Editorial

The June 1999 Commission of Assembly has met and finished the business which was left over from the General Assembly in May. In the eyes of some the problems of the Free Church have been brought to a conclusion. Decisive action was taken. Lines were definitely drawn. Statements have been issued. Discipline is promised. Some believe that our Church will now at last be able to get on with the work of the gospel of Christ which we love, free from the problems which have beset us in recent years. We certainly wish with all our heart that this were the case. No-one in his right mind takes delight in argument and strife between brethren, particularly when they dwell in the same house. Our fervent prayer is for the advancement of Christ's kingdom on earth and for an end to all that may hinder that great work.

Burden
Yet we feel a burden from the Lord to present another point of view (although we know that to state a different opinion can get one into difficulties these days). We do not regard ourselves as the real troublers of Israel. We believe sincerely before God and men that the recent Assembly and Commission have served only to move our Church further away from her proper foundations and to deepen the Lordšs controversy with us. As we write the situation is developing rapidly. Possibly we have reached the point of no return as a denomination. Much as we value the unity of the visible church, it looks now as if a split may be inevitable.
In the following pages we seek to inform our readers what took place at the Commission of Assembly in Edinburgh and its significance for the Free Church. You will discover how a highly-respected minister known and admired far beyond our own small Church was unjustly dismissed from his pulpit and congregation. You will learn of petitions which sought to help the tarnished reputations of innocent men and women but which were rejected by the Commission. You will see an attempt to prohibit the FCDA and to effectively end free speech within the Free Church. Please read these articles carefully and prayerfully. Ask yourself seriously, Is this the Church I belong to? Is this what we should expect from the church of Jesus Christ? And then ask yourself before God, What does the Lord require of me? What must I do?

Choices
Many are fond of telling us today that if we cannot agree with decisions of the supreme court of our Church then we face a simple choice: we can either submit to the authority of the Assembly and keep our grievances to ourselves or we should leave the Free Church and go somewhere else. But what if the matters concerned are not complex theological issues but basic things such as truth and honesty and justice? And what if the Assembly has in fact exceeded its powers and acted unlawfully? Must we then remain dumb or simply walk away? Neither course would demonstrate much zeal for the Lord or love for His cause! We are not aware that Elijah or Isaiah or Paul forsook the church of their own day because of spiritual declension or abuses in discipline or the refusal of the majority to accept and obey their message. Surely it is our duty, like these prophets and preachers of old, to lift up our voice and to testify against the sins of the church until she acknowledges the error of her ways. The Confession of Faith affirms that the decisions of assemblies are to be submitted to "if consonant [agreeable] to the word of God" [ch. 31.3]. Church courts have no business in enforcing anything but the laws of Christ and when they do this faithfully it is a great sin to disobey their decisions. But they can and do err. What then?

God or Men?
The issue is really very straightforward. To whom are we subject? Who are we answerable to at the last? Assemblies are fallible and cannot be made the rule of our faith or practice. The apostles said: "we ought to obey God rather than men" (Acts 5:29). No-one would be allowed to stop them declaring Godšs truth in God's temple. An old writer comments: "This is said in answer to the charge of disobedience to the orders and commands of the council: men, civil magistrates, and ecclesiastical rulers, are to be obeyed in things which are not repugnant to the will of God; but in things that are, God is to be obeyed, and not men". Modern Presbyterian author G I Williamson states the position exactly: "When a church assembly issues a decree or order, or makes determination of a controversy, which conflicts with the Word of God, it must be disobeyed" (author's emphasis). Christ's disciples continued steadfast in their witness on His side until they were put out of the Jewish Church for their faithfulness.

Infringements
In relation to the chief matter troubling our denomination we have seen growing infringements of the Word of God and our stated practices and procedures. These violations vary in degree and demand differing responses. A A Hodge writes of the decisions of assemblies: "If their judgments are unwise, but not directly opposed to the will of God, the private member should submit for peace' sake. If their decisions are opposed plainly to the Word of God, the private member should disregard them and take the penalty". This Assembly and Commission saw ministers and elders dissenting and protesting against decisions in a way that has not been felt necessary for a hundred years. They did so because they regarded resolutions as unconstitutional and ultra vires (beyond the Assemblyšs powers). Time and again in recent years men (and women) have acted within the structures of our church courts, committees and commissions, only to be frustrated, blocked, miscalled and finally turned away on technicalities or to fall victim to 'censures' and other 'discipline' for which no basis can be found in our Constitution, Laws or Practice.

Tide
In the Assembly the swelling tide of malpractice began in 1995 when the majority sought to close the Professor Macleod matter without the basic evidence being examined by any church court, leaving the allegations hanging over the Professoršs head and leading to a spreading fama in the Church and among the world. In October 1996 the Commission of Assembly was recalled and its earlier decisions put into reverse because they went against the wishes of the Professor and his supporters. In 1997 three respected men were 'censured' for bringing members' concerns about the Macleod matter to the Churchšs attention. In 1998 a Special Commission was set up to help bring about peace and reconciliation but it left unanswered the complaints of many who wrote of their hurts. This year we have already seen loyal members in Stornoway excommunicated in a way that was contrary to our Practice, a minister unjustly thrown out of his charge for his faithfulness to the truth and a whole presbytery rebuked for carrying out the function our Church law assigns to it. Where will it all end?

Majority
Interestingly it is those who in 1996 encouraged rebellion against the decisions of the Commission of Assembly who are now loudest in their demands for submission to its every finding. They have learned what may be done with a majority; they have rediscovered church discipline and they intend to use it. One of their number, the Rev Alex Macdonald of Buccleuch and Greyfriars, said during the debate on the Overture from the Presbytery of Edinburgh and Perth: "We must draw a line now and say, Step over it at your peril". This is from a member of the Presbytery which has signally failed to carry out proper disciplinary proceedings against one of our professors! Any church which is determined to go on her way following a course decided by majority votes rather than that charted by her Scriptural constitution is heading for the rocks. The rudder has gone. The crew is becoming mutinous. Many passengers are asleep. Worst of all, the Captain is being cast overboard. Yet this is the situation we find ourselves in. Dare we say that it seems "irremediable" from a human point of view?

Our Duty
When a vessel is in obvious danger upon stormy seas the passengers may have a strong desire to abandon ship. They may see other vessels alongside whose passage appears less troubled and wish to transfer to them. Yet the problem is not really with the vessel but with those manning her. Her original design is good. She has a proven record and has carried many passengers safely to their destination in the past. The written constitution of the Free Church is excellent.
The problem is rather with the application of that constitution and particularly in the area of discipline. Bad practice eventually makes even the best constitution effectively void. We value the Free Church and wish to see her kept from ruin. To do this we must inform our people regarding the problems and waken them to the dangers. We must oppose those ministers and elders who are setting her on a strange and perilous course. And above all we must cry to the Lord in our trouble, that He will bring us out of our distresses (Ps.107:28). May He be pleased to hasten the day of our deliverance.

Any comments or questions please E-Mail me or Rev William Macleod the editor.

[Back to Reformed Christian Pages][Back to Free Church Foundations]
[Back to Commission of Assembly Issue]