Anti Fra Muto

I have just read Fra Muto's open letter to Mr. Wells. I hope some kind person will send Mr. Wells a copy—his amusement will be unbounded.

Nevertheless, since this matter in volves the name of my college, perhaps I may also be allowed to express an opinion. In the first place this letter appears to me to be a pitiable exhibition of uncouth undergraduate insolence—an anonymous student of an unknown university at the ends of the earth squealing with frantic impotence, because Mr. Wells has dared to affront his particular ego-identifications. Since he puts such waspish venom into his letter I cannot but assume that Fra Muto is effectively involved with the Roman Catholic church: by his naively patronising style and the portentlousness of his vocabulary, I should assume that he is an undergraduate—a young one.

But enough of Fra Muto. Let us consider his letter objectively. It commences with an emotional appeal to the "ideal or religious toleration and co-operation." When did the Roman Catholic church display "religious toleration and co-operation?" Is it not for the lack of these very qualities that Mr. Wells arraigns it? And. incidentally would not "tolerance" by a better word, even at the cost of that impressive extra syllable?

"At least you have some new ideas" - this is really comic. Oh. the patronage of half-instructed youth! I shall not dilate on the enormity of the change from the second person to the third in the next paragraph, but I should like to point out that Mr. Wells' reputation as a scientist is capable of withstanding a far more dangerous attack than the one under consideration, and that more than one of his scientific textbooks are in use in even first-rate secondary schools. Apart from which, what inspires the thought that the attainment of a position in an English secondary school is a measure of intellectual ability? Can it be that Fra Muto is a teacher?

I have "Crux Ansata" before me, and I find it difficult to see on what ground Fra Muto is attacking it. He makes a number of wild statements, but has not, so far as I can see, attempted to answer one of Mr. Wells' arguments. Furthermore he fails entirely to achieve the scientific detachment and objectivity of that writer, and merely makes himself ridiculous by a display, which while doubtless is very satisfying to his ego, cannot be admitted as reasonable argument.

He has not, for example, attempted to refute the very interesting figures which Mr. Wells quotes in support of his argument on the subject of illiteracy. He offers no defence against the charge that the Roman Catholic church has persistently allied itself with that Fascism which is so much a part of its own internal organisation. He has not shown any reason why any church should be permitted to meddle in politics or to intrigue for power.

Finally, Sir, I would remind Fra Muto that irony, though it seems such a crushing weapon, is definitely not one for the 'prentice hand, particularly when that hand trembles with emotion.

I have read "Crux Ansata" as the opinion of one intelligent and informed man on a controversial question. Freedom of speech demands that he be allowed to publish it. If there is a reasonable reply I shall read that also. In the meantime, I am neither for nor against, but a simple seeker after truth, and one who would have appreciated Fra Muto's letter far more had it contained some spark of intelligent argument.

Anti Wells

Mr. H. G. Wells, in his work "Crux Ansata" has betrayed an unfortunate ignorance of the facts he has presumed to interpret. This is unfortunate from the point of view of both author himself and members of the R.C.C.

Unfortunate for Mr. Wells, because his book has denied him a place in the ranks of the great adversaries—and these ranks include many illustrious names.

Unfortunate from the point of view of the church, because a great adversary is a stimulant to a greater understanding of the doctrines of that church among its members.

In fact the only value that the book has had is to provide a source of propaganda for all enemies of the Catholic Church, be they religious bigots, so-called rationalists or propagandists of the ilk of Dr. Goebells, who incidentally was not slow to make use of this ill-timed volume.

It would take hours of research to refute all the mis-statements, complete the half-truths and allay the innuendoes made in that peevish outburst. Two points, however, are chosen at random for special attention: Page 94, paras. 1, 2 and 3:

"It is necessary to insist on his (the Pope's) profound ignorance and mental inferiority."

It is necessary, in supporting that assertion, to be unaware that the Pope has addressed an International Press Conference for over an hour in Italian, French, German, English, Spanish, Portuguese and Latin—without notes; won the Gold Medal in history at the Visconti Grammar School—reputed the best in Rome; and addresses meetings of the most distinguished scientists of the world when they meet at the Pontifical Academy of Science.

Page 68: Wells suggests that religious'disbelief and scientific research go hand in hand. If, however, he knew so much about the history of science as he professes to know of pre-history, he might recognize that the following men, despite their belief in the teaching of the church he despises so greatly, made some contribution to the progress of science:—Ampere, Volta, Galvani, Pasteur, Mendel, Le-maitre and Schmidt. Moreover, the latter three are priests who apparently "despite the peculiar limitations to which they were subjected by their training," were able to acquire at least some ideas of scientific thought of their day—they made too, a contribution to science which compares favourably with that of the omniscient Mr. H. G. Wells, B.Sc.

From an author who will be remembered for some excellent novels and scientific romances, "Crux Ansata" is a very disappointing book. That this disappointment is shared by some of Wells' own intellectual confreres is shown in the following review taken from a paper opposed to the Catholic Church.

"A tirade which begins with a crude plea for the bombing of Rome and ends with a vulgar personal attack on the Pope is unlikely to advance a cause which he—and many others—have at heart."

Neither

Dear Sir,—Mr. Wells' "Crux Ansata" has called forth just the challenge he might have expected. Some ardent supporter of the "still rather formidable edifice," stung to the quick by some home truths about his pet obsession, has dashed Into print. Whatever may be Mr. Wells' scientific capabilities (and his "Science of Life" does, not negate them) he is at least an experienced debater and not to be silenced by infallible Invective. Fra Muto has neither disproved nor denied his well-documented assertions regarding intolerance, uneducation, celibacy and other well-known attributes of Roman Catholicism. Instead, he has misread Mr. Wells, then knocked down the straw-man of his own creation.

I agree with Mr. Wells. The church has never been very progressive or informed in its actions. The countries where it is the official religion are more backward than they might be. I think celibacy is an unnatural cult. What I do find unworthy of a rational thinker is the delusion of a Popish plot. Such talk savours of the "Protocols of Zion" or the "Tentacles, of the Red Octopus." It is unwise, intolerant and unintelligent to see in every Catholic a fascist and in every priest a gauleiter.—I am, etc,

Discipulus Satanae