‘The Birth of the Restoration’
Excerpt from an Historical Address Delivered at the Clarke Fund Rally, Cincinnati, O., Dec. 11, 1923
March 8, 1924; p. 3
By Ira M. Boswell
We have already seen that Thomas Campbell was not as quick to see and as ready to accept the full consequences of his own dictum, “Where the Scriptures speak, we speak; and where the Scriptures are silent, we are silent,” concerning infant baptism as were certain others of those who were his coworkers. The same was true regarding the form of baptism. A careful reading of the “Declaration and Address” convinced Alexander Campbell that they might have to give up “infant baptism and some other practices for which it was alleged express precept and example were wanting.” He began at once a very exhaustive study of the question, reading, for the most part, the works of those who were advocates of infant baptism. Finding no proof in the works, he made a careful study of the Greek Testament. This, however, made the matter worse. He again entered into conversation with his father upon the subject, and
Found him entirely willing to admit that there were neither “express terms” nor “precedent” to authorize the practice. But as for those who were already members of the church and participants in the Lord’s Supper, I can see no propriety, even if the Scripture evidence for infant baptism be found deficient, in their unchurching or paganizing themselves, or in putting off Christ, merely for the sake of making a new profession, thus going out of the church merely for the sake of coming in again. “He seemed disposed only to concede that they ought not to teach nor practice infant baptism without divine authority, and that they should preach and practice the apostolic baptism in regard to all who were to make, for the first time, a profession of their faith. Alexander, in deference to his father’s views, dismissed the subject for the time, seemingly satisfied with the fallacious reasoning imposed by circumstances, which prevented his father from seeing then the real position which baptism occupies in the Christian economy, and, consequently, from making, in regard to it, a practical application of his own principles” (Richardson).
Later Thomas Campbell applied his own principles, and was immersed.
THE UNION OF CHRISTIANS AND DISCIPLES OF CHRIST
All that I have heretofore said has to do with the formative period of the Restoration movement, which did not have full realization until 1832. The followers of Stone, who called themselves Christians, had become a separate body, from the time the “Last Will and Testament” was published, but the followers of Smith, who were called “Reformers, Christian Baptists,” who labored to reform the Baptist Church, remained in the Baptist Church until 1829.
The North District Association convened at Unity meeting-house in Clark County, Ky., on the fourth Saturday in July, 1829. At this meeting David Chenault made the following statement, which was the wedge which split the Reformers from their brethren in the Baptist Church: “Brethren, we can do nothing; for those who are complained against are more numerous than those who complain. There is only one course that is left to us, and that is to withdraw ourselves from them.” Soon after this it was agreed by the Reformers that there should be held religious meetings in different parts of the country, “and that the brethren should be urged to come together for social worship and exhortation, ‘without regard to human rules, institutions or commands.’” “One of those ‘three days’ meetings,’ as they were called, was held at Mount Zion, in Clark County, in the month of October, 1829.” It is well known that after A. Campbell had rejected infant baptism and accepted immersion, they joined the Redstone Association (Baptists). Withdrawing from that association, he joined the Mahoning Association. “Through his influence, mainly, the last vestige of what was called sectarianism soon disappeared from Mahoning, so that in August, 1829, she was rejected by the Beaver Association of Pennsylvania, and perhaps by other communities of Baptists, on the ground that she had departed from the faith and order of the gospel church.”
A copy of the Beaver resolutions was sent to Silas M. Noel, pastor of the Baptist Church, Frankfort, Ky. The church at once sent a request to the Franklin Association, which was about to convene at the Forks of Elkhorn Meeting-house, Woodford County, that the charges of Beaver against the Reformers be endorsed and published by the association. Franklin, after due consideration, not only complied with the request, but advised all the churches in her connection to discountenance the several errors and corruptions for which Mahoning had already suffered excision.
Soon after the action of Franklin, an effort was made to adopt the Beaver resolutions by the church at South Benson. The first effort was a failure. On account of inclement weather, there were only seventy-five present, out of a membership of three hundred. The vote was 40 to 33. At the next monthly meeting, December, the vote was reversed. Because of certain offensive matters of record, the anti-creed party attempted to get a new hearing at the January meeting. This was refused and the minority of the church came together, under the leadership of Jacob Creath and his nephew, and constituted themselves, on the Scriptures alone, into a church of Jesus Christ. For this they were unanimously excluded from the Baptist Church at South Benson, at its regular meeting, in February, 1830.
THESE ITEMS ESTABLISH THE FACT THAT AS A WELL-DEFINED AND SEPARATE MOVEMENT THE RESTORATION BEGAN IN 1832
In 1826 Barton W. Stone began the publication of a periodical called the Christian Messenger. In 1830, John T. Johnson, a member of the Great Crossings Baptist Church, embraced the principles of the Reformation, and as he says, “attempted a reformation and enlightenment of the church of which I was a member.” His efforts were a failure. “Having put the church to the proof—she having refused to receive a person on the good confession and immersion, and having done other things as unscriptural—I resolved to build on the Bible alone, as containing the infallible rule of faith and practice. Accordingly, on the second Saturday of February, 1831, B. S. Chambers, W. Johnson and myself formed a congregation of God at the Great Crossings, my birthplace. At this meeting I had the happiness of baptizing my wife, my brother Joel and his wife.” He moved to Georgetown, and in January, 1832, became coeditor with Stone of the Christian Messenger. These two brethren worked to bring about union between disciples of Christ and Christians. An informal and private conference was held in Georgetown, the latter part of 1831. At this conference the union was discussed, and it was decided to hold a conference in Georgetown in December, 1831. This conference lasted four days, including Christmas. They adjourned to meet in Lexington on Jan. 1, 1832, for another four days’ conference. The Disciples of Christ selected Smith for their speaker, and the Christians, Stone. Among other things, Smith said:
God has but one people on the earth. He has given to them one Book, and therein exhorts and commands them to be one family. A union, such as the one we plead for—a union of God’s people on that one Book—must, then, be practicable. . . .
But an amalgamation of sects is not such a union as Christ prayed for, and God enjoins. To agree to be one upon any system of human invention would be contrary to His will, and could never be a blessing to the church of the world; therefore the only union practicable or desirable must be based on the word of God as the only rule of faith and practice. . . .
For several years past I have stood pledged to meet the religious world, or any part of it, on the ancient gospel and order of things, as presented in the words of the Book. This is the foundation on which Christians once stood, and on it they can and ought to stand again. From this I can not depart to meet any man, or set of men, in the wide world. While, for the sake of peace and Christian union, I have long since waived the public maintenance of any speculation I may hold, yet not one gospel fact, commandment or promise will I surrender for the world.
Stone followed with a short speech, concluding with the following words: “I have not one objection to the ground laid down by him as the true Scriptural basis of union among the people of God, and I am willing to give him, now and here, my hand.”
Those present, with songs on their lips and tears in their eyes, with glad hearts, ratified the union; and Lord’s Day they broke the loaf together.
The two congregations worshiping in Lexington, however, after meeting together and communing, disagreed as to the appointment of an elder, and failed to consummate the union. In 1835, however, under the leadership of Thomas M. Allen, a preacher among the Christians, they finally came together.
Not 1804, not 1809, but that day in January, 1832, when the union between the Disciples of Christ and the Christians was consummated, is the greatest date in religious history between Pentecost and now. On that day two different bodies, after about a quarter of a century of honest effort to carry out similar programs, independently discovered, and the full import of which they did not understand until long after they had announced them, in spite of misrepresentation and much bitterness upon both sides, finally consummated their programs by uniting in one body. Some have said that the Interchurch World Movement was the greatest witness for Christian unity, but this fails the proof. There was no financial element in the 1832 movement. There was no compromise. If the people of God to-day will manifest the same faith in God, the same loyalty to Christ and His word, the same spirit of fairness and forbearance, the prayer of our Lord will be answered, and God’s original missionary society will be launched at last for the evangelization of the world.
[END]
0 Comments