The Parting of the Ways
– 1960's

The Scripture that is governing my present step is

• "But in vain do they worship me, teaching as their teachings commandments of men. For, leaving the commandment of God, ye hold what is delivered by men to keep", Mark 7: 7-8.

I have reluctantly and painfully come to the conclusion before the Lord that it must be named as evil and, on the authority of 2 Timothy 2, I withdraw from iniquity.

Brethren may the Lord, in His mercy, grant that eyes may be opened to the true character of this teaching,

• and may deliverance be found for the brethren from this system which is setting the words of men above the plain word of God in the Holy Scriptures.

I may add that my wife is fully with me in this decision.

J. L. Wallach.

That there are two levels of eating in both Old and New Testaments is clear from Deut. 12: 4-14 – fellowship – verses 15-16 and 22 – not fellowship – also in chapter 15: 22.

• Then in the New Testament, in Luke 5: 30 and
  10: 5-9; Acts 27: 35-36 – where we are now told that Paul must have finished eating before the 276 people on board began to eat.

• Then in Acts 28: 7-10 we are asked to believe that Publius and the barbarians with him must have been in fellowship – surely without Scriptural authority – before Paul accepted their hospitality.

• As to 1 Cor. 10: 23-33, if we are "minded to go" we should do so only to glorify God and not to fraternize in any way.

JT's ministry on these matters is very helpful, as in Vol. 60: 11-14, 46-47, England 1945; Vol. 64: 212-19 [? 313-19?], Australia 1947, which, in many cases, are carefully avoided.

• But in Vol. 16, New York 1932, which is constantly brought up to justify not eating with those not yet breaking bread, but that we should treat them as those withdrawn from, the following should surely help:
  • On page 58, JT says, "We eat for sustenance and not for pleasure", and later he says in reference to Cornelius and those with him, that Peter was to regard them as clean.

• Then on page 59-60, ANW's remark shows, as to Acts 10, that Peter failed to "discriminate as to those that are clean",
  • and JT's answer indicates that it was so and that it was Peter's wrong company in the High Priest's palace which caused his failure [there] – and not eating, because eating was not involved.

But to those amongst us who insist that all eating is fellowship, JT's answer on page 65 to WB-w's remark again proves Peter's failure to discern those that were clean – though of course not breaking bread yet.

• While in regard to 'dividing the hoof', which is now taken up assiduously as meaning breaking bread, Mr. Taylor's statement on page 59 in reply to A.R.S. shows that it is a question of "discrimination in walk" which a godly Christian would be careful to follow –

• and it is such a person whom we would sincerely desire to help to come into fellowship – without necessarily making a special point of eating with him.

We frequently hear the words 'the circle', 'the company', 'the position', 'the fellowship', etc. but Mr. Taylor Jr. has now gone even further and said in the New York Readings of last month on page 292. JTJr, Vol. 6: 347.

• in connection with eating, in reply to RWS's remark of: "If you cannot control the conversation, it is probably unclean to do it" – JTJr answered: "I would think so. I would think it is unclean in any case because you are appropriating persons that are not in the fellowship and not in the assembly",
  • inferring that persons not breaking bread with us – although possibly believers in the Lord Jesus and seeking further help – are not in the assembly. What an assumption as to our position!

Also in a reading at Chesterfield [which does not appear to have been included in the series of books of 'ministry' by JTJr] on August 10th, 1960, he said:

• "The great house is everything, as we separate from the great house".

• But FER and JT taught us that we cannot get out of the great house, which is Christendom – saying "that would be apostasy" – FER.

For the following, see Guests: My Stand 1: Authoritative Ministry.

But it is not only the question of eating which has deeply disturbed and distressed me and my wife. We are called upon to accept and obey without any question as to 'authoritative ministry', so-called.

• There is indeed authoritative ministry in the history of the recovery, for which we shall ever thank God, but all such ministry deriving its character and authority from the word of God, as based upon it clearly and undeniably, carries the consciences of the saints;
  • – without this authority the claim that "we have the mind of Christ", quoted so much recently, is but vain assumption.

• But real ministry of Christ with food and lasting help and edification is gradually being replaced by rules and regulations, mostly of a negative nature, resulting in loss of freshness, power and liberty in the Holy Spirit.

• Instead of the undimmed joy and happiness once enjoyed in the restful atmosphere of brethren dwelling together in unity and love, there is unrest and sadness amongst the saints, and fear and suspicion have crept into the heart and mind.

The above is a condition of things that leaves no room for individual conscience as before God but a dictatorial attitude is ready to stifle genuine enquiry and personal exercise about Scriptural truths often conveniently set aside or misinterpre-ted, such as 1 Cor. 10: 23-33 and 1 Cor. 11: 20, and others.

• Persons with such honest convictions are summarily dealt with and even withdrawn from by those accepting the so called 'new ministry' and vigorously applying it with ruthlessness and harshness, while those not in agreement are afraid to express their exercises.

• What a pretentious system of legality and tyranny this whole set up has become – so kindred to popery!

• I feel convinced that the wrong kind of man has been setting himself up amongst us and has been allowed to exercise direction and authority that bear the mark of other than that of the glorious Head of the assembly.

As to the moral side, the outward position – in itself essential as to our righteous standing and walk before men in testimony – is scrupulously maintained,

• but often without due regard and proper concern for an inward state of holiness and purification before God.

• The distinctive and powerful ministry from the Lord in this matter has been rejected and condemned as erroneous doctrine,

  The above refers to the book Purification and Life, ministry by G. R. Cowell at Exeter, August 1958

• but this has made things easy for the unseen and secret life of so many to live in corruption and thus has opened the door for the manifestation of unbridled lust and inconceivably dreadful acts of sin of the most degraded nature. What a voice to brethren from God!

  There was a full public and private manifestation of such evil at the Aberdeen meetings in 1970.

• What a sweeping and powerful evidence of divine government and judgment upon the corrupt inward state that shelters underneath the mere cover of outward righteousness.

I fully realize the seriousness of what I have now stated, but it is the result of much heart searching and the deepest concern and distress as before God as to this state of things amongst us,

• which is now such that I – and my wife is fully with me in this – have come to the sorrowful but definite conclusion that the Lord Jesus cannot possibly be in it – in a collective sense.

• The Lord is now definitely calling a remnant to Himself out of this iniquitous system, and we both feel therefore, as before Him, that there is but one thing left for us to do, in obedience to the divine command in 2 Timothy 2, to withdraw from iniquity.

• For the plain truth is that such is the system now set up amongst us and in which we cannot remain.

I am deeply conscious of my own weakness and failures and have not forgotten how bitterly I proved in the past my inability to stand for one moment without the helping hand and grace of our Lord Jesus.

• And now we both truly desire to live with our children the rest of the time, in absolute separation from everything that is not pleasing to Himself, in holiness and righteousness and godly fear all the days of our life, and that only by His preserving hand.

Finally, will you allow me, beloved brethren, to tell you how much I sincerely love you each and all as in Christ, and shall continue to do so and bring you in my prayers before the Lord,

With our united love in Christ to you all,

Yours affectionately in Him, Philip Haddad.

This may appear surprising to some of you, but in present conditions amongst the brethren, I discern a striking similarity to the system that grew up at Plymouth in 1845, and from which JND eventually withdrew.

• The leading features of the system were:—

1. Attaching undue authority to teachers, and to one in particular, by means of which the distinctive authority of the word of God was nullified.

2. Claiming that Plymouth was a model from which all other gatherings could take pattern.

3. Building up an organization intending to promote unity, and this institution gaining such a hold on the brethren that, as JND has said, both spiritual and natural affections were set aside to maintain the claims of the system.

4. Giving up the preaching of the gospel and devoting that occasion to teaching the brethren which was said to be more important.

I judge, brethren, that some, if not all, of these things are operating amongst you.

In a lengthy letter, Mr. George H. Patton of Belfast attempted to refute and ridicule CWC's reasons for withdrawal and to fasten inconsistencies on him. On Jan. 2, 1961, GHP also wrote to Mr. W. Ernest Winter, in a similar vein, commenting on his letter of withdrawal from the JTJr sect in Donaghadee. He also charged Mr. Winter with being influenced by his "family links".

During an enforced rest from business this week, when I had more time than usual to weight things over before the Lord, my path became clear from a well-known Scripture in Matthew 14. It is the Lord's call to Peter out of the boat.

• Human nature prefers to remain in a system where the persons are held together, not by attraction to Christ, but by regulations, rules, creeds, a routine of meetings and such like things.

• Some are held by loyalty to an earthly head; fear of excision holds others.

• What the other disciples thought did not deter Peter; he descended from the ship and walked upon the water to go to Jesus.

• The Lord calls us out of every boat, however comfortable, and He also gives courage and faith to obey. He is both my Object and my resource.

I have endeavoured to keep to principles and to avoid anything that might give offence, for the bondman of the Lord ought not to contend, but be gentle towards all.

• Having been brought up amongst you, I leave with sorrow of heart, but I cannot sanction, by my presence amongst you, practices and a position which, in my judgment, are not supported by God's sure word – the only security for the saints in a day of departure.

My wife wishes me to say that she shares my exercises and likewise withdraws.

Your brother in Christ, Charles W. Cooper.

The pattern the enemy has been using recently is just what he has used at other times. In a word it is this:

• The attaching of the Name of Divine Persons to, and claiming Divine sanction of human will in order to give it weight and put it into effect.

• This has always been accompanied by strenuous effort to take full advantage of confidence in a single person so as to assure sufficient backing,
  • and eliminate, as far as possible, any challenge or opposition, all non-conformists being placed in very bad light.

From such a state can flow out all forms of error, both in teaching and practice.

• For is it not sin to disregard the sovereign work of God in others, though not walking with us, and to call them wicked and unclean persons, and to say that if they were clean they would be breaking bread with us?

• Is not such an attitude and teaching sectarian in principle and presumption in itself?

• And where is the room given to the Holy Spirit who is the power for walking in separation in this evil world when we enforce upon one another outward forms of separation which in themselves are powerless and but cater to the religious flesh.
  • No wonder JND spoke of the "pride of separation".

And is it not sin to assume any ministry as being infallible and unchallengeable?

• For no ministry can be put alongside the inspired Word of God, nor can it be considered an extension of that Word, nor of equal authority.

And is it not sin to make the acceptation of current ministry a basis for fellowship though ministered by a gifted servant and universally accepted yet found not to be in accord with Scripture?

• Any ministry that does not agree with that Word is to be rejected.

Is it not sin to attach importance to our circle of fellowship, claiming that the Lord's presence is only with us? Other sects say the same thing.

• His presence is the exclusive property of no particular company of Christians. He pledges His presence to those who are gathered to His Name.

It is also very sad to see that in many cases Romans 14 and 1 Cor. 8 are disregarded in matters relating to prohibition.

• There is no sin in prohibition itself, and it cannot rightly be made a matter of fellowship.

  This most likely refers to 'prohibition' for oneself, not as a teaching, for we are to receive "him that is weak in the faith" but "not to the determining of questions of reasoning", Romans 14: 1.           GAR

• Scripture makes it clear that the sin is in disregarding another's scruples.

• The constant reference to Christian liberty in connection with hard liquor appears to be but an excuse or a licence for continuing its use where not really needed, with all its damaging effects on the disposition and mental facilities of its user, to say nothing of the great occasion it gives to the enemy to blaspheme.

Some may say, I know things are not right, but we must not leave the position. There it is a matter of faith, a matter of where we stand in relation to Christ Himself.

• The true position is the place of nearness to Christ.

• It should be a matter of great concern to all, that though we may experience happy times together and enjoy each other's company, and be favoured with much light from above that
  • that in itself does not justify and sanction a body of believers, rendering them immune to any infiltration of evil.

• The great point is: what are those individuals in that company going to do with the light received and how stand in relation, individually, to the One from whom the light has been received?

At this present time we are actually linked with sin, with what is contrary to the Scriptures, contrary to the Spirit's speaking through valued servants such as JND, JBS, FER, CAC, JTSr.

• The Spirit never contradicts Himself. All that is fresh and new by the Spirit is always in accord with what has gone before.

• To know that there is evil amongst us and knowing that it is not being dealt with and still to go along with it is one of the worst features of Open Brethrenism.

There has been considerable speaking of late as to those who have withdrawn – I am not referring to those who have been involved in unseemly conduct etc., but [to those] who have gone out in real exercise before God –

• that they are 'going out of the assembly', are 'despising the assembly', and are 'wicked persons', etc.

• The more this is said the more it proves the state of error of those who say it and uphold such doctrine.

• For in the first place, no company of Christians can claim to be the assembly,

• and in the second place, there is no despising of the assembly if they must needs separate from iniquity in order to walk more fully in the light of the assembly.

• But whatever the derogatory statements regarding such, the Lord has His own loving appraisal of those who are faithful to Him, who follow Him – even those who lean on His bosom. Oh, what a position to be in!

I little doubt but that these things may be the last great test among us prior to the rapture.

• It is not a question this time of all following a leader in going out, but individuals being tested as to the true object of their hearts, moving in faith with Christ before them, no matter what the suffering, working out their own salvation with fear and trembling.

• The Lord is sitting as a refiner and purifier of silver – he is purifying the children of Levi, purging them as gold and silver.

The tender love and care of my brethren for me and mine occasioned by my handicap [complete deafness] and coupled with my ill health is very much appreciated –

• the reward of each is laid up in the heavens for the care shown for one of the least of His brethren.

• But, I must place Christ above all and have Himself supremely before me – letting not even the treasured love of my brethren detain me – He who, through grace, is the Object and joy of my life. But we continue to love and pray for you.

If there was hope that the above mentioned error with all its accompaniments could be judged and put away we might well bear with it, but instead of it being judged

• it has already for a long time been accepted, ministered and enforced, thus leading on to the full-blown fruits of error.

• This is no local matter, but universal in scope and practice, so, my dear brethren, in obedience to the Lord I must withdraw from iniquity,
  • my wife Laura and our daughter Roberta, likewise, but each on their own individual exercise,

• taking a place without the camp, hence we can no longer have fellowship with you in the breaking of bread.

On account of the seriousness of the evil being held amongst you we would not be free to discuss matters with any who are representatives of what is being held,

• but shall be happy to speak with any who feel with the Lord in relation to the error.

Your brother in Christ, Benjamin Isham.

Moreover, what the saints need on the city occasions is food not contention, do you not think?

Love in the Lord, R. W. N. Saunders.

— Statement of R. W. N. Saunders —

As at the Care Meeting on December 31 [1960], I was not granted the opportunity to explain my conscience as to what appears to be receiving acceptance as 'current ministry'

• I desire to convey by this means the considerations which have led me, after much exercise and crying to God, to come to the conclusion that there is error finding currency amongst us.

I refer to the assertion that 'eating with unbelievers is sin'. This appears to be directly incompatible with the apostle Paul's word in 1 Cor. 10: 27 –

• "But if any one of the unbelievers invite you, and ye are minded to go, all that is set before you eat, making no inquiry for conscience sake".

• This is set in a context which begins, verse 23 – "All things are lawful, but all are not profitable; all things are lawful, but all do not edify".

• Whilst, therefore, the profitableness of eating with an unbeliever is so rightly questioned by a godly mind, especially in present day conditions, the lawfulness of so doing is clearly allowed in the apostle's teaching.

The difficulty in the minds of many seems to be that 'fellowship' is necessarily involved in such eating which must therefore be refused as evil on account of –

• 2 Tim. 2: 19 – "Let every one who names the name of the Lord withdraw from iniquity" and –

• 2 Cor. 6: 15 – "what part for a believer along with an unbeliever?" – verse 17 – "Wherefore come out from the midst of them, and be separated, saith the Lord, and touch not what is unclean".

As has been rightly said, these Scriptures will certainly solve many questions.

• They cannot, however, be interpreted as to mean a withdrawing or touch not in a total physical sense "since [then] ye should go out of the world", 1 Cor. 5: 9-10.

It is true that this last-quoted Scripture refers to mixing but 'mixing' is a larger and more general thought and may find expression in 'eating' –

• see 1 Cor. 5: 11 – "not to mix with him; with such a one not even to eat" – which clearly refers to "any one called brother", as distinct from an unbeliever.

This brings up the question 'what is an unbeliever?' – Quite simply an unbeliever is one who make no profession of Christianity.

• It seems to me, moreover, that the "great house" comprises those who profess, and whilst this in a general way is all around us – including ourselves –

• it seems difficult to hold those who take no Christian ground at all as responsible in the same way as professors.

I have Asiatics in my office and I have to do with strangers in my business – how can I assume that they have declared either their indifference or their rejection of the truth?

• They may never have come into vital contact with the truth so as to be responsible in the sphere of testimony.

• The case is different with those brought up in Christian households.

So, that, I cannot see that the case is proven that there is no such unbeliever to-day as is contemplated in 1 Cor. 10: 27 – but this has been emphatically asserted in public in oral ministry very recently.

The 'great house' conditions had not developed at Corinth in Paul's day but even there the unbeliever was in proximity to a powerful and sustained apostolic testimony to the truth and was in the presence of the public witness of an undivided assembly in the city of Corinth.

I do not find that Scripture supports the assumption that eating is necessarily an expression of fellowship.

I am not referring to eating in a canteen, restaurant, etc., or special cases affected by recognition of the family institution as proceeding from God. I am referring to eating with an unbeliever.

• I cannot conceive that in 1 Cor. 10: 27 Paul's mind identified eating with fellowship –

• but the moment someone did connect it with "holy purposes" then the identity in fellowship became a question and involved love's concern to avoid offending another's conscience.

Other references to eating – or drinking – in 1 Cor. 10 clearly connect with a religious setting and, for that reason, do involve an identification in fellowship and must be evil if the religious setting be wrong.

• The term 'religious setting' is a poor one, but for want of a better expression I use it to convey my meaning.

I find, therefore, difficulty in facing the matter of eating as being necessarily iniquitous in cases where a man's history or background is entirely unknown to me – and eating with or at the invitation of strangers is not an uncommon occurrence in the business sphere.

I readily see that habitual eating with unbelievers is indicative of an affinity on a worldly level and would represent a 'fellowship' which cannot be tolerated.

• I can also see that even one meal with an unbeliever may amount to fellowship if I let down all my barriers and in the spirit of my conversation commit myself in an unreserved manner to him –

• but this is different to making an inflexible rule that eating with an unbeliever is sin because it involves fellowship.

I may meet a man – stranger – in business whose sole idea in inviting me to lunch is to discuss a business problem – I have experienced an actual instance.

• I would very much prefer to avoid the meal, but this is a matter of preference, and I cannot see that I must refuse to eat, in such circumstances, on the ground of principle.

• Because of the defilement generally experienced on such occasions, I would earnestly seek to avoid them, but how can I convert this into an insistence on principle?

I have felt great hesitation in bringing this forward sooner and do still, lest I should in any way appear to be weakening or diverting from the real point of the ministry – for which I see a real need viz. –

• the extrication of the saints from unholy and worldly associations and from false conceptions of social obligations to unconverted relatives.

• In this I have received much help and would seek that others might be similarly helped.

But to accept an inflexible rule – which seems to be the tendency – so as to forbid an aged widow – dependent or not on an unconverted son –

• to draw near to him, even through a meal, in godly concern for his soul, does not seem to me to be in accord with the truth.

• I am not referring to a son who has taken Christian ground.

It may be charged that I am lawless as not subject to the ministry – which I cannot claim to have fully read.

• But ministry is not ministry if it goes beyond the confines of the truth.

The challenge may also be raised that I am not respecting authority, but I cannot see that any man can come between my conscience and God

• Authority there is, thank God, and full respect is due to a servant to whom authority from God is entrusted, but the servant's authority is a limited one –

• it can only lie within the channels of God's appointment – outside of this it is no authority at all.

To remove doubt as to my own attitude to beloved Mr. J. Taylor Jr., may I say I gladly regard him as having gift from the Lord, and the authority that goes along with it must and does command the full respect of my conscience,

• but without any question I could not allow regard for even such a servant to rule my conscience as before God.

Clearly – there can be no question as to the 'wall' – it must be maintained, but is there not cause for concern as to the materials we each individually adopt, lest in any wise we "daub it with untempered mortar", Ezekiel 13: 15 –

• that is, insisting on unproven concepts – in the light of Scripture – which we wrongly assume to be true?

Are we not to "contend earnestly for the faith once delivered to the saints", Jude 3 ?

Surely there can be no inconsistency between a path of separation and one of true Christian liberty?

R. W. N. Saunders.

Looking for the fruits of the Spirit:— "Love, joy, peace, long-suffering, kindness, goodness, fidelity, meekness, self-control", Gal. 5: 22-23 – as a result of what is considered further light,

• I see around only mental cruelty, discourtesy, harshness, slander, immorality, religious fanaticism and persecution, the characteristics of the Pharisee, incitement of hatred to parents, the breakup of the family unit, homes, and friendships in the Lord.

• When I search the Scriptures for the features of Christ and His teaching, I find none of these things.

• With the grace of God I seek, in my limited way, to keep my eye on the Lord, and follow in His footsteps as laid down plainly in the Scriptures, which never fail – for He is the Word, and He changes not.

• I seek no other leader. He never misquoted or manipulated the Scripture. It was Satan who did that.

For many years I have been profoundly disturbed by the way many of the Exclusive Brethren have spoken of other Christians in a derogatory way, implying that they are lost,

• and that we are the only people – the others counting for nothing in Gods' sight as they seem to in ours.

• It is my considered opinion that the present disintegration of the Exclusive Brethren is a direct result of this.

• If this attitude of professing Christian people, who glibly speak of brotherly love, cause me distress, what must it be to the heart of God, to whom all His sons are equally precious?

• I feel that God, in anger, is breaking us up because of this, and will continue to do so, scattering us abroad to show us that there are others serving Him more faithfully, using to the full the talents committed to them, and shepherding the sheep and lambs, and feeding them, according to His request – John 21: 
  16-17 – not scattering and ravaging them.

I am appalled by the inhumanity, selfishness, self-righteousness, and apathy amongst us; a disinclination to get down to things, to examine where we have gone wrong and displeased God.

• Those who confess to having had a message from the Lord, are brushed aside and ignored, while we wait for instructions from New York, or told it is of the Devil, instead of their being listened to and the position examined.

• It might be another case of the "still small voice". I am reminded of what was said of John the Baptist – "he hath a devil".

I cannot feel that in these last days the salvation of sinners is standing still, or decreasing.

• But where is it taking place? And it is – but certainly not amongst us – and why not? The day of grace has not ceased, and the Lord died to this end.

• It would appear that through our failure and incompetence He has conferred this privilege of seeking and saving the lost on others.

Thinking back over the years, one realises that for a very long time, brothers have not been free to ask questions of a nature which would result in the building up of a healthy spiritual constitution. The lack of this has been manifest.

• Some I have asked why they have not challenged certain remarks have replied that they dared not, or that it would not do!

• These brothers have been in bondage – in fear of each other – not of the Lord, and because of this have been forced to become 'Yes Men', all saying the same things,

• not daring to cut across anything set out in the ministry of one self-appointed leader, whose opinion now changes under the name of clarification, according to the degree of havoc he finds his ministry is causing.

Yes, I think, as is said, we are being sifted, refined and purified for the Rapture, but surely the Lord is doing this by calling us out of the Romish system which has evolved amongst us under the name of Exclusive Brethrenism.

• The fruits of this system I see in the production of a spirit which has recently manifested itself amongst us in those who have shut their doors against the children of a godly man, saying their father is unholy.

• They would do well to take account of the Lord's own evaluation of such:— "whosoever shall offend one of these little ones who believe in me", etc., Matthew 18: 5-6.

On many occasions recently I have been arrested by the Lord's specific command – "Love thy neighbour as thyself", and have felt

• how little room the current ministry allows for the practice of this, and how lamentably we fail in fulfilling His request and command. Matthew 5: 43.

I am encouraged to find that there are many others all over the country, of much greater spiritual stature than myself, who have similar exercises to mine, but have not dared to voice them.

• I believe some 2,000 have come out, and I wish to identify myself with them and not with Mr. Jim Taylor.

• Are the brethren aware that we are not known as Christians by other brethren, but as 'Taylorites'?

I love my brethren and shall continue to do so, but I do not love some of their actions,

• and so long as they accept unquestioningly this iniquitous system established amongst us I cannot continue to walk with them.

• In its features it savours too much of the Church of Rome, with its confessions, authoritative ministry, ritual, new dogmas, compulsions, etc.

• What is more, by remaining in fellowship with those supporting it, I sit in judgment on those who have been excommunicated and debarred from remembering the Lord in the breaking of bread, for reasons not supported by Scripture. It makes me feel a hypocrite.

I am satisfied that the step I am taking is with the Lord's approval, as I have prayed much about this and fervently sought His guidance,

• asking Him to remove the desire in my heart to remain in fellowship for the sake of friends I should lose by withdrawal; a reason which I know is holding many.

• He has shown me that it is wrong and has removed this sense of pull, showing me too that I must come out to Him, knowing not where I should go, but trusting Him for further guidance.

I am adamant in my decision, and therefore visits from brothers or sisters would avail nothing,

• as I do not wish my emotions to be played upon, thus spoiling this impression I have received from the Lord as to what I should do. My decision is unalterable.

To leave the brethren is not an easy step after years of close association, but it has had to be a choice between them and the Lord.

• I thank them for all their love and kindness in the past, particularly at times when I have been ill.

• It is my affection for them and my desire not to be severed from them, which has made me slow in response to the Lord's call.

Your affectionate sister in the Lord Jesus Christ.

Ivy Frost.

For the following, see Guests: My Stand 1: Authoritative Ministry.

1. Authoritative Ministry

This lies at the root of all the false doctrine at present existing among the Exclusive Brethren.

• A ministry – or system of teaching or doctrine – which is regarded by its adherents as infallible, and must never under any circumstances be challenged, is simply Romanism in disguise.

• I know of only two sects in Christendom which make such a shocking claim, the Roman Church and the Exclusive Brethren.

No longer do we hear among these brethren 'What saith the Scriptures?' but rather 'Is it in the Ministry?'

• and if the two conflict, as they often do, it is always 'the Ministry' to which heed is given.

• When leaving the Elders at Miletus in Acts 20, Paul committed them to God and the Word of His grace and from then to the end of the dispensation, there has never been any other safeguard or resource for the faithful heart.

Forsaking the Word of God, and substituting the doctrines of men, has led to all the confusion in Christendom, and to all the confusion now rampant in the iniquitous sect of Exclusive Brethren, they have forsaken the Word and there is no light in them.

A further serious matter is that it is openly stated by their leaders, and accepted by their followers, that it is not at all necessary to follow the Scriptures, but they must listen to the 'voice of the Spirit in the assembly'.

• Here we have a really dreadful doctrine, a clear suggestion that the Blessed Holy Spirit is now teaching what is contrary to the Word of God, which He Himself indited.

• I have warned the brethren publicly that this doctrine borders very closely on blasphemy against the Holy Spirit for which there is no forgiveness;

• yet this phrase, so shocking to every right spiritual sensibility, is one most commonly on the lips of many brethren.

If anyone has the moral courage to call attention to these false doctrines, he is immediately marked down for excommunication as one who is 'not going on with the truth'.

• What is called the truth by these brethren is the system of false and unscriptural doctrine now taught among them.

• The phrase referred to above contains another subtle error, that the Exclusive Brethren are 'the Assembly', but with that we will deal later.

2. Pharasaism

Of all the sects existent among the Jews, when the Lord Jesus Christ was here on earth, none received more scathing denunciation than the Pharisees – or Holy Ones as they called themselves.

• To them and to them alone, did He address that terrible denunciation – "Offspring of vipers, how should ye escape the judgment of hell?", Matt. 23: 33.

• Though, blessed be His Name, many among them obeyed His word and were saved.

• The thoughtful believer cannot fail to see in the Exclusive Brethren, many evidences that they are the modern version of what Paul refers to as "the strictest sect of our religion … a Pharisee", Acts 26: 5.

I have already referred to one characteristic, that of making the Word of God void, but in addition their present line of 'Authoritative Ministry', falsely so called, has for its end

• the making only of the outside of the plate clean, and every effort is being made to whiten the outside of the sepulchre, neglecting the dead men's bones inside.

• And what a mass of corruption there is inside, never in fifty years among them have I known such foulness.

Young men and women, and older ones too, even some taking a prominent lead, have been found guilty of adultery, fornication, uncleanness, incest, drunkenness, falsehood, deceit and other such things.

• Yet the outward appearance of what is termed by them 'the testimony' must be maintained at all costs.

• Many earnest souls are still held in a false position by the desire to preserve the outward unity of the position, many indeed who would wholeheartedly endorse everything in this letter.

A great deal of trouble and sorrow has come in of late, by the false and totally unscriptural doctrine, that members of this iniquitous sect must not eat with any outside their own membership, whether relatives, believers or unbelievers.

• This is also the spirit of the Pharisee, who gathers his holy garments around him and says 'Lord, I thank thee I am not as other men'.

Widespread sorrow and misery have followed in the wake of this false doctrine – false as to the life and movements of the Lord Jesus and His disciples when here, in whose steps we are to follow –

• false as to the teaching and example of the Apostle Paul, of whom we are exhorted to be imitators as he was of Christ.

• Of those leaders who teach this doctrine it can be truly said, 'destruction and misery are in their ways and the way of peace they have not known'.

At one Assembly Meeting – so-called – it was stated openly in the presence of several hundred brethren, that 'We cannot follow the Lord, as He was unique, and could do what we cannot do, we cannot imitate Paul, he was an elect vessel', and so on.

• So now apparently it is wrong to follow the Lord – though Scripture exhorts us to do so – we cannot imitate Paul – though again we are exhorted to do so – and we cannot accept the Word of God.

• What unutterable folly and sin is here, the satanic source of it all is clearly evident.

3. Excommunication

Although there is only one case of excommunication in the New Testament, in 1 Cor. 5, and that of such an incestuous character that even the Gentiles would not mention such things, the whole system of Exclusive Brethren has run completely riot in this matter.

• All over the world godly brethren, who have served the Lord and His people faithfully for years, are hounded out of fellowship on the flimsiest pretexts –

• some for having dared to call attention to unscriptural teaching in their so called 'Authoritative Ministry',

• others because parents have had a meal with their own children, who had been excommunicated also for totally inadequate reasons, and so on.

Once anyone is 'outside' the most extreme and untruthful statements are made about them.

• They are said to 'have left the assembly – 'left the fellowship of God's Son' – 'to be unfit for Christian fellowship anywhere' – they are 'dogs and liars' – 'swine rushing downhill to their own destruction'.

• They are 'in outer darkness' – 'in the congregation of the dead' – 'associated with the table of demons'.

The above, and other phrases, have been used by their leaders in public meetings, in the presence of hundreds of brethren, and have never been challenged, so great is the reign of terror in this evil and iniquitous sect, nor have they been recanted in any way.

• All this displays the ignorance of their leaders. This kind of thing was well described by beloved JND as 'monstrous folly', and so it is.

• It is also noticeable that, as in all cases in Church History, where persecution has been rampant, it is the meek and Christ-like who suffer and the vain, arrogant and brutal take the lead.

4. Laodicean Presumption

It has also become increasingly obvious in the last year or two that the small and insignificant sect of Exclusive Brethren have come to regard themselves as 'the Assembly',

• this being abundantly evident in their 'Ministry' and also in phrases used in prayer and praise, such as 'we – the assembly' – 'the Lord is putting the finishing touches on the assembly in view of His speedy return' – 'There is an added glory in the assembly of late in view of presentation' – 'The Lord will come on some Lord's Day morning when we are breaking bread' –

• these and many other great high sounding words of vanity are in common use among the Exclusives, clearly indicating the Laodicean position into which they have fallen, a condition so nauseous to the Lord that He says "I am about to spue thee out of my mouth", Rev. 3: 16.

With all their wonderful opinions of themselves they know not that they are poor and wretched and naked and blind.

• It is good to know that there are many who have sought from the Lord Jesus eye salve that they may see and, with anointed eyes, have left this iniquitous system.

• They have come out of the house of bondage and from under the reign of terror and are finding joy, peace and happiness in the Lord.

Many still going on with this evil system would fully endorse all that is set forth in this letter,

• but they are held by family ties, by fear of the isolation that in many cases has resulted, and other motives unworthy of them, and marking them as lacking in faith and loyalty to our Lord Jesus Christ.

5. Intoxicants

On this subject two things are quite clear. On the one hand the rightful use of Alcoholic Liquor is not forbidden in Scripture

• But let it be noted that Timothy was apparently a rigid abstainer, until he received a special word from the Apostle Paul.

• but very solemn warnings are given throughout Scripture as to over-indulgence in Intoxicants.

• In spite of this the brethren are now told they ought to have Intoxicants on their tables to show that they have 'Christian liberty'.

This false doctrine has led to deplorable results – young men and young women holding parties at which some have been completely intoxicated, with sorrowful moral results, activities that are commonly found among 'teenagers' in the world.

• Young men who have appeared before Tribunals as having a conscience against military service have not hesitated to get completely drunk and been rebuked by godly young men from other sects.

  This must be a slip. Conscientious objection was only to the bearing of arms and to the taking of life, not to military service itself in a non-combatant role. See History: Conscientious Objection to Bearing Arms.

The disastrous consequences of this new and monstrous doctrine is only just beginning to bear fruit.

• In their anxiety to sweep and garnish their houses by laws, rules and regulations, they are making room for seven devils worse than the first and this is already becoming apparent.

Finally, I must express my deep sorrow at having to separate from many beloved brothers and sisters with whom I have walked for many years.

• Nothing I have written has ever to my knowledge marked any in the Meeting in Colwyn Bay, but, alas,

• even they cannot escape their fellowship with meetings, far and near, where many of these things are found,

• and in loyalty to my Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ, I must separate from the corrupt and iniquitous sect of Exclusive Brethren.

In view of the above it is impossible for me ever again to set foot in any room used by this sect.

• As they have now no jurisdiction over me, I cannot be seen by any coming officially from them, nor accept or recognize their Care Meetings or Assembly Meetings as having any Scriptural validity or authority.

My house will always be open to any who love our Lord Jesus Christ in sincerity and who walk in obedience to the revealed mind of God in His Word.

• Such may ever be assured of a warm, affectionate and hospitable reception.

Your brother in Christ, James Rainford.