By Jean
Gibson & William MacDonald
Published
in Uplook Magazine, March 1991
The
theological world is familiar with the terms Neo-Orthodox and Neo-Evangelical.
Now we can add a third: Neo-Brethren. In all three cases, trusted words are used
but new interpretations have resulted in an entirely different meaning. In the
case of the Neo-Brethren, new ideas, practices, and changes are advocated which
are significantly different from the mainstream. If the early brethren could
visit some of these churches, it is doubtful that they would find much
resemblance to what they considered to be the New Testament pattern.
We freely
admit that we don't have to be frozen into practices unrelated to New Testament
teaching, practices that are matters of culture or tradition. However, it has
become common for some Neo-Brethren to take matters on which the Scriptures
teach clearly and Label them "traditional." These men reinterpret the
Bible to fit the culture of the day or their own whims. They want to appear to
be true to the principles, however, in subtle ways
they change them and undermine them. Here are some of the general features of
Neo-Brethrenism. Obviously not every item is true of
every individual or church.
1. They
emphasize numbers in attendance with diminished concern for biblical
principles, or anything that would interfere with church growth.
2. There is
a weakened emphasis on the Breaking of Bread, its general importance, its
frequency, and Spirit-led participation by the brethren. The service tends to
be increasingly structured.
3. Sermon
topics are chosen on the basis of popular appeal; that is, what the public
wants, rather than on the whole counsel of God. Frequently themes are based on
secular psychology and contemporary buzz words rather than systematic
exposition of the Scriptures. It is a popularized pulpit with
"show-biz" techniques.
4. There is
a general lack of attention to those things that lead to spiritual revival:
prayer, conviction, confession, repentance, and obedience. Dependence is on
church marketing strategies. The offence of the cross is missing.
5. Some
leaders teach the equality of men and women in regards to their standing in
Christ (with which all agree), but fall to recognize the Scripture's teaching
that men and women have different God-given roles in the church and in the
home. Any other position is condemned as traditional and oppressive, as robbing
the church of women's gifts, and as a denial of the priesthood of believers.
Because it may be a possible cause of offense to visitors, women are often
actively discouraged from wearing a covering.
6. Public
ministry is largely confined to one man, preferably one who is professionally
trained. This would disqualify the Lord as well as the apostles. There is
little opportunity for younger brothers to develop their gift.
7. Too
often there is a scornful attitude toward assemblies and their distinctives. Church principles are reduced to a few
simplistic qualifications that almost any evangelical church could meet. Both
publicly and privately, early leaders of the so-called Brethren movement
(especially Darby) are held up for strident criticism.
8. Those
described in the preceding paragraph still want to classify their churches as
Brethren churches. In this way they retain financial and medical assistance yet
demonstrate no real allegiance to the assemblies or their practices.
9. The
tendency is to centralize all important ministries in the hands of a few paid
staff member, with virtually no distinction from the clergy-laity system. It is
not uncommon to relegate shepherding functions to paid psychologists.
10. All
this results in dividing assemblies into two factions. This divisiveness is
furthered by forming fellowships and holding conferences for research and
review of Brethren history. Actually these seemingly innocuous gatherings are
used to denigrate the movement and promote the tenets of Neo-Brethrenism listed above. This results in a polarization of
the assemblies.
It would be
far more honest and aboveboard for the Neo-Brethren to dissociate themselves
from the assemblies and form whatever kind of local church they favor.
We
certainly need revival and a fresh working of the Holy Spirit among us. There
is a great deal for which we should repent. However, we don't need to abandon
scriptural principles. We just need to practice them better.