Page:Neatby - A history of the Plymouth Brethren.djvu/259

 reflexions were the occasion of a final letter, in which Dorman took up a position of strong opposition to the new teaching, partly on the ground of its premises, partly of its practical results.

"“I object, in limine, that a whole class of the sufferings of Christ based wholly on the theory of a non-existent, future, prophetic Jewish remnant, should be forced on me as divinely taught in Scripture; while the author of them at the same time acknowledges that they have nothing to do with the grounds of the common Christian faith, as taught by the apostles. I object to it as the doctrine of development, on the most sacred subject, and in the most mischievous form. …

“Your doctrine is already bearing its bitter fruits. In one gathering, Christ’s position under God’s governmental dealings, was presented in terms so correspondent to those of Mr. Newton, that the doctrine would have been imputed to that source, only the young man who unconsciously was treading this ground, was known not to have read Mr. N.’s writings, nor to have been ever associated with those who had. And I know for certain also, that some younger brethren in a meeting for their mutual edification lately, in reading the history of the crucifixion, were apportioning out carefully the sufferings of Gethsemane to the Jewish remnant—and those of the Cross to the Church. I know that this will be as great a sorrow to you as it is to me.”"

The following passage almost at the close of the letter is far more significant of a change in Dorman than (as he fancies) in his correspondent.

"“Allow one who never had a moment’s ill-will towards you, and has not now, but the contrary, to say that you cannot conceive how much you differ from yourself in this, from any other controversy I have known you to be engaged in. If I think of the whole history of it and of your spirit and bearing in it, especially since the Portsmouth Meeting, I cannot see the proofs of the leading or presence of God’s spirit in the matter!”"

“This letter,” Dorman tells us, “brought me a curt note in reply, in which Mr. D. declined any further