"A privilege of a very different order which the State must guarantee the citizen relates to his spiritual existence. Just as the State must provide conditions which will tend to promote his material well-being and enable him to earn a decent living, so the State must promote his spiritual freedom - freedom for man's soul. This will include free speech, a free press, freedom of religion, in a word, freedom of conscience. This is a cause of which the historic Calvinist is an ardent defender. Calvinists in history have not always consistently practised this principle in granting liberty of conscience to others; nevertheless, freedom of conscience follows directly from the principles of Calvinism and must strenuously be maintained as a right which the State must grant its citizens. Liberty of conscience may be defined as the boundary line of the State's authority in the realm of the spirit.” (p 149, ‘The Basic Ideas of Calvinism’ by H. Henry Meeter, Th.D., Baker Book House, Grand Rapids, Michigan,1973)
————————————
(The following is by someone who wishes to remain anonymous) —
IF WE ARE SERIOUS ABOUT WINNING INDEPENDENCE FROM THE BRITISH STATE, WE SHOULD RESPECT THE FREE CHURCH OF SCOTLAND
It is hard to hear the hostile critics of the Free Church of Scotland in the SNP leadership debate and not regret their disregard for that body’s unique record in the nation’s constitutional history.
The SNP has to date failed to deliver independence, despite being led by the two most gifted politicians of their day. And yet some in the debate on their successor see membership of the only Scottish institution that has asserted its independence from the British state and WON as an impediment to leading the nation to independence today.
If we are serious about winning independence from the British state, we should respect the Free Church of Scotland, even if we disagree with its views on personal morality. Why? The clue is in the name, the FREE Church. It is constitutionally free to run its own affairs as the proud heir of those Presbyterians who issued a CLAIM OF RIGHT to spiritual independence from the British state in 1842, a claim that was finally recognized by Westminster in the 1921 Church of Scotland Act.
The contemporary caricature and the historical reality of the Free Kirk and its Highland Gaelic culture could not be more at odds. Sorley Maclean’s observation comes to mind as one brought up in that culture: “In the Thirties I used to be very skeptical of Scottish writers who seemed to attribute most of Scotland’s ills to Calvinism. What did THEY know of Calvinism?”
This is what contemporary critics should know about Calvinism. It knows about challenging the power of the state in the name of freedom. If you want a national leader who has independence in their DNA, then membership of the Free Church is a good place to look for someone who knows how to take on the British state – and win.
