DULL SERMONS.

Northern Advocate, 29 September 1920, Page 4

DULL SERMONS.

CLERGYMAN HITS BACK,

CONGREGATION OFTEN TO BLAME

(By Canon La-'igbridge.)

The clergy tm , having a bad time. They are despoiled not only of their

income, but also of thoir congregation. Hardly one man out of six or seven goes lo church or chapel, and he goes mainly io complain of the sermon. 1 don'ti complain of him for the complaining; 1 believe I havo ofte:i done the same thing myself. But I ffliould like io point out that the seiimon and its maker have always Ivjimi complained of. I seldom open a novel wherein a parson appears, but he is made a bit of a humbug, a bit of a fool, or a bit of both. The only hope for the seiimon is that it may be silly enough to make you laugh a little. It is seldom a product of t)ho preacher's brain; if it is made in the family at all, and not supplied by a dealer, it is made by one of the ladies. Sensible people get a little nap during its progress. The concluding ascription is hailed with such general relief that if the preacher stumbles upon a premature ''and now" there is a general grievance. Yet in some way the sermon is rei garded as a bulwark of respectability; ' its dryness is as worthy a-. , the dryness of old port. You have to put up with the sermon; if it were abolished there would be an end of all things solid and I British. It must be kept up; but how the preacher keeps it. up! Why can't he let you off t-hat "Thirdly , "J Does he never remember people's sihoulders and sirloins 1 ? In the Church of England, to be dull ha.s always been to bo correct; dullness is next to devoutness. The unendowed communities, preaching for their supper, have sometimes- contrived to be interesting, but their efforts have alwayts been regarded as sensational and eccentric —too much like a circus. REFLECTING THE CONGREGATION 1 think it is only fair tc the preacher to say that if he is dull it is largely due to the dullness of his hearers. A preacher is as responsive, to his congregation as rheumatism to! the weatiier. If the women are sucking sweet-meats or^lutiering fans the.man in tihe pulpit sinks under the siglifc Every eye that is fixed upon his'face radiates power ; into his brain and blood; every wandering thought pulls him down,; every sympathetic thought is fire to his purpose, edge to his sword. The preacher preaches the congregation back. A sensitive man will gather to him- : self th:' souls that are in sympathy. Out of hundreds he will be keenly awn re of .half a dozen. A rapt and upturned face will draw 'him like a star. Sometimes one good listener will make a good sermon. Often one lounger—ono person talking or looking round —will turn a sweet sermon sour. Kindness to dumb preachers should be taught as a duty. After all the man in the pulpit often is not such a fool as the an an in the pew. Of the many who make fun of the sermon not one in 50 could do it as decently himself. I thought the clergy were exceptionally bad readers till I heard laymen read. I thought the clergy were woeful speakers till I heard laymen who could not speak* Their addressee were all "er" —a piteous example of erring and straying. Poor creatures as we parsons are, we are in a degree, and by a degree, picked men* Our average of imbecility is lower than that of our critics* Some of us have grammar; most of us have our aitehes. Our sex- ,- mons aim at some architectural plaa. Th laity are apt to preach hasty pudding or rmid pies. PREACHING A DIFFICULT ART. The truth is that preaching is a difficult art. It takes eeven years to learn how .to cut a man's hair; 'many people cut a sermon, at sightj We in the Church of England are taught about it little and badly. ' But- a preacher, -is; born and irot made; though yoU'.can (help him to-find himself. It is a sad pity that ;,every parson must be a We should differentiate, and specialise, asTxiiuch as is possible. A good preacher is often a bad organiser; a bad visitor; a bad man at a bedside. A bad preachor is often a parochial' pearl. We should aim at* getting the sho3maker to Ms last; the preadher should do the preaching.

Some sort of circuit should be established in every diocese and connection, giving the pastors a change of flocks, and tho flocks of pastors. The flocks that suffer chronically from dumb dogs should once in a way get a dog that can. bark; We should preach less often and less long.

T!he real reason that the pulpit is, as Haweis called it, "The Dead Pulpit," is its divorce from daily life. The clergy are mot, dressed like men going to do a job. They aie all fringes and furbelows. They cultivate a diction quite apart from the speech of the street, Their accent is professional. They cultivate an esoteric twang, putting it on like a colouwl stole; they have church manners as women have company manners. They are afraid of the topics of the hour. They dare not bring a smile to tho faces of thoir audiences, though the great preachers of every period have been humorous, homely, colloquial, choosing their subjects fro-in the things under their eyes and feet, afraid of nothing but affectation and sham. I wish we had more cottage lectures; more dirty faces about us. The clean division of the church from the ihouso and the shop has made all our services artificial. It is the hardest thing in the world to get down to real life. If we were driven to preach from a boat or a cart we adiould feel as if we were doing a real thing. Sunday clotihes are the death of parson and people. We shall have to get back to shirt sleeves bpfore we can get back to Christ.