The Purpose of the Leaders of the Restoration Movement
The Purpose of the Leaders of the Restoration Movement THE PURPOSE OF THE LEADERS
OF THE RESTORATION MOVEMENT
By Raymond Kelcy
Six score and sixteen years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent a nation ... a holy nation . . . conceived in unselfishness and dedicated to this proposition: The restoration of the New Testament church. In discussing that movement and its purposes we have before us a very interesting, as well as inspirational, theme. I am sure that a nobler purpose never animated any group of men than that suggested by this subject today. It seems to me that in order to appreciate the purposes of this movement, it is necessary to understand something of the movement itself and the conditions calling it forth, for it, like every effect, had its fundamental causes. When Luther arose the people were groaning under a bondage that had reached its zenith in twelve hundred and sixty long years of gradual development. Luther inaugurated the Reformation movement. However, at the close of that great movement, in which he s,ought to reform a corrupted church, the bondage had been only mitigated. The Reformation had its good effects for which the world will ever be grateful, but that it had numerous failures is only too evident. In a few words we might get a slight glimpse of the conditions brought about by the Reformation. The divided ranks among religious followers, and the warring attitude assumed by the mos.t of them, was indeed a hindrance. The theology was greatly beclouded. No one seemed to understand the proper divisions of the word. One was as likely to consult the Psalms for the plan of salvation as he was, to consult the Book of Acts. Human creeds, ever the separating wedge, were plentiful. The clergy was arrogant . . . assuming that it had the key of knowledge, and the people relied upon this clergy for the settling of all religious questions. And, to be expected, the final outcome of all of this was an alarming increase of infidelity. A few years ago scientists observed that the planet Uranus was being disturbed. They began to try to locate the seat of the disturbance. Telescopes were turned toward the skies, and as a result the planet Neptune was discovered as the disturbing attraction. This is a fitting illustration of the religious unrest one hundred years ago. At the beginning of the nineteenth century men began to observe the trouble, and there seems to have been in the different parts of the earth an almost simultaneous turning of minds, toward the same direction. Figuratively speaking, men remotely removed from each other were focusing their telescopes upon the same star. As we now view the matter we see these men here and there, wholly unknown to each other, reach conclusions that were remarkably in unity. In Scotland the Haldane brothers plead for a return to apostolic Christianity, affirming that division was wrong. However, they were only sowers of seed, for their ideas did not take root.
Thomas Campbell had much the same trouble with the Presbyterian church that the Haldanes had with the church of Scotland. He tried diligently to unite Presbyterian churches. While he was trying to unite those churches, Barton W. Stone was, in this country, organizing congregations after the New Testament order. That was in the year 1804.
Other movements in the new world which had as their plea the restoration of New Testament Christianity were headed by James O’Kelley of the Methodists and Dr. Abner Jones of the Baptists. All of these movements were giving momentum to a similar plea made by Zwingli who had been so overshadowed by Luther as, to be given no heed whatsoever. The most significant of these movements was that inaugurated by Barton W. Stone. Calvanistic theology gave him no little worry when he decided to become a Christian. After he had given the system a thorough investigation and had weighed it in the light of the Scriptures, he said, “Calvinism is among the heaviest clogs in Christianity in the world. It is a dark mountain between heaven and earth, and is amongst the most discouraging hindrances to sinners from seeking the kingdom of God.” When he was a candidate for the Presbyterian ministry and when asked if he accepted the “Westminister Confession of Faith,” he replied, “As far as consistent with the word of God.” He thus s.howed himself in harmony with the later slogan of the Campbells. His firs.t sermon at Cane Ridge was on “Go ye into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized shall be s.aved; he that believeth not shall be damned.” The preaching of Stone and his helpers was in direct conflict with the confession of faith of the Presbyterian Church. So after a short time they were tried for heresy ... in the synods and presbyteries for preaching uncalvinistic doctrines,. Then Stone and a few others drew up a protest and withdrew from their jurisdiction. They formed themselves into an organization known as the Springfield Presbytery. They sent a letter to their congregations telling them what had happened and stating their determination to take the Bible and the Bible alone as their only rule of faith and practice. After a year they saw that their distinctive name smacked of partyism. So they threw it aboard and substituted the name “Christian.” It would seem in the light of all of this that the honor of first restoring a New Testament congregation belongs to this group.
They soon published “The Last Will and Testament of the Springfield Presbytery,” one of the unique pro-ductions of religious literature. They were not long in abandoning infant baptism. Also they were all immersed upon discovering that only immersion is baptism. The churches resulting from all of these efforts were ideal in their aim if not in their attainments. They believed that the only way to restore the power of the New Testament church was to reproduce that church in the present age. They were in the main independent of each other, and had little knowledge of each other, but the fact that each was trying to restore the primitive faith upon the same basis brought them into substantial agreement.
The religious world was ripe for a movement of this kind. It came in the fulness of the times. The world was ready to be led out of bondage even as was Israel many years ago. But as Israel needed a man of God to rally her forces and press the battle, so that little group of majestic souls needed another Moses. They needed a leader to take up their noble plea and press it before the world.
Thomas Campbell’s arrival to this country proved to be a great stride forward. He had come from the old world because of failing health. His, first clash with the Presbyterians of this country came when he expressed his regrets that other branches of the Presbyterian Church could not be invited to partake of the Lord’s supper with him and those of his branch. He made those statements while holding a communion service in the Allegheny Valley. The Presbyterian Church declared that he should suffer for such conduct which was contrary to the “usages,” of the church. He appealed to the supreme synod in a masterly way, pleading for an elimination of errors in the Presbyterian Church and for a return to apostolic authority. But his appeal was in vain, and there was only one thing left for him to do . . . that was to absolve all connections with the Ministerial Synod of North America.
He continued to preach in the homes, of friends, and it was at this time in the home, of Abraham Altars, that he reached a thrilling climax to one of his great sermons in these words: “Where the Scriptures speak, we speak; and where the Scriptures are silent, we are silent.” The enunciation of that principle was a mighty stride forward. This mighty mail had come from a world too occupied with other things to heed his plea, to plant the seed of the kingdom in the greatest republic on earth. On September 7, 1809 another important meeting was held. At this meeting they decided to organize “The Christian Association of Washington.” About a month later Thomas Campbell’s “Declaration and Address” was adopted and ordered published to the world. In that same year Alexander Campbell, the son of Thomas Campbell came to this country. In the old world he had been attending Glasgow University. While there he had associated with the Haldanes. Before his arrival here his long periods of meditation and his association with those men had caused him to determine to forsake denominationalism forever. The first thing Alexander Campbell read upon his arrival was his father’s “Declaration and Address.” Father and son rejoiced when they found that their views in regard to denominationalism and unity were practically the same. The circumstances under which they reached their conclusions were wholly different. They both, however, because of their integrity and sincerity, had been forced to the same conclusions. In 1810 Thomas Campbell applied for membership in the Pittsburgh Synod but was refused. At the next meeting of the Association, Alexander Campbell ad-dressed them, setting forth their spirit and purpose. Little did they or the synod realize that this lad who s.tood before them was soon to overthrow giants. From that time Alexander Campbell was the recognized leader. He was the Moses who had come to liberate an oppressed people.
So, with a membership of thirty, they organized a church at Brush Run. At the first meeting several of the members declined the emblems on the ground that they had not been immersed. It was discovered that nothing short of immersion would satisfy them. So, without any discussion, they were buried with their Lord in the waters, of Buffalo Creek. A year later, Alexander Campbell, his wife, his parents, and others were baptized by Mr. Luce, a Baptist preacher. By examining the Scriptures in a study of infant baptism, a study occasioned by the birth of a little girl into the Campbell home, the decision was reached that only immersion is baptism and that they had never been baptized. An interesting thing in connection with that event was that the confession that “Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God,” was made prior to the baptisms instead of the usual relating of an experience. It seems that here for the first time the good confession which was made in apostolic times was made and honored on this continent. At the meeting on the next Lord’s day thirteen others, at Brush Run made the same confession and were baptized by Thomas Campbell. Many others followed, and in a short time the church was made up almost entirely of baptized believers. In 1813 the group entered the Redstone Association. Alexander Campbell became one of the most relied upon men of the Baptists. At their request he met Walker and McCalla in debates. At the clos,e of the McCalla debate, he candidly said to a number of the Baptists: “Brethren, I fear that if you knew me better, you would esteem and love me less, for let me tell you I have almost against you Baptists as I have against the Presbyterians/’ While in this Association, Campbell preached his famous sermon on “The Law,” in which he showed the superiority of the gospel over the law of Moses. He also began editing the “Christian Baptist,” and later the “Millennial Harbinger.”
However, there was trouble brewing in the Associa-tion, and because of irreconcilable differences, the Brush Run church withdrew and united with the Mahoning Baptist Association of Eastern Ohio in 1823. In the meantime in Kentucky men like “Raccoon” John Smith, Vardeman, Morton, and others were spreading the cause like wildfire. In Ohio, Adamson, Bentley, Walter Scott, and others were greatly arousing the people. The same was true on a smaller scale of Pennsylvania, Illinois, Indiana, Missouri, Tennessee, and Virginia. About this time the Campbells were realizing that their mission could not be accomplished within the confines of any denomination. There had been much antagonism aroused against them and especially in the ranks of the Baptists. The Baptist historian, Benedict, speaking of the First Baptist Church of Nashville, Tennessee, says: “It increased between three and four hundred members, when the Campbellites succeeded in making proselytes, to their views nearly the whole of this great and growing interest. The pastor and people with their chapel all were brought under the influence of the reformers.” The New York Baptist Register of 1830 says: “Mr. Campbell’s paper, and their vigorous missionary efforts are making great achievements. It is said that one-half of the Baptist churches of Ohio have embraced this sentiment, and become what they call Christian Baptists. It is spreading like a mighty contagion through the western states, wasting Zion in its progress.” Another Baptist, writing to Mr. Campbell in 1828, said that in “travelling twenty-five hundred miles I found only four regular Baptist preachers whom you have not corrupted.” A split was inevitable. Before the separation came, Mr. Campbell said to the Baptists: “If there be division, gentlemen, you make it not I; and the more you oppose us with the weight of your censure, like the palm tree, we will grow the faster. I am for peace, for union, for harmony, for cooperation with all good men. But I fear you not. If you fling firebrands, arrows, and discord into the army of the faith, you will regret it, not I. You will lose influence, not I. We covet not persecution, but disregard it. We fear nothing but error; and should you proceed to make divisions, you will find that they will reach much further than you are aware, and that the time is past when an anathema will produce any other effect than contempt from some and a smile from others” (How the Disciples Began and Grew—Davis, page 97). And finally when it was necessary that they leave the Baptist fold, he said: “All the world must s,ee that we have been forced into a separate communion. We were driven out of doors because we preferred the approbation of the Lord to the approbation of any sect in Christendom. If this be our weakness we ought not to be despised; if our wis,dom we ought not to be condemned. We have lost no peace of conscience, none of the honor which comes from God, none of the enjoyments of the Holy Spirit, nothing of the sweets of Christian communion, by the unkindness of those who once called us brethren.
“We have always, sought peace but not peace at war with truth. We are under no necessity to crouch, to beg for favor, friendship, or protection. Our progress is upward, onward, and resistless. With the fear of God before our eyes, with the example of renowned worthies of all ages to stimulate our exertions, with love to God and man working in our bosoms, and with immortality in prospect, we have nothing to fear and nothing to lose that is worth possessing” (Ibid. pp. 97-98). The year 1830 is about the time this separation took place. From that time on Campbell and his brethren became known as “Christians,” or “Disciples of Christ,” the legal title usually being, “The church of Christ.” The “Declaration and Address” was issued in 1809. Now, twenty-one years from that time Alexander Campbell and others have loosed themselves from all entangling alliances. At the age of forty- two he stands ready to launch out on one of the greatest religious campaigns this world has ever known.
Stone and Campbell met in 1824. At first when they compared views there seemed to be great differences, but upon closer inspection it was found that thes,e were more imaginary than real and they were able to unite in their work. J. H. Garrison beautifully illustrates the union of these people. He says: “As two streams having independent sources in the high mountain ranges, in flowing toward the sea, by the law of gravitation often meet and mingle their waters in one river, s,o these two independent religious movements—the one organized by the Campbells— the other by Barton W. Stone—having the same general aim, the unity of God’s children, naturally flowed together under the law of spiritual gravitation, when unhindered by sectarian aims, forming a mighty stream of reformatory influence, whose effect has been felt in every part of the church universal.” The Stone movement was several years older than that of the Campbells, but it is usually regarded as a tributary. This is because all that was vital and permanent in the teaching of Stone, and more, were found in the teachings of Campbell. Someone has, contrasted the two people in these words:
“While the features of this organization . . . the Stone wing . . . were thus, in a good measure similar to those of the reformation in which Mr. Campbell was engaged, there were some characteristic differences. With the former, the idea of uniting all men under Christ was prominent; with the latter the desire of an exact conformity to the primitive faith and practice. The one occupied itself chiefly with casting abroad the sweep-net of the gospel, which gathers fishes of every kind; the other was intent on gathering the good into vessels and casting the bad away. Hence, the former engaged mainly in preaching; the latter in teaching. And thus they supplemented each other. Where one was strong the other was weak. One appealed mainly to the head, the other to the heart. In one the protracted meeting “was prominent and converts were multiplied; in the other the mists and clouds of theological speculation were dissipated, and the church of apostolic days was being brought back into view. In a word, one was gathering fuel and the other fire, and when the two were properly adjusted, the world as stirred as it has not been since the days of primitive Christianity.”
Thus was the beginning. And what shall I more say? For the time would fail me were I to tell of their later labors, their trials, and triumphs. Their plea was put to the test and stood. It would be interesting to notice in detail three of the world’s greatest debates . . . debates with the champions of infidelity, of Catholicism, and of Presbyterianism . . . debates that have made history, and which can be found today in the library of almost every gospel preacher. Interesting indeed are the labors of that group of men who turned the world upside down.
What was their purpose? Luther, Wesley, and others had tried to reform denominations which already existed . . . their purpose was reformation. However, that was not the purpose of that group that we are discussing today. They did not intend to form or reform a denomination. Oftentimes we probably have wondered why they were so long in breaking entirely away from sectarianism. Thomas Campbell, in the “Declaration and Address,” gives us the reason. He said, “So fully aware were we of the evils of schism, and so reluctant to assume the attitude of a new party, that we proposed to continue in the Presbyterian connection, even after we were convinced of various imperfections in the form of its; government, in its system of discipline, in its administration of Christian ordinances, and of the want of scriptural warrant for infant baptism; provided only that they would allow us to follow our own convictions by not obliging- us, to do what we could not approve, and allowing us to teach and enforce those matters for which we could produce clear scriptural authority and make all the rest a subject of forebear- ance until further enlightened.”
Although the movement never really started moving until they had severed connections with all denominations, their purpose in standing with them for awhile was a noble one. They were trying to keep from being counted as another sect . . . trying to keep the people from looking upon them as another denomination. Then, as today, it was difficult for the average religious man to view Christianity apart from denomi- nationalism. One of the great tasks was in getting the people to understand that they could be Christians only, members of the Lord’s church, without becoming identified with any sect. Awhile, for the sake of union, these leaders tolerated some error, but when they broke away from those alliances, they determined to go back of all denominationalism and restore the New Testament church as it was in the beginning. As the keynote of Luther’s movement was Reformation, the keynote of the Campbell’s was Restoration.
Speaking of the primitive church as described in the New Testament, Thomas Campbell said: “Let us do as, they did, say as they said; that is, profess and practice, as therein expressly enjoined by precept and precedent, in every possible instance after their approved example, and in so doing we shall realize and exhibit all that unity and uniformity that the primitive church possessed, or that the law of Christ requires” (Memoirs of Alexander Campbell, Vol. 2, pp. 11-12). He also said in the “Declaration and Address,” “Let none imagine that the subjoined propositions are at all intended as an overture toward a new creed or standard for the church, or as in any way to be made a term of communion; nothing can be further from our intention. They are merely designed to open up the way, that we may come fairly and firmly to original ground upon clear and certain premises, and take up things just as the apostles left them, that thus, disentangled from the accruing embarrassments of intervening ages, we may stand with evidence upon the same ground on which the church stood at the beginning.” In the Christian Baptist, Alexander Campbell stated:
“We have no system of our own or of others to substitute in lieu of the reigning systems. We only aim at substituting the New Testament in lieu of every creed in existence, whether Mohammedan, Pagan, Jewish, or Presbyterian. We wish to call Christians to consider that Jesus Christ has made them kings and priests to God. We neither advocate Calvinism, Arminianism, Socianianism, Arianism, Trinitarianism, Unitarianism, Deism, nor Sectarianism, but New Testamentism” (Vol. I, p. 90). He also declared that, “To see Christians enjoy their privileges, and to see sinners brought from darkness to light are the two great objects for which we desire to live, to labor, and to suffer reproach. In endeavoring to use our feeble efforts for these glorious objects we have found it necessary, among other things, to attempt to dethrone the popular reigning clergy from their high and lofty seats, which they have been for ages building for themselves. While we attempt to dethrone them, it is solely for this purpose . . . that we might enthrone the holy apostles on those thrones which Christ promised them; or rather that we might turn the attention of the people to them placed on thrones by the great and mighty King” (Ibid. p. 89). In that great restoration they proposed to restore the unity of the children of God. In the “Declaration and Address,” Thomas Campbell deals in detail with this phase of their purpose. Three of the propositions in that document are as follows:
“Prop. 1. That the church of Christ upon earth is essentially, intentionally, and constitutionally one; consisting of all those in every place that profess their faith in Christ and obedience to him in all things according to the Scriptures, and that manifest the same by their tempers and conduct; and of none else, as none else can be truly and properly called Christians.
“2. That, although the church of Chris,t upon earth must necessarily exist in particular and distinct societies, locally separate one from another, yet there ought to be no schisms, no uncharitable divisions among them. They ought to receive each other, as Chris,t Jesus hath also received them, to the glory of God. And, for this purpose, they ought all to walk by the same rule; to mind and speak the same things, and to be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment.
“3. That, in order to do this, nothing ought to be inculcated upon Christians as articles of faith, nor required of them as terms, of communion, but what is expressly taught and enjoined upon them in the word of God. Nor ought anything to be admitted as of divine obligation, but what is expressly enjoined by the authority of the Lord Jesus Christ and his apostles upon the New Testament church, either in express terms or by approved precedent.”
So, we can see that they proposed to unite all of God’s children by the observance of that now famous slogan, “Where the Scriptures speak, we speak; and where the Scriptures, are silent, we are silent.” Not only did they make that plea, but they also observed it in all of their religious actions. It was by observance of the plea that Alexander Campbell first decided that the Scriptures do not authorize infant baptism. When in 1812 an infant girl was born into their home there was a demand that the question of infant baptisms be res,tudied. Not only did Campbell study the English version of the Bible, he went into the original. Soon he was satisfied that only a penitent believer was a proper subject of baptism.
In this same study he learned that the word meant immersion, and although his, ancestral faith was being destroyed, he and many others of his family were baptized. It was upon the same occasion that he re-quested to have the privilege of making the confession made by Peter in Matthew 16 instead of relating a “religious experience.” The discovery of one truth led to the discovery of others. The principle of speaking where the Bible speaks and being silent where it is silent led them to forsake infant baptism, discover that only a penitent believer is a subject of baptism, and make the good confession. That the plea practiced will lead one to know the truth is evidenced by this. That it will unite those who practice it is seen in the fact that when Stone and Campbell who were making the same plea met, they were substantially united. In giving his reasons for not being a party man Alexander Campbell said:
1. Because Christ has forbidden me. He has commanded me to keep the unity of the Spirit; to be of the
same mind and judgment, and to call no man master on the earth.
2. Because no party would receive into communion all whom God would receive into heaven. God loves
his children more than our creeds.
3. But if I am asked by a partisan, ‘could you not join us and let these things alone?’ I answer, no, because ....
(1) The man who promotes the interest of a party stands next in guilt to the man that made it.
The man that puts the second stone in a building is as instrumental in its erection as the
man that laid the first.
(2) All parties oppose reformation. They all pray for it but will not work for it. None of them will
dare to return to the original standard. I speak not against any particular denomination, but against them all. Of course, all of those men were not united in their opinions, but in their faith they were, and another famous principle enunciated by them was, “In faith, unity, in opinion liberty, and in all things charity.” In connection with this, “Raccoon” John Smith said: “God has but one people on the earth. He has given to them but one book and therein exhorts them to be one family. A union such as, we plead for ... a union of God’s people on that one book . . . must, then, be practicable. Every Christian desires to stand in the whole will of God. The prayer of our Saviour and the whole tenor of his teaching, clearly show that it is God’s will that his children be united. To the Christian, then, s.uch a union must be desirable. Therefore, the whole union practicable or desirable must be based on the word of God as the only rule of faith and practice.
“There are certain abstruse and speculative matters . . . such as the mode of divine existence and the nature of the atonement , . . that have for centuries been themes of discussion among Christians. These questions are as far from being settled now as they were at the beginning of the controversy. By a needless and intemperate discussion of them, much feeling has been provoked and divisions have been produced. For several years past I have tried to speak on such subjects only in the words of inspiration, for it can offend no one to say about those subjects just what the Lord has said. Whatever opinions about these and similar subjects I may have reached, in the course of my investigations, if I never distract the church of God with them, or seek to impose them upon my brethren, they will never do the world any harm. I have the more cheerfully resolved on this course because the gospel is a system of facts, commands, and promises, and no deduction or inference from them however true forms any part of the gos,- pel of Jesus Christ. No heaven is promised to those who hold them, and no hell is threatened against those who deny them. They do not constitute, singly or together, any item of the apostolic gospel. While there is but one faith, there may be ten thousand opinions; and hence, if Christians are ever to be one, they must be one in faith and not in opinion.
“For several years past I have stood pledged to meet the religious world, or any part of it, on the ancient gospel and order of things,, as presented in the Book. This is the foundation on which Christians once stood, and on it they can, and ought, to stand again. For this I cannot depart to meet any man in the wide world. While for the sake of peace and Christian union, I have long since waived the public maintenance of any speculation I may hold, yet not one gospel fact, command, or promis,e will I surrender for the world” (How the Disciples Began and Grew—Davis, pp. 117-118).
Isaac Errett said: “In matters of opinion . . . .that is, matters touching which the Bible is either silent, or so obscure as not to admit of definite conclusions ... we allow the largest liberty, so long as none judges his brother, or insists on forcing his opinions, on others, or in making them an occasion of strife” (Ibid. pp. 133-134).
Barton W. Stone is equally clear on this matter. Speaking of the union consummated at Lexington, he said: “It may be asked, is there no difference among you? We answer we do not know, nor are we concerned to know. We have never asked what was their opinion, nor have they asked us. If they have opinions different to ours, they are welcome to them, provided they do not endeavor to impose them on us as articles of faith” (Ibid. p. 132). In his debate with N. L. Rice, Campbell said: “We long since learned the lesson to draw a well-defined boundary between faith and opinion, and while we earnestly contend for the faith, to allow perfect freedom of the opinion, and of the expression of the opinion, as, the true philosophy of union and the sovereign antidote against heresy” (Ibid. p. 131).
Also in the “Declaration and Address” these words are found in the proposition numbered 13:
“Lastly. That if any circumstances indispensably necessary to the observance of divine ordinances be not found upon the page of express revelation, such, and such only as are absolutely necessary for this purpose, should be adopted under the title of human expedients, without any pretense to a more sacred origin, so that any subsequent alteration or difference in the observance of these things might prolong no contention or division in the church” (Memoirs of Alexander Campbell—Richardson, pp. 261-262, Voi I).
So, we can clearly see that they emphasized the distinction between faith and opinion, and between matters incidental and matters essential. If many in the brotherhood of today could learn that valuable lesson, it would be a happy day for us.
Although the whole purpose of their plea might be summarized in the word, restoration, it included these fundamental points:
1. The plea for Christian unity.
2. The proper divisions of the word of God.