A Dying Man’s Testament to His Church

6. Final Thoughts

Rev A W MacColl
This is the final section of a Theological Conference paper dealing with James Durham’s volume, A Dying Man’s Testament to the Church of Scotland, or, A Treatise Concerning Scandal. All page references in the text of this article refer to the Naphtali Press edition of the book. The previous article, last month, summarised Durham’s views on church union.

In conclusion, we might ask what lessons we can derive from reading the Treatise on Scandal. For the sake of brevity, we may point to three areas where Durham’s thoughts might be considered of particular interest.

1. What lies at the heart of Durham’s book lies at the heart of practical godliness. The proper biblical understanding of giving and taking offence should be a matter of the utmost seriousness to the Christian for it is no less than being stumbled into sin or being a stumbling block to cause others to sin. Durham saw it in this light and so ought we. No doubt the peace and prosperity of individual believers and the Church generally would be greatly enhanced in proportion to our carefulness in this area. “Whether therefore ye eat, or drink, or whatsoever ye do, do all to the glory of God. Give none offence, neither to the Jews, nor to the Gentiles, nor to the Church of God” (1 Cor 10:31,32).

2. Practical and doctrinal scandals must be dealt with prayerfully and prudently in a way that seeks the glory of Christ and the good of His cause. Both “wholesome severity” and pastoral tenderness are to characterise our dealings in this most trying area of Church life. It would be interesting to know the extent to which Durham’s Treatise influenced subsequent Presbyterian practice and especially the Form of Process adopted by the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland in 1707. But this is possibly beyond the scope of historical verification. At the very least we may say that Durham’s great care that judicial processes be undertaken in a firm, impartial and careful fashion is worthy of imitation.

3. Church unity. To ascertain how much value Durham’s approach to Church unity has in the early twenty-first century is a great question. I would suggest that, whatever view we take of Durham’s practical steps for reunion, it is a good thing for us to remind ourselves continually of the vision of the Reformers and Covenanter for one national, established, Presbyterian Kirk in Scotland. That is what we are labouring and praying for in our witnessing for the truth in this nation at this time, and that is what we believe the Lord intends to restore to us in His own time.

How ought the Free Presbyterian Church of Scotland to seek the furthering of that vision? We might venture to suggest that to lessen, for the sake of mere ecclesiastical unity, our testimony on any point where we differ from other denominations would be sin on our part. If the distinctive elements in the Free Presbyterian witness, especially in the realm of practice, are biblically-based – as we believe they are – then to compromise these elements of our witness would serve only to weaken the Lord’s cause in Scotland.

For example, we believe that the law of the Sabbath requires that we abstain from using public transport run in systematic disregard of the Lord’s Day, even if used to attend public worship. No other Church in Scotland shares our view of the matter, at least to the extent of withholding church privileges from those who so travel on Sabbath. We cannot, therefore, conscientiously unite with any other Church unless they would be prepared to adopt our position on Sabbath transport, at the very least. It is non-negotiable. Again, the same point applies to the biblical requirements for distinction, in dress and length of hair, between male and female. Sadly, it appears that none of the other Presbyterian denominations appear to be prepared to take a stand on these issues to the extent that unity in practice and discipline would become practicable.

With regard to those other branches of the visible Church in Scotland which are sounder in doctrine and practice than the rest, we still find ourselves unable to join in ecclesiastical communion with them. This is not a matter that gives us any pleasure; on the contrary it is a source of “searchings of heart” for “the divisions of Reuben”. We agree with the words of Rev Neil Cameron, that if anyone is not grieved for the divisions of the Church in Scotland, he is not worthy of the name of a Christian.

Yet we fully believe that, without union in government, discipline and practice, no firm foundation can be laid for the Church of Christ in Scotland that we long to see in the future. “Now the God of patience and consolation grant you to be likeminded one toward another according to Jesus Christ: that ye may with one mind and one mouth glorify God, even the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ” (Rom 15:5,6). For all the imperfections of the Free Presbyterian Church as individuals and as a body, we believe that the principles it professes to stand for will yet be vindicated by the Head of the Church in the day when the watchmen shall see eye to eye. And we can scarcely doubt that if the Presbyterian people of Scotland would prayerfully lay to heart the practical wisdom and the tenderness towards our brethren that The Treatise on Scandal exhorts us to seek, the divisions which have marred the face of the Church in this nation would be greatly lessened.