A Lecture

BY THE REV. NEIL CAMERON, GLASGOW.

Delivered on New Year’s Day, 1920, in St. Jude’s Hall, Glasgow.

“Then Samuel took a stone, and set it up between Mizpeh and Shen, and called the name of it Eben-ezer, saying, Hitherto hath the Lord helped us.”—I SAMUEL vii. 12.

TWO things should be carefully taken notice of in all the inspired history of the children of Israel: (1) How they prospered spiritually and nationally while they adhered to the Lord and the order of worship set up amongst them by His authority, and (2) How they suffered from wars externally and revolutions internally when they set up idolatry and departed from the worship of the living and true God. In the fourth chapter of this book we read of two battles fought with the Philistines. The Israelites lost four thousand men in the first of these. Then they sent for the Ark of the Covenant to Shiloh. When it came into the camp the Israelites cheered so lustily that the noise was heard, and the cause of it understood, in the camp of the Philistines. In the second battle the Israelites lost thirty thousand men, “and the ark of the Lord was taken” by the Philistines. The two priests who came with the Ark, Hophin and Phinehas, were slain. The Lord, by the mouth of Samuel, when he was only eight years of age, told godly Eli that, on account of the evil conduct of his sons, and the fact that he did not restrain them, notwithstanding he knew it, these two young men would be punished by the Lord, and that the whole family of Eli would be destroyed. All this was accomplished on the house of Eli, and it should teach men, to the end of time, of their need of being faithful in the things of God committed to their charge. In our own affairs we should be as liberal as we can, but in the great affairs of God, and the eternal salvation of men, we must deal impartially.

There seems to have been twenty years between the battles recorded in the fourth chapter and this battle recorded in our context. It seems also that the people had by this time, under the faithful preaching of Samuel, come to repentance, for we read: “and all the house of Israel lamented after the Lord,” and that they “did put away Baalim and Ashtaroth, and served the Lord only.” Samuel called them together to Mizpeh, and the Philistines, hearing that they were gathered there, came to fight against them. Samuel offered a sacrifice and prayed to the Lord. The Lord “thundered with a great thunder on that day upon the Philistines, and discomfited them; and they were smitten before Israel.” After the battle was over, Samuel “took a stone and set it between Mizpeh and Shen,” to commemorate the event.

The words which I desire to draw your attention to at this time, as the Lord may help me, are, “Hitherto hath the Lord helped us.” We will consider (1) some of the proofs we have that the Lord has helped us hitherto; and (2) that we should not forget this in the future.

I.—Let us consider some of the proofs we have that the Lord has helped us hitherto.

1. A large number of you were not born into the world when the Free Church of Scotland began to depart from her own well-defined Creed and Constitution. She changed her form of worship by introducing hymns and instrumental music. By doing so, she took a long step back towards the form of idolatrous worship which existed in Scotland prior to the Reformation, which backsliding caused grief and alarm in the minds of all who loved God’s truth and the purity of His worship. The innovators did not stop there, neither would they pay any attention to the remonstrances of the faithful men, such as Dr. Begg and Dr. Kennedy, who saw and declared the evil that would follow. But they went on to unite with the U.P. Church. If this union had taken place then (the movement for it began in 1863 and ended in 1873), it would have meant that the Free Church had ceased to hold the Scriptural doctrine of the headship of Christ over the nations for the benefit of His body, the Church, and that she had ceased to hold also that Christ died for the elect only, and not for all men. These two doctrines stand in the forefront of the Word of God, and were set forth in the plainest terms in the Confession of Faith. It was also true that every office-bearer in the Free Church had of his own freewill vowed to hold by them to the end of his days. This deplorable laxity of conscience on the part of a large majority of ministers and elders made the hearts of the righteous sad. These union negotiations came to an end in one form in 1873; but an Act was passed, called the “Eligibility Act,” which placed all the ministers of the U.P. Church, as regards their being amenable to be called by Free Church congregations, on a par with F.C. ministers. Dr. Kennedy wrote a very able Article, which appeared in the “Watchword” in 1872, exposing the hypocrisy of this Act, and the baneful effects of it on the Free Church. Instead of calling a halt, they began a crusade for the Disestablishment and Disendowment of the Church of Scotland. Large, and very numerous signed petitions were sent to the Assembly against these proposed changes, but without any real effect, for Dr. Rainy and his party were bent on ruin. Thus, they endeavoured to get over the two main obstacles to union with the U.P.’s. Bad as these things were, the next step was worse. The Bible itself was attacked, and its infallibility and inerrancy scoffed at. Efforts were put forth, at the beginning of this sacrilege, to bring these infidels to an account, and to have them dealt with, but without avail. These infidels were placed in the Divinity Chairs of her colleges, so as to make sure that the future ministry within her pale would be all Higher Critics, if it would be possible to make them so. Of this I had a most painful experience in the New College, Edinburgh. But they did not stop there. Discussions were started in the Presbytery of Edinburgh about some of the fundamental doctrines of the Confession of Faith. These discussions led, as they were meant to do, to the appointment of a Committee, to whom powers were delegated by the Assembly, for giving in a report to the next Assembly as to the relation of the Church to certain doctrines in the Confession of Faith. This report was brought before the Assembly of 1891. After it was read and discussed pro and con, it was moved and seconded that it be sent down as an overture under the Barrier Act to the Presbyteries of the Church. This motion was carried by an overwhelming majority. Almost all the Presbyteries approved of it by a majority. At the Assembly of 1892 it was passed as a Declaratory Act. We were present at that Assembly, and we can never forget the scene of exultation on the part of the victors. They had now carried their point. The Confession of Faith was no longer their confession of faith, and all the changes they had made were now to be bound on the neck of the Free Church. The Constitutional Party entered a protest against this Act. When we were leaving the Assembly Hall, one of the ministers of the Church, who is now in the present Free Church, told us that there was to be a meeting that evening, and that they purposed to separate at once from the Rainy majority. We asked him, “Where was the meeting to be held, and at what hour?” He told us, so we attended that meeting. It was moved that Dr. W. Balfour should take the chair. This was agreed to. He rose and said:—”Fathers and brethren,—The time has now come when we must separate from the majority in this Church, and declare ourselves the ‘Free Church of Scotland,’ for, if we will not do this, and if we will continue to oppose this Act, we shall be kicked out of the Church, one by one.” One of the ministers present got up at once, and, in a weeping tone of voice, warned them of the danger of taking such a step, and reminded them of the trials endured by many congregations in the North before they got churches and manses erected after the Disruption in 1843. He told them also that the property was a part of the Constitution of the Church, and, should they separate, that the people would not follow them, and that Dr. Rainy would send men who would fill their pulpits. One of the leaders of the Constitutional Party got up, and said: “I never thought or dreamt of a disruption.” The tone of the meeting was immediately changed, and they declared that they would fight within. There were three students present, who were, at the request of a minister and the chairman, asked to speak. One did speak, then another was asked to speak. He rose, and said to them “that he believed that the Lord’s people in the Free Church were that day on their knees in secret praying that the Lord would give them grace and strength to enable them to fulfil their vows to God and men, and that they were bound by their voluntary oath to do so; but, if they would not do their duty, they were to understand that he, at least, would not follow them one step.” The one of them who said that he never thought or dreamt of a disruption got up, and said, “that a committee should be appointed to hold a meeting on the following Monday, and that they should put their decision off till then.” That meeting was held, but nothing was done. We often heard from the lips of this minister that the passing of the Declaratory Act meant—”Bible or no Bible; atonement or no atonement; Confession of Faith or no Confession of Faith.” We heartily concurred with him in that statement. But the time for making strong speeches had now come to an end, and that of showing by deeds the sincerity of the hearts of men had come.

Dr. Rainy had spies, both in the north and south, who had learned in private that there would be no separation should this Act be passed, and he and his followers thought that they had gained a complete victory. This was the secret of their cheering and shouting when the Act was passed. But the Lord had men in the Free Church who meant to follow up their words by deeds. So, when the Assembly of 1893 refused, by an overwhelming majority, to repeal that Act, the Rev. Donald Macfarlane came forward, and read and tabled a protest against the drastic changes enacted, and declared that he, and such as would follow him, would adhere to the original Constitution of the Free Church of Scotland, and that he did now and then separate himself from the so-called Free Church, claiming all his own rights, and that of them who might follow him, to all that belonged to them as loyal Free Churchmen. Dr. Rainy confessed afterwards that this was the greatest surprise he got in his lifetime. The Rev. Donald Macdonald, Shieldaig, joined Rev. D. Macfarlane about the middle of June. The two ministers and a few elders constituted a Presbytery at Portree on the 14th day of August, which they denominated, “THE PRESBYTERY OF THE FREE CHURCH OF 1843.” They, at that Presbytery, adopted a Deed of Separation, in which the main causes for separation were set forth. The Free Church of Scotland was now delivered out of the hands of infidels and carnal office-bearers, who knew not what they were doing, and set up again in her purity of doctrine and worship. Great was the joy of the godly men and women who mourned on account of the wounds given to Christ in the house of His friends. The Rainy Philistines were discomfited by the Lord, and notwithstanding that, as regards numbers and worldly power, the revived Free Church could not now lay claim to either, yet she had God’s Word, the whole Creed of the Church of the Reformation in Scotland, and the seal of the Holy Spirit on the hearts of the Lord’s people. We could then say from the bottom of our hearts, “Hitherto hath the Lord helped us.” I remember words which the late Mr. Archibald Crawford, Tighnabruaich, uttered when we met him after the separation. He said, “You are now like the children of Israel after they were delivered from the Egyptians at the Red Sea; but wait you until the Lord will begin to pump up what is in your own bowels, and that will be more painful to you than all you have suffered in the past.” Alas! how true I have found the godly man’s prediction!

1. At the Assembly of 1894 a motion was passed to the effect that a civil action should be raised in the Court of Session to deprive us of all the property which we then possessed. To the great shame of the former Constitutional Party, this motion was moved by one of them. The action was raised, and they took from us every manse, church, and meeting-house in our possession, so that in many places our people had to worship God under the canopy of the heavens. We took with joy the spoiling of our goods, and we felt like Mephibosheth, when his servant by fraud took from him his inheritance; all he said was, “Yea, let him take all, forasmuch as my Lord the king is come again in peace unto his own house.” We found that suffering for and with Christ was true happiness. This reminds me of a saying of the late Joseph MacKay at the time of the Disruption in 1843: “There are,” he said, “two kinds of Christians in the world, and as I have no better illustration I will compare them to the dog and the cat. The cat is not so attached to the people with whom he lives as he is to the house, and should the people leave the house, the cat will be quite as content to live with the strangers who will come to dwell in it. But the dog cares for his master more than for the house, and if his master should have to sleep at night under a rock, the dog will be quite content with him there.” The application of the above similitude was self-evident at the Disruption of 1843. Those who then loved wages and property more than Christ and His cause and people remained in the slavery to which the Church of Scotland had been brought by the tyranny of the Patronage Act, and by the injustice of the Court of Session; but those who then loved Christ and His cause and people, left all for His honour and glory. The so-called Constitutional Party acted in the same way as the Moderates did in 1843—they stuck to their wages, churches and manses, notwithstanding that the cause of the separation in 1843 was not to be compared to 1893. At the former, the Confession of Faith and the Church’s relation to the Word of God remained intact; at the latter, the relation of the Church to both had been changed, so much so, that I heard the statement already quoted, that the passing of the Declaratory Act meant “Bible or no Bible; Confession of Faith or no Confession of Faith; atonement or no atonement,” applauded by these same men. But the testing time had now come, and the thoughts of many hearts were revealed.

Not a word was now said in public against these extraordinary changes. The Rainy party, but especially the so-called Constitutional Party, did their level best to stigmatise us as schismatics, who were guilty of breaking up the Church of Christ. But none of these things moved us, for we had the warrant of God’s Word for the step we had taken, and also the approval of our own conscience. The warmth and spiritual joy felt by us in the means of salvation, and the unity and love which then existed between brothers and sisters in Christ, as also the seals set upon the Word preached in the conversion of sinners to God, made us absolutely sure that the Lord approved of the step we had taken. We were fully convinced that we had continued long enough in Church fellowship with men who, like wild beasts, tore God’s Word to pieces, superseded the Westminster Confession of Faith by the accumulation of old heresies contained in the Declaratory Act, and had become perjured men to the bargain. Men might call them “the Church of Christ,” and charge us with schism for separating from them; but we knew that men would not be the judges at last but God, and therefore we appealed to Him. Notwithstanding all they did, and the fact that we had troubles from within, we continued to prosper. This continued during seven years. We could say at the end of that period: “Hitherto hath the Lord helped us.”

1. In the year 1900 the union between the so-called Free Church and the United Presbyterian Church was consummated. Twenty-five ministers refused to follow the Rainy party into the united body. They declared themselves and all who would adhere to them, “The Free Church of Scotland.” A movement was set on foot in our Church at once to join this party. We pleaded for delay, till we could form a proper judgment of the position these men would adopt. It was quite manifest to anyone who wished to see that they had still all the innovations which were brought into that Church, and that it would be our duty to wait till we could see what they intended to do. Still there was a determined effort made by some in our Church to join them as soon as possible, but their efforts were thwarted. We had not to wait long in order to form an opinion of what the future of this new movement would be.

(a) They declared that they had always adhered to the Confession of Faith as adopted in 1846 by the Free Church. Had they declared that they adhered to the property and their salaries in 1893, and let the Confession of Faith go, their declaration would be nearer the truth. Further, if it were possible for them to have remained in the Declaratory Act Church during these seven years, why had we left that body? It was a desperate effort on their part at self-justification. To confess that they acted wrongfully would expose them before the public, especially their own followers, as being guilty of unfaithfulness to their ordination vows, and of accusing us of being schismatics for having separated from them. They did their utmost to prove the above view of their conduct by leaflets sent to some of our congregations, and by word of mouth to others. (b) They appointed as their first Professor a man who had written and published, before they appointed him, a book in which the inspiration of the Bible was seriously impinged. When several of the lower Courts petitioned their General Assembly, craving that the book should be examined, and, if need be, that the author should be dealt with in accordance with the procedure of the Church, the members of Assembly praised the book and the man who wrote it as being learned and sound in the faith. This decision caused that doubts were raised in our minds as regards the soundness of the Free Church Assembly concerning the infallibility and inerrancy of the Holy Scriptures. Nothing has been done since by them to remove these doubts. (c) They continued to hold social gatherings, at which things were done which were a scandal to any Church. One of these was held at Oban, another in the vicinity of Glasgow, of which our worthy Editor took notice in the F.P. Magazine in 1907. These things caused us a great amount of mental pain. We cannot see what connection such meetings can have with the cause of Christ, or of what benefit poor, perishing sinners can obtain in them. The Free Church at her beginning would not have tolerated such works of darkness in her halls and churches. (d) They took no effective steps to rescind the Declaratory Act. It is understood that their legal advisers held that to rescind it might weaken their case which they raised in the Civil Courts in order to gain the property and funds of the Church. So property and funds were still holding the first place in the minds of the men who led the Free Church. (e) When they gained the case in the House of Lords, they opened the door of admission to the ministry of the Church to men out of all denominations. This they did in order to enable them to keep as much of the property and funds as they could when the Commission appointed by Parliament to divide the same was to give them only as much of it as they would be able to administer. These men seem to us to have lost their heads in acting so contrarily to the careful regard shown in better days by the Free Church as to who should be admitted into her ministry. Every step taken by them made the barriers between themselves and us more formidable. They were warned of this fact on several occasions, but they would not listen to remonstrances. Every word spoken or written was construed as maliciousness on our part.

In face of all the above, and much more, a motion was brought forward at our Synod in November of 1905, to the effect that a Committee should be appointed to confer with the Free Church, so that a union would be consummated between us and them. The Synod decided that, while they would be prepared to consider a motion for union with any Church holding the whole doctrine of the Confession of Faith and the infallibility of the Holy Scriptures, both in her profession and practice, they could not consider a motion for union with the Free Church on account of the fact that, notwithstanding she made ample profession as regards her orthodoxy, she came very far short in her practice. Four ministers and two or three elders, and a very small number of our people, left our communion and joined her. We could repeat the words of our text again with emphasis: “Hitherto hath the Lord helped us.” The effect of this exodus was never felt in the least as detrimental to the F.P. Church, and that notwithstanding those who left us did their very utmost to disseminate, by word and pen, that they only had carried out the principles of the Confession of Faith and their ordination vows. But all this went to prove where these men felt the shoe pinching them.

1. In the year 1916 a motion was passed at the meeting of Commission of Assembly of the Free Church, appointing a Committee to confer with a prospective Committee of our Church about union. Much confidence as to the success of this movement on their part was expressed by the mover and seconder of that motion. For some time we were quite in the dark as regards the grounds of this confidence expressed at the Commission. After some correspondence we understood that these men had some ground for the statements they made. At the meeting of our Synod in 1917 a statement of obstacles which barred the way was passed and sent to the Free Church. There was unanimity in the Synod that it would be futile to appoint a Committee until these obstacles were removed. This statement was drawn up and passed after serious and prayerful consideration on our part. The reply sent by the Free Church was made up of evasions and offers of compromise. That action on their part left us no alternative but to end any further correspondence about the proposed union. For what was the usefulness of continuing correspondence with men who thought that we would be blindfolded by fair words instead of a practical effort to remove these obstacles? The whole fault lay with them. We would ask any intelligent Free Church man or woman: “What would he or she do if they were in our place? Would such join us until obstacles were removed which were clearly inconsistent with God’s Word and the principles and practice of the Free Church at her beginning?” I believe firmly that they would refuse to do so, and they would be fully justified in their refusal.

But the four ministers who moved, at the Synod in 1918, that a Committee should be appointed to confer with the Committee of the Free Church for union, held a different opinion. They went so far in justifying the reply sent by the Free Church, that it became very evident that the change was not in that Church but in their own minds. We could see no change for the better in the Free Church, since these men used stronger language in denouncing her conduct than we ever did. This caused us to think that their own speeches and writings in the past would make a splendid refutation of their speeches and writings in the present. Three of these ministers went over to the Free Church in November of 1918. (The other left recently.) Two of these ministers we highly regarded as men who truly preached the Gospel, and whom we loved in the close bond of brotherhood in Christ Jesus, and we hope—notwithstanding all that they have manifested towards us in connection with their change of mind, and otherwise—that we will continue to love the dead and the living.

We certainly thought that they would do much harm to our poor Church should they go over to the Free Church; but be it said to the glory of the Lord and the faithfulness of our people, we know not of a dozen that followed them. That was not because they did not do their very utmost to take our people away, but because our people knew and saw what it would mean to them should they leave the F.P. Church. Instead of causing any real loss to us, we have to say, that the F.P. Church has not been since 1900 so bound together in one spirit and one mind in defence of our position as a Church, as she has been since this last controversy began. Whom are we bound to thank for this? Surely the Lord’s goodness to us is made manifest in it. So that we may repeat again the words of our text: “Hitherto hath the Lord helped us.”

1. I desire to direct the attention of each one here to the fact stated above, that we took up in 1893 the position held by the Free Church in 1843, so that we are the only true representatives of the Free Church. We had to change our name, for identification’s sake, by adding “Presbyterian,” but that made no change on our position. The party now called the Free Church acted contrary to the “Evangelical Party” in 1843, who left the privileges of State connection, such as property and salaries, so as to have Christ ruling in His own house. We have already shown how the 1893 leaders of the Free Church stuck like a limpet to a rock to earthly things, and also how the leaders that now are showed the same spirit in 1900. So that these men have no claim to the name—”The Church of Scotland, Free,” no more than the Moderates had to it after 1843. To leave the F.P. Church in order to be united to the Free Church, means, in my opinion, that men are leaving the only Free Church in Scotland to join a “heterogeneous conglomerate body” of ministers gathered out of every denomination by the present Free Church, not for truth or conscience sake, but to enable them to get worldly substance. They have the name—Free Church—and their followers are deceived by that name, and, consequently, they follow them. We are quite certain that they would not follow ministers taken from all denominations (Roman Catholics excepted) had these not been placed under the designation, “Free Church.” But, however strange this conduct on the part of their followers may appear, the fact cannot be denied. It is actually a new body gathered together and claiming to be the Free Church. We always felt pained at the heart for the people of the Free Church; but we abhor the tactics of her ministers.

The following instances give our reasons: (1) It can be proved that they were writing private letters to some of the ministers of our Church, offering them congregations in the Free Church if they would join them. (2) They kept a Professor’s chair vacant in their Divinity Hall, Edinburgh, since 1900, and they openly avowed that this was done on purpose to get one of our ministers over to fill it. In the last instance, they have been successful in capturing their man, but, in doing so, they are guilty before God and the people of this country of breaking the Tenth Commandment—”Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s house, . . . nor his man-servant.” (3) They declare that there is no difference between our Church and theirs, but by the same breath they beg for the money of others to pay for a church building bought for the very purpose of dividing a congregation of our Church. If they believe in their own words, they must confess that this is schism in the scriptural sense of that sin. These low and unchristian actions demean these men in the eyes of even worldly men. We regret sincerely, that we are forced by the words and actions of these men, to lay bare the truth for our own self-preservation as a body.

I desire to observe before closing this subject, that in 1894 we were stripped of any Church property our followers possessed up till then. Since then, we have built churches, manses, and halls, in such numbers as cause us amazement, seeing that the remaining debt is below £2,000 over the whole Church, and that our people cannot say that this has made them poorer than their neighbours. The goodness of the Lord towards us financially is to be admired. So that we may again, on this account, repeat the words of our text: “Hitherto hath the Lord helped us.”

II.—That we should not forget this in the future.

1. We have endeavoured to show that, while we have learned by very painful experiences, how little man can be trusted, we have proved that the Lord may be trusted in every circumstance that can arise. This is a lesson which took years to learn, and we should not forget it in future. We know some of the things that are past; what the future may have in store for us is unknown to us. Let us place all our hope and confidence in the Lord alone. “Trust in the Lord at all times; for in the Lord Jehovah is everlasting strength.”

2. We have endeavoured to show that, as far as we can understand God’s word and providence, the Lord helped us hitherto because we, in much weakness and infirmities, have adhered to His Word, the Confession of Faith, and purity in worship and practice as a Church. Let us not forget that this has been the cause of our overcoming such as rose up against us again and again, as sure as it was in the case of the Old Testament Church, who prospered while they held, even outwardly, to God’s instituted means of grace and to His Word. We are, as a Church, founded solidly on the foundation laid in Scotland at the Reformation. That foundation was solidly laid upon God’s infallible and eternal truth, and while our Church will continue to hold it without surrendering or compromising in the least degree, any part thereof, no power in hell or upon earth shall prevail against her. But as soon as she will depart from that firm attitude, she is gone.

The late Mrs. Annie McLeod,

CLASHMORE, STOER, SUTHERLAND.

THE choice ones of the earth are being removed one by one. What a solemn voice the death of the Lord’s people conveys! What spiritual gloom and darkness does it betoken to those left, like-minded with them, when they compare the present with the past! Christ’s winnowing fan is at work, calling home His own from the evils that are still to come; and yet very few they are who lay it to heart. Thus, where Christ’s praying people are taken home, the communities among whom they lived become more exposed to the prowlings and the assaults of the Wicked One. May the Lord arise for our help!

The subject of this notice, whose death took place on the 14th February, 1919, was one who gave every evidence of being a gracious woman. In the days of her youth she was, like the rest of the world, light and careless with regard to the eternal interests of her soul. Her mother was considered by all as a truly pious woman, who was old in years and ripe in grace when she died. It would also appear that the Psalmist’s description—”The secret of the Lord is with them that fear him”—was, without exaggeration, applicable to her. Whether or not the exemplary life and God-fearing character of her mother was instrumentally effective in producing serious impressions upon the mind of her daughter, we are not in a position to say. At all events, it was not until many years after she was married, and after most, if not all, of her family of five were born, she was plunged into the depths of conviction of sin and misery. How or by what means she was thus awakened, we have no data upon which to go. Suffice it, however, to say that if she was formerly engrossed in worldly and earthly objects, to the great neglect of Christ and salvation, her heart became now overwhelmed with a sense of her lost condition. Her bodily health—not very robust previously—becoming considerably impaired, she was frequently laid upon her bed. But the Lord had His own gracious purpose towards her. The day of her espousal had come, and the words in which the Holy Spirit brought the glad tidings of salvation to her soul were: “Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life; no man cometh unto the Father but by me” (John xiv. 6). It was, indeed, a very appropriate passage of truth, and this marked deliverance she never forgot, for it stood out, as a beacon-like light, supporting her when the after-clouds and darkness of desertion, and want of sensible spiritual enjoyments, interposed. Some time after she made a public profession of her faith, and she was not at all free of the fear that she might bring a reproach on this profession. This, indeed, was her own confession.

Her husband having taken ill not long after she bore this public witness, she attended him, with no inconsiderable harm to her bodily state. Nursing him night and day, she contracted a cold, which afterwards induced an internal disease which threatened fatal symptoms. The duty of nursing now devolved on her late eldest son—a most dutiful and loving son he was. The husband died, and so weak was she that she could not rise to take a final look of her partner’s remains. She herself was now attended to with the same loving and ceaseless devotion by this likeable son. For months she lay between life and death, until she was sufficiently able to be removed to the Infirmary in Glasgow. We heard her saying that, during those months on bed, the lamp or candle light was not known to have been extinguished, owing to the weak and tremulous state of her mind. Satan did not fail to take advantage of her mental condition, and her anguish was only known to herself and to God. She was not left without truths that gave nourishment and strength to her weary soul.

While in the Infirmary she could only be attended to with treatment; she was not operated upon. Finally, she was discharged as incurable. But she derived much benefit from the mode of treatment that was applied, and lived for many years afterwards. In fact, she got so well that she was travelling to Communions all over the north-west. We believe it was a relapse or recurrence of this acute malady, from which she was suffering more or less for a year or so previous to her death, causing her a good deal of mental agitation, that really brought on the end.

The Word of God was the subject of her meditation; secret prayer was her element; the means of grace were her meat and drink; and the society of God’s people was her cordial and loving choice. If the maxim, “Like draws to like,” be operative in the natural sphere of resemblance, it may be said, with no less truth, to be operative in the spiritual. In whomsoever she could discover reflected the features of her own spiritual image, it provoked in her a feeling of attachment which, by the degree of its warmth, she was inclined to carry perhaps to excess. Rather frank and open in the company of those with whom she felt at home, her purposes all the same were sincere and her intentions pure. Her knowledge of the deceitfulness and pollution of the human heart was deep and constant.

To her the contentions of the Free Presbyterian Church were a necessary witness for truth from which she would not resile. The recent troubles were to her a source of deep and genuine grief. We miss her greatly, and the vacant seat in the church is to the writer a heart-searching reminder; for never was it empty of its faithful and devoted occupant while she could move at all, and she was often there when she should have been in bed. The loss is great to the congregation of Stoer and the cause of Christ in general, while the happy gain is her’s. Her age was only fifty-four years.

To her surviving son—(the eldest son, referred to above, died six years ago in Australia, which was a severe blow to his mother)—and three daughters we tender our deepest sympathy; and may the Lord raise up the children instead of the fathers and mothers removed to the upper sanctuary. M. M.

The late Mrs. William Sutherland,

LOCHINVER.

THIS worthy and excellent old lady died in April, 1919, having reached about fourscore years. Up to some two or three years ago she was able to move about and attend the house of God—a place it was her intense delight to be in as long as she was able to do so. She was the second wife of the late respected Mr. William Sutherland, who acted as missionary and catechist in the Lochinver district for many years, and of whom an appreciative account appeared in the pages of the Magazine after his death. He was, without doubt, a tower of strength in the early stages of the Free Presbyterian movement, and Dolina, his second wife, the subject of this notice, was characteristically like-minded in the things of God with her gracious husband.

Mrs. Sutherland came under the merciful strivings of the Holy Spirit at a very early age. The circumstance which contributed to move her spirit relative to the claims of eternity was providential. A brother, older than herself, to whom she was deeply attached, and in whose company she would always be, died. This sad event made the profoundest impression upon her mind, and the solemn consideration of death took a deep hold of her spirit. As she herself put it, on one of the extremely rare occasions on which she became communicative of her own experiences—”It was when my young brother died that my mind was carried into eternity.” Thus, awakened, while a mere girl, she began to propose her own terms and form her own resolutions, in order to prepare for eternity. She set to herself a time limit of three years, in which, if the Lord should spare her, she would be sufficiently prepared, fearing meantime she might die unconverted. The soul which is brought under genuine concern, let it be young or old, endeavours by its own efforts at good works to atone for the past and to pacify the conscience. Conscience, by the illuminating rays which the Holy Spirit sheds into it, begins to assert its proper function, testifying to its personal guilt, and the soul becomes spiritually active; it cannot rest, and need we wonder, when it discovers itself to be a subject of everlasting existence, with the inevitable prospect before it, if it continue unregenerate, of the wrath to come. Let it be noted, she was quite a young girl then, and as to how long she was cleaving to the covenant of works, we cannot say. But she left it on record herself that when she was about fourteen years of age her mother sent her, at the time of a communion, in accordance with time-honoured practice of generosity among Highland people, with some gift in a basket to the Scourie Manse. As she was making her entry by the kitchen door, the late Rev. Mr. Corbett of Kinlochbervie, who was assisting in Scourie on this occasion, met her, and quoted to her the passage in Zechariah, chapter ix. and verse 11: “As for thee also, by the blood of thy covenant I have sent forth thy prisoners out of the pit, wherein is no water.” Naturally abashed and modest—traits of character which she displayed with increasing lustre to the end—she, Nathanæl-like, wondered exceedingly at so much attention being bestowed on her by Christ’s servant, and especially at words of Scripture being addressed to her. That evening Mr. Corbett preached from the words which were quoted to young Dolina a few hours previously, and she then thought she closed in with Christ on His own gracious terms. But she used to exclaim, immediately after saying this much of herself, “That is far from being the case with me now.”

Henceforth she became noted among her neighbours, not only for her careful walk and tender conversation, but for her anxiety to attend the means of grace, far and near. In the flourishing days of Dr. Aird, Creich, and Dr. Kennedy, Dingwall, no obstacle, however formidable, would she not endeavour to surmount—and her effort was always attended with success—in order to be present at those memorable Sacramental gatherings in Ross and Sutherland, in which these famous ministers played so eminent and acceptable a part. As an instance, while she was scarcely twenty years old, of her predominant purpose to be at the Sacrament in Creich—long and tedious though the distance was—she enlisted the services of the young women of Badcall at harvest-time, and, thus reinforced, would gather in the corn through the moonlight nights, so as to be able, without hindrance, to proceed to the communion. It strikes us that, her humility and modesty being what they were, she would get her girl friends to help her gathering in the corn under the moonlight, so as not to be seen. To her, it mattered not whether she would walk the dreary distance of forty or fifty miles, or take the mail coach. In any case, the want of a conveyance would not keep her back. Dr. Kennedy, of all ministers she knew and heard, was her noted and unequalled favourite. One so fitted and qualified in every respect as Dr. Kennedy could not fail being a nursing father to the young Christian, and the latter, at the most impressionable and formative period of life, was bound to find such a preacher a veritable gift from heaven, or as one speaking in Christ’s stead. The benefit derived would never be forgotten, and the impression made would be indelible. At the mere mention of the eminent preacher’s name, her countenance was wont to brighten up, as the past was conjured up before her mental gaze. Dr. Kennedy had the wonderful spiritual vision and the faculty of expressing in remarkable detail, in the choicest language, the almost limitless variety of spiritual experiences of his numerous hearers, composed of the children, the young men, and the fathers of God’s family. Every one got his own peculiar case unfolded at some time or another, and thus food convenient was provided for all.

Of all we knew, Mrs. Sutherland may be said to have excelled in the Christian virtues of humility and modesty. Fearful and cautious of putting herself forward, or taking a place which did not belong to her, she would upbraid herself in the most self-denying terms for the fewest remarks she would utter in the presence of others—remarks which, under the closest examination, were absolutely free of anything harsh or offensive. She looked, in fact, on all others professing Christ in sincerity as far excelling herself, and yet every one gave precedence to her for holiness of heart, walk and conversation. Very deep was her knowledge of the evil heart of unbelief which is so ready to depart from the living God. This, indeed, kept her in constant fear, and in conscious dependence upon the grace of God. Like others, her experience varied and alternated between the hope and assurance that arise from enjoying tokens of His favour, and the mistrust and depression, resulting from hardness of heart, unspirituality of mind, and distance from God. Always straightforward, she placed the claims of truth and righteousness above every human consideration and expediency. She identified herself heart and soul with the cause of truth as championed by the Free Presbyterian Church in 1893, and was a loyal supporter of it ever since. Those who are engaged in the public work of the Lord greatly miss the pleadings and the support of the prayers of such godly persons as Mrs. Sutherland, and their death is a painful wrench.

In conclusion, we cannot but extend a tribute of admiration and gratitude to those who attended her in her enfeebled state. This attention was given by our elder and his wife, Mr. and Mrs. Alexander M’Leod, Ardrishnich, with loving care and devotion. Mrs. M’Leod was her stepdaughter, and to them we extend our sincere sympathy in the loss of so precious a relative. Precious in God’s sight is the death of the saints. M. M.

Air Beatha a Chriosduidh.

LE MR. EOIN UELSH.

“Dh’fheuchainn am feudainn air aon chor teachd a dh’ionnsuidh na h-ais-eirigh o na marbhaiddh.”—PHILIP. iii. 11, 12.

DO bhrigh’s gu’m b’aill leam so a chriochnachadh aig an ám so, air an an aobhar sin, cha dean mi ach na briathran a mbíneachadh gu h-aithghearr. Tha fhios agaibh air an rùn a bha againn’san làmh; bha e air a chuir sios duibh ciod a chrioch air son am bu chòir dhuibh cleachdadh agus caith-beath a chriosduidh a bhi agaibh; co lion agaibh, ’sa tha iaratasach air son slainte fhaotainn, agus a ta sealltain air son crùn na gloir a ta air a thasgaidh suas air neamh air bhur son, tha a shamhuil air a chuir sios ann an so, a chum’s co liugha agaibh ’sa tha sealltuinn air son na beannachd fhaotainn’san latha mhor, gu’n deanadh sibh, sibh fein a chomb-chumadh ris. ’Se a cheud ní anns an t-samhlachas so, am meas urramach a bh’aise air Mac Dhe, air chor ‘s gu’n do “mheas e na h-uile nithe mar aolach ann an coimheas ri ro-oidheirceis eolais Chriosd.” Cha bhi cúrsa chriosduidh ach na h-uallach duibh gus am faigh sibh an steidh so air a shuidbeachadh ann ar cridheachan, air doigh’s nach b’urra bheag sam bith deadh bholadh a bhi aige ann bhr cluasan ach sin a tha teachd troimh Chriosd; air an aobhar sin cha’n iongantach ge d’ tha sibh co tric a’ togail, agus co tric a’ tilgeadh sios an ni a thog sibh; ‘se so an t-aobhar gu’m bheil sinn co tric a’ ruith air ar n-ais, agus cha’n ann air bhr n-aghaigh, do bhrigh’s nach ‘eil sinn a’ suidbeachadh Chriosd mar chlach-bhunait ar n’anama, agus nach ‘eil sinn a’ togail air a luach urramach-san; oir gus am faigh sinn e air an doigh so, gu’m meas sinn e mar aon neamhnuid agus seud ar n’anama; cha’n urradh do’r n’ imeachd anns a chreidimh chriosduidh gu bràth a bhi le gairdeachas agus tlachd do’r n-anama, agus an sin tha mi cinnteach gu’m bu chóir do’r cúrsa gu leir anns a chreidimh chriosduidh a bhi na aoibhneas agus na shubhachas; agus na’m b’aill leibh bhr togail a bhi cinnteach, ‘se sò a cheud chlach air am feud sibh togail, eadhon am meas urramach so air Chriosd.

‘San ath áite, b’e iartras anam a bhi air fhaotainn ann. ‘Se sin, ann a dhearbh chridhe-san as an d’thainig a mach uisg agus fuil, gu’m biodh e air fhaotainn ann an sin; agus an sin bha fhios aige nach biodh a chaithir-bhreitheanais sin uamhasach dha. Ciod as an urrainn thu eagal a bhi ort am feadh a riarach an Mac ceartas Dhia, agus uime sin cha’n urrainn fhearg greim a dheanamh ort. ‘Nis, an deigh dha bhi air fhaotainn ann-san, tha dà ni eile a mhiannaich e, ‘Sa cheud áite, dh’iar e fhireantachd-san gu a chomhdachadh; oir cha’n e t-fhireantachd nadurrach fein gu bràth, no obair ghrás air tòiseachadh ‘na d’anam, as urrainn do thoirt a dh’ionnsuidh an aoibhneas agus an t-sòlaís shuidhichte so, ach ‘se a mhàin fireantachd Chriosd air a meas dhuit, a’s urrainn fior shìth agus gairdeachas a thabhairt do d’ chridhe; uime sin feumaidh tu an tús a chreidsinn ann do chridhe, gur leat fein fireantachd a Mhic, mu’n urrainn thu aoibhneas air bith no sith fhaotainn ann ad’ anam fein; agus an uair a chreideas tu so, bithidh e dhuit do reir do chreidimh, agus bheir so gairdeachas agus sìth a dh’ionnsuidh d’anam. Cha’n urrainn e bhi air innseadh ciod an aoibhneas agus an comhfhurtachd a ta anns an anam is urrainn a radh, tha mise ann an Chriosd agus tha Chriosd anam-sa, tha fhireantachd-san a’ comhdachadh m’anam ‘o theine dian-loisgeach feirge Dhia; air an aobhar sin cha’n’eil díteadh sam bith dhomh-sa. ‘Nuair a tha’n dearbhadh so agad, an sin cha’n urrainn do na h-uile a ta’n taobh stigh, na’n taobh mach dhuit, do chreach no do spùileadh de shìth.

An ath ni a mhiannaich e ann an Chriosd b’e so e, cha’n e mhàin gu’n do mhiannaich e fhireantachd gu a chomhdachadh, ach mhiannaich e mar an ceudna eolas beo agus iomlain a bhi aige air Chriosd, cha’n ann leis an litir, ach le mothachadh an Spioraid; cha’n ann le beachdachadh, ach le cleachdadh; a leithid do dh’eòlas agus a dheanadh e na fhear compairt deth ais-eiridhsan, agus ann an coslas cruth ri a bhàs.

‘Nis, air do’n cheud steidh a bhi air a leagail, leanaidh càch uile ‘nan órdugh fein. Mar sin saothraich gu Criosd fhaotainn agus fhireantachd-san air a meas dhuit, an sin cha’n urrainn thu sealltainn a thoirt air a bhàs, nach feum do pheacanna-sa basachadh maille ris, agus cha robh buille riamh a fhuair a dhruim, nach bi na iocshlaint leigheis do d’anam-sa. Mar sin cha’n ‘eil a h-aon a bha air am faotainn ann an Criosd, agus a tha ann, an uair a sheallas iad air a bhas-san, feumaidh iad a bhi ann an coslas cruth ris. Agus bheir so orra radh, am bi mo lamhan-sa agus mo chosan fuasgailte gu peacadh, agus esan ceangailt air mo shon-sa? Am bi mo Thighearn-sa marbh, agus mo chuid-sa peacanna beò annam? Am bi esan air a chuir ann an uaigh, agus mo pheacanna-sa aig imeachd air an talamh co beothail ‘sa bha iad riamh? Ciod is aobhar, a shaoileas sibhse, gu’m bheil co iomadh peacadh beò, agus air chuthach mar bheistean an taobh a stigh dhoibh, ach do bhrigh ‘s nach ‘eil iad a’ cuir an Tighearna ceusda so ra’n cridheachan, a chum ‘s gu’n d’thugadh boladh a bhàis-san buille bhàis do na pheacadh annta-san? Ach a mheud ‘s aig am bheil eolas beothail air Chriosd, cha’n eil iad aig fois gu brath gus am bheil iad a’ faotainn feartuinn beothail a’ teachd o a bhas-san, agus a’ marbhadh a pheacaidh annta. An so tha eòlas oirdheiric, agus is maith a dh’fheudas e bhi air a ghairm eòlas oirdheiric, oir esan a fhuair e, fhuair e deadh sheoltachd, agus dh’ionnsaich e deadh innleachd, agus foghlum neamhaidh. Is maith do’n anam sin a gheibh an t-eòlas neamhaidh so, a tha tabhairt air eòlas fhaotainn air cumhachd ais-eirigh-san, agus air co-chomunn fhulangais, agus coslas cruth r’a bhas. ‘Nis ann an so tha e dol a’ dh’ionnsuidh comhara eile, na’s fhaide air aghairt na aon-chuidh fhireanachadh no a naomhachadh, an ni ‘se so, comhara a ghloireachaidh. eadhon dochas na beatha siorruidh; air an aobhar sin tha e ag radh, “Dh’fheuchainn am feudainn air aon chor teachd a chum na h-ais-eirigh e na marbhaibh.” Mar gu’n abradh e, ge do tha mi ann an Criosd, agus ge do tha mi am fhireantachd-san ‘gam chomhdachadh, agus ge do tha mi am fhear compairt do chumhachd ais-eirigh-san, agus do chomh-chomuinn fhulangais. agus ge do tha mi ann an coslas cruth r’a bhàs; gidheadh cha’n fhoisich mi gu bràth gus am bi mi air taobh steach na’n neulaibh, agus gu’m faigh mi ann an sin gu faicsinneach làn mo ghàirdeinean do Thighearn na glòir. Ma ‘se agus air aon-chor, deir esan, cha’n ‘eil speis agam ciod sam bith co cruaidh no dhoirbh sa dh’fheudas e bhi dhomh a theachd d’a ionnsuidh, ma ‘se a’s air aon chor gu’m feud mi ruitheachd air, uime sin cha’n’eil umhail agam na h-uile nithe a thabbairt fuidhe mo chosan, a chu’ms bi iad na’n co iomadh stòl-chois gu comhnadh a chum mo chridhe a thogail suas gu neamh: cha’n’eil suim agam air son gach crois agus trioblaid a ghiùlain air mo ghuailibh, ma ‘se is gu’m buannaich mi a dh’ionnsuidh a ghloir ud; oir rinn sealladh dheth m’anam a chomh-eighneachadh, air doigh’s nach eil curam agam ciod sam bith co cruaidh no co doilbh, agus ciod sam bith cho garbh ‘sa bhios, an t-slighe, oir feumaidh mi bhi aige, feumaidh mi a bhi air taobh stigh an nuadh Ierusalem sin, baile an Dia bheo; feumaidh mi an t-óran nuadh sin a sheinn, agus an Aleluiah sin a tha na naoimh’s na h-ainglíbh air neimh a’ seinn do Dia a gnàth. Tna fios agam gu’m bheil an t-slighe cruaidh, ach cha’n eil spèis agam ciod sam bith cho cruaidh ‘sa bhiteas e, ma’s urrainn mi air aon doigh teachd d’a ionnsuidh. Gu dearbh tha’n t-slighe cumhang agus aimhleathan, agus uime sin feumaidh e bi cruaidh; ach ‘s ann a mhàin do dh’fhuil agus do dh’fheoil a tha e cruaidh; agus ‘s ann a mhàin aig a thoiseach a tha e cruaidh; gidheadh tha e air a ghairm an t-slighe nuadh, do bhrigh ‘s gu’m bheil aoibhneas nuadh aig ceann gach mile nach leig dhuit fàs sgith. Tha e air a ghairm an t-slighe bheò, do bhrigh ‘s gu’m bheil e toirt air d’anam do ghnàth a bhi bed; co fhad ‘sa tha thu ag imeachd air. “Chum’s gu’n d’thiginn a dh’ionnsuidh na h-aiseirigh,” tha’m focal gu’n tiginn a dh’ionnsuidh a’ ciallachadh gu’n coinnichinn. Mar gu’n abradh e, tha fios agam gu’m bheil an Tighearn a teachd, agus tha fios agam gu’m feum na mairbh eiridh; uime sin tha iarrtas agam a dhòl a mach agus a choinneachd; Eadhon mar sin bu chòir dhuibh-se a gnàth smuaineachadh air a so, tha’n Tighearn a’ teachd a chum breith thabhairt, mar-aon air bheò agus air mhairbh, air an aoibh sin feumaidh na h-uile eirigh agus taisbeanadh ‘na làthair-san; bithidh cuid air an comh-eigneachadh gu eiridh ann an aghaidh an toil, eiridh muinntir eile gu h-aoibneach gu chomhlachadh anns na neulaibh, agus bithidh an dream so air an togail suas anns na neulaibh maille ris, ach bithidh a chuid eile air am fagail air an talamh leo fein: uime sin tha mi a’ miannachadh a bhi do’n aireamh sin a dh’eireas gu choinneachadh gu h-aoibhneach, agus tha iarrtas agam air son dòchas na coinnidh aoibhneich sin a bhi na’s mó agus na’s mò air a daingneachadh agus air a deanamh cinnteach do m’anam.

Tha mi faicinn, ma ta gu’m feum mi fhàgail gu àm eile, oir cha dean mi bhrur sgiosachadh; uime sin tha mi aig earbsa ri beannachadh Dhe na nithe a bha air an labhairt gu ruige so, agus tha mi guide air Dia gu’n naomhaicheadh e bhrur cuimhne, a chum’s nach di-chuimhicheadh sibh gu bràth am meas urramach so bu chòir duibh a bhi agaibh air bhrur Tighearn Criosd; a chum’s nach bi sibh gu bràth as eugmhais am mealtuinn beannaichte sin, agus an t-aonadh sona sin maille ri bhrur Tighearna; nach bi sibh gu bràth as eugmhais fhireantachd gu ‘ur comhdachadh, agus fhuil gu bhrur fireanachadh agus bhrur naomhachadh; a chu’ms gu’m bi aithe agaibh air doigh’s gu’n tarruing sibh gach là beatha mach as; a chum’s gu’m bi sibh air bhrur comh-chumadh ris, mar-aon ann a bhàs agus ann a ais-eirigh; agus gu’m bi sinn do ghnath nì’s mò agus na’s mò air ar daingneachadh ann an dòchas na glòire sin. Amen.

The late Miss Sarah Cameron

(OF STRONTIAN, ARGYLL), RESOLIS.

MISS SARAH CAMERON, who died at Resolis, Ross-shire, in November last, was born eighty-six years since at Geusachan, near the head of Lochshiel, in the parish of Strontian, Argyllshire. Her father, Donald Cameron, was, to begin with, a Roman Catholic. He did not leave that idolatrous Church until all his family, with the exception of the youngest, had been baptised. When the Lord opened his eyes to see his lost condition, and the uselessness of penances, etc., to satisfy the claims of Divine justice and of a guilty conscience, he was from that day a Protestant. The Word of God, which he read carefully, was the means used by the Holy Spirit in his conversion. He began immediately to keep worship in his family, and to teach them God’s way of salvation through Christ crucified. Thus, Sarah had, from her childhood, been taught in the ways of God, and had also an example of sincere godliness set before her from day to day. But, as in the case of many who have had such privileges, she continued careless until she was about eighteen years of age.

The Lord laid his hand on her that year with a virulent suppuration of the throat. This brought her so low that her life was despaired of. The doctor declared that, if the matter in the throat would go down, there was no hope; but that, if it came up, she would have a chance. Her conscience awoke, so that she expected the Lord would cast her into hell for her sins, especially for having despised and rejected the Lord Jesus Christ. Her agony was indescribable. She cried to the Lord for mercy and deliverance. He heard her cry, and delivered her. After her strength had recovered sufficiently, she used to walk all the way to Strontian to hear the late Rev. John Macqueen. The distance would be about fifteen miles, nine of which were without a public road. She told the writer of one day, when she was returning home in the company of John Cameron (Iain an Tailer), that, when they came to the Mines, where John lived, four miles from the church, he held her hand when saying good-bye, and, looking at her in the face, said: “Contend with the mountains, and let the hills hear thy voice.” This encouraged her to cry to the Lord in secret for mercy as a lost sinner. In the year 1859, she was enabled by faith to embrace Christ as her own Saviour. This took place during a sermon preached by Mr. Macqueen. A year or two after that she was advised to profess the Lord publicly at His table. Before she would take this solemn step, she consulted her father. He advised her to delay, so as to make sure that the change was a real one. This she did, in obedience to her father; but no one could doubt ever after 1859 the fact that Sarah Cameron was truly a God-fearing woman.

The writer met her for the first time in the year 1880. A bond of sincere friendship was formed between them that continued unbroken to the last. She was one of the most exercised Christians the writer had the privilege of knowing. Her love to God’s Word, and her abhorrence of the blasphemous views of the “Higher Critics” was such that, when the late Rev. Marcus Dods was placed in the Chair of New Testament Exegesis in the New College, Edinburgh, she wrote a friend that she would cease attending the means in connection with the Free Church. He wrote her that, while the constitution of that Church remained intact, and while she knew that two or three of the Lord’s people met to worship the Lord in Strontian, she ought not to separate herself from the Church and from them. So she continued to attend the means of grace.

In the year 1889 she went up to Lochshiel, all the way from Aharacle, to Geusachan to have a last view of the home of her early days. The party landed in Isle Finnan, the burying-place of their family, where lay interred the remains of her father and mother. At their grave a part of the 103rd Psalm was read and sung, viz., the 13th to the 18th verse inclusive. She looked very solemn for some time, but quite silent. At last she begged to be excused, “for,” she said, “our mother made me and my two sisters promise her, on her death-bed, that we would read these verses together every day, while the Lord would spare us in the world, and that we would pray together for the fulfilment of that promise. It struck me as being very wonderful that you have taken them to be sung by us at her grave.” When she arrived at Geusachan, the first place she visited was the rivulet which passes the house a little to the south. She came back to a friend, who was standing nearer the house, with tears in her eyes, and said to him: “Ah! the marks that my father’s knees and elbows left in the ground, and the place itself, have been washed away by the burn.” Her friend went with her to see where Donald Cameron, her worthy father, used to wrestle with “the Angel of the Covenant,” and he told her not to weep because the Lord had removed the sacred spot, seeing there was no one using it now. This did not mean that there was not a praying person then in Geusachan.

In the year 1892, the whole family left Strontian and came to live in Glasgow, where they resided till 1905. In 1893 the separation took place by which those who were grieved in their souls at the God-dishonouring and soul-ruining conduct of the so-called Free Church towards the Bible, the Confession of Faith, and the Form of Worship and Government of the Church of Scotland (Free), got the relief they longed for. It is not any exaggeration to say that no one in Scotland felt more relief in his or her conscience than Miss Cameron did, by finding herself in the Free Church, separated from men who showed such hatred to God’s Word and its doctrines.

Miss Cameron was very often tempted by Satan and unbelief. A friend called at their house once, to whom she said: “I know that, when I will tell you the truth about myself, you will endeavour to argue against the conclusion to which I have now come, viz., that I have been all along a hypocrite, deceiving myself and others. So you need not say one word, for that is the truth.” Her friend said: “If you will not allow me to reason with you against that conclusion to which you have come about your condition, will you allow me to ask you a question?” She agreed. Her friend asked her to repeat the answer to the question, “What is Effectual Calling?” She did so correctly. Then he asked her: “Do you deny that you have been convinced that you are a sinner, and did that conviction cause you not to feel miserable?” She answered: “That was and is still true.” “Has not your mind been enlightened in the knowledge of Christ, so that you see that there is no salvation in any other, and that there is no other name given under heaven among men whereby we must be saved but the name Jesus. And, do you not count all things as dung, so that you may win Christ and be found in Him, not having your own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith?” She answered: “That was true, I thought, in the past, but what is that to me now?” “But it was true in the past, so we will leave it that way just now.” “Did you not feel that the will that led you to delight in sin, in yourself and others, was taken away, and that your delight turned to the Lord Jesus, His truth, means of grace, and His people?” “That was so at one time, I thought,” she said, “but what have I got of that to-day?” “Did you feel that you did close in with Christ as your own Saviour as He is freely offered in the Gospel?” She answered: “I did think that I received Him as my own Saviour, as He is offered in the Gospel, but I find now that all that was a delusion.” Her friend said: “Now, you have confessed that you did pass through ‘Effectual Calling,’ and I will ask you one other question, Where can you find in the Scriptures anyone who passed through effectual calling but once? For the calling of God is without repentance.” She was quiet for a few minutes, and then asked to be excused for a minute. She came back to the room, after a short interval, full of hope and comfort. At another time, she complained that she was more ignorant of God than she had been forty years ago, and that this was a sure proof that she was not one of His people. One who was present said to her: “Have you not learned much of the long-suffering of God during the last forty years?” She answered: “I do not believe that I have.” Next morning, when she came downstairs to breakfast, she said: “I must withdraw what I said last night; I do know more of the long-suffering of God than I did forty years ago.”

In the year 1905, Mrs. Boyd and herself left Glasgow, and went to reside at Corpach. The kindness shown them by the late Donald MacMaster, while they remained there, was such that she remembered it to the last. This was more appreciated by them both, because they had two bereavements—the loss of a daughter of Mrs. Boyd, and of Mrs. Boyd’s husband, shortly before they left Glasgow. After residing there for two or three years, they went to live in Dingwall. On account of her physical weakness and deafness, she was not able to attend the ministry of the Rev. D. Macfarlane with the regularity which characterised her while her physical strength enabled her to do so. This was a cause of much sorrow to her, for there were very few ministers whose preaching she valued and admired so highly as his. The Lord saw fit to remove Mrs. Boyd at Dingwall, and to leave Miss Cameron alone in the world, like the sparrow on the house-top. They had lived together all their days, and participated in each other’s joys and sorrows. Mrs. Boyd had been to her all that any sister could be as regards affection and concern as to her comforts. But this came to an end, as all worldly comforts must do. She bore this great trial with commendable resignation to the Lord’s will. She acted like the Psalmist: “I was dumb, I opened not my mouth; because Thou didst it.” During the few years she remained in Dingwall, after Mrs. Boyd was taken from her, her nephew, Captain Boyd, providing for her needs, as regards a house, a housekeeper, and plenty money for her support. The dutifulness of that young man towards his mother, while the Lord spared her to him, and afterwards towards his aunt, is deserving of all praise. May the Lord repay him a hundredfold! For the last four years she lived with her nephew, the Rev. William Cameron, Free Church Manse, Resolis. He and Miss Cameron, his sister, could not have shown more kindness to their mother than they did to Miss Cameron. The writer, who visited her once and again, while she lived with them, had from her own mouth expressions of appreciation concerning their great kindness and consideration towards her. We desire to express our gratitude to them for this; not that we think that they did it from any motive but that of sincere affection towards their aunt.

Miss Cameron was the last of the Lord’s people who were the companions of the writer in his early days, forty years ago. The mind delights in going back to those days of sincere and loving fellowship in the Lord. The thought of that noble band of godly men and women being now on Mount Zion above, beholding the face of their Beloved, and singing the song: “Unto him who loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood, and made us kings and priests unto God and his Father; to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever, Amen,” causes much joy; but the thought that their places have become a barren wilderness in this poor, poor generation, causes much sorrow of heart. We need much the prayer of the Church of old: “Wilt thou not revive us again; that thy people may rejoice in thee.”

Miss Cameron passed away to her everlasting rest on the 13th day of November, 1919, and was buried beside her sister in the Dingwall Cemetery on the 18th, there to await a glorious resurrection on the last day. We desire to express our sincere sympathy with all who mourn after her. N. C.

P.S.—The following Gaelic poem was composed by Miss Cameron. The first part of it records her grief when her sister, Mary (Mrs. MacNaughton) was taken away to her everlasting rest. She was an eminent woman for piety and extraordinary love to the Lord’s people, and great kindness towards all her fellow-sinners. She died when she was comparatively young. The latter part of the poem describes her own mental experiences, especially those of doubts and also hope in the merits of Christ’s righteousness to meet her ruined condition. It shows that, although she had doubts and fears, she had also appropriating faith in Christ crucified.

O gur mi tha muladach!
Tha mi duilich tiamhaidh,
Bho’n dhealaich luchd mo ghaoil rium
D’fhag sud dhomh ‘n saoghal cianail.
Mhairidh ghaoil, bu chairdeil thu,
Bu bhlath ri pobull Dhia thu,
S’ b’ aoidhail thu ri pairteachadh
Ri cachta mar an ceudna.
B’fhuaith leat fuaim na gall-truimp,
U’s sramdu na fein iarraidh;
Ach thugheadh banntraich ‘s dileachdain
Gu roibh mór bhrigh ‘nad dhiadhachd.
Bu shoilleir do na cairdean
Gun d’fhuaith thu gràs gad riaghladh,
‘Us tomhas a rinn ailidh thu
Do mais ‘us grais na diadhachd.
Bu toil leat an fheinaichadh,
‘Us t’aite ghabhail iosal;
Ach th’fhuaith thu ait ro-urramach
Bhi gul aig cosan Iosa.
Dhoirt E spiorad urnuigh ort
A ghleidh thu dlu ga iorraidh,
‘Us bhiodh dealta spiorad bruite
A druthadh troimh do bhriathran.
Is tric mar Iacob ghleachdadh tu
Ri taobh nan sruthan fior-uig,
‘S tu ‘g aslachadh nan geallaidhean,
‘S ag aideach do mhi-dhiadhachd.
Nuair bhiodh cach nan leabaichean
Bhiodh tusa a gleachd ‘s ag iarraidh
An Spioraid Noaimh a chunainte
Gu d’ tharuing dluth ri Iosa.

Dhinnis Dia na firinn dhuinn,
‘Us gheibh sinn sgiobht a bhriathran
Nach fag E iad nan diliachdain,
Gun tig E ris gan iarraidh.

Mur sin ged sgar am bäs mi
An traths o d’chomunn diadhaidh,
Ma chomhlaicheas sinn na laithirsan
Bidh an gairdeachas sin siorruidh.

Ma se’s gum faigh mi saorsa,
A tha cho daor’s na fachan;
Am bheil neach ‘san t-shaoghal s’
Nach faigh so saor ma dhiaras?

‘Us troimh fuil m’fhear Saoraidh,
‘Sa ghaol a tha neo-chriochhach,
Tha suil agam ri fabhar
Bhon’ rinn na’m aite dioladh.

Troimh oibríbh a cheud chananta,
Cha bhi mo dhuil gu siorruidh,
‘Sann tha mo dhochas buineatach
A Mac an duine Criosdu.

Bho’n tha mo lotan bäsmbhor
‘Smo chreuchdan graineil diobhlaidh,
Cha leighis ni gu brath mi,
Ach plasd d’on fhuil rinn dioladh.

Bhiodh ‘n sin an ola chubhraidh
A drughadh orm tre Criosda;
‘S cha ruigeadh claidheamh ceartais orm
Bhon a tha e cheanna riaraicht.

An sin ged sheid na gaothan
‘S ged robh gaoir nan tuitlean fiadhaich,
Bhithinnsa gun charrachadh,
‘S mi air a charraig shiorruidh.—Sarah Cameron.