THE ECCLESIASTICAL SITUATION IN SCOTLAND.
IT is sincerely to be hoped that the Government are awake to the need for clear and strong legislation in regard to the position of the United Free Church of Scotland, and will push through with vigour the Bill which they have promised to introduce next Wednesday. The Bill, if it is to be satisfactory, must give effect to the Report of the Commission as to the carrying out of the trusts under which the property affected by the House of Lords' decision is in future to be held. Unless that Report is acted on both in the spirit and the letter, and effect given to it by appropriate legislation, it is not too much to say that a condition of affairs will be brought about in Scotland which for nearly a half of the population will be one of ecclesiastical anarchy. We desire, in writing of the condition of Church affairs in Scotland, to avoid even the appearance of exaggeration. The position is far too serious for rash or careless language. It is impossible, however, to deny that the present state of uncertainty is doing grave harm to many forms of religious work across the Border. We fully admit that the way in which the United Free Church has met her tribulations has given strong evidence of the vitality of the spiritual life of Scotland. The tendency to complain, to show indignation, to recriminate, which overtakes men in moments of trouble and anxiety has been drowned in the noble resolve that if possible the interests of the Church shall not suffer. Money has been freely subscribed, and voluntary work done with a zeal and in a spirit which have called forth universal admiration. Nevertheless, the dignity, the good sense, and the good feeling shown by the United Free Church must not blind us to the fact that serious harm has been done, and is being done, to many religious interests. A Church may be inspired by the exaltation that comes from sacrifice, but uncertainty and perplexity cannot be the foundations of lasting spiritual work. It is hardly too much to say that it would be better that the United Free Church should be at once stripped of all her remaining worldly possessions, that her ministers should be driven from their churches and their homes, and that their congregations should once more be compelled, as in the Disruption, to "roll the psalm to wintry skies," than that she should endure a long period in which no man will know the worst, and in which all that can be said of the future will be that it is dark and precarious.
The need for dispelling this deadening uncertainty by legislation which shall be clear in meaning and thorough in its action being so great, we appeal without hesitation to all who care for the spiritual interests of the United Kingdom as a whole to help in the work of obtaining for the United Free Church that settlement which the Commission has declared, after deep and anxious inquiry, to be necessary in the public interest as well as in that of the Churches affected. If opinion becomes alive and united on this point, Government are far more likely to be strong and confident in their action than if the public mind is apathetic or indifferent. This is not a case in which Englishmen and citizens of the United Kingdom who belong to other Communions should take up the attitude:— " This is a matter of Scottish ecclesiasticism in regard to which we have no right to express, or even to feel, an opinion." The religious strength and welfare of Scotland are a national, or rather, an Imperial asset, and when that strength and welfare are in danger of being impaired, as they are by the prevailing uncertainty, Englishmen of all creeds have the right—nay, the duty—to insist that any legislation which is undertaken shall be adequate. We admit that the difficulty of public opinion prescribing specific action would be very great ; but fortunately that obstacle does not exist. There is a clear object to strive for, and that is the carrying out to the full the Report of the Commission. The recommendations of the Com- mission must be regarded as a minimum and not as a maximum, but otherwise Englishmen will be safe if they are content to assume a position which may be thus expressed :—" A body of specially able and far-seeing men who fully realised the greatness of the responsibility cast upon them were appointed to advise as to what should be done. They have made a Report which it is admitted on all sides is a wise and statesmanlike document. It remains for the Legislature to give, and to give promptly, the force of law to their recom- mendations."
What has caused the Government delay in regard to the introduction of a Bill it is difficult to understand. Needless to say, no party considerations have influenced their action. We may be certain that the party managers for Scotland have told them that the effect of exposing the United Free Church to further uncertainty and delay could do nothing but harm to the Government in Scotland. Not to carry out the Report of the Commission this Session would do much more than merely set the United Free Church against the Government. The force of serious Scottish opinion has all along been in favour of a prompt settlement, and Scotland would regard a failure to conclude such a settlement with something like universal indignation. That a Bill carrying out the Report of the Commission will meet with no serious opposition in Parliament can, we think, be regarded as certain. An explanation is possibly to be found in the desire of the Government to combine with the Bill intended to carry out the Report of the Commission a measure which proposes to give greater elasticity in the matter of declarations of faith to the Established Church of Scotland. Last week the General Assembly came to a momentous decision in regard to the declarations required from their ministers, and unanimously decided to seek from Parliament the sanction held to be necessary in the case of the changes contemplated. It has been suggested that it is the intention of the Ministry to give legislative effect to the wishes of the Church of Scotland by means of the same Bill that will carry out the Report of the Commission. We have the strongest sympathy with the Established Church in her desire to obtain greater elasticity in the matter of declarations of faith. At the same time, we can understand the fears of those members of the United Free Church who, though not adverse in any way to the actual proposals of the Church of Scotland, are anxious lest the inclusion of clauses creating so great a change should jeopardise their own measure. They not unnaturally argue that their need is of an instant nature, while there is no occasion for hurry in regard to the demands made by the Established Church. When a man is drowning you throw him a rope at once, and do not wait to attach to it a contrivance for effecting some other purpose, how- ever needful. The true view in regard to this complaint seems to us to be that the action alleged to be contemplated by the Government—i.e., the introduction of an omnibus Bill—can only be justified by success. If they carry their omnibus Bill, no one will have the right to complain. If they fail, they will have incurred a most grave responsi- bility. In these circumstances, all that it is possible for outsiders like ourselves to do is to point out the responsi- bility involved, and to urge on the Government the necessity for avoiding any risk of losing their Bill by widening its area, too greatly. Considering the history of the past two years, and the inability frequently exhibited by the Government to realise the responsibilities that rest upon them in regard to national affairs, we cannot but remain anxious as to their handling of the issues we have been discussing. We do not doubt for a moment that they mean well, and that they sincerely desire to carry out the Report of the Commission. What we are doubtful about is their ability to realise fully the gravity of the situation and the great- ness of the responsibility which at this moment rests with the civil power. Frankly, what we dread is lest the Govern- ment should introduce an inadequate measure through a certain levity or indifference of feeling; or again, should overload their measure ; or finally, should let the Bill get entangled in side-issues or complications which they have not been at the pains to think out, and then at the last moment should be forced, as the only way out of the impasse of their own creation, to abandon the idea of legislation for this year. We sincerely trust that we are doing the Government wrong in thus stating our anxiety, and that when their Bill is produced next Wednesday we shall find that they are proposing legislation thorough and appro- priate. If so, such legislation will have no warmer supporters than ourselves, nor shall we fail to do justice to the Government, and to regret that we ever raised doubts as to their ability to estimate accurately the responsibilities with which they are faced.
While we are dealing with the present ecclesiastical situation in Scotland we cannot refrain from noticing one memorable outcome of the crisis in the -United Free Church. We believe, though the fact will not be admitted at present, that one result of the decision of the House of Lords will be to minimise in a very marked degree the demand for Disestablishment and Disendovrment in Scotland. Though Scotland may not realise it for the moment, what she is witnessing is in effect the disestablishment and disendowment of a great and historic Church by the fiat of a Court of Law. It is true that the establishment and endowment of that Church have in law a purely voluntary basis ; but that does not alter the fact that the phenomena are the phenomena of Disestablishment and. Disendowment. Can it be said that the spiritual welfare of Scotland has been improved, or that the true interests of religion have been furthered, by the decision of the House of Lords ? The world will also, we believe, learn from the present crisis that an Establishment may prove a better protection for the rights both of the majority and of the minority than any barrier which can easily be set up within a voluntary system. The possession of worldly goods by those who in the eye of the law are merely private indi- viduals or private associations, and the irresistible claim of the Courts to interpret all trusts and contracts on rigid—nay, mechanical—lines, may prove in the end to provide an Erastianism which cuts deeper than that which is founded. on the power of Parliament. When the time comes, as we presume it must, for the re- modelling of the United Free Church on her old. basis of voluntary establishment, we trust that some plan will be devised for giving that Church a legal status above that of a mere religious association, and for conferring on her powers of internal legislation which will relieve her from the rigid legal bonds that are connected with the possession of lay property. Might not, for example, the United. Free Church obtain by statute or by charter a status and constitution analogous rather to that of a University than of a voluntary religious association ? We admit the difficulties, but we do not see why the ingenuity of the lawyers should not be used to prevent the United Free Church from being in the future placed at the mercy of a minority of her members.
Previous page
