GOOD AND BAD CHRISTIANS.

Press, Volume LVI, Issue 10387, 3 July 1899, Page 6

GOOD AND BAD CHRISTIANS.

. ADDRESS BY THE BISHOP. Connected with the commemoration of St.Peter's Day, epedal Services have been held at St. Peteifs Church, Biccarton, and yesterday afternoon bis Lordship the! JSishop of Christchurch delivered an address to men. The weatiapr wi« very , - unpropituras', and there were only thirty, persons present His Lordship's text was, "A living dog is better than, a dead lion," Ecclesiastes be, 4. Many, he said, would have noticed a discussion which had arisen on certain words used by him a wbue ago, and to which he only referred because they seemed to offer a suitable subject for their t&oughts that afternoon. What he had said was, "that a, good Mdhommedaa was better than a bad Christian." * That seemed to him just another, way of putting his text. Of course the words had been altered in such a way that they might be easily Attacked. He would put them again in the way he had said them, "A good Mahommedan is better than a bad Christian." Now, it might be supposed that in saying such a thing? one was giving countenance to the prevailing opinion thatone religion was as good as another. That did not follow from -the words themselves; but it might be supposed to be in some measure borne oat by them; Most of us> understood that a religion was not to be gathered from those who professed it. For instance: Suppose a total stranger came to New Ze&-. land and said, "I want to find out what Christianity is, and I will study it from the people of Chrisfcchurch." Most of us would allow that he .would go away with a mixed opinion of what Christianity was. "At the CathedrrA he would hear one thing, at the Wesleyan churches another, at the Presbyterians another, but the underlying unity it would be.difficult for.him to discover, especially as we were more apt to dwell more largely on those points on which we differed. Yes, it would be said that was true enough as to doctrine, but, then., as to the influence of Christianity, what was its practical effect. would go round Christchurch and see what Christianity was in its influence on the men who professed it. And on that, again, 'his ideas would be mixed, and he would go back to his. own country wiuo. tie opinion that his religion) was as good as theirs. The difficulty would have been that he would not have got at the root of our religion. One might go to India and form c/ very poor opinion of its religion, for the Hindoo only took up the popular side, and knew little or nothing of its real root and character. It was just the same with the Mz'hommedan religion. But in these days we had been able to get behind the common popular religion, and to study the real thing from its source, to learn something of its history, its moral end social codes, and we had a reasonably accurate idea of Mabomedanism and Buddhism. This complete knowledge had tended to tolerance, whacu was a great virtue and a beautiful thing. As a tree was judged by its fruit, so was Christianity by its fruits, and Mahomedanism by its, and so we could see the wide difference between the two. What did he mean by a good Mahommedan? He meant a man who had a certain light he had received from one source or another, and according to that light was sincere and earnest, faithful as" far as his light led him. A Mahommedan twas imperfeot, .because his ! creed end religion waa imperfect,but as far as ■he was sincere he was a good Mahoimnedan, Then, what was a bod Christian? To make his words more vulnerable, the words he had used had been altered by correspondents to '"an inferior Christian." What he had said 'was, '"a bad Christian," and what did he mean? The converse of s< good Mahommedan. He did not .mean an imperfect Christian: .he had never seen a perfect one. He meant the man who brought up to the-faith, baptised, and had taken his vows, lived a life totally inconsistent with the faith he professed, and the code he. professed to adopt. Was not a good Maihommedan better than he? He would ask them to think of the bad Chrisi tian in three aspects. First was the aspect iof his faith. He had allowed himself to J drift until he scarcely knew what he had been. We wanted some searching discipline to find us. out, and no doubt it would come. Fifty years ago it was not the proper thing > to. stay away from church: everyone went, ' even the men. It was bad form in those ! not "to do'so. Nowadays a man was not looked down upon if he did not go: he was looked upon as a poor fellow if he did. It showed that Christianity' had to some extent been swamped by fashion. But, coming ;baek to his first point, was not a man i whin he drifted away from the faith that 1 enobled him a bad Christian? Of course he was. Or, again, take the practice of the church, her worshfp and her claim on the man. If we found a man deliberately i steadily resisting all these, opposing them, disregarding -her discipline, was he not right when he said that such a man was a bad Christian? He was speaking exactly of going to church because that was not everything. But 'he was speaking generally s>t the "discipline and order of the church of tne , Lord Jesup. Chrisij and the moment we allowed ourselves to drift from it we were putting ourselves into the position of a bad i Christian. Then next, was the code of Christianity. There was such a thing as Christian character. Not written down in common words, but certainly written down in the teaching of Christ, yet there was a good deaT that Was done amongst us that would very much astonish the 'Mahommedan, the gle. x>ut what was done, but it occurred in our. commerce, in our amusements-, in our social'lives, which would make the Mahommedari'say, "I don't think much;of your religion." That was where he would be wrong, because th£t was something we did in spfte of our religion. Then he .would say, 'Then you must be a bad Christian." Exactly; that was what he meant when he used the words he had quoted. There were possibilities in a Christian life which ought to weigh largely with us. It was bad enough to be a bad Mahommedan, but it was ever so much worse to be a bad Christian.