CHAPTER I. EARLY HISTORY.
It is easy to turn aside, and hard to recover; but God is faithful, as Mr. Baxter was to prove. “Continuing however in the exercise of their power, and in daily teaching and preaching the things which had been declared in power, I was providentially led to an examination of doctrines, for neglecting which at an earlier period I justly suffered what came upon me. At the recurrence of the monthly meeting for exposition of scripture, to which I have before alluded, the friend to whose turn it had fallen to choose the subject, chose this, The Word was made flesh, with the special view, as I believe, of eliciting the views which were held by those of us who believed in the power, he himself deeming it a delusion. I stated what, as far as I am conscious of my own mind, had always been my view, viz.: That Jesus took the fallen flesh, but took it free from the law of sin which we are all born under—by fallen flesh, intending the consequences of the fall, as it respects our outward relations, and the constitution of our frame—we having become unsuited to the world, and the world unsuited to us; and we having become subject to pain, sickness, and other infirmities of frame; whereas Adam was made suitable to all around him, and all the world was suitable to him; and the diseases and infirmities to which we are subjected, had no place in him. Many persons identify the idea of fallen nature with sin. The fall was certainly the consequence of sin, and we, in our fallen estate, are under the law of sin, which rules in all our members. But it is clear the consequences of past sins are distinct from sin itself; and it is very easy to understand that Jesus took our nature in that condition into which sin had brought it, and yet took it free from all sin—as free as Adam before his fall possessed it. Jesus came into a fallen world, and took part of flesh and blood with those whom He was not ashamed to call brethren, and subjected as that flesh and blood was to all weakness and infirmity; and yet He so took it that He took no stain of sin nor taint of corruption with it. Being conceived of the Holy Ghost, He took manhood of the substance of the Virgin, but took it pure, and free from all sin. The law of the flesh, or law of sin, which was in the substance of the virgin, was not in His substance; so that in Him there were no motions of the fleshly or carnal mind, as there are in all of us.
“This my friend fully assented to; but he charged Mr. Irving with holding the opposite view, and asserting that the law of the flesh, or law of sin, was in Jesus, and only kept down by the Spirit. I could not see this, but contended as my persuasion was, that Mr. Irving by “sinful nature” meant no more than I meant by “fallen nature,” and that my views were the same as Mr. Irving's. After much discussion we parted, and I thought little more about it, until I received a letter from a member of Mr. Irving's church, making inquiries relative to the Indian chief, and the prophecy of the Jews before detailed; and in this letter, by way of postscript, he added that he had just heard Mr. Irving expound the eighth chapter of Romans, and he gathered Mr. Irving's view to be that our Lord had the carnal mind, or law of sin, to contend with. My correspondent was troubled at this, and asked my opinion upon it. He had heard two utterances in power, which, put together, seemed. to him conclusive that Jesus had not the carnal mind to keep down or contend with. One was from me on Mr. Irving's having asked whether Jesus was baptized with fire, the power answered, “No, He had nothing in Him to be burnt out.” The other was from Mrs. C., who, explaining in power what the baptism by fire was, declared it should burn out the carnal mind.
“After this letter, I thought much on the matter; but my persuasion continued that Mr. Irving did not hold the law of sin to be in Jesus. I was, however, in power, made to write to him on the subject, setting forth that the carnal mind was not in Jesus, and some other points alluded to. After this my mind was at rest upon it, under the assurance that, if there had been any error in his view, it would be corrected from the message I had been made to write to him.
“God, however, graciously ordained that the matter should not rest here. A few days later a clergyman from Staffordshire came to me, who, though by no means disposed to receive the work, thought it his duty to inquire, perhaps more in the hope of my conviction than of his own. He examined very closely my views on the human nature of our Lord, and declared, when he heard them, that they were opposite to Mr. Irving's. He produced Mr. Irving's book on the subject to prove his assertion, and pointed out many passages. These, however, did not seem to prove his point, but on the following day, resuming his position, two passages were found which showed clearly that Mr. Irving conceived the workings of the law of sin were felt by our Lord (Hum. Nat. p. 23):`And in the face of all these certainties, if a man will say that His flesh was not sinful flesh as our's is, with the same dispositions, and propensities, and wants, and afflictions, then, I say, ‘God had sent that man strong delusion that he should believe a lie'; and page 24, ‘Now if there had not been in Christ's nature appetites, ambitions, and spiritual darkenings, how, I ask, could the devil have addressed these several temptations to His will?’ On reading over this, an utterance in power broke from me, ‘He has erred, he has erred’ —an utterance accompanied with great anguish under the feeling then that my friend's presence was grieving and quenching the Spirit; but which I now see to have been because the utterance was wrung from the spirit, as a desire of testifying against Mr. Irving to lull my inquiries. My friend's argument, which followed upon this, was very sound; he argued that, if Mr. Irving had been upholding false doctrine, it could not be the Spirit of God which was speaking in his church, or he would before this time have been rebuked. I, however, thought that the spirit in me had fully testified against this error, and, as I had never myself held it, the character of the work could not be involved in it.
“These discoveries, and the reference to Mr. Irving's book, led me to search more fully into the views he held; and I not only found, on the further reading of his work, that his views were unsound on the human nature of our Lord, but that he was also still more unsound on the doctrines concerning holiness in the flesh. Besides his works, I also consulted the published sermons of Mr. Campbell, who had preached in Scotland, and was spoken of as the great champion of the truth in Scotland; and he appeared to be involved in the same mistakes as Mr. Irving. I was much disturbed by this, because I thought how greatly the church was prejudiced by these false doctrines against what I yet deemed the manifestations of the Spirit; and in much heaviness I sat down to write to Mr. Irving, stating fully his error in conceiving the law of sin to be in the flesh of Jesus; and in stating also what I conceived to be the truth concerning our holiness: that as by faith accepted in Christ, and clothed in His righteousness, so we are in the sight of the Father holy and without blame; but whilst in the flesh, the law of sin remains even in them who are regenerate, and the flesh lusteth against the Spirit. And though our mark and aim should be to be perfect even as our Father is perfect; yet that we all come short of perfect holiness in the flesh, and are unprofitable servants. As Mr. Irving regarded me destined to the apostolic office, and set for the instruction of his church, I had great confidence that he would receive this, and would be led to retract and abandon his errors, and thus remove a great stumbling-block from his door.
“A short time before this, I had received a communication from the Rev. Mr. Dow, who in Scotland was exercising the gift of utterance, after the same manner as those speaking in London. His sister had written to Mrs. Irving, and she had sent me an extract from the letter; declaring, that much additional light and power had been vouchsafed to Mr. Dow, and he had in the Spirit given a clear testimony confirming my prophecies, opening the six trumpets in the Book of Revelations, and giving a very full opening of each trumpet. This was an encouragement to me, giving me, as it did, the recognition, in my prophetic office, of the Scotch followers at Irongray.
“In a few days after I had sent to Mr. Irving, I received his answer, and as this letter was mainly instrumental in opening my eyes to the delusion by which we were bound, I give it at length.
“London, 21st April, 1832.
“My dear Brother, Read this letter with your eye on God. We have great need, especially the spiritual amongst us, to walk humbly with the Lord. Your first letter, containing the utterance of the Spirit, without any expression of his intention in sending it to me, led me very deeply to ponder the subject of our Lord's flesh, and to cry upon the Lord to examine me; and to the same exercise of soul had I been drawn by the utterance of the Spirit, and the experience of the spiritual of my flock in these days past. These things put me into a fit condition for receiving the full impression of your last letter, which arrived last night after I had preached a sermon on the Holy Generation of the Flesh of Christ. This I had done, in order to express anew, before my people, with all caution and consideration, what I firmly believe to be the truth; and to guard them against the effect of any rash or unguarded expressions which I might at any time have used. All night long, my soul, sleeping and waking, was exercised upon the subject of your last letter. And it being wonderfully ordered in God's providence that Mrs. C. should be in town a day or two; and that Miss E. C., though desirous to go home before breakfast, was so burdened as not to be able to go—these two prophetesses of the Lord, who have been His mouth of wisdom and warning to me and my church in all perplexities; I called along with my wife, who had read your letter, and read it to me, and having spread the whole matter before the Lord, and twice besought His presence, we proceeded to read your letters in order. Upon your first letter there was no utterance of the Spirit, nor expression of any kind amongst us, but that of assent. When we had read the two first pages of the second, wherein you reason upon the words of the Spirit, 'He has erred, he has erred,' given to you upon two sentences of my book; and bring forward your views of our Lord's flesh, and of the believer's holiness, in contradistinction from mine, we paused, and seeing there was so manifest a discrepancy between us, I solemnly besought the Lord that He would speak His own mind in the matter. Instantly the Spirit came upon Miss E. C., and, after speaking in a very grieved tone and spirit in a tongue, she was made to declare many words which I will not take upon me to attempt to repeat, seeing the Spirit has discountenanced such attempts. But the substance was most precisely this, that you had been snared by departing from the word and the testimony—that I had maintained the truth, and the Lord was well pleased with me for it—that I must not flinch now, but be more bold for it than heretofore—that He had honored me for it, and I must not draw back—that in some words I had erred, and that the word of the Spirit by you was therefore true; and that if I waited upon the Lord He would show me them by His Spirit, but that He had forgiven it because He knew my heart was right towards Him—that I had maintained the truth, and must not draw back from maintaining it. Thereupon we knelt down, and having confessed my sin and thanked Him for His mercy, I proceeded to entreat Him for you, that you might be delivered from the snare in which you were taken concerning the flesh of Christ and the holiness of the believer. This done, I sought to recover and recount the substance of the utterance as above given, that by their help I might report it to you exactly. My wife was mentioning a doubt as to whether it should not simply be left to the Lord, and not dealt with in the understanding at all; seeing that in your letter you had gone astray by commenting in your own understanding on the words of the Spirit, ‘He hath erred,' as applicable to two sentences of my book, and applied them to my whole doctrine, which the Spirit had just declared to be the truth, 'that must be maintained’; when Mrs. C. was made to speak in a tongue with great authority and strength, and immediately after in English, to the effect that you had stumbled greatly by bringing your own carnal understanding to spiritual things; that truth in the inward parts, the law of God in the heart, wrought in us the fulfillment of the righteousness of the law in all our members; and that union with Jesus brought into us the holiness of Jesus in body, soul, and spirit; that the Lord would have a church upon the earth holy as He is holy, the light of the world as He is the light of the world; that some had sought to bring this about in the flesh; that you had been snared in the opposite extreme of denying it altogether, and making a distinction between Christ's holiness and that of His church; that you must be informed of it, because this it was which was preventing the work of the Lord. There was a third utterance through Miss E. C. to teach me Satan sought to overthrow my confidence in the truth, and to bring me into a snare; but that I was called upon to maintain it now more firmly than ever.
“There were no more utterances, but when we came to that part of your letter where you say, 'Concerning the vessels by whom He speaks, you have fearfully provoked Him, and they are ready to burst asunder under your hands,' there was great indignation felt by both the vessels of the Lord present, and great sense of injustice felt by myself. For, oh! dear brother, I have done all things to know and follow the Lord in respect of them. It was indeed said, I think in the Spirit, that this in you was the same spirit of ‘The accuser of the brethren,' which hath manifested itself lately amongst us in one of the gifted persons who spoke evil of me in the midst of the congregation. But the Lord hath showed him that though it was with power, the power was not from God but from Satan, to whom, by hard and unjust thoughts of me, he had opened the door. Ah, dear brother, you have surely been much overseen in some way or other—search it out. The thing you spoke of F. and of Miss H. was not of God. I fear, and am persuaded in my own mind, that you have not discriminated duly what is of God, and what is not of Him; and that sin in this matter, un-discerned and unconfessed, hath brought on greater falls, as we have seen amongst ourselves; and that now you are brought to oppose that very doctrines which alone can bring the church to be meet for her Bridegroom—That as He was holy in the flesh, so are we, through the grace of regeneration, brought to be holy—planted in a holy standing—the flesh dead to sin, as His flesh was dead to sin; and that by the baptism of the Holy Ghost we are brought into the fellowship of His power and fullness, to do the works which He also did, and greater works than these.
“When we came to that passage of your letter where you censure as fearfully erroneous a passage in the Day of Pentecost, we were all made to feel that you were forgetting what you yourself had been made to utter so abundantly concerning the baptism with fire and the spiritual ministry.
“I have read this to my wife, and Mrs. C., and Miss E. C.; and they say it is a full and exact account.
“And now, upon the whole, my well-beloved brother and prophet of the Lord, I give you counsel to search and prove what it is that sits so heavy upon your conscience, for the Lord will surely reveal it. Concerning the flesh of Christ, we will discourse when we meet. I believe it to have been no better than other flesh as to its passive qualities or properties, as a creature thing. But that the power of the Son of God, as Son of man in it, believing in the Father, did for His obedience to become Son of man, receive such a measure of the Holy Ghost as sufficed to resist its own proclivity to the world and to Satan, and to make it obedient unto God in all things, which measure of the Spirit He received in His generation, and so had holy flesh; and by exercise of the same faith, He kept His vineyard holy, and presented it holy to the great Husbandman. Regeneration, through faith, sealed in baptism, doth give to us the same measure of the Spirit to do the same work of making our flesh the holy thing, the temple of the Holy Ghost, body, soul, and spirit holy, wherefore we have the name ‘saints,' or ‘holy ones,' ‘sons of God,' as He received those names in virtue of His generation of the Holy Ghost. If we were to meet, I think we would not find much difference of mind as to the flesh of Christ. But as to your view of holiness, it is the very deepest and darkest and subtlest snare of the enemy. If you understood thoroughly the one subject, you would understand thoroughly the other. I say not that Christ had the motions of the flesh, but that the law of the flesh was there all present; but that where as in us it is set on fire by an evil life, in Him it was by a holy life put down, and His flesh brought to be a holy altar, whereon the sacrifices and offerings for the sin of the world, and the whole burnt offerings of sorrow, and confession, and penitence for others, might be ever offered up. And thus ought we to be, and shall be, when the flesh becomes the sack-cloth covering.
“Oh! brother, I have had many trials, but the Lord hath sustained me, and I dwell before Him in peace of soul, though in much sorrow because of the condition of His church. I shall be glad when we meet. But, oh! I beseech you, lay to heart the words which have been spoken by the Spirit, and doubt any words which may be spoken in you contrary thereto. For though an angel from heaven should come to me, testifying to your views of holiness, I would not receive him
“` Do you hold correspondence with any of my flock, that you speak so positively, yet so unjustly, concerning my treatment of the spiritual persons? or is there some meaning couched under it which I do not understand? Did the Spirit say so in you? If so, doubt that spirit; for certainly it is not true, they themselves being witnesses.
“Fare you well. May the Lord have you in His holy keeping. Amen. Your faithful brother,
EDWARD IRVING.'
“This letter was at once a great blow to me. Here I saw doctrines, which I could never have believed Mr. Irving held, not only avowed by him, but sustained and enforced by the utterances, in power, of those who were deemed gifted persons. I had no copy of my own letters, and had the utterances been confined to a denial of the accuracy of my views, I should not have dared to question it, as I should rather have attributed it to some inaccuracy of statement. But here was an unqualified approval of Mr. Irving's views; and in the same letter, those views broadly stated without disguise, and clearly involving heresies most fearful and appalling.”
[NOTE. The Editor thinks it well to state here, that, while giving Mr. B.'s testimony as much the most important he knows on the real character of the Irvingite movement, and especially on the fact of powers beyond man, yet not of God though professing to be, he does not mean to endorse all Mr. B.'s thoughts or expressions. He does not, for instance, approve of applying “fallen flesh” to the human nature of Christ, which was a body prepared of God by the power of the Spirit of God, beyond Adam's even when unfallen. But Mr. B.'s doctrine is sound in the main.]