Although at the time of the Disruption there were differences of view to be found among the Churches on a variety of subjects, they were all found following the same pattern as far as the public worship of God was concerned. It is following that event that innovations were introduced in the form of uninspired hymns and musical instruments. In the Established Church, only 40 years have passed since the introduction of musical instruments in its worship and at this present time we see now the extent to which this practice has gathered pace and has led to departure from purity of worship in Scotland.
It is evident that it is deep-rooted in the corrupt nature of men to please themselves and think that what they relish is also what is acceptable to the Lord. This they may consider to be pleasing to Him, but, in truth, they are defiling the holy worship of the eternal King. They are doing so by introducing what is not in accordance with the Scriptures and at the same time omitting from divine worship what the Scriptures prescribe. Because music appeals to the natural ear, instruments are being employed that were permissible under the Old Testament, but that was because they were appointed. There is a discordance between the Psalms and the carnal mind; the Psalms are in many places now barred and what is produced by man is preferred to what was produced by God.
The sons of men are very like sheep to this extent, that if one breaks out through a gap, the others are inclined to follow it. The following of the current fashion in worship now prevails as much as it does in the choice of clothes. Nothing will do for many young ministers now but to follow Anglican customs as closely as they possibly can. There are some of the old ministers who are found with their heads itching, as it were, to be crowned as archbishops. Between the two classes it is not surprising that the ancient landmarks are being altered. We took note recently of the commotion there was in Dundee with regard to the Established Church at Barnhill.^2^ It is likely that this matter will come before the Assembly, whatever the outcome will be. It has already been dealt with by the Synod. Although the declensions of the present day merit discipline, it ill becomes men who are themselves not adhering to the prescribed form of worship to condemn a man as guilty of the same practice as themselves.
But in regard to the Romeward movement, we see how congregations here and there are acting as if out of their minds in seeking to have musical instruments. A man from America of whom no more can be said but that he has traversed much of the world, is spreading abroad his doctrines throughout the nation and corrupting the worship of the Creator.^3^ And this generation is so blind, so lacking in discernment, that the leaders of the people here and there are, with bonnets in hands, seeking some of his wares that they may be so much ahead of their neighbours.
The old proverb expresses it well: Where you have a blind people, the one-eyed servant will do for a minister.^4^ It may well be the case that we might go too far in giving credence to many of these one-eyed ministers, for the one-eyed man has one eye more than the blind man. If they have not the eye of education, we do not know what many of them have beyond the people following them. It is lamentable to think that so many light-headed, unconverted young men are now entering the ministry. It is therefore not surprising that so many churches have now largely become spiritual wildernesses. It is a wonder that there are churches at all and congregations attending them, but people who have itching ears will provide themselves with well-matched teachers of a mind akin to their own.
We are not aware of any Presbyterian minister going over to the Church of Rome since Reformation times, but that is what has recently taken place in Scotland. If a few of the other men who take upon themselves to be priests were to go with him, it would be more honourable for them to do so than remain where they are. Not that it is the duty of any living man to side with error, but if men are to act with a clear conscience they will not outwardly profess one thing when they secretly believe otherwise.
Thus we are constrained to say that there are Presbyterian ministers who are found in a situation which does not become them, when priestly thoughts occupy their minds. In the common affairs of this world men are expected to be trustworthy, at least to the extent that the community they live in may take their veracity for granted. People are then so greatly lacking in discernment, as to the concerns of their souls, that they will commit themselves to be taught by men who are living a lie. But this is only a portion of what the Apostle says: that the god of this world has blinded the minds of them that believe not lest the light of the gospel of Christ should shine in them. There are worldly men who will direct the righteous in regard to every step that they ought to take, but will not themselves take these steps. They regard what they have some knowledge of as of so little worth that they will give place – many of them – to leaders whom they certainly know to be blind leaders of the blind.
But if there is, in our day, danger with regard to the darkness of Rome, there is no less a danger with respect to the carnal reasoning of men. It is a broad way that leads to destruction. There is a great distance, it would seem, between the carnal reasonings of men and the teaching of the Pope, but the man that is under the influence of either shall be brought to the same end. If one is able to discern the signs of the times, there is every indication that there is a dark night ahead of the United [Free] Church as a result of her toleration of error. The newspapers tell us that Dr Dods^5^ has been chosen to be the Moderator of their General Assembly. It is the voice of those voting that exalted him to this eminence. “On each side walk the wicked, when / vile men are high in place.” Whether or not he will accept the honour remains to be seen; the company that he belongs to have made very clear the mind that they are of with regard to the inspiration of the Scriptures when they give the highest place among them to a man who is as loose in his views as he is.
At the same time we see a movement among some in the United Church against Professor Smith^6^ in Glasgow and, whoever is alive to see the General Assembly, it is not unlikely that they will see demonstrated just how far this Church is prepared to tolerate views held by her chief teachers which embrace the tearing apart of the Old Testament Scriptures. If it is the case that this man will be left to occupy his office whatever the decision of the General Assembly is, on the inspiration of the Old Testament, that decision will just be tantamount to Judas being left alone while he betrays his Master – blessing outwardly, cursing inwardly.
If ever there was a need of a spiritual awakening, it is in this day of ours. There is the need that Christian Churches among the Gentiles have of life from the dead – something that is promised in connection with the natural branches being ingrafted into their own olive tree. At this time, in the midst of these years, before these blessed days arrive, we can only give ourselves to prayer. “In the midst of the years make known, in wrath [which we deserve], remember mercy [which we do not deserve].”
^1^This is a translation of a Gaelic article which appeared in the December 1901 issue of The Free Presbyterian Magazine. It was contributed over the initials JM. It is accepted that the initials were those of the Rev John Macleod, minister of the Free Presbyterian Church of Scotland in Kames, where he had been inducted earlier that year. He later became well known as Principal Macleod of the Free Church College and the author of Scottish Theology. Towards the end of this article, in which he draws attention to the general departure from the “old paths”, he writes, “If ever there was a need of a spiritual awakening it is in this day of ours”. How much more is that the case in our day, when even the Free Church of Scotland sanctions the use of hymns and instrumental music in her public worship! J McL
^2^The Barnhill case (1901–1904) involved the disciplining of the Established Church minister, Rev Thomas Adamson. He was regarded as one who was “aping high Anglicanism”. He introduced such innovations as “decorating the communion table (which he referred to as an altar) with cross and candlesticks, praying with his back to the congregation, adopting the eastward position when celebrating communion, mixing water and wine, elevating the cup, and kneeling to receive the communion.”
^3^It is Reuben Archer Torrey (1856 – 1928) that is probably referred to. Torrey was born in New Jersey and in 1889 joined Dwight L Moody (and presumably Ira D Sankey who accompanied Moody in his travels; his “rousing hymns and solos” were supposed to “soften hearts” before Moody preached) in his evangelistic work in Chicago. He became Moody’s protégé and his successor, propagating the same Arminian doctrines as his mentor and following the same pattern in conducting services. It was Moody’s “gospel” and methods that Dr Kennedy condemned in his booklet Hyper-Evangelism “Another Gospel” Though a Mighty Power.
^4^In Gaelic: Far am bheil am pobull dall ni an gille dall minsteir.
^5^Marcus Dods (1834 – 1929) was a minister in the Free Church of Scotland, ordained and inducted to the Renfield Street Free Church in 1864. When the constitution of that body was vitiated as a result of the passing of the Declaratory Act in 1892, and when the Assembly failed to repeal it in 1893, he did not, of course, join those who left and took with them unimpaired the constitution of the Disruption Free Church. In 1900, when the union of the Declaratory Act Free Church and United Presbyterian Church took place, he continued to serve as a minister in the United Free Church. In 1877, while still a Free Church minister, he preached and published a sermon in which he cast doubt on the infallibility of Scripture and the doctrine of inspiration as enunciated in The Westminster Confession of Faith. When he was called to account by his Presbytery, he withdrew these statements, but with reservations, and only in deference to the Court. The Synod, and eventually the Assembly, by a large majority allowed the views he held as tolerable in the Church. That this was the case indicates the extent to which the Free Church had gone adrift from its moorings at this stage and it is almost unbelievable that the same man should, in 1889, be appointed Professor of New Testament Exegesis in the New College. The view he held in regard to the inspiration of Scripture was confuted by Dr Hugh Martin in the classical statement of that doctrine found in the book entitled Inspiration of Scripture. It was reprinted by the Free Presbyterian Church’s Publication Committee. In 1902 Dods declined to take the Moderator’s chair in the United Free Church Assembly. It was assumed that the reason for this was that since the Moderator has to be neutral; he, accordingly would not be able to express his opinion on certain doctrinal points.
^6^George Adam Smith (1856 – 1942) was a Free Church minister (United Free after 1900) who adopted “critical approaches” to the Bible. In 1901 – the year John Macleod wrote – his heretical views were clearly revealed in Modern Criticism and the Preaching of the Old Testament. The Dictionary of Scottish Church History and Theology states that “the book was the cause of a near-trial for heresy in the UFC General assembly of 1901. Smith was accused of, among other things, undermining the truthfulness, inspiration and authority of large sections of Scripture. On a motion of Robert Rainy the case was dismissed.”