Theology and Controversy

pity may be spared, or handed over to those on the other side. Years ago, when I preached a sermon upon Baptismal Regeneration, my venerable friend, Dr. Steane, said to me, "You have got into hot water." I replied, "No; I do not feel the water to be hot. The truth is far otherwise. I am cool enough; I am only the stoker, and other folks are in the hot water, which I am doing my best to make so hot that they will be glad to get out of it." We do not wish to fight; but if we do,

we hope that the pity will be needed by those with whom we contend. ¹ A hab's quenchless feud seemed mine," so Ishmael confessed in the quest for Moby Dick. Spurgeon clearly saw the white whale of destructive error tear the spiritual limbs from many a seeker and dare an assault on the integrity and rule of God himself. No area of Christian truth had been without its detractors and all revolt and rebellion seemed renewed in his lifetime. It was his thorough satisfaction with the living waters of revealed truth that made his feud with error quenchless indeed.

Apt and Ready for Convictional Controversy

Though Spurgeon's most intense concentration of mental energy and spiritual devotion was expressed in his commitment to preaching the gospel for the salvation of sinners, his lengthy and complex involvement in theological controversy was not far behind and was vitally connected to his first love of gospel preaching. Given the situation of truth unchallenged, Spurgeon could say, "To win a soul from going down into the pit is a more glorious achievement than to be crowned in the arena of theological controversy as Doctor

Sufficientissimus." ² And though one should not go around with his fist doubled up and with a theological revolver in the leg of his trousers, he must nevertheless "be prepared to fight, and always have your sword buckled on your thigh, but

wear a scabbard." ³ Sometimes, as he later admonished, the scabbard must be thrown away.

If men preached ever so powerfully with natural gifts and yet had no saving message what good was any pretended kind of evangelism or how would they ever "win a soul from going down into the pit?" Christ invested churches with a saving gospel message and commissioned them to preach it with no warrant to alter that message. Its ministers were ambassadors, not legislators. The only lawgiver and king is Christ and his mandate is in Scripture alone. The minister is a man under authority and has no right to compromise either message or practice by introducing ideas from his own brain or from another source of religious tradition. Every system, therefore, that altered the shape of the gospel or that questioned the utter veracity of Scripture as divinely revealed truth was an enemy to the souls of men, to the glory of God, and to Spurgeon.

One cannot be true, Spurgeon believed, unless one were willing to make controversy on every challenge to true religion. "When the gage of battle is thrown down," he told the Baptist Missionary Society, "I am not the man to

refuse to take it up." ⁴ The unsheathed sword gleamed and the scabbard posed no temptation when vital truth suffered assault. He was not willing to do this for any kind of trouble at all, however, and preferred peace and would seek a high degree of toleration within the clearly marked sphere of central gospel verities.

He wrote, "I had rather run a mile any day than quarrel, and that is saying a good

deal, for miles are long to legs which have the rheumatism." ⁵ Though W. Y. Fullerton judged that "Mr. Spurgeon was too earnest, too intent on the eternal meaning of things, too sure of his own standing to be a good

controversialist," ⁶ one must take seriously that Spurgeon purposefully named his monthly magazine, not The Trowel, but, The Sword and the Trowel. His

intent was to do battle. His earnestness, rather than weakening, intensified his qualifications. He was after something beyond himself, beyond the mere appearance of vanquishing a foe, and beyond the awe of men; he was after the glory of God in the defense of his truth. If this were not his intent, he chose very poor words for his preface to the first volume of the monthly magazine when he wrote, "Foes have felt the sword far more than they would care to confess, and friends have seen the work of the trowel on the walls of Zion to their joy and

rejoicing." ⁷ For his 1880 Almanack, Spurgeon wrote a piece bristling with a theological militancy indicative of deep-seated concerns. "When invasion threatened in olden times, they beat the drums and summoned all good citizens to the defence of their country." Only the feeble and cowardly held back. Hearths and homes are dear and "rouse the patriot's fighting spirit." No less should be expected when the war is spiritual and we "know that truth is assailed, [and] the glory of God is the object of attack." Using the weapons of the word and all-prayer, no enemy shall pass unchallenged. "Ritualism and Rationalism, a double enemy, have come in upon us," and not only fight from without but now infiltrate the churches. Sensationalism and prideful academics join forces to impugn the old fashioned gospel as stale. "Let us, therefore, set our faces like flints against all adulteration of the pure word, [and] all bedizenment of simple worship. If we give them an inch they will take an ell." Prefer the charge of bigotry than the reality of guilt before God for giving way to Popery and infidelity. "It is as much our duty, under God," Spurgeon acknowledged in a familiar and oft-repeated refrain, "to conserve the truth as to convert sinners." He reinforced the conviction with the stinging comment, "It is idle to talk about missions to this and that while the eternal truth is disregarded, [and] the essential doctrines are frittered away." Generosity cannot be set in opposition to that which is just and the circumference cannot expand if the center disintegrates. "The Lord make his

people more zealous for the faith once delivered to the saints." ⁸ In spite of what some resisted admitting and others viewed as regrettable, at least one American friend saw Spurgeon's courage in controversy as a compelling quality. Rejecting the picture of Spurgeon as the "goody goody sort of man," J. D. Fulton, a Brooklyn pastor, viewed Spurgeon as his "ally in proclaiming Christ as the Saviour of the lost, in fighting Romanism, in defending the Bible as essential to the life of liberty, in lifting the warning signal of danger concerning 'The Downgrade' and the so-called 'New Theology,' and in

defending at every cost what he thought truth." ⁹ Iain Murray made a virtually identical observation in his The Forgotten

Spurgeon. Noting the variety of ways in which Spurgeon's biography had been handled, Murray summarized, "Controversy and theological debate, it is said, were not Spurgeon's roles and in so far as he engaged in them he was out of his true calling." From such an opinion he entirely dissented. He concentrated on the controversy that arose early in Spurgeon's ministry over his clear proclamation of Calvinist doctrine in an unambiguously evangelistic context. Neither Arminian nor hyper-Calvinist quite saw the rationale for such unadorned boldness and freedom. Murray discussed also the controversy over the sermon on baptismal regeneration and evangelical Anglicans and, third, the Downgrade Controversy. He correctly pointed to controversial interaction, as highlighted in these three, as extremely important in Spurgeon's outlook on his own

stewardship of truth. ¹⁰ Spurgeon's controversies fall into three major types. Controversy at the first level came at the point of immediate conflict over scriptural teaching. This involved a clash of messages and a clash of confessions. Spurgeon had much to say in this area and spread his remarks over a wide field including persons, denominations, and movements. The second level of conflict emerged with those that held a confessional position ostensibly, but felt themselves justified in functioning in opposition to it. Sometimes this was because their theology was better than the confession, and led Spurgeon to admonish them to leave their church and place themselves at the behest of divine provision. Others ministered outside the parameters of, or in opposition to, their confessions because they believed less and worse that the confession proclaimed. For these he felt special alarm and was particularly disdainful of their hypocrisy. A third type of controversy focused on the theological differences that he had with other publications, including periodicals and books. For the most part this type involved a single interaction but on occasions resulted in prolonged, and sometimes bitter, insulting exchanges.

Controversies of the first sort always focused on conscientiously held theological divergence. Often these were short lived and established a standing relationship on confessional differences. At their best, when doctrinal differences were small, these brief battles brought mutual respect for faithfulness while contending for the truth in its purity. Shots across the bow on particular doctrinal points would punctuate Spurgeon's writings and preaching when he felt that reiteration of a theological idea in opposition to error was necessary.

When these differences concerned matters that did not attack the doctrines of Scripture, God, Christ, or salvation, Spurgeon sought ways in which to express his unity on these most central issues.

For example, Bishop Ryle was always good on experimental Christianity, the

importance and craft of preaching, and the central issues of the gospel though he functioned under a cloud, in Spurgeon's view, of Episcopacy. When he preached the gospel, Ryle was right; when he played the bishop, Ryle could expect Spurgeonic lampoons. His book Simplicity in Preaching "out-Ryles anything we have ever read for raciness and direct home-thrusting power." Spurgeon saw so much power and wisdom in it that he recommended that every student of preaching should memorize it. "Dr. Ryle," Spurgeon admitted, at least on this

point, "has not been spoiled even by being made a bishop!" ¹¹ Even beyond Ryle's gifts in preaching, Spurgeon would acknowledge, "While with all her faults he loves the Church of England still, he loves the souls of men much more, and most of all the gospel of their salvation." Ryle's experience of the gospel had made him great by its gentleness and earnest by its threats and promises. Spurgeon commended his intensity in appeal to sinners and denoted his evangelicalism even apart from a statement of the leading doctrines. "The practical claims of the gospel upon true believers are here most scripturally and lovingly enforced," Spurgeon wrote of Ryle's book Practical Religion, "and at the same time the self-deceived and unconcerned are called upon to see how

much they also need the atoning blood." ¹² Spurgeon could have been describing his own message. Concerning a cordial meeting of devotees of different denominations in Southampton on October ²⁷, 1881, after Spurgeon had preached, he reported, "It was a singular sight to see at these services men of all grades and creeds, and even more remarkable to observe with what kindliness they received the preacher of the Word." He observed softening candor towards long-despised truth, friendly discussion, and, more important, "spiritual communion both in conversation and prayer." In a statement of great ecumenical breadth, Spurgeon proclaimed, "The life of God in the souls of believers triumphs over even important difference of ceremonial and doctrine. In honestly dealing with each other in the spirit of love to Christ we shall, by the Holy Ghost's guidance, find the way to mutual edification and

enlightenment, and so to real unity." ¹³ Societies formed for the purpose of achieving unity will do less than "congresses, and conferences, and meetings" in which opportunity is given for genuine spiritual fellowship built on shared experience and commonly held truth. Such meetings, Spurgeon believed, would increase knowledge and common regard for those differing in less central matters. Pointing out differences among such brethren was not unnecessary and had its appropriate place, but the large field of genuine camaraderie in revealed truth far transcended the stubborn differences.

Controversies that involved major confessional differences in vital areas

evoked ongoing resistance on the part of Spurgeon and prompted his most exquisite displays of sarcasm and close analysis. Roman Catholicism and certain aspects of Anglicanism were major opponents in this type of conventional controversial engagement. Arminianism provided another chief position to which Spurgeon took explicit exception in its distinctive theological ideas. With many Arminians he managed warm and mutually respectful relationships, but he consistently resisted their defining peculiarities as erroneous while he commended them for their defense of biblical inspiration, their true zeal for souls, their urgency for conversion, and their proclamation of forgiveness on the basis of nothing less that the cross of Christ. Hyper-Calvinists he often scolded for their development of leading doctrines into an oppressive metaphysical system that produced serious omissions in their practice. Frequently, Spurgeon gave passing rhetorical references to the theological misperceptions behind those practical idiosyncrasies. In reviewing a work on the tabernacle by Robert Sears, Spurgeon called Sears "one of those thoroughly sound Suffolk Baptists, of the old school, of whom we should wish to see many more." Sears was a "staunch old Calvinist, firm in the faith, but without the gall which generally goes with

high doctrine." ¹⁴ For those, however, that were untrue to their public confessional commitments he reserved a peculiarly tragic outlook. These were "Ministers Sailing Under

False Colours." ¹⁵ Spurgeon knew ministers in the Reformed churches on the Continent who had endeavored to retain their "offices and their emoluments" while blaspheming the atonement and denying the deity of Christ. They deny the inspiration of Scripture "yet remain in churches whose professed basis is the

inspiration of the Bible." ¹⁶ Much of his scorn on this issue fell, not on heretical divergence from an orthodox confession, but on orthodox evangelicals that functioned under the authority of a sacramental ritual. Ministers well-entrenched in the Reformation doctrine of justification by faith put into the mouths of babes, in accordance with the required rites of the church, a profession of their faith in Christ and their union with the church when those ministers knew that no such thing existed. He found the same thing true with evangelical Anglicans, an issue to be developed below.

These latter violated conscience, while the former violated justice. Spurgeon argued strongly for the civil right of every person to hold whatever theology he felt correct and to use all his energies to propagate it. Repression of conscience in these matters is an opprobrious and disgraceful business. At the same time, however, for a man to maintain his office who has denied a confession he has

pledged to uphold has "all the elements of the lowest kind of knavery." To claim such as a legitimate spiritual liberty reeks of reverse oppression, violation of conscience, and persecution; Spurgeon indicated nothing but the sternest abhorrence for the "license which like a parasite feeds thereon." So obvious was the unreasonableness and absurdity of one's claiming this as his right, that Spurgeon barely had patience to expose it. "The whine concerning persecution is

effeminate cant," he responded. ¹⁷ "Treachery," Spurgeon boiled, "is never more treacherous than when it leads a man to stab at a doctrine which he has solemnly engaged to uphold, and for the maintenance of which he receives a livelihood."

18 One who has made such a change must offer a resignation from the body whose faith he can no longer maintain nor nourish.

The question arises as to whether a standard of doctrine should be required at all. Preaching on the Bible at Exeter Hall in March of 1855, Spurgeon had affirmed the centrality of the doctrines of grace as standards of theological truth that should be believed if one were to believe the Gospel, when he began considering the wording at the beginning of the Athanasian Creed. He halted from such a start as this—"Whoever should be saved, before all things it is necessary that he should hold the Catholic faith, which faith is this." Then Spurgeon stopped and said, "When I got so far, I should stop, because I should not know what to write." He professed to believe "the Catholic faith of the Bible, the whole Bible and nothing but the Bible." As far as making any other determination beyond that, Spurgeon asserted, "It is not for me to draw up

creeds. But I ask you to search the Scriptures, for this is the Word of Life." ¹⁹ He demurred at the ostentation of placing an ecumenical creed at the level of absolute authority on a par with Scripture, but he did not resist the necessity of making clear condensations of biblical truth as a confession of what one believed and as a guideline for loyal ministry. Only a race of triflers would agree to have a minister unbound by any set of standards. Should churches throw away all creeds, Spurgeon's argument would have no relevance, he admitted, "for where

there is no compact there can be no breach of it." ²⁰ This situation would have immediate and painful relevance seventeen years subsequent to the writing of this article, as it would be at the heart of the Downgrade Controversy. For the moment, however, Spurgeon only pointed out that churches do have creeds and doctrinal expectations. "Protest by all means against creeds and catechisms," Spurgeon urged the conscientious non-subscriber, "but if you sign them, or gain or preserve a position by appearing to uphold them, wonder not if your morality

be regarded as questionable." ²¹ If a minister is found to be inconsistent with the standards, what should be

done? Spurgeon had a succinct and reasonable approach to the problem:

They should have a patient hearing that they may have opportunity to explain, and if it be possible to

their consciences, may sincerely conform; but if the divergence be proven, they must with all the

courtesy consistent with decision be made to know that their resignation is expected, or their expulsion

must follow. The church which does not do this has only one course before it consistent with

righteousness; if it be convinced that the standards are in error and the preacher right, it ought at all

hazards to amend its standards, and if necessary to erase every letter of its creed, so as to form itself on

a model consistent with the public teaching which it elects, or with the latitude which it prefers.

However much of evil might come of it, such a course, would be unimpeachably consistent, so

consistent indeed that we fear few ordinary mortals will be able to pursue it; but the alternative of

maintaining a hollow compact, based on a lie, is as degrading to manliness as to Christianity. 22

Within this same category, Spurgeon placed those that he denominated "Advanced Thinkers." These lurked within all denominations during the latter half of the nineteenth century, according to Spurgeon, and every Christian in all denominations must be wary of them. Spurgeon had nothing but disdain for such puff-up creatures. He hated their arrogance, their dishonesty, and their destructiveness. Their arrogance made them look upon themselves as the cultured intellectuals of the day. "Let half a word of protest be uttered by a man who believes firmly in something, and holds by a defined doctrine, and the

thunders of liberality bellow forth against the bigot." ²³ Some have given an honest look at the supposed fresh air of nineteenth century intellectual superiority and have found it a mere revamping of "old, worn-out heresies" passed off as deep thinking. The avant-garde, nevertheless, look with arrogant pity on those that still adhere to benighted creeds of the past. They consider themselves manly and courageous to be willing to preach their creedless message in churches founded on the doctrines that they assail. Spurgeon did not find this a point of manliness; if they would put themselves out and refuse to eat the bread of the orthodox they might be entitled to a verdict of manly honesty, but their retention of privilege shows that they fight, "not with the broad sword

of honest men, but with the cloak and dagger of assassins." ²⁴ Spurgeon gave positive marks to James White who delivered a series of nine lectures that surely helped settle their listeners in the faith. White's presentation stood in contrast to the many Congregational churches where orthodoxy would be a novelty and emptiness a sparkling fascination. Spurgeon, relieving the sober tension with a playful representation, had heard recently of "Rev. Empty Brainbox" who had resigned his Independent church in Sleepyton. The newly atlarge minister reasoned that he had "outgrown the creed of the Congregational body, and felt the necessity of greater liberty than he could obtain among the Independents." Spurgeon was incredulous at the covetous grasp for more

freedom. "What on earth could he want?" The creed had long been meaningless for he knew Congregationalists who believed anything and "some who believe nothing." The limits of creed "would seem to have vanished into thin air." In truth, Mr. Empty Brainbox simply had nothing to say; the cupboard was bare.

"Doth the wild ass bray when he hath grass?" ²⁵ This aggressive assertion of the right of freedom is vicious and aims at total annihilation of Christian truth. True liberality, they contend, means that one should be sure of nothing. Opinions, not truths, we utter, and "therefore, cultivated ministers should be left free to trample on the most cherished beliefs, to insult conviction" and to teach anything as directed by their own cultured and enlightened thought. No more sacred duty for the enlightened minister may be conceived than that of sneering at the man of a creed. Spurgeon cynically observed the sense of duty exhibited in their imperative of entering the synagogue of confessional bigots under cover of adherence to outmoded doctrines in order to inveigh against them in the very midst of the darkened foes of enlightenment. These arrogant, dishonest men make it their duty to destroy the faith of others from the very pulpits consecrated to defend what they assail.

If anyone bothers to object to this intrusion and oust the intruder, the charges of illiberality begin to fly and the ejected infidel becomes the object of sympathy and defense by the secular press. "Our pity," Spurgeon protested, "is reserved to the honest people who have the pain and trouble of ejecting the disturber: with the ejected one, we have no sympathy; he had no business there, and, had he been a true man, he would not have desired to remain, nor would he even have

submitted to do so had he been solicited." ²⁶ Spurgeon objected to the charge from such broad-minded spirits that he and others of his confessional ilk were lacking in liberality. Their accusation would be true, Spurgeon admitted, if the matter between them was one of mere opinion.

But Spurgeon had invented none of his doctrine; he received it from the witness of the church to the truth as contained in the historic creeds which were but witnesses to the deposit of truth given in Scripture. While he did not consider himself a believer in "stereotyped phraseology" nor a promoter of "stagnant uniformity," he found removing the landmarks and throwing down the ramparts a sure method to produce doctrinal chaos. In short, he was a steward and a steward must be found faithful, not innovative or filled with liberality in the matter. A liberal spirit toward the matter of stewardship is nothing short of infidelity, even treason, to the master whose charge we keep. One may not negotiate with any of the truths given to us as a matter of trust; "it is rebellion, black as the sin of witchcraft, for a man to know the law, and talk of conceding

the point." ²⁷ To give a man poison under the guise of being liberal minded about chemistry or anatomy is still murder. "No fiction do we write," Spurgeon testified, "as we bear record of those we have known, who first forsook the good old paths of doctrine, then the ways of evangelic usefulness, and then the

enclosures of morality." ²⁸ Spurgeon had advice and an observation for the proponents of the "Advanced

Thought" that unshackled the intellect and gave such liberality of spirit:

Let our opponents cease, if they can, to sneer at Puritans whose learning and piety were incomparably

superior to their own; and, let them remember that the names, which have adorned the school of

orthodoxy, are illustrious enough to render scorn of their opinions, rather a mark of imbecility than of

intellect. To differ is one thing, but to despise is another. If they will not be right, at least, let them be

civil: if they prefer to be neither, let them not imagine that the whole world is gone after them. Their

forces are not so potent as they dream, the old faith is rooted deep in the minds of tens of thousands,

and it will renew its youth, when the present phase of error shall be only a memory, and barely that. 29

In the Preface to the 1871 Sword, contextualizing his confidence that the old faith is rooted deep in the minds of tens of thousands, Spurgeon summarized his concerns for the theological direction of the churches which caused him "alarm and much distress." He pointed to a "craving for novelty, a weariness of the once honored truth." Sickened by the churches' coquetting with Infidelity and toying with ritualism, Spurgeon confessed that he did know which of the two lovers to despise the more. "They are both arrant knaves and seducers, and those whose hearts are true to the Lord Jesus will utterly detest them." But such warnings, and such detestation, gained for the one that resisted their enchantment the epithets of "unenlightened, bigoted, and out of date." That did not bother Spurgeon, and he would not be slow to warn for he was convinced that there was nothing new in theology but that which was false, and even that was as old as the serpent himself. "Our sword will never rust for lack of enemies to smite; they multiply like the race which sprang of the dragon's teeth." Should the time come, and he believed it would soon, restating his optimism of the month before, when a recoil from advanced thought would ensue, and the faithful would be

"pestered with hypocrites as now we are with heresies." ³⁰ Two decades would prove that Spurgeon's confidence in how deeply rooted the old faith was in the churches was ill placed. The influence of the liberal spirits would increase in both content and spirit of toleration within his own Baptist denomination so that he, rather than they, would be severed, if not in fact ejected, from the fellowship of those whose heritage he defended. He would not pretend fellowship with those with whom he disagreed upon vital points of truth.

If they would not leave, or could not be dismissed, he would sever from them by

dismissing himself. When his act of personal dissociation from the unholy alliance replaced the act of disfellowshipping, the theological progressives, even though they could not stomach his theology, found his action insulting. He responded that "to separate ourselves from those who separate themselves from the truth of God is not alone our liberty, but our duty." Having done so, he wished to be left free. "Those who are so exceedingly liberal, large-hearted, and broad might be so good as to allow us to forego the charms of their society

without coming under the full violence of their wrath." ³¹ Spurgeon's response to the surprisingly relentless advance of "advanced thought" in his own denomination led Kruppa to observe, "It was Spurgeon's tragedy that he lived long enough to witness the comfortable intellectual assumptions of evangelicalism disrupted by the twin challenges of science and higher criticism. He saw his task as one of resistance rather than reconciliation,

and he devoted his last energies to a fruitless crusade against modernism." ³² While it is true that he devoted his last energies to this crusade, one can see clearly that he devoted not only his last energies but his early energies. And he would never have admitted that his fight was fruitless; he maintained his own witness and faithfulness unimpaired and that, combined with his confidence that truth would descend from the scaffold to live, was fruit enough for him.

The decision to fight, however, according to Kruppa, "has impaired his reputation with posterity, for the future belonged to his opponents. He failed to stem the tide against the future, and his life ended on a note of defeat," but nevertheless, a defeat without surrender. One could not have expected him to make any other decision or to care about his reputation with a posterity committed to heresy. He did not change his theological persuasion nor his posture toward theological modernists. Spurgeon knew, and so practiced, that constant vigilance was as much a necessity as a virtue in protecting the purity of the faith once for all delivered to the saints.

Not Easily Offended

The open profession of such determination against doctrinal unfaithfulness must not make one think that Spurgeon was unreasonable in his consideration of the dynamics of controversy. Spurgeon did not react negatively to a theological idea simply because others may have thought it unsound. He judged for himself. He did not shift into his controversial mode over matters that were light. Some departures he would ignore believing they would pass away from the deadness within them; some differences he bore in good spirit realizing that orthodox men had taken different views through the ages; some idiosyncrasies he tolerated well enough because of how encouraging and healthy to Christians the overall impact of one's ministry.

As much as he suffered at the hand of hyper-Calvinists, he much preferred them and their influence to the supposed liberal-mindedness of the liberals. In a discussion of Calvinism among the Baptists of England, Spurgeon indulged in an

entertaining aside contrasting the hyper-Calvinists with the modernists:

We believe that these brethren, whatever their failings may have been, have done good service in

keeping much precious truth stirring among the churches; and we should therefore rejoice to see them

renew their youth, with more loving hearts and candid minds. They have been far too much despised

and slighted. They ought not to be driven into isolation, but their alliance should be sought by their

Baptist brethren, and Christian intercourse would lead to mutual advantage. As far as we have had an

opportunity of judging, the bands of exclusiveness are not so strong as they once were, and a more

liberal spirit is asserting itself among them. It was not, however, to this ultra kind of Calvinism that

Mr. Dale referred, for it has never been maintained by us, though we would ten thousand times rather

embrace it in its most rigourous form, than fall into the anything-arianism of modern thought. Even the

stern spirit of our high doctrine friends we would prefer to that of the new theology. We used to think

that Hyper-Calvinists were sometimes rather acid, but since we have met with religious liberalism we

count all things sweet in comparison with the proud, contemptuous airs of large hearted bigots for

liberality. Some articles of a certain free-thinking Christian paper, in their supreme contempt for "the

simple gospel," exceed anything ever before manifested in that line; the art of sneering could no

further go; they display a scorn which would be less intolerable if it could be regarded as the fruit of

strong convictions. A strong, hard-shelled Calvinist holds his own tenaciously, because he believes

that there are truths in the world worth holding, but your "cultured thinker" abhors in his magnificent

soul all who will not make ducks and drakes of gospel doctrine after his own fashion. 33

John Gadsby, the son of William Gadsby, the doyen of hyper-Calvinism in the early nineteenth century, published a book of sermons, sermon fragments, and letters of his father. Spurgeon said, "Though shrinking from certain of his extreme opinions, we venerate Gadsby's memory, and wish that there were many like him." He said that he was interested in anything about Gadsby and particularly found charming and refreshing that "old-fashioned savoury talk, which was the staple of the discourse of our High-Calvinistic brethren of the past

generation." ³⁴ When Charles Waters Banks died in 1886, Spurgeon seemed melancholy at the idea of the passing of this generation of men. Banks, as much as his position and context would allow, sought to befriend Spurgeon when others criticized him and James Wells even questioned his conversion. "He loved the doctrines of grace," Spurgeon remarked about Banks, "but he did not like to smear them over with wormwood, as some of his comrades thought it wise to do," He went on to note that the "old-fashioned high Calvinists are passing away, and we are among those who miss them." They were not all that they should have been but "they were good men and true, and believed firmly what the Lord had taught them."

They were not quick to learn more, but were "faithful to the light received."

Better men have not taken their place. Cleverness and pretended liberality has replaced "positive and fixed belief." Spurgeon preferred "the narrowness of

those who have gone than the emptiness of those who ridicule them." ³⁵ He even sought to protect Wells from a second-hand misrepresentation passed on by Paxton Hood. He did not agree with Hood's estimation of Wells as a preacher and informed his readers that "some of the stories to the detriment of

these good men are mere distortions of fact." ³⁶ He knew that some of the stories were inaccurate when Hood heard them and others older than the men themselves. Spurgeon had had many an ageless anecdote applied to him also.

He was also surprised at the dismissive attitude Hood took toward William Huntington, the "coal-heaver," calling his ministry "spiritual ribaldry" and his book on answered prayer "as detestable as it is queer and curious." Spurgeon took exception to these judgments, somewhat amazed that a man of Hood's Christian experience and biblical knowledge would deprecate a Christian's testimony to the divine mercy and condescension in answering the prayers of a simple needy child. Spurgeon could write a larger book than Huntington's of like answers but had decided not to do so for they would not be believed and it "might be casting pearls before swine." The commonplace character of Huntington's requests and the corresponding answers seemed to offend "superfine critics" but Spurgeon believed the stories and had himself experienced the detailed providences to which Huntington testified. Huntington had been treated with harshness in the Baptist literature of the early nineteenth century as a notorious antinomian and scurrilous critic of any that dared question any of his opinions. Spurgeon showed his remarkable frankness, balance, and tender appreciation for the evidence of divine power and grace in the ministry of

Huntington:

We are not going to extol "the Bank of Faith" as altogether unexceptionable, for we greatly regret the

stern way in which its author sees the judgments of God falling on all who disagree with him; but even

in this we had rather a man should see too much than too little of the hand of God in terrible events. Of

course the times were rougher and more plain-spoken than ours, and many expressions are used by

Huntington which are not melodious to ears polite; but then he did not conceal the fact that he was a

coal-heaver, and he never aspired to a higher degree than S.S., a sinner saved. When it is remembered

that he knew the Bible by heart, and was accustomed to quote texts, and give chapter and verse many

times in a sermon; and that, too, of passages almost unknown to common readers—it will never do to

sneer at his preaching. One aged man told a friend of ours that he heard W. Huntington preach for two

full hours, and nobody in the place seemed to have noticed the lapse of time. Many of his people were

deeply experienced Christians, and it has been my privilege to have known their descendants, and to

have heard loving testimonies to the piety of their forefathers. Singular, eccentric, and faulty as

Huntington may have been, he might have met his critics in almost any field but that of science, and

have disdained to set them among the dogs of his flock. 37

In reviewing a book entitled Boston Monday Lectures by Joseph Cook, though some represented him as unsound in some areas, Spurgeon remarked, "So often are such attainments set in array against religion, that we were charmed in this

case to find them zealously engaged in behalf of the truth." ³⁸ Spurgeon felt the urge to shout when he saw the champion "smiting the Philistines hip and thigh."

Cook, a graduate of both Harvard (1865) and Andover (1868), was a prolific lecturer throughout the world and stood for orthodoxy against materialistic evolution, criticized transcendentalism, and questioned the orthodoxy of Theodore Parker. He did not stand in opposition to theistic evolution but was very careful in his language on the issue. Spurgeon evidently read Cook carefully and was willing to bend to his method of engagement because of the arena in which he chose to defend the faith. "Mr. Cook's lectures are answers to infidels," Spurgeon explained, "and the tendency of fair controversy is to concede too much, or to fashion definitions with such extreme care that the thing defined is missed by the original believer though fully present in the intent of the controversialist." Those ambiguities certainly were true of Cook, but "his heart and soul are with the orthodox, and he never differs essentially from Calvinistic teaching; indeed he goes farther than half the Calvinists of modern times."

Careful study of Cook's language would often lead Spurgeon from an initial shock to a pause and consideration with the result that he might consider the argument "awkwardly put" but accurate, "liable to misconstruction," but true.

Spurgeon assured his reader that he was as "anxious for the maintenance of sound doctrine as any man living," but he was unwilling to impute to a man serious departures from the faith, denounce and ostracize him for his willingness to defend evangelical truth in a way designed to engage the infidelity of the day.

He would never make him an offender for a word. "If anything could shake our faith in the grand old cause of evangelical doctrine," Spurgeon argued, "it would

be the bitterness and narrowness of certain of its upholders." Concerning Cook,

"we again express our confidence in the man and his communications." ³⁹ It is probable that he had read Cook in preparation for his appearance in London on a lecture tour of Europe. So positively impressed was Spurgeon that he had Cook in the Tabernacle three times during May 1881. All who heard him testified to Cook's orthodoxy. Spurgeon trusted those that recommended Cook and though not endorsing "every expression used by Mr. Cook," he found every reason to approve his "intense earnestness for the old-fashioned gospel" as well as "his ability to defend against philosophical skeptics." Spurgeon also confirmed Cook's adherence to that form of the gospel "which is known as thoroughly Calvinistic." ⁴⁰

Convinced Minds and Changed Lives

Ability in polemics, must, in a defense of Christian truth, be supported by earnestness. Controversy was a necessary evil in Spurgeon's view. He did not like to give any time publicizing errant and destructive views. The option, however, was to let them go unchallenged, and this was neither safe for the sheep nor consistent with the example of the apostles. His preferred method of refutation, however, was to point to certainty of knowledge gained from his own experience and the experience of Christians as verification of the biblical gospel, the deity of Christ, the reality of substitutionary atonement. An ounce of truth will remain when a pound of error seeps away.

Not only did he point to the life-saving power of the old gospel for common sinners, and often notorious sinners, but to the self-effacing God-centered labors of prominent Christian leaders. Among his most endeared fellow laborers were Hudson Taylor and George Muller. The character of both as well as the demonstrable soul-altering, life-saving results of their extensive toils for the glory of Christ held its own refutation of all the objections of skeptics. "Mr. Taylor," Spurgeon informed his readers, "is not a man of commanding presence or of striking modes of speech." Little about him would be impressive as a leader as he is "lame in gait, and little in stature." His spiritual manhood, however, manifested noble proportions; there is no self-assertion but only an unshakeable confidence in his call to carry the gospel to China. "He is hampered by no doubts as to the inspiration of the Scriptures, or the truth of Christianity, or the ultimate conquest of China for the Lord Jesus." He is too "conscious of consecration to the living God, and too certain of his presence and help to turn

aside to answer the useless quibbles of the hour." ⁴¹ Likewise, George Muller "believes God with great reality, and practically takes him at his word, and hence his peace is as a river." By faith Muller had great sense of purpose and moved beyond mere submission to the divine will into a sheer delight in every demonstration of divine glory and faithfulness through provision in the context of trial. Spurgeon himself responded, "O that we could all learn this lesson and put it into practice." Spurgeon reveled in the gracious, joyful exuberance about life and friendship and God that covered every word and action of Muller and commented energetically on his humility and beauty of character. Muller's preaching and life abounded in a simple testimony "to facts by which he has for himself proved the love and truth of God." The daily provision for ²,050 orphan children confirms every promise of Scripture for Muller; "with speculations he does not intermeddle, but the eternal verities he handles with practical, homely, realizing faith." Because of such evident

demonstrations that Scripture is true, "modern thought and the higher criticism never trouble this happy man." He lives far above the fray and soars aloft. Those more bound to earth and less conscious of the presence of heaven "are distracted and tormented by the discordant voices of error." Muller, however, "hears the voice of the great Father in heaven, and is deaf to all besides. In his old age, still hale and strong, he ministers the word with ceaseless diligence, journeying from

place to place as the Lord opens the doors and prepares his way." ⁴² Equally necessary as an accompaniment to the irrefutable life was the careful and extended expose of error. William Ritchie provided a model for controversial interaction in his Bible Truth and Broad Church Error. The term "broad" referred to the broad way that leads to destruction rather than the ecclesiological nomenclature of one part of the established church. The book should "make us blush for the age in which we live" Spurgeon wrote. But he welcomed this book as an antidote to the errors it deplored. First, the author established clearly the biblical truth on a number of doctrines, then exposed the deviations from each, and pointed out the source of the error, and the road for a return to health. "The principal subjects which are thus treated," Spurgeon summarized, "are the inspiration of the Scriptures, the incarnation, atonement, and justifying righteousness of Christ, the fatherhood of God, the duration of future punishment, the extent of redemption, and the restitution of all things."

Spurgeon advised all who had been "captivated with the aberrations of these writers to give ear to the instructions of this book, and give glory to the Lord their God before they cause darkness, and before their feet stumble upon the

dark mountains." The book was an "uplifted standard against a flood of error." ⁴³ That was a flood that would never nourish but only parch the barren ground.

Spurgeon's fight against that flood would never be satisfied until the day he died. Life and light are the unopposable answers to the absolute claims of death and darkness.

Some Minor but Revealing Skirmishes

The Rivulet

Spurgeon's participation in the Rivulet controversy early in his ministry came from his conviction that inculcating definite truth in a plain, forthright, and aggressive biblical manner was essential in Christian worship. Fullerton

surmised, "In retrospect it seems much hubbub about very little." ⁴⁴ Fullerton, however, surely must be wrong if the theological issues were quite what its main participants say they were. Since, however, it was over a book of poetry and both perceived denials and affirmations are quite open to dispute and other interpretations, the controversy did not amount to such a critical importance as later conflicts would. Given that, as to its representation of the earnest commitment of Spurgeon to clarity in the expression of biblical orthodoxy, his fairness in presentation, the brief and sometimes humorous interaction is paradigmatic.

One friendly commentator, J. Ewing Ritchie, gave his opinion on this supposed tempest in a teapot. In November 1855, Thomas T. Lynch published The Rivulet, a volume of religious poems for both private perusal and public worship. The Eclectic Review gave it favorable marks and The Morning Advertiser countered with its concerns that "the Rivulet was deeply tainted with deadly heresy." When ministers of his denomination came to Lynch's defense, The Morning Advertiser made those ministers the subjects of its censure. More publicity and controversy as well as confusion followed, and, in the words of Ritchie, "Reverend gentlemen and Christian laymen quarreled with all that bitterness which usually distinguishes the divine—pamphlets and letters were

plentiful as blackberries." ⁴⁵ The Congregational Union postponed their meeting on account of the strife thus generated. Ritchie summarized the results: "The publicans complained, and the Advertiser for a time directed its attention to more congenial subjects than those connected with theology. Moreover, the connection of John Campbell, Spurgeon's friend, with the British Banner was terminated, and Mr. Lynch "had a much speedier sale for his poems" than otherwise he would have had.

Externally, according to Ritchie, Lynch was a failure. He was "a small spare man" whose "bodily presence is contemptible" and whose voice was so weak that one could scarcely hear him. In addition, his appearance was "so homely that you would never think that in such a casket a soul of any greatness could be enshrined." He was, nevertheless, so Ritchie assured his readers, one of the few men in London worth hearing. ⁴⁶

G. Holden Pike gave a less sarcastically inclined description. When James Grant, editor of The Morning Advertiser, reviewed Hymns for Heart and Voice,

The Rivulet, he commended its literary and intellectual merits. ⁴⁷ Its verses were specimens of poetic celebration of the beauty of and beneficence of nature, or how certain aspects of nature show us something of nature's Creator. This content, however, hardly qualifies it as Christian poetry. "There is not, from beginning to end, one particle of vital religion or evangelical piety in it." The name of Jesus only occasionally enters the verses but "there is not one solitary recognition of His divinity, of His atoning sacrifice, or of His mediatorial office." Such vital doctrines as "the inherent depravity of man" and the necessary agency of the Holy Spirit in conversion and sanctification find no

voice; in short, the whole could easily have been written by a Deist. ⁴⁸ Grant's review, so both Ritchie and Pike observed, was severely reprimanded in the cultured press of the day and many ministers entered the fray on either side of the issue. The Eclectic, under a new editor, made its mark in the controversy by challenging Grant's presentation of theological concerns, which in turn provoked a response by Grant, and then a counter-comment by The Eclectic endorsed by fifteen non-conformist ministers. The Baptist Messenger now engaged the issue with a piece expressing regret that the fifteen had intervened especially since, "we greatly fear it betokens on their part an evident leaning towards a transcendental theology—the blighting influences of which

have proved most fatal to many once flourishing churches." ⁴⁹ Grant himself again pressed the issue home in a most practical manner to these protesters by quoting a number of hymns and asking which of them would dare to line-out such non-descript religiosities in his pulpit. John Campbell analyzed the poetry and sent a series of open letters through his paper, The British Banner, to professors and principals of Baptist and Independent colleges in England pointing out how these presentations of supposedly Christian truth had no more distinctive Christian theology than the hymns used by Unitarians.

As some of the wrath began to subside, Spurgeon himself wrote a review, "Mine Opinion," that criticized mainly the murkiness of the views of truth hidden within the poetry. In The Christian Cabinet for May ²³, 1856, Spurgeon, calling the controversy a "fierce affray" and aligning himself wholly "with the men who have censured the theology of the writer of the hymns," spoofed the book's mystical spirituality by recommending it for possible suitable venues. "If I should ever be on amicable terms with the chief of the Ojibewas," Spurgeon mused, "I might suggest several verses from Mr. Lynch as a portion of a liturgy to be used on the next occasion when he bows before the Great Spirit of the

West Wind." Spurgeon called on the Delawares, Mohawks, Choctaws, Chickasaws, Blackfeet, Pawnees, Shawnees, and Cherokees (showing an impressive display of knowledge of native Americans, with whom he had sincere sympathy) to find in Lynch's collection their "primitive faith most

sweetly rehearsed." ⁵⁰ Like others he found no way to recommend its contents for Christian worship. If there had been no controversy over the book, none should have felt compelled to join sides and either approve the whole or censure the whole, for it clearly was written for a select group who are free to enjoy it without the opprobrium of others. The orthodox that came to his defense, in Spurgeon's opinion, did so more in sympathy "with the man censured than with

the man singing," ⁵¹ Should such sentiments pass as sufficient for Christian affirmation, then the battle is the Lord's, and "We shall soon have to handle truth not with kid gloves, but with gauntlets—the gauntlets of holy courage and

integrity." ⁵² Lynch agreed but indicated that Spurgeon was too young "in the experience of

the world's sorrows and strifes to know what the old faith really is." ⁵³ Spurgeon knew precisely what the old faith was and soon would know enough of the world's sorrows and strifes. In 1872, after sixteen years advancement in the world's sorrows and strifes, Spurgeon reviewed a publication by Lynch after his death. "Too much noise was made concerning this author while alive," Spurgeon clearly recalled. "He became notorious by accident, and was forced by opposition into a prominence which neither his merits nor his demerits deserved." Perhaps the memory of this first venture into public controversy was a bit stinging still, and Spurgeon confessed that he did not have enough patience to read through the volume but what he had read had "just enough 'tincture of

error' in it to give it an ill odour." ⁵⁴ Lynch's staying power proved amazing to Spurgeon, for in 1885 a series of Thursday evening lectures by Lynch was published. Spurgeon could ask, "Who remembers the great splash called 'The Rivulet Controversy?'" Few earned honor and most showed weakness in that controversy, according to Spurgeon, for Lynch was lynched by Dr. Campbell and he in turn kicked out very vigorously. The colors of the advanced school presently made Lynch's advanced views seem altogether pale. "He wrote some real poetry as well as some heterodox couplets; and we doubt not that he held much precious truth, though in solution with his own imaginings." Now at this distance, Spurgeon found him interesting, a man of wide reading, and one that must have been a lovable person. He did not wonder that friends that might not have agreed with his eccentricities nevertheless took his part in the controversy. ⁵⁵

Joseph Parker

Charles Spurgeon marked Joseph Parker's recent coming to London by reviewing a book of his sermons. Perusing The City Temple: Sermons preached in the Poultry Chapel, London 1869-70 gave opportunity for Spurgeon to remark, "Although we are far from endorsing all Dr. Parker's doctrinal teaching, we hail his advent to the City as a great gain to the Evangelical church at large, and to Dissent in particular." When Parker sets his heart upon preaching gospel truth, Spurgeon called his words "weighty and powerful." Parker's so-called parables and addresses had a different flavor and the reader would not be poorer without them. Spurgeon wished he had filled the volume with discourses as valuable as those on the Holy Spirit. "Every man has his way," Spurgeon conceded, "and the Poultry preacher has a very distinct one of his own." Even with this distraction, Spurgeon saw "no pandering to the latitudinarianism which so largely leavens the Congregational body." Spurgeon hoped that Parker's "intense energy and remarkable powers of eloquence" would influence others under the anointing of the Spirit to set up a bulwark of defense of the cross of

Christ among the Congregationalists. ⁵⁶ Spurgeon regularly reviewed Parker's new works when they appeared, often finding something to commend, and almost as often issued a caveat concerning his theology. He reviewed Parker's Ad Clerum with the recommendation, "Young men must be great dolts if they can read his advice and derive no profit from it." He added, "Our grief that Dr. Parker should have gone aside to certain modern heresies is intense, and we pray that he may soon see his way out of them." He made sure the reader knew that "none of that mischief" marred the

volume before him. ⁵⁷ Parker's restatement of The Priesthood of Christ had nothing in it that Spurgeon could make himself commend. He hoped that some in Parker's own denomination would have enough courage to expose the "mischievous tendencies of this book." The chapter on "Ultimate Aspects of Christ's Priesthood" Spurgeon gave the ultimate denunciation in calling it "the most evil piece of writing it was ever our misery to read." Parker wrote in such a way as to avoid being blamed specifically for positions explored in the book, all of which Spurgeon pronounced as "unutterably bad." Even an honest infidel should dislike Parker's slipperiness and lack of resolve to shoulder the burden of his doctrinal proposals. "The underlying idea of preaching one thing when you mean another, disguise it how you please, and justify it how you may," Spurgeon fired,

"is simply detestable." ⁵⁸ In December 1879 in a purely spontaneous gesture of brotherly unity in a

singular cause, Parker urged his congregation to give an offering for the Stockwell Orphanage. Spurgeon remarked, "Our intercourse with him has been but slender, hence the utter spontaneousness of his kindly deed was the more striking and refreshing to our heart." Parker sent a letter include a check for £20 explaining how it came about and included a very careful sentence of restricted encouragement to Spurgeon, "Use it for the boys or girls just as you like, and always remember that the City Temple is open when you care to occupy it in the

interests of your orphanage." ⁵⁹ On February ¹⁵, 1883, Spurgeon preached, at the invitation of Parker, at the City Temple. "Never was a reception more hearty than that accorded to us by Dr. Parker," Spurgeon exclaimed, "who has on many other occasion displayed a kindness towards us for which we are at a loss to account, except by the

largeness of his own heart." ⁶⁰ Parker's treatment of the book of Acts brought Spurgeon to say that Parker is "a man of genius, and whenever he speaks he has something to say, and says it in his own striking manner." Parker always was original, his thoughts were his own and the jewels he spread along the way were

"from his own caskets and not others." ⁶¹ Spurgeon clearly found Parker intriguing and he had an irresistible attraction to Parker's native genius. Always original, Parker could not but entertain even if one must always be on guard against being led astray. Spurgeon had to fence each compliment with a caveat, but was far from dismissing Parker as unworthy of attention. His sermons on Genesis were "bright and original, and altogether Parkerine." He was startling as well as edifying and practical even if many passages needed to be "interpreted into the commoner forms of thought." His comments would not quite be to the mind of the readers of Gill and Henry, but to Lange and other moderns he was second to none. Parker did things his own way and filled up the thoughtful reader with an abundance of stimulating manners of expression, and "whether you endorse it or not, you are struck with the singular

ability and special originality of the preacher." ⁶² Certainly Spurgeon's ambivalence toward Parker through the years could have soured Parker's disposition. Parker returned the ambivalence, however, and fluctuated between the polarities of great admiration and condescending snobbishness. It seems that resentment was gradually building and would press itself out during Spurgeon's most vulnerable time.

One of the harshest and most unfair, as well as irrelevant, caricatures of Spurgeon and his position came from Parker when the Downgrade Controversy provided opportunity to pounce on Spurgeon's adamantine stance for doctrinal orthodoxy. He wrapped an insult around a compliment, but gave a good

summary of his rocky relationship with Spurgeon:

When people ask me what I think of Spurgeon, I always ask which Spurgeon—the head or the heart—

the Spurgeon of the Tabernacle or the Spurgeon of the Orphanage? The kind of Calvinism which the

one occasionally represents I simply hate, as I hate selfishness and blasphemy. It is that leering,

slavering, sly-winking Calvinism that says, "Bless the Lord we are all right, booked straight through to

heaven first-class"... But when I turn to the orphanage all is changed. All is beauty. All is love … 63

Spurgeon on Science

A Christian's ambivalence toward science is rooted in the proneness of many scientists to use their success in mastering the scientific method of research, and the many advances in medicine, technology, mechanics, and numerous other areas to justify their assumption of authority as metaphysicians. Spurgeon observed this tendency; while, therefore, he nurtured a healthy respect for science and scientists, his acceptance of their philosophical ontology was far from impressive. "The most absurd theories will have their admirers," Spurgeon noted, "if they come from men of great scientific attainments." Their actual discoveries will fuel admiration for their speculation. The dynamic in the scientific world, Spurgeon noticed is the same as in the world of finance. Just as thrift and sound investment policy leads to real wealth and then fuels "ruinous speculation," so "real scientific knowledge often leads to more than ordinary folly." The ones to whom we should be able to look for "real acquisitions and clear reasonings in natural science are the first to overleap its boundaries and to

substitute their own reveries for established facts." ⁶⁴ They may reason themselves into the descendants of "apes, lobsters, and material molecules," but they have no warrant to do so for others. Charles Elam, an M.D., in Winds of Doctrine reasoned that if the prevailing evolutionary thought afforded the only plausible "solution of the various problems of ontology, then it follows naturally and of necessity that matter is all-sufficient, and that man is an automaton without spirit or spontaneity." Were it so, immortality is a dream, volition and responsibility mere delusions, virtue, vice, right, and wrong merely words without meaning, and "education, government, rewards, and punishments are illogical and mischievous absurdities." Spurgeon appreciated Elam's scientific refutation of the errors involved in evolutionary metaphysics but was more thankful that "our own common sense upon these

subjects still remains." ⁶⁵ Spurgeon found himself utterly opposed to the flood of evolutionary literature following the publication of Darwin's The Origin of Species. The theory in Spurgeon's view was atheistic, illogical, and those who believed and defended it were gullible. At times, however, he indicated openness to the question of the age of the earth and at others he welcomed refutations of a supposed ancient origin of humanity. His response to a book entitled Echoes From Distant Footfalls; or the Origin and unity of the Human Race included the concession, "Nine very sensible lectures upon the antiquities of our race, dealing most wisely with the supposed geological proofs of its extremely remote origin. Here we have much learning, and an equal measure of piety. The little book will be

useful." ⁶⁶ In reviewing a book entitled Darwinism and Design; or, Creation by Evolution by George St. Clair. Spurgeon contended that to argue for design from Darwinism was irrational. "If greater beings are evolved from less, the power must be in them or given to them; and if in them we have a chain of effects producing causes more powerful than themselves; we cannot accept, therefore, the apology here made for Darwinism in reference to design." The very places, Spurgeon contended, where the greatest strength of argument and evidence was needed were the weakest and most absent of demonstration. Critical differences call for compelling evidence. How something moves from inorganic to organic, from vegetative to instinctual, from instinctual to rational has no demonstration in St. Clair's evidence; he "fails to show the transition from one to the other, and to produce examples in which that process is still going on." We know seeds become plants, and boys become men, and eggs become chickens; we see it regularly displayed all around us and from the presence of these phenomena we learn to explain them and make scientific observations about them. Nothing about the critical leaps in evolution has ever been observed, and therefore, is incapable of description. The attempt to affirm design in Darwinism

demonstrates its absurdity. ⁶⁷ To theories that seek to discover six periods of millions of years in the geological record as indicated by the six days of Genesis, Spurgeon objected that the intent of the biblical record was not to teach geology. "This supposition is absurd," Spurgeon contended, "and has so far failed that it may be safely affirmed that the theory of six definite periods could not have been suggested by the facts themselves." He also dismissed any attempts to allegorize "what is narrated as literally true" in favor of the most recent scientific assertions, as calculated "to weaken our faith at the commencement of our Bibles in all that is to follow." Men try various procedures to steady the ark of God, "but it needs

not their help." ⁶⁸ He dealt with another attempt to lengthen the days of creation into "six long divisions of time." Spurgeon acknowledged some of the reasons brought forth by geology for lengthening the days and at times even making them overlap. The value of this study he saw as preventing "others from wasting their energies in the same direction." The institution of a literal Sabbath in the moral law based on the other six days of labor "compels us, against all criticism and reasoning, to conclude that the six days were literal as well as the seventh."

If the seventh is a literal day, then it is not a day in the same sense that the other

six are days and would constitute no reason for its observance as such. ⁶⁹ Scientific theories passed away quickly from one generation to the next. "The

march of science, falsely so called, through the world may be traced by exploded fallacies and abandoned theories." Continual wreckings of false hypotheses have scattered debris and left in ruins the once proud outposts of scientific thinkers from generation to generation. "As the quacks which ruled the world of medicine in one age are the scorn of the next, so has it been, and so will it be, with your atheistical savans and pretenders to science." The vaunted facts derived from naturalistic assumptions that are supposed to drive the believer from the words that God has penned, are like bubbles to be burst when pricked by the sharp edges of honest investigation. More are being blown, however, and "we are expected to believe in whatever comes, and wait with open mouth to see what comes next." Science is often just an excuse to hide, or justify, unbelief. "Show us a man of science worthy of the name, and then we will not follow him if he dares to oppose revealed truth." But those that would do their work with open minds, not as a cloak for destruction of faith, but, like Newton, "reverent toward the Scriptures," and they will be followed not only by their own

generation but by those of the future. ⁷⁰ Though he was hostile to Darwininan theory as a system, he did not approve of a method of argument that merely insulted the opposition. A book by Robert Payterson entitled The Errors of Evolution did not make his list of desirable books. "This book cannot be accepted as a contribution to our sacred literature," he wrote; the approach was disrespectful. "The weapons of our warfare would indeed be carnal if we lent ourselves to offensive personalities in contending for the faith." He objected to the coarseness of Payterson's presentation citing in particular some chapter titles such as "On Geological Evolution—'Why did not

Moses make a fool of himself like the Chinese, Hindoos, and Evolutionists?'" ⁷¹ Spurgeon had his own way of ridiculing the ridiculous and casting sarcasm on some theological and cultural icons, but he did not warm to mere declamation.

He was willing, moreover, to concede a measure of autonomy to science and then to work to maintain biblical truth in its context. A striking example of this is found in his sermon on Christ as the "Destroyer of Death." "Geology tells us that there was death among the various forms of life from the first ages of the globe's history, even when as yet the world was not fitted up as the dwelling of man."

Spurgeon could accept this and still regard death as the result of sin. Acceptance of the idea that animal death depended on the entrance of sin meant that "those deaths before Adam [were] the antecedent consequences of a sin which was then uncommitted." He justified this by establishing an analogous relation between salvation before propitiation and death before the commission of sin. "If by the merits of Jesus there was salvation before he had offered his atoning sacrifice, I

do not find it hard to conceive that the foreseen demerits of sin may have cast the

shadow of death over the ages which preceded man's transgressions." ⁷² While Spurgeon severely doubted, and at times scoffed, at the conclusions of some scientists derived from speculative hypotheses, he considered science the friend of divine revelation. "For our own part," he affirmed, "we hail the light that streams upward from the dark places of the earth." He welcomed archaeology, geology, and physical geography as "the very sciences that God has ordained to be his witnesses, to frustrate the tokens of liars, to make diviners

mad, and to confirm the word of his servants the prophets." ⁷³ "We have no fear," he commented, "for the result of the conflict between science and religion: the God of Nature is the God of the Bible, and when we read both aright we shall

not see conflict, but deep unity and harmony." ⁷⁴ He admitted a review into The Sword and the Trowel, probably written by another, but approved at least in part by him, in which this summary is stated: "The Darwin theory of evolution, as it is commonly called, does not appear to him [that is, the author of The Day-Dawn of the Past ] subsversive of the inspired narrative of Genesis. Only he stipulates that, if satisfactorily demonstrated, it must be accepted as a discovery of the way that God took to work out his own purposes, and not as an alternative method of accounting for things that are, without the intervention of a Creator, by whose will they were made and by

whose will they consist." ⁷⁵ He does not fully approve of that slight capitulation to Darwinism, but he seeks to disarm the concession in a rather mild way by pointing out that Darwin took an existing evolutionary theory and added the idea of "natural selection" as its modus operandi. That in itself indicates that evolution is a disconnected theory looking for a way to survive. Whether the theory is fit or not, only a long future will tell for, he noted, "To our feeble apprehension, modern philosophy is just now in the primitive stage of protoplasm—a mass of jelly; and its loose ideas will probably take as many aeons to develop into solid facts as the interval they compute between chaos and

cosmos." ⁷⁶ An attempt to show that "both scientifically and theologically the first two chapters of Genesis are true," received the sincere appreciation of Spurgeon, but also elicited the frustrated remark, "We are getting weary of this constant

defence of the Pentateuch." ⁷⁷ A Christian minister should know that it is true, preach it as truth, and expect the God of truth to bless its preaching for the edification of saints and the conversion of sinners.

Spurgeon saw the prejudices of the guild operating in the reaction against James Southall's work The Epoch of the Mammoth, and the Apparition of Man

on the Earth. Spurgeon noted that Southall "gets the cold shoulder in scientific circles." This is because he martials scientific facts "to refute certain scientific hypotheses that have too easily become popular in this age of pyrrhonism."

Southall's intent was to "reconcile the results of scientific research with the received interpretation of Scripture." He summed up the evidence to show that "the Scriptures have not been broken." Spurgeon knew that that enterprise was not in fashion, for scientific circles were exclusive and their development of hypotheses was uncongenial to the certainty of Scripture on certain issues. The "bias from which they vaunt themselves to be pure betrays itself too palpably."

They are not pleased with the confirmation of ancient truth but delight in detecting a semblance of discrepancy "between sacred testimony and modern discovery." He had little confidence in the assumptions that governed the reasoning from research to hypothesis. "After pursuing their enquiry into the operations of nature with commendable patience, they perplex themselves with endless conjectures as to the explanation of the conflicting phenomena which they have observed." When poised on the edge of the facts, verdict is delayed, for new discoveries are constantly before them and the cultivation of an attitude of entire disinterestedness is necessary for the success of their craft. They cultivate therefore, on the one hand, a bias toward naturalistic answers and, consequently, on the other, a sense of condescension toward the finality espoused by theologians on ultimate questions. Science does not pose a problem;

hesitance toward the supernatural does. ⁷⁸ This tension that scientific assumptions produced in the Christian doctrine of particular providence generated a bit of ridicule toward Spurgeon. Spurgeon had referred to the cold winds that he experienced in Marseilles as sent of God to

produce a particularly sanctifying affliction. ⁷⁹ Writing in the pages of the Christian World periodical a medical doctor with the pseudonym "Adelphos" rejected Spurgeon's assumption of God's particular personal providence in this matter, saying that God designed the winds for the benefit of a certain kind of vegetation. Spurgeon just happened to be in the way and his assumption that God designed the resulting malady for him was to make God vindictive. The error, both in science and theology, lies at the door of the M.D., according to Spurgeon. Should the doctor be correct about the vegetation (Spurgeon was dubious about this), that purpose did not inhibit an all-wise God from using the wind for other particular purposes. "A particular providence, even in the lighting of sparrows, and in the number of the hairs of our head, is the doctrine of the Bible, and it is also matter of fact." This does not have to be a matter of sight, demonstrably true scientifically for Spurgeon, for it is a matter of belief, a

submission to Scripture truth. "The fact that wind and weather can be scientifically predicted, and that they are produced by fixed laws we know quite as well as M.D.; we are quite scientific enough for that: but this by no means opposes the grand doctrine that the hand of the Lord ordereth all things." Fixed laws do not operate apart from divine power or purpose, and his hand is present in the ordinary course of things as much as in those events we call miracles.

Spurgeon did not consider himself either irreverent or irrelevant to believe that God is in all things, not only here and there. "When we testify to our faith in God's love it is hard to be accused of representing God as a capricious and vindictive ruler." True science would recognize that God can accomplish more than one thing by his determinations and the "unscientific inferences belong to M.D. and not to us." ⁸⁰

Ongoing Strife with Periodicals

The numbers of periodicals that Spurgeon read was massive, and that he took issue from time to time with their viewpoints, politically, theologically, socially, or personally should come as no surprise. It was all in the interest of clarifying truth, or making those that gained the public's attention more careful in their presentation. He had suffered much at the hands of pundits and cartoonists, and at times had benefitted from them, but he always shuddered at misrepresentation whether to his denigration or his advantage, whether a deflation or a puff. The intense interest in everything Spurgeon made it impossible for him to respond to everything, but certain types called for rapid and unwavering confrontation.

When the Westminster Review reported, "among other falsehoods and misrepresentations," that some of his own deacons described him as "a regular pope," Spurgeon called it "an unmitigated lie, for which there has never existed a shadow of foundation." He challenged the paper to produce a single name and address and he would respond with all the names and addresses of the deacons so that the reporter could either verify the statement or "admit himself to have

uttered a gratuitous falsehood." ⁸¹ When his friends Arthur Mursell and William Landels lectured before his college men, Spurgeon wryly observed, "It is most remarkable that, while the Westminster Review was announcing these brethren as our opponent, they were actually of their own free will serving us as friends."

Mursell's lecture, in fact, took a particularly Spurgeonic texture as he laid "such scathing sarcasm upon the modern schools of thought, and such a defence of the old orthodox faith, as we have seldom, if ever, heard" and he hoped that they

would never forget it. ⁸² In reviewing a book of interesting incidents in Baptist history by J. J. Goadby, Spurgeon remarked, "If this book does not interest a reader, we give him up; he must surely be as ignorant as the writer in the last Westminster Review, who evidently knew more about pewter pots that Baptists."

83

The Daily News described the watchnight service held at the Tabernacle on December ³¹, 1873. "The account was more interesting than true," Spurgeon reported, "for the remark as to the devil's causing the people to drag the tune, and sing slowly, was an interpolation by the reporter." Spurgeon himself may have made a similar remark at some time, but certainly not that evening, he claimed, but "the temptation to be smart is very powerful with reporters when Spurgeon is the subject." He would not have minded the reporter commenting on the "melodious singing of hundreds of our people in the area fronting the Tabernacle" after midnight. The music had a charming effect, held hundreds spell-bound. Spurgeon had never heard anything more sweet, but the reporter did

not find it to his purpose to give any such positive message. ⁸⁴ When Spurgeon preached at the London Tavern on January ⁶, 1874, both the Daily Telegraph and The Christian World reported on the message. Though the Telegraph normally achieved accuracy and some degree of sympathy with Spurgeon, on this occasion the accuracy lay with The Christian World.

Supposedly, according to the report given to the Daily Telegraph and transferred from it uncorrected to the Freeman, Spurgeon commended devotees of Rome for their zeal and praised the Crusades. His words actually encouraged the believers of truth to excel the servants of Romish superstition in zeal and diligence as he himself planned to continue a spiritual crusade upon heathenism and sin. "Our rule has been not to correct reports or answer charges made in newspapers," Spurgeon noted, "since we should have nothing else to do." He made an exception in this case because two usually friendly papers had printed errors

peculiarly misleading. ⁸⁵ The open-air preachers of London came to the Tabernacle in January 1876 and Spurgeon preached to them, giving them some practical advice about style and content in the art of open-air preaching. By the time his remarks were reported in the weekly and daily periodicals, he wondered if he had been at the same meeting they reported. "The method adopted," as Spurgeon observed it, "seems to be to pick out every sentence in which there appears to be a funny observation, and leave out all the rest." This method rendered the speech an absurdity and turned what should have been an honest report into a slander. One of his friends, who had not been there but read the reports, wrote upbraiding him for having ridiculed the preachers. Spurgeon found it discouraging to find himself caricatured by those that should be giving a report. Though some of the older religious papers were managed as well as the daily secular papers, "certain of the newer issues are scandalously managed in the matter of reporting." These penny ventures insert reports from men that can hardly spell, and "whose ignorance is so great that they mistake the most common theological terms and

names." ⁸⁶ One publication with which Spurgeon had an ongoing battle for more than two decades was The Christian World, the product of an entrepreneurial publisher named James Clarke. He had begun this paper in 1857 as an unsectarian and evangelical newspaper, a "general intelligencer" for broadly evangelical thinkers in England. Spurgeon seems first to have paid close attention to The Christian World in 1866. The lead review for that year in The Sword and the Trowel gave a sterling recommendation from Spurgeon. He said that the editor "is manly in his utterances, and decided in his teachings, keeping

back no truth because of its angularity or unpopularity." This newly minted periodical avoided the malady of non-denominational publications in becoming "namby-pamby, truckling, timorous, and anything-arian." He continued the recommendation of the editor by saying, "His leading articles are admirable, his selection judicious, and his news fresh and varied." He recommended everything except "the religious novels, and if we should ever be able to screw up our grim judgment round to allow us to recommend works of fiction, we should most certainly put the tales in the Christian World in a very high place." He urged his friends to seek the extension of the influence of a "paper so excellent" for it

certainly commanded his "constant and increasing confidence." ⁸⁷ Within six months, Spurgeon's confidence began to decrease. By June, Spurgeon's correspondents had disturbed his mind about the theological ambience of the religious periodical. He felt embarrassed that he had not noticed certain theological leanings and had given such an enthusiastic welcome. The mitigating circumstance featured the editor as "a gentleman whom we highly esteem, a man of great ability and generous spirit." In addition, "his paper, for its freshness of news, and its power of writing, deserves every encomium, while its aid to all sorts of practical work, in the cause of religion and education, commands our gratitude." Lately he had noticed, however, "from numerous letters and personal remarks... there is a growing want of confidence in the theology of the paper in certain directions." He concurred. "Theologically," he judged, "it does seem to us that of late the articles in the paper are generally loose and frequently dangerous." He gave such a notice, not to interfere with the perfect freedom of the editor in the conscientious promulgation of his own views, but to dissociate his influence from the "promulgation and palliation of

what we feel to be very serious error." ⁸⁸ When his correspondents began to write to him complaining about the "the heterodoxy of the Christian World newspaper," he responded that "no one is more grieved at the fact than we are, but we have not even the remotest share in the conduct of the paper, or any sort of connection with it." Though he had always wished the paper well, he was

"sorry that it takes the course it has." ⁸⁹ Future days would prove the instincts of Spurgeon true. An obituary of the publisher, James Clarke, described him in terms exactly suited to irritate and alarm Spurgeon. "His breadth and boldness continually caused the weaker brethren to tremble. To admit into 'News of the Churches' the headings 'Unitarian' and 'New-Church,' was sure proof that he was on the 'down-grade.' Many were scandalized at the latitude afforded alike to

Annihilationists and Universalists to advocate their heterodox views." ⁹⁰ This reference is a scarcely subtle poke at Spurgeon as one of the "weaker brethren."

Frequently, The Christian World had correspondents in Spurgeon's services to report on the sermon or other events that might happen. The memorable defense of smoking given in the Tabernacle was reported in The Christian World on the occasion of George Pentecost's visit in September 1874. When Pentecost, asked to give some personal reflections on Spurgeon's call to holiness in his sermon, revealed that God had led him to relinquish his indulgence in "the best cigar which could be bought." After Pentecost explained what led him to that conviction and encouraged others to find a similar point of scrupulosity for the sake of holiness, Spurgeon rose with the task of saving himself, his guest, and making clear the point of his sermon. "Well, dear friends," he began, according to the newspaper report, "you know that some men can do to the Glory of God what to other men would be a sin." Notwithstanding Pentecost's personal conviction, Spurgeon declared, "I intend to smoke a good cigar to the Glory of God, before I go to bed tonight." He saw no commandment in Scripture, "Thou shalt not smoke," and he had no intention of introducing the eleventh or the twelfth commandment. Some may have developed a conscience against it, just as another may believe he should not get his boots blacked; if so, the one must not smoke and the other must refrain from boot-blackening, for whatever is not of faith is sin. The fact is, Spurgeon emphasized, "I have been speaking to you about real sin, and not about listening to mere quibbles and scruples." Spurgeon was not ashamed of his smoking and, therefore, "I mean to smoke to the glory of

God." ⁹¹ A firestorm arose around these impromptu remarks reported in The Christian World, so Spurgeon responded with a longer defense of his smoking policy by writing a letter to the editor of the Daily Telegraph. Spurgeon regretted the occasion that prompted the "unpremeditated remarks" and regretted as well the tone of the newspaper article that reported it. He observed the arising of a "Pharasaic system which adds to the commands of God the precepts of men." He did not intend for their sneers to interrupt either his liberty or his serenity. To the degree that the expression "smoking to the glory of God" had an ill sound, Spurgeon did not justify it; but its intent was not abstract but specific and

contextualized:

When I have found intense pain relieved, a weary brain soothed and calm, refreshing sleep obtained by

a cigar I have felt grateful to God, and have blessed His name; that is what I meant and by no means

did I use sacred words triflingly. If through smoking, I had wasted an hour of my time—if I had stinted

my gifts to the poor—if I had rendered my mind less vigorous—I trust I should see my fault and turn

from it; but he who charges me with these things shall have no answer but my forgiveness. 92

W. M. Hutchins responded with a lengthy investigation of Spurgeon's

accusations of Pharasaism, and, pointing to his universal and unprecedented influence, all the bad that would accrue to families as a result of his strong endorsement of cigar-smoking. Sadly, others already had fallen into the errors that Spurgeon had managed to avoid and did not have the salutary reasons for smoking claimed by him. Did Spurgeon believe that those involved in temperance organizations from his own Tabernacle were Pharisees? Had he forgotten that the Apostle Paul himself would refuse to embrace his freedom of eating meat should such eating harm his brother? Spurgeon's principle can be distilled to this—"that a Christ man is at liberty to exercise self-indulgence in all

matters against which there is not direct and express command in Scripture." ⁹³ Hutchins insisted that his chief concern in addressing Spurgeon was to point out the "essential viciousness of the principle" he had adopted and its inapplicability to myriads of circumstances. Taking up one's cross and following Christ demanded a sacrifice of self-indulgence for the good of one's neighbor and, thus, the glory of Christ.

It does not appear that Spurgeon relinquished smoking, for even during the Downgrade, an American visitor, William E. Hatcher, tells an amusing anecdote in which he joined Spurgeon in a post-dinner cigar after midnight. Hatcher had given up the habit for ten years but felt he could not deny to Spurgeon a moment

of fellowship in the relaxed atmosphere of cigar smoke. ⁹⁴ When a biography of George Pentecost appeared in 1882, Spurgeon reviewed it in a lukewarm manner. He appreciated the fact that he was one of the few American Baptists that did not embrace closed communion. "Whether he is always wise we should not care to say," Spurgeon commented, "but he always desires to be right, and his heart is warm and true." Pentecost wanted to be useful in the work of God and for the good of men, but hardly enough of

remarkable incident characterized his life to make a very readable biography. ⁹⁵ At that time he was in England to aid in a Moody crusade. Perhaps his moment of highest notoriety came with his innocent remark that stirred the controversy about Spurgeon's smoking.

Plymouth Brethrenism

Spurgeon strongly supported and encouraged Bible believers wherever he found them. The doctrine they derived from the Bible was fair game for his analysis and criticism. The Plymouth Brethren, however, in Spurgeon's view had an irritating combination of idiosyncratic theology, a sense of condescension, a divisive spirit, and a disintegrative ecclesiology that drove him to sound the alarm against them. In reviewing one writer's analysis of Brethren by question and answer, a Catechism of the Doctrines of the Plymouth Brethren, Spurgeon stated, "Nearly all the errors of Plymouth Brethrenism are here adduced and ably refuted." He believed that the method of questions and answers made the points plain to a broad spectrum of readers. The reasoning was scriptural and the feeling was generous innocent of any consciousness of superiority in debate.

Spurgeon would like "to have seen the perversion of the great doctrine of

imputed righteousness more prominently dealt with." ⁹⁶ The turn that the Brethren took under the influence of J. N. Darby, moreover, irritated him even more. In reviewing A Caution Against the Darbyites by J. E.

Howard, Spurgeon commented, "We are delighted to see that certain of the original Brethren are protesting against the Darbyites." He recommended the pamphlet for it revealed "how tyranny may hide itself under proud assumptions

of non-sectarianism." ⁹⁷ He referred to the experience of Lord Congleton, because "he knows them better than we wish to do." Under interrogation Lord Congleton provided a witness that Spurgeon saw as informative and valuable for his readers. When asked if he tried the Darbyites, Congleton replied: "I have tried them ('try the spirits whether they are of God') and found them false prophets, in every sense of the word false. They are false in what they say of

their brethren, they are false in doctrine, they are false in their work." ⁹⁸ While Spurgeon wanted to do all he could to expose the errors of the Brethren, especially of the Darbyite injection, he resisted making The Sword and the Trowel a forum for this controversy. When some of the Brethren requested that he print their response to a bit of strong criticism from the pen of his friend James Grant, he refused to publish either their response or Grant's reply. "We do not intend to enter into a controversy upon the matter of Brethrenism," Spurgeon clarified, for "dissentients have the same power to use the press as we have; and they have their own magazines in which to defend their creed and character." As far as the Grant material was concerned, he believed most of Grant's charges and his detailed defense of them to be correct. "We do not mean to insert it," he maintained, "as we have excluded, and probably shall exclude, the criticisms of

his opponents." ⁹⁹ That choice, however, did not keep Spurgeon from publishing a more amicable investigation of the Brethren. Arthur Augustus Rees wrote A Second Friendly Letter to the Christians called Brethren, on the Subject of Worship and Ministry, a pamphlet that achieved the delicate balance of " suaviter in modo, and the fortiter in re. " Rees, so Spurgeon judged, "having known the mysteries of Brethrenism," exposed them thoroughly. "He takes the bull by the horns, and attacks their favourite claim to be under the Spirit's guidance in all their

spontaneous and often absurd effusions." ¹⁰⁰ Believing the Bible is one thing; believing oneself to be an oracle is quite another.

In 1870 Spurgeon still felt the need for warnings against the tendency of Brethren, particularly Darbyite, influence. When Edward Dennett published a lecture on The Plymouth Brethren: their Rise, Divisions, Practice, and Doctrines, Spurgeon used the occasion to vent some of his personal objections to the fallout of Brethren influence. "This admirable concise, and able lecture should be read and circulated by every minister—and these are legion—who is worried by the Plymouth unbrotherly confraternity." Dennett presented facts that would seal a "richly-merited condemnation" on the Darbyite system. Though some churches benefitted from the good in the early Plymouth movements "the cloven hoof soon appeared, and the good was speedily overbalanced by the evil." He did not know of any age or place in which "more glaring inconsistencies [had] been perpetrated in the name of Christianity, or more sectarian principles been promulgated under the pretence of unity." His esteem for men as Christians did not mitigate the harm of "the system, or rather chaos which they have created." From his observation, he felt that their conduct towards other believers deserved the most severe censure, while "Mr. Dennett deserves universal thanks for his trouble and fidelity in exploring their depths of

error." ¹⁰¹ Spurgeon did not merely leave it up to others to describe the net effect of Plymouth Brethren claims to its non-sectarian, non-denominational only-peopleof-God status. Unchanged in his opinion as late as 1886, Spurgeon repeated his approval of the Christian character of the many individuals that he knew among this group, but their corporate posture provided a virtually irresistible opportunity for schism and sectarian pride. They were the wheat, all others were chaff. "After creating no end of heart-burning in churches, and unnatural hatred in families; after warring among themselves, and splitting and splitting again, these brethren have left us as the net result of their exertions a sect which exceeds all others in party spirit and bitter exclusiveness." ¹⁰²

Connected with this kind of claim to be the only church of Christ, Spurgeon also inserted a critique of the Transatlantic group, the "Campbellites." "If the Campbellites wish us to believe that they are the church of Christ, they should also let us know what they are as to their distinctive views." He was willing to accept their claim to be Christians, and he welcomed any brothers that would join in the fight against evil and for the gospel, but the "invidious claim to the title" of Christian did not impress Spurgeon but rather put him on guard to see if they would prove it by a greater "likeness to their Lord, and their clearer

manifestation of the spirit which vaunteth not itself." ¹⁰³ Since the late 1820s Alexander Campbell and his followers had caused controversy within Baptist churches and associations in the Southern United States, and as a result Baptist churches had lost thousands of members. Among their distinctive beliefs were the rejection of all creeds, the justifying effect of baptism as the biblical expression of faith, and exclusive claim to be the Church of Christ. In Spurgeon's mind this sort of sacramental ecclesiology fostered division and bitterness and was a sure way to avoid true unity. Pointing to all others as sectaries was "to cement our walls with dynamite, and lay the foundations of peace upon barrels of gunpowder." ¹⁰⁴

Interpretations of Prophetic Material

Without doubt Spurgeon believed in the inspiration of the entire Bible and believed that every part played its own role in opening a more complete revelation of the gospel and its implications. Apocalyptic literature, therefore, carried fascinating if mysterious baggage for Spurgeon's inspection. He personally looked for the literal fulfillment of the restoration of the Jews to the

land prior to the coming of Christ and his earthly rule:

I think we do not attach sufficient importance to the restoration of the Jews. We do not think enough of

it. But certainly, if there is anything promised in the Bible, it is this. I imagine that you cannot read the

Bible without seeing clearly that there is to be an actual restoration of the children of Israel. "There

they shall go up. They shall come with weeping unto Zion and with supplications unto Jerusalem."

May that happy day soon come! For when the Jews are restored, then the fullness of the Gentiles shall

be gathered in. And as soon as they return, then Jesus will come upon Mount Zion to reign with His

ancients gloriously and the halcyon days of the Millennium shall then dawn. We shall then know every

man to be a brother and a friend. Christ shall rule with universal sway! 105

While his own views were premillennial, he cautioned against too much detail in treating apocalyptic material. "Of expositions of this mysterious Book there are swarms, and yet not one," Spurgeon judged in reviewing yet another attempt at giving a credible treatment of Revelation. He left the reader to judge what he meant by " yet not one. " This particular book was "more rational in its interpretations, and more sensible in its speculations" than most books on the Revelation tended to be. Spurgeon observed that "A sort of fascination draws minds of all sorts towards the insufferable light of the Apocalypse, and around it they flit and dart like birds aroused at midnight by the introduction of a torch."

106

The Franco-Prussian War brought about the musings of many enthusiastic apocalypticists, and Spurgeon found it his best part to warn against such misplaced fervor. S. A. Blackwood's The Last Trump saw in the war signs of the speedy sounding of the last trump. Spurgeon said that these same prognostications "were equally clear to the vision of interpreters 300 years ago, and yet their lucubrations were disproved by time, as we venture to believe the

intimations of our modern seers will be." ¹⁰⁷ Finding the precise prophetic meaning of the drying up of the Euphrates, Louis Napoleon, the Emperor Phocas, the year 1873, and other matters was fitter entertainment "for spiritual

children than for men in Christ Jesus." ¹⁰⁸ Prophetic quacks played on the credulity of the less informed members of the churches. "Pretenders to prophecy have risen in all times, and have all been equally unworthy of trust," Spurgeon lamented. With the numbers of these he

was surprised, given the law of probabilities, that not more had conjectured correctly. He would not concede that these were serious attempts at biblical interpretation, for he found "no interpretation, but only theories tacked on to texts, and Scriptures twisted to support imaginings." He would be more likely to be "instructed by the cackling of geese, or the flight of vultures, as by the maunderings of men who are crazed with Daniel-on-the-brain." The favorite antichrist was Louis Napoleon who surely would wonder how his English

friends would be so keen to see in him a dragon and a beast. ¹⁰⁹ The next year, 1871, Spurgeon learned that the recent ecumenical council, Vatican I, was Armageddon, and that the drying up of the Euphrates referred to the overthrow of the Spanish monarchy. "That is quite enough for us," he wrote in disgust. Should he give himself such exegetical latitude he was sure he could find the answer to the "Eltham murder, the Tichborne case," and even find the

last Derby winner. ¹¹⁰ "We cannot help observing that the more of these prophetical books we are doomed to review, the more sick are we of the entire business." Spurgeon advised men to "leave the mysterious oracles of God to be interpreted by providence." All of these fanciful schemes, outlines, and prognostications "dishonour the sacred word from which they profess to draw them." He advised the Author, Mr. Wylie, to turn his pen to something useful.

111

Nathaniel Starkey entitled a book Things which must shortly come to pass; for the time is at hand. As an attempt at comedy it would have had more merit.

Spurgeon found the contents "about as grotesque as its title." The rapture was a favorite theme of the author and of "those who are left behind he draws several fantastic sketches." Even funnier reveries appeared as the author surveyed the political and social landscape "with some fine touches of fancy." The history of predictions of the antichrist should be a severe warning against any attempt to make another but Starkey was undeterred in his "strange mingle-mangle of serious things with comical thoughts." It was a pity that some flashes of pure

gospel were "overshadowed with paltry gossip." ¹¹² At another book's suggestion that the British were Israelites, as well as the Turks and the Germans, he responded "There is not an argument in the book worth the trouble of

demolishing." ¹¹³ Spurgeon believed unequivocally in the return of the Lord in glory to establish his rule in the earth, but the eschatological mania that sought to find current concrete matches for the apocalyptic symbols of Scripture were not only doomed to failure, but were distractions from pure gospel preaching and the demanding call of day-by-day Christian discipleship.

Spurgeon and War

Spurgeon's view on war could be summarized in a sentence he wrote in reviewing The Mad War-Planet. Not a fan of poetry normally, the content of this poem so distilled Spurgeon's hatred of war, that he wrote, "The poem pleads vehemently, eloquently for peace. Would to God its voice could be heard. It ought to call the Christian Church to do her duty as to war, and that duty plainly

is to denounce it utterly and without reserve." ¹¹⁴ He followed his own advice, denouncing it by every means he could muster. Though he defended the British army in its vigorous quelling of the Sepoy Rebellion in India, he viewed that, not as war, but as the legitimate execution of domestic justice for crimes against civil society. In May 1855, preaching "Thoughts on the Last Battle" in Exeter Hall, one of the word pictures that he displayed was of a war-mad tyrant gasping the last breaths of life and envisioning the sins that lingered to his account

immediately before standing in the gaze of the Lord of Life:

Imagine a conqueror's deathbed. He has been a man of blood from his youth up. Bred in the camp, his

lips were early set to the bugle, and his hand, even in infancy, struck the drum. He had a martial spirit;

he delighted in the fame and applause of men; he loved the dust of battle and the garment rolled in

blood. He has lived a life of what men call glory. He has stormed cities, conquered countries, ravaged

continents, overrun the world. See his banners hanging in the hall, and the marks of glory on his

escutcheon. He is one of earth's proudest warriors. But now he comes to die, and when he lies down to

expire, what shall invest his death with horror? 115

The sin of war. The spirit of a widowed mother passed by and reviled him saying, "Monster! my husband was slain in battle through thy ambition." The husband then appeared, and revealing his gaping wounds cried, "Once I called thee monarch; but, by thy vile covetousness thou didst provoke an unjust war.

See here these wounds—I gained them in the siege. For thy sake I mounted first the scaling ladder; this foot stood upon the top of the wall, and I waved my sword in triumph, but in hell I lifted up my eyes in torment. Base wretch, thine ambition hurried me thither!" Pomp and splendor might accompany the man of war in this life, but the prospect of eternity foreshadows unbearable dread. This

had been a bloody man and "his hands were red with wholesale murder." ¹¹⁶ In 1878 Spurgeon analyzed the periodical war interest that seemed to assault the English spirit. Even after all the lessons, disappointments, and outrages of the past, "We are still pugnacious, still believers in brute force, still ready to shed blood, still able to contemplate ravaged lands and murdered thousands without horror, still eager to test our ability to kill our fellow men." Mythical "British interests" were the foundation of much of this, but the fact is, the national bull-dog wants to "fix his teeth into somebody's leg, and growls

because he does not quite see how to do it." ¹¹⁷ The warrior must learn the tenets of peace. Spurgeon was vivid in his depiction of all the demonic traits of war and the necessity of exorcizing them from the country. "The fight-spirit must be battled with in all its forms, and the genius of gentleness must be cultivated. Cruelty to animals, the lust for destroying living things, the desire for revenge, the indulgence of anger—all these we must war against by manifesting and inculcating pity, compassion, forgiveness, kindness, and goodness in the fear of the Lord." Spurgeon insisted that the truth about war be put plainly as loss of time, labor, treasure, and life, and its tendency to satanic crimes must be laid bare. "It is the sum of all villainies, and ought to be stripped of its flaunting colours, and to have its bloody horrors revealed; its music should be hushed, that men may hear the moans and groans, the cries and shrieks of dying men and ravished women. War brings out the devil in man, wakes up the hellish legion within his fallen nature, and binds

his better faculties hand and foot." ¹¹⁸ It hurls nations back to barbarism and retards the growth of everything good and holy.

Only as a dire necessity as the last resource of an oppressed people can it be considered. At that point it might be heroic and the lasting results might compensate for the immediate evils. The remedy for war, peace teaching, is but the practical side of gospel preaching. Loving one another and loving one's neighbor is set in the context of "Love is of God." The evangelistic task of the Christian church has nothing in common with the waging of war, Spurgeon argued. "Above all we must evangelize the masses, carry the truth of the loving God to their homes, preach Jesus and his dying love in their streets, and gather men to his fold." The work of soul-saving aims a blow at the root of the warspirit. Conversion to Christ makes a man a lover of his race and fosters repentance from blows and battles. Sanctification recreates a hater into an embodiment of love. Spurgeon looked for such a powerful and extensive work of the Holy Ghost that "we shall see their outbursts of rage become less frequent and less violent, for there will be a strong counteracting influence to keep down

the evil, and to restrain it when in a measure it breaks loose." ¹¹⁹ Spurgeon even employed the philosopher Immanuel Kant as an advocate of peace. A 1795 treatise by Kant, a Philosophical Treatise on Perpetual Peace, had been republished in which he argued against mere political artifices in a treaty that would only prepare the way for future war. Spurgeon derided the "bluster of the daily press" provoking "endless national jealousies" from which no good could come. The chivalry of peace, Spurgeon believed, was far better than the chivalry of war, and the heroism that would protect and save life more

valuable than that which imperils and destroys it. "Let the Peace Society continue to put forth such pamphlets as this," Spurgeon advocated, "in the interest of pure goodness and moral greatness, and its protests will yet fall upon

worthy ears." ¹²⁰ No respecter of persons, Spurgeon went from Kant to John Ploughman in the campaign against war. In a letter addressed to Napoleon, Emperor of the French and William King of Prussia, Ploughman began, "I beg to send my most disrespectful compliments." If someone accused him of violation of the scriptural principle "Honour to whom honour is due," Ploughman responded, "Kings who go to war about nothing at all have no honour due to them. So I

don't send you so much as would lay on your thumb nails." ¹²¹ Ploughman had a good bit of advice for the two with his usual series of proverbial aphorisms, but loaded with a deadly, but befitting, seriousness cloudy with the gray, dismal consequences of the business of war. Do they have too much money and need to burn it in powder? Do they have too many people and need to make murderers and murdered of many of them. They are like boys with new knives who must cut at something. "One of you has the gout," Spurgeon said, a subject he knew a good bit about, "and that does not sugar the temper much, and the other is proud about having beaten his neighbour; and so you must needs let off your steam by beginning a murderous war." Ploughman believed nothing good would come of it and told them so. "You are as daft as you are days old if you think any good can come of it. If you think you will get ribands and flags by fighting, you had better buy them at first hand of the drapers; they will come a deal cheaper, and there will be no ugly blood stains on

them." ¹²² With clear message that wars were often the results of personal grudges with little or nothing to do with national honor or justice, Spurgeon advised the two national leaders to "strip and go at it yourselves as our Tom Rowdy and Big Ben did on the green." To have others fight their battles showed the epitome of cowardice. Though opposed to fighting in any case, Ploughman offered, "if it would save the lives of the millions," to mind their jackets while the two of them "had a set-to with fisticuffs." In light of the cause, he would even "encourage you both to hit his hardest at the gentleman opposite." Ploughman invited them to Surrey for the battle, and the police would accommodate them with protection while they went at it. If they bloodied their shirts some ploughman would lend them the smock frocks if they would promise to return them. He would even arrange for Madam Rachel to be released from jail to enamel their eyes if they get a little blackened. In fact, Ploughman suggested, the keepers of Agricultural

Hall would probably gladly arrange for them to be a main event wrestling spectacle. "So you could get glory and ready money too, and nobody would be killed." As he thought about that proposal more, it appealed to Ploughman for he could wash his hands of the entire matter. He held little desire to be near two

such kicking horses. ¹²³ It seems that Ploughman's grandfather was right about the tendency of the "Bonyparts," for though the nephew seemed a quieter sort than the famed uncle, "as the old cock crows the young cock learns." The German king's consent to go into butchering seemed a strange occupation, but he must be a very bad disposed man or he would be ashamed of killing his fellow creatures. "When war begins hell opens, and it is a bad office for either of you to be gate-opener to the devil; yet that's what one of you is, if not both."

Spurgeon then put some powerfully graphic language and images in the mouth of his friend John Ploughman. He had no stomach to see a kitten drown or a rat suffer, but a man! "Where's your hearts if you can think of broken legs, splintered bones, heads smashed in, brains blown out, bowels torn, hearts gushing with gore, ditches full of blood, and heaps of limbs and carcasses of mangled men?" If they considered the language disgusting, they must concede how much worse the thing itself is. "How would you like to let a man into your palace-garden, and run a carving knife into his bowels, or cut his throat? If you did that you would deserve to be hanged; but it would not be half so bad as killing tens of thousands, and you know very well that this is just what you are

going to do." ¹²⁴ They were no better than cut-throats condemned by law, except they were worse. "Is there so little want in the world that you must go trampling on the harvest with your horses and your men? Is there so little sorrow that you must make widows by the thousand! Is death so old and feeble that you must hunt his game for him, as jackals do for the lion? Do you imagine that God made men for you to play soldiers with? Are they only meant for toys for you to break?" He questioned their genuine humanity with mothers, sisters, homes, perhaps creatures "who were never suckled at a woman's breast, and therefore have no human feeling." The blood they have shed will choke them when they die, but harder still will it be to "bear the heavy hand of God when he shall cast all murderers into hell." Whoever has caused the war should be more hated than the common hangman and "instead of being called 'his majesty' you ought to be hooted as a demon."

For Ploughman, the great speeches made by the respective kings merely showed the leanness of their cause and the scantiness of their justice; the worst

cause usually gets the best pleading for "men who cannot walk take to horseback." He pleaded with them not to cut their fellowmen with swords, "tear them with bayonets, blow them to pieces with cannon, and riddle them with shots." While they fancy that the end of their quest is glory, Ploughman told that the plain English word for such glory was damnation, which would be their lot if they went on cutting and hacking their fellow man. They must stop the war. "Before the deep curses of widows and orphans fall on you from the throne of God, put up your butcher knives and patent men-killers, and repent." The closing identified John Ploughman as "one who is no servant of yours, but a Fighter for

Peace." ¹²⁵ Ploughman was forced to produce a follow up in September due to the vitality of the response to his first bits of advice. From the Emerald Isle he received a hostile note that promised him that if he were not quiet about the issue, the French emperor would blow down the English Protestant places of worship and he had some friends that had designed a bullet for his head. "I suppose I ought to choose a spot for a grave, and order a coffin at once," Ploughman pondered, "but I have done nothing of the sort. Threatened folks live long, and though the shooting season is near, I am not a partridge, though this fiery gentleman tries to

make game of me." ¹²⁶ Ploughman seemed a bit bewildered about the response of an Irishman to his letter, but perhaps a Fenian, as he assumed his disturbed opponent was, is not at peace unless he is at war and "they think themselves Frenchmen born out of their native country." The Fenian movement had been actively seeking independence from British rule for decades, had organized secret pockets of resistance to the English government, and had recently, 1867, plotted an uprising which eventuated in the killing of a police officer and the arrest and hanging of three Fenians. Spurgeon's hard stance toward the "Fenians" was intermingled with his strong denunciation of "Home Rule" for Ireland. He had Ploughman remark, "Sure I am the cause of the Fenians and the welfare of Ireland are two things quite as different as the appetite of a cat and the

life of a mouse." ¹²⁷ After answering the misgivings of a German reader and a Quaker, Ploughman reminded his readers that he was "on the side of peace." "With all this soldiering about, one is apt to get in a fighting humour, and forget that war is a great crime —murder on a huge scale—and little less than hell let loose among men. 'Thou shalt not kill,' is as much a divine command as 'Thou shalt not commit adultery.' No one supposes that adultery of a great scale would be right; then why should killing be? War pays the papers well, no doubt, but it is a wretched business, and may God soon send an end of it. Some men seem ready to cry,

'Fight dog, fight bear;' but such fellows ought to be put down between the two,

to let them have a taste of it." ¹²⁸ When some people complained that his style was too rough and uncouth, Ploughman promised to "take as much notice of what they say as the mastiff did of the gentleman in the yard at night, when he told him to lie still, for his voice was not musical, and his teeth were ugly."

Spurgeon, through Ploughman, told the readers, probably in defense of his style in general, "Some improvement in style can be improvement for the worse, as the fox said when his tail was cut off in a trap. You may pay much for your

schooling and be all the worse for your learning." ¹²⁹ In 1871 he recommended a book entitled The German Drummer Boy; or, The Horrors of War. "God speed the pens which write for peace," he began, "and dry up the quills which in glowing terms write up the pageantry of war." After encouraging the publishers to do all they could to spread abroad that book he reiterated, "Our heart chides us if we have failed to urge upon our readers and hearers the absolute sin of every kind of war. 'Thou shalt not kill,' is a command, the breadth of which is not excused but aggravated by the largeness

of the scale on which the killing is conducted." ¹³⁰ In 1876 Spurgeon published his prayer that the Lord would preserve peace and remove from office any rulers that would not learn wisdom on this matter.

Disraeli had come out in support of a Turkish policy that had resulted in atrocities of the government against Turkish Christians. Supporters of Disraeli were vexed with Spurgeon's public stance on the issue presented in the form of prayer. Even Gladstone had come out of retirement to oppose the policy of Disraeli. When Spurgeon's prayer prompted answers from the earth, many of them were not sympathetic with the petition. "To us," he responded, "mere party politics are nothing; but when we see war threatened on behalf of a detestable tyranny, contrary to the dictates of humanity and religion, we cannot do otherwise than implore the Judge of all the earth to save us from such an astounding wickedness, and to remove from office the man whose rash bravados give rise to our fears." Many abusive letters to him bore no name, for which Spurgeon expressed thanks in hope that their omission meant that they still had some feelings of shame. His prayer made the papers and was translated into German and Serbian and was read by a relief worker among fugitives from Bosnia. He felt gratitude for a merciful expression and wrote, "While to the persecuted Christians of Turkey... the attitude of the English government is so incomprehensibly hostile, a token of sympathy and pity, and the evidence that they are not forgotten by the English people, is doubly precious." Spurgeon's words opposing the policy of Disraeli in his pugilistic posturing against Russia's

intervention and his pro-Turkey policy had "cheered and comforted many sorrowful hearts." The correspondent continued, "Oh, may they but be heard!

And the thousands now groaning in slavery and exile, the victims of Turkish

barbarism, be delivered from the hand and power of the wicked." ¹³¹ One important case in which Spurgeon justified war came as he contemplated the presence of slavery in America and particularly among his fellow Baptists.

On an evening week-night service in 1860 an escaped slave, John Andrew Jackson, spoke for an hour of his experiences as a slave and of his escape.

Greatly moved, and reflecting the mood of the entire congregation Spurgeon called slavery, "the foulest blot that ever stained a national escutcheon, and may have to be washed out with blood." Though he considered America a glorious country in many ways, he believed that it might have to learn its lesson about slavery "at the point of a bayonet" or have true freedom carved into her with a bowie knife or sent "home to her heart with revolvers." "Better far should it come to this issue," he advocated, "that North and South should be rent asunder, and the States of the Union shivered into a thousand fragments, than that slavery

should be suffered to continue." ¹³² When his references to slavery were omitted in their American printing, Spurgeon learned of it and responded in heated terms in a letter to be published in an "influential paper in America." He wrote "I believe slavery to be a crime of crimes, a soul-destroying sin, and an iniquity which cries for vengeance." When asked to write an article on the Christian view of slavery, Spurgeon declined in light of pressing engagements and pressures involved in the building of the Metropolitan Tabernacle, but he did manage a substantial letter to the Watchman and Reflector in which he reiterated, "I do from my inmost soul detest slavery anywhere and everywhere, and although I commune at the Lord's Table with men of all creeds, yet with a slave-holder I have no fellowship of any kind or sort." This plain speech about a deeply divisive topic brought severe consequences for Spurgeon's popularity and pocketbook in America. The sale of his sermons, which was massive, was virtually ended for the years 1860-65. He knew this would happen, but as he interpreted man-stealing as inextricably identified with slavery and mentioned as a particular violation of the ten commandments, the principle was so clear that no amount of political or pragmatic concerns could sway him in a different direction. His bound volumes of books were committed to the fire in public ceremonies in several places in the South. ¹³³

Interlude

Each of these controversies marked Spurgeon in particular ways and demonstrated his tenacity about truth and gospel clarity in a diversity of contexts. In Spurgeon's view of the comprehensive nature of divine revelation, any expression of theology, worship, or moral outlook could not be isolated entirely from impact on the gospel. These called for earnest, though often brief, warnings and a perpetual circumspection but not a consuming visceral warfare.

They inflicted damage of light and momentary consequence capable of repair by some doctrinal darning in particular spots. Though war was of severe consequence, its moral lineaments were so distinct that no extended doctrinal analysis was called for, as Spurgeon saw it. Other conflicts, however, so thoroughly disemboweled the body of gospel truth that they called for unreserved and relentless doctrinal opposition with a purpose, if possible, to destroy them. Any pretensions to biblical fidelity these systems asserted were so fundamentally compromised by their errors, that there was too little baby left to

maintain any of the bathwater. To these we now turn.