CLUTHA PRESBYTERY.

Clutha Leader, Volume III, Issue 129, 29 December 1876, Page 5

CLUTHA PRESBYTERY.

Ths 'usual quarterly rnlßetihg of tl)'e : Clutha Presbytery was. held ; -in the Churchy Balclutha, on- Wednesday the 21st inst. Sederunt — Revs. Waters (Moderator), Allan (Clerk), Chisholm, Cameron, Skinner, Connor, M'Aia, Bett, Telford, and Cowie (associated) j and Messrs D. Dunn, R. Robsoii, Jaihes Adam and John M'Nicoll, elders.

The minutes of previous meeting were read and confirmed. . . '

. The Rev. Mr Allan reported the result of the call, to the .Rev. Mr Paterson of Waihola to the second congrega tion, Invercargill.;

Mr Allan submitted plans and specifications of the proposed new church at Kaitangata. The same were referred to a Committee, reported upon, and approved of"

The Deacon's Court, Lawrence, re quested the Presbytery to recommend the Synod to ..give a grant of £200 towards repairs to the manse.

It was resolved that the plans be approved of, and the recommendation agreed to.

The following gentlemen were elected members of Presbytery for the Synod's Committee on Bills and Overtures: — Rev. Mr Skinner and Mr James Adarc-*.

The Clerk reported that the collection iappointed by 'the Synod had been pretty generally made j also that no returns ot Sessions re the Barrier Act had yet been received. The Rev. Mr Connor moved the following overture ; —

That the Presbytery overture the Synod to devise such measures as in their wisdom may see fit, for the glory , of God and the good of the Church, for the effecting a harmonious and satisfactory Union with the Presbyterian Church of New Zealand, reserving in the meantime' (if that be thought necessary) all the legal rights and privileges of the Church estate belonging to the Synod of. Otago and Southland.

!In speaking to to tbe overture he said it was unnecessary for him to. do so with lengthened remarks. His object in bringing forward the overture simply was that the matter might be brought before the Synod de novo. At last meeting of Synod there seemed to be a strong feeling in favor of union, but much dissatisfaction with the manner in which the question had been brought forward. When he came to tbe Colony he thought he was coming to a united Church, but found he only belonged to a section of it He thought the basis of union adopted at last meeting of Synod was not a satisfactory one — one of co-operation only — they should aim at a fully incorporated union, and he introduced the overture in order that the matter might again be discussed upon a new basis. Tbe Rev. Mr Allan hoped tl.e overture would be withdrawn in order not to necessitate his voting against it. ; '--" Rev. Mr Cameron considered they had had enough of the union discussion for some time. It had created a con-' r siderable amount of ill-feeling, and he thought too many sudden changes were to be deprecated. They were now going to have the 'musical instrument (laughter), and. he thought that this innovation was sufficient for the time being.' They should let the union question remaia as it was for the present. Rev. Mr Chisholm seconded the overture pro forma. Mr Allan moved that the overture be not transmitted-. Seconded by the Rev-. Mr Bett. Rev. Mr Cameron moved : — - That thig Presbytery, while desirous of; TJnion with the Northern Church, yet, seeing the divided state of opinion in regard to the subject, think it inexpedient to take any steps in the meantime to accomplish it, and agree not to transmit the overture. ; Rev. Mr Skinner seconded i the amendment, Mr Adam, in supporting the amendment, referred to the bad results of the union discussions home and here. He was -opposed to so many sudden changes, and thought the Church had other and more important work -tj> do than to take up the time of : its courts with union, and other sim^r d<dbair4s. After some further discussion a! vote was taken upon, the' twftsy^iJßmerits' with the ..following Mr Cameron's amendment, nines Mr Adam's/ two. :- --,„-.- -.-*- yyy yy§.y \ . i, . Mr Cameron'ijM^d^rtiv^na thf overture were m^^^^^^^j^M^i^r ing results V-^--FOT2-i^«affl_^i^^^|pii^^ moti6n,;,bhe7 '- ' Art W'##r •-'''. The amendment m^yfi^fe^ carried. • The Presbytery ; Ch-en^l^ourned for an hoar, ?

At the eveni^p^^ttnt (Mr Bett, Moderator), -^d ''^44 '■ • ■ '- ; Mr Waterf^^P^^fhW?' folio wing overture i-^^^p.iifi^eajr; ; . ,?. j

Whereas it »"* desirable that the Pres- ! byterian Chuiefi.';lpf^t|go and the Presby-. terian ChurcV^pf :thefN orthern provinces of the Colon|{^f3]N'^72!ealand stiomd'' cooperate in ;^a^sH-a||ers "in which it 3_U^%e ; found pr|t(^^p^'*i» do so, gi-rin&t:'io some exiie^. : ;|n ! 7 Reference to niters specified^' %ii#|&ft voice ahd vote in each other's ; iu^»ie^burt ; and whereas 'tne' late dej^j|^^^7 on Uxiionij though not di_wlQSra#aonpeAess' for incorporation, yet Wa^at^ke belief that tKe.---s_aid chUl^e^^^faa^ ior , entering • into '{ a Union, [^-s^pdratibn^ •it is therefore hum^lyWertibed by the Presbytery .'of Cl^^mjp -.Synod- to take these prem_&M^i^pieir consideration, with „the, ?W-M3|l- m g wli at ste P s their-jwisdom -W|p-,:#f* d -have such Union! of* cbpjg^pliia.tured and carried' into effect] ; the; interests of religion y4 ■ • •

Lan,d. promote the glory of God within pthese. Provinces and on foreign mission [.fields.. -- ; ,.., r ... ;.., "Mr Waters spoke : af some length? in i-Jupport of the overture. Her pointed QUr?the large extent— of- territory— over, tfro- churches had. jurisdiction, and ,the impracticability of gov/.-ni-iug" the whole under one ecclesiastical jurisdiction, -the unnecessary expense this would entail,. &c. There was, however, no difficulty in the one church co-operating with the other, and it was with this view that he wished the matter brought before the Synod; The Rev. Mr Connor seconded the overture. „•■■-*. : Mr Adam moved an amendment, that the overture be not transmitted.

Seconded by the Rev.-MrChisholm.

After a discussion,, and Mr Waters having replied, the vote was taken, when there, voted for the amendment 8, and for the motion 2. The amendment was therefore declared carried.

The Rev. Mr Waters: moved the following- overture : —

Whereas there is much diversity of opinion among the members and adherents of this Churchin reference. to- the use of instrumental music in the public worship of the! Christian Oliurch, and whereas by the. terms of the deliverance adopted at last Synod, it is declared that Tniusical instrumentsThave the. warrant and sanction of Divine Scriptures for their use in the Christian worship of God — a declaration which very many are unable to -believe to be in accordance with the New Testament precedent or precept —.therefore- this Presbytery- resolve to petition, the Synod, as a Supreme Court of this Church, to reconsider the terms of the resolution above referred to, with a view of relieving a grievance from the minds of those who are unable to believe th£tt there is Scriptural wain-ant for the use of such instruments in the worship of God, as instituted by and under Christ, the Church's great Head-

In speaking to the above, Mr Waters said : Sir, — It is with reluctance that I rise to support this overture or petition, ahd urge upon this Presbytery to give its consent to have it forwarded to the Synod^as Supreme Court'of this Church. Were I at all able to believe that, by statements of the scriptures or by indications of Providence, instrumental music has any sanction to be employed in Christian worship*— were I able to believe this however vaguely,~l should . refrdn from further agitation. But I do not believe there is any divine sanction for, or recognition of, its use in the Christian Church as Vmeahs by which •to worship God, or to. enable worshippers to worship Him' more acceptably. Sir, the overture which this Church has adopted declares that the use of instrumental music in Christian worship has the warrant of Divine sanction. The overture begins : " Whereas tbe use of instrumental music as an aid in the Worship of God is scriptural ;" and /in answer to the reasons of dissent, *'there occur the following . — " In -de--, daring the provisions of the overture] to be scriptural,' the Synod founded its judgment on the scriptures of the Old. and New Testaments; as bearing upon j the regulations of the worship of the j New Testament?' Again : "It permits nothing but what Scripture warrants." Again ; " It merely declares what has already been tbe doctrine of Scripture as regulating tbeworishtpol God. -> — (See ' page 22 of proceedings). Surely* if these terms mean anything, they, mean i that there is Divine warrant for musical instruments in the worship of the Christian Church. I believe, sir, ours is the first Church, that has ever put forth such an allegation, arid she has got a bare majority to vote for it without any thing at' all like pointed arguments in support of that allegation, ] and in this way, she has framed-and,im-posed a new article of faith. I say a new, article of faith, for he who now "ob- j jects opposes himself to what he is told" has the sanction of Christ for its being ' employed in the worship of the Church ! as instituted by Him 5 for whatever we ! allege as having divine warrant for a I place in New Testament practice, must I ,be regarded as there 111 virtue of ft is /sanction 1 ; otherwise, to allege a divine [sanction is fallacious and deceptive. Now, sir, in objecting. to the lawfulness of instrumental music in Christiain worship, I am put into" tlf6 position of ob]ficting to what has the sanction of Christ for its use in His Church;' So it appears to me aiid to a great many ot^r-^isiihe^fDsijtion we are put in by this resoiut^n^ido^ted by a bare mai||f^t|^^g^^nod. We feel our:Jm^fiߧ^^M^^ow r siy of evading it — we feel ourselves in the position of ob-**-. jectors ' to what jour Church alleges to have, directly or indirectly, the sanction of the ChurcuV great head, - And yet , Up. evidence ' of 'such sanction was pro'dufced' by that majority ? who' voted, affirniihg that -the- Churches, head 'has given the sanction' alleged. :, Now, if the matter be at ull as f have repre.sentj.d r it> surely 'we put it mildly in saying th'^t'we 'h&ve 'a 'grievance, and one of such a nature that honesty and consistency call upon 7 us to take every legitimates^p to have it: removed, . I would say . to, those wh^' imposed; on-ns this new article of faith, do not persuade .yourselves that bur action ; is from the 'love ""of opposition ?• You may cbnie v to discover that r it proceeds from a better #neV i . stronger principle; •-• : ffceu-embfir that ybiyj6'aU.:'iipfr.-. vis t6 believe that . "there i's r 4l?e' 'sanction of Christ for the worshipping' of >God =7py instrumental 1 , mv^c.'|brJa^H> < ...iij-a -sanctioned- it, ; the'! ( p^ying'o| , 7tli^mstrument is as mu-cb'i vwiolfshipas i^ the 1 sihgih^witH-the voice. ; "Now, girf in the. 'absence of 'all "pfoefy t r

am unable to believe 'this dogma put forth by this very small Church of ours. .?.. s .! l .? 1 1-5? .wy.glud to be shown that there are " doctrines- r»f 'Scripture regulating and warranting . New Testament and yer that such regulatingand Warranting ' are altogether Oaside from (Joist's authority; that this Scriptural warrant claimed for the use of instrumental music in the worship of the New Testament is apart from and beyond His authorising j that it is Scriptural authority, though unauthorised by Him, ftnd that we are not called on to connect it with His name/ Well, show me that such a posiiim is tenable- and I may see a way of relief from the di&r culty of this, new. dogma. But if this position cannot be taken up, as I humbly think it cannot, then; say straight- \ orwirdly that by Scriptural warrant •you mean the sanction of the Church's Head. What then "f Just this : I am, and others are, in the position of objectors to what you, the majority, tell us, there is the*. sanction bf Christ for its use in the devotional services of His Church. I hppe you may be able to record your vote for reasons clearly commended fo' your own conscience, and which ou^ht to be plain enough to my'intellect. -.^Observe — my difficulty, aad my argument at present, are not as to the use ot no- use of instrumental music, but as to its having the sanction of the Head of the Church, which.sanction frames it into a dogma, arid which alleged sanction, if true, makes my position hertf*4^day, one of opposition to an Ordinance Ist' God. But passing from this, I- wish to point out as briefly as I can, some arguments to show that there is no such .sanction as has been alleged. One or two words in the New Testament have been cited as havino*, in their original meaning, a reference to a musical 'instt-umenti but- it. is not what the terms might mean originally,! but the question, is in what sense are, they used in the New. Testament ? The; original meaning ofa word is one thing,, and its current meaning hundreds of years after may be a very different, thing. If such words were meant to commend the employment of instruments in the ..worship, of the Church, we could not fail to find some corroboration of that in the Church's practice, for in many, or: most, places, circumstances were favourable to the use of such instruments as' were then common. We deny : that ifc can be shown that the word or two referred to could have, in its current use, any such reference as has been alleged, while it is perfectly certain that no instrument Was employed in the New Testament worship during her apostolic time, nor for centuries after. And when first introduced it was strenuously opposed, as contrary to the purity of Christian worship, but was introducing into that worship what was) in no sense referred to or recogapostles. H 'you*^ find such musical reference^ in a Greek word, we demand of you to point us tb some corroborative evidence in .-the practices of the Church in the apostolic .time,? ami if no suph, evidence can be found, you. are called on to abandon your criticism as unwarranted; • I wish, to refer, also to the synagogue as an argument of very great^ importance as bearing on this question. The synagogue was, in the apostolic time, a great institution, and existed wherever a score'of Jews were residing. Indeed, it was?one of those preparations which thad been making for the .reception ojf the Messiah and hisf Church. He 'himself frequented' ithe temple hut seldom,' but' Was 'a -regular worshipper and expounder in the synao*og'ue, and his apostles always sought, and often succeeded; to plant there ,tbe Christian Church. -Now, .in the synagogue no musical: instrument was allowed. " They-sung there , David's psalms every; Sabbath-day, but none of David's instruments were allowed, to accompany that: singing. „ The very people who were Wont to listen with rapturirto organ* lute, and> lvre-.accom-panying. the singing. in rhV temple's gorgeous worship, took with them > the same songs into the humbler synagogue,, but; felt . unwarranted -to take lute or lyrej timbrel or organ| into that synagogue service to accompany, its singing;'or :: aid' their worship of God: there; and. that because s . they were taught to regard the musical instruments as a part of the temple's ritual — as conngeted- with, the altar/ the sacrifice, ats .the_Jneense. Now, it f was that synagogue, service vyhicfi.. Jesus himself so constantly took part in. It was it which the apostles,: under "Divbe guidance, took as the model for the worship ef the Clmrch'the^ were commissioned to plant-. Into her worship they took David's psalms as their songs cf praise, buf admitted none of the instruments *mentio*a<id in. thosa ■ Very psalms they so. ardently sang. They listened to""them in the temple, hut left them there,, and \yhen the. templets services closed, those much, admired instruments Were heard no more in the worsb'p r ,of Jewq^ here illustrate this part 'of my'argument as ;I: would, otherwise have done.,. I?on.yjask thpse.on tlie .ether side to weigh this fact ,aa it -deserves.' ' f tis an historical. argument indeed, but ,;has abou t. * it .'. a . great ySm\ ; of sacrednessi; Those-instruments were in the terapte , 8 worship "by express appointment,* had ' 4 repeated ?'Di vine • recog-nitmr.,'-and?-yell/ ih^ planting Hiss Chutob iW*;this* wcu/l£, ,an^7|ec6Xstructing the v^orship i ,wfuc4 men i sfio^ldlrepder to GfodJ'he

'tomKiVi .•■,*_-}• yfif-iu'lc/ i -?

j left out of that worship one and' those instruments, while he adopt very songs with which they we, , sacredly , and .hisfcorieally^.conaec nnd in which they were "so often 'nSfi - terms OT statemi in Old or. NewTTep^rtmenT/ijfere" * heen'produced in behalf' of thiValle^ Divine sanction no argument whlci. comes up to even the magnitude ot paltriness,. \yfcile from; history.. no argument for. such . sanction' has "tfeen. attempted, and .yet from the bis&rr I'^"1 '^" the Church's plah'tin'g- or pt'.-cfctce,"^.-main argument 'stands to be rdrawh Sir, ere this new dogma be fastened .... our conscience, we ; challer.g-* proof of your haviug a ., warrant. „frora .^the Church's Great .Head, 'for' so nuposin"' it on us. ft is a grievanfie?Rur t elv?fo'r it puts us into the position of believing it to be Divine, because a bare majority have voted-it to be /scriptural; .or,.j.qno the other band, puts us in the position of objectors to.what this Chuvchlells.Z ,US is an ordinance of Chr_st,,'to be* used in that worship in which He is mediator^ J may also refer to' the RefonriaYiuu now. When they reformed. .public wu*. ship back . to the apostolic model, theY specially cast out insjrram^tar'\vusiV as having no place or recognition fia that model, but a. corruption froji the" temple imitations and Juda.sing tendencies of the middle age^ the) great Greek Church with her"' ''seven Vy millions of members has nevpr admitted such instruments into her worship, h«» cause having no warrant For their.ad*. mission. Then the Great Westminster Assembly discussed at length.- rhia very question, and decided, that there was no warrant for such "music in Church worship And the Pope of Rome, an old historical identity;- Holds that Christ gave^no sanction to the U3§ of such; instruments. in His ChurchL's services. We ar-3 told byf.frose on .the opposite ride that' by'the'languaga tliey ' have used they don't mean scriptural in any sense -like a warrant brvai sanction, but only that it "is in 'harmony with scripture. But so to-put/.H -seems to me only a miserable, equivocation, '"for what truth is. there that is not in hai'-* mony with Scripture ? Let the c"T*\n*guage be defended or abandoftf*d~ there are other grounds on which- to place these instruments than on' tha tot' a, Divine warrant or sanction. ■■ I move that this Presbytery. adopt: this oypr. ture so tar as to forward ie to the-Synqd for its consideration. The Rev. Mr Connor seconded the overture He agreed with' wh'at'Mr Waters ■ had advanced, and considered his argument unanswerable.- J ln the Synod he (Mr Connor) voted against the introduction. f)f;instrumentaV;music, because it was made a matter of faith, and because, consequently,, if he did not use instruments he might be charged with infringing a divine injunctions <4le^wished ._i££trumentrti. ; music introthe grouricT A of *expe & di^ey^|ji-^^P^K like it to be left to cbttfi|leg^-t.ont^^ adopt it or not as they chose. Mr Adam opposed the overture, and considered the best plan would bewlet the question rest for .a ftw yp'm^~"77H.e believed that if an organ or HarVrioniuin was introduced .into the. ...Tpkoma.riru church, all the Highlanders would/leave iri a body. He thought there )&s£ no instrument like the human voice, but . the matter -should. -be- allowed to drbpin the meantime." "• •"• : -- -•- r -.^ The Rev: Mr MfAra said Mr Waters had brought out -the matter, in. a new light, that /instrumental :music;had 'W.n introduced ,h,v. the .Synod as a dbcrma. If Mr Wafers and ms party would be - prepared to allow— its introductibuUs -a matter of expediency; then ?be i 'would vote for his overture, as he thought it should be left to congregations to introduce i t or- n ot as they; chose. ■r-.Bu t the mischief was that Mr Waters and his narty seemed determined , not „to allow instruments to be used upon any /ground whatever. - io Mr Waters would give no such promise. Mr M'Ara would' have to giv-s his-indep^ndent.vo'te upon the q'tfeStion before th°mi / \ ;, yy } y4 The Rev v ,Mr APanWpliedatsl^njyth to Mr Waters' argument, as to instru* ments being-introduced as a new dogma, 'of- a rule cf faith. „■ Be ; can.tende# that such wa3 not the memoir, g pii-t*, \ty -the Synod on tne word "Self iptural?' Tha meaning, he said,^wa8 v: n6t'tß*a't Tnstra* ments wefe prescribed in Scripture, hut that their introduction in the wor*shipo'f God was fn harmony with, an A not opposed" to,' Scripture. He would move that tlie overtnre- be.-ndtvtrans-mitted. . > m - ■-•■■l Seconded -by. Mr M'Ara. After a. di«cussipn,?and Mr Waters * f having replied, there' voted r sy the \* amendment 4, and transmission 3, A The timehclrnen't wai tWeTorerieclared | cal-ri'.d. „ . *'»*„-i, ' MpWs' f elfordf T.nd Skin* | ncr thpnjr^poftf-d^mpst favourably. upon j <& Mr A. G. Bond's studies, and generally fi upbn bis rfficVftncy and ftb.lirifis. Mr'Boyd thenf reajlTSPveral V.aper* i| and-/ discburses, rafter ,wliich. 7< i Jj The Jvtoderajtor put %Vn§nnj rp.*»»* 7 | tions, .and, "formal}** licynppd^Mr BoVtl % Mr " r fe.foni' } s&d 1 he had bfien r«- 1 guested by tK©^ Ale-tar-dra corti*i*i?£ftH->n m to .Icalcefftip/usu^ a 1 ,call;td'M^Bt.yl!:" o n^ , :^?f^lft ,:•-;; || ford wasly' #. W. wm^othßT \ uni|apv>f lght • hiii^H t B^*;i^^f^^^ti^p^i^^H