N.Z. Discussion.

Star (Christchurch), Volume LXVI, Issue 20484, 10 December 1934, Page 6

N.Z. Discussion.

The Angus Case

New Interest Aroused In Australia.

(Special to the “ Star.’*) SYDNEY, December 1. CERTAIN amount of interest has been incited here by the discussion of the teachings of Dr Angus which took p’.ace at the recent session of the New Zealand Presbyterian General Assembly at Dunedin, and surprise has been expressed in some quarters at the strong feeling evidenced by some of the members who took part in the debate. It may be as well, for the “ orthodox ” section of the Presbyterian Church in New Zealand to understand that many members of the church here are entirely in accord with its views. A few days ago the Rev R. J. M’Gowan. who has been foremost in opposition to the school, published in our newspapers a Statement compiled recently by a number of Presbyterian clergymen in Melbourne. These ministers hold that “ the widespread unrest and anxiety in the Presbyterian Church over the Angus case has not been allayed but intensified by the decision of the Judicial Commission”— which declined to take action against Dr Angus and practically recommended the two parties to reconcile their conflicting views as best they can. They feel that 44 if matters are left as they are until the General Assemblv meets in 1930. the exist*n£ gravity of the situation will be accentuated.” They desire, therefore, to assure all Presbyterians that “ the faith of the church will be maintained with the utmost resolution by concerted action in all the States.” Steps to be Taken. Certain steps are to be taken which do not require publicity at present, but which those who hold these views believe will prove efficacious. Orthodox Presbyterians in New Zealand may derive some comfort from this assurance that the controversy is not over yet, and that the case against Dr Angus will not be permitted to go by default. Dr Angus himself, when his attention was drawn to the discussion in the New Zealand General Assembly, made some oracular remark to the effect that “ nobody can turn back the hands of the clock”; and his chief supporter, the Rev K. Edwards, observed that 44 We should seek to come to an understanding rather than carry on the controversy.” But it ought to be clearly understood why men like the Rev R. J. M’Gowan regard it as quite impossible to compromise with such professions of faith as truth and tradition. Defining Christianity. According to Dr Angus, and to the Rev Iv. Edward, who upholds his views, no man who professes to accept Christianity should be regarded as a heretic and turned out of the Presbyterian Church. But this is only another -way of saying that any man should be free to choose his own definition of Christianity and that there is nothing in Presbyterianism which makes it materially different from any other type of Christian faith. This at least is the interpretation placed on the Angus teachings by Mr M’Gowan and his allies; and if we accept this view of the Angus 44 evangel ” it is easy to understand the distress that it has occasioned among the upholders of orthodox traditions, and to appreciate their stern resolve to carry on the struggle to the bitter end.