While thinking about brethren doctrines, and how little sense they make when removed from their context and culture, I concluded that the key doctrine, that of "separation", is perhaps more helpfully viewed as a symptom of a more general pattern of thought.
The brethren believe both in the desirability of earthly perfection, and that it can (and should) be attained.
Without being at all educated about these things, I suspect this belief puts them outside mainstream Christian thought. I'm not qualified to say much on the subject, so I won't get into the theological side. What is more to the point is how that belief influences their behaviour.
Most obviously, it provides the background to separation. In this wider view, that rationale for separation from the world translates as "WE are on the road to perfection and YOU are in the way."
In the brethren's view, there is, in the abstract, an ideal company of people who embody everything God wishes from humanity, with no flaws to spoil it. It is their duty to become that company, and in a sense they believe that they are filling the position already by virtue of their awareness of the duty. Complete purity in all the individuals, as well as the group as a whole, is not just a goal but a minimum standard. To brethren, talking about compassion and love without first having achieved that purity is a devilish distraction from the primary obligation.
That means that anything which even appears to compromise that theoretical purity must be cut off. Even if that "thing" is a loved one. Purity comes first, and compassion next.
It also explains to some extent the regular rule changes. It's like a management goal: all the time, the management asks whether the current policies are helping the company to reach purity, and if they aren't, they must be changed. If, like me, you think that purity is, by definition, out of reach, you won't be surprised that the policies never do get them any nearer and must therefore be changed pretty much constantly.
At the individual level, everyone is very much aware that the aim is perfect purity, and they wouldn't be human if they didn't feel oppressed by that awareness. Looking in one direction, they feel superior because they have such an exalted goal and are part of such a programme, and looking in the other, they feel guilty that they don't measure up. They can't let down their guard, ever, in case they're seen to be the ones holding up progress. It's a recipe for hypocrisy, repression of self, enormous peer pressure.
In addition, the personal side is complicated by the fact that they believe there is always one man on earth who has achieved this purity. It means they have to accept their culpability for not coming up to scratch themselves, for a start. And it also makes the aim somewhat confusing; perfection may already be impossible, but when the goalposts keep moving because it's defined by the foibles of a human being, it becomes impossibility squared. No wonder brethren seem bedeviled by split personalities at times.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
J N Darby thought that holiness and love were two of a pair. You cannot have purity without love. Love is the energy of purity.
“There are two great principles in God's nature, owned of all saints - holiness and love. One is, I may be bold to say, the necessity of His nature, imperative, in virtue of that nature, on all that approach Him; the other, its energy.”
(From ‘Grace, the Power of Unity and of Gathering’ by J N Darby.)
Do you think the quest for perfection actually caused the Brethren to develop their particular version of separation, in the sense that it was a motive, not just a rationalisation?
I suspect it was only a rationalisation, not a motive. Much of the early doctrine of separation was formulated by JND, who had no delusions about perfection being attainable on earth.
I think the real motive for separation among the EB, from JND onwards, is probably the same as in many other totalitarian sects: i.e. it is necessary to prevent the members from being exposed to rival ideas or rival ways of life, which would make them question the Brethren’s claim to a uniquely valid insight into divine truth. From the leaders’ point of view, it is a way of protecting themselves and their ministry from unfavourable comparison, scrutiny or criticism.
If separation were genuinely in the interests of purity, then it would probably be of the sort prescribed by Paul: i.e. separation from a person who was a fornicator or swindler, or idolater, or abusive, or a drunkard, or rapacious. Not from any non-EB.
The quest for perfection is also prominent in several other sects, where it seems to be used mainly to induce feelings of inadequacy and guilt, as a means of exercising control over people. Some of them insist on written confessions of all your sins, which can be used as the basis of a sort of blackmail.
These are intriguing points, a bit much for a comment answer, so there's a new posting with my thoughts.
Post a Comment