[From the French.
Very dear Brother,—I thank you for your letter. All this interests me much. ——writes to me also of the issue of this division movement of which you speak. It appears, blessed be God for it! that it is coming to an end. Often a little patience to let God act is the remedy, while judging all manifested evil, specially when the evil is more in the general state; then it is necessary to seek, by nourishing the souls of those who are Christ’s, to raise their spiritual tone. For the rest we must always look beyond this poor world down here.
We ought to be a testimony for God down here, and we must surely remember this. “Ye are my witnesses,” said Jehovah to Israel, and with still greater reason are Christians such, who are the salt of the earth, the light of the world. I seek this, I pray God for it, and also that He may maintain His testimony in its purity. I believe He will, but for that we must live near Him in spirit, as He lived by His Father, one with Him, in such a way that all He said and did was but the expression of what the Father was. It is what we ought to be for Christ, but for that the heart must be with Him above. The first thing is communion with the Father, and with His Son Jesus Christ, for there the direct power of the life is. But it is a mistake to suppose that the heavenly things are not revealed to us: “Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him. But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit.” “We have received not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit which is of God, that we may know the things that are freely given to us of God.” Now, whilst giving us strength down here, and detaching us from the things that are seen, this accustoms us to live in the things that are our eternal portion.
We often make use of the Saviour in His grace, so suited to our need, and that flows so freely towards us—who thinks of us, of all our difficulties, of all our weaknesses—and we are quite right, for He makes us pass in peace and safety through a world of sorrow and danger; but it is another thing to have the heart lifted up above the world, whilst passing through it, and attached to Him in heaven in such a way that that which fills the heart now is also the object of our hope. It is what I seek, and pray to God for, for other Christians as for myself. But we must have Christ for the journey through the wilderness; we need to know how to count on His faithfulness in all circumstances, and to wait on Him.
May God keep all the brethren very near to Him, this is our eternal position, and it keeps the conscience awake. “The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom.”
1880.
* * * * *
Dear——,—I have thought it well to send you my answer* to Mr.——, who wrote to me19 to announce his separation from brethren. Though I sorrow for him, I do not know that it is an evil that the system of which it is the expression is come to a head. The evil has long been apparent to me.
*My dear——,—You know nothing of my relationship with Abbot’s Hill, nor what I have said or written to them, but that is not the question now, but the position you have definitively taken…
You now openly judge the whole body of brethren as unfit to be associated with, on account of their state, while reserving to yourself the right to select certain assemblies and individuals whom you will own. You and this party are characterised by that holiness and truth which are proper to the precious .testimony which God confided to brethren, at least by the love of it and fidelity to it; the rest are in a mass regarded as unworthy.
Now I have not seen that those who pretend to this, are more holy or characterised more by what is proper to this testimony, nor more devoted, nor have the good of the church of God at heart. Their state does not approve itself to my spiritual judgment, while owning many of those I refer to as dear brethren. I know among the thousands of whom you know nothing, brethren walking in obscurity, more devoted, more given up to Christ, than those who are disposed thus pretentiously to quit them. You admit the precious testimony of God was confided to brethren, so that it is solely on the ground of their unfaithfulness and your greater faithfulness that you leave them. Now I admit that brethren have declined from the unworldliness which was proper to this testimony, and have borne as God enabled me a testimony to this effect, and the troubles in London have largely awakened conscience, and I may add, I never met in visiting, so great an appetite for the word. But all this was fully before me, before——’s case arose. I weighed before God, with deeper anxiety than I can speak of here, the question of leaving brethren, and what I should do. I felt clearly it was not faith—“the hireling fleeth”—and I remained where I was, though in some things more isolated. I have not remarked that those who have taken the ground you do have advanced in holiness and spirituality, rather the contrary, and I am satisfied it is the path of pretension, not of faith. The question was fully before me, and decided before any of the particular questions arose, though partially occasioned by what brought some of them in result. I therefore, having had the matter fully before me, reject as evil the ground you have taken. Were the movement of those you join yourself to, to break up brethren—and I have thought of all that—your party, were I to be with any (which I do not think I should) would, I think, be the very last I should be with: indeed, I should not think of it at all, it is too pretentious for me. I have felt that brethren had got into a low state, and have felt the path was to serve them in it. You have judged that they are in a hopeless, irremediable state, and judged of God to be unworthy of His testimony. God will judge whom He accepts in this. If God has not so judged them, you are clearly wrong. I shall not regret, if He does reject them, having sought to serve them, and Him, in their low estate.
I enter into no details as to——. It is not the question. Your statement is, ‘I am not free to be in their association, as feeling my great responsibility to the Lord and to the brethren.’ I believe that under the influence of an evil system you have not been able to resist the effect of the pressure of A. H., and what was associated with it. You cannot be surprised if I act as to you on your own statement, and at the same time reject in every way the system under whose influence you are. I reserve to myself, as it concerns many besides you, the right to communicate this letter in any way I think proper. I leave the judgment of the question, and of the right path, entirely in the Lord’s hands. Your affectionate brother in Christ.
Perth, September 22nd.
* * * * *
My dear Brother,—I trust that it is error,20 and not heresy. For the latter there must be the evil will of the flesh; and I trust that this is not the case with our brother. Another thing it is right to add, that it is always right to hear what a person has to say before condemning him. But taking your account of the matter and question, it is quite clear that there must be faith in the word in order to be born again. That we are begotten, and born, by the word is plainly stated in scripture; and the word is received by faith. A word not believed has no effect at all. A person may see men as trees walking, that is true; still the word has been believed. I believe that the source of the teaching is taking up a doctrine in the mind; and, lowliness failing—it is not experimentally realised, but the mind trusted—things are put out which are not really of faith.
I do not think the passage in Matthew 13 as to the good soil, applies at all. In every case, save the first, the seed sprang up and grew: the object of the parable is quite another. I should not, on the other hand, use for it (though I do not doubt I have often done it, from not examining it closely), Galatians 3: “We are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus,” because it ought to be “sons,” not “children.” And this, which is christian standing, is contrasted in Galatians 4 with those who were quickened, and heirs of all, but not in the position of sons; that is, believers under the law. The origin of the error I believe to be a hasty and immature taking up of the difference between being quickened and set free. That people must believe the word to be quickened I have no doubt of; but a person may believe in Christ, and not know the value of the work of Christ so as to have peace and forgiveness. Thus the prodigal referred to was brought to know he was perishing, confessed his sins, and set out to his father, and that was the work of grace in him, but said, “Make me a hired servant.” That was not knowing his father; nor had he the best robe on him so as to be fit to go as son into the house. When his father was on his neck he does not say, ‘Make me a servant’; and, indeed, we hear no more of him, but of what his father was to him and did for him.
I have no doubt that He who begins the good work will perfect it unto the day of Jesus Christ; but the work of the Spirit and word, by which we are converted, born again, through faith, is distinct from that knowledge of the work of Christ in the conscience which gives peace, and there may be an interval passed between them; but my heart being repentant and turned to God, is a distinct thing from having the Father on my neck, and the best robe upon me. In Acts 2 they believed, through grace, Peter’s word and said, “Men and brethren, what shall we do?” Peter then presents to them the forgiveness of sins, and the reception of the Holy Ghost. Here there was no delay, but there were two distinct things; and, from want of a plain gospel, souls often stay some time in Romans 7, converted (by the word), but without peace, much more, without deliverance—nay, are taught to stay there.
My impression (for, I repeat, it is always fair to hear what a person has to say) is, that what has been taught is the fruit of being aware of this difference, and the mind, having had too much confidence in itself, teaching what was not experimentally learned, and hence immaturely and with mistakes, which might be mischievous—perhaps, dear brother, with a little dogmatic impatience on your part, there being behind truth which you had not learned. But in this case it would be error, not heresy; only the teacher would have to be more a learner, and not to go beyond what he had learned with God. I have spoken openly, having confidence in his and your love as brethren, though personally I have not the pleasure of knowing you.
Earnestly desiring you may all find true peace and union through grace.
Your affectionate brother in Christ.
Perth, September 21th.
Dear ——,—I did not like the article21 by —— at all, and sent him word so. But there is great general decline on this point, and I have a tract in hand as to it, which I hope to get out as soon as possible.22 We must not confound manifested salvation, and being born of God. We read, “To give knowledge of salvation to his people by the remission of their sins.” But before Christ came, souls were born of God; but they could not believe that Jesus was the Christ, for He had not come. They might have believed the promises then which referred to Him who should come: “But life and incorruptibility have been brought to light by the gospel.” I can now say, “Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God.” But that is not exactly saying, Whosoever does not, is not. We can say, he that, when He is presented, rejects Him is condemned, dies in his sins; and a saving work may be begun in the soul by the Spirit of God where the soul is not clear as to the Person of Christ, but which assuredly leads to it, and which, now that His name is spread abroad, it is almost impossible to separate from it; nor can we ever say that a man has life till he believes in Christ. Still this remains always true and fundamental, “He that hath the Son hath life, and he that hath not the Son of God hath not life”; and repentance and remission of sins were to be preached in His name. Conscience and knowledge may be both, there without a quickening work. But there may be a work in consciences in the living power of the Spirit, before the mind is clear as to the truth concerning the Lord, yet ultimately the testing-point; and, the fact of Jesus Christ being the Son of God and dying for us being universally known, it is implicitly believed without the passage to real faith being perceived. We see love to the brethren, love to the word, and we cannot help trusting the work of the Spirit is there, and there is the current faith in Christ with us, as I have said— the change into reality unperceived. But all this refers to our perception of it, not to the reality of the thing in God’s sight. But “of his own will begat he us by the word of truth,” and that truth is concerning His Son. We may see the fruits, and so judge or trust that life is there; but the root is not in the fruits.
It does not follow that a person is clear as to the efficacy of Christ’s work, because he believes in, and loves, Christ. The sealing of the Spirit goes, as to the detail of the work, I believe, with faith in the work, as well as the Person. See Acts 2:37, 38, and 10:43; Ephesians 1:13. But in a plain gospel they go together; Being in the flesh is being in the standing of the first Adam before God, and not in Christ—judging from ourselves to God’s judgment, and not from His work to our place before Him: “According to this time shall it be said of Jacob and of Israel, what hath God wrought?” So the prodigal. “In the flesh” (Rom. 7 and 8) is the same. Deliverance and forgiveness are not the same thing. We must learn what we are, as well as what we have done; deliverance is known by sealing, as being in Christ. “Where the Spirit of the Lord is there is liberty.”
We had a most useful meeting at Rochdale.
London, October 14th.
* * * A question was communicated to me by —— ‘What would be sufficient to deprive the assembly of the testimony of God?’ Now the question is, to my mind, a profound mistake— that the testimony they bear is the governing object of the mind of saints. It is no new thought to me, but what I have insisted on, I know not how long (some thirty or forty years), that wherever an assembly, or the assembly, are such to bear a testimony, they will be a testimony to their own weakness and inefficiency; because the object of their walk cannot be one which efficiently forms a Christian. When they have a right one, they will be a testimony; but to be one is never the first object. To have Christ, I mean practically to walk with Him and after Him, to have communion with the Father and the Son, to walk in unfeigned obedience and lowliness, to live in realised dependence on Christ and have His secret with us, and realise the Father’s love, to have our affections set on things above, to walk in patience and yet confidence through this world—this is what we have to seek; and if we realise it we shall be a testimony, whether individually or collectively, but in possessing the things themselves, and they form us through grace, so that we are one: but seeking or setting up to be it does not. Moses did not seek to have his face shine, nor even know when it did, but when he had been with God it did so.
Wherever Christians, so far as I have seen, set up to be a testimony, they get full of themselves, and lose the sense that they are so, and fancy it is having much of Christ. A shining face never sees itself. The true heart is occupied with Christ, and in a certain sense and measure self is gone. The right thought is not to think of self at all, save as we have to judge it. You cannot think of being a testimony save of your being so, and that is thinking of self—and, as I have said before, it is what I have always seen to be the case.
Yours sincerely in the Lord.
[Date uncertain.]
* * * * *
My dear Brother,—One of the first signs to me of the evil current as to that point was the Manchester meeting. Brethren were thinking and speaking of themselves, not of Christ. Setting up to be Philadelphia was being of the spirit of Laodicea, as indeed I have often said: I have trusted that God was working towards that, but setting up to be something was the very opposite to that work. Philadelphia is never gone till Christ comes—has the promise, because she has kept the word of Christ’s patience, to be kept from the hour of temptation which is coming on all the earth, and the promise that Christ is coming quickly. I trust that there will be a much more decided Philadelphian testimony. That is not what I quarrel with, but the corporate pretension to be it now.
The next thing I object to is making those who open when the Lord knocks, specially excellent Christians who are in this spiritually advanced state. I see nothing of the kind. They are unconverted or professing to be Christians, in so low a state, that all is going to be spued out of Christ’s mouth, and they are warned to get Christ and what is real. There is not a word of their coming out and, being in testimony; Christ goes in and sups with them. But so far from thinking the promise the highest, I have always thought it the lowest. It is merely reigning—a wonderful thing, no doubt, for such as we, but what Old Testament saints will have too. It is the external glory, not being inside the house. The exhortation is to get what is real from Christ instead of their empty pretension, “that the shame of thy nakedness do not appear,” and. get their eyes anointed that they may see. I see nothing of extraordinary advance in spirituality here—a most salutary warning in the present state of things, but nothing extraordinarily spiritual, nor any call into a special place of testimony at all. The whole thing seems to me a delusion. Philadelphia is praised because they have not denied Christ’s name. They have a little strength: that does not sound very exalted; but to be faithful and keep Christ’s word when others are giving up the faith, may be the test of theirs. I desire earnestly to see the beloved saints roused to entire devotedness and strength and constancy of communion; but it is not pretension to be something which characterises this.
When I saw you, you were unhappy because you had not the gold. Now, any one who knows anything about the matter, knows where this comes from. I told you you were the gold, that is, the righteousness of God in Christ… The system you speak of was calculated to lay hold on saints who were desiring something better, but filled them with themselves and fancied spirituality, not Christ. Truth sanctifies, and in these things he had not the truth. That I have from himself: the very thing he was inflating people’s minds with, he owns to me was unsound teaching; and women running about teaching as they did, ought to have opened the minds of sober saints.
You say both go on to the end [Rev. 3]: how, then, can Philadelphia be gone? I do not at all object to judging our state, provided it be conscience, not murmuring. It has gained much latterly, through grace; but the earnest desire of more of Christ dwelling in our hearts, I go heartily with. But that is not pretending to be something, and an inflation which does not come from God…
I believe I have answered all your questions.
London, October 20th.
* * * * *
Dear ——,—I have been informed that your dear husband is gone to his rest. Though it be long time since I saw him I have not forgotten the pleasure I had in knowing him as a true servant of the Lord. We could not be surprised at his being taken away having been so long feeble, but this does not hinder its being a sorrow and a blank to you. The comfort we have is, that this is not our resting-place, and the blessed Lord never fails in sympathy and kindness for the inevitable sorrows of the way. If He takes away what was long an object, and for our hearts at least a prop, He always comes in to cheer and comfort the spirit. Him alone we can never lose, who is really nearer to us than any human tie, and beside us on to rest and glory. If our hearts now wish themselves with Him we abide in Him, and He in us, and there is no rest like that, nor stay, and then it is a sanctifying stay, and leads us onward towards Him. How real a comfort too, to feel those we love to be surely gone to Him. The Lord expected the disciples to rejoice in His going, for He was going to His rest: well, He is entered as our forerunner, having secured our entry there.
Be assured of my sincere sympathy with you, and with your daughter, who I trust is, for her, pretty well, for I have heard she is again a good deal an invalid.
Sincerely yours in Christ.
London, October
* * * * *
* * * I felt much what has happened to poor——breaking up his plans and hopes, and yours for him too. But I cannot help thinking that, strong as was the hold the world had upon him, the Lord’s eye is upon him for good, and indeed that there is a work of God in his soul, strangely spoiled by other elements, still a work there. The style of young men and young women is, at present, not merely displeasing to a staid Christian, but utterly offensive to good taste. Vanity I expect in this world, as long as the Lord allows it to go on in His patient grace; but there is besides divine life, a respect for what is comely, a moral modesty, which seems going clean out, even where you might expect it, and to characterise the style of the day, and offend, in the young women—even young men. I do not speak now of——, for though I might see, of course, vanity, and the love of it in some, I did not see it in them; I speak of what is general. But I think more at this moment of dear——. I trust his voyage will be of use to him; still one cannot but feel that the Lord has laid His hand on him; in love I am sure, and for his good, still it is a solemn and serious thing for him. May the Lord deepen the work in him, and lead him to peace. God cannot let us alone, and leave us to ourselves when He has begun a work in us, and when anything in our natural character tends to carry us away, He says stop… .
I am glad your health holds up. But there is more to sustain us than that, a faithful loving Lord, who never fails us and never will. You have, in some respects, a trying place, but He does all things well and makes everything work together for good to those who love Him. There is much more reality in a living loving care of us, than we are aware of. It is faith for us now, but what is not seen is eternal. I often have said, how little they knew they were sending the poor thief to paradise when they were breaking his legs. But I must be off to a meeting.
Affectionately yours in the Lord.
London, November 9th.
* * * * *
My dear——,— … The Presbyterians profess to hold new birth by baptism in a worse way than English Episcopalians, though they have no formulary to bring it under the eye. It was held by all the Reformers. But where sacramental grace is held, the root of Popery and ecclesiastical hostility to the truth is always found.
As regards the kingdom of heaven; the kingdom of heaven is the kingdom of God, only dispensationally spoken of, and is the kingdom of God when the King is in heaven. But “kingdom of God” is a more general term; we have “it is not meat and drink,” etc. “Kingdom of heaven” is only used in Matthew in contrast with Messiah on earth. John never speaks of dispensations, but of the reality of things, God being revealed: and so “kingdom of God” is used here, John 3.
The Red Sea I believe to be Christ’s death and resurrection, and thus redemption by which we are brought to God, as is there said. You have not the saint raised in Romans; he is looked at as we are, a man living on the earth, but having Christ as his life, forgiven and justified, and reckoning himself dead, and giving himself up to God as one that is alive in Christ from the dead. The Red Sea redeems, not from enemies, but out of flesh, and so sin and Satan’s power. Pharaoh was not an enemy, but an oppressor. Jordan is death experimentally, death with Christ; then after being risen, fighting begins.
London, November 19th.
* * * * *
Dear Boys,—Thank you for your kind note; I am now, through mercy, in my 81st year and pretty well; but the great thing is, as you know, to be born again. They say, ——, that you are, and love Christ; now a proof of it will be that you bear with patience and submission your deafness, it is a real trial for you and I feel for you, but God makes everything work together for good to those who love Him. I trust you may get better, but He is always right and perfect in His ways. I trust——gets as sure at six years old of God’s love as I am, through mercy, at 80. I can look back along life and see how gracious and perfect He has been all through, and that my years cannot measure all the mercy and faithfulness He has shewn to me.
Kindest love to you both.
Affectionately yours in the Lord.
November 19th.
* * * * *
Dearest Brother,—I was very glad to hear from you and of the saints, I do not find absence enfeebles my interest in them. I should greatly like to see them all again, but having now entered my eighty-first year I can hardly look to long journeys and active labours as once undertaken, but ever to Him who, with no journeys to take, ever watches over and visits them in an unceasing and tender care—a heart that never grows weary, and strength that never decays. I am fresh through grace, and Christ gives me renewed strength still to work on. I have had these last few days three meetings a day, and scarcely less than two for a long time, having been round visiting the saints up to the North of England and Scotland. Thank God, I found the brethren generally happy and much appetite for the word; and others labouring about give the same testimony, and in several places there is a good deal of conversion. You will have heard there has been trouble in London which has been really largely blessed… Not that all are clear, but the general state of the work encourages those who are engaged in it, and any evil is sinking down in its littleness. Our conference meetings too have been much blessed. But I do not doubt and have not doubted there had been decline in spirituality and devotedness; and God in His rich mercy gave them a good shake, but it has roused and blessed them. There is far more conscience and reference of heart to God than there was. For myself it deeply tried me, though I had little personally to say to it, which my being in France helped me in, but I never enjoyed the Lord’s love, and learned what His word reveals to us, and its power, as I have in these times; and I have felt how good it is to trust Him who never fails.
God makes a difference between mistakes in judgment, and positive wrongness of state. There is a government of God: where there is integrity of heart, He may chastise us because of it for blessing: there is always in such case want of waiting upon Him. But while He may exercise our patience by the other, it will sink out of the place of testimony. Chastening is good for us—we seldom wait sufficiently on God. He goes on straight in His way to the end of purposed blessing, while the petty ways of man cross each other in a thousand directions, and where only men come to nothing: where the Lord is at bottom the motive, He leads us into His straight way in the end—so faithful, so patient in goodness. The Lord give us to have Himself always before us—the eye on Him, the heart looking for Him, who shall receive us to Himself, and have nothing imperfect.
Redemption is perfect, absolute: when first known, in itself a source of boundless joy and triumph, and at the end of our course, when more or less we may accuse ourselves of failure (Deut. 9), gives as to acceptance God’s judgment, “What hath God wrought,” said of Jacob and Israel. (Num. 23) All that is a work finished and done, and Christ sitting down because it is. But it brings us generally into the wilderness (not as imperfect, for the thief could go straight to Paradise), and that is not a finished work, but what we go through and which tests us, but in which where life is, God helps us by His power: we learn what we are, but we learn what the Lord is— it is constant dependence or failure, but constant faithfulness to sustain us. But here we go through exercises which humble and prove us (Deut. 8), but learn much to do us good in our latter end. We have the priesthood to help, the red heifer and running water to cleanse for communion, and at the end return to what I have quoted—Numbers 23; but we must learn it along the way. The redemption is never unsettled. Put Deuteronomy 9 and Numbers 23 together, and much is learnt, but it must be experimentally learned with God on the way.
Your affectionate brother in Christ.
1880.
* * * * *
* * * When I have a moment, what occupies me now is the sealing of the Spirit, and His coming down here—not anything new, but brethren were becoming muddy about it, part of the general decline; it has an importance in my mind it never had. Indeed, I am sometimes afraid the importance of the great facts of Christianity almost sets aside the thought of souls. This would be want of love, a central, vital point of Christian truth, and of the state of our hearts. I always feel that I fail in it. Christ is everything to me; that I know; there my heart is at rest. Though my affections are poor, the link is there; but I feel that my heart does not go out enough to those He loves. Well, He will be perfectly glorified in every one of us; that is a comfort. Though I feel my want of energy in love, He guides us in what we do. Patience and perseverance I understand, at least, in a general way.
November, 1880.
* * * * *
To the same.]
* * * I am preparing my head for a volley of stones, for I have a tract printing on the Sealing with the Spirit, which was needed, and I hope will be useful; the part I thought the least of probably the most so… I have certainly been nearer the heavenly rest than ever, and to the chamber the other side the cloison (I do not say galandage, for the body is for the Lord). I fear there is not enough adoration in my frame, yet Christ knows what He is to me.
How unspeakable the grace that gives us a place with the Son of God! such a word, “As is the heavenly, such are they also that are heavenly”; then as to standing and acceptance, “As he is, so are we in this world”; and as to nature, origin, life, “He that sanctifieth and they who are sanctified are all of one.” We ought to be empty of all but what comes from Him, and its source in us. A3 far as it is so, it makes us very serious to be so in derivative communion with God, and then in thinking of the world around us—full of joy too, and according to the nature of God. Such was Christ’s life, and He is our life; but poor creatures we are, even when devoted, but He is our strength, a strength made perfect in weakness…
At this moment I am occupied with Adonai, who and what He is—clearly, directly, Christ sometimes, as Psalms 2 and ex., but there is more than that.
December, 1880.
* * * * *
My dear Brother,—The idea that ceasing to break bread a Sunday, or even two, dissolves the assembly, seems to me without any ground whatever. An assembly may not break bread out of the fear of God, by reason of trouble and confusion at the time through a perverse individual (and I have known such a case), without a thought of dissolving itself, but because it was a faithful assembly and feared God. Why, a persecuting police or violent man might come in and hinder them breaking bread! If it must be by the will of the assembly, it must be a will to dissolve itself. I trust the Lord will put an end to the confusion at —— and I believe He will. What is needed in such cases generally is restoring souls, not the outward state of things. There is an interference often of brethren from a distance which is not of God, and dulls the conscience of the assembly. I do not deny they may be useful if coming to serve and awake the conscience of the assembly itself. Its own folly may dissolve an assembly as a fact.
[Date uncertain.]
* * * * *
Dear——,—I should gladly give you anything which would enable you to carry out your plans. My difficulty is whether it can be done. I will tell you where I am about it, and you will see I am bringing out a new edition23 as it is out of print. As a had come out, save for learned people since the last, I thought I would give it where it changed anything. This led me a little further, and where I had said T. R. reads, in the note, I have added the principal authorities for and against. I doubt I have done any good by it; still inquirers will see that B D L (and now a generally), and Memphitic go together, and A, later uncials, and generally Syrr (Peshito and Harclean) go together, and so other MSS. further on. My original object was translation, not text. Hence, if all the main authorities accepted it, I did, and in common cases this is all right. When it is a question of mere copying, the older are more likely right, and there is the influence of lectionaries and Tatian [‘the Harmonist’ so called], which may be often thus corrected. But I believe the old MSS. have been quite as much wilfully tampered with, if not more, than others. We have none the clergy and monks had not to say to: I have no doubt a number of small mistakes—“answered” for “answered him” or “them,” and “Jesus” for “He”—from lectionaries. But I am not myself satisfied critically, nor do I trust these received authorities.
Tregelles is very accurate, but has merely a selection of MSS. which he approves of because they follow B. It is a system: Tischendorf more complete, but as a general rule following the same. Lachmann, though systematically following early uncials, is very often more with Textus Receptus. But I am not satisfied as to a critical text though many mistakes are corrected in mine. Hence my difficulty in replying to you.
January, 1881.
* * * * *
To the same.]
* * * I know of no such change as you speak of in my views. I have looked it [Synopsis] over at some, if not all, of the new editions, and am doing the same now for another. Developments thus there have been; the Psalms you will see a note on; the division of Romans got clearer in my mind, and some difficulties in Deuteronomy were cleared up: but there has been no change of views at all that I know of.
I have no doubt at all that Rebekah is a type of the church, and in no respect of the remnant of Israel: to them Christ returns. In every point it is just the opposite.
But as to my Synopsis, I go and learn from it myself sometimes. Nor am I aware of any changes. You may be quite at ease then.
January 14th.
* * * * *
To the same.]
* * * In general it is a mistake about fresh truth. ——did apply to the church some things I should not, as Song of Songs, though to individual souls there may be application, just as individual souls are under the law. It was, on the contrary, the discovery of church truth and place which threw back crowds of passages to the Jews. You have only to look at the headings of a Bible of the Authorised Version to see it. There is nothing so fresh as the truth which comes from God, and is always fresh. Opinionum commenta delet dies: I do not trust notions. There is a large linking of truth in scripture; and if people get out of this for notions, these only mislead and hinder, and give importance to our ideas and so to ourselves: whereas in receiving the truth one is subject to God, and nothing oneself. I write these few lines because an important principle is involved in it.
Affectionately yours in the Lord.
January 21st.
My dear Brother,—It is a good while now since I exchanged a line with you; and, in fact, I have been laid up, so that I could do, for some time, little or nothing—entirely down, so that I did not know whether I should be raised up at all again. It is now near three months that I have been unable to pass the night stretched in my bed—at first, not at all: now I sit up in bed about a third of the night, but I sleep rather better then, than lying down—all this of the poor body, but it makes its being left, if not glorified, nearer to us. God may give higher apprehensions of the joys before us, and if all be not habitually and honestly purged before God there may be exercises of conscience, even if we know the remedy. I hardly came so near to going away as that; but I was surprised, in at least looking it in the face, how little difference there was: Christ with me for the way, and Christ at the end for full and perfect joy. It is a difference to go. It is what is eternal, but we live as in Christ in what is eternal; but faith is not sight. But the word is ever precious, which brings what is of God, and God Himself to us, in the power of His own Spirit, and so as from Himself, and this gives it a peculiar and blessed character: soon it will be better still; not from Himself, but Himself. But it is suited to us here, just like Christ Himself— what is of God and heavenly, but suited to us here—with a divine flexibility which suits itself to all circumstances and to everything that is in our hearts, but to take us up whence it comes from.
I have written a tract on the “Sealing of the Spirit.” I felt its being muddied, as it was, a good deal, and this was the case everywhere; it was a sign of the state of souls. But dear ——was never, I think, clear; I have often told him so, never really out of Romans 7 But how many are there! Yes, very many take for granted they are out of it, while full, perfect, simple redemption is not really known. Ask, not in Palestine, but in Boston and New York, what it is to have “no more conscience of sins,” and they cannot tell; and then God for us is not known. This side in the public teaching was wanting at the Reformation. They saw Christ’s work meeting our need before God, but “God so loved” was hardly a part of their gospel. On assurance they largely insisted; indeed, justifying faith was, to them, the personal appropriation of Christ’s work in an assuring way: it was not sufficiently the object of faith, though it was there, but the state of the soul. But when it pleases God to do so, He works with very imperfect truth, provided it be Christ; it is one of the present difficulties. At the first, full truth flowed from the centre and drew souls up to it; now it works where all is confusion, to bring in divine order and faith through the word—I mean order as to the truth. But I close.
In general, throughout the country, there is a real appetite for the word—a happy sign—and brethren are blessed. In some parts of London, though there is nothing outward, the effect of local troubles remains. But the Lord loves His church, and does not cease His care for it. Nothing will fail of His purposed grace. Peace be with you, dear brother, and constant guidance, keeping near enough to hear His voice through grace.
Your affectionate brother in Christ.
January 29th.
* * * * *
[From the French.
* * * The word “friend” has a double meaning: my friend is a man to whom I can open my heart, and also a man who is kind and friendly towards me; but the term always implies a certain intimacy. The Jews called the Lord “a friend of sinners,” and truly He was so. He called His disciples His friends, because He had communicated to them all that the Father had given Him. Any familiarity with the Lord, such as one finds among the Moravians, impresses me painfully, and I consider it carnal, even when it is linked with piety. “He is not ashamed to call us brethren.” In this last sense, it is quite improper to apply this word to Jesus, and to call Him oui Brother. In the instances which you quote, I think the style is too familiar. But if we say, ‘What a wondrous Friend of sinners Jesus was, when He gave Himself upon the cross!’ or, ‘What a Friend to His own is that Jesus who ever lives to intercede for us!’— the thought assumes quite another character. But we must avoid a freedom which is not becoming.
The meeting for breaking of bread is in principle the meeting together of all Christians in the unity of the body of Christ. Every Christian, then, has a right to share in it. But at the same time, in the present state of Christianity, we are called to maintain, scrupulously, faithfully, and with zeal, the holiness of the Lord’s table. (2 Tim. 2:22.) Now the assembly is in no way a voluntary meeting of Christians who have chosen the assembly, for in that case it would be a sect. It is, so far as such a thing is possible now, the meeting of all the members of the body of Christ. We must have sufficient evidence that those who desire to take part in it are true Christians, and that their walk is moral, christian. Now, if they habitually meet with those who deny the truths of Christianity, they are defiled; and it is so also if they meet where immorality is allowed.
Difference in ecclesiastical views is not a sufficient reason for shutting out a soul. But if one wanted to be one day among the brethren, the next among the sects, I should not allow it, and would not receive such a person; for, instead of using the liberty which belongs to him to enjoy the spiritual communion of the children of God, he puts forward the pretension to change the order of the house of God, and to perpetuate the separation of Christians.
London, February.
* * * * *
* * * I was very glad to hear of you and from you, and that the Lord is helping you on. If we look to Him He ever does: He never leaves us. But there is a government of His, in which the enjoyment of blessing depends on our walk with Him, and nothing can take the place of that. But I must turn, with but little time, to your questions.
It was the almost universal opinion of early Christians that Genesis 6:2 applied to fallen, or rather to the fall of the angels (in this case different from Satan); and Jude 6, 7 seems to confirm it—compare 2 Peter 2:4 more generally. But if it be so, God has shut them up in chains of darkness, and hidden the whole scene and its fruits from our sight in overwhelming waters of the deluge; and it is a mercy that He has.
Baptising for the dead (1 Cor. 15:29) is, I believe, the nature and meaning of baptism. Alive in flesh, we as a figure take our part in Christ’s death; only it is put in a general way, and the force of it—what is the good of taking a place in death if there be no resurrection? If you take verses 20-28 as a parenthesis, the verses connect directly: verse 29 answers to 18, and 30-32 to 19. This renders the intelligence of it easier.
As to Daniel, Christ was cut off and took nothing (see margin —the real sense—did not take the kingdom then), after sixty and two weeks, that is sixty-nine. Now we learn from the gospels His ministry was as nearly as possible three years and a half, so that for intelligent faith there is only half a week left, and, in tact, only that of the great tribulation. For unbelief —the beast and the apostate Jews—there is a week; and they enter into covenant for this time, but he breaks it when half through, takes away the sacrifice, and the great tribulation begins—that which is spoken of in Matthew 24 after verse 15, and in Mark 13—and this only in the Revelation.
I have been laid up ever since my last return here, but am a great deal better; not an illness, but exhaustion from overwork, and the effects of a bad fall at Dundee Station; but the Lord’s hand ordering all.
Your affectionate brother in Christ.
February 7th.
* * * * *
Dear——,—I rejoice that you are helped and happy in your work—I trust very constantly dependent too. That is the secret of a work wrought with God, and that, though it may seem quiet, lasts, and lays the ground for progress. I can only write a line now, though, thank God, much better.
It is not that there are not deep things in the word of God, but if we search it with His grace and Spirit it is always plain for us on the top; then we have it from Him. The cream is on the surface, not that we do not search and study, but that when we get it from God it is plain and on the surface. Till then we must wait till He teaches us. The passage you refer to is quite general. You must expect in a great house all sorts of vessels, precious and vile. Christendom has become such, and hence we must expect such. False doctrine, when it characterises a man, is a vessel to dishonour; sound and exalted doctrine accompanied with unholiness, makes a man a vessel to dishonour; he who builds up sacramental corruptions, as Puseyites, Romanists, Greeks, are—at any rate as teachers— vessels to dishonour. I give these merely as examples; but it is left to spiritual discernment, according to the word, to judge what is, and then to purge oneself from them…
The Lord keep you humble and near Himself.
London, February 9th.
* * * * *
My dear Brother,—I do not like the pages24 you sent me, because they perplex the mind as to what it needs as fundamental truth. The first passage might pass, because the last words save it. But the first two lines state boldly that God does not need to be propitiated, and the second line of page 246 throws all into confusion. ‘To be propitiated on their behalf He never needed,’ yet propitiation was requisite. Now this confounds two senses of ‘propitiate’: the disposing to kindness, and meeting justice about sins. Yet it was ‘an act Godward,’ and propitiation was needed; yet ‘God needed not to be propitiated.’ This confuses and mixes up the two senses of the word, and indeed the characters of God, as judge and as love. Now as regards reconciliation, I recognise fully God did not need to be influenced to be gracious towards us. In John 3 His love is stated as the ground on which the gift came, by which propitiation could be made. The outgoing of the love of God was the free spontaneous actings of His own grace and nature. This was wanting in the theology of the Reformation and their creeds. They had, “the Son of man must be lifted up,” and believed in its efficacy; but they had not, “for God so loved” etc. Christ on the cross had satisfied for believers the justice of God, but God still retained the character of a judge.
The mistake is, confounding the character of judge and sovereign love, which is above all causes and relations. God is a righteous judge; righteousness is a real thing, and God is righteous, a righteous Lord, and requires righteousness. He is not said to be righteousness, but righteous, because it is a relative term; no more than we are called to be love, because it is free and supreme. Now love brought down God to deliver Israel. But the God who delivered them was a righteous God, “of purer eyes than to behold evil, and canst not look on iniquity.” He passed through Egypt to smite; and blood, the blood of the lamb, had to be presented to His eye, or He must have smitten Israel. He judged being what He was, according to that which met Him, righteous judgment, and passed over because the blood was there. It was a righteous estimate of the value of what God saw. “The Son of man must be lifted up”; and this should have all its value: to reveal God’s love and all its manifold consequences, according to the counsels of God, it needed to be the Son of His love.
I read, ‘It is not the meeting of the sinner’s need, though that results from it, but the providing that God should be able to act in grace.’ This supposes that God’s activity is only in grace, and that judgment is only a casualty. But this, save as to activity, is false. There exist relationships to which responsibility is attached, and these must be met. There is right and wrong, which bring in judgment, besides grace. Of these the express measure, as to man, is law; nor would grace exist but for this, though love would. When men have failed, righteous judgment ensues, the receiving of the things done in the body. And in bearing our sins in His own body on the tree, Christ directly and intentionally met our need—this as regards us; but as a general principle, He gave Himself a ransom for all, gave Himself to meet the need as an ajntivlutron. This giving Himself was pure, unbounded love, but it was to meet a need. The blood on the lintel and doorposts was the effect of divine love, but it was to meet a need. Responsibility and its consequences are forgotten in the statements; and the requirements of God’s nature founded on it lost, as if there was nothing but the activity of love which had to be kept pure in God, according to some unknown standard and exigency. The love is free and sovereign, but the righteousness and righteous requirement is true and unchangeable: “The Son of man must be lifted up.” The existence of conscience is the now innate sense of this. And obligation to God is in these pages set aside or forgotten, in insisting on the love of God. There is a vast deal more: the doctrine of God’s righteousness for man when man had none, and the wonderful counsels of God in which grace reigns through righteousness, so that righteousness is itself the fruit of love, and a far, far wider range of thought behind, on which I do not touch, confining myself to the questions you have sent me.
Reconciling God is not scriptural, and it seems to me unworthy of God—[supposing] some being, superior Being in love, who is so to dispose Him. I add, the words are confounded in A.V., Romans 5:11: “atonement” should be “reconciliation”: and Hebrews 2:17, “to make reconciliation” should be “propitiation,” where the need is clearly expressed: compare chapter 1:3.
February 18th, 1881.
* * * * *
Dearest——,—Your letter was not answered, because, first, I was so low, I could do next to nothing; and then it got astray, when I could take care of nothing; and it hung ever on my mind as a thing to do, and I was very glad to get yours to-day.
I may comfort .you concerning England, for as a general rule the gatherings are in a far better state than they were before the trouble, and there is more conscience. I do not doubt much is yet to be desired, but there is more spring, too, in work, and everywhere a great desire for the word. The difficulties found faith very low; and a mass had come in as they would to any other sect with little or no principle, and what occurred found them in this state of weakness. Then there was a revival baptist work, which, while it sought to be accredited by brethrenism, had none of the principles which had formed them…
A collateral difficulty arose, that a large number of godly brethren were so disgusted with the duplicity and want of uprightness that they were disposed to leave, and so get clear of it. This was perhaps the most trying part of it, having to oppose men you loved and valued; but, dear brother, the Lord is sufficient for everything. The last difficulty is gone, and the upright ones more cordially united than ever… But the mass of brethren are sound, and going on, not occupied with all this, and because they are quiet they pass unnoticed. Occasionally there is a local effort which troubles them, but it is left to God; and if a few who stand in the gap are firm, then all go on peacefully and happily…
In general, God has sifted, and sifted for blessing, and has sustained brethren; and I trust Him fully for the testimony. I have no doubt Satan made a dead set at brethren, and God allowed it because they wanted it; but He has shewn Himself in goodness, and He always does well, wisely, and right…
And now for your texts. Those who yield feigned obedience [Psa. 18:44, etc.] are those who, without any heart for Messiah, are afraid to do anything else, and nationally. The sheep in Matthew are the individual results of the preaching of the kingdom, and judged only for the manner they have received the messengers. There is a war judgment (Rev. 19:11), and a sessional judgment. In Psalm 18 they bow under power to the throne. Matthew 25 is individual moral judgment when He has the throne. (Compare Psalm 18:34-45; Matthew 25:31.) Only there is a double action. He comes from heaven to destroy the beast, and takes the kingdom, and then out of Zion establishes His kingdom on earth, the Assyrian [being destroyed]. This is connected with all His ways as to Israel, His being in the midst of the people or not; Israel owned or not owned. I apprehend the 1000 years will give ample time for the existence of the army at the end. Partial dominion would not do; “every eye shall see him”; He will “plead with all flesh.” (See Isa. 66) “And there shall be one Lord, and his name one”; “the God of the whole earth shall he be called.”
Remember, dear——, what I have often said in New Zealand and as to England, that Christianity works by what it brings, not by what it finds. I have to leave the active field now to younger men than myself; but there is One who never grows old, the same yesterday, to-day, and for ever, and who cannot fail His own, or in making all things work together for good for them…
Ever affectionately yours.
London, February 24th.
* * * * *
My dear Brother,—I have a tract on Sealing which I thought I might have had to-day; but it is not come. I do not write in any magazine now. I am not at all happy about the brothers’ book-selling concerns; the spirit of the world has got thoroughly hold of it. Sealing on the new birth is a mistake in principle; it leaves out the sprinkling with blood for forgiveness. I know of no ground for delay save knowing this. (See Acts 2:38; 10:43, 44.)
As to eternal life: in the full sense of it it is Christ Himself, and that revealed as Man in glory, 1 John 5:20. But its essence is divine life in the Person of Christ, 1 John 5:11, 12. In Him was life, and that life He has in manhood, John 5:24. But this has a double character; the Son quickens as Son (verse 21), and then we are, when dead in sins, quickened together with Christ: in one as Son of God, a divine Person; in the other, a dead man whom God raises. Now life and incorruptibility were brought to light by the gospel. For eternal life was manifested in the Person of the Son, and when He was risen and glorified, shewn out in its new full character in Man. If we be risen with Christ, “when Christ, who is our life, shall appear, we shall appear with him in glory.” Now till He came this never was displayed, nor according to God’s full purpose in man, till He was glorified: but I have no doubt the Old Testament saints were quickened and they will be perfected. Still it was as much in Christ humbled, as in Christ glorified. 1 John 1 was before the world, and that is its essence, only now brought to light in connection with the incorruptibility of the body in resurrection (or changed) a spiritual body. Paul never speaks of it as ours25now that I remember: John does, for he always speaks of things in their essence. But it comes in the knowledge of the Father sending the Son, and Jesus Christ as so sent of Him; and the Father, Son, and life come in the Son, and the Father revealed in Him, runs all through John’s teaching, connecting us with Him in life. (1 John 4:9; 5:11, 12.) We live, but Christ is our life. But the revelation of the Father in the Son, and that as giving eternal life in Him, is the essence of John’s doctrine, along with propitiation and forgiveness in his epistle—not in his gospel. But it is not necessary that it should be in the heavenly glory to be eternal life; but redemption through Christ is. In Matthew 25 they go into life everlasting. The places in the Old Testament where it is spoken of are Psalm 133 and Daniel 12.
Its essence is Christ as life, but in its full thought as to us, is being like Him in glory. But there is quickening by Him as Son, and being quickened, and raised with Him—in both cases life, in the latter known in heavenly glory as the result. God has reserved some better thing for us, but the Old Testament saints will be perfected with us. No one who has not life can have to say to God really. The Pharisees had got hold of the expression, as they had of resurrection. But the Lord goes down to the ground they were upon, if they will enter into life —God’s commandments. But in the Lord’s unfolding the subject in John 6, you find having eternal life as a present thing, as constantly in John, but directly connected four times over with His raising us in the last day. Its full development is in the sphere it came from, and in the power of Him who has it in connection with man, and so immortality (incorruptibility)—the body brought in. Nor, though they have it down here, is this shut out in the final result in Matthew 25, Daniel 12, and Psalm 133.
You cannot separate eternal life and new birth; but though the essence of divine life is there, yet eternal life in Christ as man and finally in glory does go further—man being quickened as accomplished in Christ glorified. It is the gospel which has brought it to light… The moral subjective effect was produced by being quickened, obedience, dependence, reference of heart to God, delight in His will. Hence the saint now can delight in the Psalms, though there is no knowledge of the Father.
I am, through mercy, much better; but, saving a reading in my room, have held no meetings, but been twice to the breaking of bread.
February 24th.
* * * * *
My dear Brother,—I owe you well a letter, but you know I have been ill, and all this kind of work fell in arrear; but I am a great deal better, and seek to pull the arrear up. Beloved brother, what we have to cleave to is Christ: in Him we know the Father, and He is that eternal life which came down from heaven; in Him, too, as glorified on high, once crucified, we are introduced into the holiest. He has sanctified Himself that we may be sanctified through the truth. It is little noted that what human nature could not see or conceive is revealed to us by the Holy Ghost given to us, “that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God.” This is the world the new man lives in, to which he belongs, and all the rest passes—when “his breath goeth forth … all his thoughts perish.”
We have to go through a world full of experiences, and christian life in it thus, with which as ministering we have to do. Our great affair is so in our own souls to have Christ formed in us, and so to know Him experimentally in the little world of our own souls, that all that is of self being judged, then only Christ may come out, whether as testimony of life in the big outer world, or in that which we apply to others in ministry; and to wait on Him so that we may be guided in doing it. I often find the question arise in my mind in service, whether I was enough in the spirit of unitedness—that is, with Christ— the sense of His presence—so as to have had the right thing come into my mind: for “a word spoken in due season, how good is it!” At least we must seek this, and be continually looking to Him so that there may be nothing hasty in our words. I have no doubt that if we kept close to Christ, His Spirit would guide us in our intercourse with others. We are not always conscious of divine guidance, even when it is there; but the word comes from Christ to the souls we have to say to, even if rejected—as we see with the Jews. But our part is to keep close to Christ, so that it should be “not I, but Christ liveth in me,” and thus He acts in our thoughts and ways without our, at the moment, thinking of Him directly; but we always have the consciousness of speaking for Him, and of His presence. “Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt,” “which is good to the use of edifying, that it may minister grace to the hearers.”
What a life, an honoured life, a Christian’s is if it be a Christian’s! But all perishes but the word (I mean of what we have as in this world); but that does not—it abides for ever. For our life first—”Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God” —it is of and from heaven, divine like Christ; but suited, as He was, to a world and hearts which were the opposite of what is divine; and He and it are alone so, and we—if we eat Him and live by Him and so follow Him. What an immense privilege that we are set to bring out divine things on earth, and soon shall enjoy them where there will be nought else! May Christ keep us close to Himself: we may be assured He cares for His church and cannot fail it. May we judge ourselvet and trust Him, and nothing can separate us from His love That is a comfort!
As regards this country: those who went out at Kent will, I suppose, immediately break bread, and for good and all. Some urged them to do it. In general about the country, conscience has been much awakened, and there is much more freshness and desire for the word, and that even in London, too. But the absence of all principle and conscience in those who have formed a party (though the rest leave it to God) cannot, if there are to be gatherings, go on long. But it opens people’s eyes. It is a question, Can godly discipline be exercised? And God seems raising the question in different places. I should add that —— was round as far as Aberdeen, and came back quite cheered with the state of brethren. For if Satan is at work, and such audacity I never saw (a little bit once at——), the Spirit of God is evidently and happily working too; but the revival work, and the tone which accompanied it, has introduced a mass of persons from whom God alone can deliver us. I keep entirely aloof from them. I am a great deal better, only have no breath. Nothing separates us from the love of Christ, and all things work together for good to those that love God.
London, March 1M, 1881.
* * * My impression,26 for it is not the result of theological examination, is that the Lord God speaks of Christ’s mission as a whole from the time it was said (if time it can be called) “a body hast thou prepared me” till the service was accomplished. He sent that blessed Person with the whole scene before Him into the world; but the actual sending, down here when a man in the world, was from the Holy Ghost coming upon Him when He returned in the power of the Spirit into Galilee. With quite another object in view the two steps are in Philippians 2, “emptied himself,” and, being a man, “humbled himself.” So God prepared a body for Him (dug ears for Him); and then, though Son all the while as when twelve years of age, He was sent out as man set apart to bear the witness He was sent for. God had created the world by Him, He will judge the world by Him. But here He is looked at as sent into the world for service; and His whole Person, Son of God and man, is in view as one whole in service. He took the form of a servant. “Lo, I come to do thy will.” The sanctifying was the appropriating—setting apart—this Person to the humble, in one sense, but glorious service which Christ performed, though service He never gives up. The Father set apart this Person for this service—did so in preparing a body—did so in incarnation, and did so in anointing and sealing when the opportune time was come. He was sent into the world, so actually set apart (in divine purpose in Psa. 40) for the service, the Word made flesh and dwelling among us, and then as Man by the Holy Ghost coming and abiding on Him. He could not be sent before He was set apart for it, but while actually set apart in Matthew 3, 4, He could not have been actually then if not in God’s mind and by incarnation before.
[1881.]
* * * * *
My dear Brother,—Thank you for your account. I cannot but think God is bringing things to light. I trust and pray that God may guide the brethren at——. Waiting upon Him,
He surely will. Christ never ceases to care for the church. He may see good to try us, but He is a match for any mischief-maker. But I write properly for two points: First, that I do trust our dear brother will do nothing whatever, but cast it all on the Lord; He will take care of it: I know that. The other is, that unanimity is nonsense, a denial of the power and operation of the Spirit, and clean contrary to the word of God. First, it is nonsense; because till the case is decided the person charged is one of the assembly, and you are not going to make him agree as led by the Spirit in judging his own case. If you do not allow him, you have put him out before his case is decided. It is real nonsense. Waiting for quiet godly men who doubt is all right: unanimity is so many men agreeing. The world must go on and so judges by a majority, but for the saints nothing can be done unless all agree—this is man, not the Spirit of God. Supposing it was a flagrant case of stealing or adultery? Are you to wait till he agrees to put himself out? Again, supposing the person or persons are obstinate, self-willed, evil walkers? The assembly must, in either case, go on with wickedness, with what God judges in its midst, till the guilty think proper to judge themselves, or break up altogether. It is denying the operation of God’s Spirit in the assembly’s clearing itself: better not to have any discipline at all.
It will be said that we have not the power—say of Paul. Be it so. But put out “from among yourselves” is a duty, obedience to the plain word of God, not power in the sense of an apostle. Evil is to be got rid of “that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened.” The requiring unanimity is contrary to the plain word of God on the point. Paul says, “Having in readiness to avenge all disobedience when your obedience is accomplished.” This puts the case that after the labour of the apostle to produce obedience had produced its full effect, some might remain not subject to the word; then he would come with the rod and avenge disobedience. The case is stated of non-unanimity, and dealing with those who stood out. I quite understand that people may seek to say the power is not here. But that is not the question, but that unanimity is not supposed even when the power was there; and I am persuaded that though power is not manifested as it was, Christ is just as true to His church, and has just as much power now as then, and will shew it. But unanimity is a mere human device: there is no such thought in scripture. It is merely a set of men must agree: the power of the Holy Ghost is denied. The judgment is not valid because men agree, but because God is there: and Christ being there is not supposed by the apostle necessarily to produce unanimity; he puts the contrary case. It is because it falsifies the whole ground of the church’s standing and authority that I attach importance to it.
March, 1881.
* * * * *
* * * As you are so far off I tell you more of these news of different parts; but what we want always is news from heaven, to be at home there, Christ dwelling in our hearts by faith. I find the word richer and richer daily. This has brought us news and blessed news from heaven, and in the Person of Him who is the fulness of them, and is gone back there after accomplished redemption, and, think of it! as our forerunner. And we must not think these things are not revealed—what eye has not seen, nor ear heard, nor is entered into the heart of man to conceive; “but God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit.” “We have received, not the spirit which is of the world, but that which is of God, that we might know the things which are freely given to us of God.” All the other names of God—Almighty, Jehovah, Most High, Adonai—have to do with this world, and God shines but through the cloud. But the Father is seen in the Son: this is not dispensational; it is the sun breaking through them: and God known in His ways of perfect grace, Himself known. Christ, the only-begotten Son, has declared Him—what a blessing I—and brought us into His own place with the Father, soon in the glory itself. In that name of “holy Father” we are kept; and this is what we have to seek, to walk according to this place as dear children, as sons. May we remember that we are set in Christ before God; that is perfect; but, if so, He is in us, and we are set before the world to represent Him. (See John 14 and Rom. 8) And to do it, “out of his fulness have we all received.” We must learn experimentally our own nothingness to be there, but it is a blessed (but a very responsible) place; and we must be full of Christ to do it at all—converse with Him for His own sake, for our delight in Him gives us, if we keep in mind our dependence, His presence and wisdom and strength for all through which we have to pass; and men and the world and the saints should meet Christ in us as they did in Christ. I have no need to say how infinitely and constantly perfect He was, and whatever we are it is still Him and of Him; but then so far weakness is not a hindrance, because God does not suffer us to be tempted above that we are able, and then His grace is sufficient for us, and His strength made perfect in weakness. The secret is to keep the sense of that weakness, and look entirely to Him. Man lives by every word; it, and He in it, ought to be the source of every movement, as well as the rule of it, in us; and that is a great secret. “The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom.” But I must close. The Lord keep you near Him, and guide your heart within and your ways without. My loving remembrances to all the brethren.
Affectionately yours in the Lord.
London, March 22nd, 1881.
* * * * *
Dear ——,—May I beg you to be my mouth-piece to the other sisters, and receive the same yourselves, to assure them of my sincere thankfulness for their kind interest. I account it a precious thing that the saints take interest in one another. The life of Christ shews itself thus. I was very low indeed, but am much better, but humanly speaking shall never have my breath for work as I had; but it is all in the Lord’s hands; at past 80 it is not very surprising. My mind through mercy is as clear as ever, and study work I go on with as usual. God may use us, but the good that is done down here is wholly done by Himself; who else would do it? And Christ has loved His church and given Himself for it, and sanctifies it for and will present it to Himself, without spot or wrinkle, or any such thing, Man’s ways cross and traverse each other, but He goes on in the secret of His own love always straightforward and makes everything work together for good to them that love Him, I should be very glad to see the brethren: whether God will allow me, I know not—perhaps in warmer weather. It is in His hands. He may use us, but has no need of us, and soon we shall be where the patient continuance in well doing will not be called for. I am very thankful to all for so kindly thinking of me. Yours sincerely in the Lord.
London, March 28th, 1881.
My dear Brother,—My letter to Mr. ——, though private, concerns us all. There is a principle at work which puts external unity before righteousness—uses unity to hinder righteousness. Now to me righteousness goes first. I find, that in Romans 2, let grace be what it may in sovereign goodness, it never sets aside righteousness…; The course of Abbot’s Hill, I was convinced, was wicked, I was so convinced from the beginning; and it was not a mere mistaken act, but a course pursued, and I could not own them. The question goes far deeper than local claims: whether christian profession, and so-called unity, to which in its place I hold thoroughly as ever, as plain scriptural truth, is to go before righteousness—God’s claim to fidelity to Him… I do not think that any church theory, however true and blessed when walking in the Spirit, can go before practical righteousness.
Such is the substance of my letter as to principles, what I have gone on all along,…
Affectionately yours in the Lord.
April 20th, 1881.
* * * * *
* * * First, Ephesians 2 is not experimental, but that absolute work of grace which has taken us, when dead in sins, and put us into Christ in heavenly places; as it took Christ dead as man for our sins, and put Him into glory. Romans 6, 7 are experimental, though we find liberty in Christ. As to it, we have died with Him: that is Romans. We have risen with Him is also added in Colossians: died to sin in Romans—from the principles of this world in Colossians. But this, while known in Christ, or it would be hopeless labour, is experimental. But what gives deliverance is seeing it in Christ, though of course when free I feel the comfort of it: but deliverance is the difference of being in the flesh and out of it. A soul earnest after holiness labours after it and does not succeed. The new man craves it, seeks it, toils for it, and has it not. The cords that bind it down are too strong for it, but it is learning a most profitable lesson, that it has no strength. But this is while comparing its own state with what it would be before God, with what it knows God would have pleasure in. It is not a question of guilt, properly speaking, but of practical acceptance. It judges of what God’s feelings towards it are, by what it is, and just because it “would” holiness cannot find rest. It is learning it has no more strength than righteousness; when it has really learnt this, and this is experience, and necessary experience—“without strength”—it recognises, as taught of God, that it has died as to the flesh with Christ, and that it is not on that ground at all, that it is not on that standing at all. It learns to say “when we were in the flesh,” and this by the Holy Ghost, though through the appropriation by faith of Christ’s death—not for sins (that refers to guilt) but to sin. The soul reckons itself dead with Christ to its old position, and now alive in Him, married to Him who is risen from the dead. It is not that conflict does not go on, “the flesh lusts against the Spirit”; but it is not under the law of sin and death—the cords are cut it could not break. In the experience of Romans 7 you have not the Spirit, but the law. Conflict there is; but conflict with one who ties me down is different from conflict with one whom I have power to tie down.
I am not in the flesh if Christ, if the Spirit of God, dwell in me. I know (John 14) that I am in Christ and Christ in me —not progress but a new position—when we have, in the old, experimentally learned we have no strength, whatever our desires. It may be sudden consciousness of the effect. It is by faith; but never till we have experimentally learned that we cannot succeed. A man may have learned the doctrine, but he must know himself as having no strength to have deliverance from himself. “We know the law is spiritual”: all the rest is “I,” till we arrive at “O wretched man that I am!” What is deliverance from bondage if I am not in it? You may be very naughty, but you cannot be in Egypt if you are across the Red Sea. Not that the Red Sea is our death with Christ, but it is His dying and rising again so as to make in Himself the new position for man before God. The Passover was for their sins—non-imputation.
April, 1881.
* * * * *
My dear Brother,—The divine nature and place of Christ must be held above all question. All men shall “honour the Son, even as they honour the Father”: He and the Father are one—all the fulness of the Godhead in Him bodily: “the Word was God,” and created all things. I might quote texts without number to shew it: it enters into the very warp of the whole truth of scripture. I put this in the forefront of my reply. The Adonai Jehovah of Isaiah 6 was Christ.
This is not the question, nor do I believe it to be a question with our dear brother M. Taylor. Did I suppose he denied this, as I have heretofore said, I might seek his restoration, but I should as so holding, disown him altogether. But we must remember that no man knows the Son but the Father; that this—all concerning Him—was when in the form of God He made Himself of no reputation (“emptied himself”) and took the form of a servant and was found, in the likeness of men, [having] laid aside the form of divine glory, and for our sakes and for the Father’s glory humbled Himself even to death. “Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him”; through which having accomplished redemption He now sits as man at the right hand of God. He has received the glory as man though He had it with the Father before the world was. Hence we find (that in the days of His flesh, with strong crying and tears He made His supplication unto Him who was able to save Him from death; that He could say “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?” and “Father into thy hands I commend my spirit,” and now risen can and does say to His disciples, My Father and your Father, My God and your God.
If this humiliation of Christ be lost, all is lost with it. In our relationships, therefore, we say, “to us there is but one God the Father… and one Lord Jesus Christ.” I cannot doubt that M. Taylor has made unadvised and undesirable statements, the effect certainly being to turn away from the worship of the Lord Jesus. I have found this cropping up in Pennsylvania. But I regret deeply the way in which it has been taken up; and, it may seem strange, but I attribute much of the effects, such as existed in Pennsylvania, to the way in which what he said was taken up: because what may have been rash and unadvised was pushed to the utmost possible extreme of heresy, and others from favouring him defended this… It is possible, too, he may have sought too much to defend himself.
I do not see any contradiction in these two letters. My present conviction is, that he did not deny worship to Christ, but that he did decline addressing himself to Christ at the Table, though leaving liberty to others. This happened in my own case in Brooklyn. There is a great difference between the worship there being addressed to Christ and to the Father; the whole tone of the meeting is changed by it: this I have long noticed. Though with no formal intention, I seldom give thanks without being led to both, but quite sensible of the difference; and worship, when met for it, is more suitably to the Father, if people are up to it. But if it was taken as objecting to addressing Christ I should resist that. I dare say Taylor made a kind of system of this without being clear. But I doubt a little that the mass of brethren are quite clear as to the real bearings of the question. I believe a little wisdom would have made it the occasion of all getting clearer on what spiritually is practically important, instead of its being a ground of conflict and attack. I have no sympathy with the way it has been done. If Taylor repelled any address to Christ in breaking bread, I think he would have tied himself to a system which marred the liberty of the Spirit in himself; and this, though leaving others free, I cannot doubt he did: a general denial of worship to Christ I doubt; and I somewhat doubt, but from my general acquaintance with the state of souls, that the brethren understood the bearing of insisting on worshipping the Father. There was a system, instead of the guidance of the Spirit in Taylor’s mind, and then I fear, some self-defence, as there had been unguarded and exaggerated statements; and the whole thing has degenerated into moral charges.
As I see things now, were I at——, I should object to the charge of any intended falsehood in these letters. I do not think the explanatory one clear, and I doubt that —— was clear about it; but that is another question: and ill as he is now it would be quite unseemly to press the matter against him. This is a mercy from God for you all. But you must be careful at —— if you decline endorsing the attack of the others, not to get into a separation outward or inward from the rest… I trust the Lord may restore peace and mutual confidence; but this is easier lost than restored.
Your affectionate brother in Christ.
I doubt there was any definite doctrine as to the Lord in Taylor’s mind, but I apprehend there was a theory and system as to addressing Him at the Lord’s table, and that it was not the leading of the Holy Ghost at the time.
April, 1881.
* * * * *
My dear——,—I did not wait for your letter to express my feelings to the brethren as to the way in which they took up M. Taylor’s case. Not only did I not like the spirit of it, but I do not think they knew the bearing of the question. Still there was evil: I think their position augmented it, because others took up what they accused Mr. Taylor of, and defended what he could not himself have maintained.
In Pennsylvania there was an attack made on worshipping the Lord Jesus, and contempt poured out on those who did. When I was at Brooklyn, and had broken the bread, and had addressed the Lord Jesus, one remarked to him, ‘Mr. D. can do it!’ He said ‘He may be at liberty to do it, but I cannot.’ He admitted that, though leaving others at liberty, he could not do it there. I do not think he meant to deny worship to Christ absolutely; but in getting fresh apprehensions of direct approach to the Father by grace, he got his mind, often hasty though so true to the Lord, into confusion in putting his fresh knowledge in its place; and being attacked (by what, I believe, was inadequate apprehension, though in the main seeking Christ’s glory) instead of humble spiritual inquiry that all might be clear from the word, he defended what he was not clear about.
That Christ could say, “Before Abraham was I am;” that even when humbled and in the flesh all should honour the Son as they honour the Father must be fully maintained—is beyond controversy for the [Christian]; and it is a fact that many had been led away from this. I justly believe M. T. sound as to the divinity of the Lord; but as to worshipping Him there was confusion, through the thought of worshipping the Father being a higher thing; and this had gone further perhaps than he meant in the minds of many…
Ever yours in the Lord.
May, 1881.
* * * * *
You are, I dare say, a good deal isolated now where you are, being incapable of as much activity as you were wont to employ. I am yet more shut up (from want of breath) from going about. But the blessed Lord is never shut up, nor His heart either. He could say, “Ye shall leave me alone, and yet I am not alone, because the Father is with me.” It is this sustains and holds up in this time of faith; and it is meant to be a time of faith, but a time when “our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son Jesus Christ”: the Father fully revealed in Him, and we knowing the Father in Him. What could we look for more? save that the Spirit is the power that brings it all to us; and that we have. I find two things in the New Testament as to our joys and sorrows: first, “Rejoice in the Lord alway: and again I say, Rejoice”; and, nothing separates us from His love. Still, we are poor, feeble, exercised creatures as to what passes here and, however faithful, may be cast down, though doubtless ought not to distrust. Then I find, “God, who comforteth those that are cast down.” Ah, I say, it is worth while being cast down for such comfort as that! And this is not faith that rises above the circumstances, but grace that meets us in the circumstances: and think what it is to have God occupying Himself with us in our sorrows, when we remember who He is.
I have no doubt you find yourself more alone; at our age it is natural. How few remain of those I once was associated with, but in general I have a happy feeling that they are with the Lord. I was always a solitary soul, thinking more for, than with people: but it is good to be more alone—most good, if it be more alone with Christ. What a place that is!
We get Christ’s love to His disciples compared to His Father’s love to Him (and ours ought to follow)—is in one sense above, as the Father was in divine glory, not in trial or sorrows. I have often said there is loving up, and loving down. In loving up, the higher and more perfect the object, the more excellent the affection: in loving down, the more wretched and worthless the object, the more truly divine and without motive the affection. Both were perfect in Christ. He gave Himself “for us,” but “to God.” (Eph. v.) But I must close my desultory letter. May the Lord be abundantly with you, both alone and in work. Kindest remembrances to all yours.
Your affectionate brother in Christ.
19 [‘An excited letter written at 4 a.m., but withdrawn the next day, most thankful that he had only written to me.’ ‘No one went with him.’]
20 [‘That a person may have life for years and not know of it; that faith is not required for life, but only for deliverance.’]
21 [When is the believer sealed?’ Helps, vol. iii. p. 98.]
22 [Col. Writ., vol. xxxi. 385.]
23 [New Translation of the New Testament. Third edition.]
24 [The Christian Friend, September, 1880.]
25 He does say Christ lives in me and Christ our life.
26 In what sense is the term “sanctified” used (John 10:36)? Why does it precede the sending into the world?