SERMONS.

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume XXIV, Issue 114, 15 May 1890, Page 3

SERMONS.

To tub Editor op the "Evening Mail," Sib,— Mr G-rubb has recently been attracting enormous congregations, solely, as I believe, on account of the energy and earnestness thrown into his sermons, elements which are only too often lacking in. ordinary preachers, who would do well to take a lesson from him in this respect and endeavor to impart some life into their deliverances and thus arrest and retain the attention of their hearers. In fact I thoroughly agree with the sentiments expressed in the following extract from a recent number of the Church Times, which I would ask you to reproduce. I have italicised that portion which I would specially bring under the notice of some of our clergy,— l am, &c, Ofien A Wearied Listener. [Extract.] The Times has been devoting several columns to that well worn subject, the length of the flermon. The general complaint is that it is too long, and is wearisome to the vexed soul of the member of the congregation who is longing to get home to his dinner, or who is to well doctrinally instructed to desire any exposition of the faith, or who, out of courtesy to the preacher, or for the sake of example, feels bound to sit the service through. The discussion was started by one who wrote from the point of view of a rustic, and many have been the eritioisms and remedies suggested. But after all the - modern sermon, is very muoh shorter than Jts precursor, and, the oifchQdos twenty

minutes ought not to be an insupportable burden. The general complaint against the sermon is probably not so much against tho quantity as the quality, for where there is the latter, a congregation even of modern times might conceivably be capable of asking for the hour glass to be turned. While there is, on the whole, a great improvement in the matter of the modern sermon, a better grasp of doctrinal teaching, a better sense of the adaptability of the Gospel to modern needs and methods of thought, there is, 011 the other hand, still a want of manner in the pulpit which renders very true tha criticism that the stage ims more influential than the pulpit because while the actor spoke ivhat xvas fiction as though he thought it to be tnw, the preacher spoke what xvas true as though he thought it to be false.