Unchristian Clerics

New Zealand Graphic, Volume XXXIV, Issue 11, 18 March 1905, Page 24

Unchristian Clerics

(By

MARIE CORELLI.

It is generally supposed that an ordained minister of the Gospel is a Christian. Whatever the faults, ncgligencies and shortcomings of other people in other conditions of “calling and election,” it is tacitly expected that the professing disciples of Christ, the priests, teachers and exponents of holy and spiritual things, should he more or less holy and spiritual in themselves. They are at any rate accredited with honest effort to practise, as well as to preach, the divine ethics of their divine Master. Their position in the social eommunity is one which, through oldtime tradition, historical sentiment and inborn national piety, is bound to command a certain respect from the laity. Any public disgrace befalling a clergyman is always accompanied by a strong public sense of shame, disappointment and regret. And when we meet (as jmost unhappily we often do) with men in “holy orders” who, instead of furnishing the noble and pure examples of life and character which we have a distinct right to look for in them, degrade themselves and their high profession by conduct unworthy of the lowest untutored barbarian, we are moved by amazement as well as sorrow to think that such wolves in sheep’s clothing should daro to masquerade as the sacredly ordained helpers and instructors of the struggling human soul. it would be vain to deny that during the past few years there have been many examples of men belonging to the hierarchy of the Church who have wantonly and knowingly outraged every canon of honour and virtue, and their sins appear all the blacker because of the whiteness of the faith they profess to serve.

Most of us have met many a mean little curate, many a sly, spiteful, scandal-mongering, hypocritical parson, in tlie daily round of our common lives and duties. Most of us know the “naiad” cleric, the man who is a doubtful compound of oil and vinegar, with a good deal of tough “green” vegetable matter growing where the brain should be —coarse weed of bigotry, prejudice and rank obstinacy. In country towns we can scarcely fail to have come across the domineering vicar—the small and petty tyrant who whips the souls committed to his charge with rods steeped in his own particular pickle of arrogance, austerity and coercion, playing, the part of a little despot over terrorised Sunday-school children, and laying down the Jaw for his parishioners by way of a “new dispensation” wherein the Gospel has no part. One such petty martinet, well-known in a certain rural parish, plays regular “ogre’ - to his choir boys. It is always a case of “Fee, fl, fa, fo, fuml I smell the blood of a choristers,” with him. Should one of these unfortunate minstrels chance to sneeze in the course of service this vicar straightway imposes a penny fine ((sometimes more) on the unlucky little wretch for yielding to an irresistible nasal impulse. This kind of thing is, of course, absolutely ridiculous, and would merit nothing but laughter, were it not for the dislike, distrust and contempt engendered in the minds of the boys by the display of such a peevish spirit and trumpery oppression on the part of a man who is played in the position he holds to be an example of kindness, good temper, cheerfulness and amiability to all. True, the vicar in question is what may be called “liverish,” and the small boy’s sneeze may seem, to'a mind perverted by bilious bodily secretions, like the collapse of a universe. But there arc various ways of conquering even one's physical ills, nt least to the extent of sparing poor children the infliction of fines because they have noses which occasionally give them trouble. The begging cleric is of all sacerdotal figures the one most familiar to the general community. One can seldom at-

tend a church without hearing the mendicant’s plea. If the collection taken was indeed for the poor, and one felt that it was really and truly going to help feed the starving and nourish the sick, how gladly most of us would contribute to the best of our ability! But sad experience teaches us that this is not so. There are “funds” of other mettle than the sick and poor, “restoration” funds especially.

For many years a famous church was in debt, owing to “restorations,” and Sunday after Sunday the vicar implored his congregation to “lift the burden" off its time-honoured walls—in vain! At last one parishioner paid the amount required in full. The vicar acknowledged the cheque, put a recording line in “The Parish Magazine,” and—never spoke to that parishioner again! This is a fact. Neither he nor his wife ever showed the slightest common civility to the one individual who, out of all the parish, had “lifted the burden,” concerning -which so many pious exordiums had been preached—an individual who, by the way, holds many striking letters from the reverend man in question, full of eloquent promises as to what he would do, and how grateful he would be if this “terrible debt” was once paid. Till it was paid, the vicar showed every friendliness to ths person in whom he thus confided; but afterward —well, one can only suppose that it was a case of “Othello’s occupation gone.” He could beg no more—not for that particular object. But I understand that he has started fresh “restorations” lately; so till he find another trusting sheep in the way of a too-well-disposed parishioner he will be happy.

There are some clerics who to their sacred duties add “a little literary work.” They are not literary men—indeed, frequently they have no idea whatever of literature —they are what may be called “literary jobbers.” Many clergymen have been and are still greatly distinguished in the literary calling; but I am not alluding to past or future Kingsleys. The men I mean are those who “do a bit of writing,” and help in compiling books of reference to which few ever refer. They are men to be kept well at a distance. They are apt to be the most pertinacious beggars of their class, beggars, not for other’s needs, but for their own. They want introductions to “useful” people—people of “Influence”— and they want letters to publishers, which they sometimes get. The publishers are not grateful. They are overrun, they say, with clergymen who want to write guide-books, books of travel, books of reference, books of reminiscence. One of these “reverend” individuals, pleading stress -of poverty, was employed by a woman to do some copying work, for which, in a wellmeant wish to satisfy the immediate needs of his wife and children, she paid him in advance fifty pounds. He sent a signed receipt for the money, with the following gushing epistle: Dear

Could I write as you do, I might find words to express in part some of my feelings of gratitude to you for all your kindness. My little daughter owes to you untold happiness, and I believe the goodness you ever show her will brighten her whole future life. My dear wife yon help to bear her many burdens of health and loneliness as no other has ever attempted to do; and my very mediocre self owes to you a rccogni tion, after many long struggles, I will not say of merit, for no one knows better than myself my own shortcomings, but of “effort.” tn fact, you come to us as Amenhotep sang of the sun: “Thou art very beautiful, brilliant and exalted above earth, Thy beams encompass all lands, which thou hast made. Thou art. our sun. Thou blndest us with thy love. Thou art on high, but the day panes with thy going.’*

Even so, your kindly heart has shone upon our life, and made "ns feel the springs of life within us. May the great Master of all things forever bless you and yours!

After this poetical effusion, it is difficult to believe that this same “Christian” minister, in order to gratify the private jealousy, spite and malice of a few common persons whom he fancied might be useful to him on account of their wealth, wrote and published a personally signed “lampoon” on the friend who had tried to benefit him and his wife and family, and to whom he had expressed himself in the terms of such unmeasured gratitude. But such, nertheless, was the ease. Report says that he was handsomely paid for his trouble, which may perhaps serve as an excuse —for in many cases, as we know, mofiey outweighs principle, even with a disciple of Christ. It did so in the case of Judas Iscariot, who, however “went out and hanged himself” phomptly. It is reasonable to expect that the “very mediocre” cleric, who owed to the woman he afterwards insulted “a recognition after many long struggles,” will nition afer many long struggles,” will do the same morally and socially in due course. For it would be as great a wrong to the ehureh to call such a man a "Christian” as it would be to canonise Judas. Even the untutored savage will not injure one with whom he has broken bread—the rites of hospitality with him are sacred. And to bite the hand that has supplied a need is scarcely the act of a mongrel cur —let ns hope it is a. sufficiently rare performance among mongrel clerics. “Christianity” and “Christian” are beautiful words, emblematic of beautiful thoughts and beautiful deeds. The men who profess to teach the value of those thoughts, the influence of those deeds, should be capable in themselves of practically illustrating what they mean by their faith, in their own lives and actions. They should be strong,

cheery, noble and upright examples of humanity at its best. Inspired by the purest creed that was ever tanght to mankind for its better hope and enlightenment, they should express in their attitude to the world a confident and constant joy and belief in God’s goodness, and should remember that if He, their divine Master, “so loved us,’* equally should they, His ordained ministers, love us, ay! even the worst ol us, in their turn. When, on the contrary', they do things for which the poorest peasant or dock-yard labourer would have the- right, and the honest right too, to despise them, when they, commit base actions for money or advancement, when they arc harsh, unyielding, discourteous, and obstinate to the degree of even declining to aid, a good cause or assist in some benefit to the nation at large, merely because they have not been consulted as to ways and methods, they do not deserve to be called “Christians” at all. They, are of that edass, unhappily increasing 1n number, who cry out: “Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Thy name?” And to whom will be given the answer:' “I never knew you; depart from Me, y« that work iniquity!” Great and noble beyond all praise are true “Christian” ministers—and thousands of them are to be found in all parts of the world, working silently and bravely for the rescue of bodies as well as souls, giving practical as well as spiritual help and sympathy to their fellow-men in 'trouble. But just because their labours are so valuable, one resents all the are so valuable, one resents all the more deeply the conduct of certain members of the clergy who cast dishonour upon their whole calling, and just because the vocation of “priest” is so high, we intensely deplore every action that tends to debase it. The un-Christian cleria belongs to no spiritual form of faitK whatsoever, and should not be permitted to pretend that he does. He has only, one religion—Self. And from the professor of Self, no man need ask either, help or instruction. .