thought. And here it is necessary to begin with a caution. The writers that have made this subject their special province are generally extremely untrustworthy. They are commonly passionately prejudiced against the Brethren. For the most part they make the writings of altogether unrepresentative men the basis of their attack, and even these men they have misrepresented.[1] For example, in the principal book of this class, Reid’s Plymouth Brethrenism Unveiled and Refuted, many quotations are taken from Mackintosh, Charles Stanley, and a Dr. Davis, of Aberdeen, for every one taken from Darby or Mr. Kelly. This is not the way to “refute” Plymouth Brethrenism. The real leaders of the Brethren would have called Mackintosh “a popular man,” with a strong touch of depreciation; and their verdict would have been just. Charles Stanley was, if possible, still farther from being a responsible theologian, and owes his reputation to his gifts as a mission preacher, which were very considerable.
Mackintosh wrote vaguely about the humanity of our Lord being a “heavenly humanity,” and exaggerated some of the dangerous tendencies to which reference has been made. Now Mackintosh was the last man to deal
- ↑ I feel bound to express a strong disapprobation of Plymouth Brethrenism Unveiled and Refuted. The title would lead us to expect an untrustworthy book, and the book certainly does not disappoint the expectation. I believe Dr. Reid’s intentions were honourable, but his animus made it impossible for him to distinguish between conclusive evidence and evidence nearly worthless. Perhaps the best gauge of his state of mind is to be found in the fact that he refers with commendatory epithets to Dr. James Carson’s book, which is much worse than his own, and which I forbear to characterise.
A book of a far higher type is Prebendary Teuton’s. Idonot think the author always fully apprehends the character of Brethrenism; but he is most honourably distinguished by his candid and conciliatory spirit.
