THE following letter, signed “F.C. Minister,” recently appeared in The Scotsman. It informs us of the unsatisfactory character of the religious views and conduct of Dr. Macmillan, Greenock, the coming Moderator. One is disposed, however, to express astonishment that “F.C. Minister” can, with a good conscience, hold office in a church that puts a premium on unsoundness in the faith and exalts to the highest honour in her power a man who disrespects the Sabbath, and is otherwise blameworthy:—
“THE MODERATORSHIP OF THE FREE ASSEMBLY.
23rd December, 1896.
SIR,—It appears from a paragraph in to-day’s Scotsman that Dr. Macmillan, Greenock, has been elected Moderator of the Free Church General Assembly. That honour used to be reserved for those who had manifested outstanding evangelical power in their ministry and the service of the Gospel. How has the Free Church changed in all her lines of action! Like the foolish woman, she has been now long at the work of pulling down her own house. She seems to have put a premium on Broad Churchism, ‘the spirit of the age,’ unsoundness in the faith, and
a diluted Gospel! If a man gains notoriety in any of those fields, he is promoted to honour, amid the clamour of his brother-ministers shouting ‘These be thy gods!’
Dr. Macmillan has never shown pronounced evangelical sympathies, and he scouts the idea of attending Assemblies, and some other things besides. When he goes to the country he may honour a church with his presence in the forenoon, but in the evening he will sit at home or go with his family to botanise in the fields. He is advertised to propose the toast of the ‘Immortal memory of Burns’ at a Burns Club festival shortly. That speech will serve as his Moderator’s address! If Burns himself were in the flesh he would be the next Moderator.—I am, &c.,
F.C. MINISTER.”
Latha na Sabaid.
BY REV. NEIL CAMERON, ST. JUDE’S, GLASGOW.
CUIMHNICH latha na Sabaid a choimhead naomh. Co labhair na briathran so? Labhair Dia iad, air bein Shinaí, a mach as an teine, ann an eisdeachd Israel uile. Thug Criosd an lagh sgriobhte seachad an sin leis an tabhair e breth air na h-uile air an latha dheirinneach. “Is eigin duinn uile bhi air ar taisbeanadh an lathair cathair breitheanais Chriosd.”
Tha cuid de’n bheachd nach eil e ’na chionta cho mòr, latha na Sabaid a mhi-naomhachadh, ri mort, gadachd, adhaltranas a ghniomhachadh. Cha ’n eil an sin ach mealladh mòr: Bu choir a cheart urad ghraim a bhi aig daoine de luchd-mi-naomhachaidh na Sabaid’s a bhiodh aca de luchd mortaidh, adhaltranais, agus an leithide sin de pheacaibh. Bha na h-athraichean agus na màthraichean diadhaidh a seachnadh briseadh latha Dhè, mar a bha iad a seachnadh mort. Carson? A chionn gur e àithne Dhè a bh’annta le cheile. “Oir ge b’e neach a choimheadas an lagh uile, agus a thuislicheas ann an aon àithne, tha e ciontach de’n iomlan. Oir an ti a thubhairt na dean adhaltranas, thubhairt e mar an ceudna na dean mortadh,” agus thubhairt e mar an ceudna. “Cuimhnich latha na Sabaid a choimhead naomha.” Bithidh staid fir mi-naomhachaidh na Sabaid, air latha bhreitheanais, cho truagh agus cho ciontach ri staid a mhortair. Tha e ’na ni mi-reusonta do dhaoinibh a bhi smuaineachadh nach eil am peacadh cho mòr a chionn gu’m bheil am mòr-sluagh ciontach dheth. Bha Noah eadar-dhealaichte bho shluagh an t-seann t-saoghail; oir an uair a bha iadsan ag itheadh agus ag òl, a pòsadh agus air an tabhairt ann am pòsadh, chaidh Noah, a reir àithne Dhè, Steach do’n àirce a rinn e, agus chaidh càch uile a sgrios. Is ann mar sin a bhios sgrios naimhdean Dhè agus a lagh naomha, agus tèarnadh na muintir air am bi eagal Dhè agus a choimheadas àitheantan. Ann a bhi tarruinn ar n-aire a dh’ionnsuidh caochladh
de nithibh air a phuinc chudthromaich so, bheir sinn iad fa bhur comhair anns an ordugh a leanas :—
-
Tha an t-Sabaid air a briseadh le sraid-imeachd, ge be air bith an leithsgeul a chleachdas daoine air son a bhi ‘g a dheanamh, ach a mhain air gnothaichibh trocair. Tha mòran ‘g a cleachdadh ‘n a latha gu bhi dol a d’fhaicinn an cairdean, agus a cheilidh, agus mar sin tha iad a spuineadh Dhe dhe ghloir, a toirt call agus truaighe air an anama fein, agus a deanamh na tha ‘n an comas gu anamibh eile sgrios mar an ceudna. Coidlidh cuid air latha na Sabaid cho fada anns a mhaduinn ‘s nach urrainn iad a dhol do’n Eaglais agus air laithibh na seachduinn bidh iad air an cosan gle thrath. Bheir iad oidhirp air dichioll a dheanamh air son gnothaichean a chuirp, ach air son an anam neo-bhasbhor chan eil aon smuain ciod a d’heireas dà. Tha t-anam caillte, agus latha na Sabaid, le meodhainean nan gràs, tuilleadh is luachmhor gu bhi ‘gan leigeadh seachad air an doigh bhruideil sin. Dhoibhsan a tha a caitheamh an latha phriseil a thug Dia ‘na throcuir dhoibh air an doigh so tha e ‘na sgrios mòr, agus uairean cho fada. Anam, cia mar a dh’fhaodadh tu bhi sona ann an glòir a ghleidheadh Sabaid Shiorruidh? Tha e soilleir gu’m feum do nadur a bhi air ath-nuadhachadh no chan urrainn thu dol ach a dh’ionnsuidh ionad a bhroin bhith-bhuain. Tha comhradh mu nithean aimsireil, agus mu nithibh diomhain ‘n am pairt mhòr de mhi-naomhachadh latha Dhe. Bu choir do ‘na h-uile na nithean so a sheachnadh, agus mur cum daoine eile bho ‘na nithean sin, seachainn an cuideachd, agus bi coma cò d’a shaoil eas iad dhiot air son sin. Leughadh leabhraichean faoine, agus an leithid sin, ri ‘n seachnadh. Cha ‘n eil leabhar anns an t-saoghal anns am bheil nithean air an cur sios, air son t-ùine fein, coltach ris a Bhiobul. “Ma philleas tu air falbh do chos o’n t-Sabaid, o do thoil fein a dheanamh air mo latha naomha-sa; agus gu’n abair thu ris an t-Sabaid, Toilinntinn; ri latha naomh an Tighearna, Urramach; agus gu’n tabhair thu onair dhi, gun a bhi leantuininn do shlighean fein, no’ labhairt do bhriathran fein; an sin gabhaidh tu tlachd anns an Tighearna; agus bheir mise ort marcachd air ionadaibh arda na talmhuinn; agus beathaichidh mi thu le oighreachd Jacob d’athar; oir labhair beul an Tighearna e.”—(Isaiah lviii. 13.)
-
Tha moran a mi-naomhachadh latha na Sabaid le bhi saltairt tigh Dhe fo ‘an cosaibh; le bhi ‘g aoradh do Dhia le dealbhaibh no doigh sam bith eile nach’ordaichte ‘na fhocal. Tha mhòr-roinn ‘g aoradh dhoibh fein ‘s chan ann do Dhia. Chan e a cheist a tha orra ciod a thaitneas ris-san, ach ciod a thoilecheas an fheoil? Uime sin thiundaich iad tigh Dhe gu bhi na thigh-cluich. Orgain ‘gan cluich; Laoidhean, air an deanamh le daoinibh ‘gan seinn an aite Saim Dhaibhidh. Tha mar sin intinnean an luchd-aoraidh a fàs nis truailidh, an cogaishean a fàs nis cruaidhe agus a codal nis truime. “Naomh-aich iad troimh ‘n fhirinn; ‘s e t-focal-sa an fhirinn.” Chuir
laoidhean, agus orgain an fhirinn a mach as na cubaidean, agus as na h-àiteachan suidhe. “Is lochran t-fhocal do m’ chois, agus solus do m’ cheum.” Agus, “Biodh agaibh gràs leis an dean sibh Seirbhis thaitneach do Dhia, le h-urram agus eagal diadhaidh : Oir tha ar Dia-ne ‘na theine dian-loisgeach.”
-
Tha na roidean-iaruinn, eich agus carabadan a dol a mach air son toileachas-inntinn, no gu bhi giulan litrichean, daoine dol mun cuairt an gnothichean saoghalta, ceannach agus reic na mhi-naomhachadh air latha na Sabaid a chuireas an tir so fàs. Leubh Leviticus xxvi. 27 gu croich na caibdeil.
-
Tha sluagh na Gaidhealtachd air an truaileadh gu mòr, le coigich as an taobh deas a cur droch-eis-eamplair rompa air latha Dhe. Tha muinntir a tha gabhail orra fein a bhi ‘n an luchd-aidich air Criosd—ministearan, eildearan, agus buill choithionalan a giulan na plaigh so do’n taobh tuath. Bu choir do ‘na Gadhaill a chuimhneachadh gun dubhairt Criosd, “Ma’s toigh libh mise, coimhidibh m’ aitheantan,” agus “Air an toradh ainmichidh sibh iad.” Tha e sgriobhta, “Na lean a mhòr-chuideachd a chum an uilc.” Bha na h-athraichean, agus na màthraichean diadhaidh cur an gnothaichean saoghalta ann an rian air feasgar Di-sathairn a chum nach biodh an t-Sabaid air a mi-naomhachadh. “Is mise an Tighearna ‘ur Dia ; gluaisibh ann am reachdaibh, agus coimhidibh mo bhreithneanais, agus deanaibh iad : agus naomh-aichibh mo Shabaidean ; agus bithidh iad ‘nan comharadh eadar mise agus sibhse, a chum gu’m bi fios agaibh gur mise an Tighearna bhur Dia.” Bha duine mòr anns an Fhraing da ‘m b’ ainm Malan, agus air do aon de dhaoine mòra na rìoghachd so a bhi air chuairt an sin bha e fuireach an tigh Mhalan, agus thug e fainear an rian agus an t-sith iongantach a bha san tigh. Dh’fhiosraich e dheth cia mar a bha na h-uile nithe cho siochail agus ordail na thigh ? agus thubhairt Malan ris gun do chuir e roimhe latha na Sabaid a choimhead naomh agus gun obair de ghnè sam bith a cheadachadh na thigh air an latha sin ; agus gun do bheannaich Dia a thigh agus a theaghlach n uair a bha luchd-mi-naomhachaidh na Sabaid ann an troimh-cheile air gach taobh dheth. “Is beannaichte an duine a ni so, agus mac an duine a ni greim air ; a choimheadas an t-Sabaid gun a mi-naomhachadh, agus a choimheadas a lamh o aon olc a dheanamh. . . . Oir mar so deir an Tighearna, Do na caillteanaich a choimheadas mo shabaidean, agus a roghnaicheas an ni a thaitneas rium, agus a ni greim air mo choimhcheangal ; dhoibh sin bheir mi ann am thigh, agus an taobh a stigh do m’ bhallachan, àit’ agus ainm ni’s fearr na ainm mhac agus nighean ; ainm siorruidh bheir mi dhoibh, nach gearrar as.”
-
Tha cuid a smuaineachadh nach eil an t-Sabaid ri bhi air a gleidheadh fo linn an Tiomnaidh Nuaidh. Tha Criosd ag radh, “Na measaibh gu’n d’ thainig mise a bhriseadh an lagha na nam f’aidhean cha’n ann a bhriseadh a thainig mi, ach a choimhlonadh. Oir tha mi ag radh ribh gu firinneach, gus an teid neamh
agus talamh thairis, cha teid aon lite no aon phung do’n lagh thairis, gus an coimhlionar gach aon ni.” Anns an athghineamhuinn tha lagh Dhe air a Sgrìobhadh air a chridhe, agus a reachd air a chur air an inntinn; agus mar sin tha tlachd aig an anam bheo ann an lagh Dhe. Feumaidh gu’m bheil a cheathramh aithne anns a chridhe air an do shaoothrich an Spiorad Naomh. Thug Criosd ùmhlachd agus riarachadh iomlan do lagh agus do cheartas Dhe an aite a shluaigh ionnas nach eil iad fo’n lagh mar chunanta, ach mar an riaghailt beatha. Bha an t-Abstol Eoin anns an Spiorad air latha an Tighearna; agus na mnathan naomh aig bàs agus adhlaicadh Fear-Saoraidh; “Agus chunnaic iad an uaigh, agus cionnus a chuireadh a chorp. Agus phill iad, agus dh’ulluich iad Spìosraidh agus oladh deadh fhàile; agus ghabh iad tamh air an t-Sabaid a reir na h-aithne.”
Moderator na h-Eaglaise Saoire.
SGRIOBH aon de mhinistearan na h-Eaglaise Saoire an litir a leanas ann an Scotsman, 23rd December, 1896:—
“SIR,—Tha e ri thuigsinn bho chunntas aillghearr ann an Scotsman an latha ‘n diugh gu’m bheil Dr. Macillevoil, Ghrianaig, air a shonrachadh gu bhi na Mhodearator air Assembly na h-Eaglais Saoire. B’ àbhaist an t-urram so a bhi air a ghleidheadh dhoibhsan, a mhain, a bha ‘n an teachdairean foghainteach an Tiomnadh Nuaidh ann am ministrealachd agus saothair an t-soisgeul. Cia truagh a tha an Eaglais Shaor air a riaghailtean fein a threigsinn! Coltach ris a mhnaoi amaidich, tha i nis, bho cheann fada, spionadh a nuas a tighe fein. Tha e coltach gu’n d’ thug i a h-àrd-urram do bheachdan ùra ‘Spiorad na h-aoise so’—neo-fhallaineachd ‘s a’ chreidimh agus soisgeul truailte. Ma gheibh duine àin mòr anns na nithean sin, tha e air a thogail gu urram le cò-ghair a bhràithrean anns a ministrealachd a’ glaodhaich ‘So do dhiathan.’ Cha do nochd an Dr. Macillevoil riamh co-fhulangas diongmhalta air taobh an t-soisgeul, agus tha e fanoid air a bhi frithealadh aig an Assembly, maille ri nithean eile de ‘n t-seorsa sin. Nuair a theid e do ‘n duthaich, theagamh gu’n d’ theid e do ‘n Eaglais toiseach latha na Sabaid, ach anns an fheasgar suidhidh e aig an tigh, no theid e do na h-achaidhean, maille ri theaghlach, a chruinneachadh fhuinnsean. Tha sanas air a thabhairt gur e esan, an uine ghearr, aig coinneamh cuideachd Robert Burns, a ghaireas air a chuideachd, deoch Slàinte Bhurns òl, leis na briathran “Cuimhne neo-bhasbhor Bhurns.” Ni an oraid a chleachdas e an sin an gnothach dha a ris aig fosgladh na h-Assembly. Na’m biodh Robert Burns fein beò ‘s e bhiodh ‘n a Mhoderator air an ath Assembly!
Is mise,
MINISTEIR DE ‘N EAGLAIS SHAOIR.”
Pastor Chiniquy Threatened by the Romanists.
WE had a strong impression that Pastor Chiniquy’s visit to this country would be the means of arousing the enmity and rage of the Romanists to a more than ordinary degree. This impression has been verified by the Oban challenge, Donlevy’s letter in The Scotsman, and a sermon preached by a Canon Maglione in Blackburn, of which we have some account in The Bulwark. It is still more fully verified by the following threatening notice which appeared in the Roman Catholic Times of 27th November:—
“A WARNING FOR CHINIQUY.—When one finds that an individual is not afraid or ashamed to indulge in blasphemy, the best rule to adopt with regard to him is to leave him severely alone. He is not a fit person to argue with or recognise in any way. If there are those who listen to him, they must be content to share his malodorous reputation, for men are still judged by the well-known rule, ‘Tell me your company and I shall tell you who you are.’ But we would remind this aged blasphemer that there are blasphemies and blasphemies, and whilst strongly deprecating violence, would warn him not to repeat again whilst in this country the horrible parody with regard to the Blessed Eucharist which drew imprecation on his head even at the Oban meeting. Catholics can stand a great deal from their opponents. That falsehoods—endless and wicked falsehoods—with regard to their practices, ceremonies, and clergy, should emanate from Protestant platforms is to them a matter of course. But there is one thing at which their blood boils, and which they cannot and will not stand, and that is the travestying of the sacred ceremony of the Last Supper at which our Lord instituted the Sacrament of the Eucharist. If the law does not prevent it, then the person who indulges in this awful profanity does so at his peril.”
This warning plainly reveals that Rome is the same fierce persecutor as ever, and if she had the power as she has the will, she would pursue Protestants to death to-day in the same manner as she did in past ages. It appears that Pastor Chiniquy’s faithful exposure of the monstrous figment, Transubstantiation, coming as it did from one who formerly was a Romish priest, greatly stirred the wrath of the Papists, who could not, unmoved, see their idol broken in pieces. The above paragraph was the result, and it should be the means of opening the eyes of many Protestants who fondly imagine that Rome has changed her principles of deadly persecution.
The late Mr. John Campbell.
IT is recorded of old Alexander Peden that when he came to see the resting place of what was mortal of Richard Cameron, and sat down on his grave, he exclaimed “O to be with Ritchie.” In this dark and cloudy day somewhat of the same desire creeps over the minds of some while thinking of those who died in the faith, kept their garments clean, and of whom it can truly be said, “Write, Blessed are the dead which die in the Lord from henceforth : yea saith the Spirit, that they may rest from their labours ; and their works do follow them.” We feel much the loss, and must acknowledge that many of our thoughts and affections (such as they are) have gone after them to eternity. The small tribute that follows, we feel to be very inadequate to give our readers a glimpse of the life, faithfulness, experiences, and true piety of a great man.
John Campbell, one of the elders of St. Jude’s congregation, Glasgow, entered into his everlasting rest on the 14th January, 1897. He was born in the parish of Snizort, in the island of Skye, in the year 1824. About the age of 20 years he was, along with many others, brought to the saving knowledge of Christ under the ministry of that renowned servant of Christ—the Rev. Roderick M’Leod. From his knowledge of the depravity of man’s nature, his convictions must have been very deep. At that time he, and five other young men, built a hut in the hills where, far from their fellow-creatures, they used to spend much of their time in prayer and reading the Word of God. He came south to Glasgow about the year 1847, and except at short intervals, he lived in Glasgow till the end of his earthly journey. After he came to Glasgow, he attended successively the ministry of the Rev. Messrs. Gordon and Logan of the Macdonald Church. He continued till the day of his death to hold these servants of Christ in great veneration. It seems that, after they were gone, poor John Campbell found himself forsaken, much like the pelican in the wilderness. Hymns, soirees, &c., kept him from finding a resting place. Like the captives in Babylon the spoilers called for mirth, but he wept thinking on Zion :—
“By Babel’s streams we sat and wept,
When Sion we thought on.
In midst thereof we hang’d our harps
The willow-trees upon.
For there a song required they,
Who did us captive bring :
Our spoilers call’d for mirth, and said,
A song of Sion sing.
O how the Lord’s song shall we sing
Within a foreign land ?
If thee Jerus’lem, I forget,
Skill part from my right hand.
My tongue to my mouth’s roof let cleave,
If I do thee forget,
Jerusalem, and thee above
My chief joy do not set.”
He never gave up going to church, but continued to go from the one to the other of the Gaelic churches until, at last, relief came. During this period of his life he, and a few others, held private meetings to read the Word of God, sing the songs of Zion, and to “pray to him who heareth in secret.” These meetings were the means by which the Lord strengthened a few to contend against the flood of the enemy coming in upon the Church. They continued these meetings for many years. In June of 1893 he conducted the first prayer meeting held in Glasgow in connection with the Free Presbyterian Church. The departures of the Free Church from her own creed and principles caused him much grief, and when in 1893 a few in Glasgow, as well as in other places, refused to be duped any longer by Dr. Rainy and his party, or by other spire-cocks which face the way the wind blows at the time, he heartily joined them. To the end he continued a most ardent supporter of the same.
At the Men’s Fellowship Meeting he, in our humble opinion, was the leading man of all the Gaelic speaking men in Glasgow. (That does not cast any slur upon these men, among whom are some of the finest in this land.) His knowledge of the Scriptures was most accurate and profound; his understanding of the subtleties of the human heart, with its deep attachment to the covenant of works, and man’s utter inability to look to Christ for salvation without the teaching of the Holy Ghost, would be expressed by him in the clearest possible terms. He brought these points before an audience in our hearing, from the following truths. “Men and brethren, what shall we do to be saved?” “You see,” he said, “they are looking for something which they could do themselves. Again, “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved,” but the convinced sinner said, “I cannot believe.” “He has learned much who is convinced that he cannot believe, and that faith is the gift of God.” The infinite merit of the atonement of Christ before God, the Judge, and the accusing conscience of the sinner approaching it by faith, aroused his powerful eloquence to the highest pitch. The despicable weakness of the sinner, dead in trespasses and sins, of himself to embrace Christ in the free offer of the Gospel, and his infinite need of the Holy Ghost in His quickening, enlightening, and creating power, to enable him to close in with the proffered Saviour, caused every attentive listener to feel the need every sinner has of the Spirit. The freeness of the offer of the Gospel as a sovereign act of the beneficence of God, and the utter unworthiness of the sinner, were things he never lost sight of. These are a few of the expressions which fell from his lips upon such occasions:—”When a child is born into the world there is
in him naturally a craving after the mode of subsistence which God provided for him in his mother’s breast, so with the child ‘born from above,’ nothing but Christ in the Word of God, ‘the true bread which came down from heaven,’ can give him satisfaction. It is Christ or death with him. ‘As new born babes, desire the sincere milk of the Word, that ye may grow thereby.’ ” “Many a mountain the child of grace has to ascend and descend which he did not expect at the beginning of his race. His hope may fall so low as to cause him to conclude that he may bid good-bye with the Church of Christ, and wish her God-speed, and the presence of Christ and of His Spirit, but as for himself, that he will never win the crown of life. At such times he will be regretting that he ever professed Christ publicly, for fear of bringing His glorious name and cause into disgrace in the world. There is always something in the gracious soul that, at the lowest ebb of his hope and faith, wishes well unto the true church of God.” “Another mark of grace in the soul is that, however low he may be, he rejoices to hear both law and gospel declared in their proper relations to perishing sinners.”
In prayer he was a mighty prince, and might truly be called Israel. In public he was invariably concise, and most refreshing to the poor in spirit. His tenderness towards them that mourn in Zion appeared by his earnest solicitation in their behalf that their faith should not fail. He delighted to plead for them in connection with that most precious truth—”A Father to the fatherless, and a judge of the widows, is God in His holy habitation.” His face beamed with joy when he expressed that those who were afraid to call God their Father, and therefore were often fatherless, were, in this truth, called God’s children in spite of their unbelief. His yearnings over the souls of the young of this generation, whom he often declared to be in imminent danger of being eternally lost, were conspicuous in all his prayers. They lost a true friend the day John Campbell’s voice was hushed on earth. His earnest pleading for an outpouring of the Spirit to quicken the dead, and to revive and comfort the living, refreshed the drooping spirits of not a few. Christ’s cause and truth; the peace and felicity of Jerusalem; and the efforts of hell and earth against them; but the sure victory of Christ and His followers, were both his consolations and fears in this valley of Baca. No language could be more vehement than his in describing the loathsomeness of sin in man’s nature; and none more sublime than his descriptions of the holiness and justice of God. Christ in His atoning death satisfying divine justice and holiness, as the sinner’s substitute and surety was his only hiding place. Latterly it was observed that his mind soared aloft to the throne of God and the Lamb in almost every prayer. The church triumphant seemed to be often before his mind.
As a friend he was both true and faithful, but was very cautious whom he chose as a friend. None ever heard him say that he was
a converted man ; but none could be any time in his company without being thoroughly convinced that his conversation was not of this world. Often, after speaking at the fellowship meeting, or at public prayer, he would spend the whole night in restlessness fearing that he had wounded the Lord’s people. So great was his honest humility, that he often pled that he should be passed over, because of his inability and unsuitableness for such exercises. He said to a lady going home from church recently, “I have travelled north, south, east, and west, but I never met a sinner so black as myself.” The lady said, “Was Manasseh not as black?” “I have sinned against light, which Manasseh had not.” To another friend, a few Sabbaths before his death he said, “I am just waiting the summons to call me to His judgment seat, and it may come very soon.” To another friend who visited him on his death-bed he said, “Abel looked to Christ’s atonement on Calvary’s cross, and the last of the saved from among men will look back to the same atonement.” He was only three Sabbaths unable to go to church before the end came. “Help Lord because the godly man doth daily fade away.” “Mark thou the perfect, and behold the man of uprightness ; because that surely of this man the latter end is peace.”
N. C.
Notes and Comments.
RELIGIOUS OSTRICHES.—What numbers of professors I have known who go into one place of worship, and hear one form of doctrine, and apparently approve it, because the teacher is “a clever man !” They hear an opposite teaching, and they are equally at home, because again it is “a clever man !” They join a church and you ask them, “Do you agree with the views of that community?” They neither know nor care what those views may be ; one doctrine is as good as another to them. Their spiritual appetite can enjoy soap as well as butter ; they can digest bricks as well as bread. These religious ostriches have a marvellous power of swallowing anything ; they have no spiritual discernment, no appreciation of truth. They follow any clever person, and in this, prove that they are not sheep of our Lord’s pasture, of whom it is written, “A stranger will they not follow, for they know not the voice of strangers.”—Late Rev. C. H. Spurgeon.
ROMISH WINDOW FOR AN ESTABLISHED CHURCH.—It is not a new thing for professing Protestant churches in Scotland to have windows decorated with idolatrous figures after the example of Rome. Witness St. Giles, Edinburgh. But it seems the mania for external decoration of the Romish type is spreading. The latest case is in connection with St. George’s, Edinburgh, over which presides Dr. Scott, last Moderator of the General Assembly of the Established Church. Somehow it was the impression that
Dr. Scott was one of those that inclined rather to the old paths, but the impression seems to have been a mistake. This new window which is to adorn his church is decorated with a representation of the ascension of Christ. “The composition divides itself,” it is stated, “into two important groups. The upper one consists of our Lord in the act of blessing, surrounded by a group of angels, whose wings of varied colour, mostly blue, become a background emphasising the principal figure. A band of cherubs and cloud-forms of varied rubies separate the upper from the lower group, which latter consists of apostles and the Virgin Mary; some kneeling, others standing, but all with upturned faces concentrated on the ascending figure.” This is the sort of thing that is now the ornament of professing Christian Churches. The true beauty of a church, we understand, is to have the spiritual image of Christ stamped upon the souls of its members, and the example of Christ embodied in their life and conversation. When this is lost, the resort to unlawful images impressed upon wood or glass is simply the setting up of an unworthy tombstone over a grave full of dead men’s bones. The outside may attract the carnal eye of men, the inside is the abode of death, rottenness, and corruption.
THE NEW ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY.—A scene took place at the confirmation of Dr. Temple, the Archbishop-elect of Canterbury. When objections were called for, a certain Rev. S. D. Brownjohn entered dissent for the reason that Dr. Temple was a believer in the theory of evolution, a theory that is inconsistent with the doctrine of Creation as contained in the Thirty-nine Articles of the Church of England. The dissent, however, was brushed aside without much parley, and Mr. Brownjohn contends that the call for objections is a mere form of no value. It would appear, however, that this is Mr. Brownjohn’s sole contention. He himself holds strongly the theory of evolution, and professes to desire that the standards of the English Church should be so adjusted that persons holding this theory might consistently hold office in that body without any valid objection to the contrary. The above method of protest at the Archbishop’s confirmation, he declares, was the most effectual means he could adopt to draw attention to the subject. Apart from Mr. Brownjohn’s intention, this incident sheds light upon the laxity with which creeds are held nowadays even by men assuming the highest religious profession. Proof is given in such a case as above, not only of a lack of reverence for the doctrines of the Word of God, but also of a conspicuous want of moral honesty. Dishonesty and infidelity are in no wise sanctified though the guilty party should be an Archbishop. The Word of God and the moral law are authorities which all must acknowledge, and they will one day judge the peasant and the prince, the meanest criminal in the gaol, and the highest dignitary in the professing Church.
“ET TU, BRUTE!”—When the noble Cæsar, covered with wounds, was stabbed last of all by Brutus, he was too sorrowful to be angry, and he exclaimed, “And thou also, friend Brutus!” Such an exclamation may well escape the lips of Dr. Bruce and “Ian Maclaren,” for the one has been wounded by The Free Church Monthly, and the other has been attacked by The British Weekly. Both have lately published books of theology, and both have been too embarrassingly heterodox to please their respective journals. A sense of danger and insecurity has overtaken the editors of these eminently safe and conservative publications, and they have been forced to hoist the danger signal. As for Dr. Bruce’s book “With Open Face,” the following are some criticisms of The Free Church Monthly upon it:—“It is disappointing to meet with so little recognition of the fact that the evangelists are inspired.” “There is unquestionably unfortunate vagueness in the presentation at once of the doctrine of the person of Christ and of the atonement.” “The thoughts are often rather those of the intellectual critic than those of the whole Christian man,” with more of the like sort. The Rev. “Ian Maclaren,” alias Dr. Watson, in his new book “The Cure of Souls,” is reprov’d in the following manner by The British Weekly, the journal which has nourished and brought him up: “Dr. Watson’s lectures lack power and sting.” “When Dr. Watson speaks of the atonement he is invariably unsatisfactory.” “There is something little short of childishness in such examples as Dr. Watson gives (to elucidate the mystery of the atonement), and they show that the great truth of the propitiation is but darkly apprehended.” “We miss the tremendous emphasis with which the New Testament draws the line between the church and the world.” If some obscure evangelical preacher or writer had handled these men of light and leading in this fashion, it would of course befit them well to take no notice, but let them beware when their adverse critics are the men of their own household.
A MERE MUSICAL AND LITERARY CLUB.—The British Weekly has received the programme of a series of Sabbath evening praise services to be held in St. John’s Free Church, Glasgow. On each occasion the minister, the Rev. J. S. Carroll, M.A., will deliver an address in the middle of the service. The subjects announced are “Tennyson’s ‘Palace of Art,’” “Browning’s ‘An Epistle of Karshish,’” and “Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam.”
OH! the hell of horrors and terrors that attend those souls that have their greatest work to do when they come to die. Therefore, as you would be happy in death, and everlastingly blessed after death, prepare and fit yourselves for death.—Dr. Thomas Goodwin.