There was an ideological affinity between the Catholic Church and the fascist regimes in Europe, including Adolf Hitler's Germany. Despite Alfred Rosenberg's known opposition to the Christian churches, he had no authority to shape the Reich's church policy nor did he participate in the regime's political anticlerical measures. The insistence on Christ's Jewish origin and the historical link between Judaism and Christianity were part of the Katechismuswahrheiten and Nathanaelfrage. The Catholic defence literature was primarily meant as self-defence against an encroaching anticlerical National Socialist ideology as well as an attempt to bind Catholics to the community's traditional values and tear them away from ‘neopaganism’ and its antisemitism that undermined Christianity. The imbalance between accounts of communism and fascism was not confined to fringe organisations. ‘Latin’ fascism appeared to be the means to solve pressing social problems while still safeguarding Christian values.

Antisemitic images after the First World War were most likely to occur in English Catholic discussions of modern capitalism and socialism, but were not limited to the pure economic and political aspects. Anxieties of a growing Jewish influence and of a parallel decline of English (Christian) culture harboured anti-Jewish sentiments in Catholic publications and organisations. Together with economic antisemitism, the Jewish-Bolshevik stereotype was the most common anti-Jewish remark. Antisemitism had become common and ubiquitous in Bavaria, while it was still seen as a radical form of Jew-hatred in other parts of Germany. Within the spectrum of conservatism, the antisemitism within the Centre Party and Bavarian People's Party (BVP) was neither as hostile nor as coherent as that of the conservative-right, the German National People's Party (DNVP) and those Catholics who joined or sympathised with the German nationalists.

This chapter discusses the initiatives taken by the episcopate in preparing public protests against the anticlericalism of the regime and eventually the persecution of the Jews, as well as the practical aid offered to ‘non-Aryan’ Christians by Catholic organisations. The defence against völkisch anti-Catholicism shows how an essentially theological discourse continued to harbour antisemitism. The war against Germany made it quite clear where Cardinal Arthur Hinsley's loyalties stood. Hinsley and other bishops often turned down Jewish requests for Catholic support with the explanation that the Jews had not stood up for Catholics whenever they had been persecuted. In Hinsley's eyes, the oppression of the Catholic Church and its priests in Mexico, Russia and Germany overshadowed the persecution of the Jews. The Catholic Church in England had opened itself to first ecumenical projects with other Christian groups and the Jewish community.

This chapter considers the farewell sermons as physical performances, whose prevalence and intensity demonstrate that religion remained a prominent feature in the Restoration landscape, analysing how these self-conscious performances were planned and orchestrated, and what the texts reveal about the relationships between the Bartholomean preachers and their various audiences. It discusses Michael Braddick and John Walter's thoughts about the term negotiation of power, and suggests that parliamentary legislation and political action at both local and national level impinged on the minds and actions of the nonconformist ministers, and helped shape the character of the farewell sermons.

This chapter sums up the key findings of this study on the farewell sermons of the Bartholomean clergy. The farewell sermons demonstrate the extent to which religion remained a central consideration in the conduct of post-Restoration politics. This study has challenged several received wisdoms regarding the Restoration religious settlement and the origins of organised Dissent, as well as the simplistic preconception that historical significance must be imbued in structural change rather than language. The re-evaluation of the farewell sermons has also highlighted how much more we need to find out about the religio-political culture of Restoration communities, and particularly about the interaction between the centre and provinces with regard to the creation, reception and implementation of the Act of Uniformity.

This chapter analyses the polemical responses to the circulation of Bartholomean sermons, arguing that figures in the Restoration establishment exploited the texts not simply to pursue an anti-Puritan agenda, but often in order to promote factions at Court and further their personal careers. It suggests that though the publication of the farewell sermons from 1662 onwards may have been aimed primarily at a sympathetic readership, they provided Cavalier-Anglicans with a visible target onto which to project their anger and insecurity.

After the Norman invasion, an important and relatively sizeable Jewish community existed in Winchester until the nationwide expulsion of the Jews from England in 1290. It was one of the earliest settlements, dating from at least the 1140s, and its size and significance grew thereafter, especially from the late twelfth century onwards when Jewish business activities had to be officially recorded in archae (chests), leading to concentration in certain towns. This chapter shows that while the historiography of Winchester Jewry is still relatively undeveloped, memory work associated with this medieval community is rich and multifaceted, providing unique insights into the construction of local, national, and imperial identities. Jews themselves have played an important role in the process of remembering, reinforcing as well as challenging wider perspectives on Winchester Jewry and adding further layers of complexity to its memory. The chapter also considers other minority groups within Winchester's history, especially the Huguenots, in order to allow a comparative approach and to enable an analysis of whether or not the memory and representation of the Jews is unique.

This chapter explores the nature of liberal tolerance towards the Jews within Victorian politics. It focuses on the experiences of and responses to the two Emanuel families and the Abraham family. It asks whether these leading Jews accepted locally, and if so, on what terms?