BHO’N URR. ALASDAIR MACCOLLA.
I. Feòraichidh sinn cò ann a tha uile-fhreagarrachd agus a chumhachd gu tearnadh a’ co-sheasamh.
Tha e soilleir bho’n fhocal a tha’n t-abstol a cleachdadh an toiseach na h-carrainn gu’n robh aige na bheachd na thubhairt e mu thràth ‘s an litir so mu àrd-cheannas sagartachd Chriosd. 1. Cha’n eil uile-fhreagarrachd agus a chumhachd gu tearnadh a co-sheasamh, a mhàin, ‘n a chumhachd neo-chriochnach mar tha cuid ag ràdh. Biodh e air a ràdh le mòr urram, tha nithean nach urrainn Dia a dheanamh. Cha’n eil so ag éirigh bho neo-iomlanachd no neo-fhoirfeachd sam bith ‘n a nádur na ‘n a bhuadhan ach bho fhoirfeachd neo-chriochnach a náduir agus diongmhallas a bhuadhan. Cha’n urrainn dhā sin a dheanamh a tha an aghaidh naomhachd a náduir agus a chlith, urram a riaghlaidh, agus glóir a bhuadhan. Air an aobhar sin cha b’urrainn da tearnadh le uile-chunnaichd a mháin, dh’earshuidh a cheartas a bhi air a riarachadh. Feumaidh réite bhi cadar buadhan Dhé ann an deilbh, ann an coimhlionadh, agus ann an co-chur inmleachd iongantach na sláinte. Cha ghabh mi-chórdadh, no aimhreite no neo-fhreagarrachd a bhi cadar buadhan Dhé. Tha gach aon de na buadhan glórmhor ann an cleachdadh, a gabhail tlaichd ann am foillseachadh moladh agus glóir a chéile. “Tha trócair agus firinn air comhlachadh a chéite: tha eartas agus sith air pogadh a chéile.” Tha cuid eile mar gu’m bi am beachd nach eil buadh eile ann an Dia ach trócair—agus gu’n amharus, tha e ni’s neo-chriochnaiche trócaireach na smuaintich iad riann, no ni’s urrainn dhaibh gu bráth a thuigsinn—Mur biodh, bha ar cuibhriomn bho chionn fhada anns an ionad anns am bheil gul agus caoidh agus giosgan fhiacal. Cho tric agus a chluinneas sinn sluagh a toirt mar am bonn tearnaidh—O tha Dia trocaireach agus tha sinn an dòchas gu’m bi e trocaireach ruinne. Tha dòchas aig cuid eile nach mill e obair a laimh; agus their cuid eile, gu h-aimideach, ni siun ni’s urrainn duinn, agus cha bhi an côrr air iarruidh òirrn. B’e obair gun chrioich a dhol thairis air na h-uile grainne gainmhiel a tha anns a’ bhunait air am bheil iad a togail tigh breòite a thuiteas ann an latha an dearbhaidh. Tha sinn ag ràdh, mar sin, gu’m bheil uile-fhreagarrachd gu tearnadh a co-sheasamh, anns a chéus àite, ann an aonachd a Phcarsa. Is Dia agus is duine e ann an aon Phcarsa. B’éiginn so a bhi. Bha eas-urram air a chur air an lagh naomh—oilbheum air eartas—Dia diombach. B’e an duine, air a bhrosnachadh leis an ard-dheamhain, a chionntaich. Is ann air an talamh a chionntaich e. Bha peacadh air a dhcanamh an aghaidh Bith neo-chriochnach ‘n a fhoirfeachd, ni a thug neo-chriochnachd de olc agus de thoilteanas do pheacadh. Mu’s biodh réite agus sith air an aiseag, dh’fhéumadh peacadh a bhi air a dhioladh agus air a chur air falbh—dh’fhéumadh réite tre iobairt a bhi deanta. Cha b’urrainn d’an duine so a dheamamh, no do ainglibh. Ach dhealbh glíocas neo-chriochnach inmleachd. Chuir grádh neo-chriochnach an cleachdadh i. Is e so an t-aobhar gur e Criosd an Sfánuighear toradh do-rannsaichte mòr glíocas neo-chriochnach. Féumaidh E bhi na dhuine, oir ‘s e duine a chuir eas-urram air an lagh, ann an nádur duine feumaidh an lagh a bhi air àrdachadh, agus urram a bhi air a chur air. Chuir duine e tén fodh’n mhallachd, féumaidh duine a’ mallachd a ghiulain. Pheacach an duine agus tha e airidh air corruich Dhé; feumaidh duine a chorruch a ghiulain agus a sitheachadh. Dh’earshuidh dòrtadh fola cha’n eil maithenas peacaidh. Cha’n urrainn dà, mar Dhia, bàs fhaotainn. Is éiginn da nádur an duine a ghabhail thuige, agus a bhi buailteach do bhàs, eadhon bàs a chroinn-chéusaidh. Ach mar a chì sinn gu’m b’éiginn dà a bhì na dhuinne, chi sinn gu’m b’éiginn dà a bhì na Dhia—Dia gu bhì ‘n a chuideachadh ‘n a fhuolangasaibh, gu a naimhdean a chlaoidh agus a mhilleadh gu tur—a naimhdean, peacadh, an saoghal, Satan, am bàs, an uaigh, agus ifrinm—Dia gu fu, airidheachd, agus éifeachd neo-chriochnach anns gach mì, a rinn agus a dh’fhuilin e. Bhà a shamhuil’ sin de àrd-shagart iomchuidh dhuinne, a bha naomh, neo-lochdaich, neo-thruailidh, air a dhealachadh bho pheacaich, agus a rinneadh nì’s àirde na na neamhan. Tha uile airidheachd agus éifeachd ùmhlachd agus a bhàis a thàinig bho innbhe neo-chriochnach a Phearsa. Ann an so chi sinn tri bunabhasam àiridh air ar beachd agus a tha na’m buinn chinnteach agus shàbhailt dòchais fhor. Ann an aonadh a Phearsa mar an Dia-duine, chi sinn ar n-àrds-hagart thairis air tigh Dhe a eur an gnìomh an nì a dh’earbadh ris. Ann an nàdur na diadhaichd chi sinn an altair oir air a d’thug e seachad iobairt deagh fhàile do Dhia. Ann an nàdur daonnachd naomha, chi sinn an tabhartas a chaidh a thoirt suas. Ann an so, ann an aon, tha co-aonachte, an t-àrd-shagart, an altair, agus an iobairt.
(R’a leantrùinn.)
II. Mhuinntir a tha e tearnadh agus cinntheachd agus maireannachd an slàinte.
Notes and Comments.
Movement Against Foreign Missionaries in India.
A report in the press recently quoted an Indian M.P., Mr. N. Chatterji, as saying that there was a feeling in India that her tolerance was being abused by men in clerical garb who carry out anti-Indian activities. Christian missionaries had, he said, undermined the loyalty of the people and made them repudiate ancient Hindu culture and civilisation. This attitude is to be expected from Hindu leaders toward the real work and influence of God’s Word and the truths of the gospel of Christ Jesus. The Apostle Paul and Silas, the servants of the Lord, while showing the way of salvation to dark heathens in Philippi, experienced bitter opposition and suffered imprisonment. And so it is also reported that a movement in India is on foot to combat what is called “the menace of foreign missionaries.” This Indian organisation, called the Hindu Mahasabha, are sending 73 volunteers to combat the work of the missionaries who are trying to raise the level of the untouchables. Whatever the details are on the Christian side and Hindu side, it appears that in varied parts of the pagan world the powers of darkness are arising to prevent the light of God’s Word penetrating into the dark places of the earth. Satan, the oppressor of many millions by means of paganism and idolatry and superstition, seems to be stirring up his slaves against the light of Christianity. The terror activities of Mau Mau in Kenya are directed against Christian missions as against other objects. In Ceylon leaders of paganism there are importing from America thousands of rationalistic pamphlets which blaspheme God, the Bible and Christianity as propaganda against Christian activities. But the Lord Jesus, in His time, will bruise Satan under His feet in all parts of the world.
T.V. and Crime in the U.S.A.
An American correspondent in the Daily Express quotes the American National Association for Better Radio and Television as reporting that “Murder, torture, sadism, morbid suspense, and fear and tension are saturating children’s minds and senses to a degree never before experienced by any generation. TV more than any other medium is responsible for a deluge of crime.” This is an appalling statement and indictment against those responsible, who seem to be entirely bereft of any moral sense in relation to influencing the impressionable minds and emotions of the rising generation. It is beyond our comprehension that the “powers that be” in U.S.A. and in our own nation seem to be completely oblivious to the damage done to mind and character by entertainment of such a devilish nature. The cinema has been doing this evil work in this country, and there is no guarantee that Television here also will not follow the pernicious ways of T.V. in America. What guilt before God, the Judge of all, lies upon those who thus flood the minds of the young with such infamous entertainment!
Public Idolatry in South Uist.
On the 30th July last, it was made known that a 24ft. statue of the Virgin Mary and the child Jesus in her arms, weighing about 50 tons and costing about £6,000, is to be erected at Rhueval Hill, on the Atlantic side of the island of South Uist, on the West Coast of Scotland. It is to be one of the largest statues in Europe and will be a landmark. It is to be known as “Our Lady of the Isles.” We know that the people of South Uist are predominantly Roman Catholic as to religion; but those hundreds and thousands of Protestants who almost entirely predominate in North Uist, Harris, Lewis and the Isles of Skye will certainly repudiate the title of this idol, and abhor the erection of it in the area of the Scottish Outer Isles. We can visualise the heathen idolatry of Ephesus being openly established and practised in South Uist. In Ephesus they cried, “Great is Diana of the Ephesians.” And in South Uist they will be taught and encouraged to say, “Great is the Lady of the Isles.” What darkness of mind, what delusion, what bewitchment characterises poor slaves of the Vatican! £6,000 to put up an idol which can neither see, hear, speak nor walk, and which will be erected from sinful and senseless adoration of the Virgin Mary. Better far that all this money would be diverted to the improvement of roads than exposing the people of South Uist to the anger of the righteous God of heaven for blatant idolatry. And what a lie and a fraud are these spurious and imaginary attempts on canvas and in stone to compose the likeness of the child Jesus and Mary! A photograph of the model of this statue appeared in the press. The Lord Jesus Christ, the alone saviour of sinners, so fully set forth in the Scriptures, is alas! not sufficient for poor lost sinners in South Uist. May the time soon come when all such idols will be utterly abolished by the light and power of the blessed Gospel of Christ Jesus.
Royal Support for Roman Catholic Cathedral.
In the last issue of our Magazine we wrote a brief Note and Comment on the deplorable fact that Her Majesty the Queen and the Duke of Edinburgh had given a donation to the rebuilding of the R.C. Cathedral, Southwark. This note was written on the basis of the first, very brief press announcement regarding the matter. Since then the matter has been given a good deal of publicity. We take the liberty of publishing the following information on the subject from “Notes and Events of the Week” in The English Churchman, of 23rd July, 1954, as we agree wholeheartedly with the strong Protestant sentiments expressed therein:—
A letter from the Duke of Norfolk, published in The Times on Monday, made an appeal for funds towards rebuilding St. George’s Cathedral, Southwark. “We seek to secure the support of all lovers of Gothic architecture, irrespective of creed,” wrote the noble lord. But there was not one word in the letter to suggest that it was a Roman Catholic building for which he was appealing. Neither did the caption to the picture published on the next page of The Times give that information. We consider it grossly unfair that the public should not be given the full facts. For it is not merely Gothic architecture for which support is being asked. The Roman Catholic cathedral is being restored, naturally, as a centre from which to propagate Roman Catholicism in a Protestant country.
There is, as our correspondence shows, considerable concern in the country that Her Majesty the Queen is reported to have contributed to the rebuilding of this Roman Catholic cathedral. Roman Catholic spokesmen are, of course, making a good deal of the matter and non-Romanists are being obliged to take notice of it. On behalf of the Council of the Protestant Truth Society, Mr. J. A. Kensit, secretary, has addressed a letter to the Queen in the course of which he says:—
“With all dutiful loyalty, the Council of the Protestant Truth Society desires to make representation to your Majesty that statements are being issued by the authorities of the Roman Catholic Cathedral at Southwark which are causing some disturbance in the minds of large numbers of people whom this Society represents, that for the first time since the Reformation the occupant of the Throne has made a substantial donation towards the rebuilding of a Roman Catholic Cathedral. In the press it is stated that the gift was most generous.
“It is felt by the British people that such a gift is not consistent with the oaths taken by your Majesty under our Constitution. We feel that this is a matter upon which you may not have reflected, for the Crown can only claim to be secure when the Protestant oaths are fully adhered to, namely: (1) The accession declaration made in the House of Lords on November 5, 1952, that ‘I am a faithful Protestant’; (2) That uttered at the Court of St. James on the 8th day of February, 1952, in the presence of the Privy Council with its pledge to ‘inviolably maintain and preserve the Settlement of the true Protestant Religion as established by the laws made in Scotland’; and (3) The Coronation Oath made in Westminster Abbey on June 2, 1953, ‘to maintain in the United Kingdom the Protestant Reformed Religion established by law.’
“These oaths are for the guardianship of our Protestant faith and liberties, to which the Church of Rome maintains an undying enmity, and her actions of intolerance in Colombia, Spain, and other countries to-day establish that she is unchanging in her spirit.
“While this country rightly gives the fullest possible freedom to Roman Catholics to worship as they wish, it is not for us who are ‘faithful Protestants’ to aid Rome’s efforts to strengthen her foothold in this Realm.”
The Private Secretary to Her Majesty has acknowledged this letter and has referred it to the Home Secretary.