Congregational Church and Church of Scotland.
The Congregational Union of Scotland at their Annual Meeting in Edinburgh, at the beginning of May, disclosed that they had engaged in talks with the Church of Scotland on union with that Church. The congregations in the Congregational denomination are independent as to Church government and in this respect are more or less separate entities which is all so different from the Presbyterian Order of the Church of Scotland. The Congregationalists revealed that they were not at present favourable to corporate unity and Professor Wood stated that there was a “Very real fear, of absorption by the larger Church. A committee was to investigate “all possible forms of association.””
In reading of the attitude of the Congregational Union to union with the Church of Scotland, we feel they are endeavouring to cling to something very superficial and of no fundamental religious value. The doctrines held and preached in the majority of pulpits within both denominations will, no doubt, be much the same, of the general modern type. The form of worship during ordinary religious services will be quite similar. And surely it is common everywhere for Church of Scotland ministers and Congregational ministers to collaborate as ministers on many religious occasions. We are not here campaigning for these churches to unite but we see so little difference between them fundamentally, and in the light of their generally accepted liberal theology, that reasons on the part of the Congregationalists for avoiding being “absorbed into” the Church of Scotland are grounded, not upon sound Biblical doctrine, but upon the questionable benefits of independent congregational life. We as a church are considered narrow in our church outlook because we keep apart for clear, sound doctrinal reasons. They keep apart denominationally, but not in doctrine and practice, except in the matter of points in Church government.
Women as Elders.
By the time this issue appears, the Church of Scotland assembly will have met and decided in some way as to the question of women elders. The special committee on the Place of Women in the Church, appointed two years ago will have submitted their recommendation that women should be eligible for the office of elder on the same terms as men. Twenty-seven presbyteries were stated to be definitely in favour and nineteen against the admission of women to the eldership, and two equally divided. It has been stated by the Committee that “The general conclusion is that the Biblical evidence is too scanty and too contradictory for any final conclusions to be drawn from that alone.” Surely if it is permissible to appoint women as elders now without acting beyond Scriptural requirements, it seems strange to us that the worthy and eminent Christian fathers in Scotland in the past centuries would have none but men, men in the pulpit and Kirk Session.
Of course they took the Word of God as their guide; such as Paul’s directions to Titus, “… and ordain elders in every city, as I have appointed thee; If any be blameless, this husband of one wife, having faithful children not accused of riot or unruly.” (Titus. Chap. 1, verses 5 and 6). The fact is that women generally are taking more interest in the activities of the Church of Scotland than men, and there has been a clamour for years now that seeing this is so, they should have a place, by ordination to office, in the Courts of the Church. Among the saints at Rome was Phebe, who is described by Paul as a sister, a servant of the Church and a succourer of many; but not an elder. (Romans, Chap. 16, verses 1 and 2.)
Television Programmes Criticised.
Again we note severe criticism of what is shown in the homes of Scotland and elsewhere through B.B.C. Television. At the Scottish Unionist Association’s annual conference at Perth on the 12th of May last, Mrs J. V. Finlay in a speech declared that although she was no prude or killjoy, there was a limit to what adults or children should see and hear on television. She said: “Crime, sex and violence are all too prominent. It would seem that sensationalism is the key to success . . . I for one am tired of this pandering to the baser side of human nature.” She also referred to the case of a 13-year-old girl sent to Borstal for blackmail, and a 10-year-old boy charged with murdering a little girl. Both were said to have got their ideas from television. Mrs Finlay also attacked the many allusions on television to atheism and agnosticism. She asked, “Why flaunt disbelief? Why scatter doubts?” Mrs Finlay rightly demanded that the clause governing the supervision of programmes be examined and reviewed with care. We see in all this an appalling state of affairs, when such as are accustomed to the theatre, cinema and the television are themselves shocked at what is happening and are greatly afraid of the harmful effect especially on young minds. What is it that bewitches the powers that be so that they take no action in this matter except build more Borstals for young offenders? Is it finance? Or what? Many societies and some Government Departments continually express anxiety about the youth problem. But nothing is done to eliminate brutality and immorality from films and television. It is all very grievous to right thinking people “Darkness covers the land, and gross darkness the people”
The Summit Conference Failure.
The long looked for Summit Conference between America, Russia, Britain and France failed completely to begin aright or function. It just didn’t take place at all although the heads of the four nations concerned came to Paris in the middle of May as arranged. World opinion, we were informed after the failure, was divided as to whether the Russian Khrushchev or President Eisenhower of America was to blame for this fiasco in the political world. But looking back it can be recalled that there were political meetings and discussions between Mr Khrushchev and Mr MacMillan and the other heads of State on the Lord’s Day immediately preceding the Monday opening of the Summit Conference. There was no concern to have regard to God and His name and claims. And indeed the Western leaders, who profess connection with the Christian faith, seemed to be as usual dumb and indifferent as to the need they and the Nations have of wisdom and guidance from the Lord who ruleth in the kingdom of men. It has been said that the Russians did not wish the Conference to succeed for reasons of their own. And it has also been asserted that the Roman Catholic influence in U.S.A., Germany and France did not desire the success of negotiations with Russia. If Britain’s Prime Minister, Mr MacMillan, who has been praised for his efforts to save the Conference, had the mind to publicly acknowledge God and seek the prayers of God’s people and keep clear of God-dishonouring conduct on the Sabbath, at Paris, then he might have expected better things than the grievous disappointments experienced. The Communists as a party are atheistical. America and Britain profess to be Christian nations. But alas! Our leaders did not follow the example of David when he went against the uncircumcised giant Goliath in the Name of the Lord. Christ Jesus is the Prince of Peace, and to ignore Him, inevitably, results in failing to attain peace in International relations.
Earthquakes in Chile.
At the end of May, when people all over the world were beginning to forget the terrible earthquake at Agadir, violent and widespread earthquakes shook Chile. It was reported that the occurrences gave the impression that the whole world was shaking and a sense of great horror took hold of the minds of the people. The sky was darkened by the smoke and dust thrown out and up by several volcanoes, and there was a sound like thunder. Thousands were killed and multitudes lost their all. The value of the material losses sustained was estimated at £100 million. What an awesome and terrible experience for many of our fellow creatures! What an unspeakably solemn providence from the hand of God! What a loud voice to us all in this Nation, a back-sliding and guilty Nation in the face of so much Gospel light!
A Sermon Reviewed by Spurgeon.
A gentleman who is not a Free Presbyterian, sent us the following review by Rev. C. H. Spurgeon which appeared in a copy of Spurgeon’s Magazine. “The Sword and Trowel,” in December, 1889. We present the cutting herewith.—”What is a Christian? A Sermon preached in St. Giles’ Cathedral, in connection with the Edinburgh University Gathering, September 29, 1889. By Marcus Dods, D.D., Edinburgh: Macniven and Wallace. “As every man will endeavour to create Christians of the kind which he believes in, this Free Church professor will, no doubt, produce Christians and ministers who treat the Bible as they please, and doubt the Godhead of the Lord Jesus. Every seed produces after its kind, and the Free Church will soon be full of “true Christians who find much in the Bible which they cannot accept.” Well may the Socinians sound their trumpets of victory. They could not find in all their ranks a scholar who could serve their cause so efficiently as Dr. Dods will do through this sermon. “One thing, however, is matter for congratulation: the sermon is issued by its author. He does not cavil about the inaccuracy of notes, and so forth, as a coward would do. Like a man, he throws down the gauntlet, and is ready to abide the consequences. This is as it should be. We shall now see where the Free Church of Scotland really is. Between the precious and the vile this sermon will develop a clear distinction; and we trust it will be thoroughly done. To stop the sifting would be the height of unwisdom. Anything is better than unholy compromise. The question at issue is well raised by this discourse, and it should be fought out with all calmness and good temper, but with the solemn resolve that truth shall be maintained, and all lowering of the standard shall be opposed, tooth and nail. The ages to come look down upon the conflict of the present: to-day is fashioning morrows of darkness or of joy. Let every man take his place, and do his work.”—
And the following are the comments of our correspondent, which we consider very much to the point: viz.—”The attached cutting should prove interesting to you — and if reproduced in Magazine might shed some very necessary light on the gloomy doubts that have arisen in many minds, as to whether the stand taken by Rev. D. Macfarlane, and his brethren in 1893, had been of so urgent a necessity as to be justified. It will, of course, be admitted that the reasoned opinion of such a spiritual giant, as was C. H. Spurgeon, is not to be lightly disregarded. At all events in this review it is emphatically pointed out that in 1889 the Free Church had reached such an impasse when separation of the precious and the vile within her pale had become both inevitable and imperative.”—As to the above sermon by Dr. Marcus Dods, D.D., the eminent Spurgeon does not actually quote from it offending passages, but his reference to doubting the Godhead of the Lord Jesus Christ is significant. We are of the opinion that the sermon referred to, is the one in which Dr. Dods, declared that a man could be a Christian without believing in the divinity of Christ. Since our childhood we heard of Dr. Dods and this terrible heresy promulgated by him. And now Spurgeon rises in the printed page once more to speak to those who fear the Lord, to take their place and do the work delegated to them by the Lord in an evil day.