[To the Editor of THE SPECTATOR.] &R,—As regards your correspondent,
Mr. Ross Wallace, I have nothing further to say, except this, that it is his type of attitude, rather than his facts, which makes us young people react instinctively against what he upholds. All your other correspondents have been very understanding, for which I should like to thank them. I never intended to enter into a theological argument for which I claim no qualifications, but simply to show what I feel is wrong, and there, so far as I am concerned, I must leave the matter. I cannot say anything about the Roman Catholic Churches, but I think most Protes- tant clergy will agree that their churches are far too empty— in fact this point was mentioned by Dr. Raton in the very first letter of this discussion. • The vast majority of people who have written, both privately and through the columns of your paper, have agreed that, for some reason or another, the Church has become inadequate, but it is easier to criticise than to construct, and I leave it to wiser heads than mine to construct the new philosophy : if they still feel that organised religion is necessary for the com- munity. But, if it must be, let it be the simple philosophy of Christ the Perfect Man. He never meant religion to be a' complicated affair of dogma, theory and ritual, nor did he state that the Church should be the sole avenue of understand- ing. Could we not live more richly by trying to understand what human minds, having created it, can understand, leaving alone what I feel sure we were never meant to know ?
But that-, as I said, rests with wiser heads than minc.—Yours
65 Ennismore Gardens, S.W. 7.
Previous page
