Some photographs from that time of contending for the Gospel
The protest took place at the installation of Richard Hanson as Bishop of Clogher, on March 17th, 1970.
The protest brought about the ejecting of us from of a local Orange Hall, Andrews Wood hall, where I was conducting a Gospel mission. The mission continued however, and by the end of April a Free Presbyterian hall had been erected and some months later that year, Clogher valley Free Presbyterian Church was constituted in the hall.
Despite the efforts of local ecumenists and their roping in of some Tyrone County Council officials to aid them, their demand that the hall be taken down and removed, failed.
It can be seen that a hall had been erected and was in use for regular services by June. Many years ago, the hall was replaced by a beautiful permanent building.
The Gospel outreach in the Spring of 1970 in Clogher Valley was the first of a number of missions undertaken by Lisbellaw Free Presbyterian Church that resulted in a permanent Gospel witness in the area.
AN ANSWER TO FOUR LECTURES DELIVERED IN ENNISKILLEN CATHEDRAL BY THE BISHOP OF CLOGHER RICHARD HANSON
by
REV. IVAN FOSTER
Minister of Lisbellaw Free Presbyterian Church
Published as a booklet in 1970
Chapter 1 – The Unchangeable Character of Christianity
Before examining the text of these lectures we shall examine the title: “CHANGING CHRISTIANITY IN A CHANGING WORLD”. Its suggestion as before stated, is that Christianity must change with the times. But is this so? We say no.
I. My first reason for rejecting a changed Christianity is that the needs of the world (i.e. mankind) have not changed.
Solomon, the wise man, said: “There is no new thing under the sun”. The scoffer points to the men who recently walked on the moon and cries: “There is something new”. No doubt this is man in new surroundings and new circumstances, but—and this is what Solomon meant —it is old-fashioned man who is on the moon. Th men who trod the earth in the dawn of creation and those who trod the moon’s surface in recent times are exactly the same SPIRITUALLY and MORALLY. Six thousand years may have brought man many technological advances, but he has not advanced one inch toward God or holiness. The sins of the world today were those of the world at the time of the Roman Empire, and correspond with those of the Babylonian Empire. The awful virus of depravity can be traced to its source—Adam’s transgression. ‘By one man’s disobedience many were made sinners’ (Romans 5:19).
In his unrighteous state before God man has remained and will remain utterly alienated from God. However, the grace of God has decreed that this state of affairs can be remedied and that only by faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. The preaching of the Gospel is the spreading of this good news. The resultant religion that stems from faith in the Gospel is Christianity. Christianity is the religion based upon and agreeable to the Holy Scriptures. The position of the reformed theologian can be summed up in the words of the statement which the Bishop swore he believed.
‘Are you persuaded that the Holy Scriptures contain sufficiently all doctrine required of necessity for eternal salvation through faith in Jesus Christ?’ (Consecration of a Bishop, Book of Common Prayer.)
In answer to this the Bishop should have been honest and said, ‘No’, since he believes that the Bible does not give us sufficient doctrine and we must add to and alter it. Of course the Bishop was posing as a reformed and Protestant Bishop, and since this is what the Reformers believed—namely that the Bible contains all the doctrines necessary for our salvation through Jesus Christ—he said, ‘I am persuaded…’
The successful cure
If as we have already seen man’s disease (sin) has not changed then surely the formula which has proved successful in the past MUST NOT BE ALTERED. That unalterable formula is of course the Bible, which contains ‘all doctrine required of necessity for eternal salvation through faith in Jesus Christ’ (Church of Ireland Prayer Book).
If man’s intrinsic nature and character had altered then we might speak of a ‘changing Christianity’, but while the world remains unchanged talk of a ‘changing Christianity’ is the talk of one who has the same aim and ambition as the ‘birds of the air’ in the parable of the sower (Matthew 13), that is to rob us of the good seed of God’s Word.
II. My second reason for rejecting a changed Christianity is that the Lord Jesus never suggested any change in God’s revelation.
The Saviour Himself said in John 4:34, ‘…My meat is to do the will of him that sent me, and to finish his work’. He refused the Devil’s temptations because they were contrary to the Word of God. He answered Satan consistently with the words, ‘It is written…’, and proceeded to quote a portion out of the Book of Deuteronomy to show why he refused to comply with Satan’s wishes. CHRIST WAS SUBJECT TO THE WORD OF GOD. If any had the right to change doctrine then surely He who is ‘The Word of God’ (John 1:14 ; Rev. 19:13) had that right, yet Christ never changed one doctrine. He said, ‘Think not that I am come to destroy the law or the prophets, I am come not to destroy, but to fulfil. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled’ (Matthew 5:17-18). We are not to ‘think’ or expect that there will be changes in God’s Word. Christ’s coming brought many changes, it is true. The era of the prophets had come to an end. Albeit THE WORD OF THE PROPHETS REMAINED UNCHANGED AND UNCHANGEABLE. The dispensation of the law came to an end. Its types and shadows gave way to Christ, the Antitype. However, THE PRINCIPLES OF THE LAW REMAIN INTACT AND ARE REEMPHASISED IN THE NEW TESTAMENT. The bishop and his fellow-modernists take upon them more than the Lord of Glory did. THEY SEEK TO ALTER THE WORD OF GOD by subtracting one doctrine and adding another. What is so momentous about the Twentieth Century that we should have a change? Surely there was never an event in history equal to the coming of Christ–God made manifest in flesh and dwelling among men; yet—and I reiterate this, for I feel its significance must be grasped—yet no doctrinal changes resulted from that great event. Why then must there be changes now? Since Christ made no attempt to bring about changes then we reject as arrogant and blasphemous the attempt by the Bishop of Clogher to introduce new doctrine.
III. My third reason for rejecting a changed Christianity is that the Apostolic Church never sought to introduce new doctrines, but was always subject to the Word of God.
The commission given to the apostles directly before the ascension was, ‘Go ye therefore, and teach all nations baptising them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: teaching them to observe all things what whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen’ (Matt 28: 19 – 20). We have already seen that Christ taught nothing contrary to the teaching of Old Testament Scripture. So when He commanded the apostles to teach the nations to observe ‘all things whatsoever I have commanded you’, He was making the boundaries of their teaching the same as His own – the Word of God. It was not the will of Christ that His apostles introduce changes. Their duty was ELUCIDATION of the Old Testament Scriptures not ALTERATION. EXPOSITION of Bible doctrine is the duty of the preacher, not, as the Bishop is attempting, EVOLUTION.
Old-fashioned results
The first sermon preached by an apostle was an exposition of the Old Testament. Peter on the day of Pentecost preached upon a text taken from the prophecy of Joel. (Acts 2:16.) During the course of the sermon he made many references to the Old Testament, proving that Christianity WAS NOT CONTRARY TO OLD TESTAMENT DOCTRINE. In Acts 2:25 David is quoted from Psalm 16:8-11. David is again quoted in verse 34, this time from Psalm 110:1. The preaching of this old fashioned message
(Peter was quoting from David who had lived approximately 1,000 years before Christ) was followed by the conversion of three thousand people. Here is the reason why Satan does not want these doctrines to continue, but wants them put away for something new and less damaging to his kingdom of sin and darkness. There are no conversions in the church where ‘NEW’ doctrines are preached in the place of the ‘OLD’.
The pattern of apostolic Christianity is given to us in verses 41-42 of Acts 2: ‘Then they that gladly received his word (from reports received of the Bishop’s sermons they are ENDURED rather than ENJOYED) were baptised (unashamedly confessed Christ as their Saviour): and the same day there were added unto them about 3,000 souls. and they continued steadfastly (not changed subtly as the Bishop is seeking to do) in the apostles’ doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers’.
As the Apostolic Church increased and multiplied under the preaching of old fashioned doctrines (see Peter’s sermon in Acts 3:12-26 as another example of the compatibility of Old Testament and New Testament doctrine) various disciplinary measures were needful. Questions and disputes arose. Then where did the apostles turn for a revelation of God’s will at such a time? To the Holy Scripture of the Old Testament.
In Acts 15 they encountered those who sought to substitute a doctrine of salvation by works ( Acts 15: 1) for that which they had been preaching, salvation by the grace of God through faith in Jesus Christ. (Acts 15:11; Eph 2:5.) It is worthy of note that the apostles speak none too kindly of those who had introduced this new doctrine. They referred to them as men who ‘trouble you with words, subverting your souls’. Dr. Hanson, with his attempts to persuade the people to accept ‘new’ doctrines, is a troubler seeking to subvert souls. The Greek word for ‘subvert’ can be translated ‘destroy’. Surely men who preach another Gospel are about the task of destroying souls. Those who believe the false gospel of this false bishop will find themselves damned alongside the man who taught them the doctrine of devils. (I Tim. 4:1)
The Apostolic Church knew nothing and had no desire to know anything in the way of a ‘new’ doctrine contrary to the Old Testament. Every aspect of church life was subject to Scripture.The doctrines of Justification by faith alone, Sanctification, Adoption, Regeneration, Man’s responsibility to God, Predestination, Election, Glorification of the Saints and many others are all proved from the OLD TESTAMENT in Paul’s Epistle to the Romans. Every other epistle uses the same standard of reference – the OLD TESTAMENT. Thus, the apostles of Christ, like the Saviour himself, saw their message as the eternal message of God, unchanged, unchangeable.
IV. Another reason why I reject the ‘new’ doctrine of Dr. Hanson and the ecumenists is that it is contrary to doctrines already revealed.
No doubt there is much about God and Heaven that we do not know, BUT that which God will be pleased to reveal to His people in eternity will NOT BE CONTRARY to that already revealed in the Bible. What we will learn in eternity will strictly be an OPENING and ENLARGING upon that which is contained in the Holy Scriptures. Like the disciples on the road to Emmaus we shall have our eyes opened that we might know Him and all His glory and majesty. (Luke 24:16, 30-31.) II Timothy 2:13 teaches us that God cannot deny Himself. Any new revelation that eternity will bring will not be a denial in any way of that which God has already shown us. For this reason we reject the so-called new revelations of ecumenical theologians— they are all contrary to what the Bible teaches us.
For example, if the ECUMENICAL DOCTRINE of the Virgin Birth is true then Jesus was possibly the son of a German mercenary in the Roman army. This is the opinion of a leading ecumenist, Dr. Nels Ferre and of many others less open in their blasphemies. This makes the Bible history of Christ lies. It makes Mary a woman of no morals at all, nothing better indeed than a common army camp prostitute. BUT, and it is here that we realise the full depths of this man’s hatred of the spotless nature of Christ, worst of all, it makes Christ an illegitimate child of an unknown father. Is this what the Bishop would have us believe? In his last lecture he says that there is no alternative to ecumenism. No alternative to a Christ of an unknown father and a prostitute mother? Thank God we have. The Divine Christ of Whom God the Father said, ‘ Thou art my beloved Son; in thee I am well pleased’ ( Luke 3:22). We cling to our own Christ, for He also pleases us well and we will reject the blasphemous babblings of false prophets with their wicked notions and spurious revelations. Well could we quote the words of Jeremiah concerning those men. ‘I have not sent these prophets, yet they ran: I have not spoken to them yet they prophesied. How long shall this be in the heart of the prophets that prophecy lies? ye, there are prophets of the deceit of their own heart’ (Jeremiah 23: 21, 26).
V. Another reason for rejecting the Bishop’s doctrine are the warnings of Christ and His Apostles.
In the New Testament we have strict commands concerning changers of doctrines. Christ said to His disciples in Matthew 16: 6, ‘Beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees’. Verse 12 shows us that Christ meant DOCTRINE when He referred to the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees. What was the doctrine of the Pharisees and Sadducees? That question is plainly answered for us in Mark 7: 5-9 : ‘then the Pharisees and scribes asked him, Why walk not thy disciples according to the tradition of the elders, but eat bread with unwashed hands? He answered and said unto them, Well has Esaias prophesied of you hypocrites, as it is written, This people honoureth me with their lips, but their heart is far from me. Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men. For laying aside the commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men, as the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like things ye do. And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition’.
This was the doctrine then of the Pharisees–replacing the doctrines of God’s Word by the doctrines of men. We shall, in our examination of the Bishop’s first lecture show that this is exactly what the Bishop wishes us to do. One of his standards of judging what is right and what is wrong is–and here we quote the Impartial Reporter’s account of the lecture, ‘… the other criterion which I shall use is one which is probably not nearly so familiar to this audience. It is the verdict of historical and theological scholarship. The theologians- for better or for worse- are the experts here’. Is this not an echo of those who clamoured against Christ and prated about the ‘traditions of men’? Christ says to beware of such men as the Bishop.
Warnings given
These warnings are reiterated in the writings of the apostles. Paul says in Romans 16:17, “Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them”. He refers again to falsehoods in Gal 1:8-9. “But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.” I Timothy 4:1-2 reads, “Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron.” II Timothy 3:1-9, “This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come. For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God; Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away. For of this sort are they which creep into houses, and lead captive silly women laden with sins, led away with divers lusts, ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth. Now as Jannes and Jambres withstood Moses, so do these also resist the truth: men of corrupt minds, reprobate concerning the faith. But they shall proceed no further: for their folly shall be manifest unto all men, as theirs also was.”
Peter also makes pointed references to false doctrine. “But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction. And many shall follow their pernicious ways; by reason of whom the way of truth shall be evil spoken of,” (2 Peter 2:1-2.) “Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts, And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation,” (2 Peter 3:3-4.)
John, the apostle of love, has harsh words to say of the false prophets. “Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time. They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us,” (1 John 2:18-19.) “Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son. If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed: For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds,” (2 John 1:9-11.)
Jude also voices warnings in verses 3-4. “Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints. For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ.”
Perhaps the clearest warning of all is one reserved for the final chapter of the Bible and spoken by the Lord Himself: “For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book,” (Revelation 22:18-19.)
Thus we have seen that Christ came not to introduce new doctrine and that this principle of His was continued by the apostles and early believers. Any changes or attempts at changing doctrine were looked upon as the action of troublemakers which would damn souls in hell and bring the curse of God upon the advocate of change. May this chapter ring out a warning to the Bishop of Clogher and those who share in his apostleship of falsehood.
Saturday 5th June 2026
Part 3 will follow next Saturday DV.