* * * * *
My dear Brother,—I am not unaware that a considerable party seek to keep up excitement. I do not think with quiet staid souls they do much except expose themselves: quiet service to Christ is what tells in the long run; it is all I think of doing. But God has acted. I do not expect to be clear of the incubus all at once. Had we more faith, we might see yet greater deliverance. I accept with thankfulness what God has done. A great deal of the talk that meets my ear has no effect upon me at all, at the utmost, tries me at the moment. What you are now feeling, when broken up as a system, weighed on my spirit, in all its collective force, beforehand. I do not see that haste has ever done any good in all this matter. I wait still on God: on what else should I? But I go on with my positive work with the best faith I have, and it is but poor; but feel the Spirit more than ever with me.
I am thankful you take courage to go on helping others. What I look for is to bring in Christ in power; the obstruction of unbelief will then, when people are not restored, wither. It is this, with patience, my soul thirsts after. I would I had more of both, still He is with me. Kent has shewn a deplorable state of things; still, haste brought the actual state of things about, under God’s overruling hand. This prolongs our need of patience; but He will guide in this as in all else. It is God’s actings, as far as I can, I look to; not, save for their own sakes, the state of individuals.
I do not doubt the state of those whose evil condition I spoke of, weighs down the comfort of those who seek to walk with God, but the question was then, Is the testimony given of God to be given up? It is more locally felt where opposed, but before it was doing its work unrestrained. It is now evil one meets with, too constantly, in gatherings; not a question if the testimony should exist. Our word is, “Be careful for nothing; but in every thing by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving let your requests be made known unto God. And the peace of God, which passeth all understanding, shall keep your hearts and minds through Christ Jesus.”
I thought only to write a line, for I am very busy.
[1879.]
* * * * *
* * * My resources are somewhat diminished … but it is all right: everything is right for faith, save, of course, sin itself. “In everything give thanks”; and if all comes from God it must be right. Even where we have made mistakes, wliat comes from Him is for good. I am not surprised at the working of evil. That evil I felt all along: my trust is God’s working. If He sees fit to preserve the testimony in the hands it is in. He will and He can. In such a state of things every one finds his level. There have been tendencies to haste, through upright separations. If God brings one about, all that are godly and solid will be there. There are a mass of God-fearing men who will be led right… The least self-confidence will go wrong. I am tried, but not uneasy. God, I still believe, is working for good. I have no doubt that both unbroken and ill-disposed persons labour to do—or in a way to do—mischief; but there is One behind mightier than all that. Nor can I say I am afraid as to God’s testimony. Whether ‘the brethren’ will have it depends on His good pleasure. I trust so with all my heart: but His testimony is more than those who bear it… . What saints—what we—have to do, is to rest quiet and let them go on, and help souls on with something better—feed them with Christ. I think this multiplying printed papers very undesirable…
I am writing on John, in French, when I have a minute, and again (having left oif) on Romans, in German; have been looking over and correcting the hymns, and have two papers coming out; but it is only at short moments I can do anything, but get as fast into heaven as I can. But I have never found the Lord and scripture what they are to me now.
Pau, 1879.
* * * * *
My beloved Brother,—I was very glad to hear from you, as I always am, and of the beloved brethren too. It is a comfort to think that God, in sovereign grace, will have His beloved redeemed perfected and in peace with Him. Our part here is faithfulness in walk, under His care and by His will on the way. You will desire to know something of England… All is not yet clear, but when God works we look for full result. And through it all I never was so happy within, and scripture and what is unseen more real and blessed than ever. I trust Australia will go on quietly and earnestly seeking the Lord and the good of souls for His glory. It is what I seek in England, to drop all this, and seek to minister Christ. It is what souls want, both for quietness, and forming them in His image. It is those who are not with Him who are restless.
I have heard that brethren out in your world have been exercised about dear——’s teaching, that souls are not Christ’s till they are sealed. Now I agree with him, the authority for it being Romans 8:9. The prodigal son shews what the force of it is; as converted and in the right road, he at best hoped to be treated as a mercenary, had not on the best robe which fitted him to go into the house, nor knew in any way his place as son. But we have to be guarded as to dealing with souls as to this, because they may cry, “Abba, Father” really, yet be kept down by the teaching they are under; and we must not quite confound the “perfect”—that is, those who know their new place in Christ—and one who being forgiven, and being sealed can cry, “Abba, Father,” but does not yet know what he is brought into: he may be, like the Corinthians, carnil though a Christian. But I am very glad the question is before brethren. The fact of the Spirit being given besides a nun being born again by the Spirit, has been so lost sight of, that a Christian’s place has been lost sight of with it. And God blesses this truth of the Spirit’s presence now; He would have it before the saints. But the knowledge of the liberty wherewith Christ has made us free, is different from that into which He has brought us so as to say, “As he is so are we in this world.” The latter is more John’s doctrine than Paul’s (Paul’s more the liberty), though you may get the groundwork of it in Paul.
The Lord guide you, dear brother, about your marriage, if still in abeyance: it is ever good to wait on Him, and not be in a hurry, or let our own will work. “I waited patiently for the Lord” is a word of Christ’s Himself, and He cares for us and directs in everything.
[1879.]
* * * * *
Dear——,—I want to get this6 printed as a leaflet letter. It is with unfeigned trembling I have put it out, not as doubting its truth, and as to its contents, opportunely, but doing it in the way of addressing all.
Do not give in to the alarm and uneasiness some would create: many things God alone can settle, and there is an effort to give importance to discontent. God will keep in perfect peace those whose minds are stayed on Him. He is above all evil, and Christ has gone through everything, and has all power in heaven and on earth… The Lord governs, and will bring all about in His own way. The brethren everywhere, speaking generally, are in ten thousand times a better state than they were before the hubbub. There is more conscience, more fear of God… Seek the good, leave the evil to God, only keeping a good conscience. He says, “Be still and know that I am God.” “I waited,” says Christ in Spirit, “patiently for the Lord.” And then there will be a new song in our mouths, and blessed is the man that maketh the Lord his trust.
Love to the saints.
Paw, October 13th.
* * * * *
* My beloved Brethren,—I never felt the same distrust of myself as I do now in writing this, and I desire to speak to my own conscience as to you. I should not write at all, but as taking the lowest place, always the best, and now especially the only true and right one. He who is lowest and lowliest will be most blessed.
Let me say a word as to Bochim. Looked at merely as used for humiliation or sorrow where saints have failed, and voluntarily by grace place themselves to own it before God, I heartily enter into it, but taken as it is really in scripture, there was nothing of the kind at Bochim. The Lord declared in judgment that He would no longer drive out their enemies, and they wept when they heard the judgment. There was no sorrow for sin and failure, but for judgment, and they worshipped where they wept. Gilgal, that is circumcision, the removal of the reproach of Egypt, and the Lord’s presence by His angel in it, was lost for ever. There was no voluntary confession and humiliation at all. It is all a mistake. They had not faithfully put out the evil that was amongst them, and the Lord, though interfering from time to time in compassion, left them judicially in this state. I refer to this because the word became a kind of watchword with many. But God has wrought a great deliverance for us, much greater than most of those spared are aware of: some have felt it. And what I desire now is, that our consciences may turn and see where we had so failed as to bring this sorrow upon us. I am not going to turn back and charge any one or refer to any recent circumstances, but to weigh, where conscience is awake, how we brought ourselves into the strait place we were in. I hesitated a moment whether I should say anything, before the details which remain were set in order by God, as I am assured His grace will do; but they do not affect my object.
Is it not true for every thoughtful conscience that the spirit of the world had invaded us? We do not go to parties; if we meet, we meet to read the scriptures and edify one another. Discipline for any gross evil would be, I suppose, exercised with some measure of faithfulness where the evil was apparent: I make no exaggerated statement of evil: many, I doubt not, were walking christianly, I dare say better than myself. But as to the course of this world, had we not greatly fallen into its ways? not, as I have said, in open worldliness—but was not there that, current, and let pass, which grieved the Spirit of God, and hence weakened all spiritual energy, and spiritual discernment for discipline and for the Lord’s mind in all our course—the loss of discerning things that are excellent “to be sincere and without offence till the day of Christ,” “filled with the knowledge of his will in all wisdom and spiritual understanding … fruitful in every good work”? Have we been as purified to Himself for a peculiar people; not our own, bought with a price; as epistles of Christ known and read of all men; living by Him, and close to Him, and for Him; as is said, “Christ is all, and in all,” so that whatsoever we should do should be done in the name of the Lord Jesus? Were our sole and constant motives Christ, or the common motives of the world? Were buying and selling, our houses, our clothing, ordered on principles which Christ, if there, would approve? Did we walk even as once we walked? Was there devoted service among the poor and needy, visiting the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and keeping ourselves unspotted from the world? We read, “Be not conformed to this world, but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind.” Were we yielding our bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable to God as an intelligent service, proving what was that good and acceptable and perfect will of God, as Christ offered Himself for us a dying sacrifice? Ah! what place had He, has He in our hearts? Do we live to Him who died in love for us? If the testimony of God as to the truth was with brethren, was it the truth as it is in Jesus, the having put off the old man and put on the new man, which, after God, is created in righteousness and true holiness?
I had long dreaded: the Manchester meeting alarmed me. I was not there; but the discussion was whether we were Philadelphia, or who was Laodicea—and not at Manchester only. Brethren had got to think of themselves as a body of people, and to say the least, less of Christ and His body. Now God calls us, and that in love, to remember from whence we are fallen and repent and do the first works. He looks for consistency and devotedness. He always does, and I bless His name He does, but He does so call us now by special circumstances. Satan, long practically undermining as to devotedness and unworldliness, had made a deadly effort to set brethren aside in their testimony to the truth. God in His sovereign mercy has broken his effort. It has been His doing only. Now comes the positive side. Is that which gave him entrance, and a handle, removed, and the Lord truly honoured? If our consciences do not take notice of His ways, the next thing, though His patience is great and long, would be His judgment. Satan’s efforts and power He can easily break, humbling us in the meantime; but His judgment who shall withstand? I ask myself, I ask you, how far can we say, “To me to live is Christ”? That is the grave question for us all now. I do not seek to discourage, quite the contrary. The Lord, in sovereign mercy, has not left us, though we have greatly failed. He has shewn Himself most graciously with us, when we might have expected the contrary. How soon could the apostle say, “All seek their own, not the things of Jesus Christ”! He has shewn Himself full of mercy and grace: what I seek is that our hearts may turn to Him according to that grace.
I add, as the passage has been circulated, that Hebrews 12:27 has no possible application. There God Himself yet once more shakes and removes what can be shaken, that the things which cannot be shaken may remain. What man, when God shakes all things, can establish what cannot be shaken? One part of the passage does belong to us, to those to whom the warning of God’s shaking all things yet once was addressed, namely, “We therefore receiving a kingdom which cannot be moved, let us serve God acceptably with reverence and godly fear: for our God is a consuming fire.” Such is His government here, but with that we have boldness to enter into the holiest. May our thoughts be formed there: may we yet remember that He governs!
Your affectionate brother in Christ.
* * * * *
* * * I never felt so thoroughly humbled as in writing the leaflet I sent. I have felt more than ever through all this business, what a solemn thing it is to have to do with God— never practically knew His faithful love so much, and the deep responsibility of acting for Him, and a most solemn thing it is. And then when I set about to write to all, as a kind of resuming word from Him at the issue of it all, I felt and feel now, in looking back at it, this responsibility as, I believe, I never did. And then all I have said and done has been so canvassed, that I had to see and not say a word that He did not mean me to say, and which I might not know how to justify afterwards, at least before God. But if you feel you can do that, it gives great firmness and comfort of spirit with Him, not going beyond His will, and serving Him in it. Of course it is always what we have to do, but it is greatly put to the test sometimes. I have happily not a feeling of unkindness. Character comes out in these siftings, and there are things which morally offend you; but God is above all the evil. It is the essence of Christianity. He can be where, as to our own path, we cannot; but further, this ought to rule in us—”Be ye therefore followers of God, as dear children; and walk in love, as Christ also hath loved us, and hath given himself for us.” And we must remember that His saints are precious to Him. This allows no evil in ourselves, nor acquiescence in it; but it should govern our ways towards others…
Patience with any human effort to maintain evil will prove its nothingness more than a restless feeling: it gives weight and gravity to the testimony, and it enlists God with us. It is the “God of peace” sanctifies: it is not acquiescing in evil; I would have—I have no tendency in that direction; but following God, not going before Him. Though often tried, I do trust Him fully.
I have looked through the old ‘Poor of the Flock,’ and corrected a great many hymns, perfectly astounded that so much short of all the light we had ever passed; but there was often piety, and I have put them in the form of truth where there was. I have already gone through the new one. I am now going to look through other hymn-books which I have, to see if there are any which could be added, and there are two or three of my own from which some verses perhaps may be taken, some of which you have not seen.
May the Lord keep you all in peace and patience! Rousing to devotedness I trust will follow: that God alone can do; but our hearts can be directed towards it, and that, I trust, they may be. There has been a good deal of awakening of conscience… I look much to rousing the saints to joyful devotedness, but, I repeat, that is God’s gracious work. But after all, our business is to keep our hearts up in heaven, for our own joy and for the life of our souls, and to be able to serve Him on earth. God is above all this evil, and can keep our hearts above it. Not that there may not be exercises and fears; still He is there to sustain, and will in His own time—the best—bring us out of them. Meanwhile we have to stand fast, trusting in the Lord.
Pau, October 25th.
* * * * *
[From the Italian.
Dear Brother,— Your letter has long lain under my eyes waiting to be answered, but all September I was occupied in visiting the assemblies in Haute Loire, etc., so that I was not able to write much. Here it is difficult to do all that I have on hand… It is very sweet to have confidence in Him. You need, dear brother, to have the same confidence with respect to Italy. God has wrought there; the work is a work of patience, but when I think of the state of things at Milan the first time I went there, the difference is great. The work is a difficult one: people educated by priests always remain for long years under this influence; I have known it in Ireland, but God’s grace is sufficient; it suffices for everything. And then God has raised up labourers. You have cause to bless God for what He has done already; progress that was too rapid would not be so solid… Be sure the work in Italy is of interest to brethren; but we must look to God that He may work. I feel increasingly, what we all know, that the work for God is the work of God.
I am greatly enjoying the word: its fulness and perfection are more than ever wonderful to me; but all that we learn in the word is bound up in Christ, and we receive it from Him, from this fulness.
Pau, October.
* * * * *
* * * I hold most distinctly that the assembly must judge: “Put away from among yourselves that wicked person.” There are three concerned in the judgment: Christ’s glory, the purity of the assembly, and the guilty individual. The second makes it necessary they should act, or they are involved in the evil. “Ye have,” says the apostle, “approved yourselves to be clear in this matter.” This connects itself directly with Christ’s glory. But nothing is done as to the assembly, if it has not acted. I have, always objected to brethren going down to settle things for an assembly. A wise and godly brother may counsel from scripture and seek to arouse the conscience; but nothing is really done if the conscience of the assembly does not act. The word of scripture is, “Having in readiness to avenge all disobedience, when your obedience is fulfilled.” The power of God’s Spirit was to bring all that was under its influence to obedience to the ways of God. Then came vengeance on disobedience. You may not have an apostolic rod, but you have God’s sure government for Christ’s glory. Thus, supposing evident sin, as at Corinth, and one supported him in it and refused the clear common consent of all, so that it was a rejection of the assembly’s authority when the case and the word were clear, they might hold him guilty with the offender.
But if there were godly brethren who doubted about the facts, or the judgment of scripture on the fads—provided the Tightness of discipline in itself be recognised, so that it is not the principle of retaining known evil, or the denial of the competency of the assembly to judge evil—then I should say they should wait and look to the Lord to make them of one mind. Speaking of a ‘dead-lock’7 is supposing only men are there, whereas Christ is. If the assembly be in a state incompetent to judge, it is for the assembly to humble itself, that through grace it may be able to know God’s mind. There is One above it all able to bring about His thoughts, and he who has faith will find the sureness of His hand if He be really waited on. But nothing requires more waiting on Him than discipline, personal feelings are so apt to come in.
October 30th.
* * * * *
My dear Brother,—I need not say how thankful I am that the Lord is working. He has been, in the States, and many meetings have gathered in many places. His own work and hand have been very evident, for which I greatly thank God. I should much like to see them all again, but it is very uncertain if I shall. In a little more than a fortnight I shall enter, if spared, my eightieth year, and it requires younger men (though my strength has been wonderfully preserved) to go much about in active work. May the Lord graciously raise up labourers in His harvest! My heart is only there when not with Christ in heaven—there where, through grace, it will ever be. I find all that is not seen ever more, and alone, real—my affections sometimes dull, but the purpose of my heart ever there: I cannot conceive having the heart anywhere else. These troubles in England, or rather London, have awakened many consciences, and I believe have done a great deal of good. We were getting sleepy—nothing outwardly very bad, but Christ was not all as He had been, and that gave occasion to the enemy to come in. Save in giving one plain testimony, after great conflict of heart, before the Lord (by my occupation here, God kept me out of all discussions about it) I cast it on the Lord and did nothing, and when I returned to London did not go to any meetings about it till the last when all was closed. And I have learned of God’s ways and trusting Him what I never did before. His faithfulness is very great, and how little we are! The great secret I find is patience, and its having its perfect work—not going before Him in His ways.
I believe there ought to be much more power than there is, and more being led of the Spirit; but that system (perfectionism) is all wrong, and ignorant of scripture too on the point. The want of spiritual power, so common, gives occasion to it. God is working everywhere. In Sweden, Norway, Germany, there is considerable work going on, and there is considerable subject for thankfulness even in Spain, and manifestly the Lord’s work.
I am again for a little while at Pau, to revise our translation. I have withal held meetings in the country, and been comforted. I count on the gracious Lord to keep and bless you always. One cannot do an instant without Him, and oh how blessed it is to trust Him! I feel all our work ought to be directly the immediate expression of God’s mind, and it is a very solemn thing to work (and wait) directly from Him. What a thing to say in this world! The Lord keep you and be with you.
Pau, November 1st.
* * * * *
My dear Brother,—I do not think you see the bearing of ——’s act. It was not that he broke bread with you or any other isolated Christian. That, and I said so and was reproached with it, might pass. One might desire confidence and fellowship in such actings, but if done in the unity of the Spirit there was no wrong in it. But at Ryde there was a meeting, owned right or wrong by the other gatherings in the island and elsewhere, and he went down, while saying in London that it was only to follow what he considered a movement of God, declaring to others that he went also to give a testimony against the gathering that was there—in fact, setting up something apart from it. This entirely altered the character of the act. As to the unity of the body, I feel no difficulty as to scripture or the position of brethren. As to the danger of slipping into sectarianism, that is, making ourselves a body apart, I recognise it fully; but it has through mercy received a rude shock. The printed list of meetings tended to it, for evil slips in unintentionally, and for this reason I never would have anything to say to it, though very convenient, and done with this view. M.’s book,8 which I never heard of till three days ago, strange to say, had from what I hear of it (I have never seen it) the same tendency; but human nature is always disposed to say ‘we’ if it cannot say ‘I’: “He followeth not with us”: while in separation from the camp, I am as decided as possible. But I never in my life asked any one to come among brethren.
But the principle of scripture is as plain as possible. There was one body on earth, of which all are members. They do not heal in heaven, nor preach, nor use any of the gifts spoken of in 1 Corinthians 12:“If one member suffer, all the members suffer with it:” that is not in heaven. The body will be perfected in heaven (Eph. 1:23), but is practically always considered as on earth, and formed there: “by one Spirit are we all baptised into one body.” And this was clearly down here. (Acts 2) The Lord’s supper is the external sign of this unity: “one body for we are all partakers of that one loaf.” It was this, more than fifty years ago, brought me out of the establishment: nor have I any other principle now. This obliged me to own every one baptised with the Holy Ghost as a member of the body. Only in the last days we are called on to distinguish those who “call on the name of the Lord out of a pure heart” which at the first was not called for: “the Lord added daily.” This makes the brethren (so-called) not the church of God, but those who alone meet on the principle of its unity. The line between narrowness and fidelity is a very narrow one. But the Spirit of Christ can guide and keep us on it. The unity of the body cannot be touched, for the Holy Ghost unites to Christ: all those who have been baptised by the Holy Ghost (that is, received Him) are members of the body. It is “the unity of the Spirit” we have to keep; that is, to walk in that power of the Spirit which keeps us in unity on the earth, and that needs endeavouring. I dread a gathering in any place being called the church of God. They are the only assembly that meets on scriptural principles: did I not think so I should not go there, but it tends to narrow and sectarianise them.
All this seems to me very simple, but it is not so easy to keep the spirits of all here to it, both in fidelity and love, for we are poor creatures. I know those who tend too much to looseness, others too much to narrowness. The Spirit of God alone can lead us in both, and that requires us to walk near Christ. But as to principles I have no difficulty; but without holiness and Christ being all, being emptied of self, we shall not practically succeed. God is light and love, but He alone can unite both and thus give a true and right unity.
November, 1879.
* * * * *
My dear Brother,—I thank God with all my heart for the blessing He has granted you. … It would seem that God is testifying that He does not give brethren up, at least, that He encourages them to count on Him, and go on; for in France, Switzerland, and elsewhere, there seems a reviving. I have asked myself if it is that He owns what little effort at fidelity there has been. At any rate, He is encouraging those who look to Him… As to leaflets, it is at present the fashion, and it seems to me a very bad one. I quite agree with—— that the assembly must act; but I accept neither unanimity, majority, nor minority. Abstract principles do not settle any practical cases. “Put away from among yourselves that wicked person” is clear and decided. Who is a wicked person? —— says we must be guided by the Lord. But who is to decide if we are? All these things seem to me rather labour lost. They go, without despising any, out of my head, with all I have to do, about as fast as they go into it. We want quiet godliness, and, above all, lowliness.
I have been very happy in the Lord, and find the word more rich to my soul than ever, and, I think, heaven more near. But all out thoughts are poor things, but not the Object of them. I feel, too, the direct action of God by the Spirit more than ever.
Pau, November 17th.
* * * * *
Dearest Brother,—Eternal life in full is conformity to Christ in glory, according to the purpose of God. As life we receive it now: they did even when He was here, though, till the Holy Ghost came, they little knew what they had received. That He did quicken them, see John 5:25: but when the Holy Ghost came, Christ in glory—the pattern of this life in glory— was revealed, and attached itself, so to speak, to the life which existed in the saints, and thus became the hope and formative power of the life of Christ in the saints here, and so their spring of joy. John always unfolds life as in this subjective state in us; but, beholding the glory of the Lord unveiled, we are changed into the same image from glory to glory. So Christ has sanctified Himself that we might be sanctified through the truth. Thus Paul who ever, as his general theme, presents us to God justified and glorified, never really speaks of the present eternal life of the Christian (the nearest to it is Romans 5 and vi.; now, one is given in the well of water springing up into eternal life—the glorious state, that into which it springs up— and is fife in the power of the Spirit, recognising this at least on the way to the glorious result in the mind of God) save at the end of his course [chap. 6:22], which is generally taken as the close of this life: there is not much difference. The other is a mere image of its present operation.
As to your second question: I have never doubted (since studying it) that the departure from first love involved, in. the general history, the final rejection of the professing church. The evil was greatly aggravated, but repentance and return continues for three churches: and in Thyatira space had been given to repent, and judgment, and the Morning Star and the kingdom take the place of the church. The rest are, as Protestantism, beyond as to the basis church structure; and all from Thyatira to the end of Philadelphia refer to the Lord’s coming. There are always (Isaiah 5, 6) these two grounds of judgment: what God first made us, and—Can we meet the Lord? departure in Adam, and Christ coming. So that, as to Ephesus, I agree with you.
As to revision, a very large part is done, but not all, and what is has been sent to another Hebraist for Hebrew and French. That may delay. But I wait for my work to be closed which is very near, and one or two things relating to—and if it lingers too long, I may very probably return before all is closed, even if I had to return here.
J. G. D. seems failing, dear man; happy for him, but a real loss there. The uncommon kindness of his character was sometimes a snare to him, but he was upright, and God delivered him; and his piety, grace, and devotedness were beyond many —I might say, most—and God used him very much out there. If we trust God, we shall see God’s end of things. And, blessed be His name! all is just as He would have them; and we are but on a journey. Still God ought to be glorified here.
Pau, November 19th.
* * * * *
[From the Italian.
Dear Brother,—Being very busy, I have not been anxious to answer your letter, inasmuch as the urgent matter was done already; but I was always thinking of writing you a few lines… Just now my days pass one after another without any difference, always occupied in the revision of our French translation, only the word of God is always new, and His love always more precious. I continually find something new in the word which nourishes the soul and reveals to it the love of God, and His ways.
It is by the Word that we live in this passing world, and it clearly reveals to us the things that are not passing, the heavenly things. “We have received, not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God.” It is a great truth, a great fact, that the Spirit has been given to us; not only that we are born of the Spirit, but that believing in the efficacy of the blood of Christ, we are sealed with the Holy Spirit: by Him we cry, “Abba, Father”; by Him “the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts”; by Him we know that we are in Christ and that Christ is in us The work of Christ is the foundation, but the presence of the Holy Ghost is the power of enjoyment. He gives the consciousness that we are children, and heirs, and He is the earnest of our inheritance until the possession of that which Christ has won for us; He causes us to wait for Christ. Once redemption as a personal matter is known, there are the two great truths presented by the word; we have been converted “to wait for his Son from heaven” (1 Thess. 1); and where the Spirit is there is liberty; when He is not grieved, there is communion with the Father, and with His Son, Jesus Christ. May our Father keep us in His holy name from thus grieving Him; and may we enjoy His blessed countenance!
I am delighted, dear brother, to see that God is evidently working in Italy; He is indeed working everywhere in these last days, but in Italy the work went on slowly… but it seems as if the Spirit was working more at present. I do not want to go faster than what would be solid work; but it is happy when He encourages us, and shews us fruit. We must follow God, and not run before Him; and how great was the Lord’s patience!
Pau, November 20th.
* * * * *
Dearest Brother,—As the list of meetings has come up and dear——shewed me what you said, I write a line. It is quite true what you heard: I never liked it. It was the principle; and the gravest things often come from very small ones when a principle is in it. But I never wished to make any fuss or bother about it. It is of course very convenient. Still such motives as that lead to many things. My objection was, that it was making a list—numbering the people—and of brethren a distinct sect; as Congregationalists or Baptists might count their churches. This was my grand difficulty, but there has been another. The names put in, by whom I know not, though I have no distrust of the care taken, yet by the fact itself (and this your letter confirms) [confers] a kind of position as elders. Now this may lead, not to the influence of those who are pillars, which I find in scripture, but soon to a recognised place. I knew the case where there were three, and the order being changed, the one who lost the first place was greatly grieved about it.
Again I wrote to —— about a very bad tract. This man’s name was in the book: he had been excommunicated a year before. These were the things which made the difficulty: the inconvenience remedied by it, faith and earnestness of purpose would overcome… At first it was much abused—not I daresay now. But the principle is my difficulty. But as I did hitherto, so I leave it now—only write a line to you to explain my thoughts. No change in the form would affect my difficulty as you can see, and I have no distrust as to the care it is done with.
Your affectionate brother in Christ.
Pau, November 26th, 1879.
* * * * *
* * * The paper on the “Bride” in the “Voice”9 is evidently put in to re-assure those who thought the corporate relationships of Christians in danger of being set aside; so that with its purport I can have no quarrel, as assuredly I have not with its author. But my objection to what I have read is wider and deeper, and I allude to it now only for common profit in reading scripture, making no suppositions which many have made. My objection to what I have read is this: generalisations as to divine teaching in scripture, drawn from slight expressions without any adequate examination of the word, and consequently, when sifted, found sometimes very imperfect and misleading, sometimes wholly false. To this I confine myself here.
We are told that Peter does not name the assembly, nor John the body; Paul does not name the bride. If the name were all, a concordance would suffice to judge of it. But it is not all. The article continues, ‘These omissions are characteristic of the writings of each;’ so that whatever collateral help we may find in them, this characterises, and so far gives the scope of the Holy Ghost in these inspired writings. Let us examine the facts. Peter does not name the assembly. But Jude does not, nor James, nor John. The last two speak of a local assembly, with which we have nothing to do here. Not even in the Apocalypse does John speak of the assembly as such; on the contrary, carefully avoids it, so that its absence is certainly not characteristic of Peter. That a special dispensation of the mystery was committed to Paul, he states himself, and that has been the subject of teaching about fifty years. But so little is the omission of the assembly characteristic of Peter, that he alone, of all besides Paul, does speak of it in a special, but very interesting aspect. (See 1 Peter 2:4, 5.) The saints are built up a spiritual house.
But the grand point is that we get the bride in John. The bride aspect, the affections of the heart for Christ, is to be found there only; Paul does not name it, and this is ‘characteristic of each.’ I read through John’s gospel—not a trace or a hint of it, not a thought of anything corporate place, my answer is, The passage, where what of John, turn to them: total and confounding silence! The truth is, that John is exclusively and carefully individual in all his teaching. This is what, in this respect, unequivocally characterises him. But I forget ‘Mary Magdalene, as it were, telling the brethren in the corporate place of blessing’; but this is another example of this misleading carelessness. There is nothing of bridal relationship, nothing corporate. If in this obscure phrase with no tail to it, it be said it is we who are in the corporate place, my answer is, The passage, where what was told is given, leads away from everything else to our wondrous relationship along with the blessed Saviour to His Father and God. Relationship with the glorified Man brings in the body and bride. (See Eph. 1 and 4) This [John 20:17] refers to individuals and the place of sons. The whole ground is wholly wrong. In John’s teaching what is said to characterise it, is not found at all.
I shall be referred, of course, to the Apocalypse. There I find myself on altogether other and lower ground, however glorious. It is the Lord God Almighty and a throne. If the churches be referred to, Christ is a judge, not a Bridegroom. There is neither body nor bride. In the properly prophetic part we have the divine judgment of the world, we are going to reign over the earth. But it will be said, the bride, the Lamb’s wife, is shewn to us. It is; but in what way? Affections for a bridegroom? Not a trace of them. It is a great city. The throne of God and the Lamb are in it. It is a matter of glory and government. The bride has this place, but the place of the bride with Christ as such is not hinted at. There is one word which speaks of it when the contents of the book are closed,10 “The Spirit and the bride say, Come.” Here the relationship is alluded to, but assumed, and if I am to know what or who the bride is, I must look outside John, unless I make it a great city and government, for he, in all his teaching, never says one word about it. And where shall I find it? In poor, cold Paul! There, using the image of the wife, I find the ways of the Lord in love in gaining, preparing, and presenting to Himself the heavenly spouse according to the love He bears it. And if I would learn the other side, what we ought to be in this character, I turn to 2 Corinthians 11, “I am jealous over you with godly jealousy; for I have espoused you to one husband, that I may present you as a chaste virgin unto Christ.”
I do not know what is meant by ‘naming,’ but when I examine scripture, I find every one of the statements of the article baseless, wholly baseless, as to the alleged characterising facts. Paul is the only one who really teaches anything of that, the omission of which, we are told, characterises him. And in John’s teaching, not one word is found of that which we are taught to look for in him. Paul is sober on such topics, and would have others not be led away from the simplicity that is in Christ. I entirely disagree, as to the fact, with what is said of the Reformers,11 but my object is not controversy nor teaching. I would only add, that, pretending to be Philadelphia is quite another thing from being Philadelphia, and tends directly to Laodiceanism of heart. May the saints be kept in the simplicity that is in Christ. Assuredly I can have no wish to weaken true devotedness to Christ, Christ being all, which only is life; but I have not found this the effect of this teaching, but rather filling people with the thoughts of themselves and the wonderful new things they had got—not a self-judging knowledge of Christ Himself. Nor do I a moment question that John has a peculiar place and character in the teaching of the Holy Ghost, specially in the revelation of the Father, and, through Him, immediate relationship with Him. But then only notice, that in the summing up and guarding of the system found in the article I comment on, what is true is old, and what is new is wrong.
* * * * *
My dear Brother,—It is high time I should be answering your letter, but if you knew how I have been occupied, and how many I have to write which are obligatory, you would not be surprised at it.
The Lord is as faithful and as mighty to save now as ever, indeed I have found Him more so, that is, had experience of it. It makes me tremble in looking back at what was at work in London, but in waiting on the Lord there is a strength that nothing can resist, and a hand that can move everything, and a wisdom that can guide it, ahd—shall we not say?—alone that does—I must. But all was the Lord’s doing, not that there were none upright and faithful, for there were those with whom my heart went; but some were apt to be in a hurry, and others disheartened. Even those who sought to act aright saw only the details and surface. I saw the evil, and was greatly exercised as to leaving those called brethren altogether, but felt it was the testimony of God, and could not, and then had to take the thing up in earnest, but only to cast it on the Lord. That day only will declare what had to be gone through. Details have still to be dealt with, but the brethren are at peace, and there is good in London, and souls added. Thank God my soul realised the faithful love of the Lord, and my heavenly portion, as it never did, so that this was only a place of work. But I do not expect my spirit, in the human sense, ever to return to its former state. One has now to seek to get the spirit of brethren out of it all, and encourage mutual confidence. For myself, always alone, I am more totally alone than ever before; but I feel the Lord’s faithfulness as I never did. What matter, then, where one is as to circumstances?
Kindest love to the brethren in Chicago, if you are there. I am in my eightieth year, and I shall hardly see them all again now, but my heart is as fresh in its affection to them all as ever. There is that which never ends. I have been interested lately in the thought, how the heavenly divine holiness of glory is the only one—the same now. One has only to draw the veil, and it is there in perfectness, here under a veil. See 1 Thessalonians 3:12, 13; as many others. This sets us practically, wonderfully in heaven though, in a poor earthen vessel. The Lord keep you, dear brother, near Himself, in all lowliness of spirit, but cheerful confidence!
Pau, December.
* * * * *
My dear Brother,— … As a principle I object to brethren settling things for an assembly, because they have ministerial gift, and was thus rather indisposed, as to this, towards the action of——, and I am far too little acquainted with the facts to form any judgment, even for myself, in the case. They assured me that it was a case of manifest evil and unrighteousness towards this sister (I forget the words used), and that some were beginning to see it, and had (I know nothing as to number) returned to the Table they had left, so that the case was getting really quite clear. I have a considerable jealousy of individual, practically clerical, influence, though such may of course help an assembly; the conscience of an assembly ought to be exercised and purged: merely judicially putting away is no use without this; there is no purging of themselves without this. It is always well to hear both sides: many questions may arise… These two brethren represent it as a very bad and flagrant case of party and unrighteousness. I am habitually slow to form any judgment. But they seemed to think the case was settling itself. This is not the only case in England, and there are cases where God alone can bring all to a righteous standing, and in such we can only leave it to Him, and act where a positive claim on us arises, and then we can count on Him: for abstract judgment we cannot in the same way. But the question would at once arise, Are things in the same state as they were? I am ignorant of the present, and, indeed, of the past facts of the case, and thus cannot judge with any real godly judgment.
Your affectionate brother in Christ.
Pau, December 13th, 1879.
* * * * *
[From the French.
* * * I am at work from seven in the morning till eleven at night. Then I generally have many things which press heavily, within the range of my responsibility. But I commit them to Him who is mighty above all which this poor world can require, and to whom a burden is no burden at all. He guides everything, just as I, sitting in a carriage, might guide it; and orders everything according to the counsel of His will. It is well to journey thus, and the Lord is faithful in making everything contribute to the blessing of those who love Him.
I have been much enjoying the thought that the whole life, holiness, condition of soul down here, is but the making good of what we possess up there. It is always Christ, and “before the Father.” (See 1 Thess. 3:12, 13.) This indeed sets us there in Him (and He in us); save that we have the treasure in an earthen vessel, and we increase “to the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ.” There are not two kinds of holiness. Christian holiness is the same which we shall have before our God and Father, when we shall come again with Christ. But although the thing is realised with God, it must be bound up with brotherly fellowship, because love, too, is in the nature of God. Separation from evil is realised by dwelling in Him. and this is shewn in love to one another.
Pan, December 18th.
* * * * *
My dear Brother,—I have no doubt at all of the resurrection of the Old Testament saints. The answer of the Lord (Matt. 22; Luke 20), as well as other passages make it as clear as possible, as well as those you quote. But it is one of the characteristics of New Testament teaching, that it is teaching people, dealing with people, not with abstract doctrine or theology. Hence the teaching of the resurrection is the resurrection of those concerned in the teaching. Thus the apostle has in his mind those he was writing to: 1 Corinthians 15:18, 22, 23, refer to Christians: verse 21 is more abstract—resurrection of dead came by man. 1 Thessalonians 4:14 clearly applies to Christians, verse 16 also. Revelation 14:13 can refer to the saints which compose the church, but may to those slain afterwards also. Resurrection is always individual. There shall be a “resurrection of the just.” That takes in all, but in the body of the passages the apostle is thinking of those he was writing to; and life and incorruptibility were brought to light by the gospel. Daniel 7 gives us the slain saints under the beast as heavenly saints. 1 Thessalonians 3:13 embraces all, I cannot doubt. But I have no doubt the apostle had specially in his mind those he was writing to. Such, as far as I see, is the mind of God in these passages. But Christ repeatedly speaks of saints in general.
Bordeaux, December 21th.
Dear Miss——,—I suppose I must have perceived that this objection could be raised, for in the fourth edition,12 which I got to look at it, I have, ‘All this (1 Thess. 4:14-16) is a matter which belongs exclusively to the saints—to those who, sleeping or waking, are Christ’s, and who will be, from that moment, for ever with the Lord.’ The truth is, the mind is justly occupied with what concerns the church; and so I find in the New Testament many passages refer directly to the christian saints who form the church, because they were there and then before the writer’s or Holy Spirit’s mind, which yet from other places we may know to be true of Old Testament saints. Here the word ‘exclusively’ meant to the exclusion of the wicked dead. I do not doubt the Old Testament saints will arise, though in many a passage they are not at all brought before the mind; because the Spirit was founding and encouraging the hopes of Christians then tried, perhaps persecuted, not meaning to deny that Old Testament saints would be in the kingdom. The word ‘exclusively’ does not apply here to the Old Testament saints, but to the world; but the mass of passages in the New Testament apply in fact only to the church. Other passages say we shall sit with Abraham and Isaac in the kingdom, and the Lord teaches clearly their resurrection. That which the Old Testament saints do not form is the body and the bride.
Ever yours truly in the Lord.
* * * * *
My dear Brother,—.Your letter has lain some days on my table, but I am constantly hard at work, from seven in the morning to eleven at night, and hard head work. The epistle you refer to, you must remember, was written to one who wielded derivatively the authority of the apostle, as his trusted and intimate companion. Still the directions given, when applying to general responsibility, apply now as ever. But you cannot have authority without really possessing it, nor did I ever see the case of discipline which could be decided otherwise than in actually deciding it. Where it is a wicked person clearly, the case is pretty clear; but even then the question comes in, Is he really such? and the state and competency comes in. This was really the case with you, and in this condition of weakness, your yielding, God turned into blessing. If one such as Timothy rebuked, according to the apostle’s order, he would carry the conscience of all the sound part of the assembly with him. But rebuke before all is different from rebuking one who is not there, nor has it the effect in the same degree of making others fear. But if the assembly, or those who watch over it and carry the mind of the assembly with them, are agreed that it is not wickedness calling for excision, but cannot be passed over, I see nothing to hinder a person’s being rebuked publicly. It was done at —— in a case where a man was overtaken in a fault which none would have known had he not voluntarily told of himself, and there was no question of his godliness or state of mind; but the world had more or less known it. And that is now forty years ago, I suppose, and I believe it has been done in several instances. But it requires the existence of moral authority to do it, and must now flow with the conscience of the assembly. If it is a case of putting away, and the assembly cannot decide—and it is an act of the assembly, “put out from among yourselves”—they must wait on the Lord to have spiritual unity of judgment; I do not say numerical unanimity. And even for an apostle it was so delicate a thing, that he regretted having written an inspired epistle, and one which had produced the desired effect really, and was deeply troubled and exercised. It is as to this he speaks of being not ignorant of Satan’s devices. … In all these cases I look to the conscience of the assembly being exercised, that the weight of the assembly go with the act if anything short of excision; if it amount to that it is the assembly’s act, the assembly purges itself. A rebuke never had that character, it was preventive to others, and a rod to the offender…
Pau, January, 1880.
* * * * *
[From the German.
Beloved Brother,—My hearty thanks for your affectionate letter. I have said nothing about this history of the brethren, because I was afraid such a letter might somehow have theappearance of counterpoise to brother —— and I believe it better to write to him direct. I knew that the history was being translated and issued. I always dread whatever would represent the brethren as a sectarian body. But each is free, and I have not occupied myself with it… But when people would say that the brethren were Philadelphia, and this was circulated amongst many, I was really anxious about it. May God give us to assume this character practically! But to apply this to ourselves is another thing, and at a time when the brethren in London were in confusion, was something certainly deplorable. It appeared even to some godly brethren, that with such a pretension, God must withhold His blessing from the brethren, and this feeling has been vented amongst brethren in the communications from abroad. I had before I came back from America observed this presumption in very dear brethren also, to whom I was closely attached, and it has given me great pain. I bethought me of the word of Zephaniah to Israel: “I will also leave in the midst of thee an afflicted and poor people, and they shall trust in the name of Jehovah.” “Thou shalt no more be haughty because of my holy mountain.” God has been full of goodness towards us, He has humbled, but spared us; and in London they are quiet, and God adds to them precious souls, although some would disquiet them. But God is there, and keeps them in peace: and I believe that these events have been full of blessing to the brethren, and that in England, and Ireland also where there was merely care of heart through brotherly feeling. I have never been in circumstances to call for so great thankfulness as in this test of God. He is ever, we know, faithful: I have proved it here. There are some slight remnants of the results in Kent: but God has put forth His gracious hand likewise, and many have reaped abundant fruit; and what remains to be done God will do, I doubt not. I thank you also for all the details you have communicated to me… It will be on my heart—to say nothing of the welfare of the dear Saviour’s redeemed ones, and especially of the German brethren, many of whom I have known personally, and heartily loved. I am in my eightieth year, and that brings eternity near: there we have the Father’s love, Christ, and His own people. It is, in fact, quite near for me. The word which is eternal is more precious than ever: I have nothing but daily, present blessing. I have suffered much with respect to this confusion in London; yet there was an inner life, and the presence of God is more appreciable than ever. I can no more climb mountains on foot, but my heart is just as much with the brethren before God, nay more than ever. Heartily do I thank you for the news you have sent me. Greet them heartily for me. May God preserve us in a deep, true feeling of our nothingness in England, in Germany, and everywhere, and all will go well.
Your attached brother.
1880.
* * * * *
My dear Brother,—I hold it of all importance to maintain intact the discipline of God’s house, as to not eating with those under discipline. I got a dreadful scolding from one for acting on it. Nor do I in the least blame ——. It is very well that the son should feel that the father did not feel lightly his son’s getting put out. I should not eat with him, and if he ate at the same table, I should not enter into conversation with him, and if—— did, I should not like to be at the table. If the lad’s spirit be at all subdued, and there was fear of alienating him by harshness, I might have him eat at the table, telling him that I could not have free intercourse with him. But as he was necessarily in the house I should not refuse letting him eat at the same table. But I could not keep company with him till he was humbled. This would not hinder anxious love as regards him, and the assurance of it; but familiarity and company at table, as if nothing had happened, I should not accept. I give my son his dinner if needed, I shew him my heart yearns over him, but I could not be familiar and at ease with him. I should not eat with him, if even I ate at the same time. Something would depend on the age of the son, and how far he was under the father’s authority. If young and under it, I must let him eat, and treat him as I would treat him as one under rebuke. If grown up and independent, I should be less disposed to do so.
[Date uncertain.]
* * * * *
My dear Brother,—I remember the same question13 arising in my mind, at least thirty years ago, when writing in French the tract “On Worship.” There is one thing which may facilitate your inquiry. John’s writings always refer to the individual. Chapter 4 shews that individual worship is recognised. But if this was in intentional separation from all saints, it would be another thing. Love to all the saints is a necessary ingredient in the heart’s going up to God. But worship together has a distinct and peculiar character, because there is Christ’s promise to be there. “In the midst of the church will I sing praise unto thee.” But I do not doubt that if I am alone I can worship God alone. Still scripture is full of joint worship, and so it will be in heaven.
But in an assembly I should think it an unhappy thing for one to set himself apart as superior to others. Our part is to esteem others better than ourselves, and whereto we have already attained, to mind the same thing. If it is something that positively grieved the Spirit, it is another thing. I cannot in Spirit have communion with what is contrary to the Spirit. But while I admit a low estate of soul will be painful to a spiritually-minded person, yet in the case you put, the person has not learned to esteem others better than themselves. “Let each” it is said.
London, February 5th.
* * * * *
Dear ——,— … Very glad indeed to hear good accounts of Italy. I expected blessing. You were always a pessimist, but keeping aloof, looking to God, one is above the heaving and breakers, and walking on a rough sea is the same as walking on a smooth one.
There is as much danger from those who want to be extra, as from those who were at mischief; but God is above one as above the other. And both lived with their minds in evil to justify their discontent: whereas those who seek simply to serve Christ, and to walk in peace, are blessed of God and in quiet… I have seen no sign but of positive progress, and firmness when I did not expect it… but my confidence is not in progress, but in God. If the testimony is more honestly unworldly, I do not fear: if not, what good is it? Trust in the Lord, and work away for Him. May we be found watching and so doing when the blessed Lord comes!…
London, February, 1880.
* * * * *
To the same.]
* * * It is remarkable that when I heard of B.’s death, suited for Italy as he seemed to be, true and faithful, the feeling that came into my mind was, God is going to bless Italy—which I could not account for, nor give a reason, but there the feeling was. Not that there will not be exercises and trials: that one must expect—still rejoice in the goodness and grace of God; and so we ought.
I am not, dear brother, a pessimist, because I may say, since my conversion, I never had a thought of any good in man or myself, while fully admitting amiable and nice natural characters, as I think the Lord did. But He did not trust it: He knew that all true good was beyond and behind. I fear rather drawing the line too sharp and. too hard, for there is not a good, but a moral, nature in man. Hence we are born of water as well as of the Spirit: the word is the instrument, but all good is of God. When He loved the young man, He said, “None is good save one, that is God.” But I am not disheartened, though I may be cast down, because behind all there is God, One who never fails; and if He be for us, who can be against us? Only we have to know our own nothingness, and wait patiently for Him.
I was thinking lately that Christ is still waiting in patience. “Sit at my right hand, till”—and not said when. We do not know how deep and wide divine thoughts in connection with man go; but we know the Father has given us to Christ, and we shall be like Him, and brought, identified with Him, into the Father’s house. Those whom the Father has given Him, at all cost He will bring back to Him, according to His own heart and purpose. It is a bright and blessed prospect. But I trust Him for blessing quand même as to man, if we have His mind… The Lord be with you in your work, and keep you near Him—the only source of good, and true self-judgment.
Deuteronomy 26 gives the normal apprehensions of a godly soul in that book. He does not go up to Abraham, but merely a Syrian (Jacob) going down to Egypt, redemption and enjoyment of promises in the land, with personal integrity in connection with it. It is a kind of key to the book. The Lord always quotes from Deuteronomy (Matt, 4); it was the ground Israel was on, and not according to promises to Abraham. And He was the tested Man there.
March, 1880.
* * * * *
To the same.]
* * * I have been getting on much more definitely with Deuteronomy: though as yet I have found some paths in the wood, I am not out of it. But the scripture is already a good deal developed, and that is positive enjoyment. When I have anything definite, you shall have it. Chapter 4:[leads] up to outside Jordan; Jehovah, jealousy and restoration in mercy. Chapters 5-11. they are passed over—the covenant of ten words, government and what they were, the legal responsible ground of their possession of the land, Jehovah jealous: restoration not till chapter 30. After chapter 12 it is the plea to preserve them from idolatry. These are some of the paths into the wood, but the divine footsteps can be traced, where they had not so reached yet…
The Lord is faithful, and full of tender compassion; of whom should we be afraid, except of ourselves? There we have reason. Trust in the Lord, and be doing good. Our time is a time to sow, but, if faithful, the sheaves will come in due time. It is by faith and patience we shall inherit: God means it to be so. My heart is with you in your work, but, what is better, the Lord Himself will be.
Ever, beloved brother,
Your fellow-labourer and servant in Christ.
* * * * *
To the same.]
* * * As regards Deuteronomy [14:22-29; 26:12; cf. Num. 18] you will find in Tobit 1:714 what gives historically the fact of the second tithes, and of the third year, which facilitates understanding the text. But the spirit of the difference is important. Worship, in the previous books, was the degree of nearness to God in His sanctuary: here it is thankful enjoyment of blessings received according to promise, only enjoyed before Jehovah, so as not to be detached from Him, and enjoyed in the spirit of grace. (See chap, 26) In chapter 16 you have no eighth day in the feast of tabernacles. It is thus not priestly drawing near to God, but enjoyment of the fruit of His promises, in grace with Him. This characterises the whole book. With us there is not this difference, because the most holy place is our Canaan, and in Spirit we are there, and it is what is there as the fruits of promise that we enjoy.
I was very near forgetting to tell you how I was getting through the wood! But that was by your being a pessimist, saying there is no hope, as if God had forgotten us, and did not see it.
March, 1880.
* * * * *
My dear Brother,—In Job 2:9 you have also from his wife, “Curse God and die.” In 1 Kings 21:10 it cannot mean bless. If taken in this sense it must be a euphemism for cursing The usual explanation is this: Er~B# (barak) means ‘to kneel,’ used for camels even: Er~B# (berek) is ‘a knee,’ hence ‘to implore’; and there are two words, one Arabic the other Ethiopic, which have this uncertain sense (I know nothing of these languages). Hence while kneeling is the physical sense, it is to bless from above in Piel, and to cause (camels) to kneel down in Hiphil: but while some Hebraists, particularly Jews—but Schultens and others—will not allow the sense of cursing in this derivation of the word, and the Jews translate bless when we say curse, if you believe Gesenius it is as I have said above; others take it as derived from a word signifying, ‘to dismiss,’ ‘send off.’ So Delitzsch interprets it in Job. In 1 Kings 21, his fellow-labourer also translates ‘blasphemed’; but in explaining, derives from ‘dismissing, or sending off,’ saying, ‘Which is the same as blasphemed.’
I judge you are quite right as to the purport of the book, but all God’s dealings and care are wonderfully brought out. “He withdraweth not his eyes from the righteous”—had considered Job before Satan; justified Job, by allowing Satan’s efforts, from his charge of hypocrisy; and then takes him in His own hand for discipline, making him know himself in grace, and God in majesty; sends an interpreter, one among a thousand; and when he has owned both, blesses him more than ever.
My answer has been delayed, but if you knew all I have to do you would pardon me.
1880.
* * * * *
To the same.]
* * * The point of the verses [1 John 5:1-4 etc.] is this. Love to God’s children is the proof of love to God. Who are they? Whoever believes Jesus is the Christ is born of God, and he who loves Him that begat, loves him that is begotten of Him. Thus if it be love because of the Father, I shall love all the children, for they are all His. Then comes a counter-check: I know that I love God’s children, as such, if I love Him—not merely a set of people I like, but His children as such. But my obedience to His commandments is the proof I love Him. Love to God’s children as such cannot be, because it is not loving Him, hence clearly not His children, because they are such, for I do not love Him. It is the testimony that love to the brethren, to be really such—chapter 2:9, because they are God’s children—cannot be separated from obedience, because that proves I do not love God, consequently not others because they are His.
* * * * *
To the same.]
* * * You seem to get into a multitude of questions. As to a remnant, it seems to me lost time to argue it. There clearly is a remnant in Christendom; that is, all nominal Christians will not possess the privileges of true ones. And they are in this sense a remnant. But, the result being different, it seems different, because the Jewish remnant remains on earth, to become, as such, the nation; whereas true Christians, going up to heaven, never appear as a distinct body in possession of their privileges, as all the dead saints will be raised and go with them. But in the time of faith, the faithful will be just as much practically a remnant as the Jews will be. That is, I believe, the true state of the case, but there is much instruction in viewing them as such, only we have to keep the truth of the unity of the body in its full force.
London, March, 1880.
* * * * *
To the same.]
* * * I suspect your good vicar has never read Clemens Romanus, but only his (Mr. Marshall’s) epitome: probably it was before he was born that I did. But you ought yourself to have had the answer ready. Clement speaks, § 42, of bishops and deacons: but if there were several that is not episcopacy. There are only two classes—so in Timothy and Titus, called also bishops and deacons. Titus was to appoint elders, several, in each city; and Paul goes on, “for a bishop must be blameless” : bishops and deacons in 1 Timothy 3. So Paul in Acts 14 chose elders for them—forgot the bishop!—and in chapter 20 calls for the elders, and then says to them “bishops”—again forgot the poor bishop or awfully despised him! We have thus the certainty that those whom Clement speaks of, § 42, were several in one place. He always speaks in the plural. They appointed persons, § 44. He does not think those should be thrown out of their ministry, and says, ‘Blessed are those elders who, having finished their course before these times, have obtained a fruitful and perfect dissolution.’ Clement, like Paul, ignores the existence of a bishop, writes (if there was one) to his church, without hinting at the existence of such a personage. ‘Further we see that ye have put out some who lived,’ etc. The letter is a letter from ‘the church of God which is at Home to the church of God which is at Corinth.’ There is no trace, I repeat, of a bishop at Kome or at Corinth. The passage he refers to is the proof that he objected to their deposing their elders, but has no thought of any bishop, as the word is now used. Speaking of some—‘You have put out some’—though it was in the one church of Corinth; and calls them elders, for which archbishop Wake has translated ‘priests’ —Chevalier, honestly, ‘elders,’ with ‘presbyters’ in margin.
You can easily see why I suspect your clergyman (I have not his name exactly) has read Marshall, which I have not, and not Clement, which I often have, and discussed with others, too. Perhaps he has not read Tertullian or Jerome either. Tertullian says John the apostle instituted them in Asia Minor, a plain proof Paul had not. Jerome says the church got into this plan as the elders were each trying to draw the faithful to themselves, and then they set up one as primus inter pares. In Alexandria, though there was a patriarch, Jerome tells us there was no episcopal ordination till Hesychius and the council of Nice. As to Justin, I do not remember his saying anything about bishops. He speaks largely of a president at their Lord’s day meeting, and his praying as well as he could, also of his holding meetings at his lodgings, at Kome, when he went there. But I cannot now look them up; but I have read them more or less, and I am not aware of any such passage, or finding it quoted on the subject. Clement being short, and I having often read it, I could lay my hand on it. As to Clemens Alexandrinus, he may be quite at ease: in his day there were bishops plenty, but the reference is unfortunate, for, if I am to believe Jerome, there was then no episcopal ordination. As to Ignatius, all the rhetoric on the subject [notwithstanding], I have no doubt it is spurious. In the genuine Syriac copies a bishop is mentioned in this way once. Now I do not doubt, according to Jerome’s account, they soon came in, possibly, partly through John, too. In Clement’s time it is clear there were none such that he recognises—’not a trace’—but what totally excludes the idea, As to Article XVII., I quite admit that God’s predestination is secret to us, but the seventeenth Article is not: it is very plain, and I think very good. I may add, in Clement, § 57, where he exhorts the leaders of the sedition to submit to their elders. I have read some of Hooker, too; but [he was] one whose mind rested in human order, and not on scripture, but a reverend, godly man; but while a standard work with the clergy it is really intrinsically not worth reading. They say he died meditating on the hierarchical order of the angels. As to the Fathers, I have read some, consulted almost all, and some a good deal. But when, many years ago, I set about to read them, I found them as a body such trash that I gave it up as a study: for history they are of course useful, and I have examined them largely. Did Mr. —— ever read Hernias? If that is not enough to destroy all confidence in the early church, I do not know what would. Did he ever read Cyprian or Chrysostom on the state of the church in their days? Talking of looking to the primitive church for some doctrine or morality is the most wicked humbug that ever was: either people have not read what is patristic, or they must love and excuse wickedness. Hermas was read in the churches, and is quoted by Irenseus as scripture, and Origen speaks of it as inspired. Pretty work you give one to do.
March 23rd.
* * * * *
To the same.]
* * * I write to send you back Mr.——’s letter, but I do not think of answering it. I think, in general, positive truth is of more avail than controversy. He is upon ordinary evangelical Arminian or semi-Arminian ground, and that is a wide field to enter on in a letter. I do not think that I ever said, as he quotes, ‘elders nowhere,’ I may have said ‘elders, as such, nowhere.’ I suspect the seventeenth Article tries him, and it is really a very wise statement as I remember it. Their point of departure is not scripture, and hence they have difficulty in having anything. What I mean by ‘doing this’ was, that if a friend or a parent was to give me something, and say, Keep it in remembrance of me, to make it a command or a precept would destroy its whole nature. The emphasis is on “remembrance of me.”
As to Article XVII., he confounds the counsels of God before the foundation of the world, and our knowledge of our election when we are called and justified, and cry Abba, Father. Whatever the means of assurance, I am necessarily assured that if I believe and am sealed so as to cry Abba Father, I know I shall be kept to the end; one, according to scripture and the seventeenth Article, involves the other. They that are called, says the article—obey the calling—are justified, etc., and at length by God’s mercy, attain everlasting felicity. So that the question, according to the article is, Can I know I am called and justified? for if so I shall attain everlasting felicity. Now scripture says—first John as Christ’s forerunner came to give the knowledge of salvation, then the blessed Lord says, “In that day ye shall know that I am in my Father, and ye in me, and I in you”—and the apostle, “We have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear, but the spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father.” So John writes, “I write unto you, little children, because your sins are forgiven you for his name’s sake.” I need not quote more. The epistles are addressed to saints, to the “elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit,” and we are said to be saved, not merely as a principle (but in the perfect) seswsmevnoi, actually saved, for He has saved us, and called us with a holy calling—fruits the proof in others, the Holy Spirit dwelling in us, in ourselves. “Knowing, dearly beloved, your election of God.” So 1 Thessalonians 5:9.
Now I would deprecate levity in so solemn a thing as the consciousness of our relationship to the Father. I had rather see a man deeply exercised in Romans 7 than taking up the doctrine of assurance with levity. And further, I see in the scripture the Christian looked at as not only in Christ, where there is no “if,” but as running the race to attain actually the glory, as actual men in this world; and here I find “if,” and working out our salvation with fear and trembling, and the responsibility of the saint comes in, but with a sure promise of being kept. And this is the difference in the character of the assurance; one is in an actually accomplished redemption, with the knowledge (John 14) that we are in Christ: the other, glory, is not an accomplished thing, as is evident; it is certain through the promise of God. See Romans 8, “Whom he justified, them he also glorified”: the whole chain is there from beginning to end, and depends on His faithfulness in keeping us. And this distinction is morally very important, because it maintains constant dependence, but dependence on a faithfulness that cannot fail, which is most important for practical spiritual life. As regards my path, I am kept, and if so need it, but do not doubt God’s faithfulness in doing it. I cannot speak of danger as to redemption, it is accomplished, but for my wilderness journey there is; but there is a keeping which exercises my dependence and faith. (See 1 Peter 1:4, 5.) See, too, 1 Corinthians 1:8, 9—where he then goes on to blame them for everything—and the far happier testimony in John 10. I must close. This is more important than ecclesiastical questions or the Fathers. It is “that which is from the beginning.”
In Ephesians you will find plenty of exhortations but no “ifs”: you do, when we are spoken of as yet on the journey. No doubt we see this, as all things, clearer if we are near to God, because what He is is realised, and Christ dwells in our hearts by faith. We make our calling and election sure, not surer, of course, in God’s mind, but in ours.
Your affectionate brother in Christ.
As regards 2 Peter 1:3, Tischendorf reads “by his own glory and virtue,” l§[q, not Sid, but it does not alter much. But in these are given the promises, the word communicates them to us as ours, and thus our moral delight is in them—escaping the corruption of the world—the heart is elsewhere. Peter never goes beyond the moral effect—not the vital source: “suffered in the flesh,” not “dead”: born of the word, not of the Spirit. “Whereby” (2 Peter 1:4) is dij w|n, and “by these” (diaV touvtwn) the promises; the revelation of the glory and virtue (ver. 3) to the soul is what produces the effect.
The difference of 1 Corinthians 12 and Ephesians 4 is that one is the operation of the Spirit down here, distributing to every man as He will—simple power, so that it might be stopped, as tongues, if no one understood or no interpreter or even more, at the most, than three prophets. Ephesians 4 it is Christ who takes care of His church, and this cannot cease or fail. Apostles and prophets are the foundation which cannot be laid now, it would be a new church: but these apart, Christ cannot fail to give what is needful for His church, and will to the end. Hence there are no miraculous gifts, so-called, spoken of. I am much better, but have again a cold.
1880.
* * * * *
My dear Brother,— … As to the book of meetings I take no notice of it as I always objected to it altogether: very convenient, no doubt, but it is a counting up of a company, and as your letter shews is looked at as conferring a kind of authority and representative character given by—whom? Those who are going to a place can easily find out those they seek with a little trouble… I knew of a place where there were three, and the order of the names being changed caused the greatest displeasure to the one who was no longer first!
But I am sure God is working, and will bring about the result which He can take pleasure in. Indeed, from the first, having given a plain testimony I have only cast the matter on God; and I am thoroughly confident He has acted and will act. I said when in England, when asked if I thought He would give deliverance—Yes, when He judges the brethren adequately humbled. As regards Kent, which He saw needed sifting, and where all went on without my having anything to say to it, I have also left it to God, save answering the letters written to me… But I feel, dear brother, that God must bring blessing about in His own way. The evil was deeper than mere present circumstances, or I might have ventured to write. The only thing I dreaded was some taking the ground of making a fresh start, that all was now individual. In one sense it must always be individual. But beginning anew for a fresh testimony apart from what God had raised up was just what——wanted and attempted to do, and a denial of the one there was. I was long and deeply tried before it broke out whether I should leave brethren, feeling the state of things long before it broke out, but I felt it would not be faith and was held through the storm. But God has evidently wrought and is working in rousing brethren, and putting an end to what I long dreaded in many details. He has wrought in Switzerland, in France, in the States, in Canada, and I hear in Ireland, New Zealand, to say nothing of Sweden and Norway—Italy too—and has been giving fresh blessing since all this in London. I have no doubt through mercy Kent will partake of it… My confidence is in God only, and there we can be assured, if looking to Him in the way of His will. The attacks of those who are unfaithful I have not even read. I believe in God’s acting. All I seek is not to go beyond His leading… His government never fails “though he bear long with them,” and I trust it will be in peace and blessing for all.
* * * * *
To the same.]
* * * I do not believe all I hear, or rather it does not produce upon me the effect it does on some; because the good, of which as the fruit of His own grace God can and does take notice, is much quieter than the evil. Had I not been fully convinced conscience had become swamped or weakened by the influences at work I should not have given the testimony I did. But this conviction made me feel that God alone could maintain and restore the testimony confided to us. Hence having given my testimony I took no part in details… The result is in God’s hands, not mine, and I desire to leave it there. When people wait on God, His actings and government will always bring them up into the place of His approval.
I have said, both in my first letter as to —— and in the little leaflet I ventured to send to brethren, what I felt as to the state of brethren. But I do not think that setting up to be on higher ground, and leaving the state of things, is the path of faith, but a humble looking to God and crying to Him. There has been an effort to have a kind of common humiliation, which would swamp the judgment of evil, but I was not to be caught by that in my judgment—for I was not in the way of it locally…
I do not look to the state of personal feeling, much as I may desire it, but bona fide corporate action. This distinction I have always made, because corporate action (namely in the church) we have God’s promise for, not for the state of each individual soul, save in the general principles of grace… I am aware there is an effort to get up a party against faithfulness, but for that I trust God. And faithfulness does not want a party, nor can a party help it… I desire healing; but I desire no healing which lowers the standard of christian walk, or hinders bringing God and His word to bear on conscience—first one’s Own, and then on that of others. Hence I have felt one must leave God to work out the result in Kent, as with all brethren. The difficulties of those who desire to walk faithfully, and with whose intentions I sympathise, are more trying than positive evil.
* * * * *
6 See below
7 ‘One unspiritual person bringing things to a dead-lock, and thus the evil would remain unjudged.’
8 ‘The Brethren: their Origin, etc.’
9 Vol. xiii. p. 93.
10 Before the contents of the book are opened, the saint refers to the effect of Christ’s first coming; and after they are closed, to His Second. (Chapter 1:6, 7; 22:17.)
11 ‘The assembly as the house was certainly caught hold of by the Reformers.’
12 [The Hopes of the Church of God, Col. Writ., vol. ii, 468.]
13 ‘Is there such a thing in these days (of Christianity) as private or individual worship, or is everything, properly so-called, confined to the gathered assembly? And, as a collateral point, Can a person, forming part of a meeting for worship, retire from it mentally, if he feels it is below his own state, or the like, and go on with God alone, as it were, though in the meeting actually?’
14 ‘The first tenth part of all increase I gave to the sons of Aaron who ministered at Jerusalem: another tenth part I sold away and went and spent it every year at Jerusalem: and the third I gave unto them to whom it was meet.’