|
A Defence The following is a speech prepared by the Editor but not delivered at the Commission because of the lack of time and because the essential points were covered by others. It is included here because it summarises the points made by the various ministers in defending themselves. I understand that it is only at this stage of relevancy that I will be able to make a reasoned defence of my actions. First I would like to make some brief general points. 1. If precedent is anything to go by, something is missing from this Libel that I have received. When I brought a Libel earlier this year against Principal Donald Macleod, it was rejected by the Courts of the Church because I had not included documentary evidence that I had first consulted privately with Principal Macleod. There was no documentary evidence included with this Libel of any private consultation with me. Obviously it is one law for Principal Macleod and another law for others. What do technicalities matter, or Constitution, or laws providing you can get a majority vote? 2. I think it is bad practice in church discipline to use the blunt instrument of Contumacy rather than dealing with the real issues. Contumacy should only be used in church discipline when the individual fails to appear after being duly cited. 3. I believe it is contrary to natural justice to call individuals to the bar of the Assembly in order to try to get them to incriminate themselves. This is the sort of thing that is done in Third World dictatorships. We first saw this method of establishing guilt being used against the Rev Maurice Roberts, then later in the case of the Rev David Murray and myself and at the last Commission in the case of the ten ministers who were cited there and then to the bar and asked three questions: “Were your names added to the letter to the Commission with your knowledge and consent? Are you prepared to have your name removed? Will you resign office from the FCDA and sever your connection with that body?” “No!” “Then you are guilty of continued and wilful contumacy and indeed this is committed in facie ecclesiae (in the face of the Court)”. 4. The Finding of the Commission on 7th October 1999 declared “that the Free Church Defence Association is pursuing a divisive course from the government and discipline of the Free Church of Scotland” and “that the office-bearers of the FCDA have adopted a position that is in violation of their position as office-bearers of the Free Church of Scotland”. We have here a new declaratory act, and it was not passed by means of the Barrier Act nor even by an Assembly but only by a Commission and yet it is proposed to depose ministers on the basis of it. This is altering our Constitution and indeed making an addition to our ordination vows and is therefore ultra vires. 5. I believe it is a denial of my constitutional rights and indeed my human rights that I am to be tried before the Assembly rather than the Presbytery. The same body is acting as prosecution, witnesses, judge and jury, and I am being denied my right of appeal to another Church Court.
The Libel Itself It begins by referring to Hebrews 13:17 on the duty to obey and submit to them that have the rule over you. With this I totally agree providing the command is according to the Word of God. Similarly it quotes Matthew 18:17 “if he neglect to hear the church let him be unto thee as an heathen man”. Strong words! If the hate mail that I receive from some in the majority party in the Church is anything to go by there is every intention to carry it out and to treat me and my colleagues as heathen. I have no problem listening to the Church providing the Church is speaking the Word of God and not asking me to do something that is sinful.
Westminster Confession The Libel then proceeds to quote the Westminster Confession and Ordination Vows on the duty of submission to the Courts of the Church. Again I have no problem with this providing the Courts act according to the Scriptures and the Constitution of the Church. But if the Courts act contrary to the Constitution I am duty bound not to submit. If the Commission of Assembly commands me to tell a lie or to allow an injustice against anyone, I must not obey. Surely we admit that Courts can act wrongly. Our Confession states: “All Synods...may err, and many have erred; therefore they are not to be made the rule of faith or practice, but to be used as a help in both” (WCF 31:4). The idea that you must always obey the majority in a Court or Assembly is Papal rather than Presbyterian. The Church is never infallible. All authority comes from the King and Head of the Church through the Bible which is our only rule. That means that in looking at the relevancy of the Libel it is essential also to look at the rightness or wrongness of the command that we have disobeyed.
The Command On 7th October 1999 the Commission of the General Assembly of the Free Church of Scotland declared “that the Free Church Defence Association is pursuing a divisive course from the government and discipline of the Free Church of Scotland” and “that the office-bearers of the FCDA have adopted a position that is in violation of their position as office-bearers of the Free Church of Scotland” and they called upon “the FCDA to disband immediately, requesting that they give notice of their having disbanded to the Principal Clerk by 30th November 1999 at the latest”. The FCDA is declared to be divisive and its immediate disbandment demanded. We are being found contumacious because we will not agree to leave the FCDA. But why does the FCDA exist? We do not wish to be divisive nor does it give us any pleasure to see the mess our Church is in. Some of us have been many years in the ministry of this Church and love it with all our heart. We have given our lives to its service.
The FCDA is Needed The FCDA came into existence because some of us believed that a powerful party within the Church was undermining the discipline and the worship of our Church. The FCDA sought to reverse that trend. As everyone knows the FCDA is especially concerned about the continuing and increasing allegations against a certain professor. It is particularly because of this that there is such bitter hostility to us. I and two other ministers were prepared to produce the evidence that this individual had seriously breached the Ninth Commandment and at our own risk we were prepared to prove the charge in a Church Court. The Rev Alex MacDonald warned me before the last Assembly that if I continued with this I would be libelled. But I am not prepared to be intimidated. Is that the right way to handle cases of discipline? Is it right to attempt to frighten those who bring evidence so that they will not pursue their complaint? The FCDA must continue to exist in order to call the Church back to the proper exercise of Church discipline. Without the FCDA there will be continuing attempts to brush everything under the carpet in the interests of a false unity and love. Discipline has correctly been recognised since the Reformation as a mark of the true church.
The Division Everyone knows that the division in the Free Church today is especially centered upon one man. The June Commission stated: “They instruct all office-bearers and members to abide by the 1995 Finding and, furthermore, not to pursue this matter now or henceforth in any form whatsoever”. I believe this finding was ultra vires. Ministers and others have a constitutional freedom to write about, comment on, or preach on any finding of the General Assembly. If it was a judicial finding, come to after a trial, then it could not be overturned. But there was no trial. I was a Commissioner in 1995. No charges were mentioned and no evidence was presented. The 1995 Finding and also the June 1999 Finding can be overturned. All it needs is the majority at the next General Assembly. Any administrative finding can be overturned. It is incompetent and intolerable to try to make it final and to forbid all discussion of it. I believe that whoever the minister is, he should be treated the same way and evidence of misdemeanours against any minister should not be brushed under the carpet. Paul exhorts us to “Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump” (1Cor.5:7). One Achan brought a great curse and disaster upon Israel. It is not just a matter of the Professor himself. My greater concern is for the many ministers and others who were publicly called by him and his counsel, conspirators and liars. If they are conspirators they ought to be disciplined and if not he ought to be disciplined for falsely accusing his brethren. And then there is the problem of the many in our church who are prepared to defend the Professor whatever he did, or will do, and to use fair means or foul to defend him. I believe our Church is morally undermined and paralysed through lack of discipline or the misuse of discipline.
Dissent, Protest, then leave it with God But it has been said, “You have dissented and protested. Now leave it with God”. But God requires action from us. He will hold us guilty if we fail to keep proper moral standards in the ministry of the Church. When there was a moral problem with one of the members of the church in Corinth, Paul demanded action. He would not allow them just to leave it to God. The Assembly Clerk says “Dissent and Protest, and then leave it with God and if you are not prepared to do that you should leave the Church”. But I don’t want to leave the Church. I was born, baptised, brought up in this Church. I have been in the ministry of this Church for twenty-three years. I have served it to the best of my ability and in many different capacities. I love the Free Church, its history and its Constitution. I just want my Church to remain what it has ever been, renowned across the whole world for Reformed theology, worship and discipline, a Church characterised by holiness and faithfulness. Moderator, the problem in the Free Church today is not the 30 or so ministers but the one. It is possible to cast out the thirty to protect the one but you will not succeed. Every one of you here today will be held responsible before God and man for the outcome of this trial. You can hide behind no one. You know what it is all about. What is my duty? To join others in sweeping evil things under the carpet, hoping that it will go away. No! The Bible says: “Cry aloud, spare not, lift up thy voice like a trumpet, and show my people their transgression, and the house of Jacob their sins” (Is.58:1). I will do that. I must do that. You call it contumacy. You say “Cast out the bond woman and her sons”. I call it faithfulness and obedience to God’s Word.
Any comments
or questions please E-Mail
me or Rev William Macleod
the Editor. |