THE CHURCHES AND LABOUR.
[To THE EDITOR OF THE " SPECTATOR.'
SIR, —I regret that Mr. Dennis should find what he imagines to be my view of prayer " a sad thing." But he does not seem to have read my letter very carefully. For—though I fail to see how a public religious act can be other than ceremonial (which is not to say that it is either perfunctory or super- fluous)—I was not speaking of public worship as such, but of the proposal that " a day of national humiliation and prayer should be enjoined by authority." Nor did I say that this was either desirable or the reverse : what I questioned was the assumption that those who do not join in the demand for it " ignore Almighty God in public affairs." I will not say that it is " a sad thing " to find Mr. Dennis urging that " there is in this country a vast reservoir of spiritual aspiration waiting to be tapped." But I confess that I find it difficult to attach any definite meaning to mixed metaphors of this kind, and. I think that their prevalence in religious circles is one of the reasons why many people find church-going a difficulty. The, crude Dualism which underlies them does not correspond to experi- ence, and the language in which it is expressed leaves on many persons—I do not doubt mistakenly—an impression of un- reality. I am reminded of an excellent Nonconformist of my acquaintance who occasionally lapses into this " language of Canaan." His wife, whose Nonconformity is as stalwart as. but more sensible than, his own, never fails to repress his enthusiasm. Her method of applying the closure is unsym- pathetic, but efficacious : "Now, Sam, no more o' that."—I am,
Ashby St. Ledgers.
Previous page
