OUR readers are doubtless aware that some time ago a movement was started in Edinburgh with a view to the making of a new Catechism for the public schools of Scotland, that would take the place of the time-honoured Shorter Catechism, which is now getting out of date for modern tastes and opinions. The new Catechism is now practically completed, but at the time of writing (March 19th) it has not yet been formally endorsed by the representatives of the various Churches who approve of its formation, and so we enter into no criticism of its contents. There will be scope for this, if well, in some future article or articles. Meantime we shall give a short account of the origin of this new Catechism, and of the attitude that has been taken up by the Free Presbyterian Church in relation thereto.
In 1903, the General Assembly of the Established Church, in response to overtures, appointed a committee to consider “the whole subject of religious instruction in schools,” with power to invite the co-operation of the other Reformed Churches in Scotland in their deliberations upon the matter. Some time after this appointment, a letter was received by our Clerk of Synod from the Rev. Theodore Marshall, D.D., to the effect that the various Churches mentioned were asked “to consult together in order to arrange for the extension of religious education in public and secondary schools throughout the country in the event of any opportunity being offered to secure this by the introduction of a Government measure or otherwise, that might alter the present educational settlement in Scotland.” The letter also requested that a delegate for conference be appointed before 1st October, 1903, and this was done by our Presbyteries, but no meeting was held. The subject then came up before the Synod in November of the same year, and the Southern Presbytery was appointed to act as a committee to watch proceedings and report. The idea of a new Catechism was not yet to the forefront, and so the Presbytery’s instructions were in the following general terms:—That all should be done to prevent any detriment to present “use and wont” in the schools; to improve matters, if possible, by assisting all efforts to make the reading of the Scriptures a regular school subject; and to oppose any attempt to place denominational schools, Episcopalian or Roman Catholic, on the rates, or to give them any further countenance. As the result of the above instructions, the writer and two other ministers of the Church attended a meeting of the Committee on Religious Education in Edinburgh on Tuesday, the 12th April, 1904. By this time we understood that a new Catechism was to be proposed, and, as the issue turned out, the proposal for a new Catechism for schools occupied the chief attention of the meeting. There were present representatives of various bodies, such as the Association for the Inspection of Religious Instruction in Schools, the Church of Scotland, United Free Church, Episcopal Church, Congregational Union, Free Church, Original Seceders, Wesleyan Methodists, Free Presbyterian Church, and others—the Rev. Norman Macleod, D.D., of Inverness, being in the chair. The new Catechism proposal was subjected to some discussion, in the course of which two Free Church ministers present opposed the proposal, and spoke in favour of the Shorter Catechism. They shortly afterwards left the meeting. The late Principal Rainy, who took a prominent part in the proceedings, moved the appointment of a sub-committee, with a view to draw up a Catechism for schools. The motion was seconded. At this stage the writer moved an amendment, as follows:—”That, in view of the past history and excellent character of the Shorter Catechism, as well as its general acceptance throughout the country, it was highly undesirable to draw up another Catechism.” The amendment was seconded. Motion and amendment were then put to the meeting, when the former was carried by a large majority, the latter being supported only by the three Free Presbyterian ministers present. Some members of committee did not vote at all. Thus, so far ended our connection with the Committee on Religious Education.
We reported what had been done to the Synod, which met at Inverness in July, 1904, and the action that had been taken against the new Catechism proposal was approved of. The Synod again appointed the members of the Southern Presbytery as a committee to act in connection with the proposed introduction of a new Catechism, and instructed them to enlighten the people with the regard to the excellencies of the Shorter Catechism, and to warn them of the danger of introducing into schools a modified Catechism. The ministers of the Church in general were also instructed to inform their people in these matters.
The following is a list of the members of the Sub-Committee who have prepared the new School Catechism:—Arthur W. Cooke, M.A., Minister of the Wesleyan Methodist Church, Glasgow; James Cooper, D.D., Professor in the University of Glasgow; Robert Craig, D.D., Minister of the Congregational Union, Edinburgh; John Dowden, D.D., LL.D., Bishop in the Scottish Episcopal Church, Edinburgh; Rowland Ellis, M.A., Canon in the Scottish Episcopal Church, Edinburgh (now Bishop, Aberdeen); Jas. R. Leslie, M.A., Principal of the Episcopal Training College, Edinburgh; A. R. MacEwen, D.D., Professor in the New College (United Free), Edinburgh; William Mair, D.D., ex-Moderator of the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland, formerly minister of Earlston; John Marshall, Esq., Wesleyan Church, Glasgow; Theodore Marshall, D.D., Home Mission Convener, Church of Scotland; M. Paterson, Esq., LL.D., Rector of Moray House Training College (United Free), Edinburgh; the late R. Rainy, D.D., Principal of the U.F. College, Edinburgh; James Robertson, D.D., Whittinghame (Church of Scotland); Walter Ross Taylor, D.D., United Free Church, Glasgow. Principal Rainy was first Convener of this Committee, but his place is now filled by Dr. Mair.
As already indicated, we do not feel at liberty yet to criticise the contents of the new Catechism, though a draft is before us; but we are safe in stating meantime that, if it is adopted in all its present particulars, as it is very likely to be, it will be a document that will call for serious criticism, an instrument of education in nowise to be compared to the Shorter Catechism, and a thing to warn the people against.
J. S. S.
The Bigotry of the Liberal-minded.
—Dr. Johnson, during his tour to the Hebrides, met with a person who, like many in the present day, was vehemently opposed to creeds and confessions of faith. His principal objection to them was that they are inconsistent with mental freedom. The human mind, he said, is confused by them, and they ought not to be imposed upon it. To this the hard head and robust commonsense of Johnson made answer, that what the objector called imposition is only a voluntary declaration of agreement in certain articles of faith which a Church has a right to acquire, just as any other society can insist upon certain rules being observed by its members. Nobody is compelled to belong to the Church, as nobody is compelled to enter a society. This, however, did not satisfy the pertinacious opponent of creeds; and he continued his objections in the same general strain as before. Johnson then silenced him with the remark: “Sir, you are a bigot to laxness.”—Shedd’s Orthodoxy and Heterodoxy.