Clergymen Express Opinions On Church Broadcasts

Radio Record, Volume VIII, Issue 36, 15 March 1935, Page 12

Clergymen Express Opinions On Church Broadcasts

Canon Percival James's Views Are Discussed

In a recent issue_of the "Radio Record" Canon Percival James, of St. Paul’s Pro-Cathedral, Wellington, made certain suggestions for the reorganising of the broadcasting of church services. To-day we publish letters of reply from Archbishop Averill, of Auckland, and the Rev. W. Bramwell Scott, of Trinity Church, Wellington. Archibishop Julius, of Christchurch, was asked for an opinion, but he said that "Church broadcasting is new, and a younger man must deal with it. I am of yesterday-or the day before." The Rey. Jonathan H. Haslam, president of the Methodist Conference, was also approached for an opinion but, as Mr. Haslam has not yet been on the air nor has a radio set in his houie, he does not feel that it would be becoming for him to express an opinion. Bishop West-Watson, of Christchurch, is a radio listener of less than a fortnight’s standing and, by reason of his short acquaintance with broadcast_ing, he also feels constrained te remain silent on the subject.

Yo the Iditor, Sir-lI find myself largely in agree: ment with the views expressed by Canon Percival James regarding the broadcasting of church services. I fully realise how much the broadcast services. are. appreciated by the sick. the aged and the dwellers in country districts, far remote from the places where church services are held, and for their sakes I should be sorry to see a less number of services broadcast. Doubtless there are very. many. who would not be included inthe aforementioned eategory who do appreciate the services and sometimes the sermons even if they are not in the habit of iittending Divine service. I cannot understand how any reasonable being could regard such broadcast services as in any way a substitute for the worship of Almighty God or attendance at the Sacraments, ~ I. quite understand how difficult. it must be to allot the privilege of broadcasting church services when there are so many applicants for the honour, I suppose even broadcasting authorities desire to give heed to the wishes of their subscribers, and consequently, more consideration should, I think, be given to the. numerical strength of the

various churches and denominations. The religious census returns may not be the perfect or ideal way of allotting the privilege of broadcasting but it might well afford some. guide in the matter. With regard to having one representative for every church or denomination irrespective of its numerical strength on the "Church Committee" for arranging the broadcasting of services, I eannot thing that it’s fair ov just. There is much to be said for Canon James’ contention that the broadeast service should be entirely separate from the ordinary evening services in the

churches. .Many of them at present, are quite unsuitable for broadcasting, I should prefer a‘special broadcast service lasting about 45 minutes from a church rather than from a studio. Why -could not such a service be held from $30 p.m. to 9.15 p.m.?. If possibie the service should be conducted by the-same -individual on four consecutive Sundays. The children’s service is very important and much valued. It might even be more helpful to have a short Suaday morning service, say, from 9 a.m. .to 9.30 a.m. in place of the morning ser vices as they are now broadcast: I am- entirely in agreement with Canon James re Sunday broadcasting in England. In addition to the services. lectures, addresses, etc., I listened in on every possible occasion when I was in England to a short service every Sunday night which to my mind was a gem. If 1 remember rightly the service took plave after 10 p.m. and lasted possibly ten minutes, -but I could never forget. the impression made upon my mind by that wonderful. finish to the Sunday broadcast. I desire to thank you for your ob vious desire to give the broadcasting of religious services a "fair. run." Your faithfully, A.W., NEW ZEALAND,

To the Bditor, Sir,-I am on holiday’ and have. had -for me-the novelty of "listening-in" to a number of church services in various centres of the Dominion. Canon James’ article in your issue of March 1 has helped to erystallise my views on the matter of church servive broadcasts. From the Anglican point. of ‘view there is much to be said for his contentions. Perhaps a Methodist may he allowed to give’ his viewpoint: . I prefer the broadcast as part.of the ordinary church service. The time allowed has been more than sufficient for* my service. The ordinary church service is likely to’ be more inspirational than the one turned on specially for listeners-in after the close: of. the main service, The difficulty of reconciling the claims, of the regular church congregation with the unseen "listenerin" is overcome by conducting the service. for the benefit of the "listener-in." On more than one oceasion I have. given my service an Anglican: turn,. particularly on Whit Sunday, because I realised that. many Anglicans would be amongst my hearers. With regard to the allocations of services: I agree with the Canon that.the smaller demoninations have more

Services than they are entitled to pro- . portionately. At the Same time it must not be forgotten that the Anglicans and Presbyterians have one service ' every Sunday: from one of the YA stations and that is a concession not enjoyed by the Methodists, for example. I listened-in from Dunedin one Sunday evening and heard services in all four centres’ and these included an Anglican and a Presbyterian service. If 2YA gave the Anglicans 46 services and the Presbyterians a similar number where would . the Roman Catholics and Methodists come in, to say (Cntd. on p. 57.)

Church Broadcasts

(Continued from page 12.) nothing of the lesser denominations. I agree that 23 Anglican services from 2YA in twelve months seem too few but the balance is adjusted by the concession of one Anglican service on the air each Sunday from one of the YA statious. With: regard to preachers and sérvices:: Have we made the best ariangements in this counection? We Want to hold the "listener-in." We want him to see what Christianity really me@ans in his life. We want a service that "goes over" well and appeals to the devotional and worshipping tastes of the average man who owns a Wireless

that direction? I am afraid not, and that some re-adjustment is necessary in this respect apart altogether from the claimg of denominations, Of the six services that I listened to only one reached the standard of a real inspirational service that would keep the listener from wanting to twist the dial till he found something more to his taste. I am. against the studio service. Better the weaknesses of the ordinary preacher, choir and congregation than mechanised and wooden services, As one who has been rapped over the knuckles for transgressing the regulations, I admit the necessity for such regulations, but plead for more freedom in order that the preacher may not be-

come stereotyped and that the principles.of Christ may be applied ta the problems with which the world is faceé to-day. ; As to whether the broadcast has affected church attendance, I am in full accord with the Canon. My own congregation realises that they are helping me to broadcast and they feel a bounden duty to be present, and "listeners-in" realise how well they do their part in a large number find their way to church in order to. have a "personal appearance" of the preacher and the choir so as to be able to visualise the surroundcongregational singing. I find too that ings when next they "listen-in." Yours faithfully,

W. BRAMWELL

SCOTT