An Apology
Humble pie time. In previous articles I was somewhat critical of the commission set up by the Church of Scotland to conduct an inquiry into the issues raised by the appointment of ministers in same sex partnerships. I thought they would achieve nothing and end up with a fudge. I was wrong. So apologies to Dr Andy McGowan and his colleagues for ever doubting their ability to get the Church of Scotland to make a clear decision. Although the report is over long and in places quite turgid, and although it offers nothing that was not known in 2011, it is quite clear in the choices that it offers the upcoming Assembly of the Church of Scotland. It is a job well done.

An Apologia
Let me offer a defence of the position taken by the ‘traditionalists’, better known as the biblical position. That’s basically it. It’s biblical. And no church should be advocating or proclaiming anything that is unbiblical. Indeed that is the beauty of the report. The Church of Scotland as a whole will be making a clear decision next week (unless someone attempts to come up with another fudge). Is it as a Church going to follow the biblical teaching set out in the report, or is it going to declare that the Bible is wrong and that the Church must just go along with whatever the contemporary Zeitgeist is? Does the Church of Scotland wish to remain part of the Church of Christ throughout the world, or does it wish to go its own route? All the major branches of the Christian Church, through all the centuries, have held to the view that marriage is between a man and a woman, that sex out-with that context is wrong, and that therefore those who engaged in homosexual relationships cannot be married, or ordained to the ministry of word and sacrament. The report sets out clearly that the Assembly can choose to remain within that Church or to leave. There is no middle ground in that respect.

Despite all the best efforts of liberals and liberal evangelicals like Steve Chalke and Rob Bell, no-one has managed to come up with anything other than ‘its not nice/loving’ to be against same sex marriage and homosexual partnerships. This is always stated with such authority, usually backed up by a couple of stories about nasty homophobes and nice homosexuals, that is seems unquestionable. Without rehashing all the details again, let me just question that whole premise. To go against the Makers Instructions is not loving, kind and Christlike. It is destructive, stupid and suicidal for society, church and the individual. One aspect of this that is almost delusional is the way that the more ‘liberal’ position is often portrayed not only as being more loving but also more radical. It is neither. What is loving about going against Christ’s teaching on marriage? What is radical about meekly going along with the current trends of the ruling classes and metro-elites within Western society? What kind of radicalism will get you ostracised by polite society, banned from the BBC, shut out of many jobs and probably prosecuted? Not the liberal agenda which is promoted endlessly by the elites out-with the church, to their allies within it. Rather it is the biblical position which goes against the flow, challenges the culture and calls for a costly and radical discipleship. In this respect by the way, watch out if you are an evangelical within the C of S and the liberal trajectory continues. Right now you are wanted, but although you will not be required to obey the Bible, you will be required to obey the Assembly. One of the more chilling aspects of the report is that it calls for yet another ban on Church courts, councils and committees of the church discussing this until 31 May 2014.

An Advance?
I put a question-mark on this one. If, and I accept it is a big ‘if’, the General Assembly rejects the new ‘trajectory’ and decides to stick with the Bible, there is a great opportunity. The battle is not over, it will have just begun. The Church of Scotland needs to be reformed root and branch. Homosexuality is not the issue. Adherence to the Bible as the Word of God and the only rule of faith and life for the Church, is the crux issue. If the Assembly goes along with the Zeitgeist of the time then whilst I am sure that some will feel called to stay in and continue the battle, the bottom line is that the fight is over. It is difficult to see how one could remain within the C of S and continue as a Presbyterian, submitting to a Church which defies the Word of God, and yet at the same time submitting to the God whose Word it is. Doubtless some will square the circle by becoming de facto independents and will do a good job looking after their flocks, but surely even they must realise that the game would be up. Perhaps we all need to recognise the new situation. Christendom has gone. Christian Scotland has gone. Welcome to the Brave New World of a secular Scotland, in theory diverse and pluralistic, in practice governed by a ruling secular metro-elite.

The concept of a national State Church has gone. The concept of the Church of Scotland as a national church of any description is rapidly disappearing into the history books. The Assembly reports that membership has fallen another 15,000 in the past year (that’s equivalent to 100 churches closing in the year) and is now down to 403,000. Some estimate that fewer than 125,000 people actually attend a Church of Scotland on a regular basis. A church which has only 2% of the population attending it, cannot claim in any sense to be the national church, never mind the only game in town. The remnant trappings of civic religion, and the applause of the liberal elites for accepting their agenda, are no substitute for the church being the pillar and foundation of the truth.

I read today Muriel Armstrong, a former editor of Life and Work and an elder of the Kirk, making a plea in the Herald, both for the Assembly to go the liberal route and, in a case of wanting to have her cake and eat it, also urging the evangelicals to remain – “To the evangelical wing of the Kirk I would say go if you will be happier and you think it will further the Gospel of Christ in the world. To those of you within that grouping whose Christian faith allows you to be gracious to those who interpret the Gospel in more so-called liberal ways, please stay– we need your contribution of preaching and pastoral care. Who knows, you may yet be led to change your mind on this particular issue.” Once again the patronising tone of liberalism is set out – if you are gracious, tolerant and open-minded you will stay, and if you have any sense at all, you will overcome your prejudices and come to see the liberal light. But her first sentence is spot on. Evangelicals who stop fishing within the Titanic and instead get on with fishing in the wider ocean of society will find that they will be much happier and the cause of Christ will prosper.
If I was a prophet, which I am not, I would suggest that what will happen if the Church of Scotland Assembly does not change the trajectory, is that only a handful of churches will leave (not the 50 suggested in the press). Most evangelical ministers will stay because they will not be able to take either their congregations or their buildings with them. However many individuals will leave and the decline in the C of S will be accelerated. I suspect that most people know that and that this past couple of years have not really been about deciding what trajectory to take (that was done and dusted some time ago) but rather seeking how many evangelicals can be persuaded to stay.

Where now?
This is of course not just about the Church of Scotland. Those of us out-with (especially in the Free Church) might be tempted to indulge in some Schadenfreude. But that would be both ignorant and self-defeating. We have our own problems to deal with as well. Evangelical Christians are far too divided – especially evangelical Presbyterians. It is almost beyond parody that some who will leave the Church of Scotland will find it so impossible to have the prejudices of the past, the intransigence of the present and the fears of the future (on all sides) overcome, that yet another Presbyterian denomination in Scotland will be set up. I understand why some cannot and will not join the Free Church, but another Presbyterian denomination in Scotland? Please. I think I would just remain independent rather than go through the whole rigmarole of setting up a new denomination in Scotland which will probably end up having an ‘ecumenical relations’ committee to cultivate Christian unity!

It is all very frustrating but hopefully in the future we will be able and prepared to work together for the sake of the Gospel. At the end of the day what really matters is that we have good biblical churches in every community in Scotland – whatever the denomination.

What about the Free Church Assembly?
I suspect it will be a quiet Assembly. The Free Church has major financial and structural difficulties, but overall the Church is in as good heart as I have seen it in 27 years of ministry. There are several new initiatives, churches that are growing and new church plants beginning. The key issue for the Free Church Assembly is to get the College sorted. It is very weak and struggling to get students, funding and to provide what the church needs. At a time when ICC in Glasgow is downsizing and other theological colleges are struggling, it may seem that now is the time for the Free Church College to restructure and reduce its expenditure considerably. Is it insane to suggest that we should do the opposite? At a time when the Church in Scotland is faced with turmoil and we need to train more church planters, ministers, elders, deacons, youth workers and evangelists, in order to take the opportunities available in a failing secular humanist culture; now is the time for a radical root and branches reform for the College. The choice of principal, a change of curriculum, renaming, involvement of other churches, co-operation with HTC and other European seminaries, training missionaries (both out-with and within Scotland) and bringing in other lecturers are all essential. Otherwise the College would be as well closing. The Free Church could certainly not afford to keep it going. In a sense the Free Church College is analogous for the whole Church. We either retrench and huddle up hoping for revival, or we seize the day and, together with other biblical churches, get on with the task of revitalising and replanting the hundreds of churches that Scotland so desperately needs.

Whatever I am assured of this – the Lord will build his Church and the gates of Hell will not prevail against her.

David Robertson – Dundee, May 15th 2013

David Robertson is a minister in the Free Church of Scotland.  He is currently serving as the pastor of St. Peter’s Church, Dundee (a pulpit once filled by Robert Murray M’Cheyne.  He serves as editor for the Free Church of Scotland Monthly magazine, as well as being chaplain for the University of Dundee. This article first appeared on his blog and is reprinted with his permission. 

[Editor’s note: the original URL (link) referenced in this article is no longer valid, so the link has been removed.]