CORRESPONDENCE.

Daily Telegraph (Napier), Issue 3114, 21 June 1881, Page 3

CORRESPONDENCE.

CHURCH SERVICES.

fTO THE EDITOB OF THE DiILY TE LEGE-PH.] Sic,—-It has been noticed for some time that you take considerable pains in collecting information from the various churches as to the preacher whose services will be given on Sundays in your Saturdays evening issue—information, which, I am sure, is highly prized by the readers of your paper who belong to those churcbe3; but it is regretted by a large proportion of the attendants ?t the Church of England that no notice is ever given of the preacher who is to officiate at St. John's, either rooming or evening. What reason you have for not giving St. John's the same privilege that you do to the others I know not, but if you will do so in the future you will oblige. Ap, if any one takes a friend wanting him to hear his favorite preacher, it is, to say the least of it, "awkward" to find another preacher in the pulpit. Or again, take an example : A. B. and C. like one man, and D. E. F. like another; A. B. and C. think their favorite is going to preach, and go to church ; D. E. and F. think their favorite is not going to preach, and do not go to church. Thus oue party go and are disappointed, and the other party who do rot go are also disappointed, when they find out next day who had preached—therefore, a notice in your summary of church services at St. John's could do you no barm, and would please most of the congregation. If you object to give these notices in connection with St. John's services perhaps you will kindly state why, in a foot note for general information, when, if possible, some means may be devised and other reasons adduced to overcome your objections. _ The priests to officiate at the Catholic Church are also not mentioned in your summary, so that it looks " passing strange" to see the two oldest established churches "left out in the cold." If it takes up too much of your space—and perhaps that is the reason of your not inserting these notices—to mention " who reads the service," and " who preacheV it may ea?e your mind and "space " to know that the " name " of tbe preacher, morning and evening, would amply suffice to please all concerned. You and others may say that it ought not to matter to any true Christian man or woman who occupies the pulpit of any church as long as they preach the Bible, but then, dear Bir, don't you kno~ that human nature is human nature aftc all, and very few of us—l am sorry to say, of course present coraj any excepted —have got to that state of perfection—if you like to take up tbat ground ? No doubt if you permit the insertion of this letter—l wish a better pen that mine had the wording of it—you will receive letters from others telling you that you are acting perfectly right in withholding the names of those who preach at St. John's or any other church, on the supposition that churches might be more attended when one or the other preached, and so create a kind of—we will say— " clerical discontent," for clergymen as well as lawyers, like to get the best congregations and the most clients; but I may say before that subject crops up, if ever it should, that surely all who pay for hearing religion expounded have an undoubted right to prefer which preacher they feel does them the most good. Your space is, I know, too valuable—using a hackneyed term—to be taken up with a correspondence on this subject—a very paltry one, as you may say—so I have no doubt you will add a foot-note to this letter saying in your future Saturday's issue notices of St. John's services will be given. If not you may have another infliction from, —I am, &c, Cosmopolitan.

Napier, June 20, 1881

[We are indebted to the incumbents of the several churches for all information in connection with Divine services; the omission complained of by our correspondent therefore does not rest wit*i us. —Ed. D.T.J