*Post-WWI Conflicts**—An editor is often required to be umpire or referee of his periodical when controversies arise about its contents and readers violently disagree.

Dr. Taggart exercised this difficult responsibility as the editor of the Covenanter Witness from 1933 to 1957, though he had the excellent assistance of co-editor Owen F. Thompson from 1933 to 1938. From that year until near the time of his death in 1958, Dr. Taggart had to “call the shots” for many a tough contest of ideas and religious conflicts which arose in the Covenanter Church.

From 1937 until it was discontinued in 1953, the Service Print Shop was also a heavy burden on Dr. Taggart, editor-manager of the one and only denominational printing establishment ever owned by the Reformed Presbyterian Church of North America.

World War II (1941-1945)—Most of the troubles Dr. Taggart had to deal with in the turbulent post-war period after his 60th anniversary issue of the church paper printed in 1944 were connected with the effects of World War II in Europe against Hitler or in the Pacific against Japan. The pressures of the war were felt by all, but the Covenanter Church had many peculiar reasons to be disturbed.

The most important effect of the war came unexpectedly through strict government efforts to control security by extending the demand for personal swearing of the Oath of Allegiance to the Constitution of the United States. In the military, in defense plants and finally in the schools by requirements of a Teacher’s Oath, the problem of Covenanter consistency was threatening many.

One older minister whose career had been an untiring crusade of loyalty to the traditions of past Covenanter glory now faced a crisis in his own New York church. Teachers were faced with the option of taking an oath to the Constitution of the United States or losing their jobs. I recall the emotional plea, which this old gentleman made to Synod for help, crying out to us, “Brethren, do something, do something!”

The result was the adoption in 1939 of “The Explanatory Declaration.” This was drawn up by a Quaker lawyer at the request of Dr. R. H. Martin of the National Reform Association, and presented for adoption to the Synod. It was approved as a compromise arrangement enabling Covenanters faced with taking the oath to the Constitution to swear allegiance and yet qualify our allegiance by stating our Christian objections to a Christless Constitution.

Another wartime issue was a letter from a “Gold Star Mother” who had lost a son in the war and wrote to the Covenanter Witness sharply blaming the church’s clergy for not enlisting chaplains to be with Covenanter men as they faced death. My long reply to this letter was printed in the Covenanter Witness of April 7, 1943.

The Christian Amendment—Approval of, and participation in, the war was by no means interpreted as a neglect of the Covenanter Church’s central message of Jesus Christ’s Kingship over the nations. As the Civil War in 1861 had fueled the zeal for Christianizing America through the National Reform Association, now World War II produced a spontaneous demand and a new vision within the Reformed Presbyterian Church of taking Christ to Congress.

In 1680 Richard Cameron dared to lead a small band to Sanquhar with a demand to make Christ King of Scotland. Inspired by the godly example and idealism of veteran Witness Committee chairman Dr. W. J. Coleman, a young Covenanter minister, A. J. McFarland of Kansas launched forth with his own prepared slide lecture to begin to call America to write Jesus Christ into the Constitution and make America a Christian nation.

Simultaneous with this response to God’s call, the Covenanter ladies of New York Presbyterial in 1942 called on the ministers of the Reformed Presbyterian Church to wake up, and to lift up the old Blue Banner by making some effort to present Jesus Christ the King to our nation. From this began the Christian Amendment Movement (CAM), a remarkable campaign that resulted in the introduction of many Christian Amendment resolutions in both houses of Congress over the next two decades.

Dr. Taggart freely granted space to the CAM leaders for publicity in the Covenanter Witness to help influence Congress to pass this amendment. When the CAM first set up an office and made me the first editor of our paper, The Christian Patriot, we put the office in my parents’ home next to the Topeka RP Church. Dr. Taggart gave constant assistance to our amateur periodical in the Service Print Shop.

Dr. Taggart firmly believed in the Covenanter dream of a Christian nation, and he used his talents to help CAM on its way. Our friendship was deepened by this fellowship.

Doctrinal Controversy Over Modernism— At this time, the Protestant world was being torn apart by a major doctrinal struggle between Modernism and Fundamentalism. The Covenanter Church was interested but not seriously involved. It seemed to many just a temporary fuss among the big churches, and of no great threat to the RPCNA.

One who did not share this false optimism was the late Rev. J. G. Vos. He came out of the Presbyterian Church U.S. after graduation from Princeton University and Princeton Seminary. He was the son of a brilliant and orthodox Princeton theologian, Dr. Geerhardus Vos. Jack Vos chose to transfer his membership in 1927 from the liberal Presbyterian Church U.S. to the small and oft-despised Covenanter Church. He became pastor of the Miller’s Run RPC near Pittsburgh while I was a student in the RP Seminary. Our friendship was most beneficial to my theological education and intellectual growth.

He went as a missionary to Manchuria in 1930. I went to our South China Mission in 1934. We corresponded frequently during that time. After World War II was extended to Japan and the Pacific theater of war, we were both called as pastors in central Kansas. Jack was at Hebron Church, and I was pastor at Sterling.

Jack was often challenging articles in the Covenanter Witness. I followed his lead and took up the battle to try to make our denomination more aware of the serious nature of the war against Modernism.

Two serious areas of concern impressed us as offering targets for reforming the lethargy in the Synod and the church at large. First, we considered that the RPCNA Board of Foreign Missions should end a long involvement with the Federal Council of Churches (FCC) through its world missions agency, The Foreign Missions Conference of North America. This stirred up quite a storm, and my cooperation with Vos became a stumbling block to my former pastor. He did not see the issue.

Jack Vos saw how the careless use of materials from the liberal Protestant ecumenical agencies poisoned our own church. He had soon to combat a news article from modernist FCC sources which was printed in our church paper describing the Christian situation under Shinto persecution by the Japanese military in Manchuria. The article had completely distorted the religious perils of shrine worship and cooperation with the Japanese puppet union church there. The Board of Foreign Missions had mistakenly trusted the information from Protestant denominations, which was biased by liberal reporters.

Now, because of Vos’ experience in Manchuria, the FCC information could be exposed and refuted for its misrepresentation of facts in Manchuria under Japanese occupation. The Board of Foreign Missions apologized for letting this article slip past. This helped convince many of the danger of Modernism.

Synod Withdraws from FMCNA—In the April.19, 1944, Covenanter Witness editor Taggart published my helps for the prayer meetings in the month of May. All four of my articles were on the subject of Modernism in the Protestant churches. As editorial preface to this series, Dr. Taggart wrote a short piece entitled, “How Dangerous Is Modernism?” He referred to the ongoing debate over this matter, and made this query: “Shall our church cooperate with interdenominational and nondenominational organizations which tolerate modernism among their constituent members?” He predicted that the 1944 Synod would be debating this. The issue in our Synod was not heresy. As one older minister who was moderator at a Synod during these years once declared in some anger, “There is no modernism in the Covenanter Church!”

The issue was twofold: (a) Were there denominations and interdenominational organizations around us that did tolerate notorious liberals? and (b) Could we safely condone this breach of doctrinal purity by failing to condemn and separate from that toleration of anti-Christian Modernism by these churches or agencies?

Eventually, because of our pressure, the Board of Foreign Missions withdrew from the Foreign Missions Conference of North America, and peace on the issue returned. Within a few years the National Association of Evangelicals was formed, and our denomination has aligned our church with the fundamentalists who begin with the inspired and infallible Word of God as their authority.

Liberalism and World Peace—Another debate broke out after Dr. Taggart published an article borrowed from the Christian Statesman, the National Reform Association journal. This article was the summary of an address given by John Foster Dulles in New York’s Riverside Church, where the notorious Modernist Harry Emerson Fosdick once preached. Dulles was chairman of the Federal Council’s Commission on a Just and Durable Peace. His theme was “The Moral Law, the Unifying Force of Nations.” The language was easily misunderstood by Covenanters with a zeal for national reform and the Christian Amendment to the Constitution. But it was severely criticized by a letter to the Covenanter Witness by J. G. Vos.

Dr. Taggart gave full exposure to this debate in the March 26, 1947, Witness. Vos’ 10-point critique of the Dulles speech came first. Then a defensive editorial by Dr. Taggart followed. Last of all, Dr. R. H. Martin, editor of The Christian Statesman, concluded with a rather indignant rebuttal to Mr. Vos and a defense of John Foster Dulles and his FCC Commission on World Peace. (Dr. Martin reveals his lack of understanding of the fact that Protestant liberals were at that time quite skilled in using Christian terminology, which seemed orthodox enough despite their own public denials of all the cardinal verities of historic Christianity.)

The conclusion drawn from Dulles’ speech by Dr. Martin was this: “This appears to me as orthodox Christianity, and as reaching very near, if not altogether up to the high watermark of Covenanter principles, aims and faith.”

Mr. Vos, on the contrary, began his article by this statement: “The purpose of the present article is to evaluate Mr. Dulles’ article candidly and to show that it is an expression of pure Humanism and therefore utterly irreconcilable not only with the testimony of the Covenanter Church concerning the Priesthood and Kingship of the Lord Jesus Christ, but even with common orthodox Christianity.”

The 1947 Petition to Synod—Many times Dr. Taggart expressed his unhappiness over criticism of his work as editor, but discontent mounted. Finally, at the Synod of 1947 his critics brought in a petition asking for the appointment of a special committee to examine our documentation of articles published in the Covenanter Witness which were alleged to be either contrary to, or not fully consistent with, the creedal standards of the Reformed Presbyterian Church of North America.

The 1947 report of Synod’s Committee to examine our petition may be read on pages 39-42 of the 1947 Minutes of Synod. It was considered even by the petitioners as a fair and well-balanced report. We were reprimanded for excessive scrutiny of the church paper and some lack of charity toward the editor. The committee praised all who in these days of wide-spreading heresy act as watchmen on the walls of Zion.

Of Dr. Taggart the committee said, “We believe there has been some carelessness and some misjudgment, especially in selecting articles quoted from other periodicals. The religious literature of the day is permeated with Modernism, and this appears in poems and articles where it would not be expected…” The committee warned that our church is evangelical and will not wish to have anything published in the church paper which would destroy this faith.

“On the other hand, however, we do not believe that anything that has appeared in the Witness justifies any doubt of the complete loyalty of the editor to the doctrines and principles of the Covenanter Church.”

At the 1948 Synod, an item of unfinished business was the Report of the Committee on Church Publications (1948 Minutes of Synod). This was amended and adopted. It presents an excellent statement of editorial policy, which is still the pattern for church publications in our denomination. The struggles and disagreements which always arise among people, even Covenanters, can now be handled by editors of our church papers in an orderly manner. The Board of Publication appointed by Synod was given more power to oversee the contents of the Covenanter Witness.

It is my opinion that the effect of this report has been to stabilize and safeguard the publications of our church. This has helped to keep the editor from having a continual dog fight with readers, to the detriment of all concerned.

The experience of being hauled before Synod and exposed to examination hurt Dr. Taggart as well as his family. After that unhappy confrontation Dr. Taggart asked me, “Why did God not speak to me directly about my faults instead of coming in an around-about manner through you men and Synod?”

Another blow fell on Dr. Taggart in 1952 when the Synod and the Board of Publication decided to discontinue the Service Print Shop in Topeka, Dr. Taggart’s other project. The Covenanter Witness was then printed by the Herald Book and Printing Company of Newton, Kan. Dr. J. G. Vos published his own private theological journal for some years but asked that it be taken under the care of the Synod’s Board of Publication in 1953. This was granted, with Mr. Vos as editor.

In spite of the controversy over these years, Synod regularly reelected Dr. Taggart as editor every three years. He was elected moderator of Synod in 1953. He continued his editorial tasks until he was nearing the close of his final three-year term, 1954-57, when he indicated to the Board his will to resign. He died at the age of 78 on Nov. 12, 1958.

Conclusion—While reading over the files of the Covenanter Witness from World War II until 1958, when Dr. Taggart was released from his labors, I gained a new appreciation of his gifts and his faithfulness. No indications of his personal grudges appear. He fought a good fight. For nearly 25 years this Christian gentleman bore his heavy burdens. He was truly a man who by the grace of God deserved the title, “A Covenanter Witness.” He looked always to “Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten from the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth” (Rev. 1:5).

—Sam Boyle