THE first paper given at the conference (in Inverness on 3rd and 4th December) was Alexander Henderson by Rev. K.D. Macleod. The more spiritual aspect of Henderson’s life and work was dealt with, an approach that was refreshing to those of us who had been accustomed to hearing of Henderson in political situations. Henderson was thrust into the political struggles of his time but he took part in them, first and foremost, as a man of God: a man of whom a contemporary spoke as “the fairest flower, after John Knox, of incomparable memory, that ever the Church of Scotland did enjoy”. We were led through Henderson’s life from his conversion, when already in the ministry, to the renewing of the National Covenant and the 1638 General Assembly. These are heart-stirring events in the history of our nation and its Church: events of which to a large extent our generation is ignorant, and towards which the professing church in Scotland, to its shame, is apathetic.
Though Henderson was virtually the leader of the Scottish nation against the tyranny of Charles I, and was responsible for the drafting of the Solemn League and Covenant, his chief concerns were the cause of Christ and the care of souls. During the 1638 Assembly, “Henderson and other ministers spent many evenings with Argyll. The Earl afterwards traced his conversion, or at least his assurance of salvation to these evenings he spent in Henderson’s company in Glasgow”. We were left with the abiding impression that Henderson was, as a contemporary said, “A man in whom I see much of the image of Christ and who fears God”.
In his paper, The Church of Rome at the Bar of History, Rev. John MacLeod gave what he said “might loosely be called an extended review” of The Church of Rome at the Bar of History by William Webster. The Church of Rome was brought to the bar of history as to: 1, the status it gives to tradition; 2, the claims of the Papacy; 3, Mariolatry; 4, its doctrine of salvation; and 5, the Eucharist. On each of these important matters the Church of Rome not only cannot stand the test of Scripture, but even fails the test of history, because much of what Roman Catholicism claims as part of her changeless creed was both unknown to the Church Fathers and directly contrary to what they taught.
The Romish doctrine of placing tradition on a par with Scripture can be dated definitely to only the 16th century and was resorted to as a desperate attempt to stem the tide of the Reformation unleashed by Luther in his appeal to Scripture. That the central teachings of Rome are contrary to Scripture is not at issue but it was satisfactorily proved from her own writing that they have not always been held by her and have been added piecemeal over the centuries for reasons that have more to do with political power than with concern for the souls of men. The warnings against Rome were timely as the religious world is more and more allured by her and attracted to her theatrical and sensual worship.
In presenting his paper, The Toronto Blessing, Rev. K.M. Watkins gave it the subtitle, “A distinctly Reformed perspective”. He proceeded to weigh the Toronto Movement “in the balances of our distinctively reformed doctrines”. These doctrines were: 1, Scripture, in which the authority, necessity, and primacy of Scripture were highlighted; 2, worship, with particular reference to the manner and content of worship, and reverence in worship; 3, the Holy Spirit, which included the “Christ-exalting” nature of the work of the Holy Spirit, the sovereignty of the Holy Spirit, and the work of the Holy Spirit in sanctification; and 4, Christian experience.
The disparity between the Toronto Movement’s teaching on Christian experience and the Scriptural, Reformed position was strongly emphasised, because the Toronto Movement claims to be primarily a movement of “experience”. “Reformed doctrine insists that the only way to the heart is through the mind”. Conversely, “the Toronto Movement insists on bypassing the human mind, by way of a suspension of the intellectual processes in order to receive the spiritual”. By all the given criteria the Toronto Movement was found to be utterly wanting. The need of thorough biblical reformation was impressed on us. The church that holds fast to these biblical and reformed principles in her doctrine, worship and practice, will be strong against every aberration and delusion with which the religious world may be visited.
In his paper Personal Piety, Rev. A. McPherson began with a brief definition of piety and proceeded to explain the “necessity for personal piety”, stating, “Anyone claiming to believe in Christ for salvation who clearly is not aiming at piety, is raising a serious objection to his claim. Salvation is always to be salvation from sin – from its dominion as well as its penal consequences.” In speaking on the “measure of piety”, Mr. McPherson reminded us that the work of sanctification by which the godly or pious are enabled to die unto sin and live unto righteousness is gradual. “Enabled more and more”, are the Catechism words. On the other hand, spiritual declension and backsliding will impede progress towards holiness and may even lead to open sin. The failure to grasp the necessity of holiness and to rest in a “current average of piety” was also warned against. The “pursuit of piety” was dealt with in three sections: 1, the negative aspect – sin to be forsaken; 2, the positive aspect – holiness to be earnestly sought; 3, the encouragements to the duty. We were left in no doubt from Scripture and from the writings of eminent theologians, of our need of earnestly pursuing piety, personally, patiently and perseveringly.
The final paper, The Need for Creeds and Confessions, by Rev. D. MacLean, was divided as follows: First, the historical need for creeds, (a creed was defined as “a public avowal of the doctrinal content of a person’s religious belief”). Creeds were necessary from earliest New Testament times to establish the substance of the Apostles’ preaching, prevent error, and instruct converts. The earliest extant creed is the Apostles’ Creed, though no apostolic authority is claimed for it. More sophisticated statements of Christian belief, such as the Nicene Creed, became necessary in later times to refute error, and culminated in the peerless Westminster Confession of Faith.
Secondly, the constitutional need for Confessions. Dealing with the post Reformation Church, Mr. MacLean noted that Confessions were now necessary to define Protestant and Reformed doctrine in contra-distinction to Roman Catholic belief. Confessions were also necessary as a uniform basis of instruction and a bond of communion within the Church.
Thirdly, the present need for Confessions. A Confession emphasises the identity of a Church. It is vital that the Westminster Confession of Faith, for example, be adhered to if the doctrinal distinctions of the Protestant Reformation are to be maintained. Mr. MacLean noted how the present Church of Scotland, though clinging to its claims to be the national church, is in danger of losing its identity, as is proved by its sliding away from its confessional basis and into ecumenism. The need for a continuing Confessional Church, Protestant and Reformed, was impressed on us and our attention was drawn to the distinctive testimony that we hold as a branch of the visible church in our day.
All the papers were informative and stimulating, and we trust they will prove of spiritual benefit to all present. Indeed, we hope that they will be available to a larger audience through the Magazine or on tapes.* All those who prepared papers in the midst of full and taxing programmes are due our thanks.
- (A cased set of five tapes, with one lecture per tape, is available from Mr Duncan MacDonald, 5 Falcon Avenue, Inverness, IV2 3TF, at £10 per set).