The history of a denomination: Epilogue.

The history of the United Free Church of Scotland from 1900 to 1929 is very instructive. The thread that runs through it all is that of the United Free Church's relationship with the Church of Scotland. Open hostility in 1900, when the Church of Scotland was rarely referred to by its own name, and disparagingly called 'the Establishment' mellowed into friendship, and friendship became Union! What had once been the leading party, the advocates of disestablishment, became irrelevant and embarassing. The reversal was almost total! Those who had been for leaving the dissenters in 1900 without property or funds or name found themselves the dissenters in 1929.

Just as the Union of 1900 had been seen as a triumphant new beginning, so was the Union of 1929. And in both cases the expected revival did not happen. Why? Well, just as George Reith of Edinburgh said that the dissenters of 1929 might have been better called 'the Disunited Free Church', agreed in little else beyond their opposition to Union, so those who went into the Union disagreed on every point except for the desirability of Union! Liberals who denied the inerrancy of Scripture mingled with stanch Westminster Calvinists. It was a Union in organisation only, not in mind or in heart. In effect, the blessing of God was being asked on that which He had not commanded. The Church of Scotland experienced the same decline as other British denominations. Many of the fine buildings owned by the United Free congregations that went into the Union, but also by Church of Scotland congregations, are now closed. Some have found alternative uses that retained their original interiors and character, most have been gutted and turned into offices or flats or houses. Others are derelict. Some have been demolished. On each is written the old word ‘Ichabod’. The glory has departed.
Am I saying that revival can only be expected in doctrinally orthodox circles, that we need to have our theology right before God will grant a revival? Certainly not! But we cannot BRING ABOUT a revival by ignoring God’s commandments. The main instruments in the revivals of the 18th century in England were ministers in the Church of England, a body which had lost its way.
But what I am saying is that organisations can never replace God’s presence in the Church, and THAT is what we need.

The history of a denomination: XXX.

1929 saw another General Election, and another narrow victory for the Socialists. Ramsay MacDonald became Prime Minister, but James Barr was not given a seat in the Cabinet. The result had no effect on the Union Assembly.
The United Free Church Assembly reconvened on 1st October 1929, and when they did there was a fine silver casket on the clerks' table, presented along with the freedom of the city of Edinburgh to the Moderator, Principal Alexander Martin. It was a gift from the city honouring him for his role in the Union.
The last report of the Union Committee was given. It was mostly taken up with the property agreement reached with the dissenting body of the Church. In addition to their churches and manses they had been awarded £25,000 and were allowed to retain the name of 'The United Free Church of Scotland' provided that they affixed the word 'Continuing' to it for five years. The difference between this and the harsh treatment meted out to the minority in 1900 is startling at first, but only until one realises that the 1929 settlement was deliberately designed to prevent a repetition of the events of 1900-1904 embarassing the Union.
The continuing body still continues under the name of the United Free Church of Scotland. It is a broadly evangelical body, although it has approved the ordination of women since the 1930s. Congregations from both United Presbyterian and Free Church backgrounds adhered to the Continuing party.
After some routine business had been done, Dr. Harvey moved that the House adjourn, to meet the following day in the Hall at 10 AM, then to proceed to the High Kirk of St. Giles at 11 to meet with the Church of Scotland Assembly for worship and thanksgiving before proceeding to the Hall of Assembly in Annandale Street where the Union would take place and the first General Assembly of the new Church of Scotland would take place.
Dr. Forrester, representing the dissenters, moved that the Assembly should not proceed with the Union, but rather adjourn to meet the next day in St. Andrew's Hall, Glasgow. Should Dr. Harvey's motion be adopted, he said, the minority would make no protest, but the Church would divide. Of course the Union went ahead, and the United Free Church split. The minority went to have their Assembly elsewhere.

Meanwhile the majority of the United Free Church were going into Union with the Church of Scotland. That night the Lord Provost, Magistrates and Town Council of Edinburgh held a reception in Parliament House to which the members of the two uniting Assemblies were invited. There was something of a carnival atmosphere in the Athens of the North.
The morning of the Union was wild and stormy with heavy rain and high winds. The two Assemblies met separately for the last time at ten in the morning, and at eleven they processed, headed by their respective Moderators, from their halls. Crowds lined the routes.
Two two processions met at the junction of Bank Street and the High Street, where the Moderators shook hands. A great cheer went up, and as the processions merged into one the crowd spontaneously began to sing. The song was one of the old Psalms, and the tune was 'Eastgate.'

"Behold how good a thing it is,
And how becoming well,
Together such as brethren are
In unity to dwell."

About two thousand ministers and elders entered St. Giles Kirk by the great west door for a service of thanksgiving. Though the Union was not formally consummated for some hours, it was really already a fact. The old United Free Church, formed in 1900, was no more. Most of it had merged into the Church of Scotland, and a few dissenters remained to re-fashion a Church according to their views.
The Act of Union was signed in the great Annandale Street Hall, and there finally the history of the United Free Church as formed in 1900 came to an end.

God willing, next time we shall consider some of the lessons of this history.

The history of a denomination: XXIX.

The Assembly of 1929 had a festival air to it. It was to be the last General Assembly of the United Free Church of Scotland as constituted by the Union of 1900.
The Lord High Commissioner, representing the crown, was H.R.H. Prince Albert, Duke of York, a sign of the deep interest the King felt in the events taking place in Scotland between the two great Churches. Principal Martin was installed as United Free Church Moderator, and he wore the traditional robes. As his great predecessor Robert Rainy had led the Free Church majority in 1900, so Alexander Martin would lead the United Free majority now. In his opening address he naturally spoke of the great historical processes now coming to a climax. The address was broadcast on the BBC throughout Scotland.
The United Free Church Assembly wanted to enter the Union without a debt. For one thing, to enter in debt might make it appear that they had discovered the voluntary system of supporting the Church did not actually work, and so they were running to where the money - in the form of endowments - was. The main source of debt was, as ever, foreign missions. As a debate went on about setting up an enquiry, Dr. J. Robertson Cameron of Kintyre rose and said boldly, "My suggestion is that we, here and now, every man and woman of us, rise up and wipe off this deficit, and I shall begin with THAT!"
He put down a cheque for fifty pounds on the table. During the debate alone, nearly three thousand pounds was given. Although Assembly rules forbade a collection being taken up, an open suitcase was left on the table, watched over by two clerks. By the end of the Assembly it was bulging with cash and cheques amounting to well over six thousand pounds.
How many matters would be better dealt with by prompt action, rather than giving them to committees to be sat upon?
The day of the Union report was like a fete, the appearance increased by the presentation of a huge bouquet of pink roses and ferns by the Church of Scotland Union committee.
It was reported that of the 63 home presbyteries, 61 had approved of the Unite Free Church Declaration that her principles remained intact and only one had not. Of the overseas presbyteries, 10 approved, and 5 had not sent in any return. Every Presbytery had approved the plan of Union and the basis of Union, with the exception of Manchuria, which had not sent a return. Under the Barrier Act the plan was passed. Union had been declared for! A few kirk sessions and congregations had disapproved, but not enough to damage or derail the plan. The Declaraction was adopted without even an official opposition amendment.
When the Union Committee's report was called for, a protest was tabled by Dr. Forrester, signed by himself and fifteen others. Dr. Drummond, giving the report, presented it with all the force and winsomeness he was capable of. As for Barr and Forrester, they merely paraded the old arguments, heard by all and convincing to very few. It was too long, and not really relevant. Barr found problems where few others could see them, and finally only 39 supported his anti-union amendment. It was James Barr's last speech in the Assembly. Many regretted the departure of the dissenters, but the Union would not be wrecked on so small a rock, and Barr and his brethren went forth. Those who had argued that the minority of 1900 should give up all its rights to its property were now in the position of that minority, and hoping for better treatment.
The Church of Scotland also voted for Union. Although Union might have taken place at once, it was deferrd until 2nd October while final preparations were made for a great public Union such as that of 1900.

And so, amid brilliant sunshine, the last General Assembly of the Free Church of Scotland (which is what our illustration shows) broke up. When next they met, it would be to form a part of what had been the dream of Principal Rainy's biographer, a Church in Scotland 'United, National and Free'.

That union, God willing, shall be our subject next time.

The history of a denomination: XXVIII.

The Assembly of 1928 was the penultimate full General Assembly of the United Free Church of Scotland. The two Churches had come to the very brink, and there was no turning back. Shades of 1899 arose for United Free Churchmen. Just as then, two great Churches were about to unite, and one was about to divide. Yet, in a delicious piece of historical irony, the central issue in that division was the same as that of 1900 - and the men who were now the dissenters were those who had been most enthusiastic then! So true it is that 'as ye sow, so shall ye reap.'
The Moderator of that Assembly was Dr. Harry Miller of Edinburgh. Another former Glasgow student, Miller was famous for his work in the slum district of Edinburgh with the rather ironic name of 'the Pleasance'. Once the site of a royal garden, it had become a sink of iniquity. But the Pleasance Church, under Dr. Miller, had pursued vigorous evangelism, and now it was a garden of the Lord. Miller, born in 1869, was still a relatively young man, and they dubbed him 'The Boy Moderator'. He spoke on 'Our Heritage and Our Task,' with of course the Union in view. Principal Martin remained in his place as the de facto leader of the Church, and he would once again be called to the Moderator's Chair for the Uniting Assembly of 1929.
Business still had to be carried out, and once again the College Committee had to fill up a vacated place. Dr. Clow of Glasgow had resigned as Professor of Christian Ethics and Practical Training and as Principal. He was granted the status of Principal emeritus. The office of Principal was filled by the most senior of the remaining Professors, Dr. W. M. MacGregor, New Testament Professor. Arthur J. Gossip of Aberdeen was elected to the Chair of Christian Ethics and Practical Training.
As usual there were distinguished representatives of foreign Churches in the Assembly. The most notable of these was M. Paul Fuzier of Paris, from the Evangelical Reformed Church of France. He was of genuine Huguenot stock, with forefathers who had suffered and died for the Faith once for all delivered. One had spent the ten years from 1700 to 1710 chained to an oar in a royal galley for the crime of possessing a Huguenot communion token. What is worse, the man was already seventy when he was so chained!
France was even then the most secular country in Europe. Explaining this fact, M. Furzier noted that the average Frenchman was suspicious of Christianity because he mistook Roman Catholicism for it.
The visit of Dr. J. Montgomery Campbell of Dumfries, the Church of Scotland Moderator, was the most cordial of all the visits - for the next time the Moderators of the Churches met it would be to merge both Churches into one, and there would be one Moderator and one Assembly.
The hall was crowded for the report of the Union Committee. The result had already been anticipated, of course, but it remained to be seen what James Barr and his cohorts would do. It was moved that the Assembly, instead of immediately sending down the draft Uniting Act to the Presbyteries under the Barrier Act, to declare that the time for Union had come, and to adjourn the Committee until November, thus giving the Presbyteries a few more months to scrutinize the terms of Union. The Act would then, if appropriate, be sent down. Every attempt had been made to accomodate the dissenters. What was wrong, Dr. Drummond, the representative of the Committee, aske, with the plan? What was the objection? If it was to the 'vestiges of establishment', well, vestiges are the remains of what WAS, not something that IS. No, what they had was disestablishment in all but name. What had happened in Scotland was practically what had happened in Wales - and that HAD been called Disestablishment!
To the joy of the House, several of James Barr's former partisans now came over to the other side. But Barr was not cowed. Now he launched his last speech. He knew that he could not prevent Union, so he threw caution to the wind. No more delaying motions, no more talk of a process of consultation. He laid down HIS demands. It amounted to this: that the Church of Scotland must be publically humiliated by Parliament (strange, from one who professed a dislike to Parliament meddling in religious matters). First a bill must be passed declaring the Church of Scotland no longer to be by law established and that the compulsory payment of the land-charge that supported the Church had to be abolished. Commutation he declared to be 'endowment for evermore', forgetting that, if that was so, the disestablished Welsh Church had been 'endowed for evermore. He had not changed - but the Church had.
A more extreme amendment was suggested by Mr. Small of North Berwick. He wanted the Church of Scotland to divest itself of its endowments in order to please a few United Free Churchmen. No-one even seconded him. In a vote only 53 declared for Barr's motion, and in the end some 23 signed the formal dissent with him - no more than had formed the despised 'Wee Frees' in 1900.
The Assembly adjourned on 30th May to meet again on 21st November. It was on 20th November that Principal Martin was unanimously appointed Moderator of the 1929 Assembly - the very last of the United Free Church as it then stood.
The final sessions of the United Free Church Assembly of 1928 found that the plan of Union was approved. Dr. Martin declared that the principles of the Church were intact, so, "If Mr. Weir (one of the other dissenters) means leaving us, he need not think to carry the principles and constitution of our Church away with him, like another samson carrying off the doors and posts of the city. May I recall to the House the words of that narrative? 'And he arose at midnight, and took the doors of the gate of the city, and the two posts with them, BAR AND ALL, and put them upon his shoulders, and carried them up to the top of an hill that is before Hebron'."
The joke convulse the Assembly with laughter. Seriously, Barr and his party would be left with nothing but Disestablishment as their principle. While they might talk about preserving the historic testimony for liberty, the United Church would be as free as they were!
Only 48 voted with Barr, and only 27 signed the protest against union. This time there was a desire to reach a property settlement with the seceders. But only once Union was achieved and it was known who was in and who was out would that be done.
Meanwhile the Church of Scotland had adopted the Union report. The way was clear. All that remained now was for the Presbyteries to approve Union itself. All Scotland waited for the result, the Assemblies of 1929.

And that, God willing, will be our subject next time.

The history of a denomination: XXVII.

The United Free Church met with some sorrow in 1927. Dr. Archibald Henderson, one of the chief architects of the Union between the United Free Church and the Church of Scotland, had died six weeks before the date set for the Assembly. Yet the Union was not founded on him, and new leaders had risen up. Henderson's mantle had fallen on Principal Martin of New College. It was nevertheless regretted that Henderson would not live to see the union that he had worked so long for.
The Moderator was Dr. James Weatherhead of Dundee, another former Free Church minister. Dr. Weatherhead had planted a Church in Giffnock in 1900, and since 1905 he had been minister of United Free St. Paul's, Dundee. Dr. Weatherhead was an energetic man. In his address he spoke on two questions, 'What is wrong with the world?' and 'What is wrong with the Church?' Dealing mainly with the second question, he referred to criticisms of the Church that were common, but without foundation. He indicated the evil influences working on the minds of people, a cold, materialistic philosophy, a modern paganism. What was the answer? The Church had to keep on teaching the same message - the Gospel. Yes, it must be ensured that the message was preached so that people understood it, but fundementally it had to remain the same message.
The United Free Church Semi-Jubilee Thanksgiving Fund report was most encouraging. It had reached the desired sum - £100,000 - and therefore the foreign missions fund was saved. They could go forward still!
Principal Martin retired from his Chair of Apologetics at New College that year, but he retained his principalship, and his leadership of the Union movement. The Chair of Church History in the Glasgow College was also vacant, since Dr. Moffatt had been called from that Chair to Union Seminary, New York (notoriously liberal).
Although the natural thought was of replacing the men, Dr. Troup of Brughty Ferry moved for delay, suggesting that in view of the coming Union, when changes would have to be made in the Colleges, it would be prudent not to be appointing new professors who might have to be removed in a year or so. He was overruled, and Mr. Daniel Lamont was appointed to the Edinburgh Chair and Mr. W. D. Niven to the Glasgow Chair.
But everything else faded into the background compared to the Union Report. With amazing rapidity the joint-committee had come to agreement on the plan and basis of union. Everything seemed ready. Principal Martin spoke of Henderson as a Moses come to the verg of Jordan. Now the Moses was dead, and the Joshua (Martin never made the comparison, of course, but it was obvious to others) was ready to lead the people over the Jordan of Union and into a new land.
The plan of union provided, he pointed out, everything that was necessary. Most importantly, it provided freedom. Freedom from state control and freedom of conscience within the United Church. Martin invited James Begg and all his party to join the United Church. Of course they refused. They argued for delay, brought up hypothetical objections, insisted that everything - every jot and tittle - be settled before Union. They forgot that everything had not been settled in 1900. One of the silliest objections was to the name 'the Church of Scotland'. The objector said it was exclusive, and he preferred 'the Presbyterian Church of Scotland' - despite the fact that there were at least four other Presbyterian Churches in Scotland who would have been excluded by that name.
The debate lasted for five hours. On a division the vote was found to be 675 in favour of going forward and 126 preferring delay. The fact that the opposition vote was for delay, not against Union, must be noted well.
Dr. Norman Maclean, Church of Scotland Moderator, spoke of the great and wonderful change from the days of his youth when the two Assemblies had breated out threatenings - though not, it must be said in all fairness, slaughter - at each other across the Grassmarket. Those days were over, and soon there would only be one Assembly on the Grassmarket.

How that happened we shall see, God willing, next time.

The history of a denomination: XXVI.

(Blogger's playing silly beggars, so no illustration today)
1926 was notorious as the year of the General Strike, when the Trade Unions tried to overrule constitutional government and hold the country to ransom by a mass walk-out. It was over before the Assembly met, ended as Mr. Baldwin said, by "the triumph of commonsense." The Socialists had planned to bring down the government, and although they succeeded in costing the United Kingdom millions, they failed. There was no revolution.
The Assemblies were somewhat disturbed by the strike. They had to meet on the arranged days, but the strike affected public transport. Officials of the Assemblies arranged to meet on 18th May to transact necessary business, then the Assemblis were adjouned until 22nd June. In fact the strike only lasted from the 4th to the 12th of May, and the Assemblies were able to resume on 1st June.
The Moderator of the United Free Assembly in 1926 was Dr. George Herbert Morrison of Wellington Church, Glasgow (it has already been noted that the cities were over-represented among the Moderators of the United Free Church). Dr. Morrison was a Glasgow man, educated at the University and the United Free Church College there.
The 1926 Assembly, as well as being affected by Communism, was also affected by feminism (though at that time there was no thought of calling it Evangelical). Four Presbyteries, one in the mission field, sent an overture to the Assembly concerning the ordination of women to the eldership and ministry. Although claiming to be based on Scripture, the arguments in favour of the motion noticable ignored the Bible passesages that did NOT work in their favour. One man, Dr. Frank Knight, argued that 'lalein', the Greek verb rendered 'speak' in I Corinthians 14.34 meant 'to chatter'. One wonders how competent Dr. Knight's Greek really was if he thought that!
The Assembly did not just dismiss the proposal, but it was thought to be the wrong time to be dealing with such a serious matter, since the United Free Church was considering union with another Church that was not even considering the matter. After a healthy debate the question was dropped and the feminists were left unsatisfied.
The miners' strike was still going on when the Assembly met, and they recieved a deputation from the Scottish miners made up of three Socialist MPs. The deputies were less than honest with the Assembly, apparently forgetting that many of the delegates in the Assembly knew as much as they did about the miners - if not more. They knew many miners did not approve of the strke and were opposed to the policy of the Trade Unions. The Moderator politely thanked the deputies for their address, expressed sympathy with the miners, and explained that the United Free Church of Scotland could not pass an opinion on the situation.
Stanley Baldwin himself visited the 1926 Assembly and spoke to them, expressing his sympathy with them for seeking points of agreement rather than disagreement. The Moderator thanked Mr. Baldwin and presented a bouquet of flowers to Mrs. Baldwin.
Dr. McCallum of Larkhall (near Glasgow), Moderator of the Church of Scotland, came with the greetings of his brethren. He said that the friendly conference between the two Churches had developed into a genuine 'courtship', and the Auld Kirk was only waiting for the United Free Church to 'name the day'. The Church of Scotland was now free from state control, what more was there to hinder Union?
As Dr. Henderson was incapacitated by the infirmities that would ultimately end his life, the report of the Conference Committee was given by Principal Martin of New College. Once again, as in 1900, the Principal of New College would lead the Union campaign - but Robert Rainy had hardly been the man who would lead a movement towards union with the Church of Scotland!
The Church had been polled on the question of Union, and the turnout had been low. It seemed most members of the United Free Church did not really care what their Church was called! Even in congregations which had voted against the union less than half of the membership had voted. Some of this was undoubtedly due to members who did not actually attend Church at all,, but that still left a lot of apathetic members. Martin pleaded to and end of 'ecclesiastical disputation'. The deliverance of the Assembly approved the report and proposed to appoint a special committee of a hundred members to prepare, in conjunction with a Church of Scotland committee, a provisional basis and plan of union.
Of course there was opposition. 285 congregations had declared against Union and 475 were, in the opinion of Mr. A. M. Smith of Moffat, 'seriously divided' (according to a very generous definition of 'seriously'). It was observed by a member of the Conference Committee that he had already heard all the speeches on the opposition side several times. The vote was 631 in favour of going forward and 115 for delay.
The Conference Committee was discharged, and in its place was appointed a new Committee. Offcially it retained the old name, but in fact it was known by a new name - the UNION Committee.

God willing, next time we shall see how that committee, and the rest of the Church, conducted itself through the Assembly of 1927.

The history of a denomination: XXV.

The Assembly of 1925 met in a very different political atmosphere. The Socialist government was no more, and the Prime Minister was Stanley Baldwin, a Tory (see picture). The country was politically stable again, and the Church of Scotland (Property and Endowments Act) 1925 had been passed and recieved the Royal Assent (this is more of a formality than anything else), clearing the second of the main obstacles to Union out of the way. The United Free Church had stood for 25 years and celebrations were planned -especially since few expected she would have fifty years, much less a centenary, in her present state. Perhaps a 'rump' of a United Free Church would see fifty, but not the united Church as it stood in 1925.
The Moderator in that memorable year was Dr. James Harvey of United Free Lady Glenorchy's, Edinburgh, Senior Principal Clerk of the Assembly.
Of the extra £20,000 needed by the Church's foreign missions, £18,000 had been raised. However £11,000 of expected income had fallen away due to a decrease in income from invested legacies. The Committee was intensely worried, but once again they were enabled to continue, making savings in administration and other matters that did not interfere with the work of overseas mission.
James Barr resigned from his post as Home Mission Secretary due to his victory in the general election. He had stood as Independent Labour candidate for Motherwell and won easily, defeating the sitting member, a Communist who had sealed his doom by sending a telegram reading 'Motherwell has declared for Moscow' to the Russian Soviet after the victory that had put him in place. Motherwell immediately declared against Moscow at the next opportunity. Barr's engergy was thrown into his work as an MP, but he remained the leader of his party in the Assembly, trying to use his position at Westminster to affect the Union plans.
Field-Marshal Earl Haig spoke to the Assembly on behalf of the British Legion, calling on their support for the institution of November 11th as Rememberance Day. The Church agreed.
Brotherly love from the Church of Scotland was in evidence at the visit from 'over the way'. One of the Church of Scotland Commissioners, Lord Sands, freely confessed that he had in his early days come to hate the Free Church with a violent hatred. That old hatred had passed away - as hatreds on the other side had. Abroad the Church of Scotland and United Free Church congregations in Central Africa had united, and at home the Church of Scotland was in full control of its property. Union negotiations proper could now begin. The Churches sought to prepare for a formal Union process most saw would begin in 1926, if a two-thirds majority in both Churches after consultation thought that the main obstacles had been removed.
James Barr moved an amendment denything that they HAD been removed and in his speech he threatened secession. Dr. Henderson declared that the obstacles to union WERE removed, the door was open - all they had to do was step through it. It would be a matter of the two Churches acting together. The state, he said, would be no-where. It was a speech worthy of a Moses - and like Moses, Dr. Henderson would not enter into the rest of his people - this was his last Assembly.
The vote was taken, and James Barr's motion was defeated. More hearteningly, the vote was only 104 in favour of James Barr.

In his closing address the Moderator referred to the history of the United Free Church, a history soon, it was hoped, to merge again with the Church of Scotland from which it had been separated. How this movement went in 1926 will be, God willing, or subject next time.

The history of a denomination: XXIV.

The opening of the United Free Church Assembly of 1924 was broadcast on the BBC (radio, of course). It also had a Lord High Commissioner who was not from the nobility (or the 'nonconformist nobility' such as Lloyd-George), but he was the Socialist MP Mr. James Brown, a working coal-miner.
The Socialists were in office, and the Prime Minister, Mr. Ramsay MacDonald (illustrated), was a United Free Churchman. It was thought by some that a miner Lord High Commissioner might give offence. He did, but to some of his own side when he said that the aristocracy weren't at all bad, really.
The Moderator in 1924 was Dr. Alexander S. Inch of the United Free High Church, Dumbarton. A large man, he was nicknamed 'the Square Inch' by his friends from New College. Indeed it had been thought that the Moderator's chair would have to be enlarged to admit him! Mercifully it was just large enough. Dr. Inch's opening address dealt with the Christian pastorate and was a call on ministers to turn their attention back to PROCLAIMING Christ, not just explaining and defending Him.
Again the United Free Church foreign missions were in need of money. And this should not be wondered at, if they were agressively expanding the work and making Christ known where before He was not. Many were being reached, and Churches were being formed on the mission field. But success requires money, and missionary giving was not expanding as had been hoped. It was suggested that the work might have to be cut back, but that the Assembly would not do. They knew that it would be an act of flagrant disobedience to Him who said 'go ye into all the world.'
William Watson of Alloa (a plac in Scotland, not as one might think, a South Sea island) made an impassioned appeal to the membership, and a motion was proposed that the missions be carried on without curtailment for a year while the Church raised the £20,000 extra funds needed. The Moderator said he would be glad to go around the galleries and take a collection in his hat but feared it would not be practical (some of the aisles and gangways were rather narrow). Before the end of the evening £1000 had been promised. Before the end of the Assembly nearly five thousand punds had been given and another thousand promised.
It was a good thing that the missions had not been cut back, for 1924 was the centenary of the undivided Church of Scotland's historic motion approving foreign missions. Before then the Church of Scotland, dominated by the 'Moderate' party, had disapproved of them, leaving it to the Baptists and other nonconformists to take the Gospel 'into all the world'. When Dr. Inch crossed 'over the way' to the Church of Scotland Assembly, he carried with him the congratulations of the United Free Church on the anniversary.
The question of 'spiritual healing' came up at this Assembly and passed on to a less than enthusiastic committee, many of whom one suspects were confirmed as cessationists by the way the issue was shuufled off onto them.
The change of government was a cause for concern in view of the Union negotiations. It threw everything into a temporary uncertainty. Dr. Henderson pointed out that the Church of Scotland had placed their temporalities in the hands of the government for a final settlement so that afterwards the Church would be able to do what she pleased with them. The opposition continued to presss for some sort of disendowment, forgetting that one of the conditions on which the Church of Scotland had entered into Union talks was that her property not be secularized but retained for religious purposes. And what, we would ask, would do the nation more good than that?
It was at this Assembly that the opposition vote reached its high water-mark - 138 to 375. With such a strong position as a minority, James Barr and his fellows began to talk of division if union was agreed on any terms but their own. A group called the United Free Church Association had been formed to prosecute this aim, which seemed to many to be the relic of a bygone and largely irrelevant age. An attempt to have the Assembly condemn this group was defeated by those who argued that to do such a thing would give the Association a legitimacy it did not deserve.

In his closing address the Moderator reminded the Assembly that the question of 'how to reach the masses' came down to reaching, not a 'mass' of people, but individuals with the Gospel. So it is, Dr. Inch, and so it will always be. Although our series is about Assemblies, we must reach sinners one by one, and God calls them each by name.

God willing, next time we shall see how 1925 brought Union closer and the spectre of division began to gather a corporeal form.

The history of a denomination: XXIII.

Dr. David Cairns (pictured), Professor of Systematic Theology in the United Free Church College, Aberdeen, was the Moderator of the 1923 United Free Assembly. Cairns was a former United Presbyterian, educated at Edinburgh University and the old United Presbyterian College. In 1895 he had been ordained as pastor of the United Presbyterian Church at Ayton in Berwickshire, and in 1907 he had been called to his Chair at Aberdeen. As a theology professor, Cairns took a deep interest in the youth of the Church. He saw that all was not rosy in the United Free Church, yet he was young enough not to be a decided member of the Disestablishment party.
The year of 1923 was significant to Dr. Cairns in another way also - after the death of Principal Iverach of Aberdeen a few weeks after the Assembly of 1922 the Assembly now appointed Cairns to the Principalship of Aberdeen.
The Dundee Presbytery had sent up an overture calling for the preparation of a new Confession to supercede that prepared by the Westminster Assembly of Divines. The twentieth century, it was argued, had changed everything, casting the Christian faith into a new mould, approaching the faith differently. Now we do not deny this, but we deny that what was being thus expressed was in fact the Christian faith at all. It is precisely this departing from the faith that made it inadvisible for ANY revision, much less a new confession, to be prepared at that time. Among other things the Union movement doomed this overture to failure - if the United Free Church were to adopt a new confession it would have thrown up a further barrier to union with the Church of Scotland. As things stood, the Churches could unite on the basis of the Confession.

The Assembly was mostly taken up with the Haldane Report on the temporalities of the Church of Scotland. The Haldane Report was a government report dealing with existing law affected by the Church of Scotland Act (1921) and the further legislative changes necessary to facilitate the coming Union. The Report's reccomendations, if carried out, would give the Church of Scotland full control over all her property, lands, manses, churches, endowments and so on. The official deliverance proposed welcomed the Report and directed the Committee responsible to disseminate information about it through the Church.
The first amendment proposed to this was essentially one of delay. It was movd by Dr. Young that the Assembly pronounce no immediate opinion on the Haldane Report, but send them down, together with the 1921 Act and the Declaratory Articles of the Church of Scotland, to be considered by the office-bearers and the members of the Church.
What is interesting about this suggestion is that it is very much what the Constitutionalist party in theold Free Church proposed before the Union of 1900. Those who were calling for it now were the very people who had ignored the Constitutionalist plea before 1900!
Dr. Young's reason was not that he wanted to prevent Union, but that he was afraid of the Church splitting when Union came. This way he hoped to be able to bring everyone in.
Another amendment, submitted by Mr. Small of Berwick, declared that only complete disestablishment and disendowment could possible form the basis of any Union. This would have meant that Church of Scotland ministers coming into the Union would have no salary or next to no salary! What was more, Small's position was that the government should be completely indifferent to all religion - which is logically atheism!
The vote decided against both amendements by a large majority - about ninety per cent of the members.
The Church and State Committee was divided. A large minority had wanted to blast the Haldane Report, but the majority won out, and so the report submitted by the Committee was a gagged, edited version of what had been intended. However the minority managed to get their position out in the debate. The 'teinds' (roughly equivalent to the tithes) were, they declared, not the property of the Church but of the nation, and as such they should be employed for the national good.
Two assumptions were made here. Firstly, that the Church of Scotland was not doing any good to the nation. Second, that something expressly given to the Church had not in fact been so given.
And the majority of the Assembly refused to be led by such people. They continued to press on towards Union.

Next time, God willing, we shall see what 1924 brought.

The history of a denomination: XXII.

(Interior of old Church of Scotland Assembly Hall)

The Assembly of 1922 was presided over by Donald Fraser, missionary to central Africa. Fraser was an old Free Church man, trained at the Free Church College in Glasgow. There he had been inspired by the appeal of the Students' Volunteer Missionary Union, and he had given himself up to labour to spread the Gospel in Africa. He spoke on 'The Supreme Task of the Church' in his address. There are no prizes for guessing what the missionary thought that was - to preach the Gospel to all nations. It was a wholesome reminder of the true task of the Church, especially after the socialist polemics of the previous year's debates.
It was a quiet year. the most inspiring part of the Assembly was the Foreign Mission report. The galleries were packed, and the speaking was of a high order. Dr. Laws of Livingstonia spoke of the need to take the Gospel far and wide, and Christian hearts rejoiced at the thought of Christ preached where for ages heathen darkness had reigned.
The question of the Church's testimony came up again in 1922. The 'Brief Statement of the Church's Faith' had been revised and circulated, and two new sets of preamble and questions had been drawn up, one for ordination of ministers, missionaries and professors, the other for elders, deacons and licentiates. It was proposed to send the 'Brief Statement' to Presbyteries for consideration and to send down the two sets of preamble and questions to the Presbyteries under the Barrier Act (this is an Act that requires at least two thirds of the Church's Presbyteries to agree to any act before it passes into the constitution of the Church).
The first recieved no objection, but Principal Martin of New College objected severely to the second. The preamble, he noted, stated that the Westminster Confession of Faith was the chif subordinate standard of the Church, but no reference was made to the Confession in the formula. This was quietly putting the Confession out the back door! Surely, he said, a question could be added clarifying the candidate's relation to the Confession?
It was finally agreed that both drafts be sent back to the committee from whence they came to be revised accordingly.

The movement towards union was now practically unstoppable. The Government in Westminster had recognized in the Church of Scotland Bill (1921) that the Church of Scotland possessed spiritual independence. Most of the Assembly accepted this news joyfully. The dissenters, led by James Barr, pointed out some remarks made by MPs in debate. But it was the bill, not the debate, that was law.
Real fears were beginning to emarge that, as the Free Church had divided at the Union of 1900, so it would be with the United Free Church when union with the Church of Scotland came. Although a majority of the Assembly were in favour of the Union, the opposition had grown from 65 votes in 1919 to 101 votes. It was feared the growth might continue and wreck the plan of union.
The Church and State Committee continued to exist, and it had become something of a centre for James Barr and his party. They would be satisfied with nothing less than disestablishment and disendowment of the Church of Scotland forthwith! The Assembly politely 'passed from' the first two sections of the Church and State report - which is a polite way of saying that it repudiated them! The Church and State Committee wanted to condemn the Church of Scotland Bill, the Assembly had already accepted it.

The Church and State Committee was committed to a dead ideal of the past. The Assembly as a whole saw what seemed to be a better future.
And next time, God willing, we shall pass on to what that future brought in 1923

The history of a denomination: XXI.

The Assembly of 1921 was somewhat overshadowed by the miners' strike and the situation in Southern Ireland - practically a civil war.
The Moderator of the 1921 Assembly was Rev. Mr. Adam Philip of Invergowrie, whose only distinction was that of having been minister of the Free (and later United Free) Church there for forty years. It is a striking indication of the undue influence of the cities that Mr. Philip was the only country minister appointed Moderator in all the thirty years of the United Free Church. Mr. Philip's father, rev. Dr. George Philip, had been Thomas Guthrie's successor in Free St. John's (the building now called Free St. Cloumba's), Edinburgh. Adam Philip had been one of those ministers who prop up the Church, the men who live and work far from the attention of men, and yet who do, in many cases, far more good than half the D.D.'s ever created.
The Assambly had to appoint a new Principal to the Glasgow College. They chose Professor William M. Clow of the College.
Church Union was a matter that had been before the United Free Church from its inception. Many had looked upon it as the beginning, the nucleus, of a united Scottish Church. So when a proposal from the Church Of England was brought before the two Assemblies of the Church of Scotland and the United Free Church, proposing conference with a view to closer co-operation and unity, it was seen as a great thing, and a desirable thing. Of course there could be no immediate action on the plan (and the Anglo-Catholic insistence on episcopal ordination and apostolic succession would eventually ruin everything), but it was accepted as a good sign.
Of more lasting importance were the dealings between the two Presbyterian Churches. The Government had laid a bill before pariament a bill to recognise the Church of Scotland's spiritual independence in her new constitution, and both parties were sympathetic to the Church's claims. The United Free Assembly only had to express approval of the bill and wait for a further bill that would deal with the 'temporalities' of the Church, property, endowments and so on. The desire of the majority was that they would so be dealt with the the Church should be absolute mistress of such property as Parliament should declare to be hers.
Dr. Henderson presented the report of the Union Committee with great enthusiasm. At eighty-four he could now see that great union gleaming ahead of him, and the vision excited him. He moved that the Church welcome the Parliamentary bill, and assumed that the Parliament would swiftly introduce another bill to set the Church of Scotland free from any remaining restraint.
It was not welcomed by all. James Barr contended that, before ANY union negotiations could be entered into, the Church of Scotland had to be disestablished and disendowed. As such it was completely irrelevant. The deliverance of the committee had nothing to do with the question of the negotiations for union, but with the conditions for such negotiations to take place. While James Barr gave a moving and eloquent speech, it was a speech that had little to do with the matter in hand. Instead he spent his time criticising state endowments.
James Barr's motion was ineffective.
The College Committee that year submitted a reconstructed curriculum for Divinity students. As well as trying to shorten the course, they wanted to introduce two new subjects (!!!), namely Sociology and Paedagogy. Since no-one in the Assembly could pronounce the latter Principal Martin had no trouble convincing them to send the revised curriculum back to whence it came for fuller consideration.
A group of socialists in the United Free Church Social Problems Committee presented a gradiose scheme for co-ordinating the affairs of all the various Church Committees dealing with public affairs and morals. The scheme had every advantage except one - that it was quite unworkable. In fact the members of the committee were labouring under the delusion that the Church must take care of all society's social problems. There is in fact only one social problem before the Church AS SUCH, namely how to preach the Gospel to those who are perishing. It is the Gospel itself, not welfare schemes, that will reform society and guide christian governors in their duty under God.
These socialist dreamers were defeated.
The Temperance Committee was also disappointed (as were many would-be bootleggers) that the government was dragging its heels over prohibition.
As the Assembly closed the Moderator called it to affirm the God of the Bible and to fight for His Kingdom.
As for wht lay ahead, that will be our subject, God willing, next time.

The history of a denomination: XX.

(Illustrated: the Church of Scotland Assembly Hall)

The Moderator of the United Free Assembly of 1920 was Principal Alexander Martin of New College. In some respects Martin resembled Rainy. He was a born leader, of whom it was said that wherever he sat was the head of the table.
His opening address looked forward to the now hoped-for union of the two Churches. There was, he pointed out, really no difference of principle as such between the two Churches. The difference was one that had always existed within the post-Revolution Church of Scotland. The two Churches looked almost identical, the family resmblance was strong. Why should there be two Assembly Halls either side of the Lawnmarket?
The 'rebels' on the matter were treated well, James Barr himself being appointed by that Assembly to the post of Home Mission Secretary of the Church. It was significant in another way. James Barr was a socialist, a temperance campaigner and somewhat liberal theologically (later he would advocate the ordination of women. His daughter Elizabeth Barr would be the first United Free Church female minister, ordained in 1935. To appoint such a man to the post of Home Mission secretary signalled a chage in the United Free Church understanding of 'mission'.
Foreign missions were in a sorry state. Finances had not recovered from the War, the exchange rate was down, and disaster threatened particularly in Manchuria and India. The committee began to think of the possibility of closing down some missions, hospitals being closed up, schools abandoned, village evangelism stopped.
But now was not the time to give up. The Assembly boldly adopted the policy that NO work should be abandoned. Instead they would appeal to the Church for gifts to cover this situation. The cost WAS covered.

The Assembly of 1920 saw further changes in the Church's relation to the Westminster Confession of Faith. Before the Union of 1900 both uniting Churches had adopted 'Declaratory Acts' modifying their relation to the Confession, but by 1920 dissatisfaction with the Confession had grown. The Church no longer held to the whole of it, and it was seen as too long. The dissatisfaction began with the questions put to candidates at the licensing of probationers and the ordination of ministers.
A committee had been appointed and their proposals were submitted to the Assembly. As well as revised questions for candidates, they had prepared a sort of popular 'manifesto' for the Church.
Professor W.M. Macgregor tore into this 'manifesto'. It was badly written, he declared, without intest or life, woolly and unclear. There was nothing 'popular' about it, he said, apart from its length, and he doubted whether any of the labouring classes would patiently read such a document. He moved that it be revised. He was not alone, and the 'manifesto' went back into the committee, which had six further members added. One hopes those members were chosen for their standard of written prose!
Others felt such a revision ought to be left until after union with the Church of Scotland.

1920 was, of course, the year Prohibition began in the United States. The United Free Church temperance committee was overjoyed at this, and they looked forward to such an act being passed in the United Kingdom. One is tempted to agree with The Saint that the only advantage such an Act would have had is that we could all become bootleggers and get rich. But Temerance was a cause in which even James Barr could agree with the Church of Scotland (namely that it was a good idea).
Meanwhile the Church of Scotland was trying to sort out its own constitution. Interestingly the Church of Scotland Moderator in 1920 was Dr. Thomas Martin. But, Lord Balfour of Burleigh, Lord High Commissioner, cautioned, two Martins do not make a summer.

The 'summer' many in the Church were looking for was the union of the Churches. How they progressed in 1921 we shall see, God willing, next time.

The history of a denomination: XIX.

Our illustration for this post draws attention to the fact that in 1919, for the first time, an Archbishop of Canterbury was present at the United Free Church General Assembly. Archbishop Randall Davidson, himself a Scot, was concerned for ecumenical relations. He dreamed of the reunion of Christendom, a dream that many Anglicans still hold, although they tend to pursue relations with churches less nonconformist than the old United Free Church was.

A spirit of relief sat upon the Assembly. The terrible war was over at last, and the radiant sunshine of the assembly period seemed the sunshine of peace. The Moderator was Dr. William Malcolm Macgregor of Edinburgh. For some reason which none in the Assembly could fathom, he added a long black stole to the Moderator's already elaborate outfit. Let it remain a mystery. He also introduced the custom of ending his prayers by saying the Lord's Prayer, in which the whole Assembly joined, a far more understandable innovation.
Delegates from the English, Welsh and Irish Presbyterian Churches attended, and so did delegates from Geneva and from the Waldensians of Italy. The Waldensian delegate, Captain Bartolo, attended in the uniform of Britain's ally, Italy, and he remarked on the extraordinary resemblance the Moderator bore to the poet Dante. He felt at home, he said, seeing such a face in the Hall.

In the mission debate an extraordinary scene ocurred when Rev. G. R. Robertson of Tranent proposed in a spirit of brotherhood that the German missionaries who had been expelled from certain stations which had been handed over to the United Free Church be allowed back. The spirit of the day was against him, and he was often interrupted by hostile shouts. The motion was defeated. The Germans were still unforgiven in the Assembly, as in the country.
But the end of the war provoked some other debates. Following worrying reports coming out of Eastern Europe, Mr. J.D. Robertson moved that the Assembly call upon the allies to ensure religious freedom in all countries that adhered to the League of Nations. Mr. A. Herbert Gray moved anouther addition to the Assembly's deliverance to the League of Nations deploring the severity of the terms of the treaty of Versailles. It looked, he complained, to armed force as the great preserver of peace, but he felt that the greatest means to secure lasting peace were forgiveness, generosity and good-will. He further denounced the treaty as a flat denial of Christianity. That motion was rejected.
With the war over, the vacant Chairs in the Colleges were filled. The Moderator himself was appointed to the Chair of New Testament in the Glasgow College, Mr. Hugh Watt appointed to the Church History Chair in New College, and Mr. A. B. Macaulay of Stirling was appointed to the Chair of Systematic Theology and Systematics in Glasgow.
Relations between the United Free and Church of Scotland Assemblies continued to warm. They agreed to work together on a Scottish Churches' memorial in Jerusalem, and once again the Moderators visited each other's halls.
But the great moment was to take place when the Committee on conference between the Churches.
The great question was this: was disestablishment and disendowment of the Church of Scotland necessary for negotiations to proceed. It was already clear that parliament would have to pass the legislation necessary BEFORE any move on the part of the Churches. But what legislation? Disestablishment or an act recognising the spiritual independence of the Church of Scotland?
Principal Henderson indicated the latter. If Parliament were to recognise the freedom of the Church of Scotlnd, that would be enough.
It was then the opposition, led by James Barr of Govan, burst into the open. Nothing but disestablishment and disendowment would suit them! James Barr dwelt eloquently on the great effect the sacrifices of the Church of Scotland would have on the working people, apparently fogetful that under his scheme the United Free Church would sacrifice nothing.
But he was overruled. And, to the astonishment of some, the Church and State committee meekly agreed to accept the report that would move both Churches forwards!

Next time, God willing, we shall see the form of that forwards motion.

The history of a denomination: XVIII.

The Assembly of 1918 did not meet in the glow of peace, but amidst the crash of nations. The war had apparently just taken an alarming turn for the worst. The German armies had mounted their last great offensive, and once again shells were bursting in the streets of Paris (see illustration). The Allied forces in Western Europe found themselves 'with their backs to the wall,' as General Haig put it.
The United Free Assembly met under this cloud. It seemed that the war was far from over.
The moderator was Dr. Robert J. Drummond of Edinburgh, the youngest Moderator the Church had ever had. At thirty-five he seemed far TOO young to some, but to others he was a sign that the old guard were on their way out.
Some were anxious that he would dress as Principal Hutton and John Young had - in ordinary ministerial garb. They need not have worried, youthful though he was, Drummond had regard for the traditions of the Assembly and made a splendid Moderator.
In his address he spoke of the peace that was sure to come. The country, he emphasised, would be talking about reconstruction. For the Church the aim was rededication. But like too many of his generation, he was under the delusive spell that mankindf would learn reason and sense from the war, and that utopia was just around the corner. Events would prove otherwise. Another worrying trend he himself called attention to - attendance on the opening devotions of the Assembly was falling off again.
The greatest shock to the Church in the period since the last Assembly was the death of James Denney. He died relatively young and very much unexpectedly. His place was filled up by Dr. Archibald Henderson.

Although the war was not yet over, it was felt best to resume negotiations with the Church of Scotland concerning future union. The question of the lawfulness of ANY official church-state connection at all was the great sticking-point, but the movement would not stick for long!
The question of women in the Church had been raised very much as the war had highlighted in a way the Suffragettes couldf not the importance of women in the state. It was moved before the Assembly that there was no bar to women in the diaconate provided they were not ordained. This was apparently not due to any great desire among United Free Church women to serve as deacons, but due to the concern of some members of the Assembly that many men who would otherwise have served as deacons had perised in the War.
The matter of female suffrage also came up. The Women's Society of United Free St. George's petitioned the Assembly concerning the instruction of women newly granted the vote in the use of their new responsibility as Christian voters. The Assembly unfortunately rushed into a scheme without actually thinking it through.

The final noted sight at the Assembly of 1918 was David Lloyd-George. The Prime Minister paid a visit to the Assemblies that year. He was not impressed by the United Free Church. For its part the United Free Church was far too impressed by David Lloyd George.

And there, on the verge of peace, we must leave them until next time when, God willing, we shall see how the United Free Church met that peace.

The History of a denomination: XVII.

By May 1916 it was becoming painfully evident that the War was going to be a long, bloody slog. The dead were going to be counted in the millions, and practically every eligible young man would be called upon. United Free Church colleges were almost emptied of students, congregations robbed of their best members. Rationing was on the horizon, and most fearful of all the all but silent spectre of Zepplin raids hung over Edinburgh. There was a black-out in force, for Edinburgh had been attacked, and all lights in the Assembly Hall had to be out by 10.15.
The Moderator in 1916 was Principal George Adam Smith of the University of Aberdeen, noted United Free Church heretic. Perhaps it was ironic to see a man who had leaned so heavily on German Higher Criticism denouncing Germany from the Moderator's chair.
Again War Work occupied most of the business of the Assembly. A woman's place was also debated, and an overture sent down under the Barrier Act (an act safeguarding the lower courts of the Church, at least in theory) recommending that women be allowed to serve as deacons. While we believe it is possible to make such as case, we feel that the Bible is against such a position.
The admitting of women into Assembly Committees, which was decided upon by the Assembly, is open to the highest criticism, namely that it placed women in positions of exceptional authority over men - for previously only ministers and elders had been admitted to those committee. Yet the Bible is explicit on this point that women are not allowed to have authority over a man.

The Assembly of 1916 was very routine in other matters.

When the Assembly met for the next time the end of the war seemed as far off as ever. Flanders was all mud and blood, and Russia had collapsed. True, America had entered the war, but it would take time before the American war machine could take effect against the Germans. Meanwhile the daily casualty lists were long and harrowing. There was hardly a member of the 1917 Assembly who had not lost someone, a brother, a son, or a nephew.
The Moderator of 1917 was Principal Dugald Mackichan, of Wilson College, Bombay. He spoke of the loyalty of India to the empire, and of a revival there particularly among the low-caste Hindus.
The United Free Church had a new mission station in its hands because of the war. The old Swiss station on the Gold Coast had been manned by Germans who had withdrawn for political reasons, and the United Free Church was given the station by the British government.
The Assembly heard an address on the Jewish report by the Bishop of Stepney, speaking of the work among the Jews in London. The Jews, he said, would be most unlikely to be moved by Christian missions until they saw true Christianity in action in the churches.
The death of A.R. MacEwen, professor of Church History at New College, created a problem in watime. For a while his chair would be unfilled and United Free Church and Church of Scotland students (owing to the small numbers) would study togther under the University Divinity faculty and the New College faculty. This and the exchange of visits to each other's Assemblies by the Church of Scotland and United Free Church Moderators showed that though the formal movement towards union had stopped, informally it was still going.

Next time, God willing, we shall see how the last year of the Great War affected the United Free Church of Scotland.

The History of a denomination: XVI.

The Assembly of 1915 was very different from that of 1914. There was no procession for the Lord High Commissioner, no pomp or circumstance. The only procession was a terrible reminder of the cost of war. One hundred coffins of men of the 7th Royal Scots killed, not on the battlefields (for the men who died in France and in Belgium stayed there and were buried there), but killed in a rail disaster at Gretna a few days before. The Moderators of the Assemblies, The Church of Scotland, the United Free Church, and the Free Church, joined the procession, for members of all their churches were among the fallen.
Let me apostrophise here. What would such a disaster do to the morale of modern Britain in a war where we were bogged down, where our shores were not in danger of invasion?
It was the tenth month of the Great War when the Assemblies met under one roof in the great Assembly Hall on the Mound. The three moderators stood on the same platform and the members of the three Assemblies sat together on the benches as they joined in prayer for a nation at war. Defences were going up along the North Sea coast to protect British towns agaist German naval bombardment, and brave men from every cormer of the land were going out to fight and to die in Flanders' fields.
The shallow optimism of the first few weeks of war had gone, it was now realised this would be a long and bloody conflict. On the benches of the Assembly ministrs coud be seen in the uniforms of Army chaplains and elders in the uniforms of officers in His Majesty's Services.
The Moderator of 1915 was Dr. Alexander R. MacEwen, Professor of Church History in New College and author of a small biography of the Erskines and a very large biography of Dr. John Carns, United Presbyterian leader. Inevitably he spoke mostly to an Assembly at war.
PRAYER was in evidence as it had never been before in the Assembly, and so was patriotism. When the traditional address to the King was adopted the members joined in singing the National Anthem.
Principal T. M. Lindsay (see this blog passim) had died in December 1914. His books are still read and published today, they are his best memorial and the best evidence of his greatness - that 1900 should be able to communicate with 2007!
In the principalship he was succeeded by James Denney - the only candidate. His successor as Professor of Church History was James Moffatt.
In time of war the Chaplains' Report was of supreme interest. Dr, Patrick R. Mackay, respendent in his uniform of Chaplain-Colonel, gave the report, declaring that he was proud to say that the United Free Church had not failed Scotland in her time of need. A little over 91 per cent of eligible sons of United Presbyterian manses were serving in the armed forces. The militant suffragettes were forgotten, and the Women's Work Committee spoke of the war work of United Free Church women.
The movement for unity was inevitably retarded in some respects by the war, but on the ground it was helped forward as ministers were absent on the front United Free Church ministers looked after absent Church of Scotland ministers' flocks, and vice versa. In these circumstances the two churches became still closer. Meanwhile the Church of Scotland had sent its draft constitution down to the Presbyteries.

What the next twelve months of war brought to the United Free Church we shall, God willing, see next time.

The History of a denomination: XV.

The Moderator of the 1914 United Free Assembly was Dr. George Reith of Glasgow, father of Lord Reith the first Director-general of the BBC. Reith was pastor of the College Church, Glasgow, for most of his ministerial career. Something of a theological liberal, he urged the social evils of the day to the attention of the Church in his address. Which is not to say that liberals are the only ones who have such concerns - Thomas Chalmers, THE Scottish Evangelical, was first in his concern for the poor and needy, and James Begg, the champion of orthdoxy, pioneered the construction of low-cost social housing.
A welcome visitor the the Assembly was Rev. Ernesto Giampiccoli of Milan, a representative of the Waldensian Church. Remarking that his Church was best known in Scotland through the agency of collectors, he threw the blame on John Calvin. Calvin had advised the poor suffering Church to send out one or two collectors. "Since then, fathers and brethren," he joked, "wee have been very good Calvinists, and I am afraid we shall be obliged to be more so in the future!"
The Irish Presbyterians continued to ask for United Free Church support against Home Rule. The United Free Church, however, was already practically committed to neutrality, so the Assembly simply issued a letter assuring the Irish of their 'Sympathy', carefully committing themselves to nothing.
One of the other political issues of the day, the violent methods adopted by some Suffragettes to draw attention to their campaign to extend the voting franchise to women, came to the attention of the Assembly in a rather unnerving way. Whilst the report on Women's Work was being given two women in the gallery began to loudly protest about the injustice of the Assembly considering Women's Work whilst a great injustice was being done to women in the country. After the women had been removed one of the members of the Assembly remarked to the clerk that he was afraid they might burn down the Hall in revenge! This was no hysterical worry, such acts of arson had been committed!
Whatever the merits of any cause, violence against the property or persons of other can never be a legitimate form of protest. We fail to see how the destruction of artworks and acts of arson against historic buildings could have helped the cause of the Suffragettes.
In fact it was in part the productive war-work that many British women contributed that finally earned them the vote after the Great War.
James Orr, Professor of Apologetics and Systematic Theology in the Glasgow Free Church College (see the blog passim), had died. A truly great Christian and a defender of the faith, it was almost inevitable that his successor would be less orthodox than he was. It proved to be the case, Rev. Dr. D.W. Forrest of Edinburgh was chosen. Forrest was a Kenoticist, that is he believed that the Lord in some ways CEASED to be divine in the incarnation.
The Union debate was marred, as it had been in previous years, by an unfruitful debate on the matter of establishment and disestablishment. James Denney of Glasgow characterised it as 'a barren logomachy' (strife about words). 'Church' and 'state' were being thrown about as mere words. The real question, Denney insisted, was how two such Churches as the Church of Scotland and the United Free Church were to secure both spiritual feedom and national recognition of religion without injuring the interests or consciences of anyone. Brought up a Reformed Presbyterian, Denney did not have the doctrinaire objection to any sort of establishment that some others had. Although the Cameronians have been accused of living in the past, it was James Denney who saw the clearest in the union debate.
The Church and State committee were rattled, and their debate was impassioned. Principal Iverach startled his fellow-members by remarking that there might be a better way to effect the healing of Scotland's Church troubles than political surgery. It was understood that he meant he was backing off from disestablishment.
Professor J. A. Paterson said heatedly that no sooner had Dr. Rainy and Dr. Hutton died than, as far as he could judge, a section of the Church had been doing its best to reverse their policy. This was untrue. That section had always existed, especially within the Free Church portion of the United Free Church.
What was more, Dr. Henderson reminded the Assembly, Rainy had never unequivocally committed himself to disestablishment (Rainy rarely unequivocally committed himself to anything beyond the Gospel). He quoted Rainy:
"If one could imagine the possibility of any other way of dealing with this question, if by any means the people of Scotland could be got together to consider what was for the good of the land, and should be able to see a way of settling this matter so that the Church should regain her freedom, and that all the Churches in the land should come together to see what could be made of this country of ours, what might be accomplished! It is enough to make the heart leap to think of it!"

So the Assembly of 1914 closed, little thinking what was about to come upon Europe.
Of which more, God willing, next time.

The History of a denomination: XIV.

The Assembly of 1913 was presided over by Principal James Iverach of Aberdeen. In many ways Iverach was like Rainy - a rather elusive figure in his utterances, and unquestionably brilliant. Iverach was one of the supporters of 'academic freedom' in the Free Church Colleges - an academic freedom that paid scant regard to the Bible and preferred human philosophy to the Oracles of God! He was utterly impatient with all criticism of what was going on in the colleges.

There was no sign as yet of the European crisis that was about to burst on the scene. Indeed the Assembly actually sent a message to the Kaiser congratulating him on the marriage of his daughter and expressing the hope that the peaceful relations between Germany and Great Britain might be for ever preserved unbroken.
Many United Free Church ministers had studied in Germany, after all, and it was German liberal theology that was responsible, humanly speaking, for the theological down-grade in the Church. Once war had broken out in 1914 many of these men would distance themselves from Germany, but in 1913 there was no such desire.
A Chinese Christian, General Chang, Military Secretary to the Republical government of China, appeared before the Assembly, seeking their support in his efforts to persuade the British Government to stop the Opium trade and to remove all opium stocks from the treaty ports. It is a cause for shame that this nation was ever involved in such a massive drug-running operation. Of course the Assembly agreed to give what support they could - no Christian body worthy of the name could have done less.
Union matters continued to loom large in the Assembly. The mechanism of the United Free Church moved exceeding slowly, but it was caution in a good cause. The Church of Scotland had conceded that union was only possible on the platform of Spiritual Independence (the principle on which the Disruption of 1843 had taken place). The Church of Scotland was willing to adopt a new constitution on this basis. Having adopted the constitution they would go to parliament seeking, not ratification, but recognition of the fact. They wanted the United Free Church to assist in the framing of this new constitution.
The United Free Church stood at the brink of union, and some United Presbyterian and Free Church old hands hung back. The whole question of Establishment remained. Dr. Whitelaw moved that the statutory connection of Church and state be put out of the question. James Barr of Glasgow, former Free Church minister and a socialist, was one of the leaders of the disestablishment party, and he was vehement in upholding his position. But Whitelaw dropped his amendment to the motion accepting the Church of Scotland's offer, and an amendment asking that the relation of the future united Church to the state be clarified was adopted.
A sign of things to come was seen when the Church of Scotland Moderator for that year, Dr. Wallace Williamson, visited the United Free Assembly on its last day. "Our brethren are over the way (in the Church of Scotland Assembly Hall) discussing the things concerning the Kingdom, and here am I; and I have never been over the way to say 'God bless you,'" he said had been his though. So he had resolved to come - and there he was.

A war was coming, but there would be one more Assembly before it came. God willing that will be our subject next time.

The History of a denomination: XIII.

The Moderator of the 1912 Assembly was Dr. Thomas Whitelaw of Kilmarnock, conservatve evangelical author of several books (illustrated is his commentary on John). Whitelaw pulled no punches in his opening address about the state of the Church in Scotland, and what needed to be done about it (a return to the Gospel would have been a good start in some pulpits and colleges, we fear).
Outside business pressed on the Church in two rather unwelcome forms. First was a deputation from the Irish Presbyterians calling on the United Free Church to help them to campaign against the new Irish Home Rule bill that was before the House of Commons. Feeling this was not their fight, the United Free Church declined.
The second unwelcome matter was the bill to Disestablish the Church in Wales. Councillor John Owens of Chester, a deputy representing the Presbyterian Church of Wales (Calvinistic Methodist) asked for a message that the United Free Church was with his Church on the issue. Having just succeeded in killing Scottish Disestablishment, the United Free Assembly was hardly likely to give its support for Welsh. On the other hand the Free Church and the Welsh Calvinistic Methodists were historic allies. In the evnt the United Free Assembly sent a very guarded message expressing a mild hope for rearrangements which would be agreeable to Wales and beneficial to the Christan religion in that country. Later on the Church and State Committee claimed great credit for having, in spite of great temptation, sent a memorial supporting Welsh disestablishment to the Government. Such an action would have brought down the wrath of the Assembly on them, of course, but that is another matter.
The Russian pogroms against the nation's Jews excited the disgust of the Assembly for those responsible, and the Assembly's sympathy for the sufferers. A protest was sent to the Russian government by the Assembly.
Interest in the great work of bringin the Gospel to the Jews was excited by this event. Rev. Mr. W. M. Christie, formerly a missionary to the Jews in Aleppo, and now in Glasgow. made a speech to the Assembly in which he reminded them that converted Jews were, of all the Middle Eastern races, the best missionaries to Muslims. "The Jew is the only one who can carry the Gospel to Islam," he declared baldly. Romans 11 was his text on the matter, the conversion of the Jews to Christ would be 'life from the dead' to the Gentiles.
In this connection another move towards union with the Church of Scotland was made; the United Free Church and the Church of Scotland agreed to jointly run a mission to the Jews in Jaffa, in modern-day Israel. The return of the Jewish people to their ancient land was already underway, and the port of Jaffa was the point of entry for many.
Numbers in the denominational colleges were down, and Mr. David Woodside (author of 'The Soul of a Scottish Church') suggested that the reason for this was the difficulty of the preliminary examinations, which presented a barrier to those who might be called to the ministry later in life. Mr. Woodside told the Assembly that, should THEY have to go through the examination, many of them would not make it! The standard had been raised since they had been at university, he declared, and the Church should remember that.
Professor James Orr retorted that Mr. Woodside might have forgotten all HE knew when he took his degree, but the Assembly could not help that.
More seriously, it had become plain that the United Free Church needed a revival. Alas the thought that REFORMATION might also be necessary was ignored. Instead, forgetting that the Union of 1900 had not produced a revival, the Church moved on towards reunion with the Church of Scotland.

Next time, God willing, we shall see what occupied the United Free Assembly on the eve of the Great War.

The History of a denomination: XII.

1911 was a fairly quiet Assembly. It was overshadowed by preparations for the coronation of King George V. The Moderator was Dr. James Wells of Glasgow, a noted evangelist whose voice was familiar to many in that city through his open-air work. In his address Wells warned against the spirit of the 'Social Gospel' and of Socialism, the temptation to neglect the preaching of the Gospel to the poor in favour of mere social work. Here Wells spoke with authority, as his church, located in the slums of Glasgow, did both. He was glad the Church had woken up to the terrible social evils of Edwardian Scotland, he said, but he was afraid that some would use the amelioration of social ills as an excuse to neglect evangelism. History proved that without true religion no civilization worthy of the name could long exist. Every effort to secularize the Church, in the supposed interest of the poor and of untried theories, must be resisted. The tendency of some to postpone the evangelization of the poor until their outward conditions were improved was the sign of decaying faith in the true mission of the Church to preach the Gospel to every creature under heaven. The Open-air preacher's voice filled the Assembly Hall as he appealed, on behalf of millions of living souls of men and women, souls that would have to spend eternity in heaven or in hell, that the Church remain focussed on the Gospel!
What else is there? 'Woe is unto me is I preach not the Gospel', said the Apostle. Yes, woe is unto me if I preach social reform only, woe is unto me if I preach slum clearance, woe is unto me if I preach Socialism, woe is unto me if I preach politics, woe is unto me if I preach teetotalism AND NOT THE GOSPEL! 'Woe is unto me if I preach not the Gospel!'
'But we preach Christ Crucified' is the motto of the Church of God. Let others preach social justice, 'but we preach Christ crucified'. Let other preach socialism, 'but we preach Christ Crucified.' Let them preach politics, 'but we preach Christ crucified.'
How we are grateful to men like Dr. Wells who saw through all the plausible talk of social reformers to the core of the matter - that what must be changed is the man himself, not his surroundings. Change the man, and then you truly will change his surroundings. But if you only change his surroundings, you throw good money after bad.
We cannot hope to stop the decay of our society by petitioning parliament, nor by providing social care, but by preaching the Gospel. Do not misunderstand, those are good things to do, to care for the widow and the fatherless. But we ought to remember to care for their souls as well as for their bodies. 'These things ought ye to have done and not left the others undone.'
The 1911 Assembly saw the attempt in the Temperance debate to force all Kirk-Sessions to use only unfermented 'wine' in Communion. Mercifully this wrong-headed attempt was thrown out and the choice put freely before the individual Sessions. Thus a throughly unnecessary battle in the Church was narrowly avoided.
Here let us remark that we hold this to be one of the drawbacks of denominations, the tendency to centralise all decisions in the Assembly. Presbyterianism at its best is a thoroughgoing federalism, with local issues decided locally. The Assembly's purpose it to co-ordinate local Congregations, Synods and Presbyteries and to deal with Church-wide matters like foreign missions and the training of the ministry (and indeed false teaching). It is not intended to settle every little detail of Church life, and if it is looked on to do this, it will fail badly.
A great step was taken in the direction of Union. The Church of Scotland agreed that Spiritual Independence (i.e. that in purely spiritual matters the government had no authority over the Church) was a necessary requirement of union. Most of the Assembly were overjoyed at this - for it was the United Free Church's main issue in the matter. A small group of hard-line supporters of Disestablishment was however beginning to emerge who threatened to block Union no matter what.

God willing, next time we shall look at the 1912 Assembly's progress.