CORRESPONDENCE

Southland Times, Issue 20199, 9 June 1927, Page 9

CORRESPONDENCE

Letters must be written in ink and on one side of the paper. Unless a signature, not necessarily for publication, accompanies a letter as a guarantee of good faith it will not be considered. An asterisk attached to the signature to a published letter denotes that some portion has been deleted by the Editor, a right which is exercised in questions of public policy, libel, good taste and fair play. THE CHURCH’ “WHAT IS WRONG WITH IT?” To the EditorSir, —I was a much interested listener to the Rev. J. Chisholm’s address on “The Church” in Knox Church last Sunday even ing and to see such a good report of it in the Monday morning’s issue of your paper. Whilst obviously resenting criticism, Mr Chisholm admitted, as he needs must, many serious offences by the Church in the past for which it is now paying the penalty—and one might well paraphrase the old cry and exclaim, “Oh! Church! how many crimes have been committed in thy name!” It is admitted upon every hand—by clergymen, ministers of all denominations, as openly as by laymen, that the Church is to-day—to use a somewhat vulgar but expressive phrase—“up against it” and the situation will have to be faced if the whole world is to be saved from an overwhelming cataclysm, and in face of this fact a little friendly criticism cannot do harm, but may do good, and it is the obvious duty of all men to do their little bit towards averting the pending tragedy. In my humble opinion the position of the Church to-day is similar to that of the Churches of Ephesus, Pergamos, Thyatira, Sardis and Laodicea at the time they each received a spiritual message. Their works, labour, patience, tribulation, poverty, charity, faith and service were all known and recognised, but they were nevertheless found wanting by reason of various deadly offences. They repented, were saved and became the enlightenment and inspiration of the world. “Go thou and do likewise.” “What is wrong with the Church?” Mr Chisholm considers the phrase “too hackneyed; that people were becoming sick and tired of it”—the more is the pity—for we shall hear much more of it before matters even begin to improve. He added that one could get a dissertation on it almost anywhere —“from a trades union hall” to “the Church news column of the Southland Times,” and a very fortunate thing that it is so, say we. Now I cannot speak as to trades union halls, but 1 should imagine that such dissertation might well come from worse places; but what on earth is wrong with the Church column in your paper ? Obviously it is very little—if any—more than a glorified advertisement column open to ministers of all denominations—a column in which the layman finds little of interest, for when he looks for Church news which he would expect to find there and finds a row of paragraphs to the effect that the Rev. Mr “So and So” will occupy the pulpit at “such and such” church he turns away disappointed and the last state of that man is worse than the first. One “must” wonder why such a capital opportunity of propaganda and publicity is allowed to pass. We love and respect our ministers, we revere their high calling; their task is herculean, and must, at times appear all but hopeless; they are entitled to all our true sympathy and co-operation; we do not question their deep love and devotion to their work; and thus we become jealous of their interests, reputation and efficiency, and in return one may surely, in a brotherly way offer a suggestion or two without giving offence, or laying oneself open to the charge of seeking cheap notoriety and the like. It should be remembered that the musical portion of the service is as important as the reading of the Scriptures or the sermon —yes or even the collection. Invercargill being a musical city they are far above the average in this respect. After the Sunday evening’s service at Knox Church I heard a highly trained musician remark upon the excellent taste displayed in the selection of the music and its rendering by the choir. Only to-day I heard the question asked, “Why on earth are the Scriptures not read in an intelligent way?” and why the ministers do not act their part in the matter, and, instancing St. Paul's address to King Agrippa the query was put as to how many ministers would visualise the scene and elocute the speech ? The Bible is written in the purest Anglo-Saxon; its imagery, its sublime pathos, its concise phrasing all form a setting for a vivid rendering and appeal such as may well picture and imprint the meaning upon the mind of the least intelligent listener. Why should “elocution’ be reserved for {he stage and criminal court and this important portion of the service be nullified when an intelligent rendering would conduce so greatly to the attractiveness of the service ? In conclusion may I very briefly and very humbly touch upon one other point which is of vital importance—the due thought and care in the preparation of the sermon. It is not long ago since eminent clergymen and ministers were asking, “What wonder our churches are empty when the pulpit throw such unmitigated trash at the heads of their devoted congregations—St. Paul’s addresses were masterpieces and bore upon their surface the marks of deep thought. There at Athens, as he is ascending (the side of the Areopagus he is revolving in his mind the inscription which he has just read 'To the unknown God” and, thus he stands on Mars Hill, with the intellect of the world before him, not ifnprepared, and gives forth unflinchingly, to those who spend their time in naught else but to hear or tell some new thing, the latest news from the throne of God. Demosthenes did not rely upon extempore speech even when his subject was but a laurel-wreath which withered ere his speech was done. These were well considered and they, or at least St. Paul’s, will be immortal. My space is done, but should this letter find favour in your eyes, sir, I think that it would only be cricket to approach you once more with a layman’s views as to “What is 'right’ with the Church?” Don’t you?—l am, etc., ARTHUR E. SYKES. IT STARTED IN DUNEDIN. A SCOTCH TRAIT. About four years ago Messrs. A. and W. Baxter, the well-known chemists of Christchurch, had a request from a Dunedin mother that they should put up Baxter’s Lung Preserver in a larger sized bottle. Although admitting that the half-crown bottle represented splendid value she stated that where there was a large family it was quickly used up and she wondered if a bigger bottle could not be sold. The economical family size of “Baxter's” at 4/6 was the result. The first winter there was a surprising demand for the new package from all over Otago and Southland. The following year supplies were sent out to other parts of the South Island, while two years ago isolated orders came trickling in from Wellington and Taranaki Districts. Now, the family size is in general demand throughout the Dominion, and the other day a heavy order for the 4/6 size came from an Auckland Warehouse. In any home, and where there are children particularly, the 4/6 bottle of “Baxter’s” is recommended. It not only ensures a plentiful supply against the winter ravages of coughs and colds, but it represents better value. Baxter’s Lung Preserver is unrivalled as a cough and cold medicine. It stops hacking coughs, eases sore throats and soothes chest and bronchial complaints in a surprising manner. You can feel it doing good from the first dose. “Baxter’s” is a rich, red, warming compound that is palatable to old and young alike. From North Cape to the Bluff, and even on Stewart Island, it is the general favourite. Obtainable from all chemists and stores at half-a-crown for a generoussized bottle, or if you would emulate the canny Dunedin folk ask for the economical family size at 4/6.—Advt.