3. Difficulties
1. Gathering Clouds
2. Increasing Dissension
3. The First Great Division
4. Further Developments

A. Gathering Clouds

the oneness and fellowship among the Brethren was too fair a scene for Satan to tolerate

At this time, J. N. Darby was most prominent among the brothers in Ireland, and B. W. Newton had been a leading one in Plymouth for fifteen years. Neatby wrote that “the maker of Brethrenism as a system, its guiding and energising spirit throughout, was John Nelson Darby.” [24] Ironside said of Newton that “he was the man whose learning, ability and piety outshone all others in England.” [25] However, the oneness and fellowship among the Brethren was too fair a scene for Satan to tolerate. Soon the clouds began to gather and the beauties of this primitive scene began to be marred, its loveliness decimated. Despite Darby's and Newton's many talents and contributions, their differences began to create turmoil and division which limited the extent of the Lord's work among the Brethren.

1. Differences on Prophetic Matters

One difference between Newton and Darby that soon became apparent was on prophetic matters. In the biography of Groves, Lang mentions three different views on prophetic matters held among the Brethren:

Darby and many others held that the church of God would escape the days of the end [i.e., the days of the great tribulation]; Newton, Tregelles, George Müller, and others believed the church will go through that period; R. C. Chapman, Groves, and Lady Powerscourt thought that not all believers will share in the first resurrection and the millennial kingdom…. [26]

(top)

This latter group thought that some believers would pass through the tribulation and that only the overcomers would share in the first resurrection with the millennial kingdom being a reward to them. Newton felt that the church would go through the tribulation and that all the saints would be raptured when the Lord appears at the end of the tribulation. Darby believed that the entire church would be raptured before the days of the great tribulation. Despite these doctrinal differences, for a long while all of these saints walked in the same basic way and met according to the same principles.

2. Differences on the Church

There were also differences of opinion regarding the nature, calling, and order of the church. In expressing his views, Newton was supported by Tregelles, the outstanding Greek scholar. He felt that the church includes all the faithful from Abraham to the present, that it is not something unique to New Testament times. He was not interested in the extreme dispensational views of Darby and stated that they were the “height of speculative nonsense.” [27] Newton was opposed to the idea of the church being “a special company of whose calling and destiny the Old Testament knows nothing.…” [28] Darby's view is known as the “parenthesis view” of the church.

3. Views on Inter-Relationship of Assemblies as to Discipline

Another important difference involved their views on how the churches handled disciplinary matters and the inter-relationship of the churches in such cases. Darby taught that the disciplinary acts of one church should be ratified by all churches, if scriptural authority could be shown for that action. Groves felt that each assembly was directly dependent upon God and should not interfere with other assemblies. Newton's position was that each assembly should appoint elders and deacons and recognize pastors. These were to constitute an official board to handle the affairs of the local church. This was the practice in Plymouth.

(top)

4. The Beginnings of Exclusivism

Some of the brothers sensed that Darby had left his original position. They felt he had forsaken what he had seen on the inclusiveness of all believers at the Lord's Table regardless of their views, their denominational position, their understanding or lack of understanding. Groves's view is indicated in a letter which he wrote in 1828:

My full persuasion is, that inasmuch as any one glories either in being of the Church of England, Scotland, Baptist, Wesleyan, Independent, etc., his glory is in his shame, and that it is anti-Christian; for as the apostle said, “Were any of them crucified for you?” The only legitimate ground of glorying is, that we are among the ransomed of the Lord by His grace. As bodies I know none of the sects and parties that wound and disfigure the body of Christ; as individuals I desire to love all who love Him. Oh, when will the day come when the love of Christ will have more power to unite than our foolish regulations have to divide the family of God! As for order, if it be God's order, let it stand, but if it be man's order, I must examine whether or not it excludes the essence of Christ's kingdom; for if it does, I remember the word, “Call no man your master upon earth; for one is your Master, even Christ, and all ye are brethren.” [29]

(top)

Groves, when he returned to England from Baghdad, wrote these strong words to Darby:

I wish you to feel assured that nothing has estranged my heart from you, or lowered my confidence in your still being animated by the same enlarged and generous purposes that once so won and riveted me; and though I feel you have departed from those principles by which you once hoped to have effected them, and in principle returning to the city from whence you departed, still my soul so reposes in the truth of your heart to God that I feel it needs but a step or two more to advance, and you will see all the evils of the systems from whence you profess to be separated, to spring up among yourselves. You will not discover this so much from the workings of your own soul, as by the spirit of those who have been nurtured up from the beginning in the system they are taught to feel the only tolerable one; and not having been led like you, and some of those earliest connected with you, through deep experimental suffering and sorrow, they are little acquainted with the real truth that may exist amidst inconceivable darkness: there will be little pity and little sympathy with such, and your union daily becoming one of doctrine and opinion more than life or love, your government will become—unseen, perhaps, and unexpressed, yet one wherein overwhelmingly is felt the authority of men; you will be known more by what you witness against, than what you witness for, and practically this will prove that you witness against all but yourselves. [30]

(top)

Groves went on to share with Darby more of what was burdening him:

I ever understood our principle of communion to be the possession of the common life, or common blood of the family of God; these were our early thoughts, and they are my most matured ones. The transition your little bodies have undergone, in no longer standing forth the witnesses for the glorious and simple truth, so much as standing forth witnesses against all that they judge error, has lowered them in my apprehension from heaven to earth, in their position as witnesses....The position which this occupying the seat of judgment places them in, will be this: The most narrow-minded and bigoted will rule, because his conscience cannot and will not give way, and therefore the more enlarged heart will yield. It is into this position, dear Darby, I feel some little flocks are fast tending, if they have not already attained it, making light, not life, the measure of communion. [31]

Along with the comments made by Groves, there were other significant indications that a storm was approaching.

Some of the brothers and sisters were looking with a degree of contempt on the godly saints that were still in the denominations

Some of the brothers and sisters were looking with a degree of contempt on the godly saints that were still in the denominations, even though these sometimes bore a considerable amount of light and had evidence of a deep devotion to their Lord in their lives. The claim of an exclusive possession of the Lord's Table was also beginning to be heard. Ironside has the following comments about the situation:

(top)

Worldliness had crept in, with its accompaniments of pride and vain-glory. To this G. V. Wigram bore trenchant witness. Many Brethren became occupied with themselves, and commonly wrote and spoke of their companies as “the latter day remnant,” “the godly residue,” “the Philadelphia church,” and similar self-laudatory expressions.... [32]

For the most part the problem was not with the brothers and sisters but with the leading ones.

The rank and file were simple, godly Christians rejoicing in their liberty from what they regarded as sectarian bondage, and were, generally speaking, ardent gospelers going out into the streets and public places, as well as in their rented halls and chapels, to carry the glad tidings of a known salvation received by faith and evidenced by the love of the Spirit. That Satan hates this we may be sure and so he sought to destroy the testimony by sowing discord among brethren. [33]

B. Increasing Dissension

1. Conditions in Plymouth

Darby was invited to Plymouth on his return from the Continent. He had heard that all the preaching in the assembly in Plymouth was in the hands of either Newton or Harris, restricting the ministry of others. He also had been given the impression that the Lord's Table meeting had become secondary in Plymouth.

(top)

When Darby arrived at Plymouth he found the true situation to be quite different from the reports he had received. Darby did not find Newton dominating the assembly, but rather he had to encourage Newton “to sit where he could conveniently take the oversight of the ministry.” [34] This would also enable him “to hinder that which was manifestly unprofitable and unedifying.” [35] Darby agreed with the principle of liberty of ministry with restraint. Those with ability from God should have freedom to minister, but any speaking “which was not to profit—which did not commend itself to the consciences of others—ought to be repressed.” [36] This was the practice of many of the assemblies in that day, including Plymouth, Exeter, and London. The events following Darby's return to Plymouth unfortunately began a sad phase of the Brethren's history. Lang records the situation as follows:

This devastating work began soon after Mr. J. N. Darby's return from the continent in 1845. I was told that, when he left Plymouth for his mission there, he commended Mr. B. W. N. to the assembly as one qualified to lead on the saints in truth...and to watch over, and guide them in all spiritual matters. But, when he returned he found him in a position of great influence, attracting to his teaching believers from various parts of England, many of whom took up their residence in Plymouth, to benefit by his teaching and that of others. What were the feelings this popularity stirred? It would not perhaps be difficult to suppose; but a personal attack was soon made, and the disastrous strife of the two great teachers, who then became rivals, broke up the peace of the assembly and almost stopped the progress of the work. The particulars of this sore contention have been partly set forth in Mr. Neatby's History of the Plymouth Brethren so that they need not be repeated. But no account, gathered merely from pamphlets, could describe the distress of mind, the poignant sorrow and heart-grief produced by Mr. D. as he ruthlessly pursued his course against his former friend. There was no question of evil doctrine in this antagonism, but only of ecclesiastical practice. I deeply regret to have to record that strifes, jealousies, wraths, factions, parties, works of the flesh, took the place, in great measure, of the fruit of the Spirit and loving fellowship of the saints. [37]

(top)

Ironside likened the situation in Plymouth to that in Corinth at the time Paul wrote I Corinthians:

Mr. Darby comes to Plymouth, and finds Mr. Newton's influence paramount. What an opportunity for grace to shine in! for Christ to triumph in the saint over self! But, alas! self triumphed over Christ on both sides of the conflict, though in different ways; and the schismatic spirit of “I am of Newton,” and “I am of Darby,” came in and carried all before it, but those who had been really walking before God. These could but sigh and weep for the sin and wickedness carried on in the holy name of Jesus, and keep aloof from that which so dishonored the Lord. In Corinth, Paul would take no part in the unholy strife that was going on, amongst those who contended to belonging to Paul, to Peter, or to Apollos. He was content to remain the servant, and not to become the master; for he belonged to all, and sought to raise them out of their sectarianism, by telling them that Paul, and Cephas, and Apollos, were alike theirs—theirs to serve in the bonds of the gospel; and in the same spirit the eloquent teacher, Apollos, could not be persuaded by Paul to come among them, as if to keep himself out of sight, that the crucified Lord might eclipse himself as well as Paul. [38]

When Darby arrived in Plymouth, he realized that the majority was with Newton. But he encouraged a small group of dissenters and publicly protested against what he considered to be secularism and clericalism among Newton and those with him.

Interesting are some of the comments made by Ironside, who was with the Brethren until taking the pastorate at Moody Memorial Church in Chicago. This is what he said he would have done if he had been in this situation:

Looking back through the years one can scarcely escape the conclusion that it might have been better if the minority had quietly separated and begun a new meeting in another part of the city—not in antagonism to the older Brethren, but where fuller liberty could be enjoyed, and then have waited on God to show the next step. [39]

(top)

In other words, when difficulties arise, they are best solved by separating and then starting something new, even if it is in the same city. Such a suggestion displays a disregard for both the cross and the oneness of the Body. Unfortunately, this has been the way that the Brethren have repeatedly taken in the past.

Attempts from both sides to arrange a conference to resolve their differences failed when neither group accepted the other's suggested format for meeting. Ironside describes the events which followed:

...Mr. Darby meets what he considers the sectarianism of another by a sectarianism of his own which he consummates by making a division among the saints with whom he had been in fellowship from the commencement; and that, notwithstanding the remonstrance of most of the brethren who came from a distance to investigate the state of things in Ebrington Street, where till now all had met in fellowship. Having affected the division, he spread a table elsewhere on the last Sunday of that sorrowful and eventful year, which was in future to be exclusively “the table of the Lord,” around which himself and his followers were to rally. From this meeting in December, 1845, we must date the rise of Darbyism, and its development into a distinct and self-excommunicated body…. [40]

(top)

2. Fellowship Refused to Newton

Darby published “A Narration of Facts” in 1846. This booklet contained charges against Newton.

The next event to follow was a meeting in the Rawstorne Street assembly in London in February, 1847. It was attended by many brothers from various parts of England, who gave their solemn testimony “as to the evil system which had grown up at Plymouth, and as to the need of absolute and entire separation from it. The testimonies of Messrs. M'Adam, Harris, Lean, Hall, Young, and others, were all most solemn and decisive.

When some of the brothers and sisters came from Plymouth to fellowship at Rawstorne Street in London, they were refused fellowship

There was scarcely a brother, whose name was well known amongst brethren as laboring in the word and watching for souls, who did not at that time acquiesce in the sorrowful necessity for separation from this evil and demoralizing system.” [41] When some of the brothers and sisters came from Plymouth to fellowship at Rawstorne Street in London, they were refused fellowship. Newton, it was said, was suspect of heretical teachings. Newton, after examining his teachings and what he had already printed, did acknowledge that they were in error. In 1847, therefore, he published “A Statement and Acknowledgement Respecting Certain Doctrinal Errors.” Although Newton had been inaccurate in his teaching, the response of those at Rawstorne Street was excessive and unforgiving.

Some did not agree with the position taken by Darby and many of the leading ones. A very godly man of Barnstaple, Robert Chapman, said in a conversation with Darby, “You should have waited before acting as you did.” To this Darby replied, “I waited six months and there was no repentance.” Chapman replied that at Barnstaple they would have waited six years before taking a step that would have so divided the Brethren.

(top)

It is sad that the oneness which had caused such sweet fellowship to prosper had been broken

It is sad that the oneness which had caused such sweet fellowship to prosper had been broken. In its place were now bitter debates and divisions over ecclesiastical, doctrinal, and personal differences.

C. The First Great Division

The assembly in Bethesda, which met in a rented chapel for over thirty years, was led by George Müller and Henry Craik. To them came the problem of what to do about Newton's followers who had come from Plymouth. The majority of the brothers felt to receive them into fellowship, as they indicated in a privately circulated letter called “The Letter of the Ten.” The believers who came from Plymouth were to be received unless there was clear evidence of heretical beliefs. They strongly maintained that fellowship with believers is not based on common views. They could fellowship with all Christians, regardless of whether or not they saw eye-to-eye on any particular doctrinal matter.

Darby reacted strongly to “The Letter of the Ten.” He was in Plymouth when he received word of it. He suggested that a kind of quarantine be put into effect on anyone coming from Bethesda until it could be shown that they do not hold Newton's teaching.

(top)

Meanwhile, the elders in Bethesda had second thoughts. They felt perhaps that they should not have taken such a stand. They drew up a second letter stating that “no one defending, maintaining, or upholding Mr. N.'s views should be received into communion.” [42]

Even though the brothers in Bethesda withdrew “The Letter of the Ten,” Darby pressed them further, demanding that they publish their second letter. They refused, saying “that both letters were written merely for the guidance of the Church of Bethesda, and were so far private: that the former letter was published without their consent and that he [Darby] was welcome to publish the later letter if he wished.” [43]

Because of the dogmatic insistence of Darby and his followers that others heed their instructions, which they felt to be the Spirit's leading, they reaped divisions in abundance

Unfortunately, this did not satisfy Darby. During a subsequent visit to Plymouth he insisted that the believers there should have no fellowship with Bethesda. He required public refutation of the teachings of Newton as a basis of fellowship and was heard to say, “that, if Mr. Müller did not deal with the Newton matter as he desired, he (Darby) would divide every meeting in the world over it.” [44] Because of the dogmatic insistence of Darby and his followers that others heed their instructions, which they felt to be the Spirit's leading, they reaped divisions in abundance.

This became the first big division among the Brethren, between those that followed Darby, later called the “Closed” or “Exclusive” Brethren and those who stood with Müller and A. N. Groves, including those in Bethesda. These came to be called the “Neutral” or “Open” Brethren, the “O.B.'s” for short.

There were unsuccessful attempts at reconciliation. Many suggested calling a conference where both sides could get together, open the Word, pray, and talk together about the situation. But the division among them had a deeper root. Ironside gets at the heart of the matter in the following passage:

Division might possibly have been averted. I say, might possibly, for I cannot but think the pride and self-will of many was what forced division at last and if this state had not first been judged, no amount of teaching as to principles, however Scriptural, would have preserved the unity.[45]

Self-pride and self-will were at the heart of the matter

Self-pride and self-will were at the heart of the matter. These had to be dealt with if there was to be any resolution of other matters.

The following poem written by Darby was found after his death. It indicates his realization that there remained something within him which needed to be dealt with.

(top)

Behind my back I fling, Like an unwanted thing,   My former self and ways, And reaching forward far, I seek the things that are   Beyond time's lagging days. Oh! may I follow still, Faith's pilgrimage fulfil,   With steps both sure and fleet; The longed-for good I see, Jesus waits there for me,   Haste! haste! my weary feet.”

Many years later, Darby was accused of holding some of the same errors as Newton. Several brothers called upon Darby to renounce these teachings. Upon his refusal they withdrew from fellowship with him. Concerning these teachings one of them wrote the following:

So like are they to Mr. Newton's doctrines, that even had they not been as bad in themselves as I judge them to be, I should be quite unable to maintain the place of what is called testimony against Mr. Newton while connected with those who hold what I think to be as bad. [47]

D. Further Developments

One might expect that the break between Darby and Müller would have had a most damaging effect on the Brethren. Generally, however, the Lord's blessing was still with them.

Generally, however, the Lord's blessing was still with them

The assemblies, both Open and Exclusive, increased in number, eventually spreading throughout the whole world. They applied themselves to the preaching of the gospel wherever they went. Tract depots were established to publish and distribute tracts. Missions were established in China, India, the Straits Settlements, Africa, New Zealand, and the South Seas.

Traditionally, the Open Brethren excelled in preaching the gospel. The Exclusives, while they had gospel preachers among them, strongly emphasized the solid ministry of the Word. It is unfortunate that the gospel preaching and the ministry of the Word could not have been carried out in oneness. Obviously, both are needed. The churches today need to be strong in the gospel and strong in the Word.

(top)

Among the Exclusives were preachers like George Cutting. His little tract, “Safety, Certainty and Enjoyment,” has had wide circulation and has brought many to the Lord. W. T. P. Wolston became editor of the Gospel Messenger, a little gospel magazine. Charles Stanley was a tract writer.

There were many outstanding teachers among the Exclusives. William Kelly was the author of many books and also editor of the Bible Treasury. Notes on the Pentateuch by C. H. Mackintosh is still looked upon as an outstanding work. Mackintosh was also editor of Things Old and New. Stoney edited two Brethren magazines called A Voice to the Faithful and Food for the Flock.

The Brethren had missions to the West Indies, Egypt, South and Central Africa, Guiana, India, Burma, and Japan. They were instrumental in the revival that spread throughout

Many of the brothers and sisters went out, migrating for the spread of the assembly life

Scotland, Ireland, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and the United States. Many of the brothers and sisters went out, migrating for the spread of the assembly life. Darby and Wigram visited those who had migrated in order to minister to them.

F. W. Grant established a publishing enterprise which became the Grant Publishing House after his death. He would never have allowed his name to be used in such a way while alive. Paul J. Loizeaux was also added to the Brethren. He was a French Huguenot and a college professor. He wrote the book, The Lord's Dealing with the Convict Daniel Mann. He was also a founder of the Bible Truth Depot in Iowa, which later was moved to New York as the Loizeaux Brothers' Publishing House. It has become one of the main publishers of Brethren literature.

Copyright © 2002. Christian Websites. All Rights Reserved.