 Ibid. 23 LAC, CNCR, MG 28, vol. 43, box 6, file 24, ―Minutes of the First Meeting and Interviews with Members of the Dominion Government,‖ 6/7; Davies and Nefsky, How Silent Were the Churches?, 56. December 1938, in between appendix II and III. The SSCC was an Anglican initiative, but was affiliated with the Baptists, Salvation Army, Presbyterian Church, United Church, and the YM/WCA. 24 LAC, CNCR, MG 28, vol. 43, box 6, file 24, ―Minutes of the First Meeting and Interviews with Members of the Dominion Government,‖ 6/7.

63 and a need for Canadian Christians to take a more active opposition to the treatment of Jews.

The document ends with a clear charge to Canadians:

And we would call for more vigorous efforts in the promotion of an essential Canadianism based on Christian citizenship in which the roots of ancient prejudices may wither, and we may know ourselves as the creators of a new culture which, preserving and fusing the best in various traditions, will be free from racial arrogance and thus, making for the abatement of narrow nationalism, will contribute to the realization of justice and righteousness throughout the world.25

The SSCC and Rev. Silcox realized that there was a shortfall in the churches‘ actions in regards to the treatment of the Jews in Nazi Germany, even before Kristallnacht. They believed that the ―ancient prejudices‖, which had been a part of Canada for so long, continued to hinder churches and Canadians in general from acting in accordance with their Christian morals. It was time to organize for change and the CNCR was the result.

The CNCR was not only Christian in the sense that it was intentionally and overtly founded on Christian principles, the founders themselves were almost all Christians. Chief among these were Senator Wilson, Rev. Parkes, Rev. Silcox, and Rev. Judd, all of whom were leading spokespeople for the Christian community and all of whom testified to the role their

Christian faith played as a motivating factor in the founding of the organization. Senator

Wilson was the most public and well-known leader in the CNCR, but another Christian also played a pivotal role in the organization: Sir Robert Falconer. Sir Falconer, who served as the honorary president of the CNCR, was a close personal friend of Senator Wilson and a

Presbyterian minister.26 He was an academic and a leading New Testament scholar who served as the president of the University of Toronto and played a prominent part in the unification of the Presbyterian, Methodist, and Congregational denominations. He sought

25 Ibid. 26 LAC, CNCR, MG 28, vol. 43, box 7, file10, ―Distinguished Educationist Sir Robert Falconer Dies,‖ unknown newspaper, November 4, 1943.

64 what his biographer, James Greenlee, describes as ―a moral and religious rejuvenation of society.‖27 Greenlee goes on to describe Sir Falconer‘s belief that the ―diffusion of essential

Christianity and a ‗higher conception of liberty‘ would lead to overall moral regeneration.‖28

Not surprisingly, this ministerial desire for rejuvenation and his experience in negotiating ecumenical cooperation left him advantageously positioned to assist Senator Wilson in her quest to motivate a broad spectrum of Christians to their cause. Both of them shared a common Presbyterian heritage and both were dissatisfied with the churches‘ and the country‘s response to Jewish suffering in Germany.

The strongest argument against including the CNCR as a key witness to the protest of

Canadian Christians is that most churches did not formally recognize it as a member of the ecumenical Christian community. In the months leading up to the war and during the war years there is little evidence of an official recognition or relationship between the churches and the CNCR, but this changed shortly after the war ended. In January of 1946, the Canadian

Council of Churches asked the CNCR to be their representative in the newly formed

Ecumenical Refugee Commission, which was under the auspices of the World Council of

Churches.29 Instead of creating a church-run refugee commission, as every other country had done, the Canadian churches realized that a group of Christians had already created an organization that had successfully fought on behalf of refugees for nearly a decade.30 The fact that it took until after the war for the Canadian churches to officially associate with the CNCR was more indicative of the churches‘ inability to act on behalf of refugees than a reflection of the CNCR‘s fundamental Christian character. An examination of the CNCR makes it clear

27 Ibid.; James Greenlee, Sir Robert Falconer: A Biography (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1988), 93. 28 Greenlee, Sir Robert Falconer, 338. 29 LAC, CNCR, MG 28, vol. 43, box 4, file 41, International Council of Churches, 10 January 1946. This is from an informal meeting, called at short notice, of the Toronto members of the CNCR along with Senator Wilson. 30 Ibid.

65 that it was comprised primarily of self-conscious Christians who organized and intentionally infused the CNCR with a Christian message and purpose. In summary, therefore, one must include an analysis of the CNCR in any study seeking to understand the Christian response to the Jewish persecution between Kristallnacht and the beginning of the war.

CNCR: Formation

The idea of the CNCR was born on October 15, 1938, at a meeting of the LNS.

Senator Wilson, who had been president of the LNS since May 1937, pushed for the creation of an organization dedicated to helping refugees and lobbying the government on their behalf.31 The LNS tasked the CNCR to arouse ―the Canadian people to a sense of the

Dominion‘s share of responsibility‖ for all those suffering in Europe, whether they were

Jewish or not.32 While this meeting occurred in October, the LNS deferred taking action to create the CNCR. It seems likely the events of Kristallnacht accelerated the decision-making process and by the first week of December, the CNCR was ready to begin its work.

The first meeting took place on December 6 and 7 at the Chateau Laurier, a block away from the Parliament buildings in Ottawa. In contrast to the official denominational community, it was clear from the beginning that the CNCR was not going to be indecisive, quiet, or noncommittal. Four hours before the first session began, Senator Wilson, Rev.

Silcox, Rev. Judd, and other members of the Executive Committee visited the Honourable

T.A. Crerar, Minister of Mines and Resources, a portfolio which at the time included immigration. The intent was to send a message that this advocacy group was serious about impacting public policy. After the second day of the two-day meeting, a smaller group from

31 LAC, CNCR, MG 28, vol. 43, box 7, file10, ―Senator Wilson Named President of League Group,‖ unknown newspaper, May 1937; Knowles, First person, 195. 32 LAC, CNCR, MG 28, vol. 43, box 6, file 24, ―Resolution Authorizing the Establishment of a National Committee on Refugees and Victims of Political Persecution,‖ 6/7 December 1938, appendix II.

66 the CNCR also met with the Prime Minister.33 This delegation, like the previous one, expressed their concerns about Canada‘s policy and urged the government to change its position. It is noteworthy that neither Mr. Crerar nor Mr. King showed a genuine openness to a change in the government‘s position.34 More importantly, however, the new organization had served notice to the government that there would now be an active, organized, and

Christian-inspired voice in the country demanding assistance for Jewish refugees and seeking practical means of helping them come to Canada.

The opening session of the CNCR on December 6 began with an address by Rev.

Parkes in which he bemoaned the fact that ―Christians had failed lamentably‖ in their assistance to the Jews. He still believed, however, that the ―Christian community‖ had the power to ―handle the problem easily.‖35 Shortly after this, the meeting addressed the ―Main

Resolution,‖ a document that Rev. Silcox and Rev. Judd had drafted, in which they clarified the aims of the CNCR. The resolution condemned the federal government‘s passivity at the

Évian conference and requested that ―the Government give special consideration to modifications in its present restrictions.‖36 In a sign of how provocative this language was compared to previous ecclesiastically oriented protests, this more aggressively toned criticism of the government irritated the sensibilities of a couple of members attending the first meeting

33 Ibid., ―Minutes of the First Meeting and Interviews with Members of the Dominion Government,‖ 6/7 December 1938, 7. The Meeting with the Prime Minister also included Rev. Judd and Rev. Silcox, Rev. Robert Johnson, and some delegates from the League of Nations Society. 34Ibid., 2, 9. William Lyon Mackenzie King, ―A Real Companion and Friend: The Diary of William Lyon Mackenzie King, 1893-1950,‖ Library and Archives Canada, n.d., November 13, 1938, www.collectionscanada.gc.ca. King notes in his diary that he suggested they look to convince the provinces to change. This is corroborated by Constance Hayworth‘s account in the CNCR‘s Minutes. 35 LAC, CNCR, MG 28, vol. 43, box 6, file 24, ―Minutes of the First Meeting and Interviews with Members of the Dominion Government,‖ 6/7 December 1938, 3. 36 Ibid., 5-6.

67 and the motion only passed 13 to 5.37 Despite the opposition, all of Rev. Silcox‘s and Rev.

Judd‘s clauses passed and the course of the CNCR was set.

The CNCR suffered from a major weakness right from the outset just as other initiatives and pro-Jewish activists did. According to Constance Hayward, the secretary of the

CNCR, Senator James Murdock, a participant of the opening session, ―pointed out that one third of Canada (French Canada) was not represented on the Committee‖ and, therefore, the

CNCR must remain ―reasonably minded‖ about its prospects for reform.38 At the time, his comments appeared pessimistic, but the CNCR‘s future correspondence and government records in the following months proved his concerns were well founded. The CNCR was a

Christian response to the plight of Jews and other refugees in Europe, but it was only an

English and, primarily, a Protestant response.39 The political reality was that those with power to effect change were members of the Liberal government, which was deeply reliant on seats in Quebec to retain power.

The initial meeting of the CNCR in early December was the only meeting it held before the New Year, yet by the time it concluded, the delegates had clarified the organization‘s mission and appointed an Executive Committee that would pursue the goals in accordance with the ―Main Resolution.‖ The delegates charged the Committee with the task of raising money, lobbying the government and the House of Commons, and sending Rev.

Silcox, Rev. Parkes, Senator Wilson, and others on national tours to galvanize support for their cause. Where there had been official ambivalence and silence, the messengers of the new

37 Ibid. Charlotte Whitton of the Dominion Executive of the Canadian Welfare Council led to opposition and requested that it be noted in the record. 38 Ibid., 7. 39 Ibid., ―Attendance,‖ 6/7 December 1938, appendix I. Most of the people and organizations at this meeting were Protestants. For examples: the General Council of Protestant Women‘s Federation, two YMCA groups, and the Anglican Archbishop of Ottawa. The one exception to this was J.A. MacCabe of the Catholic Women‘s League.

68 organization would condemn churches for failing to meet their obligations to be moral leaders in the country. Over the next few months, they would call on lay Christians and active clergy to come together under the CNCR‘s banner to create a political pathway for persecuted Jews in Europe to receive practical assistance.

The Continuation of the Public Response

Organizations, almost by definition, need time to gather resources and implement objectives. While the CNCR was going through this process, the spontaneous expressions of public protest published in the major Canadian dailies continued. There was at least one protest directly linked to the events of November. The Halifax Herald reported that more than

1,000 people met at Yarmouth, Nova Scotia, on December 1 at the behest of the ―ministers‘ institute of Yarmouth,‖ the Roman Catholic clergy, and the local Jewish society, which included clergy from Baptist, Salvation Army, Roman Catholic, United, and Anglican churches.40 Rev. Father W. Penny of St. Ambrose Roman Catholic Church summarized the message of the meeting when he claimed that it was the duty of Christians to present

―vigorous protest at the savagery and brutal treatment of the Jewish race.‖41 He felt that continued persecution against the ―Children of God‖ could not prevail, for Christian history showed that persistent persecution against Christianity always failed and only encouraged its spread and development. Father Penny wanted the Jewish community to know that the Jews were not alone in their experiences of persecution, both in the past and present, and that the anti-Christian nature of the Nazis would inevitably cause them to fail.42 The rhetoric in this

40 ―Call Mass Meetings to Voice Protest‖ Halifax Herald, December 2, 1938, 9; ―Germany‘s Actions Protested‖ Halifax Herald, December 5, 1938, 9. Clergy included Rev. F. L. Orchard of Zion Baptist Church, Rev. Father W. Penny of St. Ambrose Roman Catholic church, Rev. J. R. Davies of Holy Trinity Church, Rev. Crowell of Wesley United Church, Rev. N.M. Rattee of Central United Church, Rev. P.R. Hayden of Tempest Baptist Church, and Rev. Gordon Lewis of the Salvation Army. 41 ―Germany‘s Actions Protested,‖ Halifax Herald, December 5, 1938, 9. 42 Ibid.

69 final post-Kristallnacht rally emphasized the solidarity of Christians with the Jews and a belief that these attacks actually stemmed from a strain of anti-Christianity in Nazism. Both of these themes characterized the published Christian protest during the month of December.

Belief that the Nazis‘ attack on the Jews was a veiled or direct threat to Christianity coincided with an early premonition of what the Nazis‘ ultimate goal might be in regards to the Jews. For example, on December 7, The Gazette printed a report by the former League of

Nations Refugee Commissioner, James McDonald, who had stepped down in disgust over the international handling of the refugee question, raised the prospect of an ―extermination‖ of the

Jews.43 One can sense the impact of Kristallnacht in Mr. McDonald‘s analysis:

Just as I am convinced that the Jewish community in Germany is doomed so am I convinced that if the Nazis remain in power for a generation the Catholic and Protestant churches are doomed too. The schedule will depend wholly on matters of expediency.44

Beyond revealing that thoughtful people were aware of how dire the plight of the Jews was,

Mr. McDonald‘s report opens up the underlying issue, namely, that hatred for a group of people references deep social problems. It was a logical step for him in his analysis to allegorize the inaction of the Christians as a feeding of Hitler‘s ―appetite‖ and, ultimately,

―doom‖ the churches. Mr. McDonald did not provide a clear solution to the problem, but he was unequivocal about the consequences to and for Christians.

Newspapers in Ontario and the Maritimes also carried articles that prognosticated doom for the Christian community. Writers during this period began to appeal directly to

Christians to become involved for reasons of self-preservation, as well as for reasons of compassion and solidarity. A few days before Mr. McDonald‘s report, the Toronto Daily Star republished an editorial from the Orillia Packet and Times, which argued that Canada, as a

43 ―No Hope for Jews of Germany Seen‖ The Gazette, December 7, 1938, 13. 44 Ibid.

―Christian country,‖ could not ―escape the scriptural challenge; ‗Whoso hath this world‘s goods‘ and seeth his brother have need, and shuteth up his compassion from him, how dwelleth the love of God in him?‘‖45 From the writer‘s viewpoint, the eternal wellbeing of

Canada was at stake if Canada and its Christians did not act, which, undoubtedly, was the most ominous consequence they could think of.

Near the middle of December in Pictou, Nova Scotia, Rev. S. Buchanan Carey of St.

Andrew‘s Presbyterian Church reminded his congregation that if one passed by the Jew ―you pass by Christ.‖46 Rev. Buchanan made it clear that ―Christianity and faith in Christ is challenged‖ and, he believed, it was a challenge Christians could address successfully if they united.47 Rev. Buchanan and the unsigned editorial from Orillia presented the refugees crisis as both an opportunity and a threat to Christianity. Like Rev. Parkes, these two individuals believed Christians coming together in response to the ―scriptural challenge‖ could make a meaningful difference. Conversely, silence was simply not an option, if one cared for the spiritual soul of the country.

Christians in December continued to utilize the argument that emphasized the interconnectedness of Jews and Christians. Throughout the month there were a few incidental comments in the newspapers about Christians engaging in meaningful contact with the Jewish community. In Toronto, Rev. Crossley Hunter, who had earlier referred to the Jews as

―brethren‖ in his keynote address at the Toronto protest meeting in November, spoke to a gathering of the United Jewish Women‘s ―Save the Children‖ campaign. He went so far as to describe the work of these Jewish ladies as ―the finest thing in the world.‖48 In Calgary, there

45 ―Canada and the Refugees,‖ printed in the Toronto Daily Star, December 3, 1938, 4. 46 ―Appeals for Aid for Refugees,‖ Halifax Herald, December 14, 1938, 9. 47 Ibid. 48 ―Work for Victims of Hate Said Finest Thing in World,‖ Toronto Daily Star, December 30, 1938, 5.

71 were similar signs of Christians interacting with the Jewish community as a group of

Christians provided practical assistance to help with the extradition of Jews from Europe and resettlement in Canada. In early December, Rev. Warwick Kelloway of Knox United Church, the keynote speaker at the Calgary Kristallnacht protest meeting who had received death threats over his pro-Jewish immigration stance, invited a rabbi from Edmonton to share in a joint Sunday morning service with him. The Calgary Daily Herald reported that they discussed ―the Horror in Germany‖ and, more specifically, Canadian efforts to find and fund

―new homes for Jewish refugees.‖49 The fact that Rev. Kelloway and Rev. Hunter were active participants in the November protest meetings indicates that their support for the Jews was more than just rhetorical flair or a temporary emotional response to a publicized news event.

Now, a month later, their rhetoric was the same and their actions, which included support for a

Jewish aid organization and an effort to find housing for refugees, demonstrated sincerity.

These two clergymen from Toronto and Calgary were not an anomaly: on December

10, the Montreal Gazette quoted Rabbi Stern, of an undeclared synagogue, stating that there had been a nationwide shift in Christian attitude. He told his synagogue that he was now able to tell them something he had never been able to say before:

‗The Jews are not alone.‘ At no other time in the past 2,000 years have they had the allies they have today and all the more glory to the Christian Church is this fact, said Rabbi Stern. Hardly a day in the past few weeks was there when he had not spoken before some Christian organization on the situation in Jewry from the Jewish point of view.50

Rabbi Stern‘s statement testified to a new era in Christian-Jewish relations arising out of the shards of Kristallnacht. The fact that the rabbi was receiving daily expressions of support reveals that much of the intensity seen in the Christian reaction following Kristallnacht had

49 ―A Dialogue Sermon at Knox United,‖ The Calgary Daily Herald, December 3, 1938, 25. 50 ―Rabbi Asks Prayer for Jews‘ Enemies.‖ The Gazette, December 10, 1938, 19.

72 moved out of the streets, church auditoriums, and stadiums and into the spaces of everyday life where people lived. The Christian protest movement was undergoing a metamorphosis that did not have the same visible impact or noise of the mass meetings, but was arguably as profound and recognized in the Jewish community in Montreal. To describe this as ―silence‖ is to misunderstand the meaning and impact of the change that was taking place.

Public and Political Opposition

Rabbi Stern‘s remarks that the Christian community was now acting on behalf of the

Jewish community in tangible and appreciated ways came at a time when opposition to Jewish immigration was gathering strength. There were several reasons for this. The first was an economic concern, which one can see clearly in the newspaper editorials and letters to the editor. This argument held that Canada was still suffering too severely from the Depression to assist the Jews in a meaningful way. The second factor was a religious concern. A few

Christian clergy and lay people argued that it was inappropriate to have non-Christians – Jews in this case – entering the country. The third and most significant concern was that helping the

Jews was not politically expedient. These three concerns warrant careful consideration in order to understand the environment within which Christians were responding. Given that

Canadians as self-conscious, professing Christians were only obviously distinguishable in the second and third concerns, the following analysis focuses on these two points.

The English newspapers reported little distinctively Christian lay or clerical opposition to immigration. One of the only instances came from an Ottawa Evening Citizen report on antisemitism near the middle of the month. The newspaper reported an incident on December

5 when Rev. John Inkster of Knox Presbyterian Church in Toronto gave a sermon in which he noted it was ―sad to see the Jews turning in every direction and seeking sympathy and help

73 from man instead of God.‖51 He went on to insinuate that the persecution and misfortune of the Jewish people in Europe was primarily a ―sign of disbelief and denial of Christ.‖52 The

Citizen recognized that such statements were ―isolated from the viewpoint of all Christian bodies,‖ but called for a clearer condemnation of such statements from ―responsible members‖ of society.53 This example of Christian antisemitism and opposition to Jewish immigration stands in contrast to the many loud and vigorous protests made on behalf of the Jewish people in November and December. The record in the newspaper sources is indisputable: Christians were not silent and they were sincere in their desire to help the Jews. Nonetheless, the record also is clear that there were strands of antisemitism in this community. The bold, if isolated, statements of a Rev. Inkster and the repeated testimony of Christians writing in to criticize their fellow believers for harbouring such thoughts both testify to the existence of this antisemitic perspective.

However, the most significant opposition to immigration in December did not come from the Christian community, but from the inner sanctum of Prime Minister King‘s government. The month of November ended with three important political developments. The first was private: Mr. King showed a personal interest in helping the Jews based on his self- professed Christian faith. The second was geopolitical: the United Kingdom began to put pressure on Canada to accept Jewish immigrants. The third was socio-political: there was evidence that significant anti-immigration sentiments were present in Mr. King‘ cabinet. In the month of December, the third development became by far the most prominent contrary force the Christian community faced in its advocacy of a new, pro-Jewish immigration policy in Canada.

51 ―Canada and Anti-Semitism,‖ Ottawa Evening Citizen, December 12, 1938, 19. 52 Ibid. 53 Ibid.

The consequence of Mr. King‘s realization over his late November dinner with Mr.

Lapointe that Jewish immigration ―was anathema‖ proved to be significant.54 In John

MacFarlane‘s biography of Mr. Lapointe he examines seventeen of Mr. King‘s decisions and concludes that Mr. Lapointe ―heavily influenced‖ the prime minister. Even though Mr.

MacFarlane‘s biography does not specifically address the refugee crisis, it is apparent that Mr.

Lapointe would have had exceptional influence on the prime minister‘s thinking.55 While it seems easy to blame Mr. Lapointe‘s influence on the Prime Minister in this case on a virulent antisemitism, Lita-Rose Betcherman argues for a more nuanced understanding of the minister.

Despite the provocative nature of Mr. Lapointe‘s sentiments and their effects, she believes that the cabinet minister was ―troubled‖ by the ―political necessity of refusing sanctuary to Hitler‘s victims.‖56 Nevertheless, she admits that ―it was Lapointe, speaking for Quebec, who influenced King the most and shaped government policy on the refugee question.‖57 Whether he was personally troubled by the suffering of the Jewish people or not, his actions were particularly damaging to the efforts of Christians who sought to reverse Canada‘s immigration policy.

Mr. Lapointe‘s effect on the cabinet and the government‘s policy manifested itself quickly after his late November meeting with the Prime Minister. A memorandum circulated by N.A. Robertson on November 29 marked the beginning of decisions that would make it very difficult for anyone in Canada to help the Jews in a meaningful way. In this memorandum, Mr. Robertson recognized that ―renewed and particularly brutal attacks on

54 King, ―A Real Companion and Friend,‖ November 29. 55 John MacFarlane, rnest Lapointe and Que e ’s Influen e on Canadian Foreign Policy (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1999), 186, 197. 56 Lita-Rose Betcherman, rnest Lapointe : Ma kenzie King’s Great Que e Lieutenant (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2002), 254. 57 Ibid.

Jews in German territories in these last weeks‖ had ―enormously complicated‖ the refugee problem and revealed ―the depth and sincerity of the indignant sympathy of the people of this country.‖58 What Mr. Robertson also recognized, though, was that Canada‘s ability to absorb immigrants had been ―grossly exaggerated‖ by others and, at best, Canada could probably

―facilitate the entry of individual refugees who appear, after investigation, to be likely to adapt themselves successfully to Canadian conditions‖ through Orders-in-Council.59

Despite Mr. Robertson‘s recognition of a deep sympathy in Canada for a potential increase in Jewish refugees, there was a muted but virulent counter sentiment running through the government. On December 1, O.D. Skelton reported on a meeting with King in which ―it was considered there was very strong opposition in the country under the present employment conditions to the influx of any sudden or large amount of persons who would find difficulty in fitting into the economic or social life of the country.‖60 Like Mr. Robertson and the Prime

Minister, Mr. Skelton appeared to have some personal sympathies, but he also appeared to have resigned himself to the limits of his influence as a public servant. Terence Crowley, in his book Marriage of Minds, reinforces what seems apparent here when he argues that Mr.

Skelton ―was sympathetic to the plight of the European Jews, but there was little he could do since decisions were political,‖ which meant the cabinet decided the issue.61 While Mr.

Robertson and Mr. Skelton sensed the pressure from Canadians and foreign dignitaries for the

58 Documents on Canadian External Relations [DCER], vol. 6: 1936-1939. Ed. John A. Monro (Ottawa: Department of External Affairs, 1972), 838, 840. 59 Ibid., 840, 842. 60 Ibid., 845. 61 Terence Crowley, Marriage of Minds: Isabel and Oscar Skelton Reinventing Canada (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2003), 201.

76 government to accept even some Jews, they carried out their roles in the government by setting the stage for inaction as they began to list the obstacles to Cabinet.62

On December 8 and 9, only two days after the CNCR met with Mr. King and Mr.

Crerar, the ―problem‖ of needing to act was conclusively averted as Mr. Robertson and Mr.

Skelton demonstrated how they believed Canada could avoid changing its immigration policy without losing face either domestically or abroad. The decision to defer to expediency bothered Mr. Crerar, who was the minister in charge of immigration and one of Mr. King‘s chief members of cabinet. His biographer, J.E. Rea, notes that, on four occasions during this period, Mr. Crerar ―urged the cabinet to admit Jewish refugees,‖ but ―each time he failed.‖63

Rea offers two different explanations for this. First, immigration was a low priority on Mr.

Crerar‘s long list of commitments, which meant that he was ―content‖ to leave most of the decisions on those matters to the anti-immigration and antisemitic F.C. Blair, who was the director of immigration.64 The second reason was the intractable position of the Quebec ministers in the cabinet. In her biography of Mr. Lapointe, Betcherman lauds Mr. Crerar‘s efforts to gain admittance for 10,000 Jewish refugees in December, but recognizes that ―his

Quebec colleagues, who remained ‗strongly against any admission,‘ and his rabidly anti-

Semitic deputy minister, F.C. Blair, stymied him.‖65

And so, despite his own concerns, the concerns of Mr. Skelton, Mr. Crerar, and even

Mr. King, Mr. Robertson dutifully reported on December 8 that, ―having regard to the general

62 J.L. Granatstein, A Man of Influence: Norman A. Robertson and Canadian Statecraft, 1929-68 (Ottawa: Deneau Publishers, 1981), xii, 80. Unfortunately, Granastein does not discuss Mr. Robertson‘s reaction to the refugee crisis, but he does recognize that until Mr. Skelton‘s death in 1941, he did not carry the influence he would during the war. Interestingly, Granastein defines Mr. Robertson‘s position before the war as a ―neutralist‖ who saw Europe‘s problems primarily as their own. His sentiments towards Jewish persecution in late 1938 may indicate the beginning of a shift in his attitude. 63 James Edgar Rea, T.A. Crerer: A Political Life (Montreal: McGill-Queen‘s University Press, 1997), 185. 64 Ibid., 184. 65 Betcherman, Ernest Lapointe, 254-55.

77 situation in Canada we will not proceed on a quota basis‖ and the country would only admit immigrants, not refugees.66 The next day, Mr. Skelton also issued a memorandum that pointed out ―that immigration under the B.N.A. Act is a problem for both the Dominion and the

Provinces,‖ which meant that without provincial consent the federal government would have to make sure its immigration policy did ―not run counter to provincial policy.‖67

Corroborating this assessment, Mr. King records in his diary that he informed the CNCR delegation on December 7 that it would profit them more to ―wait on provincial governments and get their approval as a means of finding [a] solution to the problem.‖68 It seems clear that

Mr. Skelton and Mr. Robertson worked together, with the knowledge and blessing of the

Prime Minister, to create a case for Canada not increasing its quotas. They were spokespersons for a Council that had met and made its decision; it was their job to communicate to the public and the international community the government‘s reasons for retaining the existing policy.

Although the official stance of the Canadian government was allegedly undergirded by technical limitations in the BNA Act and was supposedly unhindered by the ―silence‖ of

Christians, there is another more probable and satisfying explanation for the government‘s unwillingness to change its policy regarding Jewish immigration. This explanation of the underlying motivation for the policy decision is found in Prime Minister King‘s diary. On

December 21, at the insistence of Mr. King, the Cabinet finally brought the Jewish refugee question to a head by agreeing that, outside of letting immediate relatives into the country, there would be ―no letting in others lest it might foment an anti-semitic problem in this

66 DCER, 846-7. 67 Ibid., 850. 68 King, ―A Real Companion and Friend,‖ November 13, 1938.

78 country and creating a new problem here.‖69 The issue was not a legal one, but a political one influenced by antisemitic attitudes in certain segments of the country. In fact, King notes that on that very same day Canada secretly permitted visas for 3,000 Czech and Sudeten Germans; evidently some refugees were more equal than others and flexibility was indeed available, if there was political will.70

The most important decision makers appeared to have made up their minds by the end of December, but the political debate outside the confines of the cabinet meetings continued.

Not only were these cabinet meetings private and the decisions unknown to the public, the

Prime Minster had already recessed Parliament by the time Kristallnacht occurred and he did not reconvene it until after the New Year. This resulted in a political debate in January and

February that was vigorous, but almost meaningless. As far as Mr. King and the decision- makers were concerned, the matter was settled, the decision had been made.

Interestingly, the most public political statement against immigration in December came not from the Prime Minister‘s Office, the Cabinet, or even the Liberal Party, but from the Honourable Robert James Manion, leader of the Conservative Party of Canada and the opposition at the time. Newspapers across the country commented on his speech of December

15 in Quebec. In it, Mr. Manion declared his ―flat opposition to the admission of any immigrants to Canada while Canadians are out of work.‖71 Mr. Manion went on to explain that he wanted to ―stop rumors being circulated to the effect he favored immigration.‖72 Not surprisingly, such a public statement generated controversy and cynicism as the speech was

69 Ibid., November 22, 1938. 70 Ibid. 71 ―Opposes Immigration While Any Canadians Jobless, Says Manion,‖ Edmonton Journal, December 19, 1938, 1; ―Manion Asks Bar Against Refugees; Urges Ministry of Youth Welfare,‖ Vancouver Province, December 15, 1938, 9. The articles printed in papers across Canada were from the Canadian Press, which meant the text was largely the same. 72 ―Opposes Immigration,‖ Edmonton Journal, December 15, 1938, 5.

79 given in the heart of Quebec by a man who was married to a francophone Roman Catholic.

The next day, a student wrote into The Gazette exclaiming that Mr. Manion was merely making a speech on ―racial grounds‖ in Quebec ―which would be popular with the voters.‖73

The fact that the student felt Mr. Manion would likely go on to succeed due to the political climate in the province demonstrates how regionally divided Canada appears to have been over the issue.

Many responded to Mr. Manion‘s statements, but some of the most intensely negative responses published in the papers came from individuals who made their Christian sentiments known. A day after the student from Montreal wrote in to The Gazette, P.E. Layton, President of the Montreal Association for the Blind, also sent a letter to The Gazette in which he stated that he was ―very surprised and deeply shocked‖ at what Mr. Manion said.74 Mr. Layton went on to explain it was ―the duty of every Canadian who calls himself a Christian to do all he can to help give a home in this vast Dominion to this persecuted race.‖75 As a self-professed

Christian, Mr. Layton felt that Mr. Manion was betraying both his Christian and Canadian heritage by taking this political position.

Two days after The Gazette published Mr. Layton‘s letter, W.H. Davison of St. John the Evangelist, Montreal, also sent in a letter to The Gazette to protest Mr. Manion‘s speech.

Citing the line of reasoning many Christians used in November, Rev. Davison referenced the allegory of the Good Samaritan to contend that the Jewish people were like the ―half-dead‖ man on the ―wayside of human life.‖76 Continuing with his figurative language, Rev.

Davidson made an emotional appeal to his Christian readers:

73 ―The Refugee Question,‖ The Gazette, December 16, 1938, 8. 74 ―Refugee Immigration,‖ The Gazette, December 17, 1938, 8. 75 Ibid. 76 ―Dr. Manion on Immigration,‖ The Gazette, December 19,1938, 8.

In the name of the Jewish Babe whom Christians hail at this season as the Savior, Deliverer and Redeemer of all mankind, let us heed the cry of Jewish children who are the innocent victims of the Nazi Herod‘s wrath. For the sake of the Holy Family driven from the persecuting Herod to flight and refuge in a strange land, let us endeavor to provide a haven in this fair Dominion for homeless families who are helpless victims of the Nazi fury.77

In Rev. Davison‘s mind, Mr. Manion‘s statement mirrored the wrong done to the ―Jewish

Babe‖ following his birth in Bethlehem and, in doing so, captured many of the themes of

Christian protest. He recognized the barbarity of the Nazis by comparing them to Herod, the connection of the Jews and Christians through the racial background of Christ, and the peril

Canada faced if it failed to act.

The sources used in this thesis support the contention that Canadians were largely unaware of the workings of Mr. King‘s cabinet, but public antisemitic outbursts by politicians garnered the ire of many Christians and they confronted them in the most effective way they knew, by protesting and challenging them in the public forum of the newspapers. In the following months, the frustration of being unable to do more to create political change would dramatically increase, but in December optimism still prevailed.

Christmas Response and Conclusion

Rev. Davison‘s utilization of the Christian liturgical calendar to shame and condemn antisemitic and anti-immigration political rhetoric in Canada illustrates the most unique aspect of the Christian response in December. Lord Baldwin‘s radio address at the beginning of the month foreshadowed how potent a Christmas oriented response to Jewish persecution in

Germany could be when he contrasted the message of peace and goodwill at Christmas to the suffering of the Jews.

77 Ibid.

One of the first references in newspapers to Christmas following Lord Baldwin‘s radio address came from a founding member of the CNCR. On his return trip from the inaugural meeting in Ottawa, Dr. G.W. Black, professor at the University of British Columbia, spoke at

Scarboro United Church in Calgary on December 12. In his talk, he went so far as to claim that he was ―glad that [the persecution of the Jews] happened just before Christmas‖ because

Christians were more sensitized at this time of year to show their Christianity.78 Moreover, he believed that ―it is a challenge to us to show our Christianity; if there is any humanity in our hearts we must support the refugee movement.‖79 Such insensitivity is not surprising given Dr.

Black‘s abrasive statements during the CNCR‘s meetings, but it makes the point that lay

Christians were calling Canadians to action based on a broad reference to the ideals of humanity embedded in Christianity, which were seen clearly in the spirit of Christmas.80

On Christmas Eve, at least two newspapers published a Christmas oriented appeal on behalf of the Jewish refugees, one in the form of an unsigned editorial and the other in the form of a letter from a layman. The editorial staff of the Kitchener Daily Record recognized both the ―bitter conflict‖ in ―the land of Christ‘s birth‖ as well as the fact that Germany was

―ruthlessly [crushing] the race from which our Saviour came.‖81 In contrast to this gloom, the editorial claimed that ―the Star of Bethlehem still shines clear—a beacon-light that would lead the world to peace.‖82 The other published expression of Christian support for Jews on

Christmas Eve came from Harold T. Roe, who wrote to The Halifax Daily Herald. While he expressed similar sentiments to the unsigned editorial in Kitchener, his language was more

78 ―Plan Refugee Settlement Board Here,‖ The Calgary Daily Herald, December 12, 1938, 10. 79 Ibid. 80 Dr. Black sent a couple of aggressive and almost rude letters to Constance Hayward, the secretary of the CNCR, questioning the way in which the CNCR was being run. 81 ―Blessed Noel,‖ Kitchener Daily Record, December 24, 1938, 6. 82 Ibid.

82 strident and his warning harsher. He explained that never before had it been ―so widely recognized as today that unless the teachings of Christ of Bethlehem and Calvary are accepted as the form of human conduct, the outlook of Civilization is bleak and barren in the extreme.‖83 In his mind, ―the world‘s one hope‖ lay in ―Christianizing‖ society in a way that would combat the barbarous nature of Nazism.84

These two articles are merely representative of others printed throughout the Advent season in newspapers from Vancouver to Halifax. In general, they all called for action on behalf of the Jews and refugees, and include a general condemnation of Nazism on the basis of Christmas ideals and symbolism. Accompanying these Christmas appeals was a shaming of

Canadian Christians for not acting in accordance with shared Christian values and a warning for the consequences of inaction. The juxtaposition of the hope and peace of Christmas with the despair of the Jews motivated members of the general Christian public to undertake new organizational initiatives that they believed could make a genuine difference for the Jewish people.

Kristallnacht awakened Christians from the relative silence of an earlier period. By

December, this voice of protest took on an organizational and socially active dimension. The most prominent of these initiatives was the CNCR and it was expressly established as a vehicle for Christians to come together to create meaningful political change when it was discovered that the church as an agency of change was unavailable. Unfortunately and unknown to Canadian Christians, political developments during the month were creating an inhospitable climate for the critical change they desired. While the Prime Minister and Mr.

Crerar would meet with Senator Wilson and express sympathy with the CNCR‘s appeals, even

83 ―The Star of Hope,‖ The Halifax Daily Herald, December 24, 1938, 6. 84 Ibid.

Mr. King‘s Christian sentiments were sacrificed for what Blair Neatby calls the ―prism of unity‖ through which Mr. King saw the world.85

The sources used in this thesis do not support the idea that Christians were ―silent‖ during the months following Kristallnacht. Christians themselves recognized the lack of an effective response from their denominations, which Davies and Nefsky, Abella and Troper,

Nawyn, and Ross document in their monographs. Protest against the abuses of Kristallnacht continued in December, but now the protests increasingly included statements about Canada‘s anti-immigration policy and emotional appeals to the Christian community to act in the face of an unresponsive government and ecclesiastical structure that was failing to respond adequately to the crisis facing the Jewish people.

Throughout history, poetry has often captured emotions and arguments better than prose and the expressions of protest in Canada were no exception. The published poems of two women, one in The Globe and Mail and the other on December 23 in the Toronto Daily

Star, provide a suitable summary of the Christian response in December:

―Refugee‖

I am the Voice of the voiceless, Of those lips are mute, Whose homes are ravaged and destroyed, Of a striving lifetime‘s fruit.

I am the Voice of the outcast. I seek a friendly door. Ah, do not say there is no room Upon Canadian shore.

I am the Voice of the hungry, Of all who sadly weep For bread which is now denied them. ―If ye love Me, feed My sheep.‖

85 H. Blair Neatby, William Lyon Mackenzie King: 1932-1939 the Prism of Unity (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1976), iii.

I am the Voice of the Saviour, Crucified anew. Has the world forgotten, ceased to care That Christ was born a Jew?

I am the Voice of the voiceless, Will no one heed their cry? Stripped bare of hope and home and love– We dare not let them die!86

―Christmas Tragedy‖

Intolerance and hate are here, and bitter crying; And persecuted, mocked and scorned, His people dying, And Jewish Mary‘s gentle Son must look down, Tearful, While over Europe‘s sodden plains the day dawns fearful.

Again the Christmas bells announce the Little Stranger, And hosts, unsure and mystified, approach the manger. O Sad! behold alone and weary with His Weeping, The Little Christ is in the manger sleeping.87

These two poems, the first by Clara Bernhardt and the second by E. Anne Ryan, contained many of the sentiments expressed elsewhere by Christians in December, while presaging the

Christian sentiment in 1939. Both poems emphasise the Jewish nature of Mary and, therefore,

Christ and Christians. Furthermore, the references to Christmas made the poems even more significant because Christmas, along with Easter, was the time of the year when Christians were most likely to express their religious beliefs. For example, the contrast of the ―Little

Christ‖ weeping and the joyful ―Christmas bells‖ would have emotionally moved Canadians preparing for Christmas cheer. Together these poems reflect the logic, the sentiment, the

86 ―Refugee,‖ The Globe and Mail, December 10, 1938, 11. 87 ―Christmas Tragedy,‖ Toronto Daily Star, December 24, 1938, 4.

85 worries, and the hopes of those Christians who protested. They speak to the alarm and disappointment many were beginning to feel in December, which arose from a lack of demonstrable ―Christian‖ love and compassion in the country and the governing structures, whether ecclesiastical or political.

Chapter 3

The Politics of Protest

The maturation of the Canadian Christian response continued into the first months of

1939 as the memory of the catalytic events of Kristallnacht faded and organizational efforts in

December began to bear fruit. The Executive Committee of the CNCR introduced an aggressive information campaign and organized regional representative agencies. Christians continued to utilize the public media to express their concerns about Canadian inaction and to protest evidence of antisemitic and anti-immigration policy. Increasingly, though, Christian protest on behalf of the Jews expressed itself in a self-centred concern for the preservation of

Canada‘s Christian heritage. For these protestors the most threatening aspect of Nazism was its anti-Christian nature, which currently manifested itself as antisemitism, but threatened to metastasize and cause suffering for countless millions of Christians across the globe. It was clear to them that Christians needed to take a stand before it was too late and respond in accordance with Christian conviction that aligned with Canada‘s status as a Christian country.

Paralleling these developments was a growing confusion in the CNCR and in the public Christian response found in the newspapers. Discounting the Prime Minister, his

Cabinet, and other privileged officials, including the Director of Immigration, F.C. Blair, few knew of the decision regarding Canada‘s refugee policy, which the country‘s Liberal leaders had made in December. Even though the emotional impact of Kristallnacht declined from the beginning of January until March, Christians continued to find opportunities to speak for political change in the newspapers and public venues, and to find new ways in which to assist the Jewish community through the organized efforts of the CNCR.

Confusion in the Public Record

One of the defining features of the first three months of 1939 was the increasingly conflicted information Canadians received during this period. The leading Canadian newspapers painted a fragmented picture of developments in Europe, which included incomplete and contradictory information about refugees and their plight. In the first week of

January, two newspaper reports suggested that there was hope for a European resolution to the refugee crisis. The Globe and Mail reported optimistically on January 4 that Britain was providing a haven for ―thousands of refugees‖ and assisting many of the Jews needing to leave

Germany.1 Two days later, The Vancouver Province informed their readers that Mussolini had decided to aid the Jews while trying to temper Hitler‘s anti-Jewish drive.2 Just over a month later, in the middle of February, the leading dailies used in this thesis published at least a half a dozen reports of positive developments in Europe, often on the front page.

On February 13, for example, The Gazette and The Vancouver Province reported that

Hitler had made what The Province called a ―truce‖ with Jews by relaxing pressure on how quickly they needed to leave German controlled areas.3 The following day, the front-page news story across the country was that a $300 million international fund had been set up in

Great Britain for ―Jewish migration‖ with the hope that many could go to Palestine.4

Newspapers informed Canadians that the fund would attempt to move 150,000 Jews in the

1 ―Aid Thousands of Refugees,‖ The Globe and Mail, January 4, 1939, 16. 2 ―Report Duce Will Aid Jews,‖ The Vancouver Province, January 6, 1939, 1. 3 ―Hitler Makes Jewish Truce,‖ The Vancouver Province, February 14, 1939, 14; ―Nazis Relax Pressure on Jews,‖ The Gazette, February 13, 1939, 1. 4 ―Form $300, 000,000Plan for Jew Migration,‖ Edmonton Journal, February 14, 1939, 1; ―Great Syndicate is Formed to Aid Escape of Jews,‖ The Vancouver Province, February 14, 1939, 1; ―Way Now Clear for Reich Jews is Evian‘s Hope,‖ The Gazette, February 14, 1939, 1. The issue of allowing Jews into Palestine was particularly heated during this time period. Many Jews, Christians, and politicians felt that allowing unrestricted migration could elevate the refugee crisis altogether while others saw it as the only way to move that many refugees in a short period of time.

88 first year with more to follow.5 These accounts in early 1939 led one journalist to claim that there might ―be a spice of mercy‖ from the ―heavy hand of Hitler.‖6 Undoubtedly, such reports and commentary left readers believing that the global outcry, including Canada‘s

Christian protests, were responsible for changing Hitler‘s attitude and at least the attitude of

Canadian political leaders.

Other reports during this period contrasted sharply with this optimism. Interspersed among the positive reports that emerged in early January and mid-February were others that painted a different picture. One example was a graphic letter sent from a German Jew that The

Gazette published, in which the writer catalogued some of the continuing atrocities committed against the Jews.7 A few days later, on January 23, The Halifax Herald printed a similar story by a Swiss-American journalist who reported on ―the ruthless persecution of Jews in

Germany‖ and predicted that it was ―but a foretaste of what is to come in the Nazi program of complete subjection of the Christian churches.‖8 Later on, in mid-March, Regina‘s The

Leader-Post published an editorial describing a new wave of persecution in ―Czecho-

Slovakian areas,‖ which they termed a further regression of ―Nazidom‖ from ―Christendom.‖9

These examples of negatively toned articles, printed intermittently between and during the first set of positive articles, constituted a continuation of a theme seen in the newspapers towards the end of 1938. They held the situation to be dire, not only for the Jews, but for

Christians and Christendom. The papers presented competing and contradictory realities that left some feeling optimistic, some feeling pessimistic, and others conflicted. These perceptions logically influenced the nature of the Christian reaction to Jewish suffering. The

5 ―Form $300, 000,000 Plan for Jew Migration,‖ Edmonton Journal, February 14, 1939, 1. 6 ―Jewish Refugees,‖ The Vancouver Province, February 14, 1939, 4. 7 ―Jew Tells Story of Reich Pogroms,‖ The Gazette, January 16, 1939, 11. 8 ―Tells About Persecution in Germany,‖ The Halifax Herald, January 23, 1939, 9. 9 ―More Persecution?,‖ The Leader-Post, March 18, 1939, 4.

89 period immediately following Kristallnacht had left little confusion about the nature and meaning of the event, but three months later Kristallnacht had receded from public consciousness and, as Davies and Nefsky point out, the ―intermission‖ blurred the facts and the severity of the situation faded.10 Christians continued to protest publicly in the newspapers and organizationally through the CNCR, but now with maturing arguments and modified motivations. Nazism‘s perceived threat to Christianity and the divine blessing Christian

Canadians assumed the country enjoyed because of their Christianity led protestors to be more self-focused and concerned about the Jews for secondary or indirect reasons. Protestors published in the papers during this period also became increasingly prophetic about the divine judgment that was sure to follow if they failed to support the Jews in their time of need.

Rt. Hon. R.B. Bennett

One of the ways in which this self-serving apprehension manifested itself as concern for the Jews was through an aggregated sense that the churches were failing to express a satisfactory response to the plight of the Jews. The rhetoric surrounding the creation of the

CNCR foreshadowed this sentiment, but in December this frustration became more prominent in the Christian response found in the newspapers. This line of reasoning found an unexpected proponent in a former prime minister and leader of the Conservative Party in Canada, the Rt.

Hon. R.B. Bennett. On January 5, Mr. Bennett addressed the audience attending his farewell retirement banquet at Central United Church in Calgary in a speech the newspapers entitled

10 Alan Davies and Marilyn Nefsky, How Silent Were the Churches?: Canadian Protestantism and the Jewish Plight During the Nazi Era (Waterloo: Wilfrid Laurier University Press, 1997), 130.

―Church has Failed.‖ It captured the attention of the nation as newspapers from Vancouver to

Halifax featured it prominently.11

The substance and tone of the former prime minister‘s speech provides a micro-study of the historiographical debate about Mr. Bennett‘s humanitarianism. In the only comprehensive biography of the former prime minister, John Boyko argues that ―most historians have dealt with Bennett only tangentially, and few have been kind.‖12 For example,

Michael Bliss describes Mr. Bennett as ―rich, fat, self-satisfied, and in some of his policies apparently uncaring,‖ which Boyko describes as an almost ―gleeful‖ attack on the former prime minister.‖13 Larry Glassford attempts to explain Mr. Bennett‘s apparent contradictions by concluding that Mr. Bennett presented both reaction and reform in his personal and political life, which has confused both critics and historians.14 Boyko concurs, arguing that a comprehensive analysis of Mr. Bennett‘s life and politics actually demonstrates that the

―Prime Minister did a great deal of good‖ as a man who based many of his policies on

―personal religious values that he had learned at his mother‘s side in the polished oak pews of the small Hopewell Cape church.‖15 P.B. Waite recounts that Bennett was brought up in a strong Wesleyan tradition that instilled not only a hard work ethic, but a philosophy of life that

11 ―Church Fails in its Duties,‖ The Vancouver Province, January 6, 1939, 2; ―Church has Failed Says Mr. Bennett,‖ Ottawa Evening Citizen, January 6, 1939, 2; ―Has the Church Failed?,‖ Toronto Daily Star, January 9, 1939, 4. These are just a couple of headlines from the Canadian Press report many newspapers printed. 12 John Boyko, Bennett: The Rebel Who Challenged and Changed a Nation (Toronto: Key Porter Books, 2010), 24. 13 Michael Bliss, Right Honourable Men: The descent of Canadian politics from Macdonald to Chrétien (Toronto: Harper Perennial Canada, 2004), 108; Boyko, Bennett, 24; L.M. Grayson and Michael Bliss, eds., The Wretched of Canada: Letters to R.B. Bennett 1930-1035. (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1971), xxiii- xxiv. Michael Bliss‘ introduction, written along with L.M. Grayson, is more sympathetic to Mr. Bennett‘s humanitarianism. They recognize that he gave significant sums of money personally, but also hint at possible political motivations. 14 Larry Glassford, Reaction and Reform: The Politics of the Conservative Party under R.B. Bennett, 1927-1938 (Toronto: University Of Toronto Press, 1992), x. 15 Boyko, Bennett, 17, 90.

91 required him to ―be a steward, of himself, of his family, [and] of others.‖16 The lesson and teaching of his childhood gave birth to an active and personal charity that seemed to expand as he grew older.

The speech Mr. Bennett gave at the farewell banquet and other speeches on his farewell tour provide some direct evidence for the argument that he comingled a strong element of ―reform‖ and humanitarian ―good‖ in his political ideology.17 Furthermore, the evidence presented here points to the fact that his Christian beliefs and heritage played a significant role in shaping his political philosophy. Mr. Bennett‘s speech to the assembled guests in the church auditorium summarized and gave a very public and powerful voice not only to his own convictions, but to that segment of the Christian populace who had been protesting and expressing their discontent over the previous two months. The volume of published letters and the public status of the people who responded to Mr. Bennett‘s decision to intervene in this national debate signifies how relevant many Canadians found his statements, particularly those Christians who were already speaking out regarding the intransigence of the government‘s position and the lack of denominational response.

Mr. Bennett made it clear that he felt ―the church in general has failed to discharge its obligations to men who in all good faith accepted the Christian charge.‖18 In an apparent attempt to insert some levity into his speech, he quipped that if someone came from Mars, ―he would find little reason to conclude we Christians are the best there is.‖19 A few weeks later, in St. John, New Brunswick, Mr. Bennett clarified this criticism by arguing that there was ―an

16 Peter Waite, The Loner: Three Sketches of the Personal Life and Ideas of R.B. Bennett, 1870-1947 (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1992), 8-10. 17 Boyko, Bennett, 200, 207. Boyko describes Mr. Bennett‘s Christianity as an ascetic ―Wesleyan faith.‖ For example, he refused to campaign on Sundays under almost any conditions. 18 ―Church of World Are only Instrument for Insuring Peace, Declared Bennett; Guest of Central United Congregation,‖ The Calgary Herald, January 6, 1939, 17. 19 Ibid.

92 obligation upon this Christian country to do its share‖ in helping the Jews. Furthermore, the idea ―that Canada is a Christian country and does not desire more Jews‖ was an oxymoron and entirely unacceptable to him.20 Like others in December and, in particular, those involved in the founding of the CNCR, Mr. Bennett felt that Canada‘s status as a Christian nation was in question if the country did not make a concerted effort to help the Jewish people.

Undoubtedly, Mr. Bennett was aware that the media was carefully recording what he was saying during this, his farewell tour. The fact that A. A. Heaps, a leading Jewish MP from

Winnipeg and a member of the CCF, utilized Mr. Bennett‘s statements in St. John as ammunition against the government during the House of Commons debate indicates that politicians as well as the Canadian public were following Mr. Bennett‘s comments with interest.21 The opposition had little power to change Canada‘s policy, but statements by a former Prime Minister added legitimacy to the efforts of those who sought to challenge the government after the summoning of the House in the winter session of 1939. The most powerful impact of Mr. Bennett‘s statements, though, came after he left the country as

Christians picked up on his themes and used the forum he created to express their frustration with their churches and their supposedly ―Christian‖ nation.

A letter written to The Leader-Post by a reader, F. deBoth, was the first to have his reaction to Mr. Bennett‘s speech published in the newspapers. The Leader-Post printed his letter in which he did not hide his disrespect for Mr. Bennett as a politician. He freely expressed his incredulity at Mr. Bennett‘s apparently newfound compassion and sincerity, given his record as prime minister. Mr. deBoth went on to attack the current prime minister

20 ―Mr. Bennett on Immigration,‖ Toronto Daily Star, January 27, 1939, 6. 21 Dominion of Canada Official Report of Debates: House of Commons (DCORD), 18th Parliament, 4th Session, 1936-1940, vol. I (Ottawa: Printer to the King‘s Most Excellent Majesty, 1939) January 30, 1939, 433.

93 for adhering to the same ―politicise‖ as Mr. Bennett.22 He argued that Mr. King, like Mr.

Bennett before him, was attempting to ―serve two masters, Christ and Mammon.‖23 Moreover,

Mr. deBoth extended Mr. Bennett‘s criticism of the churches to a criticism of the entire country and to call into question Canada‘s right to be called a ―Christian‖ country. Like others in November and December, Mr. deBoth felt the Christian foundations of Canada were being undermined by the ―politicise‖ of both political parties.

The week after The Leader-Post published Mr. deBoth‘s letter, Charles Herbert

Huestis published a special editorial responding to Mr. Bennett in the Toronto Daily Star. As a former Methodist minister who joined and now headed the powerful lay-run Lord‘s Day

Alliance, Rev Huestis was a welcome contributor to the Star which occasionally gave him a prominent spot in their editorial section.24 Other affiliated newspapers across the country republished his editorials, which gave him a broad readership. A month before Mr. Bennett‘s statements, for example, Rev. Huestis had published an article entitled ―Our Debt to the

Jews,‖ which maintained that Christians and Canadians ―owe [their] greatest debt to the

Jews.‖25 He argued, as many others had, that the recent pogroms against the Jews in Germany demanded action from Canada because it was a Christian nation. In response to Mr. Bennett‘s speeches, Rev. Huestis felt the need to publish another article, but this time on the failure of

Christians and Canada to rise to the level of his expectation of Christian duty.

He began his article by expressing his belief that Mr. Bennett was sensing ―the blow‖ that the churches had received during the First World War.26 Like Mr. Bennett, he argued that

22 ―Sees too Much Selfishness,‖ The Leader-Post, January 11, 1939, 6. 23 Ibid. 24 David Marshall, Secularizing the Faith: Canadian Protestant Clergy and the Crisis of Belief, 1850-1940 (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1992), 180. 25 ―Out Debt to the Jews,‖ The Vancouver Province, December 9, 1938, 4. 26―Can the Church Survive?.‖ Toronto Daily Star, January 23, 1939, 4.

―Canada, for instance, has vast areas which might afford homes for many of these refugees from the scourge of the modern Attila,‖ and that inaction was a blatant sign of the churches‘ failure.27 According to him, Canada‘s ―latent anti-Semitism‖ was inhibiting the country from offering the Jews the one thing they needed, which was space. With disgust he then went on to explain, ―…and all the church can do is pass resolutions of sympathy. Has it no influence in

Ottawa?‖28 While he acknowledged the wounds of the war and its legacy of inhibition and self-doubt, Rev. Huestis felt that the current situation offered a moment for change and redemption provided Canada and its churches roused themselves to act. David Marshall, who assesses the churches‘ decreasing influence during this era, explains that for many men returning from the war, and particularly for Methodist men, the ―church no longer seemed to have the spiritual resources or theology to make sense of the world they lived in.‖29 As

Christians and Methodists, Mr. Bennett and Rev. Huestis felt these wounds and hoped to turn the current crisis into a moment of healing and renewal.

Both Mr. Bennett‘s and Rev. Huestis‘ criticisms referenced a perceived failure, or at least a challenge, to the principles of social gospel, which had dominated Protestant ideology in the late nineteenth century and first two decades of the twentieth century. Historian Robert

Wright‘s analysis of the mainline Protestant Churches in Canada during the First World War leaves him with the impression that it had ―cast a long shadow upon the ethos of enlightened progress that had animated much of the American Protestantism in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries.‖30 This is not to say that the ideas and support for the social gospel no longer existed, but the circumstances of the Twentieth Century created a challenge that

27 Ibid. 28 Ibid. 29 Marshall, Secularizing the Faith, 175. 30 Robert Wright, A World Mission: Canadian Protestantism and the Quest for a New International Order, 1918- 1939 (Montreal: McGill-Queen‘s University Press, 1991), 15.

95 forced many Christians to develop a more ―sophisticated attitude toward the outside world and their international responsibilities.‖31 John Grant described it as social gospel principles collapsing ―under its own weight‖ as human failure continually seemed to outstrip the churches‘ ―optimistic faith in the perfectibility of man.‖32 As people began to leave the church in growing numbers and rebel against religion, the churches realized that they needed to develop a ―new religious language,‖ as David Marshall puts it.33 It was a muted language, a language of caution and restraint that left the churches reluctant to make moral assessments of yet another European crisis.

Mr. Bennett‘s and Rev Huestis and those they represented were the anomalies that made the point: they stood out from a church establishment that was reluctant to interact on a social issue that seemed to prove again that the world was not evolving in accordance with a positivistic, postmillennial understanding of human evolution. This is not the same, however, as saying that Christians were uninvolved and silent. A few historians have argued that

Christianity maintained its influence throughout this period. Nancy Christie and Michael

Gauvreau suggest that instead of social gospel, a ―social evangelism‖ developed.34 They argue against the assertions of historians who believe the 1930s was ―a wasteland of reform activism‖ by bringing to light the fact ―that until the late 1930s almost every facet of social investigation and social policymaking fell under the aegis of Christian leadership.‖35 The evidence presented here seems to lend support to both interpretations of the period. As

31 Ibid., 16. 32 John Grant, The Church in the Canadian Era: The First Century of Confederation. (Toronto: McGraw-Hill Ryerson, 1972), 122. 33 Brian Clarke, ―English-Speaking Canada from 1854,‖ in A Concise History of Christianity in Canada, ed. Terrence Murphy and Roberto Perin (Toronto: Oxford University Press, 1996), 341; Marshall, Secularizing the Faith, 179-80. Clarke describes the post-war era as a ―sobering experience‖ as people rebelled against religion. 34 Nancy Christie and Michael Gauvreau, A Full-Orbed Christianity: The Protestant Churches and Social Welfare in Canada, 1900-1940 (Montreal: McGill-Queen‘s University Press, 1996), xi. 35 Ibid.

96 progenies of the social gospel generation, Rev. Huestis and Mr. Bennett were almost apostolic in their appeal to the church to be renewed in the face of crumbling ideals and to avoid a surrender of the churches‘ power to address domestic social issues or in their ability to challenge the government to action. Yet, Senator Wilson, Rev. Silcox, and others in the

CNCR sought to create a ―secular‖ organization under the ―aegis of Christian leadership,‖ as

Christie and Gauvreau put it. The point is that the Jewish suffering in Europe and the refugee crisis it caused in Canada highlight the change in Canadian Christianity, which many like Mr.

Bennett viewed with criticism and concern – but not with silence.

The newspapers of the period are full of responses to Mr. Bennett‘s speech but one in particular stands out because it was written by Nellie McClung, one of the leading first-wave feminists and a vociferous advocate of the social gospel. She welcomed Mr. Bennett‘s criticism of the churches and Canada on the refugee issue.36 Feminist and religious scholar

Randi Ruth Warne describes Ms. McClung as a ―staunch critic of the church,‖ but also as someone who was a part of the Christian community and who advocated for the ―centrality of religion‖ in her social activism.37 Illustrating and supporting this characterization, Ms.

McClung wrote a lengthy article published on February 18 that responded to Mr. Bennett‘s criticism. In it, she recounted a speech she recently gave to women of an unnamed church. Put simply, she argued that the problem with the church was that it failed to train its followers to

36 Eleanor Stebner, ―More Than Maternal Feminists and Good Samaritans: Women and the Social Gospel in Canada,‖ in Gender and the Social Gospel, ed. Wendy J. Deichmann Edwards and Carolyn De Swarte Gifford (Chicago: University of Illinois Press, 2003), 54; Randi Ruth Warne, Literature as Pulpit: The Christian Social Activism of Nellie L. Mcclung (Waterloo: Wilfrid Laurier Univ. Press, 1993), 7. Stebner and Warne argue the importance of Ms. McClung and other feminists in the Social Gospel movement. 37 Warne, Literature as Pulpit, 3, 5, 7. Warne‘s thesis challenges the somewhat tertiary and harsh treatment of Ms. McClung‘s religious sentiments forwarded by Carol Bacchi and Veronica Strong-Boag. Warne believes that one cannot separate her Christianity from her social work, which seems apparent in the source material used by this thesis.

97 be ―Christ‘s ambassadors.‖38 Her criticisms in this article addressed a more general failure of

Christians in Canada to act in accordance with Christian principles during the European crisis, but a few days later in a subsequent article, she narrowed her focus to address the Jewish crisis. She explained that Canada was ―a land of destiny‖ and part of that destiny involved allowing refugees into the country so that they might ―enrich us.‖39 Ms. McClung‘s criticisms and concerns were not merely abstract ideas worthy of debate: they were moral concerns that motivated and energized her. Shortly after writing these articles, she contacted Senator

Wilson in an effort to assist a couple of Jewish families she knew. It is significant that she turned to her friend Senator Wilson and to the CNCR, and not to the churches.40 She was frustrated with the organized church as a vehicle of social action, just as she was with the government as an institution capable of responding to the will of those people who wanted change.

These examples of a broadly based frustration in the Christian lay community paralleled the expressions of frustration coming from those who formed the CNCR. Most significantly, in the context of this thesis, is the fact that Christians were the ones making their voices heard. In spite of the confusing reports indicating a breakthrough in Europe and a possible resolution of the ―Jewish problem,‖ it was a group of prominent laypeople and clergymen who were agitated enough to prod the religious establishment to action in the first quarter of the New Year. Credit goes in part to Mr. Bennett who leveraged his fame and imminent departure to provoke a strong response from political, social, and religious leaders.

38 ―Says Christian Church Hasn‘t Made its People Different from Others,‖ Ottawa Evening Citizen, February 18, 1939, 18. 39 ―Many Nations Enriched by Refugees; Canada no Exception‖ Ottawa Evening Citizen, February 25, 1939, 20. 40 Library and Archives Canada [LAC], Wilson Papers, MG 27, vol. 2, file 9, ―McClung, Nellie 1939.‖ Ms. McClung sent two letters on March 6 and March 26 asking Senator Wilson if there was any way to assist these families.

Public Response: Christianity Threatened

Other vocal Christians in the public record expressed concerns similar to those of Mr.

Bennett and his respondents. Their protest centred largely on the lethargy of the general public in the face of a pending moral failure that threatened ―Christendom.‖ As the events of

Kristallnacht became a blurred memory in the face of other continuing atrocities in the first part of 1939, the tone of the protest became increasingly introspective. In December, a number of newspaper articles had already identified this heightened concern for Canadian and

Christian wellbeing, but in the first months following the New Year it became the dominant theme. The wellbeing of the Jewish people and the general refugee crisis remained a concern to Christians who spoke out for this reason, but it was a derivative concern drawn from the primary concern for the welfare of the country and its dominant religion.

Many now pointed to the existence of antisemitism in Canada as a root cause of the unconscionable lethargy they perceived. The secretary of the International Missionary

Council‘s Committee on the Christian Approach to the Jew, Dr. Conrad Hoffman, visited

Canada in the second half of January and spoke out against both the actions of the Nazis in

Germany and the rise of antisemitism in Canada. Dr. Hoffman, an American Presbyterian, argued to an interdenominational gathering of Christian women under the auspices of the

Women‘s Missionary Society of Canada, that there was ―a ringing challenge to Christians everywhere to do their part as individuals to stem the lie of anti-Semitism which has swept over many countries of Europe.‖41 Dr. Hoffmann pointed out that many of the Jews being harassed in Germany were ―of their own religion‖ due to their conversion to Christianity.42 A couple of days later in Montreal, Dr. Hoffmann told a congregation that the ―citizens of

41 ―Anti-Semitic Tide Needs Stemming,‖ The Globe and Mail, January 24, 1939, 11. 42 Ibid.

99 democratic nations should fight tooth and nail against the beginnings of anti-Semitism.‖ He then went on to read a firsthand account of how Jews in Germany faced ―slow starvation and death.‖43 Dr. Hoffman directly related the potential rise of un-Christian antisemitism in

Canada with the brutal acts of the Nazis. For him, confronting antisemitism at home was an attack on the barbarism of the Nazis.

These published speeches of Dr. Hoffmann represent an articulate summary of this internally focused response by Christians. The sense of urgency expressed in 1938 was still there, but the need for action arose from internal concerns about the root causes for inaction, which he felt was Christian antisemitism. In February and March, numerous letters, editorials, and sermons, expressed these convictions. For example, near the beginning of February,

Florence Cozens, the wife of an Anglican minister in Alberta, wrote to the Edmonton Journal, distressed by the ―opposition‖ she heard towards the Jews on radio broadcasts. She saw a hypocritical contradiction in the fact that Christians would ―send missionaries to convert the

Jews,‖ pray for them in their Anglican services, and believe that, in ―God‘s sight,‖ there was no difference between ―the Jew and the Greek,‖ while at the same time they were unwilling to assist the Jews in their hour of need.44 Ms. Cozens argued that Canada not only had

―thousands of acres‖ of open land, but ―surely it would be an honor to provide sanctuary for such unfortunate people‖ as the Jews.45 For Ms. Cozens, antisemitism in Canada, which manifested itself in an opposition to immigration, signified a rejection of scripture, church tradition, and Christ‘s people. Two weeks later, on February 24, The Halifax Herald published an editorial in which the editorial staff expressed its belief that the Nazi leaders were doing their ―utmost to discredit Christianity‖ by dubbing Christ‘s Jewish origin an ―Asiatic

43 ―Urges Firm Stand on Anti-Semitism,‖ The Gazette, January 27, 1939, 13. 44 ―Jewish Refugees,‖ Edmonton Journal, February 6, 1939, 4. 45 Ibid.

100 superstition.‖46 Like Ms. Cozens, the editor believed that the antisemitism in Nazism challenged the ―very fundamentals of Christianity.‖47

These referenced articles, and others like them, suggest that many Christians were in virtual disbelief that a Christian Canada would not want Jews. One letter sent to the

Vancouver Province was in response to an ―Anti-Jew‘s‖ publication printed earlier that month, which claimed that many people in Canada did not want Jews. The writer strongly disagreed with this assessment because he believed ―millions of our fellow-countrymen would heartily welcome them, in a true spirit of altruism, in the name and for the sake of the One to

Whom they owe so much, namely, their beloved Saviour the Lord Jesus Christ!‖48 Moreover, the author reminded his readers that ―he that soweth sparingly‖ would also reap sparingly.49 In other words, he felt that millions of people in Canada wanted to act generously and in accordance with their Christian beliefs, but if they remained inactive, it would result in a reduction of God‘s blessing on Canada. While the line of argument here suggests the benefit to Canada was a secondary motivation for Jewish advocacy, he certainly saw it as compelling if Christians found altruistic concerns for the Jews insufficient motivation for action.

While the rhetoric may have changed, the Jewish community continued to recognize these Christian protests as a call of support for their cause. For example, in mid-February Rev.

Bedford-Jones of St. Georges‘ Anglican Church in Ottawa gave a sermon broadcast on the radio that called for Canada to take ―its fair share of refugees.‖50 In response, a prominent

46 ―Sheer Effrontery,‖ The Halifax Herald, February 24, 1939, 6. 47 Ibid. 48 ―Would Welcome Jewish Refugees,‖ The Vancouver Province, January 21, 1939, 31. 49 Ibid. 50 ―Should Take Fair Share of Refugees,‖ Ottawa Evening Citizen, February 13, 1939, 2; ―Declares Palestine is Only Star of Hope Now for Thousands of Jews,‖ Ottawa Evening Citizen, February 13, 1939, 3.

101

Jew, Ms. A.J. Freiman, whose husband was the president of the Zionist Organization of

Canada, phoned to thank him for the public manner in which he propagated his views.51

Letters such as Ms. Cozens‘ and the unsigned one written to the Vancouver Province rejected the anti-Jewish and anti-immigration rhetoric in the country and warned Canadians of the repercussions of not acting. These Christian addresses, letters, and sermons represent an ongoing desire to reach out to sympathetic Canadians who wanted to modify Canada‘s opinion about Jewish immigration. Although many of the expressions of concern during this period came out of a Canadian ethnocentric rhetoric, the challenge to the government and the established churches was the same: the Jews needed meaningful help and Canada could and should provide it.

CNCR: Regional Developments

The month of December saw the creation of the CNCR and the formation of its mission, but there were few actual activities. However, the dedicated work of Senator Wilson and other members of the Executive Committee began to bear fruit in the first three months of

1939. The first order of business was to begin building the organizational structure. This involved appointing regional CNCR representatives who would form a network of communicators who could raise public awareness of the goals and work done by the organization. This public relations strategy relied on the leadership of Senator Wilson and

Rev. Silcox, who traveled across much of the country with a message that reflected the dominant themes found in Christian protests across the nation. During their travels, Rev.

Silcox and Senator Wilson‘s message reflected many of the same themes found in other

Christian protests. The difference was that an infrastructure existed to support their ideas – an infrastructure with which people could identify and to which they could turn if they were

51 Ibid.

102 motivated to act. Letters to editors, sermons at churches, and rousing speeches at public rallies were the most popular forums for protest, but without denominational involvement, such actions merely broke the silence. The CNCR allowed for an organized Christian response free of ecclesiastical constraint.

The emergence of regional chapters during the first three months occurred primarily in

Western Canada, which was where Rev. Silcox did most of his traveling and speaking. This is not surprising. Although the CNCR‘s headquarters was in Ontario, the Prime Minister had told the leadership in their November meeting that they needed the support of provincial premiers, particularly out west, if the government was to admit a substantial number of refugees.52 Furthermore, Canadians still perceived the west to be largely underpopulated and undermanned at the time, which made it an ideal location for émigrés.53

The Leader-Post recorded the first of these regional meetings on January 9 in Regina.

Unfortunately, the newspapers provide little information about the meeting other than the fact that it was held in the Hotel Saskatchewan and that the goal was to allow Jews to settle in

Saskatchewan.54 A month later, on February 2, the head of the London, Ontario, branch of the

League of Nations Society, Rev. William Beattie, announced his intention to coordinate his operations with the CNCR in its goal to bring refugees to Canada. His primary motivation and argument in favour of Canada changing its immigration policy lay in the belief that Jewish refugees would develop ―a thriving industry‖ in Canada.55

52 LAC, CNCR, MG 28, vol. 43, box 6, file 24, ―Minutes of the First Meeting and Interviews with Members of the Dominion Government,‖ 6/7 December 1938, 9. 53 John Thompson, Forging the Prairie West (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998), 114-115, 117. Thompson notes that while the depression did take a toll on western expansion, the drive for new farms never ended. Moreover, corporations such as the Canadian Pacific and Canadian National railways continued to need more workers. 54 ―Committee to Aid Jews to Be Formed,‖ The Leader-Post, January 9, 1939, 3. 55 ―Seeking Admission of Selected Refugees,‖ Ottawa Evening Citizen, February 2, 1939, 1.

103

Two weeks later, this time in Calgary, the Herald reported on the establishment of a regional CNCR group in the city and spoke of its efforts to find refuge for the Jews. The author of the article, Donald Leslie, noted that Canada was passing ―on the other side‖ of the abandoned traveler in an obvious reference to Jesus‘ parable of the Good Samaritan. He felt that if there were any negative side effects to the Jews immigrating to Canada, it was actually

Christians who were making the process difficult for the Jews.56 In March, Rev. Macdonald, in Edmonton, and Mr. G.E. Beament, in Ottawa, held founding regional organizational events and likewise called for the admission of refugees.57 The significance of these meetings across

Ontario and Western Canada lay in the fact that they sought to provide practical assistance to the Jewish refugees by lobbying local leaders and politicians.

In the final chapter of this thesis, I will show how the CNCR helped various Jewish refugees in specific instances, but in these first three months, the organization displayed its ability to educate and organize a disparate group of Christians. It is noteworthy that it was

Christian clergy and Christian laypeople who led almost every one of these meetings or hosted them in their churches. They did this while publically criticizing fellow Christians for their lack of involvement. Without noting this fact, it is easy to read criticism of the church and assume that the statements of a lack of Christian involvement were factual rather than rhetorical devices used by a segment of the Christian population to motivate another segment to action. Ironically, the personal actions of protesting Christians undercut their categorical statements about the state of the Christian church.

CNCR: Senator Wilson

56 ―Members of Local Refugee Committee Ask Practical Aid for Europeans Seeking Sanctuary from Persecution,‖ The Calgary Herald, February 17, 1939, 16. 57 ―May Open Doors to Young Refugees,‖ Edmonton Journal, March 17, 1939, 14; ―Asserts Dominion Would Benefit by Taking Refugees,‖ Ottawa Evening Citizen, March 28, 1939, 12.

104

The most effective communication strategy of the CNCR was to have their two best- known national figures write and speak on their behalf. Senator Wilson‘s activities in the first quarter of the year included the publication of an essay and the dissemination of speeches in various media formats. The most significant of these was an essay she wrote in the second week of January and it was featured in every major newspaper. This essay, which the Ottawa

Evening Citizen entitled a ―Call to Canada to Give Christian Aid to Jews,‖ provided a valuable resource for concerned Canadians because it systematically catalogued the developments of

Canadian protest over the previous two months. Senator Wilson began by quoting and emphasising the importance of Lord Baldwin‘s and Rev. Parks‘ radio addresses in December and then referenced that only a few days after these addresses Mr. Malcolm MacDonald,

Dominions and Colonial Secretary, challenged the Dominions to help ―this island.‖58 She concluded her overview by referencing a telegram sent by the SSCC to the Prime Minister in

November, which stated ―the Christian conscience lays upon this Dominion an imperative moral obligation to share with other countries the responsibility of providing a haven for a reasonable number of selected refugees.‖59

Senator Wilson provided her readers across Canada with an understanding of the shift that had occurred in the Christian response since Kristallnacht and the implications this had for ―Christian duty.‖ While recognizing the struggle ahead, she portrayed the political and religious calls of Mr. MacDonald, Lord Baldwin, Rev. Parkes, and the SSCC as an opportunity for Canada. The greatest challenge, in her mind, was the fact that ―the

Government is bound by regulations adopted at the height of the [depression],‖ which left

58 ―Canadians Urged to Decide on Refugee Relief Policy; Problem is Discussed,‖ The Calgary Herald, January 11, 1939, 14; ―Call to Canada to Give Christian Aid to Jews,‖ Ottawa Evening Citizen, January 9, 1939, 21. These are just a couple of examples. 59 ―Christian Duty of Canada to Aid Refugees, Is Claim,‖ Toronto Daily Star, January 10, 1939, 15.

105 little room for humanitarian or emergency consideration.60 For her, the issue was straightforward:

The question is: do the Canadian people wish the Canadian government to take action along the lines suggested in the foregoing [as summarized above]? Do they want Canada to play its part by admitting carefully selected families which have suffered only because they are attached to democratic forms of government or because of their racial origin or religious affiliations?61

Senator Wilson clearly believed that the responsibility lay with individual Canadians. If

Canadians were going to throw off inherited prejudices and predispositions, whatever their supposed justification may have been in the past, they would have to act on the basis of their personal conviction, not on the basis of their participation in some organized religious body.

One of the unique features of Senator Wilson‘s and Rev. Silcox‘s message during this period was their articulation of both the positive benefits of allowing refugees into the country as well as the perils of not acting. On March 22, Senator Wilson explained to a meeting of the

National Council of Women in Toronto that Canada had an opportunity to secure the ―cream of the culture of Europe.‖62 Rev. Silcox‘s tour of western Canada made the same point, which indicates the two collaborated on the essentials of their message. At a meeting of ―Knox

United Ladies‖ on March 3, the Senator once again espoused Jewish immigration as an opportunity to enrich the country. She reminded the women that if Egypt had adopted a policy similar to Canada‘s 1900 years ago when ―two Jews and their Jewish baby fled to a neighbouring country … there might never have been a Christian religion.‖63

60 Ibid. 61 ―Call to Canada,‖ Ottawa Evening Citizen, January 9, 1939, 21. 62 ―Refugees Offer Canada Wealth She Seeks Aboard in Return for Hospitality,‖ The Globe and Mail, March 22, 1939, 15. 63 LAC, Wilson Papers, MG 27, vol. 6, file 1, ―Speeches, addresses, articles: 1939-1940.‖ This was taken from notes she transcribed in preparation for her talk before the Knox Ladies group. Vol. 10, file 1, also contains the same quotes from her talk in an unnamed and undated newspaper.

106

Senator Wilson‘s catalogue of potential benefits included the belief that providing help for these individuals would bring profit to every sector of Canada‘s economy and society. Not only did the act of immigrating a few Jewish refugees in the past lead to Jesus‘ escape from the hands of Herod, but doing so again could cause leading scientists, skilled doctors, and successful entrepreneurs to enrich Canada.64 In summary, her seminal essay in January and her reasoned, yet passionate, speeches in March called for informed and purposeful action – qualities, which until then, were largely missing in the protest landscape.

CNCR: Rev. Silcox

The Rev. C.E. Silcox was the most important and prolific contributor to the work of the CNCR and perhaps the most persuasive advocate of Canadian support for the Jewish cause. An indefatigable traveler, he toured Western Canada during the inhospitable month of

January, and set aside many of his commitments to the SSCC in order to pursue the cause of the CNCR and its Executive Committee. His first stop was in Regina on January 7 in which he told a meeting called to support the CNCR that ―Canada should grasp the golden opportunity of enriching the cultural and economic wealth of the Dominion‖ by opening its boarders.65 He supported Senator Wilson‘s idea that Canada would benefit from the admittance of Jews, yet he went even further by claiming that ―if Canada does not take them she does not deserve prosperity.‖66 Rev. Silcox‘s arguments presented the proverbial ―carrot and stick‖ of potential blessing or potential curse. Both of these arguments touched on the more self-focused

64 Lawrence D. Stokes, ―Canada and an Academic Refugee from Nazi Germany: The Case of Gerhard Herzberg,‖ Canadian Historical Review 57, no. 2 (June 1976): 150-51, 169-70. Stokes‘ article overviews the missed opportunity for Canada when it took only a ―handful‖ of academic refugees through a focused study of Dr. Gerhard Herzberg, a future Nobel laureate in Chemistry who did successfully emigrate to Canada. Stokes lays blame largely on the shoulders of politicians, but recognizes the financial limitations of the universities as well. As the final chapter will illustrate, the CNCR and Senator Wilson sought to utilize such success stories in order to push the government towards a more lenient immigration policy. 65 ―Silcox Favors Canada Taking Best Refugees,‖ The Leader-Post, January 7, 1939, 3. 66 Ibid.

107 motivations found in the public responses during these months and the spiritual warnings seen in December and early 1939.

Two days later on Sunday, Rev. Silcox spoke at Knox United Church in Regina and addressed both the refugee crisis and Mr. Bennett‘s recent statements at Knox United Church in Calgary, which were capturing the attention of the national media from coast to coast. His message revealed a personal desire to defend the actions of Christians who spoke out on behalf of the Jews against some of the criticisms in Mr. Bennett‘s message because he felt

―the Jew was not standing alone.‖67 Rev. Silcox believed the great ―battle‖ that lay ahead was between ―Christian tradition‖ and the ―new paganism‖ of Nazism.68 According to him, this challenge was the worst Christians had faced since the days of the Roman Empire. In keeping with a strong and irrepressibly positive postmillennial eschatology, he remained hopeful that one of ―the greatest spiritual revivals of all times‖ was coming.69 Both Senator Wilson and

Rev. Silcox were critical of the churches‘ inaction regarding the Jewish refugee crisis, but they still saw Christianity and the ―Church‖ as a body of ecumenical believers that could become the solution to the problem. This helps to explain why both continued to appeal to

Christians and to structure their argument in ways that reflected a Christian point of view.

Rev. Silcox continued his tour by visiting the rural communities of Moose Jaw and

Weyburn, Saskatchewan, before heading on to Edmonton. In Moose Jaw and Weyburn, Rev.

Silcox reiterated the Canadian-centric argument, but he also took issue with the antisemtism that he thought he saw in Saskatchewan and, to an even greater extent, in Ontario and

67 ―Challenge Seen by Silcox,‖ The Leader-Post, January 9, 1939, 2. 68 Ibid. 69 Ibid.

108

Quebec.70 After castigating those whom he felt embraced this position, he told the listeners that 20 people in Moose Jaw had raised $3,500 while the ―whole Christian community has raised scarcely anything.‖71 Despite these failings, Rev. Silcox encouraged a gathering in

Weyburn with the thought that a ―practical demonstration‖ would act as a ―repudiation of anti-

Semitism.‖72 It seemed logical to him that if Canada was going to help the Jews and thereby affirm its democratic and Christian principles, it would first have to eradicate antisemitic tendencies within the country so that it could allow Jewish refugees into the country.

Moreover, such an action would work as a redemptive, purging force in Canada, removing the stain of its unconscionable failures to date.

Upon Rev. Silcox‘s arrival in Edmonton during the third week of January, the

Edmonton Journal chose to publish an introductory piece that featured his work on behalf of the CNCR in Western Canada, just as The Leader-Post had done earlier in the month.73 Once again, Rev. Silcox spoke about the potential benefit the Jewish refugees represented by claiming that it was the ―greatest opportunity‖ the province had ever had for increasing its population with quality refugees.74 To make this a reality, however, Albertans needed to seize the initiative and become proactive because the ―federal government is waiting word from each of the provincial governments as to how many refugees‖ each province could take.75

Undoubtedly, Rev. Silcox had come to this conclusion because of what the Prime Minster and

Mr. Crerar had told Senator Wilson and him during the founding meeting of the CNCR.

According to the government, one of the primary hindrances to allowing Jewish refugees into

70 Silcox‘s focus on Quebec and Ontario stemmed from recent flashes of antisemitism in the form of increased ―Gentile Only‖ resorts and a couple of cases of general harassment. 71 ―Attack on the Jews Watched,‖ The Leader-Post, January 10, 1939, 1. 72 ―Anti-Semitism First Step in Attack on Democracy—Silcox,‖ The Leader-Post, January 7, 1939, 5. 73 ―Warns Canadians on Anti-Semitism,‖ Edmonton Journal, January 20, 1939, 1. 74 ―Declares European Refugees Offer Alberta Opportunity,‖ Edmonton Journal, January 20, 1939, 1. 75 Ibid., 6.

109 the country was the lack of tangible support from the provincial governments. The CNCR and

Rev. Silcox had obviously taken this to heart and decided to appeal to the public on the basis of this semi-private statement. In doing this, the CNCR distanced itself from the protests of the unorganized Christian public and revealed their intention to respond directly and specifically to the concerns laid out by the government.

As a consequence of this intentional strategy, Rev. Silcox‘s tour, Senator Wilson‘s public communications, and the building of a network of regional chapters all played a part in shaping an organized response that stood in contrast to the more generalized calls of Mr.

Bennett and other statements of frustration and admonition that many individual Christians offered in the newspapers. In all cases, whether it was the tours, the radio broadcasts, the formal meetings of the CNCR or the informal letters and editorials, it is possible to discern a more Canadian-centric rationale for action during this period in the first quarter of 1939. On the one hand, the high profile leaders of the protests called on Canadians to consider the positive impact the refugees would make on the economy and the culture. On the other hand, they also warned of the consequences of moral failure while encouraging people to hope for a grand spiritual renewal in the country around its Christian principles. Above all, Christians were now being shown a definite way in which they could act with meaning and impact. The

CNCR positioned itself within a Christian, but non-ecclesiastical framework, in order to sponsor a grassroots network that would channel the protest into meaningful care for refugees.

Political Developments and Opposition

In January, Parliament reconvened and the debate over the refugee question reappeared in an invigorated political format. Even at this point, there was little evidence that people outside of Mr. King‘s government knew about the policy decisions made in December

110 as newspapers continued to carry a mixed message about the government‘s policy. The government exacerbated this confusion in the Throne Speech, which they delivered on Friday,

January 12. Two days later, The Globe and Mail reported on the speech with the title ―Ottawa

Settles Refugee Policy of ‗Sympathy‘‖ and a couple of days later, The Vancouver Province reported that Prime Minister King ―said to favour plan‖ to ―take refugees.‖76 The Throne

Speech and the ensuing Commons speeches by the Prime Minister did not address the refugee situation directly, so it seems likely the newspapers were reporting on leaked information, perhaps by the government, which was attempting to spruce up its image as a sympathetic and concerned body.77

The debate following the Throne Speech made it clear that the government‘s position was more complicated and less favourable than these optimistic articles suggested. True to form, the Liberal caucus from Quebec made its opposition known. Liberal MP Wilfred

Lacrois, representing the Montmorency riding in Quebec City, had ―the honour‖ of presenting the House of Commons with a petition signed by 127,364 people ―vigorously protesting against immigration whatsoever, especially Jewish immigration.‖78 Yet, amazingly, The

Gazette, which referenced this petition, claimed that Canada‘s policy would be ―generous.‖79

Then, on the same day, The Globe and Mail reported the same story with the title ―Canada will not adopt open door to refugees, Premier King intimates.‖80 The Globe also added that one of the demands made by the ―French-speaking Canadians‖ was that not even a few

76 ―Ottawa Settles Refugees Policy of ‗Sympathy,‘ The Globe and Mail, January 14, 1939, 17; ―Dominion May Take Refugees,‖ The Vancouver Province, January 19, 1939, 2. 77 DCORD, 18th Parliament, 4th Session, 1936-1940, vol. I (Ottawa: Printer to the King‘s Most Excellent Majesty, 1939) January 12, 1939, 2-4. In the speech, the Governor General‘s discussion of the European situation focused exclusively on the possibility of, and aversion to, war. Unfortunately, neither the Prime Minister‘s diary nor the newspapers provide a source for this information despite reporting it with such certainty. 78 Ibid., 428; ―Canada Policy Upon Refugees to by Generous,‖ The Gazette, January 31, 1939, 1. 79 ―Canada Policy Upon Refugees to be Generous,‖ The Gazette, January 31, 1939, 1. 80 ―Canada Will Not Adopt Open Door to Refugees, Premier King Intimates,‖ The Globe And Mail, January 31, 1939 1.

111 refugees should be allowed into the country.81 While it appears that some newspapers did not understand the importance of this rhetoric of protest from Quebec against Mr. King‘s government, the documentary evidence from December reveals it was critical.

The ambiguity of the government‘s position in the Throne Speech and in the debates following meant that it was unlikely Christians advocating for government action on immigration would have immediately recognized the lack of true intention to provide meaningful assistance to the Jews, but this realization began to emerge over the next two months. A few days after these reports from Parliament, one gentleman, John Frazer, wrote to the Ottawa Evening Citizen to point out the irony of the situation. He argued that ―French-

Canadian Roman Catholics are noted for their devotion to the Church,‖ yet if Jesus Christ

―were alive today (and His Spirit still lives in spite of the dictators) the petition they have signed would have the effect of barring Him from entering into Canada.‖82 He felt justified in making this claim because of the role the Roman Catholic clergy in Quebec had played in promoting and organizing the petition Mr. Lacroix brought before the House of Commons.83

In the House of Commons, Mr. A. A. Heaps, a leading Jewish MP from Winnipeg, paralleled

John Fraser‘s argumentation when he scornfully responded to Mr. Lacroix in the House. He claimed that, unlike his Quebec bishops and priests, Pope Pius XI joined ―with other leaders in a plea for aid to the victims of cruelty such as the world has seldom seen.‖84 The Prime

Minister and Mr. Lapointe came to the defense of the politically essential Quebec wing of their caucus and spoke of its members as men of ―humanity,‖ much to the disgust of Mr.

Heaps who claimed he had ―never heard such childish remarks coming from the right hon.

81 Ibid., 10. 82 ―Quebec Protest Against Refugees,‖ Ottawa Evening Citizen, February 3, 1939, 21. 83 Ibid. 84 (DCOFD), 18th Parliament, 4th Session, 1936-1940, vol. I (Ottawa: Printer to the King‘s Most Excellent Majesty, 1939) January 30, 1939, 432.

112

Minister of Justice [Mr. Lapointe].‖85 Both Mr. Heaps and Mr. Frazer sensed the government was playing an unsavoury political game of pretence in order to court favour and mute criticism.86

The CNCR waited until the month of March before it showed signs of frustration with the government‘s ambivalent and incoherent position. On March 20, the CNCR held its first meeting of the year and the political situation was on the agenda. They decided to send a telegram to all the leading party members, and Mr. King in particular. In it, they attempted to ameliorate the concerns they believed were holding the government back by promising that the ―Committee will sponsor immediately raising large Canadian fund for care of refugees, provided Government indicates number to be admitted and guarantees required.‖87 The minutes of the meeting appended the responses the Committee received. All responders were vague and some were abrupt to the point of rudeness, except for one, Mr. J.S. Woodsworth, the ex-Methodist clergyman and leader of the CCF party.88 The Prime Minister actually refused to receive another delegation from the CNCR, indicating that there was nothing further to communicate regarding the refugee question.89

Despite these setbacks, the CNCR continued to lobby the government in every way it could. Rabbi Eisendrath, a member of the CNCR Executive Committee, praised the CNCR for

85 Ibid., 432, 436. 86 Leo Heaps, The Rebel in the House: The Life and Times of A.A. Heaps, M.P. (Markham Ont.: Fitzhenry & Whiteside, 1984), 158-59. Leo Heaps, his son, notes that this was one of Heaps‘ last speeches in the House and a defining issue in his life and his time in Parliament. 87 LAC, CNCR, MG 28, vol. 43, box 6, file 25, ―C.N.C.R. Minutes: 1939,‖ March 20, 1939, 5. 88 Kenneth McNaught, A Prophet in Politics: A Biography of J.S. Woodsworth (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2001), 47; Daniel Coleman, ―J.S. Woodsworth and the Discourse of White Civility,‖ in Human Welfare, Rights, and Social Activism: Rethinking the Legacy of J.S. Woodsworth, ed. Jane Pulkingham (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2010), 238. Both Coleman and McNaught recognize the Anglo-centric ideology of Mr. Woodsworth in his writings such as Strangers within Our Gates. Yet, McNaught argues that he always sought to serve the needs of all immigrants, not just British ones, and Coleman even argues that most of the non- Anglo anti-immigration sentiments died off during the 1920s and 30s as ―he moved towards a more inclusive, pluralistic idea of Canada.‖ If Mr. Woodsworth‘s response to the CNCR is any indication, by 1939 he showed a willingness to support more lenient immigration rules. 89 LAC, CNCR, MG 28, vol. 43, box 6, file 25, ―C.N.C.R. Minutes: 1939,‖ March 20, 1939, 5.

113 attempting to intervene with the Minister of Mines and Resources, Mr. Crerar, on a couple of particular cases. When nothing substantive came of these efforts, the rabbi pointed out the pattern that was leading to frustration:

There had been a feeling of hopefulness but that several test cases submitted to the Department had dissipated this feeling. The Committee had done an excellent job in enlightening the public but the Government had not yet taken adequate action.90

Several of these ―test cases‖ are analyzed below in the final chapter because their details did not come to light until later in the year, but the rabbi predicted the future and he clearly understood how difficult it would be to change the government‘s position.

The first quarter of 1939 brought new arguments to the protest movement and new action with focused aims. For the most part, during these three months, the CNCR sought to educate Canadians on ways to lobby the government and on ways to give practical aid to

Jewish refugees. It is difficult to measure how successful the CNCR was in these endeavours, other than to take the word of witnesses such as Rabbi Eisendrath who felt Rev. Silcox and

Senator Wilson were making progress and accumulating meaningful support for their cause.

In addition to testimonials, which suggest there was still optimism in some circles, it is reasonable to infer that some of the motivation behind the letters and recorded protests among

Christians was due to the organizing work of the CNCR. Nevertheless, the historical evidence does not provide a direct causal link. The intensity of the Christian protest in the newspapers did not diminish, but the frequency of published responses did and the tone was increasingly focused on self-serving interest that also had a derivative benefit for the Jews and Jewish immigration.

The CNCR utilized its Christian base to pursue practical solutions, which had not been a feature of the Christian protest in November and December, regardless of how laudable their

90 Ibid.

114 emotional and well-intentioned initiatives may have been. The silence of the denominational establishment in the public forum continued to surprise and frustrate those who looked upon the ecclesiastical structures as an appropriate platform for protest. Ultimately, the political situation checkmated intentions and thwarted hopes.

115

Chapter 4

Opposition and Perseverance

The final months before the beginning of the war were a time of hope and despair. A number of CNCR initiatives matured and gave a hint of success, but for many Christian activists who had struggled since Kristallnacht to change the attitude of an intransigent government, discouragement and despondency were increasingly prevalent. The CNCR‘s two major achievements during this period followed months of concerted effort to build a national organization which could provide meaningful assistance to refugees. The first achievement was personal in nature as a number of refugee cases were successfully resolved in favour of the refugees. The political influence and competence of a well-positioned organization proved decisive. During this period, Rev. Silcox and Senator Wilson continued to provide high profile leadership, but other members of the CNCR and new recruits from various denominations assumed leadership roles that facilitated the organization‘s growth and effectiveness. This maturation led to the second achievement. As the organization stabilized and diversified, it was increasingly able to act as a resource for other Christian organizations, churches, and individuals. The more the CNCR experienced success and the more it attracted adherents, the more it emerged as a viable, national leader for those wanting to assist Jewish refugees. These final months brought fruition to the metamorphosis of the emotional reaction seen in the

November protests into a meaningful and thoughtful response that resulted in limited, but tangible and practical outcomes.

The popular press continued to provide an outlet for Christian clergy and laity who wished to express their concerns and to influence public opinion. For these Christians, the

116 most significant change during this period was the increased despondency evident in their writings and public statements. In this they reflected a discernible negative sentiment in the

CNCR and its staff. The sense of impending doom as the war approached depressed the country and darkened the mood of Christians pursuing change. Both the gloomy tone and the decreased number of published newspaper articles, letters, and reports illustrate the difficulties a movement experiences when faced with a prevailing contrary opinion in a democratic system. Yet, Christians advocating government action and protesting church inaction still found opportunities to make their voice heard.

Just as Christmas provided Christian protestors with an opportunity to draw moral lessons from a Biblical event, so did Easter in April, 1939. The CNCR and individuals protesting in the newspapers used this highly religious season of the year to issue challenges to churches, government officials, and the Canadian public to act in accordance with Christian principles, which they believed were forgotten or suppressed. Despite the fact that these attacks were the most strongly worded and passionate responses since Kristallnacht, the reality was that the Canadian government remained intransigent. As one rejection followed another and tragedies multiplied in the weeks before the invasion of Poland, protesting Christians wondered aloud if there was any hope for the Jews or Canada.

The final months before the commencement of the war represented the end of the post-

Kristallnacht protest movement. Throughout this period, it is clear that many Christians were not silent or apathetic, even though the ecclesiastical bodies to which they belonged were silent and their government was actively opposed to them and their efforts to help the Jewish people.

Easter Appeals

117

Easter fell on the first week of April in 1939 and it provided an opportunity for

Christians concerned about the Jewish plight to highlight the parallels between Christ‘s mistreatment at the hands of authoritarian Rome and the contemporary persecution of the Jews in Europe. Those who spoke out wished to capitalize on Canada‘s heightened sense of religiosity during this holy period in the Christian calendar. As was increasingly the case in the first quarter of 1939, the organized element of the Christian protest movement played a leading role. The SSCC, under C.E. Silcox, and the CNCR both made particularly poignant and challenging appeals, which had an emotional intensity not seen since the early days of following Kristallnacht.

The SSCC published their ―Holy Week Appeal‖ in a newspaper article on Good

Friday, April 7. They claimed that their ―Appeal‖ spoke ―on behalf of the thousands of persecuted men, women and children in Europe who suffer because of their race or religion.‖1

The fact that Rev. Silcox was president of the SSCC and that this ―Appeal‖ quickly moved from a generic plea on behalf of the persecuted to a specific plea on behalf of the Jewish refugees suggests that Rev. Silcox authored the text. Even if he did not write it, he likely influenced the document as the tone and tenor certainly aligned with his speeches in the latter half of 1938 and in January 1939. For example, the author of the article claimed in a language reminiscent of Rev. Silcox that it was impossible to remember ―the crucifixion of the

Nazarene, himself a Jew, and who suffered as King of the Jews, without being stirred to offer the hand of sympathy and help to refugees who now desperately seek sanctuary and means of rehabilitation.‖2

1 ―A Holy Week Appeal,‖ Ottawa Evening Citizen, April 7, 1939, 21. 2 Ibid.

118

By directly connecting the sufferings of Christ on the cross with the suffering of the

Jews in Europe, the SSCC hoped to cause Christians and Canadians who were sincerely remembering Christ‘s sacrifice during Holy Week to be ―stirred‖ to assist. The ―Appeal‖ went beyond merely rhetorically engaging Canadians about some abstract, distant issue; instead, the spokesperson for the organization called for concrete action in the form of donations to the

CNCR for the ―alleviation of distress amongst these unfortunate people.‖3 The article also went on to call for Canadians to help, through individual protest, by ―urging upon this government the Christian duty of offering a haven of refuge.‖4 In other words, the SSCC‘s

―Holy Week Appeal‖ asked for more than a recognition of the Jewish nature of Christ and an acknowledgement of a correlation between his suffering and the suffering of Jews in

Germany. It also called on people to provide practical assistance to those in need, which the

CNCR naturally facilitated.

The CNCR itself also prepared a longer and more strongly worded document that was intended to appeal to Canadian Christians during Holy Week. This article, which ran on to more than 1,000 words, was entitled ―Reproaches From the Cross and Refugees.‖ It was published in newspapers across Canada and took up nearly an entire broadsheet. During the proceedings of the CNCR‘s meeting on March 20, the Executive Committee charged Rev.

Silcox with the preparation of ―a pamphlet for circulation to churches in time for Holy

Week.‖5 While it is impossible to know for certain whether this publication is the result of this request, it is a reasonable conclusion. The introductory paragraph of this second Holy Week statement made the objective of the appeal clear:

3 Ibid. 4 Ibid. 5 LAC, CNCR, MG 28, vol. 43, box 6, file 25, ―C.N.C.R. Minutes: 1939,‖ March 20, 1939, 3.

119

This appeal is addressed primarily to the leaders of Canadian Christianity and it affords an opportunity for action by all groups who profess and call themselves Christian to create a Christian conscience and foster a Christian attitude in Canada towards the homeless exiles who, by thousands, seek an opportunity to rebuild their cruelly-broken lives within this Dominion.6

It went on to recognize that ―the Church‖ did not formulate policies, ―but it is the task of the

Church so to arouse and express national conscience.‖7 Once again, the sense that the

Canadian churches had failed in their role as Canada‘s moral compass remained a catalyst for the CNCR. In saying this, it is clear they also believed there was a large Christian community in Canada, which wanted to see change in the immigration policy and wanted to provide tangible assistance to Jewish refugees. This appeal sought to galvanize these forces and to give them a voice in one of the strongest indictments of the Canadian response found in the newspapers.

To understand the significance of the published circular, it is helpful to know the role

―Reproaches From the Cross‖ played every year at this time in many mainline Christian churches. ―The Reproaches‖ formed a regular part of many Good Friday services until the mid-1970s.8 Controversially, Anglican churches removed ―The Reproaches‖ from the 1979 version of the Book of Common Prayer because they apparently parodied a Jewish Passover rite, but the debate that ensued continues to this day.9 Regardless of its current contentious character, Protestant Canadians in the 1930s would have recognized this publication by the

CNCR as a central component of the Good Friday service. By including this text from the

6 ―Reproaches From the Cross and Refugees,‖ Ottawa Evening Citizen, April 7, 1939, 21. 7 Ibid. 8 Louis Weil, ―The Solemn Reproaches of the Cross,‖ Saint Mary the Virgin, March 10, 2006, http://www.stmvirgin.org/archives/article19433c2290727.htm. (accessed on February 28, 2011). Louis Weil is the Hodges-Haynes Professor of Liturgics at the Church Divinity School of the Pacific in Berkeley, California. 9 Ibid.

120

Easter liturgy, the CNCR presented their arguments as though Christ were making the point, reproaching Canadians from the cross.

Two passages from this lengthy document illustrate its tone and intensity. The article begins by claiming that the ―cry of dereliction‖ that came from ―the Jewish Mother‖ of Jesus and from Jesus himself is the same one being uttered by the Jews in 1939.10 Like the SSCC

―Appeal‖ published at the time, these ―reproaches‖ sought to remind Christians of Christ‘s

Judaism. If Rev. Silcox was the author of both documents then it would appear that he simply used the additional space to expand his argument. Regardless of the authorship, it is clear the author wanted to use the platform of Holy Week and the centrality of Jesus‘ cross to deliver a series of indicting questions, one of which captures the mood of the message:

I am a Jew, like John the Baptist, and never denied it. My fathers could not accept Paul‘s interpretations of the Messianic role of Jesus and brought me up to fulfil the law. I never sought assimilation. Therefore am I a wanderer. Is it nothing to you all ye that boast religious freedom? ANSWER ME!11

Because most Canadians would have answered in the affirmative, the author went on to make the repercussions of a negative response clear. He described the ―Judgment of Christ‖ by quoting a passage from Matthew 25 in which Christ foretells his future return to earth as the judge who would separate the sheep and the goats. In Jesus‘ analogy, the goats, who did not help the hungry and thirsty stranger would ―go away to eternal punishment,‖ while the sheep would inherit ―eternal life‖ (Matt. 25: 46). In light of this passage, the writer for the CNCR posed the central question: ―Where does our nation, our Canada, stand in light of this test, and what will the judgment of Christ be?‖12

10 ―Reproaches From the Cross and Refugees,‖ Ottawa Evening Citizen , April 7, 1939, 21. 11 Ibid. 12 Ibid.

121

The CNCR‘s references to Matthew 25 once again brought the prospect of eternal repercussions before the Canadian public, this time in the most public and direct challenge to date. The article was delivered at a time of year when Christians were particularly sensitive to the consequences of their sin and the writer sought to help the audience understand that their personal culpability could extend to corporate and national sin. Understood in this light, the references to Matthew 25 and Canada‘s eternal wellbeing take on a more persuasive, motivational aspect than a simple reading of the text might convey to a modern reader.

The article concluded by recognizing the limitations of Canada‘s ―statesmen,‖ but, more importantly, it reminded Canadians that ―the voice of the Church of God must arouse our lethargic citizens and give direction to our bewildered statesmen.‖13 It is particularly noteworthy that the author references the ―Church‖ in this context, not denominations: it was already apparent to him or her that these ecclesiastical bodies were incapable of persuading the government to change its position. The appeal was not to the Anglican, United, or Catholic

Churches, but to the ―Church,‖ the universal body of Christ, whose ―members‖ needed to persuade their fellow Christians while confronting their morally confused political leaders.

Such actions would reflect the heart and attitude of a genuine follower of Christ.

Refusal to take refugees, on the other hand, was essentially a refusal to respond to the cries of

Christ on the cross. By extension, this meant that Canada‘s place among the ―sheep‖ was not guaranteed as its actions seemed to align more with the ―goats.‖ This article also suggests by inference that Christians remained concerned and active, even though their ecclesiastical bodies were quiet during Easter. Individual lay Christians and clergy, acting independently, were now the leaders and their preferred platform was the SSCC and the CNCR.

Public Record: Growing Despondency

13 Ibid.

122

The authors of CNCR‘s ―The Reproaches‖ and the SSCC‘s ―Appeal‖ seemed to assume that Christians would be receptive and the initial newspaper responses after Easter indicated that there was still a motivated Christian protest movement, but the voices of the movement published in newspapers across Canada revealed that there was a growing pessimism about the likelihood of the Canadian government acting on behalf of the Jews before it was too late.

A couple of weeks after Easter, on April 29, The Halifax Herald published an editorial entitled ―The Great Tragedy,‖ by Harold T. Roe, which reflected this growing pessimism in the months immediately preceding the war. It was a relatively long essay in which the author contrasted the fact that it was ―the Year of Our Lord 1939‖ with the treatment of the Jews, which would ―lead one to think that we still were living in the Dark Ages‖ and not the enlightened age one would expect if it was really during the Lord‘s years.14 In a style reminiscent of the CNCR‘s ―Reproaches,‖ Mr. Roe attributed ―epochal importance‖ to the question, ―Can Christian civilization, what is left of it, look on unmoved at this tragic drama of barbaric persecution?‖15 While Mr. Roe spoke in more general terms, he employed the same ominous tone found in the Easter messages. In his mind, Christianity was on the defensive around the globe because the Gospel simply ―can‘t be squared‖ with the treatment of the Jews. Nevertheless, he believed he saw signs that ―Christian peoples‖ in Canada were

―growing disturbed and uneasy‖ and that the collective action of Christians from all denominations could lead to a new home for refugees.16

Mr. Roe‘s lengthy article was one of a selection of editorials and letters to the editor in the weeks following the Easter appeals in April. One clergyman whom the papers published

14 ―The Great Tragedy, ―The Halifax Herald, April 29, 1939, 6. 15 Ibid. 16 Ibid.

123 was Rev. A.R. Ferguson, who called for action through a telegram addressed to all the

Presbyterian churches and the Prime Minister. Once again, the content of this protest was imbedded in a more general protest against the Nazis, whose attacks on the Jews he described as ―an attack upon the whole Christian church.‖17 Another Presbyterian minister claimed that

―every nation that has persecuted the Jews, God‘s chosen people, has either perished or become a second-rate power.‖18 Both of these examples reflect the emergent negative tone.

Hope for deliverance was fading and the consequences for Canada were thought to be highly unattractive.

Despite the heightened sense of urgency in the post-Easter letters and editorials, the publication of responses related to the Jewish tragedy decreased to almost nothing in May and

June. One possible explanation for this is a loss of confidence and a sense of failure in light of the government‘s intransigence. This explanation has merit and can be seen in other groups which were seeking to help the Jews at this time. In Paul Stortz‘s analysis of professors attempting to assist Jewish refugees, he describes a ―remarkable‖ pessimism, even though they had only been an organized, self-conscious entity for a few months.19 David Cesarani, writing about the experience of British intellectuals and clergymen who faced many similar challenges, attributes the rise of pessimism to the fact that ―political action in a democracy tends to be long-drawn-out, time consuming, wearying, frustrating, and often forlorn.‖20 The mass protests, meetings, letters, and telegrams in the weeks and months after Kristallnacht

17 ―Call Christians to Face Naziism‖ Ottawa Evening Citizen, April 20, 1939, 16; ―The Nazi Drive Against Christianity,‖ The Globe and Mail, April 10, 1939, 6. 18 ―Death is Seen for Jews‘ Foes,‖ The Globe and Mail, April 18, 1939, 5; ―See Ruin Facing ‗Jew Persecutors‘‖ Toronto Daily Star, April 18, 1939, 29. 19 Paul Stortz, ―‗Rescue Our Family From a Living Death‘: Refugee Professors and the Canadian Society for the Protection of Science and Learning at the University of Toronto, 1935-1946,‖ Journal of the Canadian Historical Association 14, no. 1 (2003): 245. 20 David Cesarani, ―Mad Dogs and Englishmen: Towards Taxonomy of Rescuers in a ‗Bystander‘ Country - Britain 1933-1945,‖ in Bystanders to the Holocaust: A Re-Evaluation, ed. David Cesarani and Paul A. Levine (London: Frank Cass, 2002), 30.

124 seemed destined to cause change in the eyes of the participants, and when their hopes were deferred, frustration and demotivation set in. The very nature of democracy led these people to speak out in hope for change, but the slowness of change and the government‘s preference for expediency rather than principle led to the frustration and weariness described by Cesarani.

Another possible reason for this shift of attention in the newspapers could be attributed to fact that this timeframe coincided with the first visit to Canada of a ruling monarch. It was a month long affair from May 16 to June 16 and, while it played an important role in easing the isolationist sentiments in Canada, it so captivated the public‘s attention that the newspapers reported little else.21 The phenomenon led Robert Stamp to say that the royal visit was a defining moment for Canadians of that generation, one that ―would never be forgotten.‖22

While one cannot be certain whether Canadians were suffering from a weariness associated with a sense of futility, or they were merely distracted, the net result was that pro-Jewish refugee protest rhetoric virtually disappeared from the newspapers for a period of time.

When the euphoria of the royal visit subsided and the realities of the European situation once again captured the attention of the Canadian populace, the published letters and editorials returned and they continued to reflect the critical and hopeless tone associated with

21 William Alexander Binny Douglas and Brereton Greenhous, Out of the shadows: Canada in the Second World War (Toronto: Dundurn Press, 1995), 20. For days and weeks beforehand, newspapers featured front-page reports regarding preparations for their arrival. For example, on May 10, 1939, the Toronto Daily Star printed five articles plus a picture on its front page discussing preparations from food and invitations to thousands of children preparing to meet the royals. Such intense coverage was normal in the days preceding their arrival. Once they arrived, the media continued to focus most of its attention on the royal tour, even in the editorials. Douglas and Greenhous argue that the ―royal visit diverted attention from these problems,‖ such as economic issues in relation to the Depression and the government‘s policies in general; William Lyon Mackenzie King, ―A Real Companion and Friend: The Diary of William Lyon Mackenzie King, 1893-1950,‖ Library and Archives Canada, n.d., June 15, 1939, www.collectionscanada.gc.ca. The Prime Minister corroborates this in his diary when he expresses his belief that their trip ―helped to unite Canada and different parts of the Empire and to consolidate a continent in friendly feelings.‖ 22 Robert Stamp, The World of Tomorrow: A View of Canada in 1939 (Toronto: Fitzhenry & Whiteside, 1985), 55. Stamp went on to explain that any Canadian who lived during that time remembered exactly where they stood when they saw the King and Queen. Even if they were too young to remember, their parents told them many times where they stood, or were held.

125 the weeks preceding the royal visit. In an editorial published on August 3, The Leader Post raised the question, ―Is Canada Christian?‖ The author raised this provocative question in order to make the point that Canada‘s unwillingness to act on behalf of the Jews reflected a seismic shift away from Christianity in the country.23 The article focused specifically on the refugee issue and concluded that ―not a single moral element‖ had been applied to Canada‘s immigration policy.24 Moreover, the editorialists claimed that ―we believe that the Christian church in Canada has never had a finer opportunity‖ to redeem itself, but warned that, if missed, the opportunity might not return ―for a long time.‖25 Despite this failure, the editorial recognized that there were Christians, such as Rev. Silcox, who were not silent.26

This article, which represents an editorial board‘s perspective on the Christian response, points to four dominant themes in the public response in the final weeks before the war in September. First, there were those who still hoped that a public Christian outcry could galvanize the churches of Canada to force the government to revise their rigid and intolerant immigration policy. Second, the most active Christians operated outside the denominational strictures. Third, some felt, like the editorialist at The Leader-Post, that Canada was imperilled because of its unchristian attitude towards the Jewish crisis. Fourth, there was a discernible increase in the number of those who expressed the depressing belief that Canada would not become a sanctuary for Jews seeking to flee persecution in Europe.

CNCR: Meaningful Assistance

One significant exception to the despondency theme occurred among those who believed that the actions of the CNCR would bear fruit and result in meaningful action on

23 ―Is Canada Christian?,‖ Regina Leader- Post, August 3, 1939, 4. 24 Ibid. 25 Ibid. 26 Ibid.

126 behalf of the Jews. The CNCR‘s formation a mere eight months before the start of the war gave the group little time to organize into an effective agent of change, yet members of the

CNCR quickly went beyond speaking at Sunday worship services and writing in denominational journals. They presented the public with strongly worded and challenging publications in widely read newspapers, they held public meetings, and, above all, they collected money to provide actual assistance to some refugees.

Three cases that were resolved before the start of the war in September illustrate how the CNCR provided this meaningful assistance. All three ended quite positively for the Jews in question, but not without significant challenges that illustrate both the strengths and weaknesses of the CNCR. The first of these was the case of Dr. Mendel, a Jewish professor working in the University of Toronto‘s (U of T) Department of Medical Research who had served at the U of T as an Assistant Professor without salary and on a temporary visa.27 His case came to the attention of Senator Wilson and the CNCR in the second week of April after it became known that the government had denied Dr. Mendel‘s request for a renewal of his visa because he attempted to seek permanent residency for his family and himself. This became apparent in a letter from Senator Wilson to Sir Frederick Banting, a leading medical scholar at the department of Department of Medical Research at the U of T and one of the co- discoverers of insulin. In this letter, Senator Wilson expressed her belief that Mr. Blair must have been misinformed about Dr. Mendel‘s situation at the U of T, for there appeared to be no other reason why the Department of Immigration would not accept Dr. Mendel‘s application for refugee status.28 Senator Wilson sought to enlist Sir Banting, whose name and position

27 LAC, CNCR, MG 28, vol. 43, box 1, file 5, ―Prewar Cases: 1939-47,‖ April 18, 1939. This was a letter from Ser Frederick Banting to Mr. Blair. 28 LAC, Wilson Papers, MG 27, vol. 1, file 1, ―Banting, Sir Frederick, Refugee Problem, Dr. Mendel, Dr. E. Stein, Leadership League,‖ April 17, 1939.

127 were likely to have significant influence on Mr. Blair, especially considering the fact that the

Nobel laureate was not always supportive of the refugees‘ cause. In his biography of Sir

Banting, Michael Bliss notes that the professor generally agreed with Mr. Blair‘s policy on limited Jewish immigration.29 Moreover, Bliss argues that his support of Dr. Mendel‘s admission into Canada was more of an exception than a rule, which showed the degree of influence Senator Wilson and the CNCR could exert even on those who were ambivalent supporters of Jewish refugees.30

Regardless of his broader sentiments about Jewish refugees, Sir Banting‘s ensuing letter sent to Mr. Blair on April 18 reviewed Dr. Mendel‘s situation in a very favourable light.

He made it clear that Dr. Mendel had received no pay, had brought his own laboratory equipment, and had paid over $10,000 dollars in salary for both a ―German‖ and Canadian assistant.31 On May 13, Mr. Blair responded with a letter expressing appreciation for the information and assured Sir Banting that he would forward the information to the Chief

Justice, which would likely lead to a positive decision for Dr. Mendel.32 The efforts of the

CNCR and Sir Banting were rewarded later that year when Dr. Mendel and his family were naturalized in Canada.33 More than anything, this incident illustrated the effectiveness of

Senator Wilson‘ personal influence as well as the ability of an organized and publically savvy committee to intervene, and in this case, save a family from likely death.

29 Michael Bliss, Banting: A Biography (Toronto: University of Toronto, 1992), 252. Bliss provides an example of Sir Banting telling Mr. Blair that a certain Jewish doctor was ―not the type of immigrant who would benefit Canada.‖ 30 Ibid., 245. 31 LAC, CNCR, MG 28, vol. 43, box 1 file 5, ―Prewar Cases: 1939-47,‖ April 18, 1939. 32 LAC, Wilson Papers, MG 27, vol. 1, file 1, ―Banting, Sir Frederick, Refugee Problem, Dr. Mendel, Dr. E. Stein, Leadership League,‖ May 13, 1939. 33 W. S. Feldberg, ―Bruno Mendel: 1897-1959,‖ Biographical Memoirs of Fellows of the Royal Society 6 (November 1, 1960): 192. Feldberg notes that Dr. Mendel‘s son joined the Royal Canadian Artillery and participated on D-Day as a member of the Intelligence Corp.

128

The two other examples of the CNCR‘s efforts to assist Jews had suffered from more mixed results. One intervention was on behalf of Mr. Max Weile, who was also another

Jewish resident of Canada under a temporary visa looking for a permanent residency permit in an effort to avoid deportation to Germany. Mr. G. Raymond Booth, a member of the CNCR‘s

Executive Committee, dealt almost exclusively with his case. Mr. Booth was a vocational clergyman on loan to the CNCR from the Society of Friends (Quakers), an organization that generously paid his salary for six months while he worked for the CNCR.34 The involvement of the Quakers raises questions about the role small denominations may have played in the protest movement. Undoubtedly, some smaller Protestant denominations had difficulty aligning themselves with mainline Protestants on social and political issues, but a denominationally neutral forum like the CNCR may have created a structure for them to become involved.35 Because this thesis relies on the published record in newspapers and on the records of the CNCR, further research in alternative sources is necessary to determine if the silence theory is applicable to churches in the Anabaptist and ―Evangelical‖ traditions in the same way as it is in the mainline churches.36 The point here is that the Quakers chose to fund a position in the CNCR and in doing so, demonstrated that the CNCR was seen as the

34 LAC, CNCR, MG 28, vol. 43, box 6, file 25, ―C.N.C.R. Minutes,‖ March 20, 1939, 6; LAC, CNCR, MG 28, vol. 43, box 6, file 17, ―Vancouver Branch 1939-1947.‖ This file contains a letter from Constance Hayward, the Executive Secretary, to Dr. Black, the head of the Vancouver branch of the CNCR, on May 17, 1939, informing him that $2,000 had been given by the Society of Friend (Toronto Branch) for six months of Mr. Booth‘s salary. 35 Thomas Socknat, Witness Against War: Pacifism in Canada, 1900-1945 (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1987), 259-61. Socknat describes the Quaker‘s who became involved with the CNCR as a part of a group of ―liberal pacifists‖ who became proponents of leniency towards refugees. He argues that the Quakers who became involved in this movement put aside some of their pacifistic tendencies and instead focused on assisting those being hurt by the European crisis, which seems in line with Mr. Booth‘s motivations for being involved in the CNCR. 36 John Stackhouse, Canadian Evangelicalism in the Twentieth Century: An Introduction to Its Character (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1993), 16, 200. Stackhouse describes these evangelicals as a ―largely informal network of Christians united in their central concerns but pursuing them with no limited cooperation.‖ Moreover, he argues that Canadian evangelicalism never developed with the same fundamentalist intensity as their American counterparts, which makes tracking their activity on such issues as social or political policy somewhat difficult. Nonetheless, they did have clear ―concerns‖ that could warrant further investigation in this context.

129 appropriate way for a socially active Quaker to respond. Mr. Booth was made Executive

Secretary of the CNCR in the spring of 1939 and he increasingly became the voice and face of the organization.

On August 7, only one month before the beginning of the war, Mr. Booth sent a letter to Mr. Blair regarding Mr. Weile‘s request ―for permanent domicile‖ in Canada.37 While recognizing that Mr. Weile had caused the Department of Immigration some ―difficulties,‖

Mr. Booth attempted to appeal to a ―compassionate interpretation.‖ Mr. Booth informed Mr.

Blair of a recent message he had received from the Society of Friends in Germany, which stated that since Kristallnacht Jews returning to Germany were being ―dealt with in a peculiarly vicious and sadistic manner in concentration [camps]‖ that often led to death.38

Nearly three weeks later, Mr. Blair responded to Mr. Booth in a way that revealed the depressing attitude of his department. As far as he was concerned, people like Mr. Weile, who

―invented lies galore,‖ deserve to be sent back ―to any country‖39 Fortunately for Mr. Weile,

Mr. Blair doubted whether Canada would have an opportunity to send him back due to

―existing conditions.‖40

Mr. Weile‘s case revealed a few important characteristics about both the CNCR and the Department of Immigration. In regards to the Department of Immigration, his case revealed both intransigence and disregard for humanitarian concerns. There was no attempt to understand why Mr. Weile may have entered the country under false pretence. Furthermore, the staff seemed only too willing to use the supposed failure of one Jew to stigmatize the many. Mr. Blair informed Mr. Booth that Mr. Weile‘s actions would cause his department to

37 LAC, CNCR, MG 28, vol. 43, box 1, file 5, ―Prewar Cases: 1939-47,‖ August 7, 1939. 38 Ibid. 39 Ibid., August 25, 1939. 40 Ibid.

130 question the declarations of many of his ―fellow-countrymen.‖41 This situation also showed the role that the CNCR played in assisting Jews, even those in poor standing with the government. During the week of the Throne Speech in January, the newspapers claimed that the government would pursue an immigration policy of ―sympathy,‖ which the CNCR and

Mr. Booth sought to put to the test. The CNCR continued to challenge the government on this case until 1946 when the Department of Immigration, then under the administration of A.L.

Jolliffe, finally told them that Mr. Weile‘s status would not change.42 The work of Mr. Booth and the CNCR did not result in a modified decision in Mr. Weile‘s case, but it likely caused

Mr. Blair to delay forcefully sending him back to Europe. In the end, it is quite likely that the engagement of the CNCR saved this man‘s life as well.

The third example of the CNCR‘s work on behalf of Jewish refugees in the months immediately preceding the war relates to the case of the Herbst family, which was resolved just as Germany invaded Poland. Once again, Mr. Booth took a leading role by sending a letter to Mr. Blair on September 4, 1939, asking him to assist the Herbst family. Mr. Booth‘s letter portrayed the Herbsts as a valuable addition to Canada because of their wealth and because one of them was Protestant.43 Fortunately for the Herbst family, they were in Holland once the war started and, on November 14, Mr. Blair informed Mr. Booth that they would be granted entrance into Canada on the condition of $50,000 being transferred from their accounts in the United States.44 The work of the CNCR obviously meant a great deal to the

Herbst family as demonstrated by the fact that when one of the sons took his own life two years later, the son chose to designate $100 of his $300 savings to the organization before

41 Ibid. 42 Ibid., February 19, 1946. 43 LAC, CNCR, MG 28, vol. 43, box 1, file 13, ―Herbst Family: 1939-1947,‖ September 4, 1939. 44 Ibid., November 14, 1939.

131 killing himself.45 The same article that reported his death claimed that discrimination played a role in the young man‘s death, yet the non-discriminatory work of the CNCR may have saved the rest of his family from a similar fate, which was something the young man recognized and acknowledged with his gift.

These three pre-war cases from the CNCR‘s files temper Davies and Nefsky‘s harsh conclusion that the CNCR was utterly doomed to failure. They are correct in concluding that a radical modification of the government‘s policy was impossible, but that does not mean that the CNCR was insignificant or inconsequential. Certainly some Jewish individuals did not see it that way, nor did many Christians, including non-members who sought out the CNCR when they wished to assist the Jews. For example, Hope of Israel, a Christian organization whose mission was to bring Jews and Christian closer together, wrote articles refuting antisemitism and the expansion of Nazi propaganda in Canada.46 When the organization decided to help a certain Jewish family they contacted the CNCR, through Mr. Booth, who worked with them to obtain employment and housing.47

The CNCR also worked with other multi-denominational Christian groups such as the

Women‘s Missionary Society and the YMCA in the months leading up to the war. By August

28, days before the war began, the Toronto Daily Star reported that ―most of the churches in

Canada are co-operating with the Canadian National Committee on Refugees‖ to ―induce the

Canadian government to admit a large number of selected refugees.‖48 They reported that the

45 Ibid., March 22, 1941. This information was found in an article from the Ottawa Citizen. Unfortunately, the documents did not preserve the title 46 LAC, CNCR, MG 28, vol. 43, box 3, file 3, ―Falticzek, Mr. and Mrs. Franz: 1939-1946.‖ The article ―Contributions Jews Have Made to Modern Civilization‖ and general anti-antisemitism comes from their March- April 1939 Hope of Israel publication. 47 Ibid., May 28, 1939. From a letter between Hope of Israel and Mr. Booth. 48 ―Churches Plead Refugees‘ Cause,‖ Toronto Daily Star, August 29, 1939, 21.

132

CNCR claimed to have reached every minister in Canada with information regarding

Canada‘s immigration policy and with ideas of how they could help refugees.49

The CNCR‘s interaction with Sir Banting and Sir Falconer also points to the fact that the CNCR sought to create ties to the academic community in Canada. Organizational records in the months leading up to the war reveal another connection to universities. While the documentation is somewhat unclear, it is apparent that during these months before the advent of the war, Dr. J.S. Thomson, the president of the University of Saskatchewan, took the lead in setting up the Saskatoon division of the CNCR.50 Interestingly, Paul Stortz argues that the work of the CNCR may have actually hindered the academic response because it provided academics with a sense that ―others were doing it.‖51 Nevertheless, the case of Dr. Mendel and the willingness of university presidents to become directly involved with this organization confirm the broad base of appeal that the CNCR enjoyed. If the CNCR did invade the prevue of the academic community, as Stortz‘s research seems to indicate, it was likely in an effort to engender support and action just as it was attempting to address a poor response in the denominational establishment.

The CNCR experienced a measure of success in its first few months of existence, even though it was unable to create a significant change in government policy. It not only had the satisfaction of seeing specific individuals and families helped, it also appears to have helped foster a climate of hope among Christians that some change could still occur. More than any protest or sermon, the CNCR provided practical assistance to Jewish refugees and empowered

49 Ibid. 50 LAC, CNCR, MG 28, vol. 43, box 6, file 10, ―Saskatoon Branch: 1939-1947.‖ Unfortunately, this file is rather incomplete and lacks significant correspondence. What is apparent is that the Saskatoon branch was set up in 1938, but remained inactive for a large part of the war. As the war drew to a close, the branch actively assisted the post-war refugee efforts. 51 Stortz, ―‗Rescue Our Family From a Living Death‘,‖ 248.

133

Christian organizations, Christian individuals, and members of the academic community who were looking for avenues to express their help and concern.

Final Months: Canada’s Shame

Unfortunately, the collective effort of individuals and groups, such as the CNCR, proved to be modest, slow, and inconsequential compared to the need and the dream these advocates of change shared. Whether they protested in the newspapers or became active participants in organizations such as the CNCR or its affiliates, the months before the war were characterized by a realization that effort, logic, and moral rectitude would not be enough to convince those with decision-making authority to implement the changes that were required in order to save European Jews from the devastation that awaited them at the hands of Nazi

Germany. The few successes they achieved, as illustrated above, were significant, not just because they showed that Christians were involved and having a discernible impact, but because they make the point that the success was highly limited. They also reveal the depressing attitude of Mr. Blair and the unwillingness of his staff to work with either the

CNCR or the protesting public with its strong Christian orientation. A few additional illustrations from the newspapers and the CNCR‘s records make this point even more clearly.

On June 22, the Toronto Daily Star published an interview with Mr. Booth regarding the work of the CNCR. Mr. Booth told the journalists that ministers and university professors had applied to adopt refugee families, ―but without success.‖52 He gave a specific example of a Toronto church that applied to adopt a family ―after members of the congregation agreed to be totally responsible, but the government refused.‖53 In another article in August, Mr. Booth reported similar efforts by private Christian schools that offered scholarships for refugee

52 ―Meet Snag in Plan to Adopt Refugees,‖ Toronto Daily Star, June 22, 1939, 26. 53 Ibid.

134 students and asked for refugee teachers to whom they would pay full salary.54 In both of these cases, the government thwarted the efforts of organized Christian groups, who were offering to take the entire load of responsibility off the government and Canada‘s economy in order to provide meaningful assistance to Jewish refugees. The efforts of the CNCR were successful in a few cases, such as with Dr. Mendel and the Herbst family, but even when the government was unable to make any reasoned defense for its actions, it remained unyielding. One event, in particular, illustrates why those who were pursuing a change in government policy, became deeply frustrated and despondent.

On May13, 1939, the St. Louis sailed from Hamburg to Cuba carrying 937 Jewish refugees. Once the boat arrived in Cuba, the government decided to change its mind and not permit the refugees to land. This forced the St. Louis back to Europe where many of the passengers died in the Holocaust. In Sarah Ogilvie‘s and Scott Miller‘s overview of ―the St.

Louis affair,‖ they argue that it came to ―symbolize the world‘s indifference‖ and highlight the gap ―between sympathy and action.‖55 But before the ship returned to Europe it attempted to find a merciful country to offload its human cargo. One of those countries was Canada.

The newspapers paid some attention to the St. Louis even before the ship made its appeal to Canada in early June, but once it did, the story was regularly featured on the front pages. Newspapers across the country reported on Canada‘s refusal to allow the refugees to land and the ship‘s forced journey back to Europe.56 On June 9, shortly after the boat left

Canada, The Globe and Mail and the Toronto Daily Star reported Anglican Bishop R.J.

Renison‘s response to these events in a speech he gave to the jubilee Baptist convention. He

54 ―Churches Plead Refugees‘ Cause,‖ Toronto Daily Star, August 29, 1939, 21. 55 Sarah Ogilvie and Scott Miller, Refuge Denied: The St. Louis Passengers and the Holocaust (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 2006), 4. 56 ―Refugees‘ Steam Ship Is Still without Harbor,‖ Ottawa Evening Citizen, June 5, 1939, 3; ―Tell of Refugees Panic on Liner,‖ The Gazette, July 27, 1939, 14. These are just a couple of examples.

135 took the opportunity to denounce Canada for condemning ―nearly 1,000 Jews to return ‗with death and suicide in their hearts.‘‖57 By this time, there was no question that the Jews would face persecution, torture, and likely death if they went back to Europe. He was disgusted that

Canada, with its ―plentiful resources‖ and spacious land, acted this way when it could easily absorb such a relatively small group of refugees.58 The Globe reported that the Bishop and other active Christians were not merely using the incident for personal publicity, but were actively involved on a personal level. In the case of the Bishop, he was willing to intercede directly with the Prime Minister at the request of Sir Robert Falconer, the honorary president of the CNCR, who had asked him to sign a petition.59 A few days after Bishop Renison‘s speech, another clergyman from Yorkminister Baptist church in Toronto took up the cause and further castigated the government and the lethargic people of Canada. He said that Canada could have accepted at least a few refugees and that by not doing so Canada placed itself in the role of Pilate, when he ―washed his hands‘ of responsibility at the trial of Jesus.‖60 He went on to warn that Christ‘s judgement was ―especially severe toward that kind of conduct— the side-stepping of responsibility.‖61

Both Bishop Renison and the pastor of Yorkminister Baptist energetically and publicly denounced the government for its inaction. They felt, as Christians felt earlier during the

Easter appeals to the government, that Canada‘s Christian response was not just regrettable, it was evil. In these interpretations, Canadian Christians played the role of Pilate and the mockers at the cross.

57 ―Canada Condemns Jews to Suicide, Says Renison,‖ The Globe and Mail, June 9, 1939, 4. 58 ―Bishop Would Give 1,000 Jews Haven,‖ Toronto Daily Star, June 9, 1939, 13. 59 ―Canada Condemns Jews,‖ The Globe and Mail, June 9, 1939, 4; ―Pastor Says Canada Plays Pilate‘s Part,‖ Toronto Daily Star, June 19, 1939, 9. 60 ―Pastor Says Canada Plays Pilate‘s Part,‖ Toronto Daily Star, June 19, 1939, 9. 61 Ibid.

136

The most politically significant Christian response to the St. Louis affair came in the form of a telegram from ordained Anglican minister and leading Canadian historian George

M. Wrong. His message was sent to Prime Minister King while he was in Washington D.C. escorting the King and Queen:

As a mark of gratitude to Almighty God for the pleasure and gratification which has been vouchsafed to Canadian people through the visit of their Gracious Majesties King George and Queen Elizabeth and as evidence of the true Christian charity of the people of this most fortunate and blessed country, we, the undersigned Christian citizens of Canada respectfully suggest that under the powers vested in you as Premier of our country you forthwith offer the 907 homeless exiles on board the Hamburg American ship St. Louis sanctuary in Canada.62

Mr. Wrong‘s identification of Canada‘s Christian duty would likely have had an impact on the

Prime Minister but, as Lita-Rose Betcherman notes, the Prime Minister was in Washington, so

―unfortunately, for the desperate people on the St. Louis, the immigration director was F.C.

Blair and the acting prime minister was Ernest Lapointe.‖63 In other words, the pleas of

Bishop Renison, Sir Falconer, and Mr. Wrong fell on the deaf ears of Mr. King‘s antisemitic immigration director and his anti-immigration Quebec lieutenant. Most importantly for this thesis, though, is the fact that even in these final days before the war, it was individual

Christians, lay and clergy, rather than denominations who sought to persuade the government to take a more favourable attitude towards refugees, in general, and Jewish refugees, in particular.

Not surprisingly, the Jewish community shared the despondency felt by Christians in the final months before the war. Perhaps the worst indictment of this entire period comes from

MP A.A. Heaps on August 8:

62 Lita-Rose Betcherman, rnest Lapointe : Ma kenzie Kingʼs Great Que e Lieutenant (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2002), 269. 63 Ibid.

137

I am bitterly disappointed in the attitude of the government of this country in regard to the refugee question. No country in the world has done so little for the Jewish victims of persecution in Europe.64

Although Mr. Heaps does not provide evidence for his claim, it is difficult to think of a country that did less than Canada, regardless of how one defines assistance. Like the Christian protestors of the period, Mr. Heaps had hoped that when the members of parliament reconvened in January the government would follow through on what it had publicly stated it would do, to pursue a refugee policy based on ―sympathy.‖

The gap between sympathy and action was painfully obvious to many Canadian

Christians. On August 15, The Gazette reported that in the first half of 1939 the government had accepted a total of 9,193 people and rejected 240,000 applications.65 The moment of opportunity had passed, and Canada had failed to act in accordance with any Christian definition of morality or sympathy. While a significant number of Christians, many of whom were prominent lay leaders, were at the forefront of those seeking to hold Canada to a standard of decency and charity, the government they elected and the churches to which they belonged were conspicuous by their silence or opposition.

64 ―Heaps Deplores Immigration Bar,‖ The Calgary Herald, August 8, 1939, 16. 65 ―The Immigration Trickle,‖ The Gazette, August 15, 1939, 8.

138

Conclusion

The Tragedy of Expediency and Fruit of Resolution

This thesis assesses the adequacy of a theory which holds that Christians in Canada were inexcusably silent during one of the worst atrocities in recorded history. In order to undertake this assessment, traditional ecclesiastical sources were set aside in favour of sources which were more likely to reveal the nature and breadth of the supposed silence during this period. Davies and Nefsky ask the question in the title of their book: ―How Silent Were the

Churches?‖ and, like these two authors, this thesis recognizes that there is more than one answer to the question. The utilization of neglected source material makes it possible to find new and more definitive answers to this troubling question.

The first of these answers is definitional in nature: what exactly constitutes the

―church‖? Davies and Nefsky themselves acknowledge that the nature of the Christian response was complex when they answer their own question, ―Were the Churches silent?‖ with both a ―yes and no.‖ Davies and Nesfky arrive at this inconclusive answer because while they recognize that the ―Churches‖ were not homogenous entities, their research does not explore the breadth and influence of the ―no‖ response. They acknowledge ―that many

Protestant pulpits were not silent … nor were a sizable number of editorialists, bishops and academics, nor, of course, were the special envoys who devoted themselves to the refugee cause: Silcox, Judd and Booth.‖1 Nevertheless, they focus almost exclusively on these individuals and do not seek to analyse the broader influence that these men and the organizations they were a part of, especially the CNCR, had on the Christian response. This

1 Alan Davies and Marilyn Nefsky, How Silent Were the Churches?: Canadian Protestantism and the Jewish Plight During the Nazi Era (Waterloo: Wilfrid Laurier University Press, 1997), 128.

139 thesis seeks to create a more balanced perspective by utilizing the public record in the newspapers and the CNCR‘s extensive documentation. These show, with greater clarity and depth, the contribution these leaders and many other individuals and Christian organizations made to the cause of the Jewish people during this period.

If one accepts that the ―church‖ is theologically more accurately defined as a community of individuals who have made personal commitments to follow Christ‘s teachings and example in word and deed, then it is imperative that the aggregated voice and actions of individuals be incorporated into the ―silence‖ question. This definition recognizes the reality that Christians frequently experience their faith outside the institutional church. The ten months following Kristallnacht make this point abundantly clear. Was the church as an institution or series of institutions silent? Essentially and, more importantly, practically, ―yes.‖

Was the church as a community of believers categorically silent? ―No.‖ Understanding this definitional detail makes it possible to provide a clearer understanding of who was not silent, what it was they said, and how significant their actions were in the ten months between

Kristallnacht and the beginning of the war in Poland.

A second answer that emerged from the sources analyzed in this thesis is qualitative in nature. The sources suggest that three distinct motivational themes inspired the Christians who spoke out. Some became involved because they perceived the antisemitic events in Germany as an attack on western civilization and Christianity. Implicit in this conviction was the idea that there was a fundamental connection between Christianity and a modern civilization, which found its origins in the Reformation and the Enlightenment‘s rejection of ―barbarism.‖

A second motivational theme grew out of the idea that the Nazi attack on the Jews was an attack on the essence of what it meant to be human. Christians who participated for this reason

140 believed that the persecution of the Jews was an affront to ―the brotherhood of man,‖ and that maltreatment of the Jews called for people of all races and creeds to rise up and defend humanity.

A third group of Christians argued that the Kristallnacht pogrom demanded Christians respond simply because they were Christians, that is, people with particular beliefs and presuppositions. As followers of Christ, it was their duty to oppose evil wherever it appeared.

Not only were they committed to acting as Good Samaritans in defence of their neighbours, but they were also motivated by an historical and theological link to the Jewish people. For

Christians who held to this view, Kristallnacht was a threat to Christianity itself and a highly motivational reminder that they had an obligation to defend the Jews. Moreover, they had a spiritual responsibility to join with them in their struggle against oppression. Protest and action followed naturally because the Nazis were evil and the Jews were fraternally related to

Christians.

In summary, Christians were motivated to protest because they perceived a threat to what Christians held dear: Christian civilization, Christian humanitarianism, and Christianity itself. Comingled with these motivational forces and essentially undergirding them was an optimism that the Nazi regime‘s policies and the Canadian federal government‘s immigration policy could change as a result of sustained protest. These motivational themes and convictions about the process of change in Canada defined the multifaceted message of the

Canadian Christian protest movement. Those who hold to the ―silence‖ theory of Christians during this period need to take into account that the way in which Christians responded and the reasons for their responses were not monolithic.

141

The final aspect of the silence question requires that due consideration be given to the different ways in which the Christian protest manifested itself at different times during the period between Kristallnacht and the outbreak of the war. One reason historians have suscribed to the silence theory is that the protest movement following Kristallnacht appeared to result in no enduring impact. The sources used in this thesis show that while the protest did change over time, it was not ―silent‖ in the ways suggested by the silence theory. The four chapters of this thesis deal with four discernable periods or phases in the protest movement.

Certain defining characteristics mark each phase, but elements of similarity connect them all.

The first phase, which occurred in the final weeks of November, was filled with sermons, letters, and protests. This initial response was vigorous and widespread from coast to coast, but it was also spontaneous and largely the effort of individuals acting locally and regionally.

The following month of December brought two important changes in the Christian response. The first meeting of the CNCR at the beginning of the month indicated that there was an organizational metamorphosis occurring within the sincere, but somewhat chaotic response seen in the first few weeks. The protests in November had a catalytic impact on a segment of the Christian population which understood that if change were to occur, emotions would need to be channelled into organizational structures and sustained pressure would need to be brought to bear on decision makers who had the ability to introduce meaningful change.

The founding of the CNCR was the most significant strategic initiative during this phase. The second distinguishing feature during the last month of 1938 was a new line of reasoning that was linked to the arrival of the Advent season in the Christian liturgical calendar. Individual

Christians and members of the CNCR utilized an increased religious awareness among

Canadians during the Christmas season to leverage the impact of their message. Both the

142 organizational metamorphosis and the decision to take advantage of the Christian liturgical calendar set the stage for a Christian response in the following year that would not end after many Canadians had forgotten about the smoldering synagogues of the Kristallnacht pogrom.

The third and fourth phases, which constituted the period between the New Year and the beginning of the war, were characterized increasingly by a disheartening struggle to transform an evasive and determinedly resistant federal government. David Cesarani describes individual political action in a democracy as ―time consuming, wearying, frustrating, and often forlorn,‖ which aptly describes the difficulties faced by Christians before, during, and after Kristallnacht.2 In spite of these challenges, Christians and the organization they founded, the CNCR, experienced three enduring successes in these final months, which provide evidence that many Christians were not silent and that their impact was not inconsequential.

The first enduring success of the CNCR was its ability to influence the Christian community to remain publicly minded and concerned about social justice. While David

Marshall, Nancy Christie, and Michael Gauvreau disagree about the way in which Christianity was changing in the first decades of the twentieth century, they all agree that there was a considerable diminishment in the official role that Canadian churches played in social reform.3

The sources used here support the understanding that a more private ―social evangelism‖ took place through individual action and lay-run organizations. Robert Wright notes that many saw the failure of the church to respond to the Jewish refugee crisis as a failure of the Christian church ―to take its rightful place on the cutting edge of Canadian opinion on the matter.‖4

2 David Cesarani, ―Mad Dogs and Englishmen: Towards Taxonomy of Rescuers in a ‗Bystander‘ Country - Britain 1933-1945,‖ in Bystanders to the Holocaust: A Re-Evaluation, ed. David Cesarani and Paul A. Levine (London: Frank Cass, 2002), 30. 3 Nancy Christie and Michael Gauvreau, A Full-Orbed Christianity: The Protestant Churches and Social Welfare in Canada, 1900-1940 (Montreal: McGill-Queenʼs University Press, 1996), xi. 4 Robert Wright, A World Mission: Canadian Protestantism and the Quest for a New International Order, 1918- 1939 (Montreal: McGill-Queen‘s University Press, 1991), 225.

143

What became increasingly apparent in this thesis, though, was that this criticism and concern came from Christians themselves who became involved in the CNCR, wrote to their newspapers, or sent telegrams to their political leaders. These developments represented a gradual shift in Canadian society away from corporate ecclesiastical power structures to a more individualistic, personal expression of Christianity. This new expression of Christianity in culture was not a sign that Christianity had become ―silent.‖ On the contrary, there remained a significant number of Christians who continued to promote Christianity‘s role as a moral and social compass in the country.

The second enduring legacy of the Christian protest movement was personal and focused on the lives of refugees who came as a result of the intervention of Christians. While only a few Jews were able to emigrate to Canada before the war, the CNCR and its supporters managed to help save dozens if not hundreds of individuals and families.5 They also helped to provide organizational and logistical support for individual Christian churches and agencies, such as Hope of Israel and, later on, the Canadian Council of Churches. While the number of

Jews saved was insignificant in light of the almost incalculable horrors of the Holocaust, the sources used in this thesis support the contention that the CNCR and its supporters constituted one of the only Canadian groups to actually assist the Jews prior to the Holocaust.

The final legacy was less tangible, but remains perhaps the greatest enduring aspect of this protest movement. Gerald Dirks concludes his analysis of Canada‘s refugee policy during this period by explaining that it ushered in a new era in Canada‘s response to future refugee crises. Before the Jewish refugee calamity of the 1930s, Canadians and their government largely ignored global refugee problems. However, in this instance, Dirks argues that the

5 The CNCR Papers indicate that they worked on at least 357 case files, some of which represent families and not just individuals. Most of these are temporally outside of the confines of this thesis, but are almost exclusively individuals or families of Jewish origin, which provides a picture of how significant this tangible assistance was.

144

―decision to try and alleviate some of the hardships encountered by refugees was prompted by a heretofore unparalleled awareness of the problem.‖6 Canada‘s response to refugee crises was never the same after the events of the 1930s and the ensuing war. Undoubtedly, some of these lasting changes were due to the a national awareness of the Holocaust‘s atrocities, but the public‘s ―unparalleled awareness,‖ to use Dirks‘ term, was due, at least in part, to the work of

Christians who utilized the newspapers, attended protests, lobbied the government, and organized the CNCR. Canada‘s positive image in the modern world as a place for refugees and a country that deals generously and fairly with individuals seeking freedom from oppression developed in the years following the Second World War. Nevertheless, one finds the antecedents of this radical new way of thinking in the Christian protest movement following Kristallnacht. While it is not possible to attribute causality from the sources used here, it is possible to see a correlation between the high profile, public action of the protestors and an openness to a new way of viewing refugees after the war.

A study of the Christian response to the Jewish suffering in Europe following

Kristallnacht needs contextualization. Just as Stortz points out in his study of the academic community‘s response to the persecution, historians need to understand the Christian response as a ―microcosm of Canadian society.‖7 The Christian community, like the academic community and Canadian society as a whole, was not monolithic. One of the shortcomings of the ―silence‖ theory, is that historians who are denominationally focused tend to group all

Christians together, thereby showing a remarkable disregard for the diverse nature of

Christianity, even within one particular denomination. Even in the initial outburst after

6 Gerald Dirks, Canada’s Refugee Poli y: Indifferen e or Opportunism? (Montreal: McGill-Queen‘s University Press, 1977), 46. 7 Paul Stortz, ―‗Rescue Our Family From a Living Death‘: Refugee Professors and the Canadian Society for the Protection of Science and Learning at the University of Toronto, 1935-1946,‖ Journal of the Canadian Historical Association 14, no. 1 (2003): 260.

145

Kristallnacht it is possible to see theological, ideological, and motivational differences among those Christians who responded. Similarly, there were many who did not respond – who were seemingly silent. Some saw helping the Jews as deleterious for Canada, or of secondary importance, given Canada‘s economic problems and political realities. For those motivated by the arguments noted above, this position was unthinkable and un-Christian. The intensity of the criticism that the protesting Christians had towards the latter group was palpable, but in the end, a strong minority voice was incapable of persuading an unresponsive government, which was most deserving of the ―silent‖ label in the face of Jewish suffering.

The characterization of Canadian Christians as silent during the aftermath of

Kristallnacht is not only incorrect and misleading, it also unintentionally fails to highlight those Christians, particularly in denominational leadership, who failed to act in accordance with their stated beliefs in this tragic crisis. In many ways, this thesis follows Tony Kushner‘s approach, which sought to ―chart the impact of the Holocaust on ordinary people in the democracies, rather than to outline in detail the implementation of state policy.‖8 The failure of denominational leadership to implement a strong pro Jewish-refugee policy is not the focus of this thesis either, but, instead, the focus is on the Christians whose protests reached out to their churches, the general public, and to the government. They did so in numerous ways and for diverse reasons in order to persuade a listening audience, who were then left without an excuse. The silence brought attention to those who spoke out just as those who spoke out brought attention to those who were silent. In the end, some were silent, some were not: both deserve to have their narratives understood and their role in Canada‘s failure properly identified.

8 Tony Kushner, The Holocaust and the Liberal Imagination: A Social and Cultural History (Oxford: B. Blackwell, 1994), 275.

146

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Primary Sources

Library and Archives Canada, Ottawa

Canadian National Committee on Refugees Collection Cairine Reay Wilson Papers Fredrick Charles Blair Papers

Newspapers (November 1938-August 1939)

Edmonton Journal Kitchener Daily Record Ottawa Evening Citizen The Calgary Herald The Gazette (Montreal) The Globe and Mail The Halifax Herald The Leader Post Toronto Daily Star The Vancouver Province Winnipeg Free Press

Published Primary Sources

Documents on Canadian External Relations, vol. 6: 1936-1939. Edited by John A. Monro. Ottawa: Department of External Affairs, 1972.

Dominion of Canada Official Report of Debates: House of Commons. 18th Parliament, 4th Session, 1936-1940, vol. III. Ottawa: Printer to the King‘s Most Excellent Majesty, 1939.

King, William Lyon Mackenzie. ―A Real Companion and Friend: The Diary of William Lyon Mackenzie King, 1893-1950.‖ Library and Archives Canada. www.collectionscanada.gc.ca.

Secondary Sources

Abella, Irving, and Harold Troper. None Is Too Many: Canada and the Jews of Europe, 1933- 1948. Toronto: Lester Publishing Limited, 1991.

Anctil, Pierre. ―Interlude of Hostility: Judeo-Christian Relations in Quebec in the Interwar Period, 1919-39.‖ In Antisemitism in Canada: History and Interpretation, edited by Alan Davies, 135-166. Waterloo: Wilfrid Laurier University Press, 1992.

147

Betcherman, Lita-Rose. rnest Lapointe : Ma kenzie King’s Great Que e Lieutenant. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2002.

Bliss, Michael. Right Honourable Men: The descent of Canadian politics from Macdonald to Chrétien. Toronto: Harper Perennial Canada, 2004.

Boyko, John. Bennett: The Rebel Who Challenged and Changed a Nation. Toronto: Key Porter Books, 2010.

Brennan, Patrick. Reporting the Nation’s Business: Press-Government Relations During the Liberal Years, 1935-1957. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1994.

Brown, Michael. ―From Stereotype to Scapegoat: Anti-Jewish Sentiment in French Canada from Confederation to World War I.‖ In Antisemitism in Canada: History and Interpretation, edited by Alan Davies, 39-66. Waterloo: Wilfrid Laurier University Press, 1992.

Cesarani, David. ―Mad Dogs and Englishmen: Towards Taxonomy of Rescuers in a ‗Bystander‘ Country - Britain 1933-1945.‖ In Bystanders to the Holocaust: A Re- Evaluation, edited by David Cesarani and Paul A. Levine, 28-56. London: Frank Cass, 2002.

Christie, Nancy, and Michael Gauvreau. A Full-Orbed Christianity: The Protestant Churches and Social Welfare in Canada, 1900-1940. Montreal: McGill-Queen‘s University Press, 1996.

Clarke, Brian. ―English-Speaking Canada from 1854.‖ In A Concise History of Christianity in Canada, edited by Terrence Murphy and Roberto Perin. Toronto: Oxford University Press, 1996.

Coleman, Daniel. ―J.S. Woodsworth and the Discourse of White Civility.‖ In Human Welfare, Rights, and Social Activism: Rethinking the Legacy of J.S. Woodsworth, edited by Jane Pulkingham, 221-243. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2010.

Coppa, Frank. The Papacy, the Jews, and the Holocaust. Washington D.C.: Catholic University of America Press, 2006.

Cornwell, John. Hitler’s Pope: The Se ret History of Pius Xii. New York N.Y.: Viking, 1999.

148

Crowley, Terence. Marriage of Minds: Isabel and Oscar Skelton Reinventing Canada. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2003.

Davies, Alan, and Marilyn Nefsky. How Silent Were the Churches?: Canadian Protestantism and the Jewish Plight During the Nazi Era. Waterloo: Wilfrid Laurier University Press, 1997.

Delisle, Esther. The Traitor and the Jew: Anti-Semitism and xtreme Right- ing Nationalism in Qu e from to . Montreal: R. Davies Pub., 1993.

Dirks, Gerald. Canada’s Refugee Poli y: Indifference or Opportunism? Montreal: McGill- Queen‘s University Press, 1977.

Douglas, William Alexander Binny, and Brereton Greenhous. Out of the shadows: Canada in the Second World War. Toronto: Dundurn Press, 1995.

English, John. Citizen of the World: The Life of Pierre Elliott Trudeau. Toronto: Alfred A. Knopf Canada, 2006.

Fay, Terence. A History of Canadian Catholics: Gallicanism, Romanism, and Canadianism. Montreal: McGill-Queen‘s University Press, 2002.

Feldberg, W. S. ―Bruno Mendel: 1897-1959.‖ Biographical Memoirs of Fellows of the Royal Society 6 (November 1, 1960): 191-199.

Gewirtz, Sharon. ―Anglo-Jewish Responses to Nazi Germany 1933-39: The Anti-Nazi Boycott and the Board of Deputies of British Jews.‖ Journal of Contemporary History 26, no. 2 (April 1, 1991): 255-276.

Gilbert, Martin. The Righteous: The Unsung Heroes of the Holocaust. New York: Henry Holt, 2003.

Glassford, Larry. Reaction and Reform: The Politics of the Conservative Party under R.B. Bennett, 1927-1938. Toronto: University Of Toronto Press, 1992.

Granatstein, J.L. A Man of Influence: Norman a. Robertson and Canadian Statecraft, 1929- 68. Ottawa: Deneau Publishers, 1981.

Grant, John. The Church in the Canadian Era: The First Century of Confederation. Toronto: McGraw-Hill Ryerson, 1972.

149

Grayson, L.M., and Michael Bliss, eds. The Wretched of Canada: Letters to R.B. Bennett 1930-1035. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1971.

Greenlee, James. Sir Robert Falconer: A Biography. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1988.

Heaps, Leo. The Rebel in the House: The Life and Times of A.A. Heaps, M.P. Markham Ont.: Fitzhenry & Whiteside, 1984.

Iacovetta, Franca. ―‗A Respectable Feminist‘: The Political Career of Senator Cairine Wilson 1921-1962.‖ In Beyond the Vote: Canadian Women and Politics, edited by Linda Kealey and Joan Sangster. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1989.

Kaplan, William. State and Salvation: The Jehovah’s itnesses and Their Fight for Civil Rights. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1989.

Knowles, Valerie. First Person: A Biography of Cairine ilson: Canada’s First oman Senator. Toronto: Dundurn Press, 1988.

Kushner, Tony. The Holocaust and the Liberal Imagination: A Social and Cultural History. Oxford: B. Blackwell, 1994.

Lawson, Tom. ―The Anglican Understanding of Nazism 1933-1945: Placing the Church of England‘s Response to the Holocaust in Context.‖ Twentieth Century British History 14, no. 2 (June 1, 2003): 112-137.

Lipstadt, Deborah. Beyond Belief: The American Press and the Coming of the Holocaust, 1933-1945. New York: The Free Press, 1986.

Longerich, Peter. Holocaust: The Nazi Persecution and Murder of the Jews. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010.

Maccoby, Hyam. ―The Origins of Anti-Semitism.‖ In The Origins of the Holocaust: Christian Anti-Semitism, edited by Randolph Braham. New York: Columbia University Press, 1986.

MacFarlane, John. rnest Lapointe and Que e ’s Influen e on Canadian Foreign Poli y. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1999.

150

MacKay, Robert, and E. B. Rogers. Canada Looks Abroad. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1938.

Marshall, David. Secularizing the Faith: Canadian Protestant Clergy and the Crisis of Belief, 1850-1940. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1992.

McNaught, Kenneth. A Prophet in Politics: A Biography of J.S. Woodsworth. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2001.

Mosse, George. Toward the Final Solution: A History of European Racism. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1985.

Nawyn, William. American Protestantism’s Response to Germany’s Jews and Refugees, 1933-1941. Ann Arbor Mich.: UMI Research Press, 1981.

Neatby, H. Blair. The Politics of Chaos. Toronto: Macmillan of Canada, 1972.

Ogilvie, Sarah, and Scott Miller. Refuge Denied: The St. Louis Passengers and the Holocaust. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 2006.

Palmer, Howard. Patterns of Prejudice: A History of Nativism in Alberta. Toronto: McClelland and Stewart, 1982.

———. ―Politics, Religion and Antisemitism in Alberta, 1880-1950.‖ In Antisemitism in Canada: History and Interpretation, edited by Alan Davies, 167-196. Waterloo: Wilfrid Laurier University Press, 1992.

Rea, James Edgar. T.A. Crerar: A Political Life. Montreal: McGill-Queen‘s University Press, 1997.

Rittner, Carol, and John Roth, eds. Pope Pius XII and the Holocaust. London: Leicester University Press, 2002.

Ross, Robert. So It Was True: The American Protestant Press and the Nazi Persecution of the Jews. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1980.

Socknat, Thomas. Witness Against War: Pacifism in Canada, 1900-1945. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1987.

151

Speisman, Stephen. ―Antisemitism in Ontario: The Twentieth Century.‖ In Antisemitism in Canada: History and Interpretation, edited by Alan Davies, 113-134. Waterloo: Wilfrid Laurier University Press, 1992.

Stacey, Charles P. Canada and the Age of Conflict: Volume 2: 1921-1948. Toronto: Macmillan, 1981.

Stackhouse, John. Canadian Evangelicalism in the Twentieth Century: An Introduction to Its Character. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1993.

Stamp, Robert. The World of Tomorrow: A View of Canada in 1939. Toronto: Fitzhenry & Whiteside, 1985.

Stebner, Eleanor. ―More Than Maternal Feminists and Good Samaritans: Women and the Social Gospel in Canada.‖ In Gender and the Social Gospel, edited by Wendy J. Deichmann Edwards and Carolyn De Swarte Gifford, 53-67. Chicago: University of Illinois Press, 2003.

Steinweis, Alan E. Kristallnacht 1938. Cambridge Mass.: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2009.

Stokes, Lawrence D. ―Canada and an Academic Refugee from Nazi Germany: The Case of Gerhard Herzberg.‖ Canadian Historical Review 57, no. 2 (June 1976): 150-170.

Stortz, Paul. ―‗Rescue Our Family From a Living Death‘: Refugee Professors and the Canadian Society for the Protection of Science and Learning at the University of Toronto, 1935-1946.‖ Journal of the Canadian Historical Association 14, no. 1 (2003): 231-261.

Thompson, John. Forging the Prairie West. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998.

Tulchinsky, Gerald. Canada’s Jews: A People’s Journey. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2008.

Waite, Peter. The Loner: Three Sketches of the Personal Life and Ideas of R.B. Bennett, 1870- 1947. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1992.

Warne, Randi Ruth. Literature as Pulpit: The Christian Social Activism of Nellie L. Mcclung. Waterloo: Wilfrid Laurier Univ. Press, 1993.

152

Weil, Louis. ―The Solemn Reproaches of the Cross.‖ Saint Mary the Virgin, March 10, 2006. http://www.stmvirgin.org/archives/article19433c2290727.htm.

Williamson, Philip. Stanley Baldwin: Conservative Leadership and National Values. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999.

Wright, Robert. A World Mission: Canadian Protestantism and the Quest for a New International Order, 1918-1939. Montreal: McGill-Queen‘s University Press, 1991.

Zimmerman, David. ―‗Narrow-Minded People‘: Canadian Universities and the Academic Refugee Crises, 1933-1941.‖ Canadian Historical Review 88, no. 2 (June 2007): 291- 315.

Zuccotti, Susan. Under His Very Windows: The Vatican and the Holocaust in Italy. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2000.