S PE S

A

1:1

SOUTH PLACE ETHICAL SOCIETY

OFFICERS:

General Secretary: Peter Cadogan

Lettings SecretarylHall Manager: Iris Mills

Hon. Registrar: Rose Bush

Hon. Treasurer: C. E. Barralet

Editor, "The Ethical Record": Eric Willoughby

Address: Conway Hall Humanist Centre

Red Lion Square, London WC1R 4RL. (Tel: 01-242 8032)

Coming at Conway Hall

Sunday, September 293.00 pm—Annual Reunion

Sunday, October 611.00 am—Sunday Meeting: T. F. EVANS on Shaw's Religion6.00 pm—Bridge Practice in the Library6.30 pm—Concert

Tuesday, October 87.00 pm—Discussion introduced by Stan and Margaret Chisman

Subject: Success and Failure in Human Problem Solving

Sunday, October 1311.00 ain—Sunday Meeting: DR COLIN HAMER on Ethical Feeling

3.00 pm—Forum: International Humanism—report of the AmsterdamIHEU conference by Peter Cadogan

6.00 pm—Bridge Practice6.30 pm—Concert

Tuesday, October 157.00 pm—Discussion

Sunday, October 2011.00 am—Sunday Meeting: DR JAMES HEMMING on The Work

Ethic6.00 pm—Bridge Practice6.30 pm—Concert

Tuesday, October 227.00 pm—Discussion introduced by Dr W. Grey Walter. Subject:

Expectancy and Guessing in Human Brains

Sunday, October 2711.00 am—Sunday Meeting: PETER CADOGAN on The Long Exile

of the Idea of Justice3.00 pm—Forum: Man the Pattern-Making Animal with Victor Rose6.00 pm—Bridge Practice6.30 pm—Concert

Tuesday, October 297.00 pm—Discussion

(Full details will he given in October Record)

THE ETHICAL RECORDVol. 79, No. 8 SEPTEMBER 1974

The views expressed in this journal are not necessarily those of the Society

EDITORIALTo Adapt or to Confront?THE ADAPTABILITY of the human mind seems to know no bounds. Fiveyears ago, when the first horrifying crimes of violence which startedwhat we now euphemistically call "the troubles of Ulster" were re-ported, the outrages were a talking point for a few days. Now, theUlster tale of atrocity and violence is taken for granted, as part of theBritish way of life.

Even now, as bombs and crimes of arson violate the British main-land, the headlines proclaim the number of dead the first day, then itis a paragraph or two about investigations, and then the matter isreduced to phrases like "another incendiary bomb went off today".

What is it in the structure of a human being which allows us toacknowledge man's inhumanity to man with a disgusted look, themutter of a few well-chosen words and then on to the next diversion?

Is it our way of life, which pursues constant enjoyment and gratifi-cation for its own sake? Is it society's warped system of values, whichplaces more store on bank balances than social equality? Is it our atti-tude to life itself, which extols the "I'm all right Jack" notion?

Or is it the system of "social order", supposed "decency standards"and acceptance of non-rational ideas, which condition us to taking inour stride the heinous manifestations of social injustice?

Surely the development of human adaptability has been a combina-tion of all these factors—and more—over the history of mankind.Probably we shall never know the truth. Is man, as "naturists"believe, a wildlife animal, basically vegetarian, basically individual butgregarious, or is man, as many "futurists" believe, still developing, andyet to reach his peak of scientific discovery?

The Humanist outlook, as many see it, is that man lives in, forand relative to, the generation into which he is born. To look backmay be illuminating; to look forward may be speculative, but mayaid our offspring. But the important time is now and the near future.

Ever striving for improvement, we look for change, adaptation andrenewal for the betterment of the lot of mankind.

But in all improvement schemes there are pitfalls. The top is reachedby those who climb the hardest in modern man, and in today's society,that often leads to violence.

How long will it take our race to realise that true fulfilment, ultimatehappiness and purpose in life has little to do with adaptation, accept-ance of horrendous acts of violence and meaningless existence dayafter day, but instead depends on our attitude to each other? Ourstance for living should be based on social justice and equality insteadof violence-provoking strife and perpetuation of class divisions.

Just now, it looks as though that might take a long, long time.

3

Jesus and JudasBY

G. A. WELLS

STANDARD CHRISTIAN WOrkS of reference today admit that what Judas be-trayed and why he betrayed it are insoluable problems. Most people never-theless believe that the story of Jesus' betrayal by one of his closestassociates is too unedifying to be a Christian invention. In fact, however,Cheyne showed, at the beginning of this century, that this is not so. Herealized that, if the original tradition had left the ease with which thecapture of Jesus was effected unaccounted for, Christian ingenuity wouldrapidly have exerted itself to find an explanation. And passages in thePsalms which spoke of the righteous man as treated with brutal insolenceby his own familiar friend would have suggested that the betrayer was afaithless friend.

Those who assert that no Christian would have invented a traitorousdisciple need to be reminded of the statement in the non-canonical epistleof Barnabas (written probably about the same time as the gospels, butindependently of them) that Jesus "chose his own apostles from the worsttype of sinners, since it was not his mission to call saints but sinners".Theologians agree that the author took this not from the gospels, but froma tradition only partly in line with them. No one today believes that whathe says is true, that Jesus' closest followers consisted exclusively of "theworst type of sinners". Here, then, we have a Christian invention of pre-cisely the:kind which is today so confidently asserted to be an impossibility,because so discreditable. The intellectual environment in which suchinvention arose would naturally favour, as a further development, specificcharges of evil-doing against named inmates. Furthermore, the gospelpassion narratives are anti-Semitic. They represent Pilate as doing his bestto have Jesus acquitted, but as nevertheless forced into ordering his execu-tion by the malice of the Jewish leaders. And what could better suit theanti-Jewish attitude of these evangelists than the betrayal of their Lordby one Jew and his denial by another?

Paul's Omission

The earliest Christian ideas on record are those expressed in the lettersof Paul, the oldest extant Christian documents. He believed that Jesus hadbeen crucified, but he says nothing of Judas. All he says is that Jesus was"delivered up" or "handed over" (1 Cor. 11: 23). English Bibles render theGreek so as to make him say that Jesus was "betrayed" or "arrested".But this is to interpret Paul from the gospels, which of course did notexist in his day. Professor J. Jeremias thinks it indisputable that Paul isechoing the Septuagint of Isaiah 53, where the suffering servant of Yahwehis repeatedly said to have been "delivered up" for our sins, i.e., deliveredby the Father as a sacrifice for sinners. And this is what Paul seems tohave had in mind. His use of this very general term "delivered up" doesnot suggest that he had any knowledge about a supposedly historical arrest.

All four gospels mention Judas, and use the Pauline verb "deliver up"in connection with his activities, not the usual Greek verb for "betray".The evangelists, then, were reworking an older tradition derived, viaPaul, from the Old Testament. Mark (or his source) was clearly inter-preting a tradition which had not specified when, or by whom, or towhom Jesus was delivered up, so as to make it mean Judas' handing overof Jesus to the Jewish authorities on the night of the passover. And notonly the Psalms to which Cheyne referred, but also other Old Testament

4

passalguided me plucess of reinterpretation. The Bishop of Gothenburghas doted that a number of traits in the Judas tradition are paralleled inrabbinic sayings about Ahithophel, and that these similarities show thatChristian thinking about Judas "fits well into the 'betrayer categories'which the Jews took from the Old Testament scriptures". The theologianProfessor Enslin thinks that even the name Judas, and his position as oneof the twelve, selling his master for money, is "scarcely accidental, butwould seem a clear reflection of the act of the earlier Judah (in Greek'Ioudas'), one of the twelve brothers, urging the selling of Joseph to thelshmaelites for twenty pieces of silver". (Matthew specifies "thirty pieces"because he has another "prophecy"—from Zechariah—in mind).

"Iscariot" could have any one of half a dozen meanings, and onesuggestion is that it represents the Aramaic word for "deceit", "false-hood": in which case Judas would be named "the false one". Todaythere is some vogue for the view that Iscariot is a Semitic transliterationof the Latin sicarius, "dagger-man". This is taken either as evidence thatJesus was a political rebel (because he had a "gunman" in his retinue),or that he was a pacifist, and that Judas betrayed him for repudiatingviolent revolution. It all goes to show that we know next to nothing abouta historical Jesus! On this question of dagger-men, Josephus mentionsmany "sicarioi" or "lestai" (bandits) who were active in the first centuryAD. Resistance to the Romans was, until the outbreak of actual warin AD 66, guerilla action, and would naturally be designated banditryby the disapproving Josephus. Now Mark and Matthew's lists of thetwelve disciples include not only Judas Iscariot but also one "Simon theCananaean". In Luke the term is translated correctly into its Greekequivalent (zelotes) as "Simon called the zealot" (to distinguish him fromSimon called Peter). He is never mentioned again, and there is no sug-gestion that he acted as a zealot, in the sense of a rebel against Rome,after joining Jesus. The late Professor Brandon and others have, however,insisted that, if one of the twelve was a zealot, Jesus himself could nothave been without zealot sympathies. More orthodox Christian scholarshave retorted that it is fantastic to make a disciple of whom no deedor word has been recorded, the basis of such an inference. Furthermore,one of the twelve is said to have been a tax-collector (Mt. 10: 3), "many"of whom—according to Mark and Matthew—were included in Jesus'following. Greater enemies than zealots and tax-collectors cannot beimagined, and the idea may have been to suggest that Jesus stood abovesuch divisions, not that he sympathized with any one faction.

Money MattersLet us now study the place of Judas in the gospel passion narratives.

We learn from Mk. 14: 10-11 that Judas "went away unto the Chiefpriests, that he might deliver him unto them. And they, when they heardit, were glad, and promised to give him money". In Matthew the "money"is further interpreted—from Zechariah 11: 12—as a specific sum. Markdoes not say that Judas' motive was financial, but Matthew, in an attemptto make his behaviour more intelligible, makes the traitor ask the priests:"What will you give me if I deliver him to you?" He receives a sumwhich, commentators agree, is ridiculously low—the equivalent of a fewpounds sterling. The only other text which represents Judas as greedyfor money is a verse in the fourth evangelist's version of the anointingat Bethany, where Judas hypocritically complains about the waste ofointment. He wanted it sold, ostensibly for the benefit of the poor, but infact—as treasurer of the group—in order to pocket the proceeds. (Howmany people today believe, uncritically, that Judas was the treasurer ofthe twelve, when in fact this trait in the story is represented only in a

5

late and degraded tradition in the latest of thc four gospels! rii/Luke seems to have despaired of finding any human motive which would ex-

plain Judas' treachery, and simply affirms that "Satan entered into him".At the Last Supper Jesus tells the twelve that "one of you shall betray

me, even he that eateth with me" (Mk. 14: 17). He adds that the betrayerwill be "one of the twelve". Commentators concede that he would hardlyhave said this, but rather "one of you". He also adds that his betrayermust needs betray him, in order that the Scriptures he fulfilled, and yetmust needs be frightfully punished for his betrayal. Not, ethically, verypleasing. The whole wording shows that the evangelist had Psalm 41: 9in mind; that is, it had been inferred from the Old Testament that Jesuswould be betrayed by someone who shared table-fellowship with him,and on this basis a scene was constructed where he sits at table with hisclosest associates and prophesies the treachery.

Armed Entrance

At Mk. 14: 43 we learn that "Judas came, one of the twelve, and withhim a crowd with swords and clubs". Judas has already, only a littlebefore, been introduced as "one of the twelve", and the repetition of thephrase here suggests that this story of Jesus' arrest was originally anindependent unit of tradition which Mark has woven into his whole.This impression is confirmed when we find that no hint has been giventhat Judas left the party during or after the Last Supper. (Only thefourth gospel motivates his appearance now, at the head of an armedparty, by saying that he "went out" after Jesus had earlier identified himas the one who will "deliver" hint) The mob led by Judas has come, weare told, from "the chief priests and the scribes and the elders-. InMark's next chapter it is "the chief priests, with the elders and scribesand whole council" who deliberate about Jesus. These all-inclusive listsare anti-Semitic rather than historical, and reflect the early Christian desireto emphasize the wide Jewish responsibility for Jesus' death. Judas hadtold the mob that "the one I shall kiss is the man". But the narrative itselfgoes on to represent Jesus and his movements as well known, and there-fore Judas' role in helping the authorities to find and identify him assuperfluous For this reason Albert Schweitzer argued that Judas betrayedto the priests not Jesus' idcntity (which they knew already), but thesecret (known only to the twelve) that he claimed to be the Messiah;whereupon the priests were easily able to persuade the mob to regard himas a blasphemer and demand his execution. If Schweitzer were right, itwould not in fact have been necessary for Judas to accompany anyoneinto the presence of Jesus, or to kiss him. This confrontation impliesidentification of Jesus, not the passing on of some secret informationabout him. In any case, the "Messianic secret" is today known to be nopart of the biography of a real Jesus, but an artificial element introducedby Mark. And Schweitzer is also wrong to suppose that one who claimedto be the Messiah would necessarily be denounced as a blasphemer. BarCochba, who made the claim, had it accepted by Rabbi Aqiba, the great-est of the Pharisaic leaders of the time.

At Jesus' arrest, all the disciples "forsook him and fled". That hefaced death completely alone and deserted is a feature which Markreiterates and which guides his presentation of the passion material. Hemakes Jesus die in utter loneliness in order to show both the magnitudeof the burden he assumed, and his strength in bearing it alone. To thisend the evangelist represents him as, at the end, forsaken even by God;for the dying Jesus speaks from the cross (Mk. 15: 34) the opening wordsof Psalm 22, "My God, why hast thou forsaken me?" Mark's wholeaccount of Jesus' arrest may well be but an imaginative expansion of

6

the`crite idea that "they all forsook him and fled-, which was inspired byprophecy—Jesus says, as they flee, "let the scriptures be fulfilled"—and isalso important to Mark's Christology.

In Mark we hear no more of Judas. Matthew gives a supplementarylegend about his death, and Acts another legend about it (irreconcilablewith Matthew's). Non-canonical writers such as Papias add gruesomedetails to make his death more horrible. Matthew's account of Judas'death serves the anti-Semitic purpose which pervades his whole gospel.Judas is represented as at least penitent, and confesses to the chief priestsand the elders that he has "betrayed innocent blood"; to which theycallously reply: "What is that to us?." (Mt. 27:4).

The evangelists' failure to make Judas' behaviour plausible is to beexpected if the betrayal story is a legend. Earlier this century it was widelyso regarded, and to-day Professor Enslin sets aside both Judas' betrayaland Peter's denial of Jesus as "details added by Mark to make even morevivid the picture of the dreadful aloneness of Jesus, abandoned by all,even by his closest band, and of the bleak and unbroken despair whichthe act of Easter was so tremendously to reverse". It seems to be quitegenerally the case that, if a hero is superlatively great, then his supportersinvent a false friend who betrays him. So it is with King Arthur, withRoland, Seigfried, and many others. Mark's technique, then, so far fromcertificating his narrative as true, is almost universal as an effectivedevice to heighten the tragic injustice of the hero's death.

(Summary of a lecture given on May 5)

Further Memories of an OctogenarianBY

GEORGE DOWMAN

Pr HAS been suggested that I might write something more about members,speakers and events of the past. Although I received no complaints Iwould apologise for some grievous omissions in my last article. Therapeuticconsiderations were my chief concern at the time of writing.

When I first commenced my editorship of The Monthly Record I receivedinvaluable help from Louise Booker who was working in the office atConway Hall at the time. Later Hector Hawton came into the picture.Those who have known and admired his writing with its impeccable prose-style often decorated by occasional humourous quips will appreciate thevalue of his help to me. His later elevation to the editorship of TheHumanist deprived me of that help, but he had given me a good send-offespecially when I formed an advisory committee with him and S. K.Ratcliffe.

S.K. had often admired greatly the writing of Archibald Robertson. Thereis much I could say of Archibald who was something of an editor's dreamin that when he gave his Sunday morning addresses he would punctiliously

'bring his summary with him which would always be the correct lengthfor publication. He would always be available for an article if I was evershort of material and many times he provided paragraphs for the featuresigned Custos, a feature which lost much of its vitality after he and S.K.were no longer able to contribute. With the many rationalistic books hewrote, Archibald enjoyed a great reputation in the Movement. On the firstoccasion that Mrs Margaret Knight visited Conway Flall I greeted herin the vestibule just as Archibald was entering and so, of course, I intro-

7

duced them to each other. Mrs Knight's face immediately litArchibald Robertson? I've long wished to meet you". \Vhen he retiredmissed him sadly and expressed my regrets to him. His cheerful reply was,"I shall be back from time to time", but he never returned for we heardthe swish of Father Time's scythe alas all too soon.

There are many other speakers I must mention. One of the most colour-ful was Henry W. Nevinson who spoke with a dry almost parsonic utter-ance. On one occasion when he announced the subject of the next Sunday'saddress, "Morals in the modern novel," I imagine few of his audienceheard his dry comment, sotto voce, "I didn't know there were any". Onthat occasion I sang two Schubert songs and during the collection Nevinsonwalked across to me to say what a wonderful man Schubert was, com-posing over 600 songs apart from .many piano and large orchestral worksin his very short life. Journalists do get around especially if they arc war-correspondents. He told mc that Rupert Brooke asked him if he couldaccompany him on one of his missions but sadly, this was not possibleas his paper would not agree to paying the expense for two people."I wish I had been able to do so," said Nevinson, for I could have givenhim some tips in campaigning which later might have saved his life".

Psychological Problem

Another eminent speaker was Professor J. C. Flugel who at that timewas Britain's leading psychologist; he always drew a large audience. Iwas waiting in the vestibule one Sunday morning when Flugel came acrossand handed me a letter from The College of the Sea, asking if he wouldtake a class for psychology for men at sea who wished to employ theirspare time profitably. As he was too busy he asked me if I would takeit on? I expressed my regrets as I knew so little about psychology. As heappeared to be disappointed I told him that perhaps I could give someassistance in the matter of music and he said he was sure the Collegewould be most grateful and so I did this until I took over The Monthly

Record. I corresponded with some of the pupils. One of them told methat he had been on the battleship taking Churchill to sign the AtlanticTreaty and anothed correspondent was a Flight-Lieutenant in the FleetAir Arm who wished to know why he should prefer Mozart's Eine Keine

Nacht Musik to "pop"? I started him on a course of musical appreciationfor which he was very grateful.

Other friends I made were Sir Ernest Kennaway whom I enlisted tohelp in the cure of my first wife. He and Lady Kennaway were thekindest of people and he invited me to dinner at the Athenaen Club(I did not see any bishops present) but he introduced me to a doctor ofthe Chester Beatty Institute.

I visited S. K. Ratcliffe until the end of his long life. He was a friendof G.B.S., and after that remarkable man had his last accident I hada letter from S.K., "If Shaw should die you will want a piece from me—but he says he won't! Shaw told S.K. the story of the secretary of awoman's club asking if G.B.S. would send them a copy of The Intelligent

Woman's Guide to Socialism and Capitalism as her club was too poorto buy one. Shaw's reply was that if her club was so poor it shouldn't bein existence. This was written on one of his famous post-cards. Thewoman did as Shaw intended, she sold the post-card to buy the book.S.K. told him, "you know Mr Shaw I have several of your post-cards"."Sell 'em while the market's good," came the prompt reply.

Of other friends there are Hector Hawton whose literary career hasbeen widespread for apart from his work on The Humanist he haswritten "Thrillers" and books for boys, and Dr W. E. Swinton fromwhom I sometimes receive letters from Toronto. With the pen of a ready

8

writer Or Swinton demolishes the two thousand miles or so and 1 canalmtici hear his form of speech flowing so easily from his • typewriter.He has told me how the Canadian Government supplied expensive scien-tific equipment for the use of their scientists. The question is thereforeposed and answered—Why the brain drain? It is unfortunate there are somany other deserving causes in Britain needing financial help.

Let me relate two stories which I hope will be acceptable to a seriousjournal. Dr Swinton said he was amused by a letter he read in a Torontonewspaper from a reader who wrote he had been attending a UnitarianChurch for a whole year and only heard the name of Jesus Christ men-tioned once—when the caretaker fell down the stairs. He also told ofthe chimpanzee walking up and down his cage with a Bible under onearm and Darwin's Origin of Species under the other. He was mutteringto himself, "I wonder if the keeper really is my brother?" An intriguingquestion.

I should mention Professor G. W. Keeton, a charming man who-talkedwith me about his apple orchard and how he was on the committee ofhis local football club. Then again there was the late Professor T. H.Pear with whom I exchanged many a schoolboy "howler" on those dayswhen he came down to Conway Hall from Manchester University. Hewas an easy speaker to whom it was a joy to listen. Yet again there wasthe late William Kent, that fluent and intriguing writer on London whowhen I asked him for an article provided me with a series of six onThe Environs of Red Lion Square. He and I had in common a love ofcricket. Being an honorary member of the Surrey Cricket Club, heinvited me along to a match at Kennington Oval where we spent apleasant day together in the sun.

With the mention of members of long ago, I must recall the name ofWallis Mansford, the brother of Herbert Mansford, architect of ConwayHall. Wallis had leanings towards spiritualism which fitted ill with theviews held at Conway Hall. He gave talks on spirits with whom heclaimed to have association. I assisted him when he gave talks on Ten-nyson and Byron, illustrating his remarks with songs from the works ofthose poets. He filled the large hall to overflowing when he spoke ofOmar Khayyam, the author of The Rubdiyát, and a quartet of vocalistssang the music from In a Persian Garden. Walks had chosen some appro-priate scenery and dressed himself as old Omar, the occasion was bothpicturesque and harmonious. Wallis Was a very friendly man muchrespected by his fellow-members.

May I close with quotations from that perspicacious schoolboy wholikes to, and I suppose does, sum up the whole of theology, "Man createdGod in his own image," and "Faith is something people believe in whichthey know ain't true".

COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP LIST 1974/5 (Conveners shown in bold type)

General CommitteeMrs L. L. Booker (Chairman), Dr A. Lovecy (Vice-Chairman), Mr C. E.

Barralet, Mr J. D. Brown, Miss R. Bush, Mr P. Cadogan, Mr D. C. Camp-bell, Mr J. Stewart Cook, Mr L. J. Fischer, Mrs M. Fowler, Mr H. Hawton(retired under the Rules as a newly Appointed Lecturer), Mr G. Hutchin-son, Mr H. G. Knight, Mrs R. Lovecy. Miss I. Mills, Miss E. Palmer, MrV. S. Rose, Mr L. Ross, Mr G. N. Salmon, Mrs M. Sinha, Mr G. Swade.Mr J. T. Willmin, Mr E. Willoughby.

9

Executive Committee

Chairman, Vice-Chairman, Lettings Secretary, Hon Treasurer,'M-IonEditor, Hon Registrar.

Finance Committee

Mr W. Home (Chairman), Mr C. E. Barralet, Mrs L. L. Booker, Mr D.C. Campbell, Mr L. J. Fischer, Mr P. Cadogan, Miss 1. Mills, Dr A. Lovecy,Mrs R. Lovecy.

Lectures and Discussions CommitteeMr P. Cadogan, Miss E. Palmer, Mr E. Willoughby, Miss B. Smoker, Mr

R. Hall, Mrs M. Sinfia, Dr and Mrs Lovecy, Mrs M. Fowler, Miss V.Hassid, Mr J. Willmin, Mr V. Rose, Mr 1'. Lumsden.

Ethical Record—Editorial Board

Mr E. Willoughby, Mr J. D. Brown, Miss I Mills, Dr A. Lovecy, MrV. Rose.

Building Committee

Mr P. Cadogan, Mr W. Home„ Mr C. E. Barralet, Miss I. Mills, MrG. N. Salmon, Mr J. D. Brown, Mr G. Swade.

Decor and House CommitteeMiss I. Mills, Mr P. Cadogan, Mrs E. Washbrook, Mrs G. Salmon, MrsMales, Dr A. Lovecy, Mr V. Rose.

Social Committee

Miss R. Bush, Mrs T. Delius, Miss C. Davis, Mr J. Hargreaves,.Miss E.Palmer, Mrs M. Sinha, Mr J. D. Brown.

Library Committee

Dr A. Lovecy, Mrs T. Delius, Mr P. Cadogan, Miss E. Palmer, Mr C.Morey, Mr V. Rose, Miss McGill, Mrs M. Fowler, Mr D. R. Reidy.

Bookstall Committee

Miss E. Palmer, Mr J. Hargreaves, Miss I. Mills, Miss R. Bush, Mr P.Cadogan.

Sunday Morning Music Committee

Mr G. Hutchinson, Mr F. Hawkins, Miss J. Langley.

Concerts Committee

Mr G. Hutchinson, Mr F. Hawkins, Mr and Mrs C. E. Barralet, MrC. Brown, Miss V. Hassid, Mr and Mrs A. 0. Hooper, Mrs Hutchinson,Mr Goldesgeyme, Mr and Mrs L. Lince, Miss 0. Sowter, Mr .1. Brebner,Mrs I. Burall.

Hawkins Chamber Music Library

Mr Hawkins, Mr and Mrs L. Lince.

Clements Memorial Prize Committee

Mr C. E. Barralet, Mr F. Hawkins, Mr G. Hutchinson, Mr and MrsLince.

For the RecordBY

THE GENERAL SECRETARYLooking Back

One of our members who is as familiar with Paris as he is with Londonsays that there is much more stability, solidity and security in London but lifeis much more interesting in Paris. In Paris people have ideas, act on them.succeed or fail and generally engender a dynamic atmosphere. In London

10

(he savx) there is a general levelling of initiative, a blanketed atmosphere as

thougt invisible Big Brothers were gently putting the brakes on everywhere.

I think there may be something in this. T'he resistance to new ideas, the

continuing hold of old.dogmas and the reign of 'respectability' (in the badsuffocating sense) seems to be much as it has ever been despite 'the per-

missive society'. To those that hath shall be given .. . it remains like that.

It will need a series of traumatic experiences to wake us up properly.

That's why, looking back to June 15, it may be that Kevin Gately did not

die in Red Lion Square in vain. More people did more hard thinking over

him than over any battle casualty in war. In England we have a profound

antipathy to domestic violence and that is good; it led on this occasion to

endless heart searching.It just so happened that in the following two week-ends we had two

speaker-cancellations so we managed to have a Forum and a Sunday morning

meeting on the theory and practice of the freedom of speech and assembly.

The discussion was fast and furious and then the General Committee, with

the full documentation in front of it, went over the ground again. Ourstand on the freedom of assembly was grimly upheld but we unanimously

agreed that Conway Hall and Red Lion Square were never intended for,

and should not be used as, final rallying points for marches and mass demon-

strations. So we have added Clause 17 to our contracts and it reads: "Let-

tings are made on the condition that no march or demonstration on the

streets is held in connection therewith." Apart from that we stand where we

stood—for freedom.Fully documented evidence (covering Conway Hall's involvement) has

been provided for Lord Justice Scarman's public inquiry that opens on

September 2.

Looking Forward

At intervals throughout our past there have been times of such social

balance that ideas were able to count. Perhaps the first was the Golden Age

of the 1590s, after the Armada and in the days of Shakespeare and Bacon;

the next was in the 1640s, the decale of first principles of par excell-ence; the

third was long delayed, when between 1815 and 1867 the industrial revolu-

tion had shaken the social foundations of England to its roots and new

social alignments demanded recognition—the age of Bentham, Godwin, Mill,

Faraday, Stephenson, Darwin and a galaxy of greatness. In each of these

cases the old Establishment was under fire, no longer sure of itself and no

longer carrying conviction. I don't think it is wishful thinking to suggest

that the same condition is beginning to apply to today. Any time now ideas

could be important, at least as important as they were in the days of William

Johnson Fox at South Place (1817-1852). I am not going to go on about it—

the test is: Can we deliver? We have done it before, we can do it again.

A George Dowman Memorial

Throughout the Hall there are at least half-a-dozen memorials to old

members who did sterling work in the service of the Society. George Dow-

man certainly deserves one and we have an idea ... In a previous Ethical

Record I mentioned a proposal that we have wrought iron flower stands

in the Library. Bill and Evelyn Brown discovered where they can beobtained and suggested that, with a suitable inscription, they would make

a fine memorial to George. The idea has been welcomed and accepted in

Committee and Constance Dowman has approved it and made the firstcontribution. We need to raise £70. George made many friends over the

years and it should not be difficult to raise that amount of money. If you

would like to contribute will you do so and send the money to me (cheques

made out to the Society). Many thanks in advance.

Humanist FuneralsNFollowing some recent publicity in the Colour Supplement of The Observer

we have had over fifty letters about our funeral service, asking for copiesof it. I have written another document for the use of officiants so thatpeople conducting the ceremony for the first time will know exactly what todo. It is perfectly simple and straightforward but it is understandable thatsomeone doing it without any previous experience might feel a little unsureof himself, so it all helps. Consider the kind of need we have to meet, asindicated in this letter to the Society:

"Two years ago I lost my lifelong friend very suddenly and unexpectedly,from a heart attack. One month later her husband was killed on the road.In each case they were cremated and all we (their children and twosisters and myself) could think of to do was to go by the undertaker'scar to the crematorium, wait there in silence, and drive away after theseven minutes or so before the coffins, by the crematorium system, glidedout of sight.

Her husband was present at the first occasion, and did his best withthe undertaker to arrange it. It was unbelievably bleak, and I would havebeen glad of some form of service, but knew of no alternative between anunacceptable religious one, or else just nothing. The undertaker told usthat it was not unknown to them to have a cremation without a service,but that on these former occasions no one had attended the coffin. Myfriend's husband described this as "worse than a dog".

it is plain that even in elementary things we still have a long way to go.

The New SeasonWe begin again with the Annual Reunion on Sunday September 29 at

3 pm. Our Guest of Honour this year will be Dr Peter Draper and thetwo intervals of song will be well taken up by Harvey and Sylvia Kesselmanwith Joyce Langley at the piano. Rose. and her team will see that we get thetraditional good tea to follow and everybody is invited including membersand supporters of our kindred societies. The BHA, the RPA, the NSS andthe PL will also be represented on the platform. We look forward to seeingas many as possible of old faces and new on that first Sunday of the season.

The following Sunday, October 6, sees the start of the Sunday Meetingsand I shall write at length about the October programme in the OctoberRecord. PETER CADOGAN

HUMANIST FORUM

The FamilyWHAT is right and wrong with the family was Stan and Margaret Chisman'stheme.

Stan began with the various definitions of "the family": extendedparents, children, aunts, uncles, grandparents; one parent families; pidgeonpair; serial monogamy; polygamy (i.e. polyandry and polygyny); groupmarriage; communes; nuclear family in a suburban box. For the purpose ofthe forum he assumed that in England 1974 the last named (i.e. Mum, Dadand the kids) was what is most commonly meant by "the family".

Margaret then described three aspects of what can go wrong with thefamily. Firstly, the actual choice of partner is made on the basis of romanticlove. In other times and climes, marriages were arranged on the basis of the

12

The General Secretary's Report to the Annual General Meeting

A tradition is only alive when it is known about, talked about, applied,adapted and developed so that there is a conscious and continuing relation-ship between the past, present and future. South Place has the kind oftradition that will take the closest scrutiny and yield valuable guidance downthe years.

We certainly need that guidance today but we should be greatly mistakenif we took our tradition for granted and made no study of it. lt needs to beworked at.

Since the last war we in this country have been through any number ofparticular and limited revolutions—in computers and electronics, in com-munications generally, in printing, transport, the arts, packaged holidays.We have seen a new medicine, the advent of the Pill, Black Power, StudentPower, Women's Lib and the life-style revolution invented by the youngand taken up by the not-so-young! We witness a tolerance hitherto unheardof and the end of Mrs Grundy's Sunday.

We still, however, face problems that are so massive that they seeminsoluble. We have virtually full employment, the Welfare State and noapparent danger of any war in Europe—three conditions that taken togethermean the collapse of old rules that were designed for circumstances andsocial structures that are now departed, irrelevant or residual. England istrying to live in 1974 with a social structure that belongs to 1874 and itcan't be done.

With so much change behind us there are two great fields of change ahead—the first is religious and the second is constitutional.

The religious revolution rises like a tidal wave. It began, in its currentphase, in the 'sixties with Zen Buddhism and moved on to yoga. 400,000people in this country are now reported to be practising transcendentalmeditation. There are innumerable charismatic imports from the US andthe Orient, the use of drugs for mystical purposes, black magic, witchcraft,faith in UFOs, Pentecostalism (speaking in tongues) and a vast increase ininterest in astrology. Churches that try to stick to their old ways are splitand destroying themselves. The religious revolution either remakes oreliminates established forms of religion. At our last Sunday Meeting DrJohn Lewis spoke to a welhfilled Library, 56 members and friends werehere, but at the same time our Large Hall was filled with over 500 youngpeople who had paid £2 a head to hear the latest guru from India. Therewas standing room only.

There are those, not in this Society, whose wishful thinking disinclinesthem to face this kind of situation--they still want to fight the battles of 50years ago. But no one is listening any more.

At South Place we did our share of religious pioneering a century ago.The Society was committed to the Christian ethic of human brotherhoodand kept that commitment when, at Noncure Conway's instigation, thedecision to abandon prayer was taken in 1869. Hymns were retained until1961.

What then of God? Conway used to recall Fox's keynote address of1842 as exemplifying the attitude of the Society. Fox said: "What is Deity?What is deity but the loftiest conception of each mind. As high as eachsoul can get in its nature of the true, the wise, the good, the powerful—thatto each is God." And he went on to speak of the Society "carrying on inthe one great work of knowing and realising more and more of the True,the Good, the Beautiful, the Spiritual and Enduring."

The language may seem old-fashioned to some but its intuitive perceptionand its lasting quality are unmistakeable. From these foundations we proceed

15

with our free enquiry in the name of religious and political liberty.oplemake religions and religions make and destroy people. They are made outof our deepest needs and aspirations and not by bread alone. It is ourconcern to enquire and discriminate, to bring cool reasonableness to uponour own feelings that we may be a joint and just product of both.

The new religious revolution is an exciting phenomenon and we shouldbe glad to be in amongst it. We are, indeed, mostly deeply involved. TheAttorney General's office, no less, has officially questioned our integrity inrelation to our 1825 Trust Deed, i.e. to our title to our own property. Foryears we have gone over this ground to avoid trouble that was not of ourown making but since the authorities maintain that since there is noprecedent for our position (and this concerns our charity, status as well).only the High Court can decide the issue. Our lawyers have told us that wecan hope for a decision this summer. Mr Peter Oliver, QC, has beenappointed as Leading Counsel and he will be supported by Mr OwenSwingland.

Religious Horizons

Religion is the field of our sense of mystery, of personal relationships, ofbelonging and of caring. It is the matter of our way of life and of ourenquiry into it. It links in all directions with the social, with questions offreedom, justice and peace and the forms, rather than the programmes,through which we work. These forms are collapsing all round us. Inflationnot only gets worse but the rate of inflation itself inflates—I0 per cent lastyear. 15 per cent this year and who is to say what it will be next year?

We live through political disenchantment, chaos in Northern Ireland anda resolute country-wide determination to pretend that this is not all happen-

ing. The English sickness centres on the way we use the English language asa means of self-deception. Problems are -solved" by giving them new names,announcing paper plans and declaring good intentions while below thesurface things get steadily worse. This is the constitutional question on whichwe don't have any official South Place view. I simply give it as my opinionthat we face a situation without precedent since 1648 and that we shall needto invent new relationships and institutions at every level, including thehighest, in order to meet the impending challenge of financial and constitu-tional collapse.

The very first thing to do is, however, well within our power and weexercise it freely. We can and do at our meetings ask the most exacting

, questions in the plainest English. This is a great service to new thinking andmany of our lecturers acknowledge it. Secondly we can identify problemsand, as all science and scholarship is witness, that is half the battle.

Plain speaking without rudeness, fierce argument within friendship, respectfor truth married to respect for persons, stringent criticism in the context ofopenness and trust—these are great ingredients.

And finally there is vision. . . . South Place was always built on vision.Those who built the chapel in 1824 and who built Conway Hall in 1928/9believed that they had something to say and something to do—and theytook risks accordingly. We can do no less.

Conway Hall is ours. The freedom of speech and association that itpossible for us and for others in London is in part our achievement. OurSociety is small but it is based on fnstant accountability. We have nohierarchical structure. We have a tradition, a flexibility and an opportunitysecond to none.

When it comes to inventing the future it is qualities not quantities thatcount. We are not doing so badly. We can always, within our range, aspireto do better.

PETER CADOGAN 29th May, 1974

16

CONWAY DISCUSSION

A New Look at Class

WYNFORD 1-licKs raised the question as to whether it was now timelyand possible to clarify the appalling confusion that ranged over an extra-ordinarily complex subject of class. If we take an expression like "classconsciousness", for instance, it can mean quite different things. Perjora-tively it can mean a chip-on-the-shoulder and politically it can be usedin relation to the understanding of power relationships.

Mr Flicks argued that we are still not very far advanced in our consciousunderstanding of the problem. There is, for instance, a straightforwarddistinction between the economic and social meaning of class; thus econom-ically, a docker who wins the pools, changes place with the public school-boy living on national assistance. An economic class position can changemore quickly than a social position.

The expression "upper-class" used to mean, and perhaps still does, fit;aristocracy, but the expression is not much used these days as the upper-classes tend to scale themselves down to the middle-class. Then againthe expression "working class" has a different meaning to "lower-class".Surveys show that people who agree being called the first emphaticallyrefuse the second. Thus it seems that the expressions "upper" and "lower"are tending to get left out as social divisions narrow, or are thought todo so.

The Marxist case that the creation of an industrial proletariat by theindustrial revolution makes the case for Socialism possible has to facethe response that the mass of the population had never governed, noteven in Russia in 1917. In fact the social agency that seems to have thegreatest sense of internal coherence is the peasantry. The peasants, byvirtue of the collective tradition of the villages, can introduce new formsof collectives that actually work.

And so it was in China, Africa and elsewhere, that peasants, not indus-trial workers were the spearhead of the revolution. In fact, the historyof revolution so far, has -been the history of peasant rebellions, somesuccessful, some not. All of which seems to show that the Marxist theoryabout the historical role of the working-class was indequate, if not mis-taken. Faced with this problem Marxist historians became a-historical.The "working-class" ceases to be actually people and becomes an abstrac-tion to replace the old belief in the kingdom of heaven.

The trouble with this kind of thing is that under the influence ofslogans and categories people cease to think about the realities involved.The "working-class" ceases to be human beings and becomes a myth.Furthermore, "workerism" can corrupt left-wing politics. Some peopleunder its influence, instead of arguing about the abolition of the wagessystem (the original socialist idea) put the case for its extension and Mrgethat housewives be paid wages. The current myth involves the assumptionthat the "working-class" is unionised, strong, male and white. At a recentconference of militant socialists a resolution was proposed putting downthe white-collar unions, but the people who supported it, teachers, journ-alists, students, etc., were themselves white-collar workers. They caughtthemselves in their own trap. Their adulation of manual work had ledthem to believe that a docker or car worker is a worker properly so-called; a teacher or bank clerk, is not.

This, today, is a pathetically inadequate position in view of the spreadof service industries and while-collar organisation. Teachers, bank clerks,hospital workers, civil servants, local government employees and others

17

have recently come out on strike. When they do so we arc recpYil tothink. Wc arc accustomed to the idea of miners and dockers strikffig assomething we can instantly accommodate in our way of looking at theworld, but this is now changing. Furthermore, although there are tenmillion people organised in trade unions, there are also ten million peoplewith mortgages, so that mass considerations now apply as much to thealleged middle-class as they do the alleged working-class.

Traditionally, industrial workers have been put down, but this is notthe case today. For generations living standards amongst the working-classes have been increasing, but there are grounds for supposing thatthe last budget made the end of that process of increase. We can nolonger look forward to a series of pay-offs leaving basic inequalities wherethey were. The cost of raw materials, oil in particular, has changed thepicture.

The white-collar workers are now in the position that the old blue-coat workers were in and the factors making for solidarity between themare gaining ground. In the old days of the Empire it was possible to havethe notion of being a nation "together under the flag", but this is nolonger possible. There is a vacuum which needs to be filled, taking intoaccount all the recent changes in our basic social structure.

Class remains the key to social change. Who holds economic power?Who governs us? These are fundamental questions. To answer themeffectively we need to look again and much more closely at our changedsocial realities. P.C.

(Summary of a talk on April 16)

BOOK REVIEW

The Jesus Hoax by Phyllis Graham. (Leslie Frewin, £3.95).

PHYLLIS GRAHAM was bfought up in a non-conformist home, but at theage of 16 she fell under the spell of Roman Catholicism. I can understandhow she felt because exactly the same thing happened to me. I might verywell have become a Jesuit if circumstances had been different. MissGraham, unhappily, was not prevented from becoming a Carmelite nun.This meant the sacrifice of some of the best years of her life and the losshas embittered her. "A cruel hoax has been perpetrated on the simple, thetrusting and the innocent. An organised parody of worship has been per-

- formed at an empty shrine" she writes.She now believes that either Jesus did not exist or that he is "possibly

a composite figure, a patchwork of personalities with nothing whatever toauthenticate the resulting identikit". The former means that the ChristianChurch is built on a gigantic fraud. All the physical and mental sufferingfor which this illusion has been responsible throughout the ages has beenfor nothing. Her reaction was partly anger and resentment at having beenfooled, and partly a sense of liberation. "The myth theory has its guerdonof mental and spiritual release and is the one I have, perforce, to prefer".

To decondition herself after such heavy indoctrination was difficult andpainful. "The Jesus image played too big a part in too long a period ofmy life," she writes. "To borrow from a popular lyric, I am not ready tosing light-heartedly: 'I'm gonna wash that man right out of my hair'. I

18

fervt4My wish that I could. Perhaps the completion of this book will seeme rkarer to the possibility".

So she really had to write the book in its present form as a kind oftherapy. To complain that it is rambling and that far too much space isgiven to reasons with which all her rationalist readers will be familiar forrejecting the dogmas of the Church is beside the point. It would have beenmore generally interesting if she had given us more details of life in anenclosed order.

The vast majority of monks and nuns can move freely about the worldand work as teachers, nurses, missionaries, etc. The Carmelites arc con-templatives. Their whole lives are spent in prayer, not good works. Theyare so austere that the wedding ring is dispensed with in the siinulatedmarriage to Christ on entering the order. The sight of the altar, with itscandles and flowers, is also denied except during mass, and the nuns remainbehind a double grille with a black gauze veil. There are no chairs, thereis much squatting, kneeling and total prostration. Course clothing, strawmattresses, self-flagellation are also means of mortifying the flesh.

Only a very special type of introvert can succeed as a professional mystic.Miss Graham might have fared better if she had become a Benedictine,as she admits, though I think she is mistaken in supposing that accessto books on science would necessarily lead to scepticism. Some top scientistshave been, and still are, devout Catholics.

I am not qualified to judge her verdict on the historicity of Jesus orher view that the Judas of Galilee mentioned by Josephus as a rebel againstRome in AD 6 is identical with Judas Iscariot. But she puts her fingersunerringly on the one doctrine which makes possible the submission toauthority—even if delayed until the deathbed—which puzzles outsiders.Without the fear of hell there would be no need of the confessional andthe ecclesiastical machine would run out of steam. We all know whathappened when an American baptist sect gave up the belief in hell and in1793 founded in London what became the South Place Ethical Society: Acautionary tale!

HECTOR 1IAWTON

Your ViewpointFreedom of Speech

As one who has been associated with the SPES for many many years,it seems obvious to me that if Peter Cadogan, as General Secretary,writes officially on behalf of the organisation, I have no option but toresign. Moreover since the Conway Hall is regarded as the HumanistCentre, unless his statement on Freedom of Speech is officially repudiateda cleavage of some sort is inevitable. The very fact that I write in thisway, after having been approached—and reproached—by many peoplefor a clear expression of where the SPES stands, is itself -all the evidence •needed that these institutions do not exist in a social vacuum—like themeaning of the words "Freedom of Speech". But there appear to beindividuals so blind to this elementary fact that they cannot grasp thesimple consequence that some topics are so highly emotional and inflam-matory that Freedom of Speech, in certain circumstances, may arousedeep passions, involve serious destruction of property, and loss of life.In fact it can be seen to lead to the destruction of Freedom of Speechitself. To Peter Cadogan "it is pointless and irrelevant to compare the

19

England of today with the Germany and the Russia of the tlff3kfies".Ireland does not appear apparently in his historical map. I am still alive,but all my aunts, uncles, and cousins, who lived in that highly culturedGermany of the 1930's and 1940's were reduced to ashes during theNazi period. "If some people have had any vicious notions, as is some-times the case"—in whose judgment, pray—"they put themselvesevidently in the wrong, when they make them public . . .". If I remaina member of the SPES and of the BHA have I to accept the view thatRacism is a mere Battle of Words, and never moves as far as IncineratingChambers or Concentration Camps, or Gelignite Bombs? Was is nottouch-and-go that Conway Hall still stands where it did? Petcr Cadoganis not inclined to draw lessons from history, even the history of RedLion Square and Belfast, but he has no hesitation in making the historicalprediction "freedom of speech will continue at Conway Hall, and thosewho make or threaten any assault upon it will, in so doing, forfeit theirown right to meet here for such a period as we shall determine". Un-fortunately Peter Cadogan is not in control of the Universe, and thereare many rights which are disappearing before his eyes. Those who cannotafford to pay the fee for the hire of a hall at Conway Hall have alreadylost their right of Free Speech from that platform. Isn't it about time thatthe SPES carried through the elementary task of asking themselves—what arc the Social Limitations of Freedom of Speech? Content of thespeeches? Advocacy of Racism? What is unrestricted freedom but anarchy?Is this what the SPES stands for? What were the two sides battling aboutin Red Lion Square? Is the role of the SPES merely to provide a battle-ground? It. is useless to answer yes, in words, and then complain if itbecomes a real battle and not merely a verbal one, for you are dealingwith real people who hold their views with conviction. Peter Cadogaffsattitude assumes the real existence of an imaginary tightrope along whichhe can walk without being committed to anything. In a world of steeplyrising inflation where the search for scapegoats and blame is regardedas a substitute for scientific analysis, that tightrope is likely to snapultimately under the strain. Why the marshalling of forces in Red LionSquare? Peter Cadogan must know, so must the SPES, and possibly alsothe BHA. If they don't, then they were playing with fire. To blame it on"vicious and bad notions" is childish nonsense.

PROF HYMAN LEVYLondon, 5W19

The General Secretary replies:

It is quite true that the freedom of speech and assembly in this countrydoes not exist in a vacuum. It exists in the context of our successfulstruggle for it over a period of 400 years. Freedom and tyranny elsewhereneed, likewise, to be related to the traditions and conditions that obtainin those places. It would be absurd to renege on our own achievementbecause other people failed to make it—and vice-versa.

What is at issue is not what "Peter Cadogan" thinks but what SouthPlace stands for, has stood for for nearly two hundred years and todayhow its General Committee interprets that position and mandates itsexecutive officers.

In the recent troubles I had a mandate, operated it and enjoyed thecontinuing support of the General Committee. That Committee has sincetaken a further decision, now a contractual obligation, that meetingsin the Hall shall not be preceded by marches because the Hall and theSquare are not designed to accommodate demonstrations. This idea origin-ated with Mr Stewart Cook and was unanimously agreed by the GeneralCommittee. It is now the responsibility of Iris Mills and myself to see

20

that16s carried out. It is very important that people should understandthat oath Place activity is very much an exercise in team-work.

We are not in control of the Universe but we are very much in controlof Conway Hall and that control we shall exercise without fear or favour.As a Society we make our own platform available, gratis, to every pointof view except those of evangelical religion and party politics and eventhose who take rooms at Conway Hall at rates that result in our making amodest annual loss. As a non-profit Society what more can we do? Ourservices are widely appreciated and much used.

The social limitations on the freedom of speech are those of slander,incitement, defamation and obscenity and these are the responsibility ofthe law. Freedom of action is another matter; here the issue is freedomof assembly. We respect the law and accept it but we do not presume tobe the law. Every hirer of rooms signs a contract specifying seventeenconditions and those constitute our own domestic rules. Anyone whoaccepts them and observes them is welcome to Conway Hall.

What the two sides were battling about in Red Lion Square wassomething outside our control. Again, in Professor Levy's own words, weare not "in control of the Universe". Both sides were also inside the Hallwhere they made no contact with each other and where there was notrouble. That much we were able to make sure of.

We are very much committed. We are committed to the rightness ofthe freedom of speech and assembly. This is the ethical position, deeperthan politics. To regard that freedom as a mere tightrope "likely to snap"is to disregard and dismiss the signal achievement of centuries of struggleby people like ourselves.

We know all too well that tyranny can proceed as much from the Leftas it can from the Right. We are against tyranny from any quarter.

P.C.Religious Belief

1 rejected religion in 1937 but am still deeply interested in the origin ofthe universe and of Life.

Documentary evidence for the existence of any of the prophets seems tome irrelevant to Humanism because, oven if a skeleton were to be foundwearing the remains of a seamless garment which had J.C. in Cash's tapestitched firmly to the neckband, that evidence would prove nothing about thegenerative power commonly referred to as God.

DORA I. BENTLEYSt Albans, Herts.

THE SOCIAL SIDE OF SOUTH PLACE

THEANNUAL

REUNION

Sunday, September 29, 3 p.m. Guest of Honour: Dr. Peter Draper

Informal tea

21

South Place NewsNew Members

We are pleased to welcome the following new members: Mr and MrsJ. Yeomans, E4; Mr P. Truran, Newport, Mon.; Miss J. Hare, Newport,Mon.; Mrs M. Riley, SE21; Mr R. Robinson, Kent; Miss C. Periton, Kent;Mr M. Segal, WC1; Mr T. Stillingfleet, SW12; Miss J. Stanger, SW12 andMr D. Porter, Southampton.

ObituaryIt is with deep sorrow that we report the death in July of George Dow-

man, who gave a lifetime of service to South Place.For more than 50 years George was a stalwart of the Society, serving in

many roles. The tributes from his very many friends are too numerous topublish here, but Mrs Constance Dowman, to whom our sympathy isextended, has kindly provided the following text. The words were those ofHector Hawton, who conducted George's funeral.

"George Dowman could look back on a life of rich and varied interests.The love of music predominated but his literary interests ran a close second.At the age of eight he became a pupil at the London College for Choristers.He continued to sing in church choirs until 1920 when he was invited to jointhe vocal quartet at South Place Ethical Society. Then began a fruitfulassociation which continued for fifty-four years. For some years he editedthe Society's journal, The Monthly Record. He contributed occasionalarticles to it, and also to the house journal of I. and R. Morley, the textilesfirm by which he was employed for the greater part of his career.

I couldn't help feeling that both by talent and temperament he was morenaturally suited to the world of the arts than to commerce. In addition tothe concert platform he took part in amateur dramatics, mainly Gilbert andSullivan operas of which he was an enthusiastic follower.

The urge to write—the strange necessity, as it has been called—was easierto satisfy after his retirement from a full-time job in 1963. He had completedthree novels and was engaged on a fourth right up to the time of his death.

If a happy marriage far outweighs most of the more lauded forms ofsuccess, George was fortunate indeed. In 1931 he married Kathleen EthelMill and their son Patrick was born in 1932. Ethel contracted cancer anddied in March 1952. It was a devastating blow, but George, fortunately, hada natural resilience. In November 1954 he married Connie Kerr and theyhave both been able to enjoy nearly twenty years of unalloyed happiness.

I have known George for some twenty-five years and I admired him andvalued his friendship. I think all of us who came in touch with him wereimmediately aware of the warmth of his personality; above all, his infect-ious sense of humour. He had a rare gift of making you feel at ease—andno exasperation, no gloom could wholly survive that cheerful courage whichhad known suffering and disappointment as well as fulfillment, and refusedto be daunted.

He knew what it meant to love and be loved. In order to be loved youhave to be lovable; and all his friends, and those who were closer to himthan friendship, can testify that George was a very lovable man".

George's many friends are invited to send a short tribute for publicationin next month's Record.

Shortly before his death George supplied the manuscript of the articlepublished in this issue.

RamblesSaturday, September 7. Meet at 2.15 pm at Richmond Station (for July

ramble cancelled through rain). Walk through Richmond Park to Tedding-

tolleapprox. 4 miles). After tea return by towing path to Richmond.Leaner Mrs L. L. Booker. (Tel. 743-3988).

Saturday, September 21. Walk around Chalfont St. Giles, visit Milton'scottage etc. Catch 10.22 train from Marylebone. Full details from JohnBrown, telephone: 01-484 4811.

Kindred OrganisationsHumanist Holidays is arranging a weekend in Brighton, October 18-20.

The venue will be a small hotel, and during the weekend Bill McIlroy willlead a visit to Lewes, where Thomas Paine lived. The cost of the hotel is£7 a day, bed, breakfast and one main meal. No more single rooms. Furtherdetails Mrs M. Mopham, 29 Fairview Road, Sutton, Surrey, tel (01) 6428796. Bookings will soon be taken for Easter next in Cheltenham, andAugust fortnight in Isle of Man.

The annual conference of the Rationalist Press Association takes placeSeptember 13-15, at St Peter's College, Oxford. The subject of this, the 75anniversary conference, is New Women in a New Society. Speakers includeEva Figes and Barbara Smoker. Maximum cost £11. -

The RPA is holding a weekend conference on The Problem of ChristianOrigin, with lectures by Prof G. A. Wells. The conference will take placeNovember 8-10 at The Hill Residential Centre, Abergavenny. Full detailsfrom RPA, tel (01) 226 7251.

The British Humanist Association has published a booklet The Right toDie. The booklet, written by Charles Wilshaw, sets out the case for legalisingvoluntary euthanasia. Most common objections are answered, and manypractical considerations are dealt with. The booklet costs 25p.

The annual excursion of the National Secular Society will take place onSunday, September 8. The tour will include stops at Sunhill Place, Pembury,to see the latest Humanist Housing project, Tunbridge Wells, SmallhythePlace and Sissinghurst Castle. Fare (including packed lunch) £2.40. (NationalTrust members f2). Further details from Bill McIlroy, NSS, tel (01) 2721266. Copies of the 1974 NSS annual report are now available.

CURRENT SPES PUBLICATIONS

THE SECULAR RESPONMBILITYMarghanita Laski 10p.

THE ALTERNATIVE SOCIETYJames Hemming lop.

THE BREAKDOWN OF GREAT BRITAINLeopold Kohr lOp.

MAN AND THE SHADOWLaurens van der Post 10p.

WHAT ARE EUROPEANS?G. K. Young, CB, CMG, MBE 10p.

THE OR !GINS OF CHRISTIANITY FROM PAGANAND JEWISH BACKGROUNDS G. A. Wells 20p.HUMANITY AND AN1MALITY

Edmund Leach 10p.

3-1-p postage for one — 7p for two or more

23

South Place Ethical Society itFOUNDED in 1793, the Society is a progressive movement which today advocates anethical humanism, the study and dissemination of ethical principles based onhumanism, and the cultivation of a rational religious sentiment free from alltheological dogma.

We invite to membership all thosc who reject supernatural creeds and findthemselves in sympathy with our views.

At Conway Hall there are opportunities for participation in many kinds ofcultural activities, including discussions, lectures, concerts, dances, rambles andsocials. A comprehensive reference and lending library is available, and allMembers and Associates receive the Society's journal, The Ethical Record, free.The Sunday Evening Chamber Music Concerts founded in 1887 have achievedinternational renown.

Services available to members include Naming Ceremony of Welcome toChildren, the Solemnisation of Marriage, and Memorial and Funeral Services.

The Story of South Place, by S, K. Ratcliffe, is a history of the Society and itsinteresting development within liberal thought.

Minimum subscriptions are: Members. El p.a.; Life Members, .E21 (Lifemembership is available only to members of at least one year's standing). It isof help to the Society's officers if members pay their subscriptions by Bankers'Order, and it is of further financial benefit to the Society if Deeds of Covenantare entered into. Members are urged to pay more than the minimum subscriptionwhenever possible, as the present amount is not sufficient to cover the cost ofthis journal.

A suitable form of bequest for those wishing to benefit the Society by theirwills is to be found in the Annual Report.

MEMBERSHIP APPLICATION FORM

To THE HON. REGISTRAR, SOUTH PLACE ETHICAL SOCIETY,CONWAY HALL HUMANIST CENTRE, RED LION SQUARE, LONDON, WC1R 4RL

Being in sympathy with the aims of South Place Ethical Society, I desire tobecome a Member and I enclose as my annual subscription the sum of

(minimum El) entitling me (according to the Rules of the Society)to membership for one year from the date of enrolement.

NAME(BLOCK LETTERS PLEASE)

ADDRESS

OCCUPATION (disclosure optional)

How DID You HEAR OF THE SOCIETY?

DAM SIGNATURE

The Ethical Record is posted free to members. The annual charge to subscribersis El. Matter for publication should reach the Editor, Eric Willoughby,46 Springfield Road, London E17 8DD, by the 5th of the preceding month.

rgiff David Neil & Co Dorking Surrey