Spanish Practices

Peter Hitchens writes:

The amazing thing about Britain's slow-motion national suicide is that so many seemingly sensible people attack and damage their own homeland, without having a clue about what they are doing.

Here's an example. Last month, a group of 13-year-olds in a school in East Anglia were learning about the Spanish Armada, that pivotal moment in our island story.

Then they were handed a worksheet. I have a copy of it, if you don't believe me.

It was downloaded from a website called schoolhistory.co.uk which is widely used by teachers so the same thing has quite possibly been going on in a school near you.

"You are a Spanish sailor about to embark in the Spanish Armada," said the worksheet. "Draw an anti-English poster to show all the reasons why you are invading the country."

It also asked for a "spider diagram of at least four reasons why Spain was angry enough with England to want to invade".

The school head and the teacher involved (I shall not name them because I think they're clueless rather than anti-British) claim this stuff is in line with the National Curriculum.

They didn't see anything wrong with it.

Well, try substituting "Germany" for "Spain", "the Blitz" for "Armada", and "Luftwaffe airman" for "Spanish sailor" and you might get my drift.

Now, I have actually checked to see how Spanish children are taught the same subject, and I have established beyond doubt that they are not asked to draw an anti-Spanish poster.

Not so long ago, they were taught that Francis Drake, that hero of my youth, was a wicked pirate.

Good for the Spanish.

They at least understand that national history, taught to the young in schools, is the lore of the tribe, the basis of our identity and pride.

It is not a matter of seeing all sides of the argument or working out why other people might have wanted to occupy, plunder and enslave us, as if that wasn't pretty obvious.

But long ago, radical teachers in this country, led by a gentleman called E.H. Dance, began a campaign against what he called "drum and trumpet" history based on battles and national pride.

They succeeded. Almost all school history now is deliberately confusing.

Pupils are exposed to conflicting scraps of information, grandly called "sources", and asked to make up their own minds – which means they are robbed of pride in their nation, and left confused and vulnerable to the BBC's anti-British propaganda and the Leftist monopoly that runs the universities.

No wonder patriotism is disappearing.

Do you really know what your children learned in school last week?

It is worth pointing out that the Navy that defeated the Spanish Armada was not in fact commanded by El Drac, still the bogeyman used to frighten children to sleep in Spain and Latin America, but rather by Lord Howard of Effingham, a Catholic (though probably forgotten just because he was less colourful than Drake) as loyal to his Queen Elizabeth as I am to mine.

Even the early-twentieth-century Catholic Encyclopedia, pre-Conciliar and basically Irish-American, has this to say:

Among the many side-issues which meet the student of the history of the Armada, that of the cooperation or favor of the Pope, and of the Catholic party among the English, is naturally important for Catholics. There can be no doubt, then, that though the Spanish predominance was not at all desired for its own sake by the Catholics of England, France, and Germany, or of Rome, yet the widespread suffering and irritation caused by the religious wars Elizabeth fomented, and the indignation caused by her religious persecution, and the execution of Mary Stuart, caused Catholics everywhere to sympathize with Spain, and to regard the Armada as a crusade against the most dangerous enemy of the Faith.

Pope Sixtus V agreed to renew the excommunication of the queen, and to grant a large subsidy to the Armada, but, knowing the slowness of Spain, would give nothing till the expedition should actually land in England. In this way he was saved his million crowns, and spared the reproach of having taken futile proceedings against the heretic queen. This excommunication had of course been richly deserved, and there is extant a proclamation to justify it, which was to have been published in England if the invasion had been successful. It was signed by Cardinal Allen, and is entitled "An Admonition to the Nobility and Laity of England". It was intended to comprise all that could be said against the queen, and the indictment is therefore fuller and more forcible than any other put forward by the religious exiles, who were generally very reticent in their complaints. Allen also carefully consigned his publication to the fire, and we only know of it through one of Elizabeth's ubiquitous spies, who had previously stolen a copy.

There is no doubt that all the exiles for religion at that time shared Allen's sentiments, but not so the Catholics in England. They had always been the most conservative of English parties. The resentment they felt at being persecuted led them to blame the queen's ministers, but not to question her right to rule. To them the great power of Elizabeth was evident, the forces and intentions of Spain were unknown quantities. They might, should, and did resist until complete justification was set before them, and this was in fact never attempted. Much, for instance, as we know of the Catholic clergy then laboring in England, we cannot find that any of them used religion to advance the cause of the Armada. Protestant and Catholic contemporaries alike agree that the English Catholics were energetic in their preparations against it.

This being so, it was inevitable that the leaders of the Catholics abroad should lose influence, through having sided with Spain. On the other hand, as the pope and all among whom they lived had been of the same mind, it was evidently unjust to blame their want of political insight too harshly. It point of fact the change did not come until near the end of Elizabeth's reign, when, during the appeals against the archpriest, the old leaders, especially the Jesuit Father Robert Persons, were freely blamed for the Spanish alliance. The terms of the blame were exaggerated, but the reason for complaint cannot be denied.