Worship and the Free Church of Scotland
The month of November is highly important for the Free Church of Scotland. A plenary Assembly is due to debate the introduction of hymns and musical instruments into her public worship. Those wishing to make the changes are vociferous but they appear to be a minority and it is unlikely that they will carry the day. The difficulty is for the majority to know what to do with them. They have manifestly broken their ordination vows but they are so numerous that it would not be easy to bring cases of discipline against them. In some cases they make up virtually whole Presbyteries.
Office-bearers and probationers in the Free Church of Scotland promise, in the Formula that they sign, to “assert, maintain, and defend”, to the utmost of their power, the worship of the Free Church, and to follow no divisive course from that worship. The purity of worship that they are promising to assert and defend is defined in Act V, 1932, as being “to avoid the use in public worship of uninspired materials of praise as also of instrumental music”. Thus they have promised that they will assert, maintain and defend the principle of exclusive, unaccompanied psalmody. It goes without saying
that agitating for hymns and musical instruments is a violation of this promise. One doubts, in the light of such vows, whether the Moderator of Assembly should even receive a motion to discuss the subject, let alone one to repeal the legislation. He too has to assert, maintain and defend the principle to the utmost of the power that Christ has entrusted to him.
If those faithful to this part of their ordination vows do form the majority in the Assembly, they need to re-assert order and discipline in the Church. If they feel unable to address past transgressions, they must at least ensure that future ones will be dealt with and that the agitators will not be allowed to pursue their course of division and trouble-making. In particular, they should ensure that the public organ of the Church, The Record (until recently The Monthly Record), starts to reflect the Free Church position. A change of editor is urgently required. Those office-bearers and probationers who feel compelled to argue for the use of hymns and musical instruments should follow the example of Alexander Anderson of Old Aberdeen and resign from the Free Church. No one forced them to take their vows, but they got their position by taking them; and now it is grieving to other parts of the Christian world to see them in such manifest violation of common honesty.
If the changes proposed in the Free Church were “of the Lord”, the proponents would proceed in a very different spirit. For one thing, they would be more respectful towards the past. They would feel a duty, for instance, while preserving the good name of the “Fathers” of the Church, to explain why the arguments of the likes of Hugh Martin, John Kennedy and James Begg for exclusive, unaccompanied psalmody were erroneous. They would face these arguments and patiently correct them, instead of ignoring them and deriding the men concerned. A recent article in The Record laughs at the elders who walked out of Horatius Bonar’s church when he introduced hymns. One of Bonar’s elders who resigned at that time was no less a figure than George Smeaton.
For another thing, the proponents would patiently await the Lord’s time. There have been several recent instances in which Free Church ministers have held public meetings which they claimed were not “services”, at which they used hymns or musical instruments. Such playing with words, and disregard for order, is unseemly in servants of Christ sent out to proclaim the truth in a world full of lies and rebellion.
DWBS
Biblical or Contemporary
A train of thought was stimulated by two rather unconventionally titled (and written) books by Professor T David Gordon: Why Johnny Can’t Preach: the Media Have Shaped the Messengers (2009) and Why Johnny Can’t Sing
Hymns: How Pop Culture Rewrote the Hymnal (2010) – both issued by P & R Publishing. One would not endorse everything in these popularly-written and quite perceptive books, especially the idea that certain kinds of traditional instruments and traditional uninspired hymns may have a place in God’s worship. The basic thesis of these volumes, however, is sound and needs to be trumpeted around the churches. The author does not claim that what he says is a full explanation of the alleged rarity of good expository and edifying preaching or the prevalence of professed worship which is mere entertainment, even in “the conservative evangelical and conservative Reformed churches” of the USA with which he is acquainted – but that it is a significant contributory factor.
The thesis is that, wittingly or unwittingly, preaching and worship have been changed from the biblical standards of the past by the influence of contemporary methods of communication and popular musical fashions. Contemporary culture has replaced the norms of Scripture in determining the life of the Church. Traditions which have biblical authority have been jettisoned in the interests of supposed contemporaneity. The new, by virtue of being new, is judged to be better and more likely to make contact with contemporary society than the old because it is old. Many give little consideration to the fact that, where the old is biblical and the new is not, the concern for contemporaneity will dishonour God rather than worship Him; it will fail to communicate His mind faithfully and profitably, and it will not have His blessing in making the desired contact with the contemporary generation, but it will most likely confirm them in their own ways.
This is not a book review, or the volumes might be subjected to somewhat more rigorous analysis. The point this note would underline is that we must always be careful that our practice, whether as preachers, worshippers or Christians, endeavouring to live soberly, righteously and godly in this present world, is determined not by conformity to what is contemporary in the world or Church around us but by the standards of God’s Word.
That much preaching has abandoned the biblical norms of the past must not lead us to crave popular appeal rather than solid communication of God’s mind in His Word. That the modes of worship adopted by much of Christendom have been determined by the wisdom of men rather than regulated by the Word of God must not make us slacken our adherence to the principle that the acceptable way of worshipping the true God is instituted by Himself and prescribed in the Holy Scripture (Westminster Confession of Faith 21). That the behavioural standards expected of professing Christians may be increasingly accommodated to those of the world around must not close our eyes to the fact that God requires of His people who have experienced His
mercies that they be not conformed to this world, but transformed, even in their outward conduct, by the renewing of their mind, that they may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect will of God (Rom 12:1,2).
We certainly have to speak to our generation in language which they understand and which does not obscure the truth we seek to communicate. It is not, however, contemporaneity that will secure the conversion of sinners, the edification of the Lord’s people and the glory of God, but the Lord’s blessing on the doctrine, worship and practice originating with Himself, which are as relevant today as in the first century. When Paul for the gospel’s sake was made all things to all, that he might by all means save some (1 Cor 9:18-23), he by no means accommodated himself or his doctrine or practice to the fads and fancies of those with whom he dealt, but he adhered to the commission given him by God, “that your faith should not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God” (1 Cor 2:5). “Thus saith the Lord, Stand ye in the ways, and see, and ask for the old paths, where is the good way, and walk therein, and ye shall find rest for your souls. But they said, We will not walk therein” (Jer 6:16). HMC
The New Labour Leader and Marriage
The newly-elected leader of the Labour Party, Mr Ed Miliband, is clearly just a little uncomfortable with his present unmarried status; he has a partner, Justine Thornton; they already have one child and are expecting a second in November. He has said they will get married, but political events, he claims, have so far “got in the way”; he lists the Copenhagen climate-change summit, the general election and the election for leadership of his party.
Manifestly, if Mr Miliband really wanted to get married, he could have found time even in the midst of a busy political life. He accepts that marriage is “a very important institution”, but argues that it is not a pre-requisite for a stable family. Soon after his election as leader, he was asked several times by reporters about his marital status. He responded: “We will get married, but I think it’s important, and I feel this quite strongly, that politicians should be able to make their own decisions about their lives”. This is the answer of a man who does not accept the authority of God and of God’s revelation in Scripture, it is the answer of a professed atheist. He ignores the counsel God in His wisdom has given, setting out directions for relations between the sexes. This is not the kind of man Britain needs as a political leader, for “he that ruleth over men must be just, ruling in the fear of God” (2 Sam 23:3).
Asked whether he felt being married would be important if he were to become prime minister, he answered: “I think people are pretty relaxed about this. I don’t think people care one way or the other about what other
people do in their lives as long as they show responsibility to each other.” There may be a degree of truth in this assessment of public opinion in Britain today, but his anxiety to let it be known that he will soon marry rather suggests that he is less than convinced. May the Lord open the eyes of rulers and people to see that “there is a way that seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death” (Prov 16:25).
Trinitarian Bible Society
Over recent years the Society has been involved in Bible-translation projects in various languages, including Spanish, Hebrew, French, Mongolian and Ndebele. However, the Society has announced, after a number of years during which much of its work has been supported through legacies, that this source of income is all but exhausted. For 2010 a reduced budget has meant that some activities have been curtailed or suspended, but a significant deficit of £575 000 is still being projected for 2010 in the UK. Major contributing factors are a reduction of nearly 20% in the sales of Bibles and smaller Scripture items compared with the equivalent period in 2009 and a reduction of nearly 50% in donations. Further budgetary reductions, which it is still hoped will be only temporary, are therefore needed in 2011.
The General Committee and Management of the Society are actively considering a variety of proposals which will, with the Lord’s blessing, bring the Society safely through the current financial challenges it faces. Accordingly, the Society is calling for prayer at this difficult time, not only that the Lord would provide for its financial needs, but also that He would grant it much wisdom to know where cutbacks might be made if these prove necessary. All concerned at the Society fervently believe that its vital work must and will continue, but they acknowledge their total dependence upon the gracious Hand of God to supply according to His own promise: “And God is able to make all grace abound toward you; that ye, always having all sufficiency in all things, may abound to every good work” (2 Cor 9:8).