Читать книгу Henry John Cody - Donald Campbell Masters - Страница 14

Chapter 6

Cody, the Coming Man, 1900–1905

The early years of the twentieth century were a buoyant time in the history of Canada. Trade was increasing, capital was flowing in, immigrants were arriving in the thousands. Sir Wilfrid Laurier seemed justified in his assertion that the twentieth century belonged to Canada. In this buoyant atmosphere Cody’s star was rising. An attractive young priest with an expanding congregation, supported by a band of devoted laymen and consulted by bishops, other clergy, academic colleagues, and students, he was indeed the coming man.

Cody’s correspondence and diaries give a picture of a busy urban church and of Cody’s place in it. St. Paul’s congregation for the most part consisted of comfortable, middle-class people living along Jarvis and the adjacent streets and in Rosedale, across the ravine. The names that recur in the diary are of business or professional people such as S.H. Blake, the Jarvises, the Larkins, R. Millichamp, W.R. Smallpeice, Strachan Johnson, and the Gooderhams. Cody’s diary includes many casual references to events at St. Paul’s: “Sept. 12, 1900 At church wedding of Mr. Skeats and Miss Chipman. Mr. Des Barres married them and I assisted, afterwards met Mr. and Mrs. Chipman, Mr. and Mrs. Hirschfelder, Mr. and Mrs. O’Brien ...” And a later entry for May 7, 1905: “175 communicants – Mrs. Bernard, the Ashworths, Lady Gzowski; Saw Mr. and Mrs. G. Gooderham.”

Cody was priest-in-charge from 1899, as Des Barres was still rector. But Cody was in virtual control, and his stipend was raised from $500 in 1898–99 to $1,500 in 1900–1901. He was assisted by an assistant rector (i.e., a curate), R.B. Patterson from 1900 to 1904 and E.A. McIntyre from 1904 to 1906. Cody did most of the preaching and a good deal of the pastoral work. Des Barres and the curate preached occasionally and Cody received some help from his old friend, George Wrong, at that time a professor of history at the University of Toronto. Occasionally a missionary or an evangelical bishop would also preach.

Cody was a hard worker. Although he had declined the appointment to the Church of the Redeemer in 1897 on the grounds that the work would be too onerous, his program at St. Paul’s was even heavier. Sundays were particularly tiring. Perhaps Cody’s performance on September 9, 1900, was a little more demanding than usual but not untypical: “a.m. Preached on Naaman’s cure 2 Kings 5:1–12. After church met a Mrs. Leith and Mrs. White fr. the south boarding 591 Jarvis St. & went into church with them. Before church met Mr. Millichamp Mr. Jno. Taylor. At S. S. met Miss Williams, Mrs. Copp. After S. S. called at the Thompsons: met Jno Jones & family preached at St. Paul’s [evening service] on ‘Greatest in Kingdom?’ after service met Mr. Scovil, Mrs. & Miss Grosvenor.”

Only one of the clergy or a member of a clergyman’s family could appreciate how unusual Cody’s Sunday was. Most parish clergy found the Sunday services sufficiently tiring without the additional social contacts and pastoral visiting Cody recorded. No matter how busy his Sunday he always put in an appearance at the afternoon Sunday School to encourage the teachers and staff.

Cody had one problem that became recurrent at St. Paul’s, his relations with the organist. This was not an unusual situation for Anglican rectors, particularly the evangelicals. Many Anglican churches had a tradition of a simple service in which congregational singing was a primary feature. The organist and choir, however, were often primarily concerned with the beauty of the singing, preferably by the choir alone. They resented the untrained participation of the congregation and sought to increase the part played by the choir, through anthems and the use of unfamiliar chants. There was resentment on both sides and friction between the rector and the organist. Cody had trouble with at least three of his organists.¹ In this case, the organist, H.D. Phillips, wrote to Cody on March 21, 1905, announcing his intention to resign. He complained about the location of the organ as well as the hostility of the congregation. He felt that the Codys were sympathetic (after all, Florence was a former organist), but added, “Unfortunately you are not yourselves musical and therefore do not grasp either the full significance of the drawbacks existing thro’ the bad placing of the organ and choir or the utterly ignorant nature of the criticism made by the congregation.” He went on, “The choir, I may tell you, have all along looked upon the congregation not as a friend to be pleased but as a foe to be appeased ... My greatest trouble however has been no connection whatever, all along between what the congregation have liked, and what has really been good either in the music itself or its performance and it is this which has paralysed my powers of initiative.”

One of the keenest critics of fancy music in the church was S.H. Blake, one of Cody’s leading parishioners. He once wrote to Cody after an ocean voyage expressing his joy at the Sunday-morning service on shipboard because there was no choir. Blake had many allies in the congregation.

Despite minor problems, St. Paul’s continued to expand. Its growth was reflected in the renovation of the church in 1900 and by its extension in 1904. In the latter year, the church was lengthened and new transepts and a new chancel added; 450 seats were provided so that the church now had a seating capacity of 1,250. Sheraton congratulated Cody in glowing terms: “Every friend of Wycliffe ought to thank God for what you have done in St. Paul’s and every true friend of your Church must find, in your work there a splendid encouragement and the best omens for the future.”²

It should be noted that in all this prosperity Cody always sought to make clear the real purpose of the Christian church. When the church was reopened after the renovations of 1900, he preached on the text from Corinthians “But of him are ye in Christ Jesus,” and followed with the admonition “He that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord.”³

St. Paul’s served as an important source of help for smaller, lessprosperous congregations in the diocese. In May 1905 St. John’s Church, Whitby expressed its thanks for the gift of a communion table from St. Paul’s. More extensive aid was given to St. Paul’s, Runnymede, which was in effect a colony of St. Paul’s, Bloor Street.

In 1905 Cody was involved in an event that might have had stormy consequences, the visit of A.F. Kirkpatrick, the Lady Margaret Professor of Divinity at Cambridge. Kirkpatrick was a biblical scholar who shared the views of Welhausen, Driver, and others. When the visit was announced, he was attacked by the Rev. John Langtry and others in the columns of the Canadian Churchman. Langtry was a redoubtable high churchman but he had conservative views of the Scriptures. Canon E.A. Welch defended Kirkpatrick in the Canadian Churchman, asserting that his ideas were held by “almost all the competent scholars.”⁴ Kirkpatrick’s visit seemed likely to develop into a major confrontation, but it actually it went off quite smoothly. Kirkpatrick was more moderate than had been anticipated, and the press, mercifully, ignored the whole visit. “Spectator,” a columnist in the Churchman, reported in relief: “Dr. Kirkpatrick of Cambridge, England, has come and gone, and behold the sun still shines in his might and the foundations of the earth are unmoved.”⁵

Cody had supported the visit. He undoubtedly disapproved of Kirkpatrick’s views but felt that so distinguished a visitor should be shown every courtesy. He attended at least two of Kirkpatrick’s lectures and two dinners in his honour, one given by Kirkpatrick’s cousin (a member of Cody’s congregation), the other by Goldwin Smith. He gave a supper in Kirkpatrick’s honour and even had him preach at St. Paul’s.

In this period Cody’s reputation as a preacher continued to increase. Letters in the Cody Papers suggest the effectiveness of his sermons: from D.R. Keys in January 10, 1902, “Your sermon has been an epiphany to me ... God bless you and strengthen you in the work you must be doing”; from Fred Jarvis in November 10, 1904, “I hear you preached a magnificent sermon on the Apostle St. John last Sunday how I wish you could repeat it at St. John’s York Mills.” And so it went on. Some letters were patronizing, such as one from a Toronto barrister: “I don’t suppose that I heard anything really new, but there is nothing so refreshing and helpful as the simple truths of the Gospel.” One self-styled skeptic was impressed by Cody’s sermon and wanted to find out “the ground upon which you stand and feel secure.”⁶

Not all the letters were laudatory. Some objected to Cody’s delivery or to his use of big words. John Tate liked Cody’s sermon on the justice of God but wanted more discussion of the corporate duty of people as distinct from their individual responsibility.⁷ But whatever the line taken by those who commented, they all testified to the fact that he was making a deep impression.

A memorandum by Bishop White contains the best description of Cody as a preacher. White had had a long connection with Cody from the time that White was a student of Cody’s at Wycliffe in the 1890s. His considered judgment was that the outstanding feature of St. Paul’s was “the inimitable character of Canon Cody’s preaching. It was Gospel preaching of an expository type, always evangelical even on Old Testament themes, and full of practical teaching.”⁸

There can be no doubt of the profound effect of Cody’s sermons upon many of his listeners. Others remembered only how long they were. It is true that many of them were long, particularly in the later stages of his ministry. The author once heard him preach for fifty minutes in 1932. In his early career they were probably shorter. There is a story told of the student Cody preaching one Sunday morning in a country church. He had thought the sermon had gone rather well until an ancient parishioner assured him, “It was quite good ... what there was of it.” While many of his sermons were indeed long, they were carefully crafted and devoid of meaningless rhetoric.

An examination of Cody’s sermon notes indicates the care and thoroughness with which he prepared them, but conveys little of the effect the sermons had on Cody’s listeners. It was his personality, vigorous, enthusiastic, and sympathetic, that came through to the hearers and made his words so compelling and comforting. Canon W.A. Filer, who began his ministry when Cody was in his middle years, recalled, “A Cody sermon lasted about an hour, but it seemed like fifteen minutes.”

The work at St. Paul’s was central in Cody’s life, but he also maintained contacts with Wycliffe, Ridley, and the new girl’s school, Havergal. As well, he did a good deal of public speaking and preaching at other churches. He was on the boards of Ridley and Havergal, and at Wycliffe he continued to establish himself as Sheraton’s right-hand man.

At Wycliffe the peace which had previously characterized the faculty was disturbed by what might be called “the Plumptre affair.” In some ways it was petty, but it throws a good deal of light on the relations between Cody and his Wycliffe colleagues. H.P. Plumptre was appointed to the staff in 1902 to teach courses in Pastoral Theology and to act as dean. He was modest and well-meaning and anxious to get on well with Sheraton and his other colleagues. Unfortunately, he had liberal tendencies in theology and churchmanship. This made it almost impossible for him to establish a good relationship with Sheraton. There might also have been personality differences. Plumptre complained to Cody that Sheraton treated him with coldness.⁹ He trusted Cody and appealed to him for help in his relations with Sheraton, writing in June 23, 1902: “If you get a convenient opportunity before September next of letting Dr. Sheraton know the desire of my heart is simply for a true and happy friendship you would do me and the world here a service ... I know that a word from you would go a long way.”

But Sheraton became increasingly exasperated with Plumptre’s ideas. By October 25, 1903, he was so upset that he suggested to Cody that he might resign the principalship. “Things cannot go on as they are,” he protested, “and if my friends fail to act for me, I do not see how I can remain. I have gone far beyond the limits of self-respect and of patience.” Sheraton apparently felt he was not being adequately supported in his opposition to Plumptre. Indeed, there is some evidence of sympathy in the Wycliffe camp for Plumptre. George Wrong supported him, and C.C. Owen, a prominent evangelical and a Wycliffe graduate, told Cody he liked Plumptre and regretted that “things are so unsatisfactory at Wycliffe.”¹⁰

The Plumptre affair might have precipitated a serious breach in the Wycliffe constituency. Fortunately for Sheraton and Wycliffe, the rift failed to develop. Things reached a climax in November 1903. Plumptre had decided he could not continue at Wycliffe, and when Bishop Carmichael offered him a post in the Diocese of Montreal, he accepted.

Cody’s role in the Plumptre affair may be deduced from the testimony of his colleagues. While he always treated Plumptre with sympathy and kindness, he must have disliked his ideas much as Sheraton had done. He remained loyal to Sheraton and did not support Plumptre in opposition to the principal. Wrong, who was more liberal than Cody, blamed Cody for not supporting Plumptre and thus for helping to bring about his resignation. Wrong told Cody that he would express his opinion of Sheraton’s conduct in the Plumptre affair when Plumptre’s resignation came before the Wycliffe Council. He added, “On the few occasions lately when I have found it necessary to speak of the situation there I have said that I lay a good deal of the blame on your shoulders.”¹¹

But Plumptre appears not to have born a grudge against Cody. He remained his friend. Later in 1907, when he was considering whether to accept the rectorship of St. Paul’s Church, Woodstock, he consulted Cody in the matter.

Havergal was established in 1894 by much the same group of Anglicans that had established Ridley in 1889. Its first principal, Miss Ellen Mary Knox, was a redoubtable English evangelical, a sister of Bishop E.A. Knox. The success of the school during its first thirty years was largely the result of her drive and personality. The objectives of the school’s founders were indicated in an advertisement published in the Evangelical Churchman: “The promoters of the School are convinced of the importance of uniting distinct Evangelical spiritual influences with a thorough, intellectual culture ... Their aim will be to give such an education as will help to make the pupils not only accomplished gentlewomen, but also intelligent and useful members of society.”¹²

Havergal was located in one of Toronto’s most affluent areas. Having purchased the old Mervyn School building at 350 Jarvis Street, the school immediately began to expand its facilities by the purchase of additional land and the construction of new buildings in 1896–98 and 1902. In spite of all this expansion, however, the school needed yet another building and this was constructed in 1906—1907.

Though not a member of the original board, Cody was soon closely associated with the school. St. Paul’s and Havergal were within walking distance of each other, and Havergal students attended St. Paul’s on Sunday mornings. In effect, Cody became Havergal’s parish priest. He was conscientious in his attentions to the school. He prepared the girls for confirmation and was frequently at the school for social occasions, prize-givings, and other special events. His membership on the board of directors brought him regularly in touch with his friends S.H. Blake (president), J. Herbert Mason (vice-president), George Wrong (secretary), Stapleton Caldecott, and N.W. Hoyles, among others.

Cody soon became the friend and confidant of Miss Knox. She was frequently at his home for lunch or dinner and often came to him with problems about the financing of the school. In 1905 Cody, Wrong, and R. Millichamp (treasurer) were instrumental in carrying the school through a financial crisis, probably a result of the school’s need for a new building. Miss Knox was most grateful and wrote to Cody on January 3, thanking him “for the way you have helped to save me and the school.” She added cryptically, “It was done at so much risk to yourself – I was too tired to realize anything on Wednesday night except gratitude to those who put it through – Now I can see a way even though it may have difficulties. It literally was a fight for existence at any rate to me if not to the school. I don’t think I can forget what you and Mr. Wrong and Mr. Millichamp have done.” Precisely the nature of this crisis or the measure that saved Havergal is not revealed, but there seems no doubt of Cody’s role in saving Havergal.¹³

Cody’s membership on the Ridley board kept him in touch with the school and with the principal. Most of his fellow board members were men he was associated with in other capacities, at St. Paul’s, Wycliffe, or Havergal – Herbert Mason, N.W. Hoyles, Millichamp, and Sheraton. The evangelical community was a small one, a sort of family compact.

The year 1904 was an amazing one for Cody. Although still a young man (36) and not yet the titular rector of St. Paul’s, he was elected to the bishopric of Nova Scotia and rejected it. Three Winnipeg men urged him to let them nominate him for the archbishopric of Rupert’s Land, but he declined that as well, saying he would not oppose his good friend S.P. Matheson, who had been consecrated assistant bishop in 1903. The third offer to stand, probably the most attractive to Cody, came from the Diocese of Huron, where Bishop M.S. Baldwin had died. Cody was invited by Verschoyle Cronyn, the son of the first Bishop of Huron, and by other evangelicals to let his name stand. Huron was Cody’s home diocese and the most evangelical of all the Canadian dioceses. To be sure there was some jealousy of Wycliffe men on the part of Huron college graduates, but this might be overcome. T.A. Wright, the rector of St. Jude’s Church, Brantford, wrote to Cody on October 28: “We know that the feeling against Wycliffe men is quite strong. But have the Huron men a man among themselves that we can unite upon? I fear not from what I have so far gathered. The feeling against Wycliffe would largely give way if you were being considered.” But Cody had already written to Cronyn declining to accept. Blake, Cody’s mentor at St. Paul’s, had been very concerned with rumours that Cody might accept, and was thus much relieved. He wrote reassuringly, “There must be something better in store, and in due time the Allwise will make it plain.”¹⁴

Cody was fortified in his decision by a strong resolution from the St. Paul’s advisory committee, dated November 15, 1904, describing his work at St. Paul’s in glowing terms and concluding with the request “that you continue for the present in the work which God has opened for you, and which you have, by His good hand upon you, been so wonderfully successful.”¹⁵

Cody urged the Huron evangelicals to back L.N. Tucker for the bishopric. Tucker was an evangelical, an eloquent preacher, and later dean of the cathedral in London. But Tucker was not elected. David Williams, nominally an evangelical, was elected and then consecrated on January 6, 1905. Cody hastened to send his congratulations. This was the beginning of his friendly relations with Williams, who later wielded a powerful influence in the counsels of the Canadian church. Early in 1905 Williams showed his good will by inviting Cody to preach at St. Paul’s Cathedral in London.

Cody was rapidly becoming a sort of ecclesiastical statesman, controlling the future prospects of many of his friends and acquaintances. Because of his Wycliffe connection and his growing reputation in the church generally, he was widely consulted by bishops and others desiring to secure suitable men for curacies or rectorships. He was also invited by many of the younger clergy to support their own candidacies for desirable posts. In April 1902 the Bishop of Niagara, J.P. DuMoulin, asked Cody to recommend a student to act as a supply in Fergus. Cody suggested W.T. Hallam. Dyson Hague, who had a church in Montreal, wanted a curate and was demanding in his requirements: “Now what is needed is a man over 30–35 perhaps – a preacher with a good voice – musical if possible – and of moderate churchmanship ... as far as possible a presentable man to a congregation like this ... and if a Wycliffe man a good all round man so as to disarm criticism.”¹⁶ Cody’s old friend F.J. Steen, who had been appointed senior assistant minister at Christ Church Cathedral, Montreal, was looking for a curate. He was even more demanding than Hague: “It is a sine qua non that he be a gentleman in the highest and strictest sense of the word, with all a gentleman’s manners and polish, and also that he be a good churchman of moderate views. I am not anxious to get an extremist, either High or Low. The Hague type of evangelical, however good, would never do.”¹⁷ Everybody wanted a “moderate” man, even Dyson Hague, not regarded as moderate himself.

Other correspondents enlisted Cody’s help. A Bishop’s College graduate, who had been teaching at Upper Canada College, wanted a position at Ridley, finding his duties at UCC too completely “secular.”¹⁸ A curate in St. George’s Cathedral, Kingston, wanted to succeed De Soyres, the rector of a church in Saint John, New Brunswick: “I understood that Evangelical principles prevail and I can say that my churchmanship coincides with yours and that nothing would be introduced to interfere with the spiritual upbuilding of the congregation.”

Moderation in the clergy was as valued then as later. Nobody wanted a man of extreme views. Those who wanted Cody to recommend someone usually stressed that the person be moderate, and those seeking posts frequently stressed their own moderation. Most of Cody’s applicants could be classified as evangelicals, but all trusted in his fairness and discretion.

Cody had had a strong interest in politics ever since his days in Embro and Galt. Now that he was a rector, this interest was reflected in some of his sermons. He never saw any conflict between his religious and political opinions. In his Thanksgiving sermon in 1910 on the text “Blessed is the nation whose God is the Lord,” for example, he discussed the connection between Christianity and patriotism.

Some of the basic ideas he held that he considered Christian were actually common to much of Anglo-Saxon conservatism. In Thanksgiving sermons in 1913 and 1921 based on Luke 12:48 (“For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required”), he put forward the typical conservative idea that privileges always involved responsibilities. As a Christian, he insisted that the responsibilities could only be fulfilled if there were moral and spiritual growth among our people.

Cody’s type of conservative was frequently regarded by other nationalists as colonial, but he was not a colonial in the sense of regarding everything British as first rate and everything Canadian as second rate. Like other fellow conservatives such as George Monro Grant, George T. Denison, D’Alton McCarthy, and Alex McNeill, he was proud of Canada’s position and achievements but never considered separation from the Empire. He believed Canada would become increasingly significant within the Empire.

Evangelical Christians were often accused of not being interested in social justice. This was not the case with Cody. He had a sophisticated view of the relation between the Christian religion and social justice. He argued that God was concerned with all aspects of human life, physical as well as spiritual. Our duty is to make God’s will prevail upon earth. It is his will that his children should have healthy homes and breathe pure air, and that capital and labour should not defraud each other. Cody insisted that Christian doctrine and concepts of social justice were closely related in the minds of Christians.

In his early career Cody seemed merely to display the normal interest of a well-informed Canadian in current affairs and in the spectacles Toronto society provided. The South African War was in progress in 1900 and Canadian troops were actively engaged. On May 30 and 31 Cody went downtown to witness celebrations over the capture of Pretoria. He witnessed the Orange Parade on the “glorious twelfth” of July and the Labour Day procession on September 3. During the federal election campaign of 1900, he attended a Tory rally at Massey Hall. There he saw the leaders, Sir Charles Tupper and Hugh John Macdonald, and heard a speech by the Tory warhorse Sir George Foster.

Cody continued his political participation through the 1900–1905 period. By the year 1905, the Laurier government was involved in the controversy over separate schools for the new provinces of Alberta and Saskatchewan. On February 7 Cody heard Sir John Willison speak of the issue at the Canadian Club. In the following month Cody addressed a meeting on “North-West Autonomy” at Massey Hall. Other speakers were John Willison and D’Alton McCarthy, the famous leader of the “Equal Rights” movement. In April he heard Clifford Sifton, the leading opponent of separate schools, at the Canadian Club. From the company he kept, McCarthy and Sifton, it is obvious that Cody was an exponent of public schools and an opponent of French separate schools in the West.