is, Mr. N. was not alone responsible for those views which he first brought into unfortunate prominence, and which have since been matured by Mr. Darby himself, in that class of sufferings, which he would make the Lord to pass through, of which the New Testament knows nothing.
“6th. Even supposing that those who inquired into the matter had come to the same conclusion, touching the amount of positive error therein contained, this would not have guided us in our decision respecting individuals coming from Plymouth. For, supposing the author of the tracts were fundamentally heretical, this would not warrant us in rejecting those who came from under his teaching, until we were satisfied that they had understood and imbibed views essentially subversive of foundation-truth; especially as those meeting at Ebrington-street, Plymouth, last January put forth a statement, disclaiming the errors charged against the tracts.”
For a full explanation of this clause, we refer to a letter written by Mr. Craik in 1849, given hereafter,[1] in which he states that the invariable practice was, for persons coming from known heretical teachers not to be received, except on the renunciation of the errors, and the relinquishing of fellowship with the false teacher. This had been the course pursued for the sixteen years before the letter was written, and has been the course pursued the eighteen years that have succeeded. And surely the practice of saints for thirty-four years should satisfy any upright mind, even if, in the judgment of some, ambiguity may attach itself to the expressions here made use of; and yet some are not wanting who affirm that this clause would open the door to socinianism or any other form of known heresy! The passage as it stands has an exclusive reference to the “author of the tracts,” about whose real views there was both uncertainty and ambiguity; and surely the Righteous Lord who loves righteousness—He who ever discerns between things that differ, and remembers the “some good thing” found in a son of Jeroboam, would never regard those who held fellowship with Mr. Newton, ignorant of his views, or denying that he ever held what was imputed to him, as he would regard those who went to, and had fellowship with a Socinian whose views are avowed and known. In saying this we make no allusion to the unrighteousness of placing side by side with a Socinian, a man who held alike the perfect Godhead and the immaculate Manhood of the Lord Jesus. The tendencies of certain teachings may often be dreaded, but judgment can only be passed when acting on the written word, we can judge of tendencies by fruits. There was in the present
- ↑ See page 46.
