Original Correspondence.

Clutha Leader, Volume III, Issue 156, 6 July 1877, Page 6

Original Correspondence.

. - . - .TO THE EDITOR. For Salo, on easy terms and cheap, tho King-" .dom ot Heaven : small deposit, and not interest chargeable on the remainder. TVEr Editor,— l don't wish to be in any wise considered profane, and lest I should shock the sensibilities of some of your :^yell-disposed readers, I may say tha + . the above is hardly my own notion of things, but only one suggested at this season of -■the year, and perhaps in some measure by ; someol themselves. The present is, I believe, the vintage of the Presbyterian church, during -which the fruits of that peculiar plant -called the Sustentation Fund aro being -gathered in ; and from what I can learn, the above motto is very appropriate to some of the gleaners in the harvest. We hear a good deal of boasting, or what appears to be boasting, about the results of "this fund *. it is metaphorically called a --sheet anchor, and so on. And after all, what'is it ? I've taken the trouble to look •over the amount, and find that on an aye- - rage it comes to about £200 a year. And I learn that this is all that the bulk of the ministers of tlie Presbyterian church have t© vegetate upon. I've heard a good deal about the wealth of the Presbyterian • church, and the comfort of its ministers ; -and looked at from a ditcher's point of view this maybe correct, but looked at from any other point I think it is simply foolish exaggeration, not on the part of "the people merely, but on the part of the ministers chiefly, who wish no doubt in tins matter to blow their own horn, and exalt their position and influence by • contrast with the other denominations. who are probably worse off. I think, Sir, that it is simply ridiculous "to say that the ministers of the Prcsby- ' terian Church are so well provided for as is given out, as no man having a family is -able to live comfortably on the sum referred to ; ? and having other claims upon him, he cannot be easy on it. But the • question arises, Are the people to blame for keeping down the amount of the sustentation fund? I think they are not • altogether directly to blame for it: the machinery creaks, and is not wrought as it should be. Sometimes men are sent to -collect it who are the personification of ' meanness themselves. I knew of a case -in Southland where an old screw of that 'sort was in the habit of collecting, and when a sum was offered that tended to put to shame not himself but his offering, he would say, "Tak 1 it back, it's ower muekle for the minister." Now, Sir, there are not a few of this sort in the : men who make religion stink in

the nostrils of society. They say, and do not ; and as their religion is the cheapest tiling they have got, so it is the worst, I think all such should give np their connection with any work that requires a liberal spirit, otherwise they will hi tlie end blast with the leprosy of tlieir own

meanness the work hi which they engage. In conclusion, I may say Dm not an office- " bearer in any church, but I've long abhorred to see men professing to esteem -above all wealth what to "sustain in vvigoru r they won't give more than 2s 6d a year to •support. — I am, &c, UNHAPPY. P.S. — Since writing the foregoing it has -occurred tome that I'll write next time "and give you the names of some of the -collectors and subscribers whom I've reformed.