THE Clerk of Synod has received the following invitation addressed to the Free Presbyterian Church: “The Church of Scotland and the United Free Church request the honour of the presence of a Delegate from the Free Presbyterian Church of Scotland at the Union of the Churches, which will be consummated at Edinburgh on Wednesday, 2nd October, 1929.—(Signed) Joseph Mitchell, Moderator of the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland; Alex. Martin, Moderator of the General Assembly of the United Free Church of Scotland.” The Clerks of the respective Assemblies, Dr. J. T. Cox and Dr James Harvey, in more effusive wording, also send an invitation, promising to provide hospitality for delegates, if required, and add: “If it is not convenient for your Church to send an official delegate bearing an address of goodwill, we would welcome a letter of fraternal greeting from your Church on the occasion of this important and historic event in the history of the Scottish Church.” We do not wish to appear rude to those sending these invitations, but the remembrance of past events and honesty demand of us to say that a delegate or letter of fraternal greeting from the Free Presbyterian Church to the Uniting Churches would be an act of hypocrisy in view of our attitude to the Union. Reasons have already been given why we disapprove of this Union, and in our next issue we hope to re-state these. Besides, we cannot forget that we are in the position of the man who was turned out of house and home by his brethren, and allowed to shift for himself as best he could, while they retained full possession of all that belonged to their father—money, property, and all. After many years these brethren, without one word of regret for their unbrotherly conduct, now greatly enriched, having a mind to enter into a big business deal, invite the brother so wrongfully treated to be present with an address of goodwill, or if not, that a letter of fraternal greeting should be sent them. As Principal Rainy once said: “There must be something wrong somewhere” when such an invitation was sent to the Free Presbyterian Church.
Communication From Ontario Kirk-Session
THE following communication has been received by the Clerk of Synod, and is authorised to be printed in the Magazine by the Synod’s Business Committee:— “At Lochalsh and in the Church there on Saturday, June 29th, 1929, the Kirk-Session of the Ontario congregation of the Free Presbyterian Church of Scotland in Canada met and was constituted. Sederunt with Rev. Wm. Matheson, Moderator; Messrs Hugh Scott, Ailsa Craig, Clerk; Alex. Macfarlane, Chelsey; and Murdo Matheson, Lochalsh, ruling elders.
Inter alia: A communication from Rev. D. Beaton, as Clerk of Synod, dated 31st May 1929, conveying the “finding of last Synod re communication from your Kirk-Session” was then adverted to, and it was moved, seconded, and unanimously agreed to forward an acknowledgment of the receipt thereof in the following terms: This Kirk-Session wishes respectfully to acknowledge receipt from Rev. D. Beaton, Wick, of the recent finding of Synod respecting this Kirk-Session’s resolution of September 19th, 1928, and also of the Synod’s intimation thereanent. It recognises gladly and to the full, as it has hitherto sought scrupulously to do, the lawfully constituted authority of the Synod, as of all Courts of the Church, but desires simply to intimate to the Synod its re-affirmation of the aforesaid resolution of September 19th, 1928, with a cordial expression of gratitude to the Great Head of the Church for the whole-hearted loyalty of our people in this vital issue. This Kirk-Session also desires to intimate to the Synod that, while the Synod’s will for “putting away” arouses the deepest grief and pain, it is determined to maintain, at all costs, the testimony of His Word and of the subordinate standards of our Church to the sole lordship of God over the conscience, according to ordination vows. This being all the business, the Session was closed with prayer. Extracted from the Minutes of Session.— (Signed) HUGH SCOTT, Clerk of Session.
The above-mentioned resolution of the Kirk-Session, dated September 19th, 1928, was freely circulated amongst our people since last September. It was first read and explained briefly to the congregation at the regular Annual Congregational Meeting on Monday, July 1st, 1929, at the close of Communion services at Lochalsh, and then the Synod’s finding above referred to was read and explained, and a free and full opportunity was given
for questions and for expression of individual opinion. In like manner the Kirk-Session’s resolution of acknowledgment of June 29th, 1929, was read and freely discussed, and at the close of discussion it was cordially endorsed by uplifted hand, without one dissenting note, as a simple statement of the only position consistent with a pure conscience.—WILLIAM MATHESON, Chairman; A. R. FINLAYSON, Clerk.”
The Two Magnitudes*
BY DR CHALMERS.
I SHALL just conclude with a few words of explanation of the extracts which have been read to you this evening from a certain pamphlet.* Sir, that pamphlet I now declare to have been a production of my own, published twenty years ago. I was indeed much surprised to hear it brought forward and quoted this evening; and I instantly conceived that the reverend gentleman (Mr Fleming) who did so, had been working at the trade of a resurrection-man. Verily I believed that my unfortunate pamphlet had long ere now descended into the tomb of merited oblivion, and that there it was mouldering in silence, forgotten and disregarded. But since that gentleman had brought it forward in the face of this House, I can assure him that I feel grateful to him from the bottom of my heart for the opportunity he has afforded me of making a public recantation of the sentiments it contains. I have read a tract entitled the “Last Moments of the Earl of Rochester,” and I was powerfully struck in reading it, with the conviction how much evil a pernicious pamphlet may be the means of disseminating. At the time when I wrote it, I did not conceive that my pamphlet would do much evil; but, sir, considering the conclusions that have been deduced from
*The incident that called forth this famous utterance was a quotation from an anonymous pamphlet during the long debate on pluralities or Union of Offices, as it was called, in the Assembly of 1825. The Rev. Alexander Fleming, Neilston, in his speech quoted from the pamphlet which called forth the recantation and impressive speech of Dr Chalmers, the author of the pamphlet written in his unconverted days. In the account of the Assembly proceedings it is stated: “The reverend doctor was listened to with breathless interest during the whole of the latter part of his speech.”—Editor.
it by the reverend gentleman, I do feel obliged to him for reviving it, and for bringing me forward to make my public renunciation of what is written there. I now confess myself to have indeed been guilty of a heinous crime, and I now stand a repentant culprit before the bar of this venerable Assembly.
The circumstance attending the publication of my pamphlet was shortly as follows:—As far back as twenty years ago, I was ambitious enough to aspire to be successor to Prof. Playfair in the mathematical chair of Edinburgh University. During the discussion which took place relative to the person who might be appointed his successor, there appeared a letter from Prof. Playfair to the magistrates of Edinburgh on the subject, in which he stated it as his conviction that no person could be found competent to discharge the duties of the mathematical chair among the clergymen of the Church of Scotland. I was at that time, sir, more devoted to mathematics than to the literature of my profession; and feeling grieved and indignant at what I conceived an undue reflection on the abilities and education of our clergy, I came forward with that pamphlet to rescue them from what I deemed an unmerited reproach, by maintaining that a devoted and exclusive attention to the study of mathematics was not dissonant to the proper habit of a clergyman. Alas! sir, so I thought in my ignorance and pride. I have now no reserve in saying that the sentiment was wrong, and that in the utterance of it I penned what was most outrageously wrong. Strangely blinded that I was! What, sir, is the object of mathematical science? Magnitude and the proportions of magnitude. But, then, sir, I had forgotten two magnitudes—I thought not of the littleness of time—I recklessly thought not of the greatness of eternity.
The Confession of Faith.
THE Confession of Faith is not read in our families as it ought to be. It is simply deplorable that a large number of our people have no real acquaintance with the Confession of Faith, and particularly parents who receive Church privileges: some of these admit that they never read it. We are of the opinion that Church privileges should not be granted to any able to read until they become well acquainted with the whole of the Con-
fession of Faith. We do not mean that they should memorise it from cover to cover; but that they could say that they had read the articles of faith, the doctrines of the Larger and the Shorter Catechisms, and that they had made themselves acquainted with the government and practice of the Church. We are living in dangerous times, and cannot be too well armed against the wiles of the devil and wicked men. The most of our people can read English even better than Gaelic, and a copy of the Confession in English may be had second-hand from W. F. Henderson, 19 George IV. Bridge, Edinburgh, or from Messrs Holmes, Dunlop Street, Glasgow.—J. M.
— A Word of Advice. —
MANY years ago we read “The Plenary Inspiration of the Holy Scriptures,” by L. Gaussen, D.D. This last winter we renewed our acquaintance with this excellent treatise, and we came to the conclusion that a copy of it should be in the house of every family in the Free Presbyterian Church. The author, Dr Gaussen, was himself a truly converted man, a lover of the Word of God, a fearless defender of its sacred pages. He was an able, accurate scholar. His faith and knowledge of the precious Bible were not mixed with modern philosophical speculation. The poor young going out from our congregations and families have to face the most determined efforts, subtle arguments, and vile suggestions which they may find it difficult to meet unless their minds are well grounded in the truth, and shielded by the knowledge that the Bible is the Word of God, from Genesis to Revelation, inspired by the Holy Ghost and infallible in every possible respect. Copies of the book may be had from Messrs Farncombe, 30 Imperial Buildings, Ludgate Circus, London, E.C., 4. Price 3/6.—J. M.
All our stability, and the strength of our salvation, is anchored and fastened upon free grace.—Rutherford.
He is such a Judge, that the power of the most powerful cannot daunt.—Carlyl.
Desecrating the Sabbath.
WHEN I speak of public desecration of the Sabbath, I mean those many open, unblushing practices which meet the eye on the Sabbath in the neighbourhood of large towns. I refer to the practice of keeping shops open, and buying and selling on the Sabbath. I refer especially to “Sunday” trains on railways, “Sunday” steamboats, and excursions to sea and country, and the opening of places of public amusement; and to the daring efforts which many are making in the present day to desecrate the Lord’s Day, regardless of its Divine authority—”Remember the Sabbath Day to keep it holy.” On all these points I feel not the smallest doubt in my own mind. These ways of spending the Sabbath are all wrong, decidedly wrong. So long as the Bible is the Bible, and the Fourth Commandment the Fourth Commandment, I dare not come to any other conclusion. They are all wrong. These ways of spending Sabbath are none of them works of necessity or works of mercy. There is not the slightest likeness between them and any of the things which the Lord Jesus explains to be lawful on the Sabbath Day. To heal a sick person, or pull an ox or an ass out of a pit, is one thing: to travel in excursion trains, or go to concerts, theatres, dances, and cinemas, is quite another. The difference is as great as between light and darkness.—Bishop Ryle.
The Psalms.
IN the Psalms we learn the mind of Messiah in His union with His people. Hence the Psalter is the incomparable and comprehensive manual and hymn-book of the saints. As Johann Arndt says: “The Psalter is a necklace, consisting of the gold of doctrine and salutary instruction, of heart-reviving gems of consolation, and precious stones of beautiful prayers; a theatre of the unveiled great purposes and works of God; a cheerful meadow and extensive garden of roses, in which the most beautiful and fragrant flowers delight us; an infinite ocean, in which those who experience many tempests of affliction find precious pearls; a heavenly school, where we converse with God Himself, our Great Teacher; a mirror of divine mercies, in which the glorious countenance of our most compassionate Father shines forth; the most perfect anatomy of our souls, showing not merely our inmost thoughts and passions, but their corrective and medicine.”—Adolph Saphir in “Expository Lectures on the Hebrews.” First series, p. 197.