Would he, then, have held that liberty to be now restored, and the way
to an honourable, safe, and beneficial alliance reopened? We doubt it.
He would certainly have seen that, in point of fact, the Established
Church now enjoys a degree of liberty that enables her to discharge the
ordinary functions of a Christian church without obstruction, and in
particular to continue with great success that very enterprise of church
extension for which he thought that she would be able to do nothing.
But he could not have failed to see that this liberty was an indirect
fruit of the Disruption, and that it was quietly conceded to the
Established Church in order that she might stand practically on the same
platform of liberty with the nonconformist churches, and especially her
great rival the Free Church. He would have found no concession of
principle, no acknowledgment by the state or by the civil courts of an
essential difference between a Christian church and a civil corporation,
and no acknowledgment that the church, as the creation of Christ,
enjoyed privileges from Him independent of any state. He would have
found no repudiation of the dictum of the then Lord President that the
Established Church had no jurisdiction whatever in the country except
what had been conferred by the state; and he would have found no
security that if a new collision should occur between church and state,
between the worldly and the spiritual power, the state would repudiate
her old principles and policy.
Further, the contention of Chalmers in his London lectures and in his
latest deliverance (see p. 148) always was, that the state ought to
support religion, not merely because people wished it, but because the
religion was true. Would he, then, have found in the members of the
present Parliament any such value for revealed truth, as such, as would
have given him confidence in them as its guardians? A Parliament that
numbered Agnostics, Jews, Roman Catholics, Unitarians, and what not
among its members—how could such a body be a nursing-father or a
nursing-mother to the Christian church? Such a Parliament could not
safely be intrusted with its guardianship. It was a very different
condition of things when the Scottish church allied itself to the
Scottish Parliament, all or nearly all being members of the church. Nor
could he have found any cause for believing that at any future time,
within reasonable distance, the nursing of the church could be safely
committed to parliamentary hands.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account