1. The most obvious is the moral law. Its first table teaches us the shape which the religious side of the Christian life should take. The worship of God in public and private is seen to be an essential element of the practice of Christianity. It is our practice. Because of the first commandment, public worship is given the main place in our Sabbath observance and engaged in also during the week. For the same reason we worship privately morning and evening, and at mealtimes. There is no denying that in this respect our practice is different from that of many who also call themselves Christians. (Note that the duties of this commandment, and all the others, are urged all through the Scriptures, and examples in plenty given of their being performed by the godfearing).
Then, from the second commandment originates the form that our worship takes, and here also we differ from the will-worship that is almost universal today. (Will-worship is any form of divine worship that differs from the simple, scriptural pattern). Next we learn from the third commandment that reverence is to be the keynote of all our handling of the things of God. It is not difficult to discern differences between Free Presbyterians and others in this; and then in the Sabbath observance required in the fourth commandment we come into an area where there are great differences between our practice and that of others.
In the same way we could go through the second table of the law, those commandments which govern our conduct toward our fellows, and find the grounds of one point of Free Presbyterian practice after another. The discipline and order which today still distinguishes many Free Presbyterian households from others, derives from the keeping of the fifth commandment. And reasons, though not all the reasons, for abstaining from novel-reading, the theatre and the cinema with their radio and T.V. counterparts are supplied by the sixth, seventh and eighth commandments. One would go on and on in this vein, but enough has been said to stress the fact that as Free Presbyterians we base much of our practice squarely on the moral law. It is surely tragic that this should contrast with the many calling themselves Christians, who increasingly ignore that divine code of conduct.
2. Another scriptural principle by which our practice is guided is that of non-conformity to the world. By the world here we mean its inhabitants in their alienation from God and concentration on worldly interests, pleasures and aims. Remember that every person whom Christ has not chosen out of the world and joined to Himself in a spiritual union, is of the world. Bear in mind also that the world is the province of the devil. He is the prince of this world, its goal, and his realm is evil. So that even in its less vicious aspects, even in those moods where it seems harmless enough and not apparently opposed to God and Christ, the world is still potentially the enemy of such as follow Christ because it hates Him. He says this. (John 15:18).
Therefore, because there is such a difference between Christ’s kingdom and Satan’s between the Church and the world, the Saviour in his Word warns his people, “Be ye not conformed to this world.” (Rom. 12 v. 2). Again He says, “Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him. For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father but of the world. The world passeth away, and the lust thereof: but he that doeth the will of God abideth for ever.” (1 John 2 v. 15-17). Of these fleshly lusts Peter says, “Dearly beloved, I beseech you as strangers and pilgrims, abstain from fleshly lusts which war against the soul.” (1 Pet. 2 v. 11). And Paul tells us that, “denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously and godly in this present world.” (Titus 2:12).
What then do these plain directives to live unworldly lives mean when translated into Christian practice? It means the avoidance of pleasures, interests, attitudes, customs and fashions which are characteristically worldly and denote membership of Satan’s kingdom. No-one who loves and seeks to honour the Saviour could frequent the theatre or cinema, the dance-hall or billiard room, the casino or bingo-hall, or whist-drive, because, apart from other reasons, they are utterly worldly. So too with the public bar and the race-track, the football stadium and the shinty-match. They are all the pleasure haunts of the world.
Then there are the fashions of the world which have their origin in the attempts of worldly persons to be different and so draw attention to themselves. Now, careful thinking is required in this matter. I am aware that there are various reasons for changing fashions in clothes, and some of them not to be condemned. Materials, colours, designs, all change for one reason or another, and no-one need be concerned about it, for it is probably better that we all should not appear identical. But if someone, simply to draw attention to himself or herself, sets a new fashion in some way that does not fulfil a reasonable function, that is worldly. It is not beyond possibility in a day like ours that some designer, supported by an army of fashion reporters, and aided by a galaxy of stage stars, might startle the world with a garment extending to the ankles and closed at the foot with two holes close together for the feet to come through. Some would be bound to follow it and would be worldly in doing so. To illustrate the point further, this time from real life rather than the imaginary — footwear which raises the wearer on platforms several inches from the ground, and is thus non-functional and even dangerous. These are irrational fashions whose worldliness cries out, and no follower of the holy Saviour could innocently adopt them.
There are, of course, fashions in female clothing which are immodest, such as the mini-skirt and the low neck. And men’s clothing can also exemplify worldliness; its wearers show clearly what camp they belong to when they take up with fashions which very often are set first by theatrical performers and next worn by vain-minded teenagers. Changing one’s appearance in other ways, hairstyle, etc., in obedience to current fashions is a following of the world that is unworthy of a Christian. Whoever will copy the world in its speech, mannerisms, habits and customs in order not to be odd or different, is disobeying the command, “Be not conformed to the world,” and is not likely to endure much for Christ’s sake when called upon to do so.
3. Following naturally upon the principle of non-conformity to the world is the positive one of taking Christ for our example. We must distinguish the Christian way of doing this from two other very different things. One is the idea that 19th and 20th century liberalism promoted so strongly, that Christianity consists of following the example and moral teaching of Christ. In this view sin is just a defect which can be eliminated by living a better life after the pattern of Christ’s life and not the supreme evil needing to be atoned for by a divine Mediator, and overcome and eventually cast out of the soul by the Holy Spirit. The other thing is Roman Catholic moral theology in which the imitation of Christ by the individual and society is scientifically set out on the assumption that man can co-operate with God’s grace, and that sin has not left him totally unable to do good in the sight of God.
So, when we come to the true following of Christ’s example, we have to stress that in God’s Word it is connected with spiritual union with Christ and the faith which evidences that. In proof of this read 1 Peter 2:20-23, and then v. 24: also John 15:12-14. Now, what guidance to our Christian practice do the biblical references to Christ’s example give us? They require meekness and humility of manner, speech and conduct; “Take my yoke upon you and learn of me who am meek and lowly in heart.” Many humble and self-denying actions will have to be performed in service to brethren and fellow-creatures. Then, when we think again of 1 Peter 2:20-23, we find that the patient endurance of injury and blame is part of Christian practice. This undoubtedly has a bearing on the whole subject of labour relations, pay disputes, strikes, etc.
Again, we find the example of the Saviour given in connection with a strong call to holiness in the entire range of the Christian’s activities; “He that saith he abideth in Him, ought himself also to walk even as He walked.” Couple these words with others, “As He which hath called you is holy, so be ye holy in all manner of conversation.” Think also of the words, “The grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men, teaching us that denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously and godly in this present world, etc.” (Titus 2 v. 11-14).
4. Another principle for our guidance is that of example. There are two sides to this. One is the guidance afforded us by the actions of believers which God has approved. A selection from the Old Testament with their works that proceeded from faith is given in Hebrews 11, and from the recorded actions of some in the New Testament, valuable instruction may be gathered. The footsteps of the flock should be followed. They may be traced down to our own age, and they represent the accumulated wisdom and experience of the Church in this matter of practice. The way of life of those who are known and honoured as spiritually-minded, godly, and well-balanced Christians can well form an example for young Christians to follow.
The other side of this principle is that we should so live that our own example will harm no-one. Bad example is a powerful influence, as the wise men of the Persian court were quick to tell Ahasuerus. See Esther 1:17 for what they considered was a bad example. Solomon says, “One sinner destroyeth much good,” (Eccles. 9 v. 18). And Paul says, “Evil communications corrupt good manners,” (1 Cor. 15 v. 33). So we should ask ourselves on occasions when we may be considering whether it be right to do something; “Will my action, though it result in no harm to me, encourage someone else to do what will almost certainly harm him?” That is a subject which Paul treats at length in 1 Corinthians, Chapters 8 to 10.
5. The last principle I shall mention is perhaps the most comprehensive. It is that all should be done to the glory of God. This test may often resolve perplexity as to what we should do. “Will this be to the glory of God?” The Word says, “Whether therefore ye eat or drink, or whatsoever ye do, do all to the glory of God.” (1 Cor. 10 v. 31). As a result of redemption, the Christian is a saint, a separated person; “Ye are not your own. For ye are bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God’s.” (1 Cor. 6:19, 20). So we find Paul in holy love to his Saviour saying, “Christ shall be magnified in my body, whether it be by life, or by death. For to me to live is Christ, and to die is gain.” (Phil. 1:20, 21).
Will my actions tend to God’s glory? Will they be a shining forth of God’s grace within me in the form of words and deeds, in a way of life that cannot be condemned and which will glorify the Father which is in heaven? Either we thus reveal ourselves as children of the day, or we shall be seen to be children of the night. Our way of life will show whose servants we are, whose colours we march under, whose kingdom we belong to. Any mingling of light and darkness is offensive to God, so let us seek by grace to be Christians, and to live like Christians to the glory of the triune God.
“The disciples of Christ must not muffle themselves up in privacy and obscurity, under pretence of contemplation, modesty, or self-preservation, but, as they have received the gift, must minister the same.”
Matthew Henry.
Gathan Gloir na Diadhachd
Leis an Urr. Eldeard Pearce
(Air a leantuinn bho t.d. 315)
4 Bho neo-chaochlaidheachd Dhé tha sinn a tarruig am feum do-sheachainte a tha air atharrachadh ann am peacaich, ma bhios iad gu Bràth sona, ma bhios iad gu bràth air an saoradh, agus air an deanamh gu siorruidh sona, feumaidh atharrachadh a bhi aon chuid ann an Dia naannt a-san. Nis ann an Dia cha’n urrain caochladh a bhi, feumaidh, uime sin, an caochladh a bhiannt a-san. Is e dòigh argumaideachadh reusanta agus nach eil cur na aghaidh, do pheacach a bhi’g argumaid agus ag ràdh, Tha Dia neo-chaochlaidheach; agus do-bhrigh gu’m bheil Dia neo-chaochlaidheach feumaidh mise atharrachadh na dhol a bith, atharrachadh na bàsachadh, atharrachadh na bhi truagh gu bràth. Oir, gabh beachd, cha d’rinn Dia, agus cha dean E gu bràth, duine air bith a shaoradh na pheacaidhean. Tha E ann an Criosd neo-chriochnach toileach, ullamh, agus comasach air a bhi saoradh dhaoinne bho am peacaidhean; chuir E agus sheulaich E agus sheulaich E Mhac a dh’aon ghnothach gu bhi saoradh dhaoinne bho’m peacaidhean agus uime sin thug E Dha ainm freagarach a chum sin, eadhon Iosa, ni a tha ciallachadh Slànuighear; Goiridh tu Iosa mar ainm dha, do-bhrigh gu’n saor e shluagh bho’m peacaidhean. Mata i.21, Ach cha d’rinn e riamhm agus mar a h-atharraich E, cha dean E gu bràth, daoine a shaoradh ‘n am peacaidh-ean, gu’n atharrachadh, uime sin, annan-ne, agus aoirne, tha sinn dheth gu siorruidh. Ach beagan ùine air adhart a chùm a bhi leigeil fhaicean dhuibh neart a nì so, agus reusantachd a leithid sin de dh-argumaid, a chùm agus gu’n tuiteadh e leis an tuilleadh cudthrom agus dearbhadh air ‘ur n’anamaibh uile, gu’m bu toil leibh a thoirt fa’n ear, gu’m bheil e gu tur an aghaidh, agus gu’n a bhi Cùmtha ri fhocal, nàdur, comhairle, agus mionnan Dhé, gu’n tearnadh E peacaich gu’n atharrachadh a thighinn orra; oir tha iad so gu tur agus gu sònraichte an aghaidh sonas agus slàinte anamaibh air nach d’ràinig atharrachadh; anamaibh a tha fathasd a fuireach ‘n am peacaidhean, fathasd ann an staid nàduir.
-
Tha focal Dhé an aghaidh sonas agus saorsa anamaibh neo-atharraichte; tha focal Dhé ag agradh gu sònraichte, gu’n atharrachadh, nach urrain daoine, nach bi daoine, agus nach gabh iad a bhi air an saoradh. Tha focal Dhé ag ràdh, “Cuirear na h-aingidh gu h-ifrinn, na cinnech uile nach cuimhnich Dia.” Salm ix17. Tha focal Dhé ag ràdh, ni air bith a steach, ni air bith a shalacheas na a dh’oibricheas gràinealeach, na ni breug, Tais. xxi, 27. Tha focal Dhé ag ràdh nachsealbhaich luchd deanamh na h-eucorach rioghachd Dhé, I. Cor. vi, 9. Tha focal Dhé ag ràdh, as eugmhais naomhachd cha’n fhaic neach air bith an Tighearn. Agus air eagal gu’m biodh e air a smuainteachadh nach eil so uile a ciallachadh ach daoine aindiadhidh agus mi-mhoralta, cuiream so ris, Tha Dhé ag ràdh, nach teid feoil agus fuil a stigh do rioghachd Dhé, ‘s e sin, daoine ann an staid nàduir. I. Cor. xv, 50. Seadh, tha focal Dhé ag ràdh, agus sin le cudthrom, “Mar a beirear duine e ris,” mar a bi e air athnuadhachadh leis an Spiorad, “nach urrain e dol a stigh do rioghachd neamh.” Eoin iii. 3, 5. “Gu deimhinn, deimhinn, )a deir Criosd( mar a beirear duine a ris, etc. Agus a rise,” Gu deimhinn, deimhinn, tha E dha ràdh thairis agus thairis, agus dha chur an ceill, ann a’ nithean eile, mar chudthrom na ffrinn a tha E daingneachadh, mar sin tha ar duilgheadasan agus ar cion toil a bhi dha chreidsinn agus a sleuchadh Dha. Mar sin tha Focal Dhé an aghaidh a ni so.
-
Tha nàdur Dhé an aghaidh sonas agus saoradh anamaibh nach eil air an atharrachadh. Tha nàdur Dhé neo-chriochnach fior-ghlan agus naomh, agus cha cheadaich E do pheacaich còmhnuidh a ghabhail maille Ris. “Oir cha Dia thusa aig am bheil tlachd ann an aingidheachd, agus cha chòmhnuich an t-aigidh maille riut.” Salm v. 4. Cha seas an t-amadan “(agus mar sin tha na h-uile dhaoine mar a tha iad a thaobh nàdur( a’d lâthair; is fuath leat luchd deanamh an uilc.” rann 5. Mar sin tha Eabh. . 13. “Tha thù nì’s gloine na do rosgan na gu’n amhairc thù air peacadh;” ‘s e sin, gu’n ghràin agus sgreamh. Tha nàdur Dhé naomh, seadh, ‘s e naomhachd fein a th’ann, agus tha cho furasda Dha sgur a bhi na Dhia, agus sgur a bhi naomh. Tha nàdur gu neo-chriochnach an aghaidh gach seorsa peacaidh, agus tha e gu neo-chriochnach, gu do-sheachainte, agus gu siorruidh a fuathachadh gach uile pheacadh. ‘S e’m peacadh gu dearbh, gu sònraichte agus gu h-àraidh an aon ni a tha Dia a tuathachadh. Tha ghràdh air a leigeadh a mach air iomadh cuspair, ach ‘s e’m peacadh an aon chuspair is fuathach Leis, agus nach eil nàdur an Dia so an aghaidh slàinte gu’n atharrachadh? Feumaidh Dia an toiseach sgur a bhi neo-chriochnach naomh, agus mar sin sgur a bhi na Dhia mas urrain E peacaich a tha fanntuinn ann an staid neo-atharraichte a bhi air an tearnadh.
-
Tha comhairle Dhé an aghaidh tearnadh anamaibh air nach d’ràinig atharrachadh. ‘S e lagh comhairle Dhé, gu’m bi sinn naomh, ma bhitheas sinn sona. Gu’m bi sinn air gairm, air ‘ur ffreannachadh, air ‘ur naomhachadh, ma’m bi sinn air ar glòrachadh: mar sin gheibh sibh anns an t-shlabhraidh òir sin (mar a theirear ris) 4 Rom. viiim 29, 30. Gabh beachd, tha comhairle, na mar a tha e air a ràdh ris an so, ro-òrduchadh Dhé, ag innse dhuinn, gu’m feum sinn a bhi air ar n’atharrachadh, air ‘ur gairm, air ar fireanachadh, ma bhios sinn air ar glòrachadh. Mar sin gu sònraichte ann an II. Tesalonianach ii, 13. “Do bhrigh gu’nim do thagh Dia sinn a chùm slinte.” Ach cia mar? Am bheil feum air bith air atharrachadh? Thà. Toghnaich sinn air a leithid de dhoigh agus gu’m bheil atharrachadh air a chiallachadh. Toghnaich E sinn chùm sláinte tre naomhachadh an Spioraid, agus creidsinn na firinn. Seadh tha comheirle Dhé a comharrachadh a mach naomhachd, agus gu’r siamachadh a mach air son naomhachd. Roghnaich e sinn a chùm agus gu’m biodh-mid naomh. Feumaidh Dia uile chomhairlean a bha bho shean, ar neo feumaidh peacaich a bhi air an atharrachadh, ma bhios iad gu bràth air an tearnadh.
(R’a leantuinn.)