a. Lehtonen steers a course towards England
The year 1946 did not begin positively for the CRE: the distribution of funds promised proved to be a troublesome task. The agreed payment of
£3500 to the Finnish Missionary Society’s account in London had still not been made. Lehtonen sent a telegram to the CRE enquiring about the delay in late February 1946. He received a prompt reply from Miss Eleanor Ire-dale, who had succeeded Mr Allen as General Secretary of the CRE. Iredale took the task immediately in hand and informed Lehtonen that she had already taken steps to pay the sum to the Finnish Missionary Society, the remaining £500 being held by the CRE until the Finnish Church wanted to spend it.1 Iredale struck the Finns as a positive and energetic General Secretary from the beginning.
It was clear that Iredale had a mind of her own, and was not afraid of using her initiative:
May I make a suggestion? I am most anxious that at least some part, and if possible a considerable part, of the gifts which are made by Sister Churches such as our own, should be used to strengthen the relations between the Churches of our country and the Churches of Europe. The kind of thing I have in mind is the facilitating of visits by the most outstandingly gifted members of the Church of either country to one another, with a view to enabling such visitors to get that knowledge of each other’s KA AL 42 Iredale to Lehtonen 21.2.1946.
problems, interests and concerns that would give them the respect for one another’s experience on which friendship is based.
This whole question is one which may have to be considered a little later when things are easier, but I am sure we would be wise in planning for it as soon as possible and keeping at least a part of the funds that are raised and given to different countries in reserve for use in enabling visits to be exchanged between our two countries for anything from six weeks to two months, or even three months, if able people can be spared for so long.
Iredale’s suggestion was bound to please Lehtonen; it should be noted that the idea of using CRE funds to support and strengthen relations between the Church of England and the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Finland originated from the General Secretary of CRE and not from the Archbishop himself.
Iredale asked Lehtonen only to write something about how the funds had helped the Finns to meet their needs to “stimulate the interest of the Church of this country in the Churches of Finland, for whom we are all concerned at this difficult time.”3 While sharing the generally gloomy as-sessment in England of the Finnish situation, Iredale’s position as leader of an ecumenical body is exemplified by her use of the plural form when speaking about churches in both countries. This is an indication of the bal-ance between bilateral Lutheran-Anglican and wider ecumenical co-opera-tion the CRE and its officials were bound to by the nature of their work.
Iredale’s suggestion for using CRE funds for ecclesiastical exchanges could hardly have arrived at a better time for Lehtonen, who was preparing for a trip to England in May 1946. He must have informed Iredale of this in his telegram, as she already knew of his impending visit and looked forward to meeting him.4 It seems that the two were in immediate agreement about how the limited CRE reconstruction funds might be used in Finland. The beginning of Iredale’s chairmanship must thus have energized Lehtonen to seek ever closer relations with the Church of England in particular and Brit-ish Christianity in general. His forthcoming visit would provide a perfect opportunity to do just that.
Lehtonen’s visit was organised by the British and Foreign Bible Societ-ies and was associated with the formation of the United Bible SocietSociet-ies, which the Finnish Bible Society had been invited to join. The Bible
Societ-KA AL 42 Iredale to Lehtonen 21.2.1946.
KA AL 42 Iredale to Lehtonen 21.2.1946.
KA AL 42 Iredale to Lehtonen 21.2.1945.
ies constituted another front on which Archbishop Lehtonen was work-ing to increase contact with the British churches.5 Some attempts had been made to coordinate the efforts of the British and Foreign Bibles Society’s (BFBS) Finnish branch and the Finnish Bible Society in 1934, but without success. The intention had been that the Finnish Church should take entire responsibility for the sale of the Scriptures in Finland. Surprisingly, this had been strongly advocated by the BFBS, who nevertheless wanted to ensure the independence of the Finnish Bible Society from the Finnish Home Mis-sion Society. According to the BFBS, the Finnish Bible Society had gradu-ally “lost all life and was content to maintain the quiet ‘status quo’, even allowing its control to pass into the hands of the Finnish Home Mission Society”.6 Evidently, the BFBS had no real confidence in the Finnish Home Mission Society’s handling of Bible distribution.
The situation had changed in the autumn of 1945, when Archbishop Lehtonen had invited the Secretary of the BFBS, the Rev. John R. Tem-ple, to visit Finland on the 133rd anniversary of the Finnish Bible Society.7 Lehtonen and Temple had produced a plan for future Bible work in Finland, according to which the Finnish Bible Society should become completely in-dependent from the (Finnish) Home Mission Society, form a Committee under which the work in Finland of the BFBS and its director Mr. Pime-noff should come, and enter into the fullest co-operation with other Bible Societies in encouraging the wider circulation of the Holy Scriptures within and without Finland. As part of the plan Lehtonen was to represent the Finnish Bible Society at the Conference of the Bible Societies in London in May 1946.8
While the united Bible work clearly coincided well with Lehtonen’s ecu-menical vision, there was more to his visit: it provided an opportunity for furthering relations with the Church of England. Thus, at the same time he hoped to organise a follow-up meeting of the 1930s discussions with the Church of England and wrote to the Archbishop of Canterbury Geoffrey Fisher with this suggestion in March 1946.9
The interview of the Rt Revd Samuel Lehtonen 11.5.2000; Ripatti 1990, 236-237.
CUL BSA BFBS D8/8/1 Finland. 1931-1948. Record of Policy and Main Events.
Ripatti 1990, 236-237.
CUL BSA BFBS D8/8/1 Finland. 1931-1948. Record of Policy and Main Events.
LPL CFR LR file 28 Lehtonen to Fisher 2.3.1946 copy.
Lehtonen began with various compliments. He had looked forward to coming to England for a long time, as he wanted to meet Fisher personally to thank him “for his kind interest in the Church of Finland, shown by the presence of the Bishop of Fulham as your representative at my installation to my present office, and by your valuable support to our Church in London during the last difficult years.”10 He also asked Fisher “to convey our thanks to all friends of the Church of Finland who in England have kept up friendly relations with us, so many of who are bishops and leading churchmen.”11
In this way, Lehtonen sought to bond with Fisher, with a clear aim in mind:
I would be grateful, if perhaps an opportunity would be found during my stay in London for discussion concerning the next steps to be taken in our relations in accordance with the Resolution passed by the Convocation of Canterbury on June th, (The Chronicle of the Convocation of Canterbury, pages , ; and the York Journal of Convocation January , pages 0, , and ). As far as I can see, a notable progress has taken place during the last eleven years, but there still remain points for further consideration. I wonder whether there could be an opportunity for me of meeting some of the members of the Joint Committee on our mutual relations. These were Bishop Headlam, the Bishop of Derby and the Bishop of Fulham, the Dean of St. Paul’s, Dr. Matthews, the Dean of Chichester, Dr. Duncan-Jones, Professor Raven, and Dr. C.B. Moss. Of course, I would also like to meet the Rev. Waddams who so kindly visited me in Finland . If you have no objection to my suggestion, I would later on send you further details.
Lehtonen knew exactly what he wanted: a meeting that would take on the work of the negotiations of the 1930s. His specific reference to the resolu-tions of the Convocaresolu-tions of Canterbury and york reveal that he did not expect Fisher to know the actual state of relations, and wanted to get him on the right track from the start.
Fisher accepted the proposal and assigned Waddams to prepare for the meeting. Following his orders Waddams sent invitations to all whom Lehtonen had mentioned and who had taken part in the previous confer-ences, explaining that the meeting was to discuss the relations between the churches and asking them to make every effort to attend.13 The Church of England followed Lehtonen’s initiative to the letter.
0 LPL CFR LR file 28 Lehtonen to Fisher 2.3.1946 copy.
LPL CFR LR file 28 Lehtonen to Fisher 2.3.1946 copy.
LPL CFR LR file 28 Lehtonen to Fisher 2.3.1946 copy.
LPL CFR LR file 28/1 Archbishop Lehtonen. A draft invitation by Waddams s.d.1946.
There was more to Lehtonen’s ecumenical endeavours. Two days after he had written to Archbishop Fisher, he wrote to Waddams regarding the next Anglo-Scandinavian Theological Conference, planned for Denmark in 1947.14 Waddams had participated at the last meeting, held in Durham in 1939, and had been preparing for this conference ever since his Nordic visit in 1944.15 The only Finnish participant at these conferences had thus far been Eelis Gulin, who had already expressed his enthusiasm for the confer-ences in general and Waddams’ preparations in particular the previous sum-mer.16 Now Lehtonen wanted to ensure that the timing of the conference would allow both him and Gulin to participate, and that Waddams was aware that they wanted to organise the next conference in Finland.17
Hosting this conference would have allowed Lehtonen to further the Anglo-Lutheran relations both at home and abroad and would have brought international attention to his church and nation. In the tense political situ-ation of 1946, all relsitu-ations with sympathetic western churches were bound to give a positive stimulus to Finnish morale and affirm the sense that their cause was not forgotten. yet just at this time, the Finnish People’s Demo-cratic Press was voicing strong criticism of Finns and Norwegians who trav-elled to Sweden, suggesting their promotion of Nordic co-operation was a cover for both junkets and the creation of an ideological block against the Soviet Union. Not surprisingly, Lehtonen kept a low profile concerning the existing co-operation with even the other Nordic Churches, let alone the Church of England.18
Waddams, however, was delighted to learn of Lehtonen’s trip, and looked forward to seeing him. He suggested that one person from the BFBS should be made responsible for Lehtonen’s programme and offered his assistance in general and in making some engagements in England in particular.19 Aside from the forthcoming visit, Waddams supported Lehtonen’s plans to get to the Anglo-Scandinavian Conference, although the practicalities were in the hands of the Danes, and offered further help in getting the Archbishop’s
LPL CFR LR file 28/1 Lehtonen to Waddams 4.3.1946.
LPL CFR LR file 117/1 Anglo-Scandinavian Theological Conference. Waddams 29.11.1944; Bring 1965, 187.
LPL CFR LR file 117/1 Gulin to Waddams 25.7.1945; Bring 1965, 186-187.
LPL CFR LR file 28/1 Lehtonen to Waddams 4.3.1946.
Ripatti 1990, 213.
KA AL 35 Waddams to Lehtonen 11.3.1946; Ripatti 1990, 237.
son to study in Cambridge, a matter which Lehtonen had mentioned in his letter. Waddams concluded by sending his regards to both Lehtonen and his family.20 His correspondence with Lehtonen was friendly and down-to-earth, the product of an easy working relationship that was not stiffened by the difference in age, position or nationality.
Another sign of the friendliness and warmth between the two was the way Waddams responded to Lehtonen’s gift of the Swedish edition of his Encyclical Letter, 1945, which Lehtonen sent before leaving for England. He promised to read it “with the greatest interest” and write something about it for some English church newspapers, if he possibly found time.21 Even if his tone was friendly and familiar, it seems that the time was never found. Typi-cally, Lehtonen’s attempt to raise interest in England about his church was met with kind words and little action. However, in this case it was at least understandable. Finding the time to review a book in a foreign language was a tall order for a busy bureaucrat like Waddams.
As the news of Lehtonen’s forthcoming visit to England spread his old friends and colleagues in the ecumenical field began to get in touch with him.22 Among them was Bishop George Bell, who wrote at the beginning of March saying how sorry they had been that Lehtonen had missed the World Council of Churches (WCC) meeting in Geneva. Bell hoped that Lehtonen would indeed make it to the meeting of the United Bible Societies, which was to be held in his own diocese, Chichester.23
Bell’s concern about Lehtonen’s ability to travel abroad was valid.
Lehtonen had indeed felt unable to attend the meeting in Geneva, since it coincided with the trumped-up trial of the ‘war criminals’ imposed by the Allied Control Commission in Finland. Based on retrospective legislation the trial was contrary to Nordic principles of justice, and caused great un-ease in Finland. Most of the war-time government concerned with foreign relations were convicted of initiating the war and delaying a peace treaty.
Only the commander of the armed forces during the war, President Man-nerheim, escaped charges and subsequently handed in his resignation on the conclusion of the trial in early March. This was followed by a
presiden-0 KA AL 35 Waddams to Lehtonen 11.3.1946.
KA AL 35 Waddams to Lehtonen 11.4.1946.
KA AL 35 Bishop of Derby to Lehtonen 19.4.1946; KA AL 35 Rank and Gregory to Lehtonen 24.4.1946.
LPL Bell papers vol.76 f.307 Bell to Lehtonen 6.3.1946.
tial election by the Finnish Diet, which elected J.K Paasikivi with a large majority as the new president of Finland.24
This critical time for the nation inevitably affected the Archbishop. The tension, however, eased during the spring. The correspondence between Lehtonen and Waddams shows that the Finnish situation was closely fol-lowed by the CFR. As early as April, Waddams expressed the hope “that things in Finland are getting back to normal again.”25 This was indeed the case and there was no further hindrance to Lehtonen making his long await-ed journey to England. Lehtonen repliawait-ed to Bell that he lookawait-ed forward to having “an opportunity to discuss with you several actual matters, especially the further developments of the relations of our Churches.”26 Lehtonen had set his priorities, and the development of close relations with the Church of England was high on his list.
However, Lehtonen left one question unanswered in his reply, possibly wanting to discuss it with Bell in private once he was in England. Bell had included a document in his previous letter, which he had acquired through the CFR and found “rather baffling, in a way, to us” and asked if Lehtonen could provide him with any information concerning the situation.27 It re-mains unknown what the document really was, but Bell’s apologetic and non-committal style suggests that he was puzzled about and less than happy with the content of the document.
The document may well have been Pimenoff’s 1945 report on Finland, written for the BFBS and probably sent to Waddams in January 1946.28 In his report, Pimenoff continued the discourse of December 1944, with strong criticism of Finnish society and showing a similar sympathy for Sovi-et aspirations. Pimenoff’s report contained disturbing suggestions of crimes committed by Finns against Russian prisoners-of-war, of anti-British feel-ings in Finland during the war, and of the Finnish Government’s successful attempts “towards moulding the country’s political life into such new forms of democracy, that these have so far been approved by both the West and
Ripatti 1990, 205; Paasivirta 1992, 299-302; Nevakivi 1995, 162-169; Nevakivi 1999, 227-228, 235; Kirby 2006, 233-234.
KA AL 35 Waddams to Lehtonen 11.4.1946.
LPL Bell papers vol.76 f.309 Lehtonen to Bell 18.4.1946.
LPL Bell papers vol.76 f.307 Bell to Lehtonen 6.3.1946.
CUL BSA D3/1/6 Annual Report of the Helsingfors Debot of the British and Foreign Bible Society for the year 1945. Finland; LPL CFR OC file 121 Pimenoff to Waddams 16.1.1946.
East despite their largely different interpretation of democracy.”29 So the cause of Bell’s bafflement may have been anything from disgust to disbelief and concern for the state of Finnish democracy.
Leaving aside the particular allegations, it is likely in any case that Bell was baffled by Pimenoff’s pro-Soviet discourse. If so, it is an indication that Church of England politics had already changed considerably. What Wad-dams had considered as Allied policy just over a year earlier, had become an embarrassment for Bell, who now knew much more about the actual politi-cal and ecclesiastipoliti-cal situation in Eastern Europe under Soviet occupation:
Pimenoff’s argument was already hopelessly out of date.
b. Nordic reconciliation at the Bible Conference
In April, Lehtonen received more information about his schedule in Eng-land. The Bible Conference part of his programme was handled by Temple, who sent him information about registration and the engagements he had made for him. The letter was accompanied by travel tickets for the Arch-bishop, his wife and Harjunpää, who travelled as Archbishop’s Chaplain.
The austerity of post-war Britain was underlined by the fact that Temple asked the participants to give Bible House in London as their address in England, in order that he could obtain food vouchers for them. A limit of £10 could be brought to England, which, Temple said, would not be a problem, as all expenses of the guests would be met.30 Everything suggests that the BFBS took good care of their foreign visitors.
As a personal friend, Temple was delighted to welcome Lehtonen and his wife to England. He had arranged some engagements for the Archbishop, and asked him to speak on some occasions and to chair one of the sessions at the conference.31 This was natural not only because of Lehtonen’s posi-tion as the Archbishop of Finland, but also because he had chaired several international ecumenical meetings before the war.32
CUL BSA D3/1/6 Annual Report of the Helsingfors Debot of the British and Foreign Bible Society for the year 1945. Finland, 10.
0 KA AL 35 Temple to Lehtonen 8.4.1946 with attachement BFBS to Lehtonen 25.3.1946.
KA AL 35 Temple to Lehtonen 8.4.1946 with attachement BFBS to Lehtonen 25.3.1946.
Aurola 1951, 91-92.
The Finnish delegation sailed for England from Turku on 23 April 1946.
The Finnish delegation sailed for England from Turku on 23 April 1946.