We are a great People!—Since the British people have been able to draw their breath a little after the tremendous crisis through which the nation passed a good deal of it has been used in declaring our greatness as a nation. No other nation could have come through such a crisis in the way we did it has been almost universally proclaimed among us. Now, while all allowance must be made for the stability of Britons as compared with, say the mercurial French, would it not have been wiser for us to be in a more chastened mood and acknowledge the Lord’s kindness in taking us through one of the most momentous crises in the nation’s history? Such acknowledgment became us as a people and in giving the glory to God it would not interfere in any way with due recognition of the calm sanity of the Prime Minister in dealing with a situation of extraordinary difficulty and the wonderful unanimity that prevailed in Parliament. We should not be blind to God’s hand in the mighty deliverance He once again vouchsafed to us undeserving though we were and are.
The Old is Better.—Wall Street of all places has sent out a cry for the old religion. In a recent article, the Wall Street Journal says: “What America needs more than railway extension, Western irrigation, a bigger cotton crop, and a larger wheat crop, is a revival of religion, the kind that our fathers and mothers used to have. A religion that counted it good business to take time for family worship each morning right in the middle of the wheat harvest. A religion that prompted men to quit work a half hour earlier on Wednesday so that the whole family could get ready to go to prayer-meeting” (Christianity To-day).
John Knox and Sabbath Golf.—In an article which appeared recently in the Daily Record (Glasgow) on “Sunday Golf” the writer, Theodore Moone, opens with the sentences: “John Knox played golf on Sunday afternoons. For all I know, he may even have indulged in mixed foursomes with the Queen
of Scots and her Maries.” For all he knows in these matters Mr. Moone knows nothing at all. But ignorance does not justify a man in bringing an untruthful charge against any one. The writer of the above is doubly culpable because this lying report had been exposed years ago by Dr. Hay Fleming. “Both Dean Stanley and Mr. Mathieson,” says Dr. Fleming, “have been far outstripped by a learned Scotsman, who, in a recent article, introduced the statement that Knox occasionally took part in a round of golf on Sabbath afternoon. On being asked for his authority, the writer frankly acknowledged he had none; but declined to delete the statement, because, as he thought, it helped to lighten an article which was too technical to be generally interesting! Thus it is that history is falsified and good men slandered” (Critical Reviews Relating to Scotland, pp. 191, 192). The cool mendacity of a man who, while admitting he is lying, will not withdraw the charge he has made indicates moral bankruptcy of a deplorable kind. Mr. Moone may have read somewhere that Knox played golf on the Sabbath and then, without verifying whether it was false or true passed on the lie. The article in which the above quoted sentences appear is accompanied by a map showing the places in Scotland where golf is played on the Sabbath. We regret there are so many and, still more regret, that they are on the increase.
Presbyterian Church of America.—The newly formed Church held its second Assembly at Philadelphia. The Committee on the Constitution unanimously recommended that the Church adopt the Westminster Confession of Faith and Catechisms in the form they possessed previous to 1903 with the following two exceptions: (1) The retention of the change made in 1903 in chapter xxii. sec. 3 which omitted “Yet it is a sin to refuse an oath touching anything that is good and just being imposed by lawful authority.” (2) The Committee further recommend that the change made in 1903 in chapter xxv. sec. 6 which omitted the reference to the Pope as anti-Christ etc. should be retained. The changes referred to above in the doctrinal standards of the Presbyterian Church in U.S.A. (i.e. the Church left by Dr. Maehen
and his followers) include (1) the two new chapters added to the Confession in 1903 together with their preamble. (2) The deletion of the Declaratory Statement of 1903 disavowing certain inferences that have been drawn from the representations of the Confession concerning God’s eternal decree, His love to all mankind and concerning the salvation of those dying in infancy. (3) The adoption of sec. 7, chap. XVI. as it read before the change made in 1903. Some of the members were for delay but Dr. Machen demanded immediate adoption. Dr. Buswell moved that the revisions of 1903 be adopted but he was overwhelmingly defeated. Dr. Machen vigorously opposed Dr. Buswell’s motion maintaining that these revisions “constituted the most serious step in the downward march of the Presbyterian Church in the U.S.A.” A motion was brought forward to the effect that the Standards should be so amended as to give constitutional recognition of Premillennialism. But, notwithstanding the threat of splitting the Church on this question, the Pre-millennialists in the Assembly lost by a vote of 57 to 20. It will thus be seen that the new Church is face to face with many difficulties. It was reported that the Church has 103 ministers.
The Relation of the Presbyterian Church in U.S.A. to the Confession.—In view of the statements made in the preceding Note it may be pointed out that the relation of the Presbyterian Church in the U.S.A. to the Confession is quite different to that of thoroughgoing conservatives at home. (1) In 1788 the chapters dealing with the civil magistrate were modified so as to conform with the American doctrine of the absolute separation of the Church from control of the State (chaps. XX. sec. 4; XXIII. sec. 3 and XXI. 1). These alterations are given in A. A. Hodge’s Class Book on the Confession of Faith, pp. 22, 23. (2) The Confession was also amended in 1887 by striking out the last clause in chap. XXIV. sec. 4 to remove any obstacle which may have existed to a person marrying his deceased wife’s sister. (3) In 1903 the Confession of Faith was amended in chapters X, XVI, XXII and XXV (as stated in preceding Note); a
declaratory statement was adopted as to chaps. iii and x and two new chapters were added xxxiv (on the Holy Spirit) and xxxv (the Love of God and Missions). (4) In the Questions put to ministers in the Presbyterian Church in U.S.A. etc. they are asked if they sincerely believe and adopt the Confession of Faith of their Church as containing the system of doctrine taught in the Holy Scriptures? Whereas in our Church the Question put is: “Do you sincerely own and believe the whole doctrine contained in the Confession of Faith . . . and do you acknowledge the same as the Confession of your faith?” There is a very great difference between these two questions. The agitation which was carried on for many years for the revision of the Confession in the U.S.A. called forth some excellent articles and pamphlets such as those from Drs. Warfield and Shedd in defence of the Confession. When the revision of 1903 came before the Assembly it was strongly opposed by the Conservatives. Things have been going from bad to worse since then and though, according to our law, we cannot approve of the setting up of the Independent Board of Missions which provoked the liberals to deal so drastically with Dr. Machen and his followers yet, we believe, it is better for Dr. Machen to be outside the Presbyterian Church in the U.S.A. The question whether the constitution was infringed was a live one in 1903 and from the Free Presbyterian standpoint we have no doubt as to what answer would be given. It would be better if Dr. Machen and his followers had taken the step sooner, for the changes made in the Confession in 1903 did not strengthen their position against the advancing forces. As we said in a former note: “The split in the conservative ranks looks uncommonly like what took place between the Free Church Constitutionalists and the Free Presbyterians in that the former believed it right to remain in the Church and fight against the new views while the latter deemed it their duty to clear out.” The Conservatives have not been gaining ground since 1903 and if it will happen to them as it happened at home it is weaker they will become.