I write to support Mrs Young's protest (August 3) at the unjust remarks of Patrick O'Donovan on the Prince Imperial.
If Mr O'Donovan is really interested to discover something of the Princes' character, he could do well to read the Prince's testimony inscribed on his monument in St George's Chapel, Windsor.
The Emperor Napoleon III conceived a grand plan for the creation of a code of international law which would eventually develop into an international Parliament, and indeed Ire discussed it with Queen Victoria in 1863. The Young Prince was well versed in the Napoleonic Ideal, and had he lived to lead his country, it is possible that such catastrophies as World War I and World War II could have been averted, and the European Parliament which arrived 100 years later could have been established.
James Campbell Honorary Secretary, The London Caledonian Catholic Association, Woodford Wells, Essex.
It is a pity that Patrick O'Donovan and your correspondent J. Young have chosen to resurrect the old controversy about the unfortunate death of the French Prince Imperial.
According to J. Young the prince had "courage, integrity and charm" but it would seem that he was also stubborn and imprudent. He deliberately rode into a dangerous situation, in a war which had absolutely nothing to do with France: it was bizarre, to say the least, for him to be in Zululand in the first place.
It is very easy for J. Young to condemn: from this safe distance. He was not there, so we do not know what he would have done. The bereaved mother did not blame anyone, but J. Young is not so generous. Has he forgotten the injunction: "Judge not, lest ye be judged"?
W. Ashcroft Paignton. Devon.
Out of date
Nearly a generation after the documents of Vatican II stated that. "The unity of marriage will radiate from the equal personal dienitv of wife and husband," Catholics will hear a reading this Sunday which says: "wives should regard their husbands as they regard the Lord, since as Christ is the head of the Church and saves the whole body, so is a husband the head of his wife; and as the Church submits to Christ, so should wives to their husbands, in everything."
Are we living in the 1st century or the 20th? Or are the clergy living in the 1st and the laity in the 20th? Would it not be better to change to some reading that people can take seriously? Have never known any woman, whether Catholic or crazy, who submitted to her husband, either before or after Vatican II.
The hierarchy brush aside any suggestion that the large drop in Mass attendances could be connected with their attitude to women. Pay, pray and obey has stood them in good stead for centuries and they don't intend to change.
Why don't they jump into their time machine and pay us a visit?
P. O'Leary London, SW3.