OUR VISIT TO BRITAIN.
(Continued from page 155.)
The letter with which we concluded our last seemed to be an extinguisher; for they neither “made their mind on this matter public,” nor did they “announce that our fellowship with them was obtained by misrepresentation.” There was no room for them to do this; and had they done it, they would have proved themselves utterly regardless of the truth. Thus far the serpent-policy of the adversary proved abortive for mischief; and we concluded, that the Ellstree brotherhood had discovered that they were being victimised by their “evangelist” on the altar of his envy and cupidity—of his envy, we say; for when “the lights” of Campbellism in Britain were congregated in Glasgow to convert the natives to the kingdom set up on Pentecost, they could scarcely bring together 150 persons all told; while the “heretic of no soul-memory,” the “rather plausible sophist,” the denounced and proscribed of their supervisor and his British and American satellites, was discoursing to 6000 people in the City Hall on the things of the Kingdom of God and the Age to Come. We concluded, we repeat, that the Ellstreans had penetrated the imposition being practised upon them, and therefore determined to let the matter drop. We were indeed strengthened in this conclusion by the rejoinder of one of their members about February 1850, of whom we inquired the fate of the agitation against us? “Oh,” said he, “the brethren found that they were going too fast.”
But though the snake was scotched, he was not killed. He was bruised and lay for a long time inanimate; but the hand that struck him being about to be withdrawn, he began to show signs of life again. To resume the literal, what was our surprise to find that after a dormancy of one year and three-fourths, Messrs. Black and King reappeared against us as large as life. “What was our surprise to find that after a dormancy of one year and three-fourths, Messrs. Black and King reappeared against us as large as life. What could have been the cause of this revival of their malevolence? We answer, that Mr. Wallis was not satisfied with what they had done. He wanted something from them on the subject for his paper. He had got “a tit-bit” against the Banner from A. Campbell, and he wanted something equally relishing against us, that he might serve them up to his readers side by side on the very eve of our departure from Britain! The extraordinary impression made by Elpis Israel, and our 250 addresses on reformers and others, was painfully distressing to his unhallowed heart. He desired therefore to shoot another arrow from his bow in the hope of wounding us to death. This arrow he drew from the Ellstree quiver, and dipped in the poison of his own malevolence. But like Paul in Malta, we shake off with dignified unconcern this power of the enemy, as at this day.
When we arrived at Liverpool, where we sojourned a few days under the hospitable roof of bro, Tickel, we found the October number of the Harbinger. On looking into it we found two articles on the 476th page; one headed “the Gospel Banner and Biblical Treasury;” and the other, “John Thomas, M.D., and his Visit to England.” The former from the pen of A.C. has appeared in No.2, page 37, of the Herald; the latter, is from Mr. Wallis, and has not been noticed by us before; nor would it be now only that it pertains to the narrative of “our visit to Britain.” The article occupies three columns of the size of the Herald. It commences thus: “The necessity that exists for inserting the following facts respecting Dr. Thomas and his coadjutors may not appear so obvious to all our readers, as it does to ourselves and those whom we have consulted on the subject.” He then proceeds to notice our acquaintance with the Ellstree church, and says “we were received a member amongst them.” This is not correct; we were simply a visitor and occasional communicant at their table; we are member of only one church, namely, at Richmond. He says, we “subsequently delivered several discourses.” We only spoke twice; on “the coming Kingdom of God and the Hope of Israel.” He then recalls attention to a notice he published concerning us two years ago, which reads as follows: “We affirm, on the testimony of the “Herald of the Future Age,” that Mr. John Thomas, in the month of March, 1847, publicly abjured not only all connection with the Reformation, but also all that he had learnt whilst in connection with its churches—asserting that the leading men of the Reformation held damnable heresy—were ignorant of the true hope of the Gospel, and, consequently, blind leaders of the blind. Now, we have no right to question, or to interfere, with this abjuration—regarding it as emanating from the firm conviction of the confessor’s mind—but still the position occupied by John Thomas ought to be known to all the disciples; and that his object, in visiting this country, is not to build-up and enlarge the churches already planted, but to proselyte as many members out of them to his own spirit and theory as he possibly can, and that, too, without any compromise whatever.”
He tells the reader that it was this notice in the Harbinger that caused the Ellstreans to demand his authority, and that in consequence he sent that part of the Herald containing our “Confession and Abjuration.” This statement, however, we believe to be untrue when he was writing it. The above notice appeared in the Harbinger for October 1848. Now on September 27th he met D. King, the delegate of Ellstree, in Glasgow, where he was distributing a reprint of the “Confession” among the initiated. Instead of the Ellstreans sending for his authority, we doubt not it was very officiously conveyed to them from Glasgow.
In the next paragraph he presents us with a piece of pious rhodomontade about his dislike of pious craftiness, hatred of hypocrisy, and love of righteousness; which by implication he would have his readers believe was contrary to our nature and practice! He also avows his dislike of what his master at Bethany styles “untaught questions;” which he says are “pestilential, engendering strife, contention, and every evil work.” Of course Mr. James Wallis, Dealer in Ready-made Clothes, 12 Peck Lane, Nottingham, a calling to which he has devoted the energies of his past life, is a capital and infallible judge of questions! For our own part, we would rather trust his judgment as to the quality of a piece of cloth, or the fit of a nether garment, than the existence of this or that question as a part of the divine testimony! What! Trust the judgment of a man who says, that “a student will certainly be confounded if he commence with unfulfilled prophecy,” when the Lord Jesus says “seek first the kingdom of God,” which is all a matter of promise, or prophecy unfulfilled! Mr. Wallis errs in measuring the intellect of others by his own. It is quite possible, that a thousand questions may be taught in the word of God, and yet both he and A.C. be ignorant of their existence there. But nothing is so “pestilential” to ignorance and presumption as a demand for light where darkness only reigns.
But to return to the Ellstreans. After reading the foregoing correspondence the reader will know how to appreciate these lines from Mr. Wallis. “On receiving the printed document, the brethren in London called on J.T. to reconcile his private statements to them with his printed declaration published in the United States previously to leaving for England. This he declined doing, for the best of all reasons, and never afterwards met with that congregation. But let us hear “bro. Black” in reference to what took place at that time:
“Having called upon John Thomas to explain his conduct toward us, or to renounce his abjuration of the churches of the Reformation—(of the existence of which fact we had no idea when we received him into the church)—but not obtaining any thing more satisfactory from him than that he held fellowship with all the disciples who would receive him upon the same principle that the Lord did Judas! And perceiving that with his state of mind he could only desire connection with the brethren in England for the purpose of creating separations and confusion among them, the church in London, at a large assembly, with only two objectors in it passed the following resolution:
“Resolved—That as we, the disciples of Christ, are commanded to mark those who cause divisions, and to avoid them; and as John Thomas teaches, by direct implication, that all who are in our position are yet in their sins, unless baptised into what he calls the hope of Israel, we must avoid him, except he has renounced, or until he does renounce, his printed abjuration against our brethren in the Lord.
John Black, Pastor.
David King, Preacher of the Gospel.”
Mr. Wallis tells his readers that he had this precious resolution before the meeting held in Glasgow in 1849. We do not recollect the month of the meeting. He must have kept it back for a year or more. He says he had reasons for not mentioning it at that meeting, nor publishing it in his paper. No doubt he had. We were in the country, and in possession of correspondence and facts which, if published would have placed him and his satellites in a worse position than before. If your purpose is evil, it is always safer to attack a man in his absence, than before his face when he is present to defend himself. This was Mr. W’s policy; a policy, however, which defeats itself, being manifestly cowardly and base.
As to Mr. Black’s declaration that we went to England for the purpose of creating separations and confusion among their churches, it is utterly false. The congregations in Edinburgh and Glasgow can testify to the contrary of this. That difficulties might possibly ensue was not improbable; for when was “the sure word of prophecy” ever caused to shine into a dark place without either dispelling the darkness, or being itself expelled? These results are never accomplished without a struggle. Luther advocated justification by faith without the works of Romanism. This was scriptural ground; but look at “the separations and confusion” that followed! Who was to blame for these; was Luther or the truth? Or should Luther have suppressed the truth for fear of what should happen? By no means. Now we went to Britain to call men’s attention to “the Gospel of the Kingdom.” In this work we were no respecter of persons. We were invited to speak to the Ellstreans and to worship at their house. We accepted the invitation, and spoke much to the satisfaction of those who heard us. We said nothing about fellowship or re-immersion. We produced no separation nor confusion there; and but for Messrs. Wallis, Black and King, there would have been no trouble there at all. But the wicked flee when no man pursueth. So it was with them. Ignorance and fear possessed them; and not knowing what might come to pass, they raised a light-darkening cloud of dust; and, shaded by its obscuration, sought protection within the barred doors of their conventicle! And there we propose to leave them till doomsday.
From what has been submitted the reader will have discerned the kind of opposition that was brought to bear against us in England. We are happy, however, in being able to record its total failure upon every point. Mr. Wallis had evoked a party spirit which he was unable to control. He had offended the Millerites in Nottingham, and stirred them up against himself; and though they were a small and waning sect, they were not entirely to be despised. They professed themselves earnestly desirous to hear us in proportion to the anxiety of their opponent to prevent it. Our course was simple and straightforward; for without pledging ourselves to the opinions or partyism of any, we were prepared to lay “the testimony of God” before all. Millerism in Nottingham has proved itself to be as rotten and corrupt as Campbellism there. The latter still exists, and after the same fashion might continue to exist like an Egyptian mummy for 2000 years. The elements of its body are preserved from disintegration and putrefaction by the antiseptic influence of worldly interest. It is a society constituted of masters and their workmen, whose subjection to their employers is well known to be absolute and helpless, to all who are acquainted with the working of things in England. The Millerite body was free from this kind of lordship. It was composed of persons all of whom in some way or other were under authority foreign to the members of the church. They had no “masters” among them, and were independent of one another in pecuniary or worldly affairs; so that there were no bands of iron and brass to keep them from falling asunder. As long as they believed Mr. Miller’s crudities heartily they were united and firm; but when these were shaken, they began to waver, to break their ranks, and retire. Out of a hundred members about twenty only can be found who are united in the truth. This is the last news that has reached us from Nottingham. There is nothing makes manifest so effectually as the truth. If a congregation have a name to live, but are either dead, or were never alive, just introduce the gospel of the kingdom in the name of Jesus among them, and their real condition will soon become apparent. We accepted their pressing and cordial invitation to visit them in Nottingham, and laid the truth before them. It disclosed the absurdities of Millerism, and caused them to perceive that their house was built upon the sand, and certainly about to fall. Though convinced of this, and of the necessity of flight, they had neither wisdom nor knowledge enough to direct their course aright. They saw they were in error, but they did not see into the truth. The natural consequence was that they became the helpless victims of the fowler who might feel disposed to ensnare them. About twenty of them were entrapped by the Mormons, whose earthly and sensual dogmas suited their natures best. Others dropped off on various pleas until by the subsequent accession of a small party their numbers stood at sixty. This was their numerical force when we left them in the possession of the Assembly Room. Their course, however, since has thinned their numbers still more. In the small party that joined them were one or two believers in modern miracles. One of them in fact mesmerised another and cured her, and absurdly imagined that the spirit of God had performed the cure through him miraculously in answer to prayer. There was another similar case in the same town. A Mormon priest mesmerised a female to produce lactation, which had failed her with all her children. He succeeded, and assured her that it was the work of the spirit in answer to his prayers. She and her husband believed him, and though better things might have been expected, they became devoted Mormons, and prepared for any absurdity that might be propounded. The former miracle-worker and his patient did not become Mormons, though their proceedings led to their exclusion. What crotchets they profess as proved by their miracles we have not heard, though we are told they have become bitter enemies to the truth they once declared themselves attached to. Be it so. The truth can only flourish in honest and good hearts; and the sooner the sons of evil manifest themselves the better. Thus Millerism has divided and subdivided until, as we are informed by a dearly beloved friend in Derby, there remain only twenty of them who have rejected human folly and tradition, and have embraced the gospel of the kingdom of God. If this be so, then the truth has not only overturned Millerism, and defeated the machinations of Campbellism, but has maintained its own in Nottingham, and “turned” twenty of “the Gentiles from darkness to light and from the power of satan unto God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them which are sanctified by faith that is in Jesus.” We trust that these believers, who have all our sympathy, will keep the great principles of the gospel before them, as the anchor of their souls both sure and steadfast within the veil. Let them beware of crotchets, or the magnification of things unimportant in themselves; and let all things be brought to the Law and the Testimony. Dwell upon the promises of God, and upon the obvious teaching of his word. Let this be the polar star and no mariner need make shipwreck of the faith.
But before Millerism fell into ruins it was useful in obtaining for the truth a large and attentive hearing. We addressed the people in the Assembly Room frequently through its management. On Sunday night they were literally packed together, so that we had to edge and squeeze along to obtain our place upon the platform. It is calculated that about 2000 people were assembled. We spoke on the subject of Jesus Christ the Heir of the Kingdom and Throne of David. The audience listened with great attention, and judging from the following note received the next day from two principals in the Scotch Baptist church in the neighbourhood, they must have been deeply interested.
New Basford, August 7, 1848
Dear Sir:
The very able and instructive discourse delivered by you in the Assembly Room on last evening has elicited in us a particular desire that the same should be published, not in part only, but if possible as a whole, that not only those who heard may be able to consider at leisure the subject, the issue of which is so vastly important; but that others who were not so favoured may have the same opportunity. We think the publishing of that discourse would be a means of helping forward the object you have in view, and of informing the minds of those less informed upon those great truths so eloquently advocated by you.
Yours very respectfully,
Signed—THOMAS ROBINSON & JOHN SISLING. —To Dr. J. Thomas.
Reporters from the several journals issued in the town, attended the lectures and published an outline of them in their respective papers, though with many vexatious typographical errors. In this our first tour we spoke about thirteen times at Nottingham, yet Mr. Wallis, who volunteered his services to enlighten the public in regard to our heresies, was present only at one of them!
Millerism in Nottingham introduced us to Millerism in Derby, Birmingham, and Plymouth. We visited derby on the 9th August. Application had been made to the Mayor for the Town Hall. He referred the request to the Bench of Magistrates, which, it is probable would have granted it, had not one of them reminded his brethren that there had been a man there from America some time ago, named Dealtry, who had created a great excitement among the people: and therefore he counselled them not to grant it to another from the same country. Being denied the use of the Hall, though granted to the Chartists, the Mechanics’ Institute was engaged for three successive nights. We desired to secure it for Sunday also; but the librarian stated that he could only let it during the week nights, the committee of the institute having reserved to themselves the letting it for that day. Though Derby is one of the darkest and most bigoted of towns in England, a disposition to hear was at first manifested to some extent. Our audiences were, it was thought, about 1000. A physician who heard us inquired if we were not a Mohammedan! What others may have thought we know not. The impression, however, does not appear to have been promotive of our popularity in “the heavenlies.” For on applying to the committee for the continued use of the institute they refused to let us have it, on the ground that the magistrates had forbid it. This was ascertained about 10 o’clock on Friday night. We were determined, however, not to be foiled by Satan, if we could help it. We succeeded in obtaining the old Assembly Room, and in getting out some bills and placards. One being pasted on a board was suspended on a boy’s back, who was sent about the town as “a walking advertisement” from 4 P.M. till night. They would not allow us to put a bill on the board before the Institute advertising the people of a change of place, although we had given out, that we should meet there if no obstacle were thrown in the way. To remove this difficulty we stationed a man at the gate to direct the people who might come, to the Assembly Room. This incident diminished our congregation considerably, though at night the room was filled. The Derbyshire Chronicle intimated that a report of our lectures would appear in its columns; but Satan was at work with the press also, so that it failed to see the light. The Mayor of Derby, who is an “infidel,” inconsistently enough declared that we spoke blasphemy? An excellent judge doubtless is he. Our blasphemy, we suppose, was against “the powers that be,” in showing that the time was fast approaching when all civil and ecclesiastical authority and power would be transferred from “the wicked spirits in the heavenlies” who were now “the rulers of the darkness of this world,” to Jesus, the King of Israel, and the Saints. Should “His Worship” be living then, and officiating as the Mayor of Derby, he will find this blasphemy of such a practical character that he would rather be a breaker of stones upon the road than rendered conspicuous by office in the service of the town.
While at Nottingham the kindness of some friends afforded us some recreation in a visit to Newstead Abbey, a beautiful estate formerly belonging to the celebrated Byron, of poetic, eccentric, and unfortunate memory. It is now in the possession of Col. Wildman, an old Waterloo soldier, who permits the public to perambulate his grounds, and inspect whatever of interest his mansion affords. From Derby we visited Keddleston Hall, the seat of Lord Scaresboro, with another party of friends. This estate abounds with deer, hundreds of which may at any time be seen grazing in the park. The interior of the Hall of entrance is quite magnificent and pagan. It is from twenty to thirty feet from the floor to the ceiling, sixty long, and forty wide. This apartment is called “the hall,” and is entered directly from without. There are some ten or more columns of the Corinthian style, with niches in the wall in which are placed statues of the mythic deities of Greece and Rome. It only required an altar, and the Keddleston priest to make every thing complete for a pagan temple. The former lord was evidently a sensualist. His statues and paintings illustrate in their selection the character of the man. If we had entered his mansion not knowing we were in a country called “christian,” we should have imagined ourselves in the domicile of an old licentious pagan of more money than wit. The grounds are fine, as indeed are all the parks of the nobility and gentry in Britain—an island where art has dressed off nature to perfection, and subdued its wildness so completely, that to a great extent the eye becomes weary of beauty, and longs for the alpine boldness and deep-delled ruggedness of rocks and mountains untouched by the hand of man. Derby shire is celebrated for its romantic scenery. Matlock and Dovedale, which we also visited, partake somewhat of the sublime and beautiful combined. Rocky precipices, caverns, and mountain hills, will always make these places the resort of the admirers of the works of God. It was quite an inspiration the contemplation of them. Eternal power and divinity were reflected from all around, and made us feel our nothingness in comparison of Him who created them, and weighed them in scales and balances.
* * *
Chetwood says, the Archbishop of Paris would not allow Moliere to be buried in consecrated ground. Louis remonstrated with him for some time but in vain. At last he asked him “How many feet deep the consecrated ground went?” The archbishop replied, “About eight.” “Well, then,” said the King, “let the grave be dug twelve feet deep, and that will be four below your consecrated ground, and there I insist on his being buried.” The account given in the life of Moliere seems more probable, that the archbishop being well informed of the religion and probity of Moliere, permitted him to be buried in consecrated ground, which privilege his profession as an actor deprived him of.
* * *
