GREENWICH, SEPTEMBER 14TH, 1898
GREENWICH, SEPTEMBER 14TH, 1898
Dr. van Someren.
My Dear Brother, — I have had your letter of July 28th, and take opportunity of being at the sea (Walton-on-the-Naze) for a few days to send you a few lines in answer to it. I am very glad to get anything like a true judgment of things on your side. I have seen Stewart who has arrived in England. I cannot but think that a time will come when they will have trouble in Melbourne. It seems to me that there is a good deal of arrogance and assumption there — and their publication of the (most unspiritual) dialogue to which you refer, which is only a covert attack on things that have been said in England, is a bad and ill-conditioned move. That kind of thing has always hitherto
†Diary of J.B.S. during his illness written by his daughter.
[p. 137] led to division in the long run. I can only say that if anyone reading it does not discern its dogmatic and assumptious tone, and the absence of unction, I am sorry for them. There would be no difficulty in pulling it to pieces, but it does not merit the labour, and I have a great repugnance to these attacks on the part of people ostensibly in fellowship. I regard it as being a grave breach of fellowship. I learn from Stewart that a tract depot has been started from Stawell and suppose that it will be employed for the issue of what is thought to be orthodox matter, and practically set aside the one at Melbourne. I do not think their literature will find much acceptance in this country. I am sorry to say that we have had another defection in the person of R. Edwards. Since Hull, he and Klein have been very uneasy, fretting against what they regarded as limitations and restrictions imposed on them by brethren. I do not know of anything in this way beyond a general feeling of disappointment in the use for the gospel of theatres and opera-houses, and the issuing of appeals, broadcast, to christians for fellowship and prayer in the work. But they cannot apparently bear this, and so Edwards has gone, and Klein is only detained, I fancy, by the influence of his wife’s relatives. I very much question if men of that stamp can afford to be apart from restraint. Edwards’s brother has gone, too, but I have not heard of anyone else being affected. I do not know whether they will have any influence on your side. In one sense it is sad and humiliating that we should not have had spiritual power to hold such, but I am persuaded that there is strong self-will at work in them. I do not know of any other disturbing element over here, but one can only count on the Lord to keep us. We are to have a meeting at Birkenhead in the beginning of October and I think it is just as well. We can there compare notes a bit. I am surprised that you should not have heard from [p. 138] Glenny. I had a letter a few days ago, but it is not by me at the moment. He was still working with Kirkup in W. Australia and I should think with some degree of encouragement. Bagshaw, I learn, is active in Sydney, and seems to be accepted. In answering your enquiries on the Weston notes I do it without having the notes by me. I think that in 1 Corinthians we get the fact of the one body, but it is brought in as a corrective of disorder in the local assembly. I do not think we have ‘the Head’ brought in as such, nor are taught the real import of the body as that in which Christ is set forth or expressed down here — for that, I think, you must go to Colossians or Ephesians, where saints are viewed as risen with Christ and quickened with Him, and the body knit together makes increase, the increase of God. As regards the point on Matthew, I think it is interesting that it was ordered that the birthright (with its rights) should be in Joseph (son of Jacob) while the genealogy is in Judah — it makes the two parts of the nation indispensable to each other — they must be joined in one stock. I do not feel much disposed to discuss with anyone the question of dying or death to sin. I am inclined to say that if objectors find what they hold on the subject satisfactory and effectual, by all means to hold to it. It is certain that J.N.D. opposed the thought of dying to sin as asceticism — on the other hand I think that a doctrinal death to sin is powerless — and that though we have been baptised to Christ’s death, we ourselves have to drink the bitter waters of Marah — and the doing so becomes to us the way of deliverance. I am afraid that the prospect of my coming over to Australia is remote. Though I have moved from the College I am detained at my post until next June — and I doubt if my courage would be equal to more than crossing the Atlantic. I doubt, too, if a visit from me in the present state of feeling would be advisable. However, the Lord must guide.
[p. 139] I cannot say much as to the last point in your letter, the passover lamb. I think that I can in a way enter into the thought of its being roast with fire — but am not so clear as to its not sodden with water. It may be what you say — but I am inclined to think that it forbids the idea in its eating of accommodation to man or to man’s taste — the lamb roast with fire has to be appreciated in that light, i.e., as exposed to the searching fire of God. I am glad to hear of improvement in the health of Mrs. van Someren and your boy, and am thankful to be able to give a good account of ourselves, which is something in a large family. My second boy is just about starting in life in the construction department of the Navy and we imagine that he will go from home to one of the dockyards. With our kind love in the Lord to Mrs. van Someren and yourself.
Believe me,
Your affectionate brother,
F. E. Raven.