Forty Years On - 1962-2002

Iain H.Murray reflects on the Leicester Ministers' Conference as it passes a fortieth milestone

My memory of the origins of this conference goes back to a conversation in September 1961 with the Rev Marcellus Kik, a minister in the Reformed Church of United States, on a visit to this country. Mr Kik was one of the original editors of Christianity Today; he had a broad knowledge of Evangelicalism and, more particularly in its Reformed branches. He was, for instance, a board member of Westminster Theological Seminary. Nearing the end of his life, Kik had the strong conviction that a recovery of true preaching was the great need of the hour, and he suggested that it could be an aid to meeting that need if there was a closer connection between ministers and missionaries who shared that vision. Men on either side of the Atlantic, he believed, could strengthen one another. A conference seemed to us both a way forward and it was agreed that he would speak to Professor John Murray in Philadelphia while I would approach the Rev. W.J.Grier of Belfast. Both of these contacts proved to be ready to help. Other support came from the Banner of Truth Trust. Jack Cullum, co-founder of the Trust, not being a minister, played no part in the planning but he was enthusiastic to give aid and it was through him that Leicester was fixed for the venue. One of his friends was the Rev Sidney Lawrence, an ex-Methodist minister, who had recently become the first pastor in a new work in Leicester. Lawrence had noticed an attractive the new building opened by the University of Leicester at Knighton, and named 'College Hall'. It was indeed suitable and thus the first conference eventually met there in July 1962. The cost was £3 for the three days!

The external history of the conference is probably of least importance and let me therefore trace it first and briefly. About 40 men gathered on that first occasion. By the end of the 1960s the average attendance was around 120. In 1974 the number had risen to around 260, by 1980 it was nearer 280 and subsequently there were occasions when it was even higher. We thus outgrew the limited space of the conference room at College Hall. For several years this problem was met by a compromise. From 1979 to 1985 we remained in residence at College Hall while all the conference meetings were held a short walk down the road in Knighton Evangelical Church. The first time we walked down to the church, people, startled at the sight of so many men, came out of their houses to ask what was happening! This arrangement was appreciated but it had its limitations and thus in 1986 we moved a mile to Villiers and Gilbert Murray halls where we have continued to meet. For many, all these places are associated with sacred memories.

I move on now to speak of the early years of the conference. Mr Kik was never to be present but he played a part in the readiness of Professor John Murray to speak at the first conference. The two other senior ministers who spoke in 1962 were W.J.Grier and Kenneth MacRae of Stornoway. No one was more enthusiastic than Mr MacRae, although he was then in his seventy-ninth year and was to die only two years later. Professor Murray and Jim Grier were friends who had been at Princeton Seminary together in the 1920s. For years to come at Leicester they did most to set the tone of the conference. Between them and the majority of the conference there was a considerable age difference. In 1962 John Murray was in his sixty-second year and Mr Grier was in his sixtieth. Mr MacRae spoke about the 'young fellows who gathered at Leicester.' Dr D.W.Mowbray, who wrote a report on the 1967 conference, had this to say on the age of the members:

'The writer was immediately struck by the large proportion of young men. At a guess, half were under 35; and there were few merely old-timers. Some were really young.'

One of the purposes of the first conference was to bring together men who had the same vision and heart beat and yet who, as yet, did not know one another. Many of the men who attended the first conferences were strangers to each other. This gave rise to an amusing incident in 1962. During a discussion meeting in the Common Room at College Hall an English pastor referred to an old Scottish book he had been enjoying and particularly its account of the 'Minister of Watten.' Watten is a small place near John O'Groats in the remote North, unknown to many in Scotland, let alone in England. It was therefore with no small surprise that a little man rose in the back of the meetings and announced in a high-pitched Highland tongue, 'I am the minister of Watten.' After that we all knew Donald MacKay, the successor to a witness of over a century earlier.

Another way in which we came to know one another was connected with the youthfulness of conference members. If not from the outset, at least from 1964, games of soccer became a regular part of the after lunch exercise for many of the men. These were mighty contests, and in later years, when some became too old to play, they remained to shout advice from the touchline. David Jones of Sunderland stands out in that regard. But the enduring value of these physical engagements was the aid they gave to the forming of lasting friendships. This is not to deny that the games sometimes gave rise to problems. For instance, we early earned a reprimand from the University authorities when we mistook the back garden of the head of the University - the Provost -- for a suitable football pitch! It was on that same day that the pace of the game was too much for Geoffrey Thomas and we had to pause so he could be laid to recover under a tree. That scene comes to my mind when I think of how Geoff outruns us all in his routine today.

In connexion with these relaxed afternoons I want to add something which I believe is important. The period between lunch time and 5 o'clock has always been kept free. This has been vital. It gave men time to pause and be refreshed. Had sessions been more crowded together we should have seen conference members choosing
which they would attend. This would have changed the whole nature of the gathering. To the question, 'Which have been the best of the conferences here?' I am certain the answer is, those where one session has blended with the next and an overall message has come through which was never planned. I hope the afternoon free time will always remain free and relaxed.

***

The first conference of 1962 was simply announced as 'a conference on Preaching.' The second was called 'The Conference at Leicester' and only on the fourth occasion was it designated the 'Leicester Ministers' Conference'. The name of the Banner of Truth Trust appeared nowhere in the programmes. This was not an accident. It was ministers and not the Trust that called the conference, although the Trust gave financial aid. The issue was sensitive in the 1960s because of the conviction that para-church agencies were playing too large a part in what ought to be church affairs. 'What,' it could be asked, 'had a publishing house got to do with calling a conference for ministers?'

Dr Lloyd-Jones had particular reason to be apprehensive about this new conference. Whatever happened in England with respect to the advancement of Calvinistic belief was at this date invariably attributed to him. Similarly, whatever wild or foolish thing might be said by a young reformed pastor, it was Lloyd-Jones who was blamed. The responsibility for all disturbances created by free grace men was said to be his. But while the young men identified with the resurgence of Puritan beliefs were indeed almost always indebted to his influence, they were not always accountable to him and their actions by no means necessarily had his approval. The start of the Leicester Conference fell into this category. He was not present in 1962 nor, significantly, was any pastor from Wales. There was here a difference of opinion which could easily have seen the conference founder in those early years.

Dr Lloyd-Jones was more responsible than anyone for the recovery of doctrinal Christianity in England in the 1950s. His convictions on that need remained the same but in the 1960s another concern had first claim on his attention. He was convinced that ecumenism was permanently changing the denominations and that if evangelicals did not face the issue, and stand together as churches, a very major threat to Protestant Christianity lay ahead. How this developing situation should be faced was uppermost in his thinking. He believed that it was of primary importance that everything possible be done to bring evangelicals together to face the common danger. But at the Leicester Conference he feared that another strategy was in operation. He was concerned lest there should be an attempt to bring Calvinistic men into some kind of organised unity, distinguishing them from others and thus making any wider evangelical unity all the harder to obtain. Further, he noted that the senior speakers at the first conference were Presbyterians from outside England and so scarcely abreast of the English situation. It looked like a new grouping was being promoted which would very distinctly belong only to one section of the churches.

This was a strange situation for Dr Lloyd-Jones to be in for, outside Wales, there was no group of younger men who held him in higher affection and esteem than those connected with Leicester. He knew this and undoubtedly it influenced his decision to speak at the second Conference in 1964. This was a memorable time. Men wept as he preached on the words of Moses in Exodus 33, 'I beseech thee, shew me thy glory.' I think he was also moved to hear John Murray speaking on Romans chapter 11, and the Nature, Unity, and Government of the Church. Murray's church addresses, with their emphasis on unity involving the whole body of Christ, had little if anything in them with which the minister of Westminster Chapel would not have been happy to concur. The outcome was Dr Lloyd-Jones' agreement to come to another Leicester Conference the following year. There was a feeling that this third conference of 1965 would see a move forwards on the question of unity, and others, hearing of this expectation, were present for the first time. In fact the 1965 Conference nearly proved to be the last. It was not a success. The programme consisted too largely of discussion sessions rather than of addresses, and some of the addresses that were given were clearly weighted against favouring church links with any who did not adhere to reformed convictions. John Murray argued that it was the duty of all pastors, whether Reformed or Arminian, to witness to the whole counsel of God and that while they 'may embrace one another in love, in the bond of fellowship with Christ, and co-operate in many activities,' it was not feasible for men, holding such differences, to be faithful to their convictions if they were in formal and regular church association.

After the 1965 conference, John Murray wrote to his fiancée, 'I was at odds with what appeared to be the prevailing sentiment.' Whether he was right in this assessment it is impossible to say. For his part, Dr Lloyd-Jones felt as though he had been ambushed, and FIEC leaders who were present certainly concurred with him in believing that what was said was unhelpful in the critical contemporary situation.

This set-back in 1965 occasioned re-thinking. Those of us who agreed with Professor Murray were not going to continue discussing church issues in opposition to Dr Lloyd-Jones. So in 1966 there was no conference. Then it re-started in 1967 on the basis that in future the gathering would not attempt to deal with church issues in England: that could be left to others and to other venues. Leicester would be better sticking to the one original purpose with which it started, namely as an aid to the personal life and work of the preacher and pastor. I do not doubt now that this was a correct reading of God's guidance and that objective has remained the controlling principle ever since.

There was another issue that might also have caused the Conference to founder in the 1960s. In Banner of Truth publications, as well as in the early speakers at Leicester, the Presbyterian presence was evident. The regulars at the conferences did not mind this so long as the focus was on the doctrines of grace but what if this was part of a preparation to introduce all the distinctives of Presbyterianism and infant baptism in particular? I admit there was at that time an idealised view of Presbyterianism held by a few of us. The existence of some concern among brethren of Baptist convictions was therefore understandable and it led to doubt among them whether the Leicester Conference should have continued support. During the 1968 Conference, Baptists present held a private meeting of their own to discuss the issue. Had they withdrawn no such Conference as we have known could have continued. Under God, perhaps one individual more than any other prevented this happening. This was the coming of Pastor A.N.Martin of the Alliance Church in New Jersey. He came first in 1967, at the age of thirty-three and the message was, 'Take heed to thyself and unto the doctrine' (1Tim.4:16). Much could be said on what his ministry meant to so many of us, but my present point is to say how he was used to strengthen overall unity among us. His Baptist convictions were well known but he clearly trusted the leadership of the Conference not to use the gathering to undermine those convictions. Never since the 1960s has their been any strain among us on the question of baptism.


***

I have spoken earlier of how the numbers attending grew and must say something more on this point. Two main explanations for the increase come immediately to mind.

From the outset it was expected that the Conference would have a trans-Atlantic aspect to it. This proved to be the case and there have been few years when at least one speaker did not come from the United States. What was unexpected was the interest shown by men from many other countries so that an international element early became evident. Dutch brethren led the way and they have remained the main group present from outside Britain, on occasions more than twenty of them attending. The international spread has sometimes been particularly noticeable among the speakers. At the 1981 Conference there were nine speakers coming from no less than eight different countries. Numbers of conference members came from behind the Iron Curtain, and especially after John Marshall gave attention of organising help for their visit.

A still more important explanation for the numbers attending lay in the spirit and ethos which we have known here. There was a brotherly love among the leaders which filtered through the conference. Men who came as strangers to one another quickly felt that they were at home in a spiritual fellowship. Lasting friendships were formed, and this became a main incentive for returning another year. This spirit of unity has been fundamental and I do not think any other aspect of the conference has been so important. The kingdom of Christ never advances where this spirit is missing. In the words of John Calvin:

'Mutual love among ministers is demanded above all things, that they may be employed with one accord in building up the Church of God. If ministers do not maintain brotherly fellowship with each other … there will be no building up of the Church.'

I do not mean we have been anything like perfect in this regard. On occasions there have been shadows in our unity but, for the most part, our sense of fellowship has been a blessing which we know has come from God.

The most valuable things at a conference are always things which cannot be planned and which are not at our command. These are the things for which men primarily have wanted to come to Leicester. We have come primarily to wait upon God, to be renewed in strength, to be confirmed in the certainty of the things that we believe. We are in no sense convened as an academic or theological forum. No one reads a lecture. Very occasionally speakers here have directed attention to the weaknesses and errors of others, but the prevailing emphasis has been upon our own lack, and upon our need as Christians, even before our need as preachers. It might be said that the spirit which has prevailed is more that of a convention than that of a conference. We have come to worship and to pray. We want more devotion to Christ. We who seek to feed and teach others come apart to hear God speak to our own souls. Sometimes this has not been comforting. John Murray once rebuked us solemnly for putting far too little trust in the present work of the living Saviour. Conrad Mbewe of Zambia gave us an address on the danger of Calvinists developing a censorious spirit which begins to look like the elder brother in the parable of the Prodigal Son. We have often been thus challenged and humbled. If the conference has been spiritually useful it is that God has made it so.

Speaking of the nature of the conference I must add a word on Jim Grier. I have already said that it was he and John Murray who set the tone. John Murray's life is documented but it is a pity there is no account of Mr Grier (1902-1983). Professor Murray's last conference here was in 1971. From 1972 Mr Grier alone was the principal chairman; for eleven years from 1969 it was the pattern that he opened the conference with a devotional address. In 1978 that opening address was on heaven and he spoke with such enthusiasm that we wondered if we would see him again at Leicester. He seemed as ready to go up to heaven as Elijah was in his chariot. But he did come once more, in 1979, and characteristically his last address in our midst was on the words, 'Praying always with all prayer and supplication in the Spirit.' He lived what he spoke. I recall an afternoon at Leicester before the conference started when I had occasion to go to Mr Grier's room. As I knocked, and entered after his response, he was hurriedly rising from his knees and it was no imagination on my part to believe that his face shone. He exemplified words which he once quoted from one of Charles Simeon's last letters, 'I am so near the goal that I cannot help running with all my might.' In his final years his mind failed badly but he wrote to me on the last day of 1980,

'I will never forget the Leicester Conference. I thank God for it. I still remember even the earliest ones.'

When he was eighty, and his memory far gone, Mrs Grier suggested to him that he ought to resign as a trustee of the Banner of Truth Trust. At first he acquiesced to this proposal but as his wife began to type the letter he became indignant and protested vigorously, 'The Banner is a good organization and I won't leave it'!

***

I think it might be profitable to say something on what hopefully we have been learning in these last forty years. I say 'we' in a very loose sense. Those of us who come regularly to Leicester cannot be labelled as a distinct group, sharing one identity. We belong to different situations and are at different stages of life and understanding. Even so, perhaps it can be said that a number of us have been learning the same lessons.

1. Since 1962 we have learned more of the weakness and fallibility of our hearts and minds. Only slowly have we come to believe the saying, 'Nothing in nature is more unknown to man than himself.' The 1960s were, in some ways, a spring-time. The doctrines of grace and the teaching of Reformers and Puritans, suddenly seemed to be amatter of almost common interest. It was as though a general change of opinion was in progress among a younger generation. Even such journals as Crusade magazine believed there was a surprising resurgence of Calvinistic influence. In our circles that situation engendered a mood of anticipation and optimism. Today I do not think I would be far wrong to say that our mood is more akin to the word of the prophet in Isaiah 26:18, 'We have not accomplished any deliverance in the earth, Nor have the inhabitants of the world fallen.' We may even be tempted to repeat the complain of the hymn writer,

The enemy faints not nor faileth,
And as things have been they remain.

But if this is our present mood it is wrong for in all that has happened we have surely learned something valuable. It is the lesson that Luther's colleague in his later years was talking about when he said, 'Old Adam was too strong for young Melancthon.' Too much of our confidence was self-confidence. In this connection I think also of some poignant words on the Church of Scotland minister and hymn-writer, George Matheson. He lived in the late nineteenth century when Higher Criticism was everywhere challenging Christian belief. After Mathson's death in 1906, W.Robertson Nicoll wrote of him:

'He knew the changed conditions under which the Church had to do its work, but he had no fear. He was confident that he could establish the intellectual coherence of religious and scientific truth ... But as time went on he seemed to lose his confidence.'

The truth is that as Matheson's life went on he had to pass through grievous trial. He went blind. And in his need, Nicholl says, 'he came to disbelieve in the Higher Criticism and in the doctrine of evolution.' He also came to testify to the Christian world,

My heart is weak and poor

And the better known words,

I lay in dust life's glory dead,
And from the ground there blossoms red
Life that shall endless be.


'Since then,' observed Nicholl, 'his books have been essentially devotional books. He set himself to live more truly the life that is hid with Christ in God.'

I suggest to you that what God did with Matheson he has been doing in different ways with us. We do not know ourselves. We have to learn our own hearts. Charles Wesley prayed

Teach me, as my soul can bear,
The depth of inbred sin

Whether we pray this or not, God teaches us that he does not use natural strength and confidence. If he did the glory would go to man. The scriptural rule is surely, 'Out of weakness made strong.' We have to say that things that have dismayed and disheartened us in these past forty years were all sent for our blessing.

There is surely a very practical lesson that arises from this. What a mistake it is to think that the main problems of our day have to do with intellectual issues - not the same issues, perhaps, as Matheson thought to answer, but we too easily think that the battle ground lies chiefly in the realm of ideas and errors. But a greater knowledge of ourselves teaches us differently. The fundamental problem lies in the heart, in human pride and self-sufficiency, in the poverty of love, and in our lack of dependence upon God. To recognise this is to believe that the great needs which have to be met are spiritual needs. To try to meet them merely on the intellectual level, and only by correct teaching, is to miss their real nature. What we need supremely is a greater measure of the life of Christ and his resurrection power.

2. Connected with a greater awareness of our own fallenness, I think we have also been made to learn to believe to put far less confidence in men in general. If I were to be asked to name a mistake that has been made here at the Leicester Conference, among the foremost would have to be the way we have sometimes been too ready to be dazzled by the natural gifts and abilities of speakers. In the book of Acts we read that the men of Lystra thought that Paul and Barnabas were gods come down from heaven. The ability to idolize men has not left us. If a man can speak passionately without notes for an hour, we have been too ready to think him above ordinary mortals. 'Let us acknowledge excellence,' observed Richard Cecil, 'but let us remember that God has, by leaving his greatest servants to the natural operation of human frailty in some point or other of their character, written on the face of the Christian Church, Cease ye from man!'

Even when a man has extraordinary, supernatural gifts, as Judas had, the command still applies: 'Put not your trust in princes, nor in the son of man, in whom there is no help' (Psa.146:3). Our Lord says, 'Do not be called teachers, for one is your Teacher, the Christ;' and his next sentence underlines that it is grace not gift that is essential in his servants, 'But he who is the greatest among you shall be your servant' (Matt.23:10-11).

In this connection the reproof which William Grimshaw once made to a lady is striking. She was enthusing to him about a certain preacher whom she admired so much. Grimshaw knew the men and believed he was more gifted in talent than in grace. To the woman he therefore said, 'Madam, I am glad you never saw the devil.' Startled by such a remark, she asked why he should say such a thing. 'Because,' the wise man replied, 'he has greater talents than all the ministers in the world. I am fearful, if you saw him, you would fall in love with him.'

The First Epistle to the Corinthians teaches very clearly that putting confidence in men is destructive to the kingdom of God. The command, 'Let no man glory in men' (1 Cor.3: 21), ought not to be necessary for Calvinists. We know the answer to the question, 'Who makes you to differ from another? And what have you that you have not received?' yet we too easily fall into the same sin. We believe that all comes from the grace of God and yet, in practice, we can attribute to men what does not belong to them. On this point there is a telling quotation from an old writer:

'Without this all-powerful grace, Latimer might have led Bonner to the stake; with it, Bonner might have ascended the scaffold, a martyr to true religion. Without this grace, Luther might have fattened on the sale of indulgences; and with it, Leo the tenth might have accomplished the blessed work of Reformation.'

3. I want to return to the subject of difference with Dr Lloyd-Jones which I mentioned in connection with the 1960's. Some of us wanted an organisational union of Calvinistic men and churches; his first concern was for a broader fellowship Christians. As far as I am concerned, I have to say that, in the main, I now think he was right. I do not mean that Calvinistic belief is not crucially important, nor did he mean that. But unity is not dependent upon organisation. We are united with true Christians everywhere, irrespective of the distinctive labels we too readily use. Weaker brethren and stronger brethren belong together and have mutual responsibilities to one another within the body of Christ. We are indwelt by the same Spirit; we own the same Saviour; we all come under the command, 'As I have loved you, that you also love one another' (John 13:34; 15:17). Archibald Alexander, first professor at Princeton Seminary, wrote these significant words near the close of his life:

'The author, in a long life, has found that real Christians agree much more perfectly in experimental religion, than they do in speculative points; and it is his belief, that a more intimate acquaintance among Christians of different denominations would have a happy tendency to unit them more closely in the bonds of brotherly love. May the time soon come when all the disciples of Christ shall form one great brotherhood under the name of CHRISTIANS.'

To say this is not to accept the foolish ideas that denominations are sinful, as some have taught. But in the situation of rampant apostasy that developed in the twentieth century the first need was surely not some new organisational grouping; it was for the recovery of gospel witness - irrespective of denominational differences -- and for greater unity between all who belong to Christ. The approach that some of us favoured in the 1960s gave to much weight to the external. It was also in danger of accentuating differences for it meant re-opening the question, What is the most biblical church government? The question is not unimportant, yet the fact is that it has been endlessly debated in church history without resolution. Mountains of material have been written on the subject and little has been conclusively determined. If finding better forms of church government was the need of the hour then this would be a sorry thing to admit, but the urgent need surely lies elsewhere. This leads me to another lesson.

4. I think a number of us stand convicted of not giving to evangelism the priority that it has in the New Testament. I know that some, hearing such an admission, may misuse it as though it were a confession that our churches are without conversions, or even that we are not gospel preachers. That is not what I am saying. One has only to attend the Youth Conference here at Leicester (supported so largely by the ministers attending this conference) to see many young Christians from our churches. But I am saying that evangelistic passion is not as marked and evident among us as it should be. This is a delicate subject. We are not to dishearten one another. We do not all have the same talents, the same opportunities, the same circumstances (John 4:38). But if taking people to heaven is the work of the gospel ministry that ambition needs to burn the brightest in our hearts. Philip Doddridge could write:

'I bless God, I feel more and more the power of his love in my heart, and I long for the conversion of souls more sensibly than for anything besides. Methinks I could not only labour, but die for it with pleasure.'

Where that spirit is found in men it is commonly also found in their churches. At Spurgeon's Tabernacle in his day the whole congregation was an evangelistic force, like the church at Thessalonica (1 Thess.1:8). If our churches are not in that condition do we not bear some responsibility?

Consider the point I am making in terms of a number of questions. Supposing you saw the opportunity to hold a series of special evangelistic meetings, could you make up a list of men you know who are proven evangelists? How long would the list be?

Or think of the age question. Can the majority of our conference today be described as 'young fellows? And if we are now short of young men does that not have some bearing on the point I am making. There are exceptions but in many congregations the average age is creeping upwards.

Or consider the extent to which we have aided in the supply of men and women to the mission fields of the world. Some names stand out of men who have been part of the Leicester Conference and who now are scattered in strategic positions across the world - in such places as Brazil, the Philippines, Turkey, and Papua New Guinea. But thankful as we are for these men, the truth is that their number is small. If anyone every wrote the history of the first forty years of this conference I am afraid it could not be recorded that here, in William Carey's Leicester, a new missionary movement was born.

This is a humbling subject. A few years ago at the Youth Conference this question was presented: 'Why is it that despite the great truths we believe and hear preached, that in this country God seems (in general) to be working through other churches to reach the lost.'

I believe that the main lesson we are learning, in relation to such a question, is that we stand in great need of having our hearts filled with the love of God. We all know the arguments to demonstrate that believing the doctrines of grace is no obstacle to evangelism, but what is needed is a baptism of the compassion of Christ to make us the men we need to be.

5. A final lesson is the most encouraging one that I know. Discouragements overtake us only when we look at things on the temporal and the horizontal level. We look for better days and when we fail to see evidence that they are coming we are troubled. But in so thinking we have left the New Testament. 'My thoughts are not your thoughts, says the Lord.' And not one of his thoughts will fail. God has now in preparation a world where there is no sin or death, and nothing can prevent it coming to pass. For God reigns. He is bringing many sons unto glory; a multitude which no man can number out of every kindred and people and tongue are going to stand before the throne of God and of the Lamb. Even the very things by which Satan would seek to confuse and dishearten us are permitted to exercise our faith, 'that the trial of your faith, being much more precious than of gold that perisheth, though it be tried with fire, might be found unto praise and honour and glory at the appearing of Jesus Christ'(1 Peter 1:7).


So if the question is asked, What is God doing among us in our day? faith has the answer: he is doing exactly what he means to do. He is making and preparing citizens for heaven. The lines of John Cennick's hymn are New Testament theology, 'Lift your eyes, you sons of light; Zion's city is in sight.' It is from this vision that we are to get the joy and hope for present service. In the words of John Calvin, 'We shall never be fit for the service of God if we look not beyond this fleeting life.'

Our 'fleeting life' is indeed apparent as we stand at a fortieth anniversary of this conference. Half-way up my staircase at home there stands a photograph given me some years ago. It shows of a group of men here at the Leicester Conference in the year 1964. Of the half dozen or more who stand in the front of the picture not one is still alive. Only a handful of those who were present at the first conference in 1962 are alive today. 'I have been thinking,' Mr Grier once said, quoting Andrew Bonar, 'that perhaps my next great undertaking may be appearing before the judgement seat of Christ.' And with another sentence and verse which our friend was fond of quoting I must close:

'We shall not meet together here any more. Let us pledge one another, as we part, to reassemble in heaven.'

Press onward, look upward, be strong in the Lord,
Our hope in His mercy, our trust in His Word;
Press forward, look upward, march homeward and sing,
'All glory to Jesus, to Jesus our King.'



Iain H.Murray, April 23, 2002


1 An address given at the Leicester Ministers' Conference, 15 April, 2002. Cassette tapes of all the Conference addresses are available from the Rev Ian Densham 15 Ayr Terrace, St Ives, Cornwall, TR26 1ED, UK
2 Diary of Kenneth MacRae, ed. Iain H.Murray (Edinburgh: Banner of Truth, 1980), p.477.
3 Banner of Truth,
4 Alexander Auld, Ministers and Men of the Far North (repr. Glasgow: Free Presbyterian Church, 1956). The minister in question was Alexander Gunn (1773-1836).
5 See Collected Writings of John Murray, vol.3 (Banner of Truth: Edinburgh, 1982), p.132, and for the substance of his address, 'The Creedal Basis of Union in the Church,' vol.1 (1976), pp.280-87.
6 Ibid., Vol.3, p.133.
7 There were many later visits. It was during his tenth visit in 1984 that his fiftieth birthday occurred.
8 Countries from which speakers have come include France, Italy, Yugoslavia, Cyprus, South Africa, Ghana, Zambia and Australia.
9 Letter of Catherine Grier to IHM, Dec.17, 1982.
10 Thomas Adam, Private Thoughts on Religion (London: Relgious Tract Soc., n.d.), p.59. ' Lord,' wrote Baxter, 'what devils are we unsanctified, when there is yet such a nature remaining in the sanctified.' And a mature Jonathan Edwards confessed, 'I find more ways that the remaining corruption of the godly may make them appear like carnal men than once I knew of.'
11 W.Robertson Nicholl, Princes of the Church (London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1921), p.189.
12 I quote from his hymns, Make me a captive, Lord, and O Love that wilt not let me go.
14 Remains of Richard Cecil, pp.352-3.
14 Quoted in R.Spence Hardy, William Grimshaw, Incumbent of Haworth, 1742-63 (London: Wesleyan Conference Centre, 1877), p.222.
15 Hannah More,
16 Speaking of Christian unity, B.B.Warfield wrote: 'We are not to seek it in the inclusion of all Christians in one organization and under one government … We cannot produce unity by building a great house over a divided family. Different denominations have a similar right to exist with separate congregations, and may be justified on like grounds.' Selected Shorter Writings of B.B.Warfield, ed.J.E.Meeter, vol. 1 (Nutley, NJ: Presbyterian and Reformed, 1970), p.304.
17 A.Alexander, Practical Sermons (Philadelphia: Presbyterian Board, 1850), p.6.
18 In few places has the literature been more extensive than in Presbyterian Scotland yet T.M. Lindsay could reach the conclusion that none of the Protestant denominations could be said to mirror the New Testament but that they all could claim warrant for aspects of their practice. The Church and the Ministry in the Early Centuries (London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1903).
19 Job Orton, Memoirs of Philip Doddridge (Dublin: Dugdale, 1801), pp.224-5.