Dear Friends,
It is easy to become mixed up with names. For instance, in Spurgeon’s “Treasury of David,” in Psalm 119 you find Spurgeon quoting from a commentator called Willian Cowper. Our minds may automatically go to that great poet and hymn writer, William Cowper. But our minds mislead us, in for we have two different men.
William Cowper the commentator is not the William Cowper whose name appears so often on the pages of our hymn books, and who is the author of some of the majestic pieces of praise that the churches sing. Although that William Cowper of the 119th Psalm showed himself to have “the pen of a ready writer,” it was the composition of those psalms and hymns and spiritual songs that it was employed, and not in the commenting on the Psalms. The William Cowper of the psalm was a very early Bishop of Galloway -1566-1619 – whose commentary on the great psalm of David bore the title of, “A Holy Alphabet” for Sion’s Scholars. We trust that the comments reproduced by Spurgeon in his “Treasury” on the 119th Psalm have given something of a taste of that old schoolmaster of another age.
Now, the case of the two William Cowpers is by no means unique in the history of the churches of Christ. There are quite a number whose names are the same, or very similar or almost the same and it is sometimes easy to mistake the one for the other and so, introduce a misleading idea or thought into our minds.
The two Augustines is a case in point. Augustine of Hippo is not to be confused with Augustine of Canterbury. The former was the great evangelical leader of the Church in North Africa in the fifth century, who did such noble battle with the Pelagians over the issue of free will of man. The latter lived almost two-hundred years later-on, and was a Benedictine monk who was sent to England by his great friend, Pope Gregory 1. It scarcely needs pointed-out, I’m sure, that he was “a different kettle of fish” altogether from his namesake who had gone before him.
Another name identifiable with Canterbury is the name Boys, and it is Mr Spurgeon who cautions us not to confuse the name John Boys with that of Thomas Boys, who came sometime later. Commenting on the works of John Boys, Mr Spurgeon says they are “Rich, racy, and running over.” “Boys is all essence,” he says; and then he adds, “What a difference between the John Boys of 1638 and the Thomas Boys of 1827! Note well the name,” he says. And then, with regard to Thomas Boys’ commentary on the New Testament, in typical Spurgeonic fashion, he pronounces, “students do not require this Boys’ exposition!”
There are probably quite a few names within the historical pale of the Christian church that are not likely to find duplication to any great extent. We can only think of one Oecolampadius! And although among the ranks of the Reformers, we doubt that it would ever become a craze for Christians to name their male offspring after the old German saint. Nor can we think of many who rejoiced in the name of Increase Mather, or Thankful Owen, or Godsgift Kirby! On the other hand, there have been some almost-unique “coincidences” even at local church level.
At one point in the life of the Baptist church on Burra Isle, in the Shetlands, the pastor and the two deacons were all named John Inkster. At the Lord’s Table, then, each Lord’s Day, there was a John Inkster “in the midst” and one on either side regardless of how they arranged their seats. One of the three was at last called home, but the other two, as pastor and deacon, went on to serve the church, and at the end of their course had notched-up 107 years between – John Inkster being pastor for 55 years, and John Inkster being deacon for 52 years.
The case of the Inksters on Burra Isle might remind us of the eventual conclusions of Mr Spurgeon when he has tried to untangle the mass of Browns within the history of the Church of Christ in Scotland. No doubt, many have shared his complexity. John Brown of Haddington, and John Brown of Edinburgh, and John Brown of Wamphray – not to mention the occasional David, etc., here and there. “Browns to the left of us, Browns to the right of us,” he says, “the Lord bless them all!” And we might well echo that sentiment with regards to a whole list of the Lord’s servants, past and present. While we would be thankful for Thankful Owen, who could be anything else but thankful for the great John Owen himself; not to mention the various Hodges, Haldanes, and Erskines, who have worn the same family crest in the battles of the gospel. It is a blessed thing where certain who share the same “human” name have an interest in the Divine name as well, but it isn’t always so. Sad to say, some who are of the name in the history of the Church are of a very different spirit from those whose name we revere or treasure, and, indeed, the old saying holds true that “grace doesn’t run in the blood.”
John Trapp was the famous old commentator of the 17th century who produced a rare exposition of the Whole Bible in five volumes, but his exposition is very different from that of his grandson, Joseph, who did a commentary on the gospels in the following century. Joseph Trapp opposed the whole evangelical awakening, and had no sympathy whatsoever with the truths that his grandfather before him had taught and preached. If a commentary, quotation, or book simply says J. Trapp, make sure it is good old John, and not bad young Joseph.
An identical case is met with in America in the name of Charles Chauncy. The “original” Charles Chauncy was an opposer of Archbishop Laud in England, and eventually escaped to New England, where he later became president of Harvard College. His great-grandson was also called Charles Chauncy, and like Joseph Trapp in England, he too completely opposed the evangelical awakening in America. He engaged in a war of words with Jonathan Edwards, and ended his days as a Unitarian, virtually laying the foundations for the establishment of that heresy in the States in the 19th Century.
Much the same kind of thing applies in the case of Bishop Ryle. Few there are who have not enjoyed and benefitted from the writing of J. C. Ryle, but it is one of the saddest cases in the history of the church that Ryle’s favourite son, Herbert, completely turned his back on his father’s evangelicalism, totally imbibed the German Biblical criticism of the last century, and wrote a destructive commentary on the Book of Genesis that is fit only for the fire. Don’t confuse the writings of Herbert Ryle with those of the esteemed J. C., they are like darkness compared to light.
Some names on a book mean a lot; some very little. The important thing is that our names are written in the Lamb’s book of life.