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
