========================================================================
  WRITINGS OF J F BURNETT
  by J.F. Burnett
========================================================================

A collection of theological writings, sermons, and essays by J.F. Burnett,
compiled for study and devotional reading.

  Chapters: 20

------------------------------------------------------------------------
  TABLE OF CONTENTS
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    1. 00.00. Titles/Contents
    2. 01.00. ABNER JONES
    3. 01.01.     REV. ABNER JONES
    4. 01.02.        That Character is a sufficient test of Christian Fellowship.
    5. 02.00. BARTON WARREN STONE
    6. 02.01.     Foreword
    7. 02.02.     Rev. Barton Warren Stone
    8. 02.03.     The Last Will and Testament of The Springfield Presbytery
    9. 02.04.     On Baptism
   10. 02.05.     Christian Union
   11. 02.06.     Christian
   12. 02.07.     On the Bible as Authoritative
   13. 02.08.     Controversy and Creedalism
   14. 03.01. JAMES O'KELLY
   15. 03.02.     FOREWORD
   16. 03.03.     REV. JAMES O'KELLY
   17. 03.04.     A CHRISTIAN DEMOCRAT.
   18. 03.05.     A MORAL HERO.
   19. 03.06.     A PIONEER OF RELIGIOUS LIBERTY.
   20. 03.07.      INDIVIDUAL LIBERTY IN JESUS CHRIST.

========================================================================
  CHAPTER 1: 00.00. TITLES/CONTENTS
========================================================================

Burnett, J. F. - Library

Burnett, J. F. - Abner Jones

Burnett, J. F. - Barton W. Stone

1. Foreword

2. Rev. Barton Warren Stone

3. The Last Will and Testament of The Springfield Presbytery

4. On Baptism

5. Christian Union

6. Christian

7. On the Bible as Authoritative

8. Controversy and Creedalism

Burnett, J. F. - James O’Kelly

1. FOREWORD

2. REV. JAMES O’KELLY

3. A CHRISTIAN DEMOCRAT.

4. A MORAL HERO.

5. A PIONEER OF RELIGIOUS LIBERTY.

6. INDIVIDUAL LIBERTY IN JESUS CHRIST.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 2: 01.00. ABNER JONES
========================================================================

Introduction REV. ABNER JONES The Man Who Believed and Served

BOOKLET--THREE

By J. F. BURNETT, D. D.

Minister in the Christian Church

Foreword This is one of a series of booklets prepared and issued under the
direction of the Secretary for Department of Publishing of The American
Christian Convention, that the members of our churches and Sunday-schools may be
well informed as to the history and distinctive principles of THE CHRISTIAN
CHURCH which accepts and proclaims:

The Lord Jesus Christ as the head of the church.

Christian our only name.

The Bible our rule of faith and practice.

Individual interpretation of the Scriptures, the right and duty of all.

Christian character the test of fellowship.

The union of all the followers of Christ, to the end that the world may believe.

Several of the booklets are from the pen of John Franklin Burnett, D.D., who has
given many years of his life to research and investigation of the subjects he
presents. Others are by men of outstanding ability who have given many years of
service in the Christian Church. They will present the distinctive principles of
the Christian church as essentials in Christian life and the basis for church
unity.

While the booklets have not been prepared especially for study books, yet the
subject matter presented can be studied with profit by the individual, students,
Christian Endeavor societies, Sunday-school classes, etc., particularly as a
part of programs for stated week-day meetings. It is the hope of the Secretary
for the Department of Publishing that they will be given by pastors to all new
members as they are accepted into church. They are also intended for general
distribution, by pastors and religious workers in our churches, to those who may
be interested in the church and principles of the Christians.

No. 1 is The Origin and Principles of the Christians with an account of the
co-ordinating of the bodies of different sections.

No. 2 is a historical and biographical sketch of Rev. James O’Kelly, who
courageously stood for individual liberty in religious thought and worship.

No. 3 sketches the life of Rev. Abner Jones, a pioneer in the thought that
character and life are the true test of religious fellowship as over against
dogma.

No. 4 is a sketch of the life of Rev. Barton W. Stone, a scholar and religious
teacher who advocated that the Bible is the book of life, and the only rule of
faith and practice necessary for a Christian, as over against any formulated
creed.

No. 5 combines sketches of Elias Smith, publisher, and Horace Mann, educator.

No. 6 gives sketches of the pioneer women workers of the Christian Church. That
all who use these booklets judiciously may be supplied, they will be sent free
on request and payment of postage, 15c. for one dozen, 40c. for fifty, 75c. for
one hundred. Order them from The American Christian Convention, or The Christian
Publishing Association. Both are in the Christian Publishing Association
Building, Dayton, Ohio.

If the hopes and wishes of the Department of Publishing are even in a measure
realized, the effort and expense of the publication of the series will be
justified.

O. W. WHITELOCK, Secretary for Publishing.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 3: 01.01.     REV. ABNER JONES
========================================================================

REV. ABNER JONES The Man Who Believed and Served

Creeds and confessions? High Church or the low?

I cannot say; but you would vastly please us If with some pointed Scripture you
could show To which of these belonged the Savior, Jesus.

I think to all, or none. Not curious creeds Or ordered forms of churchly rule be
taught, But soul of love that blossomed into deeds, With human good and human
blessing fraught. On me no priest nor presbyter nor pope, Bishop nor dean, may
stamp a party name; But Jesus, with his largely human scope, The service of my
human life may claim.

Let prideful priests do battle about creeds, The church is mine that does most
Christ-like deeds.

--John Stewart Blackie.

Abner Jones was four years old when the Declaration of Independence was signed.
He was born amid the birth throes of a nation, and his first breath was that of
political liberty. The first sounds that fell upon his youthful ears were the
screams of the American Eagle, as it proudly beat the air in celebration of the
great victory of the Revolutionary war.

He belonged to nature’s noblemen, whose high-born spirit refused the low
servilities of political and ecclesiastical courts, but who proudly stood erect
in the presence of both king and pope, and declared that of right all men are
free. To that generation liberty was the simple birthright of all human beings;
they claimed it as such; they reverenced and held it fast as the inalienable
gift of God, which was not to be surrendered to power, nor sold for gold. It was
theirs as men; without it they did not esteem themselves as men; it was
essential to their happiness, a thing to be prized above wealth, ease, honor,
country, or life itself. They claimed for each person a perfect individual
freedom in matters of conscience. No one was authorized to be master over
thought, or commissioned from on high to tell men what to believe. No man, nor
group of men, could sit in judgment in the realm of thought. God had given to
man the boundless element of truth, the shoreless and fathomless ocean of love,
and who should direct his path. We now know that there was manliness in the
words of Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty, or give me death." The spirit of
liberty and equality was in the air, and many thousand hearts echoed every sound
that went forth in hope of its realization. The farmer’s cottage, the pioneer’s
cabin, and the well-to-do trader’s mansion, all gleamed in radiant light as the
word went forth that the yoke was to break, and the bondage end. Amid such
surroundings Abner Jones first saw the light of day, and had grown to young
manhood e’er the spirit had subsided, or the tumult ceased. He was born a
freeman in principle, a freeman in thought, a freeman in action, and when grown
he came to his inheritance, and in the consciousness of that high born right he
refused allegiance to all kings, except the King of kings, and confessed to no
bishop, except the Bishop of his soul. But while he was so well favored in the
spirit of his early years, he was nevertheless greatly handicapped by the severe
limitations of his material surroundings.

He was born in Royalton, Massachusetts, April 28, 1772. Eight years afterward
his father moved to Bridgewater, Vermont. At that early day the state was yet a
wilderness, and his father the first settler in that part of it. In his Memoirs
he says: "Our house (though to the popular part of mankind may seem strange) was
erected without either plank, joist, boards, shingles, stone, brick, nails or
glass, but was built wholly of logs, bark, boughs and wooden pins, instead of
nails. The snow was four feet deep, and the weather extremely cold, and many
trees within reach of the house, and two miles from neighbors. We were favored,
however, with warm clothing and solid provision, and enough of it. The great
plenty of wood which was so nigh was easily collected into large heaps before
one end of the house (the greater part of which was open) and set on fire, thus
it was kept day and night until the weather grew warm. What little household
furniture we then had was drawn two miles on hand sleds, by men on snow shoes,
which made a path sufficiently hard for my mother, and such of the children as
were not able to assist in drawing the hand sleds, to follow after." And this
was not the only limitation. Vermont was a wilderness, dense, dreary,
melancholy. Poisonous serpents were in the grass, wild beasts were in the
forest, skulking Indians were in the shadows, and treacherous white men were by
no means unknown. Fifty miles back from the Atlantic Coast the country was an
unbroken jungle. Dense forests and impassable morasses added to the difficulty
of travel, and in places made it impossible. Travel was on foot, or horseback;
schools were few, and poorly equipped; the entire population of the United
States would not exceed three and a quarter million, when young Jones cast his
first vote, and yet, with all these limitations, and more of like character
besetting his path, he marched steadily on, until his name and his fame have
been entwined in the hearts of all who know and love the Christian Church. None
of us have ever seen this great pioneer of religious liberty in the flesh, but
we have breathed his spirit, we have felt his presence, we have known his power,
and we have been aided by the strength of his faith and the character of his
courage. He is a force never to be forgotten; he made his contribution to the
cause of Christian freedom, and though dead, he yet speaketh. When he was but
eight years old, he was deeply concerned about his soul, and went through all
the soul-racking experiences common to those early days. He says of such
experience: "I know not a better similitude than the wilderness in which I then
dwelt; uncultivated, and inhabited by wild beasts of prey, dreary and
melancholy." But from out the gloom his soul emerged into the light, and from
that time begins the life about which we write. That the reader may know
something of his religious experience, we repeat it as he tells it in his
Memoirs:

"A dreadful event occurred just at this time, in which a man was accidentally
shot by his intimate friend, while hunting deer. As may well be supposed, in a
population so sparse, a tremendous excitement was created which ended in a
’revival of religion so general, that it seemed there was not a person come to
years of reflection, who did not share in it, and many were brought out of
darkness into God’s marvellous light.

"I remember of having my attention more than usually called up to the concerns
of my soul, in the above mentioned reformation, by hearing Mr. Benjamin Burch
speak about death, judgment and eternity. Although I was only nine years old,
the pride of my heart was so great that I was ashamed to let any one know that I
felt concerned about my soul, neither could I bear to have any one see me
weeping. I now felt the need of religion more than ever I had done before. I was
fully convinced that I must be born again or be damned. I used frequently to
resort to secret prayer. The place which I chose for this purpose was at the
foot of a rock, where it seemed there was a place carved out on purpose for me
to kneel down in.

"About this time there came a man by the name of Snow, into these parts, who was
a Baptist preacher, or rather an exhorter. He had a meeting appointed one
evening about a quarter of a mile from my father’s, which I attended. As I was
going, I remember of trying to pray that God would have mercy on me. I felt
particularly desirous that I might get some good that evening. I do not remember
ever to have had such a desire before. When I arrived every thing seemed
overspread with gloominess and darkness, and every thing of a religious nature
appeared melancholy, and I do not remember that the thought ever passed my mind
that religion yielded any joy, or peace. All the advantage I thought of, was
that it would save my soul from eternal misery, and on that account I felt
desirous to obtain it, feeling fully satisfied of my lost, undone condition. It
appeared to me as though for a moment I was lost, and then every thing appeared
new. I really thought that the preacher had entirely altered his subject from
something that was melancholy, to something joyful and happy. The following
thoughts passed through my mind in swift succession: What is this? It is
something entirely new; it makes me completely happy; I wish to enjoy it
forever. After the speaker had done, my father rose and gave a word of
exhortation, as I had often heard him before, and which always until that time
seemed to fill my mind with gloom. But I really thought my father spoke as he
never had before, for it appeared to be glorious. I did not at that time think
the alteration was in me, but thought it was in my father. The unspeakable joy
and peace which I then felt, I cannot describe. I was completely happy, and
wished for nothing more. The fear of being miserable was entirely gone from my
mind, and the dreary gloom that before rested on my mind had vanished away. All
this time I had no idea what it was that caused this change in my mind. From
whence it came, and whither it went, I could not tell. I had no thought that I
was converted. My mind remained in this situation for a number of days, not
knowing what these things meant.

"At length one day, as I was passing from the house to the barn, these words
came to me with great force: ’For this my Son was dead, and is alive again; was
lost, and is found.’ Luke 15:24. This was the first passage of Scripture that
was ever sent home to my heart. It seemed to open, and explain to my
understanding, how I had been dead in sin, and made alive in Christ; and also
how I had been lost, but was now found of Christ as a Savior. From that moment a
hope sprang up in my soul of eternal life." This experience was not unbroken. He
had seasons of doubt and despair. At one time, while working in the field, he
felt so depressed that it appeared to him that he was eternally deprived of
hope. He really felt that he had begun his eternal, endless, despairing misery;
he believed that he heard the voice of God saying to him, "Depart from me ye
cursed." In his despair he dropped his work, and ran with wild, reckless speed
to his mother, who was able to comfort him. For some years his experiences were
contradictory; at times the most exhilarating joy would overflow his soul, and
all would be light and peace; at other times the most indescribable gloom would
settle down upon him, and he would walk in darkness and in doubt. But at last he
was firmly anchored in the faith of the gospel, and was assured of his
acceptance, and on the 9th of June, 1793, he was baptized by Elder Elisha
Ransom, of Woodstock, Vermont, and received to membership in the Baptist Church.
When twenty-one years of age he was deeply impressed that he must preach the
gospel, and the question came to him, "If I must preach, what shall I preach?"
He was far from being satisfied with the views, or creed, of his brethren; he
determined to give the whole matter a careful and serious investigation. He
accordingly took the Bible, and without note or comment, and without consulting
any individual, or receiving sympathy from any living being, he commenced a
prayerful and careful examination of the Book itself. He was led to conclude
that the name Baptist was not the authorized name for the followers of Jesus
Christ, and that the polity of the Baptist Church could not be supported by the
Scriptures, and yet for a while he continued in fellowship and in service with
the church. The story of his call to the ministry, and his courage in the matter
of his ordination, is told by his son, A. D. Jones, in the following language:

"Elder Jones commenced preaching in September, 1801, and from that time to the
day of his death he gave himself with great fidelity to the good work. From the
first, he announced his determination to stand alone, and acknowledge the
authority of no church or set of men. He and about a dozen others, laymen, and
residents of Lyndon, covenanted together in church form, and called themselves
CHRISTIANS--rejecting all party and sectional names, and leaving each other free
to cherish such speculative views of theology as the Scriptures might plainly
seem to teach them. This was probably the first FREE CHRISTIAN Church ever
established in New England.

"He immediately became an itinerant, and went wherever and whenever he was
invited; and soon found large congregations in all the neighboring towns. He
presently extended his sphere of labor into the adjoining States, and in the
course of two or three years swept nearly the whole extent of New England.

"When Elder Jones commenced preaching, he had great doubts about his being
called of God to this work. He therefore made a vow, that he would preach one
year, unless convinced before its expiration that he was doing wrong. He had
property enough to support his family for that length of time, and he supposed
that if God had called him to the ministry He would provide bread for his
family. The year went round, and plenty crowned his board. He had not touched
the little he had accumulated in his medical practice. So his fears were
somewhat abated, and he more fully believed that the hand of the Lord was in it,
and that he must now consecrate himself entirely to the work of the ministry.

"He accordingly looked around him for the means of ordination. Now it happened
about this time that he was invited to attend a quarterly meeting among the
Free-will Baptists. He was pleased with the zeal and piety of the brethren, and
his heart was strongly drawn towards them. He preached among them, and to much
acceptance. They were desirous that he should become one of their number, and
solicited him to do so. I will let him give his own account of the conference
that passed between them:

"’I attended the Elders’ conference, and gave them my views of being nothing but
a Christian; and that I could not be a Free-will Baptist; yet that I heartily
fellowshipped them as Christians, and so far was happy to unite with them in the
work of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. I further observed that I should be
glad to receive from them the right hand of fellowship as a Christian, but not
as a Free-will Baptist; for the Lord had taught me that I must be a Christian
only. Although their fellowship was very desirable, as I was entirely alone, yet
I determined that it should be known what kind of fellowship was meant.

"’I said to them, "You came out free, but the devil sent the name of Freewillers
after you, and you have picked it up."

"’Elder Randall observed, "We glory in the name of Freewillers."

"’I answered, "I will not acknowledge any of the devil’s impositions. Understand
me perfectly, brethren, I do not wish to join the Free-will Baptists. I wish
Christian fellowship. If hereafter it should be asked, ’Have you joined the
Free-will Baptists?’ the answer will always be, ’No.’ It shall not be said
thereafter, ’Brother Jones, you belong with us, and our rules are thus and so.’
I will never be subject to one of your rules; but if you will give me the right
hand as a brother, and let me remain a free man, just as I am, I should be
glad.’"

"’On these grounds, the right hand of fellowship was cheerfully given. A number
of months after this they voluntarily appointed an ecclesiastical council, and
ordained me a free man.

"Elder Jones received ordination on the last day of November, 1802. Elders Aaron
Buzzell, Nathaniel King and Nathaniel Brown were the officiating clergymen."
From childhood he had been taught the Scriptures according to the Calvinistic
formula. The doctrine of the trinity, original sin, vicarious atonement, literal
punishment for sin in a literal lake of fire, had been his daily mental and
moral diet, from his earliest recollection. When he came to know for himself the
truth as it is in Christ Jesus, he felt his intellect outraged and his moral
sense at war with the system of doctrine, and hence there was nothing for him to
do but to count the cost, pay the price, and meet the issue, and this, he did
bravely, courteously, and courageously. When James O’Kelly went out from the
Methodist Conference, no doctrine was involved, but when Abner Jones went out
from the Baptist Church nothing but doctrine was involved. Immediately the brand
of a heretic was upon him, and he was religiously ostracized, and his doctrine
denounced as of the devil and dangerous. Always in such separations love is put
to shame, and the truth suffers. But like all men of vision he was willing to
suffer for conscience’ sake. He had faith in what he believed; he had faith in
the future; he believed that no man, or group of men, had the right to say to
honest seekers after truth, this is true, and this is false, but that every man
must find the truth for himself, and finding it for himself it is his alone. No
great man has ever been inspired through his memory, nor by the ideals of the
past. Abner Jones was a truly great man, and he was not afraid of the future,
and, like the Master, he set his face steadfastly to go to his Jerusalem. He was
not unmindful of his obligation to those who had first taught him the way of
life; his friends were now doubly dear to him, seeing that he must be separated
from them, but cost what it would in friendship, and in fellowship, his duty was
imperative, and his way clear, and like the hero that he was, he walked out
alone to dare and to do for the right. Nor was he ignorant of what he would have
to suffer in the untrodden path he had chosen for his feet. He knew that he
would have to run the theological gauntlet, and that doctrinal sticks and stones
of enormous size would be hurled at him by minds of gigantic strength, and
hearts of conscientious conviction; he saw the wall, grim and dark, that was to
separate him from those he loved; he saw the fiery red tongue of envy and hatred
protruding from every pulpit he had hitherto occupied; he knew that everything
would be done within the possibility of human strength to crush him, and silence
his teaching; he knew that he would be looked upon as a disturber of society,
and a preacher of strange doctrine; he knew that the firesides at which he had
sat and held sweet communion with his brethren would be his to enjoy no more; he
knew that the tables at which he had eaten would be given to another; he knew
that he would be spoken of among his old friends as "one that is not of us" and
that upon his head would fall the anathemas of the whole church, but what could
he do? That old sweet spirit of freedom that he had breathed through all his
early years now surged through his soul and permeated his whole being and, like
a mighty power moving toward, a glorious hope, he went out into that truth which
makes all men free.

While Abner Jones was not college trained, he yet merited and held a creditable
place among the educated of his day. He was a teacher in the common schools, of
recognized ability; he studied medicine, and was a successful and popular
practitioner for several years; he acquired a creditable mastery of the Greek,
Latin and Hebrew grammars, and could read with tolerable readiness in each of
these languages; he accumulated considerable property while practicing medicine,
all of which he used in maintaining his family while preaching the gospel to the
poor. These facts are recited that the reader may know something of the man
whose contribution to the Kingdom of God has met the approval of the church for
more than a hundred years, and which grows in favor with men as the years go by.
What was his special contribution?


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 4: 01.02.        THAT CHARACTER IS A SUFFICIENT TEST OF CHRISTIAN FELLOWSHIP.
========================================================================

That Character is a sufficient test of Christian Fellowship.

He taught that it was not so much what a man believed, as it was what he was in
life and conduct. It was more than incidental that this pronouncement came from
Abner Jones. His character was an embodiment of his teaching. James O’Kelly, the
sturdy personality, that towering individual, stood for the right of the one
man; he could not be absorbed; his individuality was impressive and convincing,
and it was fitting, indeed it was inevitable, that he should speak for the
individual. But Abner Jones possessed no such impressive personality. His
strength was in his character. He was a brother among brethren; a physician in
the sick room; a nurse at the bedside; a pastor in the home; a preacher in the
pulpit; a laborer in the field and at his trade; and when he spoke it was with
his character, as well as with his tongue. It is indeed significant that the
distinctive principles of the Christians had for their expression distinctive
types of men. O’Kelly, with a strong, convincing personality, stood for the
right of the individual; Jones, the man of character, stood for character as the
sufficient test; and Stone, the man of the schools--the book man--for the Bible
as a sufficient rule of faith and practice.

Abner Jones never taught, as some would have us think, that there could be
Christian character in the absence of the fundamental principles of Christian
faith. He did not admit that one could accept or reject Christ, and still have
Christian character; neither did he admit that one could accept or reject the
doctrines of repentance, faith, prayer, or any other fundamental doctrine of the
Bible, and still have Christian character; he never taught that one could
believe or disbelieve them and one would be as good as the other. Abner Jones
knew, as we all know, that we cannot have a Divine command before us, and say to
all men, you can treat that command as you like; if you like it, keep it; if you
don’t like it, don’t keep it; it really does not matter; please yourselves, and
all will be right in the end. Such teaching never entered the mind of Jones, nor
is it to be found anywhere in all his teaching. But in the field of
interpretation he maintained a Christian character, he was entitled to
fellowship, no matter how widely he might differ from his fellows in
intellectual conception of truth. When a man gives proof that his heart is right
with God, and his life is right with men, why should there be a divergence that
would debar him of fellowship! Rev. Henry Ward Beecher said that he was
sensitive in behalf of theologies, but that when theology put its hoof upon a
living, palpitating heart, his heart cried out against it. Abner Jones said as
much before Mr. Beecher was born, and his followers have been saying it over
after him. The fact is that most of the religious controversies are of detail.
Christians cannot stand apart, except on matters which do not touch individual
Christian character. Individual Christian character, let it be said, is not what
a man believes, for devils believed, and remained devils; not what he is on the
Sabbath Day, when he is influenced by the sanctuary, the music, the prayers, the
sermon, the fellowship and the spirit of worship, but what he is on Sunday, and
in the week-days when life is wearing, and working, and weaving for him the
garment which he is to wear when he stands to be judged for the deeds done in
the body, and it was Jones’ contention, and the contention of all his followers,
that such a character should have Christian fellowship despite the mental
attitudes he may chance to hold. Not that belief, as elsewhere stated, can be
ignored, for what a man believes makes all the difference between life and
death, salvation and destruction. A man sincerely believing that there is no
precipice before him, when there is one, will not be saved from a broken neck,
should he go forward and fall over, but as to the question of that precipice
being a thousand feet perpendicular, or sloping after the first five hundred
feet, men may dispute about to their hearts’ content.

Doctor Jones knew and taught, as we must know and teach, that there are some
things about which opinions are not admissible.

Life is not a matter of opinion. Life is real; life is a fact. But accepting
life as a fact, we may then express opinions concerning its development. We may
differ in our opinions as to the best way to develop life. We may discuss the
time that a child should enter school; what books should be studied, and for
what length of time. We may discuss the age at which one should join the church,
enter society, engage in business, without in any way disagreeing about the
fundamental fact.

Law is not a matter of opinion. Law is a fact. I do not mean a law, this or that
law, but law as it enforces itself in nature, in life, and indeed in all things.
Knowing that without law the sunrise would be irregular, the seasons uncertain,
society insecure and progress impossible, then we may proceed to discuss the
various methods, and believe in the multiplied ways by which law is enforced,
and none of our beliefs, opinions, or arguments would either change the law, or
affect our character.

Health is not a matter of opinion. Health is a fact. When once we are agreed
that health is a fact, and of supreme importance, then we may discuss whether we
should eat much or little, few or many times a day; whether it is better to
drink water hot, or cold, or whether we should drink it at all; whether or not
we should retire early, and rise early, or retire late and sleep late.

Farming is not a matter of opinion. Farming is a fact. The soil must be
cultivated, or life would perish from the earth. Farming must be done according
to seed and season. Even though a farmer should believe with all sincerity that
seed planted without preparing the ground would be as good as seed sown in well
prepared ground, or that one month of the year was just as favorable as another
for planting seed, and would act accordingly, he would find himself with barren
fields and empty barns. But, having settled that farming is a fact, and is
governed by law, he may differ from his neighbor as to whether or not turnips
have greater food value than potatoes, or whether white corn is better than
yellow, without affecting his harvest, or changing his character. His belief
would influence his course as a farmer but would not change his personal
virtues. His truthfulness, honesty, uprightness, and indeed all other personal
virtues would remain unchanged. His rating as a farmer would be in the fact that
he farmed, that his fields produced grain and his orchards fruit, and not upon
any belief that he might have about relative values of seed, or the kind of
machinery to be used. All these principles hold good in matters or religion, as
well as in the ones mentioned. Let it be settled that the Bible is the word of
God, that Jesus Christ is God’s son, that he came into the world to save men,
that sin must be forgiven, or the soul suffer, that repentance toward God, and
faith in the Lord Jesus Christ puts the life into proper relationship to the
Divine government, and other fundamentals about which there is not, and never
has been, disagreement, and believers may have opinions ad infinitum. The
mischief is that we attach far too much importance to things that are mere
matters of opinion, and the result is that we have sectarian and denominational
bigotry on all sides; one little bigot trying to slay another little bigot, and
to make out that he holds in his own little head, and carries in his own little
heart infinite truth and eternal justice. We have all too long been running up
and down the lists of men’s opinions, examining their beliefs to see what ones
we could adopt, when we should have been inquiring about the central purpose of
their life. When Doctor Jones found a man who was fundamentally right in the
central purpose of his life, he hastened to invite his fellowship, and he asked,
even demanded, fellowship on the same basis, and that has been the fundamental
plea of the Christians from his day until now, and may God forbid that it shall
ever be otherwise. When men differ in opinion, see truth from different angles,
they give evidence of life, a sign of vitality, and the assurance of progress.
When a man says there is no God, he puts himself outside the realm of opinion.
When a man says there is no such thing as truth, no such thing as honesty, no
such thing as virtue, no such thing as the sanctity and purity of the home, he
puts himself outside the realm of opinion. With such a man there is no
discussion, nor argument; no exchange of thought, for there is nothing to
discuss, no point to argue, and no thought to exchange, and with such men
neither Jones nor his followers had fellowship. To the end of time men will
differ in their thinking. Truth is infinite. All facts break up into countless
forms as soon as men begin to investigate them, and men describe, and interpret
what they see. Abner Jones contended that it was wrong to impose the duty of
seeing all things in the same light, and from the same angle, and that
intellectual tests would not answer where truth was infinite and the human mind
finite. And why, I ask, denounce two men of equally good character, but who
chance to see truth from different angles, and within different limitations. We
must know men by their fruits, but their fruitage must be in service, and not in
doctrine. Christian character is in life, not in doctrine; in service, not in
commandments; in heart, not in intellect; in love, not in syllogisms. Abner
Jones, for himself, saw certain forms of obedience, and certain interpretations
of truth, so clear and distinct that he could not think, nor speak independent
of them, but he never taught that they should be tests of Christian faith for
others. They were to him a means to an end, and hence his fellowship was based
upon Christian character. He believed and taught that a man is not a man because
he thinks aright, but because he acts aright. He contended that a man who
repented of his sins and accepted Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior possessed the
fundamental and necessary elements of Christian faith, and from that point on
his attitude toward God, and his conduct toward men, was a sufficient basis for
Christian fellowship, no matter how widely he might chance to differ from others
in matters of doctrine and commandments. He little cared whether his neighbor
went to this church, or to that one, provided he was a true worshipper while
there, and afterward he would graciously and effectively wait upon his Lord in
loving personal service to His children. To him it was far more important to
visit the sick in the name of the Lord, than it was to wait upon Him in
proclaiming a doctrine, or yielding obedience to an ordinance. Were Doctor Jones
living today, he would not be a stranger to the emphasis we are now laying upon
service, for he taught it, and he lived it, through all his years, beginning
with his freedom from ecclesiastical domination.

It was urged then, as it is now, that the test was not specific enough for so
vital a matter; that by it any one could be admitted to church fellowship, no
matter what he believed. But, as explained elsewhere, that was not true, but it
is true that no matter what one believes, ones acceptance or rejection is based
upon what one is in life and character and not upon what one chances to believe
about certain theological doctrines. Goodness is the only orthodoxy that God
cares anything about, and every man who lives the Christ life is accepted of
him. There were then, and there are now, those who ask questions about facts and
feasts, about moons and modes, about days and doctrines, mechanical scholars,
mechanical Christians, technical legalists, who must always go to priest or book
to know what they must believe and do. Such ones fast by rule, and go to church
by rote, they read their Bibles by measurement, and their prayers by seasons.
Jones could not bind himself to fast on certain days, or do any other thing
according to code or decree. He believed and taught that the man who determined
to know nothing but Jesus Christ and Him crucified was entirely orthodox. Today
no man of immoral character would be admitted to church membership, though he
believed, accepted and endorsed all the doctrinal requirements of the church.
The character test is quite largely the one that holds first place in business,
as well as in the church. A great American banker testified before a
congressional committee that banks loaned money on character security, rather
than on property; that no matter how much property a man might have, if he did
not have a good character, he could not borrow money. When asked if that was the
way he loaned money he answered, "Yes; I have drawn my check for a million
dollars to men who had no property at all." The Vice-President of a large and
prosperous Loan and Savings Association said to the writer: "There is a moral
value which has a rating: we take a character risk as well as a property risk,
but we never take a property risk alone." This principle is the basis of
partnerships for trade or manufacture. Men of large estate in committing their
affairs to agents or managers are guided by the same principle, for if a man is
not truthful, trustworthy, honest and discreet, no matter how much he may know,
he has neither part nor lot in a business organization of character and
standing. More and more character and not creed is becoming the basis of
fellowship in the domain of the church. Within the month (March, 1921) the
writer had a letter from a Christian woman, a licentiate member in a Christian
Conference, telling him that she had been teaching in the Sunday-school of a
strictly orthodox church, and that when the pastor was told that she did not
believe all the doctrines of the denomination, he expressed great surprise and
disapproval that she had been teaching. The purpose of her letter to the writer
was for advice. She was advised to remain true to her conviction of truth, and
not to appear in a false light, to pass for something she was not. She was
reminded that the test of fellowship in the Christian Church was not doctrinal,
but character, and that she had better resign, and be true, than to teach and be
false. She prepared her resignation, and handed it to the pastor of the church,
reminding him of the situation. He would not accept the resignation. He very
frankly said to her, "Your character and your service are both acceptable to me
and my church. You keep on teaching the Bible and we will say nothing about the
doctrine."

Two things appear to the writer to be true. One is that Christian character is a
safe and equitable test, for by it men are accepted at their full value, neither
receiving a premium for certain beliefs, nor suffering a discount for others.
The second is that a doctrinal test for church membership reduces the standard
to the approval of an ecclesiastical court, and no such court is divinely
authorized. We are to call no man master, for one is our Master even the Lord
Jesus Christ.

Abner Jones, having assured himself of the ground of his faith, started out with
great enthusiasm and high hope to preach it to others. It was to him so
reasonable, so Biblical, that he never doubted its acceptance by others, but in
this he was sadly disappointed. It was not long until he, and his followers,
were excluded from the Baptist churches, and having none of their own, they were
without places or worship. Henry Wendall, a member of Doctor Stillman’s church,
hired a hall in Boston, at his own charges, paying for it at the rate of $150.00
per annum, and a Mr. Cole, of Charlestown, opened the upper story of his
dwelling for Conference meetings, seating it at his own expense, The audiences
that gathered in these places for worship were large and orderly, and yet they
were disturbed by the rabble, to the extent of storming the house. Especially
was this true in Boston, where the interruption became so distressing that the
congregation made appeal to the town authorities for protection. The petition
was sent to the "Selectmen of the town of Boston." The document is quite
elaborate and bears date of September 16, 1804. It recites the disturbance, and
the means that had been taken to prevent it. After the usual formula of address
common to that day the petition says in part:

"It is now more than four months since we have met in this place, as above
mentioned. We had not long occupied, before some young men--by their appearance
from 14 to 18 years of age--began to disturb us by talking loud in meeting,
stamping and scraping on the floor with their feet, laughing out loud, whistling
and caterwauling, running up and down stairs eight or ten at a time, striking on
the stair-casing with their staves, and yelling in a most ridiculous manner,
with language most obscene and insulting. Ladies have been treated in such an
insolent manner by them, that they dare not pass that way, even in the early
part of the evening, without protection. We have had our lights frequently blown
out, our lamps in the entry knocked down and broken, every evening on which we
meet, unless we watch them. We have several times had our door locked, in order
to prevent our coming out when we wished. Segars have been smoked in time of
meeting repeatedly. It is common to have our house stoned in time of worship. We
believe in one instance that as many as about twenty stones or brickbats have
been thrown against the house in time of one meeting, together with a number of
loud, tumultuous huzzas. Loud, do we say? Yes, so loud that they have been heard
on Charlestown Training Field. The gate at the entrance of our yard has been
torn down repeatedly while we have been worshipping. When people go out of
worship, they cannot walk peaceably, but have often been insulted in the most
shameful manner. Firing squibs at the house and into the yard, has of late
become common. As near as we can judge, not far from twenty were blown off in
one evening. Fire, flying in such a manner around a house, at such a dry season
as this, is truly alarming. Many more things might be named by us, but we
forbear. And now, gentlemen, as you stand in the characters of fathers and
guardians of the town, we request that you would in some manner, as you in your
wisdom shall think best, use your influence to stop such tumultuous and
disgraceful conduct. We feel firmly attached to the government of our country,
as well as being desirous of our own peace, and in the violation of either gives
us pain.

We entreat you, gentlemen, to act by the golden rule, and in this case do as you
would wish to be done by. We are very sensible that many unfavorable stories are
reported about our manner of worship, and many things which are entirely false.
We endeavor to regulate our form of worship as nearly according to the Scripture
rule as possible; we will not set ourselves up as being perfect, but liable to
err as well as others. We assure you we mean to be governed by the laws of our
land, if we conduct otherwise the law is open."

Despite all these interferences, handicaps and discouragements, the man kept on,
and the Lord was with him and abundantly blessed his labors. It will be of
interest to know that the first church he organized was at Lyndon, Vt., in 1801.
This was before his ordination to the ministry. The second church was organized
in the autumn of 1802, at Hanover, N. H., and the third during the winter of
1803, at Piermont, in the same state. The first meeting-house erected under his
labors was at Salem, Massachusetts. It was situated on English Street, was
twenty by forty feet, and bore the name Christian Tabernacle.

Abner Jones died May 29, 1841.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 5: 02.00. BARTON WARREN STONE
========================================================================

REV.

BARTON WARREN STONE The Man Who Studied and Taught

BOOKLET--FOUR

By

J. F. BURNETT Minister in the Christian Church


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 6: 02.01.     FOREWORD
========================================================================

Foreword This is one of a series of booklets prepared and issued under the
direction of the Secretary for Department of Publishing of The American
Christian Convention, that the members of our churches and Sunday-schools may be
well informed as to the history and distinctive principles of THE CHRISTIAN
CHURCH which accepts and proclaims:

The Lord Jesus Christ as the head of the church.

Christian our only name.

The Bible our rule of faith and practice.

Individual interpretation of the Scriptures, the right and duty of all.

Christian character the test of fellowship.

The union of all the followers of Christ, to the end that the world may believe.

Several of the booklets are from the pen of John Franklin Burnett, D. D., who
has given many years of his life to research and investigation of the subjects
he presents. Others are by men of outstanding ability who have given many years
of service in the Christian Church. They will present the distinctive principles
of the Christian church as essentials in Christian life and the basis for church
unity.

While the booklets have not been prepared especially for study books, yet the
subject matter presented can be studied with profit by the individual, students,
Christian Endeavor societies, Sunday-school classes, etc., particularly as a
part of programs for stated week-day meetings. It is the hope of the Secretary
for the Department of Publishing that they will be given by pastors to all new
members as they are accepted into church. They are also intended for general
distribution, by pastors and religious workers in our churches, to those who may
be interested in the church and principles of the Christians.

No. 1 is The Origin and Principles of the Christians with an account of the
coordinating of the bodies of different sections.

No. 2 is a historical and biographical sketch of Rev. James O’Kelly, who
courageously stood for individual liberty in religious thought and worship.

No. 3 sketches the life of Rev. Abner Jones, a pioneer in the thought that
character and life are the true test of religious fellowship as over against
dogma.

No. 4 is a sketch of the life of Rev. Barton W. Stone, a scholar and religious
teacher who advocated that the Bible is the book of life, and the only rule of
faith and practice necessary for a Christian, as over against any formulated
creed.

No. 5 combines sketches of Elias Smith, publisher, and Horace Mann, educator.

No. 6 gives sketches of the pioneer women workers of the Christian Church. That
all who use these booklets judiciously may be supplied, they will be sent free
on request and payment of postage, 15c. for one dozen, 40c. for fifty, 75c. for
one hundred. Order them from The American Christian Convention, or The Christian
Publishing Association. Both are in the Christian Publishing Association
Building, Dayton, Ohio.

If the hopes and wishes of the Department of Publishing are even in a measure
realized, the effort and expense of the publication of the series will be
justified.

O. W. WHITELOCK, Secretary for Publishing.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 7: 02.02.     REV. BARTON WARREN STONE
========================================================================

Rev. Barton Warren Stone The Man Who Studied and Taught

It takes great strength to live where you belong When other people think that
you are wrong;

People you love, and who love you, and whose Approval is a pleasure you would
choose. To bear this pressure and succeed at length In living your belief--well,
it takes strength.

--Charlotte Perkins Gilman. With every great movement is associated great men.
Reforms are only accomplished through human agencies. Martin Luther and the
Reformation are inseparable. The Wesleys and revivalism are linked together. The
American Revolution and Washington, the elimination of American slavery and
Abraham Lincoln, Evangelism and Dwight L. Moody, Christian Union and Barton W.
Stone, are inseparable--to think of the man in each particular place is to think
of the work he wrought.

Great men can only be estimated through the perspective of years. Paul was
accounted a criminal, John Bunyan was imprisoned, Washington was defamed, and
Lincoln was the victim of vilest slander. It remained for future generations to
recognize and appreciate their greatness, and accord to them their true place
among the world’s worthies. Even now we may be too near the days of Barton W.
Stone to estimate properly his true value to the church, and to fully appreciate
his real service in helping to clear the way for the great things the church is
doing today. But when the history is written, and the final chapters are
completed, it will be found that he made a large contribution to its triumphs.
He, like Dr. Abner Jones, of New England, was born amid the stirring times of
the Revolutionary War. His brothers were revolutionary soldiers, and the
eventful scenes of those historic days were not only written upon his young
mind, but influenced his whole life for all the years he lived. He drank so
deeply of the spirit of political freedom that he could not do less than what he
did for religious liberty.

Barton Warren Stone was born near Port Tobacco, Maryland, December 24, 1772. In
1793 he became a candidate for the ministry in the Presbyterian Church, in
Orange County, North Carolina. The subject of his trial sermon, as assigned by
the Presbytery, was "The Being and Attributes of God and the Trinity." His
examination was satisfactory, but he did not accept license at that time. He
went to his brother’s home in Georgia, and while there was chosen Professor of
Languages in the Methodist Academy, near Washington. After a year he returned to
North Carolina, and attended the next session of the Orange Presbytery, and
received license to preach. When the license was granted a venerable father in
Israel gave him a Bible and said, "Go ye into all the world and preach my gospel
to every creature." He commenced his public ministry at Cane Ridge and Concord,
in Bourbon County, Kentucky. In 1798 these churches extended him a formal call
to become their pastor, which call he accepted, and a day was set for his
ordination. Of his ordination he says: "I went into Presbytery, and when the
question was propounded, ’Do you receive and adopt the Confession of Faith, as
containing the system of doctrine taught in the Bible?’ I answered aloud, ’So
far as I see it consistent with the word of God.’ No objection being made, I was
ordained."

Elder Stone entered into the Trinitarian Controversy with much zeal and great
assurance, and it would be strange if in the heat of controversy he had said, or
written, nothing of a speculative character. In his more mature years he ceased
all contentions and satisfied himself by speaking of the Son of God only as the
Son of God had spoken of himself. He preached for the churches that had called
him only for a few years, for he was in the Presbyterian ministry but seven
years in all. His labors while pastor at Cane Ridge were excessive; he spared
not himself that he might serve others, and indeed this was true of him
throughout his whole life, for, like Paul, he was "in labor more abundantly."
The Christian Herald (1825) describes him as follows:

"He is rather small in stature, but thickset and well proportioned, light
complexion, hair curly, has a pleasant blue eye, expressive of great
sensibility, his voice bold and commanding, his gestures natural and easy, his
sermons characteristic and instructive. He never leaves any part of his text
unexplained, and seldom do his hearers go away uninstructed."

He was, at this time, but a few years past fifty, and was in the prime of his
manhood and the perfection of his strength. He was Secretary of the Kentucky
Christian Conference, which evidently he had helped to organize in 1804. He was
pastor at Cane Ridge during the time of the great revival there. Of this meeting
he says:

"This memorable meeting came on Thursday or Friday before the third Lord’s day
in August, 1801. The roads were literally crowded with wagons, carriages,
horsemen, and footmen, moving to the solemn camp. The sight was affecting. It
was judged by military men on the ground that there were between twenty and
thirty thousand collected. Four or five preachers were frequently speaking at
the same time, in different parts of the encampment, without confusion. The
Methodist and Baptist preachers aided in the work, and all appeared cordially
united in it,--of one mind and one soul, and the salvation of sinners seemed to
be the great object of all."1

It should be stated that the great revival in which Elder Stone participated did
not begin at Cane Ridge. Rather, it was carried there. It began with the
preaching of Rev. James McGready, on Red River. This man, McGready, was a
remarkable man. It was said of him that he would so array hell before the wicked
that they would tremble and quake, imagining a lake of fire and brimstone
yawning to overwhelm them, and the hand of God thrusting them into the horrible
abyss. Also, it was said of him that the fierceness of his invectives derived
additional terror from the hideousness of his visage, and the thunder of his
tones. And it was said, also, that if you came anywhere upon a group of
McGready’s older people, you would find them weeping and talking about their
souls, and the same was true of young people when found singly, or in groups.
While B. W. Stone was yet in school he heard this son of Boanerges preach, and
he describes the man, and the effect of his preaching, as follows:

"A crowd of people had assembled--the preacher came--it was James McGready, whom
I had never seen before. He arose and looked around on the assembly. His person
was not prepossessing, nor his appearance interesting, except his remarkable
gravity and small, piercing eyes. His coarse, tremulous voice excited in me the
idea of something unearthly. His gestures were sui generis, the perfect reverse
of elegance. Everything appeared by him forgotten but the salvation of souls.
Such earnestness--such zeal--such powerful persuasion--enforced by the joys of
heaven and miseries of hell, I had never witnessed before. My mind was chained
by him, and followed him closely in his rounds of heaven, earth, and hell, with
feelings indescribable. His concluding remarks were addressed to the sinner to
flee the wrath to come without delay. Never before had I comparatively felt the
force of truth. Such was my excitement that, had I been standing, I should have
probably sunk to the floor under the impression."

Rev. McGready had charge of Presbyterian churches on Red River, Gasper River,
and Muddy River, in Kentucky. Peter Cartwright says that when his father settled
in that country, in 1793, it was called Rogues Harbor, and for the reason that
the majority of the citizens were murderers, horse thieves, highwaymen,
counterfeiters, fugitives, bond-servants and absconding debtors who fled there
from the clutches of the law. It was in this society that McGready, with his
terrible countenance and thunderous voice, found the environment for which he
was fitted, for no sooner did he begin his work there than a transformation
began. It was here, in this modern Sodom, that the great revival had its
beginning. Elder Stone was at the time pastor of the Presbyterian churches at
Cane Ridge and Concord, in Bourbon County, Kentucky, and went over to attend the
wonderful meeting of which he had heard. It was all, and more, than had been
reported, and he carried back the fire to the Cane Ridge country, where it
blazed with greater force than in any other section.

Elder Stone’s interest in this great awakening was intense from the opening day,
and none among them all labored with greater zeal, more conquering faith, nor
triumphant hope than did he. When the revival closed he, unexpectedly and
without desire, found himself the central figure in a large group of converts
who had not faced the question of church membership, nor given the subject any
consideration at all. They had been converted, and that was enough for them.
They were in the kingdom, and were satisfied. But they were as sheep having no
shepherd. Many of them belonged to families, parts of which had been brought up
in some one of the churches engaged in the revival. Sectarianism did not die
with the birth of souls into the kingdom. Indeed, it seemed to be stimulated,
for each of the sects laid claim to a large number of the converts, and set
about to secure them. Religious energy was consumed in denouncing the creed of
each other. Party spirit ran high, and sectarianism grew bold and aggressive.
Elder Stone’s heart was broken over the wrangling of preachers, whose only aim
seemed to be to add members to their church lists, and prove the correctness of
their doctrine. It was not an easy task for him to decide his duty. He had been
ordained a Presbyterian minister, had taken churches under his care, and was at
that time pastor of the Cane Ridge Church, that was then in good standing and
full fellowship in the Presbyterian Synod. He was harassed with misgivings at
facing his old time co-laborers, and the doctrines which he himself had
preached, and yet down deep in his heart he was conscious of the fact that
creeds were divisive and believed that, when all human creeds and traditions
should be set aside, Christians would find a simple, yet sufficient, rule of
faith and practice in the Word of God. The processes by which he reached a
conclusion disentangling himself from his former associates, and crossing the
boundaries of sectarianism into the liberty of the children of God, were slow
and painful. He was greatly misunderstood, and grossly misrepresented, but he
remained unmoved in the course he meant to pursue. He was aided, no doubt, in
reaching a decision by the sticklers for Calvinism complaining that he, and
others, were preaching anti-Calvinistic doctrines, and finally the matter was
brought before the Synod of Lexington, Ky., in 1803. Finding that the Synod
would likely decide against them, the following persons withdrew: B. W. Stone,
Robert Marshall, John Dunlavy, Richard McNemar and John Thompson. The Synod
proceeded to pass upon the sentence of "suspension," for the crime of departing
from the doctrines of the Confession of Faith. Stone had never promised to
accept the doctrine. He promised only to "receive it so far as he found it
consistent with the word of God."

Elder Stone now saw that his connection with the Presbyterian Church must soon
terminate, and accordingly he called his congregation together and informed them
of the situation. He told them that he could no longer sustain to them the
relation of pastor, and while he loved them dearly, he must be true to his
conviction of truth and duty. He informed them that he expected to continue to
preach the gospel among them, but it would be the gospel, and not ism.
Immediately he, and his associates, formed what they termed "The Springfield
Presbytery," and went on preaching and organizing churches for about one year.
They discovered, however, that the Presbytery they had organized was about as
sectarian as the one they had left, and so they proceeded to dissolve it, and,
discarding all man-made creeds and human names, they took the Bible alone as the
rule of their faith and practice, and the name Christian as the only name for
believers in Jesus Christ.2 Of this event Elder Stone says:

"Having divested ourselves of all party creeds and party names, and trusting
alone in God, and the word of His grace, we became a by-word and laughing-stock
to the sects around us; all prophesying our speedy annihilation. Yet from this
period I date the commencement of that reformation which has progressed to this
day. Through much tribulation and opposition we advanced, and churches and
preachers were multiplied." The Last Will and Testament appears in the Origin
and Principles of the Christians, but being directly connected with the life and
work of Elder Stone, who in all probability wrote it, it is reproduced here:


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 8: 02.03.     THE LAST WILL AND TESTAMENT OF THE SPRINGFIELD PRESBYTERY
========================================================================

The Last Will and Testament of The Springfield Presbytery For where a testament
is, there must of necessity be the death of the testator; for a testament is of
force after men are dead, otherwise it is of no strength at all while the
testator liveth. Thou fool, that which thou sowest is not quickened, except it
die. Verily, verily, I say unto you, except a corn of wheat fall in the ground,
and die, it abideth alone; but if it die, it bringeth forth fruit. Whose voice
then shook the earth; but now he has promised, saying, yet once more I shake not
the earth only, but also heaven. And this word yet once more, signifies the
removing of those things that are shaken as of things that are made, that those
things which cannot be shaken may remain.--Scripture.

LAST WILL AND TESTAMENT The Presbytery of Springfield, sitting at Cane Ridge, in
the county of Bourbon, being, through a gracious Providence, in more than
ordinary health, growing in strength and size daily; and in perfect soundness
and composure of mind; but knowing it is appointed for all delegated bodies once
to die, and considering that the life of every such body is very uncertain, do
make and ordain this, our last Will and Testament, in manner and form following,
viz.:

Imprimis. We will, that this body be dissolved, and sink into union with the
Body of Christ at large; for there is but one body and one spirit, even as we
are called in one hope of our calling.

Item. We will, that our name of distinction, with its Reverend title, be
forgotten, that there be one Lord over God’s heritage, and his name one.

Item. We will, that our power of making laws for the government of the church,
and executing them by delegated authority, forever cease; that the people may
have free course to the Bible, and adopt the law of the spirit of life in Christ
Jesus.

Item. We will, that candidates for the Gospel ministry henceforth study the Holy
scriptures with fervent prayer, and obtain license from God to preach the simple
Gospel, with the Holy Ghost sent down from heaven, without any mixture of
philosophy, vain deceit, traditions of men, or the rudiments of the world. And
let none henceforth take this honor to himself, but he that is called of God, as
was Aaron.

Item. We will, that the church of Christ assume her native right of internal
government--try her candidates for the ministry, as to their soundness in the
faith, acquaintance with experimental religion, gravity and aptness to teach and
admit no other proof of their authority but Christ speaking in them. We will,
that the Church of Christ look up to the Lord of the harvest to send forth
laborers into the harvest; and that she resume her primitive right of trying
those who say they are Apostles, and are not.

Item. We will, that each particular church, as a body, actuated by the same
spirit, choose her own preacher, and support him by a free-will offering,
without written call or subscription--admit members--remove offenses--and never
henceforth delegate her right of government to any man or set of men whatever.

Item. We will, that the people henceforth take the Bible as the only sure guide
to heaven; and as many as are offended with other books which stand in
competition with it, may cast them into the fire if they choose; for it is
better to enter into life, having one book, than having many to be cast into
hell.

Item. We will, that preachers and people cultivate a spirit of mutual
forbearance; pray more and dispute less; and while they behold signs of the
times look up, and confidently expect that redemption draweth nigh.

Item. We will, that our weak brethren, who may have been wishing to make the
Presbytery of Springfield their king, and wot [know] not what is now become of
it, betake themselves to the Rock of Ages, and follow Jesus for the future.

Item. We will, that the Synod of Kentucky examine every member who may be
suspected of having departed from the Confession of Faith, and suspend every
such suspected heretic, immediately in order that the oppressed may go free, and
taste the sweets of gospel liberty.

Item. We will, that Ja--------, the author of two letters lately published in Lexington, be encouraged in his zeal to destroy partyism--we will, moreover, that our past conduct be examined into by all who may have correct information; but let foreigners beware of speaking evil things which they know not.

Item. Finally, we will, that our sister bodies read their Bibles carefully, that
they may see their fate there determined, and prepare for death before it is too
late.

Springfield Presbytery.

June 28, 1804.

(L. S.) Robert Marshall,

John Dunlevy, Richard McNemar,

B. W. Stone,

John Thompson, David Purviance,

Witnesses.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 9: 02.04.     ON BAPTISM
========================================================================

On Baptism

One of the really heart-breaking experiences of Elder Stone was that of deciding
for himself the mode of Christian baptism. It was not long after he, and his
associates, came to the Bible itself that there was a dissatisfaction with their
former belief on the subject. Elder Stone had been a believer in sprinkling, and
had taught it, and now to face his old faith and the fact and fervor of his
teaching, and then to publicly accept and practice immersion as the only mode of
Christian baptism, was not an easy task, even for a man as strong as he. Of this
experience and event he says:

"The brethren, elders and deacons came together on this subject; for we had
agreed previously with one another to act in concert, and not to adventure on
anything new without advice from one another. At this meeting we took up the
matter in a brotherly spirit, and concluded that every brother and sister should
act freely, and according to their conviction of right--and that we should
cultivate the long-neglected grace and forbearance toward each other--they who
should be immersed should not despise those who were not, and vice versa. Now,
the question arose, who will baptize us? The Baptists would not, except we
united with them; and there were no elders among us who had been immersed. It
was finally concluded among us that if we were authorized to preach, we were
also authorized to baptize. The work then commenced, the preachers baptized one
another, and crowds came and were also baptized. My congregations very generally
submitted to it, and it soon obtained generally, and yet the pulpit was silent
on the subject. In brother Marshall’s congregation there were many who wished
baptism. As brother Marshall had not faith in the ordinance, I was called upon
to administer. This displeased him, and a few others.

"The subject of baptism now engaged the attention of the people very generally,
and some, with myself, began to conclude that it was ordained for the remission
of sins, and ought to be administered in the name of Jesus to all believing
penitents."

Elder Stone’s idea of baptism is expressed in the following words, which are
found in a letter addressed to Elder David Purviance, his old-time companion in
service:

"It is no article of my faith that God cannot, and will not, forgive and save
the penitent believer without immersion--but if a man knows to do right, and
does it not, to him it is sin. Our duty is to teach the good and the right way,
and not teach two or more ways to obtain the same end."


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 10: 02.05.     CHRISTIAN UNION
========================================================================

Christian Union In 1824 Elder Alexander Campbell visited Kentucky, preaching
"Immersion in Water for the Remission of Sins." This was the first meeting
between the two men, and they found that they had much common ground in gospel
labor. Elder Stone was pleased with much of Campbell’s teaching, and yet says,
"That the doctrines had long been taught by the Christians--his co-laborers and
himself."

There are three good reasons for the fellowship of these two great leaders. The
first is the one given above, that they found common ground in gospel teaching.
The second is that both were scholarly men. Stone had been a student from his
early years, and had reached a fine degree of scholarship, but had spent the
most of his life with men of the field and forest, to whom educational
opportunities had been denied, and he hungered for companionship in
intellectuality, and when he found it in Elder Campbell, he welcomed it with
great heartiness. Elder Campbell was a teacher of great ability, a man of
impressive personality, and Stone was a student, willing and anxious to learn,
and he found in Mr. Campbell a teacher worthy of his confidence and respect. The
third reason is, they were both reformers--Campbell from choice, Stone from
force of circumstances. Each man was leading a movement away from sectarianism,
and toward Christian unity. Mr. Campbell had a well-defined plan; a sure system
of salvation; he knew a path already beaten hard by oft repeated travel. Mr.
Stone was open to conviction; a man seeking a sure way to a definite goal. He
wanted a safe path and a solid foundation, and with an open-mindedness that
characterized his whole life, he gave attention to Elder Campbell’s doctrine,
and undertook to co-operate with him in propagating the truth in the interest of
Christian Union. As early as 1827 the question of union was being considered,
but nowhere is it shown that the union then in mind meant more than
co-operation, and when the union, so called, was consummated, neither party
abandoned its position--neither party went over to the other. Stone and his
party, and Campbell and his party, were still in existence as distinctly as they
were before they met and formed the union. They were undertaking to co-operate
for the building up of the Kingdom of Jesus Christ. Of this union for the
purpose of co-operation between the two men and their associates., Morrill, in
the History of the Christian Denomination, says:

"The ’union’ itself was consummated on New Year’s day, 1832, in Hill Street
Christian Church, at Lexington, Kentucky, where representatives of both parties
pledged themselves ’to one another before God, to abandon all speculation,
especially on the Trinity, and kindred subjects, and to be content with the
plain declaration of Scripture on those subjects on which there had been so much
worse than useless controversy.’ The plain meaning is that they found common
ground to occupy, threw away their divisive teachings and opinions, and acted as
one. The men who at Lexington pledged themselves, there and then gave one
another the hand of fellowship, speaking for themselves, and the churches they
came from, but not for all the churches or the denominations in Kentucky or the
United States. There was no voting, and no attempt at formal union, but merely a
’flowing together’ of those like-minded. In token of that union Elder John
Smith, of the Disciples of Christ, and Elder John Rogers, of the Christians,
’were appointed evangelists by the churches’ to promote that simple unsectarian
Christian work, which was adhered to by thousands; and Stone took Elder J. T.
Johnson, a Disciple, as co-editor of The Christian Messenger."

It is an obvious fact that in this union there was no joining one body to the
other, in the sense that one body was lost in the other. The Disciples of Christ
joined the Christians as certainly as the Christians joined the Disciples of
Christ, and Alexander Campbell became a member of the Christian Church, as
certainly as B. W. Stone became a member of the Disciples of Christ. It is
evident that it was not Stone’s desire, nor intention, to join the Disciples of
Christ as an individual would join a church, but to make effective the union
spirit, and reach the ideal so deeply seated and fervently cherished by the
signers of the Last Will and Testament of the Springfield Presbytery, and their
co-laborers, in the gospel. This "union" did not change the status of any name
or church or minister or piece of property.

It is very evident that Elder Stone did not regard his union with the Disciples
of Christ as leaving the Christian Church, nor was it ever so considered by the
church as such. It was Stone’s individual right to believe, and to teach as he
believed, a privilege recognized by the Christian Church as belonging to each
and every member of God’s family.

Indeed, it is an open question whether or not Mr. Campbell did not oppose the
union. There were well-known uncompromisable disagreements between Mr. Campbell
and Mr. Stone, on the subject of baptism, and the name that should designate the
believers in Jesus Christ. Campbell insisted on immersion in water before
believers were received to membership in their churches, to which Stone
strenuously objected, saying: "We cannot, with our present views, unite in the
opinion that unimmersed persons cannot receive remission of sins." Upon the
question of the name, Stone remained unmoved; he would not surrender the name
Christian as a denominational title, and did all he could to get Mr. Campbell
and his party to accept it. And, in addition to this, Elder Campbell clearly
indicated his objection to the union in an editorial in the Millennial
Harbinger, as follows: "Or does he (Stone) think that one or two individuals, of
and for themselves, should propose and effect a formal union among the hundreds
of congregations scattered over this continent, called Christians or Disciples,
without calling upon the different congregations to express an opinion or a wish
upon the subject? We discover, or think we discover, a squinting at some sort of
precedency or priority in the claims of the writer of the above article." It is
quite evident that the article referred to had been written by Elder Stone, in
the interest of union, and defense of the name. In 1826 Elder Stone began the
publication of a monthly periodical, which he named "The Christian Messenger,"
and which he continued to publish until 1844, though during the last two years
of the time he was sorely afflicted, and greatly incapacitated. Part of the time
he had for a co-laborer in this work, Rev. J. T. Johnson., but after his removal
to Illinois, Elder D. P. Henderson served in the same capacity. In 1834 Elder
Stone removed, with his family, to Jacksonville, Illinois. Here he found two
congregations, one Christian, the other Disciple, or Reformers, as they were
then known. He succeeded in having these unite, when he became their pastor.
Immediately following the union of these two churches there was a great wave of
Campbellism, which lost to the Christians not fewer than eight thousand members,
and increased the membership of the Disciples of Christ as many. Christian
Churches in Southern Ohio, Kentucky and Tennessee were caught in the current of
the oft repeated "Where the Bible speaks we speak, and where the Bible is silent
we are silent," and ere they knew it they had become churches of the Disciples
of Christ, and many of them remain so until now. The writer personally knows of
four churches in the Southern Ohio Christian Conference, of which he is a
member, where the above is true. They are the churches at Lawshe, Liberty
Chapel, Georgetown and Bethel. As stated elsewhere, Stone was a stickler for the
name Christian. His knowledge of the Greek language enabled him to understand
that the name was given by divine appointment, and when the union was effected
the name Christian was continued. In all probability this was the beginning of
the use of the name by the followers of Campbell, for this church, and many
others, became Disciples of Christ, that had been organized by Christian
ministers.

Morrill, in closing the sketch of Elder Stone’s life in "History of the
Christian Denomination," says: "He was first and last a scholar, a successful
educator and minister of the gospel; by force of circumstances, a religious
reformer, an apologist of ability, and a journalist. Friends testify to the
humility of his bearing, his perfect frankness and honesty, his intense piety,
his great firmness and perseverance." He died in Missouri, November 9, 1844.

Barton W. Stone was a Christian in faith and character, and honestly believed
that he was Christian, denominationally. That he affiliated with the Disciples
of Christ, that he was pastor of their churches, that he used their church
phraseology, that he believed and taught much of their doctrine, that he was
buried by their ministers, is true, but all the while he believed that he was
only exercising the right that had been accorded to Christian ministers since
the dissolution of the Springfield Presbytery. However, it should be borne in
mind that such affiliation did not exist until the beginning of 1832, and, as he
died in 1844, could not have been more than about ten years of his active
ministry, and that at a time when his strength was well-nigh spent, and his
vigor greatly reduced.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 11: 02.06.     CHRISTIAN
========================================================================

Christian

Elder Stone, with heroic faith, clung to the name Christian, and worked with
untiring energy and increasing zeal for the oneness of all God’s children, with
the Bible as the only creed. His idea of a true church was that it was a company
of Christian people, united to one another in the service of God by voluntary
covenant, and under the spiritual Lordship of Jesus Christ, with the Bible as
the creed, and Christian the name. On the question of the name he says, in
"Address to the Churches:"

"We have taken the name Christian, not because we considered ourselves more pure
than others--but because we knew it was the name first given to the disciples of
Jesus by Divine authority. It better agreed with our spirit, which is to unite
with all Christians, without regard to names or distinctions. There are party
names too many already in the world, without our assuming another. But our
brethren, unwilling for us to bear that name, have given us others we will not
own--as New-lights and Schismatics. The name New-lights is not novel. It was
long ago given to Whitefield, to Wesley, to the former Methodists, to the
new-side Presbyterians, or New-Brunswick Presbytery, to the first Baptists in
Virginia, and indeed to every sect of living Christians in my remembrance for
years past. To be called by the name of such worthies we need not blush. But
this name, the least of all others, agrees with our profession. We have
professed no new light--but that old, unsullied light which shines in the Bible.

"Did we profess, as others, that we must be enlightened by some supernatural
power, a power extraneous from the Word, before we could believe the Word, then,
with propriety, we might be called New-lights. Or did we profess a great many
doctrines as true, which we could not prove by the Word of God, then we might be
called so; but these professions we have never made; therefore, the name does
not apply to us."


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 12: 02.07.     ON THE BIBLE AS AUTHORITATIVE
========================================================================

On the Bible as Authoritative On the subject of Christian Union, and the Bible
as a sufficient rule for faith and practice, many pages could be taken from his
writings, all of which would be pleasing and profitable reading, but the
following must suffice:

"As man-made creeds have always divided Christians, and stood in the way of
union, these must all be abandoned, and the Bible alone received as the only
foundation and rule of faith and practice. On no other platform can all
Christians meet. Here the Church rested in her best days. Here she would have
rested, and remained in sweet union, had not human creeds been introduced and
established as authoritative. From this period we may date the apostasy of the
church. From this period Christians were divided, and many inspired with the
fury of hell, persecuted each other to death, fighting under their great leader,
the devil, ’transformed into an angel of light.’ From this period the reign of
darkness and ignorance commenced, called the age of darkness; for as the
attention of the people were drawn to the creeds of the councils, it was of
course drawn away from the Bible. They might believe the Bible, but must believe
the creed. They might believe the Bible, but if their belief differed from the
creed, anathemas and death were their doom. Happy for the people, in a worldly
point of view, that they were soon after prohibited entirely from reading the
Bible! There was then no more danger of losing their lives; for they now
believed the creed alone, because this alone they knew, or could know. All
Protestants with one voice condemn this conduct of our fathers, and highly extol
the reformers of the sixteenth century for restoring to the people the Bible,
and the divine right of reading and judging for themselves. But does not every
Protestant see that the creed-making business is but the recommencement of the
same tragic drama? Shall they plead for that which divides Christians, promotes
strife, engenders hatred, impels to persecution, war, blood and death, and set
up their own devices in the place of the Bible to judge and condemn a fellow
Christian? Is not this like setting up the man of sin in God’s judgment seat?
Will any Christian plead for the life of his creed, when he must know that
others cannot unite on it without hypocrisy? No! no! Let it die the death. Will
any plead for the retention of his creed, because it has never promoted war,
bloodshed and death? We may thank our God and our happy government for this. The
lion is chained, but it lives, and secretly, raves and thirsts for blood. The
Bible, the BIBLE ALONE, is the only religion in which Christians can all unite.
Not on the opinions formed by man of the truths and facts stated in the Bible,
but upon the facts themselves.

"If every one would read the Scriptures for himself, as by them he will be
judged at last; if all would act up to their conviction of truth, independently,
the great obstacle to Christian union would be removed. All would soon flow
together in one body. If every humble Christian, the life of whose religion is
divine, whose heart sighs for union, and whose lips speak the meaning of his
heart in humble prayer to God, that all those who believe in Jesus according to
the Scriptures might be one as the Father and Son are one--if every humble
Christian of every sect, wearing this character, were to exert himself, not in
wishing and praying only, but also in acting, the work would, like an
overflowing flood, sweep off all refuges of lies, and the good of every name
would flow together into one glorious body."


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 13: 02.08.     CONTROVERSY AND CREEDALISM
========================================================================

Controversy and Creedalism

There were times when he was forced into controversy, but he seems never to have
lost his good and persuasive spirit, nor to have swerved from his line or
argument for the name Christian, nor his insistence that the Book was an
all-sufficient guide. No doubt at times he was carried too far by the heat of
argument, but he was always true to his high moral and intellectual standards,
and was instrumental in bringing many out of the ranks of human traditions, and
putting into their hands the Book of Books; and had he done no more, his
contribution to the kingdom of God would have been a worthy one. The testimony
of the centuries is that Christians will not unite on a man-made creed, and as
all Christians desire the unity of the church, we are forced to conclude that
the Bible, and the Bible alone, is the only platform upon which all may stand.
The first Christians used no written creed. The earliest pastors of the church
drew their conclusions from the Scripture itself, and they were contented to
express their belief in the language of that Scripture, which they believed to
be spoken of God. They were not curious to know that which was not clearly
revealed; but they adhered faithfully to that which they knew to be true, and
their variations were without schism and their differences without acrimony. But
such was not true when Stone and his associates departed from the doctrines and
forms of their churches.

It is difficult for us, in this day of modified creedal life, either to
understand or appreciate the tenacity with which each denomination at that time
enforced its doctrine, and insisted upon its creed as the only biblically
correct one of them all. With strong vehemence they declared each other’s creed
to be wrong, and stood ready to prove it by the Scripture, and did prove it to
their own satisfaction. Persistently each of them proved themselves to be right
and all others wrong. Each denomination moved together as a flock of sheep moves
through a valley, drinking the same water, nipping the same grass, and finding
them to their taste. And, as is always the case, the constant discussion of some
dogma, and the disproof of some dogma, inevitably begets in certain order of
mind the temper to discuss and distrust all dogmas, and it may be that this had
something to do with Stone’s decision to leave the church of his youth. He
suddenly found his old religious peace greatly disturbed; he was thrust into the
thick of the wars of dogmatic theology, which were impassioned and rancorous to
a degree beyond our ability to comprehend. Theology was not only rending the
churches, but personal opinion was rending theology. We can little understand
Stone’s feelings when he found himself brought from the peaceful fields of
pastoral service into the wrangling, sarcastic, envious creeds of that day, and
especially so when his own honest opinions would either be dispensed with
vitriolic criticism, or dismissed with a blast of scorn which would strike his
face like a hot wind. Stone lived at a time when religious intolerance
prevailed, when sect warred against sect, when the greatest preacher was he who
had slain the most opponents, when it was the glory of one church to prove all
others wrong. Soon after Stone’s withdrawal from the church in which he had
spent his life, up to that time, a law of the Synod, or Presbytery, forbade
their people to associate with him and his party under pain of censure or
exclusion from their communion. Aggressive hostilities against Stone and his
co-laborers were declared from every pulpit of the churches that had lost
members by his movement, and the thunders of their denunciations and wrath were
ceaseless and bitter. There was at that time a sort of blind devotion to
denominations which led men to say: "My church, may she always be right, but
right or wrong, my church," or "Other churches may be right, but we know that
ours cannot be wrong." Amid all his bitter experiences, the unjust criticism,
the warring of sects, and the loss of those who had gone out with him, he
remained true to his faith and conviction of duty, and gave to the Christian
world a declaration in which all man-made creeds are set aside, and the Bible
given its rightful place--"A basis of Christian Union upon the Bible alone as
the rule of faith and practice for the people of God." And be it said to the
honor of the people who wear the name Christian, that never yet has any man who
bore the "image and superscription" of the Lord Jesus Christ been denied
fellowship among them. Today, as in the days of the illustrious Stone, they put
the Bible, without note, comment, or interpretation, into the hands of those who
would join them, and thus seat around one communion table John Wesley, Roger
Williams and William Penn, and their fellowship for the one is the same as their
fellowship for the others. And why should it not be so? Who are we that we
should reject "one of these little ones" for whom Christ died?

Barton Warren Stone lived his life, he did his work, he fought his fight, and he
won his crown, and though dead, he yet speaketh. Men die, MAN lives. The
individual passes away by development or death, but there is a sort of
groundline that runs through all human history, and Stone was such a groundline,
and he moves among the churches today as a living personality, and his influence
is as enduring as time.

1 NOTE:--Quite a full description of this meeting may be found beginning on page
29, "Origin and Principles of the Christians."

2 Note:--See Origin and Principles of the Christians, pages 19 to 28.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 14: 03.01. JAMES O'KELLY
========================================================================

REV. JAMES O’KELLY A Champion of Religious
====== Liberty ======

BOOKLET--TWO

1921 By J. F. BURNETT Minister in the Christian Church


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 15: 03.02.     FOREWORD
========================================================================

FOREWORD This is one of a series of booklets prepared and issued under the
direction of the Secretary for Department of Publishing of The American
Christian Convention, that the members of our churches and Sunday-schools may be
well informed as to the history and distinctive principles of THE CHRISTIAN
CHURCH which accepts and proclaims: The Lord Jesus Christ as the head of the
church. Christian our only name. The Bible our rule of faith and practice.
Individual interpretation of the Scriptures, the right and duty of all.
Christian character the test of fellowship. The union of all the followers of
Christ, to the end that the world may believe.

Several of the booklets are from the pen of John Franklin Burnett, D. D., who
has given many years of his life to research and investigation of the subjects
he presents. Others are by men of outstanding ability who have given many years
of service in the Christian Church. They will present the distinctive principles
of the Christian church as essentials in Christian life and the basis for church
unity.

While the booklets have not been prepared especially for study books, yet the
subject matter presented can be studied with profit by the individual, students,
Christian Endeavor societies, Sunday-school classes, etc., particularly as a
part of programs for stated week-day meetings. It is the hope of the Secretary
for the Department of Publishing that they will be given by pastors to all new
members as they are accepted into church. They are also intended for general
distribution, by pastors and religious workers in our churches, to those who may
be interested in the church and principles of the Christians.

No. 1 is The Origin and Principles of the Christians with an account of the
coordinating of the bodies of different sections.

No. 2 is a historical and biographical sketch of Rev. James O’Kelly, who
courageously stood for individual liberty in religious thought and worship.

No. 3 sketches the life of Rev. Abner Jones, a pioneer in the thought that
character and life are the true test of religious fellowship as over against
dogma.

No. 4 is a sketch of the life of Rev. Barton W. Stone, a scholar and religious
teacher who advocated that the Bible is the book of life, and the only rule of
faith and practice necessary for a Christian, as over against any formulated
creed.

No. 5 combines sketches of Elias Smith, publisher; Horace Mann, educator; and
the pioneer women workers of the Christian Church. That all who use these
booklets judiciously may be supplied, they will be sent free on request and
payment of postage, 15c. for one dozen, 40c. for fifty, 75c. for one hundred.
Order them from The American Christian Convention, or The Christian Publishing
Association. Both are in the Christian Publishing Association Building, Dayton,
Ohio.

If the hopes and wishes of the Department of Publishing are even in a measure
realized, the effort and expense of the publication of the series will be
justified.

O. W. WHITELOCK, Secretary for Publishing.

Formatted in PDF/eBook format and made available by
www.GravelHillchurchofChrist.com, 2013 The historical statements contained in
this booklet were gleaned from many and varied sources, but mainly from the Life
of James O’Kelly, by W. E. MacClenny, and Porter’s Compendium of Methodism. The
quotations from James O’Kelly are as quoted in the Life of James O’Kelly, by Mr.
MacClenny.

Mr. MacClenny has produced a rare book which should be extensively read. The
author of this booklet hereby acknowledges his obligation to the book, and
expresses his thanks to its author.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 16: 03.03.     REV. JAMES O'KELLY
========================================================================

REV. JAMES O’KELLY
A Champion of Religious
====== Liberty ======

The man is thought a knave or fool, or bigot plotting crime, Who for the
advancement of his kind, is wiser than his time. For him the hemlock shall
distill; for him the ax be bared; For him the gibbet shall be built; for him the
stake prepared. Him shall the scorn and wrath of man pursue with deadly aim, And
malice, envy, spite, and lies shall desecrate his name. But truth shall triumph
at the last, for round and round we run, And ever the right comes uppermost, and
ever is justice done.

--Mackay.

Neither the place nor the time of James O’Kelly’s birth can be determined with
absolute certainty. Virginia and North Carolina each lay claim to the
distinction, and there is good reason for believing that he was a native of
Ireland. Mr. W. E. MacClenny has written a full and reliable history of James
O’Kelly, in which he recites the evidence concerning the birth place of the
great man, and says: "In view of the above facts and the early traditions of the
Christians, we come to the conclusions: James O’Kelly was born and educated in
Ireland, came to America in early life, seems to have settled near Moring’s
Post-office, in Surry County, Virginia, and lived there for some time before he
moved to North Carolina." Be this as it may, he had the faith and the courage of
an Irish patriot, and the courtesy and bearing of a Southern gentleman. There is
not as much uncertainty as to the, date of his birth as to the name of the
place. Appleton’s Encyclopedia of American Biography names October as the month,
and 1735 as the year of his birth. This date has support in the fact that he
died October 16, 1826, in the ninety-second year of his age.

However, it may be stated that wherever and whenever born, he was well born, and
probably knew the Scriptures from his youth up, for on one side his ancestors
were priests, or preachers, as we now call them, and church builders on the
other. Indeed, the blood of many high-born generations coursed through his
veins, and found expression in his thought and conduct, and it may be reasonably
concluded that he was creditably educated and in all probability had a fair
knowledge of Greek and Latin. Be this as it may, he spoke the language of
Canaan, and was a framer of phrases, and a master of subjects, with utterances
so clear that the wayfaring man, though a fool, need not err therein. His
conversion from sin was of the clearest type, and true to the law of God and the
need of the individual. He was converted; and had an experience with God, and it
changed his whole life; he knew Him in whom he had believed, and was persuaded
that He was able to keep that which he had entrusted to Him. The fact of this
experience he himself sets forth in the following language:

"My first mental alarm was not through the blessed means of preaching; but by
the kind illuminations of the invisible Holy Spirit. I saw by this Divine light
that I was without God and destitute of any reasonable hope in my present state.

"Now being moved by faith through fear, I attempted to flee the wrath to come,
and seek a place of refuge!

"But, O, what violent opposition did I meet with! After many sorrowful months I
formed one resolution, with a low cadence of voice, and fearful apprehension, I
ventured like Queen Esther who approached the king’s presence, at the risk of
her life, so I ventured in a way of prayer, to speak to the Almighty! With the
Bible in my hand, I besought the Lord to help me, and declaring that during life
that sacred Book should be my guide, and at the close, if I sunk to perdition,
said I, Just, O God! yet dreadful! but if thy clemency and divine goodness
should at last rescue me from the jaws of a burning hell, this miracle of grace
shall be gratefully remembered by me, a moment of mercy!

"The things which followed, which were such things as belong to my peace, the
inexpressible change, the instantaneous cure, I am incapable of speaking; but O,
my soul was lodged in Immanuel’s breast, the city of refuge; the ark of my
rest." His conversion was definitely announced, and strongly emphasized in the
most forceful way, for immediately he consigned his fiddle to the flame, and
forever turned his back upon worldliness. It would not be possible for a mind
and soul like his to remain satisfied with even such a glowing experience, and
it is not surprising that he promptly entered the public ministry of the Church.

He was not far from forty years of age at the time of his conversion, and he
immediately united with the Wesleyan Societies, and was sent out as a lay
preacher, but he was not ordained until 1784, when he was a lay preacher to what
is known in Methodist history as the "Christmas Conference of the Episcopal
Church." Here he was ordained severally, a deacon and elder, by the Rev. Thomas
Coke. From the first he became more and more a preacher of power, and a man of
influence--the people flocking to hear him much as they did when all Judea and
Jerusalem went out to hear the wilderness preacher of their day. Not only did he
increase in power and popularity, but each succeeding year marked the divergence
between the autocratic spirit of the Church, and the democratic spirit of the
man. The question as to whether or not preachers should be allowed to administer
the communion, baptize candidates, marry people, and bury the dead, always found
Mr. O’Kelly on one side, and the rule of the Church on the other. Bishop
Asbury’s insistence that the laymen were to "pay, pray, and obey" was always
objectionable to Mr. O’Kelly, and the divergence increased, and the chasm
widened, and the point of cleavage became more prominent, so that by the time
the General Conference met in 1792 a crisis was inevitable. By this time, too,
Mr. O’Kelly had reached a high place in the favor of the church. He had presided
over some of the largest and most important districts within the territory then
occupied by the Methodist Church, and only two men out-ranked him in authority.
He had, in all probability, accumulated means sufficient to put him above the
necessity of salary, and most certainly he had reached a well-established
leadership among his brethren. But it was not these that gave him prestige in
the conference. It was his devotion to the right, his indomitable will, and his
Christian courage. He would have been impressive had he been clothed in rags,
and walking barefoot. The craven had no place in his makeup, either as a man or
a preacher. In that memorable Conference in Baltimore, Maryland, November 1,
1792, the forces lined up for final decision. The storm did not burst suddenly,
nor unexpectedly. Men felt that something was impending, and stood ready for the
shock. For several days prior to the opening of the Conference, Mr. Asbury had
been holding meetings with the preachers whom he knew to be true to his bidding,
and with them planned the sessions. Nor had Mr. O’Kelly been indifferent to the
issue, for his forces were well marshaled, and stood ready for action. One of
the bitterest disappointments of his life came when Dr. Coke, contrary to all he
had promised him, and all he had lead him to expect, took sides with Asbury, and
announced the findings of a committee that had been previously appointed, in the
following words:

"The members of this Conference represent the people; and we are to all intents
the legislature of the Methodist Episcopal Church, and the government of the
Methodist Episcopal Church, and the government is autocratical. You may call me
a weather-cock." On the second day of the session James O’Kelly offered the
following resolution:

"After the bishop appoints the preachers at Conference to their several
circuits, if anyone thinks himself injured by the appointment, he shall have the
liberty to appeal to the Conference, and state his objection, and if the
Conference approve his objection, the Bishop shall appoint him to another
circuit." This motion was discussed by the strongest minds, and ablest debaters,
in the most masterly way, and was carried on at times with all the heat, passion
and prejudice of the human heart, for three days. At one time it looked as
though the motion would carry by a large majority, for the preachers in America
had heard that the England Methodists had inaugurated the "Stationing
Committee," which included the right of appeal. Finally the motion was divided
into two parts, as follows: 1. Shall the Bishop appoint the preachers to the
circuits? 2. Shall a preacher be allowed to appeal? The first part was put, and
carried unanimously, and with great enthusiasm. When the second part came to be
considered, the question was raised as to whether or not it was a new rule, or
an amendment to an old one. A new rule would require a two-thirds vote, while an
amendment would require but a majority. It was after much wrangling that it was
decided to be an amendment to an old rule. At one time during the debate, Mr.
O’Kelly stood with a copy of the New Testament in his hand, and said: "Brethren,
hearken unto me, put away all other books, and forms, and let this be the
criterion, and that will satisfy me." He says, "I thought the ministers of
Christ would unanimously agree to such a proposal, but alas, they opposed the
motion." The Rev. John Dickens declared that the Scriptures were by no means a
sufficient form of government; that the Lord had left that business to his
ministers. O’Kelly says that he withstood him for a season, but in vain. "I now
saw, " said he, "that moderate Episcopacy was rising to its wonted and intended
dignity. I discovered also that the districts had lost their suffrages." A
Sunday intervened during the debate. The Rev. Dr. Coke preached in the forenoon,
and James O’Kelly in the afternoon. All day Monday, and far into the night, was
spent in debating the subject, when the vote was taken, and lost by a large
majority. It is safe to assert that the debate was carried on at such length for
the purpose of causing a feeling of disgust with the oft repeated question, and
oft reproduced argument, and that if the vote had been taken earlier, it would
not have been seriously defeated, had it been lost at all. Three things should
be kept in mind: One. James O’Kelly did not withdraw from the Methodist Church,
but from the Methodist Conference. He did all that conscience and honor would
allow to remain in the Church of his first years, and left it only when
compelled so to do. Two. His withdrawal was on the question of government, and
not on that of doctrine. Three. He was not alone in his withdrawal, neither was
he alone in his opinions and decisions. Some of the best men of the Church stood
with him in the debate, and followed him when he went out. When the conclusion
was announced, James O’Kelly, and nineteen other ministers, withdrew from the
Conference, to be followed by the churches they served. Mr. O’Kelly, and those
associated with him in the withdrawal, held a conference at Piney Grove,
Virginia, more to comfort each other than for any other reason. They had not
withdrawn from the Methodist Church, nor did they desire so to do. While
together they formulated an address to Bishop Asbury, asking that the whole
matter be reopened and reviewed, and sent it to him by the hand of chosen men.
They then adjourned to meet at Manakintown, Virginia, to hear the report from
the Bishop. They met on the 25th day of December, 1793, and received from the
Bishop the following reply:

"I have no power to call such a meeting as you wish; therefore, if five hundred
preachers should come on their knees before me, I would not do it."

After hearing this reply, there was nothing left for them to do but separate
themselves from the Methodist Church, or slavishly submit to an ecclesiasticism
which they had determined to resist, and they unanimously chose the former. They
formed their ministers on an equality, gave the lay members a balance of power
in the legislation, and left the executive business to the Church collectively.
On the fourth day of August, 1794, they met at Lebanon Church, in Surry County,
Virginia, and held their session with open doors, which was wholly different
from the method of closed doors, and secret sessions, as was the custom of the
Bishop. Efforts were made to form a plan of government, but to no purpose. A
committee of seven chosen men were appointed to draft the form. The committee
could not agree, and the finality was that all else was set aside, and the "Word
of God as revealed in the Scriptures" taken instead. Very prominent among the
things they had to do at that Conference was the selection of a suitable name
for the new organization. For the time since they withdrew they had been known
as Republican Methodists. Whether or not this name had been formally chosen, or
incidentally applied, the writer does not know. After much discussion and
earnest prayer, the Rev. Rice Haggard, standing with a copy of the New Testament
Scriptures in his hand, said:

"Brethren, this is a sufficient rule of faith and practice, and by it we are
told that the disciples were called Christians, and I move that henceforth and
forever the followers of Christ be known as Christians simply." The motion was
enthusiastically and unanimously adopted, since which time they have had no
other. The Rev. Mr. Hafferty moved to take the Bible itself as the only creed,
and this motion also was enthusiastically adopted. No interpretation of the
public life and service of James O’Kelly can be even approximately correct,
except it be made in the light of his private character, and the time in which
he lived and wrought. It is not difficult to deduce from even his meager
writings, and that which has been written about him, sufficient evidence to
prove that his personal character was beyond reproach. He must have been
tender-hearted and deeply sympathetic; evidently he was manly, brave and
generous; from what is revealed to us, it is safe to conclude that in him were
the rugged, stalwart virtues of the man, joined with the softness and gentleness
of disposition of the woman; he must have been incapable of guile, and liberal
in his estimate of men, and was at times too little suspicious of the
guilefulness of others, though he was no mean judge of human character. Quick in
his conception, rapid in his processes, he was sometimes hasty in his judgments,
but always held them subject to evidence and argument, and with singular absence
of personal pride, he would change them upon conviction. He had an instinctive
horror of injustice, and a genuine contempt for meanness, and yet his hatred of
the one, and his contempt for the other, were often modified by his abounding
charity for all men. One must be impressed in reading of this noted man that,
after he had strongly denounced a wrong, he would seek some palliation for the
wrong doer, and try to find some mitigation for an offense which he could not
overlook. He must have been firm in his friendships, and it seems that nothing
could tempt him to an act which his conscience did not approve; no sophistry, no
personal appeal, no promise of betterment, could move him from his fixed idea of
the right. We know him to have been a man of profound religious conviction,
holding unyieldingly to the truths of revealed religion. At times his faith
seems almost superstitious, while his love for his home, and his own, was as
deep and pure as the fountain of life. His big-heartedness, his unfaltering
honesty in faith and practice, his frank and open manner, his independent
thinking, his unswerving devotion to God and country, his lifelong service for
the Church, together with the other personal virtues which have been named, and
many more which might be mentioned, makes the Rev. James O’Kelly a leader whose
following would honor the greatest and the best. And now, having had a hasty and
imperfect glance at his personal and public life, attention should be given to
the time in which it was spent. It was a time when the passions of men were
stirred to their depth; when the sky of the future was darkened by clouds of
approaching conflict. It was the time of the birth-throes of a nation, and the
beginning of a sect. Methodism was being born, as well as American civilization,
and political and religious tyranny was asserting itself to the limit of its
power. England’s heavy heel was on the neck of the colonists, and religious
liberty was threatened with the domination of sectarian bigotry, and
ecclesiastic intolerance. Asbury, the leading man of the new movement under
Wesley, had declared, "That he came to teach the people, and not to be taught by
them." The Church itself was not free from censure for its laxness in morals and
devotion to truth, for sinful indulgence was as common among the clergy as
neglect of duty in the laity. Drinking was a common habit of the Episcopal
clergy, many of whom would drink to excess, and be hailed before the magistrate
for disturbing the peace of the community, even at the dead hours of the night.
A clergyman of that early day was known to officiate at the morning worship, go
home with a parishioner, and drink so much brandy that he would have to be tied
to his gig, and a servant sent to lead his horse home, lest he lose his way and
miss his house. Many of the people of that day were very poor, and some were
quite rich, and there were constant clashings between squalor and luxury. The
priests were proud, selfish, ignorant, and the laity openly wicked. And worst of
all, it was a time of religious persecution, and that child of hell, now
full-grown and wrathful stalked abroad, seeking victims for his wrath, and
occupants for whipping post and jail; and be it said to the shame of the clergy,
that they furnished their full share of information, and did their full duty in
persecuting the saints for righteousness’ sake. And in addition to all this, and
much more of like character, the American Revolution was on, and honest men were
so much at variance with each other on matters of government, that the Tory and
the Whig, though they knelt at the same altar, oftentimes throttled each other
for political reasons, and fought until friendships died, fellowship perished,
and in many cases the body fell bleeding at the feet of a hitherto friend. There
was a religious frenzy, and a political volcano, into which men were plunged,
whether they would or not. The war clouds were scudding across the sky, the war
dogs had been unleashed, and all men were standing at arms, both in the state
and in the Church, and no man dared to speak who was not ready to die. Into this
seething, sizzling, boiling, turbulent condition of human society, James O’Kelly
threw himself with an indomitable courage and heroic faith, and gave to the
cause he had espoused all the vigor of his strength, all the force of his
character, and all the means with which he had been blessed. My interpretation
of James O’Kelly leads me to present him as a Christian Democrat, a Moral Hero,
and a Pioneer of Christian Liberty.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 17: 03.04.     A CHRISTIAN DEMOCRAT.
========================================================================

A CHRISTIAN DEMOCRAT.

He had from his childhood breathed the spirit of liberty. The mountain path was
free to all; the wilderness road had no barriers; the homes of the pioneers were
open to all comers; the fish in the sea, and the bird in the air, were not freer
than the man of the wilderness, and this very freedom influenced his character
and made it impossible for him to submit to rule or endure restraint. Then, too,
American liberty was being born, and by the time he reached his manhood, it was
a strong, healthy, robust spirit which the pioneer breathed to the full, even as
he did the fresh mountain air of the morning. Of course it is understood that I
use the word democrat with reference to its philosophic, and not its political
sense. Real democracy is more than the mere framework of government. It reaches
into the life and thought of the individual citizen, and proposes to secure to
him all the right and privileges of his kind. It affords every citizen the
greatest possible development of his powers, and the greatest and freest use of
his rights, consistent with his duties to his neighbor, his country and his God.
Self-will is not supreme in a real democracy; indeed there can be no democracy
in a community where the people are self-centered, or self-seeking. A Christian
democrat must assist his neighbor when in need, console the sorrowing, speak
thoughtful words of encouragement, and fully share the joys of those about him.
The sacrifice of self for the good of others is the only foundation upon which a
Christian Democracy can be builded, and I submit that the Rev. James O’Kelly
fully met the demands of such democracy. In the days of James O’Kelly there were
at least two great aspiring leaders, both of whom were self-centered, and
self-seeking--Asbury and Coke--which made it all the more difficult for O’Kelly
to live his life, and make effective his plan, but he neither swerved from the
path, nor faltered in the march. He was a man of peace, but was forced to fight.
He was a dissenter for conscience sake. No controversy embittered him; no
ecclesiastical opposition involved him in personal enmity; no contention ever
called forth from his lips sneering allusions to an inferior. He contended with
his brethren, but it was in the interest of the oppressed. He replied to those
in authority with sharp rhetoric, but his rejoinders were full of love and
truth. There were two forces which made his greatness possible, and his
democratic spirit effective. One was a sublime self-trust. He leaned upon no
man’s arm. He walked a path untrodden by others, except they followed. He walked
erect in every path of duty to which he was called to pursue. He accepted
responsibility, and advanced with firm and steady step. His march centered on
the consciousness of rectitude and duty. The other was that there was no royal
road to place and power. That the best a man could do under the circumstances
was his duty, and with rare singleness of purpose, and deep consecration, he
devoted himself to the work he had to do. To him the daily obligation was "thus
saith the Lord."

Very early in the history of Methodism the ecclesiastical form began to take
shape, and show assertion, and immediately O’Kelly, with characteristic
devotion, began his plans for defense, for to him Ecclesiastical Rule was
unbearable. It was the desire and the plan of Asbury, and others, to Episcopize
the Church. O’Kelly and his followers were willing for a Presbyterian form of
government, and for that they pleaded, though O’Kelly was a staunch advocate of
the republican, or congregational, form of church government. Voting by the
preachers and people was a thing to be feared and dreaded by Asbury, and his
immediate successors in office, but voting was the one thing O’Kelly believed to
be Biblically right and wholly just to the people. The leaders made an effort to
create a Central Council for the government of the new-born church, in which
O’Kelly saw the development of an unbending ecclesiasticism, which he fought
with a vigor characteristic of his strength and interest, and so well did he
succeed that in the district over which he presided the Central Council was not
recognized, nor enforced, for human rights, and human liberty, were well
entrenched in the hearts of his followers. His vigorous and decided opposition
to this Central Council was the entering wedge which finally separated him from
the Methodist Conference. Of the plan, and his interpretation of it, he writes:

"I confess that on one side it discovers weakness, and on the other hand policy.
But as we were men under authority, we feared to offend our superior. We often
prayed that God would deliver the preachers from the curse of suspicion. This
prayer had the desired effect on some of us. Francis proposed that no preaching
house should be built for some time to come, by the people, without first
obtaining liberty of the conference. I cogently opposed the motion, because I
loved the people, and conceived it to be an invasion of their civil as well as
their religious liberties. I contended on till I discovered Francis to be much
displeased, and he answered and said unto me: ’I can stay in Baltimore as long
as you, and if I do not carry this I will never sit in another council.’

"However, I obtained a small amendment, and so gave over contending, and the
business went on. In the evening I unbosomed myself to my brother, Philip Bruce,
but from what I afterwards heard, I found that Solomon’s bird had carried the
news to the great man. However, I told Francis that instead of councilors, we
were his tools, and that I disliked to be a tool for any man. The business was
finished, and the whole collected, and I suppose prepared and sent to the press.
I saw them no more until the resolves came out in print." The conditions were a
source of great mental, and soul, anxiety, and for a time sleep was denied him.
He felt himself deceived, and imposed upon, for in the matters of government, as
provided by the Council, neither preacher nor layman were recognized. Of this he
wrote Mr. Asbury, calling his attention to the infant church, and asking for one
year in which to consider the matter. The request was promptly denied, and the
writer given to understand that neither he, nor the people, had rights that the
Episcopacy was called upon to respect. O’Kelly says of Asbury’s reply, "I now
began to discover the rapid five years’ growth of a ’moderate Episcopacy.’
Whereunto shall I liken it? It is like a dwarf whose head grows too fast for its
body." Not only in the matter of government did this champion of human rights
and liberties take the part of the common preacher, but in the matter of
ordination and administering ordinances. In the contention over the ordinances
of the church, there was for a while a visible separation between the church in
the north, and the church in the south, but O’Kelly, with a bleeding heart over
the situation, stood firmly by his conception of right. He believed that all men
were equal before God, and that broad phylacteries, bordered garments, and
mitred caps called for no more respect from men, than home-spun garments,
coon-skin caps, and Indian moccasins. Mr. Asbury had demanded that he be
addressed as Bishop, but O’Kelly felt that in the land of liberty and freedom,
though yet wrapped in the swaddling clothes of its infancy, there was no place
for an ecclesiastical head, and set his face steadfastly against it. He saw in
that early day, what we have all come to see in these, that a Christian
Democracy would profoundly impress not only the people of America, but the
people of the whole world.

James O’Kelly, though a man of the wilderness, was a man of culture, refinement
and justice, and to him to be just was greater than to be generous. He was a big
man, with a big gospel, and he preached it in a big way. He was a firm believer
in the capacity of every man to receive, enjoy and express that abundant gospel
of life. To him every man was a child of God, and all things his, richly to
enjoy, whether they were temporal or spiritual in character. The greatest asset
a nation, or a church, can have is not found in fertile soil, and large
endowments; not in great rivers, and eloquent preachers; not in mines of coal
and iron, of silver and precious metals; not in the largeness of college
buildings, and the architecture of temples; not in the transportation of great
cargoes of merchandise across the seas; not in the organizations of forces
according to the latest scheme for expert work, but in giving to the world such
heroic spirits as the man, who for conscience’ sake dares to stand alone. The
greatest asset that any nation, or church, can have, is a robust,
self-respecting, intelligent, law-abiding, high-minded citizenship, and a
membership of consecrated men and women, whose lives are given to the unselfish
service of one another.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 18: 03.05.     A MORAL HERO.
========================================================================

A MORAL HERO. The outstanding type of hero in history is the popular type, but
the Rev. James O’Kelly is the true type. The statues that stand in the center
squares of cities are mostly of battle fields. They are armored bronze,
representing a bloody field in the midst of writhing agony, and ghastly death.
It will not always be so. "Peace hath higher tests of manhood than battle ever
knew," as much higher as a wounded spirit is harder to bear than a wounded body.
I have even dared to think that if the eleventh chapter of Hebrews were written
now, that the name of James O’Kelly would appear with those of Abraham, Moses,
and the other heroes of faith, who, for the joy that was set before them,
endured the cross and despised the shame. I cannot forbear thinking of the
heroism of the days that have been, in contrast with the days that now are. Our
forefathers worshipped winter-long in frosty houses. Now the gentlest rain keeps
home on Sunday many a member of an orthodox church. The reformers struggle to
purge a city government of rascality, but fail because cowardly Christians fear
for social and business interests. Great evils cry out for correction, and yet
they remain, for lack of moral courage in the life of those who profess to
believe. Every Christian needs to ask: What is my religion costing me? Not
merely in money, but in life, in comfort and in service. When we come to
estimate its cost to James O’Kelly, we find that it cost all that he had. The
strongest tie that binds human hearts together is the tie of fellowship.
Companionship is stronger than kinship, else Jonathan would not have forsaken
his father, and given up his kingdom, for the companionship of David. James
O’Kelly was a man of strong friendship, and had a passion for companionship. He
loved with all his heart, or he loved not at all. The circumstances under which
James O’Kelly lived were inevitably producing a separation between himself and
the church he loved. The Church could not change, neither could the man, and
when the eventful hour came he broke the tie that had bound him to many a life,
for many a year, and went out to suffer, and to die if needs be, for the sake of
the right as he understood it. At the time of the separation, as stated
elsewhere, James O’Kelly was a preacher of uncommon popularity and strength. He
had been appointed to the Southern District of Virginia for ten consecutive
years as presiding elder, and such was his standing in the district, and among
his brethren, that he had nothing to fear as to a desirable appointment. There
was nothing personally for him to gain by his position on the question of
appeal, but everything to lose, as men count loss and gain. It was charged that
he was ambitious, and sought the office of bishop. When this was charged, the
man arose and said:

"I can appeal to the Lord, and am now ready to be qualified, that the man hath
belied me to my face."

Only two men stood above him in authority, and none in popularity and influence
as a preacher, and had he been passive, it is not unreasonable to assert that he
would have been exalted and given authority over his brethren. The Rev. Mills
Barrett, then of Norfolk, Virginia, said in 1839, "That James O’Kelly as
absolutely ruled one branch of the Christian Church by his influence as ever
Bishop Asbury ruled the Methodist Church by his episcopal authority." He had
lived through many severe trials, and had about conquered the last of them all,
and had he spoken peace to his conscience, and compromised with injustice, he
would have been a leader in Methodism, and a hero in its history. But he had
opinions, he believed, and hence came the separation. As I write of this heroic
man, I am reminded of the time when a great king of the East set up his image,
and then sent to the princes, the governors and the captains, the judges, the
treasurers, the counselors, the sheriffs, and all the rulers of the provinces,
to come to the dedication, and when he sent for them, they came. The princes,
the governors and captains, the judges, the treasurers, the counselors, the
sheriffs, and all the rulers of the provinces were gathered together unto the
dedication of the image that Nebuchadnezzar had set up, and they stood before
the image that Nebuchadnezzar had set up. Of course it must be right, for there
are the great men of the nation, and the king himself, in favor of it.

"Then the herald cried aloud, To you it is commanded, O peoples, nations, and
languages, that at what time ye hear the sound of the cornet, flute, harp,
sackbut, psaltery, dulcimer, and all kinds of music, ye fall down and worship
the golden image that Nebuchadnezzar the king hath set up. " But some did not
fall down. No cringing, cravenly spirit in them.

"Then Nebuchadnezzar in his rage and fury commanded to bring Shadrach, Meshach
and Abednego. Then they brought these men before the king. Nebuchadnezzar
answered and said unto them, Is it of purpose, O Shadrach, Meshach, and
Abednego, that ye serve not my gods, nor worship the golden image which I have
set up? Now if ye be ready that at what time ye hear the sound of the cornet,
flute, harp, sackbut, psaltery and dulcimer, and all kinds of music, ye fall
down and worship the image which I have made, well: but if ye worship not, ye
shall be cast the same hour into the midst of a burning fiery furnace; and who
is that god that shall deliver you out of my hands? Shadrach, Meshach, and
Abednego answered and said to the king, O Nebuchadnezzar, we have no need to
answer thee in this matter. If it be so our God whom we serve is able to deliver
us from the burning fiery furnace; and he will deliver us out of thy hand, O
king. But if not, be it known unto thee, O king, that we will not serve thy
gods, nor worship the golden image which thou hast set up."

Even so answered James O’Kelly, and that, too, with the same spirit of devotion,
heroism and holy courage that characterized the three Hebrew worthies.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 19: 03.06.     A PIONEER OF RELIGIOUS LIBERTY.
========================================================================

A PIONEER OF RELIGIOUS LIBERTY.

It was an unknown and an untrodden path on which James O’Kelly set his foot in
that eventful hour when he withdrew, for he went out not knowing whither he
went, but grandly, nobly, sublimely, he met the test, and patiently, but
perseveringly, he pressed forward in the great task that Jay before him, and
through all the years he wrought right mightily for his king. He was no
whimperer; not an hour was lost in sulking; not an instant spent in criticism;
not an instant wasted in mourning over his defeat; not a thought given to
predicting the ruin of the Church he sought to save; not a glance backward to
the place and things that had been his, but setting his face steadfastly toward
the goal of a better service, he pressed on to the end. It would be a profitable
pleasure to follow the road over which he traveled; to share with him the
anxious hours; to keep him company on the burdened journey; to hear the groaning
of his soul over the problems he was forced to solve; to see him on his knees
before God at the midnight hour, as was his custom; to rejoice with him in the
victories he won, and the progress he made; to walk with him as he blazed the
way through the theological underbrush of an ecclesiastical forest, that it
might be both safe and easy for his followers, but time and space combine
against the pleasure. Suffice it to say that he reached the goal, and gave the
world the slogan of the Church that has arrived, and which should be the slogan
of the Church which is to come--It is "Individual Liberty in Christ."


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 20: 03.07.      INDIVIDUAL LIBERTY IN JESUS CHRIST.
========================================================================

INDIVIDUAL LIBERTY IN JESUS CHRIST. When James O’Kelly withdrew from the
Conference, it was no part of his thought to do more than he had done--stand for
the right of the preacher to appeal--but having done so much he had to do more.
One step called for another, and so step after step was taken, until the path
broadened from the right of the preacher to appeal from human authority, to the
right of the individual to interpret the Divine Word for himself. Just when this
came about is not known. It was pioneer work that James O’Kelly was called to
do; the theological forests in which he did his work were overgrown with tall,
strong trees of unbending fiber. It had come over from England, prior to the
Revolution, and while Wesley was more yielding those to whom he committed the
care of the new-born church were as unbending as the oak of mature growth. But
James O’Kelly knew the truth, and the truth had made him free, and in that is
found the primal fact of religious liberty. Out of his experience of inner
connection and communion with God came the self-respect and exaltation, the
supremacy of conscience, and the purpose to realize his own place and destiny.
When he realized this high prerogative he could admit no more lordship. It was
to God alone that be bowed in reverent and loving submission, and humbly said,
"Not my will, but Thine be done." With this self-respect and devotion to
righteousness came courage and endurance, in the face of persecution and
suffering; this secret of liberty and earnest, patient effort has been the
common possession of all prophets and martyrs since liberty was first born. It
inspired, directed and upheld the Pilgrim fathers, the Puritans, and the
Friends, both in the Old World and in the New. It was the guiding star of Roger
Williams, of George Fox, of William Penn, and others, as certainly as it was of
James O’Kelly, and it may be said that the need of the Church today is leaders
filled with the Spirit of God, rather than ones familiar with the plans of
modern experts in Church government. But what did he do? What path did he open?
What contribution did he make? Wherein is the profit of it all? The answer to
all these, and other inquiries of like character is, In what he did for the
individual.

It may seem strange, but it is nevertheless true, that the desire for a united
church existed in the hearts of many long years before the days of James O’Kelly
and his co-adjutors, and many very earnest efforts were made to meet the desire,
but the union sought for was based upon a system of theology. It mattered
nothing that a man was right in life, if wrong in theology. The effort was to
have all men think alike, no matter how diversely they might act. It is now a
well-known fact that all such efforts at union only created new divisions, until
there were divisions innumerable, and theologies ad infinitum. In that early day
men who felt woe is me if I preach not the gospel, soon came to feel woe is me
if I preach not the doctrines of my church, and churches, so called, were
multiplied, until the land was over-run with sectarian mills, grinding out
Christians after the fashion of making pins--all the same length of body and
size of head. Indeed the church has not yet learned that creeds are the product
of intellectual thinking, and often influenced by personal or sectarian
prejudice. The church has yet to learn that by searching, the creature cannot
discover its creator. God is not found as the astronomer finds the stars, and
fellowship is a finer thing than that which is legislated into being. About the
time of James O’Kelly the weeping prophets began to cry--Is there no balm in
Gilead: Is there no physician there? Unconsciously it may have been,
unintentional it certainly was, that James O’Kelly, and his fellow-laborers,
responded to this appeal with the unhushable voice: "Yes, there is balm in
Gilead, and there is a physician there," and this is his prescription for the
cure of division, "By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if he
have love one for another." It was a dark path on which James O’Kelly made his
first footprint, but the path of the just shines brighter and brighter, even
unto the perfect day, and it has shone so brilliantly through all the years,
that in the light of the present day, creeds, which at one time seemed as
eternally fixed as the star in the sky, are rapidly losing their hold upon the
heart and life of the church.

Under the ever spreading influence of the tree that has grown up from the
planting that day in Baltimore, Maryland, the walls of sectarian churches, once
so high that they could not be preached over, seen over, prayed over, sung over,
nor thrown over, are now toppling to their fall, and the believers in Jesus
Christ are soon to be seated around one common communion table, where they will
dwell together in the unity of the Spirit and the bonds of peace. It is a long,
rough road over which we have come, but the goal is in sight. Patience, hope and
faith of all progressive minds insure and justify perseverance, while they
confidently await the fulfillment of our Lord’s own prayer: "That they all may
be one, even as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be in
us." The antiquated lines of cleavage which disrupt Christian fellowship are
fading out. The Apostle Paul, on divine authority and with fine enthusiasm,
proclaimed that in Christ the old dislikes and aversions, or distinctions, would
disappear. In Christ Jesus there are neither Jews nor Greeks. Beyond the smoke
of doubt and disaffection, scruples and squabbles, the chronic disorder of
jealousy and prejudice and all ecclesiastical ambitions, the horizon shows our
certain road to the promised land. And withal James O’Kelly was a disturber, a
fact to be appreciated, for men who disturb the smooth surface of human society
are often sent of God, as was John the Baptist, whose words stirred all
Jerusalem. Some men bless the world by aiding in its harmonious development.
Others help the world by challenging its social customs, and its religious
beliefs. James O’Kelly opened questions which the church had long considered
settled, but she has not yet given a satisfactory answer to some of them. He had
his weakness, as all men have, but they were as spots on the sun. His life and
teaching can never be outgrown. He is still the Christian statesman of the
future, and there is no voice from out the past of our church which speaks with
greater force and inspiration than that of the man who proclaimed that in all
matters of right and privilege, the man in the pew was equal to the man in the
pulpit. We acclaim him, and the Christian world will someday acclaim him, A
CHAMPION OF RELIGIOUS LIBERTY.


========================================================================
Source: https://sermonindex.net/books/writings-of-j-f-burnett/
========================================================================