Comments on The Exclusive Brethren web site 7 August, 2005:-
(1) Home page
(a) The definition of Brethren given would apply to far, far more than the 40,000 stated and would include all those whom the Lord will take to Himself when he comes (John 14:3). Note also that the Scripture quoted (Matthew 23:8) shows that the Lord’s brethren have only one teacher, Christ (verse 10), and not a so-called man of God who effectively comes between them and Christ.
(b) Owning ones own home is an irrelevance so far as ones spiritual life is concerned. Christ had not where he might lay his head (Luke 9:58). Simon and Andrew probably owned their own house (Mark 1:29) as I myself do, but Paul, the elect vessel, had a hired lodging (Acts 28:30). To own ones home one normally needs money. One should note here what is said in James 2:5 as to wealth.
(c) My own Grandchildren have been largely home taught or attended mission schools. The latter’s educational standards are normally held in high regard, so E. B.’s schools are not unique.
(d) That there is practically no unemployment amongst Exclusives may sound good, but by all accounts the employment is largely in Exclusives’ businesses and such an employee would be out of a job if he separated from E. B.’s. Put another way, Exclusives are held together at least partly by economic factors rather than spiritual ones !
(e) Talking of public charities and natural disasters - giving and helping such causes is only what many Christians would do if financially or physically able to do so. The impression from the way the statements are worded is that the Exclusives are blowing their own trumpet, that is, saying: “Look how good we are” !
Church Life - Note that an excessive number of meetings has nothing to commend it. Mr Darby pointed out that at Plymouth in B. W. Newton’s time “Meetings... were multiplied without end” (C. W. Vol. 20 page 14), and Mr. Raven spoke of knowing some “who have gone too much to meetings” (U. S. A. And Canada 1902 page 284). See also C. A. Coates Letters p.8. As Mr. Taylor Sr said: “You are not dependent on the world, or even on the saints for your support. You live by Christ, otherwise if the brethren fail, you are done for” (New Series Vol. 5 page 428).
(2) Who are They ?
(a) It is quite clear from this section and the following sections that Brethren are obsessed with the idea of separation. 2 Timothy 2:19 is quoted in this section, again in the next section (twice) and also referred to twice in that section. Mr. Raven once said: “Heresy is using some peculiarity in doctrine in order to form a party. It may be done by exaggerating some peculiar doctrine to such an extent that it is taken out of its proper import, and becomes a rallying point for a party.” (New Series Vol. 15 page 100). Has not 2 Timothy 2:19 become a rallying point for Exclusives ? Needless to say, although they say the Internet is shunned, they have set up the web site on which I am commenting. Is that consistent ? Computers and the Internet are instruments which can be used for good or ill, as a knife can be used by a surgeon to save life or by a thug to take it. Consider Isaiah 2:4 and Joel 3:10; also Romans 6:13.
(b) They say they do not live in countries that do not have a Christian Government. What do they mean by Christian Government ? Do they simply mean a Government that is not avowedly Communist, Moslem or Heathen ? What Scriptural basis is there for such a practice ? Christians lived in the Roman Empire which was avowedly Heathen until the time of Constantine when it became nominally Christian. If we look at the world today we find that the Holy Spirit is moving in countries such as China rather than in the so-called Western world. The gospel message is going out to the ways and fences (Luke 14:23). It is probable that there are more converts in China every year than there are Exclusives throughout the world. It looks as if the Lord has moved on and left Exclusives behind. A good many years ago a Christian lady who attended an evangelical Church said as to an E. B.’s street gospel preaching that although what was said was OK it was not getting through to anyone, which is really another way of saying that there was no power in it.
(c) It is right that children of Christian parents should be brought up in the discipline and admonition of the Lord (Ephesians 6:4). However, room must be left for God to work. There is the need for new birth (John 3:3). Simply training children to become, what may be called, good E. B.’s is not adequate. There must be a testing. Consider Ruth 1, particularly verses 15-18. As far as one can ascertain Exclusives are simply increasing their numbers (if they are) by simply breading E. B.’s.
(d) The sociological study by the late Bryan R. Wilson (he did not make a Christian profession) makes no real difference between what they are today and what they were one hundred years ago or more. I have seen vast changes as to fundamentals in my own time. I was born in 1933. I can supply details to anyone interested. I can be contacted by E-mail on Gsimmonds@aol.com.
(3) Basic Teaching
(a) They quote 1 Corinthians 5:11 to support not eating with anyone outside their fellowship, whereas the passage refers to persons who were regarded as brethren and who had been guilty of gross misconduct. It does not refer to everyone not in fellowship with them as is evident from the context. It was never until the 1960's the practice to refuse to eat common meals with any one but those with whom they broke bread. Mr. Taylor Sr in the 1930's was prepared to entertain the S--------s though it is clear that he had reservations about them (Letters Vol. 1 pages 408, 412).
(b) Where is the teaching as to Christ’s Assembly, the Lord’s coming and other elements which featured so largely in the 1800's ? Most of what is presented relates to dealing with evil or what is thought to be evil. In practice this means to them anything outside their Exclusive fellowship. Look at the list of quotations on the left of the page. Presumably they consider that what is said to the apostles in John 20:23 applies to them. In practice iniquity to the E. B.’s is anything that is out of accord with the rules (laws) laid down by the current leader whether or not these contradict or modify those laid down by a former leader. The New Testament thought is that we should follow principles: righteousness, faith, love and peace, rather than a set of rules. The latter are applicable to the child state (Galatians 4:1-7).
(4) Holy Communion
(a) They give the Supper to children on the basis of Matthew 26:26-28. This is a feeble basis, because the words: “Take, eat; this is my body” were said to Christ’s disciples, all grown men. As Mr. Darby pointed out, the loaf represents the one body and should therefore only be given to those who we are satisfied are members of that body (Letters Vol. 2 pages 51 and 255; Vol. 3 page 175). Further, while baptism is the act of another, eating is the act of the partaker and therefore should only be given to those who are of a responsible age, can understand its import and take up the responsibilities connected with it. Baptism brings persons into the kingdom, but it is those who are in the house that should partake of the emblems. This may sound technical, but those who deny all this should not delude themselves that they are following the ministry of Mr. Darby and Mr. Raven, not to mention many others.
(b) Hymnology - It would be interesting to see some of the hymns that have been composed by E. B.’s since 1970 (if any). I encouraged Bryan Wilson to have a look at Brethren’s hymn book. Whether he ever got round to it before his death I do not know. The sort of hymns that one produces are a good index as to where one is spiritually.
(5) The Gospel
(a) Who is listening to the preaching of the Gospel in Exclusives’ rooms ? It would appear to be only those who are partakers of the Supper with them. Those who are partakers of the Supper are or should be believers. What this means is that the Exclusives are avowedly preaching to those they regard as converted. Outsiders are not admitted. The preaching must therefore be largely a waste of time. Actually, if the gospel writings listed on the web site are anything to go by the Gospel (Glad Tidings or Good News) element must be minimal and that what is called Gospel must be largely a dissertation to Brethren on separation and related matters.
(b) It may be noted here that “Coming to Jesus” by J. H. Symington appears to be actually an address by J. S. Hales.
(6) Leadership
(a) What is listed on the left of this page is just a repetition of what is listed on the left of the Home page.
(b) The truth is that Christ is the Head in heaven (Ephesians 4:15). The Holy Spirit acts for Him on earth (John 16: 13-15). The Spirit is not also a leader, that is, in addition to Christ. There are others who are leaders (plural) . Certainly there were leaders in Old Testament times, but we must not lose sight of the fact that they were failing men. David the man after God’s own heart was an adulterer and murderer (2 Samuel 12:9). That Mr. Darby was distinctive as a leader is no doubt true, but there were others also. They were not just lackeys of Mr. Darby. He opposed Mr. Benjamin Newton at Plymouth because he took a position of supreme leadership in the company there. See the Narrative of Facts by J. N. Darby and note the similarities between conditions at Plymouth and the conditions amongst E. B.’s today. There is no successional leadership - no successor to Mr. Darby. See Letters of J. Taylor Sr. Vol. 1 page 43/44 “I am no... successor to Mr. Darby”. Mr. Darby goes on at length about the falsity of successional leadership in his dialogues on Romanism. He presses, quite rightly, Paul’s words in Acts 20:32 in contending against Romanism.
(c) The final paragraph in bold is a very serious statement . It is far from the truth to say that J. Taylor Jr was marked by purity. You have only to listen to the Aberdeen tapes to see that. His spirit was not right and there were things not commendable in his life long before Aberdeen. The speed with which he remarried after the loss of his first wife was one. What about J. S. Hales ? He was excommunicated as unfit for the fellowship of Christians at the behest of J. T. Jr was he not ? Who was wrong ? J. T. Jr or J. S. Hales or both ?
(7) Meeting Rooms
(a) These are said to be public places of worship. They are not holy places, though any room may be sanctified by the presence of Christians. Essentially they are just bricks and mortar, as was said in my hearing many years ago. They no doubt provide shelter from the elements and insulation from distracting noise. In some countries due to persecution Christians have to meet in forests and such like places. The statement that sessions of worship have to be protected in certain circumstances from interruption sounds plausible, but in practice this means that no outsiders, or almost none, are allowed to attend their meetings whether they would interrupt or not. The quotation from John 20:19 as to the doors being shut is incomplete as the words “through fear of the Jews” are omitted. The significance of the statement is that it showed Christ in resurrection could enter through closed doors, and also that the disciples were afraid of persecution. They came out boldly after the Spirit was given. The Scripture that should govern us is 1 Corinthians 14:25. In my time an extreme statement was made in the opposite direction. The passage: “A city situated on the top of a mountain cannot be hid” (Matthew 5:14) was used to suggest that outsiders could be present even at care meetings !
(8) Become a Christian
(a) Brethren can’t seem to get 2 Timothy 2:19 out of their heads. Out of the whole Bible they keep focussing on this passage. Mr. Raven warned: “Undue activity in divine things... may lead to the mind being overbalanced” (New Series Vol. 10 page 391). Getting obsessed with one passage of Scripture is dangerous.
(b) We are called upon to believe (Acts 16:31). We are not called upon to ask for faith. The apostles asked for more faith (Luke 17:5). See what the Lord said in reply.
Overall, a big fault with the whole separation system of Exclusives is that they do not distinguish between the assembly and the individual path, as Mr. Raven said: “You must distinguish between the assembly and the individual path, else you get into confusion at every step” (New Series U. S. A. and Canada 1898 page 208). Rome failed in this respect. She not only excommunicated people, but put them out of the world, by fire and sword. Excommunication is right when necessary (1 Corinthians 5:13), but not executing people (Matthew 13:24-30). We have been called in peace (1 Corinthians 7:15) so that we are not called on to repudiate relationships that are in themselves right such as marriage. As far as depends on us we are to live in peace with all men (Romans 12:18). To quote Mr. Raven again: “Christianity was not intended to disturb the state of things, but to bring into a man’s soul that which would enable him to fulfil his obligations” (Vol. 9 page 274). The assembly is not called upon to regulate the lives of Christians. They have their own responsibility to the Lord (Romans 14:4).
Finally, if what I have said is wrong, please point it out to me. My word to Exclusives is what is said in Isaiah 41: 21 and Job 33:5-7. I do not think I need to quote these and other passages in full as I suppose most people have Bibles and can look up the references.
What concerns me is, and is the main reason for writing the foregoing, that Exclusive Brethren claim to have a fellowship based on the Holy Scriptures, when in fact what they have is a fellowship based on the dictats of a leader who makes a largely out of context selective use of texts to give some semblance of support to what he wants to teach. Persons who read this web site, if not Christians, may well take the Exclusives’ statement at face value and go on to reject not only their doctrines and practices but, supposing they come from the Bible, the Scriptures as well.
Quotations are from the J. N. D. translation.