5.13 - AIMS AND PURPOSES OF THE RESTORATION MOVEMENT

AIMS AND PURPOSES OF THE RESTORATION MOVEMENT

Notwithstanding the change of time for tonight to 6 :80, we have present not less than fifteen hundred people. I am sure that this is a concrete evidence of the interest you have in these old-time, fundamental lessons. I am talking about our purposes and our aims. Brethren of the church of Christ everywhere are spending quite a lot of money for the advancement of the cause they love. We are engaged in labors of different kinds, but all are for one definite purpose. I often ask what is this all about? If it were simply that we might have a nice meetinghouse in which to assemble with friends and go through a process of religion, there would be no reason for our existence. There are plenty of meetinghouses, possibly enough in Nashville to take care of practically every churchgoer in the state of Tennessee. I hope to outline to you tonight something that you will appreciate as the specific object of our concerted efforts. That there was a church, builded by Christ and established upon this earth during New Testament times, does not admit of any doubt whatsoever. The record of that church is found in the Bible, especially in the book of Acts, and in the twenty-one letters addressed to the churches. When we read the story as found therein, there is much encouragement; but before we have finished all the letters, we observe some evidence of a general decline, a waning of interest, and the approach of a general apostasy. Secular history of the second century soon reveals the fact that the New Testament church was practically lost. Men quickly forgot the things they were so recently taught. And being as human as they were, they soon departed from the original standard, which was never in harmony with the ways of men. There was developed a form of religion wholly foreign to that found in the New Testament. With the passing of the centuries, human organizations grew, officials were multiplied, and Bible terms were so abused that, erelong, practically every likeness of the New Testament church was forgotten. And at the beginning of the seventh century there was an organization not even akin to the church established by Christ. Doctrines unknown to God’s Word were readily accepted. They ranged from holy water to sprinkling for baptism, in 1311. Thus the reign of the Roman hierarchy had its full sway upon the earth. The era of the Dark Ages swept over the face of the earth, at which times the Bible was chained to the pulpit and Christianity was buried beneath the rubbish of human affairs. I am not disposed to argue as to whether or not the church was perpetuated throughout all the centuries. I think that makes but little difference. The perpetuity of a crop depends upon the seed from which such springs, and if the seed of the kingdom never has been lost, it is possible at any time to bring about a reproduction of that which was characteristic of the first harvest. During the black-out period of about a thousand years, that human hierarchy ruled over the entire world and directed all affairs, both religious and civil. But let man go for a spell and he will reach the limit and will become so disgusting in his affairs that somebody will have the backbone and the courage to rise up in opposition. When, therefore, the great Catholic Church finally put on a sale of indulgences to secure money to repair St. Peter’s Cathedral, young Martin Luther, born, bred, and reared a devout Catholic, could hold his peace no longer. With a courage unsurpassed in all history he challenged such deeds, and set about to expose the doctrines and practices of the mother church. That was the beginning of the end of what was called the Dark Ages. A new era was dawning upon the world and in every field the clouds began to vanish and the light of liberty and freedom of thought could be seen. Naturally, Martin Luther did not want to be without church affiliation. He held ideas of his own and began to proclaim them to his fellows. The result of his teaching was the establishment of the Lutheran Church in the year 1621. Contemporary with him were such men as John Calvin, Ulrich Zwingli, and a host of others. While they did not agree with Luther, they were religious men, and likewise, had ideas that attracted a number of followers. John Calvin was a man of power and from his preaching there came into existence the Presbyterian Church in 1535. About the same year the Episcopal Church was born. It was purely a creature of the state, with King Henry VIII as its head. Later on there came other great men of the world, dissatisfied with the doctrines and practices then prevailing. They set about to reform conditions in the churches of their fathers. It can be truly said that both Luther and Calvin first had in mind to reform the Catholic Church. They were convinced of their failure. It refused to be reformed and they therefore sought its destruction. Each reformer had some special end in view. I believe truly that I could sum up the work of Martin Luther by saying it was his supreme ambition to loose the Bible from the pulpit and give it back to the pew. His message was that the people, rather than the pope, with all of his pretensions, ought to be at liberty to study the word of God, to interpret it for themselves, and to accept only what they believe it teaches. John Calvin was deeply impressed with the sovereignty of God and the impotency of man. He summed up his conceptions in what is known as the five principles of Calvinism. These imply man’s helpless, hopeless, and hapless condition in this world. Later on came John Wesley, a member of the Episcopal Church, which church ever has been noted for its cold, formal ritualism. Wesley tried to put some fervor, some spirit, and some warmth into that iceberg form of religion. His efforts failed, and from him and three others sprang into being the Methodist Church, in 1729. It was but natural that, among these denominations thus formed, clashes and conflicts would arise. Each adopted own creed and selected its own name. Men of good sense and unbiased minds saw that something was wrong with all of them, and thus they soon analyzed the trouble. Of that number were James O’Kelley of the Methodist Church, Dr. Abner Jones of the Baptist Church, Barton W. Stone of the Presbyterian Church, and various others. They dropped their human names and turned from their man-made creeds. Their trend was back to the Bible in all things religious. In 1807 Thomas Campbell, a noted Presbyterian preacher, came to America. Two years later his illustrious son, Alexander, also came. He was fresh from the University of Glasgow. They were both members of the Presbyterian Church, but neither was content with its teachings. They found themselves unsettled in mind and were striving to find solid ground on which they could stand. They became tired and disgusted with all denominations. They were thoroughly convinced that such bodies were unknown to the Bible. At length they decided to cut loose from everything having a human name or a human creed and go back to Jerusalem, not for the purpose of trying to reform anything, but for the definite purpose of trying to restore the church of the New Testament. To establish another denomination or church was the exact opposite of their aim and intention. They believed that all denominations ought to go out of business and that there should be but one church, over which Christ reigns as head. Their plea was: no church but the one built by Christ; no creed but the Bible; no name but that found in His word; and no practice that was not as old as the New Testament. To duplicate the church of the New Testament and to restore it in doctrine and practice was their aim and purpose. Thus they laid down a platform upon which every man on earth can stand and not sacrifice a single principle of faith. Upon such a foundation, they went forth proclaiming the gospel of Christ to a sin-cursed and troubled world. Let it be truly said that for a period of thirty years or more there were more people converted than at any other period in the history of the world since the days of the apostles. There was no kind of machinery; no high-powered evangelist; no claptrap methods of seducing and alluring men under false pretense. They spoke forth the words of truth and soberness; they preached the gospel of God’s Son uncompromisingly; they preached it with all the power of their being and denominationalism was shaken throughout the length and breadth of this earth. The religious elements were stirred from center to circumference. Had those preachers continued to preach only the gospel and to practice only that taught in the New Testament, the results would have been wonderful. But in 1849 some brethren who had subscribed to the platform announced, conceived the idea that they could improve upon the Lord’s plan of spreading the gospel. Accordingly, they met in the city of Cincinnati and formed a human missionary society. Such an organization is a stranger to God’s Word, and, of course, there was a division among the congregations. Brethren who had adopted the slogan of "speaking where the Bible speaks and of being silent where the Bible is silent" forsook that principle and sought to be governed by "sanctified common sense." Objections were filed from all over the land, but the pleadings of faithful, loyal souls availed nothing. The advocates of the society were determined and nothing could stop their innovation. This act slowed down the progress and gave great joy to the "Canaanite and Perizzite" then in the land. Then in 1859 at Midway, Kentucky, a little melodeon was brought into the assembly. Protests again were made and the little instrument was temporarily removed. For a short while it seemed that the breaches might be healed and that peace once again would characterize the movement. But such was not to be. Exactly ten years after that, in 1869, at old Olive Street, in the city of St. Louis, a real organ was brought into the service of God. Three prominent men, not members of the Olive Street Church, but members elsewhere, were called in to settle the trouble. They investigated all matters thoroughly and recommended to the church that the organ should be removed. In spite of the fact that they had accepted this committee, and had agreed to be governed by its decision, they refused to do so, and, until this day, the organ has played in that congregation. The result of all of this was a general division in the church all over the land. Those who favored the innovations became exceedingly active among the women and children, and finally manipulated matters until many elders fell for their schemes. When they considered the time was opportune, they organized societies and put the organ into the most prominent churches. Property, built up by those who opposed such departures, was confiscated, and faithful, loyal brethren were robbed of that which was justly theirs. Such is the sad story. But for the unfortunate division among us, no one can tell how great would be the influence of the church by now. Denominationalism was on the wane, and there were evidences of its falling as the truth of God went marching on. Our only hindrance was from within. When all hope of reuniting our forces was abandoned, those who still contended for a "thus saith the Lord" in all matters of worship set about to rebuild that which had been so gloriously begun. Our sole effort now is to bring about a restoration of the "ancient order." If I know myself, I would not be a party to anything that looked like an effort to try to build up some human organization among men. But to the effort that the church bought by the blood of Christ may be restored, and that men may worship as it is written, every ounce of my being and every power that I possess is dedicated and consecrated forevermore. Humanity is exceedingly weak and it is so easy to yield to public sentiment and to follow paths of least resistance. Paul said: "The time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine." Maybe that time is now. Our weakness today is a spirit of compromise in the pulpit and of worldliness in the pew. It does appear that many preachers among us have been influenced more by Mr. Carnegie’s book, "How to Win Friends and Influence People," than by Paul’s statement, “I determined not to know any thing among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified." Hambone said he had noticed that when church members get to running with the devil, they become broad-minded. It is freely said of some preachers that they will not preach the word in its fullness neither will they reprove and rebuke. They seek to be galvanized into popularity. "Woe unto you, when all men shall speak well of you!" Paul said: "If I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ."

There can be no valid objection to a located preacher so long as he is subordinate to the elders. But when he becomes the pastor, trouble is not far ahead. You have, perhaps, heard such fellows speak of "my" church, "my" board of elders, "my" deacons, and "my" officials. Such talk is the very opposite of Bible language. I am in deepest sympathy with every gospel preacher’ located or otherwise, so long as he does nothing but preach the gospel. But when he gets all set and begins to play politics, his usefulness is gone, and he should be relegated. You will see that type visiting the club members and the social climbers among the dear sisters. He will also court the boys and girls and the weaker of the brethren until he feels that he has a majority on his side and then he does not hesitate to tell the elders what "my program" is and what they may expect. When a preacher wants a job, he will always apply to the elders and duly recognize their authority. But after securing the place, the elders soon become "cranks" and "out of date." They are no longer consulted. And now all decisions must be made by the majority. One of the greatest dangers threatening the church today is the tendency toward majority rule. Whenever a preacher announces a vote will be taken on any matter, he thereby announces that this church will divide. Such almost invariably follows. It also happens many times that the preacher wants the truth, but the elders and the congregation are too worldly to accept it. While in Philadelphia last week, I read in the paper the following: "Rev. Herbert J. Anderson, who recently resigned as pastor of Arch Street Presbyterian Church, Eighteenth and Arch Streets, has been dropped from the roll of the presbytery of Philadelphia at his own request. The clergyman cited ’evils’ in the Presbyterian Church in the U. S. A. and asserted he could no longer submit ’to unscriptural and unconstitutional usurpations of ecclesiastical power wherein the-word of man is placed above the word of God.’

"Rev. Mr. Anderson in his written statement charged: "1. That there are many within the Presbyterian Church in the U. S. A. whether as laymen or elders or ministers ’who do not accept the Bible as the inerrant word of God, also others who reject other great Christian doctrines so that Christian fellowship without compromise in obedience to God has become impossible to me.’ "2. There has been built up through the years a political system with the local churches, presbyteries, and boards so that a man often must disobey the dictates of his conscience to be in favor with his brethren. "3. It is increasingly impossible for a minister to be free to preach the whole counsel of God unhampered by threats issuing from the boards of the local churches. "4. The whole church is dominated by those who hold to an inclusive and compromising doctrinal policy so that unbelievers are exalted and those who seek to maintain the truth of God are belittled, persecuted, or cast out." It is wholly possible that similar conditions may exist in some of the churches of Christ. Among the elders and leading members, it may be that "unbelievers are exalted and those who seek to maintain the truth of God are belittled, persecuted, or cast out." If such there be, let us pray that we may become free from such a spirit. But enough for the present. If there are those in this audience disposed to accept the gospel of God’s Son, the invitation is once more extended.