Criticism. TRUTH AND OPINION; A LETTER TO quence of this laxity false prophets and in among them. Some affirmed that Having thus renounced the simple notion of meeting together in the Lord's name, and of comprising all doctrinal belief in Peter's confession, "Thou art the Christ," making this belief the only term of communion, some other motto or principle must be adopted. This was soon supplied by the ingenious brain of an enlightened brother who invented the postulate: "Separation from evil is God's principle of unity." By this was meant not merely separation from moral evil, but from all persons holding opinions which the church judged to be evil. And it was further expressed to be "The unity of the Body as Christ's spouse separate from evil." Carrying out their new idea, the brethren did not only come out from among other Christian professors, they soon began to cut off from their own fellowship entire companies, such as "those meet THIS anonymous pamphlet is addressed to a prominent member of the community known as Plymouth Brethren, or, more briefly, "the Brethren," by one who is old enough to remember the meeting of the first little company at which the great principles of Brethrenism were laid down. These principles were decocted into the following formula: "The children of God have nothing to do but to meet together in the name of the Lord." In less than seven years from this meeting in Dublin, 1829, one leading member of the new body spoke of their having departed from their first principles, and predicted that it needed but a step or two to be taken in advance, and then they would see all the evils of the systems from which they professed to be separated spring up among themselves. This prophet of their own further foretold that their union would daily become one of doctrines and opinions more than of life and of love; that their government would soon be one wherein would be overwhelmingly felt the au thority of men; that they would be more known by what they witnessed against than by what they witnessed ing in Bethesda Chapel, Bristol, and for; and that practically this would all who had communion with any who prove that they witnessed against all had communion with those who had but themselves. Their position, there- fellowship with Bethesda, and so on ad fore, would be this-the most bigoted infinitum. This separatistic motto has and narrow-minded would rule, because been so systematically obeyed that his conscience could not give way, and now but little unity is left among them. the most enlarged heart must yield. One of their leaders writes a "Caution" Light, not life, would then be the against the party called Darbyites, in measure of communion; and being which a nobleman, Lord Congleton, 'one of us" would become a stronger says of them that "they are false in band than oneness in the power of God's life in the soul. 66 what they say of their brethren, false in their doctrine, and false in their The original basis of brethrenism walk." On the other hand, a diswas soon abandoned, and for various tinguished Darbyite, Mr. Wigram, reasons which their holders assigned. says of a party differing from his own, Some regarded it as latitudinarian, and "Rather would I go to the table of the said that it left the community withont Socinians than to it." And again he any of the safeguards which divine says, "I would rather expose my wisdom saw fit to establish in the early family circle to the results of the church. Some believed that in conse-friendly intercourse of any Roman The author of "Truth and Opinion" says that he has read much that has been written by Mr. Newton, and more that has been written by Mr. Darby, that he has habitually sought out the productions of what is called the Bethesda party, and not unfrequently listened to those who minister among these various sections, but so far as he can perceive the teaching of brethren differs from that of other Christians only in relation to doubtful opinions; that it is, however, sometimes marked by painful if not flippant speech about "the blood"—the blood of Christ—as if that phrase meant more than the death of the Redeemer; and that sometimes it consists of interpretations as fanciful as those of Origen. Speculations regarding the experiences of the Saviour; given expositions of difficult passages in the Psalms; the acceptance or rejec tion of certain views on unfulfilled prophecy; the duty or otherwise of refusing communion with other Christians on account of supposed evils in their systems; these, and such like opinions, constitute the treasures of wisdom in defence of which unity bas been destroyed, brotherhood set at nought, and Christ dishonoured before the world."-p. 16. 66 Catholic priest than to that of any one | food of their sanctuaries as too common of the five leading brethren, though for their dainty stomachs! mourning and praying for them all." (!) These schismatical sentiments and acts could scarcely be credited if they were not recorded and revealed in their own publications. The nearest parallel to them we can think of is that which once occurred in Carthage, when Donatus disagreed with Cecilian. Donatus thought that the true church was all but defunct, the only remnant left being his own party. But shortly those who had separated from all other Christians saw occasion to separate from themselves, one party taking the name of Rogatists, and the other that of Circumcellions. Afterwards these dissidents multiplied into more sects, called by the names of their several leaders. And thus, observes our sage informant, it is given to all heresies to break out into under factions still going further in their tenets; and such as take themselves to be twice refined will count others to be but dross, till there be as many heresies as heretics. Like the Ammonites, 80 scattered by Saul (1 Sam. xi. 11) that "there remained not two of them which were together." It was charged upon those rigid Donatists that they stifled God's church by crowding it into their corner; that they confined the monarchy of Christ in the Gospel to their own toparchy; The writer of this letter being so that they fled so far from the mystical well acquainted with the teaching and Babylon as to run to literal Babel; practices of the Brethren is able to that if they had no other fault than pass proper strictures upon them, and want of charity, their hands which to contend with them in judgment. threw so much dirt in others' faces He devotes a large space to a calm could not be very clean. disquisition on church discipline and Christian charity in their relations to supposed error. Disagreeing with them in their belief that the true end of Church discipline is to enforce uniformity of opinion as to what the Scripture teaches, he maintains that the holding of any opinion, however erroneous, does not properly subject man to church discipline. This is certainly taking high ground, but to justify his position, and to guard against miscon ception, he distinguishes between religious opinion and divine truth-between human judgments and direct revelations. In the face of this testimony borne by their own writers to their discussions and divisions, the Brethren boast that they are not sectarian like other men; and they persistently affirm that "while the meetings of other Christians are nothing but mere meetings of men, the direct guidance of the Holy Spirit may be reckoned on in their assemblies." Accordingly it is well known that when any of them happen to be thrown into the circles of other sects on Sabbath days, they have the effrontery to frown on their religious assemblies, and to refuse all fellowship with them in public worship. They "By a truth divinely taught I underwill come into their houses and abide stand something which vitalizes because it there, feeding on their carnal pro- is itself vital; which therefore necessarily visions, but they disdain to accept the more or less controls the life and moulds the character of the man who receives it. | trative instances will readily present themBy a religious opinion I understand a selves. One man is decidedly of opinion mere human judgment, which being nothing more, has commonly little if any influence on the conduct, and none whatever on the heart. An opinion, if well founded, may in time grow into a truth, and so become vital. It may, on the other hand, deepen into a falsity, and so become fatal. But so long as it is a mere opinion, whether a true one or not, it will exercise little if any influence on the character. We recognize this fact whenever we say that this or that man is better than his opinions would lead us to suppose he could be. We recognize it when, in order to shew that a man is responsible for his beliefs, we argue that he is so because he is responsible for the state of mind in which he examines evidence; for the diligence or otherwise with which he seeks after it; and for the candour or want of candour he manifests in dealing with it when obtained. We fancy we have demonstrated by this reasoning that error is anything but innocent, whereas we have only proved that a wrong state of mind is not innocent. If error in itself were sin, it would follow that in the various controversies which have in all ages divided the church, one or other of the opposing parties must have been wicked as well as wrong. We do not, however, believe this to have been the case. On the contrary, if no other way of escape from such an imputation offers, we always fall back on what we call the happy i consistencies of men,' congratulating one another on the fact that men do not as a rule logically carry out the theories they profess. that in Scripture baptism is regarded as the expression of a personal faith in Christ, and that it should therefore be administered only to persons who have arrived at years of discretion. Another is of opinion that the baptism of children is implied and sanctioned in the New Testament. A third holds that the ordinance in question has a relation only to persons who come out of Judaism or heathenism, and who by that act recognise God as the one only Jehovah, revealed to man as Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. But is it evident that the holding of these views are mere opinions? Is it pretended that the holding of any one of them carries with it spiritual vitality? Do we observe as a fact that the Baptist, so called, neglects the instruction of his children, or fails to dedicate them to God? Do we imagine that the pædobaptist thinks less of a personal profession of faith in Christ than his brother? Do we not all feel that the great truth underlying these different opinions, viz., that man must be truly baptized by the Spirit of God in order to renewal, is held in common, and that this, and this alone, really touches the heart of any of the parties engaged in the controversy. The opinion that, in some sense or other, regeneration takes place in water-baptism, is as a rule quite uninfluential. Perhaps no one has written more strongly or decidedly in favour of the dogma than the late Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr. Sumner, and yet no one ever preached more fervently than he the necessity of regeneration by the Spirit of God, whether baptism had or had not been enjoyed. The same may be said of Mr. Simeon, and of hundreds beside. Further, so far from its being common, as one might have expected, to find the poor and ignorant, when called to repentance, pleading that they have been regenerated in baptism, and are therefore safe, nothing is more rare. I have heard men who have devoted their lives to Christian visitation declare that they never met with such an instance. Religious observances arising out of opinions occupy a somewhat different position. What are called High Sacramentarian views have, as theories, always been, and still are, held by multitudes, without any practical injury to the life of God in the soul. It is only when they issue in superstitious observances or false action, -in the transformation, for instance, of the Christian pastor into a sacrificing priest; in the demand that he shall put consecrated bread' upon the tongue of the communicant; in the setting up of I admit, however, as I have already said, altars; in services sung when they ought that an opinion may deepen into a falsity, to be said; in the adoption of Romish and become fatal. The notion of which I vestments, &c., &c., that we are bound to am now speaking does so wheneverseparate from those who hold them. Forms whether among Romanists or Protestants of church government, however defective, it leads to a persuasion that the outward which do not interfere with the rights of a renewed man, ought to be borne with so long as there is a shadow of hope that better things may one day be expected. Now I hold that nearly all the differences which at present separate real Christians, relate to opinions and not to truths. Illus FF rite is in itself saving, and as a consequence, to the neglect or denial of any further work of God in the soul. But how are we to know when and where this is the case? Scripture supplies the answer, "By their fruits ye shall know them." Practical ungodliness in connection with any pro all unprofitable. And if any man thinks that he sees further than his fellows in these theological prospects, let his tongue keep the counsel of his eyes, lest while be affects the fame of deeper learning he embroil the church, and raise his glory en the public ruins." "The infinite subdivi sion of those points which we advance to the honour of being the objects of our belief confound our thoughts and mar our peace. Peaceable discourse may have much latitude, but matter of faith should have narrow bounds. Never treatise coul be more necessary in this curious and quarrelsome age than Dépaucitate er fessed faith proves the rottenness of the could be persuaded to remit our heat in root from which the pretended faith springs. the pursuit of opinions! Let us be susTake another case. The Wesleyan de-picious of all new verities, and careless of nies Divine Sovereignty in the sense of the absolute election of individuals from the foundation of the world. The Calvinist, on the other hand, denies free-will in the sense of man's moral ability to repent and believe. Each holds, and zealously maintains, a series of consequences flowing from these diverse views. It is no uncommon thing to find the one almost unchristianizing the other. Yet who does not see that the points really in dispute are mere opinions, inasmuch as they do not influence the life. The Wesleyan refers all that he has or is to Divine grace, quite as devoutly and honestly as the Calvinist. The Calvinist, on the other hand, has no dendorum.””—Bishop Hall. lighter sense of practical responsibility than the Wesleyan, and places good works pretty much in the same position as his brother. The spiritual life of each is common, simply because the great divine truth which underlies differing views is held in common. Either of these conflicting set of opinions may, however, harden into fatal error. The opponent of election may become a mere self-righteous pharisee; the opponent of free-will may lose all just sense of moral responsibility, and become careless or wicked in conduct. Whenever this is the case, scripture directs us what to do. "By their fruits ye shall know them." No matter what their theories, if they have become practically ungodly, we must cease to have fellowship with them, or, which is sure to be the case, they will cease to have any real communion with us." These candid criticisms of this anonymous letter writer are entitled to consideration by other sects as well as by the brethren, although some in all communions might deem them too candid. They remind us of the sage observations of an old divine who lived in an age of fierce ecclesiastical strife and of open theological warfare; who was compelled by his position to participate in the contests of the time, but whose moderation was known unto all men. A HISTORY OF THE FREE CHURCHES OF ENGLAND: FROM A.D. 1688 TO THE PRESENT TIME. By Herbert on the contents of the cask from which IF that antique Greek were but a wiseacre who, when he was fain to sell his house, hawked about a single brick as a fair specimen of it, he is not a very capable judge who, on tasting a single glass of wine, has no verdict to give it is drawn. But is the first Part of a History like the sample glass or the specimen brick? It is a little like both, perhaps, though the latter comparison is surely the more true and germane. No doubt there are Parts difficult to infer the whole work as to and Parts; some from which it is as judge of the form, size, and convenience of a house from an inspection of a others from which the quality of the brick taken from one of its walls; and entire work is to be as truly estimated as the contents of the butt from the taste of the glass. We are disposed to think that this "Part I." may be taken as a fair sample of the wine we are hereafter to drink; and, if it be, an excellent vintage is in stock for us. In these first hundred pages, Mr. Skeats gives little more than an introductory sketch of the ecclesiastical conflict-extending from the Reformation "It is hard to be too vehement in contending for main and evident truths; but litigious and immaterial verities may soon be overstriven for. The voice of our Father in His Scriptures is that which to the Revolution, from the reign of must both guide and settle our resolu- Henry VIII. to that of William III.tions. Whatever is besides this is either in which our Nonconformist churches private, or unnecessary, and uncertain. had their rise. But this sketch is so O that while we sweat and bleed for the ably drawn that we are warranted in maintenance of these oracular truths, we expecting a fair and noble work from the artist's hands. If the omens of the | a pure Christianity is impossible withIntroduction do not mislead us, this out a true estimate of its Divine will be, on the whole, by far the best Founder, and as that true estimate popular History of the Free Churches cannot be formed without seeing Him best for fulness of information, for in all the lineaments which mark His impartiality of tone, for grace of style character, a little work like this may -which it has been, or for some years be of great value. After reading it is likely to be, our good fortune to through, with more satisfaction than receive. Of course we can pronounce we have found in any parts of the no final judgment till the completed famous book which suggested this work is before us; but our present small pamphlet, we cordially recomjudgment, based on present data, is mend its perusal to others. It is well altogether favourable to it. fitted to confirm the confidence of sound believers, and to win the assent of doubters and waverers to "the faith of God's elect, and to the acknowledging of the truth which is after godliness." A question might be raised as to the peculiar charm of Mr. Skeats' style. It has the vital signs. It is as good an historical style as one often meets; and yet the sources of its power are by no means obvious. It is not rich in epigram and antithesis; nor has it those picturesque phrases which lodge in the memory; nor is it specially elaborate and dramatic. It does not patiently add touch to touch until the very form and pressure of bygone times are set before us. Nevertheless, it is vivacious, easy, natural, and carries the reader along with an interest that does not flag, but grows, as the pages are turned. SALVATION TO THE UTTERMOST. By the Rev. G. D. Evans, with Preface by the Rev. C. H. Spurgeon. London: E. Stock. THIS twopenny treatise has a lofty how Christ can save to the uttermost, purpose to subserve, that of showing how the work accomplished on the by explaining what He has done, and cross stands related to what He is doing now. The matter of the book is Our readers will do well to get these "good doctrine," and the style is manly. Parts as they issue from the pressMr. Spurgeon's preface has nothing the work is to be completed in six patronizing in it, but if he had not parts, which are sold to subscribers at thought well both of the author and 2/- each and read them for them- his treatise, he would not have given selves. No section of Ecclesiastical to it the recommendation of his name. History has been more neglected, even by Nonconformists, than the History of Nonconformity; and none would APES AND PEACOCKS; OR, THE EVILS better repay their study. It is not creditable to us that we know so little of the noble ancestors of whom, did we but know it, we have such good reason to be proud. A main cause of this discreditable and crippling ignorance is, no doubt, the lack of any brief, reliable, handy narrative of their struggles and achievements. This cause, we may hope, is now in process of being taken away. ECCE HOMO; OR, THE INFERENTIAL HERE is an Ecce Homo in miniature, OF MASCULINE IGNORANCE AND FEMININE VANITY. A Lecture by Giles Hester, Sheffield. D. T. Ingham, 41, South Street, Sheffield Moor. THIS characteristic lecture is founded on a text of Scripture (1 Kings x. 22). It opens with pertinent observations on the study of Natural History in general, and then treats of the particular objects which Solomon's seamen introduced into Jerusalem. The former part of the lecture, embodying the most ancient as well as the most modern opinions of eminent naturalists concerning these curious creatures, is full of useful information. But the substance of it is devoted to the amusement and moral improvement of the classes it deals with: and it is here that the lecturer's peculiar powers are most apparent. Those who are fa |