THE FUNCTION OF THE CHURCH.

Gisborne Times, Volume XXIX, Issue 3148, 18 February 1911, Page 4

THE FUNCTION OF THE CHURCH.

REFUGE OF HUMAN LIBERTY. A STRIKING ADDRESS. Before the Congregational Union, the other day, the Rev. 1. Sarginson, of Limvood, delivered a striking address on “The Functions of the Church.” “The appeal of the CJiurcli,” he said, “should oe as universal as possible. Its existence should be laid not upon the things which divide men, so much as upon those things which unite them, it is at its peril—not immediate may be, but still a,t its peril—if the church neglects this note of universality. This appeal to the common spiritual background allows itself to be identical with movements because they are powerful and tout for the patronage of parties. The Church must beware of theories and programmes upon which equally intelligent and good men cf the same denomination mav be divided. Let tlie Church serve to enkindle in its members a hob- enthusiasm for humanity, a divine passion for the truth and righteousness, and the happiness and moral uplifting of every man, woman, and child, and leave its' members to go forth to do battle for the good under such banner as they may feel to have the most powerful claims upon them. “What is the Church doing? is a question as'ked by many who think it is doing nothing. Because they cannot capture it as a party machine, party leaders want to tune the pulpits as they have timed so many political platforms. It is a time of extraordinary temptation and peril for the Church. On the one hand it is scorned for its aloofness, on the other it is denounced ior allowing its pulpits to be invaded by polities and party cries. It is condemned for allowing what is supposed to be its proper work done by outside agencies, and at tlie same time it is despised as a thing obsolete in this democratic age. The Chrucli is suffering from many maladies, the most disastrous of which is the want of moral dignity and courage. It is diplomatic where and when it should be heroic. The Church is afraid of force, which it is its duty to employ ; it pays court to movements which it ought to look straight in the eyes and admonish for their excesses. There was a time when it required a good deal of courage to denounce the rich and powerful for their onoression and exploitation of the toiling. poor, and a good deal of courage to advocate the cause of the toilers. Tilings are now quite reversed. It takes a brave man to speak plainly to the democracy. The fact is that a new tyrannv is upon ns, and the Church is as afraid of it as is the average member of Parliament, and deals with it in much the same way. Democracy, or at least militant democracy, we are told is estranged from the 'Church, and too frequently is it assumed that tlie blame must be at the door of the Church, for is not democracy always in the right ? “Often enough we have the spectacle of the Church in a panic of penitence’ and concern, imploring democracy to state its grievances and name its own terms of reconciliation. lit is a piece of incredible ineptitude and folly for the Church to thus kneel at tlie feet of those who despise her and leave her to her fortunes. 1 yield to no man in my appreciation of the enormous amount of good achieved by the modern democratic movement with its splendid organisation, but let democracy be a little more sympathetic towards the Church, and remember that if all the social and economic programmes which it expects so much from were realised to-morrow the thing' of supreme value in the world would still be human personality, and that the Church would still be needed, if only as a witness to the reality.and freedom of the spirit. Strange and incredible as it may sound the Clmrch which in the .past' lias been associated with' the most- odious of a\}l tyrannies may be destined to stand a refuge of human liberty against the . encroach- > ments of an essentially despotic and l soul crushing State system.”