(It must be noted that I have freely borrowed
information for this presentation from the sources that will be cited in the
paper. This is not an academic paper, only a presentation of ideas intended for
an introduction to the Restoration Movement.)
This presentation will have 3 segments:
1) Introduction to the Restoration Movement;
2) Description of the current “Patternism” debate
3) An historical look at Alexander Campbell’s idea of “Restoration”
I. Backgrounds: What is the Restoration Movement?
and
Who are the Churches of Christ?
Much credit goes to Dr. Tom Olbricht
Pepperdine University
http://chccfamily.org/RMHistory.htm
The Churches of Christ in America result from an indigenous American movement
seeking to restore the gospel and church of the New Testament. For this reason
the term "Restoration Movement" has been employed as a self designation. Three
sizable constituencies now exist from the late eighteenth century beginnings:
(1) The Christian Church (Disciples of Christ), (2) The Independent Christian
Churches, and (3) The non-instrumental Churches of Christ.
http://www.christianchronicler.com/History2/theological_underpinnings.html
Let us survey some of the theological trends which influenced the Restoration
Movement.
The Protestant Reformation (Attempt to Reform the Roman Church)
Martin Luther is credited with beginning the Reformation in 1517 when he nailed
his propositions for debate on the Castle Church door in Wittenberg, Eastern
Germany. Major religious changes followed all over Europe. Other reformers
joined in. However, we must point out that even Luther had his precursors. John
Hus, the fiery Bohemian, preached reform during the Renaissance. Along with Hus
we could point to England's John Wyclif, who translated the Bible into English.
European reform efforts were highly important for understanding the climate that
led to our Restoration Movement. Martin Luther led the German reform. Ulrich
Zwingli led reform in German speaking Switzerland. A more diverse Restoration
group emerged which came to be called “the Anabaptist Movement” and was
eventually salvaged and given organization by the Dutchman Menno Simons, father
of the Mennonites. John Calvin laboured in French speaking Switzerland and his
influence spread throughout France, the low countries, and Scotland. Henry VIII
led English political reform that carried over into church organization.
But all of these efforts never came to completion. Furthermore, they never
seemed to bring people together. Division proved a hallmark of the Protestant
Reformation. After the Colloquy at Marburg, an attempt to find agreement on
issues surrounding the Lord's Supper, Luther and Zwingli continued on their
separate ways. Catholicism pointed to this division as proof of Protestant
heresy. At the very least, they argued, Catholicism was united.
Seekers of Church Unity
Christians usually saw division as evil. Unity efforts existed long before the
Reformation reached full swing. After John Hus' death in 1412, the Bohemian
Brethren attempted to keep their identity separate from Catholicism but they
divided into two camps. The Taborite Brethren called for religious separatism.
And The Utraquists yearned for unity with other believers. Their stance is
evident in this quotation from them: "...in so far as to hold fast to
essentials, but not to bind conscience with regard to non-essentials."
Ultimately they compromised with Catholicism and returned to the fold with
guarantees that they could hold some of their distinctive doctrines.
A Scottish minister living in Holland called for the abolition of sectarian
names during the 1600s. His name was John Dury (1595-1680). He was the loudest
voice for Christian unity during his time. He said Christians should allow
freedom in non-essentials. He was originally a proponent for all of the
Protestant sects to unite, but he eventually started reaching out to Roman
Catholics.
Movements in Great Britain
Movements in Great Britain hold more interest for us. These Church movements
greatly influenced the Campbells.
[http://www.freedomsring.org/heritage/chap1.html]
IT BEGAN IN SCOTLAND
Much credit goes to Leroy Garrett for this material (see above website)
It is always risky to attempt to pinpoint the origins of any significant
movement in history. And this is certainly true of the so-called “Restoration”
Movement, or, the Campbell-Stone Movement. The reform efforts of these men have
led to the Christian Churches and Churches of Christ.
The “Restoration” Movement began in Scotland with the principles of reform being
advocated in those days by two groups. One group was known as the Haldanes and
was led by Robert and James Haldane. The other group was known as the Glasites
and was led by John Glas.
The Haldanes
The Haldanes heavily influenced Campbell’s thought. Alexander Campbell studied
with one of these men when he lived in Glasgow, Scotland.
James Alexander Haldane (1768-1851) and his brother Robert (1764-1842) make a
story on their own. Their biographies written in their own time give testimony
to this. They were sons of a famous British admiral, and they themselves gained
honours at sea. They took the wealth left them by their father and became even
richer, especially Robert, the older one. The spiritual training given them by
their mother at last had its effect, turning them from a career at sea to
Christian ministry. God often works through common folk, and it was a stone
mason who caused Robert Haldane to turn to Jesus and to his mother's early
influence. And when he turned he really turned! "Christianity is everything or
nothing," he told himself, and if it is everything, it should command every
sacrifice. From that moment on Robert Haldane poured his great wealth and his
life into working towards Christian unity.
He financed a mission to India, liquidating some of his most valuable property
to do so. It was at last blocked by the East India Company which turned him to
missions in Scotland itself and especially to the reformation of the church. He
funded publications, built training schools, erected large tabernacles,
supported evangelists, financed a home missionary society, and once brought 35
children from Africa and educated them in Scottish culture for several years.
While he left it to his brother James to do most of the public speaking, he
himself participated until he was compelled to refrain due to coughing up blood.
The Haldanes first attracted attention through their emphasis on lay preaching.
Though neither of them was an ordained minister, they went into the highways and
byways of their native Scotland proclaiming their message of reform. Others
joined them—laymen preaching the gospel! Great multitudes heard them. Soon the
clergy became alarmed and efforts were made to stop their unauthorized
preaching. "It is not our desire to form or to extend the influence of any
sect," they told the people, "but to make known the evangelical gospel of our
Lord Jesus Christ."
All this led to vast changes in their lives. Both the Haldanes left the Church
of Scotland. Several independent congregations emerged due to their influence,
the first being in Edinburgh. They called it a Congregational Church. James
Haldane was its pastor, a position he held for 52 years. He was still there when
Alexander Campbell revisited Scotland 40 years later!
It was James Haldane who was first immersed. He told his congregation that he
could no longer baptize babies, and by the time Alexander Campbell came to
Glasgow to study, James Haldane had been immersed. Afterwards, Robert also
submitted to immersion. The Campbells were another five years in being immersed,
however.
The Haldane influence is evident in the following respects:
Their break with the state church.
Their appeal to the scriptures, alone, apart from creeds.
Their "lay ministry," a restoration of universal priesthood, instead of a
clergy.
Their church order of rule by elders, independent congregations with a pastoral
function of the elders.
Their eventual practice of immersion, though this did not become general, nor
was it made a test of fellowship—it was made a matter of forbearance (what your
parents did), which was the position of the Campbells in the early years.
The gradual emergence of weekly communion.
The second group which influenced the Campbells was started by John Glas
(1695-1773) and his son-in-law, Robert Sandeman (1718-1771), and they were also
a major part of this picture, though a separate movement from the Haldanes.
Many of their followers also adopted immersion, and they came to be known as
Scotch Baptists. Their influence upon Campbell was less dramatic than that of
the Haldanes, though he became well acquainted with their views.
The Glas-Sandemanian Movement migrated to the United States when Sandeman
brought it to these shores. He established a congregation in Danbury,
Connecticut. That congregation formally affiliated with the Restoration Movement
after 1840.
John Glas (1695-1773), was one of the first Scottish Independents, also known as
Congregationalists. He left Scotland's established church in 1728 and formed an
independent congregation at Dundee. Campbell often went to great lengths to deny
charges of "Sandemanianism". Sandeman advocated the "holy kiss" and a community
of goods as practised in the early chapters of Acts.
A few important concepts did come into the Restoration Movement from Glas and
Sandeman. John Glas very carefully distinguished the Old and New Testaments. He
pointed out the fact that in the Old Testament the "church" and state were
identical. The New Testament, however, saw the church as wholly a spiritual
community. In addition, Sandeman upheld justification by faith and defined faith
as simple assent to New Testament testimony! Campbell would not go quite that
far. Campbell saw believer’s faith as more than simple assent—there were some
requirements involved on the part of the believer.
John Glas’s tombstone is in Dundee, Scotland, and reads: "His character in the
Churches of Christ is well known, and will outlive all monumental inscriptions”.
This points to the fact that the phrase “Churches of Christ” was in use early on
in Scotland.
Many of the Restoration histories neglect our Movement’s beginnings in Britain.
Most will begin the story at the period after the Revolutionary War (around the
1780's) in which several Americans with religious interests grew restless over
issues like:
1) Autocratic structures in the church (which did not mix well with the
independent spirit of the New World),
2) European control and theology (which did not sit well in a post-Revolutionary
context), and
3) denominational boundaries (which just didn’t work in a spread out, pioneering
culture like the newly discovered, vast continent).
And so independent constituencies began to spring up in various regions.
However, some of the historians of our movement are beginning to see the value
in researching the British context that existed prior to the coming of the
Campbell’s to the New World. British members of the Restoration are proud of
their heritage although most of their churches formally merged into the “United
Reformed Church” several years ago.
Let us now look at what was going on in the States that sets the stage for the
Restoration Movement.
In Virginia in the 1780's, a group of Methodist ministers led by James O'Kelly
(1757-1826) sought freedom from supervision so that Methodist circuit riders
could determine their own itinerary. For a time it seemed they would succeed,
but the eventual outcome was that preaching assignments were placed in the hands
of the Bishop. Those who favoured self determination broke away, founding the
Republican Methodist Church. In 1794 they changed the name of the body to the
Christian Church. Before the turn of the century preachers from this movement
were travelling into the Carolinas and making their way through the Cumberland
Gap into Kentucky and Tennessee. They also went west to the Ohio River and
migrated into Ohio and Indiana.
In New England, especially in the newly developing regions of New Hampshire and
Vermont, persons of Baptist heritage, chiefly Abner Jones (1772-1841) and Elias
Smith (1769-1846), formed new churches. They went by the name Christian, or
Christian Connexion. They championed the defeat of tax support for establishment
ministers (who were Congregational), and rejected the Calvinistic features of
Puritan theology in regard to election and predestination. The Bible was
heralded, especially the New Testament, as the only source of authority and
faith. In their opinion, Christians should cut adrift from historical traditions
so as to create the New Testament church in its first century purity. They
started migrating westward after 1810, into upper New York, where they became
especially strong—then into Ohio, Indiana and Michigan.
The two most important tributaries for the larger movement resulted from the
work of Barton W. Stone (1772-1844) and the two Campbells, Thomas (1763-1854)
and Alexander (1788-1866), who were father and son.
At the turn of the century a great revival known as the second great awakening
greatly impacted the Kentucky and Ohio frontiers. Camp meetings sprang up
throughout the region, the largest being the 1801 extravaganza at Cane Ridge,
Kentucky (where Barton Stone took a central role). Denominational barriers
crumbled and the call to conversion diluted the then-dominant Calvinistic
election theology. As the months wore on, some of the preachers, especially
among the Presbyterians, favoured this ecumenical climate.
They thereupon formed an independent presbytery. Not too long after, carrying
their interests to their logical conclusions, they dissolved the Springfield
Presbytery in order to "sink into union with the body of Christ at large." These
leaders found many frontiersmen ready to embrace their sentiments and rapid
growth ensued. Barton W. Stone, born in Maryland, and then lived in North
Carolina before migrating to Kentucky, eventually emerged as the chief
spokesman.
In 1807 Thomas Campbell, born in North Ireland of Scottish descent, arrived in
Pennsylvania, settling in Washington County. Long a Presbyterian minister, he
exerted considerable energy in a struggle to unify dissident Presbyterian
groups. His efforts of rapprochement in Pennsylvania resulted in litigation to
oust him from the presbytery. Seeing the handwriting on the wall, he resigned
and with others of like-mind, formed the Christian Association of Washington
(which was located in Pennsylvania).
In 1809, his gifted son Alexander arrived with the rest of Thomas' family from
the University of Glasgow. Out of the Campbell's efforts, churches were formed
in the region around Pittsburgh. After 1816, the Campbells joined with Baptist
ministers of the Redstone and later the Mahoning Associations, winning several
Ohio and Kentucky Baptist churches to their outlooks. The Campbells envisioned a
mass exodus of believers from sectarian Protestantism so as to become one body,
one New Testament church.
Early in the 1830's the churches from the Stone and Campbell groups commenced
merging in Kentucky. The amalgamation expanded to churches in Pennsylvania,
Ohio, Virginia, Tennessee, Indiana, Illinois, and Missouri. Several churches
from the New England Jones-Smith, and Virginia O'Kelly movement also became a
part of the Stone-Campbell merger. After the Civil War, the Christian Connexion
churches, which did not merge, established headquarters in Dayton, Ohio. However
in 1931 they did merge with the Congregational Church, then with the Evangelical
and Reformed Church, to form in 1957 the United Church of Christ—this movement
is in full fellowship with the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ) today and
they even hold their General Assemblies together and fully recognize each
other’s ministers.
By 1850 Alexander Campbell, because of his journal editing, book publishing,
debating, lecturing, and founding Bethany College, became the best known leader
of the movement. His outlooks left a permanent stamp on all his descendants
regardless of location on the theological spectrum.
The churches of the 1832 merger, usually going by the name Christian Churches,
multiplied rapidly, becoming the fastest growing indigenous American church,
reaching a million members before 1900. After the Civil War differences going
back to the beginning created ruptures in the movement. The first had to do with
state and national mission societies.
Regional differences and embitterments over the war and reconstruction led to
estrangements. The liberal leaders in the movement gained the upper hand in the
mission societies, prompting the conservatives in former Confederate states to
withdraw and grow increasingly critical of the societies. In the early 1870's
the leadership for the conservatives came under the person of David Lipscomb
(1831-1917) of Nashville, Tennessee. Disputes over instrumental music were
beginning to threaten the former unity of the movement. By 1895 several of the
conservative churches rallied around the notion that instruments in Churches
should not be tolerated by any means—punishable by dis-fellowship.
The Churches of Christ (acapella) are the conservative wing of the first major
split in the movement and were identified as autonomous by the United States
Federal Census Bureau in 1906. The Independent Christian Churches first moved
toward a separate, more conservative conclave within the Christian Church
(Disciples of Christ) in 1927. When the Disciples of Christ officially became a
denomination in 1968, the independent churches asked to be removed from the
Disciples' yearbook.
The major expansion in the non-instrumental Churches of Christ took place in the
1920's and 1930's, but did continue to climb. Growth plateau-ed in all regions
in the early 1970's. The states with the largest number of members are: Texas,
Tennessee, Alabama, Oklahoma, California and Arkansas. Of these states,
Tennessee has the largest number of members per capita.
The Churches of Christ (acapella) have no organizational structure larger than
local congregations and no official journals or ways of declaring consensus
positions. This is a contributing factor to the many different flavours that one
can readily experience when travelling. There are around 50 sects of the
acapella Churches of Christ, although some estimates are higher.
Christian Churches (Independent and Disciples) and Churches of Christ (acapella)
together now have approximately 3,000,000 members throughout the world, most of
whom are in the United States.
II. What is This “Patternism” Debate All About?
(Much of this section comes from an article entitled “Oddities in Pattern
Theology”. It was given me by Troy Hodgson. Troy does not know the author of
that article.)
Some today claim that one of the very ironic characteristics of the Restoration
Movement is that it was originally a unity movement, however, it has come to be
known as a highly fragmented, divisive group. Indeed, one could argue that the
Restoration churches in the 20th century did quite the opposite. Restoration
sects are now scattered all across North America.
So, historically, what made these sects divide and subdivide? There must be an
explanation. One common explanation is because of “Patternism” which has been
described as “the germ that seems to be the culprit of division within the
Churches of Christ.” (Oddities, p. 1).
Patternism is a term that describes the longing to restore the ancient “pattern”
for church organization, doctrine, and worship as layed out in the books of the
New Testament. However, the problem is, and continues to be, that people
disagree over what the “pattern” actually is.
The Vonora Avenue Church of Christ in Montgomery, Alabama was the first church
to point out that the New Testament pattern for communion actually involves only
one cup rather than many cups. This same Church also recognized that there was
no such thing as Sunday School in the Bible. Therefore, Sunday School had to go
out the window.
Eventually, this movement would gain a following by asking questions such as,
“Does the Bible allow for many cups or for any such thing as “Sunday School?”
The Movement grew fast and is still very much alive today. Don L. King, who is
editor of the “Old Paths Advocate,” a conservative Restoration journal, wrote
this in 1995:
“We believe people are going to be lost for using more than one cup. Surely, we
believe that! If people are not going to be lost for using more than one then
let’s give up the fight and heal the division caused by those who insisted on
using more than one. If it is wrong to use more than one cup in the Lord’s
Supper I can’t worship with those who use more than one. If I can’t worship with
them I can’t fellowship them and I can’t fellowship you if you do! Individual
cups are a sinful violation of the Bible pattern. If it is right to use one cup
then it has to be wrong to use more than one.” (Old Paths Advocate, Vol. LXVII,
no. 9, September 1995, p. 2)
This divisive spirit remains a distinct voice in some of the non-instrumental
Restoration churches. The Disciples of Christ wing of the movement remain
united, as they have created an organizational structure. The independent
Christian Churches have various sects and, like the acapella churches, do not
have an organized centrality. Let us look at a handful of the various
Restoration sects in order to demonstrate how patternism comes to be interpreted
in very different ways. We could call this list:
“The Restoration Movement’s Top 10 List for Restoring the Divine Pattern.”
10) Upper Room Pattern: This was the belief that the Lord’s Supper had to be
taken only in an upper room. Some Christians built 2 storey buildings so that
they would be in keeping with Acts 1:13-14 where the apostles gathered
“upstairs”. Acts 20:7-8 and Mark 14:15 were also used as proof-texts.
9) The Flowing Water pattern people were adamant that baptism could only be
administered in flowing water, according to the pattern of Jesus’ baptism in the
Jordan River.
8) The Lord’s Supper Night pattern was based on the idea that Jesus administered
the Lord’s Supper at night, and that set a pattern in motion (Mt. 26:20-21; Mk.
14:17-18; Acts 20:7-11).
7) Foot Washing Pattern: In John 13:14-17, Jesus said after washing feet, “I
have set you an example that you should do as I have done for you . . . you will
be blessed if you do this.”
6) The One Cup pattern is still alive.
5) The Fermented Wine Pattern verses the Grape Juice Pattern. Wine only
Christians actually do exist. Grape juice brethren tend to have problems with
using wine. Some conciliatory Christians try to assuage the people on this
divisive issue by claiming that the New Testament Christians actually drank wine
that was not fermented. Thus, both views could be upheld: “Yes, it was wine, but
it was not fermented”. However, 1 Corinthians 11:20-21 proved a stumbling block
to this view, as clearly some of the early Christians were getting drunk during
the Lord’s Supper.
4) The Sitting Down pattern. This view was that a chair must be placed by the
Lord’s Table as to be true to the Scriptures, so that the one who breaks the
bread can “sit” as patterned in Matthew 26:20-21 and Luke 22:14.
3) Another pattern is the Non-Sunday School pattern that we’ve already
mentioned.
2) The Sunday Only Contribution pattern: claimed that the collection plate could
only be passed on Sunday, according to 1 Corinthians 16:1-2.
1) The Holy Kiss pattern is interesting because it is one of the most commanded
early church patterns but is little practised these days. The Scriptures are
many: Romans 16:16; 1 Cor. 16:20; 2 Cor. 13:12-13; 1 Thess. 5:26-27; 1 Peter
5:14. Many Christians do practise this in Eastern countries, however (such as I
encountered in India).
Now you have an idea of what the “Patternism debate” is all about. I know we had
a little bit of fun there, but let us keep in mind that some of these issues are
still extremely serious to some brethren and we would do well to be careful so
as not to offend anyone on some issue of faith. Let us do our part to maintain
fellowship, respect, and the biblical “pattern” of love in all things.
3) An Historical look at Alexander Campbell’s
Idea of “Restoration”
When we talk about “The Restoration”, one issue immediately comes to mind,
“Restore what?” I was asked to demonstrate what the early generation of the
Campbell-Stone Movement believed they were restoring. However, we must point out
here that Campbell referred to his movement as a restoration on many occasions,
but as a “new reformation” on many occasions as well. These two words have taken
on quite different meanings. Indeed, they are very different words. However, we
have to realize that Campbell used them quite interchangeably. Therefore, let us
investigate what Campbell meant when he used these words and referred to this
emergent movement during his time. We’ll first look at what he had to say about
restoration in general and then we’ll look into what he said about various
doctrines.
Let’s begin by quoting one of the authoritative accounts on the Restoration
Movement’s history, by Leroy Garrett (Stone-Campbell Movement, pp. 9ff):
He quotes Alexander Campbell,
“I have been, in my own weak and imperfect way, advocating a reformation, not so
much in doctrine, but for the advancement of the best interests of mankind, for
the honor of our Lord and Master, for the good of his people, for the union of
Christians, and the conversion of the world.”
The primary resource I’ll be using here is Alexander Campbell’s journal entitled
“The Christian Baptist.” This historic journal is available on the web and
should be seen by everyone interested in Campbell-Stone history. Here’s the
site:
http://www.mun.ca/rels/restmov/texts/acampbell/tcb/TCB00.HTM
In order to get Alexander Campbell’s view of “Restoration”, I contacted my
former Supervisor at ACU, Doug Foster, who offered the suggestion of looking
into the Christian Baptist because it was here Alexander Campbell wrote a series
of articles entitled, “A Restoration of the Ancient order of things.” Campbell
was long-winded so I have only selected excerpts.
From the Years between 1825 and 1830. There were 32 articles in this series.
These are all quotations from this series, written by Alexander Campbell. It
would be overwhelming to try to quote from several different restoration
leaders, so I have limited this part of the presentation to looking at some of
Alexander Campbell’s quotations.
(The following quotations are on the “Restoration/ new Reformation” and what
makes it different than previous Reformations)
The reformations most celebrated in the world are those which have departed the
least from the systems they professed to reform.--Hence, we have been often told
that there is but a paper wall between England and Rome. The church of England,
with king Henry or George IV as her head, though a celebrated reformation, has
made but a few and very short strides from her mother, the church of Rome.
It is even uncertain whether the Methodistic discipline has led more people to
heaven, or made them happier on earth, than the rubric or liturgy of England.
All the famous reformations in history have rather been reformations of creeds
and of clergy, than of religion. Since the New Testament was finished, it is
fairly to be presumed that there cannot be any reformation of religion. Though
called reformations of religion, they have always left religion where it was.
Human creeds may be reformed and re-reformed, and be erroneous still, like their
authors; but the inspired creed needs no reformation, being, like its author,
infallible.
All reformations in religious opinions and speculations have been fated like the
fashions in apparel. They have lived, and died, and revived, and died again.
Human systems, whether of philosophy or of religion, are proper subjects of
reformation; but Christianity cannot be reformed. Every attempt to reform
Christianity is like an attempt to create a new sun, or to change the
revolutions of the heavenly bodies--unprofitable and vain. In a word we have had
reformations enough. The very name has become as offensive, as the term
"Revolution" in France.
(On Christian Teaching and Creeds)
A restoration of the ancient order of things is all that is necessary to the
happiness and usefulness of Christians. For to the end of time, we shall have no
other revelation of the Spirit, no other New Testament, no other Saviour, and no
other religion than we now have, when we understand, believe and practise the
doctrine of Christ delivered to us by his apostles. Now, in attempting to
accomplish this, it must be observed, that it belongs to every individual and to
every congregation of individuals to discard from their faith and their practice
every thing that is not found written in the New Testament of the Lord and
Saviour. But to come to the things to be discarded, we observe that, in the
ancient order of things, there were no creeds or compilations of doctrine. The
word of the apostles shall be the only creed.
(On the Worship Assembly)
In our last number we demonstrated from rational principles, that there
necessarily must be, and most certainly is, a divinely instituted worship for
Christian assemblies; and that this worship is uniformly the same in all
meetings of the disciples on the first day of the week.
(On the Lord’s Supper)
The primitive disciples did, in all their meetings on the first day of the week,
attend on the breaking of bread as an essential part of the worship due their
Lord. As bread and wine to the body, so it strengthens his faith and cheers his
heart with the love of God. It is a religious feast; a feast of joy and
gladness; the happiest occasion, and the sweetest antepast on earth. The primary
intention of that meeting was to dine. Whatever might be the frequency or the
intention of that dinner, it must be confessed that they met to dine. And last
of all, on this passage (referring to 1 Cor. 11), let it be remembered, that if
the phrase, "as oft as," gives us liberty to observe it seldom, it also gives us
liberty to observe it every day if we please. But, say some, "it will become too
common and lose its solemnity." Well, then, the seldomer the better. If we
observe it only once in twenty years, it will be the more uncommon and solemn.
And, on the same principle, the seldomer we pray the better. We shall pray with
more solemnity if we pray once in twenty years!
(On Washing of Feet)
As to the washing of the saints' feet, there is no evidence that it was a
religious ordinance, or an act of social worship. Yea, there is positive
evidence that it was not. It was a good work, and still is a good work, more
frequently in Asia than America. The soil, climate, and dress of the Asiatics
more frequently called for it, than our circumstances require it.
(On the “Holy Kiss”)
The kiss of charity is not a social or church ordinance. It had not been
established by the apostles as an act of religious or social worship in those
societies. Shaking hands is one of the most usual methods of expressing
friendship and love in Europe and America. To make this a regular and standing
ordinance of Christian assemblies, appears to be entirely unauthorized by any
hint, allusion, or command, in the apostolic writings.
(Here is one reason Campbell had serious problems with many Baptists:)
Some Baptists are extremely devoted to immersion. They have read all the
baptisms on record in the New Testament, and beginning at the Jordan they end at
the city of Philippi, in the bath in the Roman prison. The ancient mode and
nothing else will please their taste. Away with your sprinkling and pouring, and
babyism! The authority of the Great King is described in glowing colors. The
importance of implicit obedience is extolled, and the great utility of keeping
his commands is set forth in language which cannot be mistaken. But when the
ancient mode of observing the Lord's day or of breaking bread is called up to
their attention, they fall asleep. The authority of the Great King will scarcely
make them raise their heads or open their eyes. Implicit obedience now has no
charms, and the utility of keeping his commands has no attractions for them.
Such Baptists are not regenerated, that is, they are not devout--not devoted to
the will of God. They seek to please themselves.
[Interestingly, Cambell devoted the most space in this series (8 of the
articles) to church discipline. He and his readers seem fascinated by this topic
as they debated who should or who shouldn’t be able to enter into fellowship or
who should be dis-fellowshipped. He gave only one mention (a footnote) to
instrumental music in this series, where he writes, “The original and scriptural
simplicity of the Baptists is fast departing in the introduction of these
associations, instrumental music in their worship, etc.”]
So there we have it: A brief introduction to the Restoration; a look at the
debate on Patternism, and some excerpts from Alexander Campbell regarding his
take on “restoration.” Whether or not there are lessons to be learned here are
of course a matter of opinion.
Goto
Sermons & Articles
Home