PAGE

29

31

32

33

33

35

35

36

37

38

38

39

40

41

42

ALL COMMUNICATIONS (Including those for the Committee of the Free Distribution Fund) to be addressed "Editor of the Ecclesiastical Observer, 30, Belgrave Road, Birmingham."

Editorial Notices.

FOR BIBLE LESSONS for Church Reading, see last page. FREE DISTRIBUTION of E. 0.-Will the friends who intend to aid in this work send as early as possible, that the number to be printed may be determined and thus secure us from the risk of having too many on hand, or too few to meet the demand? There are a number who certainly intend to take part in this work, who have not yet communicated.

G. D.-"Tribute to the Memory of the Apostles," out of print years since.

P. C. G. (Detroit.)-In answer to your inquiry, we might give our guess "as to why a certain American Missionary Society sent a missionary to Great Britain, as they might have done into Central Africa, entirely ignoring the churches and brethren in this country. But as you are on their side of the Atlantic, it would be better for you to inquire through the Standard or the Christian, and let the missionary men give their own answer, which no doubt would prove interesting, perhaps amusing. They might not quite like our explanation. Please do so, and let us see the result. The question is certainly a very proper one.

MCINTOSH v. NORTON.-We do not prevent discussion between these gentlemen, only so far as our pages are concerned. Mr. Norton, however, does not wish anything of the sort, seeing that Mr. M. has proved so diffuse, wandering, and unfit for such work.

MIDLAND DIVISION.-At a recent meeting of the committee, D. King resigned the treasurership, to which R. Mumby was appointed. Contributions henceforth should be addressed to him, at Long Row, Market Place, Nottingham. All other communications to be sent to W.

TER

PRICE 2d.

ERMS.-The Ecclesiastical Observer can be ordered from BOOKSELLERS by giving the name of publishers -Hall and Co., 8, Amen Corner, London, E.C.; or, post free from the EDITOR, on payment of 4s. for the year, 2s. for the half-year, or 5s. per annum to America, Australia, or Canada. Postal copies to be prepaid. Postage stamps received for sums not exceeding 5s. ADVERTISEMENTS.--Under Six lines, 2s. 6d. ; One inch, 3s. 6d.; Two inches, 6s.; Quarter page, 11s.; Three or more insertions, one-fourth less.

DUNN, CARTER, AND CO., Booksellers, opposite Post Office, Melbourne, Australia, remit orders, or supply monthly. The several friends who have hitherto received orders and payments on our behalf will, no doubt, continue to do so; or subscribers can send P.0.0. direct.

"SINCERITY" is in the printer's hands. When he gets through," which may take some four weeks, notice will be given. Orders have considerably increased, and are still coming in.

LESSONS FOR CHURCH READING.-From various directions we are informed of the adoption of the Bible Lessons, in course of publication, on the last page of each issue of the E.O. Queries as to difficulties in the chapters selected will be welcome, and find insertion.

PAYMENTS RECEIVED TO JANUARY 23.-H. ClarkeA. Darby-W. J. Williams-G. Haines-Thomas Kaye ---S. Drinkwater-Mrs. Mitchell-J. Moffitt-S. Langton-J. Partridge, for W. Lowery-G. Hay-J. Ballantyne W. Jones-J. Foster-R. Gregory-G. Tidswell -E. Henderson-C. Muirhead-F. Hill-W. DawsonE. Wright A. Murray-G. Brierley-H. CruikshankJames Nimmo-R. Burton--A. Wilkinson-W. LinnJ. Selbie R. Graham-J. Faulds-E. Underwood, for Mr. Day-J. Davies-E. Field-Thomas EdwardsJohn Hunter (Wedderburn)-D. Finlayson (Alma)—G. Duckett (Wedderburn)-J. Lowden-J. Smart-A. G. J. Forbes G. Newman.

Free Distribution Fund.-A. J. Jameson--J. Lowden -W. Johnson-H. Saltmarsh (Aus.)--H. Johnson- Ward-John Nimmo-James Nimmo-R. Thomson -E. Field-J. Sinclair, for church in Whitehaven J. Evans Thomas Kaye-W. J. Williams.

Observer, Feb. 1, '77.

REVISION OF STANDARDS.

CHURCHES outgrow their creeds, and why should they not, when their creeds are merely human compilations of centuries in which the Bible was less accessible and less understood than now? But when a church does outgrow its creed, it should abandon it. The profession of a faith not held, the shuffle of non-natural interpretation, would disgrace a secular society. On the part of a people claiming to be a Church of Christ it is miserably contemptible, leaving those in no wonderment as to the prevalence of Infidelity who come to discern that large communities are thus playing fast-and-loose with their Confessions of Faith.

The U. P. Presbytery of Paisley and Greenock has had a lively discussion upon a motion by the "Rev." David Macrae, who said, "I beg respectfully to move that the Presbytery adopt the following as an overture to the Supreme Court: That the time has come when the standards of our church ought to be revised. That they are too long, too intricate, and defeat the very object of their length and minuteness by preventing the members of the church from becoming acquainted with them. Further, that with all their voluminousness, they probably omit more than one thing which they ought to contain, and certainly contain a great many things which they ought to omitmixing up matters of opinion with matters of faith, separating Christian churches from one another, multiplying difficulties in the way of a Catholic union, and hindering in a variety of ways the progress of Christ's kingdom. That even as regards the church's own relation to its creed, 200 years' research and experience have developed differences between the professed and the actual faith of the church, and that the spectacle of a church professing to hold all these articles as articles of faith, while holding many of them only as matters of opinion, and not holding some of them at all, is a bad example to the world and demoralising to the church herself. That the continued timidity of the church in dealing with her standards in view of these facts is becoming discreditable to her faith in the abiding presence of God's Spirit; is a policy of unfaithfulness to the truth; and a policy that would be by no party more condemned than by the men who framed these standards according to the light they had, and by the Reformers whose creed has been preserved, but whose prompt and fearless loyalty to truth has been to a large extent lost. That our own church, from her history and also from her present position, as free on the one hand from entanglement with the State, and on the

other hand from union negotiations, stands now in a peculiarly favourable position for undertaking the work of revision, which important work the Synod is respectfully overtured to commence, with the view of preparing, if possible, a brief and simple formula, containing only the articles of faith which we think every man in order to belong to the Church of Christ must hold, and relegating to a separate category all points which are merely distinctive or may be regarded by the church as a desirable safeguard or protest against the errors of the time.""

No inconsiderable indictment that, but fully warranted by the facts. Mr. Macrae, however, has no will to turn his back upon human creeds. He merely wants the long one to give place to a short one, and the wrong one to make way for a right one, which right one would prove unacceptable to many Christians who hold firmly to the Bible. Presbyterian denominations may need human standards, because the Bible does not define their standing, and knows nothing whatever of their sects. But the Church of Christ had its "Confession" from the apostles, in words given by the Holy Spirit, and needs none other.

It may be interesting to hear what Mr. Macrae thinks of the creed he confessed some four years ago, on account of which confession he now holds position as a Presbyterian minister. He says, "I am well aware of the difficulty of dealing with our standards. I am aware that every proposition in that enormous compendium of Calvinistic theology has been, and can be, with more or less show of reason, defended. I thought myself at one time, that I could see a way through casuistry to a plausible reconciliation of its doctrines with my position as a minister of the gospel of salvation. But more and more I feel that for every honest mind wishing to keep his profession square with his principles and practice, the entanglements of casuistry are every day getting more intolerable

-worse for ourselves, worse for the church, worse for the cause of truth-that we cannot a moment too soon burst these entanglements asunder and step out into an honest and clear profession of our faith. My conviction is that if our people knew what these standards of our church contain-if these documents were not so long, so intricate, so full of theological subtleties as to repel inquirers and leave them in ignorance of their contents our people would, from a sense of common honesty, have long since demanded, what our ministers should long since have secured, a revision, if not a new statement, of what is believed and preached in our church. I maintain that our relationship to these so-called standards is not an honest

one; that the professed is not the actual creed of the church; that our church is professing one creed, while holding, and to a large extent preaching, another. What is our profession-The theology of the confession which is declared to be an exhibition of what is believed and taught in our Scottish churches. The confession teaches that God for His own glory has predestinated some men to be saved, but that all the rest of mankind He has predestinated to damnation and everlasting torments in hell. It teaches that while there is no fear of the elect, there is no hope for the non-elect. It teaches that God has absolutely and unchangeably fixed the very number, so that not one of them can be brought over to the ranks of the saved, preach to them and pray for them as you will. It teaches that none are redeemed by Christ but the elect only. It teaches that the rest of mankind are not only unable to believe in Christ, and beyond His power to redeem, but are brought into the world by God utterly unable to help themselves. It teaches, indeed, that God hardens them, withholding the grace by which they might have been enlightened in their understanding and wrought upon in their hearts. It teaches that by reason of the sin of Adam, apart from any fault of their own, they come into the world wholly defiled in all the faculties and parts of soul and body, utterly indisposed, disabled, and made opposite to all good, and wholly inclined to all evil. It teaches that because of this sin, which they could not and cannot help, they are bound helplessly over to the wrath of God and the curse of the law, and so made subject to spiritual, temporal, and eternal death. It teaches that even in heathen lands, where they have never heard, and therefore have had no opportunity of accepting the Gospel, they cannot be saved, no matter how earnestly they may frame their lives according to the light of nature, or the laws of that religion which they profess. It teaches that if they do wrong it is sin, and they are damned for it; and if they do right it is still sin, and they are damned all the same. If they turn to the one hand it is bad; if they turn to the other it is worse. If they obey the law of God it is sin; if they disobey it, it is worse sin. This is the doctrine of the Confession. Repent and turn to God it is declared they cannot. They cannot even make an effort that way; they are unchangeably predestinated to be damned. And after death, according to our standard, they are all cast into hell, there to endure for ever and ever unspeakable torments, both of soul and body, as long as God Himself shall exist. It teaches that of the countless myriads of babes who have died, and are dying

Observer, Feb. 1, '77.

in infancy, only the elect are saved. For the non-elect, young or old, it has no fate but the unending and unspeakable torments of hell. I ask the fathers and brethren of this Presbytery to say honestly if this is the theology they preach? I ask members of the U. P. Church to say honestly if that is the theology they hear preached? If not, then the church is professing one creed and preaching another. The moral of this is plain. If the church holds the theology of the Confession to be true, she should abide by it and preach it. If she holds it not to be true, she should not profess it. No doubt there is a great deal in the Confession that we all accept. The Confession contains some of the most admirable and concise statements of Scriptural truth that have ever been put into human language. But they are nuggets in the Westminster quartz; they are pebbles imbedded in the theology I have described. And in the form of accepting the Confession, no distinction is made between what is scriptural and what is unscriptural. Its truth and its error are equally professed as part of our faith. No doubt our church (from a motive and with a courage that did her honour) not only put a brand on sections of the Confession that gave the civil magistrate authority in the domain of conscience, but relaxed for the whole Confession the terms of subscription. The established and free churches require their office-bearers to declare that they believe the whole doctrine which the Confession contains, that they acknowledge the same as the Confession of their faith, and that they will firmly and constantly adhere thereto. In our church, office-bearers are only required to accept the Confession generally as an exhibition of the sense in which they understand the Scriptures. But the courage of this modification was greater than its practical value, for if we consider it, the general sense is worse than any of the individual propositions. The whole general sense of the Confession is deformed by the omission from its theological system of the true character of God as revealed in the Scriptures. The God of the Confession is not the God of the Bible; and God's character is the basis of all theology and 'of all Gospel preaching. Read the Confession; and then read the Bible. Look on this picture and on that. In the one, God bringing countless millions of human beings into the world utterly helpless, predestinated to everlasting torment by God's own free will. In the other, God having no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but that the wicked turn from His way and live ;'-' not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.' The Confession giving by its general sense the picture

Observer, Feb. 1, '77.

of men pleading with an inexorable God, struggling with an inexorable fate; the other giving us the picture of God pleading with man, sending forth His ministers as messengers of mercy, as though God did beseech men by us, we, in Christ's stead, praying men to be reconciled to God. The Confession teaching that Christ redeemed the elect only, that God effectually calls the elect only, that He loves only the elect. The Bible telling us that God so loved the world (not the elect, but the world') that He gave His only begotten Son that whosoever believeth on Him should not perish but have everlasting life. The Confession denying man's free will, representing him as utterly unable to turn to God, or even make the effort. The Bible giving us the picture of the prodigal son, saying, 'I will arise and go unto my father;' elsewhere saying, Whosover will, let him take of the water of life freely;' and again, 'Ye will not come unto me that ye might have life.' The general sense of the Confession is therefore the worst of it."

6

A truly horrible picture of God is thus reproduced from the Confession of Faith. When men are taught that such is the revelation which God has given of Himself, need we wonder that multitudes do not believe it, and, not discerning how widely it differs from the Bible, reject both together?

But how many in the Presbytery stood by Mr. Macrae in favour of revision? The votes were-five for, twenty-five against, with considerable disposition to "give him the stick," on account of his protest, further proceedings being delayed till next meeting.

AMERICA-THE MOODY REVIVAL.

ALL who are at a distance from the scene of the great revival now going forward in Chicago, are indebted to the public journals for knowledge of its methods and proportions. It is sufficient cause for profound gratitude that the people are being awakened to a sense of sin, and to the inquiry, "What must I do to be saved?" But when this question is propounded, it is exceedingly desirable that it shall be answered correctly. I have a few thoughts to offer, which I trust may be pondered by those conducting the people to Christ, as well as by those who are now, or may be hereafter, anxious for their own salvation.

In attempting to say anything upor this subject, particularly upon the methods now adopted, I sincerely hope to avoid on the one

hand censoriousness, and on the other hand unfaithfulness to truth and the Master whom I try to serve in all good conscience.

It is very noticeable that present methods are a new departure in respect to the methods which prevailed fifty years ago and since that time. In many particulars the recent methods are an improvement, because more Scriptural. The responsibility of the sinner for his conversion. is being urged now with great vehemence, without an attendant theory of conversion which requires entire passivity on his part. As I understand, he is urged now to a positive decision to accept and serve Christ without waiting for some tidal wave to waft him, while resisting, over his unbelief into the currents of a living faith. Instead of expecting the Holy Spirit, by an independent process, to invade and control the sinner's moral nature without instrumentalities, it is now the effort to secure the cooperation of the Holy Spirit with Christians to convert the sinner through the instrumentality of Divine truth. Hence Bible readings and special meetings for earnest inquiry, where Christians are supposed to exert their persuasive powers to induce a surrender of the will to Christ, to induce the sinner to a speedy decision.

The principle involved is evidently right, whatever objections may lie against some of the details of its application. In regard to the question, "What must I do to be saved?" it is thought by a religious body in this State, numbering not less than 60,000 communicants, that the answer usually given in the public preachings and inquiry meetings is mis-leading;

not that the answer is so when set in the circumstances under which it was given to the Philippian jailer, but because, practically, it is now changed from a generic to a specific. In the Times report of the 14th inst., Mr. Sankey is said to have read Acts xvi., introducing for comment the question, "What must I do to be saved?" as asked by the jailer, and the answer of Paul, "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved." Upon which Rev. C. L. Thompson said, "You cannot be saved by repentance; you cannot be saved by prayer; you cannot be saved by your feelings; you cannot be saved by your moral character. You must be saved, if saved at all, by believing in Jesus Christ. The questions were often asked: How do I know whether I have the right kind of faith? How can I test the sincerity of my faith? If their faith was of the right kind it would lead them into perfect obedience to God. man's faith stands the crucible it is all right."

If a

Precisely so. Well said. But to what extent must the sinner obey Divine commands in order to test his faith, so that he can be sure that it