THE FORCE AND BEARING OF THESE VOWS.
James Dodson
It will thus be seen that every minister and office-bearer of the Established Church is rigidly bound to maintain her Constitution as founded on the Word of God, set forth in the Confession of Faith, and confirmed by the Acts of the Assembly and of the Parliament establishing the Church. They are especially bound to maintain “uniformity of worship” as established at the Revolution, and to follow “no divisive courses” therefrom.
The subscription to these formulas by all ministers and elders as a condition of office, and the limited powers conferred upon ministers and office-bearers in their Commissions to attend the General Assembly, raise the question of change in two aspects of considerable importance.
It would appear that by these formulas the Church is bound together, and each of its members to all the rest, independently altogether of the accident of State connection, in the same way that Dissenting churches are bound together; and
Page 66
if so, it would follow that any member could enforce performance of all the obligations in the contract, provided he could show an interest to do so. If there is truth in the idea that a binding contract has been constituted by the formulas apart from, and still more clearly in connection with, civil legislation, this would open up a new field of difficulties to be overcome before any part of the service can be changed.
But keeping in view the very limited powers conferred by their Commissions on the members of the General Assembly, it can hardly be maintained that any Assembly, where the members sit only under these Commissions, can alter the principles of the Church. The only case which has yet been tried in the civil courts on the subject of changes in the form of worship is that of “Forbes against Eden,” where an attempt was made to set aside changes as made unconstitutionally; but it appeared that power was reserved to the Supreme Court of the Church in question to make alteration within certain limits upon certain points.
But it has to be kept distinctly in view, that not only is there no such power of alteration in the Constitution of the Churches in Scotland, as defined by the documents referred to, reserved to the General Assemblies of the Church, but that all the provisions in the formulas and commissions which have been quoted are expressly directed against changes of any kind. Apart altogether from the necessity for civil legislation on the subject, if alteration should be desired, it would seem
Page 67
evident that the members of Assembly sitting under such Commissions cannot have power to make any vital change either in the doctrine or worship, because it is neither conferred by their Constitution nor by the authority under which they meet to deliberate. If this be so, it would follow that any attempt to change the Constitution or worship by the Assembly must necessarily be ultra vires and incompetent.