MR BROWN'S VIEWS.
TO THE EDITOR,
Sir,— Slooe tbe ttev 0. 0. Brown gave his last leotores In the Orange Hall oertaln persons have, through the medium of your paper, flittoted forth what appear to be bald-headed statements of tbe Holy Sorlpturcs, wh'oh they maintain oannot be got over. I am sorry to see that there are so many ready to peok at what they oall "Me Brown's views" but I notice that they start pecking when Mr Brown's back Is turned, but do not oome to his lectures to refute hla statements. And last night, Sir, at the Oddfellows' Hall I was very much pilned to have to' listen to a good deal of .this sort of thing, Mr Biothroyd exhibiting very bad taste indeed (n introducing the subject of differences of doctrine, The same thing was touohed upon by all the speakers. If these Ministers are consistent at all they should oome forth like men and kill the wolf who Is making suoh great inroads apon the belief of their several flock". Even Mr North from the commencement of hla address led one to suppose that he adhered fo the principles lately adopted by Mr Sawle and his Ohurob. m literally expelling about a dozen members. It would have been more m aooordaooe with faot If the worthy Secretary of the Baptist Churoh had said m his report that so maoy members had during the year been rtques'ed to resign, because they refused to t believe |n tho wicked being everlastingly kept In perpetual torment and never dying (ft was to keep their membership with a Baptist Church that they asked to bo transferred). Mr North spoke a good doal upon liberty of thought. I question whether his sotlon with regard to Mr Brown Is In aooordaooe with his preaohing for he and Mr T. Spurgeon, who are diametrically opposed to eaoh other In dootrlne, joined hands to politely expel Mr Brown from the Baptht Union for no other purpose, I take It, fhan that be had the Impudence to think differently t:> either of them. Now Mr Norths remarks last night, and his aotlon In oomitig here to preaoh for tfee Baptist Ohuroh would lead one to sqppose that he holds views quite In common with the Dootrlnes held by this Churoh ; but, Sir, I wljl venture to show to those who think •o that that Is not the case. A newspaper correspondence was carried on m the' Dunedln "Evonlng Star," m the months of December and January, 1887 8, hotween the Be7s. 0. 0. Brown and A. North. In the oourae of Mr North's reply dated December 29 h, he says: — "Mr Brown winds up his letter by asking whether I will sobsorlbe to this orthodox confession (words of 0. H, Spurgeon, London). 'In fire exactly like that whloh we have on earth thy body will lie, asbestos like, for ever unoonsumed, all thy veins muds for the feet of pain to travel on.' Now, Kir, I venture to say that there ia no theologian living, or ; heologlcul student worthy the name who would aooept for a moment this so-called' < confession ' as a just representation of present day orthodox belief concerning future punishment, or who would fail to repudiate It with Indignation." Such are Mr North's words, be It remembered, not spoken In the heat of debate, but written with calm deliberation; What then Is Mr North's belief t He repudiates with Indignation the orthodox belief of Mr Bpurgeon of England, and yet he oomes hero and strengthens the Pss'or's hands of this Baptist Ohuroh and upholds his sotlon m requesting oertaln members to resign because they repudiate, with Indignation, the same orthodox tesohlng. Apologising, Sir, for trespassing so muoh on your valuable space, 1 beg to subscribe myself, not Baptist, Wcsleyan or Presbyterian, but— Christian. Ashburton, April 20th, 1889.
See our copyright guide for information on how you may use this title.
Use these buttons to limit your searches to particular dates, titles, and more.
Print, save, zoom in and more.