OUR VISIT TO BRITAIN.

Baby-sprinkling in Aberdeen at two and sixpence a head—The gospel of the kingdom gets a footing among the Campbellites—Visit to Plymouth—The pamphlet exposing the folly of the clergy excites the pious horror of one fishing for a call—Apostasy for a mess of pottage—Elpis Israels gambled for, and condemned to be burnt—Its author a serpent of the latter days—Liverpool visited.

            As already stated, I journeyed to Dundee from Aberdeen. The “gospel of the kingdom,” preached in this city of the north, was not without effect. The audiences were large, but not to be named after those of Glasgow. The attention of the people was strict, and, I suppose, the impression somewhat more than superficial. I come to this conclusion from the following words in a letter from that city—“Friend H—had two Sundays hard labour after you left to undo what you had done in his tabernacle. He was making a sore handling of matters, as I am informed. Poor gentleman, he could scarcely crow in his own Zion, though there were none to oppose him.”

            The gentleman referred to in this extract was formerly in the British army; but at the termination of the contest with Napoleon, was discharged with many others on its reduction to a peace establishment. In consequence of this, he changed the weapons of his warfare, and unfurled his flag in Aberdeen. Finding an unoccupied conventicle, he rented it on his own responsibility for “public worship.” It is styled, I think, “the Christian Chapel,” and is capable of holding several hundred people. The odour of sanctity in Aberdeen is not supposed to be intensified by any fragrance exhaling from his institution. The clergy there do readily detect most unsavoury perfumes when their orthodoxy occasionally snuffs the wind of his divinity. At least so it is said. Having ordained himself to the totality of the chapel offices, he can have no part with them in their apostolic successorship. The holiest hands laid upon his head were his own, so that whatever spirit was imparted to him by that formality emanated from himself; and being equally pious as they, or their ordainers, is as much the spirit of God as any that they can boast of. It is thought, however, that the alienation between him and the clergy is more to be attributed to his underselling them in the soul-market, than to his lack of due presbyterial ordination. They will not sprinkle babies for regeneration unless the parents are what they call “believers;” but this, I am told, is no obstacle in the way of Mr. H—. He grants the babe a dispensation for rhantism without faith, and performs the ceremony for unbelievers’ babes at two shillings and sixpence sterling a head. Now there are many infidel husbands and wives in Aberdeen, who still have a superstitious reverence for this “church ordinance.” They want their children to appear like other children, who are considered more respectable than those who have not been sprinkled with the church water at the hands of “the minister.” Now, Mr. H—, it is presumable, having as little respect for baby-sprinkling as an apostle, who says in regard to God’s creatures, that “without faith it is impossible to please him,” considered it a public grievance, that babies should suffer in their respectabilities for the short-comings of their parents, which they could in no wise prevent. He saw clearly, that believers’ babies had no more faith than infidels’ babies. To his mind there was no room for question or dispute upon this point. He very acutely perceived, therefore, that all babies were babies, and had an instinctive desire for no other milk than their mother’s. For “the unadulterated milk of the word,” he was intuitively and logically sure they had no more longing than for the Pope’s tiara, of which they had never heard. Hence, he perceived that the clerical requisition for parental faith did not evade the apostolically stated impossibility; for, however pleased with the parents, it is obvious God could not be with the babies, who were perfectly indifferent to the milk of his word. He placed all babies, therefore, in the same category; and practically rejected the clerical sprinkling, as having no superior efficacy to his own. If the parents’ faith in the Assembly’s Catechism was a good substitute for the babies’ ignorance thereof, his faith was as good a proxy for the parents’ lack who became his customers. Mr. H—was, therefore, the catechism become flesh. He believed it with faith enough for all infidel Aberdonians; and could consequently sponsorise all the babes in Aberdeen in the event of all church-goers honestly avowing their babylike indifference to “the milk of the word.” Was it not a public benefaction, the preservation of the respectability of multitudes of the rising generation at the low price of half a crown a head? It is said to have been so considered by many. The clergy thundered, but Mr. H—pocketed the lightning. His speculation succeeded. His bazaar was well frequented, and riches increased. Compared with his competitors in trade, his wares are as genuine, and his drafts upon heaven’s bank as likely to be honoured, as the Archbishop of Canterbury’s or the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland’s. As may be supposed, he is liberal withal. He will not close the doors of “the Christian Chapel,” against heterodoxy, if a penny can be safely turned by the opening of them. This is not the case everywhere. Orthodoxy loves money and is very prudent—wise as the serpent in all its doings. It will not let you into its houses for money, lest the heresy taught should alienate its customers, and so diminish its power and receipts. But Mr. H—, having been a soldier, was brave, and had no such fear. Pay him for present accommodation, and he would run the risk. On this principle my friends obtained the use of his chapel. It was convenient, “the minister” polite and friendly, and the risk not over hazardous, considering the faithlessness of the times, and the constitution of the audiences addressed.

            The reverend gentleman having succeeded, I suppose, in undoing the little mischief I had done among his flock, all things relapsed into their former sheolite condition. This was not the case, however, with “the Campbellite church,” as it is called there. A correspondent, writing from Aberdeen, says, “the dust has been raised among us since you left. The teaching of ‘the things of the kingdom of God’ gave offence to some of the friends, and to one of our elders who is Campbellised, and spiritualised with a double distillation. He could stand it no longer, and therefore gave in his resignation. He could sustain his theory by neither scripture nor reason. He went privately to all the members he thought favourable to his notions, and got about half the congregation to side with him. We told them they could please themselves. If they thought fit they could go; but for ourselves, we were resolved to teach what we believed to be the truth, and were willing that they should exercise the same right: but we would not be restricted by the elder in question. By advice of some of his party he gave in; but he next made a proposition that no brother should speak longer than a quarter of an hour at a time. This, however, did not take. He lost his proposition, and in the meantime we are settled down; and I have hope that the most of his friends will in the course of time come to see the truth. He did them great evil, I fear; nevertheless, I think there are some of them beginning to see things in their true light. But, let the result be what it may, we are determined to be faithful. They are the intelligent and talented of the congregation that contend for “the gospel of the kingdom.” Of this there can be no doubt; for it is only such that have the sagacity to discriminate between things human and divine.

            On the night before I bid adieu to Aberdeen, I met about a hundred persons, I think, at a soirée, to which I was invited. This was a farewell tea-drinking, at which “all and singular” were at liberty to ask any questions concerning the things I had introduced to their notice, and the contents of the Bible generally. The time was occupied in this way till past eleven. The minister of the chapel we had occupied was among the guests. He would have asked some questions, but it was then too late, and he had not wished to prevent others from questioning by occupying the time. He thought they were all under great obligation to me for subjecting myself to a public cross-questioning upon so many topics, and for so long a time. He confessed that he should not like to go through the same ordeal. After a few more remarks in this strain, he concluded, and the soirée was closed.

            Through friends in Nottingham, I became acquainted with a preacher residing in Plymouth, whom I will name Wood. He was formerly a zealous Millerite, or Anti-Jewish Restorationist. This crotchet, I think, he never got rid of; at least, so long as I knew him. In other respects, he receded from the Millerism of which Mr. Himes of Boston, is the incarnation, and became what I am unable to define. He was the pastor of a church in Plymouth, consisting of about seventy members, from whom he drew his support, which was restricted and precarious. They generally believed in the speedy personal appearance of Christ Jesus, which was the one idea defining their belief; but as to any other particular articles of faith distinguishing them from other professors, I am not aware that they possessed them.

            By this Mr. Wood I was induced to visit Plymouth. What his motive was for urging me to it, I know not. I supposed it to be referable to a desire for the diffusion of as much knowledge as possible of the scripture testimony concerning the times, and the crisis connected with the personal advent of Jesus. He was friendly, promoted the sale of Elpis Israel, and quite zealous in getting the people to hear me. The Mechanics’ Institutes at Plymouth and Devonport were hired for lectures, which I delivered at intervals during the eighteen days of my sojourn. At the latter place, the audiences were quite large—several hundreds; but at Plymouth not so many. The hearers seemed deeply interested; but, save the sale of forty-six copies of Elpis Israel and a very animated soirée before I left the town, I have no means of knowing what faith the gospel of the kingdom commands in the hearts of those that heard it.

            On my way to London it was that the conversation occurred, which set me to writing the pamphlet afterwards published as “The Wisdom of the Clergy proved to be Folly.” About twenty-five of them were sold in Plymouth by Mr. Wood, whose mind had undergone a remarkable change, apparently, at least, since the soirée, at which Mr. Wood made a speech which left the impression upon my mind that he was not far from the kingdom of God. But by a letter I received from him, expressing his opinion of the pamphlet, I clearly perceived that his mind had been alienated to something else. A thousand copies of that brochure have been sold, with the exception of a few copies in Britain, and more are demanded, but cannot be supplied there without a reprint. Speaking of it, Mr. Wood says, “For myself, while I know assuredly to my great grief, that many things therein stated are but too true, I am constrained, with painful reluctance, to differ from you upon various matters; —with reluctance, because I would that we all had the truth and the mind of God, and could see alike, —with pain, because I cannot but feel really horrified at some of your conclusions.”

            Mr. Wood’s pious horror originated from my strict construction of “the wholesome words of the Lord Jesus,” who before his crucifixion, said, “This gospel of the kingdom must be preached to all nations;” and added, after his resurrection, “He that believes and is baptised shall be saved, and he that believes not shall be condemned.” Like the serpent in the garden, he would have it that this was not true without exception. He maintained that multitudes “who believe not” shall not surely be excluded from eternal life, or “be condemned,”—they “shall not surely die.” The idea that they should, was too repugnant to his fleshly feelings, or something else, to be entertained for a moment. He wanted a doctrine more in harmony with “the thinking of the flesh,” forgetting that God’s system of truth is an embodiment of principles the very reverse of what the natural feelings of sinful flesh respond to. “My thoughts,” saith he, “are not as your thoughts, nor your ways as my ways.”

            The other point of horrification related to “the ministerial ordinances of the Lord’s house.” The pamphlet “irreverently” demonstrates “with ungodly levelling,” as he thinks, that the existing orders of priests, clergy, and ministers, popish, national, and dissenting, as distinguished from “the laity,” are the servants of anti-christ, and not of God. That their united establishments are Babylon, and Rome the mother of them all. He called these “sacred things of the Lord’s house,” and thought that what Paul says in Ephesians 4 about “apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors, and teachers,” was a plain and complete refutation of my assertions and reasonings; as if what Paul writes of these appertained to the ecclesiastics of Catholicism, Protestantism and dissent, who presumptuously assume those titles! I did not then know that posthumous Irvingism operating upon his necessities ill supplied by his flock, had turned his head. Such I afterwards learned to be the fact. Had I known it when I received his letter I should have felt no surprise. I could have accounted for his new-born zeal in babyism, and ministerial ordinances! What a trying thing is poverty. What will not some men do for a crust of bread! This surely is the reason why God has chosen the poor to be the heirs of his kingdom—the natural tendency of poverty to test principles. Jesus and his apostles were pre-eminently poor and needy men; but they braved all necessity, and adhered to the gospel of the kingdom. But all cannot do this, and Mr. Wood was among the number. After my return to this country I received a letter from Plymouth which drew aside the veil and exposed to view the ugly features of the case. The writer says, “Feeling a deep interest in the truth you so ably advocated in this place, I embrace the present opportunity of sending you some information in relation to its fortunes here. I grieve, however, to say that it is very discouraging in its especial relation to the person (Mr. Wood) who many of us thought would be its greatest advocate. The cause in this place is all but gone. Soon after the issue of your pamphlet, he went to Nottingham, Leeds, and adjacent places. On his return, I discovered that the sentiments he had entertained respecting some of the truths contained in your works were changed, though he had privately held the very same. About six months since he stood up in his place, and declared that his views were entirely altered respecting baptism, and that sprinkling was as much a baptism as immersion. In after lectures he said that infants were proper subjects for baptism; that there ought to be at the present, and that there is a fourfold ministry in the Church of Christ, namely, apostles, prophets, evangelists, and pastors. A few months since he denied any man’s claim to apostleship, though he now affirms that apostles ought ever to have been in the church. He is now for every Christian paying the tenth of his earnings into the treasury, and maintains that there ought to be a regular succession of priesthood as in the Jewish system, of which Christ should be the chief. The result of his lecturing is, that most of his congregation have left him, myself and a very few others remaining to give him a full and impartial hearing. After the defection of so many, he declared that he had been preaching errors, although while uttering them he said he was taught by the Spirit. He now intends to join the people at the Central Hall, and invited us to go with him, and hear for ourselves, which a few did. We found the performance conducted much after the Roman Catholic fashion, the prayers read being the English liturgy. On inquiring their views, we were introduced to Mr. Walker the “evangelist,” who commenced a course of private lectures to us, refusing to admit married females and all young persons without their husbands’ and parents’ consent. These private lectures were similar to Mr. Wood’s, but with some additions. They profess to be the church of the living God, and refuse all sectarian names as an abomination. They are in fact Irvingites. They decry Luther’s reformation exceedingly as being man’s work, and not God’s. They denounce the Bible as a cursed idol, because Dissent says it can read for itself; and in the next breath pronounce it a most Holy Book. They forbid men to interpret for themselves, and command them to receive the church’s dictum; and consider that the tolerance of fox-hunting parsons in the established church is no sufficient ground of separation from it. On the second Sunday after our chapel was closed, Mr. Wood and three others were admitted by the “angel-evangelist” to the Irvingite fellowship, in laying his hand on their heads, and reading a prayer. The Sunday after the children were sprinkled, and what they call “the Lord’s Supper” administered to them. This they are to receive three times a year, because the Jewish males went up to Jerusalem thrice annually to eat the Passover!! They contend that the sacrament has superseded the Passover, and baptism circumcision, and that therefore children are fit subjects to partake of both the ordinances. Yet they refused to admit us who were members of Mr. Wood’s to partake until we were admitted members with them; and meanwhile desired us to go to our parish church and take sacrament there. They desired us, however, to pay the tenth of our earnings into their treasury before we became members. But our intention is not to embrace error if we know it.

            “All their ministers, they say, are directly called of God. Mr. Wood is trying to get in as a minister, constantly writing manuscripts as specimens of grace. The apostle, who brings his prophet with him, is expected here soon, when it is augured that he will prophesy that Mr. Wood is called of God to the ministry in his house. Since his change of views, Mr. Wood has declared that Elpis Israel is blasphemy; and the angel evangelist has desired the members to burn or destroy their copies. But some of us here prize that work next to the Bible. We do not intend to yield our obedience to any thing unsupported by the word of God. Elpis Israel has been the means of enlightening many minds in this place; though on some topics we still wish for more light. We are now cast upon the world as sheep without a shepherd. But God has promised to be a guide to all that confide in his name. This is consolation.”

            In a postscript the writer says, “a copy of Elpis Israel belonging to a Central Hallist was raffled for at three pence a head; and the evangelist has declared in his public and private lectures that you are a serpent, quoting the testimony touching the Israelites being stung by serpents; so, he says, are you, a serpent of the latter days!”

            Really, the malediction of such a fellowship of foolishness and imbecility is quite a compliment to Elpis Israel and its author. But poor, unfortunate, Mr. Wood! I was evidently not the serpent that charmed him. The eyes that allured him to folly glared from a ministry fed and clothed by the tenths extracted from those it had deceived. His zeal against a strict construction of Christ’s word, is easily explained. To have adhered to it rigidly would have excluded him from the tithe-sustained ministry. He could not afford this; therefore he dipped for a sop, and betrayed the truth into the hands of the enemy.

            A notice of my visit to Liverpool brings me to the conclusion of the narrative of my journeyings in the service of the Gospel of the Kingdom. I visited that important city after being at Dundee. The effort to bring out the people, however, was but feeble there. Their energy had been overtaxed by their expenditure in support of President Campbell’s demonstration, so that they had only infirmity for “the glorious gospel of the blessed God,” which he contemns. They did what they felt like. A few handbills invited the people to their usual place of meeting. The attendance was very limited. Yet twenty-three copies of Elpis Israel were sold; and after my discourses were finished, Mr. Campbell’s friends, who had also become mine, regretted that a greater effort had not been made. They were kind and hospitable, and, I think, thoroughly dispossessed of the unclean spirits which go forth from the mouths of Bethany, Nottingham, and Auchtermuchty town. My visit to Holland, Prussia, Germany, Belgium, and France, will finish these notices of my runnings to and fro in the old world, whose present constitution being effete, is soon to pass away with a great noise, and in the fervent heat of the indignation and wrath of God. But enough, O reader, for the present; hereafter we may meet again.

* * *