by Rev. Fraser Macdonald
(A paper read at the Centenary Meeting on 25th May, 1993)
Fathers, brethren, and friends, I feel honoured to be deputed to make this small contribution to the celebrations, occasioned by the arrival of the Centenary Year of our distinctive existence and witness as a separate denomination. I pray that the God of all grace and comfort, who has so graciously and mercifully spared us, not only to see, but to participate in today’s proceedings, may deign to favour us with His divine Presence.
I wish to make four simple observations, regarding some of the differences that obtained between the Assemblies of 1843 and 1893.
Firstly, there was a difference between the issues involved. In 1843, the prime issue at stake was the defence of the Crown Rights of Christ against the intrusion of the civil courts, into the spiritual jurisdiction of the Courts of the Church of God. Now, we do not doubt or minimise the seriousness of the issues then at risk, but we would respectfully suggest that they did not possess the same degree of gravity as the later challenge made, by the appearance and tolerance of the Higher Critical views.
In 1893, it was the veracity and authority of Holy Scripture, which was imperilled and called in question. Now, without descending into the historical details, we must take cognisance of the sad fact, that Professors in Chairs of the church were the leading culprits in this field, moreover, one would have expected the Free Church to recognise the greater guilt accruing to the activity of these men from their places of confidence, leadership and more especially their consequent influence on the rising ministry of the Church. Contrary to expectation, their status as professors only served to ensure for them a degree of safety and immunity from any radical and effective discipline. We have good reason to ask if this deplorable and highly dangerous policy is still in operation in the present Free Church of Scotland. If we judge them, not by the carnal criteria of numbers, or the extent of excitement and interest generated, but by the intrinsic characters of the issues at stake, we would argue that there was MORE at risk in 1893 than in 1843.
Our second observation relates to the relative degree of courage, strength
and discernment afforded the two leaders. The voice of Dr Chalmers was no solitary one in the Assembly of 1843. He knew the strength and solidarity of the loyal and cordial support, upon which he could rely, and was already recognised as a man of great stature and power in the Church. Mr Macfarlane’s voice, on the other hand, was more or less, a lone voice in the Assembly of 1893, nor did he know the strength or weakness of his support. But a tiny minority in that vast Assembly appeared to have any real sympathy with him. Some of these spoke, and spoke well, but FAILED to translate their words into positive action. Such, it seems were easily wheedled and placated by the craft and popularity of Dr Rainy. It was therefore left to Mr Macfarlane to register his own Protest. Surely, the greater trial required the greater proportion of grace and God-given courage. We would also argue that the more singular honour was bestowed upon the man of smaller stature and greater obscurity ecclesiastically. Our founding father did more for the Lord and His Cause that day, than that whole Assembly, composed of so many men of great erudition, ability and other endowments. To God alone be all the glory. His magnifies His grace, stains the pride of man, and pours contempt upon princes, while he uses a Mordecai, as his honoured instrument to save the Israel of God from destruction.
Our third observation relates to the fact quite frequently overlooked, but none the less significant, namely, that 1893 as distinct from 1843 was the JUBILEE YEAR of the Free Church of Scotland. This feature of that august Assembly distinguished it from all previous ones. It had, so to speak, a distinct atmosphere all of its own, as one might appreciate. In 1843, a spirit of holy reverence, of deep spirituality, of humble gratitude and earnestness prevailed. There was no place there for levity, among men who loved one another in faith. In 1893 however, the Record of the Proceedings of that Assembly seems to indicate that the whole tone of the Assembly was altered and visibly lowered. We make full allowance for the fact, that this was their Jubilee Year; nor does the intensification of the notes of joy and gratitude surprise us, but, in the light of the culpable decadence already mentioned, might we not expect the spirit of contrition, penitence, concern and even consternation to be much in evidence? Indeed, had the Proceedings of that Assembly been not only tinged, but shot through with profound sadness, it would have been much more in accord with the reality of the situation. What, alas, we do find is that the air was charged with a spirit of levity, on occasion bordering on hilarity. There was in evidence a readiness to break into unholy laughter at the least display of wit, or when a point was made that appealed to the
majority, to indulge in too frequent carnal applause. It seems to us, as if the decree had gone forth, that none dare appear before that Court, clothed in sackcloth. If our judgment is worth anything, the impression given was, that the atmosphere was such, as to render it difficult for the spiritually minded to breathe, let alone speak or act out of tone with the majority.
Our last observation is perhaps the most alarming and revealing of all. The spirit of the 1893 Assembly, and the sentiments expressed by the Moderator, stand in stark contrast to the loyalty, the fidelity, and the unifying convictions of the Disruption Fathers. So changed was the spiritual and moral climate, that the retrograde steps and policies of the Jubilee Free Church were acclaimed as strident advances upon the stern faithfulness, and uncompromising love and zeal for the Truth, by which their fathers were motivated. Instead of reaffirming the principles, for which their worthy forebears had contended so valiantly, the Moderator in his Address to the delegates lamented “the folly of exaggerating their differences”. One cannot but detect in his words a noxious similarity to the slogans of modern evangelical ecumenism. The full implications of the policy advocated is, that points of disagreement should be minimised, or marginalised in the interests of the much greater significance of the points of agreement. Much lip service was rendered to their forebears but it closely resembled the activity of the Pharisees in impiously and hypocritically garnishing the sepulchres of the prophets. The ecumenical spirit which was hailed by the Moderator, as an encouraging prelude to closer union, has since then, been allowed to develop, and what a monster it is! Both the germ and the heretical language of the union envisaged, are to be found in this address. Just listen for yourselves to the Moderator, and catch for yourselves the heretical undertones, as he proceeds to make light of mutually exclusive doctrinal differences. Here I quote, “To my mind indeed, this spontaneous gathering of deputies from so many different churches, and so many scattered countries, is like an Ecumenical Council than anything we have known for long years (Applause).
We have not, it is true, in this capacity discussed doctrines, or framed creeds, or issued decrees for the whole church — but we have done, what perhaps, is quite as much of importance for the present day. We have borne witness to the essential oneness, of all the churches, holding the Evangelical Faith (whatever that may be!). For ages we dwelt on our points of difference, and exaggerated their significance. We were keen disputants, often failing in charity — rarely failing in severity. The Calvinist frowned at the Arminian, and the Arminian misunderstood the Calvinist. . . . Judah
vexed Ephraim (laughter) and Ephraim vexed Judah, but now evangelical christendom, through nearly all its borders has risen to a higher conception of the calling of God, and we recognise that there is a REAL unity, the unity of a common life in Christ . . . and it is this unity which is represented by this Ecumenical Council today.” (Applause.)
Fine words, but oh how naive! The spirit inherent in the sentiments expressed, has paved the way for dialogue with Rome and the Jesuits. The direction of the Ecumenical movement is decisively Romewards. And by using the opposite, and ostensibly more charitable and effective principle of exaggerating our points of agreement, the gap is narrowing by the hour. Neutrality or silence on such crucial issues is criminal, and our worthy forefathers knew only too well that Arminianism and Romanism were allies. The Moderator of that Assembly made light of Truth in the interests of unity, and had the temerity to say with unmistakable gratification “It is as if every man had left his sword on the wall, and left all his fighting gear at home.” That final assessment of the Assembly that refused to rescind the infamous Declaratory Act was sadly, sadly true, except for one noble exception — Rev. Donald Macfarlane — who drew his sword and drew it well. To him, under God we owe an unspeakable debt of gratitude. By God’s grace, one hundred years after the event, we celebrate, with humility and joy the Centenary of the Free Presbyterian Church of Scotland, of which, he had the honour to be the founder. This branch of the visible church has few friends, and many enemies, but we believe with all our hearts, that Mr Macfarlane was the instrument in the Lord’s hand to bring our fathers, ourselves, and, we trust, our posterity, out of real spiritual bondage and darkness. Gratitude, humility, fidelity and courage are the virtues called for, in the present climate of Ecumenism, declension and a darkness which CAN BE FELT. But we look to that God of whom it was written
“He out of darkness did them bring, and
from death’s shade them take;
These bands where with they had been bound,
asunder quite he break.” Psalm 107: 14
Mbuma Mission Meeting — April 1993
Rev. Donald A. Ross
I was once more privileged to attend and address the Mbuma Mission Meeting in Holland, held this year at Geldermalsen. My wife was also invited to attend the meeting, and it was a pleasure for us to meet old
friends and to make new ones. Rev. Z. Mazvabo from Zimbabwe and his wife were also at the meeting, as well as Mr D. Vermeulen, Kenya and Malawi, who addressed the young people. There was also an address given by Mr L.M.P. Scholton and four sermons preached by Revs. W. Verhoeks; T. Klock; H. Zweistra; and Tj. de Jong. I endeavoured to speak from the words; “Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature,” Mark 16: 15. The meeting lasted for four hours altogether, with an hour and a half interval. Over 7000 people attended and collections taken for the Mission in Africa amounted to £65,000.
It is remarkable that friends in Holland should take notice in this marked way of our small church as it endeavours to spread the word of God in Africa. We believe that one reason for their practical and prayerful help is that they have confidence in us as a church in our seeking to spread the Word of God in its purity. We hope and pray that by the grace of God we will ever maintain the ordinances of the gospel as laid down in the Word of God and formulated in the Westminster Confession of Faith. It is evident that it is the Lord who has graciously opened the hearts of our Dutch friends to be so liberal to the mission work of our Church; and it is a great responsibility for us to be stewards of large amounts of money generously donated for the work of the Kingdom of God among our African congregations.
Much of this money will be used for the schools, the hospital and the orphanage, which, of course, are used as “handmaids for the furtherance of the gospel”. Our prayer should be that those responsible for allocating this money, whether they be on the Mission Field, or on Committees in Scotland, would be given wisdom for the spending of this money to the best possible advantage for the furtherance of the Cause of Christ connected with us in Africa.
Some missions which began on a sound biblical basis have tragically become no more than a social service. The all important work of teaching the Word of God is overlooked and forgotten. We should pray that this would never happen on our mission field. Pray also that God, for Christ’s sake, would by the reading and preaching of the Word, bring many in Africa to a saving interest in Christ. Only then will the giving of our money for the furtherance of the gospel be especially rewarding for us and beneficial to them.
Address by Rev. W. Verhoeks to the representatives and deputies of the Free Presbyterian Church of Scotland
Dear Mr Ross, Mr Mazvabo and Mr Vermeulen,
As representatives and deputies of the Mission of the Free Presbyterian Church of Scotland, we give you, on behalf of the board and all the friends of the Mbuma-Mission, a hearty welcome on this missionary-day, and we are pleased to have you in our midst today.
Mrs Ross and Mrs Mazvabo also a hearty welcome.
It may be still called a wonder, that it is granted to us, notwithstanding the darkness of times and all the tumult and misery in the world, that we are allowed to come together on this day for the thirtieth time. “It is of the Lord’s mercies that we are not consumed, because His compassions fail not.” (Lament 3: 22).
As you can see, the interest is and the activities are still great.
We do hope, that they may contribute to the upkeep and continuation of the missionwork in Zimbabwe, Malawi and Kenya, under the approbation and blessing of the Lord. For without these, all our labour is in vain.
We do hope, that you and we may have a good day, to the encouragement and supporting of the missionwork, and that all the work may contribute, that also in these remote countries, may be added to the church such as should be saved.
We wish you and your church the indispensable favour and blessing of the Lord in all your missionwork.
Mbuma Zending Address
by Rev. D. A. Ross
It gives me much pleasure to be invited to this large gathering and once more to have the privilege of addressing you on a subject appropriate to this occasion, namely, the sending forth of the gospel.
We will therefore notice a few points in connection with the words you will find in Mark, chapter 16 and verse 15, “Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.”
The Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ, commanded his eleven apostles to ‘preach the gospel’. They were His appointed messengers, sent by Him to announce the gospel news.
This commission to preach the gospel continues to all ages. To this end Christ Jesus calls and equips Godfearing men to engage in this work. “And he gave some, apostles; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers . . . for the work of the ministry,” Ephesians 4: 11, 12. It is of course the duty of the Church to teach and train such as are called to preach the gospel.
But what is the gospel? Paul, writing to Timothy, said, “This is a faithful
saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief,” 1 Timothy 1: 15. By this and other portions of the Word of God, we are assured that the gospel is the good news that Christ Jesus rendered full satisfaction to the Law of God and to the Justice of God, by His obedience, sufferings and death, thereby making atonement for a multitude of mankind sinners so as to save them from eternal damnation.
While the Word of God shows this atonement to be for the sins of a definite number of sinners, that is, the elect, the Word of God also teaches that the gospel is to be preached to all sinners everywhere. This is plain from the text before us: “Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.” Consequently it must not be hid from the world nor in any way kept from sinners. While we must not doubt the doctrine of a particular atonement for a definite number of sinners, neither must we doubt that God requires His Church to preach the gospel to all sinners indiscriminately.
This gospel is the only way of salvation. Heathen religions cannot bring about the salvation of one soul. The Pharisees’ religion of good works could not save a soul; and those who today continue labouring to save themselves by good works can never do so. The false doctrine of the Sadducees could not save, nor can any false doctrines of the present time. The iniquitous system of Romanism cannot save one soul of the millions within her fold. No power of man can save a sinner; not even the heights of wisdom attained to by the great philosophers of this world. Only Christ set forth in the gospel can save lost sinners. “Thou shalt call His name JESUS: for He shall save His people from their sins.” Matt. 1: 21.
This is not only the testimony of God in His Word, but of every person saved by grace. They know this in their own experience. Indeed, they have tried other ways of supposed salvation, only to discover that these all fail, and cannot save; but Christ in and by the gospel does save; therefore the gospel “is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth,” Romans 1: 16.
When there is obedience on the part of the church to the command to preach the gospel, we must expect the fruits of the gospel; that is, sinners will come under the power of the gospel. The gospel will no doubt be rejected by many, but also it will be believed by many. By the grace of God they will come to realise that they are sinners who are lost and most certainly on their way to hell. They will know their need of the mercy of God through Christ Jesus who “died for the ungodly”. They will be brought to faith in Christ and to grieve over and forsake their sins. Were
this not so, it would be a futile exercise to preach the gospel.
Moreover, we are to wait on God to bring about this fruitfulness to the preaching of the gospel. It is evident from the Word of God that sinful man’s natural response to the gospel will always be that which Christ told the Jews: “Ye will not come to me, that ye might have life.” John 5: 40. But we read of others — “Thy people shall be willing in the day of thy power,” Psalm 110: 3, and such will come to Christ for eternal life. Therefore, while the church must preach the gospel it must also wait patiently on the Lord to bless the gospel. It is the Holy Spirit who makes the gospel effectual to the saving of sinful man. It is our work to preach the gospel to every creature, it is the Holy Spirit’s work to bless the gospel to whomsoever He will.
Moreover because the gospel proclaims Christ as the only sure ground of salvation it is to be much valued and prized by the Church. We must also readily defend it against all enemies, against all error, and against the subtleties of any false gospel.
Last of all, is it not because of the gospel that we are gathered here today? Is it not because of the gospel that we seek to make yet another contribution to the spread of the gospel? It is clear from the Scriptures that believers are required to do many things for the spread of the gospel: giving of our material substance is one such work. You will recall from the account of the building of the tabernacle in the wilderness that the people gave of their substance for that work as God required of them. So it is still: God requires that we give of our money for the maintenance of His Cause and for the propagation of His glorious gospel.
On behalf of the Free Presbyterian Church of Scotland I most heartily thank you for your liberal contributions over the years, and up to this present time. I would also like to assure you that the Free Presbyterian Church could never undertake to do such extensive work in Africa, were it not for your liberality. We have much cause to thank the Most High that He has opened your hearts to willingly and generously give to this glorious work of spreading the gospel. Indeed, we are workers together in our endeavour to carry out this great commission, “Go ye into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature.” Thank you.
Notes and Comments
College Principal’s Trial in Australia
The Principal of St Andrew’s College at the University of Sydney, Rev. Peter Cameron, was found guilty by the Sydney Presbytery of the
Presbyterian Church of Australia of undermining that Church’s stance on the authority of the Bible and, in particular, the inerrancy of Holy Scripture. According to the American Magazine “Christian Observer” he also disputed the Bible’s stance on homosexuality. His appeal to the State Assembly was due to be heard in July. It will also be further open to him if he loses this appeal to appeal to the Federal General Assembly in 1994.
Dr Cameron is a minister of the Church of Scotland and a former lecturer at New College, Edinburgh. His case received unprecedented media coverage in Australia. He claimed that the procedure was flawed and that public exposure would warn the lay members of the church that a fundamentalist movement was gaining ground in the church. Two articles in the June issue of the Church of Scotland Magazine are devoted to the case. As might well be expected both are highly critical of the Presbytery. One is by Rev. John MacIntyre, a former Principal of New College, Edinburgh. He speaks of the trial as a crude form of character assassination, nonetheless crude for being draped in a tattered theology. It is not surprising that the former Principal would speak in this way when he once presided over a College in which the cardinal sin would be to be a fundamentalist.
Dr Cameron warns the Church of Scotland to beware of the rise of fundamentalism. His view was that it might take years before the Church in Australia could be purged of what he called this “demonic” phenomenon. A similar take over of the Church of Scotland was possible and he went on to say that “collectively fundamentalism is becoming a demonic force to be reckoned with”. He ought to beware lest he attribute to the work of the devil what may be in effect the work of the Holy Spirit.
Death of “Father” Antony Ross
Antony or Ian Ross was for a time the Roman Catholic chaplain to Edinburgh University and was later elected Rector of the University. He was baptised, we understand, in the Free Presbyterian Church but while studying at Edinburgh University perverted to the Roman Catholic Church. He was elected the head of the British Dominican Order in 1983. He was very influential among the young and gave tremendous support to the Roman Catholic Church by his literary and other work. No doubt he led many along the path he himself had trodden from the light of the truth to the darkness of popery. Although he suffered several strokes in 1983, eventually he recovered his speech sufficiently to celebrate mass. His obituary in the Scotsman gives an outline of his life’s work. But the ques-
tion may be asked — Where is he now? According to the tenets of the Church of Rome, he is now in purgatory, waiting until the prayers of those on earth will merit him release from his purgatorial pains and open the door of heaven for him. According to the Word of God things are very different. If he died in the beliefs of the Church of Rome, it is very clear from the Bible that he is now a lost soul in outer darkness. Such must be the awful end of all who obey not the gospel of God but believe a lie. What a warning this should be to all who forsake the truth!
Bishop of Edinburgh’s View of the Bible
Rev. Richard Holloway, Primus of the Episcopal Church of Scotland has been airing his view of the Bible and its teachings in an article in the Glasgow Evening News in order to support the ordaining of women to the Christian ministry. He says that for centuries women have been denied access to the Christian ministry. The Bible, he says, is the big problem. He goes on to show how he is to cut the Gordian knot? His answer is that we have to admit that the Bible contains as much dross as gold, as much out-of-date nonsense as enduring wisdom, and we must find the courage to reject the bits of the Bible that are not of God and commit ourselves passionately to the bits that are. In the Bishop’s view the subordination of women is clearly wrong and reflects, not God’s will, but a Middle Eastern social system of 2000 years ago. What a sad reflection is all this blasphemous outpouring on the Episcopal Church and the one who is supposed to occupy the leading place within her bounds. What an account such men will have to give in the day of judgment when they appear before the bar of God!
Rejection of Euthanasia by B.M.A.
It is heartening to read that the British Medical Association Conference voted by a margin of four to one to categorically reject the legalisation of euthanasia. Those opposed to euthanasia warned that legalisation would undermine patients’ trust in their doctor. It is to be hoped that the B.M.A. will continue resolute in this matter in opposition to what is said to be the prevailing tide of public opinion.
Resignation of the Bishop of Durham
There will be no tears among evangelicals when Dr Jenkins, the Bishop of Durham, resigns next year after ten years in office. His questioning the literal truth of the resurrection and the Virgin Birth, both fundamental tenets of the Christian Faith, provoked widespread concern and condemnation. It is to be hoped that a suitable replacement can be found
for him who will seek to undo the nefarious work of the unbelieving Bishop. What need there is for men like Bishop Ryle to be raised up in the Church of England to proclaim the gospel of God’s free and sovereign grace.
Sabbath Trading in Scotland
According to Home Office Minister of State, Earl Ferrars, the Government have no intention of bringing in any legislation for regulating Sabbath trading in Scotland. He said to Lord Campbell of Croy: “I agree with you that Scotland does not wish to be regulated,” and he quoted a recent poll which claimed that only 8 per cent of people in Scotland wanted Sabbath Trading regulated. There is, however, to be brought before Parliament a Bill offering various options for England and Wales. Scotland’s plight is a sad one as the Sabbath is trampled under the feet of men. The God of heaven takes notice of it as He did in connection with Israel of old. For this sin the land was to enjoy her Sabbaths for seventy years when the land was to lie desolate during the captivity of the children of Israel. It is certain that the Lord will deal with Scotland for her broken Sabbaths, if she does not repent and return to the Lord.
(Since the above note was written the media have reported that the Prime Minister and Home Secretary have indicated that they are in favour of total deregulation in England and Wales).