In Defence of the Dean
SIR,—A more disgraceful paragraph can scarcely have appeared in the Spectator than that in which you attacked the Dean of Canterbury. Malice and calumny could scarcely go further. Nor is untruth despised. A glance at past volumes of The Interpreter would reveal whether the Dean has written nothltit•-" on any religious or- ecclesiastical subject."
Few grevious Deans have fulfilled their decanal duties more con- scientiously than Dr. Johnson. His speaking at the great Melbourne peace conference was taken from his statutory vacation. I have no doubt he would have preferred to spend it on holiday with his family, had his conscience permitted. His error of course lie% in obeying his Master, Instead of advocating peace and the banning of the atom bomb he should have advocated war and mass bombing. What plaudits he might have won then from the Spectator! Fortunately the Dean on this issue would 'rather have its enmity. But the paragraph serves one useful purpose. It reveals what content freedom and liberty possess for the Editor of the Spectator. As much as for the " freedom-loving " governors of the U.S.A.—Yours [It was expressly stated that the Dean, while writing three books on aspects of Communism, had written no book on any religious or ecclesiastical subject. His Interpreter contributions were not overlooked, —ED., Spectator.]
Previous page
