|
Taylorites
Dear Sir
We were distressed to read in your pages such an unfair account
of the brethren, based apparently on the testimony of disaffected persons. Surely
Eryl Davies' first duty was to enquire of those happily committed to the bretheren's
way (John 7:51)? In repudiating both articles as totally misrepresenting the brethren
and their leaders, may we comment as follows.
- J.N. Darby and others separated from clericalism and the established church
in 1827/8 to celebrate the Lord's Supper in Dublin. As the work spread, the enemy
insidiously introduced clericalism and grave error as to Christ's persona and sufferings
into assemblies at Plymouth and later at Bethesda (Bristol). When Darby with others
separated from this iniquity (2 Timothy 2:19), a division ensued in which those withdrawn
from for taking neutral ground became known as 'Open brethren'.
- Often misunderstood, F.E. Raven was a man of sterling fairness and unflinching
loyalty to the truth. This attack on Mr Raven isolates a statement to 'prove' he went
beyond Scripture, when a few lines later he says himself, 'the Scriptures are the limit,
if you go beyond them you transgress'. He consistently maintained that, though Christ
was man, he was ever divine.
- In referring to Mr Taylor, the Holy Spirit's right to speak to the churches (Revelation
2:7 etc.) has been overlooked. In acknowledging this divine right, we recognise that he
will always say what is consistent with the Scriptures he has inspired.
- Far from being enslaved in legalism, brethren families are happy and free in the
fellowship, practising separation as a welcome protection from television, videos, cinemas,
corrupt literature etc. And especially the Internet which is making way for the man of sin
(Revelation 13:11-18). Marriage is held in honour (Hebrews 13:4), the family institution
is treasured and centres around the weekly celebration of the Lord's Supper. The latter
is celebrated by all who establish their right by 'doing his commandments' (Revelation
22.4) according to Paul's word in 2 Timothy 2:19, which is the only scriptural authority
for assembly in a day of general departure. Wherever brethren are, Christ is proclaimed
publicly as a present Saviour and Deliverer from the wrath to come (especially upon
Western Europe).
- While brethren rightly esteem their leaders (1 Thessalonians 5:12: Hebrews 13:7),
their practice flows from their personal convictions before the Lord and not from any
'slavish and fanatical loyalty'. Since around 1860, yearly levitical meetings are held for
enquiry into the truth and not for discipline which, though rare, is the responsibility of
each local assembly and never centrally controlled. There is no foundation for the
degrading suggestion of a cult with a 'WACO-type' leadership with 'draconian powers'.
- We refute with righteous anger the false charges against Mr Taylor Junior of alcoholism
and adultery. Many of his close and business acquaintances have testified to his integrity
and uprightness.
We commit it all into the hands of the Lord, the righteous Judge, who 'will give every
man according as his work shall be', trusting that the author will have grace and courage
to correct this wrong.
Colin Denny, Bedford
Jim Turner, Chippenham
Roy Norman, Cambridge
Letter to The Evangelical Times
August 1999
Eryl Davies replies
I reply to the points in order.
- I am in general agreement [though we reject any implied slur on the Open Brethren: Editor].
- F.E. Raven was indeed 'often misunderstood' but mostly by brethren, as illustrated in the 1890 separation. Perhaps the Bexhill assembly acted prematurely in opposing Raven's views, but Raven himself later referred to 'defective statements [he had] made on the road to light'. Errors attributed to Raven in 1890 included the denial that true believers have eternal life as a present possession and the upholding of the Apollinarian doctrine that the spirit of the man, Jesus Christ, was the Divine Person. Later, Raven introduced a doctrine that the Lord Jesus became the Son of God at the Incarnation, though he did not fully develop the teaching.
- Yes, the Holy Spirit speaks to churches but, I add, only through the Word. And there are issues here. What is the 'new light' which the Spirit gives to churches? Do some leaders like Raven or Taylor have an infallible or superior understanding and application of the Word?
- Many brethren families are also sadly divided. In 1964, for example, an MP introduced the 'Family Preservation Bill' into Parliament because of the break-up of families and suffering of children caused by rules introduced by Jim Taylor Jr. An academic researcher has also found recently that exclusive brethren 'had significantly higher levels of psychological distress than the general public. 15% of the sample had Post Traumatic Stress Disorder'.
- How free are they to question interpretations of the Word by leaders? Can they understand the Bible without the help of the 'man of God'? To be 'shut up' (based on Leviticus) does involve discipline and I can cite examples.
- Here the quarrel is not with myself but with those many brethren involved in Aberdeen in 1970 who testify to Taylor's alcoholism, adultery and even abusive speech at that time.
Response to the letter above from the writer of the original articles.
The Evangelical Times August 1999
|