CHURCH COURT PROCEEDINGS IN RECENT CASES.
James Dodson
To give some idea of the way in which the Assembly has dealt with the cases which have come before it, the following facts may be adduced. In the General Assembly of the Established Church, 1867, Sess. 6: A Deliverance was given in the Crieff Organ Case as follows:—
“The General Assembly find that there is sufficient evidence before the Assembly that the introduction of instrumental music in the church at Crieff would be a cause of division in that church and congregation, and the Assembly therefore remit the case to the Presbytery of Auchterarder, with instructions to disallow any proposal which may be made to them with that purpose, and to see to the due observance of worship in the church at Crieff according to the ordinary practice of the Church.”
Here there would appear to be a decided departure from the constitutional principles of the Church; for whilst the matter is properly remitted to the Presbytery, the Presbytery is not expressly required to put down the innovation as unscriptural, unconstitutional, and subversive of the regulations of the Church, but to consider it mainly with a view to the opinions or feelings of this particular congregation, although “the ordinary
Page 87
practice of the Church” is also referred to. This mode of dealing resulted of course not only in confirming this particular innovation, but in giving great encouragement to the innovators. A similar case came up from Eyemouth in 1871. The Rev. Mr Bell, Eyemouth, had applied to the Presbytery to sanction the use of an organ in the public worship of his church.
The Presbytery found that this was no case calling for their interference—and that under Act VII., 1866, the present application was quite unnecessary.
The Synod affirmed this judgment: The Assembly “Dismiss the protest and appeal, and affirm the judgment of the Synod, except in so far as it finds that, under the Declaratory Act of 1866, the application of the Rev. Mr Bell was unnecessary.”
It is extremely difficult to understand the theory of this judgment, which seems indeed virtually to amount to a formal sanction of instrumental music in the worship of God on the part of the General Assembly, although the conduct of the minister in asking the permission of the Presbytery for this purpose is approved of against the decision of the Synod. The natural effect of this of course was to give a great impulse to the course of innovation. The Perth case followed in the next Assembly, 1872, and the following is the record of the proceedings:—
The Perth Case, Assembly 1872.
“The Assembly had transmitted from their Committee on Bills a Protest and Appeal by Mr Brown, Collace, Mr Hamil-
Page 88
ton, St Martin’s, and Mr Davidson, Kinfauns, against a judgment of the Synod of Perth and Stirling, of date 16th of April 1872, in regard to the introduction of instrumental music in the East Church, Perth.
“Parties were called, &c.
“It was moved and seconded—‘That whereas a petition was read in the Presbytery of Perth, making certain averments as to alleged illegal innovations in public worship in the East Church of Perth, signed by ten members thereof, and whereas the Presbytery found “that no case has been stated to the Presbytery calling for their interference,” and this finding has been sustained by the Synod, and, accordingly, no inquiry has been made into the very important averments made in said petition, the General Assembly are of opinion that in this the Presbytery erred; and, therefore, sustain the Dissent and Appeal, reverse the judgments of the Synod and Presbytery, and refer the case to the Presbytery of Perth, to inquire into the whole circumstances, and therefore to give such decision as may appear to them agreeable to the laws of the Church.’
“Another motion was made and seconded—‘Dismiss the Protest and Appeal, and sustain the judgment of the Synod.’
“After discussion, this motion, with the leave of the Assembly, was withdrawn, and the first motion became the judgment of the House.”
The effect of this judgment, as might have been anticipated, was that the objectors, who had already put themselves to much trouble and expense, gave up the struggle, and the innovations were allowed to have free course, even to removing part of the seats of the church to make room for the organ.
On the same day on which the Perth case was heard the Assembly disposed of the Cramond organ case. The Assembly’s deliverance was:—
“Dismiss the appeal, and affirm the judgment of the Synod in so far as it approves of the Presbytery’s proceeding to make inquiries into the petition then before them, and the whole circumstances of the case, and remit to the Presbytery to make such inquiry, and to proceed with the case according to the law and practice of the Church.”
This was carried by 108 as against 3 for a motion
Page 89
to find that the appeal be sustained, because instrumental music was, as averred in the petition, contrary to the law and usage of the Church. This also was a very unsatisfactory result, although there are grounds for believing that the full issues were not before the minds of the members of Assembly.
In the Assembly, 1875, Sess. 4, the Elgin instrumental music case came up. The unanimous deliverance was:—
“Sustain the appeals, reverse the judgments of the Presbytery,¹ and remit the case to the Presbytery to inquire fully into all the circumstances, and to take heed that nothing is done to create or prolong division in the congregation of the parish church of Elgin.”
This was more satisfactory, in so far as it indicated a resolution on the part of the Assembly to lay an arrest upon the apparently high-handed proceedings of the Presbytery, and a more definite apprehension of the growing evils which are resulting to the Church from the practical subversion of her constitution. The issue of the investigation will be laid before next Assembly; but unless the recent course of procedure be reversed, and such questions are dealt with on grounds of Church and civil law, and with reference to the constitution of the Church as exhibited in her Confession and history and the Revolution Settlement, no satisfactory result can be anticipated. Indeed the present dissatisfaction and disorder may be expected to increase, as when “there was no king in Israel,
_____
¹ The Presbytery’s judgment was that there was no case for interference.
Page 90
and every man did that which was right in his own eyes.”* Under the new Act in regard to worship in England, the minister is held to be the true culprit in all such matters, as he is primarily responsible for the way in which worship is conducted. The same principle pervades the Act of 1690 and of 1693, which provides that no minister is to be continued in the church who does not practise the uniformity prescribed. And this would appear to be consistent both with law and justice, since it is clear that no serious innovation in worship can take place without his sanction. This principle also directly applies to recent unconstitutional proceedings on the part of all ministers in Scotland, as truly the responsible parties in all cases of innovation, and as having received their situations on the express condition of their maintaining uniformity of worship; whilst the principle adopted in the Assembly 1638, of excluding all innovators from “voicing” in such matters, seems also both just and reasonable, inasmuch as the contrary practice virtually constitutes men judges in their own causes.
_____
* The decision of 1876 has been most unsatisfactory.