Hawke's Bay Herald. SATURDAY, JANUARY SI, 1899.

Hawke's Bay Herald, Volume XXXIV, Issue 11128, 21 January 1899, Page 2

Hawke's Bay Herald. SATURDAY, JANUARY SI, 1899.

A CANDID BISHOP.

That liberal-minded prelatd Bishop Julius of ChristchurCh, who enjoys his glass of beer, and says so (for some enjoy it and don't say so), recently delivered a sermon on the relationship of the pulpit to the people. As reported in the OhriHchurch Press his oration is most entertaining, and with his usual candor the Bishop uttered some good home truths, which divines and people alike might take to heart. Bishop Julius is no Chadband. If he sees a fault, no matter if he himself is culpable, he candidly admits it regardless of the effect of such a statement. But by such action the Bishop does not lessen his influence, but he rather increases it tenfold, for the people admire the strength of character and power which is behind such confessions. The Bishop, on this occasion, took for his text, "The Heaven for height, and the earth for depth," and the able and powerful discourse he evolved from this basis inclines one to the belief that a few more Bishop Julius's sprinkled over the colonies would do infinitely greater service than innumerable Bisiiop Thornton's, who wring their hands and bewail the wickedness of these latter days. In referring to the supinenesa of the pulpit he thus unburdened himHelf .— Why did the pulpit fail ? Why did it not attract ? Well, he answered, it was not in respect to the people. He Was old enough now to believe that nine-tenths of the failure lay with the preacher, and not with the people. And he said this because, he was a preacher. It was all very weft for him to go to his study and think of the wickedness of the people of New Zealand — they were bad enough, God knew — but it was the preacher. Why could he not win them ? Perhaps they did not come because he had nothing to give thenii fie failed because he did not reach up to the heavens for height : he failed when he did not come down to earth for depth. He might preach praotical sermons on social questions, and yet not lift the people.up to God, or he might live in the clouds of some spiritual atmosphere, not knowing how to come down and make his gospel human that his people might know it and love it, and understand it. They had built this pulpit, and he wanted to know fthat they were going: to do with the men who would occupy it in the days to come. He was not one of those who believed in the too great reverence which simply sat and listened, and thought it wicked to criticise. It was well that the preacher should be criticised, in the newspapers and out of them. It did them good and not a whit of harm. It may be remembered that Borne time since -we delivered ourselves to the same effect, and were, no doubt, considered very degenerate and reprobate for doing so by some good people. That which is above criticism must become corrupt. Imagine what atrocities would be accomplished in the name of politics if the party in power were not continually subjected to the keenest criticism by their opponents. Political life is corrupt enough with such criticism, and keen brains ever on the watch to detect the slightest fault. What would be its condition without it ? Civilisation has advanced to that stage that we now comprehend that those who occupy our pulpits are human beings like ourselves, frail enough to stoop to a gust of passion, and formed of substance weak enough to be allured by temptation. "It was," his lordship said, " easy enough to preach — any fool could do it— but it was a very hard thing to reach up to heaven for height, and come down to the earth for depth." Bishop Julius, in this remark, touches upon the very weak spot of the pulpit. A man may be holy, spiritual, imbued with the desire to lift up his fellows to those serene heights of purity of thought and honeßty of purpose which he himself occupies, but if he be not human, does not mingle with his kind and analyse their character, diagnose their foibles, ascertain their weak spots and endeavor to strengthen them, then he fails in 'his message to the people. ." The Bishop referred to this question in a manner which shows that although he occasionally commits the enormity of drinking a glass of beer, and has a pipe as his constant companion, he has a much better grasp of his message to the people than many well disposed preachers, who regard, or affect to do so, such vitiated tastes as utterly . degrading and of a demoralising tendency. Beferring to the true mission of the minister, he says : — The preacher, if he would give us views for height, should by prayer, study, and meditation, and by watchfulness, climb up the hill of God, and waiting to hear what God shall speak to him; enter into the wider cultured life of the man of God and of the universal Church. Otherwise, the preacher was the mere echo of a prevailing sentiment, who took ffom the newspapers, or got out of the magazines, matter which was gathered from the spirit of the times. It was only by spiritual culture, by raising up towards God that the preacher acquired independence of these local feelings and circumstances, and gave whole instead of partial views of life. It made him look at truth from a grander and higher standpoint, and made him realise how pitiful are the controversies of the day, and the questions that occupy men's minds for a fortnight. For the preacher's object was not the questions of the day. If he did not reach to the heaven for height, if he never lifted his people above the roof of his church into the presence of eternal things — he failed as a preaoher, and failed sadly and dismally. " The earth for depth." He had suggested that a man of high culture might be a man of no practical power. They had heard of great mathematicians who did not understand the action Jof a common pump, and men could be found in the Church of God of high spiritual culture but who knew very little indeed about the life of their own times. There were men who ' were very saintly but not very human, who knew a great deal about the Jews in i Babylon, but uncommonly little of the Gentiles under their noses. They had gone to the heaven for height, but had never come to the earth for depth. The true preacher must come for depth to the earth; otherwise he stood in his pulpit denouncing heresies that nobody held and preaching truths that no one' doubted. People described such a person as an excellent man, but " oh, dear," they added, "how little he understands his people and what they are thinking of." How was the preacher to come to earth for depth? By mixing with his people, visiting them, by going amongst them, and finding out what they thought about, what perplexed them, aud by making himself acquainted with their bodily, as well as their spiritual, wants. Was it the pulpit that was at fault? he asked. He thought it sometimes was, and he was not sure that it was always. Stem truths these, and from a bishop high in the Church, who has tlio courage to say what he thinks His Lordship said that many years ago, when he was a young man, a very able and intelligent man in his parish had said to him of preaching, "l.sir, am a man of business, ami would give many thousands of pounds if 1 might stand up in your pulpit and advertise my business." His Lordship did not Ihink that the clergy know the tremendous force which was placed in their hands. "How wonderful it is," continued he, " that we preachers with such a theme have so little to say, and say it so badly. lie wont ou to point out that a man in New

Zealand had relations with time and place, but if he were a cultured man his relations we're widened and he became not only a New Zeajander.btrt a man — and a New Zealander, tho bishop naively remarked, . was not always a man. The man of culture brought to bear on the problems of to-day the experience and knowledge of all the ages, and of many peoples, and by culture he entered intd htimnti) and not merely local, life. Nevertheless, a man of Culture alone was of little use to humanity unless he were also a man of the time and of the place, and could bring his culture -to bear on the people of his time and of his place. The preacher also had relations with time and place, and his mind was occupied a good deal with local controversies and present • day questions, and the perplexities of his own parish; but he should remember that he had other relations than these. The Bishop's argument was that the pulpit is as necessary today as ever it was, that the day of preaching was not over, but "the days when men came unlettered and ignorant to hear the one man who could read were gone; and people now read and thought for themselves. In one respect the pulpit was unnecessary. There were other and better ways, he contended, of preaching than by sermon, but if a man occupied a pulpit and kept himself in touch with his congregation both as regards their spiritual welfare and physical ills, and lifted them above the pettinesses of everyday life to a contemplation of eternal; things, he amply justified his position and place. If we had a few more outspoken clergymen of the same stamp as Bishop Julius there would be no wailing •as to the decline of the Churches influence, and the difficulty of getting the obstinate male portion of the population to attend. To hear a sermon like that under notice, and the broad-minded prelate continually delivers them, there would be a flocking from all quarters of every class in any community.