Plymouth Brethren Beliefs Explained

1. Who the Plymouth Brethren Are

The Plymouth Brethren are a movement of independent Christian congregations, usually called assemblies, that began in Dublin in the late 1820s and take Scripture alone as their rule of faith and church order. They have no clergy, no denominational headquarters, no creed and, strictly speaking, no official name: members describe themselves as brethren, or simply as Christians gathered to the name of the Lord Jesus, and the label Plymouth Brethren was fixed on them from outside because the assembly at Plymouth in Devon became the movement's most visible congregation in the 1830s. Their weekly worship centres on the breaking of bread, a service at which no one presides and any brother may speak as he believes the Holy Spirit prompts him.

Two things make the movement worth understanding well beyond its own size. The first is its doctrine of ministry. The Brethren pressed the Reformation principle of the priesthood of all believers unusually far, abolishing the pastor along with the priest, and their argument is a serious one that a Catholic has to answer from Scripture rather than from custom. The second is their eschatology. John Nelson Darby's dispensational system, and with it the belief that Christ will remove the Church from the earth before a seven-year tribulation, spread from a handful of British assemblies into the mainstream of American evangelical Protestantism, and it now supplies the plot of a great deal of popular end-times writing and film in English.

The movement is not one body. It divided in 1848 into what are commonly called the Open Brethren and the Exclusive Brethren, and the Exclusive side has divided many times since. The best known of the Exclusive lines has been known since 2012 as the Plymouth Brethren Christian Church. Anything said about the Brethren in general has to be checked against which branch is meant, because the branches differ sharply on the one question that produced the split: how far one assembly's judgment binds another.

2. Where the Movement Came From

The Brethren movement began in Dublin between about 1827 and 1830, among a small group of educated men who had grown dissatisfied with the established Church of Ireland and with the denominational divisions of Protestantism generally. The best remembered are Anthony Norris Groves, a dentist from Exeter who later went as a missionary to Baghdad and India; Edward Cronin, a medical man who had been refused communion by Dublin dissenting congregations because he would not join one of them formally; John Gifford Bellett, a barrister; and Francis Hutchinson, in whose Fitzwilliam Square house the group met. Their founding conviction was that believers in Christ already share a unity that denominational membership obscures, and that they may therefore gather to break bread on the strength of that unity alone, with no minister, no roll and no formal constitution.

John Nelson Darby Joins

John Nelson Darby, born in London in 1800 to an Anglo-Irish family and educated at Trinity College Dublin, was ordained in the Church of Ireland and served as a curate in County Wicklow, where he worked among the Irish poor with a severity of life that impressed everyone who met him. He resigned his curacy in the late 1820s. The immediate cause was a demand by William Magee, Archbishop of Dublin, that converts from Roman Catholicism swear allegiance to the British Crown, which Darby regarded as the state corrupting the gospel; the deeper cause was his growing conviction that an established church is a compromise with the world. He joined the Dublin gatherings and quickly became their leading writer, thinker and organiser, and he remained so until his death in 1882.

Why Plymouth Gave the Movement Its Name

The assembly at Plymouth in Devon was founded in 1831 by Benjamin Wills Newton, a Fellow of Exeter College Oxford, together with Captain Percy Hall and others, and it grew rapidly into the movement's most prominent gathering. Visitors and neighbouring churches began to speak of the brethren from Plymouth, then simply of Plymouth Brethren, and the name stuck to the whole movement even though its origins were Irish and its later centre of gravity moved elsewhere. Members have never much liked the name, since taking a name is precisely what they set out to avoid.

Bristol and George Muller

The other early centre was Bethesda Chapel in Bristol, where George Muller and Henry Craik gathered a congregation from 1832. Muller is the Brethren figure best known outside the movement, through the orphan houses he built on Ashley Down and the practice he made famous of never soliciting funds and asking God alone for what the children needed. Bethesda's temper was more relaxed than Darby's, more willing to receive Christians from other churches, and that difference of temper became the fault line of the split described in section 7.

That verse is the movement's charter text, and Brethren writers return to it constantly. The gathering itself, they argue, is the sufficient condition of Christ's presence, and everything the churches have added to it over eighteen centuries is human addition.

3. What the Plymouth Brethren Believe

Plymouth Brethren doctrine is conservative evangelical Protestantism held with unusual consistency and pressed to unusual conclusions about the Church. Brethren confess the Trinity, the full deity and full humanity of Christ, his virgin birth, his substitutionary death, his bodily resurrection and his personal return. They hold the verbal inspiration and complete authority of Scripture, and they hold justification by grace through faith, received by faith alone apart from works. On the questions the ancient creeds settled they stand with historic Christianity, while refusing to recite a creed on principle, since a creed is a human document set alongside the Bible.

Scripture Alone, and No Creed

Brethren teaching allows no authority beside the Bible: no creed, no confession, no council, no tradition and no living teaching office. Bible study is intense, verse by verse, and often typological, reading the tabernacle, the offerings of Leviticus and the lives of the patriarchs as detailed figures of Christ. Darby produced his own translation of the whole Bible into English, and separately into French and German, and Brethren writers such as William Kelly and C. H. Mackintosh built a large body of commentary that is still in print. The Catholic difficulty with this principle, that the canon of Scripture was itself discerned by the Church, is set out in our guide to Sacred Tradition and Scripture.

Baptism

Open Brethren baptise believers by immersion on a personal profession of faith, and they do not baptise infants. Baptism is understood as an act of obedience and public testimony, following the pattern of Acts 8:36-38, rather than as a means by which God confers grace. Some Exclusive lines practise household baptism, baptising the children of believing parents on the ground that a believer's household stands within the sphere of Christian profession, an argument drawn from Acts 16:15 and 16:33 and from 1 Corinthians 7:14. The disagreement is internal to the movement and long standing.

Salvation and Assurance

Brethren preaching lays great weight on a definite personal conversion and on the assurance that follows it. A believer is expected to be able to say when he was saved and to rest on texts such as John 5:24 and 1 John 5:13 for the certainty that he possesses eternal life now. Much Brethren teaching holds that a true believer cannot finally be lost, though the movement has never spoken with one voice on the point and has no confession to settle it. The Catholic position, that we have a firm hope grounded in Christ rather than an absolute certainty of our own perseverance, and that grace works through a life of faith expressed in charity, is treated in our guides to salvation and faith and works.

Order in the Assembly

Brethren assemblies keep a strict reading of the New Testament texts on order. Women do not preach or lead in the gathered meetings, on the basis of 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 and 1 Timothy 2:11-12, and in most assemblies women cover their heads at the breaking of bread following 1 Corinthians 11:5-6. Open Brethren assemblies are governed by a plurality of elders, recognised by the assembly on the qualifications listed in 1 Timothy 3:1-7 and Titus 1:5-9 and serving without salary or title. Discipline, including exclusion from the Lord's table, is exercised by the assembly on the pattern of 1 Corinthians 5.

Separation from the World

All Brethren teach separation from the world, drawing on 2 Corinthians 6:14-18 and 1 John 2:15-17, and the branches differ enormously in how far they take it. Open Brethren typically avoid gambling, drunkenness and worldly entertainments while working in ordinary jobs, sending children to ordinary schools and voting in ordinary elections. The stricter Exclusive lines extend separation into the ordering of daily life, and section 9 sets out what that has meant in practice.

Mission

The movement has produced missionary work out of all proportion to its numbers, sent out without any missionary society, denominational board or guaranteed salary. Anthony Norris Groves went to Baghdad in 1829 on that principle. Frederick Stanley Arnot and Dan Crawford spent decades in central Africa. The pattern of sending workers who look to God for support rather than to a committee has been widely imitated by other evangelicals, and it is one of the movement's genuine gifts to the wider Christian world.

4. The Breaking of Bread

The breaking of bread is the central act of Brethren worship, held every Lord's Day morning, and its form follows directly from the doctrine that there is no clergy. Bread and wine stand on a table in the middle of the room. The company sits in silence. Any brother may rise to give out a hymn, read a passage, pray aloud or speak briefly, as he judges the Spirit is leading him, and no order of service and no appointed leader governs what happens. At some point in the meeting a brother gives thanks for the bread and it is passed from hand to hand, then the cup is given thanks for and passed the same way. The meeting closes, often with a collection, and it may last an hour or more.

Brethren defend the practice from Acts 20:7, where the disciples came together on the first day of the week to break bread, from 1 Corinthians 11:23-26, which they read as instituting a remembrance until Christ comes, and from the description of the assembly in 1 Corinthians 14:26, in which each one brings a psalm, a teaching, a revelation. Their claim is that this was the ordinary Sunday practice of the apostolic churches and that everything else is later development.

What the Bread and Cup Mean to Them

Brethren teaching on the Lord's Supper is memorialist. The bread and the wine are emblems that call the death of Christ to mind and proclaim it until he comes; no change takes place in them and no sacrifice is offered. The emphasis falls on the worship of the gathered company and on the words of institution, "this do in remembrance of me" (1 Corinthians 11:24-25). A Brethren writer would say that treating the elements as anything more turns a memorial into a superstition.

Who May Come to the Table

The rules of admission are the practical difference between the two branches, and they matter more than any point of doctrine in Brethren life. Open Brethren assemblies receive any Christian who gives evidence of sound faith and consistent life, whatever church he normally attends, usually after a personal word with the elders or a letter of commendation from another assembly. Exclusive assemblies receive only those in fellowship with the whole circle of assemblies they recognise, so that a person put out in one place is out everywhere. The stricter lines have refused the table to spouses and to parents.

5. Why They Reject Ordained Ministry

The Brethren rejection of ordained ministry is the movement's defining doctrine, and it rests on three arguments that deserve to be stated in full before any answer is given. Brethren writers do not present this as a matter of preference or church style. They present it as obedience to the New Testament against eighteen centuries of accumulated human arrangement.

The First Argument: One Priesthood, Shared by All

Brethren teaching holds that the New Testament knows exactly one Christian priesthood and that every believer belongs to it. Peter tells the whole body of believers that they are a holy priesthood offering spiritual sacrifices and a royal priesthood (1 Peter 2:5, 2:9), and Revelation 1:6 says that Christ has made his people a kingdom and priests to God. Christ himself is the one high priest of Hebrews 4:14-16 and 7:23-27, whose priesthood is permanent and cannot pass to another. On this reading, a separate order of priests standing between God and the congregation contradicts the letter to the Hebrews, and the New Testament pointedly never calls a Christian minister a priest (hiereus).

The Second Argument: The Spirit Distributes Gifts, and Clergy Concentrate Them

The second argument concerns the Spirit's freedom. 1 Corinthians 12 describes the Spirit distributing different gifts to different members as he wills, and 1 Corinthians 14:26 shows a meeting in which several contribute. Ephesians 4:11-12 says Christ gave apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors and teachers to equip the saints for the work of ministry, which Brethren read as gifts to the whole body rather than as offices conferred by a rite. Their conclusion is that appointing one salaried man to do all the praying, preaching and administering silences everyone else and quenches the Spirit (1 Thessalonians 5:19). This is why the breaking of bread is left open: the form of the meeting is the doctrine.

The Third Argument: The Ruin of the Church

Darby added a historical argument of his own that gives the other two their edge. He taught that the visible Church fell into ruin very early, that the professing Christendom of history is the failed thing Christ will spit out of his mouth (Revelation 3:16), and that no true believer in the last days should look for a restored institution. What remains possible is to gather to the name of Christ in weakness, outside the camp (Hebrews 13:13), claiming no succession and no authority. This teaching explains why the Brethren never sought recognition, never built a structure to be recognised, and regarded every denominational arrangement, Catholic and Protestant alike, as part of the ruin.

Elders Without Ordination

Brethren do not deny that the New Testament has elders and deacons. Open Brethren assemblies have elders, and the point is how they come to be elders. They are recognised by the assembly as men who already meet the qualifications of 1 Timothy 3 and Titus 1 and who are already doing the work, and no rite makes them elders, no bishop appoints them, they hold no title, and in most assemblies they receive no pay. The office is a function, and the Brethren claim it carries no sacramental character and confers no power the rest of the congregation lacks.

6. Darby, Dispensationalism and the Rapture

Dispensationalism is the system of biblical interpretation John Nelson Darby worked out in the 1830s, and it is the Brethren movement's largest export. Its governing idea is that God deals with humanity through a succession of distinct administrations, or dispensations, in each of which he tests people under a different arrangement and each of which ends in human failure and divine judgment. Later dispensationalists commonly count seven: innocence, conscience, human government, promise, law, grace, and the millennial kingdom. Darby's own scheme was less tidy than the sevenfold list that the Scofield Reference Bible fixed in the popular mind.

Israel and the Church Held Apart

The load-bearing principle of the system is a permanent distinction between Israel and the Church. Darby taught that God has two peoples with two destinies: Israel, with earthly promises of land and kingdom that will yet be fulfilled literally, and the Church, a heavenly people that was a mystery hidden in God and unrevealed until Pentecost. On this reading the Church is a parenthesis in the prophetic programme. The prophetic clock that runs through Daniel's seventy weeks (Daniel 9:24-27) stopped at the sixty-ninth week, the present Church age occupies the gap, and the clock restarts for the final week once the Church has been removed. Everything else in the system follows from that distinction, and if the distinction fails the system fails with it.

The Pretribulation Rapture

The rapture doctrine is the practical consequence. Because the Church has no place in a programme that concerns Israel, Christ must come for his Church before the final seven years begin, catching believers up to meet him in the air on the basis of 1 Thessalonians 4:16-17 and 1 Corinthians 15:51-52. The tribulation then runs its course on the earth with Israel at its centre, the Antichrist appears, and Christ returns publicly in glory to reign for a thousand years (Revelation 20:1-6). Darby's second coming therefore has two stages separated by years: a secret coming for the saints, and a public coming with the saints. Our guide to the rapture and what Scripture actually says compares the pretribulation, midtribulation, postribulation and Catholic positions at length; section 11 below keeps to the Catholic reply to Darby's own version of the doctrine.

Where the Doctrine Came From

Historians of doctrine generally trace the pretribulation rapture to Darby and the circle around him about 1830, and the question of its exact origin is genuinely disputed. Writers before the nineteenth century, whatever their view of the millennium, expected a single public return of Christ, and the Fathers who wrote about the last days describe the Church passing through the persecution of Antichrist rather than being removed before it. A vision reported by a young woman named Margaret Macdonald at Port Glasgow in 1830 has been proposed as the source, and Darby rejected any dependence on it, and the evidence does not settle the matter either way. What is clear is that no Christian teacher is known to have taught a pretribulation rapture in this form before the 1830s.

The claim above is about the absence of a documented earlier teacher of this specific doctrine, which is how historians of dispensationalism on all sides of the debate frame the question. It is not a claim that the word rapture is new: the term comes from the Latin rapiemur in the Vulgate of 1 Thessalonians 4:17 and the expectation of being caught up is as old as the epistle.

How It Reached America

Darby crossed the Atlantic repeatedly between 1862 and 1877, preaching to Presbyterian, Baptist and independent ministers who never joined the Brethren and took his prophetic scheme home with them. James Hall Brookes of St Louis adopted it and taught it at the Niagara Bible Conference, the prophecy conference movement carried it across the country, and C. I. Scofield printed it in the notes of the Scofield Reference Bible, published by Oxford University Press in 1909 and revised in 1917. A generation of readers learned the system from the same page as the sacred text. Lewis Sperry Chafer built Dallas Theological Seminary on it. Hal Lindsey's The Late Great Planet Earth in 1970 turned it into a mass-market paperback, and the Left Behind novels of Tim LaHaye and Jerry Jenkins from 1995 turned it into bestselling fiction. Our pages on Hal Lindsey and Tim LaHaye follow that line, and our survey of end-times prophecy books sets the genre in order.

7. The 1848 Split: Open and Exclusive

The split of 1848 divided the Brethren permanently and turned on a question about the nature of the assembly: is each gathering competent to judge who may come to its own table, or are all gatherings one body in which a judgment made anywhere binds everywhere? The dispute began at Plymouth. Darby and Benjamin Wills Newton had fallen out over church government, over Newton's dominance in the Plymouth assembly and over Newton's prophetic teaching, which rejected Darby's separation of Israel and the Church. In 1845 Darby withdrew from the Plymouth assembly and set up a rival meeting.

The Doctrinal Charge

The conflict became doctrinal in 1847, when tracts of Newton's were circulated containing statements about the humanity of Christ which his critics read as making Christ subject to the consequences of Adam's sin and to the judgment resting on Israel under the law. Newton withdrew and retracted the statements, and Darby regarded the retraction as insufficient and the error as blasphemous. The important point for what followed is that the charge was serious, that it concerned the person of Christ, and that the two sides did not agree about whether the retraction had settled it.

Bethesda and the Circular

Some Plymouth members moved to Bristol and asked for fellowship at Bethesda, the chapel led by George Muller and Henry Craik. Bethesda examined the individuals, found that they did not personally hold the disputed teaching, and received them, declining to make judgment of a distant assembly's dispute a condition of the table. Darby answered in 1848 with the circular known as the Bethesda Circular, ruling that anyone who had been at Bethesda, or in fellowship with anyone who had, was defiled by association and must be refused. Assemblies had to choose.

The Two Branches

The table describes general patterns. Brethren assemblies have no central authority to define practice, terminology varies by country, and many congregations in the Open tradition now use names such as Gospel Hall, Christian Assembly, Bible Chapel or Evangelical Church rather than any form of Brethren.

What the Split Cost the Argument

The split matters for the movement's central claim. The Brethren gathered on the ground that all believers are one and that denominational organisation is what divides them, and within twenty years of the first Dublin meetings the movement had divided over exactly the question that organised churches use structures and procedures to settle. Removing the structure did not remove the problem of who decides. It relocated the decision to a leading teacher whose personal authority was greater, in practice, than that of many a bishop, and left no procedure by which he could be answered.

8. The Exclusive Brethren Today

The Exclusive side divided repeatedly after Darby's death in 1882, and the lines that resulted are usually named after the teachers who led them: William Kelly, Frederick William Grant, Clarence Esme Stuart, William Joseph Lowe, Frederick Edward Raven, and then in the twentieth century James Taylor Sr and James Taylor Jr. Several of these lines have since made partial reunions with one another, and several remain small and quiet. When newspapers write about the Exclusive Brethren they almost always mean the line that descends through the Taylors.

The Plymouth Brethren Christian Church

The Exclusive line most often written about has been known since 2012 as the Plymouth Brethren Christian Church, having previously been called the Exclusive Brethren and, in its own internal usage, simply the Brethren or the Taylorite fellowship. It has been led in succession by James Taylor Sr, James Taylor Jr, James Symington, John Hales and Bruce Hales, and press and academic accounts record members describing the leader with the titles Man of God and Elect Vessel. The church runs its own school system in several countries under the name OneSchool Global, operates a substantial network of member-owned businesses, and maintains an active charitable and disaster-relief arm.

The Plymouth Brethren Christian Church publishes membership and country figures on its own website; those are the group's own statements about itself and no independent census verifies them, so no number is quoted here. Names of leaders and of the school network are drawn from the church's own published material and from United Kingdom Charity Commission documents.

The Turn of 1960

The strictness for which the group became known dates from the leadership of James Taylor Jr, who from about 1959 pressed the doctrine of separation much further than his predecessors. The requirement that members not eat with anyone outside the fellowship was applied to households, so that members were required to separate from spouses, parents and children who did not belong or who were withdrawn from. Members left professional bodies and trade unions, gave up university education, and in many cases sold homes to move into separate housing. Large numbers of families left or were withdrawn from during these years, and the disruption is well documented in the press of the period in Britain, Australia and New Zealand. A meeting at Aberdeen in 1970 involving Taylor Jr, whose circumstances were reported very differently by his supporters and his critics, precipitated a further major division shortly before his death that year.

Charity Registration in the United Kingdom

A concrete and well-documented episode illustrates the public questions the group has faced. In 2012 the Charity Commission for England and Wales refused to register the Preston Down Trust, a Brethren meeting hall trust, on the ground that it was not satisfied the trust operated for the public benefit given the doctrine and practice of separation. The case went to appeal and attracted parliamentary attention. In January 2014 the Commission registered the trust after the acceptance of a deed of variation setting out undertakings about the group's practices, including the treatment of former members and access to its buildings.

Details of the Preston Down Trust case are published by the Charity Commission for England and Wales in its decision documents of 2012 and its registration announcement of January 2014, and were the subject of hearings by the House of Commons Public Administration Select Committee.

9. Separation and Its Human Cost

Separation is a genuine New Testament theme, and the pastoral question is where its limits lie. Paul tells the Corinthians not to keep company with a professing believer living in grave and unrepented sin, and not even to eat with such a person (1 Corinthians 5:11), while adding in the same passage that he does not mean the immoral of this world, since that would require leaving the world altogether (1 Corinthians 5:10). He tells the Thessalonians to withdraw from the disorderly and adds at once that such a person is to be counted as a brother rather than an enemy (2 Thessalonians 3:14-15). The texts are real, and every one of them has a limit written into it.

Where the Doctrine Bites

The stricter Exclusive practice extends the withdrawal to the whole of ordinary life, so a person who leaves is separated from parents, siblings, spouse and children who remain. Former members in Britain, Australia and New Zealand have described in public inquiries and in the press what that meant in their own families. The Catholic response is not that separation is unknown to Scripture. The response is that a discipline severe enough to sever a mother from her children has left the limits Paul himself wrote into the texts, and that the fourth commandment and the bond of marriage are not suspended by an assembly's ruling.

How to Talk to Brethren Neighbours

Nothing in this section applies to the Open Brethren, who live and work and school their children alongside everyone else, and it is unjust to treat every Brethren congregation as though the strictest practice were universal. If you know Brethren personally, the honest starting points are the ones you actually share: Christ crucified and risen, the authority of Scripture, the necessity of conversion, the seriousness of holiness. The disagreement about ministry and sacraments is real, and it is best reached through those texts rather than through an argument about a group's reputation.

10. The Catholic Response on Ministry

The Catholic Church holds that Christ instituted a ministerial priesthood, distinct from the common priesthood of all the baptised and ordered to its service, conferred by the sacrament of Holy Orders through the laying on of hands in apostolic succession. The Catechism of the Catholic Church sets this out in paragraphs 1536 to 1538, and treats the relation between the two priesthoods in paragraph 1547, where the ministerial priesthood is said to be at the service of the common priesthood and to differ from it in essence. Each of the three Brethren arguments in section 5 has a scriptural answer.

Answering the First Argument: Both Priesthoods Are in the Text

Catholic teaching affirms the common priesthood of all believers without qualification. 1 Peter 2:5 and 2:9 are Catholic doctrine, and the Catechism teaches in paragraph 1268 that the baptised share in the priesthood of Christ. The question is whether that shared priesthood excludes an ordered ministry, and the New Testament shows the two side by side. Paul and Barnabas appointed elders in every church with prayer and fasting (Acts 14:23). Titus was left in Crete precisely to appoint elders town by town (Titus 1:5). Timothy received a gift through prophecy with the laying on of hands of the body of elders (1 Timothy 4:14) and through the laying on of Paul's own hands (2 Timothy 1:6), and he is warned not to lay hands on anyone hastily (1 Timothy 5:22). The Seven in Acts 6:6 were set before the apostles who prayed and laid hands on them, and the church at Antioch sent Barnabas and Saul with fasting, prayer and the laying on of hands (Acts 13:3). A rite that confers a gift and appoints to an office is on the page.

On the vocabulary, the Brethren observation is accurate and the conclusion does not follow. The New Testament does reserve hiereus for the Jewish priesthood and for Christ and for the whole people, and it names Christian ministers presbyteros and episkopos. The English word priest descends from presbyteros by ordinary linguistic change. The substance of the Catholic claim rests on what these ministers are shown doing: they are entrusted with the ministry of reconciliation (2 Corinthians 5:18-20), they are stewards of the mysteries of God (1 Corinthians 4:1), they are sent by Christ as the Father sent him and given authority to forgive and to retain sins (John 20:21-23), and the elders of the church are called to anoint the sick with oil in the Lord's name so that sins are forgiven (James 5:14-15). A memorialist assembly with no ordained ministry has no one to whom those commissions are given.

Answering the Second Argument: Gifts and Offices Are Both Real

The Catholic Church agrees that the Holy Spirit distributes gifts through the whole body and that a congregation in which only the ordained ever act is impoverished. Lumen Gentium 12 teaches that the Spirit distributes special graces among the faithful of every rank, and the Catechism treats charisms in paragraphs 799 to 801. The same Paul who wrote 1 Corinthians 12 also appointed elders, and 1 Corinthians 14 ends with the instruction that everything be done decently and in order (1 Corinthians 14:40), which is an argument for order rather than against it. Ephesians 4:11-12 names pastors and teachers as gifts Christ gave, and the passage says these gifts equip the saints for ministry, so the ordered ministry and the ministry of all the faithful are the same movement rather than rivals. Our guide to the Catholic priesthood works through the texts in detail.

Answering the Third Argument: The Church in Ruin

Darby's ruin doctrine is the deepest of the three disagreements, because it is a claim about what Christ promised. Christ said that he would build his Church and that the gates of hell would not prevail against it (Matthew 16:18), that he would be with his apostles to the end of the age (Matthew 28:20), and that the Spirit of truth would guide them into all truth (John 16:13). Paul calls the Church the pillar and foundation of the truth (1 Timothy 3:15). Catholic teaching takes these promises to mean that the Church may be wounded by the sins of her members and cannot be reduced to a ruin from which the promises have departed. A movement that begins by declaring the visible Church a failure has to explain why those promises did not hold, and the Brethren answer, that the promises attach only to the invisible company of true believers, has to be read into texts that speak of a visible body with visible leaders. Our guides to the papacy and Catholic and Protestant differences take that argument further.

11. The Catholic Response on the Rapture

The Catholic Church teaches one second coming of Christ, visible, public and at the end of history, when he will come in glory to judge the living and the dead. The Creed says so, the Catechism treats the coming and the judgment together in paragraphs 668 to 682, and no Catholic doctrine divides the return into a secret phase and a later public one. This section states the Catholic position in summary; our guide to the rapture makes the full argument and our guides to the second coming and the great tribulation carry the related questions.

The Text the Argument Turns On

1 Thessalonians 4:16-17 says that the Lord will descend from heaven with a cry of command, with the archangel's voice and with the trumpet of God, that the dead in Christ will rise first, and that those alive will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. The passage describes a loud, announced, public descent, which does not read naturally as a secret event. The Greek word translated meet is apantesis, used in the ancient world for a delegation of citizens going out from a city to welcome an arriving dignitary and escorting him back in; the same word appears in Acts 28:15 for the Roman Christians going out to meet Paul on the Appian Way and returning with him, and the parable of the ten virgins uses the same picture of going out to meet the bridegroom and coming back with him (Matthew 25:6). On that reading the caught-up believers go out to meet the descending Christ and come back with him, which is one arrival rather than two.

The Church in the Tribulation

Catholic teaching expects the Church to pass through trial rather than to be lifted out of it. The Catechism says in paragraphs 675 to 677 that the Church must pass through a final trial that will shake the faith of many believers, and that she will follow her Lord in his death and resurrection rather than escaping by an historical triumph. Christ's own words in John 17:15 ask the Father to keep his disciples from the evil one while not taking them out of the world, and in Matthew 24 the gathering of the elect by the angels comes after the tribulation of those days (Matthew 24:29-31). Our guide to the Olivet Discourse works through that chapter, and our guide to the Antichrist covers the figure the tribulation centres on.

Israel and the Church

The Catholic difficulty with dispensationalism goes deeper than the timetable, to the division of God's people into two. Paul's image in Romans 11:17-24 is one olive tree, with natural branches broken off and wild branches grafted in, and the tree is one. Ephesians 2:14-16 says Christ has made the two one and broken down the dividing wall to create one new humanity in himself. Galatians 3:28-29 says that those who belong to Christ are Abraham's offspring and heirs according to the promise. Catholic teaching holds at the same time that God's covenant with the Jewish people is irrevocable, since Paul says the gifts and call of God are irrevocable (Romans 11:29), and the Catechism affirms this in paragraph 839. Two peoples with two destinies is the premise the Catholic reading declines, and once it is declined the parenthesis of the Church age and the gap in Daniel's seventy weeks lose the reason that produced them.

No Dates, and This Is Doctrine

The Brethren and the Catholic Church agree on one point of great practical importance. No one knows the day or the hour, not the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but the Father only (Mark 13:32, Matthew 24:36), and the Son of Man comes at an hour no one expects (Matthew 24:44). Every scheme that assigns a date contradicts the teaching it claims to defend. What follows from the uncertainty is readiness now: repentance, confession, the Eucharist, prayer, and the works of mercy done today rather than when the news looks worse. Our guide to the end times is the hub for this material.

12. Common Ground and Honest Difference

Catholics and Plymouth Brethren share the substance of the ancient faith and disagree about the Church that carries it. Both confess the Trinity, the Incarnation, the atoning death and bodily resurrection of Christ, the inspiration of Scripture, the necessity of grace and the personal return of the Lord in glory. The Second Vatican Council's decree on ecumenism teaches that those who believe in Christ and have been properly baptised are in a real communion with the Catholic Church, even if imperfect, and a Catholic should say plainly that a Brethren believer who loves the Scriptures and lives by them holds a great deal of the truth.

What Divides

What a Catholic Reader Should Do With This

Learn the Brethren argument well enough to state it as a Brethren writer would, since an argument answered in its weakest form has not been answered. Know the ordination texts in Acts, the pastoral epistles and James well enough to open them without hunting, because they are where this conversation actually goes. Be able to explain why one visible return fits 1 Thessalonians 4 better than two, and say it without heat. Concede the pastoral point about clericalism and hold the doctrinal point about Holy Orders. And live your own baptismal priesthood, since a Catholic laity that prays, studies Scripture and serves is the most persuasive reply available to a movement founded on the charge that the churches silence their people. Our guide to Christian denominations places the Brethren among the other bodies, and our guide to nondenominational Christianity traces the impulse they helped to start.

Related Topics