Where are the Plymouth Brethren

If you're looking for Plymouth Brethren in South Carolina, see if this page is useful: South Carolina - BrethrenPedia

I've worshiped with Plymouth Brethren my whole life. Here's a few quick bits of info:

1. We don't usually refer to ourselves as Plymouth Brethren because having a name denotes a denomination, and we are not in favor of schisms in the body of Christ. However, we do understand the desire to know what people believe and that denominations help provide that information, so it's not a contentious issue for us.

2. Unfortunately, there are schisms even in the Plymouth Brethren, which started quite early in its existence and which led to the division of open and exclusive assemblies. We tend to call our groups assemblies and our gatherings meetings (and sometimes we call our groups meetings as well), to avoid the misnomer of "going to church." Exclusive assemblies will allow visitors to attend the worship meeting but not participate until accepted into fellowship; open assemblies will allow visitors to participate, usually after speaking briefly with an elder or two. The exclusive assemblies usually call their buildings gospel halls, and the open assemblies usually call their buildings chapels or Bible chapels.

3. You're right that our theology is pretty mainstream fundamental, but here are the three main differences in practice:

a. we don't have pastors; we have a plurality of elders and the brothers who have a gift of teaching (esp the elders) share the responsibility of teaching

b. our worship service is an entire meeting focused on remembering the Lord Jesus Christ, in His death and resurrection as well as the perfections and beauties of His character and work; as the Spirit leads, the brothers share from the Scriptures in that regard, lead in prayer, and call out hymns focused on Christ, and then we share the cup and the bread; this is done every week, usually the first meeting on Sunday morning, then we have a short break followed by the teaching meeting for adults and Sunday School for children (oh, one other distinctive about the worship meeting, aka the Lord's Supper, is usually there are no instruments - the singing is a capela, and you might not be familiar with the hymns)

c. in obedience to I Corinthians 11, the women wear head coverings of some type; exclusive assemblies tend to wear hats, and open assemblies tend to wear lace coverings similar to what Catholics used to wear; it's fine for visitors to an open meeting to not wear a head covering, but exclusive meetings may ask visitors to do so and provide one if needed

4. I found your post because I was looking for the online directory of North American assemblies...it used to be under assemblydirectory.org, but it no longer is, and I can't find it anywhere else I've looked. I'll have to ask around and see if anyone knows where it's located now, and if I'm successful, I'll let you know the web address.

PS - this didn't end up being very quick, did it? I hope it's not information overload; if you have any questions, I'd be happy to try to answer them

I've lived in multiple regions of the US and it seems assemblies as a rule do not use social media or even the internet as a whole very much...that's why we've always used assemblydirectory.org to find them when we've moved or traveled. I'm still trying to track down the website.

In my experience, assemblies tend to be small and mostly middle-aged to older saints (though the exclusive assemblies can sometimes have more young adults and children). I've always figured this was because there's absolutely nothing for the flesh to enjoy in the worship meeting and I imagine that's uncomfortable for young folks particularly (it certainly was for me as a youngster before I was saved), and nothing fancy at the other meetings that would appeal to young folks like bands, contemporary music, flashing lights, entertainment of any kind, etc. My older son was in the choir in his very large Baptist church a few years ago and the Christmas programs they would perform rival anything I've ever seen...but they have over 7000 members and I guess that's what it takes to draw that kind of crowd these days.

If you'd like to share the assembly names you found, I could try to find information about them for you...we know folks around the country so it's possible we might be able to help.

I didn’t mean to drop our conversation, but a few days after I last wrote my father was hospitalized out of state and I was with him until he passed, then with my mom while we went through the house they had lived in 59 years, sold it, packed her up and moved her in with me just before Christmas.

While I was gone I finally learned the web address of the Plymouth Brethren assembly directory…it’s assemblycare.org. Just click on the thumbnails on the right under Assembly Directory and put your city and state in the search bar to find assemblies in that area.

HTH!

Hello folks,

I just stumbled across this thread and decided to through in a few additional thoughts.

I spent over four decades with the Brethren and learned much in the process, for which I am exceedingly grateful.

The positive aspects have been well-addressed already, so I won't repeat them other than to say that there is a certain amount of variability in the application of these principles. For example, although the Brethren officially eschew salaried clergymen (never women) many of the Open Brethren (aka Chapel Brethren vs. Gospel Hall Brethren) have accepted the practice of having a "full-time worker", usually salaried in one form or another, who, for all intents and purposes, serves the same role as a pastor in a church. One of the most prominent of that type is Alexander Strauch of Littleton (Colorado) Bible Chapel. He has authored a couple of books on elders and deacons, which are well worth reading.

Gender roles are in flux among the Open Brethren. One of the standard practices of the Brethren has been the covering of women's heads while in meeting (and the uncovering of men's heads) as well as uncut hair for women and short hair styles for men. In addition, women are to remain silent during the meetings. As with many Christian groups who practice headcovering for women, the type of headcovering is one of the key indicators of the specific brand of Brethren. The Gospel Hall Brethren (of the Open Brethren) have favored hats, usually black in color, and not stylish. The Chapel Brethren are in the process of abandoning headcoverings altogether, having previously favored lace doilies, but never hats.

As with many presbyterian churches, the governance of Brethren meetings is by an oligarchy of elders, usually under the direction of one man who exercises final decision making, although not at all in an open or obvious manner. Elders are never elected by the congregation and their terms have no limits. When an open does arise, usually as a result of the departure of an elder, the other elders appoint a replacement. No input from the congregation is usually sought and when it is offered, it is typically ignored.

The Brethren have a glorious history of evangelism and foreign missions, which is fading to various degrees. One will find Brethren assemblies in virtually every country and in some countries, such as Spain, it is the largest non-Catholic branch of Christianity. This missionary activity remains a key aspect of the Brethren to this day. On the home front, it is quite the opposite situation. The Brethren, as you have discovered, are highly secretive and very difficult to locate. It took me two full years of active searching before I found a Gospel Hall in Boston located in a rather nasty slum and having a six-foot high chain link fence around the property with a gate which was shut and locked at the commencement of the meeting. The Brethren also post erroneous times of their meetings on their buildings. I have been told several times that it is because "we never get visitors".

The result is that the Brethren assiduously avoid evangelism, especially personal evangelism. The Gospel Hall Brethren make a great show of their evangelistic zeal, but frame it in such a way that they rarely, if ever, get any outsiders to attend. They will hire one of their professional evangelists to preach at evening meetings, sometimes for more than a week, but such advertising for these meetings is done very selectively and using code terms which outsiders simply don't understand.

There is a whole system of code language used by the Brethren which is quite alien to outsiders. On my first visit to a Chapel I was startled to see doilies pinned on top of ladies heads. When I asked someone why the ladies were wearing doilies on their heads I was informed that the doilies were, actually, head coverings, to which I said that if I covered my loins with a doily like that I would be promptly arrested. That comment, needless to say, did not go down well.

Another example of code language is that of the seating arrangement. In Chapels there are usually pews facing the platform below which is a communion table. The Gospel Halls differentiate themselves by having the table placed in the center of the room with chairs (sometimes pews) arranged in a square. This square is called "the circle" and one must be "in fellowship" (i.e. a member in good standing) to sit in "the circle". I had the unfortunate experience of arriving in the middle of a meeting in a Gospel Hall with a friend. We proceeded to quietly sit down during a lengthy prayer. Immediately after the prayer ended a young man leaped out of his chair on the other side of the room and took us into the foyer where he demanded to know why we had taken seats in "the circle". I gently asked him where the circle was since the chairs were arranged in a square. In the end we ended up in seats along the perimeter wall where unbelievers and other sinners could observe the meeting.

In any event, I have written more than I intended. I trust that you will find rich fellowship with excellent Christians, regardless of what name or tradition they follow.

7b, I hope you won’t mind me replying to your post...

>I spent over four decades with the Brethren

I’ve spent over 6 decades with the Brethren, 1/3 in gospel halls (both exclusive and tight) and 2/3 in chapels (open), in 5 states and multiple cities, as well as visiting other meetings while traveling, so I've seen a lot over the years.

>many of the Open Brethren have accepted the practice of having a "full-time worker"

This is only in the larger meetings which can financially support this practice; of the 12 meetings I’ve been in fellowship with (in the South, the Midwest, the Northeast, and the Mountain West), only 1 had a commended worker. Due to young people leaving the Brethren assemblies and the older folks going home to glory, most meetings that I’ve had any experience with tend to be pretty small; i.e., less than 50 people, and this practice is not possible for them.

>Alexander Strauch of Littleton (Colorado) Bible Chapel.

We lived in Golden, Colorado from 2015 to 2019 and visited Littleton Bible Chapel when we first moved there. Just my opinion, but they're not reaIly operating as an assembly…the women did not wear head coverings; the LORD’s Supper was scripted – men had been selected to speak ahead of time and were actually given a theme around which to prepare their remarks; and the LORD’s Supper was cut to 20 minutes to allow time for a slide show from a recent mission trip. I met a woman from LBC a couple of years later and was surprised and disappointed to learn she didn’t even know what a Brethren assembly was. H. G. Mackay wrote an excellent book many years ago called Assembly Distinctives that details what should characterize a church that considers itself a New Testament assembly.

>The Gospel Hall Brethren (of the Open Brethren) have favored hats, usually black in color, and not stylish.

I’ve never heard anyone suggest gospel halls are open meetings before. I grew up in an exclusive meeting/gospel hall in the South, wherein you had to be vetted for quite some time before you were allowed to partake of the LORD’s Supper. However, I lived in Maine for several years and was in fellowship in what is sometimes referred to as a “tight” meeting, wherein we were accepted into fellowship with the recommendation of the elders of our open meeting in the state from which we were moving.

As for hats, the ladies in our Maine gospel hall (and other New England visitors, of whom there were many) wore surprisingly stylish hats, at least in the summer when the temperatures were above freezing.

>The Chapel Brethren are in the process of abandoning headcoverings altogether, having previously favored lace doilies, but never hats.

Headcoverings haven’t been abandoned in any of the meetings I’ve been in fellowship with, and I’ve seen that in only in a few meetings I’ve visited (like Littleton). Only elderly women wear doilies these days (that was the popular choice when they were younger women and they never gave it up); for the last 20-30 years most women have worn longer coverings similar to what Catholic women used to wear, or infinity scarves worn as head coverings, and a lot of younger women are wearing cotton scarves.

>The Brethren, as you have discovered, are highly secretive and very difficult to locate.

This comment is why I decided to take the time to reply…I strongly disagree your suggestion of secrecy. I think the difficulty in locating meetings can be attributed to several things: fewer young people in the assemblies means less technology is being used and updated; there is still an assembly directory printed and distributed every year by Emmaus that includes both exclusive and open meetings across the country. However, people outside the assemblies of course don’t have access to that, and the assemblies haven’t embraced using the internet to further the gospel or make their presence known to any great degree. Another reason assemblies don’t advertise their presence is because the Great Commission was to go into all the world and make disciples, not invite the world to your church meetings. The church meetings are designed for worship and to equip the saints to go into the world; new disciples are to be brought into fellowship so they too may worship and be equipped. I think discouragement is another reason there isn’t as much outreach as there used to be…most assemblies I’ve had experience with are much smaller than they were years ago due to young people leaving and older saints dying, and most of the remaining believers are older and tired. None of this has anything to do with secrecy, however, and I have never come across even the tiniest hint of any desire for secrecy in any of the meetings I’ve been in fellowship with or the believers I’ve known.

When we were in the tight meeting in Maine we fellowshipped with believers in Boston and I even stayed in homes for weekend conferences in Boston… I never saw or heard of locked buildings or wrong meeting times, but that was almost 20 years ago so maybe things have changed since then, though if so, it is indeed grievous.

>The Gospel Hall Brethren make a great show of their evangelistic zeal, but frame it in such a way that they rarely, if ever, get any outsiders to attend.

I can’t speak to the exclusive meeting I grew up in because I wasn’t saved at the time and wasn’t the least bit interested in what the adults were doing, but the tight meeting I was part of in Maine was very active in outreach to the small community and very earnestly concerned about souls. The open meetings have not tended to be as evangelistic, but again, the belief is that we do the work of evangelists in our daily lives.

>I was informed that the doilies were, actually, head coverings, to which I said that if I covered my loins with a doily like that I would be promptly arrested. That comment, needless to say, did not go down well.

I 100% agree with you that a head covering should cover a woman’s head (and her hair, since it is described as her glory in I Corin 11). However, your response seems like it was a bit inappropriate.

>I had the unfortunate experience of arriving in the middle of a meeting in a Gospel Hall

You did indeed have an unfortunate experience, one which I am sure grieves the LORD. The difference between gospel halls and chapels boils down to who is allowed into fellowship. Chapels, as open meetings, will welcome anyone in, and some will even allow strangers that walk in off the street to partake of the LORD’s Supper, which is not Scriptural. The gospel halls go to the other extreme of excluding even people they know to be believers from partaking of the LORD’s supper, and as you experienced, even being allowed to sit with the believers. It is a shaming, humiliating and detestable practice. The tight meetings come the closest to getting this right, I believe – they don’t allow strangers off the street to partake of the LORD’s Supper unless they’ve had a chance to talk with them before the meeting starts to ascertain if they are indeed believers. If they’re not believers they are welcome to sit wherever they want but the emblems will not be passed to them…the LORD’s Supper is not for the unsaved.

>In any event, I have written more than I intended. I trust that you will find rich fellowship with excellent Christians, regardless of what name or tradition they follow.

Amen to that! We're so looking forward to being with the LORD someday (hopefully soon) in perfect unity and accord with Him and with each other!!

Thank you for your reply. One observation that I did not note was the really large diversity among the Brethren. In my very few interactions with Exclusive Brethren I discovered an amazingly large diversity between them and the Open Brethren, of course, but also among their various branches. For example, as I am sure you know, some Exclusive Brethren practice "household baptism" which includes infants.

In response to your points I will put your comments in green so as to be able to easily read my response. I am also dividing this extremely long posts into sections. This is the first.

I’ve spent over 6 decades with the Brethren, 1/3 in gospel halls (both exclusive and tight) and 2/3 in chapels (open), in 5 states and multiple cities, as well as visiting other meetings while traveling, so I've seen a lot over the years.

It took my some time to understand that the gospel hall folks are not all exclusive, but the ones I encountered styled themselves as "tight" in contrast to the "loose" chapel folks. And, not all Exclusive Brethren meet in gospel halls, and certainly not chapels. As I am sure you know there are meeting rooms, but I don't know if the brethren who meet there would style themselves as Meeting Room Brethren. Which reminds me of the assembly which met for many years in the auditorium of Emmaus Bible College in Dubuque, Iowa. Although the building contains a stunning chapel (having previously been a Roman Catholic seminary), the assembly insisted that the auditorium it was meeting in was a chapel, which made it confusing for visitors who, quite naturally, went to the chapel only to discover nobody there, but everyone at the auditorium. I once suggested that they rename themselves as being Dubuque Bible (or Gospel) Auditorium. Apparently there is not enough panache in being associated with an auditorium as there is with a hall or a chapel.

This is only in the larger meetings which can financially support this practice; of the 12 meetings I’ve been in fellowship with (in the South, the Midwest, the Northeast, and the Mountain West), only 1 had a commended worker. Due to young people leaving the Brethren assemblies and the older folks going home to glory, most meetings that I’ve had any experience with tend to be pretty small; i.e., less than 50 people, and this practice is not possible for them.

This has also been my observation. The vast majority of Brethren assemblies are quite small and, in general, are shrinking and disappearing. The chapel brethren in Davenport, although very small, numerically, are financially well off and are of different opinions regarding the advisability of hiring a full time worker, having had one previously for several decades in the latter years of the previous century. In North Carolina there is a well-entrenched practice of having "commended" workers doing the work of ministry for the chapels.

Which gets me into the code word "commend". Only the Plymouth Brethren employ that word. As we know, it is larded with a lot of information. I will leave it at that. Also, "ministry" carries a lot of meanings for the Brethren.

We lived in Golden, Colorado from 2015 to 2019 and visited Littleton Bible Chapel when we first moved there. Just my opinion, but they're not reaIly operating as an assembly…the women did not wear head coverings; the LORD’s Supper was scripted – men had been selected to speak ahead of time and were actually given a theme around which to prepare their remarks; and the LORD’s Supper was cut to 20 minutes to allow time for a slide show from a recent mission trip. I met a woman from LBC a couple of years later and was surprised and disappointed to learn she didn’t even know what a Brethren assembly was. H. G. Mackay wrote an excellent book many years ago called Assembly Distinctives that details what should characterize a church that considers itself a New Testament assembly.

I lived in Lakewood, Colorado from 1976 through early 1982, just as Alex Strauch was beginning his ministry at Littleton Bible Chapel. I attended Southwest Bible Chapel as it was closer to me. I have observed the enormous changes at LBC as orchestrated by Brother Strauch. The Wilson family were preeminent in the meeting, as you probably know, and provided the wealth to sustain the transformation. As you may also know, Southwest Bible Chapel closed about three or four years ago and was purchased by LBC as a satellite "campus" (a word popular in contemporary Christian circles, but foreign to the Brethren) and has rebranded it as Lakewood Bible Chapel.

I’ve never heard anyone suggest gospel halls are open meetings before. I grew up in an exclusive meeting/gospel hall in the South, wherein you had to be vetted for quite some time before you were allowed to partake of the LORD’s Supper. However, I lived in Maine for several years and was in fellowship in what is sometimes referred to as a “tight” meeting, wherein we were accepted into fellowship with the recommendation of the elders of our open meeting in the state from which we were moving.

If you read the assembly directory printed by Emmaus now (previously by Walterick Publishers) you will find both chapels and gospel halls listed. There are no Exclusive meetings listed, but only meetings of the Open Brethren. Thus, there are, indeed Open Gospel Halls (aka "tight" meetings).

This leads to a bit of historical background as to the nature of the division. In Iowa (and probably in much of the United States and Canada) the early Open Brethren were generally moderately to strongly Arminian in their theology. To be certain, they held to the eternal security of the believer, but they stressed works to a significant degree, such that they became "tight", i. e. maintaining a relatively long list of things one was allowed to do and barred from doing. For example, any instrumental accompaniment to singing was demonic, as was even the printing of musical notation in hymnals - a practice maintained in most Open Brethren tight meetings to this day.

In the early 1950's one of the most reasonable branches of the Exclusive Brethren decided that the division was a spiritual problem (to frame it mildly) and made peace with the Open Brethren in the United States and Canada. The result was a merger. The former Exclusives were much more Reformed in their theology, being pretty much four-point Calvinists. On the other side were men such as William McDonald, noted for his popular Bible Commentary, who utterly rejected all five points of Calvinism. At the time of merger there was a small Bible school in Toronto, Canada which subsequently relocated to Oak Park, Illinois, and then, in the early 1980's moved into a former Roman Catholic Seminary in Dubuque, Iowa. The teachers at Emmaus Bible College were, by and large, firmly from the former Exclusive folks. Thus, when I encountered the Open Chapel Brethren I was immersed in the controversy raging between these two strands of believers.

As for hats, the ladies in our Maine gospel hall (and other New England visitors, of whom there were many) wore surprisingly stylish hats, at least in the summer when the temperatures were above freezing.

Interestingly, the ladies at the East Boston Gospel Hall in the early 1970's wore black hats, as do the ladies at the Marion Gospel Hall, Manchester Gospel Hall, and Garnavillo Gospel Hall to this day in Iowa.

Headcoverings haven’t been abandoned in any of the meetings I’ve been in fellowship with, and I’ve seen that in only in a few meetings I’ve visited (like Littleton). Only elderly women wear doilies these days (that was the popular choice when they were younger women and they never gave it up); for the last 20-30 years most women have worn longer coverings similar to what Catholic women used to wear, or infinity scarves worn as head coverings, and a lot of younger women are wearing cotton scarves.

Headcoverings for women are optional at all of the chapels (four or five) in Dubuque, as well as in Davenport, Cedar Rapids, and Waterloo. I attribute this shift to various individuals at EBC. You are quite correct that there was a shift from doilies to lace headcoverings to long scarves - for those ladies who choose to cover their heads.

This comment is why I decided to take the time to reply…I strongly disagree your suggestion of secrecy. I think the difficulty in locating meetings can be attributed to several things: fewer young people in the assemblies means less technology is being used and updated; there is still an assembly directory printed and distributed every year by Emmaus that includes both exclusive and open meetings across the country. However, people outside the assemblies of course don’t have access to that, and the assemblies haven’t embraced using the internet to further the gospel or make their presence known to any great degree. Another reason assemblies don’t advertise their presence is because the Great Commission was to go into all the world and make disciples, not invite the world to your church meetings. The church meetings are designed for worship and to equip the saints to go into the world; new disciples are to be brought into fellowship so they too may worship and be equipped. I think discouragement is another reason there isn’t as much outreach as there used to be…most assemblies I’ve had experience with are much smaller than they were years ago due to young people leaving and older saints dying, and most of the remaining believers are older and tired. None of this has anything to do with secrecy, however, and I have never come across even the tiniest hint of any desire for secrecy in any of the meetings I’ve been in fellowship with or the believers I’ve known.

When we were in the tight meeting in Maine we fellowshipped with believers in Boston and I even stayed in homes for weekend conferences in Boston… I never saw or heard of locked buildings or wrong meeting times, but that was almost 20 years ago so maybe things have changed since then, though if so, it is indeed grievous.

I disagree with you on this point. My first experience with the Plymouth Brethren was at the East Boston Gospel Hall. A good friend had moved to Boston and had decided that the church I was attending was utterly pathetic, so I challenged him to find a better one. He visited quite a range of churches before finally stumbling across the Watertown Gospel Hall. When he visited it he was told not to return - because they were an assembly for old people only, not young folks. Instead, they directed him to EBGH which, I discovered was an Italian assembly. At that time the tight gospel halls (at least in Boston) were segregated - by age, ethnicity, and race. This remains true, especially regarding Brethren from India. They are welcomed into American Caucasian meetings, but usually until they have enough folks to form their own assembly.

When I moved to Lakewood, the elder from EBGH who had taken me under his wing, refused to divulge any contact information for any assemblies in the Denver area, although there were several in the address book. As I was literally at the airport he passed me the name and address of a gospel hall in Denver, but solemnly warned me to immediately leave it if they had a piano in it. He was not "in fellowship" with any of the brethren there. As it turned out, there was a very good reason for that. The gospel hall in Denver is composed of black Christians, primarily from the Caribbean. Even worse, they have the evil piano. When I visited one of the elders warmly welcomed me and later suggested that I attend SWBC, which I subsequently did.

I have never seen any chapel or gospel hall, Open or Exclusive, on any major thoroughfares. Unless they are in tiny towns and villages, one is quite oblivious to their existence. The chapel in Davenport was located for many years on a quiet street within a residential area. Then, disaster struck when the City of Davenport decided to reroute the street system and the street where the chapel was located became a major artery with traffic whizzing by day and night. Oddly enough, the result was an influx of curious folks, some of whom decided to remain, resulting in numerical growth. The elders determined that they needed to move - not that they had outgrown the building, but that somehow the neighborhood was in decline. Fair enough. At the time there was a lovely church building on the other major artery into Davenport which was for sale by a Christian congregation (that was their name - Davenport Christian Church) at a very reasonable price. I was asked my professional opinion (I am an architectural conservator with a reputation for discouraging folks from buying money pits) and, despite my intense examination, I could find no faults with it. However, they decided not to purchase it because they did not want the Lord's money going to unbelievers. Instead, they purchased some farm acreage on the outskirts of the city, sold off a lot of the land and constructed a chapel about the same size as the previous chapel. It sits far back on its lot and there is a lovely wooded copse which screens the view of the chapel from the street. Nowadays they get visitors from other chapels who have access to the Address Book, and don't worry much about strangers wandering into their meetings. By the way, the former chapel was sold to a Metropolitan Church congregation. Apparently it is a sin to purchase a building from Christians, but not a sin to sell a building to homosexuals.

My point is simply that the Brethren are much more secretive than the Freemasons. I generally have no difficulty noticing Masonic temples and lodges in towns and cities, whereas the location of a Brethren meeting is much more difficult.

If you had not been "in fellowship" I daresay you would never have been able to find any of the brethren or their meetings in Boston except with the utmost diligence.

Here is the remainder -

I can’t speak to the exclusive meeting I grew up in because I wasn’t saved at the time and wasn’t the least bit interested in what the adults were doing, but the tight meeting I was part of in Maine was very active in outreach to the small community and very earnestly concerned about souls. The open meetings have not tended to be as evangelistic, but again, the belief is that we do the work of evangelists in our daily lives.

The dynamics of life in a small town are really vastly different than those in a city. Here in Iowa most of the assemblies were planted in small farming towns. Over time, as is the case in all rural areas, population has been shifting out of the towns and into cities. Churches of all types in small towns are struggling to survive and many of the Brethren assemblies here in Iowa have closed or are on the verge of closing. The only bright spot has been in Dubuque, because of the influx of EBC folks. In small towns it is really a matter of sink or swim. A lot of churches get discouraged and drift into oblivion. That happened almost a century ago with the Amana Colonies (not an Amish group at all). Those churches which decide to swim and survive are much as you described. Sadly, they are too few far and in between.

I have listened to innumerable exhortations from Brethren platforms to do evangelism. When I ask the speaker to tell me about his latest experience in sharing the gospel personally with an unbeliever, they are dumbfounded - because they never have. Indeed, they insist that God has not given them the "gift of evangelism". In fact, I have yet to meet anyone among the brethren who has personally led an unbeliever to faith in Jesus Christ. One of my closest friends, who bemoans the lack of evangelism, has never led anyone to faith in Christ. He lives in a neighborhood where there are three buildings owned by three different cults within two blocks of his home. He has never bothered to lift a finger to share the gospel with any of these folks, much less his own neighbors. He, who adamantly opposes Calvinism, believes that it is futile to share the gospel with these sorts of unbelievers (as if God has predestined them to damnation). In the meantime, last year his chapel closed their doors and he now has to drive a long way to attend meetings at the next nearest chapel.

You did indeed have an unfortunate experience, one which I am sure grieves the LORD. The difference between gospel halls and chapels boils down to who is allowed into fellowship. Chapels, as open meetings, will welcome anyone in, and some will even allow strangers that walk in off the street to partake of the LORD’s Supper, which is not Scriptural. The gospel halls go to the other extreme of excluding even people they know to be believers from partaking of the LORD’s supper, and as you experienced, even being allowed to sit with the believers. It is a shaming, humiliating and detestable practice. The tight meetings come the closest to getting this right, I believe – they don’t allow strangers off the street to partake of the LORD’s Supper unless they’ve had a chance to talk with them before the meeting starts to ascertain if they are indeed believers. If they’re not believers they are welcome to sit wherever they want but the emblems will not be passed to them…the LORD’s Supper is not for the unsaved.

This is a very delicate issue, as they say. At what point can one say with absolute certainty that another individual is saved? Apparently, it was not a major issue to Peter when he baptized Simon the sorceror, based upon Simon's profession of faith. It would be nice to think that Simon was unique, but we have folks like Ananias and Sapphira, Demas, Diotrophes, etc. Even among the Brethren there have been some truly astounding folks who, at various points in their lives, departed from the path, as some would have it.

What are the consequences of accepting an individual as a believer simply based on his or her profession of faith? What works must one do to merit "fellowship"? I discovered at the EBGH that was absolutely nothing I could do or say that would ever admit me into "fellowship" other than to provide a stirring testimony of having been born again following a stirring sermon at the hall which gave me visions of burning in hell forever. Thus, I sat in the back row with the kids who had a rousing time during the meetings. One teenage chap would go outside to smoke during the meetings, along with his mates.

At the tight meetings there seems to a solid belief that God will personally afflict the believers if they were to permit any outsider to even sit with the adults rather than the children. Even the Exclusive meetings don't segregate outsiders in this manner.

Thanks again for your excellent response.

My reply to your Part 1:

My reply to your Part 2:

>I have yet to meet anyone among the brethren who has personally led an unbeliever to faith in Jesus Christ.
I think everyone in my family has, even my 21 yo son who was just saved 1.5 years ago! To our shame we’re not turning the world upside down, but we do have a heart for the lost.

>One of my closest friends, who bemoans the lack of evangelism, has never led anyone to faith in Christ.
What a stunning lack of self-awareness.

>At what point can one say with absolute certainty that another individual is saved?
That’s a good point…we can’t judge hearts so we can’t know for sure, but there should be a clear testimony at least, even if it’s just “I don’t know who He is but one thing I do know: I was blind, but now I see.”

>What works must one do to merit "fellowship"?
For the open brethren, I can’t imagine works would be required, but a clear testimony and no known open and unrepentant sin. I don’t think it’s an effort to maintain complete purity, else no one would be allowed in fellowship including the elders, but it is reasonable to attempt to prevent unbelievers and unrepentant believers being guilty of the body and blood of the LORD.

>nothing I could do or say that would ever admit me into "fellowship" other than to provide a stirring testimony of having been born again following a stirring sermon at the hall which gave me visions of burning in hell forever.
It’s so interesting that you noticed this – I did too in the tight meeting in Maine! It seemed to be a requirement of their testimonies that there be an immense and intense spiritual battle. I had more of a “Damascus road” experience when I was saved and I sometimes wondered what they thought of that.

>One teenage chap would go outside to smoke during the meetings, along with his mates.
The teenagers in our meeting would do their homework. But they were good kids, and most if not all have made professions of faith and are in fellowship now as young adults.

Thank you for your excellent responses. Here is my reply to your reply to my Part 1 (whew!). As previously, I have your reply in green.

I have never heard of that being done in the assemblies! It sounds like you’ve talked to a more diverse group of brethren than even I have.

I was also quite taken aback when I encountered it in an Exclusive assembly in Des Moines. Here is an excellent Wikipedia article about the Exclusive Brethren. It is very lengthy and, even at that, is admittedly incomplete - Exclusive Brethren - Wikipedia

I’ve not heard that either! What do they call their meeting places?

You will see in the Wikipedia article which says -

Exclusive Brethren do not generally name their meeting rooms or Halls except by reference perhaps to the road, e.g. Galpins Road Meeting Room, Mallow Street Hall. The meeting room or Hall is often referred to as "The Room" or "The Hall". Notice boards give the times of Gospel Preachings with a formula such as "If the Lord will, the Gospel will be preached in this room Lord's Day at 6.30." Meeting rooms of the Plymouth Brethren Christian Church, perhaps the most hardline of the Exclusive Brethren groups, have notice boards indicating that the building is a place registered for public worship and give a contact number for further information.

Didn’t know that either! You are a veritable font of information!

I had the unique advantage of growing up in Dubuque.

Yes…I was in North Carolina when I was saved at 21 and the first chapel I was in fellowship with had 2 commended workers. They also had 500+ people for the ministry meeting on Sunday mornings, and it was there I learned that I prefer small groups where I can know everyone.

I agree entirely with you. Small is best. North Carolina and the Southeast seems to have set in motion a lot of the changes in the Chapel Brethren such as commended workers and "The Family Bible Hour". Alex Strauch seems to have simply developed and refined these changes into what is now LBC.

I don’t know what you mean and would like to, but if it’s not something to be discussed in a public forum, I understand.

There is nothing embarrassing at all here. "Commendation" is the Brethren word for "ordination" in most other Christian groups. The Brethren eschew anything and everything attached to ordination (commonly said to be "empty hands on empty heads") but skirt the whole issue, having decided to call it "commendation". It seems to have started with the sending of missionaries (which is the Biblical basis in the book of Acts) where Christians were commended to the care of the Lord as they went out to serve Him in foreign lands. This generally means that the "commending" assembly is responsible for the primary financial, and other support, of the "commended" worker. Subsequently, commendation was extended to itinerant preachers in the home country. Many of these "commended" workers travel to various assemblies, camps, and Bible conferences as professional preachers. Most recently, the concept was developed of having a "commended" worker as a fulltime worker (aka pastor, preacher, or minister) within his home assembly.

As for "ministry" it is parallel to the activities related to service, primarily preaching. What was once the "ministry meeting" or "Bible reading" is now the "Family Bible Hour" (a term I have not encountered outside of the Open Brethren).

We visited all the assemblies in the Denver area when we first moved to Golden so we could meet people, and we visited Southwest several times before settling down at Boulder Bible Chapel – did you ever visit them?

I attended a Bible Conference in Boulder where I heard Bill McDonald for the first time. Other than that, I did not have any other contacts there.

I didn’t know any of this…we didn’t arrive in CO until 2015, and we only visited LBC one time. Do you consider the changes to it beneficial? It certainly has seen growth unheard of in traditional assemblies.

I have mixed thoughts about the changes typified at LBC. First, the changes are not motivated by a sincere desire to follow the New Testament pattern of meeting. The motivation seems to be primarily motivated to appeal to a new generation of folks, like all contemporary churches. As a result, they are in hot competition with all wannabe mega churches and, as such, have become the Brethren mega church. The only positive thing I can say is that they have avoided the pitfalls that have led to the aging and demise of many Brethren assemblies.

No, I hadn’t heard that! Do any of the people that worshipped there when it was SBC meet there now? I remember a couple of very nice folks but I can’t remember their names…one was an elder who was very kind, and one was a brother originally from NC.

There is one man left there from SWBC, John Portman, who was probably the elder you remember. He was staunchly opposed to personal evangelism (as were all of the elders when I was there).

I’ve only ever heard the term “tight” being applied to the ability to partake of the LORD’s Supper, not to behavior and works, though the exclusive brethren do tend towards legalism unfortunately.

During my time at the East Boston Gospel Hall, attendance was expected at all meetings - three on Sunday, and three on weeknights. Men had to wear suits to all of the meetings. I once wore a wool sweater one winter weeknight and was soundly scolded for it. Likewise, there was a strict dress code for women. That was just the tip of the iceberg regarding rules and regulations.

That reminds me of something funny…when we were in Maine for my husband’s job interview in 2007 he called the correspondent (also an elder) listed for the gospel hall in Augusta, which we always do when traveling because we don’t want to show up to the LORD’s Supper as complete strangers…anyway, the elder asked if we had a letter of commendation from our Midwest chapel and when we said no, he asked if he could talk with one of our elders to make sure we were in good standing in our current meeting…and then he asked what hymn books we used. They use the small blue Believer’s Hymn Book that doesn’t have music in it. I grew up using the Little Flock which also had no music, but you bought your own and carried it with you.

I had a friend who had a fascination with Exclusive Brethren, and attended their meetings but, of course, was not permitted to "break bread". My friend convinced me to go with him one Sunday morning. I already knew several of the folks there through previous interactions. I composed letters of commendation for each of us which we signed ourselves, as being in "fellowship" in the meeting of both of ourselves (where two or three . . .). The letter contained all of the correct Brethren terms and phrases. We gave our letters to the presiding brother before the meeting and, apparently, there was a great deal of consternation before they decided we could not "break bread". That was the same meeting where, during one of the lengthy silences I called out an appropriate hymn. After a bit of silence we sang it. The result was that my action in giving out the hymn became the topic of discussion there for several months. Fortunately, I am a man. I have no idea what would have happened if a woman had done that.

We’ve never met with believers in Iowa, but we stayed in Rochester years ago and met there. Iowa is stunning! Such rich dark soil…we were amazed.

When I grew up I assumed that the soil was like that everywhere. It distresses me to watch such precious soil being destroyed by urban sprawl and "progress".

Again, I have never heard of such a thing! How depressing. I wonder if that was the same elder that was so kind to us…he was an older man in his 70s or 80s in 2015.

That was probably Fred Hill, the same man I knew. He was one of the two non-Italians there.

Why did he suggest that?

Simply because I was living in Lakewood and SWBC was much closer to me than Aurora.


That is all for now. I hope to address your next post soon. Thanks again!

Okay! Here is part 2 -

I think everyone in my family has, even my 21 yo son who was just saved 1.5 years ago! To our shame we’re not turning the world upside down, but we do have a heart for the lost.

I am delighted to hear that! Would that all of us see these opportunities and find the joy of personal evangelism!

That’s a good point…we can’t judge hearts so we can’t know for sure, but there should be a clear testimony at least, even if it’s just “I don’t know who He is but one thing I do know: I was blind, but now I see.”

I agree. Fred Hill was very helpful with me at EBGH. He coached me in putting together a testimony which the other elders might accept. As it turned out, it fell flat, and they decided to leave me with the children in the back pew. I was a perplexity to them. I attended faithfully, kept all of the rules, and they could not figure why I, an apparent wolf in sheep's clothing, was attempting to invade the flock.

One of the problems is what happens with unbelievers and other sinners who do "break bread". Unbelievers are already condemned, so if the Lord slays them or afflicts them with illness, then it would be a sign that they are actually believers (cf. Hebrews 12:7-11). That is why when believers do suffer calamities of varying sorts, there are a lot of accusations regarding sin, as in the case of Job. When unbelievers suffer the same things, many believers simply think that that is just a foretaste of what is coming to them in the end. If nothing happens to these folks, and nothing happens to the assembly or its members, then all seems to be well. In one assembly (Cedar Rapids) where I was in fellowship, there was a young man with three young daughters who regularly and cruelly beat his wife. This went on for some years before anyone knew a thing about it. When it was finally discovered, he was coerced by the elders into giving a half-hearted public confession. The beating continued after that so that he was eventually excluded, whereupon he migrated to a Baptist church where he was welcomed with open arms.

It’s so interesting that you noticed this – I did too in the tight meeting in Maine! It seemed to be a requirement of their testimonies that there be an immense and intense spiritual battle. I had more of a “Damascus road” experience when I was saved and I sometimes wondered what they thought of that.

Yes, I had very much of a "Damascus road" experience, as well. As it turned out, it did not fit the proper mold for a testimony in East Boston. Curiously, another aspect that was expected from me at EBGH was the confession that this was the one and only church in Boston (the other gospel halls were not within the city limits of Boston) and that any other meetings of Christians were not legitimate because "the Lord only places His name in one place" and that is where the sign says "Christians Gathered to the Name of the Lord Jesus Christ". Fred Hill was adamant about that point and I assume that he did not invent it.

When looking for a church, there is a difference in finding an assembly serving Jesus and an assembly not.
Shalom and permit this: "The Heavenly Creator is seeking those today who serve HIM in spirit and in truth".
Wherever two or three are gathered in HIS NAME, "Lo, I AM with you" ....
(see in Malachi also: small number of people will gather to talk ABOUT ME ..... and I will call an angel scribe to record every word in a book.)
Note sadly that none of this sticks when : is a 501c3 nonprofit , which is rather determined by law(s) in place so as not to be able to serve the Creator in spirit nor in truth.

Reply to your Part 1:

>Here is an excellent Wikipedia article about the Exclusive Brethren.
My dad was saved in his early 20s through the witness of a group of Plymouth Brethren in his workplace, who had a daily lunch-hour Bible study in the machine shop where they all worked. He was a serious student of the Word, as well as being the most well-versed historian I’ve ever encountered in the history of the Plymouth Brethren – though it seems you might give him a run for his money. He went home to the LORD last fall…I so wish he was here for this discussion…it would save me having to read lengthy Wikipedia articles. LOL I inherited his substantial library of Brethren writers, which includes a few biographies and historical volumes, but with whatever time I have remaining I want to get through as many of his commentaries as I can; I hope not to be here long enough to complete that, but if I do, I’ll move on to the histories.

>the Southeast seems to have set in motion a lot of the changes in the Chapel Brethren such as commended workers and "The Family Bible Hour".
I’m not a fan of the trends assemblies follow that are more at home in Baptist churches, but I’m curious what your thoughts are on the FBH specifically.

>I attended a Bible Conference in Boulder where I heard Bill McDonald for the first time.
What was that like? Was his message edifying? I didn’t know until recently that he was a past president of EBC.

>the changes are not motivated by a sincere desire to follow the New Testament pattern of meeting
This makes it seem as if you are in favor of assemblies, but I had gotten the impression that you weren’t…although I understand any group where there are people involved is going to be ultimately disappointing, no matter how good their intentions. My husband and I used to laugh and say that if we ever found the perfect church, it would cease being perfect as soon as we stepped through the door. A dear sister at the Maine gospel hall told me not long after we arrived that they had been praying for another family to join them, and I replied that I hoped they had learned their lesson to be more careful what they pray for. I thought it was funny but she didn’t seem to know what to think. LOL

>The motivation seems to be primarily motivated to appeal to a new generation of folks, like all contemporary churches.
Exactly! As I mentioned in one of my earlier messages on this thread, there is nothing in the worship meeting that appeals to the flesh, and the rest of the assembly meetings tend to be pretty humble, so it is understandable that folks who are not terribly spiritually-minded would not be interested.

>There is one man left there from SWBC, John Portman, who was probably the elder you remember.
Yes, I recognize that name. I can’t imagine why he would be opposed to personal evangelism, but the subject never came up while we were there. Is there a much larger group there now that LBC has taken over? So Mr. Portman stayed on after LBC took over?

Reply to your Part 2:

>He coached me in putting together a testimony which the other elders might accept.
Oh my word, is this shameful…it is, after all, the LORD’s table, not ours. Would they have admitted you after a certain amount of time? Or were you just doomed to the outer darkness in perpetuity?

>Unbelievers are already condemned, so if the Lord slays them or afflicts them with illness, then it would be a sign that they are actually believers
You’re right…I thought of that when I wrote it, that I was conflating two entirely different groups, but I didn’t take time to go back and change it right then and I had forgotten by the time I got to the end.

>the confession that this was the one and only church in Boston and that any other meetings of Christians were not legitimate
Oh my word again – I hardly even know what to say to that. That’s what the group in Maine have on their sign but I never heard anyone say anything close to what you are saying. I suppose you’ve heard a lot more than me because you were talking to the men about spiritual issues and I was talking with the women about cooking and serving.