REPROACH AND PRIVILEGE
E.M.W. I thought we might speak together about the reproach which is on the outside publicly and then of the privilege which is on the inside. We would look at the passages, therefore, not simply as historic (although they happened and our hearts are affected through the Spirit by that) but, as seems essential, to appreciate the moral significance that they have for us. There is a link between the two passages in Mary of Magdala, and more than one link no doubt - probably with John too, although in the second passage he is not mentioned by name. None of us likes reproach, but it is a privilege to be in it as having affection for Christ - the reproach of the cross. There is just a handful of persons in the first passage, four women and John. Prior to this it seems that all had deserted Him, so we could look upon them as recovered persons; that is what we are. It is a wonderful privilege to share His reproach on the outside, taking a stand, not only by the name of Jesus in the confession of it but by the cross. Then if we look at the inside I think there is a certain answer: Jesus comes, they have the privilege of seeing Him. He discloses Himself to Mary, no doubt His representative, but then He comes to the disciples. It has been noticed before that it is the disciples He comes to, that is the followers; not the apostles but the disciples, and He comes where they are gathered. I thought therefore, as being brought into the sharing of His reproach on the outside, the Lord would bring us, on the inside, into the privilege of His presence as risen and ascended. As already remarked, we are to see the present moral significance of the passages, not simply their historic value.
C.M. The apostle Paul went so far in this that he can speak of boasting in the cross.
E.M.W. Yes, "far be it from me to boast save in the cross", Gal 6: 14. What is avoided in religious circles generally, and would be by all of us, is the scandal of the cross. As approaching it you hesitate because of the test that the Lord applies to us if we speak of matters like this. Nevertheless He would encourage us to do so and to get the gain of them. Mr Darby said that the cross is a symbol of honour in Christendom: therefore we need to get the force of it, it is a gibbet, a gibbet of shame; so that the world was crucified to Paul and he to the world, and I doubt not that he also proved, as he shows elsewhere, that he entered into privilege on the inside.
G.W.B. Whilst the Lord felt the reproach, as we learn from the Old Testament prophetic scriptures, would there be the difference, that He is the Second Man, but it is the remnant of the first man with us and his pride that feels the reproach so keenly?
E.M.W. Indeed, yes, we would need to note that difference. He felt the reproach. Elsewhere it says "the reproaches of them that reproach thee have fallen upon me", Ps 69: 9. Every delicate feeling of a perfect man was there, sin apart. With us, because of pride and the like, we abhor reproach, as you say; but the cross really is an exposure of that man that abhors reproach. In the death of Jesus that man was extinnguidhed in judgment; then in His burial he is put out of sight. I think something of that enters into Paul’s statement to the Galatians who might well have boasted in a religious position but who were avoiding the scandal of the cross. Have I your thought right?
G.W.B. Yes, so he got to boasting.
E.M.W. Exactly, he could have boasted in man’s strength, his intelligence or his education, but I think he would have apprehended not only the removal of that man but the exposure of the man before he was removed, so tha he would have a clear judgment of hi. It is not arbitrary, it is moral.
D.E.R. Nothing will bring us greater reproach through the religious man than the acceptance of the fact that the first order of man is completely out of court in God’s sight, and the cross is the removal of that man; the religious man hates that.
E.M.W. We have got to get hold of that because Christianity and the teaching of it has attached to that order of man, and that is exactly what Christendom is. We have to acknowledge we have had that, attaching some importance and even attaching the truth in its terms to the first man as though to build him up. It is a tremendous lesson which I feel I have not learnt, not fully at any rate, that that man has been exposed and extinguished. That I think will help us to take a stand by the cross of Jesus.
C.M. Paul can speak of the cross as the means by which all that was against us has been taken out of the way. He speaks in Colossians (see chap 2: 15) of the element of triumph in connection with it, does he not?
E.M.W. Yes, that is another aspect of it. This seems to be persons taking their stand. It says they stood; "And by the cross of Jesus stood his mother, and the sister of his mother, Mary the wife of Clopas, and Mary of Magdala". They took their stand there. I suppose it was simple affection for Christ that caused them to do that. The same thing obtains today, it is love for Christ that will enable us to stand by the cross.
C.M. I suppose that is what in some degree we begin our Christian experience with, but if we go on with it it is the way of preservation, is it not ?
E.M.W. Do you mean we come to value the cross initially?
C.M. I thought attachment to Christ would impress us in our early days. If only we are true to that we are preserved all the way through and we shall be found with this company.
E.M.W. Yes, although no doubt to arrive at this we are usually some way on in experience. Some reach it quickly. Malcolm Biggs once told me that he thought John Bunyan had put the cross in the wrong place, too far on, but as he got older he began to think that maybe he had put it in the right place. The real significance of it (not speaking of the immediate appreciation of what the cross and the work of Christ brings to the soul), its practical significance, seems to me to come later in Christian experience.
R.E.T. Is there skill in the way the apostle speaks in Galatians: "the world is crucified to me, and I to the world", chap 6: 14? Unless we come to the scandal of the cross we shall not be able to say "I to the world".
E.M.W. He puts it both ways, does he not? There you have a man, not in the initial appreciation of the benefit that is brought to him, but the way in which by experience he has arrived at it. You could hardly think of him there as in the simplicity of his initial appreciation of Christ. There had been His sacrifice for him and all that He bore for him, but what had entered into his experience was the reality of the meaning of the cross. So that, as you say, he puts it both ways: "the world is crucified to me, and I to the world". What association could a man like that have with the world?
G.W.B. Even then the Lord was superior to the reproach because of who He is and who He was. The verses read show that. Was it so with Paul too, in such measure as a believer can be, in the sense of what he is inwardly, as you were saying? Paul rises above the reproach, he is not crushed by it.
E.M.W. I think that is important. That Jesus was superior to it is evident. We all know that in this gospel He does everything Himself; and in this particular section referring to His death there is no reference to the Father or to the Spirit. He is sustaining everything Himself and is superior to everything; and that should greatly encourage us, so that if we think of the reproach of the cross we are not submerged by it but, as having His Spirit, are to be superior to it although feeling it publicly.
E.C,B. Is the moral basis for bearing the reproach the same as the moral basis for enjoying the place of privilege? I do not think we fully appreciate that the reproach of the Christ can only be sustained as we are on the same moral basis as in the place of privilege. I was thinking of what Mr Brown said earlier, that the first man cannot be reproached, he is in a world that matches him; but the first man feels the reproach that attaches to Christ in the saints in the position of testimony.
E.M.W. Yes, and seeking to be true would I suppose bring us into it. But the moral basis being the same would greatly help us. I thought therefore there was a certain balance between them, between the reproach outside and the privilege inside.
E.C.B. As you have been speaking, the impression I have is that we cannot rightly speak of esteeming the reproach of the Christ unless we go into the sphere of testimony in the quality in which we are in the place of privilege, otherwise there is no reproach rightly so called. Touching on what you referred to before, I think we have often thought we felt reproach because we were presenting aspects of the first man that were not acceptable to the world that is marked by the first man.
E.M.W. Hence in that passage it is "the reproach of the Christ", Heb 11: 26. There is a good deal of reproach attaching to us because of our own behaviour, or because, as you say, of something that is not appreciated among men in the world generally. But we need to understand what "the reproach of the Christ" is; and I thought therefore in this passage it is standing "by the cross of Jesus". If we weighed that over I think it would help us in relation to what you are saying.
E.C.B. I think it has been said in regard to this section that you have to be morally qualified to stand there. You do not become morally qualified by standing there, but you have to be morally qualified to stand there.
E.M.W. That is exactly what is in one's mind in saying that it is not so much in early history, in appreciation of what is brought to me through what Jesus has done, but that the truth having had its formative effect, I am morally qualified to stand there. They stood by; and yet it does not weaken the fact, it seems to me, that they would be regarded as recovered persons.
C.G.H. It would seem that there are two sources of reproach. There is the reproach connected with what we have here in John 19 where there has been the perfect expression of God in the Person of Christ and what He undertook on the cross and the character of the scandal of the cross to which you have referred, then there is also the reproach connected with behaviour which would relate to the bearing of the iniquity of the holy things - reproach from without because Christians have not been exponents of the truth.
E.M.W. Well, we have to accept that and, as you say, distinguish between them. Of course bearing the iniquity of the sanctuary is bearing it before God, carrying it in our spirits. The thought of bearing (another scripture says "bearing his reproach" Heb 13: 13) would confirm what was said, that persons standing there are morally qualified. So that we are not thinking in this passage of the reproach that we may have to bear because of our own misdemeanour and that of Christians generally, but the reproach that is proper to Christianity, "the reproach of the Christ".
C.H.S. Why is only one man mentioned, John the disciple whom He loved?
E.M.W. I think because the emphasis is on formed affection for Christ; that is where the emphasis would be. It was affection for Him that caused them to be here. As we have said, they were morally qualified for it. We need to note that distinction that it is not because they were there that they became qualified, but they were there because they were morally qualified.
A.K.T. When persons are morally qualified would the Holy Spirit link on with them? I was thinking of 1 Corinthians 2 (v 2); "I did not judge it well to know anything among you save Jesus Christ, and him crucified", then it goes on to speak of a demonstration of the Spirit and of power.
E.M.W. Yes, he was determined there not to know anything save Jesus Christ, that order of man; but "him crucified" would exclude every other order of man. As you say, that would make room for the Spirit, so that the first man is completely extinguished.
A.K.T. The Spirit would be free to link on with such persons.
E.M.W. Yes, and it is such persons, if I apprehend it rightly, that would know something of the privilege within. I think it works both ways; that, if we are to be here as standing by the cross, we must know something of the privilege. I think the experience works both ways. Would you think that right?
G.W.B. I think we have found that in our experience. The cross, in each case it is recorded but especially in John, is a full exposure of man, is it not? You follow from the beginning of the gospel who He is that was crucified; He is God, the Word become flesh.
E.M.W. That is a sobering consideration, who it was; this gospel emphasises that particularly. It is the simple personal name Jesus that is used here; "By the cross of Jesus stood his mother".
S.D.K.R. Would this bear in a practical way on speaking to souls we may meet or, in a more public way, in the open air preaching? Someone spoke about the reproach connected with behaviour. In view of all that has come in there may be a reticence to take a public stand.
E.M.W. As far as we are concerned we have much to be ashamed of, but there is nothing to be ashamed of in the gospel. We do not announce ourselves but Christ Jesus Lord. It is a matter of exercise in individuals who may have gift, but I would think it not only in order but very desirable for the gospel to be preached. We come to the distinction already made as to the kind of reproach that we might be bearing. We have to accept the one governmentally, that is our misdemeanour; the other is normal to Christians. We should not hesitate to preach the gospel because we feel ashamed of ourselves, if I can put it plainly.
E.C. While we may feel reproach keenly, because reproach is something which is felt especially by anybody who is sensitive to it, may we not enjoy privilege as we ought to?
E.M.W. I think, as Mr Burr has said, the more we appreciate what belongs to us, which is the privilege of the assembly and belongs to all, the more we shall have power to bear the reproach. E.C . What actually is that privilege? E.M.W . Our association with Christ as risen and ascended. Take for instance the immensity of truth contained in those words, "I ascend to my Father and your Father, and to my God and your God". Think of the strengthening effect that would have, and then for them to be aware of His presence. I have felt increasingly recently that, in the present confusion, we need to have the consciousness of His presence; as Mr Raven said, not only the faith of it but the consciousness of it. I think that would settle us in our souls, steady us, and it would help us to bear the reproach that is proper to Christianity and not simply hang our heads at the reproach that we have to bear because of misdemeanour in which we have been involved.
D.E.R. Mr Stoney frequently refers to the importance of being inside the veil in order to be rightly outside the camp. The privilege of being inside the veil helps us to be in the outside-the-camp place.
E.M.W. I think those are parallel thoughts, outside the camp, inside the veil. So we are not to be crushed and walk about as persons that are apologetic. As Mr Brown has indicated, we should be, as having the Spirit of Christ, superior as He was. The truth has not broken down; Christianity has not broken down. What has broken down is the man who is in ruin and is depraved in any case.
G.W.B. Peter preached very successfully fairly soon after this breakdown.
E.M.W. And without any apology. He does not say, I am very sorry, not long ago I broke down and denied the Lord and I am really very much ashamed of myself. As having a judgment of the man that had acted in that way he is free from him. And as you say, he can preach shortly afterwards.
E.C.B. When we speak of privilege (we use these conventional words) are we not referring to everything that we enjoy, as believers, in a scene before God where there are no moral questions outstanding. Therefore we are free to enjoy things in a perfect scene, and apprehend the way in which perfection or completeness attaches to us there. We can elaborate the detail, but is that broadly the basis?
E.M.W. I think it is, that there is a scene before God, of which Jesus is the centre, where there is no need and where moral questions do not exist. It is very precious to get hold of that, and again quoting beloved Mr Taylor, he says we need to learn in our minds to take the ground proper to us. If we did that I think we should get very much help in being superior on the outside.
R.E.T. Is that why it says in verse 26 "the disciple...whom he loved"? Is this relationship of love known between them?
E.M.W. Yes, as we have often been reminded, that would be because he was lovable. The triumph of love is to love what is unlovely, but with John I think, representatively, there is what is lovable. How the Lord Jesus must value persons who are formed and who are themselves lovable! It is not simply His love for them in the basic disposition of His mind and soul but that there is in them what is formed and lovable. That would seem to emphasise that this area is one of affection for Himself.
R.E.T. Linking it on with what Mr Brown said earlier in regard to the breakdown of man, it is the woman that is outstanding here, and again in your next scripture. Is it the subjective side of things that is showing itself?
E.M.W. Yes, life and love, and I think the woman represents that; and I wondered therefore if she becomes a link between the two. It has been pointed out before that there is a relationship in the mother and a relationship in the sister and a relationship in the wife; that is, each had somebody; but Mary of Magdala had nobody. Evidently she is a very fitting vessel to represent the assembly as having no relations here at all; she has no relationships here on earth.
E.C.M. Linked with the Lord in resurrection would really mean that she would never be deprived of Him again.
E.M.W. Quite so, she had to learn that. She was seeking Him - "They have taken away my Lord, and I know not where they have laid him". Would that there were more fervour with us in seeking Him, and that we were not satisfied until we found Him. Would that there were more of that earnestness with believers! I am certain they would not be disappointed; they would find the Lord and become enlightened as to the truth and the path of the will of God, and enlightened also as to a scene, outside of this broken one, where we are associated with the Lord Jesus eternally.
D.E.R. Moses' face shone through being in the presence of the glory. If we were more in the presence of the glory our faces would shine in that sense and that would bring a reproach. The Lord Himself is an example to us in this; He brought in the light of another world and that caused the rejection by this world.
E.M.W. He brought in the light of another world, and I suppose the affections of that world too, and laid the moral basis for the securing of it and our part with Him in it.
C.M. These to whom He comes are spoken of as disciples. Is what you are setting before us the line that disciples would be learning? If we are truly disciples we are really bound to come to this, are we not?
E.M.W. Oh, I think so. John seems largely to avoid anything official. He does not use the word 'apostle' for example, but he does speak of being sent by God, as though what he is concerned about is the living substance in the saints; if I might use such an expression, the thing itself rather than the knowledge of the letter of Scripture; the intelligent expression of it - "life in His name”. We speak together over the Scriptures and the good teaching but it is becoming an increasing concern to me how much I am vitally in the substance of what is presented in them; and that I think should be an exercise to all of us.
G.A.P. Do the disciples arrive at spiritual relationships of brethren consequent upon the Lord's death and resurrection and ascending up? He says "Go to my brethren" and Mary goes to the disciples. Is that something that develops, spiritual relationships understood. We understand natural relationships but spiritual relationships are something greater.
E.M.W. They are. Of course the Lord saying "my brethren" is how He views them. I suppose as Mary conveyed the message, that would become light to them. We are so much acquainted with these words of Jesus: "Go to my brethren and say to them, I ascend to my Father and your Father", but to them it would be divine light. I would to God that it were light to us in our souls rather than just knowledge in our minds.
C.G.H. It would be a concern that we should not merely be taking the ground that is proper to the light we have of the place that God has in mind for His people but that we should be formed to move into it in reality.
E.M.W. We need both of course. When we come together, if the Lord leaves us here tomorrow morning, then in the service of God we need power in the Holy Spirit to take the ground that is proper to us, not to think of ourselves as poor miserable sinners in a broken company and that everything has broken down. I do not doubt at all that the degree in which we are formed is the degree in which we shall really appreciate that and respond, but the Spirit would help us to be abstracted, I think.
C.G.H. Then growth comes into that too as to individual experience, does it not?
E.M.W. Oh yes, that would all enter into this.
A.K.T. What would you say about Mary weeping?
E.M.W. What comes out is her deep affection for Jesus. That of course would be evidenced in her weeping; then her preparedness to be associated with Him in death and burial. It has always struck me that she is rather in person a demonstration of what Paul teaches in Colossians 2 (v 12) - "buried with him". It says "she stooped down into the tomb"; where He was, she would be. If we can see the moral application of that it would help us. Then as she goes through this experience she comes into the knowledge and light of an association with Him as a risen and ascended Man. He says "Touch me not, for I have not yet ascended"; and I think she would understand from that that her link with Him now was in a different condition altogether.
R.E.T. When He says "Touch me not", does that mean that we face every exercise in the power of resurrection?
E.M.W. We face every exercise in the knowledge of Himself as risen and of our link with Him. Is that what you mean?
R.E.T. Yes, that. Christ's death has removed everything.
E.M.W. "Touch me not, for I have not yet ascended"; Mary would have resumed a relationship with Him which she had known before.
E.C.M. She could have had no link with Him in the condition in which he was in flesh and blood. Is not our real link with Him as He is now?
E.M.W. Yes, that is it.
H.H. I think Mr Taylor sen said that ascension is the true ground of Christianity. Resurrection is the place of power but ascension is the true ground of Christianity.
E.M.W. I think so. So looking at it broadly John 12 is like Colossians but this is more like Ephesians: "has raised us up together, and has made us sit down together in the heavenlies" (chap 2: 6); that is the ground that is proper to us in the fulness of Christianity. So, "Touch me not, for I have not yet ascended". Mary could never know Him again in the way in which she had known Him before; as Paul says, "if even we have known Christ according to flesh, yet now we know him thus n longer", 2 Cor 5: 16.
E.C.M. It is the same Jesus, the same Person, but in another condition. Is that where we are tested in the change of condition?
E.M.W. We need to lay hold of that, it is the same blessed Man. This Man who was speaking to her, this Man Jesus that came into the midst, was the same Person that was on the cross in a different condition.
S.D.K.R. Would you say a little more as to how we are formed? We all want to be formed. We may have the light of these things, and thank God we are able to speak about them; but we feel the lack of formation.
E.M.W. We are formed by keeping company constantly with the Spirit I think. That is perhaps almost too-simple an answer; but we need to be in closer relation with the Spirit, more simple in our relations with Him, more dependent, more real in our appeal to Him; because, after all, He is the One that forms us.
G.W.B. Jesus is the object, the Spirit the power for formation in us.
E.M.W. Yes, and the more we are with the Holy Spirit and our links close with Him, the more He presents to us the object, the Lord Jesus. "We all, looking on the glory of the Lord" (2 Cor 3: 18), that is the object, "are transformed according to the same image from glory to glory, even as by the Lord the Spirit". I have an impression that my own relations with the Lord and the Spirit, with the Father indeed too, are not nearly strong enough.
G.W.B. There is not much wrong with that expression 'faith in the Spirit'. It describes a need with us.
E.M.W. Yes, I have found the expression in Mr Taylor sen's ministry but I was not too sure whether he meant faith in the Spirit as an object. You said, Yes, Mr Burr?
E.C.B. Yes, I have noticed that expression. I suppose the question of formation can be expressed fairly simply in our seeking constantly to be true to the ground that we take. There will never be formation unless we know the ground that we are on. Once we have identified the ground that we have the privilege to take, formation comes about by our seeking constantly to be consistent with that ground, does it not? For this the Spirit is needed. Then the Spirit is needed to apprehend the ground in any case.
E.M.W. We must apprehend the ground first. In other words, to use a simple expression, what is objective must be understood first. We can never, for example, be formed in the affections proper to brethren if we have not the light that we are His brethren.
E.C.B. That is in Mr Taylor's ministry as well. If I could go back to what was said as to "Touch me not" and its bearing on what you are bringing before us, is the Lord not indicating to Mary that He is moving into a scene in which there is no reproach at all, and that that is the first thing for her to learn? The disciples begin with a message that relates them to that scene, then they come out like Him into the world in which there is reproach, sent as the Father sent Him. Is that right?
E.M.W. Yes; indeed. There are no tears in that world either.
E.C.B. Does it also help us that in Psalm 69, which is the great psalm about reproach, the paragraph that begins "Reproach hath broken my heart" ends with "I will praise the name of God with a song, and will magnify him with thanksgiving; and it shall please Jehovah more than an ox".
E.M.W. Yes, that is a good help to what we are considering because that psalm is very experimental. "Reproach hath broken my heart": prophetically that would be the Lord Himself, but no doubt the spirit of it would be known by the remnant and the spirit of it is to be known by us.
E.C.B. Yes, I wondered if the spirit of it was known by Mary of Magdala.
E.M.W. I think so. That is why I believe the Lord uses her, if we may put it simply, as a link between these two incidents.
E.C. In connection with the ground on which we are, is it essential to know the peace that the Lord would give us in order to know privilege? He says this twice to the disciples, the second time after He had shown them His hands and His side.
E.M.W. When He says "Peace be to you" it is not what we might call the initial thought of peace towards God but rather the conveying of the peace that presides in the Father's realm, in this realm referred to where there is no reproach. One finds it very testing but there it is; the truth is there, and if we could lay hold of it the Spirit would help us into the enjoyment of it.
E.C.M. Do you think too that, as we make room for the Spirit 's service, there would be a greater brightness in our testimony here? I was thinking of what Peter says: "If ye are reproached in the name of Christ, blessed are ye; for the Spirit of glory and the Spirit of God rests upon you", 1 Pet 4: 14. Do you think that would be reflected in some way testimonially?
E.M.W. I think so, so that we should not be submerged. As we said earlier in the reading, as having the Spirit of Jesus we should be superior to it; not unfeeling but superior to it, and therefore we should be brought along in triumph, not in despair. The testimony is to go through in persons who are triumphant.
E.C.M. So Paul speaks of "God, who always leads us in triumph", 2 Cor 2: 14.
H.H. It was said many years ago that our power with men is according to our at-homedness with God.
E.M.W. If we are going to be with men and with the brethren for God, we must be with God for them. I think that is vital.
C.M. So He says "Peace" to them prior to what He has to show them, and then He says "Peace" to them again in regard of sending them forth.
E.M.W. Yes. Do you not think that the consciousness of the peace that presides in the world where there is no reproach will enable us to have our part in the testimony where there is the reproach?
C.M. Yes, our peace would not be disturbed by how the testimony is received.
T.B. Would it be important to lay hold of the fact that we need the strengthening power of the Spirit to be here in testimony? I was thinking of the importance of representation as coming out from the immediate presence of the Lord's supper.
E.M.W. Quite so, and so it is the Spirit of the heavenly Man. It says, "And having said this, he breathed into them" (that is most intimate) "and says to them, Receive the Holy Spirit". It seems to me that that is characteristic. He was the heavenly One in whatever circumstances He was, and they are to be heavenly ones, are they not? All this would greatly encourage us, so that we should not be submerged by the conditions in which we find ourselves publicly.
E.C.B. What do you understand was involved in Moses esteeming the reproach of the Christ, because it is clearly in a sense an interpretation by the Spirit in the writer of the Hebrews as to something Moses did? Is it at the point where he identified himself with his brethren in the condition in which they were?
E.M.W. That is what I thought, with the people in the condition in which they were. It is not subsequent to the setting up of the tabernacle system; that is rather a picture of the universal glory, is it not?
E.C.B. In Hebrews 11 it says "when he had become great", and in Exodus 2 it says when he "was grown", that is at the same point in time. I wondered if it did not bear on what you have just been saying as to the reproach in the confused situation that exists, that is, the readiness to identify ourselves with our brethren and with His brethren in that confused situation; and the Lord identifies the reproach of the Christ, in Acts 9, with "me"? Is that right?
E.M.W. I think that is helpful. That should be an encouragement to our younger people. One would love to see a definite committal to the saints in the position of reproach in which they are; not the reproach in which they are because they have made such a mess of things responsibly but through identifying themselves with a rejected Christ.
G.W.B. The Spirit says particularly as to Moses in those circumstances in his negotiations with Pharaoh, "the man Moses was very great", Exod 11: 3. I thought it was in line with what we have been saying, that though you face and feel reproach you are superior to it; the Lord pre-eminently so.
E.M.W. I suppose Moses was morally great.
G.W.B. And the power of it was evidently felt by Pharaoh and all his.
E.M.W. I am sure that would be the effect with us if we took this course, there would be moral power. Mr Hatcher said, if we were more with God about we should have greater power with them; and when we speak of men we are also thinking of our brethren of course.
A.J.E. It says it came into his heart to visit his brethren, not exactly into his mind? Do we need to be more feeling about these things?
E.M.W. That applies to all of us I am sure. Definiteness in this would greatly help us.
ST ALBANS
30 March 1974
KEY TO INITIALS
E.C.B. E.C.Burr London; G.W.B. G.W.Brown Barnet; T.B. T.Broughton Richmond;
E.C. E.Croot London; A.J.E. A.J.Ellis Barnet; C.G.H. C.G.Hitchcock London;
H.H. H.Hatcher Kingston-upon-Thames; C.M. C.Middleton St..Albans;
E.C.M. E.C.Muggleton Croydon; G.A.P. G.A.Palmer London; D.E.R. D.E.Remmington St. Albans; S.D.K.R. Dr.S.D.K.Roberts Croydon; C.H.S. C.H.Stay St.Albans;
A.K.T. A.K.Turner Doncaster; R.E.T. R.E.Turner St.Albans; E.M.W. E.M.Walkinshaw Gillingham