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