p217* * * I am not anxious to explain my conduct - I quite expected the use likely to be made of it by many. … I told them I saw no harm in the circular, and had pressed its withdrawal, and as it stood as "a stumbling-block" to many, I took it out of the way. I did not see much meaning in withdrawing a warning, never on sale, and three years old, but as it was a matter of feeling, and they felt it a hindrance, I was willing to remove everything in the way. The merits and demerits of B. remaining I supposed unchanged, I go on with those with whom I am in communion on the broad and plain ground of my duty to Christ. If others are faithful to Him, we shall go together; if they are not, by His grace we shall not. The fact is I never was on any other, only I supposed myself with all the brethren on it, and the Ebrington Street iniquity broke that. I never - not even when in the Establishment - thought that Christ and iniquity, and Christ and fundamental false doctrine as to Him, were to go together. If others think they can and ought (and it is the whole question) … of course this will lead us in different paths. I have withdrawn the circular in grace because it was a hindrance and a stumbling-block to minds of brethren, from before whom I would take every such thing. Any conclusion drawn from it I entirely repudiate. I shall act as faithfully as I am able in every case which shall arise as a servant of Christ. I dare take no other ground: I never did. I know of no "ecclesiastical position" but this: I took it publicly in London. On arriving I told brethren I could not be for ever on questions. I have done with B. entirely, and every case that I meet with I will try and act godlily in. The question for every one is, "What is faithfulness to Christ?" It remains, and must remain, just where it was.

[51112E]