Travers reorders a City church 

December 19th, 1924. 

THE Church of St. Magnus-the-Martyr by London Bridge was reopened on Monday afternoon in the presence of the Bishop of London and a company of priests and lay folk which thronged every corner of the building. . . . As the Bishop said in his sermon, the alterations accord in every particular with the faculty issued by the Chancellor. But to say that, and merely to enumerate the gifts with which the church is enriched and to give a bare summary of the alterations, is to give no hint of the extraordinary skill shown by Mr. Martin Travers, who has been generally responsible, in adapting old material to new uses and in adding to the existing features of a typical City church in such a way as to to make it rank with the most notable Catholic churches in London in its fitness for the full beauty of Catholic worship and ceremonial. . . Most striking of all the changes . . . are those of the sanctuary, which has been enlarged by bringing forward the old Sussex wrought-iron rails and providing ample space for the full ceremonies of the Mass. A golden altar has six tall candlesticks and a great cross of mother-of-pearl brought from Bethlehem. The Lady altar, described throughout the legal proceedings as “the second holy table”, is in keeping with the rest of the woodwork of the church, and near it is a new aumbry. . .

Moscow whitewashed 

December 24th, 1924. 

THE preliminary report of the British Trade Union Delegation to Russia is an extremely .disconcerting document, although perhaps not altogether unexpected. Fantastic reports appeared in the Soviet Press while the delegates were in Russia in which Mr. Purcell, the leader of the delegation, is said to have described Bolshevist Russia as “the first bright jewel in the world’s working-class crown”, while Mr. Ben Tillett, another of the delegates, declared that it was “the hope of the world’s workers”. . .

It is remarkable that this Labour report should have been published within a few days of the denunciation of Communism and Socialism issued by the Pope. The whole Christian world will agree with everything that his Holiness says of the Government of Russia and of the plots of the Third International. We would, however, diffidently suggest that the Vatican does not sufficiently appreciate the wide difference that has hitherto existed between Socialists of the type of Mr. Ramsay MacDonald and the followers of Lenin. It may be that, as some of our friends have always insisted, the differences are accidental and temporary. But since we are convinced that certain radical changes in the structure of society are inevitable, we most earnestly hope that the moderate Socialists will be strong enough to maintain an uncompromising hostility to the forces of destruction and unbelief.