Menu•SiteMap | History

The Manchester Connection
– Stopping the Wells

 
Introduction
James Macdonald:
1. Withdrawal Letter – May 15, 1956
2. Statement of James Macdonald
W. Mauchan:
3. January 8, 1961
4. February 13, 1961
5. C. L. Nunnerley: March 20, 1961
6. A. Angus: August 30, 1961
7. F. G. Holding: September 18, 1961
John Murray:
8. July 15, 1961
  John Murray: continued
  9. Memorandum
10. Withdrawal Letter – August 9, 1961
11. September 7, 1961
12. October 22, 1961
13. Charles W. Cooper: October 6, 1961
  James Macdonald:
14. October 22, 1963
15. March 31, 1964
16. A Vessel to Honour
17. The Lord's Table and the Lord's Supper
18. Ron A. Westfield: April 14, 1972
 




INTRODUCTION
The Manchester Connection – Stopping the Wells
"And Isaac dug again the wells of water that they had dug in the days
of Abraham his father, and that the Philistines had stopped
after the death of Abraham; and he called their names
after the names by which his father had called them", Genesis 26: 18.

This page is taken from No. 18 in my Historical Reference Series. It relates to the position of Mr. James Macdonald of Manchester.

Mr. Macdonald wrote No. 490 in the '1973 Re-Selection' and No. 536 in the 'Supplement 1993'. They were in the 1951 edition as 443 and 347,

Two pamphlets, A Vessel to Honour and The Lord's Table and the Lord's Supper – the only records of J.Macd.'s ministry available – are included so that his views, many of which are those generally held, may be better understood.

Text in [square brackets] and all explanatory notes, unless otherwise indicated, are mine.

G.A.R.

Page Top

JAMES  MACDONALD
1. Withdrawal Letter – May 15, 1956
2. Statement of James Macdonald
Andrew Robertson kindly supplied both the letter and the statement.

1. Withdrawal Letter – May 15, 1956

To saints meeting at School Lane, Manchester 20, and elsewhere 

Dear Brethren,
At the meeting on Friday night I must confess that the analysis of my part in the service of God over the last twelve months, which was presented to you is very humbling to me, for I am con­scious and ashamed of my poverty in His service. In other ways also I have to confess that I have failed and been unfaithful among you. He knows my deep concern about these things.

The issue in my soul which I raised relates to the sectarian spirit of pretension which I deeply feel marks us, and this has bur­dened my spirit a long time.

To say such things as we do of ourselves in contrast to other believers not in the same path is serious enough;

But when His beloved people take up, or fall into, a wrong or sectarian position, God in His mercy may allow this state of things to expose itself by the extravagance of its claims so that the simplest of us may see what is happening.

It is with deep sorrow of heart that I am no longer able to walk with you. I act solely as an individual and on my own personal responsibility to the Lord.

So that I cannot take this painful and solemn step without expressing my gratitude to you for all you have spent in affectionate care for me, for the Lord's sake.

Your affectionate brother in Christ, James Macdonald.

Page Top   Article Top

2. Statement of James Macdonald

For some time I have been deeply disturbed and concerned about the high claims we make for ourselves as a body and for our ministry.

Many time, while with us, Mr. Taylor impressed us with the importance of "persevering in the teaching, and fellowship of the apostles, in breaking of bread and prayers".

The last item in these things "prayers" is frequently linked in Scripture with praise, and would suitably link the service of God with the breaking of bread, for it has been constantly and helpfully said in ministry that the Lord's supper inaugurates the service of God.

When the Lord Jesus addresses the assembly in its public responsibility in Revelation 2 and 3 He begins with the assembly at Ephesus

Now Mr. Myles considers that in the service of God we have got beyond anything known in the apostles' day, and alludes evidently to the fresh features taken on in recent years in relation to the Holy Spirit and the Trinity.

We must recognize, of course, so far as the Divine record in Scripture goes, that these features are not found in the "prayers" or praises of the apostles.

Quite apart from current exercise I have long felt that consid­eration of his prayers as the minister of the assembly would help us on the line of assembly prayer; and meditation of his doxologies would enrich and enlarge our part in assembly praise.

When in Manchester a little time ago, Mr. [G. H.] Stuart Price spoke of the "former glory" in Haggai 2, in its application to our time as referring to the glory of the house in apostolic days;

We can hardly say, that prayer, praise, and worship to the Holy Spirit and to the Trinity are fresh light and truth because we all know that these features of the service of God have always been taught and practised in the Church of England and other churches.

What is disturbing, however, is the statement that the use of that Name is essential to the worship of God as God, for then none of the apostolic doxologies recorded in Scripture does so, because none of them brings it in.

Another line of things has cause long and anxious exercise. I quote from a paper by Mr. Myles entitled 'Assembly Calendar'.

Now every true believer on our Lord Jesus Christ – leaving the Old Testament – when he reads this last statement regarding "these men" asks – which men?

I quote now from a letter of Mr. E. J. Boyt, dated December 3, 1954, to Mr. R. Grubb on the Scriptures and ministry.

Here is a plain claim that ministry, that is authoritative ministry among us, is the personal speaking of the Holy Spirit and has not less authority than Scripture.

But the simple Christian, who, like the Berean has the Scrip­tures handy for reference and confirmation when he reads ministry rightly believes, because he has the word of God and the Spirit of God, he is able to test ministry and hold fast the right, as the apostle enjoins him to do.

I quote now from a reading with Mr. Myles at Park Street, London on 20th March, 1954. This statement caused serious concern with many brethren, and Mr. [G. H.] Stuart Price wrote Mr. Myles about it.

Now let us refer to 1 John 2 where we have the apostle John writing to the little children in view of the last hour and its dangers in regard to the truth.

Now if ministry is the personal speaking of the Holy Spirit, not to be made subject to the test of Scripture, but having not less authority than Scripture; and further if, in any case, the simple Christian is not adequately equipped with the Scriptures and the Spirit of God, to test a ministry, what can he do?

This is the attitude and position to which Mr. Darby refers in his paper on 'Universal Consent' which I now quote [J. Macd.'s underlining]:--

I desire the brethren to understand clearly where I stand. I must seek grace to persevere in the apostles' teaching and fellowship, in breaking of bread and prayers.

I cannot accept the doctrine that the ministry among us is the personal speaking of the Holy Spirit and has equal authority with Scrip­tures.*

I refer now, with reluctance and hesitancy, to other statements by one to whom under the Lord's hand we owe much.

In readings at Birmingham with Mr. A. J. Gardiner [of London] which contain much helpful ministry,

I quote now from page 9 of the notes of the reading on John 14 at Stourbridge, in January 1955, with Mr. Gardiner.

Exclusive claims are again made for those who have departed from iniquity, according to 2 Timothy 2.

I refer now to a pamphlet by Mr. J. [H.] Holland of Port Elizabeth, South Africa, published and we understand approved by Stow Hill Depot. It is entitled 'The Spirit's Present Voice to the Assemblies'.

On page 5, the writer says, "the true Israel of God has set forward to take up a fresh position"; and those not doing so are enjoined to do so, "and line up with the whole assembly which is already on the march".

How many times other saints have sought to walk with us and we would not receive them if they insisted on praying to, and worshipping the Holy Spirit. We regarded them on account of these very things, as unfit for Christian fellowship.

Perhaps if we had confessed our wrong to these brethren we would now be marked by more humility and be preserved in littleness. "Purge me with hyssop" a repentant one prayed.

Anyone who will compare 2 Corinthians 6: 14 – 7: 1 with 2 Timothy 2: 19-21 will notice a similarity in the truth they present, though the setting is different.

We are not of the world as Christ is not of the world. So that in our associations of life we should walk apart from it.

In the book of Ezra the people of God were at that time in days of recovery similar in some ways to our own. Ezra himself had led a number from Babylon to Jerusalem.

He is in great distress on hearing these things and, overwhelmed with sorrow on account of the unfaithfulness, we have this affecting confession to God of their sin.

The connection of this line of truth with the service of God is illustrated in a positive way in Nehemiah 9.

Phinehas, the son of Eleazar, in Numbers 25, deals with this evil in another way, because he was jealous for his God, and acquired a covenant of everlasting priesthood.

Now while we have dealt with brothers, who were workmen in trade unions, have we been as faithful as [Phinehas, the son of] Eleazar in disregarding social considerations?

What is the difference in principle? A social difference there clearly is and so with shareholdings and manufacturers' or traders' associations.

James Macdonald.

Page Top   Article Top

W.  MAUCHAN
3. January 8, 1961   4. February 13, 1961

3. January 8, 1961

Mr. J. Bulloch,
My dear brother,
I will send booklets to those who have not already had them from me. We distribute all the booklets free, and your gift will be used in this service. We thank God for these expressions of fellowship in the work.

We were about 45 at first, but we have lost 15 brethren over the years to the 'Glanton' and 'Open' systems. These brethren desired a 'broader path', so it was with sorrow that we had to part from them. We desire a 'narrow' path with, as J.N.D. said, hearts as 'wide' as Christ's.

As to professional associations, my own view is that many of these are set up by the government, in protection of the public, the government being 'God's officers for good'.

Another booklet is being printed and will be sent to you shortly. I have sent some on Philippians 3 to you today.

With love in the Lord to you all, Yours in Him, Wm. Mauchan.*

4. February 13, 1961

Mr. J. Bulloch,
Beloved Brother,
I have sent you some more books, and await your further request if you need a further supply.

You are right when you say in regard of J.N.D., J.B.S. and F.E.R. that leadership was moral, and what marked these men was the readiness to have what they ministered put to the test by Scrip­ture. If that is done now the person is excommunicated.

, as you say, is at present in this country. He has issued a dispensation at Buckie, Scotland, that at the fellowship meetings those who are 'interested' may stay to have tea.

There are still numbers who are moving out, especially in the south of England. There is little in our area, at the moment, and also little in the north. But there has been quite a move in the south and southwest of England, and I think it continues.

We often think and pray for you. I had a letter this week from an old brother, Bailey, Victoria, B.C. His wife is very poorly with a stroke and he is exercised about matters among the brethren. He needs our prayers. There must be many like him.

Love in the Lord to you all. Yours affectionately in Him. Wm. Mauchan.

Page Top   Article Top

CHARLES  L.  NUNNERLERY
March 20, 1961

Mr. J. Bulloch,
Beloved Brother,
… The brethren at Stafford are in close touch with Mr. [James] Macdonald [of Didsbury] and I trust we shall be in full fellowship [see paragraph 6 of John Murray's letter of September 7, 1961, below] with our brother and those with him. He will be up in London tomorrow and I shall hope to meet him …

Much love in our Lord Jesus, Charles Nunnerley.

Page Top   Article Top

A.  ANGUS
August 30, 1961
Mr. Angus is the author of No. 204 in
'Hymns and Spiritual Songs for the Little Flock – Re-Selected 1973.

Mr. J. A. Bulloch,
Beloved Brother,
You refer to Mr. James Macdonald. So far as I can see or know, he seems to be on the line of 'drawing away disciples after himself', and thus causing scattering amongst some who have withdrawn from the Taylor system.

Personally I always had some objection to the way that it was pushed that it must be done, and made a test of fellowship.

If we address the Spirit, being One of the Persons of the Godhead, I think it ought to be done in a balanced way, but avoid stressing "must" in the matter. It is really only in typical language we get it.

I did not like to hear the pretentious boasting so prevalent amongst us for years, some saying that we got the light of addressing the Spirit because of our spirituality.

Warmest love in our Lord Jesus to each and all.
Your affectionate brother and sister, A. & G. Angus.

Page Top   Article Top

FRANK  G.  HOLDING
September 18, 1961

Mr. John A. Bulloch,
Beloved Brother,
… J. Macd.'s [James Macdonald's] matter is causing some measure of concern,

Yes, C.L.N. [Nunnerley] may be rather with J. Macd., but love and patience may yet triumph. There is much to be sorted out, one way and another, but the Lord is near to help as we are depen­dent …

Your brother in Him, F. G. Holding.

Page Top   Article Top

JOHN  MURRAY
8. July 15, 1961   9. Memorandum   10. Withdrawal Letter – August 9, 1961
11. September 7, 1961   12. October 22, 1961

Beloved Brother, [This appears to be a circular letter.]

On different days during the week I received copies of a six-page document comprising:–:

  1. Copy of a letter from Mr. [A. P. C.] Lawrence (Stornoway) to Mr. [James] Macdonald (Didsbury).

  2. Copies of two replies by Mr. Macdonald to this letter.

In view of the character of the replies I feel obliged, as an Inverness brother, to comment briefly upon them. This I have done in the enclosed memorandum.

I have refrained from making detailed remarks meantime about Inverness as we are considering the whole matter locally.

The "two brethren" to whom Mr. Macdonald refers on page 5 are his own son and daughter-in-law but he does not make this clear.

With much love in the Lord Jesus, Your brother in Him, John Murray.

Memorandum

Extract from letter by Mr. A. P. C. Lawrence
to Mr. James Macdonald (Didsbury) May 25, 1961

"… In the order of your gatherings you have evidently agreed that there should be no singing to either the Holy Spirit or the Trinity, and, indeed, so strongly have you felt the need to ensure this that you have produced and use a hymn book specially selected to secure this objective.

"I know you say you give liberty to others to express them­selves in these matters, but it is evidently a condition of meeting with you in Manchester that this is not done … "

Extract from letter by Mr. James Macdonald
to Mr. A. P. C. Lawrence (Stornoway) June 30, 1961

"… You laid it down as a condition of your linking on with any company of brethren that they must have a hymn book that contains hymns addressed to the Holy Spirit, as otherwise you are deprived of your liberty to sing hymns to the Holy Spirit …

"… You will understand from what I have written that I would be twice guilty  before God if I entered into it …"

"IT" refers to fellowship in which brethren have the liberty to sing and pray to the Holy Spirit. Clearly, Mr. Macdonald forbids this liberty.

In his letter he also says "Now I ask who gave you authority to intervene in Inverness". An extract from a letter by Mr. A. P. C. Lawrence, dated June 2, 1961, to an Inverness brother – not the undersigned – reads "I am sorry I was away when you phoned and told us about the forthcoming visit of James Macdonald and his wife from Manchester. Since then I have been very much occupied and a lot away from home, so I must apologize for not writing before …"

Obviously Mr. Lawrence did not "intervene" but merely answered a brother's enquiry. The facts given in his letter were, until then, not known to the brethren in Inverness.

Mr. James Macdonald's son (Didsbury) is married to Mr. William MacDonald's daughter (Inverness).

John Murray.


Withdrawal Letter – August 9, 1961

To those who meet at 24 Stephen's Brae, Inverness, August 9, 1961
Beloved Brethren,

Recently you advised me that you intended to break bread with brethren from Didsbury. Since then I have refrained from break­ing bread – yet with the sincere desire that you would come to see the error into which you have fallen.

You are fully aware that the meeting at Didsbury has an independent hymn book and that those who meet there have stated that they intend to continue using it.

Christian liberty is thus restricted and persons made to acqui­esce to a doctrine with which they do not agree. It is apparent that an attack has been made on the established liberty to worship the Holy Spirit.

I have often told you how I viewed this matter. Now I write to make it absolutely clear that my household is not identified with the step you have taken.

Your brother in Christ, John Murray.

September 7, 1961

Mr. John Bulloch,
Beloved Brother,

When in Glasgow during the past weekend I met one of your local brethren – Mr. Brown – who urged me to write to you and acquaint you with the position here.

At Glasgow our beloved brother [G.R.C.] was sustained in power. The cable sent by the brethren with you was much appreciated and in accord with what we had before us.

A helpful remark made by Mr. Cowell was when he distin­guished between "One God" in the Old Testament and "God is One" in the New.

I was speaking to Mr. [Philip] Haddad who was there – we both had occasion to ask Mr. [C. W.] Cooper, Belfast, who has written a letter on response to the Holy Spirit to circulate it more widely – it is really excellent – he is considering this prayerfully …

In this locality James Macdonald – Didsbury – is related by mar­riage to local brethren and thus has been able to bring consider­able pressure to bear.

One Lord's Day later a brother from Edinburgh was on holi­day in Inverness and on finding out from a local brother that Mr. [Charles L.] Nunnerley had broken bread did not attend the meet­ings.

A number of brethren have been in Inverness recently but move along the coast to break bread.

The meetings at Portnockie and Findochty have sent me offi­cial letters of support and others have verbally done likewise. Airdrie and Kilwinning appear to be very clear.

A local brother said to me several weeks ago before I ceased to break bread here "We can link with anyone" and "We are linked with no one". I could not agree with his statements taken singly let alone taken together.

Please convey my warm love in the Lord Jesus to all the dear brethren with you.

Affectionately, Your brother in Him, John Murray.

October 22, 1961

Mr. John A. Bulloch,
Beloved Brother,
We withdrew from the brethren here in mid-September – since then Burghead have told Inverness that they are not prepared to break bread with them.

In Bournemouth and Worthing where James Macdonald has had support for some time he decided to break bread in spite of the consequences –

We are not breaking bread anywhere meantime as we feel it is better to wait a little in view of the current exercises.

With love to you and all the beloved brethren,
Affectionately your brother in Christ, John Murray.

Page Top   Article Top

C.  W.  COOPER
October 6, 1961
C.W.C. wrote No.'s 283, 494 and 530 in the 1973/93 Hymn Book.
Some of his poems are in The Alpha and The Omega and other poems.
See his letters in The Ulster Outlook, and The Parting of the Ways.

Mr. John A. Bulloch,
Beloved Brother,
Mr. [James] Macdonald is doing harm. He is writing and circulating letters everywhere trying to show that it is wrong to worship the Spirit, yet he says he will permit anyone to do this if they desire to do so.

There has been another split at Inverness, as you may know. John Murray objected to them allowing Mr. Macdonald's son and others to break bread but as this was of no avail he withdrew; since then brethren from England, supposedly breaking bread with us, have gone to Skinner's hotel at Inverness and broken bread with MacDonald, Smyth and Skinner.*

The brethren along the Moray Firth – including Gardenstown – feel that the position should be clarified, so Burghead – nearest meet­ing – has made investigations in Inverness

You and the brethren in Toronto are often in our thoughts and prayers. There are many lonely ones all over the world just now but the Good Shepherd knows about each one.

Our love in the Lord Jesus to your household and to your mother.
Charles W. Cooper

Page Top   Article Top

JAMES  MACDONALD
14. October 22, 1963   15. March 31, 1964   16. A Vessel to Honour
17. The Lord's Table and the Lord's Supper
All the foregoing letters should be kept in mind in reading those following. As in most matters, there was probably wrong on both sides. However three things seem apparent:–
  1. There was a determined and extended effort to attract breth­ren, who had withdrawn in 1960-61, to the Didsbury group;

  2. A clear line of demarcation existed between the two groups as to liberty to pray to and worship the Holy Spirit, and God as "Father, Son and Holy Spirit";

  3. Mr. Macdonald – despite his disavowal in the following letter, and perhaps somewhat understandably – seems to have be­come embittered over the years.

Mr. John Bulloch, October 22, 1963
Beloved brother,
We had heard of our dear brother, Mr. [J. Gordon] Mathison, being taken to be with the Lord. The details of his burial make sad reading, but I can understand the services of those you are with being declined.

On the other hand there are those who are giving up vital truth which the Scriptures teach, important Divine principles that govern the holy fellowship of His Son, to which God has called us.

This is a sorrowful situation, and it makes it very difficult for those who desire to keep away from the exclusiveness of those with Mr. [A. P. C.] Lawrence [of Stornoway]

It is a time to hold fast and guard by the Holy Spirit what God has given His people.

Please be advised, dear brother, that I write with no bitterness. At times, the Lord knows, the sadness of heart is almost unbear­able. With unfeigned love in the Lord,

Affectionately yours in Him, Jas. Macdonald.

Page Top   Article Top

March 31, 1964

Mr. John Bulloch,
Beloved brother,
Thank you for the address by Mr. Burrows,* and the copy of the letter from —.

It is sad that some have left those with Mr. [C. W.] Cooper in Belfast because they felt claims were being made there similar to those made by the Taylor brethren.

How we all need preservation from the spiritual pretension and pride of which we were so guilty!

I have been to Barbados and found them growing in number and, I believe, growing in soul. There is a remarkable interest in the gospel, the room being more than full, a good number sitting outside as their climate permits.

Trust you are well and the brethren with you. With love in the Lord to yourself and to all,

Affectionately yours in Him, Jas. Macdonald.

Page Top   Article Top

A  VESSEL  TO  HONOUR
James Macdonald
"… sanctified, serviceable to the Master", 2 Timothy 2 – 4

The deep soul exercises through which many have passed in recent years, have led them many times to consider the guidance the Lord would afford to His people through this epistle in the difficult times in which we are found. 2 Timothy 3: 1.

It is deeply comforting to find in such times there is that which stands firm.

The foundation of God has a two-fold seal,

But on our side, of which the second side of the seal speaks, there always remains the responsibility to separate from the iniquity or unrighteousness that has come in through these false brethren and evil men.<

It is said by some that while the Lord in His judicial character calls attention to evil doctrine and practice in certain churches referred to in Revelation chapters two and three, He does not tell the faithful in them to separate from the evil.

Supposing some true believers say, 'We do not agree with this evil teaching but we do not think we should depart from it and purge ourselves away from those who teach these evil things'.

As such we are to flee from youthful or worldly lusts – 1 John 2: 14-17 – on the one hand, and on the other to follow or pursue righteousness, faith, love, peace with those that call on the Lord out of a pure heart.

The idea of some that because they belong to a particular com­munity of Christians they are the vessels to honour described in verse 21 is simply self-deception;

It is the individual believer, who departs from iniquity in the name of the Lord, who purges himself away from vessels to dishonour and who flees from what is worldly, that can follow righteousness, faith, love, peace, and call on the Lord out of a pure heart.

There are many true believers who say they could not go on with the evil in the church of Rome, nor with other believers who did not depart in the name of the Lord from the iniquity in that system.

Some of us have had to separate in the name of the Lord from the iniquity in a system, which holds the Romish doctrine of a 'universal leader' whose teaching, they claim, carries the full weight of divine authority.

Reverting to second Timothy, the third and fourth chapters of the epistle suggest what should be looked for in those who are following the Lord's directions in chapter two.

Three times in these two chapters we have this expression, "But thou" – 3: 10, 14: 4: 5.

  1. In the first Paul says of Timothy, in contrast to the evil and departure generally, "But thou" hast followed up my teaching, manner of life …";

  2. in verse 14, "But thou",continue in those things thou hast learned, knowing of who thou hast learned them", a reference to the apostle's teaching;

  3. in chapter 4: 5, "But thou" … do the work of an evangelist".

It is evident from the list that follows the reference to Paul's teaching that while his teaching comes first,

In verse 14, in view of the seducers and deceivers referred to in verse 13 who would lead us astray, Timothy is exhorted to abide in those things he had learned and was assured of, knowing of whom he had learned them.

It is one who follows up Paul's teaching and abides in the apostles' teaching who will get the right understanding and profit of all Scripture as inspired by God.

In chapter 4: 5 of second Timothy we have again the words, "But thou".

We may be sure that Timothy would gain from Mark and Luke, who are referred to in this chapter, precious impressions of Christ as the Great Evangelist, whom they present to us in the gospels they were inspired to write.

Paul was minister of the assembly, the church, and minister of the gospel. Colossians 1: 23-25. The two lines of service are not to be separated.

Yet the path in the last days is a very individual one – "But thou".

We must not expect large numbers in the "difficult times" contemplated in second Timothy.

Philip, the only one referred to in Scripture as an evangelist – Acts 21: 8 – was doing the work of an evangelist when speaking to the eunuch in the desert as much as when preaching to crowds in Samaria. Acts 8.

Paul and the truth he stands for are much neglected in our time.

Page Top   Article Top

THE  LORD'S  TABLE
AND  THE  LORD'S  SUPPER
James Macdonald
1 Corinthians 10: 15-22; 11: 23-26

The Lord's table and the Lord's supper are often referred to as if they were synonymous terms because they refer to the same ordinance.

While thus distinguished in their teaching they are not to be divorced because both refer to the breaking of bread.

In bringing forward the truth concerning the Lord's table an appeal is made to the intelligence of the Christians at Corinth,

"The cup of blessing which we bless is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? the bread which we break is it not the communion of the body of Christ? for we being many are one bread and one body for we all partake of that one bread".

In verse 21 reference is made to partaking of "the Lord's table".

The cup comes first because every blessing we have and enjoy together is ours solely because of the perfect and eternal redemption accomplished by Christ in the shedding of His precious blood.

It is a cup of unmingled blessing. The cup Christ drank on the cross for us was one of unmingled woe.

  • How rightly it is called "the cup of blessing" and well may we bless it, and bless Him of whose precious blood it speaks!

    "Love that no suff'ring stayed
    We'll praise – true love divine;
    Love that for us atonement made,
    Love that has made us Thine."
    Hymn 235 (1973), J.N.D.

    Any who know nothing in their souls of the value of the blood of Christ cannot rightly partake of this cup for none such can bless it.

    • Nor would any Christian who soberly considers the matter be prepared to participate of it with persons who deny the atoning efficacy and redeeming value of the blood of Christ.

    • How serious to read a leading Anglican evangelical suggesting that Christians should be free to have "holy communion" as it is called with persons who deny the truth of the virgin birth of Christ.

    • The holiness of His humanity rests on this truth. Luke 1: 35. What atoning value would there have been in the blood of Christ, if He was not holy and sinless? Or what virtue in the offering of His body? Hebrews 10: 10.

    • The idea of "holy communion" with persons who deny the truth of His holy humanity should be repulsive to every true lover of our Lord Jesus Christ.

    "The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ? For we being many are one bread and one body for we are all partakers of that one bread".

    • The communion of the body of Christ refers primarily to His sacrificial body given for us.

    • The Scripture however goes on to speak of the bread as a symbol of the unity of all true believers as "one body".

    • How concerned we should be as in this holy fellowship, based on Christ's blood shed and His body given, that our conduct and our associations should be morally in keeping with it!

    The reference to the one body would guard us against sectarianism and any thought of local independence in Christian fellowship, for it embraces all who are members of that one body.

    How do we become members of the one body? In chapter 12, verse 13, of this same epistle we read,

      • "For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free".

    • The One who baptizes with the Holy Spirit is the Son of God, our Lord Jesus Christ. This is clear from John 1: 33-34, where John the Baptist says of Him,

      • "the same is He that baptizeth with the Holy Spirit".

    • This was fulfilled at Pentecost as we learn from Acts 1: 5 and 2: 33.

    • All who have been redeemed in this dispensation by the blood of Christ have been baptized in the power of one Spirit into one body, and it is as members of that one body they partake of one bread.

    It is of fundamental importance to see that the Scriptures never speak of believers as members of a church but always as members of the one body which is the Church.

    • We may speak of membership of the Church of England or of other churches or bodies in Christendom. But the Scriptures as the word of God refer only to membership of the one body and this clearly includes all true believers in our Lord Jesus Christ.

      • "We being many are one body".

    • With this precious truth in our souls we partake of the one bread.

    • The Scriptures speak of "the way of the truth". As we walk in the way of this truth, and in the joy of it, we walk apart from all that is a plain and public denial of it.

    There are those who say that because it is the Lord's table everyone who professes His Name has a right to partake of it.

    • It is more in keeping with the truth to speak of participation of the Lord's table and the Lord's supper as Christian privileges rather than rights.

    • Being the Lord's table and the Lord's supper the rights concerning participation are His. And it clear that participation is governed by the teaching of the apostle as the Lord's commandment in this first epistle to the Corinthians. Chapter 14: 37.

    • Divine principles embodied in the Lord's commandment are to be maintained practically in every gathering of Christians, so that the precious privileges of the house of God may be rightly and fully enjoyed.

    • Sectarianism which denies the truth of the one body is to be judged and refused. 1 Corinthians 1 – 4. Discipline is to be exercised – 1 Corinthians 5: 2; 2 Timohy 2: 19-22 – and the holiness of the fellowship is to be maintained. 1 Corinthians 10.

    • The Lord is jealous about the holiness of the fellowship connected with His table and we are to be jealous, too, in ourselves individually and in our gatherings.

    • Even two or three gathered to His Name are a gathering and as such would seek grace to keep His word and not deny His Name. Revelation 3: 8.

    If we compare 1 Corinthians 10: 16-17 with chapter 11: 23-26, the contrast between the truth connected with the Lord's table and that with the Lord's supper is apparent.

    • The one presents Christian fellowship based on the death of Christ, His blood shed, His body given, and embracing all true believers as one body;

      • the other is simply and purely a personal memorial of the Lord Jesus, "this do for a remem­brance of Me".

    • In the former the Christian fellowship is presented widely, as including all true believers on our Lord Jesus Christ.

    • In the Lord's supper, which is local, all is so personal to the Lord Jesus.

    • Paul had received it from Him to deliver it to them; how He Himself instituted it on the night of His betrayal, then what He did, and what He said; the only place* in the epistles where we have the words of the Lord Jesus given.

        * But compare Luke 10: 7 with 1 Timothy 5: 18.   GAR

    • The time of its institution, "the night in which He was betrayed", makes a personal appeal to every lover of our Lord Jesus Christ.

    Paul is insisting that moral conditions among them in Corinth must be in keeping with the holy character of the Lord's supper.

      • "For", he says, "I have received from the Lord that which I also delivered to you".

    • From the details that follow it is clearly a very personal matter between the Lord Jesus and His own, the words "in remembrance of me", being applied to both the bread and the cup. It is designed by Him to recall Himself and His love and so maintain His personal place in our hearts in the time of his absence – "till He come".

      • It is thus that lovers of our Lord Jesus Christ cherish the Lord's supper just as He has given it to us through His apostle.

    • We are told with the utmost simplicity and brevity when and how He instituted it, His own words as to its order and intention. It is all His own thought, disclosing the desire of His own heart, designed to nourish and sustain our affection for Him during the time of His absence – "till He come".

    • Paul is not here teaching them the truth of the Lord's table, but appealing for a true remembrance of the Lord Jesus in His supper.

    In 1 Corinthians 15 Paul speaks of the gospel he had received from the Lord and delivered to them as here of the Lord's supper. So delivered it is a sacred trust.

    • No true lover of Christ would think of giving up the gospel, nor of ceasing to break bread in remembrance of Him, though there were but two or three gathered together in His Name. Matthew 18: 20; Revelation 3: 8.

    In the Lord's supper the bread comes first, speaking of His body given for us. The body brings the Person before us and recalls what is often said, He gave Himself for us.

    • The cup speaks of the life laid down, His blood shed, to accomplish redemption and place our relations with Him on a new and eternal basis. It is the cup of "the new covenant in My blood", and as another scripture says, "the blood of the everlasting covenant".

    • Our relations with Himself and with God through Him and His work, He has put on an entirely new and eternal basis.

    • There is not a word to suggest the elaborate ritual or ceremonial which in so many bodies in Christendom deprives the Lord's supper of the simplicity and beauty that belongs to it.

    • There is not the slightest hint of some one ordained, as is said, to 'administer the sacrament', someone alas! who so often has no appreciation of the atoning work accomplished in His death or of the love that accomplished it.

    We do not doubt that even where such conditions prevail and such unscriptural arrangements are made, there are to be found true believers whose love breaks through these human barriers and reaches Christ in individual, personal response of heart to Him.

    • Yet how deeply thankful we are that in such a day as this through God's mercy we still have and can enjoy the Lord's supper in the simplicity in which He gave it to His own.

    It is taken up in this simplicity of love by His own assembled to break bread on the first day of the week, and the fullness and depth of His perfect love richly enjoyed as they truly take the bread and drink the cup for a remembrance of Him.

    • It is as self-judged we partake of it, so that, the conscience being clear, our affections flow freely to Him. 1 Corinthians 11: 28.

    In the two references to the breaking of bread in 1 Corinthians 11 and Acts 20: 7 there is a great contrast between

      • the brevity and simplicity of the account in the one of the institution, order, and intention of the Lord's supper,

      • and the length of Paul's discourse in the other.

    • It was as the disciples were assembled for the Lord's supper that Paul discoursed to them at length.

    It speaks in 1 Corinthians 11 of the Christians in Corinth coming together not in the church as a building, but as in church character.

    • The divisions among them were a denial of the truth that they were of the "one body".

    • And the moral conditions were altogether contrary to the holiness that becomes God's house, in which the privileges of the fellowship to which He has called us are to be enjoyed.

    • While we have the order and beauty of the Lord's supper set out in First Corinthians Paul's other teaching in that epistle had to be corrective because of the carnal conditions in the Corinthian gathering.

    • Spiritual things that would follow and flow from the celebration of the Lord's supper, he could not unfold to them. 1 Corinthians 3: 13.

    But it is evident in Acts 20: 7, in the gathering in Troas, he was not so restrained and was able to unfold to them at length the things in view as they were assembled to break bread.

    • If we are truly together in some measure in church character, in the affections and intelligence that are proper to the church, and in the holiness that becomes God's house, the Lord's supper leads on to the enjoyment of the precious privileges of those who compose His church.

    • There is response to Him as Head of the church which is His body; and love's response to Him as His bride.

    • There is no formal 'order of service' but these precious relationships to Christ give character to our response and praise to Him flowing out of our remembrance of Him in the supper.

      Although "There is no formal 'order of service' " – in accord with his rejection of worship to the Spirit – Mr. Macdonald, passes by the place of the Spirt according to "For through Him we have both access by one Spirit to the Father", Ephesians 2: 18.
      Later he does the same as to the recognition of God as God, Father and Son and Holy Spirit, a wider thought than that of the Father.   GAR

    • Yet as He has His place, He ever leads His own into the enjoyment of their place with Him before the Father.

    They have been sanctified and perfected for ever by His one offering. Hebrews 10: 14; 2: 11.

    • In His risen life in resurrection they are all of one with Him, so that He is not ashamed to call them brethren – Hebrews 2: 11 – as He did in His message to them by Mary, "Go tell My brethren", John 20: 19.

    • As His brethren, He associates them with Himself as sons of His Father and His God, in His own words, "I ascend to My Father and your Father, and to My God and your God".

    All is so personal to Christ. The abiding basis of all is in the work accomplished in His death from which we begin, "My body … My blood";

    • kindred to Him as partaking of His risen life "My brethren";

    • and associated with Him as sons before His Father in His present ascended place, "My Father and your Father, and My God and your God".

    Thus He declares to us the Name of God, and in the midst of this vast assembly of His brethren, the sons of God, He sings His praises.

    • And because we are sons, God has sent forth the Spirit of His Son into our hearts crying, Abba Father – Galatians 4 – so that we have part through Him and with Him in the praises He sings to Him who is His Father and God.

    "The praises led by Thy Beloved
    Delight Thy holy ear;
    And we, with hearts divinely moved,
    Rejoice that praise to share".
    Hymn 94 (1973), H. Allen.

    It is a wonderful thing that we are brought to share in God the Father's thoughts of Christ, what He is to God.

    • It is even more wonderful that, as sons of God through redemption and by the Spirit of His Son in our hearts, we can enjoy what God is to Christ, as His Father and God.

    Though doubtless entered into in a special way as we are together for the Lord's supper, this enjoyment, and the praise and worship that flow from it, are not confined to that occasion.

    • As Minister of the sanctuary, by Him we offer the sacrifice of praise to God continually. Hebrews 8: 2; 13: 15.

    Yet in all things He ever has the pre-eminence.

    • He has many brethren, but He is the Firstborn; there are many sons, but He is the Only Begotten Son in the bosom of the Father.

    • This does not limit the unbounded blessings that are ours through His work and according to the love and counsels of the Father, nor does it lessen our enjoyment of them by the Spirit in our hearts.

    • But it needfully guards His pre-eminent place for He who as Man has made every blessing ours through His redeeming work, ever remains in our hearts in His Divine glory, God over all, blessed for evermore.

    Page Top   Article Top

    RONALD  A.  WESTFIELD
    April 14, 1972
    The following gives further details as to the matter of James Macdonald.
    Betty and I have fond memories of Ron and Margaret. Our first experience
    – c. 1960 – in meeting brethren unknown by sight at the airport was with them – but we recognized each other as brethren at once, without any difficulty.   GAR

    Mr. George Milne, Birmingham,
    Dear George,
    In response to your enquiry, the following might be of help. Since it has become necessary to review the past wrong judgments made and doctrines taught, it became clear to me that it would require that we should review matters earlier than 1959.

    In 1956 James Macdonald withdrew from fellowship for the following three reasons:–

    1. Our claim to have the Lord's presence exclusively;
         
    2. Claim to have ministry beyond the Apostles – the latter glory of the house being greater than the former – referring to ministry regarding addressing the Spirit;

    3. Placing ministry on the level of Scripture as authority for 'universal' acceptance.

    I felt it was right that I should acknowledge to him – and others – that I should not have supported the action taken against him shortly afterwards.

    In the more serious matter of the evil 'eating' issue, I had made similar acknowledgments to some. In each case I told the breth­ren what I had said and done.

    • Action being individual, I felt I should put things right the same way with James Macdonald. There was no complaint until I referred to him.

    • Those with whom I walked here – since Aberdeen – uphold the 'assembly judgment' and regard James Macdonald in the usual manner of brethren. He was named in almost stronger language than –—.

    Three months ago, I accepted the suggestion made, that because he did not attend the 'assembly meeting' he was to be regarded as lawless, but I can see now that such a meeting should never have been called.

    • It was a serious mistake to reach a situation whereby Christians were refused fellowship over such a matter. Where the blame lies for this I could not say too definitely, but I am sure there is blame.

    • As usual, I was told I was 'independent' for see­ing James Macdonald without the knowledge of all the brethren.

    • What concerned me was the action taken at the time, not the sub­sequent history, of which I know little.

    Nearly six months ago we were helped to see that the 'phase' to the Holy Spirit, in the service of God, was an idea of –— and was not supported from Scripture or any Christian ministry that we knew of. The Lord leads directly to the Father

      I cannot recall the place given to the Spirit in the service of God being "an idea of –—" as Ron suggests.
      In any case, the scriptural basis for the formal recognition – and the order of worship – of the Spirit, as of the Lord Jesus and the Father, is clearly set out in "For through Him we have both access by one Spirit to the Father", Ephesians 2: 18.   GAR

    • For some weeks we were fully confirmed to revert to what was always customary amongst those we had walked with during more normal times.

    • After I raised the matter of J. Macd., brethren immediately reverted to the –— doctrine as to the 'phase' to the Spirit – showing clearly a pref­erence for –— over Scripture. I regarded this very seriously.

    • In the course of these events we have seen the working of the same hatred, bitter­ness, bigotry and self-righteousness that we were accustomed to in the other system.

    I told the brethren that I regarded the meetings as Mr. Will­iam's* meeting, who three months earlier, after attempting to walk out – not being free to walk with me because of what I had raised – and being restrained,

    • took his seat and proceeded in the manner of the system, to ask every brother where he stood, and in my judgment, intimidating into subjection to his thoughts, some brethren who had previously thought otherwise.

        [* "He has since gone with the Renton party and proves the point which R.A.W. made in the meeting". Source Unknown.]

    • I felt that it was no longer a gathering morally related to those we were in fellowship with elsewhere. I feel events have proved this.

    There is no doubt we all broke bread too quickly after Aberdeen, and we are reaping the rewards today.

    With warm love in the Lord Jesus,
    Yours affectionately in Him, Ron Westfield.

    Page Top   Article Top