Subscribe now

Concerning Cults

May 1999 | by Eryl Davies

Exclusive Brethren – Taylorites: 2

A cult. That was the claim I made in last month’s article regarding the Raven/Taylor group within the Exclusive Brethren movement. Here are some reasons in support of this claim.

Allegiance

Firstly, members must give total allegiance to their leaders. Jim Taylor Sr died in 1953 and six years later his son established himself as his successor. Until this time, the group’s official teaching was of Christ’s sole headship of the church. While the Taylorites still embrace this principle in theory, they deny it in practice.

Consider the evidence. In recent years they have taught that the Lord directs the group through one man. Again, some significant titles are given to their leader such as ‘the Lord’s representative’, the ‘contemporary Paul’, and the ‘great man’ whose position is ‘apostolic in character’.

James Symington, group leader from 1970 until 1987, was known as ‘God’s representative on earth’. His successor, John S. Hales, was described publicly as ‘the personification of the Holy Spirit’. This status was bolstered by the claim that ‘new light’ was being given to members by God, uniquely through him. As a consequence, the leader’s interpretation and application of Scripture were regarded as binding on members.

Serious sin

Most members would not dare to question such a ‘man of God’! And Aberdeen, July 1970, is only one illustration. Consider, for example, Jim Taylor Jr’s adultery there with the young wife of a member. Two independent persons witnessed the adultery. Astonishingly, the wife’s husband spoke later to reporters, expressing support for her. Their opinion? Well, it was ‘quite suitable’ behaviour. Why? Because she was ‘ministering’ to Taylor. A second reason? Yes, Taylor was a ‘pure man’!

There is more. In what was called a ‘Bible reading’ in Aberdeen, Taylor indulged in spells of hysterical laughter and whistling; he also frequently used obscene language. The response? Many who were present in the meetings left the group in disgust. About eighty out of the eight hundred and fifty present in the meetings decided to support Taylor because they believed that, as God’s man, he would not be allowed by God to do wrong. Or else they believed that it was proper for ‘a pure man doing God’s will’ to act in such ways!

The cultic aspect here is frightening. An individual is elevated as leader and then his status is strengthened by claims of ‘new light’ mediated through him. His actions, however wrong, are either denied or justified by members. The leader is beyond criticism. Control of ‘the whole thinking pattern of the membership’ is maintained on this formula in a Waco-type relationship between leader and members. Allegiance is total. To quote Mark Gillingham, a former Taylorite excommunicated in 1990, members have ‘a slavish and fanatical loyalty to the “Men of God”’.

Control

Secondly, tight control is exercised over members. Consider, for example, the ‘Levitical meetings’ started by Taylor Jr. These meetings were based on instructions in Leviticus to ‘shut up’ (isolate or expel) a person or house where leprosy was suspected. At intervals, priests visited to establish whether or not the leprosy had spread.

This Scripture was misapplied by Taylor to mean that a member suspected of sin or of breaking Taylor’s directives was banned from meetings and even from contact with all other members, even close relatives. The ‘priests’ were assembly leaders who visited these individuals and decided their fate. And there are many horror stories.

One husband was ‘shut up’, that is, expelled and banned fifteen years ago from living with his wife and children. Neither his brother nor his wife knew the reason for the decision but they were submissive to the leaders. Such practices place draconian power in the hands of the leadership.

Scripture undermined

Thirdly, the group undermines the supreme authority and sufficiency of the Bible. In theory, Taylorites acknowledge the Bible’s authority, but in practice they compromise it. One needs to go back to an early Exclusive Brethren leader, F. E. Raven, to appreciate this compromise. Raven wrote, ‘If I had to live over again I would study Scripture less and pray more. The great thing for a Christian is to get into his closet and pray. Prayer and meditation’ (New Series, Vol. 12, pp.136-7). The statement appears impressive, but this emphasis tends subtly towards subjectivity and places the thoughts of a man above the Word of God.

The Bible’s sufficiency is also undermined. For example, James Taylor Sr taught that the Holy Spirit speaks in meetings of the brethren in addition to what is inspired and recorded in the Bible. In other words, we need continuing revelation.

The same man insisted that the Holy Spirit is giving us truth today which was not given to the apostles. This is the significance of their emphasis on ‘new light’ but it weakens the authority of the Bible over the lives and consciences of the members. Nor should you reject the teaching given by the ‘man of God’.

All this, of course, is plain error. Nothing should be added to the Bible. There is no new revelation. And we do not need any; for revelation was given finally to the apostles and ‘once and for all delivered to the saints’ (Jude 3). All beliefs and practices, even those of prominent leaders, must be tested by the supreme standard and authority of the Bible.

Legalism

Fourthly, members are enslaved in legalism. Exclusive Brethren teaching on ‘separation’ is based partly on 2 Corinthians 6:17 and Amos 3:3. Taylor Jr developed this teaching, appealing to 2 Timothy 2:19-22 as their ‘Magna Carta’. These verses are regarded as the divinely given basis for disassociating oneself from ‘evil’. Separation is compulsory, especially where there is disagreement concerning doctrine and practice as taught by the ‘man of God’. Contact with those in the world should be minimal. This point is justified by reference to James 4:4: ‘friendship with the world is enmity with God’.

In 1959 Taylor Jr began to further develop the ‘separation’ teaching, urging that members should not eat with non-members. Ten years later a member estimated that Taylor had given 150 new ‘directives’, and others were later added. The result is legalism, with consciences bound by human regulations rather than by the Bible.

Examples

Members must not attend religious services outside their exclusive movement or join a trade union or a professional association. Nor must they live in the same building with non-members; even a semi-detached house is unacceptable as it shares a common wall with the house next door! This is applied to paths or drive-ways to houses and even to sewers.

Business links are also prohibited. Sadly, a member must be legally and physically separate from a husband or wife if they have been put out of fellowship.

There are many more rules! TV, films, radio, novels, public swimming, a mobile phone or CB radio are all banned. Nor can they buy life insurance or have a house pet. Beards and moustaches are forbidden, as is dating. A couple who want to court and marry must obtain the approval of the ‘man of God’. Computers as well as faxes are outlawed. In 1982 their leader, James Symington, maintained that computers are linked to the Antichrist. As a result, many members changed careers to comply with this ‘truth’.

Christian freedom

‘Freedom’ is how Mark Gillingham describes life outside the ‘prison’ of the Taylor cult. For him, rehabilitation was gradual and, at times, difficult. ‘The greatest release of all’, he reports, is the realisation that as a Christian he has the ability ‘to live a fulfilled Christian life and to worship God acceptably’. He continues, ‘I was given to understand there was no other divinely approved body of Christians’, but adds, ‘I can assure you that they are just about everywhere. I discovered I was free to find them, eat and drink with them, and worship with them’.

Gillingham likens the Taylorite group to the Pharisees in the New Testament who ‘grossly distorted and added’ to the Old Testament Law, ‘placing a great burden on the lives of simple Jews’. He acknowledges, ‘so many of our lives have been blighted with legalistic sectarianism’, but rejoices that ‘deliverance can be found in Jesus Christ’.

Fellowship with Christ

The Clarke family left the group in 1970 over the Aberdeen issue. Sarah was eighteen at the time and had trusted in Christ personally in 1967. What has been her experience? ‘The worst is losing valued friends and relatives’, she reports; ‘the best is rediscovering the joy of fellowship with my Saviour and learning to appreciate the worth of all believers, regardless of “brand name”’. Salutary words indeed. And words which centre on the glorious gospel of Christ, on intimate spiritual union with Christ, and on the unity of believers.