More

MacRae spoke at one meeting of the Free Church Stornoway on the:

Unusual features of the present religious movement in Lewis.
He was convinced there was a revival in Lewis and a work of God. But he wanted people to consider some of the peculiar features of it.

In particular MacRae wished the meeting to consider that in Park... convulsive fits.
Grimshader ...Trembling or tremors...With crying.
At Point and Shader trances and women praying and exhorting ( ...and a good deal of disorder).
He noted further
Those or some could not give an explanation to what was happening. Rather than looking for the work of the Holy Spirit people were disappointed if there was no manifestations.
Secondly MacRae saw a sense of superior order of Christians taking hold with those who had experienced some of the manifestations.
He felt that matters might lead to unscriptural extravagances.
He also talked and reported on other happenings in the country, quoting Kilsyth and Cambuslang.
He concluded that the manifestations were neither good or evil but hysteria.

He quoted the medical observations for hysteria.

Highly strung people mainly young women
Infectious
Associated with convulsions tremors and trances
Attacks are always in an audience never alone.
Those effected say they could not help themselves.
If wanted to those effected could have controlled themselves.
Delusions and hallucinations
Consciousness not lost.

MacRae was concluding that mass hysteria was happening in Lewis and his concern was separating it from the work of the Holy Spirit.
Hi did specifically acknowledge the work of the Holy Spirit at that time.
Quoting the action of McChenye from Dundee. He was supporting the need to have religious meetings closed by 11.00 pm. "Lest Good be evil spoken".

It is clear from MacRae there is a need to discern what is of God and a work of the Holy Spirit and what is not. While he saw the Lewis revival as of God, not all was his making. It is easy to be tricked in times of revival to assume all phenomena are in connection with the spirit of God, and to question it is to hinder that Revival. There is a more discerning Church today- but a good warning nevertheless.

MacRae on Revival

Kenneth MacRae, someone who took a keen interest in revival felt that a careful discrimination needed to be exercised in evaluating revivals.

He noted in revival there was :

Increase zeal and devotedness to Christ among believers.
The spread of conviction and alarm among the spiritually careless.
This change is spiritual condition may be gradual or as suddenly as a thunderbolt.
The existence of numbers who are awakened some who unfortunately fall back while others try to drown conviction and fail.
Converts are established in a good hope of their salvation although the manner of their conversions differ considerably some are slowly brought to a sense of peace and cannot identify a time then they first came to Christ; others are suddenly changed and may experience immediate joy and ecstasy.

During the Lewis revival of 1936 he wrote "Matters seem to be definitely improving" he was cautious about reports. By 1939 a wide revival work was present in Lewis. At the Free Church Assembly he recorded "evidences... that the Lord is effectively working in the hearts of men".

Concern over certain phenomena presented itself. At Point meetings were reverent and with solemnity. There was elements of excitement and hysteria. Yet clear evidence of lasting conversions.
By 1938 the phenomena of swooning, of out cries, of temporary paralysis of limbs and muscular spasms or jerks drew much attention. The press searched for stories. People would collapse, others rise together, some weep or call in Gaelic on their relatives. Some lost all power to their limbs and would be carried to other rooms to recover. These things caused controversy. Some ministers affirmed the physical effects as god's. In their thinking All the phenomena was linked to revival. Others were concerned how the media were presenting the situation.

Why is it?

Why is it..?
I have noticed some things over the years.
One is that people look for the easy route!
The path of least resistance is the one that many knowingly or without noticing take.
Now before you go off looking at the Bible and stories about the blessing of the smooth road and how God has blessed many with a trouble free journey, before you look at all the references quoted for prosperity theology- a doubtful theology until the late eighties- are we not to take our lot as it happens?
Has strict Calvinism got it right ?
Why is it?
Stay with it.
Are some, to find that their road is tougher than others.
So in our subconscious are we looking for the blessing sign be looking for the path of least resistance? It is easy to do this.When I read Michael Faraday's biography its not like that. Bruce and the spider story is not about that either! (No its not in the Bible).
Why is it?
Esther's road was not plain sailing and she spent a whole year preparing for one day with the King! Is it a wrong way to travel the broad road looking for the easy bit and collate that, as the narrow way fit for King servants?
The narrow way may be less broad by definition but it is more than likely a more troublesome way than the “broad way”.
Why is it then?
Because we are lazy be human nature?
Because we want all “nice” things to come our way!
Perhaps we need to redefine “Good things that come our way”-
As the things that God purposely puts our way to improve our relation with Him- Be it a new car or a broken leg!
The culture of today is about success measured by accumulation of wealth seen in goods and the ability to buy goods at any cost, modern or post modern.
Yet the real success is the ability to be in a strong relation with the Father and the ability to worship him...at what costs? Preparing for the oneday to be with the King.
Seeking the Kingdom first is becoming more obscure to the society we live in.
The behaviour of “pleasing” the neighbour at the expense of one self's destiny/Zoe life/walk/seeking God's will, is as strong as before.
So how are you going to be determined to walk the talk of the glorious journey set out before you ( and maybe made before you!) The choice is there in a strict Calvinistic way!
If nothing is going to separate you from God then that is a struggle worth winning.
So seek the narrow way whatever that means and be aware that it may mean struggle rather than the stream that seeks the easy path through the hard ground to the river, to the sea.

Certainly a wet day........

The Rain over the last few days has changed the countryside. Some are saying the local river has never been so high.


Picture of where we live and to the proximity to the burn.

Rogart flood 26 Oct 2006

This clip was taken at lunch time. I m sure there will be a lot of news regarding the flooding in the Highlands and in particular DINGWALL AT HIGH TIDE 2.30PM.

Just waiting...

Some driver waiting in the coop car park - Tain last Saturday.

So the schools are shut due to the inclement weather! Wont get much done today then!

Rain rain rain

Just went out to dump the ashes from the fire after my webcam conference call and thought Id have a look at the burn. We have had a lot of rain these past ten days, but the flow on the burn was back to normal height on Sunday. This picture taken 10 feet from the coal and ash bucket and 12 feet from the house!.

Its still raining.

At least I know there will not be a flood that covers the whole earth.!

25 Oct 2006 2.45 pm

Wear it or not?

Prayerinaction.net tell us "A top BBC executive has given news reader Fiona Bruce the green light to continue wearing a crucifix on screen."

What a caffufal in Britain ( the disruption )

Ten year conflict 1833-1843

In the internal struggle within the Church of Scotland, lasting around the 10 years, which coincided with a changing society, the industrial expansion, increase in iron works and the country's gross income increasing rapidly it was inevitable that matters would come to a head as people began to question in this new enlightenment. When the disruption came, on the basis of the state being able to have control over the church or not then many other underlying matters were neatly placed behind the disruption issue itself. Three underlying drivers were present.

• Who has final authority, church government or state church
• Patronage
• Calls and filling of church vacancies (see Marnoch case 1838)

Disruption

By 1834 the moderate had lost control of the general assembly.
By 8/3/1838 it was decreed that in the settlement of pastors the church must have no regard to the feelings of the congregation.
This Law was appealed by the House of Lords in March 1839 the decree was confirmed.
"The wishes of the Christian congregation were to be considered of no value in any way". This meant the civil court retained the power to introduce a candidate for a church to an unwilling congregation. Despite the changes over the centuries the law of patronage was back. For the Christian community of today this seems so out of date and out of line with the way churches should cooperate.

Free Churches of Scotland
So on 18/5/1843 A church disestablishes itself.
The Free Church fore fathers dissented for:

1.Non interference of civil courts in matters belonging to the spiritual of the church The claim, declaration and protest 1842 leaves it clear the fore fathers saw the rights of the Church of Scotland as established by Law.
2.No other head of the church but the lord Jesus Christ.

3.He had appointed Church officers to deal with church matters.

Their descendants were to find this ruling hard to follow when a compromise in a differing of opinion could be satisfied amicably regarding church assets in a further split in later years.
Ironically the church had to go to the courts in the turn of the 20 century. Its claim of right was in the formal document created by those founding fathers. The Church of Scotland response was a pastoral style letter with scriptural tone looking to reconcile the differences. The church it would seem in hindsight had a better grasp of how the Scottish worshipers felt.

Free Church of Scotland

Thomas Chalmers the leader of the group was particularly wanting it known that their split was not like the Scedeers before. The voluntaries mistake us was his cry. Candlish vented his ill feeling to the state church which did not help the cause. So the Free Church who called themselves evangelical took a large part of the Church away.
The remaining moderates (now a term of scorn) were left to continue as before.

The Free Church of Scotland, comes from an evangelical, orthodox, Presbyterian background with Church of Scotland principles. Chapel of Ease funded by ex Church members who now in the Free Church were being chased to pay debts or up keep of the chapels that they did not/ were not allowed to own.

One of the most outstanding evangelists in the Free Church of Scotland was Henry Drummond (1851-1898). Born in Stirling, the Drummond Trust and lectures continue to acknowledge this man who died at the age of 46. His training in science and divinity together with his passion to visit those in the deprived areas of Edinburgh showed his conviction that, where gods people get involved-gods kingdom will be made on earth. As well as working with and gaining respect from groups like the miners of Polmont, Drummond had many journeys abroad. He was recognised as a free thinker who could work with science and religion.

Hymns
Opposition to Hymns and instruments is not restricted to this arm of the Presbyterian Church. But James Begg was a promoter of the use of Psalms and no instruments.

In 1866 the Free Church voted 3 to 2 for the use of hymns. In 1869 Begg was unsuccessful in Curtailing hymns. In 1872 the Church accepted the “New Hymn book“ 213 votes to 61. In 1877 Prof Bruce wished to have their “Own Free Hymn Book” with Begg supporting a defence of no change position.
Then in 1892 the assembly with drew permission to use instruments for worship and uninspired Hymns in public worship- the current position.

Declaratory Act 1892
The Free Church produced the act to change its fundamental position in constitution from The Confession to a reformed creed, but because of the Barrier Act, had to get approval from its presbyteries for any constitutional change.
The basis of the act supported strongly by Rainy was
1.Free to allowed to modernise the creed of the church
2.Act was used to help professor deal with college “scruples” in theology in an age of questioning.
3.Discipline seemed to be a thing of the past

Rainy was successful in having the act passed.
This meant the possibility of moving away from the founding Westminster Confession to the substance of the reformed faith.
Failing to give justice to those who disagreed with this change and to their feelings and convictions stated by some and the lack of unity and peace 21 ministers and 21 elders of the Free church signed a dissenting document.

Their protest was based on :

• The overpowering of the majority on their minority

• The Office bearers were changing the “founding” constitutional which was Ultra Vires regarding The Westminster Confession and in the face of the protesting minority.

Thus in 1893 those who had now dissented, created the Free Presbyterian Church of Scotland.

When the majority of the Free Church joined the United Free Church in 1900 their were those who refused. They wished to carry on as the Free Church and decided to sue the United Free Church for some or all of the assets of the joining free church. The remaining Free Church who took the action (“Wee Frees”) suffered 4 years of legal wrangling with the United Free Church trying to evict the Free Church Ministers.

Turn up for the books
In 1904 the House of Lords came on side of the minority and said that the minority of the remaining Free Church of Scotland were entitled to all the assets. Nevertheless the Government of the day stepped in and said the division of the property should be made to both the Free Church and the United Free Church.
In terms of practice the Free Church of Scotland of today carries on very similarly to the days of the past.

Big is massive!

tallskinnykiwi has a blog and has been writing for years> was particularly struck by his recent comments on TINY AND big. Hope it stimulates your thinking on church.

People are knotted.....

This tree is near Golspie and it has an interesting root system. All knotted.

When I read blogs about the Church, Emergent, Emerging Church, baptists, theology, reformed, Charismatic etc I see knotted people.

Now I dont mean" get knotted!"( British derogatory remark)

I mean the roots of the past help to support. Be it twisted or not. Think...If you untwisted the roots of this tree...If you straightened them out if you made them tidy. The tree woiuld fall down its perched on the bank. The root system helps to give the stability.

People need to know you are what you ARE (present tense) - roots of your life digging deep and supporting you. So stand good with the roots you have and reach to the sky heavenward!
Its about "being".

The now is about growing upward to the heavenly place. What are you doing to accomodate the growth? Do not ignore the past it supports you but in the now, live for God and the future will be nurished.

Church Union...

Church Unions

It would be unfair to record all the splits in the Church in Scotland without recognising the courageous effort of many to join similar Churches for a continuing future work. The four main headings for Church splits over the 400 years or so could be categorised as follows:
1.State interference with the liberties of the Church.
2.Tyranny exercised in the General Assembly.
Hostile to any enthusiasm that threatened to overpass the bounds of "moderation".
3.Too liberal and narrow interpretation of the Covenant or founding documents.
4.Awakening of democratic spirit in the nation, effecting an enlightenment in political and church freedom.
In 1847 the Secession and Relief Churches joined to become United Presbyterian Church. These 518 Churches had a strong missionary spirit.
The majority of the original Seceders (Auld Lichts) joined the Free Church in 1852 after the satisfaction of the wording in the Act of Declaration passed by that Church. A minority did not enter this Union.
In 1857 there was a strong promotion that the time was right to join both the Free Church and the United Presbyterian Church, however after some ten years this Union was dropped. However, the Reformed Presbyterian Synod who had started talks with these two Churches united with the Free Church in 1876. In 1886 a Bill was introduced to the House of Commons designed to promote the reunion of all Scottish Presbyterian s. Although this did not happen at this point in 1898 we can see some practical working together with a common hymn-book by the Presbyterian Churches of Scotland and Ireland. It was in the previous year that the Congregationalists and Evangelical Union blended two important minor elements of Scottish dissent. The United Free Church created from the Free Church and the United Presbyterian Synod under a tolerant mutual understanding, the basis of which was used subsequently in other Unions, was successfully completed on 31 October 1900. Again a minority failed to be carried in and claimed to be the continuing Free Church (wee Frees). From the turn of the century to 1929 the spirit of the new millennium encouraged Conferences, joint work, which continued during the War and a few "false starts" in Unions were finally rewarded with the Great Union of The Church of Scotland and the United Free Church (although to this day there is still a continuing United Free Church that did not go with the majority into the Great Union.

Church of Scotland
84 Presbyteries approved the Union (1420 votes for, 22 against).

United Free Church
63 Presbyteries approved the Union (1298 votes for, 101 against).

While there was a sense at that time of completeness with the Union and indeed others mentioned, and taking aside the difficulties and healing process of generations that is remarkable that such Unions have taken place. Many long hours and dedication by individuals have played an important part and in some cases to the detriment of the health of these individuals. Whilst even I would not want to see Union for the sake of tying up loose ends there is indeed a long way to go for Scottish Churches to be more effective. In my lifetime two Presbyterian splits creating the Associated Presbyterian Church from the Free Presbyterian Church of Scotland and Free Church of Scotland-Continuing out of the Free Church, only shows there is a long way to go.
Other types of Protestant Churches of a Congregational or Methodist nature have many areas that would need satisfying or the laying down of some principles before Union. With the use of the likes of The Evangelical Alliance and ACTS there are many in Churches who want to work together for the sake of the people and their God, rather than the holding up of the "principle". Likewise there are many who would see as a compromise and failure to their forefathers any thought of Union. Many have quoted in meetings or in publications that "persecution is the most likely way that the Scottish Churches would come together as a national (free from State), witness to the community". There are good signs throughout the United Kingdom of joint Church work, sharing of resources, and buildings. Agreeing official terms of reference for Union will take much longer.
The other aspect of Church Union that should not be forgotten or discounted is a work of spiritual revival, which we will look at briefly later. When God's Spirit comes down on a community there is then a special opportunity to catalyze a work and possibly Church Union!
For all the splits in Unions there have been, the desire of those to move forward and capture a more live Church, based on the Bible and New Testament principles is seen as the driving force for change.
Again and again throughout history we see that practice has been distorted or lost e.g. It is ironic that in a Presbyterian or non Presbyterian Independent circle we hear frequently of Bishops, Presbyters, Elders and even Deaconesses, yet in the Church of AD250 below this level of authority there were Sub-Deacons, Acolytes, Exorcists, Readers and Janitors! (I am not aware of many current Acolytes in the Presbyterian or Independent circles, are you?
To Summarise the major unions we have the following:
1842-creation of United and Original Secession Church
1839-Original Burgher Synod joins with Church of Scotland
1847-The Relief Church and the United Secession (new lights) creating The United Presbyterian Church
1876 - Reformed Presbyterian Church, formerly Cameronians joined the Free Church of Scotland.
1896-Congregationalists and the Evangelical Union join together.
1900-United Presbyterian Church and the Free church creating the United Free Church.
1929-United Free Church and Church of Scotland
2000- Congregational Union of Scotland joined United Reformed Church of United Kingdom.