Finding it impossible to answer all the letters sent, in reference to the departure of many from the fellowship of saints gathered to the Lord, on account of the Ramsgate difficulties, some years ago — indeed, feeling it would be contrary to the Word of God to continue the strife (2 Tim. 2:2424And the servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient, (2 Timothy 2:24)), and yet loving many dear saints who have been misled in this matter — I feel led to write a plain statement of that principle which has been our guide and safety since the Lord gathered us to Himself.
In one word, it is the presence of the Lord, and the guidance of the Holy Spirit. The Lord says, “But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in Me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea.” He knew that offenses would come, for He says further, “Woe unto the world because of offenses! for it must needs be that offenses come; but woe to that man by whom the offense cometh.” Surely this is a searching word, and should lead us to judge ourselves, rather than one another. Let us think of the love of Christ to all His little ones, and the provision He has made when difficulties and offenses arise. “Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.” To whom do these words of Jesus apply? To the Pope? Or to what he calls the church? whatever that may be. Let the Lord explain what He means by “you.” He further says, “For where two or three are gathered together in [to] My name, there am I in the midst of them” (Matt. 18:2020For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them. (Matthew 18:20)). Does it not then follow, that in whatsoever place two or three are gathered together to His name, He is there in their midst as truly to faith, as once to sight?
This great truth, or principle, has been our safeguard, from the day the Holy Spirit again in these last days gathered believers to Christ.
Forty years ago the offense came. Not mere offense against a brother, but offense against Christ. Some were indifferent about this, and publicly refused to come into His holy presence and judge it. Two principles were made manifest. At that time the writer traveled much throughout England, in the gospel. In every assembly he knew, where the few gathered to Christ came together, as they ever had come, laying the whole matter before Him, they were led to purge themselves from this offense, and all conniving at it. In every gathering where leaders judged the matter, and sought to hush up the offense against Christ, as if it did not concern the saints everywhere, they went with the party who refused to judge it. This has continued to the present day, as is shown in the “Small-pox Allegory.”
But it is asked, What has this to do with the Ramsgate matter, or the decision of Park Street? It has everything to do with it. It is the very question at issue. What has Park Street done more than was ever done by those who, in reality, seek to honor the Lord present, when His few are gathered to His name?
Why should it be called a new test, when it is the very principle on which we have ever acted? Offense there was at Ramsgate. There were two companies professing to be gathered to Christ. Months and years passed, and they, at least Abbot’s Hill, desired others to take up the case. At last the Lord so permitted it, that one applied for fellowship at Park Street.
And thus Park Street was driven to consider the question as to which of the two companies at Ramsgate should be owned. Note, this was thus a question forced on this local assembly. They could not, in faithfulness to Christ, be indifferent. The local assembly at Park Street was called together, as usual in all such cases, the Lord being in their midst according to His word. And to settle the matter, the Lord so ordered it, that both companies came from Ramsgate, and stated their case fully.
Such a full gathering in His presence had never taken place before or since, where the facts were fully heard from both sides. And after the case had been fully heard in the presence of the Lord Jesus, that local assembly, or the saints gathered to the name of the Lord Jesus in Park Street, decided that one of those meetings at Ramsgate should be received and acknowledged; the other should not. Now, if the Lord had been visibly present, could any gathering, or individual believer honoring Him, refuse the decision of that assembly?
But it is said, there were those present who dissented in their minds. They did, and the Lord withheld them from dissenting audibly. It must not be presumed that all who are gathered with brethren, are truly and intelligently gathered to the Lord, as truly as if they saw Him. There were agitators there from other places, and they were heard fully, until all reasonable time was gone, and then the assembly pronounced its decision, and for five weeks no serious protest was raised.
Now, honestly, did those agitators know where they were, or ever know, really, what it was to be gathered to the Lord? Where are they at this moment? Surely this ought to open the eyes of the sincere, and such as, we trust, have long desired to own the Lord. Have not the chief dissentients gone to Bethesda?
It is asked, “Then do you believe every act of an assembly is infallible?” No, we do not pretend to any such thing. “Then, how would you act in a case where you thought there might be a mistake?” Such a case occurred some years ago. A man in fellowship at Y. removed to B. The saints at Y. thought, seriously, that the assembly at B. had made a mistake in putting out this man. The assembly at Y. wrote to a brother they much honored. That brother wisely replied, “You must accept the decision of the assembly at B., and look to the Lord to show them if they have made a mistake in this case.” Oh, that that dear brother had acted similarly in the Park Street decision! The Lord never did show the saints at B. that they had made a mistake. No, the mistake was in the saints at Y. not honoring the Lord present when the decision at B. was come to. If they had, they would have left the case in His blessed wise and faithful hands, and not have written some 200 miles for the help of man.
Oh, beloved brethren, is it not sad, that those who we hope desire to hold fast the many great and precious truths God has been pleased to restore to us, should fail in this one all-important fact, the only safeguard we have; to really own the Lord present, when the decision was solemnly arrived at in Park Street. If we disown Him there, we may disown Him everywhere. It is evident to us all, is it not? that the chief opposers never did know and own the Lord present, or they could not be where they are.
But, still further, it is said, “The Lord could not have led that assembly, and we do not believe the decision was of Him, and, therefore, refuse it.” The chief reason assigned is that one beloved brother came fully decided, nay, had his decision written down. And he was one that had great weight. Quite true. And is this a scriptural reason why you reject it? Then you must reject also the decision of Acts 15. Did not a brother beloved, and of great weight, go up fully decided on the question of law? Yea, did he not go up by revelation? (See Gal. 2:22And I went up by revelation, and communicated unto them that gospel which I preach among the Gentiles, but privately to them which were of reputation, lest by any means I should run, or had run, in vain. (Galatians 2:2)). Are we then to reject that which in one of these cases was declared to be of the Holy Spirit? In the other case, the brother had come to a judgment only for himself; the assembly were, in no way, bound by his judgment, nor did the assembly adopt the notice the brother had brought.
“But it is contrary to scripture for one gathering to judge another.” Is it contrary for one assembly to judge of the validity of a letter of commendation? If so, why give them? Is it not to misrepresent the case? Park Street did not judge another assembly, but met to judge which assembly they ought, in the fear of the Lord, to recognize?
But is not this the very thing you do — the very thing that offends and perplexes the Lord’s little ones? You judge an assembly. You judge, and never cease to judge, Park Street. Not only as assemblies, but even an individual will judge Park Street, and act as if he were far better able to judge the whole matter, than they were, with all the facts before them, and in the presence of the Holy Spirit to guide.
Could anything be more dishonoring to the Lord? If owning the Lord present, and recognizing every decision in one assembly by every other assembly; if this is anew test to you, we are very sorry. It should be everything to us. The Lord grant this fleshly strife may now cease. We love you as the children of God dearly. Do think of the dishonor to the Lord’s name Surely, instead of contention, we need to walk in lowly dependence upon Him, ever resting in the faithful guidance of the Holy Spirit.
If you say we really do own the Lord present with those gathered to His name, then why act in independency in judging what has been done in His presence? Does He not care for his saints? Have you not only brought sorrow even to your own souls, in thus, it may be, for the first time, disowning Him in the midst of His saints?
The Lord give you and give us light to cleave to Him. Why not, dear brethren, own your mistake? Will you contend forever? Jesus says, “I come quickly. Hold that fast which thou hast, that no man take thy crown.” If we give Him up, surely it would be to lose our crown.