Free Church Editor and the Confession
We had occasion to comment some time ago on a statement of the Free Church Editor which appeared in Life and Work which said that “Our Confession is far from final and any new alignment of denominations in Scotland will require the formulation of a new doctrinal symbol”. Our contention was that the Westminster Confession was sufficient for this purpose. The Editor in reply acknowledges the Westminster Confession to be the greatest extant confession and says that he sincerely believes its every doctrine. He then goes on to state what he regards as some of its inadequacies to meet the needs of the present day. For our part, we do not entertain the same doubt as to the Confession’s ability to cope even with present day heresies, which are, after all, only old heresies in a new dress. Also we are not so sanguine about the ability of present-day Churchmen to produce a more satisfactory document than the Westminster Confession. If the Westminster Confession was in such need of revision we cannot but think that the galaxy of stars who graced the Disruption Free Church in its early days would have engaged in this task. Instead we find one of the most noted of them looking on the 17th century divines as those “eminent men who had exhausted and settled almost every really important point in Christian theology”. Seeing that we have in the Westminster Confession such a valuable document let us prize it and cease talking about a new doctrinal symbol, which anyway in the context of a discussion with the Church of Scotland on Church Union can only be taken by them to mean a willingness on our part to depart from the doctrines contained in the Confession.
The Massacre of St Bartholomew — a Jesuit View
The “Parish Gazette” of the Stornoway Roman Catholic Church dated 23rd August, 1981, includes the following illuminating paragraph which presumably is to be accepted by the ‘faithful’ as absolutely setting the record straight in regard to the massacre of St Bartholomew and Papal involvement in it: ‘ST BARTHOLOMEW’S DAY falls tomorrow. For the unsuspecting Catholic it is the Feast Day of one of the Apostles. For the unscrupulous historian or the ill-informed non-Catholic, or even Catholic, it is one more stick to break over the long-suffering head of the Catholic Church. It marks in fact the corresponding day, August 24, in 1572 when Charles IX of France gave his consent to a plot to take action against the Huguenot or Calvinistic section of his people. The result was the Massacre of St Bartholomew’s Day when between 8,000 and 30,000 Huguenots — historians cannot agree on the exact number involved — were hunted down and killed in various towns and villages of France. The Catholic Church has ever since been blamed for the massacre although the Church had nothing to do with it — as a matter of fact the Catholics of several cities protected the Huguenots. It is true that Gregory XIII, the Pope at the time, offered up a special Mass in thanksgiving for the “rout of the Huguenots”, but he did so only because he had been deliberately misled into believing there had been an armed uprising by the Huguenots against the French King. One should not forget there were no such things as phones or radio or tv in those days, and that the postal deliveries were even worse than they are now!’
How amazing is the effrontery of the Romanist Church! The Roman Catholic Church had nothing to do with the Massacre of St Bartholomew! Poor Pope Gregory was misled and the offering up of his special Mass is to be regretted! Even the faithful must find all this somewhat difficult to swallow! Fully documented historical accounts show that Romanist conspirators were heavily and actively involved and that Pope Gregory was well aware of what had actually taken place. The distortion of history for Romanist propaganda purposes is an activity that Jesuits have long practiced and have now reduced to a fine art. J.M.
Indecent Displays (Control) Act
Amidst declining moral standards it is gratifying to learn that, through a private Member’s Bill brought before Parliament, it is now an offence to display publicly any indecent matter or to cause or permit such a display to be made. Whatever the shortcomings of this Bill it is to be welcomed as a step in the right direction and Mr Timothy Sainsbury MP is to be congratulated on bringing the measure forward. The sellers of pornographical material have had their own way for too long to the detriment of the nation, and it is a token for good that even this measure of restraint is being exercised. Many people have been seriously alarmed by the deteriorating moral situation and it is to be hoped that this is a straw the wind pointing to better things to come, and that in many areas of morals a general tightening up of standards will prevail. The restoration of the Sabbath itself in the nation would be a factor conducive to greater respect for the other Commandments and would revitalise the nation in all aspects of its life. May the Lord be pleased to pour forth His Holy Spirit to this end.