“ORTHODOXY OR WHAT IS NEEDED?"

Te Aroha News, Volume VII, Issue 443, 5 February 1890, Page 3

“ORTHODOXY OR WHAT IS NEEDED ?"

Auckland, Jan. 27. The Rev. E. H. Gulliver took the question of what is needed in religious matters? as the subject of his address to a good audience in the Temperance Hall last night. He said that in his two previous lectures he had brought a serious indictment against the popular religion ; he had shown that its influence on life was very slight, that Government and science alike ignored it, and that its main practical result was shown in hypocrisy, insincerity, and disobedience to the direct teaching of Christ. It had, in fact, landed them in a malarious atmosphere of pretence and make-believe in which healthy life was impossible. In our day we saw on all sides a spirit of insincerity. We went to churches and chapels and listened to assertions which did not bear the stamp of truth, and which raised questions towards which we stood in the same position as the early Christians and the men of the Reformation towards the questions of their day ; and just as they felt bound to avow their disbelief in falsehood and take all the consequences of such avowal, so we also were in our turn called upon to avow our bisbelief in dogmas, which have become false to us, although we may incur the displeasure of Mrs Grundy and the charge of atheism or infidelity in so doing. We hear a great deal about the Bible being the inspired Word of God, true, complete and without contradiction from beginning to end; but on the other hand we have the foremost scholars of Europe, men impartial and qualified by closest study, and of unblemished character, showing us its imperfections and contradictions. Does this destroy the value of the book ? No, but it shows that we have put the book in a false position. What follows then ? Why, as honest men we were bound to put the Bible in its true position, we were bound to deal with it as with any other _ ancient book, to employ all the skill, and knowledge, and research possible to elucidate it, and calmly and honestly accept the result. Was it not an insult to the God who made the earth to think otherwise? We needed boldness to proclaim the truth we found, even if it were unpalatable; boldness to speak out plainly and unequivocally, not as if afraid of taking cold in the head, muffled up in wraps and armed with respirator and blue spectacles. There was yet one more thing needed, and that was “toleration.” Look at our own city. We saw our Christianity divided into a number of sects, each one vaunting its own as the safest way of reaching heaven and disparaging the others. It was not thus that Christ made His way to the hearts of men ; we must allow that there are two sides to the shield and that all have an equal right to look at both sides. There was certainly a much wider spirit of toleration prevalent now than in the past, but it was not due to orthodoxy or religion ; it was due to the work of men of science, and it was to the spirit of science permeating society that we must look for the spread of the of truth, the fearlessness and the toleration which are needed to enable us to deal with the problems of our day.