The treasure may pass to other keeping, but the shrine was not merely desecrated, but rifled. To the subsequent Darbyism, indeed, the movement owes its most startling features, and a consequent increase of dubious notoriety; but, not less, a hopeless obscuration of its true lustre. Whereas the genuine inspiration of those early years was attested by a remarkable outburst of sublime song, the period following the rupture was singularly barren of great hymns. The strife of petty differences of standpoint, and even of mere personal emulation, silenced genuine song, whatever power and brilliancy of other kinds might sometimes be displayed.[1] Yet we shall err if we suffer ourselves to regard even the first twenty years of Brethrenism as a true golden age. Old men who remember those days mar see them in such a light, but the evils that have ruined the whole system were at work in it even from the first. Groves’ historical letter to Darby is a witness cf this, and much confirmatory evidence is available, even if it were possible to regard the scandals of 1845 end the following years as anything but the fruit springirg from seed long sown. It was said, as early as 1841, that “an overweening conceit of their own extraordinary spirituality and purity is one of the marked characteristics of the Brethren”.[2] Perhaps it would have been salutary if their early success had been less rapid and startling.
From this time our attention will be mainly focussed upon Darbyism; partly from the necessity of the case, since the Open Brethren—as those that refused to abide
- ↑ Mrs. Bevan’s sacred poetry constitutes an exception to the statement in the text.
- ↑ Quoted in A Caution Against the Darbyites, p. 11.
