"" 361 upon which, if it appears needful, I should act without scruple, I can only beg that you will use the utmost freedom. I feel the importance of accurate discrimination on the Calvinistic points. There is a great deal about the covenants of which I know nothing, and on that account I was so brief in my notice of them. Yours very affectionately, MY DEAR SIR, E. BICKERSTETH. February 1st. Many thanks for the kind labours you have bestowed on the "Covenants;" yet you have completely puzzled me. I gave several hours yesterday to the subject, but seemed only to get more bewildered. I do not know what to say on the subject. So many good men have for so long a time found the view which I took of the covenant of works useful to themselves and others; it is so embodied in catechisms, tracts, confessions, &c., (though I must say not in the Church of England,) that in attempting to undermine it, I seem to be pulling an old house about my ears. I admit that the Scriptures do not use the terms, but I think that something of the idea runs through them. Yet, on the other hand, I am very anxious to keep to the simplicity of Scripture, unencumbered, as much as may be, by mere theological terms. I have, therefore, in a great measure adopted your alterations, somewhat modifying them. Ever affectionately yours, E. BICKERSTETH. Norwich, February 8th, 1817. DEAR SIR, I wish I had you here. But in a few words-suppose a man comes and says, You ought not to preach the Gospel to sinners, for they are under the covenant of works, and therefore it is their duty to seek salvation by the covenant under which they are, they have no business with the Gospel, which was never designed for them as sinners, but only for the elect. You do not like this, and begin to reason with the man; but you grant him his principle, and you have then to prove that a man ought not to seek salvation by the covenant under which he is placed by divine authority, since another covenant is brought forward, proposing salvation in another way; and you have to show cause why he may and ought to seek salvation by the Gospel, rather than keep where he was, under the law. And since you cannot prove that any particular man is of the elect of God, you must prove, either that the covenant is altogether abrogated, or that it becomes so when the sinner acquires a certain portion of knowledge and conviction; you will then get into a difficulty about the Gospel being a relief only to sensible sinners, &c., and if you do not mind, and your adversary knows what he is about, you will get beaten, or, at least, severely drubbed. But if you take the system suggested to you, you hold the enemy at bay, and with a little exertion may give him enough of it. For if you can succeed in proving that since the fall it never was the duty of any man to seek his salvation by the law of works, but that all that was ever said on the subject to men proceeded on another system, the consequence follows, either that it is not man's duty to seek his salvation at all, or that he must seek it in one way. And that all that was ever said to men, before as well as since the coming of Christ, was spoken to men in the same general situation, as not under the law of works, but under a dispensation of grace, though formerly less plainly discovered than now. By this means you cut off all that excuse, that what was said to Israel was said to men under the law, i.e., the covenant of works, for on examination it proves to be no such thing. And thus you bring the whole of divine revelation, since Gen. iii., to bear on one point; and you leave your opponent to digest the inference at his leisure. Thus no inconsiderable advantage arises, I think, in clear thinking, and certainly in opposing gainsayers; and however unwilling you are to give up old consecrated expressions and reasoning, yet, push you into the field of battle and compel you to fight, and you will instantly act on the system of which you are now a little afraid; and indeed, because you have not another. Another advantage arises from it you face about and meet another set of objectors. These say, where is the evidence of a covenant of works? Were men ever asked whether they would come into the world on such conditions? &c. You see the spirit of the objection. You reply, is it not the necessary condition of created beings, to be bound to obey the Creator? Thus you, in fact, gain all you want, and need not be entangled by phraseology, which you would be perplexed to find authority for in Scripture. Yours very truly, J. K. CORRESPONDENCE WITH REV. E. BICKERSTETH. 363 February 27th, 1817. MY DEAR SIR, Many thanks for all your kindness in preparing the account of the Heretics. There must have been great difficulty in simplifying such a mass of heterogeneous and strange notions. I hope it may be useful in giving clear ideas on difficult subjects. We have a little altered the expressions, but not the sentiments. The chronology of Ezra, Nehemiah, and Esther is difficult; I left it out on this account. But if you think the additions on the other side are correct, and will be useful, I shall be glad to put them in. E. BICKERSTETH. March 4th, 1817. DEAR SIR, In p. 155, you will find a paper attached which you will think about; it relates to a difficult subject, and I thought your remarks would rather be taken too wholesale. If I had you here I would illustrate my meaning by examples, but merely to set you a thinking-Richard Baxter, John Owen, John Newton, and Dr. Gill, you do not doubt, were, in the best sense of the word, good men, taught of God; yet, in the points of their difference, (and they ALL differed from each other,) they could not all be taught of God. What common line, then, will include the whole? You cannot elect one and say he was taught, and the rest not. Here is a practical difficulty. Take some such view as I have stated, and the difficulty ceases. I should not have stated it thus in detail, had I not thought from your mode of writing, that you did not view it thus-all I ask is a review. book Now for my old acquaintances, the Heretics. As to authorities, I could give you plenty. I did not think of it, because in your it would hardly be looked for. Many things that I have collected on that subject, I have derived from very different sources. I have, as you perhaps know, been on a track of reading that made a thorough good heretic of more importance to me than a better man. Yours sincerely, MY DEAR SIR, J. K. Turvey, Bedfordshire, March 12th, 1817. Your letter, dated March 6th, with sheet containing the Heretics, &c., I have, through some unfortunate mistake, only just received. Many of the corrections I had myself made before I returned the sheet to the printer. As soon, however, as I received yours yesterday, I sent it off to Buckingham, telling the printer, if possible, to correct it by the one which I then sent, and to forward a proof to you. I am in hopes it may yet be in time. I have been preaching and speaking for the Society in Bedfordshire, with, I hope, some success. To-morrow I set off for Oxford and Hertfordshire, but proof sheets will follow me. I have to be at Bristol on the 23rd, at Plymouth on the 30th, and afterwards in Cornwall. It is rather an interruption to all my plans, but I find a constant happiness in being conformed to the will of God, wherever that will leads me. Otherwise, nothing is more contrary to my natural inclination than travelling about and public speaking. I am always, my dear Sir, MY DEAR SIR, Gratefully and affectionately yours, E. BICKERSTETH. Church Mission House, London, May 26th, 1817. I have at last the pleasure of sending you a dozen of the third edition of the "Scripture Help," which I hope you will do me the pleasure of accepting. 2000 copies were printed, and 1500 of them have been bespoken, so that I suppose another edition will soon be wanted, if anything should strike you as yet desirable to be altered. And now allow me again to express my grateful acknowledgments for all your kind labours to make it more worthy of the public attention. I know their success will be your greatest reward. I had, in my mind's eye, an idea of writing a tract on prayer, something in a similar form, and had made some progress in the thing, but doubt much whether I can gain time to proceed. What think you of the necessity or usefulness of such a work at this time? or of the books that would assist in such a thing? My wife joins me in affectionate remembrances. Believe me ever faithfully and affectionately yours, CHAPTER XX. 1817-1822. ET. 51-56. Correspondence with Rev. T. S. Crisp, on Baptism-Joseph John Gurney Joshua Tinson-Journey to Scotland on behalf of the Mission-Bickersteth's "Treatise on Prayer"-William Innes, of Edinburgh-Correspondence with Bickersteth, respecting his "Treatise on the Lord's Supper"-Letter from James Peggs, the Missionary —Proposal to form a Baptist Tract Society-John Foster's Lectures at Broadmead. In the course of the year 1817, there occurred an interesting correspondence on the subject of baptism, between Mr. Kinghorn and Rev. T. S. Crisp, then pastor of an Independent church at St. Ives, Huntingdonshire, now president of the Baptist College, Bristol. Mr. Crisp's views becoming decided on this subject, he was baptized by Mr. Kinghorn, at Norwich, in July, 1817. From the closing letters of that correspondence we make the following extracts. REVEREND SIR, is The application I am now about to make to you different from that which you received from me some time ago. My mind was then in a state of suspense and hesitation on the subject of baptism. That hesitation is now at an end, and convinced—as the result of my inquiries, which I hope have been conducted with a sincere desire to know the will of God, and a humble dependence on the aids of his Spirit-that immersion in adult years is the only Scriptural mode of baptism, I am desirous of taking that step, which, with such a conviction, it becomes my duty to adopt. I write, therefore, to ask whether it will be agreeable to you to administer to me the rite of Christian baptism; and if it be so, to inform me what time will be the most convenient to you. |