LOCAL GOSSIP.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXVIII, Issue 8472, 24 January 1891, Page 1 (Supplement)

LOCAL GOSSIP.

..Utine hate audience for a word^two."^ T srrrosE that it naturally falls to me, in the meantime, to make some observations pon the remarks of the Rev. Mr. Nelson in a sermon on " Newspapers and Religion." td o not know anything more important and •nteresting than the relations between these two powers. Let us set them straight to be.nn with. Mr. Nelson complains that newspaper writers speak always slightingly of the Pulpit, that " they speak in a kind of disparaging way of Pulpit utterances, say•nir that they performed their religious duties only sometimes, and assigning as their chief reason the indifference of sermons." I allow that writers in newspapers are sometimes guilty of a kind of foolish affectation in this way. But, as the boys liv when a quarrel is being settled up, ••Who began?" The Pulpit has been in the habit of absolutely despising and ignorM " the Press. Nothing could exceed the sublime contempt with which clergymen, as a rule, used to refer to anything which appeared in the newspapers. Some considerable time ago I drew attention to this fact, that the clergy prayed lor all rulers ami magistrates, and for this functionary and the other functionary, through a long series, because of their power to influence the public mind for good or evil, taking no notice whatever of the mightiest of all powers which had grown up before their eyes, and which had far greater influence for good or evil than all the monarchs in creation. Shortly after this I was in a church in this city, and the clergyman prayed that all those who were in a position to influence the public mind through the press might be divinely raided for the promotion of religion and morality. I have never heard that Mr. Kelson did anything of the kind. His ;i:>t notice is an attack. At all events, I iv that if newspaper writers sometimes sneer at the Pulpit, they have been led to do so by the Pulpit professing antagonism to them.

Perhaps Mr. Nelson will reply, "Oh, but we are a ' sacred' calling. To sneer at us is to sneer at religion ; you hrre no such defence." The argument is scarcely open to him, because ho says that the object of the sermon is "' the promotion and encouragement of true religion and the discountenancing of vice,'' and he adds, "Had the Press, in' its ultimate object, any other mission ''" If, therefore, he and I are exactly on a par, 1 may speak as freely of him as he may of me. " 1 am disposed to magnify my calling as much as any apostle who ever spoke, but I do not think that the mission of the Pulpit and the Press are correctly defined by Mr. Nelson.

On one point we are alike, and this brine? out an important distinction between Mr. Nelson aud myself. I quite acknowledge that if a man takes up his paper, and i: he finds that the leading article, or even " Local Gossip," is insufferably dull, or entirely wrong in its arguments and inferences, he is entitled to say, "Confound that fellow, why can't he give us something worth reading?"' And if the thing goes on past his endurance, he can simply say, "Stop my paper !" I admit all that. But Mr. Nelson does not, on his part, lie says iliac people must not stay away from church because the sermons are indifferent, "as if public worship consisted altogether, and not- absolutely least of all, in listening to a discourse." lam afraid Mr. Nelson is old-fashioned, and does nor. march with the times. If attendance at church is simply a matter of hearing prayers read, then clergymen do not need to be men of education, or ability, or energy, or force of character. Anyone can intone a litany, if tha'- is all. Mr. Nelson seems to deprecate criticism of sermons. That is just where he makes a mistake. He ought to invite criticism in every shape. I know that it has long been a favourite doctrine amongst clergymen of the Anglican Church thai the sermon was nothing, or very little. In Scotland it has always been jusc the reverse—the sermon was everything. In England, lately, much more importance has been attached to the sermon, and some clergy of the Anglican Church are now greas preachers. Nowadays, nobody will trouble with anything that does not lay itself open for criticism, and unless the sermons in a church are worth listening to, that church will not be well attended. And when it is merely a matter of prayers, service has a tendency to degenerate into formalism, and tho.-e who go to church occupy themselves with a consideration of the "eastward position," or vestments, or ceremonials. Christ spoke to the people ; we hear little about forms or litanies from Him ; Saint Paul preached with eloquence and force, and when he was at a distance from those lie desired to address, he wrote epistles full of argument and exhortation.

I quite concur with Mr. Nelson that in many cases a sermon "fails of etfect because it was not, mixed with faith in those who heard it." People in church are listless and careless, and are impatient all the time the clergyman is speaking. But might not this arise in some degree because they have been schooled into thinking that the sermon was a very small matter. Mr. iNelson deprecates the Pulpit being looked to "as furnishing interest or amusement not to be distinguished from that furnished by a magazine or newspaper," but when that is so, I am inclined to think that the preacher is entirely to blame. He has the opportunity of showing the people that he is endeavouring to do something more than merely interest or amuse, and if he tails, it is his own fault. But many newspaper articles are written with a different purpose than merely to interest or amuse, anil we believe, too, that some newspaper writers discharge their duties in a spirit as devout, and with as sincere an anxiety to convince and persuade to right courses, as many clergymen when they intone the litany.

I have left myself but little room to speak on the charges which Mr. Nelson brines up against the Press. Newspapers, lie says, are to blame in respect to gambling, impurity, and love of sensationalism. Thee three things do not stand exactly on the same line. "Sensationalism"is a slang word descriptive merely of style or phraseology. It may be carried to the extent of vulgarity and bad taste, and it often is in American papers, but it is not positively evil in itself. As for the newspaper error in regard to gambling, it consists, according to .Mr. Nelson, in furnishing full information in regard to the betting that takes place on a racecourse. Mr. Nelson must be informed that a newspaper has a function which he never acknowledges, that of recording all events of interest, furnishing its readers with what they want to know. It they did not do that, how would Mr. kelson know the extent of the gambling evil or any other evil? As to " impurity," I scarcely know what Mr. Nelson means. We all of us are proud that life now is distinguished by its purity as contrasted with the" times of our fathers or grandfathers. And this improvement has coincided with a continual decrease in the power and influence of the Pulpit, and a continual increase of the power and influence of the Press. I could give many instances to show how gross immorality in public men was tolerated in the times of our fathers, and how invariably it is severely punished now. I have no wish to retort; but for gambling, churches might be asked to look at home.

~ When any of my readers have a fortune left to them, it may be as well to say nothing about it. I give a case in point. It was announced a few days ago that Mr. William Hodge, who has found for himself a function in this community, had had left to him a bequest by a relative. It happened that, just at this time, Mr. Hodge was engaged in straightening up the affairs of the Hospital, taking sides with Miss Arnaboldi, and especially nagging the members of the Board. They put three things together— that Mr. Hodge has had a handsome legacy, that he is agitating gainst the Board, and that some time ago he was an inmate of the Hospital for some considerable time. They therefore send lu "i a little bill for £42 Gs 2d for his maintenance in that institution. William was a o'uast when it was presented to him, but

doubt when ho comes to think about ib,4ie will simply "pay and look pleasant.

We hear a good deal about ladies in Paris or London who smoke cigarettes, bub our Auckland dames have not yet commenced the custom. At all events, if they have they kesp it quiet. But a few days ago, at a picturesque suburb, those who happened to be there were surprised to see a young and fine-looking lady indulging herself in this way. But for ladies to smoke cigarettes is a fashion 1 have no desire to see introduced here.

lb was intimated the other day at the gathering to hear "the second Gough" that Sir William Fox would have been present, but that lie was celebrating in a festive manner his 79ch birthday. Surely he could nob have been too much overcome with the festivities. It is one of the vanities which I can forgive a man, to be proud of perfect vigour of mind and body in very advanced years. I can forgive him, because it is a testimony that he comes of a good stock, and that on the wholo his life has been one of temperance and virtue. May Sir William see many more birthdays ! By the way, 1 looked in the other evening at the City Hall, which was packed to hear " the second Gough." Sir William was in the chair. I felt sure that to sit for a wholo evening breathing such on atmosphere was as detrimental to health as a week's spree on brandy and soda. And yet teetotallers enlarge on the injury done to health by drinking.

The Gough recitals of Mr. E. T. Smith, at. the City Hall, have proved an unqualified success. Sometimes the travelling "stars" who come here, go in with "a big head and come out with a small tail," but Mr. Smith does not evidently belong to that class, as Ii? got better as ho wont along, and many people preferred his original lecture, "An Interview with _ a Fiend," on Thursday night, to his rocital of Cough's orations. An incident took place atone of his recitals sof i very humorous character. After an impassioned denunciation of the evils of drink, he said, " Why, when I think of these things, sir, it makes my hair stand on end ! " The audience took one hasty glance at those gorgeous locks flowing over his shoulders, took in the comicality of the situation, and roared again at the bare possibility of such a contingency.

During Mr. Smith's short stay in Auckland as terrible examples of the evil of intemperance could be pointed to as any in Gough's orations. I am glad to learn that one professional man in this city has signed the pledge, whose downward career has been a source of pain to his best friends who wish him well. He is a man of education and culture, and once held a ?ood social position in this city. If Mr. Smith lias only been the means of getting that one man to sign the pledge his mission will not have been in vain.

I have nob been able to pluck the heart out of the mystery as to why the city licensed victuallers, or at least some of them, have gone back on Jonathan. Rumour says that, after furnishing several hotels, he can furnish no satisfactory apology as to why he did not play up to the furnishing. Anyhow, ho did not play up, and some publicans are sighing in consequence. Blercutio.