in vain, if what has been written has failed to impress the reader with the plain and obvious inference that Mr. Darby affords a singular proof and instance of the truth of that word of God which declares that he who causes divisions serves not the Lord Jesus Christ, but his own belly. Mr. Darby has not served the Lord in any one thing he has done in this matter. But he has served his own belly-that is his own ends alone. We have seen one grand object continually kept in view, in all Mr. Darby has done, namely the destruction by any means of his adversary's prophetic scheme.

But was that in truth all Mr. Darby has sought? Is it indeed but a contest between two rival schemes of prophecy? Let not the reader think so; never was a delusion more profound than such a conclusion would amount to. The object of this contest is far deeper, and of far more perilous importance. Mr. Darby's object in destroying the prophetic scheme of his adversary is because its reception as truth cannot co-exist with, but utterly destroys his own, doctrinal views. It is very evident that Mr. Darby's own system of prophecy is only valuable to him only insomuch as it aids those doctrinal views: inasmuch as it supplies something like a solution of prophecy yet unfulfilled, but perhaps shortly to be fulfilled. For the letter of that unfulfilled prophecy is calculated to awaken; personally interest and terrify every soul who reads therein; and his prophetic view is designed to meet, allay and remove all ground for that personal interest and alarm, by teaching that it has no application to the church, (that is to the individual Christian) except indeed as mere matter of curiosity. The kind of aid which Mr. Darby's prophetic view gives to his doctrinal view is therefore collateral. It gives to the church, (in other words, every believer) the comforting assurance that no evil is to be feared, for that they shall be removed out of it, and may live on, under his doctrinal views, in the persuasion that the Lord may remove them to bliss to-day or to-morrow. That is the tendency of Mr. Darby's prophetic view, and it arises out of, and is absolutely necessary to, his doctrinal view. This is his doctrinal view.

66

Under the outward semblance of exceedingly honouring the work of Christ, and of exceedingly magnifying the work of the Holy Spirit, the place of the church as militant upon earth, is utterly confounded with its standing as it shall be in heaven. The church upon earth is raised by his doctrine to a pitch of glory, as THE THING," (which the disciples of this school term it.) Not only wholly beyond that which the Scriptures warrant, but beyond that which they give the least pretence or colouring for. In thus raising the church, Mr. D. implicitly and necessarily raises each individual of that church out of his proper place (the place which the Scriptures do assign him,) as a sinner, saved by grace alone, who, is to "work out his own salvation with fear and trembling." (Phil. ii. 12.)

That is a brief analysis of Mr. Darby's doctrines, as plainly taught in his writings, and those of his adherents.

:

To bolster up that view, they have not hesitated to cut off all the saints of God, from Adam to Christ, whether patriarch, prophet, priest or king and to assign to them a lower place before God, than that of the redeemed in Christ. In so doing they have ignored the fact, plainly and explicitly revealed, that salvation is primarily by grace, which was given, (to each one that shall be saved) according to the purpose of God in Christ Jesus, before the world began. (2 Timothy i. 9.)

To bolster up this doctrine, they have denied that the blood of Christ was pointed to (and therefore by faith available to) every man under the Old Testament dispensation. This, Mr. Darby has plainly and unequivocally done in pages 25-27 of his "Remarks." He quotes Mr. Newton's words, "God was too holy to propose any grounds of life to a sinful people except through mediation and atoning blood." This Mr. Darby terms a monstrous statement (Note to p. 27). Why is it monstrous to him? Clearly because, if it be true it annihilates his doctrine concerning the church, inasmuch as in that case it is plain there was redemption by faith of the blood of Christ, shed upon altars indeed, but signifying and pointing to his blood to be shed in due time, and therefore the standing before God of the saints of old, is clearly one and the same with that of the redeemed now. But is that statement monstrous or is it true? Let us see. God had said to the Jews, "For the life of the flesh is in the blood; and I have given it to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls; for it is the blood (i. e. it points to the blood) that maketh atonement for the soul." (Leviticus xvii. 11.) Now here is a blood given for atonement; but God has also said, "It is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins." (Heb. x. 4.) Therefore the blood which did make atonement for the soul was clearly pointed to only, that is signified by that of bulls and goats-given as foreshadowing that of the Lamb of God to be shed in due time-but most evidently available by anticipation to the Jews, as it is to us by retrospection. That statement is, therefore, not monstrous, but true-in accordance with revealed truth.

To continue. To bolster up their doctrine they have, finally, been driven to entire rejection of the truth of God concerning Christ, that he came in the flesh. This they have done both implicitly and explicitly in the assertion that he partook of the flesh of the children alone, and not of the flesh of man in general.

No one who believes and at all enters into the force of what God has said of the human heart, that "it is deceitful above all things and desperately wicked," (Jer. xvii. 9,) can fail to see that these doctrines throw open the door to entire Antinomianism. They will eventuate in high notions of self. To some, the thought will be a secretly actuating principle, while to others it will be an aboslutely unavoidable inference, either that they are one with Christ in the impossibility to sin, or at the least, that sin in the children is an essentially different thing from sin in other men.

If a man has a loaded gun or pistol in his possession, he has that which is adapted to destroy life. Whether he is tempted to use it in such a way has nothing to do with the fact. The adaptation to destroy life remains, and remains in his hands. It is just so of these doctrines. They are adapted to sap and destroy the soul of him who holds them. Whether he is tempted to push them to evil, has nothing to do with the fact; the nature of the doctrines is not affected thereby; their adaptation to destroy the soul, remains, and remains with him who holds them. Read again Mr. Darby's own testimony to this effect. "It is a great mistake to suppose that because people have not intelligently received an evil doctrine they have not suffered by it. The plain, simple notion of Christ is undermined; and power against evil, and for good destroyed, though the soul is unaware of it. The sense of the evil is utterly enfeebled, and Christ practically lost." (Remarks,-J. N. Darby. Note to page 4.)

To conclude. No one can have read these pages without having come to the conclusion that the fall of Brethrenism is attributable alone to the departure from their own principles of those who had taken this stand before God and before man. A place of testimony at once against the world and against all other bodies of Christians.

In Mr. Darby, the departure began from the moment he had framed to himself a system of doctrine and of prophecy apart from the word of God; and it was consummated when he violently divided the children of God. Its first fruit was schism, its end heresy.

In the great body of the Plymouth Brethren the departure began from the moment they turned from the injunction of God to avoid schismatics, and in lieu thereof permitted a schismatic to dictate to them; and their departure was consummated when they were induced by him to excommunicate a servant of God, without so much as once appealing to the word of God, that they might know his mind upon heresy; whether, that is, God, (their head and ruler,) had called what Mr. Newton had written, heresy, and whether he had sanctioned their excommunicating him as a heretic.

So long as they had continued faithful to the light they had received, God continued to bless them. When they deliberately set Him aside as their head and ruler, he set them aside too; and from that hour to this they have been progressing from bad to worse. The word of God always means what it says. It is written of them that bite and devour one and other, that they shall be consumed one of another. This is rapidly progressing to fulfilment. The state of the Brethren at this time may be briefly summed up. A few, perhaps two or three hundred, meet in Compton Street, Plymouth. They remain true to their priniples, and have peace and blessing.

Next is a party, by far the largest, who stand upon what are called "Bethesda grounds." They are scattered through the kingdom, and have a term of communion apart from the broad principles of Brethren. It is in fact a mere device to exclude Mr. Newton, and his friends. This division of the Brethren has not gone the whole length of violence, though there is but a hair's breadth between them even there, they will not (many of them) even eat on social terms with Mr. Newton's friends, though not objecting to do so with one obviously not a child of God. Besides they are 1st, Not meeting on Brethren principles. 2nd. They are both by implication and by necessary inference one with him in his views.

1st. By implication. Denial of truth is one and the same with the assertion of untruth. They deny the doctrine that Christ was mortal, that he derived mortality and sufferings from Adam, and that he was an Israelite. Herein is implied the assertion that Christ was not man. Neither a son of Adam nor a

son of David; which is nothing short of the Manichean heresy.

2nd. By necessary inference. Not only have they neither exposed, nor sought to expose Mr. Darby's actually heretical views; but they have ever been willing to unite with him, if he would receive them without the imposition of all his views; if he, that is, would quietly suffer his party to coalesce with theirs. But his determination to accept nothing short of the reception of all his views, and the utter rejection of those of his rival, has been hitherto the sole bar to this ;-not any regard to truth ;-the necessary inference of essential oneness is palpable.

If there needed proof of this, the following would establish it. Mr. J. D. Deck, a leader, who has hitherto stood on Bethesda grounds, published a

tract some while since, "On receiving and rejecting Brethren from the Table of the Lord." Its object was solely to conciliate Mr. D. and his party, and to bring about reconciliation between them and his own party. Mr. Deck has since published a paper, to which I have adverted elsewhere, which plainly signifies his willingness to give up the truth itself, rather than it shall stand in the way. He has recanted, repudiated and abhorred the doctrine that Christ partook of mortal flesh and blood, because, he says, mortal and sinful are the same and he has adopted Mr. Darby's view, that Christ partook of the flesh and blood of the children only, which is therefore not mortal in the sense of sinful. This paper was circulated with a view to its being read in all assemblies of Brethren meeting on Bethesda grounds. He who reads, and they who acquiesce in the reading of such papers as that are alike, ipso facto, one with Mr. Deck in his repudiation and abhorrence of the doctrine that Christ came in the flesh.*

The third party is that of Mr. Darby. They have received the very depths of his error. The ultra violence of their writings and conduct would be very disheartening if God's word were not true. "Hear the word of the Lord, ye that tremble at his word; Your brethren that hated you; that cast you out for my name's sake said, Let the Lord be glorified! but he shall appear to your joy, and they shall be ashamed." (Isaiah lxvi. 5.) There is, so I read in page 16 of the Retrospect, a fourth party who are neutrals.

And now I take leave of the reader. I have not sought to vilify the principles of Brethrenism, but to represent them as I believe they are. And to prove that not those principles, but departure from them, has brought about the ruin of Brethren. It is a sad and solemn thing to see on the one hand such obvious faithfulnesss on the part of God, and such miserable failure on that of man. It affords a new proof that no amount of light or blessing can, in themselves, keep long in control the desperate evil of the heart.

I do solemnly warn my reader, whatever may be his creed or denomination, that before he permits any one calling himself a brother, or who is so, to speak of principles which have been derided and set at nought, he do diligently enquire to which of these parties he belongs, lest under the outward guise of pure principles of truth he be, unawares, induced to take a serpent to his bosom. A serpent which has the power to destroy the soul; even the souldestroying heresy, (disguised to deceive the unwary, but real) that denies that Christ came in THE flesh.

Note. He who bids God speed to falsehood is partaker of the sin. See 2 John 10.