THE General Assemblies of the Established, United Free and Free Churches met this year as usual in Edinburgh on Tuesday, 21st May. In connection with the Established Church Assembly there was a little more of the pomp and pride of position through the presence of the Duke of York as Lord High Commissioner. The Moderators gave the accustomed moderatorial addresses. The Rev. John R. Mackay, D.D., was Moderator of the Free Church General Assembly, and gave a scholarly address on problems facing the Church. The matters that awakened the deepest interest in the Assemblies of the larger Churches were that of Union and Foreign Missions, while in the Free Church Assembly the question as to whether the Church was to take the heavy responsibility of building a new College in Lima was the subject of a long and keen debate.
Established Church.
On Thursday, the Rev. C. W. G. Taylor, Edinburgh, Convener of the Foreign Mission Committee, made a moving appeal to remove a debt of £26,000 on the Foreign Mission Fund.
The Union question came up on Friday, 24th May. The subject had awakened considerable interest and according to the press accounts historic scenes were enacted. The scene in the Assembly Hall was striking. Dr John White seconded by Lord Sands, moved the delivery in favour of Union. The Rev. R. P. Landreth, Perth, moved an amendment to the following effect: “That the General Assembly do not resolve upon an incorporating Union with the United Free Church of Scotland.” The amendment was seconded by the Rev. John Macphee, Rendall, Orkney (formerly a Free Presbyterian). When the matter was put to the vote only three voted for the amendment. There are other
former Free Presbyterians and Free Churchmen in the ministry of the Church of Scotland, and one would have expected to have heard their voice raised by way of protest on such an occasion if they were members.
Dr White, in giving in the report of the Church and Nation Committee, made references to such questions as irregular marriages, religious instruction in schools, Irish immigration, etc. He said, in reference to the latter, when asked by the Government to suggest lines along which action might be taken, the deputation of the Committee suggested:—(1) That so long as labour conditions in this country are such that thousands of native-born Scotsmen cannot find employment, effective measures should be taken to regulate immigration. (2) That persons, being natives of the Irish Free State, who become a burden upon the public funds of this country within a given time of their arrival, or who are convicted of crime against its laws, should be repatriated. (3) That a minimum period of residence be fixed under which no person from another country be permitted to exercise the franchise in Parliamentary or other elections.
The question of irregular marriages (that is marriages at which there is no religious service) was dealt with and the seriousness of the situation commented on alike by Dr White and his seconder, the Duke of Montrose. Dr White said that in the opinion of the Committee the time had come when it was necessary to draw the attention of the Secretary for Scotland and the Lord Advocate to the frequency of irregular marriages in Scotland, and to the scandalous traffic in marriage presently carried on at Gretna Green, and to ask the Government, by the appointment of a Commission or otherwise, to examine the whole question with a view to early legislation amending the Scottish marriage law.
The Duke of Montrose, in seconding the deliverance of the Committee, made the following reference to the Irish immigration question:—”Nearly all the Irish immigrants were of the Roman Catholic faith, and a very large number of them were unfortunately classed as paupers. It was a lamentable fact that of the pauper population of Scotland the Irish numbered 74 per cent. Worse than that, the figures for criminal prosecutions in Scotland showed that more than 50 per cent. were attributable to Irish who came into this country. That was a matter of undoubted importance
to a great industrial city like Glasgow, where more than 23 per cent. of the whole population were Irish. It was difficult for those who were jealous of their faith to accept the position with equanimity, especially when they realised that there were thousands of good Scottish people walking the streets looking for work and their families starving. There were great legislative difficulties in the way of doing anything to remedy this problem. Under present circumstances the only thing they could do was to study the situation, watch the development of events, and collect statistics, and if they were persuaded that their faith was in danger they must use such influence and such power as they possessed to cause those in political authority to take definite action.”
The Assembly concluded on Wednesday, 29th May. In his closing address Dr Mitchell, the Moderator, said:—”There is another great task which lies before the Church that is to be. If it is to hold the educated intellect of this modern time it must revise its statement of the fundamental truths upon which all religion is based.” That is an ominous statement, and from what we know of the driving theological forces behind the uniting Churches, it bodes ill for the maintenance of the historic evangelical position of the Reformed Church in Scotland.
United Free Church.
The Foreign Mission Committee of this Church, like that of the Established, have a heavy debt to meet. On Thursday an appeal was made for the extinction of this debt (£20,000).
The Union debate in the United Free Church Assembly was not quite so placid as in the Church of Scotland Assembly. The motion for the incorporating Union with the Church of Scotland was moved by Dr Drummond and seconded by Col. J. A. Roxburgh. An amendment was moved by Dr Forrester, Broughton; he was seconded by the Rev. James Barr, the Socialist M.P. When the vote was taken 39 voted for Dr Forrester’s amendment. These, according to the press, were mostly laymen. The result, when announced, was greeted with loud and prolonged applause. Profiting by painful experience, it would appear that the Majority are to treat the Minority with magnanimity, so the addendum to the motion would indicate, which was to the effect that the Assembly confer with the dissentients.
In speeches made in connection with the Education Committee Report, submitted by Rev. Dr W. Mackintosh Mackay, a few interesting points were raised. The Rev. George M. Reith, Edinburgh, asked leave to refer to a statement by Dr A. P. Laurie in that morning’s issue of “The Scotsman” with regard to what he considered a serious defect in the Local Government Act. Once the abolition of “use and wont” occurred, according to Dr Laurie, it could not be restored. He contended that a particular majority in a certain district might succeed in engineering a hostile vote, and in that case “use and wont” would be abolished. Apparently there was no provision made for the restoration of “use and wont.” Mr Alexander Hamilton, Bellshill, said that he had no desire to pass any censure upon the Committee, but he was not satisfied with their decision. Surely education was of sufficient importance in Scotland as to demand an “ad hoc” authority of men interested in education, and particularly religious education. Why should they have to go to the Secretary of State and plead for equal treatment with Roman Catholics? If the Church had been half alive, as she was to-day, the 1918 Act would never have been upon the Statute Book. Lord Alness, the son of a F.C. manse, was the man who betrayed them. It was time they had something more than be satisfied with a plebiscite. They certainly had no guarantee that religious instruction would be continued in their schools, and no matter how good the education given, without religious instruction in the schools, it was little or no use. The Rev. D. J. Ross, Stirling, was, however, of the opinion that their position was stronger than under the 1918 Act.
The Committee on the Book of Common Order suggested that they should delay their work of proceeding with a book of prayers for the day schools until after the Union. In regard to the Book of Common Order, Dr Sutherland, Junior Principal Clerk, suggested, in view of the dislike to a liturgy in many quarters, that the Committee’s deliverance should read “as an authorised manual to aid in the public worship of the United Free Church.” His suggestion was adopted by the Convener. The Assembly concluded its deliberations on Tuesday (29th May). In his closing address, Principal Martin, the Moderator, made a final appeal to the Minority.
Free Church.
On Wednesday (22nd May) an animated discussion took place on the question of receiving delegates from the United Church of Canada. The Rev. Donald Munro, D.D., moved that the delegates from this Church, which he described as almost creedless compared with the Free Church, should not be received. In this he was seconded by the Rev. William Fraser, Govan. Mr Fraser said the United Church of Canada had absolutely nothing in common with the Free Church of Scotland. They should not, he said, permit on the floor of the Assembly any representative of any Church that did not stand by the Scriptures as being the Word of God. The Rev. John Macneilage had in mind making a motion that the delegates be received and that a wholesome admonition be addressed to them, or alternately that they should not be received and the reason given to them. Dr Stewart, while agreeing with what Dr Munro had said about the United Church of Canada, did not accept the view that in receiving delegates from other Churches they were setting their imprimatur on their positions or practices. The motion for the reception of the delegates was carried by a large majority. When the delegates from various Churches were received Dr Stewart, in moving that the Moderator should convey the thanks of the House to the deputies for their interesting addresses, said with reference to the visitors from the two Canadian Churches, that while they received them both in a comprehensive Christian charity, it would be idle for him to pretend—and on that platform they believed in absolute sincerity—that they had not their ecclesiastical preferences based on closer ecclesiastical affinities. It has always been a mystery to us how the Free Church Assembly, with the profession it makes of steadfastness to the infallibility of the Word of God and purity of worship, should year after year receive delegates from this mongrel that is noseing its way into the Presbyterian family circle. Neither courtesy nor Christian charity demanded such a gesture of broad-mindedness, and the fact that when a motion calling the Assembly’s attention to the inconsistency of receiving such delegates was lost shows that there is something wrong somewhere. We should have thought Dr Munro’s motion would have been carried without a dissentient voice. Comment also might be made about the ecclesiastical position of other delegates received by the Assembly.
In giving in the Sustentation Fund report, the Rev. Norman Campbell said it was with great difficulty that the Committee were able to continue an equal dividend of £250. The Rev. John Macneilage, in a characteristic speech, said that it would be more in keeping with the desperate character of the situation if the people in the offices at Edinburgh held a prayer meeting before bombarding them with circulars from the head office. The Assembly declared an equal dividend of £250, exclusive of the £7 payable to the Widows’ and Orphans’ Fund.
On Thursday the Assembly had before it the burning question of Lima College. Considerable dissatisfaction evidently exists with the policy of the Foreign Mission Committee, and after reading the speeches in the Free Church “Monthly Record” our sympathies are decidedly with the objectors. The Committee had already spent £5500 in the purchase of a site, and they proposed to construct a new school or college on the site for £14,000. This is a big undertaking, and it is not to be wondered at that many hesitated to launch out on such a scheme. If this heavy expenditure were a venture of faith it might well evoke admiration, but behind it there is a policy to which some in the Free Church are wedded, and it is this that has not unnaturally awakened concern in the minds of many in the Free Church.
The Rev. John Macneilage, Bower, in submitting an amendment that the Assembly pass from the present scheme of building a new college, and, in lieu of the present educational policy there, devise some humbler and more evangelical line of effort, said the Free Church existed for the propagation of the evangelical faith. If the Church, therefore, opened any branch establishments, the one endeavour should be the same; but in Lima they had combined education with their original high purpose. Things had developed in such wise that they were 90 per cent. educationists and only 10 per cent., or maybe less, preachers. There was no seconder to Mr Macneilage’s amendment, which was accordingly dropped.
Mr Arch. Macneilage, Glasgow, moved an amendment expressing regret at the action of the Committee in purchasing a site for the college in Lima, and stating that the Assembly did not sanction further expenditure of the capital funds of the Committee in the erection of a new school on the basis recommended in their report. The Rev. Norman Campbell, Dingwall, who seconded, said they did not propose to close the school.
The Rev. William Macleod, Dornoch, whose amendment was to the effect that the Assembly recognise the urgent need for suitable accommodation for the school, and direct the Committee to make an appeal for funds, said he was not in favour of closing the school either. He was in favour, however, of contracting, because the Church should not go further than its capacity. Further amendments were submitted, and the debate, after having lasted 4½ hours, was adjourned until the evening.
The Assembly resumed at 6.30, and the debate continued until 11.20. The fourteen amendments had by this time been reduced to four, and on these a vote was taken. This occupied 40 minutes, and resulted in the Committee’s deliverance being carried by 32 votes to 25.
Under the report of the Religion and Morals and Public Questions Committee the Rev. K. A. Macrae, Kilmuir, moved an addition to the Committee’s deliverance deploring the refusal of the L.M.S. Railway Company to receive the petition signed by 34,000 against that Company running excursion trains on the Lord’s Day. In view of the inroads of sweeping godlessness he moved that the Assembly appoint the week beginning Sabbath, 17th November, as a week of Humiliation and Prayer. Principal Macleod moved that the Assembly authorise expenses incurred by ministers in giving instruction in religious knowledge to their students at the Provincial Colleges should be charged to the General Purposes Account. The Rev. Norman Campbell, in seconding, said he profoundly regretted the occasion there was for this proposal. Their young people came to the training centres for teachers believing profoundly in the Scriptures. After being taught there for a while their faith was shaken. It was incalculable the harm that was being done to these young people. He was sure there were many parents in other Churches who regretted as much as they did that they did not get sound Scripture teaching in the Training Colleges. Our readers will agree that this is a most serious matter. We, as a Church, have all along stressed the importance of religious instruction in the national schools, but if poison is being instilled into the minds of those who are afterwards to be instructors as to the infallibility of the Word of God during their training as teachers the harvest will be one of incalculable evil.
The Assembly closed its deliberations on 28th May, when the Moderator gave his closing address on “The Christian Family.”