ENGLISH SOCIETY.

Gisborne Times, Volume XXIV, Issue 1959, 15 December 1906, Page 1

ENGLISH SOCIETY.

DISTINGUISHED FROM THE “SMART SET.”

In a Bormon at Christchurch on Sun•'ay morning, Archdeacon Averill, who recently returned from England, took up the cudgels in dofence of English society. He said: —“ Without professing to be an expert in such matters, I did mane many inquiries in England on this and many other subjects from thoso who wore qualified to give an opinion, and I cannot help but feel that people often confuse the term ‘ society ’ with a smalt and noisy section known as the 1 smart sot.’ It is evident, I think, that thero is a class of people in England, as elsewhore, who purposely disregard the laws of God, the laws of right aod wroDg, and who lay themselves out to shock tho sensibilities of thoir nobler and more refined neighbors. But God forbid that wo should ever think that these people represent English society ! There is a curious type of mind found often in a still more curious typo of body which considers that it has reached the snenmum bonum of ex istence when it finds itself rauked amongst the smart set, but I cannot for a moment believe that such an invertebrate, effeminate, and downgrade typo in any way represents the real society of England to-day. All I can say is, God help poor old England if it is. It is quite evident that there is a groat difference between what calls itself society and what really is society, and though the so called ‘smart set’ may have increased in vulgarty and open disregard of divine restrictions and so becoiie more prominent tha they once were, yet I cannot but Ue that there is no such downward tendency in the real English society to ■ day, as possibly some of us may have imagined there is. Thero is another subjoct somewhat akin to the one on which I have touched, and about which we hear a good deal from time to time—l mean the supposed decay of that great bulwark of the British race, religion, and the falliDg'Off in that outward witness to God which we call church-going. Well, I have already expressed some opinions on that score, and I should like to add one or two more. I had a good many conversations with Bishop Wolldon, and ho said that there was a greater domand for special services of all sorts than he supposed ever before, and a greater desire to bring religion into closer practical touch w T ith tho nation’s life, its joys and sorrows, but that there were signs of a lessoning of the sense of the duty of worship. Perhaf s some words of tho late Bishop Westcott aro even more applicable to day than they were when lie wrote them, ‘ Nothing, I believe,’ he says, 1 is more unjust than to call the spirit of modern English thought irreligious; on the contrary, even in its scepticism it clings to religion. There never was a time when mon have had a keener sense of what religion ought to bo and to do. There never was a time when the demands upon religion were greater.’ A very thoughtful layman in England had told him that there was a much better tone among tho employees than formerly, and behind it he thought was tho diffused spirit of Christianity which, according to the Bishop of Southwark, was becoming strengthened with the weakening of embodied Christianity. " here was less of tho more traditional religion, this layman said, but, wherever the clergy were men of God, wherever they spoke from convictim, one would find no signs of a falling off in the attendance at church, or weakening of the interest taken in religion. Another layman summed up the position much in the same way when he said that in nine cases out of ten whore thero was a falling off in tho attendance it church it was due to want of earnestness in the clergy. ‘These opmiors absolutely coincided with my own impressions,’ said tho Archdeacon, ‘ and though a great responsibility is thrown upon the clergy themselves, yet I bs» Leva in the long run it will le tho yary best thing foif the olorgy.”