• ...the English view

Sir.Mr. McCrones letter
(October 1) ranges far and wide outside his original thesis, and I have no intention of accepting his challenge to reply to a series of assertions in the terms he proposes. Your readers will be able to judge who is seeking to outrage intelligence, or inflame hatred. The South African Bishops in a series of Pastoral Letters commencing in 1952 have informed their people, as it is their right and duty to do in a matter which involves conscience and morality. of the principles against which apartheid must he judged. Mgr. Whelan's statement and the subsequent action can he followed in the tiles of the Catholic Press. They do not amount to an endorsement of apartheid by the Catholic Hierarchy. Whatever justification might he made for a policy of separate development of cultures cannot stand if the practice outrages human dignity, and makes a mockery of the commandment to Love. To discriminate exclusively on the grounds of colour. or race is an offence against fundamental rights wherever yt exists.
In South Africa today public legislation such as the Group Areas or Mixed Marriages Acts are an affront to the Christian conscience. Every Christian who sees Christ suffering in a neighbour diminished by apartheid has the duty to denounce the evil, and to work for the redemption of society.
White South Africans themselves must see this, and act accordingly or be overwhelmed in the torrent of hatred they have unleashed. To call the Archbishop of Durban and others who strive to alert the Christian conscience "inciters to violence" is sad to sec in the columns of a Catholic newspaper. Philip L. Daniel,
Chairman, Newman International Committee.
Sir, 1 wonder whether your correspondent, Mr. Harold McCrone, has lived in South Africa and seen apartheid in action. Judging by his letter of October 1 it would appear that his information on the so-called "Christian patriotism" expressed by apartheid is second-hand. or derived from the hand-outs distributed by the practitioners of this pernicious creed.
1 have lived in South Africa for l& years and I know that it is impossible to accept apartheid and be truly Christian and practise in full the virtue of charity.
Mr. MeCrone's criticism of Archbishop Hurley is baseless and ridiculous. I know Archbishop Hurley personally and have heard him speak dozens of times. His attitude towards apartheid and the colour question is Christ-like. To accuse him of being an inciter of violence is not only ignorant, but an insult to a man who has given his life to the practice and preaching of true Christianity.
As for his comment on Archbishop Whelan's views on apartheid, anyone who was there at the time will know that he spoke for himself and his statement was considered an embarrassment to the Hierarchy.
Mr. McCrone's letters are typical of one of the most distressing facts of Catholic life today. There are too many Catholic theorists and "barrackroom lawyers" arguing about Catholicism and not enough Catholic Christians.
Doubless Mr. Daniel will answer Mr. McCrone's challenge. However, in my turn I would challenge Mr. McCrone to read and understand the New Testament and then see whether he can combine the teachings of Christ with those of apartheid. Alternatively, he might consider offering his services as a lay mission worker and see, as I have seen, the collapse of human dignity when apartheid is effectively imposed.
Basil Rooke-Ley,