| Historic Documents in American Presbyterian History NO COMPROMISE MEN AND WOMENThe Opening Message at the
 CONVOCATION OF SESSIONS
 Atlanta, Georgia, 18 May 1973,
 by Rev. William E. Hill, Jr.
 
 
        
          | This message by the director of the 
            Presbyterian Evangelistic Fellowship was the opening message of the 
            Convocation of Sessions, and was reprinted in the 6 June 1973 issue of the Presbyterian 
            Journal, though heavily edited there, due to limited space. |  Old Polycarp, one of the leaders 
            of the early Church, was hauled in before the governor. "Polycarp," 
            said the governor, "you are charged with being a Christian. Just give 
            a little salute to this image of Caesar and say, 'Caesar is lord' 
            and we will turn you loose." "No," said Polycarp, "I cannot say Caesar is 
            lord because Jesus is Lord."
 "Now, Polycarp," said the governor, "you are 
            an old man and haven't much longer to live. Don't throw away what 
            little time you have."
 Polycarp replied, "Eighty-six 
            years have I lived and Jesus Christ is the best friend that I ever 
            had. I cannot deny Him now."
 The soldiers grabbed the old man, tied him to 
            a stake, poured oil on him. As the flames leaped about his throat 
            he looked up into the heavens and praised God as his spirit slipped 
            out into eternity. Jesus had done too much for Polycarp for him ever 
            to be ashamed of his Lord.
 The Word of God abounds with illustrations 
            of men who did not compromise and of churches that did not compromise. 
            One could call the roster of the heroes of the faith and find that 
            all of them were men who refused to compromise.
 Our Lord in the book of Revelation wrote to 
            the seven churches of Asia Minor. Out of the seven there were only 
            two for which He had no word of rebuke. To the other five He said 
            many things by way of commendation, but always He came around to a 
            solemn warning about ways in which they had compromised. The two no-compromise 
            churches stood out like shining lights.
 One was the church at Smyrna. Christ commended 
            them for their steadfastness in trouble and poverty, assuring them 
            that they had vast spiritual riches. He comforted them by telling 
            them. He knew how they had resisted evil, how they had exposed and 
            cast out infiltrators of the "synagogue of Satan." He told them of 
            the things they must yet suffer, saying to them, "Fear none of these 
            things which thou shalt suffer. The devil shall cast some of you into 
            prison that ye may be tried and ye shall have tribulation . . ." Then 
            came the great challenge: "Be thou faithful unto death and I will 
            give thee a crown of life."
 The other church for which the Lord had no rebuke 
            was the church at Philadelphia. He assured them that He knew their 
            work, challenging them by saying, "I have set before you an open door, 
            which no man can shut." He assured them that He would keep them in 
            the "hour of temptation which is coming upon the whole world to try 
            them that walk upon the earth." Then He said in His word of admonition, 
            challenge and encouragement: "Behold I come quickly. Hold fast that 
            which thou hast. Let no man take away thy crown."
 No-compromise churches are made up of no-compromise 
            men. In this connection, I want to say three things about a no-compromise 
            man:
 I) He refuses to compromise in small things and as a result, he does 
            not fail when the big test comes.
 2) In making his decisions, he refuses to make them on the basis of 
            possible harmful consequences to himself.
 3) He is obedient to the Word of God and separates himself from unbelief 
            and immorality.
 
 Daniel Did Not Compromise
 I am thinking now of a young man whose nation 
            had been defeated, its army scattered. The young man was perhaps a 
            teenager. He had been bound by rude soldiers and carried on a long, 
            weary march to a strange land to dwell as a slave of a people whose 
            language he hardly understood, a heathen, brutal people.
 Daniel, a devout and earnest young man, was 
            selected from among others and with a few friends was chosen to be 
            trained in the king's palace that he might one day be among his counselors 
            and advisors.
 You remember the story. Because Daniel and his 
            friends would not compromise in the matter of the king's food, they 
            were blessed by God. Daniel rose more rapidly than any of the others 
            and became chief counselor to three successive kings through the years.
 This brings us to our second thought: The no-compromise 
            man, in making his decisions, does not do so on the basis of the possible 
            consequences to himself.
 Remember the three friends of Daniel? They were 
            men who refused to compromise in the matter of the worship of the 
            golden image. When asked why they had not obeyed the commandment to 
            fall clown at the sound of the music, Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego 
            answered, in effect:
 
 No Regard For Themselves
 "O king, we do not hesitate for one moment to 
            answer you in this matter. If our God chooses to do so, He is able 
            to deliver us even from the burning fiery furnace and He will deliver 
            us out of your hands, O king. But if He does not choose to so deliver 
            us, be sure of this one thing, we will not serve your gods nor worship 
            the golden image you have set up."
 The point is clear. They knew the consequences 
            of a negative decision. But they made their decision without regard 
            to the possible consequences for themselves, because it was the right 
            decision.
 This is a hard lesson for us to learn. It is 
            particularly hard in these soft, easy days of permissiveness. It is 
            easy to rationalize and say, "Well, tinder the circumstances there 
            is no harm and after all maybe some good will come from it if we go 
            ahead and conform. Under the circumstances, it may be the thing to 
            do. Then, too, we must not forget that if we are too uncompromising 
            it may divide some churches, it will divide the denomination and it 
            may even cause bitterness and ill will."
 We are too easily persuaded to think it is right 
            to save our own necks, our property or our ecclesiastical reputations. 
            Lots of good people fall for this line.
 When our Lord faced a crisis of this kind we 
            are told He "set His face steadfastly to go to Jerusalem." He knew 
            God's will. He could have gone out into the Gentile world and done 
            much good. But He set His face steadfastly to do the Father's will: 
            "Not my will, but Thine be done," He prayed.
 A third point is that the no-compromise man 
            is bound by the Word of God. He must "obey God rather than men." We 
            think of Peter and John as they were hauled in before the Jewish rulers, 
            questioned, threatened, and yet unbowed. As Peter said, "Whether it 
            is right in the sight of God for us to obey you rather than God, choose 
            ye. But we cannot but speak the things which we have seen and heard."
 Sure, they defied the ecclesiastical law. Sure, 
            they disobeyed the corrupt ecclesiastical leaders. Sure, they faced 
            possible bodily injury, pain and death. But they w e r e bound by 
            the Word of God and they chose to obey God rather than men.
 It is hard to get around Paul's admonition to 
            the church at Galatia, warning them about people who were "perverting 
            the Gospel." He said, and said it twice with emphasis, "If any man 
            come to you preaching any other Gospel than that which I have preached, 
            let him be anathema." And that means, let him be cursed of God. That's 
            pretty strong. It's pretty drastic. It's pretty divisive. Not very 
            conciliatory! But it is the Word of God.
 
 Bound Consciences
 Are our consciences bound by the Word of God? 
            Does that Word preach separation from unbelief and apostasy? Then 
            we have no choice. I cannot say it for you, my brother, but I can 
            say it for myself: I will not go on any longer in compromise. I am 
            ashamed that I have gone on as long as I have. The time has now come 
            when we must obey God.
 Let me add a word of personal testimony. I am 
            the son, the grandson and the great-grandson of Presbyterian ministers. 
            I was brought tip in the strictest form of old-fashioned godly Calvinism, 
            educated at Davidson College and Union Seminary, taken into Hanover 
            Presbytery, the original presbytery of the Southern Church.
 God gave me a burning sense of passion to be 
            used of Him to bring men to Christ. But at Union Seminary I got a 
            mixture of truth and unbelief-I had sown into my mind the seeds of 
            doubt about certain parts of the Word of God. I remember how I came 
            to sneer at fundamentalists.
 I remember how I participated in the liberal 
            leadership of the presbytery. I seconded some of the motions that 
            were made resulting in overtures to the Assembly from Hanover Presbytery 
            that laid the foundation for the liberal takeover. I was one of the 
            liberal's boys. How blind I was! How ashamed I am now of how I participated 
            in and gloried in what the liberals were doing. Union Seminary had 
            sown its seeds in my mind and they were bearing fruit. But 
            God began to show me the true way some five or six years after I entered 
            the ministry, particularly through a godly retired missionary who 
            worked in our midst in Hopewell. She knew, somehow, that I was a ship 
            without an anchor. Out of her meager pension, she made it possible 
            for me to spend a week at the Moody Bible Institute.
 I went; I didn't like what I heard and saw. 
            I thought they were too critical and narrow-minded. The impression 
            of the visit was negative. And yet, all unknown to me, God was dealing 
            with me and before very long He opened my eyes and showed me the truth 
            of the absolute authority of the Word of God. From that ,Point on, 
            my ministry began to change.
 At first I didn't say much about the change 
            that took place in me. I didn't tell my people about it. For a while 
            I did not inform my congregation of the issues before the Church. 
            I thought to do so would confuse them.
 But towards the end of the 1940's I began to 
            see the need to warn my people as God had taught me through His Word 
            concerning the dangers besetting the Church. How glad I am that I 
            can say today that God opened my eyes and showed me that sooner or 
            later there had to come a showdown.
 This is an awesome hour. For myself there can 
            be no turning back, regardless of the cost. I know from personal experience, 
            having participated in it for a time, what goes on in the liberal 
            establishment. I want no more part of it. No matter how painful or 
            how humbling the future may be, God helping me, I cannot compromise 
            the Gospel nor disobey my Lord. Some may disagree and I respect their 
            sincerity. But for me, any turning back now would be a violation of 
            my conscience and a sinful disobedience to God and His command.
 I know the reborn Church will not be a perfect 
            Church. I do not know whether or not it will fragment. I do not know 
            what the future holds, but I do know the decisions that I must make. 
            To do otherwise would be to compromise and I am bound by the Word 
            of God against that.
 During the height of the controversy in the 
            Northern Church in the 1930's a lady said to Dr. Benjamin Warfield 
            on the eve of one General Assembly: "Dr. Warfield, I do hope and pray 
            that at this General Assembly we are going to have peace."* Dr. Warfield replied, "Yes, madam, I pray and hope too that there 
            will be peace, but never at the expense of truth." Let that be our 
            spirit here.
 
 [*Historical correction: Rev. Hill must 
          have meant the early 1900's, as Dr. Warfield died in 1921.]
 |