Vol. 1, No. 1, Fall 2002

In light of the first public backlash against the utterances, Irving and the others considered Baxter a specially important case because he was male, intellectual, and of a higher class than the others. Also, his prophecies were lengthier, more theologically grounded, and not (except on one or two occasions) confused with utterances in tongues. From the beginning Irving declared (following Paul – Corinthians 14:19) that speaking in tongues was the least valuable of the gifts of the Holy Spirit, the charismata, which also included prophecy, healing, and the baptism by fire. In Irving's view, the tongues were merely a harbinger of these greater gifts which would be bestowed upon true apostles. The disciples of Paul at Corinth spoke in tongues, but these had been incoherent utterances, which Paul interpreted as merely a sign of greater things to come, as it later happened, at the Pentecost. Irving, too, wondered at the speaking in tongues, which some with linguistic facility analyzed as a mere pastiche of mixed-up [page 47] foreign words and sounds.(32) Other manifestations during these early days also raised question, such as the day when two twin boys, about eight or nine, began speaking in the power and, in the midst of their speaking suddenly declared that marriage should be forbidden. When they were questioned, one of them said, "Ye may try the spirits in men, but ye may not try the spirits in children." This event was accounted by Irving and his followers to be an intervention of an evil spirit. When Baxter began speaking in the power, though, prophesying upon a sound theological basis, he commanded a different sort of attention. Baxter was speaking words that corresponded to Irving's preaching and to Paul's teachings about the higher charismatic gifts, and doing so in a way that many, including Baxter himself, regarded as awe-inspiring.

Still, there was something that gave Irving pause at the point when he was considering having Baxter speak before the whole congregation. Baxter recalls that some of his utterances in the power were addressed to Irving himself, "in a commanding tone," and some of these produced in Irving a suspicion that Baxter's utterances might not be of God but "of the enemy".(33) When Irving, who himself was impressed by the "great authority" of Baxter's words, then denied Baxter permission to speak in the service, the power suddenly came on Baxter, and he rebuked Irving.(34) Others among the inspired vouched for the words spoken by Baxter, and Irving was forced to relent. The next day, Baxter writes, he "was . . . in the power, in the most fearful terms, made to enjoin the most perfect submission to the utterances".(35) Soon, this clash of powers deepened, with Baxter prophesying about "the darkness of the visible church, referring to the king as the head of the Church of England, and to the Chancellor as the keeper of the conscience of the king".(36) Church and state were "accursed . . . the abomination of iniquity".(37) Baxter proposed a radical redefinition of ministry in the form of a prophecy which a [page 48] few years later he recalled: "that God had abandoned the ordinance of ordination by apostolic succession. That the abomination of desolation was set up, and that those who were partakers of the gift of utterance were from that day forward the lawful ministers of the gospel of Christ".(38) Baxter inevitably came to regard Irving as dubious, at best, because, after all, Irving could demonstrate no charismatic gifts and made it clear that he was dubious of the powers of Baxter himself, if not others. Furthermore, Irving espoused risky points of theology, such as the matter of Christ's incarnation. This point, above all others, ultimately led Baxter to speak publicly in denunciatory terms of Irving as an instrument of Satan.

Meanwhile, Irving's ministry was also being challenged by the church authorities over the issue of Irving's giving the inspired ones permission to speak in the service, and in fact they concluded that he should be removed from the church. Irving found himself caught in between, filled with faith that he had been selected by God to minister the bringing forth of these wonders and the fulfillment of prophecy, yet recoiling from the more extreme expressions which suggested a Satanic presence even in himself, and at the same time resisting the repressive efforts of the structure of legal authority upon which his ministry was founded. To the church authorities he wrote in his characteristically archaic style: "I do you solemnly to wit, men and brethren, before Almighty God, the heart-searcher, that whosoever lifteth a finger against the work which is proceeding in the Church of Christ under my pastoral care, is rising up against the Holy Ghost; and I warn him, even with tears, to beware and stand back, for he will assuredly bring upon himself the wrath and indignation of God of the heaven and earth, if he dare to go forward".(39) However, in the same admonitory letter, Irving acknowledged "the attempt of Satan, by mimicry of the work, and thrusting in upon it of seduction and devil-possessed persons to mar it".(40) The apostle Paul had warned his disciples about the seductive and delusional power of Satan, saying, "We wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places" (Ephesians 6:12).The question was whether the darkness was to be found among the church authorities, among the putative apostles, or in Irving himself.

[page 49] Baxter was meanwhile becoming more and more bold with his power, exorcizing demons, attempting healing, and making strong pronouncements about what he deemed Satanic. At one point he resolved to leave his family and set out on a world-wide evangelical mission. (It was at this point that his wife lost confidence in her husband's inspiration.) Still, there were, for Baxter, some strange moments that he could not quite reconcile with the notion that he and the others were speaking in the power of the Holy Ghost. Why should there be inconsistencies, even disagreements, among the holy utterances? At one point, Baxter felt himself compelled to go to the court of the Chancellor to bear his testimony to the wicked state, but once there he found that the power mysteriously did not come upon him. Why would the spirit fail him? Baxter vividly depicts the crisis of conscience which he faced at this time in his Narrative, but the upshot dumbfounded all who were around him. With the same suddenness and intensity with which he acquired his power, he now recanted and proclaimed that his supernatural powers were gifts not of the Holy Ghost but of Satan and that the whole phenomenon happening in Irving's church (and elsewhere too by that time) was a gross delusion. He accused Irving of abetting this evil travesty of the Pentecost, and Irving recoiled in horror. From the bar of the Presbytery Irving faced doubt about the presence of the Holy Spirit among the inspired, and from the leading figure among the inspired (and afterward some others) he faced the accusation that what had seemed the work of the Holy Spirit might in fact be the work of Satan.

Even after the publication of Baxter's Narrative, many of the inspired ones continued to uphold Baxter's prophecies as true, deeming his recantation itself to be a delusion. However, the notion that the foundation of their belief might be unstable introduced an internal division within the power structure. Mrs. Oliphant summarizes:

Church authorities were still more disturbed to hear rumors of Satanic influence in Irving's church and even in Irving himself. They continued to act against his writings even after he had been removed from office. Meanwhile, his position in his own church was more and more decentered by the uprising and proliferation of the inspired among the laity, who eventually acted against him to delimit his powers. Thus, his position as minister was hedged in both from within and from without, and in the final years of his life, before he succumbed to tuberculosis, he felt this squeeze more and more.

Irving became a fully tragic figure in this moment, driven by what Mrs. Oliphant calls "a primitive heroic faith" to an inevitable downfall. The kernel of that faith and the key to his doom is that a person could fully stand in for the Holy Ghost and effect that miracle of transcending humanity by becoming an expression of the divine. Performing the Holy Ghost was the experiment Irving attempted, but he was too good a scientist to claim that any one case, especially his own, might prove a rule. He turned instead to the numerous cases that seemed to demonstrate the phenomenon and confirm the hypothesis in the Scripture. The established church resisted the new data and new conclusions because they clashed with existing law and challenged belief in new ways. Mrs. Oliphant portrays Irving at this late stage of his life in a way that integrates his rationality and his mysticism:

A tall man, initially a high churchman, a man of lofty diction, his eyes raised to Heaven, his thoughts an epitome of Enlightenment revivalism, his hamartia a certain pride, he came to a low and pathetic end because of a conflict of historical forces – on the one hand, an increasingly rigid institutional bureaucracy, on the other, the emergence of newly empowered individual voices. A minister is a servant, offering services, but also an embodiment of the divine, a man of the Lord. A minister conveys the pre-existent word of Scripture, but also speaks in the present. To the degree that the minister is an embodiment of Christ or of the Apostles and a locus of the Holy Spirit, he is also, as Irving's writings argue, a figure of flesh who contains the capacity to sin. To the degree that the minister is a man, born to sin, if only by excessive pride, he is also an embodiment of the Satanic, the fallen angel Lucifer's fatal act of sitting on the throne of God.

The events that took place in Irving's church during these years can be interpreted as expressions of the Marxian dialectic. As Irving's followers foresaw the end of time with the fulfillment of all prophecy, so Marx forecast an end of history, when the Hegelian dialectic would cease its relentless operation and realize the utopia of full human empowerment. The initial revolutionary gesture might be seen as Irving's insistence that Christ had, in his incarnation, realized humanity to a degree that had not been credited before. The Lord had [page 52] been subjected to the low condition of mortality and sin. As a radical expression of new doctrine, this theological point represented an attack on the established church, and Irving was, as a consequence, punished. His revolutionary impulse was echoed by the inspired ones, who felt the power come upon them, and determined to speak out in the service, thus usurping the place of the minister. They spoke in the voice of the Lord, and ultimately they denounced even the man who had allowed them authority in the church, thus effecting a revolution.

The trial scene of Irving by the Presbytery of Annan was a grim one, indeed. Irving stood firm in his conviction that the inspired ones spoke in the voice of the Holy Ghost and adhered to his beliefs about the incarnation of Christ. Long speeches were made by the disaffected elders and other church authorities who were convinced of the heresy of Irving's preaching. All this took place in a church illuminated by a single candle. At the point when judgment was about to be proclaimed, there came a voice from out of the shadows, "Arise, depart! Arise, depart! Flee ye out, flee ye out of here! Ye cannot pray! How can ye pray to Christ whom ye deny? Ye cannot pray. Depart, depart! flee, flee!"(43) It took a while in the dim light to discern that these words were said by another minister, a supporter of Irving. The report continues by saying that the assembly, which "had acted in the most becoming manner, now became confused," and Irving, much moved by this performance, shouted out, "What! Will ye not obey the voice of the Holy Ghost? As many as will obey the voice of the Holy Ghost, let them depart".(44) Mrs. Oliphant comments on this moment: "Clouds and coming night were now upon the path to which he went forth, commanded by the Holy Ghost: no longer triumph and victory, no second spring of hope – only the reproach that broke his heart – the desertion – the sin, as he held it, of his brethren, for whom he would have given his life".(45) Left behind in the dark church, the presbytery and some two thousand amazed spectators deposed Irving from his ministry.

The immediate upshot of this extraordinary scene, however, when he returned to London to his church on Newman Street, was that the inspired ones quickly spoke out, "in the power," and declared that he should not exercise any priestly functions or assume any authority [page 53] beyond the province of a deacon. This extreme limitation of Irving's powers lasted only for a short while, but never again did he exert the authority over his church that he had in past years. Irving held services in public meeting halls, or outdoors, until a new sanctuary could be found, and the newly reconstituted church took form with an entirely unprecedented hierarchy, based on Biblical prophecy. Irving was given the title Angel in this new order, though he was but one among seven. (Of this new position and title Mrs. Oliphant says, "he did not understand [his function] to be 'anything more than a Presbyterian minister'".(46)) A platform in the place of the pulpit held fifty or sixty persons, arranged in ranks as angels, prophets, and deacons, each rank with a chief at its center: "The angel ordered the service, and the preaching and expounding was generally by the elders in order. The prophets speaking as utterance came upon them".(47)

An American, Dr. Addison Alexander, happened to visit the church during this period and commented that the church "was extremely well contrived for scenic effect." His newspaper story of the experience exemplifies the attitude of mocking incredulity with which these performances were met. Mrs. Oliphant comments on Alexander's report:

This passage articulates the core metaphors and concepts that make this strange episode in the history of Christianity relevant to larger trends in nineteenth-century performance and the [page 54] portrayal of darkness. [My book will continue this exploration by examining other areas where the trickster's dark art cannot be clearly separated from the project of enlightenment.]