CORRESPONDENCE

Grey River Argus, 29 December 1934, Page 5

CORRESPONDENCE

A CRITIC OF CHRISTIANITY. (To the Editor.) Sir,—May I be allowed to comment on your article of December 24th. You state: “There remains by common consent 'of believers and doubters alike, no nobler conception of life, and no higher ideals than those which Christianity has pio•claimed.” There is no common consent to those claims. Rationalists everywhere deny them, and it is only because they deny them that they are opposed’ to the Christian religion. Rationalists oppose Christianity not merely because Christianity is not true, 'but on the grounds that it has been, and still is, the enemy of proI gress and a very great detriment to human welfare and happiness. You also stated that the advent of Christianity “weaned the ancient world from ’ pagan mythology and pagan slavery.” It did neither of these things. It perpetuated much of thU pagan mythology, and the paganism it destroyed were the pagan virtues. Slavery went out with the collapse of the Roman Empire. You suggested that an economically-bewilder-ed world might learn something from Christianity. It is significant that our economical!v bewildered statesmen are all Christians. If is truly a Christian attitude to leave the solution of world problems to Providence, instead of tackling them with fearless thinking. In conclusion. I would like to state that the word “doubter” does not correctly describe one who docs not believe in. the Christian religion, for very often he is one who has no doubts at all about the Christian religion—he knows it is ndf true. I am, etc., J. W. PATTERSON. Reefton. December 27th. 1934. [On his own showing, it is neither for believers nor doubters of I Christianity that our correspondent I speaks, but for a category whose conI sent was jot sugge c ted.—Ed. Argus.]