The Church, the Falling Away, and the Restoration

by J. W. Shepherd

(1) The Bible the only rule of faith and practice. (2) The duty of every man to judge the Bible for himself. (3) The priesthood of every member of the Church.

Instead of “the Bible only as the rule of faith and practice,” they have creeds and Parliamentary control of church services; in place of “the duty of every man to interpret the Bible for himself,” this same State Church has burned and hung Roman Catholics and Dissenters, the one for holding too much Romanism, and the other for not holding as much as the king and the clergy were pleased to demand. Then, in lieu of “the priesthood of every member,” there is a limited priesthood, differing but little from that of Rome; with infant baptism, infant membership, and numerous other human inventions “making void the commandments of God.”

CHAPTER VI.
THE REFORMATION IN SCOTLAND

Had I the time and space I would be glad to give a history of the Reformation in Scotland under John Knox and others. After all the prolonged suffering and conflict, it has precious little more of Protestantism than is common in the English State Church. There we also find the reigning monarch represented in the General Assembly by a nobleman, as Lord High Commissioner, who, on some occasions, has taken upon himself to dissolve the Assembly without the consent of its members. In 1843 a conflict between the ecclesiastical and civil courts brought about a great disruption, giving rise to the Free Church of Scotland, so that there is also the “General Assembly of the Free Church.” But these two General Assemblies are not on equal footing—in the very nature of the case could not be. In the one, the proceedings of the Assembly carry with them the sanction of the law, backed by the civil power; while those of the other have no such sanction, and are only binding upon willing adherents, who, by tacit agreement, are under moral obligation. The one is a corporate body in the eye of the law; the other entirely voluntary. But both bodies hold that the acts of their respective assemblies are binding upon their churches. Consequently those churches are in subjection to a rule of which the apostolic churches knew nothing, and, therefore, are not in faith and practice in subjection to the Bible alone. The “Confession of Faith” is the standard of appeal. Infant baptism, infant membership, and numerous other departures from apostolic Christianity stand out to refute any claims that these churches of Scotland might put in. They may protest against Rome or Episcopacy, but what matters that, as the Bible protests all of them?

THE INDEPENDENTS

But it is not to be supposed, even though the multitudes settled down in violation of their professed principles, that all would refrain from a fuller application of them. Hence the multiplication of distinct parties, each claiming to be the church, or a nearer approach to the church as ordained by Christ. Coming out in this way from the English State Church we find the Independents, who sacrificed property, liberty and life. They were glad to escape to Holland or to this country. Others suffered on and aided largely to win against a persecuting State Church the liberties the people now enjoy. Belknap’s “Life of Robinson” gives the following principles as underlying their church organization:

(1) That no church ought to consist of more members than can meet in one place for worship and discipline. (2) That a church of Christ is to consist only of such as appear to believe in and obey him. (3) That any competent number of such have a right, when conscience obliges them, to form themselves into a distinct church. (4) That, being thus incorporated, they have a right to choose their own officers. (5) That these officers are teaching elders, ruling elders, and deacons. (6) That elders being chosen and ordained have no power to rule the church, but by consent of the brethren. (7) That all elders and all churches are equal in respect to power and privileges. (8) That the Lord’s Supper is to be received sitting at the table. (When in Holland they observed it every Lord’s day.) (9) That ecclesiastical censures are wholly spiritual, and not to be accompanied with temporal penalties.

They admitted no holy days but the “Christian Sabbath,” though they had occasional days of fasting and thanksgiving; and finally they had renounced all human inventions or impositions on religious matters.

In Scotland we find Congregational principles as far back as the Commonwealth. Independency had obtained much hold in England among all classes. The soldiers of Cromwell carried their principles with them, and are said to have formed a Congregational church in Edinburgh. But that church was not permanent, and we find nothing of churches of like order in Scotland till 1726, when John Glass, an eloquent and able minister, with avowed convictions in harmony with those of the English Independents, withdrew from the Church of Scotland and formed churches in most of the large towns of Scotland. These churches were called “Glassite.” Mr. Glass and his adherents taught:

(1) That national establishments of religion are unlawful and inconsistent with the true nature of the Church of Christ. That the church being spiritual, ought to consist only of true spiritual men. (2) That a congregation of Jesus Christ, with its elders, is in its discipline subject to no jurisdiction under heaven, save that of Christ and his apostles. (3) That each church should have a plurality of elders or bishops, chosen by the church, according to instruction given to Timothy and Titus, without regard to previous education for the office, continuous engagement in secular employment being no disqualification. (4) That the churches observe the Lord’s Supper on the first day of every week; and that love feasts be held, after the example of the primitive Christians. (5) That mutual exhortations be practiced on the Lord’s day, any member able to edify being at liberty to address the church. (6) That a weekly collection be made in connection with the Lord’s Supper in aid of the poor, and for necessary expenses.

Mr. Glass was largely eclipsed by Robert Sandeman, whose activity wielded a wide influence. Those who adhered to his teachings were called “Sandemanians.” Sandeman prominently repudiated that mischievous mysticism which views “saving faith” as an inspiration directly from the Holy Spirit. His teaching has been thus summarized: