THE CHURCH.

Lyttelton Times, Volume XCIII, Issue 10653, 14 May 1895, Page 2

THE CHURCH.

TO THE EDITOR. Sir,—lt would bo interesting to some of your readers to look round Christchurch and see the sources from which the Church of England draws her revenues—not a few sections up for sale, a great many more with hovels standing on them, dirty, unpainted, falling to pieces, walla through which daylight peers, damp, unwholesome, insanitary, Tenants for these places are

not always scarce. They are apt to be, however, of the nomadic sort, who flit by moonlight juab before the rent collector comes round. There are plenty more cottages, perhaps a little better, which are tenanted by the poor, who pay a very high rent for their miserable accommodation, and who sometimes venture to suggest that they would be more comfortable if the landlord would kindly mend a few of the holes about the place. Such unreasonable demands, however, are always promptly quenched by the unanswerable rejoinder, “We can’t afford it.” Thus the greater part of tho Chureh'a re vein/ is gathered in from poverty and squalor,' and so inadequate is the income thus derived that distraint becomes a necessity where tenants are too poor or too unthrifty to pay rent for their miserable lodgments. Truly the Church is an unjust steward and an execrable landlord, and by way of a scapegoat it liberally abuses circumstances, government, taxation and Mr Reeves, all of whom are held directly responsible for this direful state of things. The argument has been adduced that the Church of _ Christ should possess nothing, but this is begging tho question. The pauper has little scope for the exercise of those Christian virtues which is demanded from him to whom much is given. The Church came by her property through endowment and gift, not by acquisition or purchase. Siie was thus in the position of a man with five talents, and with all the practical wisdom of the New Testament and the teachings of political economy/ to enable her to use her talents wisely. Instead of this a fatuous policy of short-sightedness and cupidity has reduced her noble to ninepence. There appears to have been neither sound principle nor common-sense exercised in the administration of church affairs. With the fairest opportunities of becoming a model landlord or capitalist, she has degenerated into little better than an institution for the dissemination of principles which she has completely failed to apply to the management of her own affairs. Political changes must, of course, have affected the financial position of the Church, but not to the extent which it haa done. Had the Church Property Trustees made it their business to have the healthiest and best-repaired house property in the town their tenants would not have been of a class to require eviction. Had their rents been moderate they would never have lacked tenants at all; and had they been ready to sell at reasonable prices sections which they could not use, they would have reduced their liabilities for taxation and had sufficient capital in hand for all just demands. The fairly prosperous condition of the parish churches shows that the public are quite willing to pay their share towards church maintenance, especially when they have a good man at their head, and know that the finances of the church are managed carefully and a yearly account published. In consideration of the fact that the equal distribution of wealth ia an impossibility, owing to the natural inequalities of human nature, it surely behoves the Church, if possessing aught, to use it for the good of humanity and the honour of her calling. If it was possible for the shepherd king Abraham to bo rich and yet walk perfectly, surely the Church of Christ in this nineteenth century might, likewise, bo rich and yet fulfil righteously the duties of capitalist, landlord and preacher.—l am, &s„ ONEBIMUS.

TO THE EDITOR. Sir,—The one or two innocent little questions I asked respecting the English Church has brought on my head the wrath of “ Onesimus,” who, after knocking me down and trampling on me, says what I asked for ia quite true, viz., that six families had tho bailiffs put into their houses by the Church Property Trustees, and that it is also a fact that the Bishop has had his salary raised .£2OO per year. And then I am asked whether I will allow the evicted ones to live ia my houses rent free.. Unfortunately, through tho bad management of the Church I do not own a house of my own, so I cannot answer that question in the affirmative, however much I might wish to see everybody- with a roof over their heads. But perhaps “ Onesimus ” will be astonished to learn that I did hot know until I saw hia letter that tho questions I asked were true, and I do not know one of tho evicted families, nor do I know what the Bishop's salary is. The day I wrote for information I heard for tho first time about the evictions and the increase in tho Bishop's salary, and I merely wrote to know whether it was true or not true. Of course, I know in the Old Country that a bishop may receive as high a salary as £15,000 per annum, whilst the curate who, docs the work will get, perhaps, £6O per year, I have heard of curates getting much less than that, and when I thought of those things a whole army of my namesakes rushed through my brain, and I thought of the parson who gave a poor little boy sis months for stealing a turnip when starving with hunger. And then I thought of the poor little boy whom I saw myself start eating a halfpenny candle wiiich he had been sent for on a cold, frosty night, and after devouring part of it to satisfy his cruel hunger, he began to cry, because he dare not go home. The child was a living skeleton, and that took place nob many yards from a church ! And here, in New Zealand, I learn that evictions can take place just as the winter sots in on church property, and that the Bishop is quite justified in having his stipend increased. The brotherhood of man was not practically taught when I was a boy ia the Old Country, and when we read of cases like that of poor Turner, who had to subsist on three meals per week, and cases of eviction in New Zealand, it is enough to make us ask of what use are such churches as that presided over by tho Bishop. The wonder to me is that more preachers do not leave it, as I cannot help but think there ia something wrong somewhere, _ " Onesimus” has answered my questions, but there ia a chance for someone who knows more about church affairs than I do to ans wer hia questions, which I confess are very ugly ones.—l am, &c., P. C. STIQGINS.