I.
BEFORE writing this article we read over again the messages sent to the Seven Churches in Asia, and it is important to notice that the verdict given by the Faithful and True Witness was very different from what the Churches deemed themselves to be and also very different from the verdict passed on them by the world. Another feature of the verdict was that, while words of high commendation were passed upon them where there was reason for it, this did not in any way keep back severe condemnation where it was deserved. Now-a-days it is considered bad form and evidence of a censorious spirit to call attention to the imperfections of professing churches. The great goddess, False Charity, does not permit such unseemly conduct to her devoted worshippers. A blind eye must be turned on departures from truth and laxity in discipline, as all her followers are worshipping the same God and going to heaven at last, and from the high places of her worship there has gone forth the cry:—”Live and let live.” We read the Epistles to the Seven Churches in vain to find the slightest hint of such a policy. None of these Churches is exactly the same. Ephesus is sound in doctrine but wanting in love—she is going back having forsaken her first love (Chap. ii. 4). Smyrna was poor but rich and was passing through a fiery trial but had the promise of a crown of life given to her (Chap. ii. 8-11). Laodicea was rich in her own estimation but poor in the eyes of the Faithful and True Witness (Chap. iii. 14-21). Thyatira was commended for her works and charity, and service and faith and patience (Chap. ii. 19); unlike Ephesus, she was improving, as her last works were more than the first (verse 19). Sardis had a name that she was living but in the eyes of Him who had the Seven Spirits of God she was dead (Chap. iii. 1). Philadelphia, the smallest and most insignificant of all the Churches of Asia, yet destined to have a future extending down through the centuries when the work of the others had ceased, viewed in her weak state she might well be described as a church “without the promise of a future to look to”; but her Lord had set before her an open door and no man could shut it. Laodicea was neither cold nor hot. Pergamos was a very orthodox church, even in the face of persecution, yet she was lax in discipline. Her creed was better than her practice. The message from Him who had the sharp sword with two edges was:—”I have a few things against thee because thou hast there them that hold the doctrine of Balaam, who taught Balac to cast a stumbling block before the children of Israel to eat things sacrificed unto idols, and to commit fornication. So hast thou also them that hold the doctrine of the Nicolaitanes, which things I hate” (Chap. ii. 14, 15).
It will be observed in the matters wherein the various churches are condemned there is no lessening of the condemnation because some of them are bearing a faithful witness, and it will be further observed that where they erred there is a call to go back and repent. Ephesus, Pergamos, Sardis and Laodicea are all called upon to repent. This change of mind was to be in reference to things tolerated by these churches which were displeasing to Him who warned them. We may be sure such warnings would not be lovingly given heed to by the churches who had their own complacent estimate of their orthodoxy and practice; but the sentence pronounced upon them was in strict accordance with truth however unpleasant it might have been to themselves and however outrageous it might have appeared to the blinded devotees of False Charity.
This brings us now to say something about the great Conferences recently held in Glasgow in connection with the Forward Movement of the Church of Scotland. Great preparations were made for this Conference, delegates came from all parts of the land, noted churchmen were appointed to address the great audiences expected to be present; for over a year notices and articles appeared in the press calling attention to the Movement, publicity organizations and pamphlets set forth its aims; so that any failure on the part of the Forward Movement cannot be laid at the door of lack of advertisement. The question is already being discussed in certain quarters whether the Movement is to have the same fate as the Re-dedication Movement, which was heralded by a loud blowing of trumpets, but which ended as a complete failure. This much can be said of the Church of Scotland in launching this movement that there was evidently a consciousness on the part of the Church that there was something seriously wrong and that a desperate situation demanded extraordinary means. Whether the Church of Scotland took the right way to improve things within her borders is open to grave doubt, and already many connected with this great Church, members of her own communion, and who wish her well, have not hesitated to write to the press severely condemning the suggestions made at Glasgow. Our memories are not so short as to forget all the wonderful blessings which, we were told, were to flow from the great Union of the Established Church and the United Free Church. We were never misled by the speeches made by the advocates of Union, as we had too much evidence in the past to know that Union unless on a scriptural basis does not make for spiritual revival nor for ecclesiastical strength. No one who knows anything about the present state of the Church formed at the Union need have any doubt in his mind that the loudly proclaimed spiritual benefits that were to flow from the unification of the two bodies existed only in the lively imaginations of the ecclesiastical leaders who carried through the negotiations.
The Forward Movement, as we have seen, is a clear intimation to all who can read the signs of the times that the Church of Scotland is in anything but a healthy state spiritually. Before dealing with the remedies suggested for the revival of religion in Scotland, and statements made by some of the speakers at the Conference, we may briefly glance at a few points that give indication of the spiritual backsliding of this great Church. It may be asked:—”What business have we to interfere with its affairs—we who are so few in numbers interfering with a Church which numbers her adherents by the million?” Our answer is that this Church claims to be the Church of Scotland, and is so recognised by the law of the land. She claims connection with the Church of Scotland from the Reformation, 1560, and we have a profound interest in her as the leading Presbyterian Church in Scotland. We are quite well aware that claims may not necessarily be just; neither may legal recognition be an axiomatic truth that no one dare question. In our estimation the Church of Scotland has cut herself from the old moorings and is surely and rapidly drifting down the stream at the mercy of a powerful and irresistible current. For more years than one cares to think of, the policy of drift has been publicly condoned in the church courts. Great praise has been given to Dr. W. P. Paterson for his speech in calling the attention of the Conference to the need of repentance. The learned Professor would have been much more to the point if he had emphasised that repentance should begin with so many of his own colleagues in the theological colleges, with Dr. W. P. Paterson leading them.
Let us now briefly notice a few counts against the Church of Scotland. (1) The treatment given to the Word of God is a serious count against the teachers, theologians and ministers of too many in the Church of Scotland. This is not a charge which is difficult to substantiate for, unfortunately, it is common knowledge to all who have been watching ecclesiastical movements in Scotland for years past. (2) The glaring way in which the Church connived with the world in practices that ought never to have had its sanction has done more than one can tell of damage to her spiritual life, but as yet there is no sign of recoil from worldly practices. (3) There has been a culpable indifference to the claims of the Christian Sabbath. Concerning the sanctification of God’s Day it might be truly said about it, as far as many of the ministers of the Church of Scotland were concerned, what was said about the Church of Laodicea:—”Thou are neither cold nor hot.” No doubt, in recent years, the tremendous landslide in Sabbath observance in Scotland, bringing in its train empty pews and indifference to the claims of religion, awakened concern in the minds of many who were very apathetic about their duty of keeping holy the Sabbath Day. These are a few points, out of a great number, that indicate the great need there is in the Church of Scotland for repentance. Our space does not permit us to deal with the speeches delivered at the Conference, but we hope to return to them in a future issue.
(To be continued.)