THE K I N G ’S B U S I N E S S
September 1925
392
A M om en tous D ec ision By R obert Yoimg, M oderator of th e Jud icial Commission of th e P resby terian General Assembly
This, statem en t was made by Mr. Young before th e regu lar m onthly m eeting of th e Southern California P rem illenniai Association in June. Mr. Young’s long years of service as a P resby terian layman give strong emphasis to th e fact th a t th e need in th e church fo r strong, competent, qualified laymen to defend th e fund am en tal doctrines of th e W ord of God is g rea ter th a n .ever before in its history
be about these men principally, and I w an t to enum erate them as to th e ir experience and qualifications. Of the sevfen lawyers, one was from New York, Judge Bruce. Aside from Judge Bruce, the most outstanding character, perhaps, was Judge Sells of Kentucky. He has been on the Supreme bench in K entucky for many years and is approaching eighty. He and the other judges in th e ir tim e have had numerous opportunities to decide ques tions concerning the life and death of men charged w ith crime. Judge Sells some years ago made the decision in th e Caleb Powers case. Some of you may remember th a t notable case. Then we had Judge Fox, who had been on the Supreme Bench of th a t g reat commonwealth, Pennsylvania; A finer! man I never saw anywhere, more .conservative, bet te r educated, b etter trained, more kind and moderate in his decisions th an Judge Fox and the other members of the Commission, and I speak of him . as an outstanding charac ter. Judge Burrows of North Dakota was Chairman of the Commission, to which I assigned the task, afte r the argu ments had been made in our Commission and were passed on by me as Moderator, to p u t in form our judgm ents, and Judge Burrows w rote the decision in th a t case. A finer decision in my opinion was never w ritten in any law case or any ecclesiastical case. There was also Judge Humes of Oklahoma, and I have already mentioned Judge Bruce, five of them, and as I told th e Assembly there were two of us “ ju st men”—^lawyers, w ithout any decorative title of “ Judg e,” or any degree whatever except our college degree. Now coming to the point I had in mind, no t one of these lawyers hesitated a moment in his decision, and th is is the decision we finally rendered: T hat the n arrative of the Gos pels concerning the V irgin B irth of Jesus is tru e and must be accepted by candidates for th e m inistry. T h at was the gist of our decision there. T h at was really the only case of any importance though. Two other cases came before us in which th ere was a defect of procedure. Now, before I sit down, th is is my message I came to give you. I t is th e same message I gave my church, because I felt th a t the attitu d e of the seven lawyers on th e Commission ought to be known to the church a t large, and I w ant to state to you th a t probably the most im portant tw enty m inutes in my life (except th e tim e I was m arried) were the tw enty m inutes th a t I stood on the ro strum before th a t Ceneral Assembly. It seemed like an hour. The judg ment of the Commission is the prelim inary judgm ent, to be accepted or rejected by the Assembly, and as they were read one afte r another we were curious to know how they would be received, especially the last one— th e crucial decision, and I w ant to say to you if the vote th ere was any indication of th e church at large, there was no doubt as to the position of the ran k and file on the m atter of the Virgin B irth. The “ ayes” sounded like peals of thunder while the “ noes” sounded like raindrops on the roof. I have a memorandum here asking whether I th in k the church is safer in th e hands of lawyers or preachers. You will have to draw your own conclusions from w hat I have said. I will say, however, th a t whatever danger th e re may be in the church it is not w ith the laymen.
YOUNG, who is an elder in the F irs t Presby- srian Church of Hollywood, was introduced by is pastor, Rev. Stew art P. MacLennan (brother f Rev. A. Gordon MacLennan, pastor of Bethany
P resbyterian Church, Ph ilad elph ia). Dr. MacLennan said: “Xwas reading ju st recently in one of our church papers a statem en t of a man who made th e observation th a t it was not th e ordinary layman bu t religious w riters who were saying things th a t were not at all complimentary to the Lord Jesus Christ as to His p atern al origin. He spoke of how the humble fisherman from Galilee stood and gave his testimony to the Lord Jesus Christ, and then the w riter went on to say th a t down through history in the moment of crises when the church failed, when g reat religious leaders failed and were carried into apostasy, it was th e laymen who stood firm and called the church back to its original ground and gave testimony to th e person and work of the Lord Jésus Christ, and he showed over and over again th a t long processions of men and women have stood tru e to the Word. He was calling atten tion to the fact th a t th ere was now running in the Sunday School Times a series of articles by a layman who was one of the g reatest scientists of the world, and as I heard Mr. Robert Young, one of the mem bers of our Session a t Hollywood, speak recently in our church, my h ea rt was th rilled w ith th e though t, th a t here is another layman to join th a t g reat throng, along w ith W illiam Jennings Bryan, who in his appearance before g reat gatherings has always given such a clear and strong testim ony for the Lord Jesus Christ. “ I am n o t going to say anything regarding th e General Assembly, bu t it is my privilege to introduce to you Mr. Robert Young, Moderator of the Judicial Commission of our church, which is the highest commission in th e General Assembly. Mr. Young was chosen Moderator a year ago and has been a member of th e Commission for th ree y ears.” Mr. Young spoke as follows: A lawyer among m inisters is ap t to be out of place. I am not now a member of th e Judicial Commission, my term having expired w ith th e adjournm ent of the last Assembly; otherw ise I m ight feel considerable delicacy in talking about the workings of the Commission, although I would not do so if I though t it not entirely proper. I w an t to ta lk to you about seven lawyers,— members of th a t Commission. The Commission also included eight Doctors of Divinity, fifteen in all of us. I speak of the lawyers because they are on the defensive in m atters of doctrine. They have been on the defensive in every way since the tim e th a t Christ pronounced th e “Woe unto you, lawyers.” We have reform ed since th en ; ra th e r we have been reformed. We have Bar Associations now to regu late our conduct, which I don’t believe they had in th e tim e of our Saviour. As I said, the Doctors of Divinity are not on th e defensive and lawyers usually are. For th a t reason I speak of these seven men and also for the additional reason th a t I know more about men of th a t class, for I have been following them about forty years. These seven men were not only lawyers but fivé of them were judges in various states and one or two now are judges on the bench. I refer to the character of these men because in law we recognize th a t the weight of a decision depends upon the ch aracter of th e man who renders it, which is th e opinion of lawyers and of the bench generally, so what I have to say to you today will
Made with FlippingBook - Online catalogs