TOPICS OF THE DAY.

Press, Volume XLVII, Issue 7449, 15 January 1890, Page 4

TOPICS OF THE DAY.

Archdeacon Faehab has an interesting article on the sermon question in the New York Forum, fie commences, candidly enough, by apologising fqr the large number of bad sermons that are delivered. As " preaching is an ordinance, and almost a distinctive ordinance, of Christianity," he suggests that congregations should suffer foolish sermons gladly in remembrance of the great sermons of St. Francis, i Fenelon, Wesley, and others. We confess 'that we hardly see the logic of this. If preaching is " almost a distinctive ordin- [ ance of Christianity," surely that is an argument in favor of making it as good as possible, and offers no valid reason why congregations should be content with an inferior article. Again, when we listen to a bad sermon, it is surely poor con* eolation to us to reflect on the nobl e masterpieces which, have been delivered by pulpit orators ,of other times or other countries. How would Archdeacon Farrai? like the same kind of logic applied to other professions ? If he had a finger unskilfully amputated would it console him to think of the brilliant surgical achievements of the great Sir Astley ? If a lawyer lost hie case for him would he " suffer it gladly, 1 ' buoyed up by the thought of the forensi<j triumphs of Theaiger or Benjamin ? We trow hot.

To do Archdeacon Farrar justice, however, nobody can accuse him of making bad sermons, and in the article trozn which, we are quoting there are some hinte which, if judiciously acted upon, should tend to the improvement of his weaker brethren. His remarks have at any. rate the merit of being outspoken. The pulpit, he says* is no longer the "coward's castle/ " The preacher' oan be answered if anyone thinks him: of sufficient importance to make it worthwhile to do bo. His most eelf-im-portant assertions will be taken; only for what they are worth. Exposure will sooner or later. await his incompetence. His mostiiggressively ignorant dogmatism will be listened . to with a smile, and will be taken as. a measure, not of nig authority, bat; of his conceit; Nothing will tell more powerfully and more deservedly against the modern preacher than for him to give himself the airs of the mediaeval, inquisitor or the domineering priest." The Archdeacon-especially warns the clergy against ill-considered attaoks on science. - No -one ■ (ha says) who ifi acquainted with the history of science, and, .has sufficient to accept facts, can possibly deny that scarcely a single truth of capital' importance in science Jias ever been enunciated without having to straggle for j life against the fury of theological dogmatists. The Archdeacon's advice then ia^—'?£efc the modern preacher learn 'Valittle modesty, a little suspension of judgment, from the disastrous annals of the: past., Hie cnrsas, like chickens, will only corns home to • roost." Again he caution a thorn against the "old dogma of verbal dictation " as applied to the Bible, which |he says "; has become too baseless an absurdity for any well-instructed and I unbiassed intelligence to maintain." He then goes on to remark— "Men have been learning: more and .more fully the significance of the wise rabbinic saying that the law speaks in the tongue of ,the sons of men: in other words, that the limitations of human language and the disabilities of human infirmity were not miraculously removed from those who were chosen as the channels of divine revelation. It has been seen that different parts of the Bible are of very different value, and that much of the moral teaching of the Old Testament represents an inferior phase of e.aUehtenment and stands far below that of the He*. Mankind has been 3low lesson; but the preacher who in these days thinks it necessary i as -was dqne by a very recent commentator, to institute a parallel between Jael and the Yinrin to defend the human sacrifice offered by Jephthah, to treat slavery as a divine institution, to refer acts of atrocious .cruelty to the direct command of the AULmerciful, and to maintain the righteousnessof wars which ended in the wholesale' and cold-blooded massacre of innocent women and children—such a preaoher may revel in the admiration of young ladies and religious cliques, but he puts Himself out of court when he claime to impose bis crude ignorance and shif tingmorafifey upon tne consciences of wise and thoughtful men."'.-. .; .;•■■" : . ■ ■ ■-■ ■ • . - ■. ■ . Whether people agree with thie View of Biblical criticismw not it mast at least be

that ;i attempt to & cotoageofhiropinions. .VJ** g Another mysterious telegram 3 by the Press Association L papers on Monday. It Z S^V k 1 Venice and ran as follows:— ' l 0» I ; " Vaodeebut, the New Yotk .»;«•'' 1 haspurehaMd Turner , *Caaalln &s>* 1 for in *«*«} I Atfittstetehfc this looks as if y u » 1 had purchased one of the nmaeroSS- f ways of Venice and intended to 2j f home with him as a "ourio , * * I one can doubt, the williamL/' I the Venetians, who are I usually "hard up" i Ust „ I cell a canal, or half a doeeu canal!',* Yankee millionaire wanted them ttj , millionaires unquestionably do eccentric things at times. Great al?* the power of wealth. Still, We > fess that the difficulty o f transport!!* ft Btumblingbloek in the way of? B olution. How is Vanderbilt to ■*>* T , ' canal across the Atlantio intactH.*^ , spilling any of it? This admit, seems so formidable that *L' ** driven to try some other reading o f J 1 message. It is just possible that itfc., a picture by the artist Turner wto*? referred to. He painted some JJ! of Venice in various aspect* T! perhaps half-a-dozen of Venetian'(Jf So far as we know, howewr riJ of the pictures are to be found hV? Heelf. Most of his paiatings w * : queathed by him with noble generositt the English nation, and are veryS 1 ferently lodged in the National qJZ " and at South Kensington. A good ¥ are in the hands of private collector? fl England. It is probably one of thnetfe " the telegram refers to. What strikes a t' as the most likely one is his picts* a r i< >« Grand Canal, Venice," well hxZ* $ belonging to the Dudley collection, » fc represents the canal as covered wife f ? dolas and gaily dressed shipping, ane JJ |1 the Palazzo Ducale and the Caiapanifc If was sold at the Mendel sale ia 1875 b ll Messrs Agnew, the well known dealj |l for .£7360, and afterwards by them toS F Earl of Dudley for 8000 guineas. || present Lord Dudley has how obtaiuM r ? for it, the investment hag Jj f' been a bad one. There is a |r the Grand Canal, by Turner, i n \ I jNational Gallery, but this is not r; a g likely to have been disposed of. '• . $ iSupposiNO this interpretation to be cotnt I' -it is a flmgular and eomewhat f coincidence that a few -weeks befo»% '- magnificent price was realised for mi Turner's paintings—running Tetfi&jjb the price given for Millet's which, as our readers knotf/tsj highest ever paid fot a single plcta*-.' bitter complaints wore appearing h^; English papers as* to the neglect with ■. which; Tomer's drawings foht : teteated by national aetnority to wbs£ I \ he them. ■To sbie day'it V is said fan enormous number of \- 'drawings remain "buried trcasuw.* 1 I « r 23iirty years ago Mr Euskin volnabsai arduous labor necessary for aortksr, I' arranging, and identifying these !" A few have since been partially zxkMlii I but the majority remain firmly locked ';■< tin boxes, in which Mr. Euakia jisal « them." Needlesß to say their odnostisi fvalue in this condition is not very p& t I' Perhaps now that public attentiaa&y I again been directed to the vata? 4 |. Turner's works, the authorities my U f' shamed into a better treatment of thegtsi! |fi artist's legacy. - |jr,