CAMPBELLISM EXAMINED. 
 
 JEREMIAH B. JETEB 
 
 OF WCHMOND, YtRPINIA. 
 
 NEW-YORK : 
 
 SHELDON, BLAKKMAN & CO. 
 
 CHICAGO : S. C. GIIIGGS Jb CO. CHARLESTON : SMITH & WHILDEH. 
 
 NASaviLLH : TOON, NELSON * CO., AND GIJAVES, MARKS t CO. 
 
 CINCINNATI : APPLEOATE k CO. RICHMOND : 
 
 CHARLES WORTHAK. 
 
 1858.
 
 Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year 1854, by 
 JEREMIAH B. JETER, 
 
 In trie Clerk's Office of the District Court of the United States for the Southen 
 District of New York. 
 
 
 J. J. RBBD, 
 
 PRISTER & STEREOTVPBB, 
 
 16 Spruce-St., N. Y.
 
 TO THE ^ ... 
 
 ESTEEMED BRETHREN, 
 
 AT WHOSE REQUEST, THIS WORK HAS BEEN .PREPARED, 
 IT IS RESPECTFULLY INSCRIBED BY 
 
 THE AUTHOR, 
 WITH HIS EARNEST PRAYER TO THE 
 
 "FATHER OF LIGHTS," 
 
 THAT IT MAY PROMOTE THE CAUSE OF TRUTH AND PIETY,
 
 CONTENTS 
 
 I THE INTRODUCTION, .... /^V . * *- 
 
 II. CAMPBELLISM IN ITS INCEPTION, . . - 13 
 
 III. CAMPBELLISM IN ITS CHAOS, J&* . * . . 23 
 
 IT. CAMPBELLISM IN ITS FORMATION, .,/ ^' s . 76 
 
 V. CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES, J^ > . . 114 
 
 VI. CAMPBELLISM IN ITS DISCIPLINE, *j . 292 
 
 VIL CAMPBELLISM IN ITS TENDENCIES, % . r . . 338 
 
 VIII. CONCLUSION 354
 
 LIBRARY 
 
 UNIVERSITY OF C 1NIA 
 
 SANTA BARBARA 
 
 "REV DR. J. B. JETER, 
 
 DAR SIR: 
 
 THE undersigned ministers and members of 
 Baptist churches, have been deeply impressed with the impor- 
 tance to our churches of a succinct and popular treatise upon 
 the rise, progress, character, and influence of the sect of Chris- 
 tians called Disciples, or Campbellites. The knowledge which 
 your position has given you of this subject; and the clearness 
 of thought, justness of view, candor of spirit, which have 
 marked the passage on this subject contained in your memoir 
 of the late Rev. Andrew Broaddus, have induced us respectfully 
 to request that you will at your earliest convenience prepare a 
 work of the character above described. 
 
 fhe undersigned believe that by complying with this re- 
 quest, you will do an essential service to the cause of truth, 
 and advance the glory of our Holy Redeemer. 
 
 ELISHA TUCKER,* EDWARD LATHROP, 
 
 M. B. ANDERSON, GEO. "W. SAMSON, 
 
 HEMAN LINCOLN, J. M. LINNARD, 
 
 0. "VV. HOUGHTON, A. D. GILLETTE, 
 S. S. CUTTING, J. C. STOCKBRIDCE, 
 
 "W. B. JACOBS, S. F. SMITH." 
 
 * Since the above request was signed, in May, 1852, Doctor Tucker, of 
 Chicago, Illinois, has been called from his labors to his reward^ I know, 
 loved, and vcner.Ve>l him Ho was n noble specimen of a Christian in ii-
 
 VI MEMOniAL. 
 
 ter. With enlarged views, ripe experience, sound judgment, and a conser- 
 vative spirit, he was eminently fitted to be, as he was, a leader in " the sac- 
 ramental host of God's elect." By his expansive and generous sympathies, 
 he was allied to men of all parties, and all sections ; but by his devotion to 
 truth, he was identified with the advocates of evangelic Christianity. His 
 life was a beautiful commentary on the doctrine which he embraced, and 
 his death a happy termination of a life of toil and usefulness. I need not 
 Bay more of this excellent servant of Christ, and less in justice to my feel- 
 ings, I could not say. J . B J.
 
 INTRODUCTION 
 
 THE term Campbellism is used in this treatise, 
 not as a term of reproach, but of distinction. No 
 other word denotes the system which it is proposed 
 to examine. Mr. Alexander Campbell, of Bethany, 
 Virginia, and the party embracing his views, hare 
 assumed several appellations. They have styled 
 themselves " Reformers," " Christians," and " Dis- 
 ciples." Without discussing their exclusive claim 
 to these titles, it is clear that from neither of them 
 can any term be derived which will fairly distinguish 
 their system of doctrine. The word ^Reformation 
 has been appropriated, by common consent, to de- 
 
 
 
 note that great moral revolution, of which Luther 
 and Calvin were- the prime agents. The term 
 Christianity can never be wrested from its uuiver-
 
 
 Vlll INTKODUCTION. 
 
 _ 
 
 sally established import, to express the views of any 
 sect or party, however good, wise or great. From 
 the word Disciple, indefinite as an appellative, no 
 term can be derived to signify the views of those who 
 adopt the name. Mr. Campbell claims to have dis- 
 covered the " Ancient Gospel." Without at this 
 time conceding or denying the equity of his claim, 
 it may be observed that the inquiries now to be made 
 have reference not to the Ancient Gospel, recorded 
 in the writings of the evangelists and apostles, but 
 to the speculations of Mr. Campbell, contained in 
 his voluminous works, concerning this gospel, and 
 which have been received as true by the friends of 
 the " Current Reformation." To call these specu- 
 lations the Ancient Gospel, would be a manifest mis- 
 nomer. I am then under the necessity of employ- 
 ing some indefinite term, a tedious circumlocution, 
 or the word Campbettism to denote the system under 
 discussion, and the last course seems preferable. 
 
 This system is with great propriety termed Camp- 
 lellism. Systems of philosophy, science, and reli- 
 gion, have usually been designated after their dis- 
 'coverers, first promulgators, or most distinguished 
 advocates. Mr. Campbell is the author, and most 
 eminent proclaimer of the peculiar doctrines, which,
 
 INTRODUCTION.' IX 
 
 within the last thirty years, have spread in the 
 Southern and Western states, under the title of 
 " The Reformation" No other man has added an 
 article to the system, subtracted one from it, or ma- 
 terially modified it. Many truths are taught by 
 Mr. Campbell in common with other Christians ; 
 very few of the principles for which he pleads are 
 strictly new ; ^Tmt having revived, modified, and 
 placed in new combinations some antiquated senti- 
 ments, and added to them a few original specula- 
 tions, he is fairly entitled to all the honor, and 
 obnoxious to all the censure which his system 
 merits. 
 
 It is not my purpose to write a history of Camp- 
 bellism. I have neither the inclination, time, nor 
 means to do it. Nor do I design to confine myself 
 to a polemic discussion. Campbellism, like other 
 things earthly, has passed through various and im- 
 portant changes. To arrive at just views of it, we 
 must carefully notice its rise, progress, modifica- 
 tions, and influence, as well as its distinctive princi- 
 ples. It must be viewed from different stand- 
 points, and under different phases, that its true 
 character may be understood. My purpose is to 
 furnish a faithful delineation of the system its prin-
 
 X INTRODUCTION. 
 
 ciples, spirit and influence to censure he evil, and 
 commend the good. 
 
 Various considerations have prevailed with me to 
 undertake this work. The subject to be examined 
 is important. It were vain to deny that Campbell- 
 ism has exercised an extensive influence on the reli- 
 gious sentiment of the country. We are interested 
 not less as philosophers than as Christians to in- 
 quire into the causes of this success. The proposed 
 treatise is demanded by public curiosity. What is 
 Campbellism ? This question, asked by many, is 
 not easily answered. Some perceive no distinction 
 between it and the views generally entertained by 
 the Baptists ; and -others consider it a dangerous 
 system of error. A calm, discriminating and faith- 
 ful examination of it, cannot fail to profit both those 
 who embrace, and those who reject it. All these 
 considerations would probably/ have failed to induce 
 me to undertake the work, had not brethren, whose 
 judgment is worthy of respect, and with whose re- 
 quest it is a pleasure to comply, urged me to en- 
 gage in it. 
 
 Of my fitness for the task the reader will judge 
 by the manner of its execution. I have enjoyed 
 very fair opportunities of forming correct opinions
 
 -V fs > 
 
 INTRODUCTION. xi 
 
 of Mr. Campbell's system. I first saw him in the 
 year 1825. Since that time I have been a careful 
 observer of his course. I have watched the gradual 
 development of his principles, and marked their in- 
 fluence on the churches. I have read most that has 
 been published by him and his opponents on the va- 
 rious points in debate. I have conversed much with 
 persons embracing and zealously supporting the He- 
 formation. 
 
 It is my purpose to conduct this investigation in 
 the spirit of candor and fairness, knowing that noth- 
 ing can be gained to the cause of truth and right- 
 eousness by sophistry, misrepresentation and detrac- 
 tion. No sentence incompatible with the claims of 
 justice, and Christian courtesy shall intentionally 
 escape my pen ; nor shall I withhold a frank and 
 faithful expression of my opinions on all points which 
 I deem important. ' 
 
 I do not hope to be able to meet the expectation, 
 and satisfy the wishes of all my readers. Some will 
 think me too lenient, and others too severe some 
 will think that I concede too much, and others too 
 little. Truth generally lies between extremes. I 
 am more anxious, I trust, to please God than men 
 to pioniotc the cause of truth than to gain a vic- 
 
 ' * ,
 
 xii INTRODUCTION. 
 
 tory. Writing for no sect or party, but for all who 
 desire to know the truth, I ask nothing of my read- 
 ers, except an unprejudiced consideration of the 
 facts and arguments presented in the work. The 
 interests of the writer and reader are identical ; and 
 the same law which requires him to publish, re- 
 quires them to receive, the truth.
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS INCEPTION. 
 
 CIECUMSTANCES, it has been frequently affirmed, 
 make men. The remark is not true in an unquali- 
 fied sense ; but it cannot be questioned that cir- 
 cumstances exert a mighty influence in forming the 
 tastes, opinions, and characters, and .guiding the 
 lives of most men. Mr. Campbell, much as he has 
 boasted of his independence of thought and con- 
 duct, has not risen above this common law of 
 humanity. He is, to a great extent, what his 
 peculiar circumstances his early training and asso- 
 ciations, and his subsequent relations, avocations, 
 and conflicts have made him. He bears, most 
 clearly, the impress of the mould in which he was 
 cast. He was educated in the University of Glas- 
 gow, in Scotland. If he was not brought up among 
 the Seceders as he probably was he was early 
 connected with that most rigid of all the Presby- 
 terian sects, adopted their views, and fully imbibed
 
 14 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS INCEPTION. 
 
 their spirit. " I have," said he, " tried the phari- 
 saic plan, and the monastic. I was once so straight, 
 that, like the Indian's tree, I leaned a little the 
 other way. And however much I may be slandered 
 now as seeking ( popularity/ or a popular course, I 
 have to rejoice to my own satisfaction, as well as 
 to others, I proved that truth, and not popularity 
 was my object ; for I was once so strict a Separatist 
 that I would neither pray nor sing praises with any 
 one who was not as perfect as I supposed myself." 
 Chn. Bap., p. 238. Had Mr. C. not passed his 
 early years in Scotland, his religious views and 
 career would have differed widely from what they 
 have been. Many of his speculations have been 
 Scottish importations. To which of the Seceder 
 sects he wa^ attached, does not appear, but it is 
 presumed from his early phariseeism, to the strait- 
 est. It would be strange, if his education in the 
 school of bigotry and intolerance, had not given 
 complexion to his spirit, character to his opinions, 
 and direction to his labors, in after life. 
 
 In August, 1809, this young Seceder, with a cer- 
 tificate of church membership in his pocket, set 
 sail from the city of Greenock, in Scotland, for the 
 United States, and, after a narrow escape from ship- 
 wreck, landed safely in the city of New York, in 
 the ensuing September. He brought with him the 
 Beformation in embryo. Before he left the father- 
 land, his faith ' e in creeds and confessions of human
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS INCEPTION. 15 
 
 device" was considerably shaken. Whether the 
 iron rigor of his creed, by which he had been fet- 
 tered, had any influence in unsettling his faith does 
 not appear. From New York, he immediately re- 
 paired to Washington, Penn., and commenced his 
 American career, with what he proclaimed as an 
 important discovery, " that nothing not as old as 
 the New Testament should be made an article of 
 faith, a rule of practice, or a term of communion 
 among Christians." This truth was the "pole- 
 star" to guide him in all subsequent researches and 
 labors. We cannot but congratulate him on his 
 discovery, while we confess our surprise that he 
 should have been so long in making it. It was the 
 doctrine the main pillar of the great reformation 
 led on by Luther, Calvin, and other worthies, in the 
 sixteenth century. It had never been called in 
 question by any respectable Protestant sect, or even 
 writer. The most ^ealous advocates of human 
 creeds ascribed to them no authority, except what 
 they derived from the Scriptures. They might, by 
 a misinterpretation of the Scriptures, put unscrip- 
 tural articles into their creeds, or they might 
 pervert the Scriptures to make them harmonize 
 with their inherited creeds ; but not a creed-monger 
 could be found who maintained, or even dreamed, 
 that any thing " not as old as the New Testament 
 should be made an article of faith." 
 
 Guided by this " pole-star," Mr. C. soon began
 
 , X. . 
 
 16 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS INCEPTION. 
 
 to make progress in religious knowledge. His 
 " pole-star" proved to be " the morning star of the 
 reformation." In July, 1810, he publicly avowed 
 his " convictions of the independency of the church 
 of Christ, and the excellency and authority of the 
 Scriptures." He now commenced a series of desul- 
 tory, itinerating labor " pronouncing," to use his 
 own style', " orations on the primary topics of the 
 Christian religion," in Western Pennsylvania, and 
 the contiguous parts of Virginia and Ohio. In 
 1811, he married, and became a resident, and, as 
 soon as the laws would permit, a citizen of Virginia. 
 About this time, he was led to question the divine 
 authority of infant sprinkling ; and, after a long, 
 serious, and prayerful examination of all the sources 
 of information within his reach, to reject it, and to 
 solicit immersion on a profession of faith. He was 
 baptized by Elder Matthias Luse, in the presence of 
 Elder Henry Spears, in June, 1812, ancl soon after 
 was ordained one of the Elders of the church at 
 Brush Kun. He did not, at first, design to connect 
 himself with the Baptist denomination, but forming 
 a better acquaintance with some of the members of 
 the Bedstone Baptist Association, composed of 
 churches partly in Pennsylvania, and partly in Vir 
 ginia, he induced the church with which he was 
 connected, to sue for admission into that body, and 
 presenting a written declaration of their faith, they 
 were received in the fal 1 of 1813. From this period,
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS INCEPTION. 17 
 
 until 1823, Mr. C. continued Iris labors as a Christian 
 teacher, *in North- Western Virginia, without any 
 very important results. But his mind was far from 
 being stationary. Light dawned on it apace. He 
 was preparing, either with or without design, to 
 become the advocate of what he deemed a great 
 reformation, and the Co.rypheus of a large party. 
 Chn. Bap., p. 92. 
 
 Mr. Campbell, having burst the bonds imposed 
 on him by his early creed, pursued his religious in- 
 vestigations, without restraint, except such as was 
 laid on him by natural temperament, early im- 
 pressions, and mental capacity. He had now ceased 
 to be a pharisee. He could sing and pray with his 
 Jellow-Christians. But mingling with them, he 
 soon began to speculate on their manifold errors. 
 His penetrating eye perceived, or he thought that 
 it perceived, and he did not lack moral courage to 
 proclaim, that " the present popular exhibition of . 
 the Christian religion is a compound of Judaism, 
 heathen philosophy, and Christianity." Chn. Bap., 
 p. 9. . The phrase " popular exhibition of the Chris- 
 tian religion" is somewhat equivocal ; and yet there 
 can be no reasonable doubt as to the sense in which 
 he uses it. It could be nothing to his purpose to 
 affirm that the exhibitions of Christianity made by 
 Romanists, German Rationalists, or the advocates 
 of baptismal regeneration, are such a compound. 
 An ong these classes of religionists he was not 
 

 
 18 ^CAMPBELLISM IN ITS INCEPTION. 
 
 laboring. lie, doubtless, referred to the exhibition 
 of Christianity usually made by the prevailing re- 
 ligious denominations of the country. These dif- 
 ferent Christian persuasions, mostly maintaining, 
 along with some errors, almost inseparable from 
 human imperfection, the vital, soul-saving truths 
 of the Gospel, were in his estimation, exhibitors of 
 a compound of " Judaism, heathen philosophy and 
 Christianity." 
 
 That there may be no mistake on this subject, 
 another quotation from the pen of Mr. C. will be 
 furnished. 
 
 " If Christians were, and may be the happiest 
 people that ever lived, it is because they live under 
 the most gracious institution ever bestowed on men.. 
 The meaning of this institution has been buried 
 under the rubbish of human traditions for hundreds 
 of years. It was lost in the dark ages, and has 
 never been, till recently, disinterred. Various efforts 
 have been made, and considerable progress attended 
 them ; but since the Grand Apostacy was com- 
 pleted, till the t present generation, the Gospel of 
 Jesus Christ has not been laid open to mankind in 
 its original plainness, simplicity and majesty. A 
 veil in reading the New Institution has been on the 
 hearts of Christians," &c. Chn. Sys., p. 180. 
 
 With the truth or falsehood of these opinions, we 
 have, at present, no concern. It is, however, de- 
 sirable to take an accurate observation of Mr. Camp*
 
 CA.MPBELLJSM IN ITS INCEPTION. 19 
 
 bell's position. The above language defines, quite 
 unambiguously, his own conceptions of the ground 
 which he occupied. The Christian institution the 
 Gospel of salvation had been buried, under a mass 
 of traditions, for ages. Various efforts had been 
 made, at different times, by men of great reputation 
 for learning, piety, zeal, and fidelity, to remove the 
 superincumbent mass, with small success. Then 
 the Reformer of Bethany arose, dug away the rub- 
 bish, and exposed, in the light of day, the long lost 
 Gospel, in all its beauty, simplicity and majesty. 
 These are, certainly, high pretensions. They may 
 be just, and if so, we should know it, that we may 
 render homage to our benefactor. We propose in 
 the progress of this work, to make strict inquiries 
 concerning the justice of these claims. 
 
 Mr. C. was now prepared to enter earnestly on 
 the prosecution of his mission. Having analyzed 
 the " popular exhibition of the Christian religion," 
 and pointed out its primary elements, and having 
 made considerable progress in disinterring the 
 " ancient Gospel" from the deep grave in which 
 for centuries it had lain, he was naturally desirous 
 that the benefits of his discoveries and labors 
 should not be confined to an' obscure corner of 
 Virginia. The candle was not lighted to be put 
 under a bushel. The morning star of the new 
 Reformation n~ust shed its effulgence in a wider 
 sphere. That ^o might have a channel for dissemi-
 
 20 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS INCEPTION. 
 
 nating his newly formed opinions, Mr. C. commenced 
 publishing a small monthly pamphlet, entitled the 
 Christian Baptist, The first No. was issued from 
 Buffalo, afterwards called Bethany, Brooke County, 
 Va., July 4th, 1823. The day was aptly chosen 
 for the commencement of the enterprise. Conse- 
 crated to the celebration of American Independence, 
 it was thenceforth to be distinguished as the com- 
 mencement of a struggle for the liberation of the 
 churches from priestly domination. The publica- 
 tion of the Christian Baptist marks an era in the 
 history of Campbellism. Fx>r seven years it was the 
 repository of the lucubrations of Mr. C. and of his 
 numerous correspondents, who rapidly sprang up 
 through the country. It was edited with ability. 
 As it will hereafter be necessary to examine many arti- 
 cles in this work, it is sufficient now merely to express 
 the opinion that it contains some things worthy of 
 commendation, more that are entitled to no parti- 
 cular notice, and a great mass of rubbish. Mr. C. 
 has boasted much of the independent, generous, and 
 fearless manner in which his periodicals have been 
 conducted. He has professed to publish both sides 
 ofevery controversy. It maybe remarked, that policy 
 frequently assumes the garb of liberality. He was 
 a skillful and popular debater handled a ready 
 pen was desirous to gain notoriety., and promote 
 the circulation of his paper and controversy was 
 x %he pabulum on which he lived and thrived. It is
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS INCEPTION. 21 
 
 easy to perceive that tinder such circumstances, 
 sound policy as well as liberality, would court dis- 
 cussion. Liberality is envinced, not by an eager- 
 ness for disputation, but by a candid, fair, and 
 considerate treatment of our opponent. Few theo- 
 logians were qualified to enter the lists with a 
 - disputant so ready, adroit and sarcastic as he was, 
 and most of that small number, feeling but little 
 interest in his labors or speculations, deemed it 
 sound policy, if not liberality, to decline gratifying 
 his penchant for debate. 
 
 It does not appear to have been the purpose of 
 Mr. C., at least in the commencement of his Reforma- 
 tion, to organize a new sect. That his labors tended 
 to that result was clear to every discerning, atten- 
 tive, and impartial observer. Sectarianism was the 
 object of the most intense aversion an aversion 
 probably heightened by the remembrance of his 
 previous Seceder intolerance. His favorite project 
 was to fuse the various Christian sects, not, it would 
 seem, by the fire of love, but of criticism and ridi- 
 cule, and from the melted mass mould, in what he 
 termed, the " ancient Gospel," a new and glorious 
 body. Let us hear him on this point. 
 
 " I have no i<lea of adding to the catalogue of new 
 sects. This game has been played too long. I labor 
 to see sectarianism abolished, and all Christians of 
 every name united upon the one foundation on 
 which the Apostolic Church .was founded. To
 
 22 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS INCEPTION. 
 
 bring Baptists and Psedo-baptists to this, is my 
 supreme end." Chn. Bap., p. 217. 
 
 No intelligent Christian can object to the end 
 which Mr. C. proposed to accomplish. The union 
 of all true Christians on the Apostolic foundation, 
 is an object most devoutly to be wished. All good 
 men pray for it. But we must carefully inquire, 
 whether the means by which he proposes to attain 
 this object, are Scriptural and efficacious. We are 
 now -prepared to contemplate Campbellism under
 
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS CIIAOS. 
 
 THE period of Campbellism which it is now pro- 
 posed to examine, extends from the first appear- 
 ance of the Christian Baptist to the time when Mr. 
 Campbell, and those persons who adopted his pe- 
 culiar views, and entered into his spirit and aims, 
 were excluded from the Baptist denomination. 
 This period may with equal propriety be termed 
 its chaotic or its belligerent state. Belligerent it cer- 
 tainly was. The publication of the Christian Bap- 
 tist was an open, formal declaration of war against 
 all the religious sects and parties in the country ; 
 and most fearlessly, skillfully and furiously was it 
 waged. Criticism, logic, eloquence, sarcasm, ridi- 
 cule, and especially caricature and sophistry were 
 the missiles employed in this warfare. Eevelation, 
 history, and fiction were laid under contribution in 
 the conflict. At first, Mr. 0. stood alone, battling 
 single handed, as he fancied, against the disciplined 
 | hosts of sectarianism ; but soon he was joined by 
 u, band of volunteers, less learned, strategic, and 
 cautious, but by no means less valorous, confident
 
 24 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS CHAOS. 
 
 /-* -* 
 
 and aggressive, than himself. Almost all who came 
 over to his side were from the first warriors, of 
 dauntless spirit, panoplied from head to foot. So 
 great was their ardor, and so fierce their onslaught, 
 that, for a time, it seemed as if one could " chase a 
 thousand, and two put ten thousand to flight." 
 
 This was no less the chaotic than the belligerent 
 period of Campbellism. It would have puzzled the 
 most careful, discriminating and candid reader of 
 the Christian Baptist to form any clear conceptions 
 of Mr. Campbell's principles or aims. lie eschewed 
 all the common and well defined terms of theology. 
 His teaching was almost entirely negative. He was 
 neither a Unitarian nor a Trinitarian, neither a 
 Calvinist nor an Arminian ; but what he really was, 
 or desired to be, none could certainly affirm. It 
 was clear that he rejected " the popular exhibition 
 of the Christian religion ;" but not clear what he 
 would substitute for it. Many opinions and prac- 
 tices held sacred and dear by most Christians, were 
 by him openly and sarcastically denounced ; but 
 his own views were concealed, or cautiously and ob- 
 scurely revealed. The title of his monthly periodi- 
 cal " The Christian Baptist" might seem to 
 identify him with the Baptist denomination ; but 
 the appearance was illusory. Agreeing with the 
 Baptists on the action and subjects of baptism, he 
 differed widely from them on the design of the ordi- 
 nance, and on many other doctrinal, experimental
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS CHAOS. 25 
 
 and practical subjects ; and in the sequel they re- 
 ceived a full share of his censure and opposition. 
 True, he constantly and earnestly insisted that the 
 Scriptures are the only and sufficient rule of faith 
 and practice, but in this opinion there was nothing 
 distinctive. He held it in common, not only with 
 the evangelical Protestant sects, but with Unita- 
 rians, Universalists, and almost every class of reli- 
 gious fanatics and errorists. 
 
 Mr. Campbell aspired to the honor of being a 
 Reformer. The changes which he wrought in some 
 of the churches are styled by him and his admirers 
 the Reformation. That a reformation was needed 
 by the Christian sects of that time none, who pos- 
 sess a tolerable acquaintance with their condition, 
 and the claims of the Gospel, will deny. Indeed, 
 what church, or member of a church, does not, in 
 some respects, and in some degree, need reforma- 
 tion ? There was needed then, as at all times, an 
 increase of religious knowledge in the churches, 
 but, more than this, an increase of piety. The 
 reformation demanded by the tunes was in spirit 
 and practice, rather than doctrine. They were 
 then, as now, far too worldly, formal and ineffi- 
 cient. Among the Baptist churches there were some 
 sad evils. In parts of the country, the churches 
 were infected with an antinomian spirit, and blight- 
 ed by a heartless, speculative, hair-splitting ortho- 
 doxy. These churches were mostly penurious, op-
 
 26 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS CHAOS. 
 
 posed to Christian missions, and all enlarged plans 
 and self-denying efforts, for promoting the cause of 
 Christ. In general, the careful study of the Scrip- 
 tures, the religious education of children, the pro- 
 per observance of the Lord's day, a wholesome, 
 scriptural discipline, the reasonable support of pas- 
 tors, and, in fine, devotion to the Redeemer's cause, 
 were too much neglected. The pious and intelli- 
 gent fathers, before Mr. C. was heard of, saw, con- 
 fessed and lamented these evils ; and sought, in a 
 kind and faithful manner, to correct them. But 
 they are not of easy correction. Having their root 
 in habit, or established opinions, or, worse still, in 
 depravity, they can be eradicated only by the divine 
 blessing on judicious and faithful efforts. Had he 
 labored, with discrimination, fairness and fidelity 
 for the correction of these, and similar evils, even 
 if his zeal had not always been tempered with dis- 
 cretion, nor his courage with moderation, he would 
 not have incurred the displeasure, or provoked the 
 opposition of the intelligent and candid in the Bap- 
 tist denomination. He attacked some of these 
 evils with ability, but in a spirit and manner far 
 better adapted to irritate than to convince ; and 
 even those who were reformed by his arguments, 
 lost as much in spirit as they gained in knowledge, 
 and became fiery disputants rather than meek and 
 lowly Christians. But his plans of Eeformation 
 were, by no means, limited to the evils which have
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS CHAOS. 27 
 
 been specified. His views on the subject were radi- 
 cal. He seemed to be commissioned to " pluck up, 
 to pull down, and to destroy." Scarcely anything 
 believed or practiced among Christians met his ap- 
 probation. He gave himself up to the compara- 
 tively easy, and not very profitable task, of fault- 
 finding. But to indulge no longer in general re- 
 marks, it is proper to descend to particulars. 
 
 The object of Mr. Campbell's first and most viru- 
 lent attack was, what he styled, the " Kingdom of 
 the Clergy." The term clergy is not found in our 
 English version of the Scriptures. It was at the 
 beginning of this Keformation, as at present, used, 
 and well understood, to mean ministers of the gos- 
 pel men whose office it is to give religious instruc- 
 tion and conduct religious worship. It was rarely 
 found in the reports of ecclesiastical bodies, but was 
 commonly employed by secular writers to denote the 
 pastors and teachers in every Christian communion. 
 The clergy of this country were a numerous class, 
 invested in different Christian communions with 
 very different degrees of authority ; but in all exer- 
 cising only such as was cheerfully accorded to them 
 by the people among whom they labored. Entirely 
 destitute of civil power, they had no means of main- 
 taining their spiritual authority but the sanctity of 
 their lives, the usefulness of their labors, the weight 
 of their arguments, and the consent of their flocks. 
 They were an important class ; and they derived
 
 28 
 
 their importance from their official station, their va- 
 rious toils, and their extended religious influence. 
 They were by no means faultless. Some of them 
 were ignorant, conceited and vain ; others were 
 proud, haughty and imperious ; others still, were 
 hypocritical, mercenary and base ; and not a few 
 were worldly, selfish, and sycophantic. Against 
 these evils, no vigilance or fidelity on the part of 
 the churches, or their rulers, could perfectly provide. 
 Among the twelve apostles, one was a devil. But 
 as a body, the clergy of the evangelical denomina- 
 tions were intelligent, pious, self-denying, diligent, 
 and faithful in their vocation. Among them were 
 many men of shining abilities, and most exemplary de- 
 votion to the cause of Christ the excellent of the 
 earth. Considering their talents, and their position 
 in society, no class of the community was so meagerly 
 rewarded for their toils and sacrifices. Many labored 
 for nothing, but the pleasure of doing good a 
 larger number, perhaps, for a bare support and 
 very few were able, after maintaining themselves 
 and their families, to lay by a surplus from their 
 salaries for a season of affliction or infirmity. 
 These statements will scarcely be called in question 
 by any person having information on this subject, 
 and possessing common candor. To discriminating 
 and just censures of the clergy, no reasonable objec- 
 tion can be offered. Their official rank should not 
 shield them from merited reproach, but, rather,
 
 CAMPBELLISH IN ITS CHAOS. 29 
 
 subject their conduct to a more rigid scrutiny, and 
 their sins to a severer condemnation. But every 
 friend of religion, morality and good order, must re- 
 volt at seeing them rudely attacked, ridiculed, tra- 
 duced, and held up to the scorn of the infidel and 
 blasphemer. In all time, they have been subject to 
 the reproach and scoffing of sceptics and opposers 
 of the Gospel ; but it was surely strange that a 
 Christian minister should vie with these, or even 
 exceed them, in their congenial work. 
 
 Mr. Campbell's first aim was to overthrow the 
 power and influence of the popular clergy. 
 
 " To see Christians," he wrote, " enjoy their 
 privileges, and to see sinners brought from darkness 
 to light, are the two great objects for which we de- 
 sire to live, to labor, and to suffer reproach." This 
 was very well. But by what means did he propose 
 to secure these important objects ? He shall an- 
 swer. "In endeavoring to use our feeble efforts 
 for these glorious objects, we have found it necessary, 
 among other things, to atterfrpt to dethrone the reign- 
 ing popular clergy from their high and lofty seats, 
 which they have for ages been building for them- 
 selves In opposing and exposing them, and 
 
 their kingdom, it is not to join the infidel cry against 
 priest or priestcraft ;" (certainly not !) " it is not 
 to gratify the avaricious or the licentious ; but it is 
 to pull down their Babel, and to emancipate those 
 whom they have enslaved, to free the people from
 
 30 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS CHAOS. 
 
 iheir unrighteous dominion and unmerciful spolia- 
 tion." Chn. Bap., 32. 
 
 The clergy were informed, no little to their sur- 
 prise, that their order had its origin, not merely in 
 the perversion of Christianity, but in the specula- 
 tions of the most ancient pagan philosophers. Lis- 
 ten to his words. 
 
 " Little do many think, and indeed little do they 
 know, that the modern clergy are indebted to Py- 
 thagoras, Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, Zeno, Epicu- 
 rus, and a thousand pagan philosophers, Jewish 
 and Christian theorists, for the order of things 
 which they found ready to their hand, as soon as they 
 put on the sacerdotal robes." Chn. Bap., 54. 
 
 It would be easy to fill a volume with quotations 
 resembling the above, but it is unnecessary these 
 may serve as specimens. Mr. C. employed all the 
 resources of his various learning and fertile genius 
 to subvert the influence of the clergy, and bring 
 them into popular contempt. They were stigma- 
 tized as " textuaries," '* scrap-doctors," " theoretic 
 doctors," " populars," " priests," "hirelings," and 
 " goat-milkers." The Third Epistle of Peter is an 
 ingeniously written burlesque of the clergy, with 
 just truth enough to make it plausible and biting, 
 and divert attention from its gross exaggeration, and 
 merciless injustice. Chn. Bap. 166. They were, 
 in Mr. Campbell's estimation, a set of mercenary
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS CHAOS. 31 
 
 hirelings, actuated in their labors by no better 
 motive than the love of lucre. 
 
 " They have," said he, " shut up every body's 
 mouth but their own ; and theirs they will not open 
 unless they are paid for it." " A hireling is one 
 who prepares himself for the office of a ' preacher,' 
 or ' minister/ as a mechanic learns a trade, and who 
 obtains a license from a congregation, convention, 
 presbytery, pope, or diocesan bishop, as a preacher 
 or minister, and agrees by the day or sermon, month 
 or year, for a stipulated reward." 
 
 According to this definition, the man who from 
 love to Christ and souls, prepares himself, by the 
 most earnest, attentive and prayerful study of the 
 Scriptures, for the Christian ministry, and receives 
 for his ministerial toils a stipulated reward, even 
 though that reward may be far less than he could 
 receive in some respectable, secular avocation, is a 
 hireling. Lest, however, a suspicion should arise 
 that Mr. Campbell's teaching on this subject has 
 been misunderstood, we must have another quota- 
 tion from his pen. 
 
 " Upon the whole, I do not think we will err very 
 much in making it a general rule, that every man 
 who receives money for preaching the Gospel, or for 
 sermons, by the day, month, or year, is a hireling in 
 the language of truth and soberness." Chn. Bap., 
 71, 233. 
 
 It is due to Mr. C. to remark, that he admitted
 
 32 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS CHAOS. 
 
 that there were some good men among the clergy 
 a few, who differing from their class, were pure in 
 spite of the corrupting influence of their office. It 
 is proper, also, to state that in the commencement 
 of his editorial labors, he specially excepted the 
 " Elders or Deacons of a Christian Assembly," from 
 all his censures of the " Christian Clergy." Chn. 
 Bap., 8. Who these " Elders and Deacons" were, 
 it is not easy to determine. At that time Mr. C. 
 was connected with the Baptist denomination, and 
 very few, if any congregations, had embraced his 
 peculiar views. It probably had reference to the 
 officers of Baptist churches bearing these titles ; it 
 was not long, however, before he discovered that 
 there were clergy in these churches as well as in 
 others. He writes 
 
 " There is one spirit in all the clergy, whether 
 they be Romanist or Protestant, Baptist or Pasdo- 
 baptist, learned or unlearned, their own workmanship, 
 or the workmanship of others." Chn. Bap., 94. 
 
 It is fair to permit Mr. C. to define what he means 
 bya Baptist clergyman. " I have known, he writes, 
 " a young Baptist priest made and finished in Phil- 
 adelphia, go to the State of New York, preach a 
 few times to a rich congregation, give in his letter, 
 and in two or three weeks be called out from among 
 
 O 
 
 the brethren to become tjieir bishop ; and that, too, 
 before he has got a wife, or a house, or a family to rule 
 well. Such teachers I must rank among the clergy.
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS CHAOS. 33 
 
 and, indeed, they soon prove themselves to have a 
 full portion, and sometimes a double portion of the 
 spirit of the priesthood." Chn. Bap., 94. 
 
 It is not quite clear what constituted the claim 
 of this " young priest" to. rank among the clergy. 
 Was it the fact that he was educated in Philadel- 
 phia that he became the bishop of a wealthy con- 
 gregation or that he had not " got a wife" or 
 was it all these circumstances combined, that made 
 him one of the clergy ? The Baptists, neither in 
 Philadelphia, nor elsewhere, deemed any man, either 
 young or old, fit to take upon himself the sacred 
 office of bishop, without furnishing evidence of sin- 
 cere piety, and a desire to enter on the episcopal 
 work, and possessing suitable qualifications for the 
 service. They might entertain, as doubtless in 
 many cases they did, defective views of episcopal 
 qualifications, and they might be deceived in the 
 motives of candidates for the office, but in no in- 
 stance did they knowingly induct any man into the 
 office without judging him to be holy, of good re- 
 port, and possessed of gifts for performing its func- 
 tions. The truth is, the term " clergy," in Mr. 
 Campbell's vocabulary, denoted all ministers- of 
 every Christian denomination, who did not adopt his 
 peculiar views, enter into the spirit of his Reforma- 
 tion, and co-operate with him in the accomplish- 
 ment of his plans. 
 
 Simultaneously with Mr. Campbell's attack on the
 
 34 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS CHAOS. 
 
 clergy, lie denounced all Creeds or Confessions of 
 Faith, as the fruitful source of discord, schism, and 
 mischief. The term " Creed" in its ecclesiastic 
 sense, denotes a summary of Christian doctrine. 
 There is in Christendom a great variety of creeds, 
 from the so-called Apostle's Creed down to the 
 Christian System, composed by Mr. Campbell, as 
 an exhibition of the principles of *his Keformation. 
 Some are in the main sound, and some are unsound ; 
 some are evangelical, and some are anti-evangelical ; 
 the worst contain some truth, and the best, perhaps, 
 some error. Of the lawfulness of writing a creed 
 there can be no reasonable doubt. Every intelligent 
 Christian has a creed, written or unwritten. There 
 are certain facts, truths and principles, which he 
 believes and maintains, and the belief of which he 
 deems essential to the existence of true holiness. 
 He may, or may not write these articles of his be- 
 lief, but they are equally his creed ; and equally 
 efficacious in controlling his conduct, whether they 
 be written or unwritten. The writing of them is 
 merely placing in a visible form what previously 
 existed in his mind ; and doing so contravenes no 
 law. of Christ, and violates no moral obligation. 
 But what is here affirmed of an individual, may, 
 with equal clearness and propriety, be affirmed of a 
 church of Christ. They nave, and of necessity must 
 have, a creed it may be latitudinous or rigid, may 
 comprehend many articles or few, may be written or
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS CH LOS. 35 
 
 traditional and this creed is their bond of union. 
 This remark is as true of the churches organized by 
 Mr. Campbell, as of any churches in Christendom. 
 They profess, indeed, to make the Bible their creed 
 but to say nothing of the fact that they make this 
 profession in common with all Christian denomina- 
 tions, and with Mormons there is a grand fallacy in 
 it. It is not the Scriptures objectively, but subject- 
 ively considered in other words, not the Scriptures 
 as they exist in the original languages, but the Scrip- 
 tures as they are understood, interpreted, and main- 
 tained by themselves that form the basis of their 
 union. There are certain points of Scripture doc- 
 trine in which they agree, and by which they are 
 identified. These may be few, and may seem to 
 them to be unequivocally contained in the Bible 
 but the belief of these is indispensable, to admission 
 into their fellowship. They do, it is true, insist 
 that their members shall speak of Bible things in 
 Bible terms. To restore a pure, or Scriptural 
 speech, is one of the main objects of the Reforma- 
 tion for which Mr. C. pleads. But in their boasted 
 purity of speech, there lurks another great fallacy. 
 They do not use Bible terms. The Bible, with a 
 few slight exceptions, was written in the Hebrew and 
 Greek tongues ; and they derive their theological 
 terms from a translation of the Bible made by falli- 
 ble men. Besides, Bible terms are of no significance 
 or value but as they are understood ; and they may
 
 36 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS CHAOS. 
 
 serve the purposes of ignorance, error, or hypocrisy, 
 as well as of knowledge. In fine, if men are united 
 by the adoption of certain terms, or phrases, even 
 though these may be Scriptural, apart from the 
 meaning attached to them, they are influenced by 
 sound rather than sense by form rather than sub- 
 stance by appearance rather than truth. 
 
 Creeds, like everything else, human and divine, 
 that comes within mortal reach, may be used for 
 good or evil purposes. To prevent or correct misre- 
 presentations, to promote unity of faith, and to 
 secure the instruction of church members, and their 
 children, in the most important principles and 
 duties of the Christian system, are considerations 
 which, in the view of the intelligent and candid, 
 justify the drawing up and printing of a creed. 
 There are certain principles such as the existence 
 of God the inspiration of the Scriptures the re- 
 surrection of Christ, &c. <the belief and admission 
 of which are deemed by every church, indispensable 
 to fellowship ; and it may be wise and necessary for a 
 church in some cases, to avow and proclaim them, 
 f When the Brush Eun church, of which Mr. Campbell } 
 was a member, sought to gain fellowship with the 
 Redstone Association, they presented " a written de- 
 claration of their belief," drawn up, no doubt, by the 
 Reformer himself. Chn. Bap., p. 92. ' .And why was 
 this creed presented but for the purpose of satisfy- 
 ing the Redstone Association that the Brush Run
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS CHA.OS. 37 
 
 church was worthy of Christian fellowship ? And 
 if it was lawful for this church to publish her " de- 
 claration of belief/' to prove her title to fellowship, 
 it must have been equally lawful for the Bedstone 
 Association, 01 any Christian church, to publish her 
 " declaration of belief," to show whom she thought 
 worthy of fellowship. Indeed, the Redstone Asso- 
 ciation in receiving the Brush Eun church into her 
 fellowship, on her " written declaration of belief," 
 did, in the most solemn and authoritative manner, 
 adopt and avow that declaration as her creed. That 
 creeds have sometimes been employed for unlawful 
 and mischievous purposes, no one acquainted with 
 ecclesiastical history can question. / They have too 
 frequently been used as a substitute for the Scrip- 
 tures, to embalm error, and to bind the consciences 
 of men, and have, in many instances, engendered a 
 spirit of speculation, strife, and persecution, and 
 led to the most painful schisms. 
 
 Whether it is expedient for all churches, under 
 all circumstances, to publish a creed, is a question 
 which it is not proposed to discuss. My opinion is 
 that it is not. Churches have nourished without a 
 written creed and by this is meant, that they have 
 adhered to divine truth, abounded in the fruits of 
 righteousness, and have, in a good degree, secured 
 the ends of their organization. On the other hand, 
 churches, having sound, evangelical creeds, have,
 
 38 CA.MPBELLISM IN ITS CHAOS. 
 
 in many instances, sunk into formality, error and 
 corruption. 
 
 Mr. C. was not alone in his opposition to creeds. 
 Many good and wise men doubted their expediency, 
 and others were convinced that, on the whole, they 
 were of mischievous tendency. A majority of the 
 Baptist churches in the United States, had no writ- 
 ten creed at all, and the few that did have, had only 
 a very brief summary of doctrine, practically of 
 no moment. But Mr. C. was from temperament 
 or habit essentially an ultraist. His onslaught, 
 on creeds was fierce, and indiscriminate. It was 
 the boasted peculiarity of his Reformation that 
 it was hostile to all creeds, heterodox or ortho- 
 dox, bad or goad. " So far as this controversy re- 
 sembles them," (he says, referring to other contro- 
 versies concerning creeds,) " in its opposition to 
 creeds, it is to be distinguished from them in this 
 all-essential attribute, viz. : that our opposition to 
 creeds arose from a conviction that whether the 
 opinions in them were true or false, they were hos- 
 tile to the union, peace, harmony, purity, and joy 
 of Christians ; and adverse to the conversion of 
 the world to Jesus Christ." Chn. Sys., 9. How- 
 opinions in harmony with the Bible, embracing 
 fundamental, soul-saving truths, lucidly, concisely, 
 and systematically expressed should produce such 
 direful effects, it would puzzle an ordinary man to 
 conceive ; but so Mr 0. believff 1 and maintained.
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS CHAOS. 39 
 
 And I must, too, do him the justice to state, that 
 his course was in perfect harmony with this convic- 
 tion. All creeds, Komanist and Protestant, Calvin- 
 istic and Arminian, rationalistic and evangelical, 
 voluminous confessions of faith, and concise sum- 
 maries of doctrine, came in for an equal share of his 
 denunciations. If there was any difference, the 
 Westminster Confession of Faith, (Preshyterian,) 
 and the Philadelphia Confession of Faith, (Baptist,) 
 received the largest measure of his censure. All 
 churches having creeds were, according to his views, 
 involved in the same condemnation and corruption^ 
 The purity, the wisdom, the intrinsic excellence of 
 their creed, could not preserve them from a blight. 
 That I may do no injustice, and save myself from 
 the suspicion of exaggeration, I will quote his own 
 language. " The worshipping establishments now 
 in operation throughout Christendom, increased and 
 cemented by their respective voluminous confessions 
 of faith, and their ecclesiastical constitutions, are not 
 churches of Jesus Christ, but the legitimate daugh- 
 ters of that mother of harlots, the Church of Home." 
 Mill. Har., vol. 3, 362. " What of the apostacy do 
 you place all the sects in the apostacy ? Yes ; all 
 religious sects who have any human bond of union ; 
 all who rally under any articles of confederation" 
 that is, summary of doctrine, however Scriptural, 
 clear, and important " other than the Apostle's 
 doctrine ' that is, according to the Bethany voca-
 
 40 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS CHAOS. 
 
 bulary, the whole volume of revelation " and who 
 refuse to yield all homage to the ancient order of 
 things" that is, the long-lost Gospel, disinterred 
 by Mr. Campbell. Mill. Har., vol. 3, 362. From 
 these quotations, it appears, that according to the 
 " ancient Gospel," as understood at Bethany, any 
 body claiming to be Christian, adopting a summary 
 of doctrine, as fundamental articles of belief, though 
 the articles be true, and the belief of them indispen- 
 sable to salvation, is no church of Christ but a 
 sect a harlot and the daughter of a harlot. 
 
 The writer is reminded of a discourse, which, not 
 long since, he heard Mr. C. deliver a discourse 
 whose doctrine was in striking harmony with the 
 above extracts. His text was, Eph. iv. 4-6. His 
 theme was chiefly the unity of the body of Christ. 
 The church, he insisted, was a body not a mass, 
 but an organized, symmetrical, and beautiful body. 
 But Christ has only one body a head with seven 
 bodies would be a monster. But if Christ has only 
 one body, what body is it ? Not the Koman 
 Catholic body not the Episcopalian not the Pres- 
 byterian not the Lutheran not the Methodist 
 not the Baptist. He did not inform us, however, 
 what body is the body of Christ . He trusted in the 
 intelligence and candor of his hearers to infer that 
 the body of Christ is the body that embraces the 
 "ancient Gospel," and that has restored the "an- 
 cient order o " things." The sermon was eloquent,
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS CHAOS. 4] 
 
 plausible, and sophistical. If a head with seven 
 bodies is a monster, a head without a body is useless. 
 It is natural to inquire, If the party adopting the 
 peculiar views of Mr. C., is really the body of Christ, 
 where was his body before the light shone from 
 Bethany, and while all the sects were in the smoke 
 and bondage of Babylon ? 
 
 All this sophistry vanishes before Scriptural defi- 
 nitions of the term church. It is used in two dis- 
 tinct senses in the New Testament. In some places 
 it means an organized, visible body of believers, 
 assembling in one place for the worship of Christ. 
 In this sense of the term, we read of the " church 
 of God which is at Corinth," " the churches of 
 Galatia," " the churches of Judea," &c. The Apos- 
 tolic churches were all built on the same founda- 
 tion, governed by the same laws, animated by the 
 same spirit, and all co-operated in the same good 
 cause ; but they did not constitute one great, organ- 
 ized hierarchy. If "the church" in this sense of 
 the term, was the body of Christ, then he had more 
 than one body he had seven bodies in Asia, and 
 we know not how many in Judea, Galatia, and other 
 regions. In a few places the word church signifies 
 the whole body of believers in Christ. This is the 
 church for which he gave himself, Eph. v.-25. This 
 is the body of which he is the head, Eph. i. 22, 23. 
 To this body belong all in x whcm dwells the Para- 
 clete, whatever their name. 01 visible connections,
 
 42 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS CHAOS. 
 
 may be. Of this body, the true Christians, admit- 
 ted "by Mr. C. to be found among the sects, are liv- 
 ing members. The churches of the Eeformation do 
 not constitute this body, but the pious among them 
 are components of it. Now, the sophism of Mr. C. 
 consisted in substituting the former for the latter 
 sense of the term church in his text a sense which 
 it does not fairly admit. 
 
 When Mr. Campbell commenced his Keformation, 
 he found various benevolent or religious associations 
 in existence, having for their object the diffusion 
 of Divine truth, and the extension of the kingdom 
 of the Messiah. Among these institutions we may 
 mention Mission, Bible, Tract, and Education So- 
 cieties, and Sunday Schools, whose titles indicate, 
 with sufficient precision, to the common reader, 
 their respective spheres of operation. The objects 
 contemplated by these associations were of the high- 
 est importance, and appealed most powerfully to 
 the sympathies and liberality of the pious. It were 
 uncandid to deny that they originated with wise 
 and good men, in the love of truth, and in an ear- 
 nest desire to promote the salvation of sinners, and 
 the glory of the Redeemer, that they were sustained 
 by the generous sacrifices, fervent prayers, and self- 
 denying, and, in some cases, heroic labors of their 
 friends ; and that they had been successful in a 
 measure corresponding with these toils and sacrifices, 
 and adapted to inspire gratitude for the past, and 
 
 ' -..V "
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS CHAOS. 43 
 
 confidence in regard to the future. Whether the 
 best plans had been adopted to carry forward the 
 work of evangelization was certainly a debatable 
 question ; and none were more solicitous for its 
 proper solution than those who were most promi- 
 nently and actively engaged in the prosecution of 
 these various plans. To affirm that vanity, selfish- 
 ness, and sectarian zeal had no part in the main- 
 tenance of these schemes, would be to affirm what 
 no person, the least acquainted with the imper- 
 fections of human nature, would believe. /But it 
 may be safely affirmed, that since the days of primi- 
 tive Christianity, no systematic efforts for the diffu- 
 sion of truth and piety have involved so large an 
 amount of self-denial, privation, toil, sacrifice and 
 suffering, as modern missions to the heathen, with 
 their various kindred enterprises. The friends and 
 supporters of the different benevolent institutions 
 we're e'ntitled to the most, candid and liberal treat- 
 ment from those who, differing from them as to the 
 expediency of their plans, sympathized with them 
 in the sublime and glorious objects at which they 
 aimed. 
 
 Mr. Campbell commenced his editorial career with 
 pretty strong opposition to these religious enterprises. 
 Finding them identified with what he called the 
 popular Christianity of the day, he deemed it ne- 
 to subvert their influence that his reforma-
 
 44 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS CHAOS. 
 
 tion might triumph. In his preface to the Chris- 
 tian Baptist, he thus wrote : 
 
 "There is another difficulty of which we are 
 aware, that, as some ohjects are manifestly good, 
 and the means attempted for their accomplishment 
 manifestly evil, speaking against the means em- 
 ployed we may be sometimes understood as opposing 
 the object abstractly, especially by those who do not 
 wish to understand, but rather to misrepresent. 
 For instance that the conversion of the heathen 
 to the Christian religion is an object manifestly good 
 all Christians will acknowledge ; yet every one ac- 
 quainted with the means employed, and of the 
 success attendant on the means, must know that 
 these means have not been blessed ; and every in- 
 telligent Christian must know that many of the 
 means employed have been manifestly evil. Besides, 
 to convert the heathen to the popular Christianity 
 of these times would be an object of no great con- 
 sequence, as the popular Christians themselves, for 
 the most part, require to be converted to the Chris- 
 tianity of the New Testament." Chn. Bap., 4. 
 
 It is not surprising that the Eeformer, convinced 
 that the sects did not preach the " ancient Gospel," 
 and needed themselves to be converted to the Chris- 
 tianity of the New Testament, should have been 
 without sympathy for their missionary schemes. 
 They were, in his judgment, unauthorized by Christ, 
 and subversive of his throne -and government. His
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS CHAOS. 
 
 plan for the conversion of the world, or what ne 
 supposed the Divine plan, was first to convert all 
 Christiar. sects to the Christianity of the New Tes- 
 tament. Till this desirable object could be attain- 
 ed, not an effort was to be put forth for the conver- 
 sion of the heathen. "An attempt," said he, "to 
 convert Pagans and Mahometans to believe that 
 Jesus is the Son of God, and the sent of the Father, 
 is also an attempt to frustrate the prayer of the 
 Messiah, and to subvert his throne and government." 
 Chn. Bap., 135. But even after the conversion of 
 the Christian sects, and their union in one church, 
 no missionaries are to be sent forth for the conver- 
 sion of the heathen. "The Bible," he says, " gives 
 us no idea of a missionary without the power of work- 
 ing miracles. Miracles and missionaries," and, he 
 might add, preaching the Gospel, "are inseparably 
 connected in the New Testament." Chn. Bap., 15. 
 Christians must "form themselves into societies 
 independent of hireling priests and ecclesiastical 
 courts, modelled after the forum, the parliament, 
 or national conventions," and "cast to the moles 
 and to the bats the Platonic speculations, the Pytha- 
 gorean dreams, and Jewish fables they have written 
 in their creeds ;" " return to the ancient model de- 
 lineated in the New Testament ;" "and keep the 
 ordinances as delivered to them by the apostles." 
 Then suppose a Christian church were to be placed 
 on the confines of a heathen land, as some of them
 
 46 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS CHAOS. 
 
 must inevitably be, the" darkness of paganism will 
 serve, as a shade in a picture, to exhibit the lustre 
 of Christianity. Then the heathen around them 
 will see their humility ; their heavenly-mindedness, 
 their hatred of garments spotted with the flesh, 
 their purity, their chastity, their temperance, their 
 sobriety, their brotherly love ; they will observe the 
 order of their worship, and will fall down in their 
 assemblies, as Paul affirms, and declare that God is 
 in them of a truth." Such was the Bethany plan 
 for evangelizing the world. But if the work of 
 evangelization on the " confines of heathen lands " 
 should progress slowly, and it should seem desirable 
 to adopt more active and aggressive measures for its 
 prosecution then to avoid the necessity of sending 
 missionaries, for which there is no scripture author- 
 ity, if there can a be found such a society," as that 
 above described, though it be " composed of but 
 twenty, willing to emigrate to some heathen land, -.^^ 
 where they can support themselves like the natives, 
 wear the same garb, adopt the country as their own, 
 and profess nothing like a missionary project; should 
 such a society sit down and hold forth in word and 
 deed the saving truth, not deriding the gods nor 
 the religion of the natives, but allowing their own 
 works and example to speak for their religion, and 
 practicing as above hinted; we are persuaded that, 
 in process of time, a more solid foundation for the 
 conversion of the natives wc^ild be laid, and more
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS CHAOS. 47 
 
 actual success resulting, than from all the mission- 
 aries employed for twenty-five years. Such a course 
 would have some warrant from Scripture, but the 
 present has proved itself to be all human." Chn. 
 Bap., 1'6-17. 
 
 It is not my purpose to discuss at large this 
 scheme for evangelizing the world, but I must 
 make a few remarks in passing. That churches 
 should be pure and conformed to the New Testa- 
 ment model ; and that such churches, situated on 
 the borders of heathen lands, or elsewhere, would 
 exert a good influence, must be conceded. That 
 they would have full authority to emigrate to a 
 heathen country, and hold forth the word of life ; 
 and that doing so, they might be useful, must also 
 be admitted. But what reason there is for claiming 
 for this scheme of propagating the Gospel peculiarly 
 the Divine sanction, I know not. As a plan for 
 converting the heathen it is sustained neither by 
 apostolic precept nor example. Aggressions on the 
 domain of heathenism have always been made by 
 missionaries who have gone forth, singly or in 
 small bands, with or without the power of working 
 miracles, with the truth of Christ on their lips, and 
 the love of Christ in their hearts, to instruct, per- 
 suade and convert men, and to found churches amid 
 the surrounding darkness. This is God's plan en- 
 forced by the command of Christ, and the example 
 of the apostles and sanctioned by the experience
 
 *S CAMPBELLISM IN ITS CHAOS. 
 
 of the Christian world. The substitute proposed 
 by Mr. C. is untried, impracticable, chimerical. 
 
 Had theKeforrnerconfined himself to the advocacy 
 of his new scheme of converting the world to Christ, 
 or to candid, generous and faithful criticisms on the 
 missionary, and other benevolent schemes of -the 
 time, his labors would probably have attracted but 
 little attention, or, at most, would have produced 
 no serious strife. But such a course did not accord 
 with the genius and spirit of the man. At first, 
 and for a short time, he wrote rather cautiously and 
 hesitatingly concerning Christian missions. " It 
 may be worthy," said he, " of the serious considera- 
 tion of many of the zealous advocates of the various 
 sectarian missions in our day, whether, in a few 
 years, the same things may not be said of their 
 various projects which they themselves affirm of the 
 Catholic missions, and ' missionaries." Chn. Bap., 
 14. But this inquiring tone soon gave place to 
 that of dogmatism and denunciation. Upon the 
 benevolent associations, the vials of his unmitigated 
 wrath were soon poured out. All the resources of 
 his learning, wit, and ridicule, were employed to 
 undermine their influence, and bring them into con- 
 tempt. Whatever was published in infidel, or semi- 
 infidel papers in disparagement of missionaries, was 
 promptly transferred to the columns of the Christian 
 Baptist, without comment, or with approbation ; 
 while allusions to the self-denials, toils, sufferings,
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS CHAOS. 49 
 
 and successes of missionaries, were studiously omit- 
 ted. Mr. Campbell's chief instrument in opposing 
 Christian missions, and promoting his Reformation, 
 was caricaturing an art for which his genius pecu- 
 liarly fitted him. But, as his opposition to missions, 
 and cognate enterprises, had much influence in sev- 
 ering the Eeformers from the Baptists, I will quote 
 copiously from the columns of his monthly pamphlet, 
 pretty much at random on these topics. 
 
 " The order of their assemblies (the primitive 
 churches,) was uniformly the same. It did not vary 
 with moons and seasons. It did not change as dress 
 nor fluctuate as the manners of tne times. Their 
 devotion did not diversify itself into the endlesa 
 forms of modern times. They had no monthly con- 
 certs for prayer ; no solemn convocations, no great 
 fasts, nor preparation, nor thanksgiving days. 
 Their churches were not fractured into missionary 
 societies, Bible societies, education societies ; nor 
 did they dream of organizing such in the world. 
 The head of a believing household was not in thoso 
 days a president or manager of a board of foreign 
 missions ; his, wife the president of some female edu- 
 cation society ; his eldest son, the recording secre- 
 tary of some domestic Bible society ; his eldest 
 daughter, the corresponding secretary of a mite 
 society ; his servant-maid, the vice-president of a 
 rag society ; and his l : ttle daughter, a tutoress of a 
 Sunday-school. Thej knew nothing of the hobbies
 
 50 CA.MPBELLISM IN ITS CHAOS. 
 
 of modern times. In their church capacity alone 
 they moveJ. They neither transformed themselves 
 into any other kind of association, nor did they frac- 
 ture and sever themselves into divers societies. 
 They viewed the church of Jesus Christ as the 
 scheme of Heaven to ameliorate the world ; as 
 members of it, they considered themselves bound 
 to do all they could for the glory of God and the 
 good of men. They dare not transfer to a missionary 
 society, or Bible society, or education society, a 
 cent or a prayer, lest in so doing they should rob 
 the church of its glory, and exalt the inventions of 
 men above the wisdom of God. In their church 
 capacity alone they moved." Chn. Bap., 6. 
 
 "'MISSIONARIES TO BURMAH. On Wednesday, 
 the llth of June, at Utica, New York, the Kev. 
 Jonathan Wade and his consort were set apart as 
 missionaries to the Bunnan empire, by a committee 
 of the board of managers of the Baptist General 
 Convention. An interesting sermon was delivered 
 on the occasion by the Eev. Nathaniel Kendrick, 
 from 2 Tim. ii. 10 . ' Therefore I endure all things 
 for the elects' sake, that they also may obtain the 
 salvation which is in Christ Jesus with eternal 
 glory.' Kev. Alfred Bennet led in offering up the 
 consecrating prayer. Eev. Daniel Hascall gave 
 Mr. Wade an appropriate charge, and the Kev. Joel 
 W. Clark gave him the right hand of fellowship, 
 ' that he should ga to the heathen ;' Rev. John Peck
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS CHAOS. 51 
 
 addressed Mrs. Wade, and Rev. Elon Galusha gave 
 her the right hand of fellowship. Kev. Elijah F. 
 Willey offered the concluding prayer. The services 
 were performed in Rev. Mr. Atkins' meeting-house. 
 The day was fine, and the assemblage was very 
 large, and proved, by their fixed and silent atten- 
 tion to the services, how much they felt for the 
 world that lieth in wickedness ; and by a collection 
 of $86.23 taken on the spot, they showed a willing- 
 ness to share in the pleasure and expense of spread- 
 ing the Gospel in all the earth. 
 
 " ' Mr. Wade is a young man, and a native of the 
 state of New York. He received his classical and 
 theological education in the theological seminary at 
 Hamilton. He appeared before the committee a 
 man of good sense, of ardent piety, and understand- 
 ingly led by the Spirit of God to the work in which 
 he has now engaged. Mrs. Wade is from a respect- 
 able family in Hamilton, Madison County, daughter 
 of deacon Lapham. Her early piety and active zeal 
 in the cause of her Redeemer, has encouraged the 
 hope that she will be eminently useful in the cause 
 of missions with her husband. Latter Day Lumi- 
 nary.' 
 
 " Note by the Editor. How accordant is the lan- 
 guage and spirit of the above to the following 
 passage from the 13th chapter of the Acts of the 
 Apostles : 'On Wednesday, the llth of June, A. 
 D. 44, the Rev. Saul us Paul us and the Rev. Joses
 
 52 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS CHAOS. 
 
 Barnabas were set apart as missionaries to the Gen- 
 tiles dispersed throughout the world, by a commit- 
 tee of the board of managers of the Baptist General 
 Convention, met in the city of Antioch. An inter- 
 esting sermon was delivered on the occasion by the 
 Rev. Simon Niger, from Isaiah xlii. 4 : ' The isles 
 shall wait for his law/ Rev. Lucius, of Gyrene, led 
 in offering up the consecrating prayer. Rev. Man- 
 aen gave Mr. Paulus and his companion (Mr. 
 Barnabas) an appropriate charge ; and the Rev. 
 John Mark gave them the right hand of fellowship, 
 ' that they should go to the heathen/ The Rev. 
 Lucius, of Cyrene, offered up the concluding prayer. 
 The services were performed in the Rev. Mr. Simon 
 Niger's meeting-house. The day was fine, and the 
 assemblage was very large, and proved, by their 
 fixed and silent attention to the services, how much 
 they felt for the world that lieth in wickedness ; and 
 by a collection of $86.25, they showed a willingness 
 to aid the Rev. Mr. Paulus, and the Rev. Mr. Bar- 
 nabas in carrying the Gospel to the heathen. 
 
 " Mr. Paulus is a young man, and a native of the 
 city of Tarsus ; he received his classical and theo- 
 logical education in the theological seminary in 
 Jerusalem. He appeared before the committee a 
 man of good sense, of ardent piety, and understand- 
 ingly led by the spirit of God to the work in which 
 he has now engaged. 
 
 '"' I is, then, plain that the above notification is
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS CHAOS. 53 
 
 just in the spirit and style of this passage from the 
 13th chap;er of the Acts. But in the common 
 translation, the original loses much of its apti- 
 tude and beauty ; for lo ! it reads thus : ' Now 
 there was in the church that was at Antioch, certain 
 prophets and teachers ; as, Barnahas, and Simon 
 that was called Nigor, and Lucius of Gyrene, and 
 Manaen, which had been brought up with Herod 
 the tetrarch, and Saul. As they ministered to the 
 Lord, and fasted, the Holy Ghost said, Separate me 
 Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto I have 
 called them. And when they had fasted and prayed, 
 and laid their hands on them, they sent them 
 away.' " Chn. Bap., 17. 
 
 " Our objections to the missionary plan originated 
 from the conviction that it is unauthorized in the 
 New Testament ; and that, in many instances, it is 
 a system of iniquitous peculation and speculation, 
 I feel perfectly able to maintain both the one and 
 the other of these positions Not question- 
 ing the piety and philanthropy of many of the ori- 
 ginators, and present abettors of the missionary 
 plan, we must say that the present scheme is not 
 authorized by our King. This, I think, we proved 
 some time ago ; and no man that we have heard of, 
 has come forward to oppose our views. Indeed, I 
 think, we have few men^f any information, who would 
 come forward openly to defend the plan of saving the 
 world by 11 cans of money and science ; of converting
 
 54 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS CH&.OS. 
 
 pagans by funds laised indirectly from spinning- 
 wheels, fruit stalls, corn-fields, melon patches, potato 
 lots, rags, children's playthings, and religious news- 
 papers, consecrated to missionary purposes ; and 
 from funds raised directly by begging from every 
 body, of every creed, and of no creed whatever. By 
 sending out men to preach begging sermons, and to 
 tell the people of A.'s missionary patch of potatoes 
 producing twice as much per acre, as those destined 
 for himself and children ; of B.'s uncommon crop of 
 missionary wheat, a part of which he covetously 
 alienated from the missionary to himself, and, as a 
 judgment upon him, his cow broke into his barn and 
 ate of it until she killed herself ; of E.'s missionary 
 sheep having each yeaned two lambs a-piece, "while 
 his own only yeaned him one a-piece, and a variety 
 of other miracles wrought in favor of the missionary 
 fund. I say, what man of good common sense and 
 of a reasonable mind would come forward to defend 
 a scheme of converting the world by such means, 
 and by the means of that very ' vain philosophy' 
 and ' science falsely so called,' condemned by the 
 apostles." Chn. Bap., 53, 54. 
 
 " Mr. Robert Cautious . . . You think that it was 
 rather going to an extreme to rank Bible societies 
 with other popular schemes. Perhaps a more inti- 
 mate acquaintance with our views of Christianity 
 would induce you to think as we do upon this sub- 
 ject. We are convinced, fully convinced, that the
 
 3AMPBELLISM IN ITS OHAOS. 55 
 
 whole head is sick, and the whole heart faint of 
 modern fashionable Christianity that many of the 
 schemes of the populars resemble the delirium, the 
 wild fancies of a subject of fever, in its highest 
 paroxysms and that these most fashionable projects 
 deserve no more regard from sober Christians, Chris- 
 tians intelligent in the New Testament, than the 
 vagaries, the febrile flights of patients in an inflam- 
 matory fever. We admit that it is quite as difficult 
 to convince the populars of the folly of their pro- 
 jects, as it generally is to convince one in a febrile 
 reverie, that he is not in the possession of his 
 reason." Chn. Bap., 33. 
 
 " I honestly confess that the popular clergy and 
 their schemes appear to me fraught with mischief to 
 the temporal and eternal interests of men, and 
 would anxiously wish to see them converted into 
 useful members, or bishops, or deacons of the 
 Christian church. How has their influence spoiled 
 the best gifts of heaven to men ! Civil liberty hag 
 always fallen beneath their sway the inalienable 
 rights of men have been wrested from their hands 
 and even the very margin of the Bible polluted with 
 their inventions, their rabbinical dreams and whim- 
 sical nonsense. The Bible cannot be disseminated 
 without their appendages, and if children are taught 
 to read in a Sunday school, their pockets must be 
 filled with religious tracts, the object of which is 
 either directly or indirectly to bring them under the
 
 56 CAMPBLLISM IN ITS CHAOS. 
 
 domination of some cree I or sect. Even the dis 
 tribution of the Bible to the poor, must be followed 
 up with those tracts, as if the Bible dare not be 
 trusted in the hands of a layman, without a priest 
 or his representative at his elbow. It is on this ac- 
 count that I have, for some time, viewed both 
 ' Bible societies,' and l Sunday schools,' as a sort 
 of recruiting establishments, to fill up the ranks of 
 those sects which take the lead in them. It is true 
 that we rejoice to see the Bible spread, and the poor 
 taught to read by those means ; but notwithstand- 
 ing this, we ought not, as we conceive, to suffer the 
 policy of many engaged therein to pass unnoticed, 
 or to refrain from putting those on their guard who 
 are likely to be caught by ' the sleight of men and 
 cunning craftiness.' " Chn. Bap., 80. 
 
 The foregoing extracts pretty clearly indicate the 
 spirit and manner of Mr. Campbell's warfare against 
 Christian missions, and similar enterprizes. Some 
 points in them, however, are entitled to special at- 
 tention. 
 
 Notice, in the first place, a manifest fallacy in 
 argument. The argument is implied, not distinctly 
 expressed, by Mr. C. It is this all religious insti- 
 tutions not existing in the days of the apostles are 
 unauthorized. There were no mission and Bible 
 societies in the days of the apostles. Therefore 
 these societies are unauthorized. The fallacy in the 
 argument lies 'n not distinguishing between what is
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS CHAOS. 57 
 
 essential and what is circumstantial in Christianity 
 a difference fully admitted by Mr. 0. Chn. Sys., 
 p. 74. Christianity has its doctrine, facts, laws, 
 and promises ; and these are settled and immutable ; 
 but many things relating to the progress and estab- 
 lishment of Christianity were, of necessity, left to 
 be decided by time and circumstances in short, by 
 expediency. In the days of the apostles, there 
 were no translations of the Scriptures, no houses, 
 so far as we are informed, erected for religious wor- 
 ship, no religious periodicals, no Christian editors, 
 and no alms-houses ; but are all these unauthor- 
 ized ? May not Christian churches, and individual 
 Christians, combine for any, and every good purpose, 
 in such manner as they may deem expedient, pro- 
 vided that in so doing they violate no law of Christ ? 
 But what law what moral obligation, is violated 
 by missionary societies ? They propose to convert 
 the world to Christ is this right ? They propose 
 to accomplish the work by the promulgation of the 
 Gospel of Christ is this authorized ? They pro- 
 pose to diffuse the light of the Gospel by sustaining 
 and encouraging men who believe and love the 
 Gospel, and exemplify its excellence in their lives, 
 to proclaim it among the heathen is this unauthor- 
 ized ? The truth is, if Christians are authorized to 
 do any thing, they are authorized, as churches or 
 individuals, to enter into any combinations, or em- 
 ploy any means, not interdicted by divine authority,
 
 58 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS CHAOS. 
 
 to spread the knowledge of salvation. " Let Mm 
 that hearetli say, Come." 
 
 In the nest place, direct your attention to Mr. 
 Campbell's usual art of caricaturing, and aiming to 
 bring into derision, sacred and solemn things. One 
 among many instances of its exercise may be select- 
 ed for illustration. The account furnished by the 
 Latter Day Luminary of the setting apart of Mr. 
 and Mrs. Wade as missionaries to Burrnah is plain, 
 unostentatious, solemn, and in good taste. Mr. and 
 Mrs. Wade hare proved themselves, by a long life, 
 to be eminently humble, self-denying, and devoted 
 servants of Christ. The ministers who participated 
 in the services of the occasion were among the best 
 men living venerable for their age, their piety, 
 their wisdom, and their labors. The services were 
 most appropriate consisting of prayer, preaching 
 the word, suitable addresses, and giving the right 
 hand of fellowship. The assembly was large, atten- 
 tive, and deeply interested ; and the scene was one 
 on which, no doubt, angels looked with delight, and 
 God with approbation. Had such men, in such a 
 service, and under such circumstances, erred, their 
 3rror would have deserved to be treated with the 
 greatest candor .and forbearance. Yet this very 
 scene is, in a note by the Editor of the Christian 
 Baptist, caricatured, with heartless and revolting 
 leviiy ; and that too at a period when the writer
 
 CA.MPBELLISM IN ITS CUAOS. 59 
 
 could not plead in extenuation )f his course the in- 
 discretion of youth. 
 
 The Christian Baptist, having attained a wide 
 circulation, exerted a potent influence against the 
 cause of Christian missions, and Christian benevo- 
 lence generally. The sentiments which it incul- 
 cated, and the spirit which it infused, on these 
 subjects, were too congenial to the indolence and 
 selfishness of human nature, not to meet a cordial 
 reception from many. Wherever the Christian 
 Baptist spread, the cause of missions declined. 
 " Your paper," wrote a Kentucky correspondent, 
 "has well nigh stopped missionary operations in 
 this State." Chn. Bap., 144. And what was true 
 of its blighting influence in Kentucky, was equally 
 true of its influence in Virginia, Ohio, and every 
 place, where its visits were welcomed. 
 
 " Christian Experience " is a phrase/not found in 
 the Scriptures, and not, perhaps, wisely chosen, 
 but it was, at the commencement of Mr. Campbell's 
 reformation, as it is now, in very common use, and 
 of well defined, and well understood meaning. 
 It related to a subject of great importance one 
 held in the highest estimation ~\>y all evangelical 
 Christians. It denotes that series of conflicts, exer- 
 cises and emotions, springing from a gradual know- 
 ledge of Divine truth, and the influence of the 
 Holy Spirit, which results in the conversion of the 
 soul to Christ, and accompanies this event Much
 
 60 CAMPBELLISM IN ITb CHAOS. 
 
 has improperly passed under the name of Christian 
 experience ; and great mischief has arisen from 
 ignorance or misconception on the subject. Many 
 persons have mistaken excitements; fancies, dreams, 
 and other extravagances, for genuine conversion, 
 and not unfrequently amid much ignorance and 
 superstition have been found the marks of sincere 
 piety. Christian experience is greatly modified by 
 temperament, education, religious instruction, and 
 the circumstances under which conversion occurs. 
 Men of a phlegmatic temperament may embrace 
 the Gospel with comparatively little feeling. Men 
 of ardent temperament and vivid imaginations, like 
 John Bunyan, and Colonel "Gardiner, are likely to 
 receive the Gospel with intense and overwhelming 
 emotions, and these emotions are sometimes accom- 
 panied by fancied "visions and revelations." We 
 should carefully distinguish between what is' circum- 
 stantial and what is essential in Christian experience. 
 We should separate the chaff from the wheat. All 
 that is superstitious, visionary, extravagant in fine, 
 all that will not bear the test of Scripture, should 
 be rejected ; but we should beware of condemning 
 the precious with the vile the genuine with the 
 spurious. Conviction of sin, godly sorrow, faith in 
 Christ, an obedient spirit, love, peace, joy and hope, 
 are elements of genuine Christian experience. No 
 intelligent, evangelical Christian has ever placed 
 saving es perience in any thing short of those im-
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS CHAOS. 61 
 
 pressions, exercises and feelings which are essential 
 to a passage "from death unto life." Every godly 
 man clings with unyielding tenacity to the reality 
 of his Christian experience. He would no sooner 
 renounce it than his salvation. There may, indeed, 
 be religion its name its form its pomp its sac- 
 rifices without it ; but it is spiritless, heartless 
 and worthless. 
 
 Mr. Campbell's early writings on the subject of 
 experimental religion gave great pain to the friends 
 of spiritual Christianity. Some things which he 
 published on this subject were worthy of grave con- 
 sideration. He exposed with clearness and severity 
 the illusions and extravagances which, among the 
 uncultivated and ignorant, especially the negroes, 
 was current as Christian experience. These evils 
 were seen, deplored, and opposed by all well in- 
 formed Christians, long before he commenced his 
 Reformation. They are evils inseparable, perhaps, 
 from the progress of earnest piety among an illite- 
 rate and excitable people ; but from which a specu- 
 lative, heartless formalism is a certain preservative. 
 He condemned the practice common among Baptists 
 and some other evangelical Christians of requiring 
 from candidates for church membership a relation 
 of their experience. The practice he considered to 
 be, not only unauthorized, but injurious. That it 
 has sometimes been abused by the ignorant, or mis- 
 judging, none will deny.; but that churches should
 
 62 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS CHAOS. 
 
 avail themselves of the best means in their power 
 imperfect, at best to judge correctly of the sin- 
 cerity, knowledge and piety of persons wishing to 
 enter into their fellowship, seems evident from the 
 nature of the connexion. And a brief, clear narra- 
 tive of their religious exercises, or direct answers to 
 a few plain, pertinent questions adapted to elicit 
 information on this subject, will greatly facilitato 
 this object. Philip did not baptize the Ethiopian 
 eunuch, who requested baptism, until he had cate- 
 chised him. Acts 8 : 37. True, the evangelist 
 propounded but one question to the candidate or, 
 at least, in the concise narrative furnished by Luke, 
 only one is recorded that, under the circumstances, 
 being deemed sufficient. It should be borne in 
 mind that the Ethiopian was an intelligent man a 
 reader of the Scriptures had been to Jerusalem to 
 worship and had been receiving personal instruc- 
 tion from Philip. The evangelist asked the candi- 
 date the question which was most likely to elicit the 
 true state of his heart, and the answer was satisfac- 
 tory. This example, so far from restricting pastors 
 or churches, in the examination of candidates for 
 baptism, to this brief and single question a ques- 
 tion never, so far as we are informed, proposed to 
 any other applicant for the ordinance, in apostolic 
 times fairly authorizes them to make such in- 
 quiries as the intelligence, known characters, and 
 circumstances, of the candidates may appear to re-
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS CHAOS. 63 
 
 quire. But whether the necessary information 
 shall be obtained by asjjdng questions, or by the 
 connected narrative of the candidates for church 
 fellowship, is a point about which none but hair- 
 splitting speculatists would stickle. Though Mr. 
 Campbell differed from the Baptists generally on 
 this subject, the difference would have caused no 
 serious strife between them. His views on this 
 point were not peculiar. Several evangelical de- 
 nominations, held in high and deserved estimation 
 by the Baptists, received members into full com- 
 munion without requiring a recital of their Chris- 
 tian experience. What the Baptists maintained 
 was, that persons were not entitled to church mem- 
 bership, without the various exercises, comprehend- 
 ed in conversion, or regeneration, which they 
 termed " Christian experience," and which are par- 
 ticularly pointed out in the commencement of this 
 article. On this point they have never wavered, 
 and, God grant, they never may. The propriety 
 of relating an experience before a church is one 
 thing the indispensable necessity of an experience 
 a " Christian experience" in order to legitimate 
 church communion is another, and far more im- 
 portant matter. 
 
 Now, it was in regard to the latter, and not the 
 former point, that the remarks of Mr. Campbell 
 caused so much pain among considerate and earnest 
 Christians. He treated the subject with a levity,
 
 64 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS CHAOS. 
 
 sarcasm, and disregard of the feelings of holy men, 
 which can be fairly characterized by no term less 
 offensive than shocking. Good men stood aghast 
 at the freedom and severity with which he treated 
 a subject that they had been accustomed to regard 
 with feelings of awe, not, perhaps, unmingled with 
 superstition. It is just to him to say that, so far as 
 I can perceive, he did not deny the reality or the 
 necessity of what others termed " Christian expe- 
 rience," but he wrote equivocally on the subject. 
 He knew that he was accused of rejecting Christian 
 experience spiritual religion and that his peculiar 
 views of faith and repentance were supposed to lead 
 to this result and yet the frank and full avowal on 
 these points, requisite to quiet the fears, not of the 
 captious, but of the intelligent, pious and candid, 
 who looked with favor on some portions of his Be- 
 formation, was studiously withheld. Some para- 
 graphs, considered alone, would appear to establish 
 the soundness of his views on experimental religion ; 
 but others would throw a doubt over his meaning. 
 To satisfy those who called in question the correct- 
 ness of his opinions on this subject, he wrote " It 
 is said that we have taught that there is no neces- 
 sity of being born again by the Spirit of God ; and 
 that we have denied that Christians are new crea- 
 tures, and that we have confined all divine grace to 
 the apostolic age. Now we must confess that we 
 did. not intend to communicate such ideas ; nor do
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS CHAOS. 65 
 
 we think that such can be fairly gathered from oui 
 words." But sx>n he added " We have discovered 
 that something under the name of " experimental 
 religion" is the very soul of the popular system" 
 and the reader has seen the estimate in which he 
 held that system. Chn. Bap., 64. See also pp. 
 48-49. 
 
 A few quotations must suffice to exhibit tne views 
 of Mr. Campbell on the subject of experimental re- 
 ligion, and his spirit and manner in discussing it. 
 
 "It is, perhaps, chiefly owing to the religious 
 theories imbibed in early life from creeds, cate- 
 chisms, and priests, that so few comparatively enjoy 
 the grace of God which brings salvation. The grace 
 of God, exhibited in the record concerning Jesus of 
 Nazareth, afforcis no consolation. The hopes and 
 joys of many spring from a good conceit of them- 
 selves. If this good conceit vanishes, which some- 
 times happens, despondency and distress are the 
 consequences. While they can, as they conceit, 
 thank God that they are not like other men, they 
 are very happy ; but when this fancied excellency 
 disappears, the glad tidings afford no consolation : 
 anguish and distress have come upon them. This, 
 with some of the spiritual doctors, is a good symp- 
 tom too : for, say they, ' if you do not doubt we 
 will doubt for you.' When they have worked them 
 into despondency, they minister a few opiates, and 
 assure them that they are now in a safe and happy
 
 66 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS CHAOS 
 
 state. Now they are to rejoice, because they are 
 sorrowful ; now they are to feel very good, because 
 they feel so very bad. This is the orthodox ' Chris- 
 tian experience/ This is the genuine work of the 
 Holy Spirit !" Chn. Bap., 138. 
 
 Did Mr. Campbell really believe that this carica- 
 ture, which he drew, was " the orthodox Christian 
 experience" " the genuine work of the Holy Spirit" 
 for which the evangelical Christians of that time 
 pleaded ? It is charitable to think so. But how 
 a man of Mr. Campbell's intelligence, erudition, 
 general information, and accurate observation, could 
 have reached such a conclusion, it is not easy to 
 comprehend. .It will not be denied that the evil 
 which Mr. Campbell portrayed was real, and de- 
 served correction. In all religious denominations 
 there may be ignorant, enthusiastic and misguided 
 teachers. He will concede that there are such in 
 the churches enrolled under the banner of his own 
 Reformation or if he should not, the means of his 
 conviction are at hand. But is it fair to charge the 
 crudities and errors of such teachers to orthodoxy ? 
 No evangelical Christian denomination, has ever en- 
 dorsed such an experience as Mr. Campbell has de- 
 lineated in this paragraph, either from his prolific 
 imagination, or the teachings and doings of ignorant 
 enthusiasts. He may be safely challenged to furnish 
 from any creed, document, accredited writer, or re- 
 spectabla journal, of any Christian persuasion, the
 
 CAMPBELLISH IN ITS CHAOS. 67 
 
 outline of an approved experience, so defective and 
 unscriptural as this "orthodox Christian expe- 
 rience." I have been in the Christian ministry 
 more than thirty years, and I have no recollection of 
 having read in any book, or heard from the lips of 
 any teacher, approved by any orthodox Christian 
 denomination, the description of a saving experience, 
 which did not include Godly sorrow, the renuncia- 
 tion of sins, and trust in Christ for salvation. To 
 represent an experience, having no allusion to con- 
 viction of sin, sorrow for it, hatred of it, the aban- 
 donment of it, faith in Christ, love to him, and an 
 obedient disposition in short, a change of heart 
 not as the experience of a few ignorant and excited 
 enthusiasts but as " the orthodox Christian ex- 
 perience" "the genuine work of the Holy Spirit," 
 is to misrepresent it may be, ignorantly, or care- 
 lessly, or in the heat of party zeal but nevertheless 
 to misrepresent, most grossly, the class of men 
 among whom is to be found most of the intelligent 
 piety which the world contains. 
 
 It is proper to furnish another extract on this 
 subject, of later date, tut of similar spirit. Chn. 
 Sys., p. 244, 245. 
 
 "EFFECTS OF MODERN CHRISTIANITY. Our great- 
 est objection to the systems which we oppose, is 
 their impotency on the heart. Alas J what multi- 
 tudes of prayerless, saintless, Christless, joyless 
 bear's, have crowded Christianity out of the congre-
 
 68 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS CHAOS. 
 
 gations by their experiences before baptism ! They 
 seem to have had all their religion before they pro- 
 fessed it. They can relate no experience since 
 baptism, comparable to that professed before the 
 " mutual pledge" was tendered and received. It 
 was the indubitable proofs of the superabundance 
 of this fruit, which caused me to suspect the far' 
 famed tree of evangelical orthodoxy. That cold- 
 heartedness that stiff and mercenary formality 
 that tithing of mint, anise, and dill that negligence 
 of mercy, justice, truth, and the love of God, which 
 stalked through the communions of sectarian altars 
 that apathy and indifference about l thus saith 
 the Lord' that zeal for human prescriptions, and 
 above all, that willing ignorance of the sayings and 
 doings of Jesus Christ and his apostles, which so 
 generally appeared, first of all created, fostered, and 
 matured my distrust in the reformed systems of 
 evangelical sectaries." 
 
 When Mr. Campbell commenced his labors, the 
 state of Protestant Christendom was not such as 
 the pious heart might desire. In all communions 
 there were obvious, acknowledged, and grievous 
 evils. The comparative inefficacy of all the means 
 employed for the moral renovation of men was but 
 too manifest. All good men united with the devout 
 Psalmist in the desire, " Oh, let the wickedness of 
 the wicked come to an end !" But did these evils 
 in the churches spring from " experiences before
 
 CAMPBELLISM IF ITS CHAOS. 69 
 
 baptism ?" Did the requiring of experiences pre- 
 paratory to baptism and church fellowship crowd 
 Christianity out of the churches, by introducing 
 " multitudes of prayerless, saintless, Christless, joy- 
 less hearts ?" Or did these evils originate in tho 
 moral corruption of human nature, and the deterior- 
 ating tendencies of a world enslaved by sin ? .A 
 large majority of the evangelical churches did not 
 require "experiences before baptism ;" what " crowd- 
 ed Christianity" out of them ? There were great 
 and deplorable evils in the churches gathered and 
 instructed by the apostles and that too before they 
 closed their ministry did " experiences before bap- 
 tism" produce them ? The truth is, nothing could 
 be more unfair, unphilosophical, and deceptive, than 
 to reason as Mr. Campbell did. He had, in some 
 respects, an easy task before him. It demanded 
 but little research or labor to detect, publish, and 
 magnify the evils in the various Christian commun- 
 ions. All these evils Mr. Campbell boldly and 
 confidently ascribed, without discrimination, fairness, 
 or qualification, to ".sectarian bigotry," "popular 
 Christianity," "evangelical orthodoxy," or "expe- 
 riences before baptism." With equal zeal and 
 assurance, he proclaimed that the sovereign remedy 
 for all these evils, was a return to the " Ancient 
 Gospel," not as it had been received and practised 
 by the wise and good of every land, but as it was 
 understood and interpreted at Bethany. Many saw
 
 70 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS CHAOS. 
 
 and deplored these evils, earnestly desired their cor- 
 rection, and embraced the Bethany exposition of the 
 Grospel that their wishes might be realized. Churches 
 were organized according to the " ancient order of 
 things," from which there is no danger that Chris- 
 tianity will be crowded out by " experiences before 
 baptism." The public have had an opportunity of 
 comparing the fruits of the Reformation with the 
 fruits of " the far-famed tree of evangelical ortho- 
 doxy." It is not proper to anticipate what it is pro- 
 posed to state in another part of this work ; but I 
 will mention a single fact. A few years ago, one 
 of the earliest, most intelligent, and devoted of the 
 friends of the " ancient order of things," said can- 
 didly, that the Reformation had not proved as per- 
 fect in practise as it was in theory. 
 
 Some extracts having been given from the writings 
 of Mr. Campbell, as specimens of his manner of 
 treating experimental religion, it is proper that he 
 should have the benefit of his apology for tne sevei 
 ity of his style. 
 
 " The _ reader," he says, "may perhaps think 
 that we speak too irreverently of the practice and 
 of the experience of many Christians. We have no 
 such intention. But there are many things when 
 told or represented just as they are, which appear 
 so strange, and, indeed, fanciful, that the mere rela- 
 tion of them assuiies an air cf irony." Chn. Bap., 
 141., Note.
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS CHAOS. 71 
 
 Whether the defense mends the matter, the 
 reader must judge for himself. Another, if not a 
 better, apology for Mr. Campbell's course may be 
 suggested. If he was really convinced that " or- 
 thodox Christian experiences" were, as he represent- 
 ed them, Christless, graceless and senseless an 
 artificial despondency cured by noxious opiates 
 then, perhaps, no apology was necessary. We can 
 only lament that a man of his conceded abilities 
 should have had his judgment so sadly perverted 
 by no matter what baleful influence. 
 
 As it is proposed, in another part of this volume, 
 to examine particularly the principles of Campbell- 
 ism, I shall in this chapter merely glance at those 
 ivhich distinguished this period of the Reformation. 
 It has been already observed, that the teaching of 
 Mr. Campbell, through the columns of the Christian 
 Baptist, was negative rather than positive was in- 
 tended to overthrow, and bring into disrepute the 
 popular theology, rather than to develope any pecu- 
 liar religious principles. The current teachings of 
 all the prevailing Christian sects, whether oral, or 
 written, whether in creeds, sernjons, expositions of 
 the Scriptures, or any other form, were deemed by 
 him, and his admirers, vain speculations, philosophi- 
 cal subtleties, or orthodox nonsense. Gradually, 
 and slowly, however, his doctrinal peculiarities 
 began to be ""volved. Having referred to the period-
 
 72 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS CHAOS. 
 
 icals and other works, which advocated his peculiar 
 principles, he wrote 
 
 " The CHRISTIAN BAPTIST in seven annual vol- 
 umes, being the first of these publications, and 
 affording such a gradual development of these 
 principles as the state of the public mind and the 
 opposition would permit, is, in the judgment of 
 many of our brethren, who have expressed them- 
 selves on the subject, better adapted to the whole 
 community as it now exists, than our other writ- 
 ings." Chn. Sys., p. 10. 
 
 Whether Mr. Campbell did not express his doc- 
 trinal views clearly, or with uniformity ; or whether 
 his opponents were unable, or unwilling to compre- 
 hend his meaning, need not now to be decided. I 
 certainly have never known a religious teacher 
 whose views were involved in so much mist and un- 
 certainty. From his writings might be culled pas- 
 sages, which would satisfy the most strenuous ad- 
 vocates of orthodoxy in respect to his soundness in 
 the faith ; and from the same pages, other passages 
 which seemed to threaten the very foundation of 
 evangelical Christianity. By some he was charged 
 with holding the most pestilential errors ; and by 
 others he was considered the ablest uninspired ex- 
 pounder of the Christian faith. It began to be ap- 
 parent, however, that there were serious discord- 
 ances between his doctrinal views and those enter- 
 tained by evangelical Christians, and especially the
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITs CHAOS. 73 
 
 x > 
 
 Baptists, with whom he was particularly connected. 
 These differences had reference to faith, repentance, 
 regeneration, the remission of sins, the influence of 
 the Holy Spirit, and other points of minor import- 
 ance. He was understood to teach and maintain 
 that faith is a simple persuasion that Jesus is the 
 Messiah, which demands no influence of the Holy 
 Spirit to incline the mind to its exercise that re- 
 pentance is a reformation of life that regeneration 
 is identical with baptism that the remission of 
 sins is enjoyed only through baptism and that the 
 Holy Spirit is bestowed only on the baptized. On 
 no point, perhaps, did his teaching give such general 
 dissatisfaction as in regard to the influence of the 
 Holy Spirit in the moral renovation of man. The 
 Baptists, in common with other orthodox Chris- 
 tians, held this doctrine to be of vital importance. 
 His teaching on the subject was, or to many it 
 seemed to be evasive, contradictory, unsound, and 
 of pernicious tendency. The reader will perceive 
 in the following quotation the spirit and influence 
 of his writings on this solemn and important sub- 
 ject. 
 
 " I read, some time since, of a revival in the 
 state of New York, in which the Spirit of God was 
 represented as being abundantly poured out on 
 Presbyterians, Methodists, and Baptists. I think 
 the converts in the order of the names were about 
 
 three hundred Presbyterians, three hundred Metho- 
 
 4
 
 74 CAMPBELLJSM IN ITS CHAOS. 
 
 (lists, and two/hundred and eighty Baptists. Oi 
 the principles of Bellamy, Hopkins, and Fuller, 
 .these being all .regenerated without any knowledge 
 of,,ttie Gospel, there is no difficulty in accounting 
 'for their joining different sects. The spirit did not 
 teach the Presbyterians to believe that ( God had 
 foreordained whatsoever comes to pass ;' nor the 
 Methodists to deny it. He did not teach the Pres- 
 byterians and the Methodists that infants were 
 members of the church, and to be baptized ; noi 
 the Baptists to deny it. But on the hypothesis of 
 the Apostle James, viz : ' Of his own will begat 
 he us by the word of truth.' I think it would be 
 difficult to prove that the Spirit of God had any 
 thing to do with the aforesaid revival/' Chn. Bap., 
 50. 
 
 By some persons Mr. Campbell was suspected, 
 and charged with leaning toward Unitarianism. 
 For this impression I have never found any good 
 ground. In his zeal to introduce what he termed 
 " a pure speech," he rejected the words " Trinity," 
 and " Trinitarianism," and also seme notions, more 
 or less prevalent, concerning the Trinity ; but so 
 far as I can discover, he clearly and uniformly main- 
 tained the doctrine of Christ's Godhead, and the 
 vicarious and expiatory nature of his sufferings. 
 
 It is unnecessary to pursue this subject much 
 farther. It is not my purpose to point out all the 
 sentiments ind practices among evangelical Chris-
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS CHAOS. 75 
 
 tians which incurred his displeasure, and provoked 
 his animadversions. The war was as general as it 
 was fierce and relentless. Nothing was so venera- 
 ble, so sacred, and so important, in the estimation 
 of others, or so strongly entrenched in popular favor, 
 as to shield it from his attacks. Objects, in them- 
 selves confessedly good, were denounced because 
 they were pursued with sectarian zeal, and for sec- 
 tarian purposes. In all the pages of the Christian 
 Baptist it will be difficult to find a sentence com- 
 mendatory of any institution, plan, custom, labor 
 or interest of Christendom, apart from his own 
 che rished Reformation.
 
 V CAMPBELLISM IN ITS FORMATION. 
 
 Various causes contributed to augment the in- 
 fluence of Mr. Campbell, to diffuse his peculiar no- 
 tions, and to facilitate the progress of his Reforma- 
 tion. His information, self-command, boldness, and 
 indomitable ardor, eminently fitted him to lead a 
 party. His temperament, intellectual habits, and 
 aspirations were all adapted to impel him to aban- 
 don the beaten track of thought and labor, and to 
 impart to his writings and preaching the charm of 
 novelty. His views might not be scriptural, or 
 wise, or important ; but they were, at least, un- 
 common and this was sufficient to render them 
 acceptable to a certain class of minds. By his 
 fearless and forcible defense of the distinctive senti- 
 ments of the Baptists, in his debates with Messrs. 
 Walker and McCalla, he secured extensively the 
 confidence and esteem of the denomination. They 
 were proud to acknowledge him as the bold and 
 puissant champion of their cause and they made 
 the acknowledgment with more pleasure, because 
 he had risen up suddenly, and in a quarter least ex-
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN IT3 FORMATION. 77 
 
 pected. They were, therefore, ready to pay not 
 only a candid but a confiding regard to anything he 
 might publish. His ability and prowess as a public 
 extempore debater, had given him a prestige most 
 favorable to his influence and success. His oppo- 
 nents too, with few exceptions, unwittingly pro- 
 moted the Reformation. Instead of an open, manly 
 and resolute discussion of the objectionable points 
 in his scheme ; they carried on a petty warfare, cen- 
 suring frequently without discrimination, wasting 
 their resources in the discussion of trifles, and always 
 ready to retreat at the first appearance of serious 
 danger. I do not intend to reflect on the motives, 
 or abilities, of the excellent fathers who early par- 
 ticipated in the discussion of Campbellism they 
 pursued the course to which their judgment or their 
 circumstances led them but Mr. Campbell was too 
 adroit an opponent not to interpret their guerrilla 
 warfare as a proof of his invincibility, and the sound- 
 ness of the cause which he had espoused. 
 
 His opposition to sectarianism has been already 
 mentioned ; and from this opposition, he not only 
 brought on himself much reproach, but derived a 
 large measure of his strength and influence. On 
 the subject of sectarianism, his logic was precisely 
 that which every quack employs to bring lain nos- 
 trums irto use. He expatiates earnestly on tho 
 inefficiency of the regular medical practice. There 
 ire some diseases for which physicians have no
 
 78 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS FORMATION 
 
 remedy ; for many others their prescriptions arc 
 sadly and confessedly unsuccessful ; and, in not a 
 few cases, their drugs have proved pernicious. Phy- 
 sicians of the greatest wisdom and experience have 
 lamented the impeifection of medical science, and the 
 uncertainty of the healing art. These evils and ad- 
 missions are paraded and duly magnified before the 
 public, by the empiric, who proclaims his certified sove- 
 reign panacea, while the credulous, and those who 
 have despaired of aid from science, are caught by the 
 specious artifice. The evils of sectarianism were ob- 
 vious and confessed. The division of Protestant Chris- 
 tendom into numerous rival sects, spending their 
 time, wasting their energies, embittering their spirits, 
 and affording sport for their adversaries, by their sub- 
 tle and profitless controversies, has long been its re- 
 proach, its curse, and its blight. It is an evil second 
 in magnitude only to the religious uniformity, which, 
 resembling the quiet of the cemetery, is the off- 
 spring of bigoted and intolerant despotism. Of 
 course, in these remarks, reference is had to the 
 evils growing out of the condition of the Christian 
 world. The mischiefs of sectarianism were delinea- 
 ted by Mr. Campbell, certainly, with no fear of ex- 
 aggeration. All its legitimate evils were charged 
 upon it ; and many which with equal plausibility 
 might have been ascribed to other causes. From 
 all these evils he promised a certain and speedy de- 
 liverance. The " ancient Gospel," or the Gospel
 
 \,.& rfPBELLISM IN ITS FORMATION. 79 
 
 as expounded at Bethany, was a remedy for all 
 these disorders. The plan of relief was perfectly 
 simple. Nothing was necessary to abolish sectarian- 
 ism, and its bitter fruits, and so secure the perfect 
 union of all Christians, but the belief of one fact 
 that Jesus is the Messiah ; submission to one insti- 
 tution immersion, for the remission of sins ; and a 
 steady conformity to the apostles' doctrine. The 
 scheme was defective, visionary, and utterly ineffi- 
 cacious ; but it was plausible it promised relief 
 from evils seen, felt and lamented it seemed to be 
 the only prospect for relief presented and many, 
 cheated by the illusion, gladly embraced it. 
 
 Another cause which favored the progress of the 
 reformation was the prevalence of hyper-Calvinistic, 
 or antinomian views in many Baptist churches. 
 Having adopted, in its main points, the Calvinian 
 theology, they were led by their system into specu- 
 lations as unpopular as they were sterile. To free 
 them from objections and render them acceptable 
 to their auditors, the pastors spent a large portion 
 of the time devoted to pulpit labors in their discus- 
 sion ; and what occupied so much of their thought 
 grew into most exaggerated importance in their es- 
 timation. They seemed to think that they were 
 called to the ministry for no other purpose than to 
 proclaim and vindicate a few abstruse and barren 
 points of the Calvinistic creed ; but their ministry, 
 excepting to a :ew indoctrinated zealots, was not
 
 80 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS FOKMAT10N. 
 
 pleasing. The people generally becoming disgusted 
 with such dry, and unsatisfying speculations, were 
 ready to attend on .any ministry which promised 
 them a more palatable, if not a more nutritious diet. 
 In churches of this sort Mr. Campbell found his way 
 prepared before him. 
 
 His opposition to Christian missions, and other 
 benevolent enterprizes, gained him many friends. 
 The antinomian Baptists were, almost without ex- 
 ception, hostile to all combined and self-denying 
 efforts among Christians for spreading the know- 
 ledge of the Gospel a hostility derived, in part, 
 from their peculiar doctrinal opinions, and, it seems 
 not uncharitable to judge, in part, from their 
 covetousness. They were delighted to find that 
 they had in Mr. Campbell, a champion in their 
 cause, so zealous and distinguished ; and, though 
 their doctrinal sentiments were antipodal to his, yet 
 this agreement on a very important point, as they 
 deemed it, disposed them to pass the most favor- 
 able judgment on him, and his system. Nor was 
 this pleasure limited to antinomian Baptists. Mr. 
 Campbell's ridicule of missions, and kindred efforts, 
 was too much in harmony with the selfishness of 
 human nature, and the money-loving propensity of 
 the age, not to awaken sympathy, and call forth ad- 
 miration. An intelligent correspondent of tha 
 Christian Baptist thus addressed him : " My dear 
 sir, yfi have begun wrong, if your object is reform-
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS FORMATION. 81 
 
 ation. Never attack the principle which multiplies 
 the number of Bibles, or which promotes the 
 preaching of the Gospel, or the support of it, if 
 you desire Christianity to prevail. As I informed 
 you when here, I repeat it again, your opposition to 
 a preached Gospel, to the preachers and Bible so- 
 cieties, secures to you the concurrence of the covet- 
 ous, the ignorant, the prayerless and Christless 
 Christians. Should they have had any religion, 
 they cease to enjoy it as soon as they embrace your 
 views." Chn. Bap., 7U 
 
 Mr. Campbell's opposition to the clergy had much 
 to do with the progress of the Reformation. Minis- 
 ters of the Gospel have in all ages and coun- 
 tries, and under all the names by which they have 
 been distinguished, had to bear a large share of the 
 " reproach of Christ." Whoever ridicules them, 
 throws suspicion on their motives, or, in any way, 
 undermines their influence, with whatever pretence, 
 is sure to win the smiles, and receive the plaudits. 
 of a certain class of persons, among whom, it is sad 
 to say, may be found professing Christians. Mr. 
 Campbell was decidedly politic in his attacks on the 
 clergy. While he denounced them, he flattered 
 the people. They did not need to hire priests for 
 their instruction they could read and expound the 
 Scriptures for themselves every church had within 
 itself the means of its own edification. These sen- 
 timents were too congenial to the independence and 
 
 4*
 
 82 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS FORMATION. 
 
 pride of human nature not to find a cordial recep- 
 tion. Many who had been content to be learners, 
 after reading a few numbers of the Christian Bap- 
 tist, were elated with the prospect of becoming 
 teachers. A Reformation which promised to sink 
 the aristocratic populars and to elevate the masses 
 far above their former teachers, could not fail to se- 
 cure the approval and support of those who con- 
 fided in its professions. 
 
 I know not how much influence Mr. Campbell's 
 teaching derived from its Scotch peculiarities, but I 
 know it derived some. The Scotch are remarkable 
 for the tenacity with which they adhere to their re- 
 ligious opinions. A Scotchman of my acquaint- 
 ance, an intelligent and worthy man finding that 
 Mr. Campbell agreed with him in certain unim- 
 portant, but cherished opinions, in regard to which 
 he differed from his brethren generally, was induced 
 to pay a favorable attention to the " ancient Gos- 
 .pel," and finally to become its earnest advocate. 
 
 The chief means of spreading the peculiar views 
 of the Bethany Reformer was the Christian Baptist, 
 a small, cheap periodical, whose circulation was 
 constantly increasing. To their development and 
 defense its pages were exclusively devoted. Almost 
 all who read it were either disgusted with its spirit 
 and sentiments, and spurned it from them, or being 
 gradually brought under its influence, at length, 
 enlisted under tin banner of the Reformation. Mr.
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS FORMATION. 83 
 
 Campbell, in addition to his editorial, and other 
 literary labors, frequently made long tours in Vir- 
 ginia, Kentucky and Ohio, every where proclaiming 
 to crowded assemblies the principles of hisKeforma- 
 tion. His sermons, or " orations," as he styled 
 them, long, and sometimes tedious, were heard by 
 some with disapprobation, by others with serious 
 doubts as to their usefulness, and by others still 
 with indifference ; yet, on the whole, they contrib- 
 uted much to diffuse the knowledge of his prin- 
 ciples, promote the circulation of his periodical, and 
 multiply the number of his friends. 
 
 Nor must it be forgotten in enumerating the 
 causes which facilitated the progress of theKeform- 
 ation, that Mr. Campbell taught many important 
 truths ; exposed some serious evils ; furnished some 
 striking expositions of Scripture passages, which, 
 if not original, were new to his hearers j and labored 
 diligently to awaken an interest in the study of the- 
 Scriptures. 
 
 It has been already stated that it was not Mr. 
 Campbell's purpose certainly not his avowed pur- 
 pose to form a new sect, but to abolish all sects. 
 If he did not perceive, he was the only intelligent 
 observer of his course who did not perceive, its direct 
 and inevitable tendency to produce that result. 
 His spirit was eminently sectayan. What is sect- 
 arianism, but an undue confidence in the soundness 
 of oui views of Scripture truth, an excessive partial-
 
 84 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS FORMATION. 
 
 ity for the party concurring with us in these views, 
 and the lack of candor, tenderness, and forbearance 
 towards those who dissent from them ? When tried 
 by this standard, no enlightened and unbiased 
 reader of the Christian Baptist can doubt that Mr. 
 Campbell's sectarianism was unmitigated. Within 
 the wide range of Christian literature there cannot 
 be found a work more intolerant, prescriptive, and 
 caustic. Love is the very soul of piety, and the 
 moving principle in every well-directed effort at 
 reformation ; and this principle will develop itself 
 in gentle words, candid admissions, and a duo 
 regard to the feelings and motives of opponents, as 
 
 well as in a faithful, earnest exhibition of divine 
 
 j 
 
 truth. If Mr. Campbell's object was to a^bid the 
 formation of a new sect, his course warmest im- 
 politic. Instead of commending what was good, 
 enduring minor evils, and kindly seeking to correct 
 the serious errors in the different Christian sects ; he 
 censured their views and practices with, little discri- 
 mination, and unsparing causticity, proclaiming that 
 they were all in Babylon, and their religion not much 
 better than paganism ; and justified his severity by 
 the example of Luther in contending against the 
 Papists, and of Christ in condemning the Scribes 
 and Pharisees. Never did any leader more per- 
 fectly succeed in infusing his own spirit into his 
 followers, than did Mr. Campbell. With not a tithe 
 of his genius, 1 earning, or information, they did not
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS FORMATION. 85 
 
 yield to him a hair-breadth, in the strength of their 
 conviction, that their new religious views were 
 Scriptural. Many of them were almost in an 
 ecstacy that having been so long in the darkness 
 of Babylon, a light, so effulgent and vivifying, 
 should have suddenly shined upon them. A shadow 
 of suspicion that, after all, they might misinterpret 
 the Scriptures seemed never to have darkened their 
 minds. A fact may serve to illustrate their spirit. 
 A girl of my acquaintance, still in her teens, quite 
 illiterate, and possessing no uncommon genius, had 
 been immersed for the remission of sins. On meet- 
 ing her, I found that she had entered fully into the 
 spirit of the Reformation. I inquired of her, whether 
 she was satisfied that her new views were correct. 
 She replied, " I can't be wrong I follow the Book." 
 I answered, " I acknowledge that the Bible is an 
 infallible guide; but I am not quite certain that you 
 are an infallible interpreter of it." Our conversa- 
 tion was continued for some time, and I could not, 
 by any argument or appeal, extort from her the 
 confession that she might possibly misinterpret the 
 Scriptures. " I follow the Book, and can't be 
 deceived," was her unchanged reply. I remember 
 a similar case. A Reformer invited me to his house 
 for the ostensible purpose of seeing his sick wife, 
 but for the real purpose, as it appeared, of affording 
 me an opportunity of learning the principles of tho 
 Reformation. He could n^t redd, but had a young
 
 86 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS FORMATION. 
 
 daughter, who entered fully into his spirit and views, 
 that was more fortunate in this respect, than her 
 father. The Reformer called on his daughter to 
 read certain portions of Scripture which had been 
 selected for the occasion, and she complied with an 
 air and manner which indicated how deeply she 
 thought I was indebted for her kindness. He then 
 commenced an oration, to which I listened without 
 reply, and without a smile, though I found it diffi- 
 cult to maintain my gravity, until, my edification 
 having ceased, I abruptly took my leave. I should 
 not deem it proper to mention these particular cases, 
 were I not satisfied that all acquainted with the 
 ^arly history of Campbellism will perceive in them 
 iife-like portraitures of many, not all for some 
 were modest, courteous, and dignified of the prim- 
 itive Reformers. I greatly misjudge if the early 
 disciples of Mr. Campbell, (I do not use the phrase 
 cpprobriously,) were not, for the most part, restive, 
 contentious, and factious. How could they be other- 
 wise ? They read the Christian Baptist, had strong 
 confidence in "the wisdom and piety of its editor, 
 imbibed its spirit, adopted its principles, clothed 
 themselves with the armor which it furnished, entered 
 heartily into all the schemes which it advocated foi 
 the destruction of creeds, the overthrow of the clergy, 
 the arrest of benevolent operations, and, in short, 
 the " restoration of the ancient order of things" set 
 up, or brought to light at Bethany ; and aimed to
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS FORMATION. 87 
 
 \ prove themselves worthy followers of an illustrious 
 and undaunted leader. 
 
 The Baptists, at least in Virginia, were unpre- 
 pared for the conflict which came upon them. Their 
 pastors, mostly plain men, with limited education, 
 and earnest piety, had restricted their pnalic instruc- 
 tions to the fundamental principles of Christianity, 
 and were unfitted by their lack of early training, 
 and by their confirmed habits, for polemic discus- 
 sions. The members of the churches had inherited 
 their religious opinions from the fathers of an earlier 
 period, and held them sincerely without a suspicion 
 that they could be controverted. They received the 
 Bible in the common version, as their creed, and 
 read it, mainly to be comforted by its promises, and 
 guided by its precepts, not doubting that all their 
 doctrinal views were clearly contained in it. It were 
 useless to maintain that the Baptists were faultless 
 in the controversy. They sinned far less than they 
 were sinned against, but they were not without sin. 
 They sometimes judged when they should have 
 investigated, condemned when they should have 
 debated, resorted to the exercise of authority when 
 they should have used kind persuasion, and failed 
 to distinguish between the factious and the misled. 
 In the year 1832, events were drawing to a crisis 
 in the Baptist denomination in Virginia and some 
 of the Western States. A party had been formed 
 in the churches, respectable for their number, and
 
 88 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS IORMATION. 
 
 quite formidable by the aggressive spirit which 
 actuated tljem. They adopted the peculiar senti- 
 ments and practices advocated by Mr. Campbell in 
 the Christian Baptist, and its successor, the Millen- 
 nial Harbinger. They styled themselves Reformers, 
 but by their opponents, they were styled Gampbdl- 
 ites. They were exceedingly active in making con- 
 verts, and in numbering and marshalling their 
 forces. In this state of things it was impossible but 
 that strife, irritations, alienations, and divisions must 
 ensue. Mr. Campbell had for several years been 
 sowing the seed of sectarianism, and now he was 
 about to reap the harvest. 
 
 What was to be done in this crisis ? The Re- 
 formers, with Mr. Campbell at their head, were 
 violently opposed to separation from the Baptists, 
 and were ready, to a man, to fight for peace. It 
 can hardly be doubted that this desire of union 
 sprang from policy rather than love. They were 
 willing to remain for a time in Babylon, that they 
 might extricate others from its smoke, vassalage, 
 and degradation. Knowing themselves to be in a 
 hopeless minority, they were desirous to be permitted 
 to avail themselves of Baptist pulpits and presses 
 for the propagation of their principles. But a 
 division was inevitable. It existed in fact a divi- 
 sion in sentiment, affection, interest, and aim and 
 it only remained to be carried out in form. 
 
 Had the church^ a right to expel the Reformers ?
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS FORMATION. 89 
 
 The power of expelling factious and disorderly mem- 
 bers seems to be indispensable to the purity, peace, 
 and prosperity of the churches, and this power is 
 distinctly conferred in the Scriptures. " Now, I 
 beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divi- 
 sions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye 
 have learned ; and avoid them." Kom xvi. 27. It 
 is true, the Eeformers maintained that their teach- 
 ings and efforts were in harmony with the apostolic 
 doctrine indeed, that their chief object was to 
 restore that long- lost doctrine but Christ had 
 solemnly devolved on the churches to which the 
 innovators belonged, the duty of deciding these 
 points. Their decision might be wise or unwise 
 might be dictated by sectarian bigotry, or an honest 
 and enlightened regard to truth but on them de- 
 volved, by divine appointment, the duty and respon- 
 sibility of making it ; and from their decision there 
 was, according to their established polity a polity 
 approved by the Reformers no appeal. That 
 there are occasions which call for the exercise of 
 this right on the part of churches, none can deny. 
 Members may adopt principles so utterly at war 
 with the Gospel, evince a spirit so repugnant to the 
 spirit of Christ, and pursue a course so manifestly 
 factious and schismatic, as to leave no doubt of the 
 propriety of their expulsion from church fellowship. 
 Whether the churches should exercise their au- 
 thority in putting the Reforme -s out of their commu-
 
 90 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS FORMATION. 
 
 nion, was a question environed with difficulties a 
 question involving alike the rights of individuals 
 and of churches the maintenance of truth and 
 order and the prosperity of the Redeemer's cause. 
 There were grave and weighty reasons against the 
 separation. A schism in the .churches was greatly 
 to be deprecated. Many of the Eeformers were good 
 men converted and trained up among the Baptists 
 adopting Mr. Campbell's views only in part, and 
 imbibing his spirit in widely different measures 
 from whom it was painful to separate. A division 
 could not take place without giving rise to perplex- 
 ing questions concerning the righ't of property, and 
 greatly increasing the strife and irritation already 
 prevailing, to the mortification of the godly,"and the 
 reproach of Christianity. To these considerations 
 must be added, that however sound the reasons for 
 their exclusion, the Reformers would not fail, by the 
 cry of persecution, to enlist the sympathies of a party 
 in their favor, and to bring odium on their opposers. 
 On the other hand, the reasons for a separation were 
 overwhelming. In many churches, the parties had 
 taken their grounds, and in the constant, earnest, 
 and painful strife about the Eeformation, the true 
 ends of church fellowship were almost forgotten 
 TheBeformedministers were zealous in disseminating 
 their principles in all the churches to which they 
 could gain access, and baptizing into their new faith 
 sucii converts as they could find or make, not only
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS FORMATION. 91 
 
 in their, own congregations, but in those of non- 
 Reforming pastors. Meetings of the Reformers were 
 called and held to promote the interests of the 
 Reformation. With this Reformation the Baptists 
 had no sympathy, believing it to be pugnacious in 
 spirit, unsound in theory, and barren in the fruits 
 of piety. It was utterly impossible that parties, so 
 discordant in views, so alienated in affection, and of 
 such opposite aims, should dwell together in unity. 
 To perpetuate the union, under such circumstances, 
 was to perpetuate strife, and heart-burnings, and 
 entail on the churches inefficiency and ruin. More- 
 over, the principles advocated by the Reformers, 
 were deemed by the Baptists to be, not only erro- 
 neous, but of pernicious influence, and such as they 
 could not countenance without recreancy to the 
 cause of Christ. 
 
 It is not proposed to furnish a history of the 
 painful separation which took place between the 
 Reformers and Baptists in several of the Southern, 
 and most of the Western States. The details of 
 the event would fill a large volume. Every asso- 
 ciation and every church infected with Campbellism 
 has its peculiar history. The conflict was, in many 
 respects, everywhere the same maintained with the 
 same spirit, carried on with the same weapons, and 
 producing the same results, differing, however, 
 widely in degree its details being in no two places 
 the same. Here *he hottest contest was in the
 
 92 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS FORMATION. 
 
 association there in the churches ; here the Bap- 
 tists were in the majority, ejecting the Reformers, 
 and retaining possession of the property there the 
 Reformers were in the ascendant, and the Baptists 
 under the necessity of relinquishing their interest in 
 the property, and withdrawing from the communion 
 of the Reformers ; here the hattle was fierce, and 
 the separation was attended with painful exaspera- 
 tion there mild counsel prevailed, and the division 
 bc'curred in a gentler and more forbearing spirit. 
 
 'As a specimen of the course pursued by other 
 bodies, I will give a sketch of the action of the 
 Dover Association then the largest association of 
 Baptists in the world in regard to Campbellism ; 
 and I select this because I happen to be best' 
 acquainted with it. In the autumn of 1832, this 
 body convened at Four-Mile Creek meeting-house, 
 in Henrico County, Va., not far from the city of 
 Richmond. The Reformation excitement had reach- 
 ed its height. Several of the churches belonging to 
 the body had been split asunder, and others were 
 in a distracted and unhappy condition. All eyes 
 were turned to the Association for advice in this 
 time of trial. The judicious and venerable R. B. 
 Semple, so long the Moderator of the Association, 
 was absent, having recently been called to his reward. 
 The subject which had caused such painful anxiety, 
 was referred to a select, committee, consisting of 
 Elders John Kerr, Tames B. Taylor, Peter Ainslie,
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS FORMATION. 93 
 
 J. B. Jeter, and Philip Montague. The committee 
 in due time made the following report : 
 
 " The select committee appointed to consider and 
 report ' what ought to be done in reference to the 
 lew doctrines and practices which have disturbed 
 he peace and harmony of some of the churches 
 composing this association/ met at the house of 
 Elder Miles Turpin, and having invited, and 
 obtained the aid and counsel of Elders Andrew 
 Broaddus, Eli Ball, John Micou, William Hill, 
 Miles Turpin, and brother Erastus T. Montague, 
 after due deliberation, respectfully report the fol- 
 lowing preamble and resolution for the considera- 
 tion and adoption of the association. 
 
 " This association having been from its origin, 
 blessed with uninterrupted harmony, and a high 
 degree of religious prosperity, has seen with un- 
 speakable regret, within a few years past, the spirit 
 of speculation, controversy and strife, growing up 
 among some of the ministers and churches within 
 its bounds. This unhappy state of things has evi- 
 dently been produced by the preaching, and writ- 
 ings of Alexander Campbell, and his adherents. 
 After having deliberately and prayerfully examined 
 the doctrines held, and propagated by them, and 
 waited long to witness their practical influence on 
 the churches, and upon society ia general, we are 
 thoroughly convinced that they are doctrines not ac- 
 cording to godline-s, but subversive of the true
 
 94 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS FORMATION. 
 
 spirit of the Gospel of Jesus Christ disorganizing 
 and demoralizing in their tendency ; and, therefore, 
 ought to be disavowed and resisted, by all the 
 lovers of truth and sound piety. 
 
 "It is needless to specify, and refute the errors 
 held and taught by them ; this has been often done, 
 and as often have the doctrines, quoted from their 
 writings, been denied, with the declaration that they 
 have been misrepresented or misunderstood. If 
 after more than seven years' investigation, the most 
 pious and intelligent men in the land are unable to 
 understand what the\ speak and write, it surely is 
 an evidence of some radical defect in the things 
 taught, or in the mode of teaching them. Their 
 views of sin, faith, repentance, regeneration, bap- 
 tism, the agency of the Holy Spirit, church govern-, 
 ment, the Christian ministry, and the whole scheme 
 of Christian Benevolence, are, we believe, contrary 
 to the plain letter and spirit of the New Testament 
 of our Lord and Saviour. 
 
 " By their practical influence, churches long bless- 
 ed with peace and prosperity, have been thrown into 
 wrangling and discord principles long held sacred 
 by the best and most enlightened men that ever 
 lived or died, are villified and ridiculed as ' school 
 divinity/ 'sectarian dogmas/ &c. Ministers, who 
 have counted all things but loss, for the excellency 
 of the knowledge of Christ Jesus, are reprobated, 
 and denounced as ' visionary dreamers/ ' mysti-
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS FOEMATION. 95 
 
 fiers/ ' blind leaders of the blind/ f hireling 
 priests/ &c., &c. The church in which many ot 
 them live, and from which they call it persecution 
 to be separated, is held up to public scorn as 
 * Babylon the mother of harlots, and abominations 
 of the earth.' The most opprobrious epithets are 
 unsparingly applied to principles which we think 
 clearly taught in the Word of God, and which we 
 hold dear to our hearts. While they arrogate to 
 themselves the title of f Reformers/ it is lament- 
 ably evident, that no sect in Christendom needs re- 
 formation more than they do. 
 
 " While they boast of superior light and know- 
 ledge, we cannot but lament, in their life and con- 
 versation, the absence of that ' wisdom that is from 
 above, which is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, 
 and easy to be entreated, full of mercy and good 
 fruits, without partiality, and without hypocrisy.' 
 In fine, the writings of Alexander Campbell, and 
 the spirit and manner of those who profess to 
 admire his writings and sentiments, appear to us 
 remarkably destitute of * the mind that was in 
 Christ Jesus/ of that divine lore f which suffereth 
 long, and is kind, envieth not, vaunteth not itself, 
 is not puffed up, doth not behave itself unseemly, 
 seeketh not her own, is not easily provoked, think- 
 eth no evil/ Wherever these writings and senti- 
 ments have to any extent, been introduced into our 
 churches, the spirit of hypercriticism, ' vain Jang-
 
 96 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS FORMATION. 
 
 lings and strife about words to no profit, but to the 
 subverting, of the hearers/ have chilled the spirit 
 of true devotion, and put an end to Christian be- 
 nevolence and harmony. 
 
 " If the opprobrious epithets, and bitter denunci 
 ations, so liberally heaped upon us by Mr. Camp- 
 bell and his followers, are deserved, they as pious 
 and honorable men can not desire to live in commu- 
 nion with us ; and if. they are undeserved, and de- 
 signedly slanderous, this of itself would forbid our 
 holding them in Christian fellowship. If, indeed, 
 they have found the long lost key of knowledge, 
 and are the only persons, since the days of the 
 apostles, who have entered and explored the divine 
 arcanum, it is due to themselves to purblind 
 Christendom to the world to truth to God, that 
 they should, in obedience to the divine command, 
 clothed in the shining garments of truth and right- 
 eousness, walk out of ' Babylon/ and concentrating 
 their light, exhibit a true sample of the ' ancient 
 order of things / and diffuse around them a blaze 
 of 'love, joy, peace, long-suffering, gentleness, 
 goodness, faith, meekness, temperance/ Until 
 they do this, grave and thinking men will doubt 
 their high pretentious, for 'by their fruits ye 
 shall know them/ It would seem that conscientious, 
 unobtrusive, holy men, whose hearts are sickened 
 with the depravity of the times, and who mourn a 
 sad and general departure from truth and holiness,
 
 CAM^BELLISM IN ITS FORMATION. 97 
 
 would voluntarily come out from *' the present cor- 
 rupt order of things/ and holding sweet commu- 
 nion "with one another, and with their God, let their 
 light so shine that others seeing their good works, 
 might be induced to glorify their Father in heaven ; 
 but, alas ! they appear to be a strange anti-secta- 
 rian, dogmatical sect, who live only in the fire of 
 strife and controversy, and seek to remain in con- 
 nexion with the existing churches, that they may 
 with the greater facility obtain materials for feeding 
 the disastrous flame. 
 
 "In every aspect of the case then, a separation is 
 indispensably necessary. The cause of truth and 
 righteousness requires it the best interests of all 
 the parties concerned demand it. 
 
 " We, therefore, the assembled ministers, and dele- 
 gates of the Dover Association, after much prayer- 
 ful deliberation, do hereby affectionately recommend 
 to the churches in our connection, to separate from 
 their communion all such persons as are promoting 
 controversy and discord, under the specious name 
 of ' Reformers.' That the line of distinction may 
 be clearly drawn, so that all who are concerned may 
 understand it, we feel it our duty to declare, that 
 whereas Peter Ainslie, John Du Val, Mathew W. 
 Webber, Thos. M. Henley, John Richards, and 
 Dudley Atkinson, ministers within the bounds of 
 this Association, have voluntarily assumed the name 
 of ' Reformers/ in its party application, by attend-
 
 98 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS FORMATiON. 
 
 ing a meeting publicly advertised for that party ; 
 and by communing with, and otherwise promoting 
 the views of the members of that party, who have 
 been separated from the fellowship and communion 
 of regular Baptist churches therefore 
 
 " Resolved, That this Association cannot consist- 
 ently, and conscientiously receive them, nor any 
 other ministers maintaining their views, as members 
 of their body ; nor can they in future act in concert 
 with any church, or churches, that may encourage 
 or countenance their ministrations." 
 
 This preamble and resolution, prepared by Eldei 
 John Kerr, pastor of the 'First Baptist church u, 
 the city of Richmond, was approved by all the mem- 
 bers of the committee, excepting Mr. Ainslie, who 
 was a Eeformed preacher, and named among those, 
 whose excision was proposed by the report, and 
 also by all the brethren whose counsel was sought 
 by the committee. The report was adopted by the 
 association, without discussion, and with few dis- 
 sentients. The delegates had been selected and 
 sent to the meeting for the purpose of adopting, if 
 practicable, effective measures for allaying the per- 
 nicious excitement in the churches and were pre- 
 pared to act promptly and decidedly Their action, 
 whether wise or unwise, was adopted after careful 
 deliberation, earnest prayer for divine guidance, and 
 with much anxiety for its result, and it received the 
 cordial approbation of the churches. 

 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS FORMATION. 99 
 
 It was not to be expected that the decision of the 
 association would be acceptable to Mr. Campbell, 
 and the Beformers. They viewed themselves as the 
 objects of a most unchristian and cruel persecution. 
 Mr. Campbell stigmatized the report, adopted by 
 the association, as the " Dover Decree," and thus 
 discoursed of it in the Millennial Harbinger, Vol. 
 3, page 573. 
 
 " What a dangerous matter it has become, to 
 think differently from Messrs. Kerr, Ball, Broaddus, 
 and Erastus Montague ! How perilous to view sin, 
 faith, baptism, &c., differently from these l keepers 
 of the faith' of Virginia. This alone exposes a per- 
 son to the greatest anathema in the power of Vir- 
 ginia Baptists. They can do no more in Virginia, 
 as yet, than treat a dissentient as they would a 
 murderer, or a vile adulterer. The committee or 
 managers of the butt of excommunication, can neither 
 banish, burn, nor imprison those who differ from 
 their views of sin, faith, and baptism. There is no 
 Patmos, jail, or pillory known in Virginia law, for 
 those who think differently from John Kerr or Eli 
 Ball. But they can place Peter Ainslie, John Du 
 Val, M. B. Webber, T. M. Henley, John Richards, 
 and Dudley Atkinson in the same society, as re- 
 spects the Lord's table, with all the inmates of the 
 penitentiary, now under the care of my friend Col. 
 C. S. Morgan ; yes, they can tell all the sects in 
 Virginia, that tiny view these virtuous and exein-
 
 100 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS FORMATION. 
 
 plary men as unfit for the communion of Eli Ball 
 and John Kerr, as were the infamous actors in the 
 Southampton insurrection. We ask what difference 
 have they made ? What more could they do than 
 exclude such from the kingdom of heaven ? and do 
 they not teach that the kingdom of heaven is theirs ? 
 If they think that what they have hound on earth 
 is hound in heaven, where stand these anathema- 
 tized preachers ? Are they blotted out of the book 
 of life ? But perhaps they will say, that what they 
 have loosed on earth in the house of Miles Turpin, 
 is not loosed in heaven ! Nor can they pray to the 
 Lord to ratify in heaven what they have done on 
 earth ! What a farce this is ! And how will they 
 answer to the Lord for casting out of his church on 
 earth (as they call the Dover Association) those 
 whom they have every reason to think are esteemed 
 as much the children of God as themselves ?" 
 
 Many other things of like spirit and quality did 
 Mr. Campbell pen and publish ; and his adherents 
 echoed and re-echoed his denunciations of the Dover 
 Association, with most vehement zeal. Had they been 
 fined, imprisoned, scourged, outlawed, branded, and 
 exposed to a terrible martyrdom, they could not have 
 made a greater -outcry against their shameless and 
 cruel persecutions, than they did for being put out of 
 the eommunion of churches, which, in the ardor of 
 their "zeal forRefornv*,tion,they had often pronounced 
 to foe. priest-ridden, corrupt, and in Babylon. They
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS FORMATION. 101 
 
 gloried in being, as they supposed, martyrs in the 
 cause of truth and righteousness. Thus writes one 
 of the excinded preachers 
 
 " The long agony is over. The Dover Association 
 has assumed the awful responsibility of producing a 
 faction ; consequently, a sect. We feel much re- 
 lieved as respects ourselves. Only three or four of 
 the Keformers -attended the Association, as we had 
 no objection to being a separate people, if the Bap- 
 tists were resolved on taking to themselves this act 
 of rebellion against Jesus Christ our Lord. I ven- 
 ture to say, no intelligent friend of Keform is dis- 
 pleased with it. For myself, I feel liigldy honored 
 in being made the first martyr in old Virginia in 
 the present Reformation. My Christian character 
 has been gibbeted (though yet I live) for adhering 
 to the sayings and doings of Jesus Christ and his 
 apostles. Philip Montague has conferred this honor 
 upon me. It is the highest I ever expect to enjoy 
 in time worth all the D.D.'s that ever were issued 
 from all the seminaries in the world." Mill. Har., 
 vol. 4, p. 13. 
 
 More than twenty years have passed since the 
 Dover Association adopted the report of its com- 
 mittee condemning Campbcllism. Let us now 
 endeavor to take a calm and candid review of the 
 measure. The report contained some unguarded 
 and unnecessarily harsh expressions. Its author, 
 whose temperament wus naturally ardent, had been
 
 102 CAMPBJLLISM IN ITS FORMATION. 
 
 greatly annoyed and excited by the prevalence of 
 Mr. Campbell's peculiar views in the church of 
 which he was pastor, ajwl 'the secession of a large 
 and respectable partydopting them, from the main 
 body. The report was evidently written under the 
 influence of $rfs excitement ; and the committee 
 and the Association partook too much of the same 
 feeling, to scan the document with severity. The 
 doctrines taught by Mr. Campbell were declared to 
 be " demoralizing in their tendency ;" and of the 
 party embracing them, it was affirmed that " no sect 
 in Christendom ne eded reformation more than they/' 
 On calm reflection, these expressions were generally 
 admitted to be u ajust. Whatever may be the ulti- 
 mate influence cf Campbellism on piety and morals, 
 it must be conceded, that it gives no countenance 
 to immorality. And while it can hardly be denied 
 that the party embracing the system needed reforma- 
 tion, it is but fair to admit that there are Christian 
 sects which need it " more than they." These ex- 
 pressions were subsequently expunged or modified 
 by the Association. The amiable and clear-headed 
 Moderator of the Association, the Rev. A. Broaddus, 
 who undertook the vindication of the report from 
 what he deemed the " unfair representation" of it 
 by Mr. Campbell, made the following admission 
 " In the report of the committee, (drafted by the 
 chairman) there are some few expressions which, is 
 my view, might have been advantageously omitted
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS FORMATION. 103 
 
 or exchanged for others ; the instrument might thus 
 have retained all its force, without any tinge of 
 acrimony or harshness." 
 
 Let us now examine the other side of the case. 
 Mr. Campbell and his friends maintained that the 
 Association in its action not only transgressed the 
 law of Christ, infringed the religious liberty of indi- 
 viduals, and were guilty of flagrant persecution, but 
 plainly transcended its constitutional authority. It 
 had no right, it must be conceded, to interfere in 
 the government or discipline of the churches. It 
 was simply an advisory council. It possessed the 
 unquestioned and unquestionable right of advising 
 the, churches in all matters pertaining to their peace 
 and prosperity. This right the members of the 
 Association exercised, in an important matter, to 
 the best of their judgment, and at the earnest re- 
 quest of the churches. They did not counsel hastily, 
 nor without deliberation, nor without a deep sense 
 of their responsibility to Christ, nor without prayer 
 for divinu guidance. Their advice was in the follow- 
 ing words " We, therefore, the assembled minis- 
 ters and delegates, of the Dover Association, after 
 much prayerful deliberation, do hereby affectionately 
 recommend to the churches in our connection, to 
 separate from their communion, all such persons as 
 are promoting controversy and discord, under the 
 specious name of Reformers." They might err in 
 the counsel which they gave, but so might their
 
 104 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS FORMATION. 
 
 opponents in judging of it. The churches might 
 receive or reject their advice at pleasure. The 
 Association had no power to enforce its counsel, 
 except moral power. Thus far its action certainly 
 did not exceed the limit of its admitted authority. 
 But the ministers and delegates of the Association 
 declared that they could not " consistently and con- 
 scientiously receive" certain individuals named, " or 
 any other ministers maiDtaining their views, as mem- 
 bers of their body." The Association had the admit- 
 ted authority, for such reasons as they deemed valid, 
 to expel a church from the body. In naming certain 
 ministers, with whom in future they could not con- 
 sent to co-operate, they did not exclude them from the 
 qhurches of which they were respectively members, 
 nor interfere with the discipline of those churches ; 
 but simply announced to the churches, that believ- 
 ing these ministers to be unsound in doctrine, and 
 their labors and influence subversive of the harmony 
 and prosperity of the churches, they would exercise 
 their constitutional authority in excluding from their 
 fellowship such churches as should continue to 
 " countenance their ministrations." The design of 
 the Association was to draw clearly "a line of dis- 
 tinction" between themselves and the Eeformers ; 
 and the measure adopted was admirably suited to 
 secure the object. In a very short time, and with 
 less irritation than for several years had been exist- 
 ing, the parties were clearly separated.
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS FORMATION. 105 
 
 It is proper to permit Rev. A. Broaddus, the 
 most logical and formidable of Mr. Campbell's op- 
 ponents, and one of the mildest and most courteous 
 of controversialists, to vindicate the action of the 
 Association, from the unfair representations, and 
 severe animadversions contained in the Millennial 
 Harbinger. 
 
 " But to the more particular object of this com- 
 munication the light in which Mr. Campbell has 
 endeavored to place the conduct of the Association, 
 in adopting this measure. ^Let us hear him. l They 
 can do nothing more in Virginia, as yet, than treat 
 a dissentient as they would a murderer or a vile 
 adulterer. The committee, or managers of the lull 
 of excommunication, can neither banish, burn, nor 
 imprison those who differ from their views of sin, 
 faith, and baptism. There is no Patmos, jail, or 
 pillory, known in Virginia law, for those who think 
 differently/ &c. 
 
 " Now, I really should wonder, if it were not that 
 something similar had been intimated at other 
 times I really should wonder yea, and still I 
 cannot help wondering that Mr. Campbell did not 
 think this beneath him ! this politic resort this 
 most unfair and injurious attempt to enlist the 
 prejudices of his readers against the Association, by 
 charging them, as he obviously does, by implication, 
 vith a disposition to persecute those who differ from 
 them; to persecute them even to imprisonment,
 
 106 CAMrBELLISM IN ITS FORMATION. 
 
 to exile, and to death ; restrained only by the want 
 of power from inflicting these punishments ! Such 
 is the construction which every candid and intelli- 
 gent reader must put on his expressions ; and on 
 every candid and intelligent reader, I now call, to 
 judge of the force and validity of this charge. 
 
 " What is the ground of this charge ? Why, the 
 Association has cut off e these virtuous and exem- 
 plary men' from fellowship in our body : ergo, the 
 Association would imprison, banish, or burn them, 
 if the powerwere not panting ! This then is the 
 position which arises from such reasoning : A de- 
 claration of non-fellowship is sufficient proof of a 
 disposition to imprison, banish or kill ! This, I say, 
 is the position resulting from a charge established on 
 such ground ; and on the same ground, no ingenuity 
 of man can fairly make out, how the act of exclusion 
 can be performed by a church, without incurring 
 the same charge. The principle assumed is the 
 same in every case, and thus, when we exclude 
 from fellowship, we do of course give evidence of a 
 disposition to imprison, to banish, to burn ; and 
 then, to sanction exclusion from fellowship, is, in 
 effect, to sanction the popish excommunication, 
 where the thunders of the Vatican are hurled at the 
 head of the devoted victim, and temporal pains and 
 punishments are inflicted on him. 
 
 " But I have one more argument on this case the
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS FORMAT-ON. 10*7 
 
 argumentum ad hominem or an argument applying 
 to the assailant's own views. Beader, attend ! 
 
 " Let us view the charge against the Association. 
 They have gone as far as they could go. What 
 then ? Why, they would go much farther, it seems, 
 if they had power. l The committee, or managers 
 of the bull of excommunication, can neither banish, 
 burn, nor imprison those who differ from their views 
 of sin, faith, and baptism :' which amounts to this : 
 The Dover Association has passed a resolution of 
 non-fellowship with the people called ' Keformers ;' 
 and therefore would imprison, banish or burn them, 
 if they had the power. Now, mark well, I beseech 
 you, reader, and see if the argument does not come 
 home to Mr. Campbell in all its force. Mr. Campbell 
 (be it remembered) is not an open communionist. 
 Well ; Mr. Campbell passed a resolution of non- 
 fellowship with all Ptedo-baptists : he has gone as 
 far as he can ; and therefore what shall I say ? 
 he has given evidence that he would imprison, 
 banish, or burn them, if he had the power. ' But 
 I don't believe it/ you say. Neither do I ; far 
 from it ! But is not the argumentum ad hominem 
 fairly applied ? What a pity it is that my friend 
 could not have had charity enough to believe the 
 committee, or the Association, might declare non- 
 fellowship with people, whom they would neither 
 burn, banish, nor imprison ; nor indeed injure in 
 my way whatever."
 
 108 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS FOKMATIOtf'. 
 
 It is but justice to Mr. Campbell to note that in 
 replying to this spirited vindication of the exscind- 
 ing act of the Association, (of which only a part has 
 been quoted,) he felt constrained to disavow the 
 consequence so logically deduced by Mr. Broaddus 
 from the expressions in the Millennial Harbinger. 
 ri In one word," said he, " I do not think that any 
 of the Virginia Baptists would burn myself or breth- 
 ren ; but unless they would burn, or banish, or 
 otherwise inflict civil penalties upon us, what more 
 can they do than what they have done ?" And, it 
 may be asked, with equal pertinency, believing that 
 the peace and prosperity of the churches demanded 
 the exclusion of the Keformers from their fellowship, 
 what less could they have done than they did do ? 
 They condemned the principles, and deplored the 
 mischievous effects of the so-called " Beforma- 
 tion," and aimed, with as little irritation as possible, 
 to produce the desired separation ; but carefully 
 abstained from any imputation on the moral char- 
 acter of the Eeformers. If a few unguarded and 
 acrimonious expressions escaped them, they might 
 surely find an apology, if not a justification, in "the 
 spirit that breathes, and words that burn" in the 
 pages of the Christian Baptist and Millennial Har- 
 binger. 
 
 Not long since a member was excluded from a 
 Baptist church. He was a man of irreproachable 
 moral character, but, having become a Spiritualist,
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS FORMATION. 109 
 
 as the believers in spirit rappings are called, lie de- 
 nied the inspiration of the Scriptures, human de- 
 pravity, the divinity and atonement of Christ in 
 fine, all the distinctive principles of the Gospel. 
 He claimed to be judged not by his opinions, but his 
 works. "Not opinions, but deeds," he insisted, 
 ^should be the great test of character." Yet, he 
 was expelled, and most righteously, from the fellow- 
 ship of the church. Now, on the principle adopted 
 by Mr. Campbell, this was rank persecution. 
 " What a dangerous matter," the Spiritualist might 
 plausibly, and in the language of Mr. Campbell, 
 say, it is " to think differently from" the church. 
 " Liberty, religious liberty, that liberty which alone 
 deserves the name, . . . has expired in" it. " They 
 can do no more . . as yet than treat a dissentient as 
 they would a murderer or a vile adulterer. They 
 can place ' me' in the same society, as respects the 
 Lord's table, with all the inmates of the peniten- 
 tiary ; . . . . yes, they can tell all the sects . . . that 
 they view" me, though " virtuous and exemplary, 
 . . as unfit for" their "communion as the infamous 
 actors in the Southampton insurrection." Mill. 
 Ear., Vol. 3, p. 573. 
 
 The separation, though painful at first, after- 
 wards tended to diminish the evils which had 
 sprung from the controversy and strife produced by 
 the Reformation. The parted combatants, finding 
 fewer causes of exacerbation, soon began to lose the
 
 110 OAUPBZLLISM IN ITS FOKMATION. 
 
 heat and violence created by the conflict. The 
 Dover Association., though she lost several churches, 
 and many respectable church members, continued 
 her almost unimpeded course of prosperity and use- 
 fulness. Her losses were soon repaired ; and even 
 in congregations where the Reformation seemed to 
 have acquired the greatest influence, her success 
 was not long delayed. Meantime the Reformers 
 enjoyed a privilege which without the separation 
 they could not have enjoyed the privilege of illus- 
 trating, by the loveliness of their spirit, the fervor 
 of their devotion, the sanctity of their lives, their 
 elevation above the world, and the success of their 
 ministrations, the superiority of the " ancient Gos- 
 pel" over sectarian dogmas and mystic theology 
 of the "ancient order of things" over the corrup- 
 tions of Babylon in short, the real value of that 
 Reformation, whose pretensions were so lofty, whose 
 spirit was so warlike, and whose influence among 
 the sects was so exciting and painful. 
 
 Mr. Campbell now found himself at the head of 
 a sect yes, of a sect. The Reformers were a 
 Sect according to the definition of Noah Webster : 
 " SECT A body or number of persons united in 
 tenets, chiefly in philosophy and religion, but con 
 stituting a distinct party by holding sentiments 
 different from those of other men ; a denomina- 
 tion." Did not the Reformers unite in maintaining 
 certain religious tenets ? and were they not dip-
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS FORMATION. Ill 
 
 tinguished by these sentiments from evciy ot3 
 party ? They were a sect in the Scripture 
 of the term. The word " sect/' or " heresy"] 
 Greek term " uiptaitj' is rendered in 
 Testament, signifies a party, or persons 
 and maintaining peculiar opinions. It was among 
 the Jews, not a term of reproach, 'Bm of distinc- 
 tion. They called Christians a " sect," or party ; 
 and this sect they knew was every where spoken 
 against. Acts 28 : 22. It must be added that the 
 Eeformers were a " sect" in the sense in which Mr. 
 Campbell so frequently employed the term. They 
 had all the attributes, and, eminently, the spirit of 
 a sect. Their claim to be considered " The Church," 
 and by eminence " The Christian Church," was as 
 baseless, and far more preposterous, than the same 
 claim vauntingly set forth by some older and more 
 venerable, if not more worthy, sects. Did Christ 
 have no church on earth from the commencement 
 of the Romish apostacy till the beginning of the 
 " current Reformation ?" 
 
 Of this sect Mr. Campbell was the head not by 
 appointment, nor in form, but in fact, and by merit. 
 His learning, zeal, energy and influence clearly 
 narked him out for the position ; and it was ac- 
 corded to him without dissent, without envy, heartily, 
 a ad almost unconsciously. The sect was the pro- 
 dust of liis own labor. It bore strikingly the im- 
 pi jss of his own character. Not one among tho
 
 112 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS FOKMATION. 
 
 Keformers could encounter him in debate, nor resist 
 the weight of his authority, nor add a "beam to the 
 li-ht which he shed. His word was the law of the 
 
 O 
 
 ^Reformation ; and it derived its force from the un- 
 wavering conviction among all the Keformers that 
 it was in perfect harmony with the Word of God, 
 From Maine to Georgia, and from the Atlantic 
 coast to the Far West, the same words and phrases 
 "a pure speech" " the language of Canaan" 
 were current among them ; and every portion of the 
 circulating medium bore the unmistakable impress 
 'of the Bethany mint. Meet a Eeformer, where you 
 might, or under whatever circumstances, he would 
 soon utter some peculiar word or phrase which would 
 reveal to you, without doubt, his religious opinions, 
 and party preference. 
 
 The churches organized, under the influence, and 
 by the direction of 'Mr. Campbell, did not differ 
 materially in form and discipline from the Baptist 
 churches. Of course, the Babylonish practice of 
 hearing experiences before, baptism was repudiated ; 
 and all persons applying for membership in these 
 churches, or who could be persuaded to accept the 
 privilege, were received promptly, on professing 
 their belief that Jesus of Nazareth is the Messiah, 
 and on being immersed for the remission of sins. 
 Every church had a plurality of bishops, or elders, 
 chosen from its own body ; and its government soon 
 passed from the hands of the brotherhood to thsse
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS FORMATION. 113 
 
 of the eldership, with limitations, into which I need 
 not stop to inquire. The churches met for worship 
 and edification every Lord's day, even in the most 
 sparsely peopled neighborhoods a practice worthy 
 of commendation and broke bread, or partook of 
 the Lord's supper, as a part of the instituted wor- 
 ship of Christ, at every meeting a practice, 
 which, though neither commanded, nor enforced by 
 any clear apostolic example, contravenes no law of 
 Christ, and should excite no opposition.
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 
 
 It would seem to be impossible for any person 
 admitting the inspiration and authority of the Scrip- 
 tures, and drawing his principles from them, not to 
 agree with other Christians in many tenets. It is a 
 redeeming quality in Campbellism that it uniformly 
 professes a profound respect for the teaching of the 
 Bible. Mr. Campbell holds many, and most im- 
 portant principles, in common with all Christians. 
 Nobly did he vindicate the authenticity and inspira- 
 tion of the Scriptures, and the vital principles of 
 Christianity, in his debate with Robert Owen, of 
 Scotland, the champion of infidelity ; and by that 
 service entitled himself to the gratitude and com- 
 mendation of the friends of morality-and social order. 
 Mr. Campbell holds many truths in common with 
 all Protestants ; and in his discussion with Bishop 
 Purcell, of the Romish communion, maintained 
 them with signal ability, and fully justified his ciaini 
 to be classed among the able defenders of Protest- 
 antism. The " Debate on the Roman Catholic Re- 
 ligion" a small volume has not received at the
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 115 
 
 hands of the Protestant public the favor which it 
 justly merits. Mr. Campbell embraces some views 
 in common with Baptists. Whatever evils he may 
 have done them, directly and indirectly and they 
 have been neither few nor small he should have 
 due praise for his indefatigable efforts to restore- the 
 apostolic baptism, or the immersion of believers, to 
 expose the traditionary origin of infant baptism, and 
 to show that the primitive churches were composed 
 exclusively of baptized believers. He gave great 
 prominence in his teaching to a few principles and 
 practices which were deemed important, but not 
 particularly insisted on by the ministers of the Bap- 
 tist denomination. Several, points in regard to 
 which he differed from them are of veiy little mo- 
 ment, and would have attracted but slight attention, 
 had they not been parts of a system fraught with 
 agitation and mischief. Some of the principles em- 
 braced by him, and laid at the foundation of his 
 Reformation, were not only different from those en- 
 tertained by the Baptists, and evangelical Christians 
 generally,- but were without Scriptural authority. 
 Some of these it is proposed particularly to exam- 
 ine. No intentional injustice will be done to him 
 or his principles. His opponents and reviewers 
 have, with perhaps no exception, been accused of 
 misrepresenting his views ; and I fear that I may 
 subject myself to the same accusation. But, I am 
 anxir.iu, to diminish rather than widen the breach
 
 116 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 
 
 between the Baptists and the Eeformers. And 
 this must be effected, if effected at all, neither by 
 exaggeration nor concealing their differences, but 
 by a fair, kind, faithful and logical examination of 
 them. I design, therefore, to discuss with as much 
 care and fullness as the prescribed limits of my trea- 
 tise may permit, a few of the distinctive, and most 
 objectionable Principles of Gampbdlism. 
 
 THE INFLUENCE OF THE HOLY SPIRIT IN CON- 
 VERSION. 
 
 This subject is one of vital importance in the 
 Christian system. The admission or denial of the 
 reality and efficiency of this influence constitutes 
 the main difference between evangelical and ration- 
 alistic theology between intelligent living piety, 
 and heartless, self-sufficient formalism. Almost 
 every Christian sect, holding grossly erroneous prin- 
 ciples, has included among its errors the denial or 
 perversion of the doctrine of the spirit's influence. 
 Mr. Campbell in his debate with Eev. N. L. Eice, ad- 
 mitted that the subject is " of transcendent import- 
 ance to the Christian" page 611, I would, there- 
 fore, enter on its investigation, profoundly conscious 
 of my liability to err, and earnestly seeking wisdom 
 " of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and up- 
 braideth not." 
 
 On no subject have the opponents of Mr. Campbell, 
 and the Christian public generally, found it so diffi- 
 cult to understand am represent his views as on t ie
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 117 
 
 Important point. That Mr. Campbell may have full 
 justice, I will make copious extracts on this subject 
 from his voluminous works, especially from a " Dia- 
 logue on the Holy Spirit," between "TimotJiy," 
 representing the doctrine of the Reformation, and 
 " Austin" a very docile inquirer, on the point of 
 embracing the new doctrine, contained in a work 
 entitled " Christianity Restored" issued from the 
 Bethany press, in the year 1835. 
 
 " It is a moral revolution, a moral reformation, a 
 moral change, which is essential to the salvation of 
 men. The means therefore must be moral, unless 
 we can think that physical causes can produce moral 
 effects/' p. 346. 
 
 " We have two sorts of power, physical and moral. 
 By the former we operate on matter by the latter 
 upon mind. To put matter in motion we use 
 physical power, whether we call it animal or scien- 
 tific power ; to put minds in motion we use argu- 
 ments, or motives addressed to the reason and na- 
 ture of man." 
 
 " Motives are arguments ; and the strength of an 
 argument is its power to move. Arguments are 
 said to be strong or weak, according to their power 
 to move." 
 
 " Because arguments are addressed to the under- 
 standing, will, and affections of men, they are called 
 moral, inasmuch as their tendency is to form or 
 change the hab'ts, manners, or actions of men.
 
 118 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 
 
 Every spirit puts forth its moral power in words ; 
 that is, all the power it has over the views, habits, 
 manners, or actions of men, is in the meaning aiid 
 arrangement of its ideas expressed in words ; or 
 in significant signs addressed to the eye or ear." 
 pp. 347, 348. 
 
 " The argument is the power of the spirit of man, 
 and the only power which one spirit can exert over 
 another is its arguments. How often do we see a whole 
 congregation roused into certain actions, expressions 
 of joy or sorrow, by the spirit of one man. Yet no 
 person supposes that his spirit has literally deserted 
 his body and entered into every man and woman in 
 the house, although it is often said he has filled them 
 with his spirit. But how does that spirit located 
 in the head of yonder little man, fill all the thous- 
 sands around him with joy or sadness, with fear and 
 trembling, with zeal or indignation, as the case may 
 be ? How has it displayed such power over so many 
 minds ? By words uttered by the tongue ; ~by ideas 
 communicated to the minds of the hearers. In this 
 way only can moral power be displayed. 
 
 " From such premises we may say, that all the 
 moral power which can be exerted on human beings, 
 is, and of necessity must be, in the arguments 
 addressed to them. No other power than moral 
 power can operate on minds-; and this power must 
 always be clothed in words addressed to the eye or 
 ear. Thus we reason when revelation is altogether
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PKINC1PLES. 119 
 
 out of view. And when we think of the power of 
 the Spirit of God exerted upon minds or human 
 spirits, it is impossible for us to imagine, that that 
 power can consist in anything else but words or 
 arguments. Thus in the nature of things we are 
 prepared to expect verbal communications from the 
 Spirit of God, if that Spirit operates at all on our 
 spirits. As the moral power of man is in his argu- 
 ments, so is the moral power of the Spirit of God in 
 his arguments." p. 349. vv 
 
 " As the spirit of man puts forth all its moral 
 power in the words which it Jills with its ideas ; so 
 the Spirit of God puts forth all its converting and 
 sanctifying power, in the words which it Jills with 
 
 its ideas If the Spirit of God has spoken all 
 
 its arguments ; or, if the New and Old Testament 
 contain all the arguments which can be offered to 
 reconcile man to God, and to purify them who are 
 reconciled, then all the power of the Holy Spirit 
 which can operate on the human mind, is spent ; 
 and he that is not sanctified and saved by these, 
 cannot be saved by angels or spirits, human or 
 divine." p. 350. 
 
 " We plead that all the converting power of the 
 Holy Spirit is exhibited in the Divine Record." 
 p. 351. 
 
 " Hence it follows, that to be filled with the Spirit, 
 and to have the Word of Christ dwelling richly in 
 zne, are of the same import in Paul's mind ; and as
 
 120 CAMPBELL1SM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 
 
 a means to this end, Christians were to abound in 
 singing psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs." p. 360. 
 
 " All the power of God or man is exhibited in 
 the truth which they propose. Therefore, we may 
 say, that if the light, or the truth, contain all the 
 moral power of God, then truth alone is all that is 
 necessary to the conversion of men, for we have 
 before argued and proved, that the converting 
 power is moral power." p. 362. 
 
 " Assistance to believe ! This is a metaphysical 
 dream. How can a person be assisted to believe ? 
 What sort of help ? and how much is wanting ? 
 Assistance to believe must be either to create a 
 power in man, which he had not before, or to repair 
 
 a broken power The Holy Spirit was not 
 
 given until the day of Pentecost. Hence if the 
 Holy Spirit aided men to believe in Jesus Christ, it 
 must have been subsequent to that date." pp. 
 364, 365. 
 
 " Can men just as they are found when they hear 
 the Gospel, believe ? I answer boldly, yes just as 
 easily as I can believe the well-attested facts con- 
 cerning the person and achievements of General 
 George Washington. I must hear the facts clearly 
 stated, and well authenticated, before I am able to 
 believe them. The man who can believe one fact 
 well attested, can believe any other fact equally well 
 attested." Chn. Bap., 529. 
 
 " Paul acts the philosopher fully once, and, if we
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 121 
 
 recolleo. right, but once, in all his writings upon 
 this subject. Tt has been for many years a favorite 
 topic with me. It is in his first epistle to Timothy, 
 ' Now the end of the commandment (or Gospel) is 
 love out of a pure heart out of a good conscience 
 cut of faith unfeigned/ Faith unfeigned brings a 
 person to remission, or to a good conscience ; a good 
 conscience precedes, in the order of nature, a pure 
 heart ; and this is the only soil in which love, a 
 plant of celestial origin, can grow^ This is our 
 philosophy of Christianity of the Gospel. And 
 thus it is the wisdom and power of God unto salva- 
 tion. We proceed upon these as our axiomata in 
 all our reasonings, preachings, writings 1st, un- 
 feigned faith ; 2d, a good conscience ; 3d, a pure 
 heart ; 4th, love. The testimony of God appre- 
 hended, produces unfeigned or genuine faith ; faith 
 obeyed, produces a good conscience. This Peter 
 defines to be the use of baptism, the answer of a 
 good conscience. This produces a pure heart, and 
 then the consummation is love love to God and 
 man." Christian System, 246. 
 
 It would be easy to multiply quotations of this 
 kind ; but the above will suffice to give clear and 
 just views of Mr. Campbell's theory of the influ- 
 ence of the Holy Spirit in the conversion and sanc- 
 tification of men. There can be no mistake in re- 
 ducing the system to the following propositions. 
 
 A moral change is essential to the salvation of
 
 122 CAMPBEILISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 
 
 men This change can be effected only by moral 
 power All moral power is in arguments, or truth, 
 addressed to the mind by words, or other signs. 
 equivalent to words All the converting power of 
 the Holy Spirit is in the words which he addresses 
 to men in the Scriptures Men need no divine 01 
 supernatural aid to exercise saving faith in Christ ; 
 but can believe in him as easily as they can believe 
 the well attested history of General Washington. 
 This faith does not imply the existence of love, but 
 brings a person to remission, or a good conscience, 
 through baptism ; to a good conscience succeeds a 
 pure heart ; and from a pure heart flows love And, 
 finally, to be filled with the Spirit is equivalent to 
 being filled with the w r ord. 
 
 Of several positions in this scheme I disapprove ; 
 but shall, for the present, confine my remarks to 
 its. principal error viz., that all the converting 
 power of the Holy Spirit is in the ivritten word, 
 which he has indited and confirmed. 
 
 It is desirable to divest this subject of all extra- 
 neous matter. I fully concur with Mr. Campbell 
 in the opinion that a moral change is necessary to 
 the salvation of men. With all that he has written 
 of the inspiration and importance of the Scriptures, 
 and of their adaptation to promote the salvation ot 
 men, I heartily agree. I do not think, more than 
 he, that any new faculty is given, or any old faculty 
 (understanding by the term physical, not moral
 
 CAMPIELLISM IN ITS PKINC1PI.ES. 123 
 
 powei,) is repaired in conversion. It is freely ad- 
 mitted that the Spirit operates through the word 
 in the conversion and sanctification of men. But I 
 understand Mr Campbell to maintain that the in- 
 fluence of the Spirit in the work of conversion is 
 limited, and of necessity, to the simple presenta- 
 tion of arguments, motives, truth, to the minds of 
 men, by means of words, and other signs that all 
 the power of the Spirit in the conversion of men is 
 in moral suasion. This he does explicitly teach, if 
 words have any definite import. By physical power 
 we operate on matter by moral power on mind. 
 " All the moral power which can be exerted on 
 human beings, is, and of necessity must be, in the 
 arguments addressed to them." The illustration 
 employed by Mr. Campbell would seem to preclude 
 the possibility of misunderstanding his views. The 
 influence of an orator over his hearers is not exerted, 
 by the entrance of his spirit into them, but " by 
 words uttered by the tongue ; by ideas communi- 
 cated to" their minds. Of precisely the same 
 nature is the influence ascribed by Mr. Campbell to 
 the Spirit in the conversion of men. " As tlie 
 moral power of man is in his arguments, so is the 
 moral power of the Spirit of God in his arguments." 
 The Spirit of God exerts a moral influence in con- 
 version exactly like that which men exert in con- 
 trolling the actions or emotions of one another, but 
 stronger in proportion as his arguments are clearer,
 
 124 CAMPBELLISM Itf ITS PRINCIPLES. 
 
 fuller, weightier, and more pertinently expressed. 
 But the Spirit can do no more than reason, expos- 
 tulate, and present motives. 
 
 " If the New and Old Testament contain all the 
 arguments which can be offered to reconcile man to 
 God, and to purify them who are reconciled, then 
 all the power of the Holy Spirit wliicli can operate, 
 on the human mind is spent ; and he that is not 
 sanctified and saved by these, cannot be saved by 
 angels. or spirits, human or divine." 
 
 I should deem it needless to labor this point so 
 carefully, did I not know that Mr. Campbell and 
 his friends have almost constantly charged his op- 
 ponents with falsely stating his views on this very 
 subject. These were the views of " the agency of 
 the Holy Spirit" against which the " Dover Decree" 
 was levelled. Elder A. Broaddus in the " Appendix" 
 to the " Extra Examined," published in 1831, thus 
 wrote : " In few words, then, Mr. Campbell's 
 view, in regard to Divine influence, appears to me 
 to be in substance as follows The canon of Scrip- 
 ture being closed, the actual work of the Spirit is 
 done ; but the word of truth being dictated by the 
 Holy Spirit the influence of that word may be 
 termed the influence of the Spirit : and this is all 
 the Divine influence that is exerted. And then, 
 G-od's Spirit, which is a Holy Spirit, being in his 
 word, as my spirit (for example) is in my writings 
 in receiving the word we receive a holy spirit :
 
 CAMPBELL1SM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 125 
 
 and this is all the Iloly Spirit that is receiied. 1 p. 
 48. Such were the views entertained by this astute 
 and ingenuous writer, of Mr. Campbell's doctrine 
 on the influence of the Spirit. This " Appendix" 
 was noticed by the Editor of the Harbinger in 
 several Nos. of the Dialogue on the Holy Spirit, 
 between Timothy and Austin ; and, for a wonder, 
 Mr. B.'s statement of the doctrine was not called in 
 question. 
 
 Mr. Campbell maintains, or did maintain, tliat 
 all the converting power of the Holy Spirit is in the 
 arguments or motives which he presents to the mind 
 in the written Word. On this point I take issue 
 with him. I maintain that there is an influence of 
 the Spirit, internal, mighty, and efficacious, differ- 
 ing from moral suasion, lut ordinarily exerted 
 through the inspired Word, in the conversion of 
 sinners. Whether this influence shall be called 
 moral, from the effect which it produces, physical, 
 from the energy which is put forth in it ; or spirit- 
 ual, from the nature of the agent who exerts it, I 
 have no wish to decide. It is for the reality and 
 importance of this influence, not for its name, that 
 I contend. 
 
 The principal argument adduced by Mr. Camp- 
 bell in support of his theory of conversion, is purely 
 metaphysical. All power, he says, is either phy- 
 sical or moral by physical power we operate on 
 matter, and by moral power on mind A physical
 
 126 :A.MPJELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 
 
 power cannot produce a moral effect. " And wLen 
 we think of the power of the Spirit of God exerted 
 upon minds or human spirits, it is impossible for us 
 to imagine, that that power can consist in any thing 
 else but words or arguments/' The gist of Mr 
 Campbell's logic seems to be this We cannot com- 
 prehend any power of the Spirit of God in conver- 
 sion, except that consisting in words or arguments : 
 therefore, it does not exist. What is this, but to 
 deduce a most unwarrantable conclusion from his 
 own ignorance ? It were a sufficient reply to this 
 reasoning, to quote the words of the Saviour " The 
 wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the 
 sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, 
 nor whither it goeth, so is every one that is born of 
 the Spirit." John 3:8. But we have more to say 
 on this subject. To affirm, as Mr. Campbell does, 
 "that if the Holy Spirit has spoken all its argu- 
 ments, . . . then all the power of the Holy Spirit 
 which can operate upon the human mind is spent," 
 is a bold assumption. When a man has uttered all 
 his arguments and persuasions to influence his fel- 
 low, his power may be exhausted ; but when the 
 Infinite Spirit has spoken all his arguments and 
 persuasions for reconciling proud, perverse and 
 stupid men to Christ, is his power spent ? Is there 
 nothing more that he can do ? Are his resources 
 exhausted ? Has he thus limited himself ? Has 
 Mr. Campbell any authority for prescribing this
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRIN.irLEd. 127 
 
 limit to his power ? The truth is, this assumption 
 is as unpliilosopliical as it is unscriptural. God 
 created the human spirit has access to it is per- 
 fectly acquainted with all its .springs of emotion and 
 of action and can, in ways unknown to us, and 
 without contravening the laws of its being, influence, 
 impress, and guide it. He that made, can certainly 
 renew the spirit of man, with means, or without 
 them, as he pleases. It is no less the dictate of 
 reason than of revelation, that " the king's heart," 
 and consequently the heart of every other man, " is 
 in the hand of the Lord, as the rivers of water ; he 
 turneth it whithersoever he will/' 
 
 The assumption that the Spirit can operate on 
 the soul of man in conversion only by arguments, or 
 words, is, not only unphilosophical, but contrary to 
 divinely recorded facts. It is not true that physi- 
 cal power cannot produce a moral effect. God 
 created man, not by arguments or words, but by the 
 direct exercise of physical power, in his " own image" 
 which image comprehended " righteousness and 
 true holiness." Was not this a moral eifect pro- 
 duced by a physical cause ? Christ was created 
 holy. " The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee," 
 said the angel to Mary, "and the power of the 
 Highest shall overshadow thee : therefore that holy 
 thing which shall be born of thee, shall be called the 
 Son of God." Luke 4 : 35. Was not the holiness 
 of the infant Redeemer a moral quality ? And was
 
 128 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS pKIXClPLES. 
 
 not this effect produced, not by arguments, persua- 
 sion, or words, but by the " power," the physical 
 "power of the Highest ?" 
 
 The assumption under consideration is incompati- 
 ble with the salvation of infants. They enter into 
 the world, as Mr. Campbell admits, with depraved 
 hearts. Dying before they attain to years of intel- 
 ligence, they must enter heaven with their moral 
 natures unchanged, which is impossible ; they must 
 be renovated by death, which is a mere figment ; 
 they must be renewed by the Holy Spirit without 
 the Word, the possibility of which Mr. Campbell 
 cannot conceive ; or, they must be lost. I do not 
 charge him with admitting this consequence ; but it 
 appears to be logically deduced from the position 
 which he assumes, and all his ingenuity has not 
 enabled him to escape from it. 
 
 Mr. Campbell's assumption is wholly at war with 
 the Scripture doctrine of Satanic influence. Satan 
 and other evil spirits are represented in the Bible 
 as exerting a mighty moral influence for the destruc- 
 tion of men. They tempt, deceive, enslave, and 
 degrade mankind. Satan is a mighty prince, and 
 at the head of a great, spreading empire. But how 
 do the evil spirits exert an influence over the minds 
 of men ? By arguments, or motives, addressed to 
 them by words, oral or written ? Certainly not ! 
 But by a direct, internal, and efficient influence. 
 Can Mr. Campbell comprehend it ? Will he reject
 
 CAMPBELL. SM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 129 
 
 tlie doctrine because lie cannot ? Or will he con-' 
 cede to Satan and his angels, a power which he 
 denies to the Spirit of God ? 
 
 Before quitting this subject, another point de- 
 mands notice. No writer has so bitterly denounced 
 metaphysical speculations, and mystic theology as 
 Mr. Campbell. One great object of his Reformation 
 was to rescue the Scriptures from the glosses of secta- 
 rian theorizers. I must say, that I have met with no 
 writer on the agency of the Spirit in conversion, who 
 has indulged so much in metaphysical disquisition, 
 labored so hard to establish a theory, or drawn such 
 momentous consequences from his own fine-spun 
 speculations. In his writings on this delicate and 
 vital subject, he is far from confining himself to "a 
 pure speech/' of " speaking of Bible things in Bible 
 terms," and shows no peculiar desire to be guided 
 by the plain and obvious import of Scripture lan- 
 guage ; but taseft his psychological lore, and dia- 
 lectic skill, to establish an ingenious theory drawn 
 from, no matter what source but not from revela- 
 tion. True, he apologizes for his seeming inconsis- 
 tency. He only opposes his enemies with their 
 own weapons. He plunges into metaphysics to ex- 
 tricate others from jtheir labyrinth. The apology 
 does not seem to me to be satisfactory. If Mr. 
 Campbell uses the "speech of Ashdod," why may 
 not others ? How are' we ever to be rescued from
 
 130 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 
 
 metaphysical subtleties, if those who profess to re- 
 form the abuse are most guilty of it ? 
 
 I have endeavored to show, and, I think, have 
 shown, that the doctrine that the Holy Spirit can 
 operate on the mind in conversion only by argument 
 or persuasion is a mere assumption, unphilosophical 
 in itself, contrary to divinely attested facts, and 
 pregnant with a most serious consequence. I would 
 not, however, press this argument to an illegitimate 
 extent. It does not follow that because the Spirit 
 can operate on the mind, in other ways than by 
 moral suasion, that he does so operate. This point 
 must be established by other considerations. 
 
 I will now proceed to offer direct arguments 
 against Mr. Campbell's theory of conversion. 
 
 1. It overlooks, or at least, under -estimates, the 
 inveteracy of human depravity. 
 
 The Spirit of inspiration has drawn the picture of 
 man's moral corruption in gloomy colors. He is 
 utterly depraved fleshly, sensual and impure. 
 " That which is born of the flesh is flesh." John 
 3: 6. He is without spiritual life, without holiness, 
 without moral worth " dead in trespasses and 
 sins." Eph. 2:1. He is alienated from God, and 
 opposed to his law, and consequently to truth and 
 righteousness. " Because the carnal mind is en- 
 mity against God : for it is not subject to the law 
 of God, neither indeed can be." Kom. 8: 7. This 
 depravity pervades, and controls the whole man
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 131 
 
 blinding the mind, perverting the affections, stupi- 
 fying the conscience, making rebellious and obsti- 
 nate the will, and prostituting the members of the 
 body as the instruments of sin. And this moral 
 corruption of human nature is universal. " For all 
 have sinned and come short of the glory of God." 
 Rom. 3: 23. 
 
 It is proposed to make man, thus corrupt, obsti- 
 nate and debased, a friend of God, humble, obedient, 
 and meet for heaven in short, " a new creature," 
 from whom " old things have passed away," and to 
 whom " all things have become new." 2. Cor. 5: 
 17. I do not charge MR, Campbell with denying 
 the doctrine of human depravity ; but his theory of 
 conversion does not provide for the accomplishment 
 of a moral renovation, at once so difficult, and so 
 important. 
 
 How, according to his scheme, is this great moral 
 change to be effected ? Simply by the presentation 
 of arguments, truth, and persuasion, to the mind by 
 words, or other signs. When the Spirit has present- 
 ed all his arguments, he has spent all his power. 
 Of this scheme several things may be observed. 
 
 First. It is oblivious of the chief difficulty in con- 
 version. Mr. Campbell maintains that " the argu- 
 ments which are written in the New Testament" 
 must be " understood" La order to exert their in- 
 fluence on the human mind. Chn'ty. Restored, p. 
 350 To understand these arguments requires at-
 
 132 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS I 11NC1PLES. 
 
 tention, candor, and a spiritual discernment. Men 
 attend readily to what they delight in, and believe 
 easily what is congenial with their tastes ; but the 
 " natural man/' the unrenewed, iinful man has a 
 deep-rooted aversion to divine truth. This aversion 
 is an element and a proof of his depravity. He 
 may hear or read the arguments contained in the 
 Scriptures, through curiosity, politeness, or a cap- 
 tious spirit ; but to expect of him a candid, serious, 
 docile and obedient attention to them, is to expect 
 to " gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles." 
 " For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, 
 neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be 
 reproved." If divine truth must be understood in 
 order to be efficacious ; and if it must be candidly 
 examined, before it can be understood ; and if every 
 evil doer, hating the light, or divine truth, refuses 
 to come to it, or consider it, l\ow, on Mr. Camp- 
 bell's theory, can any soul of man be saved ? But 
 the scheme which I advocate the Scriptural scheme 
 makes provision for overcoming this difficulty. 
 God, by the gracious, inward, efficacious influence 
 of his Spirit, prepares the heart for the reception of 
 the Gospel. " Whose heart," that is, Lydia's heart, 
 " the Lord opened, that she attended unto the 
 things which were spoken of Paul." Acts. 16: 14. 
 This woman "worshipped God," as did all the Jews, 
 and Jewish proselytes ; but there is not the slight- 
 est proof that she was pious. The very reverse is
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 133 
 
 clear. Her heart was closed against the Gospel, 
 else there had been no need for God to open it. 
 She hated the light, neither would come to it. 
 " The Lord opened/' or inclined, her "heart" to at- 
 tend " to the things which were spoken of Paul." 
 Mr. Campbell is of opinion that the Lord opened 
 Lydia's heart by the miracles which were wrought 
 in confirmation of the Gospel. Chn'ty Restored, p. 
 354. Of this there is neither proof nor probability. 
 There was no miracle wrought on the occasion. 
 Miracles were utterly insufficient to awaken an obe- 
 dient and saving attention, like that which Lydia 
 gave, to the Gospel. John 11 : 47. The Lord 
 opened the heart of this woman of Thyatira really 
 and effectively opened her heart, by a process which 
 is not explained. As the result of this process she 
 attended, promptly, honestly, and obediently to 
 Paul's Gospel ; and but for this process; the apostle, 
 though he had spoken as an 'angel, had spoken 
 without success. 
 
 Secondly. Suppose this great difficulty obviated, 
 the sinner's attention arrested, and truth brought 
 clearly before his mind, would knoivledge of divine 
 truth, without the special influence of the Spirit, 
 secure his conversion ? If ignorance is the only 
 evil with which the Gospel has to contend, then 
 obviously the illumination of the mind is all that is 
 necessary for its removal. But ignorance, though 
 it may be in itself criminal, is rather the effect than
 
 134 C^MPBELLISM IN ITS PIUNClPLEo. 
 
 the cause of man's depravity. There is a corrupt 
 disposition which blinds the understanding. " This 
 is the condemnation, that light is come into the 
 world, and men loved darkness rather than light, 
 because their deeds were evil." John 3 : 19. The 
 love of darkness which signifies ignorance or error 
 is the very root of man's depravity. This love im- 
 plies an aversion to light, truth, and holiness, and 
 is the cause of the prevalent ignorance of divine 
 things in the world. Conversion includes a cordial 
 approbation of divine truth. 2 Thess. 2 : 10. Now, 
 can arguments, however clear and weighty persua- 
 sion, however earnest and tender and words, how- 
 ever fitly chosen and expressive, change the tastes 
 and dispositions of the soul ? Man hates Christ, 
 not because he is ignorant of his character, but 
 because of the contrariety in their tastes and dispo- 
 sitions ; and ?'t is proposed to change this hatred into 
 love, simply by giving man clearer views of the 
 qualities which excite his aversion. Man is opposed 
 to the divine law, because it is pure, spiritual, and 
 inflexible ; and it is proposed to overcome this 
 opposition by revealing to him more fully its hated 
 qualities. Man is averse to the light ; and it is 
 proposed to subdue this aversion by increasing its 
 splendor. I cannot but suspect the inefficacy of 
 this scheme of conversion. Sinful man needs some- 
 thing more than light more than arguments, per- 
 suasion, words for his moral renovation. " The
 
 CAMFBELLISM IN ITS PBIX( 1PLES. 135 
 
 nicked . . will not listen to the voice of charmers, 
 charming never so wisely:' Ps. 58 : 5. 
 
 Thirdly. The theory under discussion is contra- 
 dicted by numerous wdl authenticated facts. If all 
 the converting power of the Spirit is in the argu- 
 ments addressed by him in words to the mind ; then 
 it follows that every minister of the Word must be 
 successful in converting souls to Christ, in propor- 
 tion to the distinctness with which he presents the 
 arguments of the Spirit to the minds of his hearers. 
 The same measure of power must, under similar 
 circumstances, produce similar results. But does 
 this conclusion agree with the experience and obser- 
 vation of Christian ministers ? But I need riot 
 appeal in this argument to questionable evidence. 
 Christ was an unrivalled preacher of the Gospel. 
 Mark 1:1. Never man spake as he did. For the 
 weight of his arguments, the clearness of his illus- 
 trations, the simplicity and force of his style, the 
 fervency of his spirit, the dignity of his manner, the 
 adaptation of his discourses to the circumstances and 
 necessities of his hearers, indeed, for every excel- 
 lence which could render his ministry attractive, 
 luminous, and successful, he stands alone. Pro- 
 phets and apostles gave him homage as the "Light 
 of the world." If all the converting power of the 
 Spirit is in moral suasion, we might certainly infer 
 that such a teacher as Christ would be eminently 
 successful in winning souls. But what was the
 
 136 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS FRIS! ClP^ES. 
 
 result of his ministry ? It was unsuccessful not 
 wholly so but it produced no such results, as from 
 his preeminent qualifications might have been ex- 
 pected no great moral revolution, and no extensive 
 revival of true religion. His ministry seems to have 
 been less effective than that of John the Baptist. 
 Matt. 3 : 5, 6. More persons were probably con- 
 verted by the preaching of Peter and the other 
 apostles, on the day of Pentecost, than by the min- 
 istry of Jesus during its whole period. The Apostle 
 Paul quotes from Isa. 65 : 2, a prediction of the man- 
 ner in which the Messiah's ministry would be treated 
 among the Jews. " But to Israel he saith, All day 
 long I have stretched forth my hands unto a diso- 
 bedient and gainsaying people." Eom. 10 : 21. 
 This prophecy was strikingly fulfilled in the history 
 of Jesus. He was earnest and diligent in "teaching. 
 " All day long I have stretched forth my hands." 
 He uttered such arguments as should have convinced, 
 
 and such entreaties as should have moved, his hear- 
 
 ; 
 
 ers ; but they were " disobedient and gainsaying." 
 The arguments, motives, and words of the Saviour, 
 were eminently suited for their conversion ; but the 
 converting power of the Spirit was not present 
 was withheld in wisdom and righteous judgment. 
 
 2. Mr. Campbell's theory of the Spirit's influence 
 is incompatible with prayer for the conversion of 
 sinners. 
 
 I do not charge him with denying, or questioning,
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 137 
 
 the propriety of such prayer. On the contrary, he 
 insists that it is obligatory, and practices it. Still 
 his theory and his practise are inconsistent. If all 
 the converting power of the Spirit is in the written 
 "Word, then all that can be done for the conversion 
 of sinners is to place the Word before their minds. 
 The Spirit indited and confirmed the Word, and in 
 that Word put forth all his moral or converting 
 power. On Christians now devolves the duty of pre- 
 senting the arguments, truths, and motives, contained 
 in the written Word, to the minds of sinners. 
 When all the arguments contained in the Old and 
 New Testaments are brought before their minds, 
 " then all the power of the Holy Spirit which can 
 operate upon" them -" is spent," and if they are 
 " not sanctified and saved by these," they " cannot 
 be saved by angels or spirits, human or divine." 
 Why then pray for the conversion of sinners ? Will 
 the Spirit reveal the Word to their minds ? or in- 
 cline their hearts to receive it ? Can any thing be 
 added by the Spirit to its power and efficiency ? 
 Prayer for any blessing implies the power of God 
 to bestow it. When we pray for our daily bread, 
 it is implied that God so governs the seasons as to 
 send rain or drought, fruitfulncss or famine. When 
 we pray that the sick may be healed, it is implied 
 that God has such a control over man's physical 
 nature, that he can, without a miracle, cure his 
 diseases. So when we pray for the conversion of
 
 138 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 
 
 sinners, if we pray intelligently, we ascribe to the 
 Holy Spirit the power to convert them. And this 
 power is not inherent in the Word, any more than 
 the power that wields a sword, is inherent in the 
 sword. The "Word is the instrument, but the 
 Spirit is the agent of conversion. The Spirit gives 
 efficiency to the Word, opening the mind to receive 
 it, impressing it on the heart, and developing its 
 excellence in the life. 
 
 3. Mr. Campbell's theory of conversion is incon- 
 sistent with the introduction of the Millennium. 
 
 I will permit him to define what I mean by the 
 Millennium. " There is reason, clear, full, and 
 abundant, to justify the expectation that the reign 
 of favor, or the government of Jesus Christ, shall 
 embrace, under its most salutary influences, the 
 whole human race ; or that there are plain, literal, 
 and unfigurative, as well as figurative and symbolic 
 representations, in both Testaments, which au- 
 thorize us to expect a very general, if not a uni- 
 versal spread of evangelical influences, so that the 
 whole race of men, for a long period of time, shall 
 bask in the rays, and rejoice in the vivifying power 
 of the Sun of Eight eousness." Mill. Har. vol 1, p, 
 54. This consummation, described in the glowing 
 language of prophecy, has been the grand object of 
 the hopes, prayers, and labors of the saints in all 
 ages. Whatever contributes to hasten this glorious 
 period must, if its tendency is perceived, awaken
 
 CAMPBELL1SM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 139 
 
 universal delight among the lovers of Christ. 
 Every principle, theory, or practice, which is in- 
 harmonious with its introduction is erroneous. So 
 Mr. Campbell very properly teaches. " In de- 
 tecting the false Gospels, nothing will aid us so 
 much as an examination of their tendencies, and a 
 comparison of their effects with what the Millen- 
 nium proposes. The gospel of no sect can convert 
 the world. This is with us a very plain proposi- 
 tion ; and if so the sectarian gospels arc defective, 
 or redundant, or mixed." Mill. liar. vol. 1, p. 7 
 With the sectarian gospels I have now no concern : 
 I wish to inquire whether the " ancient Goepel," 
 furnishes any ground to hope for the introduction 
 of the Millennial glory. I propose to try it by the 
 rule which Mr. Campbell himself has prescribed. 
 
 The Scriptural canon was completed nearl} 
 eighteen centuries ago. Christianity was clearly 
 revealed, perfect in all its parts, and confi'Tned by 
 indubitable testimonies. The inspired record, ac- 
 cording to the teaching of the Bethany Eeformer, 
 contains all tlie arguments of the Holy Spirit for 
 reconciling men to God ; in this all his moral, or 
 converting power is exhibited. Christ commissioned 
 his apostles to go into all the world, and proclaim 
 the Gospel to every creature. From the apostolic 
 times to the present day, the servants of Christ, 
 with the Old and New Testaments in their hands,
 
 140 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 
 
 have been laboring to convert the world to Christ 
 What has been the success of their efforts ? 
 
 Three-fifths of the world are still shrouded in the 
 gloom of paganism. Mohammedanism sways its 
 hundred millions of intelligent, immortal beings. 
 The ignorance, superstition, and spiritual domina- 
 tion of Popery overspread the half of Christendom. 
 The Greek church, little less corrupt and intolerant 
 than the Romish, divides the remaining half with 
 Protestantism. The various sects of Protestants, 
 in the estimation of Mr. Campbell, stand in not 
 much less need of conversion than the heathen. 
 Such was the moral condition of the world when the 
 " current reformation" began. Then Mr. Camp- 
 bell and his associates, disinterred the " ancient 
 Gospel" from the accumulated rubbish of past 
 ages. " About the commencement of this century," 
 this is his account of the matter, " finding that 
 notes and comments, that glosses and traditions, 
 were making the word of God of little or no effect 
 I say, the pious of several of the great phalanxes 
 of the rival Christian interests did agree to un- 
 manacle and unfetter the testimony of God, and 
 send it forth without the bolsters and crutches fur- 
 nished by the schools ; and this, with the spirit of 
 inquiry which it created and fostered, has contrib- 
 uted much to break the yoke of clerical oppression, 
 which so long oppressed the people, I say clerical 
 oppression ; for this has been, and yet is, though
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. J4| 
 
 much circumscribed, the worst of all sorts of op- 
 pression." Mill. Har., vol. 1, p. 4. Well, does the 
 disinterred Gospel, or the unmanacled and unfet- 
 tered testimony of God, furnish any more cheering 
 indications of the Millennial dawn than the sect a 
 rian Gospels ? Its most sanguine advocates wil.. 
 hardly claim that it does ; or if they should, the 
 futility of the claim must be apparent to all the 
 world. I shall, in another place, examine more 
 particularly the tendency and influence of Camp- 
 bellism. I will merely affirm, what I suppose none 
 acquainted with its progress will deny, that -the pro- 
 claimers of the " ancient Gospel" have found from 
 experience that all the arguments which they can 
 adduce from the inspired word all the moral 
 suasion which they can bring to bear on the minds 
 of men prove deplorably inefficient in their con- 
 version. Churches organized according to the 
 " ancient order of things/' enjoying all the light 
 that emanates from Bethany, blessed with the un- 
 manacled testimony of God, without "bolsters or 
 crutches," free from " clerical oppression," and 
 favored with the ministrations of reformed pastors, 
 of their own selection, have, in many cases, become 
 3old, worldly, and inefficient ; in others, have fallen 
 into strife, and been weakened by divisions ; in 
 some, have nourished in their bosoms the most 
 deadly errors ; in not a few, have withered and 
 perished ; and, if any of them have enjoyed unin-
 
 142 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRIN-1IPLES 
 
 terrupted, Millennial prosperity, their history is yet 
 to be made known to the world. I do not write 
 these things to disparage the Reformers. I intend 
 no invidious comparison between the fruits of the 
 " ancient Gospel" and of the " sectarian Gospels." 
 I am sorry that the history of the Eeformation 
 should bear so close a resemblance, in its dark and 
 unpromising features, to the history of the numerous 
 Christian sects. The above facts have been stated 
 simply because they are essential in the prosecution 
 of the argument. 
 
 How, in view of the above facts, is the Millen- 
 nium to be introduced ? Not by the " sectarian 
 Gospels," says Mr. Campbell. Not by the slow, 
 imperfect and feeble progress of the Bethany Eefor- 
 mation. He that hopes fur such a result from it 
 does not need to be reasoned with; It is most 
 manifest that the Millennium cannot shed its bless- 
 ings on the world without some new agency, or in- 
 fluence, or some great increase of existing influences. 
 We need expect no new revelations for our instruc- 
 tion no new powers to be imparted to the human 
 mind and no new means of spreading the Gospel, 
 and enlisting attention to it. How then is the Mil- 
 lennium to be introduced ? By an increased effi- 
 ciency of the divine word. At this point the weak- 
 ness of Campbellism is revealed. It admits no pro- 
 vision for an increased efficiency of the divine word. 
 Its theory- of conversion is opposed to any such in-
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS FOEMA.T10N. 143 
 
 crease. The Holy Spirit, in the presentation of its 
 arguments, has exhibited and spent all its converting 
 power. All that can be done, according to this 
 system, by men, angels, or the Holy Spirit, for the 
 introduction of the Millennium, is to exhibit argu- 
 ments or truth to the minds of men ; or, in other 
 words, persuade them to be holy. What is this, but 
 precisely what has been done by true ministers 
 from the apostolic age down to the present time ? 
 And what ground is there, according to this system, 
 to conclude, hope or conjecture, that moral suasion 
 will, in time to come, be more efficacious than it has 
 been in time past ? The same facts and arguments 
 must be proclaimed, in similar language, by men 
 of like passions and infirmities, and to the same 
 depraved, stupid and perverse race of beings, as in 
 past ages ; and there is nothing in the theory under 
 discussion, or the nature of the case, to justify the 
 expectation that the fruits will materially differ in 
 quality or quantity. It is true, the Scriptures pre- 
 dict a great increase of knowledge and piety in the, 
 latter days ; and Christ will certainly fulfill the pre- 
 diction ; and it is because Mr. Campbell's theory of 
 the Holy Spirit's influence in conversion, not only 
 does not contain any provision for its fulfillment, but 
 is clearly inconsistent with it, that it ought to be re- 
 jected. But the view of the Spirit's agency which I 
 maintain falls in most harmoniously with the Scrip- 
 ture promises of u Millennium. His power is in-
 
 144 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS FORMATION. 
 
 finite. He executes the purposes of Messiah. He 
 can impart an unction to the ministers of Christ, 
 and increase indefinitely their zeal, diligence, fidel- 
 ity and efficiency. He can dwell richly in all the 
 saints, filling their understandings with light, their 
 hearts with love, and their lives with his fruits. He 
 can incline men to hear, embrace, and adorn the 
 Gospel of Jesus Christ. In short, he possesses all 
 the grace and energy which are requisite to secure 
 the universal spread and triumph of the Gospel. 
 The Millennium is to be introduced not merely by 
 moral suasion, and providential dispensations, but 
 by copious, general and powerful effusions of the 
 Holy Spirit. The same Spirit which on the day of 
 Pentecost gave signal success to the labors of Peter, 
 and his co-laborers, will by a mighty, pervasive, and 
 gracious agency an agency in harmony with his 
 own perfections, and the freedom of the human 
 will- prepare men to receive, and spread abroad 
 the Gospel, and thus fill the earth with the know- 
 ledge of the glory of the Lord. 
 
 " The palaces," predicted the evangelical pro- 
 phet, " shall be forsaken ; the multitude of the city 
 shall be left ; the forts and to\vers shall be for dens 
 forever, a joy of wild asses, a pasture of flocks ; 
 until the Spirit be poured upon us from on JiigJt, 
 and the wilderness be a fruitful field, and the fruit- 
 ful field be counted for a forest. Then judgment 
 shall dwell in the wilderness, and righteousness re-
 
 CAMPBELL1SM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 145 
 
 main in the fruitful field. And the work of right- 
 eousness shall be peace ; and the effect of right- 
 eousness, quietness, and assurance forever. Isa. 3 : 
 14-17. 
 
 The direct, Scriptural proofs of the reality of this 
 effective agency of the Holy Spirit, I shall now at- 
 tempt to furnish. 
 
 4. The theory of conversion by moral suasion is 
 contradicted by the plain teaching of the Scriptures. 
 
 The question under discussion is not one of meta- 
 physics but of revelation it is to be decided not by 
 an appeal to philosophy, but to philology. Of the 
 nature and operations of spirits, and of the laws 
 which govern them, we know, and can know, but 
 little. Profoundly convinced of our ignorance, and 
 liability to err, on the important but abstruse subject 
 under consideration, we should earnestly inquire, 
 what saith the Lord ? and endeavor, with childlike 
 docility, to comprehend the import of his words. 
 
 The inspired teachers have employed the strongest 
 terms to denote that agency, or influence of the 
 Spirit, by which fallen man is morally renewed. If 
 their language does not express a real, effective 
 agency of the Spirit, more powerful than persuasion, 
 or the mere presentation of arguments to the mind, 
 it is difficult to conceive how such an agency could be 
 described. They inform us simply what the Spirit 
 does, without attempting to explain the methods 
 of his operation an explanation which we should
 
 146 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 
 
 probably be unable to comprehend, and which would 
 be unprofitable even if we could. I will adduce a 
 few passages of Scripture which teach the direct, per- 
 sonal agency of the Holy Spirit in conversion. These 
 may not, in the judgment of other advocates of the 
 doctrine, be the most pertinent or conclusive ; and 
 I readily admit that they are not better suited to 
 my purpose than many from which I have selected 
 them. 
 
 Conversion is, in the New Testament, described 
 <*! a birth a new birth a birth of the Spirit. 
 tl That which is born of the Spirit is spirit" John 
 3:6. " We know that whosoever is born of God 
 sinneth not ; but he that is begotten of God keepeth 
 himself, and that wicked one toucheth him not." 1 
 John 5 : 18. I shall here take for granted, what 
 ought to be universally conceded, that the phrases 
 " born of the Spirit," and " born of God," denote 
 conversion, or the moral renovation of man in an- 
 other place I propose to examine this subject more 
 particularly. There is a resemblance between gen- 
 eration, or the natural birth, and conversion. The 
 Spirit of inspiration has employed this resemblance 
 to elucidate the subject of man's moral renovation. 
 In physical generation the nature and qualities of 
 the parent are conveyed to the child. " Adam 
 begat a son in his own likeness." " That which is 
 born of the flesh is flesh" that is, not merely cor- 
 poreal, but depraved, corrupt, partaking of man's
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN II B PRINCIPLES. 147 
 
 fallen nature, as the term flesh frequently means. 
 So in the new birth, the nature the moral nature 
 of the Spirit of God is conveyed to his off- 
 spring. " That which is born of the Spirit is 
 spirit" resembles the Spirit partakes of his holi- 
 ness is spiritual. " Love is of God ; and ever} 
 one that loveth is born of God." 1 John 4:7 
 This mighty moral change is effected by the Gospel 
 " Of his own will begat he us with the word of 
 truth." James 1:18. " The word of truth" was 
 the instrument of regeneration the efficiency was 
 of God. God begat communicated his own nature, 
 or moral qualities, to the begotten begat " of his 
 own will/' according to his own choice or purpose ' 
 and the Gospel was the means which he effectively 
 used in producing the change. To ascribe this 
 spiritual birth to the power in the word to the 
 force of moral suasion rather than to the influence 
 and efficiency of the Holy Spirit, that operates by 
 and through the word is as if the axe should 
 boast itself against him that heweth therewith, or 
 the saw magnify itself against him that shaketh it." 
 Isaiah 10 : 15. The argument, in brief, in this 
 that the new, or moral birth implying a commu- 
 nication of the divine nature is effected not merely 
 by the written word, but is ascribed to a voluntary 
 and efficient agency of the Holy Spirit. 
 
 Conversion is termed in the Scriptures a vrcation, 
 and described in a variety of language of similar
 
 148 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 
 
 import. " A new heart also will I give you, a^i 
 a new spirit will I put witliin you : and I will take 
 away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will 
 give you an heart of flesh." Ezekiel 36 : 26. God 
 promised the Israelites, his chosen people, that he 
 would gather them out of all countries, and bring 
 them into their own land ; and having done this, 
 he would bestow on them a far richer blessing 
 would do in them a work, which neither men nor 
 angels could perform. He would " take away the 
 stony heart out of their flesh." The "stony 
 heart" is a hard, insensible, corrupt, impenitent 
 heart ; and this God promised to take away from 
 them. He would do more. He would bestow on 
 them a " heart of flesh," a " new heart," a " new 
 spirit," and this language certainly imports that 
 he would give them a tender, holy, and obedient 
 heart. We have passages of corresponding signifi- 
 cance in the New Testament. " For we are his 
 workmanship j created in Christ Jesus unto good 
 works, which God hath before ordained that we 
 should walk in them." Eph. 2 : 10. This language 
 is exceedingly strong. The conversion of a sinner 
 is termed a creation. A convert is a new creature. 
 The word employed in this text to denote this reno- 
 vation "created," (ru) is employed to express 
 that exercise of power by which the universe was 
 brought into existence. Eph. 3 : 9. Col. 1 : 16. 
 No energy short of that which brought order out of
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PK. NCIPLES. 149 
 
 chaos, can renew the soul of man. That soul is, 
 in its natural state, a moral chaos daik, void, 
 formless ; and nothing but Almighty power, and 
 infinite grace, can restore it to life, light and 
 beauty. " God who commanded the light to shine 
 out of darkness" must shine into the heart " to 
 give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God 
 in the face of Jesus Christ." Now, I will ask any 
 considerate and candid man, whether such language 
 as this, which we have been examining, could have 
 been used to denote moral suasion, without the cer^ 
 tainty of deceiving mankind ? When God takes 
 away a " stony heart," does he merely present 
 arguments to display the evil and danger of sin, and 
 persuade the offender to abandon it ? When he 
 gives a " new heart" a " heart of flesh" does he 
 only use arguments to induce the sinner to be peni- 
 tent, holy and obedient ? When he creates a man 
 in Christ Jesus makes him " a new creature" 
 does he simply address words to the eye or ear of 
 the transgressor ? As well might it be affirmed 
 that God created the world by arguments that he 
 ruled chaos by persuasion. It is true, " God said, 
 Let there be light : and there was light." But let 
 no one suppose that light was the product of the 
 words spoken. 
 
 If language is not ascribed to God in the act of 
 creation, as the mere drapery of the narrative, it 
 was uttered by him as the signal for the exercise of
 
 150 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 
 
 his creative energy. Christ, while on earth, spake 
 to those whom he healed ; but they were healed, not 
 by his words, but by his power. " The power of 
 the Lord was present to heal them;'' Luke 5 : 17. 
 " He the Lord hath made the earth ~by his power 
 he hath established the world by his wisdom, and 
 hath stretched out the heavens by his discretion." 
 Jer. 10 : 12. 
 
 Conversion is described as a resurrection from the 
 dead. "But God, who is rick in mercy, for his 
 great love wherewith he loved us, even when we were 
 dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, 
 (by grace, are ye saved)." Eph. 2 : 4, 5. The 
 Ephesians " were by nature the children of wrath, 
 even as others." v. 3. Their moral condition is de- 
 scribed by the phrase " dead in sins" a most 
 expressive phrase, which can mean nothing less than 
 that they were destitute of spiritual life or holiness, 
 and were morally corrupt and helpless. From them- 
 selves there was no hope. Their deliverance was 
 from God. It originated in his " rich mercy," and 
 " great love." In executing the gracious scheme 
 of their salvation, he " quickened" them, raised 
 them from their death in sin, or infused into them 
 spiritual life. This he did not merely by arguments 
 or persuasion, but by the energy which raised Christ 
 from the dead. They were quickened " together 
 with Christ." He was raised from the dead to secure 
 salvation to all who should believe in him. Bom
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES 151 
 
 4 : 25. As he was raised from a natural death, so 
 they, in virtue of his resurrection, were raised from 
 a moral death, or a death in sin. And that the 
 Ephesians were quickened by the same power that 
 raised Christ from the dead, is clear from the con- 
 text. The Apostle prayed " the Father of glory" 
 for them, that they might know, " what is the 
 exceeding greatness of his power to us-ward who 
 believe, according to the working of his mighty 
 power, which he wrought in Christ, when he raised 
 him from the dead," &c. 1 : 19, 20. Here it is 
 plainly affirmed that they believed " according to 
 the working of his (God's) mighty power which he 
 wrought in Christ, when he raised him from the 
 dead." The passage is thus paraphrased by Dr. 
 McKnight, who cannot be justly suspected of an 
 improper bias towards spiritual influence. That ye 
 may know " what is the exceeding greatness of his 
 power, with relation to us Jews and Gentiles who 
 believe, in making us alive from our trespasses and 
 sins, (chap. 2 :. 5) and in raising us at the last day 
 from the dead, to enjoy the glories of his inheritance, 
 by an exertion similar to the inworking of the strength 
 of his force, which he exerted in Christ, when he 
 raised him from the dead," &c. If the power that 
 raised up Christ from the dead was exerted in 
 quickening the Ephesians, then it is obvious that 
 they were not converted by the mere power of 
 words.
 
 152 CA.MPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 
 
 Before I proceed, I must meet an objection to 
 the direct proofs which I have offered in support 
 of the efficient agency of the Holy Spirit in conver- 
 sion. It will not be denied by those who advocate 
 the theory which I am combating, that believers are 
 " born of the Spirit/' " quickened/' " created in 
 Christ Jesus/' at least after baptism. But they 
 maintain that the Holy Spirit having indited the 
 Word, and confirmed it by signs and miracles and 
 having pat forth all its converting power in the 
 arguments which it contains that now whatsoever 
 is done by the Word is done by the Spirit. Men 
 are regenerated, created anew, quickened, by tho 
 arguments or motives presented to their minds in 
 the written Word, precisely as a congregation a re 
 convinced, agitated, and put into motion by the 
 words of an orator, and whatever is ascribed to the 
 Word is justly ascribed to the Spirit. The Spirit 
 has completed the instrument of conversion the 
 recorded Word f put it into the hands of his church 
 to be employed by them for its destined purpose ; 
 and for all the good which they accomplish by it, he 
 is entitled to the glory. This objection is plausible, 
 and worthy of a careful consideration. 
 
 It is neither common nor just to ascribe to the 
 manufacturer of an instrument the work effected by 
 it. The instrument may be good perfect in its 
 kind admirably suited to its purpose ; and its 
 nuker may deserve high commendation ; but nobody
 
 CAMPBELLISM N ITS PRINCIPLES. 153 
 
 would deem it proper to give him the honor of the 
 work done by it. Let me illustrate The architect 
 purchases tools of a manufacturer : they are of the 
 best metal, keenest edge, and most approved pat- 
 terns he erects a tasteful house Would any man 
 in his senses affirm that the tool-manufacturer built 
 the house ? A daguerreotypist obtains from a fac- 
 tory a camera obscura, and all the appliances neces- 
 sary for practising his art, and succeeds in obtain- 
 ing an accurate likeness of the President of the 
 United States. What would you think of the fidel- 
 ity of a reporter who should affirm that Daguerre 
 had taken a very exact likeness of the President ? 
 Or, would you be more favorably impressed with 
 his discrimination and truthfulness, if he should 
 publish that the maker of the camera obscura had 
 succeeded in taking the picture ? But if the man- 
 ufacturer of an instrument is the agent who uses it, 
 then he is, in the fullest sense, the author of all the 
 effects produced by it. Whatsoever is done by the 
 instrument, he does ; and he is justly entitled to the 
 credit of it. 
 
 Let me now apply the illustration. The written 
 Word is the instrument, divinely fitted and appoint- 
 ed for the conversion of sinners. This instrument, 
 completed in the apostolic age, has been committed 
 to the hands of the church to be by them employed 
 for its appropriate purpose. It is their duty to 
 translate the Word, print, circulate, expound, and
 
 154 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 
 
 enforce it, call the attention of men to it, and exem- 
 plify in their lives its efficiency and loveliness. If 
 the Spirit is the Agent the all-pervading and 
 mighty Agent -who uses the Word, and the minis- 
 ters of it, as suitable instruments for the con- 
 version and salvation of sinners or, in other 
 words, if he, through these means, puts forth a 
 special and ..efficient influence for their moral 
 renovation then, in the fullest sense, and with the 
 strictest propriety, he may be said to beget new- 
 create quicken the subjects of his grace ; and he 
 is entitled to all the praise of their salvation. But 
 if, on the other hand, he has merely furnished 
 the means of conversion arguments to persuade 
 men to turn to God and these means have 
 been successfully employed by his servants, I 
 do not perceive with what pertinency the strong 
 language under consideration can be applied to his 
 agency. Let us recur to the illustration used above. 
 The minister of Christ is an architect. " I have 
 laid the foundation," says Paul, " and another 
 buildeth thereon." The arguments, facts, motives, 
 furnished by the written Word are, to follow out 
 the figure, the tools by which the builder carries 
 forward his work. Now, if the Spirit merely fur- 
 nishes the tools, and exerts no effective agency in 
 rearing the edifice, can it properly be termed his 
 " workmanship ?" Mr. Campbell's theory of con- 
 version amounts to this God furnishes the tools
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS i RINCIP1.ES. 155 
 
 we do the work. The Spirit of God, having, in the 
 Old and New Testaments, spoken " all the argu- 
 ments which can he offered to reconcile man to 
 God," all his power " which can operate on the 
 human mind is spent," and it now remains for the 
 disciples, unaided hy the Spirit, to carry on the 
 work of human salvation. But orthodox Christians 
 believe and maintain, that the written Word, ordi- 
 nances, churches, ministers of the Word, and provi- 
 dences, prosperous or adverse, are so many means 
 through which the Holy Spirit, infinite in grace and 
 power, exerts a personal and efficacious influence 
 for the conversion and sanctification of men. 
 
 " I have planted, Apollos watered ; but God gave 
 the increase. So then, neither is he that plantel/'i 
 anything, neither he that watereth ; but God that 
 giveth the increase." 1 Cor. 3 : 6, 7. The church 
 of Corinth is compared to a field " Ye are my 
 husbandry/' or " field," according to McKnight's 
 rendering. In this field the ministers of Christ 
 were laborers together with God." v. 9. In it Paul 
 planted. He was an apostle, eminent alike for piety > 
 gifts, diligence, and fidelity in his ministrations. 
 He was an evangelical pioneer in Corinth. Acts 
 18 : 8. Here he sowed or planted the seed, which 
 " is the Word of God." Luke 8:11. Or, dropping 
 the figure, he preached the Gospel with great plain- 
 ness, pungency, and fervor. In the same field, 
 " Apollos watered." He was a preacher distin-
 
 156 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PKINCIPLES. 
 
 guished for his thorough knowledge of the Jewish 
 Scriptures, the fervency of his spirit, the eloquence 
 of his address, and the cogency of his reasoning. 
 He entered into the labors of Paul and others ; and 
 endeavored to irrigate and culture the plants which 
 they had set. But Paul, who planted, and Apollos, 
 who watered, were nothing, entitled to no glory, as 
 " God gave the increase." The text teaches that 
 the success of Gospel ministers even the most 
 eminent whether in the conversion of sinners, or 
 the improvement of saints, is of divine influence. 
 The doctrine is according to analogy. In the vege- 
 table kingdom, God gives the increase. The best 
 seed, sown in the best soil, and in the best manner, 
 will prove unfruitful, except God send sunshine, 
 and rains, and dews, and a suitable temperature, to 
 give the increase. The most skillful husbandman 
 on earth, cannot make a blade of grass grow without 
 divine aid. " That which thou sowest, thou sowest 
 not that body that shall be, but bare grain, it may 
 chance of wheat, or of some other grain. But God 
 giveth it. a body as it hath pleased him, and to every 
 seed his own body." 1 Cor. 15 : 37, 38. It would 
 be easy to show that the same principle pervades 
 the animal kingdom. We might reasonably infer 
 that this principle extends into the kingdom of 
 grace. But on this subject we are not left to the 
 uncertain deduction of reason. All increase in the 
 evangelic field is of God. The piety and ability of
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 157 
 
 the ministry the 'truth proclaimed the manner 
 of publishing it and the character of the people 
 among whom it is preached, can furnish no guar- 
 antee of success. If Paul and Apollos were depend- 
 ent on the Divine blessing and efficiency for " the 
 increase," no minister can reasonably hope to rise 
 above this dependence. And if the success of Gos- 
 pel ministers is from God, then it follows that the 
 inspired facts and arguments which they are author- 
 ized to proclaim are insufficient to secure it. Plant- 
 ing and watering, figurative terms, comprehend 
 within their legitimate import, all the uses that can 
 be made of the Divine word all the methods of 
 instructing, warning, and persuading all that can 
 be said and done to give efficiency to the Gospel 
 and yet something more is demanded to secure the 
 increase even the Divine blessing and energy. In- 
 deed, so powerless is the most luminous and faithful 
 exhibition of Divine truth, without God's cooperation, 
 (v. 9.) that " neither is he that planteth any thing, 
 neither he that watereth." To God be all glory ! 
 
 " Seeing ye have purified your souls in obeying 
 the truth through the Spirit, unto unfeigned love of 
 the brethren, see that ye love one another, with a 
 pure heart fervently." 1 Peter 1 : 22. In this 
 text the influence of the Word and of the Spirit 
 are clearly distinguished. By nature our souls arc 
 impure, or sinful. All moral excellence lies in 
 obeying the truth, or Gospel, (v. 25.) Conversion
 
 158 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PKIlSkiPLES. 
 
 is obedience to the truth ; and sanctificution is a 
 growing conformity to it. These positions will not, 
 it is presumed, be disputed. The Gospel alone is 
 not sufficient to secure this obedience, though its 
 facts are confirmed, its arguments are weighty, and 
 the motives by which its claims are urged are high 
 as heaven, deep as hell, and vast as eternity. An 
 influence distinct from, and above the truth is in- 
 dispensable to the production of this obedience. 
 The Holy Spirit exerts this influence not in reveal- 
 ing new truth, or creating new faculties ; but m 
 disposing the heart to receive and be guided by the 
 Gospel. This influence is particularly described by 
 the word of the Lord in Ezekiel " And I will put 
 my Spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my 
 statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments, and do 
 them." 36 : 27. 
 
 " For this is the covenant that I will make with 
 the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord ; 
 I will put my laws into their mind, and write them 
 in their hearts ; and I will be to them a God, and 
 they shall be to me a people." Heb. 8 : 10. The 
 apostle is demonstrating the superiority of the new 
 or Gospel covenant over the old or Sinaitic. Under 
 the old covenant God inscribed his laws on tables 
 of stone under the new he writes them "on the 
 fleshly tables of the heart." God's laws are excel- 
 lent a transcript of his own character. Between 
 the law and the Gospel there is perfect harmony.
 
 CAMPBELL1SM IN ITS P1UNC1PLES. 159 
 
 The Gospel is designed to sustain, illustrate, and 
 enforce the divine laws. These laws, recorded first 
 on tables of stone, and afterwards in the volume of 
 inspiration, are worthy to be loved, and obeyed by 
 men. But in order to receive a due appreciation 
 of them, and a cordial submission to their author- 
 ity, a new and peculiar process is necessary. They 
 must be put " into their mind," and written " in 
 their hearts." It cannot be doubted that the result 
 of this process is a knowledge of the Divine laws, 
 delight in them, and a willingness to obey them. 
 This process is above the power and skill of men or 
 angels. It is God's prerogative, and one of the 
 privileges secured by the new covenant, that he 
 puts his laws into the minds, and writes them on 
 the hearts of his people. The law is the stamp 
 which, with his own hand, he impresses on the re- 
 newed soul the soul renewed by the very act of 
 impressing it. It is pleasing to find that on this 
 point my views are in harmony with those of Mr. 
 Campbell. In his Christian System, describing the 
 Subjects of the Kingdom, he writes, j. 156, 
 " They all know the Lord." " All thy children 
 shall be taught of God." The Holy Spirit of God, 
 writes the law of God upon their hearts, and in- 
 scribes it upon their understanding ; so that they 
 need not teach every one his fellow citizen to know 
 the Lord, " for they all know him from the least to 
 the greatest." Now whether this process of writing
 
 160 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS IfxlNuIPLES. 
 
 the law upon the heart, and inscribing it upon the 
 understanding is physical or moral, I am not con- 
 cerned to decide. All I maintain is, that it is not 
 owing exclusively to the force of argument in the 
 Divine Law, or Word, that this deep, abiding, reno- 
 vating impression is made upon the heart ; but to 
 the inward, and effective agency of the Holy Spirit. 
 
 Before I close this argument on the direct testi- 
 mony of the Scriptures, I must make a single remark 
 to prevent misconception. All those portions of 
 the inspired volume in which conversion or sancti- 
 fication, in whatever terms expressed, is ascribed to 
 God, have reference to the Holy Spirit. Ho is the 
 sanctifier. In the economy of man's redemption it 
 is his prerogative to reveal and confirm the truth, 
 and make it efficacious in man's moral renovation. 
 This point needs no proof. 
 
 5. The theory of conversion advocated by Mr. 
 Campbell, is inconsistent with the plainly revealed, 
 and fairly conceded influence of 'the Holy Spirit in 
 believers after baptism. 
 
 That the Spirit of God dwells in the saints, or 
 believers, as in a temple, to refresh and invigorate 
 them, to quicken their devotions, and to make them 
 fruitful in good works, is a truth so clearly taught 
 in the Scriptures, and so generally admitted among 
 Christians, that it is unnecessary to attempt to 
 prove it. I will merely refer the reader to a few 
 out of many Scripture proofs of it. Lev. 11, 13.
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PEINCIPLES. 161 
 
 Kom. 8 : 9. 1 Cor. 6 : 19. Eph. 5 : 5. Phil 2 : 
 13. Gal. 5 : 22-23. 
 
 Mr. Campbell admits, and maintains the effica- 
 cious influence of the Holy Spirit in believers an 
 influence differing not in degree, but kind, from 
 that by which a sinner is converted. As this is a 
 very important point, I will permit Mr. Campbell to 
 present his views regarding it fully. 
 
 " In the kingdom into which we are born of water, 
 the Holy Spirit is as the atmosphere in the kingdom 
 of nature we mean that the influences of the Holy 
 Spirit are as necessary to the neio life, as the atmos- 
 phere is to our animal life, in the kingdom of nature 
 All that is done in us before regeneration, God oui 
 Father effects by the Word, or the Gospel as dictated 
 and confirmed by his Holy Spirit. But after we 
 are thus begotten and born by the Spirit of God 
 after our new birth, the Holy Spirit is shed on us 
 richly through Jesus Christ our Saviour ; of which 
 the peace of mind, the love, the joy, and the hope 
 of the regenerate is full proof ; for these are amongst 
 the fruits of that Holy Spirit of promise of which 
 we speak." Chn. Sys., p. 267. 
 
 I do not, I trust, misunderstand Mr. Campbell on 
 this vital subject. He teaches that all that is done 
 in us before regeneration which in the Bethany 
 dialect means "born of water," or immersion , 
 " God our Father," not the Holy Spirit, " effects 
 tiy the Word;" but after our new birth, " the Holy
 
 162 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 
 
 Spirit is shed on us richly through Jesus Christ our 
 Saviour ; of which the peace of mind, the love, the 
 joy, and the hope of the regenerate is the proof." 
 The illustration employed by Mr. Campbell seems 
 to preclude the possibility of misunderstanding his 
 views. What the atmosphere is to animal life, the 
 influences of the Holy Spirit are to the new life. 
 As the animal, after its birth, is sustained by respi- 
 ration ; so after we are " born of water," or im- 
 mersed, we live our new life is maintained by 
 " the influences of the Holy Spirit." 
 
 But to show that my interpretation of his lan- 
 guage is in perfect harmony with what he calls the 
 " ancient Gospel," I will furnish another extract 
 from his writings. 
 
 " Where there is a guilty conscience there is an 
 impure heart. So teaches Paul : ' To the unbe- 
 lieving there is nothing pure ; for even their mind 
 and conscience is defiled,' In sucli a heart the 
 Holy Spirit cannot dwell. When God symbolically 
 dwelt in the camp of Israel, every speck of filth 
 must be removed even from the earth's surface. 
 Before the Holy Spirit can be received, the heart 
 must be purified ; before the heart can be purified, 
 guilt must be removed from ^the conscience ; and 
 before guilt can be removed from the conscience, 
 there must be a sense, a feeling, or an assurance 
 that sin is pardoned and transgression covered. 
 For obtaining this there must be some appointed
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 163 
 
 way and that means or way is immersion into the 
 name of the Father, Son, ana Holy Spirit. So that, 
 according to this order, it is incompatible, and there- 
 fore impossible, that the Holy Spirit can be received, 
 or can dwell in any heart not purified from a guilty 
 conscience. Hence it came to pass, that Peter said, 
 1 Be immersed for the remission of your sins, and 
 you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.' " Chn. 
 Bap., 439. 
 
 According to the " ancient Gospel," if Mr. Camp- 
 bell is a safe expounder of it, immersion which in 
 the " pure speech" of the Reformation, is " the re- 
 generating act itself" is necessary for the remission 
 of sins ; "a sense, feeling, or assurance that sin is 
 pardoned is necessary for the removal of guilt from 
 the conscience ; the removal of guilt from the con- 
 science is indispensable for the purification of the 
 heart ; and the purification of the heart is an essen- 
 tial prerequisite of the reception of the Holy Spirit. 
 Immersion the remission of sins the removal of 
 guilt a pure heart the influence of the Holy 
 Spirit and then love, meekness and humility, the 
 fruits of the Spirit is the established order in the 
 "ancient Gospel," promulged from Bethany. I 
 might notice many things in this order, from which 
 I utterly dissent, but I must limit my remarks to 
 the point in hand. Mr. Campbell does teach that 
 there is an influence of the Spirit, after baptism, 
 und the purification of the heart. When a man is
 
 164 CAMPBELLISH IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 
 
 "born of water," and his heart is purified, then 
 the Holy Spirit dwells in him, and love, joy, and 
 other graces attest his presence and agency. All 
 that is done in the believer before he receives the 
 Spirit, God his Father " effects by the Word." 
 
 To do Mr. Campbell ample justice, I will permit 
 him to explain and vindicate his views on this point. 
 
 " But the Spirit is not promised to any persons 
 out of Christ. It is promised only to them that be- 
 lieve in and obey him. These it actually and 
 powerfully assists in the migkty struggle for eter- 
 nal life. Some, indeed, ask, ' Do Christians need 
 more aid to gain eternal life than sinners do to 
 become Christians ? Is not the work of conversion 
 a more difficult work than the work of sanctifica- 
 tion ? Hence, they contend more for the work of 
 the Spirit in conversion, than for the work of the 
 Spirit in sanctification. This, indeed, is a mistaken 
 view of the matter, if we reason either from analogy 
 or from Divine testimony. Is it not more easy 
 to plant, than to cultivate the corn, the vine, the 
 olive ? Is it not more easy to enlist in the army, 
 than to be a good soldier, and fight the battles of 
 the Lord ; to start in the race, than to reach the 
 goal ; to enter the ship than cross the ocean ; 
 to be naturalized, than to become a good citizen ; 
 to enter into the matrimonial compact, than to be 
 an exemplary husband ; to enter into life, than to 
 retain and sustain it for three score years and ten ?
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN II > PRINCIPLES. 165 
 
 And while the commands, ' believe,' ' repent,' and 
 1 be baptized,' are never accompanied with any in- 
 timation of peculiar difficulty ; the commands to the 
 use of the means of spiritual health and life ; to 
 form the Christian character ; to attain to the re- 
 surrection of the just ; to lay hold on eternal life ; 
 to make our calling and election sure, &c., are ac- 
 companied with such exhortations, admonitions, 
 cautions, as to make it a difficult and critical affair, 
 requiring all the aids of the Spirit of our God, to 
 all the means .of grace and untiring assiduity and 
 perseverance on our part ; for it seems, ( the called,' 
 who enter the stadium are many, while ' the chosen' 
 and approved ' are few ;' and many, says Jesus, 
 ' shall seek to enter into the heavenly city, and shall 
 not be ahle ;' ' Let us labor, therefore, to inter into 
 that rest lest any man fall after the same example 
 of unbelief.'" 
 
 What religious teachers those are who " contend 
 more for the work of the Spirit in conversion, than 
 for the work of the Spirit in sanctification," I do 
 not know. I do not think that Mr. Campbell qan 
 name a single orthodox divine, of reputation, who 
 does not believe that the influence of the Spirit is 
 equally and indispensably necessary in conversion 
 and sanctification. The question whether that in- 
 fluence is more needed in the one process or tho 
 other, could have originated only from such meta-
 
 166 CAMPBELLISM IN : TS PRINCIPLES. 
 
 physical, vague and barren speculations as abound 
 in the writings of Mr. Campbell. 
 
 But let us attend to the main point in our argu- 
 ment. I understand Mr. Campbell to admit the 
 influence of the Holy Spirit after baptism. " These" 
 them that believe in and obey Christ " it" the 
 Spirit " actually and powerfully assists in tke 
 mighty struggle for eternal life." This language is 
 quite orthodox scarcely distinguishable from the 
 dialect of the populars. Whether this influence of 
 the Spirit in believers, by which they are actually 
 and powerfully assisted, is physical, moral, or inde- 
 finable, he does not inform us. He not only admits 
 the reality of this influence, but clearly states the 
 ground of its necessity. Conversion, he teaches, is 
 comparatively easy ; but sanctification is very diffi- 
 cult. "Is it not more easy to plant, than to 
 
 cultivate trie corn, the vine, the olive ?" " The 
 ' ' 
 
 commands l believe,' i repent,' and ' be baptized,' 
 are never accompanied with any intimation of pecu- 
 liar difficulty." " We rejoice to know that it is 
 just as easy to believe and be saved, as it is to hear 
 or see." Chn. Bap., vol. 5, p. 221. It is quite 
 clear that for a work so easily accomplished as con- 
 version, no assistance of the Spirit is needed. "As- 
 sistance to believe ! This is a metaphysical dream. 
 How can a person be assisted to believe ?" " All 
 that is done in us before regeneration, (baptism) 
 God our Father* effects by the Word." But when
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 167 
 
 the siriher believes, repents, is baptized, has a feel- 
 ing that sin is pardoned, has guilt removed from his 
 conscience, and his heart purified, then " in the 
 mighty struggle for eternal life," he will need and 
 receive the actual and powerful assistance of the 
 Holy Spirit. " The commands to the use of spirit- 
 ual health and life ; to form the Christian character ; 
 to attain to the resurrection of the just ; to lay hold 
 on eternal life ; to make our calling and election 
 sure, &c., are accompanied with such exhortations, 
 admonitions, cautions, as to make it a difficult and 
 critical affair, requiring all the aids of the Spirit 
 of our God, to all the means of grace and untiring 
 assiduity and perseverence on our part." Accord- 
 ing,' then, to the " ancient Gospel," conversion is 
 easy, and is by the Word, without any assistance 
 from the Holy Spirit ; but sanctification, or the 
 Christian life, is difficult, and very critical, and can 
 be carried on only by his indwelling, actual, and 
 powerful assistance. From these views I utterly 
 dissent. I maintain that conversion is a work no 
 less difficult than sanctification that the same 
 influence which is requisite to nourish the new life, 
 was requisite to originate it that a man can no 
 more repent and believe without the influence of 
 the Spirit than he can love, rejoice, and continue to 
 obey. I go farther, and insist that the influence 
 of the Spirit in sanctification being admitted, it 
 follows, as a logical sequence, that the same iiiflu-
 
 168 CAMPBELL1SM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 
 
 ence is exerted in conversion, which is but tke com- 
 mencement of the work of which sanctification is 
 the progress. 
 
 Before I proceed to offer direct proofs in support 
 of my position, I must briefly notice what Mr. 
 Campbell has alleged in support of his views. This 
 may be comprehended under three heads 
 
 First. " The Holy Spirit," he affirms, " is not 
 promised to any persons out of Christ." This posi- 
 tion I do not controvert. The Spirit is bestowed 
 on believers, in answer to prayer, to comfort, refresh, 
 strengthen, and guide them in fine, to carry on 
 within them the process of sanctification. This 
 privilege is peculiar to Christians. But I do most 
 widely dissent from the inference which Mr. Campbell 
 seeks to draw from this position. His reasoning is 
 this : The Spirit is promised only to believers ; there- 
 fore, the influence of the Spirit is limited to believers. 
 .This reasoning is illogical. It is based on the assump- 
 tion that God bestows no blessing which he does not 
 promise. But this is not true. God's promises are all 
 made to believers to the obedient to the holy. So 
 far as I know, there is not a promise in the Bible to 
 the ungodly, except on condition of their repentance 
 and faith. But the- Divine blessings are bestowed 
 profusely on the bad as well as the good the dis- 
 obedient as well as the righteous. Matt. 6 : 45. 
 God has promised the Spirit of consolation and 
 encouragement to believers ; but this truth is in
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS 'PRINCIPLES. 169 
 
 perfect harmony with the doctrine that God's un- 
 promised, free, gracious, and sovereign Spirit exerts 
 a real, powerful, and creative influence in changing 
 carnal, ungodly men, into humble believers. 
 
 Secondly. Mr. Campbell's next argument in 
 support- of his views, is derived from analogy. " Is 
 it not more easy," he inquires, " to enlist in the 
 army, than to be a good soldier, and fight the 
 battles of the Lord ; to start in the race, than to 
 reach the goal ; to enter the ship, than to cross the 
 ocean ; to be naturalized, than to become a good 
 citizen ; to enter into the matrimonial compact, than 
 to be an exemplary husband ; to enter into life, 
 than to retain and sustain it for three-score years 
 and ten ?" Analogies prove nothing. It is easy 
 for Mr. Campbell to furnish examples in which it ie 
 more difficult to prosecute than to commence an 
 enterprise ; but these examples are far from proving 
 that it is more difficult to continue than to begin a 
 life of piety. Moreover, the Scriptural analogies 
 are against Mr. Campbell's views. Conversion is a 
 resurrection. Is it easier to raise a man from the 
 dead, than to nourish him after he is made alive ? 
 Conversion is a creation. Is it easier to create than 
 to preserve that which is created ? Conversion is 
 reconciliation. Is it easier to reconcile an enemy, 
 than to retain a friend ? It requires the same 
 power, and certainly no less an exertion of that 
 power, to quick" :n a soul dead in trespasses and sins,
 
 170 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 
 
 than to support and nourish the new life. So ana- 
 logy and reason decide ; and nothing but unbridled 
 speculation would doubt. 
 
 Thirdly. Mr. Campbell derives another argument 
 in support of his opinions from the difficulty of a 
 life of piety. " The commands to the use of the 
 means of spiritual life and health ; to form the 
 Christian character, etc., are accompanied with such 
 exhortations, admonitions, cautions, as to make it 
 a difficult and critical affair" I admit the diffi- 
 culty of a life of piety ; but assuredly the difficulty 
 includes the obstacles at the commencement, as well 
 as those in its progress. Take for illustration the 
 text which Mr. Campbell has misquoted in the 
 extract above as an illustration. " Strive to enter 
 in at the strait gate ; for many, I say unto you, 
 will seek to enter in, and shall not be able." Luke 
 13 : 24. The entrance through the strait, or diffi- 
 cult gate, the necessity of which we are here taught, 
 includes conversion, if it does not primarily refer to 
 it. The exhortation was addressed to captious, 
 unbelieving Jews, who needed to commence, before 
 they could pursue a life of piety. 
 
 I am now prepared to offer direct proofs in sup- 
 port of my position. 
 
 My first argument respects the power of the Holy 
 Spirit. It is this if the Spirit can and does dwell 
 in believers, " actually and powerfully" assisting 
 them " in the mighty struggle for eternal "life"
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 171 
 
 then he can exert a similar influence in enlightening, 
 quickening and renewing the ungodly. Call it 
 moral, physical, or any other kind of power, the 
 energy by which he assists Christians in their 
 struggles may be exercised in giving sinners " re- 
 pentance to the acknowledging of the truth." 2. 
 Tun. 2 : 25. 
 
 My second proof is derived from the nature of 
 sanctification. It is progressive holiness. It is 
 beautifully described by the wise man " The path 
 of the just is as the shining light, that shineth more 
 and more unto the perfect day." Prov. 4. : 18. 
 Kegeneration is the commencement of holiness. 
 Regeneration and eanctification do not denote dif- 
 ferent processes, but the same process in different 
 stages. They resemble each other as the child re- 
 sembles the man, or the dawn resembles the day. 
 I will .not now stop to defend these definitions, 
 partly, because I presume the advocates of the 
 Reformation will admit their correctness, and 
 partly, because I purpose in another place to ex- 
 amine more particularly Mr. Campbell's use of 
 these terms. Now to maintain that regeneration or 
 conversion, and sanctification are the result of dif- 
 ferent influences, or processes, is about as discrimi- 
 nating and wise as to maintain that the dawn of 
 day and the brightness of noon spring from different 
 orbs. Conversion is holiness begun ; sanctification 
 is holiness progressing ; but in both cases the holi-
 
 172 . CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PEINCIPLES. 
 
 ness is of the same nature, tendency and origin. 
 To ascribe the commencement and the progress of 
 this renovating process to different influences, or 
 authors, is as unphilosophical as it is unscriptural 
 is to adopt a visionary theory, without proof, with- 
 out plausibility, and without advantage. 
 
 My third proof is drawn from the direct testimony 
 of revelation. The Scriptures, I may remark, in 
 general terms, ascribe conversion to Divine agency 
 in language as clear, strong and varied as they do 
 sanctification. The Spirit that nourishes is the 
 Spirit that begets : the Power that preserves is the 
 Power that creates. But on this point revelation 
 bears explicit testimony. " Being confident of this 
 very thing, that he which hath begun a good work 
 in you will perform it until the day of Jesus Christ." 
 Phil. 1 : 6. This " good work" is the work of 
 grace in the soul that process of moral purifica- 
 tion by which it is fitted for communion with God. 
 The Same Agent who begins this work, in conver- 
 sion, " will perform it," or " be completing it," in 
 sanctification, " until the day of Jesus Christ." As 
 Mr. Campbell admits that the Spirit carries on 
 this good work, and as Paul teaches that he who 
 carries it on also began it, it follows that the Spirit 
 began it. By "good work" in this passage, Mr. 
 Campbell understands the liberality of the Philip- 
 pian Christians to the apostle Paul. To favor this 
 interpretation, he hap in his New Testament
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PKINCIPLES. 173 
 
 abandoned the well established translation of 
 McKnight, which he professes to follow, and 
 adopted that of Thompson, in the preceding 
 verse. Instead of " fellowship in the Gospel," as 
 McKnight has it, or " your participation in the 
 Gospel/' as Doddridge renders it, he has printed, 
 on Thompson's authority, "your contribution for 
 the Gospel." All the commentaries, within my 
 reach, both Calvinistic and Arminian, are opposed 
 to his interpretation of the sixth verse. " Some 
 sectaries," he says, have converted this good work, 
 into God's work, upon them, and have made the 
 apostle invalidate his own exhortation to them, to 
 work out their salvation with fear and trembling." 
 New Trans. Appendix 32. The quotation by which 
 Mr. Campbell aims to confirm his interpretation is 
 singularly infelicitous. The Philippians are ex- 
 horted by the apostle to work out their salvation, 
 for this very reason, that " it is God wliich worketh 
 in them to will and to do of his good pleasure.' 
 Phil. 2 : 12-13, or as the passage is more strongly 
 rendered in Mr. Campbell's New Testament, " Foi 
 it is God who inwardly workcth in you, from be 
 nevolence, both to will and to work effectually. 
 Now it is precisely this inward, effectual ivorkino. 
 of God in the Philippians, loth to will and to ivork r 
 which the apostle styles " a 'jood work" and which, 
 he is fully persuaded God will perform until the 
 day of Jesus Christ.
 
 174 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 
 
 My last remark, concerns the honor of the Holy 
 Spirit. The theory which I am opposing repre- 
 sents the infinite Spirit as condescending to carry 
 on, and complete a work, which was commenced, 
 and passed through its most difficult stage, without 
 his influence. Man without any agency except the 
 force of argument, contained in the written Word, 
 is converted. He attends to the Word, is enlight- 
 ened by it, sorrows for his sins, abandons them, 
 believes in Christ, or heartily receives him as a 
 Saviour, devotes himself with delight to the service 
 of Christ, confesses him before men, braves scorn, 
 persecution and death in his cause, and is baptized 
 in his name ; and then, this easy part of the work, 
 as Mr. Campbell deems it, but most difficult accord- 
 ing to the Scriptures, having been performed, the 
 Holy Spirit actually and powerfully assists him in 
 his mighty struggles for eternal life. What is this 
 but to wrest from the Spirit the chief glory of his 
 work ? 
 
 Mr. Campbell, in his great zeal to steer clear of 
 all speculative theology, maintains that all theories 
 of the Spirit's influence in conversion are equally 
 inefficacious and worthless. He thus writes " But 
 who can live on essential oils ? Or will the art of 
 speculating or inferring ; or will the inferences when 
 drawn that the Spirit without the Word, or the 
 Word without the Spirit, or the Spirit and Word 
 in conjunction, regenera tes the human soul ; I ask.
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 175 
 
 will the act of drawing these inferences, or these 
 inferences when drawn, save the soul ? If they 
 will not, why make them essential to Christianity, 
 beneficial to be taught ?" Chn. Bap., p. 269. I am 
 no more an advocate of mere speculation and empty 
 theory, than Mr. Campbell.. The subject of the 
 Spirit's influence has been a fruitful source of profit- 
 less theorizing and vain jangling. I fully concur with 
 him in the opinion that preaching the influence of 
 the Spirit, is not preaching the G-ospel ; and that 
 much mischief has arisen from insisting on this influ- 
 ence to the neglect of the duty of repentance and 
 faith. But whether men are converted by the 
 Spirit without the Word, or the Word without the 
 Spirit, or the Word and Spirit in conjunction, are 
 not questions of mere speculation, but grave, 
 weighty, and practical. Whatsoever is legitimately 
 inferred from the Scriptures is a part of Divine reve- 
 lation, and profitable for instruction. The belief of 
 it may not be essential to salvation ; and yet it may 
 contribute to the growth, happiness, and efficiency 
 of the disciples of Christ. The influence of the 
 Holy Spirit in the conversion of sinners is not a 
 mere theory, but a revealed truth, the belief of 
 which is intimately connected with the progress ot 
 the Redeemer's kingdom. The doctrine of the 
 Spirit's efficient agency in the salvation of men, 
 teaches us our entire dependence on God for the 
 success o^ our efforts even the most vigorous and
 
 176 CAMPBELLISM IN ITo PRINCIPLES. 
 
 best directed for the promotion of his cause. It is 
 well fitted to impress upon the heart the word of the 
 Lord unto Zerubbabel, " Not by might, nor by power, 
 but by my Spirit, saith the Lord of hosts." Zee. 4:6. 
 This Scriptural doctrine clearly understood and 
 heartily embraced, must lead Christians to humble, 
 earnest, and persevering prayer for the salvation of 
 sinners. It shows them where all their strength 
 lies, and whence all their help must come. It dis- 
 poses them to give the honor of their success to its 
 real author, inspiring them with the devout senti- 
 ment of the Psalmist, " Not unto us, Lord, not 
 unto us, but unto thy name give glory, for thy 
 mercy, and for thy truth's sake." In all ages, and 
 in all countries, the truly pious, though differing 
 widely on other subjects, have cordially united in 
 the belief and maintenance of the doctrine of a 
 supernatural agency in the conversion of sinners. 
 Under the influence of this truth they have lived, 
 their characters have been moulded, their labors 
 have been performed, their prayers have been pre- 
 sented to God, and their successes have been 
 achieved. 
 
 Much as Mr. Campbell was opposed, in the com- 
 mencement of his Keformation, to religious specu- 
 lations, it was not a great while before he adopted, 
 or elaborated, an abstruse, metaphysical theory of 
 conversion. I will not affirm that he taught regen- 
 eration by the W ~rd by the force of arguments
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES 177 
 
 without the Spirit. But if he did not so teach, in 
 his Christianity Kestored, then it has not been 
 taught by any writer within the compass of my 
 knowledge, and I seriously question whether it has 
 ever been taught in the English tongue. Indeed, I 
 do not perceive how the clearest, and most discrimi- 
 nating author, who admits the inspiration of the Scrip- 
 tures, can teach it, if Mr. Campbell has not. Now, this 
 " inference ," or theory, I am very far from deeming 
 "essential to Christianity, beneficial to be taught." 
 Nay, it is an illegitimate inference, a false theory, 
 not " essential to Christianity," but subversive of it, 
 not "beneficial to be taught," but most pernicious. 
 It cuts off all hope of divine aid, and all motives to 
 pray for it. It greatly weakens a sense of obliga- 
 tion to the author of salvation, if, indeed, salvation 
 is compatible with the " inference," and leads to a 
 cold and heartless rationalism. 
 
 I hive not yet entirely disposed of the subject of 
 the Holy Spirit's influence in the work of conver- 
 sion. I have already referred to the difficulty which 
 Mr. Campbell's opponents have found in compre- 
 hending his views on this vital point. It seems 
 thus to have arisen. While he has denounced the 
 popular teaching- on the subject, us mystical and 
 pernicious, and has seemed most obviously to main- 
 tain a new and peculiar theory of conversion, he has 
 sometimes published sentences on this point to whk-h 
 the most rigid advocates of orthodoxy could lind no
 
 178 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 
 
 objection. As early as the year 1826, Rev. A. 
 Broaddus, over the signature of Paulinus, thus ad- 
 dressed him " There are some among us possessed 
 of strong apprehension that you are disposed to 
 deny the existence of the regenerating and sancti-' 
 fying operations of the Holy Spirit on the spirit 01 
 heart of man ; and that you would ascribe all the 
 religious effects produced in us, solely to the influ- 
 ence of the written Word, or the external revelation 
 of God. . . . For myself, I have said to others, as 
 I now say to you, that I cannot think this of you. 
 / have seen many things in your writings which 
 appear inconsistent with such a sentiment." Chn. 
 Bap., p. 266. We have already seen in an extract 
 from the Appendix to the Extra Examined, pub- 
 lished in 1831, that Mr. Broaddus had changed his 
 opinion on this point. 
 
 That I may do Mr. Campbell full justice, I will 
 quote from his writings a few passages in which he 
 appears to maintain evangelical views on the agency 
 of the Holy Spirit. 
 
 " But if any man accustomed to speculate on re- 
 ligion as a science, should infer from any thing which 
 I have said on these theories, that I contend for a 
 religion in which the Holy Spirit has nothing to do ; 
 in which there is no need of prayer for the Holy 
 Spirit ; in which there is no communion of the 
 Holy Sprit ; in which there is n:> peace and joy in
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 
 
 the Holy Spirit, lie cloes me the greatest injustice." 
 Chn. Bap., 269. 
 
 " If any man ask me how the influence and aid 
 of the Holy Spirit is obtained, I answer, By prayer 
 and the Word of God." p. 329. 
 
 " From the answer above given to query first, I 
 am authorized to say, that ' saving faith' is wrought 
 in the heart by the Holy Spirit, and that no man 
 can believe to the saving of his soul, but by the 
 Holy Spirit." p. 353. 
 
 Paulinus, in an article on the influence of the 
 Spirit, thus summed up his argument " The sub- 
 stance of the leading sentiment maintained in these 
 two essays is, that we are dependent on the influ- 
 ence of the Holy Spirit to render the Word effectual 
 to our conversion and final salvation/' To this the 
 editor of the Christian Baptist replied " Although 
 it might appear that some of the sentences extract- 
 ed from different parts of the sacred volume were not 
 originally intended to prove the position which was 
 before the mind of Paulinus, yet still the conclusions 
 to which he has come will be very generally em- 
 braced as declarative of sentiments styled evangeli- 
 cal. If this language does not endorse the doctrine 
 of Paulinus, it is evasive, and unworthy of a candid 
 writer." p. 437. 
 
 " On the subject of spiritual influence, there are 
 two extremes of doctrine. There is the Word alone 
 system, and there is the Spirit alon* system. I
 
 10 CAMPBELL1SM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 
 
 believe in neither. The former is the parent of a 
 cold, lifeless rationalism and formality. The latter 
 is, in some temperaments, the cause of a wild, irre- 
 pressible enthusiasm ; and, in other cases, of a dark, 
 melancholy despondency. * * * There yet remains 
 another school, which never speculatively separates 
 the Word and Spirit, which in every case of con- 
 version contemplates them as co-operating ; or, 
 which is the same thing, conceives of the Spirit of 
 God as clothed with the Gospel motives and argu- 
 ments enlightening, convincing, persuading sin- 
 ners, and thus enabling them to flee from the wrath 
 to come." Debate with Rice, p. 614. 
 
 " I would not, sir, value at the price of a single 
 .mill, the religion of any man, as respects the grand 
 affair of eternal life, whose religion is not begun, 
 carried on, and completed by the personal agency 
 of the Holy Spirit." p. 614. 
 
 " I believe the Spirit accompanies the Word, is 
 always present with the Word, and actually and 
 personally works through it upon the moral nature 
 of man, but not without it." p. 745. 
 
 I have selected these quotations partly from the 
 early, and partly from the later writings of Mr. 
 Campbell, taking the liberty of italicising a few 
 terms. I could easily increase the list of pertinent 
 quotations but it is unnecessary. 
 
 Concerning these extracts, one of three conclu- 
 sions is certain. Either, first, they contradict the
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 181. 
 
 quotations furnished in the commencement of this 
 chapter or, secondly, they must be interpreted in 
 harmony with the theory of conversion by moral 
 suasion, which I have already discussed or, thirdly, 
 they must be understood as agreeing substantially 
 with the popular, evangelical doctrine of conver- 
 sion by Divine influence. And these several con- 
 clusions are entitled to particular attention* 
 
 First. Are the statements vf Mr. Campbell con- 
 cerning the influence of the Holy Spirit contradic- 
 tory ? In my judgment they are. Whether his 
 views on the subject were confused, or differed at 
 different times, or were carelessly and vaguely ex- 
 pressed, I will not say ; but they appear to me to 
 be inconsistent. " The only power" says Mr. 
 Campbell, " which one spirit can exert over another 
 is in its arguments." If this is not the " word 
 alone system" I would gladly be informed what 
 that system is. I repeat, I must be permitted to 
 doubt whether any man ever has taught, or ever can 
 teach the system, if Mr. Campbell did not inculcate 
 it in his Christianity Restored. And yet he affirms 
 in his Debate with Rice, " There is the Word alone 
 system, and there is the Spirit alone system. I 
 believe in neither." In one place he says, " Before 
 the Holy Spirit can be received, the heart must be 
 purified." In another place he writes, " I would 
 not value at the price of a single mill, the religion 
 of any man, whose religion is not begun, carried
 
 182 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 
 
 on, and completed by the personal agency of the 
 Holy Spirit." In one he represents that all that is 
 lone in us before regeneration, that is baptism, 
 " God our Father effects by the Word ;" in anothei 
 he maintains, that in every case of conversion the 
 Spirit and Word co-operate, " enlightening, con- 
 vincing, persuading sinners, and thus enabling 
 them to'flee from the wrath to come ;" and that the 
 Spirit " actually and personally works through" 
 the Word, " upon the moral nature of man." I will 
 not affirm these various statements are contradic- 
 tory ; but I do not perceive their harmony. For 
 the sake of the argument, however, I will admit 
 their agreement. And now I must inquire, 
 
 Secondly, Are the last recited extracts from the 
 writings of Mr. Campbell to be interpreted in har- 
 mony with the theory of conversion by moral 
 suasion ? Are we to understand all that he has 
 said of the co-operation of the Spirit and Word 
 of religion " begun, carried on, and completed by 
 the personal agency of the Holy Spirit" of his 
 "actually and personally" working through the 
 Word on " man's moral nature" as meaning nothing 
 more than that the Spirit addresses arguments, 
 through the written Word, to sinners, to persuade 
 them to be converted ; and that having done this 
 his resources are exhausted, his power is spent ? In 
 other words, is the actual, personal agency of the 
 Spirit, pleaded fo* ^y Mr. Campbell, to be resolved
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 183 
 
 into mere moral suasion ? If so, the system has 
 been already examined, and the reader must decide 
 whether it has been satisfactorily refuted. But if 
 Mr. Campbell rejects the doctrine of conversion by 
 moral suasion, or by the mere presentation of the 
 arguments of the Holy Spirit to the mind, then I 
 remark, 
 
 Thirdly That Mr. Campbell's teaching is in 
 substantial agreement with the popular evangelical 
 doctrine of conversion through Divine influence. 
 There is no middle ground between the " Word 
 alone," or moral suasion system, and that which as- 
 cribes conversion to the personal agency of the 
 Spirit through the Word. This latter system is 
 the popular evangelical system the system uni- 
 versally taught, when Mr. Campbell commenced 
 his Reformation, except by a few ultra-Calvinists, 
 and low Arminians and formalists the system 
 which permeated almost all our Biblical and theo- 
 logical literature ; our commentaries, Bible diction- 
 aries, bodies of divinity, and popular sermons in 
 fine, the system which maintained a quiet, undis- 
 puted, and controlling influence in all the orthodox 
 churches of the land. I must confirm these state- 
 ments by a few quotations from popular, evangelical 
 writers, whose reputation preceded the Bethany 
 Reformation, and has not declined from its influence. 
 
 " The instrument of this renovation (regeneration) 
 is ' the word of truth.' In infiuing the principle
 
 184 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 
 
 of divine life into the soul, God is wont to employ 
 the Gospel as the instrument." E. Hall, vol. 3. 
 p. 66. 
 
 " The change which God produces in men's dis- 
 positions and actions, by the truths of the Gospel 
 impressed on their minds, is so great that it may be 
 called a begetting, or creating them anew." Mc- 
 Knight. Note on Jas. 1 : 18. 
 
 " But though this Word (the Gospel) cannot beget 
 without him (God), yet it is by this Word that he 
 begets, and ordinarily not without it." Leighton's 
 Works, p. 120. 
 
 " The ffiord, or doctrine of truth, what St. Paul 
 calls the Word of the truth of the Gospel, Col. 1 : 5, 
 is the means which God uses to convert souls." A. 
 Clarke's Com., Jas: 1 : 18. 
 
 " In this passage St. Peter declares, that Chris- 
 tians are born, or regenerated, did ho-/ov, by means 
 of the Word of God. Of course he declares, that they 
 were not regenerated without the instrumentality 
 of the Word of God. What is true, with respect to 
 this subject, of the Christians to whom St. Peter 
 wrote, will not be denied to be true of Christians 
 universally." Dwight's Theol., vol. 4, p. 40-41. 
 
 " The means (of regeneration) are pointed out ; 
 the Word of truth, i. e., the Gospel ; as Paul ex- 
 presses it more plainly, 1 Cor. 4 : 15. This Gospel 
 is indeed a Word of truth ; else it ^uld never pro-
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 185 
 
 duce such real, such lasting, such great and noble 
 effects." M. Henry's Com., Jas. 1 : 18. 
 
 " No regeneration, no quickening grace, no faith 
 nor holiness, come this way (through the law^ hut 
 through the preaching of the Gospel ; in and 
 through which, as a vehicle, the Spirit of God con- 
 veys himself into the heart, as a Spirit of regenera- 
 tion and faith." Gill's Com., 1 Cor. 4 : 15. 
 
 "Here is a plain evidence, that the Word of God 
 is the ordinary means of our regeneration, it being 
 ' the word preached,' the word we are to hear, 
 (v. 19, 22,) and 'receive with meekness/ by which 
 the new birth is by God wrought in us, and which, 
 saith the apostle, is able to save the soul." Dr. 
 Whitby's Com., Jas. 1 : 18. 
 
 Even Andrew Fuller, who maintained a Divine 
 influence in regeneration, " which is immediate, or 
 without any instrument whatever," and in which 
 sentiment, so far us I have observed, he stood alone, 
 did not consider this influence as producing the 
 whole of that change denoted by the term regenera- 
 tion. " I admit regeneration," he says, " to be by 
 the Word of God, and that this truth is taught by 
 the passage in question, (1 Pet. 1 : 23,) and also 
 in Jas. 1 : 18 ; nor does this concession appear to 
 clash with the position above." Fuller's Works, 
 vol. 1, p. 66G. 
 
 Quotations of this kind might be indefinitely 
 multiplied, from tlir most enlightened, pious and
 
 186 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 
 
 approved authors, showing conclusively that the 
 doctrine in question was generally, almost univer- 
 sally, held by evangelical Christians, before the first 
 number of the Christian Baptist saw the light. In 
 all the " vain janglings," to which the speculations 
 of Mr. Campbell have unfortunately given birth, I 
 do jiot remember to have heard but a single indi- 
 vidual maintain the Fullerian theory, that regene- 
 ration is commenced by a Divine influence, "without 
 any instrument," and he was an earnest and faithful 
 minister of the Gospel, whose success was, in no 
 degree, impeded by his peculiar theory. 
 
 Now if Mr. Campbell rejects the theory of con- 
 version by moral suasion, and holds that conversion 
 is effected by the personal agency of the Spirit, 
 through the written Word, then on this great, vital, 
 distinctive principle of evangelical Christianty, he 
 is found in company with our Halls, our Leightons, 
 our Henrys, and a host of such Protestant worthies ; 
 nor does he need to be ashamed of his company. 
 On one merely speculative point, he differs from 
 most, or all of his brethren. They believe that this 
 is God's ordinary, or usual way of converting sin- 
 ners ; the only way in which we should hope, labor 
 and pray for "their conversion ; but that he is not 
 limited to this way. In the case of dying infants, 
 or idiots, they believe that a moral change, equiva- 
 lent to regeneration, is effected by the direct, per- 
 sonal agency of the Holy Spirit, without the Word.
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 187 
 
 They found their belief on what seems to thtm to 
 be a legitimate inference from clearly revealed truth. 
 From this inference Mr. Campbell dissents ; and 
 maintains not only that the Spirit does not, and 
 needs not, but cannot operate except through its 
 arguments. As this point, however, is purely specu- 
 lative, and as Mr. Campbell admits the salvation of 
 dying "infants, and idiots, it cannot be deemed of 
 great importance. 
 
 Is he then to be classed among- the orthodox 
 teachers of a Divine influence in the conversion of 
 sinners ? It will, doubtless, seem as strange to 
 many as it was of .old to find Saul among the pro- 
 phets. For thirty years it has been his chosen em- 
 ployment to denounce, by the tongue and the pen, 
 in no measured terms, the " mystic theology/' and 
 " theoretic doctors," and to expose the pernicious 
 effects of the popular teaching on the influence of 
 the Holy Spirit. He claimed to have made dis- 
 coveries on this subject of great importance to the 
 world. His admirers fancied that he had shed fresh, 
 and most satisfactory light on it. They certainly 
 received new views of this delicate and profound 
 subject from their erudite instructor. One of them 
 felt impelled to reflect the light which he had re- 
 ceived " about the Holy Spirit's operations in this 
 metaphysical day," in the following unequivocal 
 language, which was published in the Christian 
 Baptist, " without note or comment." " We must
 
 188 CAMl BELLISH IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 
 
 first hear, then believe and reform ; then obey, that 
 is, be immerpdd ; then receive the regenerating 
 Spirit, with all its heavenly blessings promised to 
 the believing sons and daughters of Adam. This 
 appears to be so plainly inculcated in the New Tes- 
 tament, that I am astonished that I so long re- 
 mained ignorant of the Gospel, when at the same 
 time I professed to be a teacher of it. And for this 
 discovery I am indebted to you, brother Editor." 
 p. 544. Another coadjutor, and an accredited 
 leader in the Eeformation, thus wrote "If they 
 (the Samaritans) were converted before baptism, 
 they were converted without the Holy Spirit, for 
 they had been baptized, and yet- ' the Spirit had 
 fallen on none of them/ . . . This passage (Gal. 2: 
 2,) ought alone to decide this controversy about 
 the work of the Spirit. The passages are abundant 
 which teach the nature of the Spirit's work, and all 
 are like the above, conclusive as to the fact, that 
 the Holy Spirit dwells in the saints, and that lie, 
 does not come to sinners to convert them." Scrip- 
 tural Keformation by Jas. Henshall, p. 23. But 
 this confidence that new light had appeared was, it 
 seems, illusory. Mr. Campbell believes as the great 
 body of evangelical ministers in all the Christian 
 sects, believes, that sinners are converted by the 
 personal agency of the Holy Spirit, through the 
 Gospel. But, surely, since the world began, have 
 there. never been so manj labored arguments, so
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 189 
 
 much learned criticism, so much toil, debate and 
 strife, such a waste of ink and "paper, and such a 
 multiplication of essays, pamphlets and books, to 
 prove what scarcely any body doubted. The public 
 mind was excited, the Christian world was agitated, 
 the Baptist denomination, in several states, was 
 thrown' into confusion, many of the churches were 
 rent asunder, a new sect was formed, and the aid 
 of earth and heaven was invoked in the contest ; 
 and for what ? Why, simply because Mr. Campbell 
 taught, what was almost universally* admitted, that 
 the Spirit in conversion operates through the Word. 
 But what then becomes of the boasted Eeformation, 
 of which the peculiar teaching on the influence of 
 the Spirit constituted so important an article ? It 
 turns out, if the supposition under discussion is 
 true, that the Eeformation, on this important point, 
 'is no t&foirna'tion at all. We eannot avoid being 
 remind e'd of a well known fable. Surely, there 
 were never in any previous case, such sore travail, 
 such mighty heavings, such piteous meanings, and 
 such swelling expectations, in a simple case of abor- 
 tion. 
 
 Before I conclude my remarks on this subject, I 
 must venture on a conjecture, which will, I fear, 
 not prove very acceptable to Mr. Campbell and his 
 
 admirers: Ib* is this When he commenced his 
 
 . 
 
 career as a 1< firmer, his religious views were unde- 
 fined and mi VS. :> His first object was to bring into
 
 190 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 
 
 disrepute the " mystic theology" of the " popu- 
 lars," or " clergy." He found it necessary, for the 
 accomplishment of his purpose, to publish some 
 theory at variance with the popular doctrine of the 
 Spirit's influence in conversion. This new theory 
 began to be developed about the year 1826, and was 
 consummated, and fully revealed, in the year 
 1831, when Austin taught the docile Timothy, that 
 " every Spirit puts forth its moral power in words ; 
 that is, all the power it has over the views, habits, 
 manners, or actions of men, is in the meaning and 
 arrangement of its ideas expressed in words ; or 
 in significant signs addressed to the eye or ear." 
 Christianity Restored, p. 348. But after the Re- 
 formation resulted in an organized party, Mr. 
 Campbell, to avoid the o.diuni of his peculiar no- 
 tions of the Spirit's influence, or because he found 
 it easier to defend the popular doctrine, began 
 gradually to modify his views, and to glide out of 
 the theory of conversion by moral suasion, into the 
 doctrine that conversion is by the actual, personal 
 agency of the Holy Spirit. This modification of 
 his views began to appear in a discussion of the 
 subject with the Rev. J. M. Peck, and was still 
 more apiparent in his Debate with the Rev. N. L. 
 Rice. But for Mr. Campbell to acknowledge that 
 he had erred in the fundamental principle of his 
 Reformation, and that af*er all his wanderings, and 
 denunciations of the " popular clergy," he had
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 191 
 
 been compelled to admit the truth of their teach- 
 ing on this vital point, would have demanded a 
 degree of humility and moral heroism, which the 
 high-spirited Reformer did not possess. 
 
 I do not intend to impeach the motives of Mr. 
 Campbell. With their moral qualities I have 
 nothing to do. Men are influenced by considera- 
 tions of which they have little knowledge. Mr. 
 Campbell has quite a fair share of human nature in 
 him. He does not rise above the laws which govern 
 other frail mortals. I have simply, and, I trust, 
 kindly sketched what appears to me to have been 
 his course in regard to the agency of the Spirit in 
 conversion, and the motives that probably shaped 
 it, and the intelligent and candid reader must form 
 his own judgment. 
 
 THE IDENTITY OF REGENERATION, CONVERSION, 
 AND BAPTISM. 
 
 The subject of Regeneration, or Conversion, is of 
 vital importance in the Christian System. On 
 other points ignorance may be harmless, but on this 
 it may be fatal. These terms, the former figurative, 
 and the latter literal, are almost universally em- 
 ployed by theologians to denote that moral renova- 
 tion, by which fallen man is fitted for the service of 
 Christ on earth, and the enjoyment of his presence 
 in heaven: On this subject Mr. Campbell has put
 
 192 CAHPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 
 
 forth new and peculiar views. He has written on 
 it largely. It occupies a conspicuous place in the 
 Reformation which he has so zealously advocated. 
 His thoughts on this topic, scattered through his . 
 numerous periodicals, extras, and larger works, 
 would fill a ponderous octavo. I have endeavored, 
 sincerely and diligently, to comprehend his views on 
 .the subject, but have found it very difficult to do 
 so. If they have not been obscure, variable, and 
 contradictory, I confess to a want of perspicacity, 
 which he, no doubt, will be very ready to admit. 
 That the reader may judge for himself on this 
 point, I will present in contrast a few quotations 
 from the accredited works of the Reformer. 
 
 1. " No man believes more cordially, or teaches 
 more fully, the necessity of a spiritual change of 
 our affections a change of heart than I do. I 
 have said a thousand times, that if a person were to 
 be immersed twice seven times in the Jordan for the 
 remission of his sins, or for the reception of the 
 Holy Spirit, it would avail nothing more than wet- 
 ting the face of a babe, unless his heart is changed 
 by the Word and Spirit of God." Debate with 
 Rice, p. 544. 
 
 Now this is quite orthodox. No " mystic doctor" 
 in the land could have discoursed on the subject in 
 a more evangelical strain. But let the reader turn 
 lo the Mill. Har., vol. 1, p. 136, and he will find 
 the following language :
 
 CAHPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 193 
 
 " The sprinkling of a speechless and faithless 
 babe never moved it one inch in the way to heaven, 
 and never did change its heart, character, or rela- 
 tion to God and the kingdom of heaven. But not 
 so a believer, immersed as a volunteer in obedience 
 of the Gospel. He has put on Christ." 
 
 " The sprinkling of a speechless and faithless 
 babe never did change its heart ;" but what is true 
 of the sprinkling of an infant is not true of the vol- 
 untary immersion of a believer. So Mr. Campbell 
 seems to teach. But do I not misunderstand him ? 
 He shall have the benefit of another quotation. 
 
 " There are three births, three kingdoms, and 
 three salvations. One from the womb of our first 
 mother, one from the water, and one from the grave. 
 We enter a new world on, and not before each 
 birth. The present animal life, at the first birth ; 
 the spiritual, or the life of God in our souls, at the 
 second birth ; and the life eternal in the presence 
 of God, at the third birth. And he who dreams of 
 entering the second kingdom, or coming under the 
 dominion of Jesus without the second birth, may, 
 to complete his error, dream of entering the king- 
 dom of glory without a resurrection from the dead." 
 Chn. Sys., p. 233. 
 
 Whether Mr. Campbell does here teach that we 
 enter " the spiritual life, or the life of God in our 
 souls, at," not before, "the second birth," or birth 
 
 from the water/ which in the terminology of the
 
 194 CAMPBEI.LISM II' ITS PRINCIPLES. 
 
 Bethany Reformation, means simply baptism ; ami 
 whether this teaching is compatible with what he 
 has previously admitted of the inefficacy of baptism 
 without a change of heart, the reader must decide. 
 
 2. " And will not every Christian say, that when 
 a person feds and acts according to the faith, or the 
 testimony of Grod, he is a new creature regenerate 
 truly converted to God ?" Chn. Sys., p. 259. 
 Certainly I know no one that disputes this point. 
 But if 'feeling and acting according to the testimony 
 or Word of God, constitute regeneration or conver- 
 sion, why does Mr. Campbell affirm, as he does in 
 this very volume, that " tlie Holy Spirit calls noth- 
 ing personal regeneration except the act of immer- 
 sion ?" p. 202. And if baptism be the only Scrip- 
 tural regeneration, as he maintains in this language, 
 how can he reconcile this position with what he 
 teaches in his late work on Baptism ? 
 
 Among the Questions on Infant Baptism, we find 
 the following Ques. 103. Is baptism compared to 
 any thing else in the Scriptures ? A. Yes ; to the 
 regenerating influences and operation of the Holy 
 Spirit. Hence we read of ' the washing of regener- 
 ation/ and of the 'baptism of the Holy Spirit/ 
 Camp, on Bap., p. 431. But if the " Holy Spirit 
 calls nothing personal regeneration, except the act 
 of immersion," how can the Scriptures, the only 
 medium through which the Spirit communicates 
 with us, compare baptism to " the regenerating in-
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 195 
 
 fluenccs and operation of the Spirit of God ?" Is 
 immersion in water an emblem of itself ? 
 
 3. " Now, as soon as, and not before, a disciple, 
 who has been begotten of God, is born of water, he 
 is born of God, or of the Spirit." Ch'nty Kestored, 
 p. 206. "Begotten of God he maybe ; but born 
 of God he cannot be, until born of water." Mill. 
 Har. Extra, p. 30. I have noticed this strange con- 
 ceit merely to show how flatly Mr. Campbell contra- 
 dicts it. Hear him " We are not baptized be- 
 cause of our fleshly descent from members of any 
 church, but because ' lorn from above lorn of the 
 Spirit.'" Camp, on Bap., 390. But if we are 
 baptized because we are " born of the Spirit," then 
 clearly we are not only " begotten of God," but born 
 of God," before we are " born of water." Again, the 
 distinction which Mr. Campbell sought to establish, 
 in the above citations, between the phrases "begot- 
 ten of God," and " born of God," he, in another 
 place, thus earnestly repudiates. " I would not 
 say that Mr. Kice has been sporting with the cre- 
 dulity of the audience in his dissertations on begotten 
 and born. Far be it. Yet really it looks more like 
 an attempt of that sort, than at any grave argitment. 
 Whether we shall read., 'He that believeth that 
 Jesus is the Christ, is born of God/ or is begotten 
 of God, must depend on the taste and discrimination 
 of the translator/ as the word is the same in the 
 original text." Deha'.c with llice, p. 457.
 
 196 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 
 
 I should find it easy to increase the list of seem- 
 ing contradictions on this subject from the writings 
 of Mr. Campbell ; but the above may suffice to con- 
 vince the reader that it is difficult distinctly to com- 
 prehend what he does aim to teach in regard to it. 
 His views seem to be unsettled. What he affirms 
 at one time, he denies at another. What he insists 
 on in the Millennial Harbinger Extra, as of great 
 importance, he summarily dismisses in his Debate 
 with Dr. Rice, as mere trifling. But amid^he mass 
 of confusion and contradictions, one point is clear. 
 Mr. Campbell insists, frequently, and in a variety 
 of language, on the perfect Identity of Regeneration, 
 Conversion, and Baptism. It is, or it was, an im- 
 portant article in the creed of the Reformers. 
 
 The substance of the Reformation, on 'this point, 
 as developed in the Millennial Harbinger Extra, and 
 perpetuated in the Christian System, is this Con- 
 verts made to Jesus Christ by the apostles were 
 taught to consider themselves pardoned, justified, 
 sanctified, reconciled, adopted, and saved. These 
 terms are expressive, not of any moral quality, but 
 of a state or condition. This change of state is 
 effected, not by any change of vieios or of feelings, 
 nor by faith, but by an act resulting from faith 
 and this act is IMMEESION, callecj, ivith equal pro- 
 priety, CONVERSION or REGENERATION. But let us 
 listen to the highest authority on this point. " What- 
 ever the act of fo^h may be, it necessarily becomes
 
 * 
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 197 
 
 the line of discrimination between the two states 
 before described. On this side, and on that, man- 
 kind are in quite different states. On the one side, 
 they are pardoned, justified, sanctified, reconciled, 
 adopted, and saved : on the other, they are in a 
 state of condemnation. This act is sometimes called 
 immersion, regeneration, conversion." Chn. Sys., 
 p. 193. " These expressions," (immersed, convert- 
 ed, regenerated,) " in the apostle's style, denote 
 the same act," p. 203. " For if immersion be equi- 
 valent to regeneration, and regeneration be of the 
 same import with being born again, then being born 
 again and being immersed, are the same thing." p. 
 200. 
 
 I may have occasion under another head to ex- 
 amine the above system I shall, in this place, 
 confine my discussion to the identity of baptism 
 regeneration, and conversion. 
 
 Before I enter on my task, I must submit a few 
 remarks to prevent misconception. 
 
 Mr. Campbell has been frequently, but, I think, 
 unfairly charged with teaching baptismal regenera- 
 tion. As popularly understood, baptismal regener- 
 ation denotes a moral change, effected through the 
 influence of Christian baptism. Some things which 
 Mr. Campbell has written, as we have seen, seem 
 to imply this doctrine ; and he has exposed himself 
 to the suspicion of holding it, by quoting its advo- 
 cates in support of his peculiar vifiwa ; but certainty
 
 p 
 
 198 CAMPBELLlSM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 
 
 he has not formally proclaimed it he earnestly 
 advocates principles at war with it. What he 
 clearly maintains is, not that we are regenerated by 
 baptism, but that baptism is itself regeneration, and 
 the only " personal regeneration." 
 
 I do not charge Mr. Campbell with denying the 
 necessity of a moral change preparatory to baptism. 
 He has written equivocally, perhaps it would be 
 better to say, obscurely, on the subject. His love 
 of novelty, the immaturity of his views, or the 
 blinding influence of his theory, or all these causes 
 combined, have impelled him to record many sen- 
 tences, which ingenuity, less pregnant than his own, 
 finds it difficult to reconcile with my admission. A 
 pity it is, that an author, destined to exert so wide- 
 spread and moulding an influence in the world, 
 should have written so carelessly and confusedly on 
 so vital a subject. 
 
 It is also due to Mr. Campbell to admit, that in 
 the passages under discussion, he professes to use 
 the terms Eegeneration and Conversion, not in their 
 popular, but Scriptural sense. " It is not," he 
 modestly says, " the regeneration of the schools, 
 in which Christianity has been lowered, misappre- 
 hended, obscured, and adulterated, of which we are 
 to write ; but that regeneration of which Jesus 
 spoke, and the apostles wrote." Chn'ty Eestored, 
 p. 257. It is to displace the " jargon of the schools," 
 by a " pure speech," that Mr. Campbell would
 
 CAMPBELLISM* IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 199 
 
 have us to confound regeneration, baptism and con- 
 version. 
 
 Having made these preliminary remarks, I now 
 take issue with the Bethany Reformer on the Iden- 
 tity of Baptism, Regeneration, and Conversion. I 
 maintain that neither the term regeneration, nor 
 conversion, nor any equivalent term, nor the Greek 
 words which they properly represent, nor any of 
 their cognates, are ever used in the Scriptures to 
 denote baptism. 
 
 REGENERATION. This term as it has been already 
 remarked, which is usually employed by theologians 
 to denote that moral change by which man is fitted 
 for the enjoyment of the kingdom of heaven, occurs 
 but twice in the common version of the Scriptures. 
 In the Greek it is Kcti.iyyevaia, which literally sig- 
 nifies a new birth, or creation. It is first found 
 Mat. 19 : 28. Whatever may be its import in this 
 passage, it is agreed, on both sides, that it refers 
 neither to a personal renovation, nor to baptism. 
 This text has no bearing on the controversy. Its 
 last occurrence is Tit. 3:5. " Not according to 
 works of righteousness which we have done, but ac- 
 cording to his mercy he saved us, by the washing 
 of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost." 
 The phrase the " washing of regeneration," or ac- 
 cording to McKnight's rendering, which Mr. Camp- 
 bell prefers, " the bath of regeneration," is under- 
 stood by him to mean immersion. "Washing of
 
 200 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 
 
 regeneration," he says, "and immersion are there- 
 fore only two names for the same tiling." Chn. 
 Sys.j p. 200. The phrase does not elsewhere occur 
 in the Scriptures. That it means baptism is a 
 mere assumption. The weight of authority is in 
 favor of this opinion, and there is no motive, so far 
 as this discussion is concerned, to controvert it. 
 The assumption is, however, subversive of the posi- 
 tion that immersion and regeneration are identical. 
 According to the assumption it is not regeneration, 
 but " the washing of regeneration" that means bap- 
 tism. Baptism is a washing, or, if Mr. Campbell 
 prefers it, a bat7i, emblematic of regeneration 
 alluding, as some suppose, to the cleansing of a 
 new born infant. I need not farther discuss this 
 point. I can adduce authority to settle this matter, 
 of the greatest weight with the Reformers, and to 
 which Mr. Campbell will not demur. In his Debate 
 with Eice, he thus discoursed " I believe that 
 almost all, if not absolutely all, the fathers, Greek 
 and Latin, used regeneration and baptism as repre- 
 sentatives of the same action and event. I do not, 
 however, approve the phraseology used by them on 
 this subject. I call baptism ' the washing of the 
 new birth, 5 rather than the new birth itself. So I 
 think Paul most learnedly denominates it." p. 544. 
 This point is settled. The term regeneration is 
 never used in the Scriptures to denote baptism. 
 Here we might drop this subject, were it not that
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 201 
 
 kindred phrases, such as " bora of God/' " born of 
 the Spirit," " born of water," &c., have been drawn 
 into the controversy. It is necessary to dispel the 
 mist that Mr. Campbell has spread over them. 
 The Greek term, ywvdo, means .to beget or gene- 
 rate. Its derivatives in the New Testament are 
 generally passive, and mean to be begotten. It 
 occurs in the writings of the apostle John fifteen 
 times relative to a moral change. The following- 
 are the passages in which it is found John 1 : 13. 
 -3 : 3, 6, 7, 8. 1 John 2 : 293 : 94 : 75 : 
 1, 4, 18. Twelve times it is rendered lorn eight 
 times it is found in the phrase " born of God," or 
 its equivalent twice in the phrase " born of the 
 Spirit/' and twice in the phrase "born again." 
 Three times it is rendered begotten and every time 
 it is contained in the phrase " begotten of God." 
 It is once rendered born in connexion with water 
 " born of water." John 3 : 5. Twice the term is 
 employed by the apostle Paul to denote the in- 
 fluence which he exerted in conversion ; but this 
 sense of the term does not affect the controversy. 
 1 Cor. 4 : 15. Philem. 10. 
 
 The phrases "born again," "born of God," &c., 
 have been -universally considered by evangelical 
 Christian writers as equivalent to a new ^irth, or 
 regeneration. If men are born of God they must 
 be re-generated. Even Mr. Campbell, when his 
 system is out of view, admits the soundness of
 
 202 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 
 
 this position. "To the fruits of his labors/' he 
 writes, " such a preacher with Paul may say, to 
 Jesus Christ, through the Gospel, I have regenera- 
 ted, or begotten you." Chn. Sys., p. 300. Now 
 that these phrases (not including " born of water"), 
 all denote not baptism, or a change of state, but a 
 personal, moral renovation, is clear and indisputable. 
 To ascribe to immersion what is ascribed to this 
 divine birth would be not only false, but ridiculous. 
 " Except a man be born again he cannot see the 
 kingdom of God." Does baptism open a man's 
 eyes ? " That which is born of the Spirit is spirit" 
 spiritual, holy. Can such an effect be ascribed 
 to baptism ? " Whosoever is born of God doth not 
 commit sin ; for his seed remaineth in him : and 
 he cannot sin because he is born of God." Will 
 Mr. Campbell venture to ascribe this efficacy to 
 baptism ? " He that is begotten of God keepeth 
 himself, and that wicked one toucheth him not." I. 
 need not say more to prove that these phrases de- 
 note a moral change ; and the pertinency and force 
 of the language for this purpose every intelligent 
 mind must perceive. 
 
 The phrase " born of water," John 3 : 5, what- 
 ever may be its import and I do not think it refers 
 to baptism cannot by any reasonable construction, 
 or inference, justify the confounding of regeneration 
 and baptism. Admitting that it means baptism, it 
 is clearly distinguished from the new birth, or being
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 203 
 
 u born of the Spirit," and to confound them is not to 
 interpret, but to pervert the word of God, and that 
 too on a most vital subject. 
 
 I have been greatly surprised to find on examina- 
 tion with how little caution and discrimination Mr. 
 Campbell has discussed the subject of the new birth. 
 Take the following passage as a specimen " Per- 
 sons are begotten by the Spirit of God, impregnated 
 by the Word, and born of the water. In one sense 
 a person is born of his father, but not until he is 
 first born of his mother. So in every place where 
 water and the Spirit, or water and the Word, are 
 spoken of, the water stands first. Every child is 
 born of its father, when it is born of its mother. 
 Hence the Saviour put the mother first, and the 
 
 apostles follow him Now, as soon as, Imd 
 
 not before, a disciple, who has been begotten of 
 God, is born of water, he is born of God, or of the 
 Spirit. Regeneration is, therefore, the act of being 
 born." Ch'nty Restored, p. 206. Had Mr. Camp- 
 bell not proclaimed so frequently that his mission is 
 to " restore a pure speech," it might easily be sup- 
 posed that it is to introduce an unintelligible jargon. 
 A person is begotten of God, and born of water 
 God is his father, and the water his mother and 
 this same person is impregnated by the Word. The 
 work is begun in the Spirit, and ended, not in the 
 flesh, but in water. ." How can these things be ?" 
 ' Now, as soon as, and not before, a disciple, who
 
 204 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRIXCIPLES. 
 
 has been begotten of God, is lorn of ivater, he is 
 lorn of God." With equal clearness, taste and 
 truth, might he affirm, That "as soon as, and 
 not before, a disciple, who has been" begotten of 
 water, is born of God, he is born of water. Nay, 
 the language would seem to be more in harmony 
 with his system. " In every place where the^ water 
 and the Spirit are spoken of, tlieivater stands first." 
 It is not easy to say whether this jargon partakes 
 more of the ridiculous or of the blasphemous ; yet, 
 doubtless, its author meant it for sound theology. 
 Now, the slightest attention to his Greek Testament, 
 would have preserved him from this confusion of 
 speech. He would have seen, as he subsequently saw, 
 and confessed, that the same term is rendered in the 
 common version, according to the taste of the transla- 
 tors, begotten or born ; and that all arguments and 
 deductions grounded on this distinction in the com- 
 mon version would be merely trifling with the 
 ignorance or credulity of his readers. And yet, a 
 large portion of the sophistry and crudities with 
 which the Millennial Harbinger Extra abounds, is 
 drawn from this shallow conceit. 
 
 Before "I abandon this subject, I must submit 
 another remark. The Greek word uvayewau which 
 properly means to beget again, or to regenerate, is 
 found twice in the New Testament. Once it is 
 found in 1 Peter 1 : 3, and is rendered begotten 
 again. " Blessed be the God and Father of our
 
 CAMPBELLISH IN 118 PRINCIPLES. 205 
 
 Lord Jesus Christ, which, according to his abund- 
 ant mercy, hath begotten us again unto a lively 
 hope," &c. It occurs again in the 23d verse of the 
 same chapter, and is rendered in the common ver- 
 sion born again, and by Doctors Doddridge and 
 McKnight, with the sanction of Mr. Campbell, in 
 his New Testament, regenerated. " Being born 
 again," or " regenerated, not of corruptible seed, 
 but of incorruptible, by the word of God," &c. 
 Now, it is clear and unquestioned that both these 
 texts have reference, not to baptism, but to a per- 
 sonal and moral renovation. 
 
 I have now shown that there is not the shadow 
 of authority in the language of Christ, or his apos- 
 tles, for confounding regeneration and baptism. 
 They are totally distinct in their nature, design, and 
 effects, as can be easily demonstrated. 
 
 CONVERSION. The Greek word, t-Larpi^, which 
 means simply to turn, occurs with its variations, in 
 the New Testament, thirty-nine times, and nineteen 
 times, if I mistake not, it refers to a moral change, 
 total or partial, or to what theologians term conver- 
 sion ; but never to immersion. That the reader 
 may form his own judgment on this subject, I will 
 cite the passages in which the term is found. Mat. 
 13 : 15 Mar. 4 : 12 Luke 1 : 16, 17 ; 22 : 32* 
 John 12 : 40 Acts 3 : 19 ; 9 : 35 ; 11 : 21 ; 14 : 
 15 ; 15 : 19 ; 26 : 18, 20 : 28 : 272 Cor. 3 : 16 
 1 Thess. 1 : 9 Jas. 5 : 19, 201 Pet. 2 : 25
 
 206 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 
 
 The noun, einarpu^^ is used but once, (Acts 15 : 3) 
 and is properly rendered conversion. That these 
 terms denote a moral renovation the turning of a 
 man, soul and body, to God the evidence seems 
 complete. " When thou art converted, strengthen 
 thy brethren." " A great number believed and 
 turned unto the Lord." " Brethren, if any of you 
 do err from the truth, and one convert him ; let him 
 know, that he which converteth a sinner from the error 
 of his way, shall save a soul from death," &c. That 
 the word in these passages denotes, not the act of 
 immersion, but a hearty turning from sin to God, or 
 from error to rectitude, the intelligent reader needs 
 no proof. And what the term means in these texts, 
 it uniformly means in the places where it refers to 
 man's moral change. Yet, read what Mr. Camp- 
 bell pens in the face of these truths. " Conversion 
 is on all sides, understood to be a turning to God." 
 Very well I . . . " Here it is worthy of notice, that 
 the apostles, in all their speeches and replies to in- 
 terrogatories, never commanded an inquirer to pray, 
 read, or sing, as preliminary to his coming, but 
 always commanded and proclaimed immersion as 
 the first duty, or the first thing to l>e done, after a 
 belief of testimony." The sincere "belief of testi 
 mony," or faith in Christ, necessarily implies con- 
 version, or " coming to God." It is essential to the 
 act, and inseparable from it. So an apostle teaches, 
 " Whosoever believeth tlat Jesus is the Christ, is
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES 207 
 
 born of God," and consequently converted. Now, 
 it would have been strange, indeed, if the apostles 
 had commanded an inquirer to " pray, read, or sing, 
 as preliminary" to that which had been already done. 
 If when Mr. Campbell affirms that the apostles pro- 
 claimed " immersion as the first duty. nf*:.r a belief of 
 testimony" he means that baptism is the first insti- 
 tution in which the believer is required to make a 
 public confession of Christ, I agree with him. It 
 does not follow, however, from this position, that 
 there may not be other, and important duties incum- 
 bent on a believer previously to baptism. " Hence," 
 continues the Reformer, " neither praying, singing, 
 reading, repenting, sorrowing, resolving, nor waiting 
 to be better, was the converting act." Perhaps not ! 
 Conversion, or turning to God, is necessarily a com- 
 plex exercise, comprehending that series of inward 
 conflicts usually termed experience. Mr. Campbell 
 continues " Immersion alone was that act of turn- 
 ing to God." A more gratuitous assumption was 
 never penned. It sets at naught the laws of philology 
 and the teaching of revelation. Neither godly sorrow, 
 repentance unto salvation, faith that works by love, 
 nor a readiness to suffer martyrdom for Christ, nor 
 all these together constitute conversion ; but im- 
 mersion alone, (I give his own emphasis) is the act 
 of turning to God. Let us hear him again. . . . 
 " From the day of Pentecost, to the final Amen in 
 the revcla'ion of Jesus Christ, no person was said
 
 208 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 
 
 to be converted, or to turn to God, until lie was 
 buried in, and raised up out of the water." Chn. 
 Sys., p. 209. Suppose I admit this position, is it 
 x possible that the astute Beformer does not perceive 
 that his reasoning is illogical ? Thus he reasons 
 None were said to be converted who were not im- 
 mersed ergo, immersion immersion, alone, is the 
 converting act. Let us try the force of this reason- 
 ing in another case. " From the day of Pentecost, 
 to the final Amen in the revelation of Jesus Christ, 
 no person was said to be" lioly " until he was buried 
 in and raised out of the water," ergo, immersion and 
 holiness are identical. But I will furnish a more 
 carefully fortified illustration of this argument. 
 " From the day of Pentecost to the final Amen in 
 the revelation of Jesus Christ, no person was said 
 to" believe in Christ, who had not been immersed. 
 So Mr. Campbell testifies. " The apostle never 
 supposes such a case as is often before our minds 
 a believing unbaptized man. Such a being could 
 not have been found in the whole apostolic age." 
 Debate with Eice, p. 509. Ergo, " immersion 
 alone" is the act of believing. The conclusion fol- 
 lows irresistibly, according to the principles of Mr. 
 Campbell's logic. 
 
 It is no part of my purpose to reconcile the as- 
 sertion that " a believir.g unbaptized man" " could 
 not have been found in the whole apostolic age," 
 with the acknowledged tn h that faith was a pre-
 
 CAMPBELL1SM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 209 
 
 requisite to baptism, that the Ethiopian treasurer 
 confessed his faith in Christ, previously to his bap- 
 tism, and that " many of the Corinthians, hearing, 
 believed, and were baptized." I will leave this for 
 Mr. Campbell to do a task for which his ingenuity 
 eminently fits him. 
 
 I will now notice Mr. Campbell's chief argument 
 in support of his position. 
 
 " The commission for converting the world 
 teaches that immersion was necessary to disciple- 
 ship ; for Jesus said, " Convert the nations, im- 
 mersing them into the name," &c., and " teaching 
 them to observe," &c. The construction of the 
 sentence fairly indicates that no person can be a 
 disciple,* according to the commission, who has not 
 been immersed : for the active participle in con- 
 nection with an imperative, either declares the man- 
 ner in which the imperative, shall be ^obeyed, or ex- 
 plains the meaning of the command. 
 
 " To this I have not found an exception : for ex- 
 ample ' Cleanse the house, sweeping it.' ' Cleanse 
 the garment, washing it,' shows the manner in 
 which the command is to be obeyed, or explains the 
 meaning of it. Thus, ' Convert (or disciple) the 
 nations, immersing them, ar d teaching them to ob- 
 serve,' &c., expresses the manner in which the 
 command is to be obeyed. 
 
 If the Apostles had onl} preached and not im- 
 mersed, they woul i not have converted tUc hearers
 
 210 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES 
 
 according to the commission : and if thev had im- 
 
 
 
 mersed, and not taught them to observe the com- 
 mands of the Saviour, they would have been trans- 
 gressors. A disciple, then, according to the com- 
 mission, is one that has heard the Gospel, believed 
 it, and been immersed. A disciple, indeed, is one 
 that continues in keeping the commandments of 
 Jesus." 
 
 The principle of construction, so warmly advo- 
 cated by Mr. Campbell, is simply this Active par- 
 ticiples, when united wi^h a command, invariably 
 express the meaning of the command, or the man- 
 ner of obeying it. 
 
 Let us observe the influence of this principle in 
 the interpretation of the commission. " Grc teach 
 all nations," or convert all nations, as Mr. Camp- 
 bell renders it this is the command : " immersing 
 them," &c. The active participle immersing ex- 
 presses the manner of converting the nations. 
 
 This principle or rule is assumed by Mr. Camp- 
 bell to be correct. He adduces the authority of no 
 critic in its support. His only argument in its 
 favor is a string of sentences so constructed as to 
 agree with the rule. It is quite as easy, however, 
 to form sentences at variance with it ; and it is 
 purely a question of taste whether in such sen- 
 tences the imperative mood, or the participle should 
 be employed. It is worthy of remark, too, that his 
 examples, in support of the rule are all in the
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 211 
 
 English language ; and his numeious criticisms, and 
 extended discussions, furnish not the slightest 
 evidence that the rule was based on a critical inves- 
 tigation of the genius of the Greek tongue, or even 
 the slightest acquaintance with it. 
 
 I will not follow him in his labored discussions on 
 this point I need not I am greatly deceived, if I 
 cannot demonstrate by a shorter process the ab- 
 surdity of the rule as applied to the commission. 
 There are two Greek words in this solemn charge 
 rendered teach. The first, with which we have 
 
 Chiefly to do, is fiadrjrevaare from /zafltfrei'o, which in 
 
 Donnegan's Lexicon is defined, (" act, with an ac- 
 cusative in N. T.,) to instruct." It may be well to 
 examine briefly its use in the New Testament. It 
 occurs in various forms in this volume four times. 
 Its first occurrence is Mat. 13 : 52 " Therefore 
 every scribe which is fiaOjjTcvOeif, instructed, unto the 
 kingdom of heaven, is like unto a householder, which 
 bringeth forth out of his treasure things new and 
 old." Dr. G. Campbell, following the common ver- 
 sion, renders it instructed ; and Doddridge trans- 
 lates it disciplined. There can be no reasonable 
 doubt but that the word here means instructed, 
 taught, well informed. It is found again Mat. 27 : 
 57, where Doctors Campbell and Doddridge concur 
 with king James' translators in rendering it disciple. 
 Joseph of Arimathea was "Jesus' tyal^Tevoe, disciple. 
 Joseph was, according to the usus loqucndi of Christ,
 
 212 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 
 
 and of the times, a disciple of Jesus, without bap- 
 tism, for he was one " secretly for fear of the Jews." 
 The word occurs, also, Acts 14 : 21 " And when 
 they had preached the Gospel to that city, and had 
 naGrjTevcavTEr laugJit many," or, according to the render- 
 ing of Doddridge, " made a considerable number of 
 disciples, they returned again to Lystra," &c. The 
 apostles, according to their custom, proclaimed the 
 Gospel, and taught, instructed the people, made 
 disciples, or learners of them "but whether they 
 baptized them does not appear. The word occurs no 
 where else but in the commission, where in the com- 
 mon version it is translated teach, by Dr. Camp- 
 bell convert, and by Dr. Doddridge proselyte. " I 
 vender the word fj-aOrj-Evaare proselyte," he says, " that 
 it may be duly distinguished from MuaaovTeg teaching, 
 (in the next verse,) with which our version confounds 
 it. The former seems to import instruction in the 
 essentials of religion, which it was necessary adult 
 persons should know and submit to, before they 
 could regularly be admitted to baptism ; the latter 
 may relate to those more particular admonitions in 
 regard to Christian faith and practice, which were to 
 be built upon that foundation." Fam. Expos, in 
 loco. The sum of the matter is, that Christ in the 
 command employed a term, whose obvious import is 
 to instruct, to make a disciple, or learner, precisely 
 such as was Joseph of Arimathea. But I can fur- 
 nish in support of this view h'gh authority for the
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 213 
 
 learned, and paramount authority for the Reformers. 
 In his Debate with Eice, p. 367, Mr. Campbell 
 says " The great Grotius, in his simplicity, dis- 
 tinguished matlieteuo, the first word in the com- 
 mission, as distinguished from didasco the last ; 
 both translated teach in this common version, thus : 
 Matheteuo, says he, " means to communicate the 
 first, or elementary principles ; then after baptizing 
 those who receive these rudimental views, teach or 
 introduce them aa persons initiated into the higher 
 branches of Christian doctrine." " This," con- 
 tinues Mr. Campbell, " is my view of the passage ; 
 and, certainly, it is the etymological and well re- 
 ceived meaning of the word, all the world over." 
 
 I am now prepared to apply the rule under dis- 
 cussion to the commission. " Go, matheteusafe, 
 communicate the first or elementary principles," of 
 religion, to "all nations." How? The connected 
 active participle, says Mr. Campbell, points out the 
 manner of obeying the command " immersing 
 J i,hem into the name of the Father, Son, and Holy 
 Spirit." Communicate elementary religious instruc- 
 tion, by immersing the body in loater. Is it not 
 absurd ? But I have not yet reached the climax 
 of this absurdity. The second, as well as the first, 
 subjoined participle prescribes the mode of perform- 
 ing the command. Let us follow the rule. " Go 
 communicate the first or elementary principles" of 
 the Gospel to a" 1 nations. How? 'Miralrile dictu!
 
 214 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINC.tPLES. 
 
 By teaching, or introducing them, "as persons 
 initiated, into the higher branches of Christian doc- 
 trine." Communicate the elementary principles by 
 teaching the higher branches ! Is it necessary to 
 say more to expose the fallacy of the rule ? How 
 incontrovertible then is the conclusion of that pro- 
 found scholar, and eminent critic, Dr. Gr. Campbell, 
 concerning the commission, Mat. 28 : 19-20. 
 " There are manifestly three things which our Lord 
 here distinctly enjoins his apostles to execute with 
 regard to the nations, to wit : matheteuein, baptizien, 
 disdaskein ; that is, to convert them to the faith 
 to initiate the converts into the church by baptism 
 and to instruct the baptized in all the duties of 
 the Christian life." 
 
 I must furnish another testimony on this snbject, 
 though pointedly at variance with the testimony of 
 ijie same witness elsewhere given. " In the com- 
 mission which Messiah gave to his apostles for con- 
 verting the nations, he commanded three things to 
 be done, indicated by three very distinct and intelli- 
 gible terms, viz : matheteusate, baptizontes, didas- 
 kontes." Camp, on Bap., p. 116. This point is 
 now settled. 
 
 I must briefly notice one more argument in sup- 
 port of the identity of conversion and baptism. It 
 is founded on Acts 3 : 19. " Hepent ye, therefore, 
 and be converted," &c. The argument is briefly 
 this Peter on tl'O day of Pentecost preached re-
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 215 
 
 pentance immersion and remission of sins and 
 in Solomon's portico, repentance conversion and 
 the blotting out of sins. Mr. Campbell maintains? 
 that the latter was the same proclamation as th< 
 former, conversion being substituted for immersion 
 This is a mere assumption. It is contrary to the 
 plain and well understood import of the language 
 used. The argument, if argument it may be called, 
 is based on a fallacy. It is this that the apostles 
 in their addresses to sinners proclaimed, uniformly, 
 the same truths, and duties', and in the same order. 
 Nothing can be farther from the truth. We have 
 
 but a brief outline of their discourses in the Acts 
 
 
 
 of the Apostles ; but they exhibit the greatest varie- 
 ty of topics and arrangement. Their addresses are 
 all in harmony all substantially containing the 
 Gospel but no two of them are precisely alike in 
 language, method, or matter. To infer then that 
 Peter preached baptism in Solomon's porch, con- 
 trary to the plain import of his language, because 
 he did on the day of Pentecost, is not merely illogi- 
 cal, and opposed to the history of the apostolic 
 preaching, but is to indulge in a license in biblical 
 interpretation which may lead to the most pernicious 
 consequences. 
 
 Before I quit this subject, I must offer a few re- 
 marks on another point. Mr. CampboJl labors 
 earnestly to prove that the early Christian Fathers 
 called baptism regeneration. I shall not dispute
 
 216 CAMPBl^LLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 
 
 this position. Their testimony seems to be entitled 
 to but little credit. Their writings abound in 
 peurile conceits, gross mistakes, and pernicious er- 
 rors. None pays less deference to their testimony 
 than Mr. Campbell, when it is not in harmony with 
 his views. Baptism was early confounded with re- 
 generation, of which it is, as he teaches us, the 
 " emblem." Camp, on Bap., p. 430. The sign 
 was mistaken for the thing signified. To this mis- 
 chievous mistake there is among mankind a strong 
 tendency. We -see it iij. the monstrous doctrine of 
 transubstantiation, and in the idolatrous worship of 
 the host. It is displayed no less clearly in the un- 
 scriptural practice of infant baptism, the absurd 
 dogma of baptismal regeneration, and many other 
 errors with which the Christian world has been 
 deluged. I only wonder that Mr. Campbell, the 
 Reformer, the restorer of a " pure speech," should 
 oe found following this evil tendency. 
 
 PRAYER NOT A DUTY OF THE UNBAPTIZED. 
 
 We have the doctrine of Carnpbellism on this 
 point in the following extract : 
 
 " No man can have a holy spirit otherwise than 
 as he possesses a spirit of love, of meekness, of 
 humility ; but this he cannot have unless he feel 
 himself pardoned and accepted. Therefore the pro- 
 mise of such a gift wisely makes the reception of it 
 posterior to the forgiveness of sins. Hence in the
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 217 
 
 mora* fitness of things in the evangelical economy, 
 baptism or immersion is made the first act of a 
 Christian's life, or rather the regenerating act itself; 
 in which the person is properly born again ' born 
 of water and spirit' without which into the king- 
 dom of Jesus he cannot enter. No prayers, songs 
 of praise, no acts of devotion in the new economy, 
 are enjoined on the unbaptized." Chn. Bap., p. 439. 
 
 This passage abounds in errors ; but I shall limit 
 my remarks to one a serious one that the unbap- 
 tized are not required to pray, or perform other acts 
 of devotion. 
 
 This is not a chief, nor a prominent, but, certainly, 
 not an unimportant item in the " current Reforma- 
 tion." It is not directly expressed, but clearly im- 
 plied in the language used. " No prayers, songs of 
 praise, no acts of devotion in the new economy, are 
 enjoined on the unbaptized." But if they are not 
 enjoined, either by express command, authoritative 
 example, or fair implication, they are not obligatory. 
 " Where no law is there is no transgression," and, 
 consequently, no obligation. Error is prolific, and 
 always brings forth after its kind. The error under 
 consideration was the natural offspring of Mr. Camp- 
 bell's false views of regeneration. Conceiving, most 
 erroneously, that immersion was " the first act of a 
 Christian's life, or rather the regenerating act itself," 
 he readily concluded that neither prayer, nor any 
 other act which implied spiritual life, could be de-
 
 218 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 
 
 manded of the unimmersed. This was an article of 
 the primitive Campbellism, often and variously ex- 
 pressed. It has not, so far as I have observed, been 
 repeated in the later writings of Mr. Campbell, nor 
 has it been repudiated. It stands among the re- 
 corded and stereotyped items which compose the 
 " ancient Gospel." It may have, it probably has, 
 sunk into comparative forgetfulness ; but I well re- 
 member that many of the primitive Eeformers 
 heartily embraced it, and deemed prayer before im- 
 mersion as an invention df the " mystic doctors," a 
 relic of the dark ages, and a grievous innovation on 
 the "ancient order of things ;" an error, in short, 
 closely allied to "experience before baptism." 
 
 I do not know that Mr. Campbell would now 
 maintain, or that any of the Keformers now em- 
 brace, the doctrine clearly inculcated in the above 
 extract ; but I must, in justice to the system under 
 examination, briefly expose its fallacy. 
 
 Prayer has been the duty of man under every dis- 
 pensation of religion. The obligation to this ser- 
 vice springs from the relation between the infinitely 
 merciful God, and fallen, guilty, and dependent 
 man, in a probationary state. It is an essential 
 element in true piety. It is the very breath of spir- 
 itual life a life which, I have already shown, does 
 not depend on the act of immersion, but, in the 
 evangelical order of things, precedes that act. It 
 implies repentance fai'h, and Scriptural regenera-
 
 OAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES 219 
 
 tion. No man can pray acceptably to God without 
 renouncing his sins, believing in Christ, and having 
 a new heart. And no man was ever a proper sub- 
 ject for Christian baptism who had not been taught 
 to pray, sincerely, and fervently. 
 
 What say the Scriptures on this point ? " And 
 Jesus spake a parable unto them, (the disciples,) to 
 this end, that men ought always to pray, and hot to 
 faint." Christ taught that men not baptized men 
 merely but men, irrespective of their character, re- 
 lations, or professions a?Zmen, ougltt, are under obli- 
 gation, to pray. Though the term man is not found in 
 the Greek, and the language may be fairly rendered, 
 It is proper to pray always, yet it is obvious that 
 the common version gives its true sense. Prayer is 
 proper for all men, at all times. Nay, but, says 
 Mr. Campbell, " no prayers in the new economy are 
 enjoined on the unbaptized." The publican prayed 
 in the temple, and returned home justified, without 
 baptism. The dying thief prayed on the cross, and 
 was admitted into Paradise, without baptism. There 
 is but one method, that even the ingenuity of Mr. 
 Campbell can employ to evade the force of these 
 Scriptures. It may be said, that Christ spake the 
 parable of the unjust judge, and that the examples 
 of the publican and of the thief occurred, before the 
 new economy was fully set up. Well, I will fur- 
 nish another, and unexceptionable example. When 
 Saul of Tarsus was converted, the Lord directed
 
 220 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 
 
 Ananias to go to him, " for, behold," said the Lord, 
 " he praycth." Acts 9 : 11. It is clear from this 
 Scripture, beyond a question, not only that Saul 
 prayed before his baptism, but that his prayer was 
 acceptable to the Lord, and that Ananias was sent 
 to instruct and baptize him in consequence of its 
 acceptableness ; and this example of acceptable 
 prayer has all the weight, authority, and efficacy of 
 an explicit command to the unbaptized to pray. 
 
 Baptism is the first positive rite in the new eco- 
 nomy to which the believer is required to submit ; 
 and every believer should yield to it a submission as 
 prompt as his circumstances will properly allow. 
 But baptism is not the unconditional duty of a be- 
 liever. His obligation to be baptized may depend 
 on a thousand circumstances beyond his control. 
 No properly authorized administrator may be will- 
 ing to baptize him he may be beyond the reach of 
 one the state of his health, or his want of personal 
 freedom and numerous other causes, may preclude 
 the possibility of his baptism ; and, consequently, 
 the obligation to be baptized. But is he not 
 required to pray, and engage in other acts of devo- 
 tion, until he finds an opportunity of performing 
 what Mr. Campbell calls " the regenerating act ?" 
 To ask the question, is to answer it. God has not 
 made the duty of prayer or praise to depend on the 
 act of baptism. The connection is wholly imaginary. 
 It has no existence, and, sc far as I am informed.
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 221 
 
 never had an existence, except in the brain, whose 
 fecundity has supplied such a variety and exuber- 
 ance of speculations for the pages of the Christian 
 Baptist, and Millennial Harbinger, and in the minds 
 of those, whether many or few, who have, with un- 
 questioning docility, derived their theological notions 
 from these sources. 
 
 THE REMISSION OF SINS IN BAPTISM. 
 
 " Remission of sins" is equivalent to pardon or 
 forgiveness, and does not differ essentially from 
 justification. The phrase signifies deliverance from 
 the obligation to suffer the punishment due to sins. 
 The subject is one of manifest and transcendent im- 
 portance. Its claims to our careful and devout 
 attention are commensurate with the value of the 
 soul, the malignity of sin, the preciousness of the 
 blood of Christ, the depth of perdition, the height 
 of glory, and the vastness of eternity. Our know- 
 ledge on this subject must be derived solely from 
 Divine revelation. Whether God will forgive sins, 
 and if he will, through what medium, and on what 
 conditions, are questions which only He can decide, 
 and of his decisions we can have no knowledge, ex- 
 cept as he reveals them to us. 
 
 What do the Scriptures teach on this vital sub- 
 ject ? The orthodox belief is that, in virtue of 
 the atonement of Christ, God, freely and fully, 
 remits the sins of all those who heartily repent, and
 
 222 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 
 
 cordially believe in Christ. In no article of faith 
 are those Christians, usually termed evangelical, 
 more generally and firmly united than in this. It 
 is the distinguishing tenet of Protestant Christen- 
 dom. Mr. Campbell, on the other hand, maintains 
 that penitent believers are forgiven, not before, but 
 in the act of immersion. " Peter," he says, " to 
 whom was committed the keys, opened the kingdom 
 of heaven in this manner, and made repentance, or 
 reformation, and immersion, equally necessary to 
 forgiveness. . . . When a person is immersed for 
 the remission of sins, it is just the same as if ex- 
 pressed, in order- to obtain the remission of sins. . . . 
 I am bold, therefore, to affirm, that every one of 
 them who, in the belief of what the apostle spoke, 
 was immersed, did, in the very instant in wliicli lie 
 was put under water, receive the forgiveness of his 
 sins, and the gift of the Holy Spirit." Chn. Bap., 
 p. 416, 417. I have italicised some clauses in the 
 above sentences to draw particular attention to their 
 meaning. The believer in Christ, however sincere, 
 and whatever may be his moral state, is condemned, 
 exposed to all the dreadful consequences of diso- 
 bedience, until the very instant when he is put under 
 water. Mr. Campbell teaches that baptism is per- 
 fectly useless, " as empty as a blasted nut," to all 
 who are pardoned. " If men," he says, " are con- 
 scious that their sins are forgiven, and that they are 
 pardoned before they are immersed ; I advise them
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 223 
 
 not to go into the water, for they have no need of 
 it." Chn. Bap., unexpurgated edition, vol. 6, 
 p. 160. 
 
 The doctrine of Baptismal Remission is the main 
 pillar of Campbellism. It was slowly and gradually 
 developed in the writings of Mr. Campbell, as it 
 was, or was supposed to be, disinterred from the 
 accumulated rubbish of past ages. It was, at length, 
 fully revealed, strongly stated, and defended, at large, 
 with all the learning, dialectic skill, and unwavering 
 confidence of the redoubtable Reformer, in the famous 
 Millennial Harbinger Extra. This precious relic was 
 afterwards substantially embalmed in Christianity 
 Restored, and in the Christidh System. The Extra 
 for a time spread dismay in the ranks of the "regu- 
 lars." Such an array of learning, logic, and author- 
 ity, few were bold enough to encounter. But time 
 tries all things. We have grown familiar with the 
 Extra. We have seen many of its positions suc- 
 cessfully assailed. We have seen the Eeformer 
 himself modifying, or abandoning some of his points. 
 The most timid have recovered from their alarms. 
 
 The system of Baptismal Remission, developed 
 in the Extra, I now propose to examine, with as 
 much particularity as my plan will allow. 
 
 Mr. Campbell, after some preliminary remarks, 
 presents and discusses his views of " the Christian 
 institution for the remission of sins,'' under twelve 
 propositions.
 
 224 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 
 
 The first six propositions be engrosses into one 
 leading proposition, in the following words, viz. : 
 " The converts made to Jesus Christ by the apostles 
 were taught to consider themselves pardoned, justi- 
 fied, sanctified, reconciled, adopted, and saved ; 
 and were addressed as pardoned, justified ', sanctified, 
 reconciled, adopted, and saved persons, by all who 
 Jirst preached the Gospel of Christ." Chn'ty 
 Kestored, p. 191. 
 
 To this engrossed proposition, I have no objec- 
 tion. I am only surprised that Mr. Campbell should 
 have deemed it necessary to encumber his argument 
 with an elaborate discussion, of seven pages, to 
 prove what no respectable writer, Protestant or 
 Romanist, orthodox or heterodox, so far as I have 
 observed, has ever denied. Let the proposition 
 then stand " as irrefragably proved." 
 
 But while I concur with the writer as to the truth 
 of his proposition, I can by no means agree with 
 him in his definition of itslerms. " These terms/' 
 he says, " are expressive, not of any quality of mind, 
 not of any personal attribute of body, soul, or 
 spirit but each of them represents, and all of them 
 together represeflA a state, or condition." Does not 
 the word " sanctified" denote an attribute of the 
 soul or spirit ? is it not expressive of moral qual- 
 ity ? It is generally so understood by Christian 
 writers. When Christ prayed for his disciples, 
 " Sanctify them through thy trutG," he desired that
 
 CAMPPELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 225 
 
 an effect might be produced on them, or in them, 
 by divine influence, through the truth, and this 
 could have been no other than a moral effect the 
 imparting or increasing of some quality of the soul 
 or spirit. Does not Paul clearly distinguish it from 
 justified, which means a legal state ? "But ye are 
 sanctified, ye are justified, in the name of the Lord 
 Jesus," &c. 1 Cor. 6 : 11. I drop this subject. I 
 readily concede that the term "pardoned," though 
 not found in the common version of the New Testa- 
 ment, and the term justified, dentfle a state, and 
 that the term saved refers to a state, as well as to 
 moral character ; and these, are the only terms of 
 importance in this discussion. 
 
 I pass over all that Mr. Campbell has advanced 
 concerning his engrossed proposition, as having no 
 material bearing on the question at issue, and pro- 
 ceed to notice 
 
 " Prop. 7. A change of vieios, though it neces- 
 sarily precedes, is in no case equivalent to, and 
 never to be identified with, a change of state." 
 p. 194. 
 
 Very well ! I concur in this proposition. I know 
 no one who dissents from it. I 4ismiss the two or 
 three pages devoted to its illustration without far- 
 ther consideiation, and proceed to record 
 
 " Prop. 8. That the Gospel has in it a command, 
 a^id as such must be obeyed." p. 196. 
 
 Here tho author falls into a grand fallacy. " The
 
 226 CAMFBELLISM IN ITS PKINCIPLES. 
 
 Gospel," be says, " has in it a command" Where 
 did he learn this ?- It is not so said in the Scrip- 
 tures. Nor is any thing recorded from which it 
 may be legitimately, or even plausibly inferred. The 
 texts quoted by Mr. Campbell are far from sustain- 
 ing his, proposition. The Gospel is, in some sense, a 
 law. It is called by the Apostle James, " the per- 
 fect law of liberty." Jas. 1 : 25. Wherever the 
 Gospel comes it imposes on those who hear it an 
 obligation to obey it. But his conceptions of obe- 
 dience to the Gospel must be extremely contracted 
 who supposes that it consists in a single act. To 
 " obey the Gospel" is more than to be immersed. 
 This act, though right in its proper place, is not 
 obedience to the Gospel. Kepentance, faith, love, 
 baptism, prayer, praise, watchfulness, participation 
 in the Lord's Supper, and perseverance in every 
 good work, are all required by the Gospel, and com- 
 prehended in obeying it. It is most illogical to 
 infer, that because the apostles speak of obedience 
 to the Gospel, that it has in it a command that 
 must be obeyed. 
 
 " The obedience of the Gospel is called the obe- 
 dience of faith, compared with the obedience of 
 law" says Mr. Campbell. Very good ! I endorse 
 the sentence. But, by what authority, divine, or 
 human, or according to what rule of logic, does he 
 call tho " cbedience of the Gospel," an " act of obe- 
 
 . \
 
 CAMPBELL1SM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 227 
 
 dience," and Ike " obedience of faith/' " the act of 
 faith ?" Let us hear him 
 
 " Whatever the act of faith may be, it necessa- 
 rily becomes the line of discrimination between the 
 two states before described. On this side, and on 
 that, mankind are in quite different states. On the 
 one side, they are pardoned, justified, sanctified, 
 reconciled, adopted, and saved : on the other they 
 are in a state of condemnation. This act is some- 
 times called immersion, regeneration, conversion." 
 
 If the " obedience of faith" is an act, it is a mere 
 assumption that that act is immersion. I will cut 
 this matter short. I will prove by testimony, which 
 in this discussion is next in authority to that of 
 Holy Writ, that the phrase " obedience of faith," 
 or " obey the Gospel," does not mean " a single 
 act," and, consequently, does not mean immersion. 
 I will quote Mr. Campbell against Mr. Campbell ; 
 or the matured and subtle opponent of Mr. Rice 
 against the ardent and impetuous author of the 
 Extra, resolved on establishing a favorite system. 
 Hear the deponent 
 
 " We neither believe nor teach that the phrase 
 ' obedience of faith' means one single act ; or that 
 obeying the Gospel is one solitary deed. Certainly 
 they do not ' obey the Gospel,' who do not obey 
 the first precept, any more than they who obey the 
 first, and afterwards apostatize. The Gospel calls 
 for po-pehial obedience, or a life of conformity to
 
 228 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES 
 
 its pure and elevated piety and humanity/' Debate 
 with Rice, p. 534. 
 
 Having, through the puissant aid of Mr. Camp- 
 bell, demolished the eighth proposition, I will now 
 proceed to examine 
 
 " Prop. 9. Tliat it is not faith, but an act result- 
 ing from faith, which changes our state, w& shall 
 now attempt to prove." p. 198. 
 
 This proposition brings up the real question at 
 issue. The previous propositions, with the sixteen 
 pages devoted to their illustration, and proof, are 
 of very little consequence in its decision. We are 
 at last brought to the simple question, What do 
 the Scriptures teach concerning the means by which 
 forgiveness, or justification must be obtained ? On 
 this question I take issue with Mr. Campbell, and 
 maintain that it is faith, and not an act resulting 
 from faith, that changes our state, or secures our 
 justification. 
 
 Let us endeavor to free from all encumbrance the 
 question under discussion. Men are by nature sin- 
 ful, alienated from God by wicked works, and are, 
 consequently, condemned, or obnoxious to punish- 
 ment. Between a state of condemnation and justi- 
 fication a state of pardon and of guilt, there is no 
 medium. The transition from the one state to the 
 other must be instantaneous. I maintain, in com- 
 mon with evangelical Christians of every name, 
 that the sinner passes from a state of condemnation
 
 CAMPBELL1SM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 229 
 
 to a state of justification at the precise moment 
 when he truly 'believes in Christ, or, which is the 
 same thing, receives him as a Deliverer. John 1 : 
 12. This justifying faith is not the " bare belief 
 of the bare truth." I will gladly permit Mr. 
 Campbell to define it for me. " It is," he says, " a 
 belief of testimony. It is a persuasion that God is 
 true ; that the Gospel is divine ; that God is love ; 
 and that Christ's death is the sinner's life. It is 
 trust in God. It is a reliance upon Lis truth, his 
 faithfulness, his power. It is not merely a cold as- 
 sent to truth, to testimony ; but a cordial, joyful 
 consent to it, and reception of it." Debate with 
 Rice, p. 618. If this definition of faith does not 
 harmonize with the views of faith elsewhere recorded 
 by the same writer, that is no concern' of mine. 
 Now, this faith is the principle of a new, or spiritual 
 life, involving reconciliation with God, and un- 
 feigned submission to the authority of Christ. He 
 who thus believes is, in the Scripture sense of the 
 terms, converted, regenerated, a new creature. He 
 was a rebel, but he is now a child, or, K as Mr. 
 Campbell says, " With it (faith) a man is a son of 
 Abraham, a son of God ; an heir apparent to eternal 
 life an everlasting kingdom." p. 618. This joy- 
 ful convert now obediently inquires, "Lord, what 
 wilt thou have me to do ?" God sees the change, 
 rpproves it, and freely and instantly forgives the 
 peditent believer, for Christ's salce. But, according
 
 230 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PF.1NC1PLES. 
 
 to Mr. Campbell's thecry, this believer, who has 
 given his " cordial, joyful consent to the" truth, 
 this " son of God" is condemned exposed to 
 " everlasting destruction from the presence of the 
 Lord," until he performs the " act of faith/' or 
 until " the very instant when he is put under the 
 water." 
 
 If Christ and the apostles do not teach that the 
 remission of sins, or justification, is suspended on 
 faith, and not any act resulting from faith, I do not 
 comprehend in what terms this instruction could he 
 conveyed. But " to the law, and to the testimony" 
 What saith the Scripture ? 
 
 I answer, 
 
 1. That throughout the New Testament, the re- 
 mission of sins, or justification, is unequivocally 
 and unconditionally, connected with faith, or with 
 exercises ivhich imply its existence. 
 
 In confirmation of this position, I can furnish 
 only specimens of the apposite declarations with 
 which the Scriptures abound. 
 
 Listen then, in the first place, to the testimony 
 of the " Teacher sent from God." In his memor- 
 able nocturnal conversation with the Jewish Rabbi, 
 Nicddemus, he employed this significant language . 
 " He that belie veth on him (the Son of God) is not 
 condemned, but he that believeth not, is condemned 
 already, because he hath not believed in the name 
 of the only Wgotten Son of God." John 3 : 18.
 
 CAMPBELL1SM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 23] 
 
 ^1 he Saviour here points out two opposite conditions 
 - -a state of condemnation or guilt, and a state of 
 freedom from condemnation, or justification. He 
 testifies, and we are bound to receive his testimony, 
 that the believer is in a state of justification, and 
 the unbeliever in a state of condemnation. 
 
 Let us now turn to the " Acts of the Apostles," 
 and examine the sermons dictated by the spirit of 
 inspiration, and addressed both to the Jews and the 
 Gentiles. 
 
 Peter shall be heard first. He healed a cripple 
 at the gate of the Temple, called Beautiful. A 
 multitude was quickly drawn together, in Solomon's 
 porch, by the report of the miracle. Thus Peter 
 addressed the assembly : " Repent ye therefore, and 
 be converted, that your sins may be blotted out." 
 Acts 3 : 19. They were a company of sinners, 
 needing to have their sins blotted out, or remitted. 
 An inspired apostle stood before them, to guide 
 them to the enjoyment of the ineffable blessing. 
 "Repent," said he, change your minds, "and be 
 converted," reform your lives, (and these exercises 
 clearly imply faith,) " that your sins may be blotted 
 out." I cannot for a moment suppose that if they 
 had complied with Peter's exhortation they would 
 have remained " unpardoned." 
 
 We will hear this witness again. Instructed by 
 a vision from Heaven the Apostle went from Joppa 
 to Cesarea, to preach the Gospel to the Gentiles,
 
 232 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 
 
 Arriving, he found Cornelius, the Centurian, with 
 his kinsmen and near friends, convened to listen to 
 his instructions. He preached to them Jesus 
 his resurrection, and his appointment to be " the 
 Judge of quick and dead." " To him," said Peter, 
 " give all the Prophets witness, that through 
 his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive 
 remission of sins." Acts x : 43. Name is fre- 
 quently put in the Scriptures for person. " The 
 name of the God of Jacob defend thee." Ps. xx : 
 1. " Thou hast a few names (persons) in Sardis 
 which have not defiled their garments." Kev. iii : 
 4. By the " name of Christ" we are to understand 
 the person of Christ, with his character, sufferings, 
 and works. That the virtue of the name of Christ, 
 to procure the remission of sins, is limited by bap- 
 tism, is a mere conceit. Peter said to the cripple, 
 " In the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, rise up 
 and walk ; and he leaping up, stood and walked." 
 And to the multitude, who were astonished at the 
 miracle of healing, he said, " And his name, through 
 faith in his name, hath made this man strong, 
 whom ye see." Acts iii : 6 and 12. If " whoso- 
 ever believeth in him " (Christ) does not receive re- 
 mission of sins, I do not perceive how " the Pro- 
 phets" can be vindicated from the charge of bearing 
 false witness. But they did not testify falsely. 
 " WHOSOEVER," without regard to rank, character,
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 233 
 
 clime, or outward condition, believeth in Christ, 
 " SHALL RECEIVE remission of sins." 
 
 It is now time that we should listen to the tes- 
 timony of the " Apostle of the Gentiles." Paul was 
 invited to address the Jews of Antioch in Pisidia, 
 assembled in the Synagogue. " Christ crucified" was, 
 of course, his theme. " Be it known unto you there- 
 fore," said the infallible teacher, " men and brethren, 
 that through this man," the Holy One whom God 
 had raised again, u is preached unto you the forgive- 
 ness of sins : and by him all that believe are justi- 
 fied from all things, from which ye could not be 
 justified by the law of Moses." Acts xiii : 38, 39. 
 Never was testimony more explicit. It seems de- 
 signed to answer every inquiry, and solve every 
 difficulty on the momentous subject of justification. 
 If the inquiry is, Through what channel do we re- 
 ceive the remission of sins ? the Apostle answers, 
 " Through this man (Christ) is preached unto you 
 the forgiveness of sins." Is the question, How is 
 the privilege of justification enjoyed ? the reply 
 is, " They that believe are justified." Do we ask, 
 Are all believers justified, or only such as change 
 their state by an overt act ? Paul answers empha- 
 tically, all. " By him ALL that believe are justified." 
 
 We will now direct our attention to the Apos- 
 tolic epistles. Let us first open the letter " to all 
 that be in Rome, beloved of God, called to be Saints." 
 The chief design of Paul ir writing this epistle was
 
 234 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 
 
 to elucidate and establish tlie evangelic doctrine 
 of justification by faith, without the deeds of the 
 law. Here, if any where, we may expect to find an 
 explicit and satisfactory exposition of this subject. 
 The writer could not, I should think, guided as he 
 was by the spirit of inspiration, have omitted to 
 mention, in the discussion, baptism, if its perform- 
 ance were indispensable to justification. Such an 
 omission would be unaccountable, if not unfaithful. 
 The Apostle, having demonstrated that all men, 
 both Jews and Gentiles, are guilty in the sight of 
 God that by the deeds of the law no flesh could 
 be justified, proceeded to unfold, with great clear- 
 ness and precision, the v Gospel method of justifica- 
 tion. " For if Abraham," these are Paul's words, 
 " were justified by works, he hath whereof to glory ; 
 but not before God. For what saith the Scripture ? 
 Abraham believed God, and it," Abraham's faith, 
 " was counted unto him for righteousness," or justifi- 
 cation. "Now to him that worketh is the reward not 
 reckoned of grace, but of debt, But to him that 
 worketh not," with a view to justification, " but be- 
 lieveth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith," 
 not his baptism, "is counted for righteousness." 
 Eom. iv : 2, 5. I know of no passage of Scrip- 
 ture which, in so small a compass, develop es, so 
 clearly, God's plan of making sinners righteous, or 
 of justifying the ungodly. Paul says to men, in 
 effect, you are guilty you deserve to perish in your
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 235 
 
 sing you cannot be justified by your own works 
 you cannot in any measure, expiate your guilt but 
 God has graciously devised and revealed a scheme 
 for the salvation of men. If they believe in Christ 
 cordially embrace him as their Saviour their 
 faith shall be counted, or imputed to them for right- 
 eousness they shall be treated as if they were right- 
 eous not because their faith merits this privilege 
 for them, but because God justifies them freely by 
 his grace, " through the redemption that is in Christ 
 Jesus." 
 
 Throughout this elaborate discussion of the sub- 
 ject of justification, the apostle does not pen a single 
 syllable on the influence of the " act of faith," or 
 immersion, in securing this privilege. The best 
 proof of this omission is furnished by the fact that 
 Mr. Campbell, ingenious as he is in the selection of 
 proof texts, does not venture to quote one from this 
 epistle in support of his theory. And the omission 
 is utterly at war with the doctrine that faith and 
 baptism are equally necessary to obtain remission of 
 sins or justification. 
 
 I have barely time to cite a text from the epistle 
 to the " churches of Galatia," in which the truth 
 3ontendQil fo^ is distinctly and emphatically stated. 
 '' We who are Jews by nature and not sinners of 
 l ,he Gentiles, knowing that a man is not justified by 
 the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus 
 Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that
 
 236 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PKINC1PLES. 
 
 we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not 
 by the works of the law/' ii : 16. 'It would be easy 
 to multiply quotations to prove that men are brought 
 into a state of justification by faith in Christ ; but 
 these specimens from the epistles must suffice. 
 
 Perhaps it may be objected against the position 
 under discussion, that the Apostle James affirms, 
 " that by works a man is justified, and not by faith 
 only." ii : 24. To this objection I reply, the 
 Apostle Paul no less pointedly declares, " that a 
 man is justified by faith, without the deeds of the 
 law." Eom. iii : 28. If the language of these 
 writers is to be understood without limitation, they, 
 it seems to me, flatly contradict each other. But 
 we must not charge the spirit of inspiration with 
 folly. Paul manifestly writes of the evangelic scheme 
 of justification. "Works of every kind are excluded 
 wholly from, the merit of justification. Men are 
 justified by faith, through the redemption which is 
 in Christ, by free grace, without the meritorious in- 
 fluence of works. The design of James is, to show 
 that men are justified not by a dead, but living and 
 fruitful faith. " What does it profit, my brethren, 
 though a man say he hath faith, and have not works ? 
 Can faith (such a faith) save him ?" Certainly not 
 " Faith, if it hath not works, is dead, (incapable of 
 justifying,) being alone." It is no better than the 
 faith of devils. " Was not Abraham, our father, 
 justified by works when he had offered Isaac, his>
 
 OAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 237 
 
 rfon, upon the altar ?" But bow did works justify 
 Abraham ? Why, " faith wrought with his works, 
 and by works was faith made perfect" exhibited 
 as a living, fruitful faith. " And the Scripture was 
 fulfilled, (verified) which saith, Abraham believed 
 God, and (mark this,) it was imputed unto him for 
 righteousness." 
 
 Whether this be the correct solution of the diffi- 
 culty, is not material in this discussion. The ob- 
 jection cannot avail the advocates of baptismal re- 
 mission. " A man," says James, " is justified by 
 works" not by baptism, but by works an obedient 
 life. In whatever sense the language be understood, 
 it effectually explodes the notion that the remission 
 of sins, or justification, is obtained " in and through 
 immersion. ' ; 
 
 II. That in many places in the New Testament 
 spiritual blessings, lohich imply the remission of 
 sins, are positively promised to faith. 
 
 In support of this position, I observe, 
 
 1. That salvation is promised to faith. The re- 
 mission of sins is comprehended in salvation. Christ 
 saves his people from their sins from their guilt as 
 well as their practice. A sinner saved and unpar- 
 doned is a manifest impossibility. If then salvation 
 is enjoyed by faith, so is pardon. Hear what Paul 
 gays : " I am not ashamed of the Gospel of Christ : 
 for it is the power of God unto salvation, to every 
 one that believeth, to *he Jew first, and also to the
 
 238 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PKINCIPLES. 
 
 Greek." Rom. 1 : 16. The Gospel is the power- 
 ful and efficient means which God employs for sav- 
 ing men. But to whom does its saving efficacy 
 reach ? " To every one that believeth." Does its 
 saving power extend to all nations ? Yes, " to tho 
 Jew first, and also to the Greek." 
 
 Paul and Silas were committed to prison in the 
 city of Philippi, for preaching the Gospel of Christ. 
 God graciously and miraculously interposed for their 
 rescue. A great earthquake shook the foundations 
 of the prison, and all the doors were opened, and 
 every one's bands were loosed. The jailor, seized 
 with a conviction of his guilt and danger, fell down 
 before Paul and Silas, and said, " Sirs, what must 
 I do to be saved ?" Never was a more important 
 question propounded. Never was a more direct, 
 explicit, and satisfactory answer given. " Believe 
 on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved." 
 And is it possible that these inspired men directed 
 the anxious prison keeper to do that which, Kemg 
 performed, would have left him still in an unpar- 
 doned, unsaved state ? Did they promise salvation 
 to an exercise with which it is not essentially con- 
 nected ? Surely not. 
 
 2. Adoption into the family of God is the privi- 
 lege of believers. That the remission of sins is in- 
 separably united with this honor, I need hardly 
 attempt to prove. . To suppose that the sons of God 
 are still r.n pardoned is a gross absurdity. That be-
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 239 
 
 lievers enjoy this high honor the evangelist John 
 testifies. " He (the Word) came unto his own, and 
 his own received him not. But as many as received 
 him, to them gave he power (right or privilege) to 
 become the sons of God, even to them that believe 
 on his name : which were born, not of blood, nor of 
 the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of 
 God." 1 : 11, 13. Or, as the passage is rendered 
 by Dr. Campbell, " But to as many as received him, 
 believing in his name, he granted the privilege of 
 being children of God, who derive their birth not 
 from blood," &c. If God has graciously conferred 
 on believers the privilege of being sons of God, who 
 can disannul it ? 
 
 3. Eternal life is distinctly promised to faith. 
 To bestow eternal life on men " dead in trespasses 
 and sins," is the prime end of Messiah's mission on 
 earth. " I am. come," said he, " that they might 
 have life, and that they might have it more abun- 
 dantly." Every spiritual blessing is conferred in 
 subservience to this benevolent design. Now listen 
 to the teaching of Him who cannot lie. "As Moses 
 lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must 
 the Son of man be lifted up ; that whosoever be- 
 lieveth on him should not perish, but have eternal 
 life." Jno. 3: 14, 15. Now just as certainly as tho 
 Israelites, bitten by the fiery serpents, were healed 
 by looking at the brazen serpent, on the pole, will 
 " whosoever believeth" in Christ, gain eternal life.
 
 240 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 
 
 But you shall have testimony more explicit than 
 this, if more explicit testimony can be. " Verily, 
 verily, I say unto you," these are the words of Christ 
 to the captious Jews, " he that believeth on me 
 hath everlasting life" not he may have, nor he 
 shall have but he HATH everlasting- life he has 
 within him the embryo of immortal life " being 
 born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorrup- 
 tible, by the word of God which liveth and abideth 
 forever." Jno. 6 : 471 Pet. 1 : 23. * 
 
 III. That privileges which are inseparable from 
 the remission of sins are frequently promised, in 
 the New Testament, to exercises or graces that imply 
 the existence of faith. 
 
 I will proceed at once to confirm this proposition. 
 
 1. The kingdom of Heaven, (which doubtless in- 
 cludes all the blessings of the kingdom the remis- 
 sion of sins, among the rest,) is promised to humility. 
 " Blessed," said Jesus, in his inimitable sermon on 
 the mount, " are the poor in spirit : for theirs is" 
 not may be or shall be, but is already, " the king- 
 dom of Heaven." Mat. 5 : 3 see also to v. 11. 
 
 2. Salvation is promised to prayer. " For who- 
 soever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be 
 saved." Bom. 10 : 13. Salvation includes, as has 
 been already stated, the remission of sins. It is 
 promised to him who " shall call on the name of the 
 Lord." This promise is not made to a heartless, 
 hypocritical calling on the Lord. " This people,"
 
 CAMPBELL1SM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 241 
 
 said the Son of God, " draweth nigh to me with their 
 mouth, and honoreth me with their lips ; but their 
 aeart is far from me." But the promise is made 
 to sincere, helieving prayer to such as " call on the 
 Lord out of a pure heart" to such as pray, " lifting 
 up holy hands, without wrath and doubting." 1 
 Tim. 2:8. " For without faith it is impossible to 
 please God." Heb. 11 : 6. L l How then shall they 
 call on hun in whom they have not believed ?" 
 
 3. Adoption, which supposes the remission of 
 sins, is declared to be the privilege of such persons 
 as follow the guidance of the Spirit. " For as many 
 is are led by the Spirit of God," (and if those who 
 repent and believe the Gospel are not led by the 
 Spirit of Gcd, by what spirit are they led ?) " they 
 are the sons of God." Eom. 8 : 14. Perhaps it may 
 be replied that the Spirit of the Lord will lead men 
 to an observance of the Christian ordinances. I 
 grant it. And he will lead those persons under his 
 influence " all the length of the celestial road." 
 But when do they become the sons of God ? Not 
 till they reach the end of their journey, or at the 
 middle of it or in the commencement of it ? At 
 the beginning surely. Otherwise it would not be 
 true that " as many as are led by the Spirit of 
 God," but such only as have traveled the pre- 
 scribed distance " are the sons of God." 
 
 IV. Tliat the remission of sins was, in variou9
 
 242 CAMPBELLJSM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 
 
 cases, possessed and enjoyed by faith, without, or 
 before baptism. This we can clearly show. 
 
 Jesus was crucified between two malefactors. 
 One of them railed on him. The other, touched with 
 compunction at the remembrance of his crimes, said 
 unto Jesus, (and this prayer implied faith,) " Lord, 
 remember me when thou comest into thy kingdom." 
 Jesus replied to him, long after he had said to 
 Nicodemus, " Except a man be born of water and 
 of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of 
 God," " To-day shalt thou be with me in Paradise;" 
 and he certainly did not go to Paradise in his sins. 
 Luke 23 : 39, 43. Perhaps it may be said that this 
 was an extraordinary case. Then, let us examine 
 another instance. 
 
 The publican went up to the temple to pray, and 
 " standing afar off, would not lift up so much as his 
 eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast, (con- 
 scious of his guilt,) saying, (and this prayer evi- 
 dently was the " prayer of faith,") God be merciful 
 to me a sinner." And did God hear the prayer of 
 this penitent believer and remit his sins ? Yes ! 
 " This man went down to his house (not baptized, 
 but) justified rather than the other." Luke 18 : 10, 
 14. So true it is, that " a broken and contrite 
 heart" God will not despise. Possibly it may be 
 objected (though the objection is, in my view, of no 
 validity,) that these cases occurred before the giving 
 of the apostolic commission. Well, then, to silence
 
 CAMPBELL1SM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 243 
 
 the last objection, let us select another and an 
 apposite case. 
 
 I have already adverted to the conversion of Cor- 
 nelius and his friends ; but I must again recur to 
 the interesting subject. While Peter was uttering 
 these memorable words, " To him (Jesus) give all 
 the prophets witness, that through his name who- 
 soever believeth in him shall receive remission of 
 sins/' " the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard 
 the words ;" and they began to " speak with tongues 
 and to magnify God." It is not affirmed by 
 the historian that these Gentile converts were for- 
 given before their baptism ; but consider carefully 
 the facts of the case. Peter affirmed that whosoever 
 believeth in Christ (the Gentile as well as the Jew,) 
 shall receive remission of sins. In attestation of this 
 truth the Holy Ghost was poured on all the hear- 
 ers ; that is, they were copiously endowed with the 
 miraculous gifts of the Spirit. Now, I ask, can any 
 man in his sober senses, and whose mind is not 
 warped by theory, believe that these Gentile con- 
 verts were " baptized with the Holy Ghost," Acts 
 11 : 1C, while they were yet in their sins, with the 
 wrath of God abiding on them ? The Jewish con- 
 verts censured Peter because he went in to men 
 uncircumcised, and did eat with them. The apostle 
 triumphantly vindicated his conduct. " Foras- 
 much," said he, " as God gave unto them the like 
 gift as he did unto us who believed on the Lord
 
 \ 
 
 244 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PKINCIPLES. 
 
 Jesus Christ, what was I, that I could withstand 
 God ?" Acts 11 : 17. When he saw that God had 
 received the Gentiles to his favor, his Jewish preju- 
 dices were slain, and he inquired. " Can any man 
 forbid water, that these should not be baptized," 
 not in order to receive, either the remission of their 
 sins, or the gift of the Holy Ghost, but who " have 
 received the Holy Ghost," and by fair inference the 
 forgiveness of their sins ? Acts 10 : 43, 48. I 
 know not what impression this case may make on 
 other minds ; but to my own mind it. furnishes a 
 conclusive refutation of the dogma, that we have 
 the remission of " sins in and through immersion." 
 
 " Many blessings," says the Reformer, " are 
 rnetonymically ascribed to faith, in the sacred writ- 
 ings." Metonymy is " a trope in w r hich one word 
 is put for another." But for what word is faith put ? 
 We know not, and he has not informed us. He 
 continues " We are said to be justified, sanctified, 
 and purified by faith to w r alk by faith, and to live 
 by faith, &c., &c. But these sayings, as qualified 
 by the apostles, mean no more than by believing 
 the truth of God, we have access into all these bless- 
 ings." Chn'ty Restored, p. 198. Is this all? 
 When Christ asserts that, " He that believeth on 
 the Son hath everlasting life," does he mean, not 
 that he has the germ, or assurance of life, but merely 
 access to it ? When he affirms, that the believer 
 " is not condemned," does he mea i simply to teach,
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 245 
 
 that lie is condemned, but has access to a state of 
 justification ? "When Paul declares that " faith is 
 counted for righteousness," does he mean that faith 
 is not counted for righteousness, hut the believer is 
 in a condition, in which, by performing an " overt 
 act," he may have access to this blessing ? Mr. 
 Campbell asserts, but does not prove his position. 
 
 I must notice what he considers a conclusive re- 
 futation of all the arguments of his opponents in 
 support of the doctrine of justification by faith, pre- 
 viously to baptism. " When they find," he says, 
 " where remission of sins is mentioned without im- 
 mersion, it is weak, it is unfair, in the extreme, to 
 argue from that, that forgiveness can be enjoyed 
 without immersion. If their logic be worth any 
 thing, it will prove, that a man may be forgiven 
 without grace, the blood of Jesus, and without faith ; 
 for we canjind passages, many passages, where 
 remission, or justification, sanctification, or some 
 similar term occurs, and no mention of either grace, 
 faith, or the blood of Jesus." Chn'ty Restored, 
 p. 217. 
 
 The italicised sentence above, on account of its 
 
 
 
 supposed importance, is printed by its author in 
 bold capitals. A few remarks will suffice to sho\r 
 the feebleness of this objection. Faith is indis- 
 solubly united with grace and the blood of Christ 
 The blood of Christ is the object of saving faith 
 " Whom (Christ) God hnih set forth to be a propi
 
 246 CAMPBELLIS*! IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 
 
 tiation through faith in his Mood, to declare his 
 righteousness for tt.e remission of sins/' &c. Rom. 
 3 : 25. Faith is the product of grace, and through 
 grace faith is imputed for righteousness. Eom. 4 : 
 3-5. Faith implies is inseparable from repent- 
 ance, conversion, holiness. Now, suppose remis- 
 sion, or justification is, in many passages, promised, 
 where no mention is made of " either grace, faith, 
 or the blood of Jesus ;" the blessing 'is promised to 
 some holy exercise or quality which implies the ex- 
 istence of faith, and is inseparably united to grace 
 and the blood of Christ. But, mark this ! baptism 
 is not essentially connected loith faith, nor with any 
 of the exercises wliicli suppose the existence of faith, 
 A man must be a believer, in the full, Scriptural 
 sense of the term, before he is a fit subject of bap- 
 tism. A period longer or shorter, must elapse be- 
 tween the moment of believing and the moment of 
 immersion. Nay, there is no certainty, there can 
 be none, that immersion will ever follow the act of 
 believing. The sum of the matter is this, when re- 
 mission or justification is promised to faith, then re- 
 pentance, conversion, the new birth, holiness, the 
 spirit of obedience, the grace of God, and the blood 
 of Christ, are implied are all indissolubly united. 
 But neither baptism, nor a participation in the 
 Lord's supper, is supposed in the promise, nor es- 
 sentially connected loith the blessing. 
 
 The wisdom- and grace of God are eminently
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 247 .. 
 
 manifested in making faith, and not immersion, the 
 line of discrimination between the states of con- 
 demnation and justification. It is a line invisible 
 to us, but not to God. It marks the precise point 
 at which the rebel becomes a child It is the com- 
 mencement of spiritual life and is the source of 
 all true obedience. " Indeed, true faith necessarily 
 works ; therefore, a working faith is tha only true, 
 real, and proper faith in Divine or human esteem." 
 Campbell on Baptism, p. 282. It is inseparable 
 from conversion, or regeneration, and an exercise 
 acceptable to God. Let us hear the opinion of the 
 Reformer on this point. " Now as faith in God is 
 the first principle the soul-renewing principle of 
 religion ; as it is the regenerating, justifying, sanc- 
 tifying principle; without it, it is impossible to 
 please God. With it," I must repeat this sentence, 
 " a man is a son of Abraham, a son of God ; an 
 heir apparent to eternal life." But on this subject 
 I can furnish higher authority than that of Mr. 
 Campbell. - The Apostle John says, " Whosoever 
 believeth that Jesus is the Christ, is born of God." 
 1 John 5 : 1. Now, in view of the excellent nature, 
 and momentous relations of faith, does it not seem 
 most worthy of God, and most suitable to man, 
 that it should be the exercise to which the remis- 
 sion of sins, and eternal life are promised ? Can 
 " a son of Abraham, a son of God," be still in a 
 state ">f condemnation ? Even Mr. Campbell, who
 
 248 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 
 
 once maintained so strenuously, that a man cannot 
 be born of God, until lie is born of water, is con- 
 strained to admit, " that to be born of God, and 
 born in sin, is inconceivable. Remission of sins," 
 he says, " is as certainly granted to the- born of 
 God, as life eternal, and deliverance from corrup- 
 tion, will be granted to the children of the resurrec- 
 tion, when born from the grave." Christianity Re- 
 stored, p. 208. If then the believer is " a son of 
 God," as Mr. Campbell in one place testifies, and 
 as the Scriptures distinctly teach, it is a monstrous 
 supposition) at war alike with our conceptions of 
 the evangelical scheme of justification, and the char- 
 acter of the Supreme Ruler, that he is in his sins, 
 until he can perform " an overt act," which he may 
 never be able to do. 
 
 It must, however, be conceded that there is a 
 connexion between baptism and the remission of 
 sins. In some sense baptism ivashes away sins. 
 I purpose to inquire what this connexion is ? 
 
 Baptism must either be the means, or the condi- 
 tion of obtaining the remission of sins ; or it is the 
 means of declaring, or confessing, the remission of 
 sins, previously obtained by faith. Either it sus- 
 tains a relation to forgiveness like that which 
 repentance and faith sustain ; or its relation to for- 
 giveness is that of a sign to the thing signified. 
 
 There is no medium between these schemes. The 
 Rev. Mr. Meredith, the late estimable editor of the
 
 CAMPBELL1SM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 249 
 
 Biblical Recorder, labored harct, ingeniously, but 
 unsuccessfully, to establish an intermediate scheme. 
 But in spite of the most subtle distinctions, we arc 
 forced to the conclusion, either that baptism is an 
 act upon the proper performance of which God has 
 promised that forgiveness shall ensue, and without 
 such performance there is no promise of forgiveness.; 
 or that baptism is a sign or declaration of forgive- 
 ness actually received and enjoyed by faith in Christ. 
 
 Mr. Campbell without dispute embraces the 
 former scheme. Baptism, according to the " ancient 
 Gospel," is not the figure or formal acknowledgment 
 of the remission of sins, but the indispensable, and, 
 it would seem, the only condition of obtaining it. 
 " I assert," he says, and truly, it is mere assertion, 
 " that there is but one action ordained or command- 
 ed in the New Testament, to which God has 
 promised, or testified, that he will forgive our sins. 
 This action is Christian immersion." Chn. Bap., 
 p. 520. 
 
 Is this scheme of forgiveness Scriptural ? Is 
 baptism, like repentance and faith, an indispensable 
 condition of the remission of sins ? 
 
 Let the reader notice First. That this scheme 
 of remission flatly contradicts plain and numerous 
 Scripture testimonies. These testimonies, or speci- 
 mens of them, I have already alduced. Now, it is 
 a sound and admitted principle of Biblical interpre- 
 tation, th\t tho Scriptures should be construed in
 
 
 250 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES 
 
 harmony with themselves. The obscure must be 
 elucidated by the clear, and the figurative by the 
 literal. It is impossible " for words to express more 
 clearly, pointedly, ahd emphatically, than do the 
 Scriptures, that God has suspended the forgiveness 
 of sins on the exercise of faith. Take for an illus- 
 tration the words of Christ to the Jewish Rabbi 
 " He that believeth on him (the Son) is not con- 
 demned," and is consequently, pardoned, or justified. 
 Now, " baptism for the remission of sins," a phrase 
 susceptible of different interpretations, must be con- 
 strued in harmony with this unambiguous language 
 of the great Teacher. And the remark is true of 
 all the texts under consideration. 
 
 Secondly. That the Scriptures manifestly make 
 a distinction between the relation which faith, and 
 that which baptism bears to the remission of sins. 
 We read in the Scriptures, and many such passages 
 may be found, " He that believeth not shall be 
 damned." " Except ye repent, ye shall all likewise 
 perish." "If any man love not the Lord Jesus 
 Christ, let him be anathema maran-atha." Now, 
 we do not read, nor is it intimated, nor is any thing 
 recorded, from which it may be fairly inferred, that 
 if a man is not immersed, he is condemned, doomed 
 to perish and to be anathematized at the coming 
 of our Lord. But if Christ has made, as Mr. Camp- 
 bell contends, repentance, faith, and immersion 
 " equally n&.ts&iry to forgiveness," how can it be
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 251 
 
 accounted for, that neither Christ nor his apostles 
 ever uttered a malediction against the unbaptized ? 
 How can their silence on this point be reconciled 
 with their love and fidelity to the souls of men, and 
 at the same time with the doctrine that the peni- 
 tent believer, glowing with love to Jesus, is under 
 the curse, until he is immersed ? 
 
 Thirdly. There are consequences involved in the 
 theory of baptismal remission which may well make 
 us hesitate to adopt it. God has a perfect right to 
 prescribe the conditions of forgiveness ; and we are 
 bound to receive, with readiness and gratitude, such 
 as he may prescribe. But when any interpretation 
 of the divinely prescribed terras of forgiveness leads 
 to conclusions, absurd in themselves, at variance 
 with the genius of the Gospel, and seemingly deroga- 
 tory to God, we certainly should hesitate long, and 
 examine carefully, before we adopt it. The conclu- 
 sions, logically deducible from the doctrine of bap- 
 tismal remission, are such as to make me believe 
 that it is based on a misinterpretation of the Scrip- 
 tures. 
 
 Let us now seriously notice pome of the legitimate 
 consequences cf the dogma -*hich I am combating. 
 
 If the remission of aina Is enjoyed only through 
 immersion ; or, in otl>or words, if " baptism is the 
 onhj medium divinely appointed, through which the 
 efficacy of the blood of Christ is communicated to 
 th/ conscience," then, I remark,
 
 252 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PKINCIPLES. 
 
 1. That the salvation of men, even of peuitor t 
 believers, is in the hands of the authorized baptizers. 
 Popish priests have claimed the power of remitting 
 sins ; but Protestants have ever considered the claim 
 an arrogant assumption. I freely concede that those 
 who maintain the sentiment which I am opposing 
 may not have examined its bearing and consequences. 
 I speak not of them, but of their doctrine. It is, 
 however, as clear as that two and two make four, 
 that the remission of the believer's sins, according 
 to this theory, depends, not on the will of God, but 
 on the will of man. He cannot baptize himself ; 
 and if the qualified administrator does not choose, 
 under no matter what plea, to baptize, (or regener- 
 ate) him, he must either be pardoned without im- 
 mersion, be saved without pardon, or be lost. No 
 sophistry can evade this consequence. 
 
 2. That salvation may be entirely beyond the 
 reach of the most humble, obedient and faiihful ser- 
 vants of Christ. Let me suppose a case. Fidelis, 
 after a careful examination of the subject, became a 
 convert to Christianity. Deeply conscious of his 
 guilt and un worthiness, he cordially embraced Christ, 
 as his prophet, priest, and king ; consecrating to 
 him, in the unfeigned purpose of his heart, his body, 
 soul, and spirit ; with all his time, and all his pos- 
 sessions. Enraptured with the Saviour's charms, 
 he rejoiced in h;.s word and worship from day to day. 
 Having settled his views on the subject of baptism,
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 253 
 
 lie designed, at the earliest opportunity, to take on 
 him the badge of discipleship in baptism. But, by 
 order of Tyrannus, an inveterate enemy to Christ, 
 he was arrested and cast into prison, f6r his ardent 
 zeal, and dauntless testimony in the Redeemer's 
 cause. To him baptism is now impossible. And 
 poor Fidelis cannot enjoy the remission of his sins. 
 Perhaps, it may be replied, " That God is merciful 
 that he does not require impossibilities and that 
 he may accept the will for the deed." These are 
 the very considerations which make me suspect that 
 God has not suspended the remission of sins on that 
 which to a good man may be impracticable on 
 something extraneous to the new creature. Besides 
 the persecuted Fidelis needs something more solid 
 than a " perhaps," a " may be," or a conjecture, to 
 support him in his dark and solitary confinement ; 
 God has not withheld the stable ground of comfort, 
 as I have clearly evinced. 
 
 3. That the enlightened and tender conscience 
 can never be fully satisfied. Questions as to the 
 validity, and sin-cleansing efficacy of baptism must 
 arise. I can easily know when I have passed from 
 Virginia into Ohio, because they are separated by 
 water. I may certainly know that I have been im- 
 mersed ; but whether I have received valid, re- 
 generating baptism, is another matter. Does its 
 efficacy depend on the qualifications of the adminis- 
 trator ? on his piety? on his baptism ? on his church
 
 254 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 
 
 connexion ? on his ordination ? on his intention ? 
 Is apostolical succession, either in the line of bap- 
 tism or of ordination, essential to its validity ? Is 
 its sin pardoning virtue connected with the views 
 entertained of it by the subject ? If " baptism is 
 the only medium divinely appointed, through which 
 the efficacy of the blood of Christ is communicated 
 to the conscience/'' then, it would seem to me, that 
 the believer, tremblingly alive to his own salvation, 
 must be filled with intense and ceaseless dread, lest 
 the channel, through some defect, or leak, should 
 permit the grace of pardon to escape before it 
 reaches his sin- smitten conscience. Indeed, some 
 have been goaded by this very apprehension to a 
 repetition of the ordinance. 
 
 4. That repentance, the most sincere and lasting 
 faith, the most vigorous love, the most self- 
 sacrificing the sanctifying influence of the Holy 
 Spirit the atoning blood of Christ his intercession 
 before the throne and the abounding grace of the 
 Father, are all, without baptism, unavailing for sal- 
 vation. I do not affirm that all who adopt the 
 sentiment which I am combating, push it to this 
 extent, but I fearlessly aver that this is its plain, 
 legitimate, and inevitable consequence. This gives 
 to baptism an unscriptural prominence in the Chris- 
 tian system. It must tend, as the kindred dogma 
 of transubstantiation has tended among Papists, to 
 engender superstition. At first the water of bap-
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 255 
 
 tism is deemed of equal moment in the scheme of 
 salvation with the cleansing blood of the Kedeemer ; 
 and by degrees the sign will come to be substituted 
 for the thing signified the ceremonial to be pre- 
 ferred to the vital. What has occurred may occur 
 figain. Strange as it may appear, the error which 
 I have been exposing, is the -root of infant baptism. 
 We learn from Salmasius, a learned historian and 
 critic, quoted by Booth in his Psedobaptism Ex- 
 amined, that among the ancients, " an opinion pre- 
 vailed that no one could be saved without being 
 baptized ; and for that reason, the custom arose of 
 baptizing infants." This error had its origin, 
 according to the testimony of Suiceras, a learned 
 divine and professor of Greek and Hebrew at Zurich, 
 (quoted by the same indefatigable inquirer after 
 truth,) in a " wrong understanding of our Lord's 
 words, except a man be born of water and of the 
 Spirit, lie cannot enter into the kingdom of heaven." 
 
 " It (infant baptism) arose from false views of ori- 
 ginal sin, and of the magical power of consecrated 
 water." Prof. Halm's Theology, p. 55G. 
 
 " The immediate occasion of infant baptism, it 
 cannot be denied, was extravagant ideas of its neces- 
 sity to salvation." Dressler's Doctrine of the Sacra- 
 ment of Baptism, p. 152. Chris. Keview, June, 
 1838, p. 198,199. 
 
 1 can easily conceive the influence of this error on 
 ignorarr and superstitious people. If baptism be
 
 256 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 
 
 deemed essential to salvation, the motive to extend 
 its efficacy to every individual who might, by pos- 
 sibility, be qualified to receive it, is irresistible. It 
 would be administered first to the sick then to 
 persons of very tender age then to children, whose 
 capacity for the exercise of faith is very doubtful 
 and finally to unconscious infants. The considera- 
 tion that none could be saved without baptism, and 
 that its performance could do no serious injury, 
 would lead from step to step in the path of error, 
 till the design and spirit of the ordinance would be 
 lost and forgotten. I inquire 
 
 5. What will be the condition of a believer dying 
 without baptism ? I have already shown conclu- 
 sively that the believer. is " born of God" that he 
 possesses " everlasting life,'"' and that he is a child 
 of God ; and yet, agreeably to the theory under con- 
 sideration, " unpardoned, unjustified, unsaved," &c. 
 In this condition he may unquestionably die. What 
 would become of him ? He could not be received 
 into heaven without pardon, and consequently in 
 his sins ; nor would he be sent to perdition, with a 
 regenerate heart, and possessing eternal life. There 
 would be no place for him but purgatory. And yet, 
 in the opinion of Protestants, there is no such place 
 as purgatory. I leave him to be extricated from 
 his dilemma by those whose unscriptural, I had 
 almost said abst :d, dogma has placed him in it. 
 
 Isastly. Mr Campbell recoils from the conse-
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PKINCIPLES. 257 
 
 queuces of his own doctrine. If, as he maintains, 
 Peter "made repentance, or reformation, and im- 
 mersion equally necessary to forgiveness" then it is 
 as clear as the noon-day sun, that no man can be a 
 Christian, and no man who hears, or has an oppor- 
 tunity of hearing the Gospel, can be saved, in time 
 or eternity, without immersion. Can a man be a 
 Christian without repentance ? Can a man, under 
 the light of the Gospel, be saved without repent- 
 ance ? Mr. Campbell will hardly answer these 
 questions in the affirmative. But if immersion and 
 repentance are equally necessary to forgiveness, then 
 no man can be a Christian, or be saved, without 
 immersion, except, indeed, a man may be a Chris- 
 tian or be saved, without forgiveness. Mr. Camp- 
 bell seems sometimes half inclined to look this 
 consequence fall in the face. " Infants," he says, 
 " idiots, deaf and dumb persons, innocent Pagans, 
 wherever they can be found, with all the pious 
 P&dobaptists, we commend to the mercy of God." 
 Chn. Sys., 233. As there is no promise of their 
 salvation, he turns over all pious Pasdobaptists, 
 and, of course, all other unimmersed believers, with 
 infants, idiots, &c., to the " uncovenanted mercies 
 of God." At another time, when a milder spirit 
 rules him, or, more probably, when his system is 
 out of view, he writes, in a measure, like an unre- 
 formed Christian minister. " Amongst them all,' 
 he says, alluding to the Christian sects, " we than)
 
 258 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 
 
 the grace of God, that there are many who believe 
 in, and love the Saviour, and that, though we may 
 not have Christian churches, we have many Chris- 
 tians." Camp, on Baptism, p. 16. Yes ! thanks 
 to " the grace of God," we have " many Christians" 
 without immersion, without conversion, without re- 
 generation, and without the remission of sins ! ! It 
 is exceedingly difficult for error to be consistent with 
 itself. Mr. Campbell shows in this admission that 
 he does not fully believe his own doctrine. He is 
 forced, in spite of his system, to concede that repent- 
 ance and immersion, are not equally necessary to 
 secure the remission of sins. 
 
 If baptism, as I have endeavored to show, is not 
 a condition, or means of obtaining the remission of 
 sin, then it follows that it is a symbolic declaration 
 of the remission of sins already obtained through 
 faith in Christ. In support of this conclusion, I 
 remark, 
 
 First That it is in perfect harmony with the 
 teaching of the Scriptures. This point has been 
 sufficiently elucidated, and the reader must judge 
 of it for himself. 
 
 Secondly That it is according to analogy. There 
 are two New Testament institutions baptism and 
 the Lord's supper. The latter is unquestionably a 
 symbolic ordinance. Bread and wine are used to 
 symbolize the broken body, and sin-atoning blood of 
 Jesus. May we not reasf raably infer that both ordi-
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 259 
 
 nances are of the same general nature that as one 
 is symbolic so is the other ? If we do not literally, 
 but only in a figure eat the- Lord's body, and drink 
 his blood, in the supper, does it not seem probable 
 that our sins are not literally, but only in a figure, 
 washed away in baptism ? As we do not derogate 
 from the importance of the Lord's supper, but as- 
 sign to it its true position in the Christian system, 
 as a means of promoting the edification and piety 
 of believers, by insisting on its symbolic character ; 
 so neither do we derogate from the scriptural im- 
 portance of baptism, by maintaining that sins are 
 not literally but only in a figure remitted by it. 
 The Papists interpret the language relating to the 
 Christian ordinances with perfect consistency. 
 They carry out the principle of a literal exposition. 
 They maintain that in the eucharist the body of 
 Christ is literally eaten, and his blood literally 
 drunk, and that in baptism sins are literally washed 
 away. But are they consistent expositors of Scrip- 
 ture who teach that in the eucharist we eat the 
 body, and drink the blood of Christ in a figure, but 
 that in baptism our sins are literally, really washed 
 away ? I think not. In the same sense in which 
 the broken loaf in the Lord's supper is a sign of the 
 crucified body of Jesus, is the water of baptism ;i 
 sign of the cleansing efficacy of the blood, or 
 atonemert of Christ. In like manner as we eat the 
 
 t
 
 
 260 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 
 
 ' 
 
 body of Christ in the supper, do we wasl^ away our 
 sins in baptism. * 
 
 Thirdly That it is m harmony with What Paul 
 affirms of himself. 1 Cor. 1: 17: "Christ sent 
 me not to baptize, but to preach the Gospel." The 
 apostle did not mean that he was unauthorized to 
 perform the rite of baptism ; for ' he baptized 
 Crispus and Gaius, and the household of Stephanus, 
 and perhaps some others ; and he would not have 
 baptized them without authority. The commission 
 to preach is co-extensive with the commission to 
 baptize. The apostle clearly meant, " Christ sent 
 me not (mainly) to baptize, but to preach the Gos- 
 pel." Baptism was not unimportant it was a 
 solemn duty an impressive ordinance a symbolic 
 rite ; but preaching the Gospel was the great, su- 
 preme business of Paul, as it should be of every 
 Christian minister. If, however, baptism is the re- 
 generating act, and as essential to forgiveness as re- 
 pentance, I ask any candid and discerning man, 
 whether Paul could have used such language ? " I 
 thank God," said he, "I baptized (regenerated) 
 none of you but Crispus and Gaius." Thank God 
 I did not do the very thing without which my 
 preaching is vain your faith is vain and your sins 
 cannot be forgiven ! His language is most dis- 
 cordant with the theory of baptismal remission ; 
 but strikingly harmonizes with the conclusion I am 
 aiming; to establish. The blood of Christ the
 
 CAMPBELL1SM IX ITS PRINCIPLES 261 
 
 publication of the Gospel the influence of the 
 Holy Spirit repentance faith regeneration arc 
 indispensable to salvation ;^ and baptism is an open, 
 solemn acknowledgment , or declaration that salva- 
 tion is received and enjoyed, through the blood of 
 Christ, by repentance and faith, produced through 
 the agency of the Holy Spirit. 
 
 I will now endeavor briefly to show that the pas- 
 sages of Scripture principally relied on by Mr. 
 CampBell for the support of his doctrine, utterly 
 fail of establishing it, and are in agreement with the 
 theory of symbolic remission maintained in this . 
 chapter. 
 
 To begin with the commission, Mark 16 : 16. 
 The assurance that " He that believeth and is bap- 
 tized shall be saved," does by no means warrant the 
 conclusion that the remission of sins does not pre- 
 cede baptism. There is perfect accordance between 
 this promise and the plain, literal declaration of 
 Jesus, that " He that believeth on the Son is not- 
 condemned." Certainly, if he that believes on the 
 Son is not condemned, he who not only believes in 
 the Son, but, in submission to his authority, is bap- 
 tized, is not condemned. 
 
 Let us next notice the famous passage in this con- 
 troversy, Acts 2 : 38. " Repent and be baptized 
 every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ, for 
 the remission of sins and ye shall receive the gift 
 of the Holy Ghost." That baptism is for the ro-
 
 2G2 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 
 
 mission of siris none will deny. But the import of 
 the passage turns on the force of the term "for" 
 In the Greek the preposition e/? is used. Every 
 scholar knows, and every intelligent reader may 
 learn from unquestionable authority, that it bears 
 in the New Testament various meanings. It is 
 sometimes, but rarely, rendered for, in the sense of, 
 " in order to." Its usual rendering is into. A 
 regard to the context, the sense of the passage, and 
 other considerations, must determine its import in 
 any particular place. It is only necessary to show 
 that on sound principles of hermeneutics, it may be 
 fairly understood in harmony with what I have en- 
 deavored to prove is the plain doctrine of the 
 Scriptures, and this can easily be done. In Mat. 
 3 : 11, we have these words " I indeed baptize 
 you with water unto (f) repentance." Here the 
 term cannot without gross impropriety be rendered 
 for, or in order to. We know that John did not 
 baptize his disciples in order thai? they might re- 
 pent. He demanded of 'them not .only repentance, 
 but fruits meet for repentance, before he admitted 
 them to baptism. He baptized them, not that they 
 might 'fjbtaia repentance, but as a sign, or acknow- 
 ledgment that they had repented. Mat. 3 : 8-9. 
 Now, in the very sense in which the Harbinger bap- 
 tized his disciples (?) unto, for, into repentance, 
 did Peter command his pentecostal hearers to be 
 baptized (sir) for, untc, into the remission of sins
 
 CAMPBELL1SM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 263 
 
 that is, not to procure, but as a sign, or acknowl- 
 edgment of, this privilege, which God has graciously 
 and inseparably united with repentance and faith. 
 I could produce many similar examples, but this 
 will suffice to show how fairly the passage harmo- 
 nizes with the symbolic theory of baptism. 
 
 On Acts 22 : 16, it is needless to add any thing 
 to the remarks which I have already made on the 
 figurative import of the ordinance. 
 
 " Jesus answered, verily, verily, I say unto thee, 
 Except a man be born of ivater, and of the Spirit, he 
 cannot enter into the kingdom of God." John 3 : 5. 
 
 The Keformers quote this text with great confi- 
 dence in support of their views. Let us candidly 
 examine it. The phrase ytvvr)Qk $ Jarof "born 
 of water," does not elsewhere occur in the Scrip- 
 tures. Its import must be learned from the lan- 
 guage itself, the context, and the current teaching 
 of revelation. What is its meaning ? Mr. Camp- 
 bell maintains that it means baptism, and founds 
 his argument for baptismal remission wholly on this 
 interpretation. Concerning this opinion, I have 
 several remarks to offer 
 
 First. It is perfectly gratuitous. No argument 
 has been presented, and none, it is presumed, can 
 be ; in its support. All that can bo plausibly said 
 in favor of it is, that if the phrase does not mean 
 baptism, it is not eas} to perceive what it does mean.
 
 264 CAMOBELLISM i 1 * ITS PKINCIPLES. 
 
 Now I protest against building so important a theory 
 as baptismal remission on a mere assumption. 
 
 Secondly. Mr. Campbell relies on authority for 
 the confirmation of his opinion. " This/' he says, 
 " is neither an interpretation of my own, nor of 
 modern times ; but if ever there was a Catholic in- 
 terpretation not Eoman Catholic or Greek Catholic 
 but if ever there was a Catholic interpretation, it 
 is the interpretation which I have given ; for all 
 agree to it, both ancient and modern." Debate with 
 Bice, p. 481. It must be conceded that the pre- 
 ponderance of authority is fh favor of this interpre- 
 tation. This, however, is only a part of the truth, 
 A majority of " ancient and modern" writers, espe- 
 cially of the "Greek and Latin Fathers," on whose 
 concurrent judgment Mr. C. relies for the support 
 of his interpretation, cast the weight of their au- 
 thority not only in favor of baptismal remission, 
 which he believes, but of baptismal regeneration, 
 which he rejects. This text is the stronghold of the 
 doctrine. A misconception of its meaning was the 
 root of that most prevalent error, infant baptism. 
 Besides, no man has less respect for human author- 
 ity than Mr. Campbell, when it is in -conflict with 
 his own views. 
 
 Thirdly. It makes Christ's answer to Nicodemus 
 irrelevant. The Saviour said to the Rabbi, " Verily, 
 verily, I say unto thee, except a man be born again, 
 he cannot see the kingdom of God." The Jewish
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITb PRINCIPLES. 266 
 
 ruler did not understand the language attached a 
 gross, sensual meaning to it and demanded an ex- 
 planation of it. " How/' said he, " can these 
 things be ?" According to the popular interpreta- 
 tion, Christ, instead of answering the question, 
 merely combined with the obscure proposition, an- 
 other, which must have been perfectly unintelligible 
 to Nicodemus. If the great Teacher employed a 
 figurative phrase, well understood among the intel- 
 ligent Jewish rulers, to elucidate the nature of the 
 spiritual birth, his answer was in harmony with the 
 question of Nicodemus, and the whole context ; but 
 if he used a phrase never before nor afterwards em- 
 ployed, by an inspired teacher, to denote baptism, 
 his language was adapted to confouDd rather than 
 instruct the neophyte. 
 
 Fourthly. It fully justifies the ignorance of the 
 Jewish ruler. I take it for granted, that Christ in- 
 tended to be understood by Nicodemus, and used 
 such language as a suitably qualified ruler of the 
 Jews could have comprehended. Christ reproved 
 his pupil for his inexcusable ignorance "Art thou 
 a master of Israel, and knowest not these things ?" 
 But how could a teacher hi Israel be censurable for 
 not understanding phrases peculiar to Christianity 
 nay, a doctrine which had never before been enun- 
 ciated ? If Christ meant to teach Nicodemus that 
 he must be baptized before he could enter into the 
 kingdom of God, b vein ployed language which it
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PKINCIPLES. 
 
 was impossible for the ruler to comprehend, and 
 then reproved him for his official ignorance. But 
 Christ did not reprove the master unjustly. He 
 ought as a Jewish teacher, and as a student of the 
 Scriptures, and of Rabbinical writings, to have un- 
 derstood the language used by the Eedeemer for 
 illustrating the nature of the new birth. 
 
 Fifthly. It makes the answer of Christ to Nico- 
 demus/afee. The "kingdom of God" must mean 
 the church of Christ on earth, or the state of 
 heavenly glory.. This position, it is presumed, will 
 not be called in question. Now it is not true that 
 none enter into the visible church on earth, who are 
 not born of the Spirit. In the purest churches 
 there are members who are not regenerated. In 
 the apostolic churches, there were some who were 
 not properly of them. " They went out from us," 
 said John, " but they were not of us ; for if they 
 had been of us, they would have continued with us." 
 1 Jno. 2 : 19. The kingdom of heaven is like a net, 
 which gathers both good and bad. Mat. 13 : 47-48. 
 Nor is it true, that none enter into the heavenly 
 glory who are not baptized. Frcm this conclusion, 
 though it follows legitimately from his doctrine, Mr. 
 Campbell himself recoils. Tfce Saviour's declara- 
 tion then, as interpreted by the. 'Keformers, and 
 many others, is not true. There is but one method 
 of evading this conclusion. It is sometimes affirmed, 
 for the purpose of avoiding it, that a man cannot
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 267 
 
 constitutionally enter into the kingdom of God, ex- 
 cept he is baptized, and Lorn of the Spirit. But, 
 by what authority is this long word foisted in the 
 passage ? There is nothing in the context to jus- 
 tify its insertion. Christ affirms positively, and 
 without limitation, "Except a man be born of 
 water, and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the 
 kingdom of God." 
 
 Lastly. If the phrase " born of water " means 
 immersion, the passage in which it is found yields 
 no support to the doctrine of baptismal remission. 
 If the " kingdom of God " means, as Mr. Campbell 
 understands it to mean, the reign of Messiah on 
 earth the visible church then the text proves 
 merely that a man cannot enter the church without 
 baptism, and leaves the subject of the remission of 
 sins, wholly untouched. So far as this passage 
 teaches us, a man may be pardoned before, or after, 
 as well as in the act of immersion. It has no rele- 
 vancy to the subject under discussion. 
 
 But what does the text under discussion mean ? 
 It is not incumbent on me to show its meaning. I have 
 proved that it does not refer to baptism, and that if 
 it does, it fails to support the doctrine of baptismal 
 remission this is sufficient for my purpose. I will, 
 however, perform a work of supererogation. I will 
 quote on this subject a passage from a sermon of 
 the Rev. James Saurin, formerly pastor of the 
 French church at the Hague, celebrated alike for
 
 268 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 
 
 his learning, eloquence and piety. " The phrase," 
 says this incomparable writer, " to be born of water 
 and of the Spirit, is a Hebraical phraseology, im- 
 porting to be born of spiritual water. By a similar 
 expression, it is said in the 3d chapter of St. Mat- 
 thew, ' I indeed (says John the Baptist) baptize you 
 with water unto repentance, but there cometh after 
 me one mightier than I ; he shall baptize you with 
 the Holy Ghost and with fire ;' that is, with spirit- 
 ual life" (fire, I presume, is meant.) ..." The 
 Jews call the change which they presume their 
 proselytes had experienced, a spiritual birth ; a new 
 birth ; a regeneration. It was one of their maxims 
 that the moment a man became a proselyte, he was 
 regarded as a child, once born in sin, but now born 
 in holiness. . . . Though it be not necessary to 
 prove by numerous authorities the first remark we 
 shall make on the words of Christ, { To be born of 
 spiritual water/ and to be ' born again/ it is proper 
 at least to propose it ; otherwise it would be diffi- 
 cult to account for our Saviour's reproving Nico- 
 demus as being ' a master in Israel, and not knowing 
 these things/ For a doctor in the law does not 
 seem reprehensible for not understanding a language 
 peculiar to Jesus Christ, and till then unheard of ; 
 whereas the blame naturally devolved on this Jew 
 for exclaiming at expressions familiar to the Kabbins." 
 Saurin's Sermons, trarlated from the French, by
 
 f AMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 269 
 
 Rev. Robert Robinson, and others. Vol. 2, pp. 
 419, 420. 
 
 " Christ alsc loved the church, and gave himself 
 for it ; that Tie might' sanctify and cleanse it with 
 the washing of water by the word." Eph. 5 : 25, 26. 
 This text is adduced by Mr. Campbell with great 
 confidence in support of his cherished theory, that 
 sins are remitted in the very act of immersion. Let 
 us patiently examine it. Several remarks made in 
 the investigation of John 3 : 5, are equally appli- 
 cable to the passage in hand. That the phrase, 
 KaBapiaae TU ZovTpy TOV vdarog, that he might " cleanse 
 it by the washing of water," which occurs nowhere 
 else in the New Testament, means baptism, is simply 
 an assumption, and cannot be proved. The weight 
 of authority is in favor of this interpretation, but a 
 large measure of it, both Romanist and Protestant, 
 presses the text into the service of baptismal regen- 
 eration. But admitting, for the sake of argument, 
 that the phrase means baptism, the passage cannot, 
 with any fairness, be offered in support of baptismal 
 remission. The reader must keep his eye on the 
 question at issue, Are sins forgiven in baptism ? 
 Christ gave himself for the church that he might 
 sanctify and cleanse it witli the washing of water 
 baptism by the word. Christ does two things for the 
 church, sanctifies and cleanses it, with the washing 
 of water. Now, the first of these terms, in the usus 
 loquendi of the Nev Testament, never refers to a
 
 270 C1MPBELL1SM IN ITS PElNCIPLES. 
 
 change of state, or the remission of sins, but in- 
 variably to a moral change. The term dyla^, from 
 a-yidfa, to separate, consecrate, purify, " sanctify," 
 is never used by any inspired writer to denote 
 pardon or justification. It is, as has already been 
 shown, distinguished from justification. 1 Cor. 6 : 
 11. It means to make holy. " The very Grod of 
 peace sanctify you wholly." 1 Thess. 5 : 23. " He 
 that is holy, let him be holy still." Rev. 22 : 11. If 
 there is a respectable author in the English tongue, 
 except those who use the Bethany dialect, who gives 
 it any other meaning, I have yet to learn who he 
 is. The word Kadapiaaf^ from naOapi&j to cleanse, 
 render pure, to free from the influence of error and 
 sin, is nearly as unfavorable to the argument of Mr. 
 Campbell. It is used to denote the healing of the 
 leper : " Lord, if thou wilt, thou canst make me 
 clean." Matt. 8:2. It is employed to signify the 
 process of moral purification in the redeemed : 
 " Let us cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the 
 flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of 
 God." 2 Cor. 7:1. " Who gave himself for us, 
 that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and 
 purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of 
 good works." Tit. 2 : 14. In one place, the word 
 probably refers to the removal of guilt from the con- 
 science by the blood of Christ. Hob. 9 : 14. In 
 every other passage, where it relates to the redemp- 
 tion of men, it denotes a moral renovation. That
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 271 
 
 both sanctify and cleanse, have, in the text under 
 consideration, reference to a moral purification, 
 Beems to be beyond reasonable dispute. The Apostle 
 tells us distinctly for -what purpose Christ sanctifies 
 and cleanses the church, with the washing of water, 
 by the word. It is that he may present it to him- 
 self " a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, 
 or any such thing, but that it should be holy, and 
 without blemish." These are clearly moral effects 
 effects in harmony with the universal meaning of 
 the word sanctify, and almost universal meaning 
 of the word cleanse. Christ proposes to purify, 
 adorn, and perfect his church " with the washing 
 of water by the word.'"' If the phrase " washing of 
 water" means baptism, then the text teaches, not the 
 remission of sins in the act of baptism, but rather 
 baptismal regeneration and sanctification. At any 
 rate it will be the business of those who contend for 
 that meaning of the phrase, to free the passage from 
 a consequence which is exceedingly plausible, if it 
 is not legitimate. But are such moral effects as the 
 Apostle so graphically describes attributable to bap- 
 tism ? This moral cleansing is ascribed to faith 
 " Purifying 'their hearts by faith." Acts 15 : 9 ; to 
 the word of God " Seeing ye have purified your 
 souls in obeying the truth, through the Spirit ;" 1 
 Peter 1 : 22, and to the blood of Christ" The 
 blood of Jesus Christ his Son, cleanscth us from all 
 sip " 1 Jno. ". : 7, but never, unless it be in the text
 
 272 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PBINCIPLES. 
 
 under examination, to baptism. There is, indeed, 
 a Aourpov, or bath, which cleanses the soul, as the 
 washing of water cleanses the body ; but this bath 
 is not baptism. "In that day, there shall be a 
 fountain opened to the house of David, and to the 
 inhabitants of Jerusalem, for sin and for unclean- 
 ness." Zee. 13 : 1. He has a poor conception of 
 this sin-cleansing fountain, who supposes that it is 
 baptism, Multitudes have been baptized who have 
 not been cleansed from sin and uncleanness ; and as 
 many have been cleansed who have not been bap- 
 tized. This soul-cleansing fountain is beautifully 
 described by England's evangelic bard : 
 
 " There is a fountain filled with blood, 
 
 Drawn from Immanuel's veins ; 
 And sinners, plunged beneath that flood, 
 
 Lose all their guilty stains." 
 
 The same wondrous fountain is portrayed, with 
 different imagery, by one less gifted in song, but 
 not less fervent in spirit, or learned in the Scrip- 
 tures, than was the gentle Cowper. 
 
 " Here at Bethesda's pool, the poor, 
 
 The withered, halt, and blind, 
 With waiting hearts expect a cure, 
 
 And free admittance find. 
 
 .A 
 
 Here streams of wondrous virtue flow, 
 
 To heal a sin-sick soul ; 
 To wash the filthy white as snow, 
 
 And mat. ? the wounded who'is."
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 273 
 
 Whether the blood of Christ, or the Gospel 
 which reveals the efficacy of that blood, be con- 
 sidered the fountain, is not material for these 
 things are inseparable this is the true loutron 
 the soul-purifying bath. In this the church is sanc- 
 tified and cleansed, and made " a glorious church, 
 not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing." 
 
 I see but one method of attempting to evade the 
 force of the above reasoning. It may be said that 
 " Christ loved the church and gave himself for it," 
 to deliver it from the guilt as well as the pollution 
 of sin to secure for it the remission of sins, as well 
 as sanctification. This is readily granted. Some 
 passages of Scripture, however, display the grace 
 of God, and the efficacy of Christ's blood, in the 
 remission of sins, without any allusion to sanctifica- 
 tion. " Being justified freely by his grace through 
 the redemption that is in Christ Jesus." Rom. 3 : 
 24. In other passages the purifying efficacy of 
 Christ's blood is exhibited without any reference to 
 justification " Jesus also that he might sanctify 
 the people with his own blood, suffered without the 
 gate." Heb. 13 : 12. The text we are discussing 
 belongs to the latter class of Scriptures. Christ 
 gave himself for the church that he might sanctify 
 and cleanse it and by so doing make it holy, 
 faultless and glorious worthy of himself. Remis- 
 sion of sins is a blessing which believers derive from 
 Christ and this truth is plainly taught in many
 
 274 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 
 
 portions of the Bible ; but this Scripture has no 
 reference to the remission of sins, and consequently 
 cannot prove that they are remitted in the moment 
 of baptism. 
 
 " According to "his mercy lie saved us, by the 
 washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy 
 Ghost." Titus 3 : 5. 
 
 " The like figure whereunto even baptism doth 
 also now save us (not the putting away of the filth 
 of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience 
 toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ." 
 1 Peter 3 : 21. 
 
 These two passages may be conveniently ex- 
 amined together. 
 
 The phrase " washing of regeneration" is found 
 no where in the Scriptures but in the text cited 
 from the epistle to Titus. It is generally, not 
 universally supposed to signify baptism. That it 
 does cannot be proved. My own opinion is, that it 
 is exegetical of the following words, " renewing of 
 the Holy Ghos-t." Regeneration is called a wash- 
 ing, because it is a moral cleansing ; and this wash- 
 ing is precisely equivalent to the " renewing of the 
 Holy Ghost." The text may be rendered " the 
 washing of regeneration even (ai) the renewing of 
 the Holy Ghost." The Greek participle not is fre- 
 quently rendered even in the New Testament, 
 Mat,. 8 : 27 25 : 29. Mark 6 : 12, &c. But, so fai
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 275 
 
 as this argument is concerned, I will admit that the 
 words " washing of regeneration" mean baptism. 
 
 The text above cited from Peter is one of the 
 most obscure in the apostolic epistles. Commenta- 
 tors have been greatly perplexed and divided con- 
 cerning its import. As it is not necessary for my 
 purpose, I shall not attempt to expound it. 
 
 Do these Scriptures teach that the sins of a be- 
 liever are remitted in the act of baptism ? This is 
 the question under discussion. God saves us, " by 
 the washing of regeneration (baptism) and renewing 
 Df the Holy Ghost." " Baptism doth also now save 
 us." 
 
 The term salvation is of comprehensive import. 
 It denotes the whole process by which we are de- 
 livered from sin, and fitted for the enjoyment of 
 heaven. It includes a thorough moral renovation, 
 the remission of sins, adoption into the family of 
 God, and perseverance unto death in the way of 
 holiness. It is commenced in repentance, carried 
 forward in sanctification, and will be completed by 
 the resurrection from the dead. The sincere be- 
 liever in Christ, even before baptism, is in a state 
 of salvation, but his salvation is incomplete. Now, 
 God saves us by all the means which he employs to 
 instruct, impress, purify, and preserve us. The 
 written word, the ministry of the word, meditation, 
 prayer, baptism, the Lord's Supper, afflictions, are 
 all means by which God p<wes us. We are said to
 
 276 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 
 
 be saved by faith saved by hope to save ourselves 
 and others, 1 Tim. 4 : 10 to work out our own sal- 
 vation, Phil. 2 : 12. Salvation is promised to him 
 that endureth to the end. Matt. 16 : 22. Christ is 
 the author of eternal salvation to all them that obey 
 him. Heb. 5 : 9. And we are saved by baptism. 
 All these things have an influence in securing our 
 salvation are among the means by which God, in 
 his mercy, carries on and completes the work. Bap- 
 tism, which symbolizes the regenerating influence 
 of the Spirit of God, and is a public and solemn 
 acknowledgment of the remission of sins through 
 faith in Christ, is designed and fitted to separate us 
 from the world, impress on us our obligations to 
 Christ, and aid us in the pathway to heaven. It 
 certainly, however, does not follow from this posi- 
 tion that the remission of sins is suspended on the 
 act of baptism. This conclusion is drawn from the 
 assumption, that whatever promotes our salvation 
 is essential to the forgiveness of sins an assumption 
 manifestly false. "'He that endureth to the end 
 shall be saved" but is the believer unpardoned 
 until he finishes his race ? or, is he not pardoned at 
 the commencement of it ? Christians are exhorted 
 to work out their own salvation but are not their 
 sins forgiven before the completion of the work ? 
 We are saved by baptism not as a condition of 
 obtaining the remission of sins, but as one of the 
 means which God employs to perfect the work of
 
 :AMPBELLISM IN ITS PKINCIPLES. 277 
 
 our salvation ; a means not indispensable to that 
 result. 
 
 The remaining propositions of the Extra, I will 
 very briefly dispose of. 
 
 The tenth sets forth that " immersion and wash- 
 ing f regeneration are two Bible names for the 
 same act." Chn'ty Restored, p. 223. Mr. Camp- 
 bell's views on regeneration, having a very loose 
 connexion with the subject of the remission of sins, 
 I have pretty fully discussed in another place, and 
 will dismiss without farther remarks. 
 
 Under the eleventh proposition, Mr. Campbell 
 furnishes a long list of authorities to prove that the 
 early Christian Fathers considered immersion as the 
 "regeneration" and " remission of sins," spoken of 
 in the New Testament. If this was the testimony 
 of the Fathers, it differs very widely, on one point, 
 from Mr. Campbell's system. " All the Apostolic 
 Fathers," says the Extra, " allude to, and speak of" 
 Christian immersion as the " remission of sins." 
 Now, according to the Bethany Reformation, im- 
 mersion is not the " remission of sins," but the 
 means of obtaining it. Which is right, the Apos- 
 tolic Fathers, or the father of the " current 
 Reformation ?" 
 
 I deem these Fathers of very little importance in 
 the controversy. That they early attached an 
 undue importance to Christian ordinances is very 
 clear That they called baptism " regeneration,"
 
 278 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 
 
 confounding the symbol with the thing symbolized, 
 and ascribed to the act a sin-cleansing efficacy, is 
 quite as evident, and entitled to as much consider- 
 ation, as that they employed in regard to the 
 eucharist strong language which is confidently cited 
 by the Papists in support of the dogma of transub- 
 stantiation. If Mr. Campbell can prove the iden- 
 tity of baptism and regeneration, if he can establish 
 the doctrine of baptismal remission by the authority 
 of the Fathers, the Komanists can by testimonies 
 equally clear, pointed, and unexceptionable, support 
 the doctrine of the real presence in the mass. That 
 the early converts to Christianity from heathenism 
 should have had a strong tendency to attach an ex- 
 cessive and superstitious importance to the cere- 
 monials of religion, will surprise no one who carefully 
 considers the character of their idolatrous training, 
 and the natural bias of imperfectly educated minds. 
 To this tendency, and the seemingly trivial mistakes 
 that early sprang from it, we trace that stream of 
 superstition,. error and impiety, which has so long 
 overflowed and desolated the larger portion of the 
 so-called Christian world. We should be careful 
 how we follow a leader, who, to overwhelm the op- 
 posers of a favorite theory, would open afresh this 
 copious fountain of pollution and mischief. 
 
 Mr. Campbell's twelfth and last proposition in 
 support of baptismal remission, maintains that 
 " the reformed creeds, Episcopalian, Presbyterian,
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN IIS PRINCIPLES. 279 
 
 Methodist and Baptist, substantially avow the same 
 views of immersion, (as those developed in the 
 Extra,} though apparently afraid to carry them out 
 in practice." Chn'ty Restored, p. 231. 
 
 I will leave the other denominations to vindicate 
 their own creeds, if they deem it proper to do so. 
 Some of them employ language on the subject of 
 baptism which I do not approve, any more than I 
 do that of Mr. Campbell on the same subject. But 
 on behalf of the Baptists, I affirm that they have 
 never taught, and never held any views substantially 
 agreeing, or that could by any ingenuity be tortured 
 into an agreement with, Mr. Campbell's notions on 
 the identity of immersion and regeneration, and on 
 the remission of sins in the very instant of being 
 put under water. The assertion is a gross misrepre- 
 sentation of the Baptist denomination and of every 
 member of it ; and Mr. Campbell himself furnishes 
 the proof of this misrepresentation. He quotes the- 
 Baptist creed as follows 
 
 " Chap. XXX. Section 1. Baptism is an ordi- 
 nance of the New Testament, ordained by Jesus 
 Christ, to be unto the party baptized a sign of his 
 fellowship with him in his death and resurrection ; 
 and of his being engrafted into him ; of remission 
 of sins, and of his giving up himself unto God, 
 through Jesus Christ, to live and walk in newness 
 of life." Chri'ty Restored, p. 234. 
 
 The Baptists have always maintained that bap-
 
 280 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 
 
 tism is a sign of the remission of sins ; nor have 
 they been ashamed, as Mr. Campbell insinuates, to 
 carry out this view, so far as it could be, in practice. 
 But is it possible that Mr. Campbell can think that 
 the teaching of the Baptist creed is " substantially" 
 the same as his theory of baptismal remission ? If 
 so, he is the most unfortunate writer that has ever 
 put pen to paper. We might as well endeavor to 
 understand the ravings of a bedlamite as the stereo- 
 typed writings of the Bethany Keformer. But let 
 us read his remarks on the creed 
 
 " The Baptist follows the Presbyterian church as 
 servilely as the Methodist church follows the English 
 hierarchy." We are willing to follow the Presby- 
 terians, so far as they follow the Bible ; and if this 
 be servility, it were a pity but that the Reformer 
 had possessed a good measure of it. It might have 
 saved him from many profitless speculations, un- 
 seemly contradictions, and pernicious errors, and 
 the world from a " Beformation," which, to speak 
 charitably, has been of very questionable benefit. 
 But let us hear more of the commentary. " But 
 she (the Baptist church) avows her faith that im- 
 mersion is a sign of remission." And then, as if to 
 obscure the subject, he continues " A sign of the 
 past, the present, or the future ! A sign accom- 
 panying !" Now, he knew perfectly that the Bap- 
 tists, without a dissentient, understood baptism to 
 be a sign, as the terms of their creed plainly import,
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 281 
 
 of the remission of sins already received and enjoyed 
 by faith in Christ ; but whether it be "a sign of 
 the past, the present, or the future/' it differs as 
 widely from Mr. Campbell's notions of the identity 
 of immersion and regeneration, and of remission 
 through the act of immersion, as the Lord's Sup- 
 per of the New Testament differs from the Papal 
 Mass. 
 
 WEEKLY COMMUNION. 
 
 One article of the Bethany Reformation is, that 
 all the churches of Christ are required to commune 
 at the Lord's table every Lord's-day. Mr. Camp- 
 bell's views on this subject are expressed in the fol- 
 lowing condensed proposition, in his Millennial Har- 
 binger Extra, No. II, p. 69. 
 
 " The breaking of the one loaf, and the joint par- 
 ticipation of the Lord, in commemoration of the 
 Lord's death, usually called the ' Lord's Supper,' 
 is an instituted part of the worship and edification 
 of all Christian congregations in all their stated 
 meetings." 
 
 The practice of weekly communion was not pecu- 
 liar to the Reformers. It prevailed among several 
 Christian sects in Scotland, where Mr. Campbell 
 received his collegiate education, and early religious 
 impressions. It was not seriously opposed among 
 the Baptists, except as it was a part of a system, 
 containing many objectionable principles, and usu-
 
 282 CAMPBELL1SM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 
 
 ally advocated as the harbinger of other reforms, or 
 changes, of far more questionable propriety. 
 
 It is not my purpose to follow the circuitous and 
 prolix train of propositions and arguments by which 
 the extra aims to establish the divine authority of 
 weekly communion. What I have to say on the 
 subject may be comprehended in a few plain posi- 
 tions, in the brief discussion of which the most im- 
 portant of these arguments will be noticed. 
 
 1. Weekly communion is not commanded in the 
 Scriptures, either by Christ or his apostles. This 
 point is conceded. Every commemorative institu- 
 tion, except the Lord's Supper, ordained by divine 
 authority, had a fixed time for its observance. Mr. 
 Campbell infers from analogy that the Lord's Sup- 
 per a commemorative institution must have a 
 stated time for its observance, and that time is every 
 Lord's-day. Extra, No. II, p. 73. This reasoning 
 is not legitimate. In every commemorative rite, 
 except the Lord's Supper, divinely ordained, the 
 time of its observance is a part of the law of the in- 
 stitution. The law of the Passover prescribes defi- 
 nitely the time, as well as the manner of keeping it. 
 But the Saviour in the law of the Lord's Supper 
 does not prescribe the times of its observance, bu 
 uses most indefinite language on the subject. 
 " This do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance 
 of me. For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink 
 this cup, ye do show the Lord's death till he come."
 
 OAMPBELL1SM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 283 
 
 1 Cor. 11 : 25-26. Why was the Lord's Supper 
 made an exception to this rule ? Docs not a differ- 
 ence in the form of the law establishing this rite, 
 imply a difference in the rite itself ? 
 
 The Lord's Supper is not, however, wholly anom- 
 alous. Fasting and prayer, the former, at least, a 
 positive institution, are Christian duties, the times 
 of whose observance are not divinely prescribed, but 
 left to be decided by the circumstances and desires of 
 the worshippers. Why may not the Lord's Supper 
 belong to the same class of religious duties ? 
 
 2. It does not clearly appear from the Scriptures 
 that weekly communion was practised by any of the 
 apostolic churches. 
 
 Three passages of Scripture are chiefly relied on 
 by the advocates of the practice for its support. 
 
 The first text is Acts 2 : 42. " And they con- 
 tinued steadfastly in the apostles' doctrine, and fel- 
 lowship, and in breaking of bread, (partaking of the 
 Lord's Supper,) and in prayers." From this lan- 
 guage Mr. Campbell infers that the first Christian 
 congregation, which met in Jerusalem, " did as 
 statedly attend upon the breaking of the loaf in their 
 public meetings, as they did upon any other part of 
 the Christian worship." Mill. Har. Extra, No. II, 
 p. 69. All that can be logically deduced from this 
 text is, that " breaking of bread" was a part of the 
 instituted worship, steadily observed, by the first 
 Christian church ; but whether it was observed
 
 284 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 
 
 daily, weekly, or monthly, before or after prayer, or 
 more or less frequently than prayer, does not ap- 
 pear. It may be affirmed of a church that com- 
 munes monthly, as truly as of one that communes 
 weekly, or daily, that it continues steadfastly " in 
 breaking of bread." 
 
 The second passage relied on in support of the 
 practice is Acts 20 : 7. " And upon the first day 
 of the week when the disciples came together to 
 break bread," &c. From this passage it is inferred 
 that it was the custom of the disciples to meet on 
 the first day of the week, and that the primary 
 object of their meeting was to break bread. The 
 premises do not justify the conclusion. It is not 
 logical to derive a general conclusion from a partic- 
 ular fact. The fact stated in the text is particular. 
 When Paul, the founder of the church, was in 
 Troas, the disciples came together to break bread. 
 Suppose it had been a special appointment for com- 
 munion, in view of the presence of the distinguished 
 apostle, or the stated monthly communion of the 
 church, might not the historian have said, nay, 
 would he not have been compelled to say, in record- 
 ing the event, " On the first day of the week when 
 the disciples came together to break bread ?" On 
 that particular day the disciples in Troas came to- 
 gether to break bread, but whether they invariably 
 came together on the first day of the week for the 
 same purpose cannot be learned from the text, or
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 285 
 
 its context. All that can be fairly affirmed is that 
 the text is in harmony with weekly communion, and 
 contributes, with other testimonies, to show the 
 probability of its prevalence in the apostolic 
 churches. See Mill. Har. Extra, No. 2, p. 70. 
 
 Another text quoted in proof of weekly commu- 
 nion is 1 Cor. 11 : 20. "When ye come together 
 therefore into one place, this is not to eat the Lord's 
 Supper." " To act thus," says Mr. Campbell, " is 
 unworthy of the object of your meeting. To act 
 thus is not -to eat the Lord's Supper. It is not to 
 show forth the Lord's death. Thereby declaring 
 that this is the chief object of meeting." Mill. 
 Har. Extra, No. 2, p. 72. As the Corinthians met 
 weekly, and as eating the Lord's Supper was the 
 chief object of their meeting, it is inferred that 
 they communed weekly. From this reasoning I 
 dissent. The Corinthian church sadly profaned the 
 Lord's supper. They changed it into a bacchana- 
 lian feast, perverting it from its true design. The 
 apostle reproved them for their impiety. " When 
 ye come together therefore into one place," for re- 
 ceiving the communion, whether daily, weekly or 
 monthly, " this is not to eat the Lord's Supper," 
 but to desecrate it. Whether they came together 
 for other purposes than to eat the Lord's Supper it 
 was not the design of Paul to consider. Of then 
 communion seasons, and only of their communion 
 eeasons, does ho discourse ; and when they as
 
 286 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 
 
 sembled to " break bread" they profaned the insti- 
 tution. Of this text I must say, as of the preced- 
 ing, it accords with the practice of weekly commu- 
 nion, but can only be logically urged in support of 
 the probability of its observance in the primitive 
 churches. 
 
 3. Some of the arguments used in support of 
 weekly, may with equal propriety be used in support 
 of daily communion. " Spiritual health as well as 
 corporeal health, is dependent on food. It is 
 requisite for corporeal health that food not only be 
 salutary in its nature, and sufficient in its quantity, 
 but that it be received at proper intervals, and 
 these regular and fixed. Is it otherwise with moral 
 health ?" So reasons the Mill. Har. Extra, No. 2, 
 p. 73. The writer might, quite as logically, have 
 carried his analogy a little farther. As daily food 
 is requisite for the health of the body, so daily 
 communion is requisite for the health of the soul. 
 Doctor Doddridge says " We have great reason to 
 believe that the eucharist was often celebrated 
 among these primitive converts, perhaps much 
 oftener than every Lord's day." Note on Acts 2 : 
 42. It would seem then that the probable practice 
 of the first Christian church concurs with the logic 
 of the Extra to lead the churches back, not to 
 weekly, but to daily, or semi-weekly communion. 
 
 4. Admitting that weekly communion was observed 
 by the apostolic churches, a ~>es it follow that theprac-
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 287 
 
 tice is obligatory on all churches ? The soundness 
 of this conclusion does not appear. If the law in- 
 stituting the Lord's Supper, has left the times of 
 its observance to be decided by the discretion of the 
 churches, then the practice of the early churches, 
 in the exercise of this discretion, is not obligatory 
 on other churches. Let me illustrate this point by 
 a similar case. The duty of Christians to contribute 
 of their worldly substance for the support and 
 spread of the Gospel is plainly revealed in the Scrip- 
 tures ; but the measure and manner of the contri- 
 bution are to be determined by them in view of their 
 resources, circumstances, and the exigency of the 
 Redeemer's cause. Now, the first Christian church 
 in Jerusalem " sold their possessions and their 
 goods," " and had all things common." The law 
 of Christ required that they should contribute, and 
 they in their discretion and liberality contributed 
 all they possessed. But is their example obligatory 
 on churches in the present day? The advocates 
 of weekly communion will scarcely maintain the 
 affirmative. But if the example of the first church, 
 under one indefinite law, is not obligatory on other 
 churches, why should its example under another 
 law, equally indefinite, be obligatory? 
 
 5. Conceding, as Mr. Campbell maintains, that 
 the Lord's Supper " is an instituted part of the wor- 
 ship and edification of all Christian congregations 
 in all their stated meetings" it is grievously neg-
 
 288 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PRINCIPLES. 
 
 lected not only by the religious sects generally, but 
 by the churches of the current Reformation. These 
 churches meet, particularly those in cities, twice 
 every Lord's day, once on some week-day evening, 
 and sometimes for many days and nights consecu- 
 tively, and yet they break bread only once a week. 
 If the Lord's Supper is an instituted part of the 
 worship of all Christian churches in all their stated 
 meetings, by what authority, in heaven or on earth, 
 do the Keformed churches assemble, statedly and re- 
 peatedly, without breaking the loaf? If their 
 principles are correct, they need another and an 
 important reformation. 
 
 6. There is no objection to weekly communion, 
 provided it is not imposed on tJie churches as a term 
 of communion. The practise is not binding on the 
 churches. But it is admitted that among the 
 early churches, it is highly probable, that it did 
 generally, if it did not universally prevail. I do not 
 perceive any solid objection against returning to the 
 practice. It may be well for the churches seriously 
 and candidly to inquire, whether a more frequent 
 celebration of the Lord's Supper a rite so preg- 
 nant with instruction, and so eminently impressive 
 would not contribute to increase their piety and 
 usefulness. 
 
 I cannot, perhaps, more appropriately, than at 
 this point, introduce a few remarks on Mr. Camp- 
 bell's views of what is usually termed " Close Com-
 
 CAMPBELLISM TN ITS PRINCIPLES. 289 
 
 munion" No man was ever more clearly slmt up 
 by his principles to the necessity of insisting on re- 
 stricted communion, than Mr. Campbell. Main- 
 taining, as he does, that without immersion, there 
 is neither regeneration, conversion, nor the remis- 
 sion of sins, he cannot, without gross inconsistency, 
 receive the unbaptized to the Lord's table. Surely, 
 those who are not " pardoned, justified, sanctified, 
 reconciled, adopted and saved," as according to Mr. 
 Campbell's theory, all unimrnersed persons are not, 
 are without Scriptural qualifications for communing 
 at the Lord's table. The legitimate consequence 
 of his principles he has very fully admitted. 
 
 In the year 1835, Mr. Campbell had a corres- 
 pondence with William Jones, a distinguished 
 Baptist mmi'jf.er of London. Mr. Jones proposed 
 the following question. " Do any of your churches 
 admit unbelt ized persons to communion ; a prac- 
 tice that ij becoming very prevalent in this country ?" 
 
 To this query Mr. Campbell replied " Not one, 
 as far as Irr.own to me. I am at a loss to understand 
 on wlnt principles by what law, precedent, or 
 license, any congregation founded upon the Apostles 
 and Prophets, Jesus Christ being the chief corner- 
 stone, could dispense with the practice of the Prim- 
 itive church with the commandment of the Lord, 
 and the authority of his Apostles. Does not this 
 look like making void the word or commandment of 
 God, by human tradition ? I know not how I could
 
 290 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS PKINCIPL^S. 
 
 exhort one professor to ' arise and be baptized/ as 
 Ananias commanded Saul, and at the same time 
 receive another into the congregation without it. 
 Nay, why not dispense with it altogether, and be 
 consistent ?" Mill. Har., vol. 6, p. 18. 
 
 In 1843, in his debate with Bev. N. L. Bice, Mr. 
 Campbell, to prove the liberality of the Beformers, 
 spoke thus " We, indeed, receive to our commu- 
 nion persons of other denominations, who will take 
 upon them the responsibility of their participating 
 with us. We do, indeed, in our affections, and in 
 our practice, receive all Christians, all who give evi- 
 dence of tljeir faith in the Messiah, and of their 
 attachment to his person, character, and will." 
 Deb. with Bice, p. 785. 
 
 Mr. Campbell, in his debate with Bice, labored 
 to show the perfect agreement of the above extracts ; 
 but labored unsuccessfully. If the passages are not 
 contradictory, it will be hard to find a contradiction 
 in the English language. To Mr. Jones he says, 
 We admit no unbaptized person to communion 
 there is neither " law, precedent, nor license" for it, 
 To Mr. Bice, he says, " We receive to our commu- 
 nion persons of other denominations," unbaptized 
 persons, " who will take upon them the responsi- 
 bility of participating with us." 
 
 Every man has a right to change his opinions ; 
 and for an honest and frank avowal of the change 
 he deserves no censure. Every man has a perfect
 
 CAMPBELLISM \N ITS PRINCIPLES. 291 
 
 right to explain the terms in which he expresses his 
 opinions. But when, from inadvertence, obscurity 
 of thought, or incorrectness of diction, he perpe- 
 trates a plain and palpable contradiction, he owes 
 it to himself, to fairness, and to truth to acknow- 
 ledge and correct the error.
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS DISCIPLINE, 
 
 One of the avowed objects, as has already been 
 stated, of Mr. Campbell's Keformation was the 
 union of all Christians on the apostolic foundation. 
 Of the desirableness of the object there is no differ- 
 ence of opinion among the intelligent friends of the 
 "Redeemer. It is an end devoutly wished and 
 prayed for by all who love Jesus Christ in sincerity 
 The union so worthy to be sought by Christians, is 
 not, however, a mere ecclesiastical union, cemented 
 by worldly policy, and maintained by the ignorance, 
 apathy and subservience of the laity, and the 
 ghostly intolerance of the clergy ; nor a mere nom- 
 inal unity, in which men of all principles and all 
 practices are held together by the utterance of a 
 common " Shibboleth ;" but a unity in faith and 
 knowledge, cemented by love, and resulting in har- 
 monious, cordial and effective exertions for the pro- 
 motion of the Kedeemer's kingdom. 
 
 What is* the proper foundation of Christian 
 Union ? This is a very important question a 
 question which is clearly answered in the Scriptures
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS DISCIPLINE. 293 
 
 This foundation is " the truth" that system of 
 divine truth styled in the New Testament " the 
 Gospel," "the faith," "the doctrine of Christ," 
 &c. This truth,'not merely as it is recorded in the 
 Scriptures, but as it is understood, believed, loved 
 and obeyed, becomes a bond of union among Chris- 
 tians. When Christ ascended up on high, "he 
 gave some, apostles ; and some, prophets ; and 
 some, evangelists ; and some, pastors and teachers ; 
 for the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the 
 ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ : 
 Till we all come to the unity of the faith, and of the 
 knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man," 
 &c. Eph. 4 : 8-14. The ascended Redeemer be- 
 stowed on his saints supernaturally qualified in- 
 structors, to secure their unity in " the faith," the 
 " one faith" mentioned v. 5 the system of evan- 
 gelical truth and " the knowledge of the Son of 
 God/' of his person, character, work and offices 
 whom to know is life eternal. And one end which 
 Christ proposed to secure by this enlightened union 
 of the saints is their steadfast adherence to the 
 truth. " That we henceforth be no more children, 
 tossed to and fro, and carried, about with every wind 
 of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning 
 craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive ;" 
 &c., verses 14-15. Christians are exhorted in the 
 Scriptures to " continue in the faith grounded and 
 settled," Col. 1: 23 ; to strive " together for the
 
 294 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS DISCIPLINE. 
 
 faith of the Gospel," Phil. 1 : 27 ; and " earnestly 
 to contend for the faith once delivered to the saints." 
 Jude 3. They are said to have "fellowship in the 
 Gospel," Phil. 1 : 5. Christians love one another 
 in the truth. " The elder unto the elect lady and 
 her children, whom I love in the truth ; and not I 
 only, but also all they that have known the truth ; 
 for the truth's sake, which dwelleth in us, and shall 
 be with us forever " 2 John, verses 1-2. If Chris- 
 tians " walk in the light," that is, in the knowledge 
 of the truth, they " have fellowship one with an- 
 other." 1 John 1 : 7. They are required to reject 
 from their fellowship all who do not bring the " doc- 
 trine of Christ." " He that abideth in the doc- 
 trine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the 
 Son. If there come any unto you, and bring not 
 this doctrine, receive Mm not into your house, 
 neither bid him God speed." 2 John, v. 10. The 
 church in Pergamos were sharply reproved because 
 they retained in their fellowship some who held the 
 " doctrine of Balaam," and also some who held 
 " the doctrine of the Nicolaitanes," which Christ 
 hated. Kev. 2 : 14-15. From these Scriptures it 
 is manifest that divine truth, or the Gospel, as it is 
 believed, understood and lored, is the basis of Chris- 
 tian union. The saints love one another in the 
 truth, and for the truth in obeying the truth they 
 have fellowship one with another they are required 
 to hold fast the truth, to contend earnestly for it,
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS DISCIPLINE. 295 
 
 and to reject from their communion th >se who do 
 not embrace it. Any union which is not founded 
 on the knowledge and love of Divine truth is a 
 union of ignorance, interest, policy or coercion ; hut 
 not the union for which Christ prayed, and for 
 which his people should labor. 
 
 It is by no means easy to define the measure of 
 ignorance and unbelief compatible with the exist- 
 ence of genuine piety, and sincere Christian fellow- 
 ship. There are, however, certain facts, doctrines 
 and duties, fundamental to the Christian system ; 
 and the willful rejection of these, or any one of them, 
 from whatever obliquity of intellect or of heart, pre- 
 cludes the possibility of enlightened, Scriptural, 
 Christian union. The Gospel assumes the exist- 
 ence, and moral government of God the depravity 
 and guilt of man and to deny either of these truths 
 is to subvert the foundation of Christianity. The 
 Gospel reveals the Divinity of Christ, the expiatory 
 nature of his sufferings and death, his resurrection 
 from the dead, and his investiture with regal author- 
 ity at the right hand of the Father ; and he that 
 rejects either of these truths, rejects the Gospel 
 itself. Eepentance, faith, and a holy life, are 
 plainly inculcated on men in the Gospel ; and he 
 that denies their necessity, perverts and destroys the 
 system. The Gospel teaches a future state of re- 
 wards and punishments, from which it derives its 
 strongest motives to piety ; and 'fee that denies or
 
 296 CAMPBELLISM IN ITJ DISO.PL1NE, 
 
 perverts this doctrine makes war upon, if he does 
 not overthrow " the faith." It is not my purpose 
 to furnish a summary of Christian doctrine, but only 
 to point out some of the principles which are essen- 
 tial to the system, and the knowledge and admission 
 of which are indispensable to the Scriptural union 
 of Christians. I do not affirm that a perfect knowl- 
 edge of all these principles is essential to Christian 
 fellowship ; but I do most earnestly maintain that 
 the persistent rejection of any one of them, under 
 whatever plausible pretence, and with whatever 
 show of argument, precludes the possibility of "fel- 
 lowship in the Gospel." Fellowship, indeed, there 
 may be, but it is the fellowship of error, pseudo 
 charity, and worldly policy a fellowship founded 
 on a principle, which bids " God-speed" to him 
 that brings not " the doctrine of Christ," and which 
 retains in communion " them which hold the doc- 
 trine of the Nicolaitanes," that Christ hates. 
 
 On the subject of Christian Union, Mr. Campbell 
 has written many things which deserve considera- 
 tion. It is my purpose, however, to restrict my 
 remarks at present, to the foundation on which he 
 proposes to establish this union. It is laid down 
 in his Christianity Restored, pp. 118, 119. 
 
 " But the grandeur, sublimity, and beauty of the 
 foundation of hope, and of ecclesiastical or social 
 union, established by the author and founder of 
 Christianity, consisted in this, that THE BELIEF OF
 
 CAMPBELL] SM IN ITS DISCIPLINE. 297 
 
 ONE FACT, and that upon the best evidence in the 
 world, is" all that is requisite, as far as faith goes, 
 to salvation. The belief of this ONE FACT, and 
 submission to ONE INSTITUTION, expressive of it, is 
 all that is required of heaven to admission into the 
 church. A Christian, as defined, not by Dr. John- 
 son, nor any creed-maker, but by one taught from 
 heaven, is one that believes this one fact, and has 
 submitted to one institution, and whose deportment 
 accords with the morality and virtue of the great 
 Prophet. The one fact is expressed in a single pro- 
 position, Mai Jesus, the Nazarene, is the Messiah. 
 The evidence upon which it is to be believed, is 
 the testimony of twelve men, confirmed by prophecy, 
 miracles, and spiritual gifts. The one institution is 
 baptism into the name of the Father, and of the 
 Son, and of the Holy Spirit." 
 
 The reader has now a full view of the platform, 
 established, not by " the author and founder of 
 Christianity," but by Mr. Alexander Campbell of 
 Bethany, Virginia, for the joyful union of all the 
 sects and parties in Christendom. Before we ven- 
 ture upon it, however, we must subject it to a care- 
 ful examination. 
 
 " The belief of one fact," and " submission to one 
 institution," constitute " the foundation of hope, 
 and of ecclesiastical, or social union." So teaches 
 Mr. Campbell. 
 
 " With us," these are his words " Revelation has
 
 298 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS DISCIPLINE. 
 
 nothing to do with opinions, or abstract reason, figs; for 
 it is founded wholly and entirely upon facts." Chn'ty 
 Kestored, p. 106 "All revealed religion is based upon 
 facts." p. 113. I should suppose that Mr. Campbell 
 uses the term "fact" in its^secondary sense, as equiva- 
 lent to " truth," if his own definition did not preclude 
 that supposition. " Fact," he says, " means something 
 done. That God exists is a truth, but not a fact ; 
 that he created the heavens and the earth is a fact 
 and a truth." pp. 106, 107. I approve the defi- 
 nition. That facts occupy an important place in 
 the evangelic economy must be conceded ; but that 
 the truths connected with them, and from which 
 they derive their significance, are less important, 
 must be denied. That God exists is a truth which 
 lies at the foundation of all genuine religion, natural 
 and revealed. "For he that cometh to God must 
 believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them 
 that diligently seek him." Heb. 11 : 6. That Jesus 
 is the Son of God is a truth that he wrought mir- 
 acles is a fact ; that he was put to death by Pon- 
 tius Pilate, is a fact that he died for our sins is a 
 truth ; that he rose from the dead, is a fact 
 that he rose " for our justification," is a truth ; 
 that he ascended up to heaven, is a fact that 
 he ever lives " to make intercession for us," is 
 a truth ; and it will scarcely be maintained that 
 these facts are more important than the truths con- 
 nected with them. Indeed, the Gospel facts, won-
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS DISCIPL! NE. 299 
 
 derful as they are, possess no value apart from trie 
 doctrine or truth, in which they had their origin, 
 and by which their nature and uses are explained. 
 The death of Jesus would be of no greater conse- 
 quence to the world, than that of the two thieves 
 who were crucified with him, were it not that the 
 event is a part of a great system of truths, facts and 
 duties, extending backwards to the creation of the 
 world, and forwards through the ages of eternity. 
 From the proposition, then, that " all revealed reli- 
 gion is based on facts," I must beg leave to dissent. 
 But Mr. Campbell goes farther still. He narrows 
 greatly the ground which he at first occupied. He 
 sets aside all facts, as fundamental in religion, ex- 
 cept one. " The belief of one fact is all that is re- 
 quisite, so far as faith goes, to salvation." " This 
 one fact," we are told, " is expressed in a single 
 proposition that Jesus the Nazarene is the Messiah. 
 Now, according to Mr. Campbell's own definition, 
 this proposition is clearly not a fact, but a truth. 
 It is expressive not of something done, but of some- 
 thing that exists. In a note, Mr. Campbell writes 
 " The fundamental proposition is that Jesus is 
 the Christ. The fact, however, contained in this 
 proposition is that God has anointed Jesus of 
 Nazareth as the only Saviour of sinners." p. 118. 
 Now, I deny that the fact, as he terms it, is con- 
 tained in the proposition. To affirm, as Mr. Camp- 
 bell does, that the simple proposition, " that Jesus
 
 300 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS DISCIPLINE. 
 
 is the Christ," contains the fact, " that God anointed 
 Jesus of Nazareth, the only Saviour of sinners," is 
 to evince a strange obscurity of perception, or to 
 presume very far on the credulity of his readers. 
 And even if it were admitted, contrary to Mr. Camp- 
 bell's own definition, that the proposition is expres- 
 sive of fact rather than truth, why does he affirm 
 that it expresses one fact, when it manifestly ex- 
 presses two ? That Jesus is the Nazarene, is one 
 fact ; and that this Nazarene is the Christ, is another, 
 and totally different fact. " The evidence," Mr. 
 Campbell continues, " upon which it (the. 'fact,' 
 or, more properly the truth) is to be believed is the 
 testimony of twelve men, confirmed by prophecy, 
 miracles, and spiritual gifts." But why does he 
 say on the testimony of twelve men ? The apostles 
 were divinely appointed, and important, but not 
 the only oral witnesses of this truth. But we must 
 believe it, if we believe it at all, not on oral but 
 written testimony ; and in the New Testament we 
 have but eight witnesses, three of whom did not be- 
 long to the " twelve men," the apostles. Thus 
 loosely did this Keformer write on subjects funda- 
 mental in his system, and demanding the greatest 
 clearness of thought, and accuracy of expression. 
 
 " Jesus the Nazarene is the Messiah" This is 
 an important proposition. But by what authority 
 does Mr. Campbell make the belief of it " the foun- 
 dation" of " ecclesiastical or social union ?" There
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS DISCIPLINE. 301 
 
 aie other propositions contained in the Sciiptures, 
 expressing both facts and truths, equally funda- 
 mental in the evangelic system, and the belief of 
 which is equally necesary to salvation. That 
 " Christ died for our sins" along with other im- 
 portant facts, is declared by Paul to be the Gospel 
 which he preached to the Corinthians, and by which 
 they were to be saved, if they would keep it " in 
 memory." 1 Cor. 15 : 1-3. It is through faith in 
 the blood of Christ, that God declares " his right- 
 eousness for the remission of sins that are past/' 
 Eom. 3 : 25. / That Jesus rose from the dead is a 
 fact of primary importance in the Christian system, 
 and the belief of it is requisite to salvation. " If 
 thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, 
 and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath 
 raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved." 
 Rom. 10 : 9. The "one fact," which is not a fact, 
 seems to have been arbitrarily selected, by the Re- 
 former, from many facts and truths equally impor- 
 tant, and made the basis of " ecclesiastical union." \-/ 
 
 But, we must examine this foundation still more 
 carefully. Does Mr. Campbell, by the proposition 
 that " Jesus the Nazarcne is the Messiah," design 
 to include those truths and facts, which are essen- 
 tially connected with it, and which constitute the 
 Gospel ? I grant that a sincere and an intelligent 
 belief that Jesus is the Messiah, supposes a belief 
 in the whole sstem of which this truth is an im-
 
 302 CAMPBELL1SM IN ITS DISCIPLINE. 
 
 portant part. Salvation is promised to faith in the 
 blood of Christ in the resurrection of Christ and 
 in the Gospel of Christ, as well as to the belief of 
 the " one fact" that " Jesus is the Messiah ;" and 
 this variety of language is accounted for by the sim- 
 ple, and well understood principle that the belief 
 of one fact or truth is used to denote a belief in the 
 system of which it is an essential part. Now, if by 
 the belief of one fact, Mr. Campbell means the be- 
 lief of all the truths and facts inseparably connected 
 with it in fine, the Gospel of Christ^I have, on 
 this point, no controversy with him. [But, then, it 
 follows that Mr. Campbell has made no discovery 
 on this subject has proposed no new basis of eccle- 
 siastical union. It is precisely that for which evan- 
 gelical Christians have always contended. They 
 maintain that the G-ospel the system of truth per- 
 taining to human salvation is the proper founda- 
 tion for Christian union ; and in this judgment Mr. 
 Campbell .concurs. Whether, in this aspect of the 
 case, he can be vindicated from having made a great 
 ado about nothing, and having written very vaguely 
 and obscurely on a subject w r hich called for clearness 
 and precision, others may decide. 
 
 It can hardly be supposed, however, that the 
 above is the proper interpretation of the language 
 under discussion. It does not fairly admit of this 
 construction. " The belief of ONE FACT is ALL 
 is KEQUISITE, as far as faith goes, to salvation.
 
 GAMPBELLISM Ils ITS DISCIPLINE. 303 
 
 If a man believes the proposition, styled in the 
 Bethany terminology " one fact/' "that Jesus the 
 Nazarene is the Messiah," it is not requisite to his 
 salvation that he should believe anything else, 
 whether fact or truth, in the universe. This is his 
 simple, sole, all-comprehending creed, " I believe 
 that Jesus the Nazarene is the Messiah." In all the 
 creeds, of all the sects, and in all the revelations of 
 God, there is not a fact, truth or principle necessary 
 to be believed in order to salvation, except this 
 " one fact," which is to be believed on the " testi- 
 mony of twelve men." 
 
 On this subject I join issue with Mr. Campbell. 
 I cannot admit that the belief of one fact is all that 
 is requisite, as far as faith goes, to salvation. 
 
 But let us hear the arguments in support of the 
 position under discussion. "It is again and again 
 asserted," says the writer, " in the clearest lan- 
 guage, by the Lord himself, the apostles, Peter, 
 Paul and John, that he that believes the testimony 
 that Jesus is the Christ, is begotten of God," &c., 
 p. 119. By this process of reasoning it can be 
 pDved with equal clearness, that the proposition 
 that Jesus is the Son of God, or that Jesus was 
 raised from the d^ad, is the " one fact," or truth, 
 the belief of which " is all that is requisite, as far 
 as faith goes, to salvation ;" for to the belief of 
 these propositions sal vat on is promised. The truo 
 principle of interpreting these passages has been
 
 304 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS DISCIPLINE. 
 
 already explained. But where, permit me to ask, 
 is it stated, or intimated, or implied, in the Scrip- 
 tures, that the " belief of one fact," " is all that 
 is requisite, as far as faith goes ?" To affirm that 
 " whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ, is 
 born of God," on the well understood principle, 
 that he who believes that truth, also believes the 
 facts and truths essentially connected with it, is 
 widely different from affirming that the belief of 
 one fact is all the faith requisite to salvation. But 
 hear the Eeformer again. " The Saviour expressly 
 declared to Peter, that upon this fact, that he was 
 the Messiah, the Son of God, he would build his 
 church." p. 119. . Now, I must affirm that the 
 Saviour expressly declared no such thing. Neither 
 the word " fact," nor any term of corresponding 
 import appears in the passage referred to. Mat. 
 16 : 18. The text is one, as to the proper inter- 
 pretation of which, the most learned, pious, and 
 distinguished Biblical critics have been greatly 
 divided ; and to assume its meaning, and to employ 
 that assumed meaning in support of a doubtful 
 proposition, proves nothing so much as the paucity 
 of the writer's arguments. But let us listen again. 
 " And Paul has expressly declared that ' other 
 foundation can no man lay (for ecclesiastical union) 
 than that JESUS is THE CHRIST.' ' I do not re- 
 member ever to have met with a more glaring per- 
 version of the Word of God than this. Paul has
 
 CAMPBELL1SM IN ITS DISCIPLINE. 305 
 
 expressly declared no such proposition. The pas- 
 sage has quotation marks, and yet no such passage 
 is found in all the writings of Paul. The garbled 
 text is recorded, 1 Cor. 3 : 11. It reads thus 
 " Other foundation can no man lay than that is 
 laid, which is Jesus Christ." The foundation, ex- 
 pressly declared by the apostle to he laid, is, not 
 the " one fact," as the passage misquoted by Mr. 
 Campbell would seem to import, that Jesus is the 
 Christ, but Jesus Christ, himself. This apostolic 
 declaration is in perfect harmony with other por- 
 tions of Scripture. See Isaiah 28 : 16. Eph. 2 : 
 20. And, moreover, for Mr. Campbell's construc- 
 tion of the passage there is no authority in the com- 
 mon version, the New Translation, published by 
 himself, nor the Greek text. On what ground he 
 has made this most unwarrantable change in the 
 text, I know not. He surely ought not to expect 
 that it will be admitted on his mere declaration, in 
 opposition to the plain import of the original, and 
 its well established translation. 
 
 In consideration of the flimsy arguments which 
 have been noticed, the writer proceeds to remark 
 " The poinl is proved that we have assumed ; and 
 this proved, every thing is established requisite to 
 the union of all Christians upon a prbper basis." 
 pp. 119-120. It is a striking peculiarity of Mr. 
 Campbell's controversial writings that they abound 
 in arguments to prove what nobody denies, and take
 
 306 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS DISCIPLINE. 
 
 for granted, or furnish very slight evidence of the 
 main points at issue. Of the twenty-eight pages 
 devoted to the discussion of the Foundation of 
 Christian Union, not more than a page is occupied 
 by the proofs, such as they are, that " the belief of 
 one fact, is all that is requisite, so far as faith goes, 
 to salvation." Whether these proofs are sufficient 
 to establish the point, the intelligent reader must 
 judge. 
 
 But I am not yet done with this foundation. It 
 is quite too broad and comprehensive. It sustains, 
 on its ample surface, not only all Christians, as 
 defined " by one taught from heaven." but errorists 
 of almost every class and grade. Arians, Socinians, 
 Universalists, Materialists, Shakers, Mormons, to- 
 gether with many who are ignorant and supersti- 
 tious, profess as firmly and consistently, as Mr. 
 Campbell, himself to believe that Jesus the Nazarene 
 is the Messiah. They put their own interpretation 
 on the language, and conform their religious creed 
 to that interpretation. If they submit to the " one 
 institution," and their " deportment accords with 
 the morality and virtue of the great Prophet," 
 they are in the judgment of the Keformer, Chris- 
 tians, " as defined, not by Dr. Johnson, nor any 
 creed-maker, but by one taught from heaven." 
 
 Just at this point the difference between the 
 views hold by the Reformers, and " Regulars," is 
 clearly revealed We maintain that the belief of
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS DISCIPLINE. 307 
 
 " one fact" is not all the faith that is requisite to 
 salvation ; but that saving faith embraces the whole 
 system of facts, truths, and duties, essentially con- 
 nected with this " one fact." If, then, any person 
 professing to believe that Jesus, the Nazarene, .is the 
 Messiah, is ignorant of the import of the proposi- 
 tion, or rejects any doctrine or fact, vitally connected 
 ^vith it, we consider it prima-facie evidence that he 
 does not savingly believe the " one fact." He that 
 denies the doctrine of human depravity and guilt 
 of the Divinity of Christ of the vicarious and ex- 
 piatory nature of his sufferings or of a future state 
 of rewards and punishments, furnishes decisive 
 proof that he does not savingly believe the proposi- 
 tion that Jesus is the Messiah ; or, at any rate, that 
 he does not bring the " doctrine of Christ," and 
 should not be received into Christian fellowship. 
 Such an errorist, whether baptized or unbaptized, 
 our churches would promptly refuse to receive, and 
 hold in fellowship. To do otherwise, would be to 
 " bid him God-speed," and to efface the distinction 
 between truth and error. 
 
 But the creed of the Keformation has but one 
 article, viz. : / believe that Jesus, the Nazarene, is 
 the Messiah. The belief of this proposition " is all 
 that is requisite, as far as faith goes, to salvation." 
 He that believes this " one fact," and submits to 
 "one institution expressive of it," and whose morals 
 are correct, is, according to the doctrine of the
 
 308 OAMPBBLLISi: I.S ITS DISCIPLINE. 
 
 Eeformation, " a Christian," fit for " admission into 
 the church." ^ He is not required to believe any 
 other fact or truth, contained within the whole com- 
 pass of revelation. He may, along with the nation- 
 alists, deny the inspiration of the -Scriptures ; he 
 may, in company with the Pelagians, deny the 
 doctrine of man's innate depravity ; he may, in 
 agreement with the various classes of Unitarians^ 
 pronounce " Jesus, the Nazarene," a creature a 
 man a mere man a fallible man ; he may main- 
 tain, as do the Universalists, there is no punishment 
 of sin, except in this life ; he may, with the philo- 
 sophic Priestley, insist that the soul of man is 
 material, and perishes with his body ; he may 
 believe that Joe Smith was a prophet, and that the 
 Book of Mormon is a new revelation from God ; ox- 
 he may be deplorably ignorant of the first principles 
 of Christianity ; but according to the fundamental 
 doctrine of the Eeformation, he is entitled to a 
 place in the church of Christ. Let there be no 
 evasion among the Reformers. This consequence is 
 fairly and logically deduced from their boasted 
 creed. And startling as it may seem to be, they 
 may well be reconciled to it, as it establishes, what 
 else it might be difficult to confirm, their claim to 
 unusual liberality. A more liberal foundation for 
 the union of all Christians, " as far as faith goes," 
 without a total abandonment of evangelic truth, it 
 would be difficult for human ingenuity to devise.
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS D SCIPLINK 309 
 
 But this boasted foundation is as inconsistent with 
 itself, as it is with the Scriptures. It contains the 
 elements of its own destruction. He who believes 
 " one fact," is to submit to " one institution ex- 
 pressive of it." Now, is a man to be baptized with- 
 out believing that Christ has commanded believers 
 to be baptized ? Why then is he to be baptized, 
 and upon whose authority ? But if he is to be- 
 lieve this, then something more is requisite, " as 
 far as faith goes" even according to the Bethany 
 platform, in order to the enjoyment of Christian 
 Union. 
 
 These remarks on the foundation of Christian 
 Union, might have been introduced with equal pro- 
 priety under the head of Campbellism in its organi- 
 zation ; but as I desired to discuss the doctrine in 
 connexion with its practical results, I reserved the 
 discussion for this place. 
 
 I now propose to examine the actual working of 
 this scheme of Christian Union. Experience is a 
 great teacher. Time tries all things. Many a fine 
 theory has vanished at the touch of experiment. 
 When Mr. Campbell's chief business was fault-find- 
 ing, he had an easy, if not a grateful task. All 
 churches, sects and parties, and all the instructions 
 and labors of uninspired men, had their imperfec- 
 tions ; and no great ability or research was required 
 to discover, publish, and caricature them. We 
 have now an opportunity of learning from observa-
 
 310 CAHPBELLiSM IN ITS DISCIPLINE. 
 
 tion, in a measure, the fruits of the Reformation. 
 Mr. Campbell cannot reasonably object that churches 
 built upon the Apostolic foundation, of " belief in 
 one fact," and " submission to one institution/' 
 modeled after the "ancient order of things," and 
 commended to the world by such confident and lofty 
 pretensions of superior light, purity, and freedom, 
 should be scrutinized with a careful and candid eye. 
 What are the results of the Discipline adopted by 
 the Reformers ? 
 
 It is discouraging to learn, as we do at the outset, 
 " that the theory of the Reformation is far in ad- 
 vance of the practice." Mill. Har., vol. 4, p. 4. We 
 have examined the theory, somewhat carefully, and 
 have found it consistent neither with itself, nor 
 the Scriptures ; and if " the theory is far in advance 
 of the practice," the practice must be very unsatis- 
 factory. It is due, however, to Mr. Campbell to 
 observe, that his depreciation of the practice of the 
 Reformation in comparison with its theory, was 
 based on his views of the theory, and not on mine. 
 
 It has been shown that according to the funda- 
 mental principle of church organization maintained 
 by the Reformers, no errorist, of correct morals, can 
 be excluded from the church, provided he professes 
 to believe that Jesus, the Nazarene, is the Messiah, 
 and is immersed as an expression of this belief. I 
 shall now proceed to show that the grossest errorists 
 have been, knowingly and deliberately, receiyed and
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS DISCIPLINE. 311 
 
 retained in the churches ofrthe so-called Refor- 
 mation. 
 
 Of the withering influence of Universalism I need 
 say nothing. In the year 1828, the Rev. Aylett 
 Rains, a Universalist preacher, was baptized, in the 
 Western Reserve, Ohio, for the remission of sins. 
 In the same year he appeared at the Mahoning 
 Association, with which Mr. Campbell was connected. 
 Some of the brethren became alarmed at the intro- 
 duction of a preacher among them holding such per- 
 nicious error. He publicly avowed that his pecu- 
 liar views were unchanged ; in other words, that he 
 was still a Universalist. At the suggestion of Mr. 
 Campbell, it was agreed, " that if these peculiar 
 opinions were held as PRIVATE opinions, an*d not 
 taught by this brother, he might be, and constitu- 
 tionally ought to be retained." Mr. Rains declared 
 that his views were, " in his judgment, matters of 
 opinion, and not matters of faith," and " that he 
 would not teach them," and was by " a majority of 
 the brethren" sanctioned as a proclaimer of the 
 Reformation. Mill. Har., vol. 1, 148. 
 
 Unitarianism, in all its phases, from high Arian- 
 ism to low Socinianism, is, in the judgment of the 
 Christian world, a far more serious error than Uni- 
 versalism. It divests the Gospel of its distinctive 
 glory, and converts it into a lifeless, cold, and ineffi- 
 cient code of ethics. The atonement of Christ, 
 deriving its efficacy from the essential and infinite
 
 312 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS DISCIPLINE. 
 
 dignity of his person^ is the only" foundation of a 
 siuner's hope and consolation. The Reformers 
 received Unitarians into their fellowship, and sanc- 
 tioned their ministrations with a full knowledge of 
 their errors. In the early part of the present cen- 
 tury, a party of New Lights, headed by the Rev. 
 Barton W. Stone, in the State of Kentucky, 
 became Arians. In a letter to the Christian Bap- 
 tist, published in the year 1827, he used this 
 language : "If these observations be true, will it 
 .not follow undeniably, that the Word (di' Jtou) by 
 whom all things were made, was not the only true 
 God, but a person that existed with the only true 
 God before creation began, not from eternity, else 
 he must be the only true God ; but long before the 
 reign of Augustus Csesar." p. 37. Mr. Stone's 
 views of the atonement were in harmony with his 
 conceptions of the person of Christ. He entirely 
 rejected the vicarious and expiatory nature of Christ's 
 sufferings ; and maintained that they contributed 
 to the salvation of men only as illustrating the 
 Divine goodness, they constituted a strong motive 
 to repentance and piety. The efficacy of Christ's 
 death was resolved by him entirely into the power 
 of moral suasion. Mill. Har., New Series, vol. 5, 
 pp. 63, 64. The peculiar views of Mr. Stone were 
 cordially embraced by the sect of which he was the 
 leader. This party, without any change in their 
 religious tenets, coalesced with the Reformers in
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS DISCIPLINE. 313 
 
 the West. Mr. Campbell and Mr. Stone, the prin- 
 cipal leaders of the Reformation, had a discussion 
 on the points on which they so widely differed, and 
 in his concluding article the former used the follow- 
 ing language " The discussion, on my part, was 
 undertaken with a reference to two points : The 
 first, the transcendent importance of the question 
 itself For what did Christ die ? The second, a 
 very general misconception, and consequent misre- 
 presentation of our -views of it. I did, I confess, 
 expect that brother Stone would have more fully 
 and satisfactorily relieved himself and the cause of 
 the Reformation from the imputation of some of 
 our opponents on the subject of Unitarianism in its 
 sectarian acceptation." p. 538. 
 
 Of the extent to which the Arian notions of Mr. 
 Stone did formerly, or do now, prevail among the 
 Reformers, I have no means of ascertaining. In 
 the year 1844, I made a tour in the West, of which 
 notes were published on my return in the Religious 
 Herald. From the notes I extract substantially the 
 following paragraph, the statements in which, so 
 far as I have seen, have never been called in ques- 
 tion, and which, I presume, cannot be successfully 
 contradicted. 
 
 11 In the town of Columbia, Missouri, and its 
 vicinity, the Disciples, better known as Campbcll- 
 ites, are somewhat numerous. They were formerly 
 professedh Arians, but some years since they u oiled
 
 314 CAMFBELLISM IF ITS DISCIPLINE 
 
 with, the followers of Mr. Alexander Campbell. I 
 took much pains to learn whether their views of t JG 
 divinity of Christ had undergone a satisfactory 
 change. All, with whom I conversed on the sub- 
 ject, concurred in testifying that they reject the 
 doctrine of Christ's divinity, and of his gubstitu- 
 tional and piacular sufferings. One of the Profes- 
 sors of the University of Mo., (situated at this 
 place,) informed me that in a conversation which 
 he held with Mr. A., a distinguished preacher of the 
 denomination in this State, he most distinctly re- 
 pudiated these vital principles of the evangelic 
 system. One thing is certain the Disciples are 
 not ignorant of the fact that they are generally be- 
 lieved to be Arians ; and under this imputation 
 they patiently lie. Unless there is a strange and 
 prevalent misconception in the community, these 
 Disciples stand in most urgent need of a thorough 
 doctrinal reformation." 
 
 Mr. Campbell inquires, "Have they (creeds) not 
 been the fruitful cause or occasion," not of some, or 
 of most, but " of all the discords, schisms, and 
 parties now existing in Christendom ?" Chn. 
 Sys., p. 108. I presume, he would now cheerfully 
 retract this assertion for, though in the interroga- 
 tory form, it was intended to be an emphatic asser- 
 tion. Certainly, some pretty well defined and 
 serious errors have sprung up in the bosom of the 
 Reformation, and have given rise to no little liscord
 
 CAMPBELL1SM IN ITS DISCIPLINE. 315 
 
 and party spirit. John Thomas, M. D., an English- 
 man, early, and with marked zeal, enlisted under 
 the banner of the Keformation. He was the first 
 Disciple who manifested any disposition to do his 
 own thinking. All doctrines "bearing the Bethany 
 stamp were current among the Eeformers, and were 
 received, I will not say, without examination, but 
 certainly with great readiness and cordiality. Dr. 
 Thomas aspired to be, not a subordinate, but a co- 
 ordinate Keformer. He admired, and extolled Mr. 
 Campbell, approved of the Keformation, so far as 
 it had been carried, but he was desirous to see it 
 advanced to perfection, and he engaged with com- 
 mendable ardor, in the effort to increase the light of 
 the Reformation. New light he soon thought he 
 discovered. He proposed to introduce new prin- 
 ciples and practices into the Eeformation. He 
 maintained, with perfect consistency, that persons 
 who had been baptized without proper views of the 
 nature and design of baptism ignorant of the new, 
 or, as he deemed it, the old theory of baptismal re- 
 mission should be re-immersed, according to the 
 true intent and spirit of the ordinance. Mr. 
 Campbell agreed theoretically with the new Ec- 
 former on thia point ; for in his debate with Eice, 
 he said, " Now if our baptism is for any other end 
 or purpose than was that to which Paul submitted, 
 it is another baptism, as much as bathing for health 
 U different from a Jewish ablution for legal un-
 
 816 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS DISC1PIINE. 
 
 cleanness or impurity. The action has a ueaning 
 and a design ; and it n.ust be received in that mtan- 
 ' ing } and for that design, else it is another baptism.'' 
 p. 439. Mr. Campbell and many of his disciples 
 *'ere baptized without any knowledge of the true 
 import and design of the ordinance ; but whether 
 they did not perceive the logical consequence of 
 their doctrine, or were unwilling to follow the 
 guidance of the rising Beformer, is not apparent 
 but certainly they refused to receive baptism ac- 
 cording to the meaning and design which they as- 
 cribed to it. Many, however, embraced Dr. T.'s 
 doctrine, and with new light and fresh joy, were 
 re-immersed into the name of the Father, Son, and 
 Holy Spirit. I have not access to any authorized 
 standard, if such there is, of Dr. Thomas' religious 
 faith and opinions. Kev. N. L. Rice, in his Debate 
 with Mr. Campbell, spoke of him and his doctrines, 
 as follows, p. 793. " Dr. Thomas, of Virginia, a 
 prominent preacher in the gentleman's church, con- 
 tended that men have no souls that they are con- 
 stituted of body, blood, and breath that the word 
 soul, in the Scripture, means breath and that in- 
 fants, idiots, pagans, and Peedobaptists, are annihi- 
 lated. My friend opposed his doctrines ; tut the 
 Doctor insisted that he had received his training 
 in Ireland and Scotland, Vhere the people believe 
 in ghosts and witches, and that, although a great 
 reformer, he was n ~* quite reformed. Mr, Camp-
 
 CAMPBELLTSM IN ITS DISCIPLINE. 317 
 
 bell at length refused to -hold Christian fellowship 
 with him, and called on the church of which he was 
 a member, to excommunicate him." 
 
 The fulminations of Bethany were not heeded by 
 the Doctor's church. They had been initiated into 
 the mysteries of a higher and more glorious Refor- 
 mation ; and they would not consent to sacrifice 
 their new and gifted guide to appease the wrath of 
 their early, and once honored, bufc now forsaken 
 teacher. Owing to the intractable spirit of the 
 new Reformers, Mr. Campbell found it necessary to 
 change the voice of denunciation into that of argu- 
 ment, and finally of conciliation and compromise. 
 The leaders met in Amelia County, Virginia, and 
 after discussing the points at issue between them 
 three days, without any change in the views of 
 either, they, through the influence of common 
 friends, became reconciled, and consented to co- 
 operate in promoting the Reformation. The terms 
 of their reconciliation, taken from Dr. Thomas' 
 paper, are recorded in the Mill. Har., New Series, 
 vol. 3, pp. 74, 75. 
 
 " We, the undersigned brethren, in free consul- 
 tation, met at the house of brother John Tinsley 
 Jeter, at Paineville ; and after frankly -comparing 
 our views, unanimously agreed upon the resolution 
 subjoined, and submitted the same for the consider- 
 arion of brethren Campbell and Thomas ; and bro- 
 ther Thomas agreeing to abide the same, all diflicul-
 
 318 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS DISCIPI iNE. 
 
 ties were adjusted, and perfect harmony and co- 
 operation mutually agreed upon between them. 
 
 " Resolved, That whereas certain things "believed 
 and propagated by Dr. Thomas, in relation to the 
 mortality of man, the resurrection of the dead, and 
 the final destiny of the wicked, having given offence 
 to many brethren, and being likely to produce a 
 division amongst us ; and believing the said views 
 to be of no practical benefit, we recommend to 
 brother Thomas to discontinue the discussion of the 
 same, unless in his defense when misrepresented. 
 
 " Signed by Wm. A. Stone, Thomas E. Jeter, 
 et als. The resolution being agreed upon by the 
 brethren, brother Campbell and myself were re- 
 quested to appear before them. The result of their 
 deliberations was reported to us ; we acquiesced in 
 the recommendation after a few words of mutual ex- 
 planation ; and having recognized our Christian 
 fraternity, the brethren gave in their names to 
 brother Stone to be appended in the order affixed. 
 
 Paineville, Amelia, Va., Nov. 15th, 1838." 
 
 Dr. Thomas, whose monstrous errors had induced 
 Mr. Campbell, in violation of his own principles of 
 church organization, to denounce him as unworthy 
 of Christian fellowship, was, as it appears from the 
 above articles of agreement, not only retained in 
 " Christian fraternity," but sanctioned as a co-ope- 
 rator in the Reformation ; on condition that he 
 should abstain fiom the discussion of his peculiar
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN <TS DISCIPLINE. 319 
 
 articles of belief, "unless in his defense when mis- 
 represented." 
 
 It certainly can surprise no man acquainted with 
 the condition and tendencies of the world, to learn 
 that a community, rejecting and ridiculing " expe- 
 rience before baptism," and whose creed consisted 
 in the simple and single article, " I believe that 
 Jesus of Nazareth is the Christ," should gather into 
 its capacious bosom a heterogeneous multitude of 
 persons of almost every variety of creed. The unity 
 which distinguished the early Reformers after a few 
 years began to be broken. The language of Ashdod 
 began to be mingled with the pure speech of Canaan. 
 One principle of the Reformation is that every 
 church member is an authorized preacher of the 
 Gospel. " He may" says Mr. Campbell, " of right 
 preach, baptize, and dispense the supper, as well as 
 pray for all men, wlien circumstances demand it." 
 Chn. Sys., p. 82. Under the stimulating influence 
 of the Reformation ministers of the word were mul- 
 tiplied rather too rapidly, in the judgment of the 
 Reformer. Some had the "vanity, self-esteem, or 
 boldness to assume an office, and a character, which 
 neither the church on earth nor in heaven" awarded 
 to them. In his efforts to correct this growing evil, 
 Mr. Campbell made the following frank, and, no 
 doubt, truthful acknowledgment. Mill. Har., vol. 
 6, No. 2, i 64. 
 
 " The cause of Reformation has suffered more
 
 320 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS DISCIPLINE. 
 
 frcm this portion of its pretended friends than from 
 all its enemies put together. This state of things 
 is indeed generally attendant on the incipiency of 
 all public and social institutions" (A very proper 
 apology for the bitter fruits of the Ancient Gospel). 
 11 But we have had a very large portion of this un- 
 happy and mischievous influence to contend loith. 
 Every sort of doctrine has been proclaimed by almost 
 all sorts of preachers, under the broad banners and 
 ivitli the supposed sanction of the begun Reformation. 
 We are glad to follow, rather than to lead public 
 opinion amongst ourselves on this subject. Expe- 
 rience teaches with effect, what theory could not 
 accomplish." 
 
 " Every sort of doctrine has been proclaimed, by 
 almost all sorts of preachers" these are precisely 
 the effects which I should, a priori^ expect to flow 
 from the fundamental principle of church organiza- 
 tion adopted by the Reformers ; and to the existence 
 of which Mr. Campbell has borne an incidental and 
 reluctant, but most explicit testimony. Persons, 
 holding gross and mischievous errors, have crept 
 into the purest and best governed churches of Christ ; 
 but they enter them in violation of the principles of 
 their organization, and remain in them, so long as 
 they do .remain, in spite of their system of discipline. 
 Into the Keformed churches they enter constitu- 
 tionally, and from them they cannot be excluded 
 without an abandonment of their basis of union..
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS DISCIPLINE. 321 
 
 As the point under discussion is of great import- 
 ance, it is proper that we should attend to what 
 Mr. Campbell has to say on it. I quote from his 
 Christianity Restored, pp. 122, 123. 
 
 " I will now show how they cannot make a sect of 
 us. We will acknowledge all as Christians who 
 acknowledge the Gospel facts, and obey Jesus Christ. 
 But, says one, will you receive a Unitarian ? No ; 
 nor a Trinitarian. We will have neither Unitarians 
 nor Trinitarians. How can this be ! Systems 
 make Unitarians and Trinitarians. Eenounce the 
 system, and you renounce its creatures. 
 
 " But the creatures of other systems now exist, 
 and some of them will come in your way. How will 
 you dispose of them ? I answer, We will unmake 
 them. Again I am asked, How will you unmake 
 them ? I answer, By laying no emphasis upon their 
 opinions. 
 
 " What is a Unitarian ? One who contends that 
 Jesus Christ is not the Son of God. Such a one 
 has denied the faith, and therefore we reject him. 
 But, says a Trinitarian, many Unitarians acknow- 
 ledge that Jesus Christ is the Son of God in a sense 
 of their own. Admit it. Then I ask, How do you 
 know they have a sense of their own ? Intuitively, 
 or by their words ? Not intuitively, but by their 
 words. And what are these words ? Are they 
 Bible words? If they are, we cannot object to 
 them if they are not, ve will i ot hear them ; or,
 
 322 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS DISCIPLINE. 
 
 what is the same thing, we will not discuss them at 
 all. If he will ascribe to Jesus all Bible attributes, 
 name?, works, and worship, we will not fight with 
 him about scholastic words : but if he will not 
 ascribe to him every thing that the first Christians 
 ascribed, and worship and adore him as the first 
 Christians did, we will reject him, not because of 
 his private opinions, but because he refuses to honor 
 Jesus as the first converts did, and withholds from 
 him the titles and honors which God and his apostles 
 have bestowed upon him. 
 
 " In like manner we will deal with a Trinitarian. 
 If he will ascribe to the Father, Son, and Holy 
 Spirit, all that the first believers ascribed, and no- 
 thing more, we will receive him but we will not 
 allow him to apply scholastic and barbarous epi- 
 thets to the Father, the Son, or the Holy Spirit. 
 If he will dogmatize and become a factionist, we re- 
 ject him not because of his opinions, but because 
 of his attempting to make a faction, or to lord it 
 over God's heritage. 
 
 "And will you receive a Universalist too? No; 
 not as a Universalist. If a man, professing Uni- 
 versalist opinions, should apply for admission, we 
 will receive him, if he will consent to use and apply 
 nil the Bible phrases in their plain reference to the 
 future state of men and angels. We will not 
 hearken to tnose questions which gender strife, nor 
 discuss thorn at all If a person say such is his
 
 UAMPBELLISM IX ITS DISCIPLINE. 323 
 
 private opinion, let him have it as his private opin- 
 ion ; but lay no stress upon it : and if it be a wrong 
 private opinion, it will die a natural death much 
 sooner than if you attempt to kill it." 
 
 As this quotation contains the gist of the Camp- 
 bellite discipline, I must be permitted to subject it 
 to a careful examination. 
 
 Mr. Campbell teaches, in the above extract, that 
 Unitarians and Universalists are to be received 
 into the church, provided they will consent to hold 
 their peculiar views as " private opinions." How- 
 ever erroneous and unscriptural may be their opin- 
 ions, they have the full right to hold them in the 
 church, if they will forbear to obtrude them on 
 others. " We do not ask them," he says, " to give 
 up their opinions ; we ask them only not to impose 
 them on others." Chn'ty Restored, p. 121 
 
 It may seem strange to some that the Bethany 
 Reformer, who is so zealous an advocate for the use 
 of a "pure speech," and furnishes in the context of 
 the extract under discussion, a long catalogue of 
 words and phrases, condemned simply on the ground 
 that they are not found in the Scriptures, should 
 have made such frequent and important use of the 
 term opinions a term never employed by the 
 writers of the New Testament. There is no valid 
 objection to the use of this, or any other dignified 
 term, in religious discussions, provided it is clearly 
 denned, or well understood. What does he mean
 
 324 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS DISCIPLINE. 
 
 by this word ? He has not made any attempt tc 
 explain it to inform us where faith ends and opin- 
 ion begins. 
 
 Does he use the term opinion to denote specula- 
 tions on subjects confessedly not included within the 
 scope of revelation ? This can hardly be the sense 
 in which he uses it ; for there is no person in 
 Christendom who maintains that an agreement in 
 such opinions is essential to church fellowship. 
 
 Does he by the term opinion mean the views 
 which men entertain concerning the import of the 
 Scriptures ? I understand him to maintain that 
 the persuasion of the Universalist, that the Bible 
 teaches the final salvation of all men, and of the 
 Unitarian, that Christ is not a divine being, but 
 merely an exalted man, are opinions, which they are 
 at liberty to hold privately. 
 
 This unscriptural and artificial distinction can be 
 of no avail to the cause of the Keformer. Whatever 
 he may call the peculiar views of the Unitarians 
 and Universalists, they are clearly and avowedly 
 matters of faith. The Unitarian believes that the 
 Scriptures do most unequivocally teach, that Jesus, 
 the Christ, the Son of God, is not the true God, but 
 a creature. If this persuasion is with the Unitarian, 
 not an article of faith, but a mere opinion ; then it 
 follows, that the persuasion of Mr. Campbell, that 
 Christ is a divine being, is not a matter of faith, but 
 a mere opinion. The Universalist believes that
 
 * 
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS DISCIPLINE. 325 
 
 God has clearly revealed the final salvation of all 
 men he receives the doctrine on what he deems 
 divine testimony and if this persuasion is not faith, 
 it may be reasonably questioned whether there is 
 any faith on earth. Now, allowing that unity of 
 opinion is not necessary in order to church fellow- 
 ship, the admission cannot help Mr. Campbell out 
 of his difficulty. For the differences between Trini- 
 tarians and Unitarians are not mere differences of 
 opinion- but are differences in faith on funda- 
 mental principles of faith, if there be any such. 
 
 But call, if you please, the peculiar views of Uni- 
 tarians, Universalist^, &c., opinions, and not faith. 
 I utterly object to Mr. Campbell's sweeping exclu- 
 sion of all opinions from the basis of Christian 
 Union. There are some opinions which entirely 
 contravene the essential doctrine of the Bible. For 
 example it is a doctrine of the Bible, that 
 Jesus of Nazareth is the Son of God. The Uni- 
 tarian admits this doctrine, but entertains the opin- 
 ion that the phrase " Son of God," imports, not his 
 divinity, or essential Godhead, but his great eleva- 
 tion among creatures. Now, here the opinion of 
 the Unitarian, and the doctrine of the Bible are at 
 issue. Let us now see the effect of the great solvent 
 by which Mr. Campbell proposes to melt into one 
 all the discordant elements of Christendom. The 
 Unitarian and Mr. Campbell use precisely the same 
 words " a pure speech," " Bible terms," but they
 
 326 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS DISCIPLINE. 
 
 attach widely different meanings to them and know 
 that they do ; and yet, because they use the same 
 words, they profess to have unity of faith. They 
 speak the same terms, with meanings as wide apart 
 as the poles, and then boast of their harmony. 
 What is this but sheer Jesuitism ? 
 
 But Mr. Campbell imposes a wholesome restric- 
 tion on his Unitarian or Universalist brother. " If 
 any person say such is his private opinion, let him 
 have it as his private opinion." Whence did Mr. 
 Campbell derive this rule ? Why did he not furnish 
 the chapter and verse, where it is recorded ? It is 
 an important law : I should be glad to know its 
 author. As Mr. Campbell does not pretend to 
 claim for it divine authority, I must enquire into 
 its propriety. If these private opinions are innox- 
 ious do not unfit their holders for church fellow- 
 ship why may they not be propagated ? What 
 evil can arise from the diffusion of such harmless 
 opinions? " If he (the Trinitarian) will dogmatize 
 and become a factionist, we reject him," says Mr. 
 Campbell. But suppose the Unitarian does not 
 dogmatize, or become factious, but seeks, " not as 
 lording it over God's heritage," but by kind and 
 persuasive arguments to convince men that Christ 
 is not God, and that his death was not vicarious, 
 will he be tolerated ? It would seem not, from the 
 quotation under consideration. But this conclusion 
 draws after it another consequence. Mr. Campbell,
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS DISCIPLINE. 327 
 
 jf course, claims no preeminence over his Unitarian 
 brother. Then, as the Unitarian must not proclaim 
 his peculiar opinions of the person and work of 
 Christ, so neither must Mr. Campbell. But what 
 then is the" moral value of the stereotyped propo- 
 sition, Jesus, the Nazarene, is the Hf-:ssiah ? It 
 means everything, and it means nothing ; and what 
 it does mean no man may say ! 
 
 But Mr. Campbell has prepared a way of escape 
 from this logical sequence. He has been careful 
 not to doom himself and his brethren, Unitarians 
 and Universalists, to absolute silence as to Scripture 
 doctrine'. They may use Scripture terms in a Scrip- 
 tural sense. " If he (the Unitarian) will ascribe to 
 Jesus all Bible attributes, names, works, and wor- 
 ship, we will not fight with him about scholastic 
 words." " If a man professing Universalist opin- 
 ions, should apply for admission, we will receive 
 him, if he will consent to use and apply all the Bible 
 phrases in their plain reference to the future state 
 of men and angels." The law of Christian fellow- 
 ship, prescribed by the Reformation, is that all shall 
 use Bible terms, in the Bible sense, in speaking of 
 Bible things. This is quite specious. I do not 
 know who made this law, but I know who has 
 broken it. Mr. Campbell has been a most flagrant 
 transgressor of it. In his voluminous works, he has 
 discussed almost every fact, doctrine, and duty of 
 the Christian ie iT elation, in a copious variety of un-
 
 328 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS DISCIPLINE. 
 
 scriptural, and not unfrequently, most unwarrant- 
 able terms. But who is to decide what is the 
 " plain reference" of " all the Bible phrases," and 
 when a man ascribes to Jesus " every thing that 
 the first Christians ascribed ?" Is the professor 
 himself ? Then there is no restriction on church 
 fellowship, except what each person may choose to 
 impose on himself. Is Mr. Campbell, of Bethany ? 
 Then he is a pope, and ought to be infallible. Is 
 the church to decide ? Then an agreement, not 
 merely in the belief of facts, or, properly of " one 
 fact," but in opinions as to the meaning of the words 
 and phrases in which the important facts and doc- 
 trines of revelation are expressed, is by implication 
 clearly admitted as necessary to church union ; and 
 consequently there must be in every such decision, 
 an expression, clearly indicated, of this agreement. 
 I am not yet done with this remarkable system 
 of church discipline. The Trinitarian fares no bet- 
 ter than the Unitarian or Universalist in the "cur- 
 rent Keformation." " If he will ascribe," says Mr. 
 Campbell, " to the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, 
 all that the first believers ascribed, and nothing 
 more, we will receive him but we will not allow 
 him to apply scholastic, and barbarous epithets to 
 the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit" I have 
 searched the lively oracles in vain for this restric- 
 tive law. It is not found in the creeds of the sects, 
 the decrees of councils, nor the bulls of popes. It
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS DISCIPLINE. 329 
 
 bears unmistakable marks of its Bethany origin. 
 It hath " the image and superscription" of Mr. 
 Alexander Campbell. But let us scrutinize it. 
 " Scholastic" means pertaining to a scholar, or 
 scholar like. A " scholastic epithet" is a term by 
 which a scholar would express the quality of a per- 
 son or thing. " Barbarous" is synonymous with 
 unlettered, uncultivated. A "barbarous epithet" 
 is such a word as an illiterate man would employ to 
 denote the quality of a person or thing. The pre- 
 scriptive rule is exceedingly comprehensive and rig- 
 orous. It permits neither learned nor unlearned 
 terms to be applied to the Father, the Son, or the 
 Holy Spirit. And the Reformer speaks, if not with 
 pontifical, certainly with no hesitating authority 
 " We will not allow him to apply scholastic and bar- 
 barous epithets," &c. Having considered the im- 
 port and authority of the law, let us inquire into its 
 reasonableness. A Unitarian who believes that 
 Christ was a mere man, or an imperfect man, and 
 that he died only as a witness of the truth, if he will 
 consent to call his belief an opinion, and keep it 
 private, or use only Scriptural terms, which he 
 knows are understood by those who hear him in a 
 sense entirely opposite to that in which he employs 
 them, must be received into Christian fellowship. 
 He i.s worthy of all confidence, and fraternal love, 
 though, according to Mr. Campbell's judgment, he 
 errs on a fundamental point of the Christian system.
 
 330 ' CAMPBELLISM IN ITS DISCIPLINE. 
 
 But if a Trinitarian, with sound views of the Gospel, 
 and a heart glowing with its spirit, in his learning, 
 applies an erudite, or, in his simplicity, applies ai. 
 unrefined epithet " to the Father, the Son, or the 
 Holy Spirit," to illustrate his perfections, or exal* 
 his glory, he must be rejected. And what is this 
 but to exalt words above truth, and to sacrifice 
 " unity in the faith, and in the knowledge of the 
 Son of God," on the altar of a barren, heartless, sense- 
 less agreement in words and phrases ? And what, 
 permit me farther to inquire, must be the moral 
 influence of that church which virtually abolishes 
 the distinction between truth and error ? Nay, worse 
 still, which gives to covert Unitarianism a marked 
 preference over Trinitarianism, expressed, in epi 
 thets either " barbarous," or " scholastic ?" And 
 who is to execute this new and inflexible law? 
 Every Reformed church. We will not allow the 
 use of scholastic or barbarous epithets. No Trinita- 
 rian, who understands his duties or his rights, could 
 consent to belong to a church claiming a power so 
 unauthorized by revelation, and so abhorrent to 
 reason. 
 
 I have not yet descended to the bottom of this pit. 
 Every man who knows the truth is bound to pub- 
 lish it to others. This is a truth for the early and 
 vigorous advocacy of which Mr. Campbell deserves 
 praise. I honor the man who honestly, boldly and 
 earnestly propagates the views, call them faith or
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS DISCIPLINE. 331 
 
 opinions, which he deems true and important. I 
 prefer a candid, out-spoken Unitarian, or Universal- 
 ist, to a concealed one. Now, what does the Carnp- 
 bellite discipline do, but offer a reward for hypoc- 
 risy ? It says to the candidate for church member- 
 ship, if you honestly hold, and frankly proclaim, 
 what we deem error, we cannot receive you ; but if 
 you will conceal your errors, we will embrace you 
 with fraternal confidence and love. We have no 
 objection to your errors they are opinions 
 opinions are private property" we do not ask" 
 you "to give up" your " opinions" but, whatever 
 may be your sense of duty, you must hold your 
 opinions " as private property," or if you express 
 them at all, it must be in " Bible phrase^, in plain 
 reference" to these matters of opinion. Now, let 
 any discerning man say, whether the hypocritical 
 and unscrupulous errorist is not treated with a con- 
 sideration and affection which are withheld from the 
 honest and conscientious errorist, or even the or- 
 thodox Christian who expresses truth concerning 
 the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, in inter- 
 dicted epithets. 
 
 I must notice another point in this remarkable 
 extract. " If a person," observes the Reformer, 
 " say such (Universalism) is his private opinion, let 
 him have it as his private opinion ; but lay no stress 
 upon it : and if it be a wrong private opinion, -it 
 will (I!) a natural death much sooner than if you
 
 332 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS DISCIPLINE. 
 
 
 
 attempt to kill it " Whether Mr. Campbell intends 
 this as a general or particular rule, I do not know. 
 Whether this specified error, or all error, will die 
 soonest by being let alone, Mr. Campbell does not 
 iaform us. Paul did not think the errors of the 
 Judaizing teachers would perish sooner by neglect. 
 Christ did not judge that the doctrine of the Nico- 
 laitanes would die the sooner if there was no attempt. 
 to oppose it. The whole of Divine revelation is a, 
 vigorous combat with every system and species of 
 error. What a pity it is that Mr. Campbell did not 
 make an earlier discovery that error of opinion will 
 die a natural death sooner than it can be killed. 
 What a vast saving of ink, and paper, and toil, and 
 anxiety, amd exasperation, and alienation, it might 
 have proved. But Mr. Campbell does not quite. lot 
 error alone. He closes its mouth, or limits it to the 
 use of Bible phrases, and gives it a home and coun- 
 tenance, and respectability in the church that " it 
 may die a natural death." 
 
 At this point, so far as the present discussion is 
 concerned, the notable extract might be dropped. 
 But for the purpose of showing the loose and inac- 
 curate style in which Mr. Campbell treats the most 
 important subjects, another sentence must be no- 
 ticed. " What is a Unitarian ?" To this question, 
 he replies, "One who contends that Jesus Christ is 
 NOT the Son of God." Now, it may be safely 
 affirmed, that m Unitarian has ever denied that
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS DISCIPLINE. 333 
 
 Jesus Christ is the Son of God. The Unitarians 
 not only believe that Jesus is the Son of God, but 
 maintain that they receive him as the Son of God, 
 according to the scriptural and rational import of 
 the phrase. To charge them, as Mr. Campbell has 
 done, with denying that Jesus is the Son of God, is 
 to do them gross injustice springing, it is pre- 
 sumed, so far as he is concerned, not from malice 
 aforethought but a culpable carelessness in the use 
 of language. 
 
 True, in the same extract, he represents the 
 Trinitarian as admitting, that " many Unitarians 
 acknowledge that Jesus Christ is the Son of God in 
 a sense of their own." But this can furnish no 
 apology for the statement he makes that a Unita- 
 rian is one who contends that Jesus Christ is not the 
 Son of God." 
 
 If verbal criticism were composed of flesh and 
 blood, it might grow fat on the food furnished for 
 its nourishment in the obscurities', inaccuracies and 
 mistakes, abounding on the pages of the Reformer. 
 
 "We have seen that Universalists may be retained 
 in the Reformed churches on the not very intelli- 
 gible condition, that they will "consent to use 
 and apply all the Bible phrases in their plain 
 reference to the future state of men and angels ;" 
 or, as it appears from the compromise with Dr. 
 Thamas, " to discontinue the discussion of the same, 
 unless it t^eir defense iclicr. misrepresented." But
 
 334 __ CAMPBELLISM IN ITS DISCIPLINE. 
 
 suppose they should deem it incompatible with their 
 duty and independence, to keep silent, or act merely 
 on the defensive, regarding their peculiar doctrines 
 or points of faith ? What then P Does the 
 Reformation make any provision for the correction 
 of the evil ? A case calling for correction has 
 recently presented itself. The " current Reforma- 
 tion" has been quite fruitful of heresies. First, 
 Dr. Thomas led off a sect of Materialists; and 
 lately Mr. J. B. Ferguson, pastor of the Reformed 
 church in Nashville, having embraced Universalist 
 views, is sustained by a majority of his church. The 
 Millennial Harbinger, of January, copies from the 
 Christian Age of December 22, as follows : p. 55. 
 
 " Mr. Clapp, of New Orleans, wrote to Mr. Grui- 
 ley, of Cincinnati, alleging that Mr. Ferguson ' was 
 with them fully ;' that is, that he was a thorough 
 Universalist, and that he would change the l Camp- 
 bellite Church in the South.' I do not aim to give 
 the exact words I give the exact meaning." 
 On this subject Mr. Campbell says : 
 " That Mr. Ferguson should seek to retain any 
 position among us, is irreconcilable with any other 
 view than that he intends to create a party in favor 
 ~f Universalism. This is most unquestionably his 
 (u-fiign, if there be any truth in the documents,' 
 copied t in part, from the Christian Age, above. 
 " Now, we award to every man what we claim for 
 ourselves liberty to preach and teach his own con-
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS DISCIPLINE. 335 
 
 victions. But we must hold it incompatible with 
 candor and honesty, guilefully to hold a place 
 amongst us, when he is no more of us than Messrs. 
 Gurley and Quinby, whom he endorses and com- 
 mends as worthy of the most ample success, in pro- 
 pagating bald and deformed Universalism ; and how 
 any church amongst us can choose him as its pastor, 
 unless they, too, are ultra-Universaljats, demands 
 an explanation, which is alike due to itself and to 
 the Christian brotherhood." 
 
 Concerning the above statements and remarks, 
 several things deserve to be noted 
 
 1. The " current Keformation" seems likely to 
 produce more than one schism for every generation, 
 the number ascribed by Mr. Campbell to every 
 " sectarian creed." 
 
 2. It is proper to recommend to the Keformers, 
 a patient endurance of the evils for the removal of 
 which their system has made no adequate provision. 
 Mr. Ferguson occupies the foundation of Christian 
 fellowship on which he was built. He believes one 
 fact has submitted to one institution and his 
 " deportment accords with the morality and virtue 
 of the great Prophet," and is, therefore, " a Chris- 
 tian, as defined, not by Dr. Johnson, nor any creed- 
 maker, but by one taught from heaven." He ha3 
 violated no covenant. Surely the Keformers will 
 not excommunicate and anathematize him ! Then 
 he in 'ht write " What a dangerous matter it has
 
 S36 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS DISCIPLINE. 
 
 become, to think differently from" Mr. Campbell 
 and his friends ! " How perilous to view" the 
 future state "differently from the ' keepers of the 
 faith' of Tennessee ! This alone exposes a person to 
 the greatest anathema in the power of Reformers. 
 They can do no more in Tennessee, as yet, than treat 
 a dissentient as they would a murderer, or a vile 
 adulterer !" It cannot be that the Disciples will 
 knowingly subject themselves to such dreadful impu- 
 tations. 
 
 3. Should Mr. Campbell succeed in persuading 
 or shaming Mr. Ferguson and his party into an 
 abandonment of their position in the ranks of the 
 Disciples, he will be far more successful than the 
 Baptists were in their early struggles with Mr. 
 Campbell and his party. It was more than sus- 
 pected that they intended " to create a party in 
 favor of" the Reformation. The Baptists were 
 willing to award to them what they claimed for 
 themselves liberty to preach and teach their 
 own convictions but they thought it incompatible 
 " with candor and honesty," for men whose aim was 
 to revolutionize the Baptist churches who pro- 
 nounced them a part of Babylon the Great and 
 whose labors were spreading discord and unhappi- 
 ness among them to hold a place in their churches. 
 They would gladly have avoided the necessity of 
 excluding the Reformers of provoking the cry of 
 persecution but they could not. The Reformers
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS DISCIPLINE. 337 
 
 did not deem it proper to retire from a position 
 which gave them a favorable opportunity for propa- 
 gating their sentiments, and strengthening their 
 party. The cup which they pressed to the lips of 
 the Baptists, is now pressed to their own lips. It 
 is bitter, but they must drink it. It may prove 
 medicinal. If they retain the errorists, they cherish 
 in their own bosom a faction whose aim is to " change 
 the Campbellite church in the South," and if they 
 exclude them, they sit in judgment on their reli- 
 gious faith, follow the spirit and example of the 
 creed-making sects, and utterly repudiate their 
 boasted foundation of church union. They are in a 
 dilemma.
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS TENDENCIES. 
 
 When Mr. Campbell commenced his public career, 
 serious apprehensions were entertained, by the most 
 judicious observers, that it would terminate in wild 
 speculations, fatal error, or, perhaps, downright in- 
 fidelity. Several causes contributed to create and 
 strengthen this apprehension. His religious views 
 underwent early, various, and rapid changes. From 
 ultra-Calvinism he quickly passed, through all the 
 doctrinal stages, to low Arrnimanism from being a 
 Paadobaptist he became a Baptist, and soon left all 
 his new brethren behind in his zeal for the ordinance 
 of baptism. Other important changes were fre- 
 quently occurring in his religious creed. No wonder 
 that considerate Christians were prepared to see 
 greater, and almost any, changes taking place in 
 his views. It was supposed by many that he had a 
 pretty strong leaning to Unitarianism. His rejec- 
 tion of the terms Trinity, and Trinitarian, some 
 incautious and obscure remarks which he penned 
 on this profound subject, and the early coalition of 
 his party with Mr. Stone, and his Arian followers,
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS TENDENCIES. 339 
 
 gave birth and vigor to the supposition. Others, 
 again, suspected that the tendency of the Reforma- 
 tion was towards the renunciation of all spiritual 
 religion, and the adoption of a heartless formalism. 
 This fear originated from the irreverent and sarcas- 
 tic manner iu which he treated religious experien- 
 ces, and, indeed, the whole subject of earnest piety. 
 These apprehensions of the evil tendencies of the 
 Reformation were not confined to its opposers, but 
 prevailed with many who viewed the labors of Mr. 
 Campbell with more or less favor and interest. But 
 Campbellism was not destined to realize, at any 
 rate, in the first age of its existence, and to the full 
 extent, these fears. 
 
 Several conservative influences conspired to check 
 the evil tendencies of the system, if they really exist- 
 ed. It was a redeeming trait of the Reformation 
 that it professed great reverence for the holy Scrip- 
 tures. In common with other Protestant Chris- 
 tians, the Reformers maintained the supreme au- 
 thority of revelation in matters of faith ; but they 
 gave marked and unusual prominence to this point 
 in their teaching. An unwillingness to tread the 
 beaten track, and a desire to furnish original, strik- 
 ing and systematic expositions of the Scriptures, 
 made them very unsafe religious guides ; yet the 
 custom of referring all questions concerning faith 
 and practice to the arbitrament of the Scriptures 
 proved to be the sheet anchor of their preservation
 
 
 340 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS TENDENCIES. 
 
 from the maelstrom of error into which they were 
 Drifting. They were mostly diligent and careful 
 readers of the Bible ; but they read it, with the 
 glosses it received at Bethany. Their unavoidable 
 association and intercourse with the Christian sects 
 around them insensibly exerted over them a conser- 
 vative influence. It was not easy, perhaps, not 
 possible for them, to rise superior to the influences 
 which by books, newspapers, sermons, and conver- 
 sations, were constantly, though, for the most part, 
 unintentionally, exerted to restrain their wander- 
 ings, correct their errors, modify their views, and 
 assimilate them to the surrounding Christian de- 
 nominations. The glory of being a discoverer of 
 truth, and a reformer, may impel a man to endure, 
 and even to glory in, reproach ; but others, who do 
 not aspire after this glory, will gradually seek, at 
 any rate, as far as the love of truth will permit, to 
 soften the asperities of an unpopular system, and 
 conform it to the prevailing taste. He has been a 
 careless observer of Carnpbellism who has not per- 
 ceived its effort to get rid of the odium theologicum 
 by conforming its teachings, more and more, to the 
 popular views. The reader may find a striking ex- 
 emplification of this remark in Mr. Campbell's de- 
 bate with Eev. N. L. Eice. It was perfectly obvioue 
 throughout the discussion, that he was desirous of 
 being accounted orthodox in his religious princi- 
 ples, and nothing so much annoyed him as the quo-
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS TENDENCIES. 341 
 
 tation of heterodox sentiments from his early writ- 
 ings. 
 
 Another cause, however, contributed more than 
 both the above, to restrain the erring tendency of 
 the Reformation, and, in a measure, to turn it into 
 the paths of sobriety and moderation. This cause 
 was Thomasism. The reader has already seen that 
 t)r. Thomas embraced the principles of the Refor- 
 mation, and proposed to follow them out to their 
 legitimate results. His views and labors rendered 
 him very unpopular, and brought upon the Refor- 
 mation great reproach. Mr. Campbell, in opposing 
 this new Reformation, was compelled to employ, iiz 
 part, the very weapons which the Baptists, and 
 other evangelical Christians, had used in their con- 
 tests with him. In combating the errors of Dr. 
 Thomas, he naturally sought sympathy and coun- 
 tenance ; and where could these be found except 
 among the evangelical sects ? But if these were to 
 be conciliated, they must be won, not by derision 
 and contempt, but by candid and kind words, a re- 
 turn to evangelical principles, and the exemplifica- 
 tion of the true Christian spirit. From the rise of 
 Thomasism may be dated the decline of the vaunt- 
 ing, pugnacious spirit of the Reformation. Internal 
 discussions and conflicts made the Reformers less 
 intent on foreign conquests ; and the bitter fruits 
 of the Reformation, so early developed and matured, 
 made them^less confident of its excellence. Thus
 
 342 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS TENDENCIES. 
 
 the tendencies of the system were checked, and its 
 advocates were brought to reflection, under circum- 
 stances favorable to a correction of their early mis- 
 takes. 
 
 The means necessary for building are very differ- 
 ent from those employed in tearing down. Mr. 
 Campbell, in the commencement of his Keforma- 
 tioiij ; was occupied in demolishing the " kingdom of 
 the clergy," and all sectarian combinations. Every 
 institution and every means, therefore, used in sup- 
 porting and spreading the prevalent Christian or- 
 ganizations, was condemned as evil. But when ho 
 found himself at the head of a sect, he felt the 
 necessity of resorting to the use of these condemn- 
 ed measures for the purpose of consolidating and 
 increasing it. On this subject it will be proper to 
 enter into details. 
 
 The reader has seen the utter contempt in which 
 Mr. Campbell held the " hireling clergy." " Every 
 man, who receives money for preaching the Gospel, 
 or for sermons, by the day, month, or year, is a hire- 
 ling in the language of truth and soberness." Such 
 was the doctrine of the early, but it is not the doc- 
 trine of the current Reformation. Now, the Ke- 
 formed churches have settled pastors, not reared up 
 among them, but called from abroad to officiate in 
 them, supported by regular salaries, and differing, 
 in no material respect, from the ministers of othei 
 Christian denominations. They are " clergy," or
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS TENDLNCIES. 343 
 
 " hirelings," according to the Bethany definition of 
 these terms. 
 
 The extravagance, show, and pomp of city con- 
 gregations was a popular theme for declamation 
 with the Reformer of Brooke. Many simple mind- 
 ed and pious Christians wished him success in his 
 efforts to correct the evil. Unfortunately, the Re- 
 formed churches are, in this respect, following in the 
 wake of the sects. The writer was, not long since, 
 in a large, beautiful and prosperous city, in the 
 West, where the " Disciples' Meeting House" 
 rose, in grand proportions, and towering turrets, 
 above all the temples of the " Babylonians." Nor 
 is this a solitary case. Every where the advocates 
 of the " ancient Gospel," are vicing with the de- 
 votees of a so-called spurious Christianity., in the 
 cost and adornment of their houses of worship. 
 
 Baptist Associations the messengers of the 
 churches met together for the purposes of fraternal 
 consultation and advice were pronounced by Mr. 
 Campbell to be unauthorized of God. There was 
 no " Thus saith the Lord" for them. Chn. Bap., p. 
 26. "I hope," said an early Reformer, who had 
 fully imbibed the spirit of his master, " your paper 
 will destroy associations, State conventions, all of 
 which are as assumed and as anti-scriptural as the 
 infallibility and pontificate of the Pope of Rome." 
 p. 144. But the Reformed churches soon felt the 
 need of mutual intercourse and concert in efforts.
 
 344 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS TENDENCIES. 
 
 And Mr. Campbell, who could find no Scripture 
 authority for Associations, thus lays down the law of 
 Christian cooperation. " Whether the churches in 
 a given district shall, by letter, messengers, or stated 
 meetings, once or twice per annum, or oftener, com- 
 municate with one another ; whether they shall 
 send one, two, or twenty persons, or all go and com- 
 municate face to face, or send a letter ; and whether 
 they shall annually print, write, or publish their 
 statistics, &c., &c., &c., are the mere circumstan- 
 tials of the Christian institution. * * * Coopera- 
 tion, as much as the intercommunion of Christians, 
 is a part of the Christian institution." Chn. Sys., 
 pp. 74-75. Associations, it seems, are unscrip- 
 tural, but Cooperation meetings are " a part of the 
 Christian institution." It amounts to this brief 
 proposition, What you do is wrong if we do the 
 same thing, and call it by anotJber name, it is f$glit. 
 Bible Societies and Sunday- Schools schemes of 
 the clergy were, in Mr. Campbell's early judgment, 
 " fraught with mischief to the temporal and eternal 
 interests of men." " I have for some time," said he, 
 " viewed both Bible Societies and Sunday- Schools, as 
 a sort of recruiting establishments, to fill up the ranks 
 of those sects which take the lead in them." Chn. 
 Bap., p. 80. No sooner, however, were the Ke- 
 formed churches organized, than they found it 
 necessary to resort to these " recruiting establish- 
 ments" for the purpose of filling up their ranks ;
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS TENDENCIES. 345 
 
 and schemes of most pernicious tendency when 
 cherished by the sects, became not only innoxious, 
 but useful in the hands of their new advocates. 
 
 Colleges- were, in the early period of the Reforma- 
 tion, placed among the marks of the beast. " The 
 Baptists, too," he said, " have got their schools, 
 their colleges, and their Gamaliels too and by the 
 magic of these marks of the beast, they claim hom- 
 age and respect, and dispute the high places with 
 those very Rabbis whose fathers were wont to grin 
 at their fathers." Mill. Har., vol. 1, p. 15. In a 
 few years after this passage was penned, we see its 
 venerable author placed at the head of Bethany 
 College, in Virginia, with the high-sounding title 
 of President. And did he, by the magic of this mark 
 of the beast, claim homage and respect, and dispute 
 the high places with the Rabbis, who descended from 
 the grinning fathers ? Certainly not. He has no 
 affinity with the beast. The seeming inconsistency 
 is explained by this simple consideration. To over- 
 throw the clergy and the sects, it was necessary to 
 undermine the influence of colleges ; the most 
 effectual way of destroying their influence was to 
 produce the impression that they were marks of 
 the ieasi appendages of the Romish hierarchy 
 but to give respect and influence to the Reforma- 
 tion, it was important to have a college, free, of 
 course, from v>riestly rule, and who so worthy to 
 preside over it as the father of the Reformation, to
 
 346 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS TENDENCIES. 
 
 whom belonged the honor of the exhumatior of the 
 ancient Gospel ? 
 
 To the education of the rising ministry, the 
 Keformation, in its early stage, was most decidedly 
 hostile. In reviewing a " Sermon on the duty of 
 the church to prepare pious youth in her bosom, for 
 the Gospel ministry," in the year 1826, the editor 
 of the Christian Baptist wrote as follows : p. 221. 
 
 The " sermon is intended to proclaim that it is 
 the duty of the church to prepare in her bosom pious 
 youth for the Gospel ministry. Now, this is really 
 a new message from the skies, for there is not one 
 word, from Genesis to John, which says that it is 
 the duty of the church to prepare pious youth for 
 the Gospel ministry. This point could not be 
 proved from the words of any previous ambassador, 
 and it is unnecessary for any ambassador to prove 
 his own communications to be true." 
 
 At what precise time it is not known, but before 
 the beginning of the year 1854, the "new message 
 from the skies" had been duly received and authen- 
 ticated. The " Christian church" needed an edu- 
 cated ministry, and authority to raise up one was 
 easily obtained. In the January No. of the Mill. 
 Harbinger, of the present year, (1854) Mr. Camp- 
 bell in a letter addressed to his wife, says : p. 40. 
 
 " Since I last wrote to you, I have been almost con- 
 stantly on the wing, pleading the cause of man's re- 
 demption in the dej- irtment of an educated ministry.
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS TENDENCIES. 347 
 
 That this is one of the Lord's ordinances, cannot 
 rationally be doubted by any student of nature and 
 of the Bible. . . . We want not higher authority to 
 teach or to constrain us to raise up to educate and 
 train men in human and Christian science, that they 
 may be able to teach others also. . . . We are 
 pleased to see that every form of Protestantism, 
 Quakerism alone excepted, is intent on the proper 
 education of its itinerant ministry/' 
 
 Now, this is refreshing. It sounds so unlike the 
 censorious, sterile, and hostile Campbellism with 
 which our Noells, and Cloptons, and Semples, had 
 to deal. It shows, conclusively, that reformatory, 
 conservative influences have been modifying and 
 improving the system. Every such indication of 
 genuine reformation should be hailed with delight 
 by the friends of evangelical piety. 
 
 The reader has already been informed, through 
 the extracts transferred from the writings of Mr. 
 Campbell to these pages, of his views on the subject 
 of Christian missions ; and will, doubtless, be sur- 
 prised to lekrn that the Reformers, with Mr. Camp- 
 bell at their head, have engaged in the missionary 
 enterprise. Soon after their separate organization, 
 they sent out, not missionaries, but evangelists 
 paid preachers to proclaim the " ancient Gos- 
 pel." For the appointment of missionaries, not 
 endowed with miraculous power, there could, at 
 that time, be found in the Scriptures, neither pro-
 
 348 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS TENDENCIES. 
 
 cept, example, or inferential authority ; but thu 
 appointment and support of evangelists to itinerate 
 and proclaim the "ancient Gospel," was plainly 
 sanctioned by the " Living Oracles." But recently 
 they have organized a Foreign Mission Board and 
 have sent forth, not a church, according to the ori- 
 ginal Bethany plan for evangelizing the world, but 
 individual missionaries, " without the power of work- 
 ing miracles," of which, said Mr. Campbell, " the 
 Bible gives us no idea." Chn. Bap., p. 15. 
 
 The above facts will suffice to show the favorable 
 changes which have taken place among the Reform- 
 ers. The Eeformation has been gradually and 
 greatly reformed. The present Millennial Harbin- 
 ger is a far more respectable and dignified monthly 
 than the old Christian Baptist. Though, it must 
 be conceded, that its pages occasionally furnish 
 proof that its veteran editor has not forgotten the 
 art of vituperation. The Disciples generally are less 
 opiniated, less eager for battle, and far more cour- 
 teous and conciliatory, in their intercourse with 
 other Christians, than they formerly were. In short, 
 they seem to have taken the road back to Babylon, 
 and have nearly completed their journey. 
 
 There is manifestly a growing desire among the 
 Reformers to be accounted " evangelical," " ortho- 
 dox," and "regular." A striking proof of this 
 remark, was furnished, not long since, in the city 
 of St. Louis, Mo. There was a Christian Associa-
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS TENDENCIES. 349 
 
 tion formed in that city. The members of the 
 Association were required to be members of some 
 "evangelical church." Applicants for admission 
 from the Christian, or Keformed church, were re- 
 jected on the ground that they furnished no evi- 
 dence of being " evangelical." To obviate the 
 difficulty, a prominent member of the church, with, 
 as it is stated, the concurrence of the pastor, and 
 other leading members, drew up and presented a 
 statement of the doctrines held by the church. 
 Here follows the creed : 
 
 " The independent existence of one absolutely 
 perfect Being, the Creator, Preserver, and Gov- 
 ernor of all things : The divine inspiration, the 
 authority, and sufficiency of the Holy Scriptures : 
 The existence of three persons in the Godhead, the 
 Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit : the incarna- 
 tion and Atonement of the Son for human salva- 
 tion : The justification of the sinner by faith, without 
 the deeds of the law, or meritorious works of right- 
 eousness, of any kind whatever, and the necessity 
 of the Spirit's influence to regenerate the souls of 
 men." Western Watchman, vol. 6, p. 126. 
 
 Concerning the above article several remarks are 
 worthy to be made. 
 
 1. It is a creed. It is a brief summary of the 
 doctrine in the belief of which the church is united. 
 Though not formall) sanctioned by the church, it
 
 350 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS TENDENCIES. 
 
 may be presumed to contain the truths deemed by 
 them fundamental. 
 
 2. It is a sound creed. Its orthodoxy, so far as 
 it goes, will be readily admitted by all evangelical 
 Christians. It contains, expressed in plain, and 
 well understood, but not exclusively scriptural 
 terms, the truths which are, by the Spirit of inspi- 
 ration, placed as the principal parts of the Gospel 
 system. It is the " far famed tree of evangelical 
 orthodoxy," whose bitter fruits Mr. Campbell so 
 eloquently described. It was drawn up and pre- 
 sented for a worthy purpose to furnish proof that 
 those who were united in the belief and mainten- 
 ance of its doctrines were entitled to Christian 
 confidence and affection. 
 
 3. Its adoption is a, virtual renunciation ofCamp- 
 bellism. This will appear from several considera- 
 tions. It applies certain " scholastic" terms, as 
 " three persons," and " incarnation" to the Father, 
 the Son, and the Holy Spirit, contrary to the ex- 
 press and imperative law of the Reformation. " We 
 will not allow him, (the Trinitarian,) to apply 
 scholastic epithets to the Father," &c. It sets at 
 naught the foundation of Christian union laid by 
 Mr. Campbell, and the Eeformed builders generally 
 that the belief of one fact, and submission to 
 one institution expressive of it, " is all that is re- 
 quired of Heaven to admission into the church." 
 And, lastly, it is a concession, in the fa-e of all Mr
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS TENDENCIES. 351 
 
 Campbell's teaching, that a profession of belief in 
 the Scriptures is insufficient" to indicate a man's 
 faith. 
 
 4. It is a matter of Just and sincere gratulation 
 that these St. Louis Christians have given a clear 
 and manly exhibition of their religions belief. They 
 owed it to themselves, to the Christian Association, 
 to the public, and, above all, to the truth, and to 
 the God of truth, not to conceal their faith under 
 loose and indefinite expressions, but to give it a 
 free and honest utterance. If in doing so they have 
 renounced the distinctive principles of the Bethany 
 Reformation, they may have the consolation to re- 
 flect that they have followed the oracles of God. 
 
 5. If the Reformers generally are prepared to 
 adopt this creed, with a fe\v additions, to which, it 
 is presumed, they have no serious objection, to com- 
 plete the system, there seems to be no good reason 
 why they should keep themselves, or be kept by 
 others, in estrangement from their brethren of the 
 evangelical sects. True, their Reformation would 
 utterly vanish, except in dim and shadowy remem- 
 brance. But what of that ? It was commenced, 
 and prosecuted, most unsuccessfully, to promote 
 Christian union let it perish, with a fairer pros- 
 pect of securing the same glorious result. 
 
 We have seen the vaunting pretensions of Camp- 
 bellism to be the " ancient Gospel." All the world- 
 lineas, contentions, schisms and apostasies among
 
 352 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS TENDENCIES. 
 
 the sects were ascribed by its advocates to creeds, 
 evangelical orthodoxy, metaphysical speculations, 
 &c. It was confidently predicted that the fruits of 
 the Ancient Gospel would be as far superior to the 
 fruits of the popular exhibitions of Christianity, as 
 the grapes of Eshcol were to the apples of Sodom. 
 The experiment has been made on -a somewhat ex- 
 tended scale. What is the result ? 
 
 The most enthusiastic admirer of the system 
 must admit that its fair promises have not been ful- 
 filled. The Keformation has proved a failure. Its 
 converts have been considerably increased ; but ac- 
 cording to Mr. Campbell's concession, they are a 
 heterogenious multitude, among whom " every sort 
 of doctrine has l)een proclaimed, by almost all sorts 
 of preachers" It will hardly be maintained that 
 the rapid increase of the Keformers is a proof of 
 the truth of their system. Campbellism has been 
 far outstripped in its conquests by Mormonism. If 
 success in winning converts is the test of truth, the 
 Bethany Reformer must confess the inspiration of 
 the prophet of Nauvoo. But what has been the 
 moral influence of Campbellism ? Hare the con- 
 verts made by the " ancient Gospel" been preem- 
 inent for modesty, humility, disinterestedness, so- 
 briety of deportment, good works, stability, and 
 usefulness ? Comparisons are invidious. They 
 would not now be made, if they were not necessary 
 to expose the fallacy of the liberal professions of the
 
 CAMPBELLISM IN ITS TENDENCIES. 353 
 
 early Keformation. It may lie confidently affirmed^ 
 that experience has falsified them. The fruits of 
 Cainpbellism are not better than were the fruits of 
 the Gospel preached by Noell and Semple, and their 
 worthy compeers. 
 
 If the Keformation has accomplished any good, 
 it is attributable, not to its peculiarities, but the 
 great principles which it has inculcated, sometimes 
 with strange inconsistency, in common with " evan- 
 gelical orthodoxy." Just in proportion as it be- 
 comes assimilated to evangelical Christianity, and 
 renounces, or ignores, its distinctive principles, we 
 may hope for an increase of its usefulness.
 
 CONCLUSION, i 
 
 The rise, progress and variations the principles, 
 discipline and tendencies of Campbellism. have been., 
 somewhat, carefully, examined. Many important 
 points have been passed without notice. fTo at- 
 tempt the correction of all the errors into which Mr. 
 Campbell has fallen, would involve the necessity of 
 a minute review of all the ponderous volumes which 
 he has written. Scarcely a page of his writings is 
 free from false logic, false philosophy, or false theol- 
 ogy, to say nothing of philological, grammatical and 
 rhetorical blemishes. But the writer has deemed 
 it proper, so far as he has discussed the evils of 
 Campbellism, to confine his remarks to its graver 
 errors. It is suitable, in conclusion, to offer a few 
 general remarks on the whole system. 
 
 The examination of the subject must tend greatly 
 to strengthen the conviction that the system of 
 truth, generally designated among Protestant Chris- 
 tians, the " evangelical)" or " ortJwdox faitJi," is 
 /Scriptural. When Mr, Campbell was attacking it, 
 with so much learning ingenuity, and diligence,
 
 CONCLUSION. 355 
 
 many feared that it would be overthrown. The fear 
 was idle. To suppose that the essential principles 
 of the Gospel had been for ages concealed, until 
 they were brought to light, " in the year of grace, 
 one thousand eight hundred and twenty-three," 
 was a grand absurdity. Under a spiritual despot- 
 ism, where wealth, learning, ambition, and interest 
 are enlisted to maintain the existing hierarchy, and 
 to repress and crush the spirit of inquiry and inno- 
 vation, ignorance and error may be perpetuated. 
 This remark explains the uniformity of error pre- 
 vailing under the unbroken reign of " the man of 
 sin." But where men enjoy freedom to read and 
 study, to teach and practice, the Word of God, with 
 ample means to investigate its import, it seems in- 
 credible that its fundamental principles should re- 
 main unknown. That the Protestant Reformation, 
 in a good degree, freed the human mind from spirit- 
 ual bondage, and stimulated it to vigorous and per- 
 severing efforts after truth, will scarcely be denied. 
 Though some Protestant governments have imposed 
 needless and injurious restrictions on religious in- 
 quiry, others have tolerated, protected and encour- 
 aged it. Many men, eminent for their piety, genius, 
 learning, candor, and industry men as good, and 
 as great as the world has seen, or is likely to see 
 availing themselves of this liberty, have devoted 
 their lives, under circumstances favorable to success, 
 to the study )f the Bible, and have been willing to
 
 356 CONCLUSION. 
 
 peril and sacrifice all worldly advantages in the 
 maintenance of its truths. That not one of them 
 should have discovered the essential principles of 
 the Gospel, until it was disinterred by Mr. Camp- 
 bell of Bethany, is preposterous. Whence arose 
 the difficulty of understanding the system ? From 
 its obscurity? This will scarcely be pretended. 
 From want of candor, learning and industry in the 
 inquirers? This, surely, will not be affirmed by 
 one who has been so deeply indebted as Mr. Camp- 
 bell, to his predecessors for his parade of learning 
 and criticisms. It is pleasing to the pious mind to 
 reflect, how the good and great, in every age and 
 land, who have made the Scriptures their study and 
 guide, have harmonized in their views of the essen- 
 tial facts, doctrines, and duties of Christianity. 
 Divided they have been concerning ordinances, 
 church polity, and various speculations, but united 
 in all that pertains to the vital principles the soul- 
 saving truths of the system. That any man should 
 imagine, after so many gifted minds had carefully, 
 laboriously, and with much prayer, studied the 
 Bible, that lie should be the first, in many genera- 
 tions, to discern its hidden import, and open it, in 
 all its beauty, fulness and glory, to the admiring 
 gaze of mankind, savors more of vanity than of a 
 sound judgment resembles more the hallucination 
 of a distempered mind, than the dictate of sound 
 Christian philosophy. The system of faith, held by
 
 CONCLUSION. 357 
 
 evangelical Christians, is impregnable. It has with- 
 stood, and it is destined to withstand, the assaults 
 of the most powerful, and the machinations of the 
 most subtle, minds. All hope of any new and im- 
 portant discoveries in the system is visionary. Chris- 
 tianity does not belong to the progressive sconces. 
 Its primary facts, principles, and duties were plainly 
 revealed, and fully confirmed in the beginning ; and 
 could be understood just as easily and clearly before 
 the first number of the Christian Baptist appeared, 
 as they can be now. It would be difficult for the 
 most devoted admirer of Mr. Campbell to point to 
 a single essential principle or duty of the Christian 
 system, which he has disinterred, or on which he has 
 shed any fresh light. If all his criticisms, argu- 
 ments, illustrations, and declamations were struck 
 from existence, there would not be one particle less 
 of religious light in the world. The Bible would 
 shine with undiminished lustre. The host of evan- 
 gelical authors, who shone in the religious firma- 
 ment, before the dawn of the Bethany Reformation, 
 have retained their places, and their brilliance. 
 After having pronounced the fruits of the " far 
 famed tree of evangelical orthodoxy" to be spurious 
 and pernicious, and having labored, with all his 
 powers, and with untiring diligence, for almost 
 thirty years, to uproot said destroy it, Mr. Campbell 
 is, at length, constrained to come forward and claim 
 the honor o being orthodox. He has become, it
 
 358 CONCLUSION. 
 
 seems, a " regular." The history of this Keforma- 
 tion furnishes a most illustrious proof of the truth, 
 stability and excellence of " evangelical orthodoxy." 
 It has undergone a fiery ordeal. Learning, inge- 
 nuity, wit and zeal, with all the weapons that proud 
 rationalism, and scoffing infidelity, could furnish, 
 have been employed for its overthrow, and employed 
 with a signal want of success. Every distinctive 
 principle of the popular evangelical system, as main- 
 tained by the Presbyterian, Methodist, Baptist and 
 other orthodox Christian denominations, has been 
 unscathed. The doctrines of hereditary human de- 
 pravity (denied by some of the Keformers) of the 
 necessity of the influence of the Spirit to renovate 
 the soul of man and of justification by faith, with- 
 out any necessary connexion with the act of baptism 
 (which have been denied, or understood to be de- 
 nied, by all the Keformers) have firmly main- 
 tained their ground. Like some tall and hoary cliff, 
 against which the mighty waves of the ocean have 
 dashed, and foamed, and raged for a time, and to 
 whose strength they have at last rendered homage, 
 by subsiding into a comparative calm at its base, 
 the evangelical faith, " the popular exhibition of 
 Christianity," has received and resisted the threat- 
 ening surges of the " current Keformation," until 
 their force is spent, and their receding fury pro- 
 claims its stability. Commencing its assaults on all 
 Christian denominations with dauntless intrepidity.
 
 CONCLUSION. 359 
 
 and giving strong assurances of their eaily overthrow, 
 and the speedy dawn of the Millennium, the Refor- 
 mation has been frittered away to nothing, or has 
 ended in a huge mass of inconsistencies and contra- 
 dictions.. 
 
 The course which the Baptists should pursue re- 
 lative to the Eeformers, is worthy of the gravest 
 and most candid consideration. The propriety of 
 their action in separating the Campbellites from 
 their communion has been already discussed. Much 
 as the necessity of the measure was deplored, by the 
 conservative portion of the Baptist churches, time 
 has clearly demonstrated its wisdom. There is now 
 far greater harmony of views, and far less alienation 
 of feeling, between the Baptists and Keformers, than 
 there was previously to their separation. But still 
 the question comes up, with augmented' interest 
 and importance, How shall we act towards the Re- 
 formers ? 
 
 The union of all Christians, so far as it can be 
 secured without sacrificing the claims of an enlight- 
 ened conscience, or giving countenance to pernicious 
 error, is greatly to be desired. It is the duty of 
 every believer in Christ, not only to pray for this 
 consummation, but by the cultivation of a candid, 
 kind and forbearing spirit, to endeavor to promote 
 it. The Reformers belong to the Baptist family, 
 though, in our view, they are an erring branch of it. 
 They agree with us on the action and subjects of
 
 360 CONCLUSION. 
 
 Christian baptism, however widely they may differ 
 from us on other points ; and it is to be regretted 
 that those who substantially concur in regard to 
 church organization and ordinances should be divided 
 in their affections and efforts. The principles which 
 we hold in common have sufficient opposition to en- 
 counter from without, to make it exceedingly im- 
 portant not to weaken their influence, and retard 
 their progress by discord and strife among ourselves. 
 Union, however, valuable as it is, may be purchased 
 at too high a price. A professional union, founded 
 on a common use of words and phrases, to which 
 we attach no meaning, or widely different meanings, 
 or on a mutual agreement to conceal the truth, is 
 neither Scriptural, reasonable, nor desirable. Fel- 
 lowship in the Gospel the only intelligent, hearty 
 and efficient union of Christians implies an agree- 
 ment in the essential facts, principles and duties x of 
 the system. And this fellowship cannot be secured 
 by unscrupulous compromises, and Jesuitical pro- 
 fessions, but only by unity of views concerning 
 Christian doctrine. 
 
 How far error may be tolerated by a church of 
 Christ for the sake of union, it is not easy to decide. 
 The Bible furnishes no direct and explicit answer 
 to the question. Error may be so palpable and 
 gross, call it faith or opinion, as to preclude the 
 possibility of its toleration by a church, without a 
 dereliction o' 1 duty, and a virtual abandonment of
 
 CONCLUSION. 361 
 
 the cause of truth. Whether the Refoimers hold 
 religious views incompatible with their reception 
 into evangelical 'Baptist churches, is the practical 
 question. So far as the Disciples are affiliated 
 with the Stonites, or Arians of the West, their re- 
 ception into the fellowship of our churches would 
 be, on our part, base unfaithfulness to the cause of 
 Christ, and of truth. Nor would the evil be, in 
 any degree, mitigated by their hypocritical consent 
 to conceal their errors, or express them in Scriptural 
 phrases, to which they have attached, and are un- 
 derstood to attach a false meaning. Without con- 
 demning and renouncing their error, they can have 
 no Scriptural fellowship with those who understand 
 and love the Gospel. How far this heterodoxy now 
 prevails among the Reformers, the writer does not 
 possess the means of deciding. 
 
 It would not be difficult from the writings of Mr. 
 Campbell to draw up a creed, which in all essential 
 points would be acceptable to evangelical Christen- 
 dom. In this chiefly lies the danger of Campbellism. 
 Thousands of persons have been seduced into the 
 belief that the Reformers differ nothing from the 
 Baptists, except in weekly communion, and othei 
 unimportant points. 
 
 But the reader has seen that Campbellism has 
 two sides an orthodox and a heterodox an evan- 
 gelical, and, for lack of a better term, it must bo 
 said, a Reformed side. It would be quite .easy to
 
 362 CONCLUSION. 
 
 select from Mr. Campbell's books, without any per- 
 version of the quotations, a system of doctrine so 
 utterly- at variance with the Scriptures, and so 
 repugnant to the feelings of pious people, that it 
 would receive the undivided condemnation of every 
 evangelical denomination. 
 
 Now, if the Reformers would secure the confi- 
 dence and affection of orthodox Christians, it will 
 not be sufficient that they should proclaim their 
 own orthodoxy as Mr. Campbell has recently pro- 
 claimed his nor even to put forth, in some intelli- 
 gible form, the orthodox articles of their belief ; but. 
 they must explicitly repudiate the doctrines which 
 they have been supposed to hold, at variance with 
 the evangelical syetem. They may have been mis- 
 understood, or misrepresented, or partly misunder- 
 stood, and partly misrepresented ; but the effect in 
 preventing Christian union is precisely the same, as 
 if they had been rightly understood, and rightly 
 represented. But while it may be conceded, that 
 their views and intentions may have been miscon- 
 ceived, it must be maintained that their language 
 has been candidly and fairly interpreted. But if 
 they have been misunderstood or misrepresented, 
 from no matter what motives, they owe it to them- 
 selves, their Christian brethren, and their Redeemer, 
 to place themselves rectus in curia ; and this cannot 
 be done, either to the confusion of their foes, or the 
 satisfaction of intelligent, inquiring Christians, but
 
 CONCLUSION. 363 
 
 by a distinct and formal repudiation of the hetero- 
 dox sentiments which they are charged with having 
 published. 
 
 It is proper to descend to particulars. If the 
 Reformers would secure for themselves the confi- 
 dence and affection of the great evangelical family 
 of Christians, let them explicitly disavow 
 
 First. That all the converting power of the Spirit 
 is in the Word in the sense in which ninety-nine 
 persons out of every one hundred understand the 
 language, and, indeed, in the only sense of which it 
 is fairly susceptible. 
 
 Secondly. That regeneration, the new birth, and 
 conversion,are identical with baptism,in the language 
 of Scripture, or common sense, or any other except 
 that of superstition. And let them unequivocally 
 maintain 
 
 Thirdly. That prayer is the plain and imperative 
 duty of believers, whether baptized or not. 
 
 Fourthly. That repentance, faith, and baptism, 
 are not equally essential to the remission of sins ; 
 but that this blessing is virtually, really obtained 
 by faith in Christ, and only formally and declara- 
 tively in baptism. And, 
 
 Fifthly. That the belief of one fact, and perform 
 ance of one act, with a moral life, is not a sufficient 
 foundation for Christian union ; but that this union, 
 to be Scriptural and valuable, must be based on the
 
 364 CONCLUSION. 
 
 belief of the fundamental facts and doctrines 01 the 
 Gospel. 
 
 It may be necessary for the Eeformers to disavow 
 other sentiments which they have maintained, 
 or which, from their associations, they have been 
 suspected of holding ; but the above principles hav- 
 ing been clearly and repeatedly proclaimed, and 
 made the very ground-work of the Keformation, 
 must be repudiated, before they can reasonably hope 
 to be admitted into the evangelical family. 
 
 This renunciation of the errors of Campbellism, 
 in order to secure the proposed end, must be made, 
 not in a fugitive essay, nor in equivocal terms, nor 
 on individual responsibility, but in some explicit, 
 formal, solemn, and authorized manner like the 
 " declaration of belief presented by the Brush Kun 
 church to the Bedstone Association, or the summary 
 of doctrine drawn up by the Christian church, in 
 St. Louis, to convince the Christian Association of 
 the validity of their claim to be considered " evan- 
 gelical." 
 
 For his indiscriminate, violent, and bitter attack 
 on their cherished principles, on their institutions 
 for diffusing the light of the Grospel, and on their 
 well-meant efforts to meliorate the condition of 
 men, and display the glory of Christ, Mr. Campbell 
 owes an apology to the Christian world. Especially 
 is this due, as he found it expedient, in building up 
 the " Christian church." that is. his own party, to
 
 CONCLUSION. 365 
 
 employ the same institutions, and the same means, 
 for the use of which he so freely censured them. 
 Though this apology may not be essential to the 
 restoration of harmony between the Baptists and 
 Eeformers, it is indispensable to the restoration of 
 Christian confidence in the leader of the Keformation. 
 
 Some concessions, too, may be due on the part of 
 the Baptists, to secure the desired union. They 
 have occasionally evinced, in their contests with 
 the Reformers, an acrimony, seeming to spring from 
 personal dislike, rather than zeal for the truth and 
 honor of God, which they should readily admit, and, 
 in future, carefully avoid. 
 
 The regular meeting of all the churches, in their 
 respective places of worship, on every Lord's-day, 
 which the Baptists have never opposed, they should 
 more earnestly insist on, and more faithfully practice. 
 Weekly communion they should not contend about, 
 but let it be introduced into the churches wherever, 
 and whenever it is deemed obligatory or expedient. 
 They should not yield to the Keformers, as in truth 
 they do not, in their reverence for, their submission 
 to, and their diligent study of, the holy Scriptures. 
 
 As to the name by which they shall be called, 
 neither the Baptists nor the Reformers should bo 
 much concerned. The Disciples of Christ were not 
 called Christians until eleven years after his ascen- 
 sion ; and then, whether the name was given by the 
 Spirit of inspiration, assumed by them in honor of
 
 366 CONCLUSION. 
 
 their Master, as a matter of expediency, or adojited 
 by tteir enemies as a term of reproach, the sacred 
 historian has not informed us, and we can only con- 
 jecture. We should be solicitous about truth and 
 piety, not names. The name Baptist, it is presumed, 
 was not assumed by those who bear it, after deliber- 
 ation, and of choice, nor would it be practicable for 
 them, at their option, to lay it aside. The appel- 
 lation Christian, can never, in the present divided 
 state of the religious world, be employed to desig- 
 nate, without a qualifying epithet, any particular 
 party of Christians. But if we see eye to eye, speak 
 the same things, and are animated by the same 
 spirit, whether we are called Baptists, Keformers, 
 or Christians, or are distinguished by some other 
 name, is of little consequence. The primitive 
 Christians were equally pious, happy, and useful, 
 whether they were called Galileans, Disciples, or 
 Christians. Our fathers ecclesiastic, were not less 
 worthy when they were known as " Ana-baptists," 
 than their descendants to whom has been accorded 
 the name of Baptists. 
 
 Is there any prospect of the consummation of 
 such a union as has been briefly sketched ? None, 
 it is to be feared, during the life-time of Mr. Camp- 
 bell. The frequent changes of his religious views, 
 have induced a general lack of confidence in his 
 stability. His manifold inconsistencies, and contra- 
 dictions, have awakened, in many minds, a suspicion
 
 CONCLUSION. 367 
 
 as to the integrity of his purposes. In the comse of 
 the thirty years' conflict between the Eeformers and 
 Baptists, ,many distinguished combatants, whether 
 justly or unjustly, is not material, have deemed 
 themselves unfairly, unkindly, or rudely treated by 
 Mr. Campbell ; while he, doubtless, has against 
 them a list of grievances, equally long and grave, to 
 be redressed. Beside all these things, having for 
 more than a quarter of a century, been the man 
 of his party, it is not reasonable to expect that 
 he would consent to unite himself with a deno- 
 mination in which, though he might occupy a pro- 
 minent place, he could not occupy the position of 
 leader. In addition to these obstacles, it will require 
 no small measure of humility and moral heroism in 
 him, to acknowledge that his Keformation has proved 
 a failure, and that his views are in substantial agree- 
 ment with those of the sects against whom he has 
 so long and fiercely warred. All these matters 
 considered, there, is very little ground to hope that, 
 in the life-time of the Reformer, and with his 
 approbation, such a union between the Reformers 
 and Baptists will be effected, as truth, piety, and 
 Christian codperation demand. 
 
 Still there is ground to hope for the ultimate 
 scriptural and cordial union of these parties. The 
 work of assimilation between them is going on, and 
 it will go on, with increasing rapidity, as the original
 
 368 CONCLUSION. 
 
 causes of irritation are left behind and forgotten, 
 and the veterans in the strife, gradually quit the 
 "battle-field. In many places Campbellism has lost 
 its pugnacity, and is fast losing its distinctive 
 elements, and receiving a new impression from the 
 religious principles with which it is ceaselessly 
 coming in contact. The Baptists, too, it must be 
 admitted, are not precisely what they 'would have 
 been, had there been no Keformation. They have 
 not been uninterested spectators of the religious 
 convulsions and changes around them. While they 
 have seen no cause to abandon any of their distinc- 
 tive principles, or practices, they have corrected 
 many of their mistakes, burnished their armor, and 
 learning wisdom alike from the successes and fail- 
 ures of their opponents, have prepared themselves 
 for concerted, vigorous and determined efforts in 
 support of what they deem the causa. of truth, and 
 of Christ. Let the process of assimilation go on. 
 Good men should earnestly pray for. its progress. 
 All should aim to promote it by an honest, earnest 
 adherence to the teaching of the Scriptures, by 
 diffusing the light of truth, and, above all, by cul- 
 tivating the spirit of the Eedeemer the spirit of 
 love, gentleness, meekness, and candor. 
 
 But until this union can be scripturally, and with 
 the concurrence of the churches, consummated, it 
 becomes the Baptists to pursue a firm, straight-
 
 <?ONCLDSION. 369 
 
 forward, but conciliating course, receiving no Ee- 
 forrner into their fellowship without a distinct re- 
 nunciation on his part of the peculiar principles of 
 Camphellism, and a clear assent to the fundamen- 
 tal doctrines of the evangelical system, for whicL 
 we have so long and faithfully contended.
 
 CAMPBELLISI RE-EXAMINED. 
 
 BY 
 
 JEREMIAH B. JETER, 
 
 OP RICHMOND, VIRGINIA. 
 
 NEW- YORK : 
 
 SHELDON, BLAKEMAN & CO. 
 
 CHICAGO : B. C. ORIGGS * CO. CHARLESTON : SMITH & WHFLDEII. 
 
 NASHVILLE: TOOX, NELSON * co., AND GRAVES, MARKS & 
 
 RUTLAND. CINCINNATI : APPLEGATE & CO. 
 
 RICHMOND: CHARLES WORTHAM. ,
 
 
 
 CAMPBELLISM RE-EXAMINED. 
 
 SOON after my work, Campbellism Examined, was 
 published, Mr. Campbell commenced a review of it 
 in the Millennial Harbinger. He was thankful to 
 the " ten worthy brethren," who had called me out 
 to examine " something nicknamed Campbellism," 
 as it would afford him an opportunity of extending 
 the empire of this something " over myriads of new 
 readers, thinkers and actors, in the grand ecclesi- 
 astic drama of the nineteenth century." But thank- 
 ful as he was to them, he could be thankful to 
 them no more, if, after reading his review of the 
 book, they should " yet sanction or commend it, or 
 print and circulate it through this community." 
 Such was the boasting with which he began his re- 
 view. Soon, however, seemingly dissatisfied with 
 the results of his labor, he proposed to engage, in 
 an oral or newspaper discussion, of the points at 
 issue between us. As I declined this proposal, he 
 resolved, with increased earnestness, to concentrate 
 his attention on my book, and to continue his " ex- 
 positions of its errors and misrepresentations," until 
 he should do me " ample justice."
 
 4 CAMPBELLISM BE-EXAMINED. 
 
 It is now time to inquire in what manner Mr. C. 
 has redeemed his pledge. He has published nine 
 pretty long numbers of the review, with other arti- 
 cles designed, either directly or indirectly, to expose 
 the alleged errors of Campbellism Examined. These 
 pieces are made up of a few petty, verbal criticisms, 
 many offensive personalities, a huge mass of irrele- 
 vant matter, much empty declamation, frequent 
 repetitions, and a most desultory discussion of some 
 of the positions maintained in my book. K"o state- 
 ment has been invalidated, no quotation shown to 
 be unfair, and no argument manfully and logically 
 met. The work remains intact. Allowing all the 
 reviewer's arguments to be valid, which I am very 
 far from doing, the force and importance of the 
 volume would be but little diminished, the greater 
 portion of it having received little or no attention. 
 The most devoted friends of the reformation, and 
 the warmest admirers of Mr. 0., must admit that 
 the review, and its kindred articles, are not a satis- 
 factory reply to my book. They furnish its conclu- 
 sive defence. Mr. 0. himself must have a painful 
 consciousness that he has utterly failed to meet its 
 statements and reasonings. His conviction finds 
 utterance in the last number of the review. " But 
 the half of the sophistry and of the ad captandum 
 rhetoric of this ill-fated book, has not yet been de- 
 veloped. Indeed, the broken and desultory man- 
 ner in which we have hitherto noticed & inter-
 
 CAMPBELLISM RE-EXAMINED. 5 
 
 ru ted, as we always are, and have been, in making 
 provision for numerous and various topics, (always 
 on hand for a monthly periodical,) to say nothing 
 of all the other duties of life incumbent upon us in 
 our various relations to society, is by no means pro- 
 pitious to a luminous, connected, compact, and vig- 
 orous exposition of its leading perversions, miscon- 
 ceptions, and consequent misrepresentations of not 
 only the special subjects on which it treats, but of 
 all related to them. We cannot do the subject 
 justice in our present method of reviewing it." 
 Page 553. A pretty candid confession this, that 
 the review, begun with such high hopes and vaunt- 
 ing promises, has proved a failure. For aught that 
 has yet appeared, the "ten worthy brethren" at 
 whose request the book was written, should not 
 forfeit all claim to Mr. Campbell's gratitude, if they 
 still continue to " sanction or commend it, or print 
 and circulate it through this community." 
 
 What will Mr. C. next do ? With the laurels, 
 won in many a well-contested field, still fresh on 
 his brow, he cannot be expected to retire thus from 
 the combat. Something must be done to meet the 
 exigency. In the eighth number of the review, he 
 writes " But I cannot waste time in reasoning 
 against positions so palpably false and so suicidal, 
 as not a few of my friend Jeter's assumptions and 
 positions are. Some are demanding of me a book 
 on the subject, but really I do not think it worthy
 
 CAMPBELLISM RE-EXAMINED. 
 
 of a book/' p. 456. This was the deliberate and 
 recorded judgment of Mr. C. In the next No., 
 he says, " I purpose to suspend my review for some 
 two or three months, and, in pursuance of the re- 
 quests on hand, I will give a book for a book, and 
 a line for a line ; at the same price at which Dr. 
 Jeter's book is sold and circulated by the anti-re- 
 visionist Baptists." pp 553-4. So it seems that 
 my work, though unworthy of such an honor, is to 
 have a reply from the pen of Mr. C., in the form 
 of a book, corresponding with itself in cost and 
 size. 
 
 I should postpone any notice of the review until 
 the appearance of the promised book, but for two 
 reasons : First I much doubt whether it will ever 
 be published. As my work is unworthy of an ex- 
 tended reply, Mr. C. is not likely, amid his multi- 
 plied and important engagements, to find time to 
 prepare it. Secondly If he should write a book, 
 
 1 am desirous that it may be as free as possible 
 from errors ; and I wish, by pointing out some of 
 the mistakes of the review, to afford him an oppor- 
 tunity of correcting them. I shall do little more 
 than furnish hints for his guidance. 
 
 PERSONALITIES. 
 
 It is a great pity that religious controversy, in 
 itself adapted to promote the interests of truth and 
 righteousness, should so frequently degenerate into
 
 CAMPBELLISM RE-EXAMINED. 7 
 
 bittei personal invective. Mr. C. commenced his 
 review with the seeming intention of treating me 
 courtiously. " We shall/' he says, " with all can- 
 dor, and with all attention, concentrate our mind 
 upon the efforts of our respectable, and I presume 
 to say, very estimable friend, Elder J. B. Jeter." 
 He had not, however, proceeded far before he began 
 to depreciate my abilities and my book. " There 
 are not a few things," he says, " in science, in learn- 
 ing, and in religion, which Mr. Jeter will not un- 
 derstand till he get another head or heart. We 
 are, indeed, sorry for his sake, that we cannot cre- 
 ate the one or the other." " He has too recklessly 
 dealt in assertions, and even criticisms, for which 
 he is not qualified, either by nature, by grace, or 
 by education." The review, in every part, contains 
 intimations that Campbellism Examined is a very 
 feeble production, and unworthy, except for its en- 
 dorsement, of a serious reply. 
 
 With me it is a small matter that my abilities 
 should be disparaged by Mr. Campbell. If I enter- 
 tained a high estimate of his judgment, I should 
 know that in this instance it is exercised under cir- 
 cumstances not propitious to a correct decision. 
 It demands a rare measure of candor and self- 
 control to do full justice to the abilities of an oppo- 
 nent ; and these are qualities in which the intelli- 
 gent readers Df Mr. Campbell's works will perceive 
 that he does not abound. One, however, of two
 
 8 CAMPBELLISM RE-EXAMINED. 
 
 conclusions is perfectly clear. Either Mr. 0. has 
 a consciousness that my work is not so feeble as he 
 represents it, or, he has a painful conviction of the 
 weakness of the cause which he advocates. Why 
 so labored a defence against so feeble an attack ? 
 Why a long review, many other extended articles, 
 and then a book, to counteract the influence of mere 
 " assumptions and presumptions," however respect- 
 ably endorsed ? Actions speak more loudly, and 
 I may add, more truly than words. How tottering 
 must be that cause which needs to be so carefully 
 and strongly propped under so slight a pressure. It 
 would seem that the taunt of Tobiah, the Ammon- 
 ite, however unjust in its original application, is 
 appropriate in the present case. " Were a jackal," 
 according to Mr. Campbell's version a feeble 
 assailant " to go against the stone walls which 
 they are building" the incongruous, unconnected 
 doctrines of the reformation "he would break 
 them down." p. 264. 
 
 Not confining himself to the disparagement of 
 my intellect and labors, Mr. C. distinctly charges 
 me with misrepresentation, garbling, slander, cal- 
 umny, and such practices. I will furnish the read- 
 er with specimens of his accusations "garbled and 
 distorted quotations" " in this calumny, Mr. Jeter 
 is a false accuser, unintentional, we hope, in charity ; 
 but unquestionably a false accuser" " Having been, 
 and now being misrepresented by Elder Jeter of
 
 CAMPBELLISM RE-EXAMINED. 9 
 
 Richmond" "None of my traducers, not even 
 Elder Jeter himself" "judge of the fidelity, hon- 
 esty, or capacity of Mr. Jeter" " Mr. Jeter is, 
 knowingly or unknowingly, willing it or not willing 
 it, one of the most disingenuous and sophistical 
 writers or reasoners that I have noticed in the 
 Baptist church" " We are much slandered in this 
 book." Such are some of the epithets by which I 
 am honored in Mr. Campbell's review. These are 
 very grave charges ; and by what code of morals 
 the reviewer judges, who can pronounce the author, 
 against whom they are all justly preferred, his 
 " very estimable friend," (p. 65,) and " brother" 
 (p. 71,) I know not. It may be Jesuitical or pa- 
 gan, it certainly is not Christian. To these accu- 
 sations, I plead, Not guilty. I honestly and care- 
 fully endeavored to furnish in Campbellism Exam- 
 ined a fair and faithful representation of Mr. Camp- 
 bell's peculiar views. That I may have mistaken 
 nis meaning on some points is possible ; but no 
 misconceptions have been pointed out. In mak- 
 ing quotations from his works, I extracted only 
 what was pertinent to my purpose, and, by the 
 rules of discussion, I was required to do nothing 
 more. I now affirm, that not one quotation in my 
 book bears a different meaning from what the pas- 
 sage does in his works. If his positions and argu- 
 ments are contradictory, it is no fault of mine ; nor 
 should I be blamed for placing ungarbled and fair
 
 10 CAMPBELLISM KE-EXAMINED. 
 
 extracts from his writings in juxtaposition. In 
 Campbellism Examined, p. 45 ? at the end of the 
 8th line from the top, the clause, " until Christians 
 are united," was omitted, whether by myself in 
 transcribing, or the compositor in type-setting, I 
 cannot tell. This omission has been held up, not 
 by Mr. 0., but by a writer in the Ch'n Intelligencer, 
 as a specimen of the accuracy of my quotations. 
 The slightest glance at the passage must satisfy the 
 discerning reader that the omission does Mr. 0. no 
 injustice, but weakens my own argument. It is the 
 very clause that I should have italicised. 
 
 The charges of the reviewer are mostly vague 
 and general. I have slandered him, but in what 
 he is not careful to show. There is, however, one 
 exception to this remark. pp. 182, 183. 
 
 " Mr. Jeter is not, perhaps, altogether a respon- 
 sible writer." Perhaps not ! I am very reluctant 
 to be held responsible for Mr. Campbell's definitions 
 of my words. " I would prefer to inculpate his 
 head rather than his heart" This is very kind in 
 Mr. C. " To explain myself : While condemning 
 my .opposition to creeds, he uses the following lan- 
 guage l The term creed, in its ecclesiastic sense, 
 denotes a summary of Christian doctrine. There is 
 in Christendom a great variety of creeds, from the 
 so-called " Apostles' creed," down to the " Chris- 
 tian system," composed by Mr. Campbell as an e^- 
 hibition of the principles of his Reformation.' ''
 
 CAMPBELLISM RE-EXAMINED. 11 
 
 The term " creed," from the Latin " credo," I 
 believe is of very general signification. We have 
 political and philosophical, as well as religious 
 creeds. I defined its ecclesiastic sense to be "'a 
 summary of Christian doctrine." It is defined by 
 Webster "A brief summary of the articles of 
 Christian faith a symbol," With this definition 
 agrees that of the Ency. of Kel. Knowledge "A. 
 form of words in which the articles of faith are com- 
 prehended." Right or wrong, and whether I am 
 responsible or irresponsible, this was my definition 
 of the word " creed" And to preclude the possi- 
 bility of mistake, I affirmed, that " every intelligent 
 Christian has a creed, written or unwritten." In 
 this clearly, and, I think, correctly defined sense of 
 the term, creed, I affirmed that the Christian sys- 
 tem is Mr. Campbell's creed, composed, not for 
 adoption in order to church fellowship, but as " an 
 exhibition of the principles of his Reformation." 
 But, continues Mr. C., " It is not a historic fact, 
 that a summary of Christian doctrine is, in the ec- 
 clesiastic sense, a 'creed.' * * * To make any sum- 
 mary of doctrine a creed, in the ecclesiastic jjense, 
 it must be submitted to a person, or to a commu- 
 nity, for adoption, in order to church fellowship, or 
 church organization." Mr. C. deliberately sets 
 aside my definition of the word " creed," and dog- 
 matically substitutes his own, and holds me respon- 
 sible for it. " T Vu never wrote, published, printed,
 
 12 CAMPBELLISM RE-EXAMINED. 
 
 or proposed for adoption, such a book written by 
 myself or by any one else." And who affirmed, or 
 insinuated, that he did ? I asserted that the Chris- 
 tian System is Mr. Campbell's creed, composed as 
 an exhibition of the principles of his Reformation; 
 and I use the term creed in a sense which I defined 
 a sense in which it is clearly used by, at least, one 
 respectable ecclesiastical writer, the editor of the 
 Ency, of Religious Knowledge. And says the Re- 
 viewer, " In this calumny Mr. Jeter is a false ac- 
 cuser, unintentional, (unintentionally,) we hope, in 
 charity ; but unquestionably a false accuser." 
 Calumny is a strong word. It means "false accu- 
 sation of a crime, or offences maliciously made or 
 reported." True, Mr. C. softens the accusation by 
 the charitable hope that my sin was unintentional 
 as if calumny could be unintentional and by the 
 insinuation that, perhaps, my stupidity renders me 
 irresponsible. Allowing that Mr. Campbell's defi- 
 nition is right, and mine is wrong, candor could 
 find in the passage nothing but the misapplication 
 of a term and one so carefully explained as to pre- 
 clude the slightest possibility of injury to him, or 
 his cause. His readiness to employ one of the 
 harshest terms of the language in censure of my 
 statement, proves quite clearly that he needs some- 
 thing more than fair criticism and sound argument 
 to arrest the influence of my book. I am sorry for 
 Mr. Campbell's sake that he lr\s deemed it neces-
 
 CAMPBELLISM RE-EXAMINED. 13 
 
 . 
 
 sary to resort to such epithets in his review. My 
 book speaks for itself. Dr. Lynd, whom Mr. C. 
 thanks for his brief review of it, says " The writer 
 has treated the whole subject with great candor, 
 and in a truly Christian spirit." 
 
 VERBAL CRITICISM. 
 
 The criticism of words, which is very proper in a 
 merely literary production, seems to be entirely out 
 of place in a grave theological discussion, except so 
 far as it may be required to elucidate the points in 
 debate ; but as Mr. C. has deemed it necessary to 
 criticise my style in several places, for no other ap 
 parent purpose than to display the superiority of 
 his philological knowledge, I must, reluctantly, re 
 ply to him. 
 
 I stated that the " religious education of chil- 
 dren, the proper observance of the Lord's day, &c., 
 were too much neglected." On which passage the 
 critic remarks " There is but one word in this ex- 
 hibition that is of doubtful expediency, and that is 
 the word ' too,' prefixed to ' much/ He would 
 seem to indicate that these duties might be much 
 neglected with impunity, but they were too much 
 neglected. This is a grammatical and logical infer- 
 ence. But in all candor, I do not think that Elder 
 Jeter intended to say what his words indicate. He 
 did not mean that these six sacred duties might, 
 with impunity, be much neglected, and in this case
 
 14 CAMPBELLISM RE-EXAMINED. 
 
 
 
 they were only ' too much' neglected." p. 71. So 
 important did this criticism appear to the reviewer 
 that he recurred to it frequently. This use of the 
 word too is sanctioned by very respectable writers. 
 I recently saw it used in this manner in an article 
 copied from the London Times. Coleridge, one of 
 the profoundest thinkers, and most polished writers 
 of the present century, says, " I must concede to 
 you that too many of the Pedobaptists have erred." 
 Does he mean that error is harmless in many, and 
 only hurtful when embraced by too many ? But 
 on this point I can introduce authority that must 
 have weight with Mr. C. A writer of some dis- 
 tinction, whose critical acumen he will readily 
 admit, has furnished examples of this use of the 
 term, as if for the very purpose of neutralizing the 
 above criticism. Let the reader turn over two 
 leaves in the review, and read, p. 75 " He (Mr. 
 Jeter) is, however, a very estimable man. But he 
 has, perhaps, too recklessly, at the instigation of 
 some over-excited mere Baptists, undertaken a work 
 for which he is by no means pre-eminently quali- 
 fied ; and, too willing to do them service, has tot 
 recklessly dealt in assertions, and even criticisms, 
 for which he is not qualified, either by nature, by 
 grace, or by education." I have italicised the word 
 too in this extract. The reviewer "would seem to 
 indicate that" Mr. Jeter might have "recklessly 
 dealt in assertions, and even criticisms, for which he
 
 TAMPBELLISM RE-EXAMINED. 15 
 
 was not qualified either by nature, by grace, or by 
 education," with propriety ; but unfortunately, 
 " instigated by over-excited mere Baptists" he 
 dealt in these things " too recklessly." " This a 
 grammatical and logical inference. But in all can- 
 dor, I do not think that Elder" Campbell " in- 
 tended to say what his words indicate ;" though my 
 candor does not forbid me to think that he was 
 more intent to correct errors in my style, than to 
 avoid them in his own. 
 
 The reviewer quotes from Gampbellism Exam- 
 ined. " The reformation demanded by the times 
 was in spirit and practice, rather than doctrine." 
 11 In doctrine, I presume he means," adds the cri- 
 tic. Yes, in doctrine -the sentence is elliptical 
 any well-taught school boy would readily supply 
 the ellipsis. p. 71. 
 
 We shall now notice a more important criticism, 
 pp. 550, 551. 
 
 " There are some sentences in Mr. Jeter's book, 
 and not a few of them, of such ambiguity, that lest 
 I should offend against propriety, I will merely 
 quote them, or pass them ; such as, 
 
 " ' Mr. Campbell and his friends maintained the 
 Association, in its action, not only transgressed the 
 law of Christ, infringed the religious liberty of indi- 
 viduals, and were guilty of flagrant persecution, 
 but plainly transcended its constitutional authority.' 
 p. 10,3.
 
 16 CAMPBELLISM RE-EXAMINED. 
 
 " This sentence/' continues the critic, " not be- 
 ing English, nor any living or dead tongue known 
 to me, I pass without criticism. It is one of Mr. 
 Jeter's solecisms. Who these 'its', and 'ivere' may 
 indicate, I presume not to affirm." 
 
 I admit the fault of the sentence, but not the 
 justice of the criticism. Association is a noun of 
 multitude, and may, according to the rules of gram- 
 mar, have verbs and pronouns agreeing with it, in 
 the singular or plural number. But the number 
 having been decided on should be retained through- 
 out the sentence. I admit the error either its 
 should have been they, or were should have been 
 ivas. It is a trivial mistake a mere over-sight 
 not affecting, in the view of sound criticism, the 
 perspicuity or the force of the sentence. When the 
 reviewer affirms that the sentence i^not " English, 
 nor any living tongue" known to him, he excites the 
 suspicion that something has disturbed the equilib- 
 rium of his mind, and hurried him beyond the 
 bounds of fair criticism. Let me quote a passage' 
 from high authority, Review, p. 65. " But ive 
 shall, with all candor and with all attention, con- 
 centrate our mind upon the efforts of our respect- 
 able, and, I presume to say, very estimable friend, 
 Elder J. B. Jeter." I have ventured to italicise 
 the important words in the above sentence. Who 
 are indicated by " we," " our" and "I" in it ? 
 According to editorial license, the reviewer might
 
 CAMPBELLISM RE-EXAMINED. 17 
 
 write in the singular or plural number might say 
 either we or / but having selected his number it 
 was inaccurate to depart from it in the sentence 
 yet, he did depart from it, speaking of himself first 
 in the plural, and next in the singular number. 
 Now, I will not, in the extravagance of criticism, 
 affirm, that the sentence is not English every 
 child would know better but I do affirm that it 
 is clearly obnoxious to the same criticism with the 
 sentence so unfairly censured by Mr. C. Still, I 
 thank the critic for his slight correction ; and re- 
 ceive his petty verbal criticisms as an illustrious 
 proof of the general accuracy of my style. 
 
 I am sorry I cannot reciprocate the favor which 
 Mr. Campbell has conferred on me in criticising my 
 book. The task of correcting the diction of his re- 
 view would be entirely too onerous, as he will be 
 convinced by a brief specimen of the labor. I will 
 examine, with some care, the first eleven lines. 
 
 '.'We thank Elder Jeter, and the ten worthy 
 brethren that called him out to examine something 
 nicknamed ' Campbellism,' for the opportunity af- 
 forded us to extend its empire over myriads of new 
 readers, thinkers and actors, in the grand ecclesias- 
 tic drama of the 19th century." Why does the re- 
 viewer say "ten worthy brethren?" There were 
 tivdvc, and their names are printed in the front of 
 the book. This is, however, a small mistake, indi- 
 cating merely the carelessness of the writer. Was
 
 18 CAMPBELLISM RE-EXAMINED. 
 
 the " something, nicknamed Campbellism," which 
 Elder Jeter was called out to examine, the genuine 
 Bethany Keformation, or not ? I cannot decide. 
 I should conclude from the contemptuous manner 
 in which the reviewer speaks of it, that it is not 
 but from his desire to extend its empire, that it is. 
 Perhaps, he means that my examination of the 
 spurious article will increase the spread of the gen- 
 uine. Hear the critic again " But we cannot 
 thank him for the uncandid and partial examination 
 of the matter which he has given ; nor could we 
 thank them if they, after reading our review of it, 
 will yet sustain or commend it, or print and circulate 
 it through this community." Of circulating a book 
 through a community, I have a distinct conception ; 
 but how it can be printed through a community I 
 do not comprehend. And the learned reviewer in- 
 forms us that he shall h,ave no respect for the ten 
 brethren, if they, after reading his review, should 
 continue to " print it (my book) through this com- 
 munity" He means, doubtless : print it, and cir- 
 culate it through the community the community, 
 and not "this community." Attend to the re- 
 viewer once more " If I were not reluctant to ut- 
 ter a surmize, I should suppose and affirm the hy- 
 pothesis, that the call for this review grows, directly 
 or indirectly, from opposition to the Bible Union." 
 Was there ever such a jumble of incoherent words 
 from the pen of a renowned critic ! What autho-
 
 CAMPBELLISM RE-EXAMINED. 19 
 
 rity has Mr. C. for his orthography of the word 
 " surmize ?" There is none in its derivation, nor, 
 so far as I know, in respectable usage. It is not 
 so spelt by Webster, nor Richardson, nor any of 
 the writers quoted by the latter. I should con- 
 clude that the error was typographical, if it had 
 not been repeated on p. 185. Let us now notice 
 the structure of the sentence. We may conceive, 
 assume, or state a "hypothesis;" but to suppose a 
 hypothesis is precisely equivalent to supposing a 
 supposition. The expression " affirm a hypothe- 
 sis" is a solecism. What is hypothetical cannot 
 be affirmed and what is affirmed is not hypothe- 
 tical. And yet the learned reviewer says, " I should 
 suppose and affirm the hypothesis." He does not 
 do either ; and he tells us why " If I were not 
 reluctant to utter a surmize, (then) I should (both) 
 suppose and affirm the hypothesis " How his re- 
 luctance to utter a surmise could prevent him from 
 affirming anything which he might have to affirm, 
 I cannot explain, but, perhaps, he can. 
 
 Mr. Campbell will perceive that an attempt to 
 criticise the language of his, extended review would 
 involve very serious labor. He may, by this time, 
 be reminded of the old adage, A man wlio lives in 
 a glass house should be careful not to throw stones 
 at his neighbor's windows. I cannot close my re- 
 marks on this topic, without expressing the firm 
 persuasion that the critical a 'cumen of the reviewer
 
 20 CAMPBELLISM RE-EXAMINED. 
 
 may be very profitabl) employed in revising his own 
 works. 
 
 THE REVISION OF THE ENGLISH SCRIPTURES. 
 
 Mr. Campbell bas been exceedingly anxious to 
 trace "Campbellism Examined" to tbe anti-revision 
 influence. We have already seen that, but for re- 
 luctance " to utter a surmize/' he would have sup- 
 posed and affirmed " the hypothesis that the call 
 for this (my) review grows, directly or indirectly, 
 from opposition to the Bible Union." This hypo- 
 thesis, and truly it is nothing but a hypothesis, 
 obtrudes itself into 'almost every No. of Mr. Camp- 
 bell's Keview, It is, however, quite at variance 
 with another hypothesis published in the Christian 
 Intelligencer, that I had been thirty years in pre- 
 paring Campbellism Examined a period that carries 
 us back far beyond the revision movement. But, 
 why is Mr. C. so solicitous to identify my book with 
 the anti-revision movement ? If it had its origin 
 in this influence, is it the .less true, the less im- 
 portant, or the less entitled to consideration ? I 
 understand clearly the policy of the reviewer. His 
 aim is, by attributing the book to anti-revision in- 
 fluence, to enlist in his favor that large, and highly 
 respectable portion of the Baptists who are zealous- 
 ly seeking to procure a corrected version of the Eng- 
 lish Scriptures. But he will be disappointed : they 
 perceive the artifice.
 
 CAMPBELLISM RE-EXAMINED. 21 
 
 Of the designs of the respected brethren, at whose 
 request I wrote Campbellism HAmined, I know 
 nothing, except what I have learned from their 
 note to me, published in the work. Most of them 
 are anti-Bible Union men ; but whether their op- 
 position to this society had any influence in dicta- 
 ting their request, I know not. One thing I do 
 know I was not influenced by opposition to revi- 
 sion in complying with the request. I am in prin- 
 ciplc a revisionist have been made so by the 
 arguments of those whose measures I have dis- 
 approved. Though I do not co-operate with the 
 Bible Union, I am not prevented from doing so by 
 the connexion of the Reformers with the Society. 
 Mr. Campbell ought certainly to feel gratified, that 
 if the " worthy brethren," who requested me to 
 write the book, were "actuated by hostility to the 
 revision enterprise, they were so utterly defeated in 
 their scheme. In composing the book, I most sed- 
 ulously endeavored to keep clear of that subject. 
 There is no mention of it, no allusion to it, nothing 
 to remind one of it, in the whole work. It may, 
 indeed, lead some to call in question the thorough- 
 ness of Mr. Campbell's sSlpfrship his fitness for 
 revising the common version of the Scriptures but 
 ffk Has this doubt to do with the merits of the 
 revision cause ? One may surely believe, most hon- 
 estly, that the Scriptures should be revised, and 
 tliat ho is not qualified, by the ripeness of his
 
 22 CAMPBELLxSM KE-EXAMINED. 
 
 scholarship, and the soundness of his judgment to 
 revise them. W- 
 
 I have not quite disposed of this matter. The 
 May No. of the Mill. Har. copies from the Reli- 
 gious Herald, the publishers' notice of Campbell- 
 ism Examined. After some remarks on the notice, 
 which I pass, Mr. Campbell says : 
 
 " There is but one thing wanting, and that is the 
 names and standing^ moral and religious, of the 
 1 several brethren' of Mr. Jeter, 'at tvhose request' 
 it was written. 
 
 It is said that this is the most prudential act in 
 the whole affair the concealment of their names." 
 p. 279. 
 
 Why should the names of those brethren be con- 
 cealed ? They are all intelligent, respectable Chris- 
 tian gentlemen most of them are ministers, filling 
 prominent and important positions and some of 
 them are distinguished for their learning, abilities 
 and influence. No cause needs to blush at having 
 such friends. Their " standing, moral and reli- 
 gious," will compare favorably with that of any 
 
 men, in any denomination of Christians, or enlisted 
 
 * -" r 
 in any cause. But what does Mr. Campbell mean 
 
 by the concealment of their names ? Does he intend 
 to affirm that the mere omission of Sheldon, Lam- 
 port & Co., to publish their names in this advertise- 
 ment, was a concealment of them ? As reasonably 
 might the President be charged with concealing the,
 
 CAMPBELLISM RE-EXAMINED. 23 
 
 names of his cabinet because he^ailed to mention 
 
 ^p 
 them in his late message to Congress. Mr. C. is 
 
 too well acquainted with the meaning of words not 
 to know that the mere neglect to publish is not con- 
 cealment. Besides, the passage seems clearly to 
 import that their names and standing, moral and 
 religious, are prudently withheld from the public. 
 Those whose information on this subject is derived 
 wholly from the pages of the Mill. Harbinger, no 
 doubt, believe, not only that their names are con- 
 cealed, but that -a revelation of their moral and re- 
 ligious standing would greatly weaken the influence 
 of the book written at their request. And now 
 what will they, and what will the reader think, 
 when informed that their names are published, in 
 capitals, in the most conspicuous position, in the 
 front of the look ? And yet, " it is said that tins 
 is the most prudential act in the whole affair the 
 concealment of their names" By whom this was 
 said, Mr. C. does not inform us. Perhaps, it was 
 deemed " most prudential " to conceal their names. 
 If their " standing, moral and religious," were 
 known, it might weaken the influence of their sus- 
 picion. I am not surprised that men should have 
 been found weak enough, and bad enough, to say 
 that the names of the worthy brethren had been 
 concealed from " prudential" motives ; by why Mr. 
 Campbell should have publised their surmise, I 
 cannot tell. He certainly knew that their names
 
 24 CAMPBELLISM RE-EXAMINED. 
 
 had not been Mpcealed though he miscounted 
 them and that the book composed at their request 
 could receive no injury from a full revelation of 
 their " standing, moral and religious." 
 
 THE BAPTIST MINISTERS OF THE PAST GENERATION 
 VINDICATED. 
 
 It seems to have been the aim of Mr. Campbell, 
 from the commencement of his Reformation, to de- 
 preciate the talents, labors and usefulness of the 
 Baptist ministers of the past age. Of the continu- 
 ance of this aim his reyiew furnishes abundant evi- 
 dence. On p, 72, we read 
 
 " There were not a few laymen that knew more 
 than their good old orthodox preachers. These 
 preachers disparaged the more learned ministry of 
 the Presbyterians and Episcopalians, and claimed 
 a species of inspiration and a special descent upon 
 them, or an immediate influence of the Holy Spirit, 
 and abstract from, independent of, and paramount 
 to, the written word. They did not go for ' book re- 
 ligion,' but for ' Holy Ghost religion/ as they were 
 wont to say. Servants uneducated and in the corn 
 fields, and their masters in their carriages, with 
 their diplomas in their secretaries, were equally the 
 subjects of special visits, special grace, and special 
 conversion. They went to church once a month, 
 and told their experience at some big meeting. It 
 was voted to' be orthodox ; they were immersed,
 
 CAMPBE.LLISM RE-EXAMINED. 25 
 
 and had a joyful season for a few days. Is this ex- 
 aggeration, a fancy sketch, or a solemn reality ? 
 Deny it who can ! So I found them in Kentucky 
 in 1823, and in Virginia in 1825." The review con- 
 tains much more in the same strain. 
 
 What motive can Mr. C. have in thus seeking to 
 derogate from the reputation of the early Baptist 
 preachers ? The cause of truth and piety does not 
 demand such invidious labor. Does he suppose 
 that the more darkly he can paint the back ground, 
 the more bright, beautiful and prominent will be 
 the picture of his Keformation ? Does he desire to 
 exhibit by contrast with the old Baptist preachers 
 the superior attainments and efficiency of the pro- 
 claimers of the " ancient gospel ?" These Baptist 
 worthies have, with few exceptions, descended to 
 
 the tomb. Their voices, once so earnest and eifec 
 
 
 
 tive in beseeching sinners to be reconciled to God, 
 they cannot now employ in vindicating their prin- 
 ciples, labors and reputation. 
 
 It is not easy to refute such locse generalities as 
 those contained in the above extract. Nothing is 
 more common, and, I may add, more unfair, than 
 to censure classes for the defects or errors of indi- 
 viduals belonging to them. The practice is, unfor- 
 tunately, not confined to Mr. Campbell ; but is to 
 be the more deplored on this account. That there 
 were faults among the early Baptist ministers no 
 candid man acquainted with their history will deny.
 
 26 CAMPBELLISM RE-EXAMINED. 
 
 They were mostly uneducated, in the technical 
 sense of the word ; some of them were, doubtless, 
 enthusiastic and visionary ; and others entertained 
 very imperfect views of the system of divine truth. 
 But the great majority of them were intelligent, 
 evangelical preachers. They were men of faith, 
 prayer and righteousness plain, earnest, faithful, 
 fearless ministers of the gospel whose labors God 
 delighted to honor and who left a blessed impres- 
 sion on their generation. Many of them I knew, 
 loved and venerated. Ministers more learned, and 
 of higher pretensions, I have known ; but minis- 
 ters, more self- sacrificing, laborious, devout and 
 useful/ 1 do not hope to see. Now, I do, in the 
 name of these departed worthies, nost solemnly 
 protest against the indiscriminate censure of Mr. 
 0. found in the foregoing quotation. Had he af- 
 firmed that there were some Baptist ministers of 
 that time obnoxious to these censures, though I 
 should have deemed them extravagant, I should, 
 perhaps, have remained silent ; but when he charges 
 these evils on the " good old orthodox preachers/' 
 without exception, or discrimination, I must deny 
 the correctness of the accusations. As applied to 
 the prominent ministers of the Dover Association, 
 and of the Baptist denomination generally, they 
 are an exaggeration a caricature I will not -sa} r a 
 " slander," for that is an odious term, and, I trust, 
 Mr. C. did not intend to do them injustice. Thev
 
 3AMPBELLISM RE-EXAMINED. 27 
 
 did not disparage learned ministers ; but were 
 making liberal contributions for the establishment 
 of the Columbian College, and other Institutions, 
 for the education of young preachers. Their views 
 of the nature of religion, and of spiritual influ- 
 ence, were those which now prevail among the Bap- 
 tists. " Holy Ghost religion" is a phrase which I 
 do not remember ever to have heard. For the cor- 
 rectness of these remarks, I appeal to the writings 
 of Elder A. Broaddus, contained in the Christian 
 Baptist, to t he early pages of the Religious Herald, 
 and other publications of that time. 
 
 The preaching of Elder John Kerr is singled out 
 by Mr. Campbell as a special subject of animadver- 
 sion. I quote from p. 130. 
 
 " Just at this point, I congratulate myself, that 
 Elder Jeter will remember, with^ me, what an ex- 
 citement and tumult of feeling Elder Carr (Kerr) 
 got up at the Dover Association, to which he has allu- 
 ded in the commencement of our acquaintance, after 
 I had set down from a calm and deliberate address 
 on the first principles of the gospel. It is only thir- 
 ty years since on the 7th of October next, (1S55.} 
 It was equal to Wesleyan Methodism in its palmiest 
 days. What a shaking there was in the camp ! 
 What a hugging of men with men ! What weep- 
 ing of females i What screaming of negroes ! I 
 thought I had got into a Methodist Camp-meeting, 
 and began to apprehend that it would find its way
 
 28 CAMPBELLISM RE-EXAMINED. 
 
 into the preacher's tent. * ^ * But apart from 
 the action, the vociferation, and the intonations of 
 lie ascending and descending climax, of passion, I 
 jonld. not hear one word, or appreciate one idea, as 
 the worthy parent of what I saw and heard in the 
 great congregation. I confess it awakened more 
 painful than pleasurahle associations, because indi- 
 cating a condition of the pulpit, and of the public 
 taste, that depressed my spirit, and saddened my 
 heart with many a painful association and anticipa- 
 tion as likely to arise from my new connexion." 
 
 I then heard Elder Kerr preach for the first time, 
 and was somewhat disappointed in his sermon. It 
 was more declamatory, and less instructive than I 
 had expected. Of its effects my recollections are 
 less vivid than are those of Mr. C. I had afterwards 
 frequently the opportunity of hearing Kerr preach, 
 and I deem it due to his memory, in view of the 
 above disparaging extract, to state my impressions 
 of his abilities and influence. God has endowed his 
 ministers with a diversity of gifts. On Elder Kerr 
 was bestowed the gift of exhortation. His doctri- 
 nal views were evangelical, and his piety sincere 
 and ardent. He taught the way of salvation clearly. 
 I have heard many preachers, of different denomi- 
 nations, and many distinguished public speakers, 
 of various kinds ; but I must say that for beautiful, 
 impassioned, and effective declamation, I have ne- 
 ver heard him eq lalled. He was one of the most
 
 CAMPBELLISM RE-EXAMINED. 29 
 
 * 
 
 powerful of natural orators. Thousands now living 
 can bear testimony to the efficiency of .his labors 
 Had he been as highly gifted in the instruction of 
 the disciples as he was in the conversion of sinners, 
 the history of the Bethany Keformation in Eastern 
 Virginia would be widely different from what 
 it is. 
 
 On page 69, we read " In the year 1825, the 
 Virginia Baptists immersed the candidates into 
 their own experience. Yes, their Christian expe- 
 rience ! ! Thousands of them had as much Chris- 
 tian experience before baptism as after it. A 
 few added that they had the additional experience 
 of l having obeyed a command ' ! I saw some strange 
 sights, and heard some strange utterances, at the 
 
 O 7 *-> ' 
 
 Baptist Camp-meetings in Old Virginia, in those 
 days." 
 
 I do not comprehend what Mr. Campbell means 
 by baptizing "candidates into their own experience." 
 The Baptists have always required an experience 
 in order to baptism an experience comprehending 
 the various exercises which result in conversion. 
 No man is fit for baptism who has not an experience 
 of the depravity of his heart, the sinfulness of sin, 
 his guilt in the sight of God, sorrow for sin, a sense 
 of his own insufficiency, trust in Christ, love to 
 him, and his people, in fine, all those convictions, 
 conflicts, sorrows and joys which attend the new 
 birth ; and this may be called Christian expe-
 
 3G CAMPBELLISH RE/-EXAMINED. 
 
 rience because it is the experience, not of a pagan 
 or infidel, but of a young convert an unbaptized 
 Christian. If this is what Mr. C. means by being 
 baptized into experience, then the Baptists, not only 
 in the year 1825, but in all times have baptized the 
 " candidates into their own experience" as John 
 baptized his disciples into repentance. Mat. 3 : 11. 
 If this is not what he means, what does he mean ? 
 But says Mr, C., "I saw some strange sights, 
 and heard some strange utterances, at the Baptist 
 Camp-meetings in Old Virginia, in those days" 
 " in the year 1825," as the context shows. I con- 
 fess this language surprises me. By "Old Vir- 
 ginia," he must mean Eastern Va. ; for, not only is 
 that the usual import of the appellation, but the 
 Baptists in Western Va., so far as I am informed, 
 have never held camp-meetings. Now, from all 
 that I can learn, and I think my information is 
 accurate, the Baptists of Old Virginia had no camp- 
 meetings "in those days." The first Baptist camp- 
 meetings of Old Va., within the present century, 
 except a few feeble attempts, the dates of which I 
 do not recollect, at a point which Mr. C. I pre- 
 sume has not visited, occurred in the year 1831. 
 Since that time they have had but few. And can 
 I be mistaken in supposing that, if Mr. C. attended 
 any of them, he did so incognito ? My curiosity is 
 much excited. Is it possible that in disguise, he 
 has been attending Baptist camp-meetings in Old
 
 CAMPBELLISM RE-EXAMINED. 3] 
 
 Virginia, and seeing "strange sights," and hearing 
 "strange utterances ?" Or does he draw upon his 
 imagination, or the dim recollections of a departed 
 dream, for these wonderful statements ? I hope 
 that in his promised book, he will not only reveal* 
 these strange sights and utterances, but also the 
 times and places of the " Baptist Camp-meetings," 
 at which his knowledge was obtained. He may 
 thus dispel the mystery which otherwise must for- 
 ever rest upon his astounding disclosures. 
 
 TRUE AND SPURIOUS REFORMATION. 
 
 I admitted in Campbellism Examined, the neces- 
 sity of a reformation among the Baptists at the 
 time Mr. Campbell first appeared in Eastern Vir- 
 ginia. It required no great stretch of candor to 
 make the concession. They have made some pro- 
 gress since that time in knowledge and efficiency, 
 but, unfortunately, they still need reformation. In 
 nothing are they perfect ; in many things their de- 
 fects are obvious. But of what sect, or church, or 
 class of Christians, are not these admissions true ? 
 The Disciples, Mr. Campbell himself being judge, 
 stand in need of farther reformation. The reviser 
 seized hold of these concessions to justify the refor- 
 mation for which he pleaded. Referring to an ex- 
 tract from Campbellism Examined, he says, "This 
 concedes all we ask, and all that our position before 
 the living age requires." p. G7. " That a rcforma-
 
 32 CAMPBELLISM RE-EXAMINED. 
 
 tion was needed/' he says in another place, quoting 
 from the same work, "by the Christian sects of 
 that time, none who possess a tolerable acquaint- 
 ance with the (their) condition, and the claims of 
 the gospel, will deny." p. 25. To which he adds, 
 " Well, have we not done the work ? If so, why 
 complain?" p. 144. 
 
 Now, this reasoning seems to be very plausible 
 a reformation was admitted to be necessary we 
 wrought a reformation " and this is all that our 
 position before the living age requires " but it is 
 merely plausible. The argument resembles that 
 of a surgeon who justifies the amputation of a limb 
 on the ground that the patient had a diseased eye. 
 I concede the necessity of a reformation in the Bap- 
 tist churches a reformation " in spirit and prac- 
 tice, rather than doctrine" or in doctrine, as Mr. C. 
 would express it. But, having disinterred what he 
 termed the " ancient gospel," he engaged zealously 
 in the propagation of certain speculations such as 
 " truth alone is all that is necessary to the con- 
 version of men " that men are justified by an act 
 of faith "and this act is sometimes called immer- 
 sion, regeneration, conversion" that Peter has 
 " made repentance, or reformation, and immersion, 
 equally necessary to forgiveness " " The belief of 
 this one fact " that Jesus is the Messiah "and 
 submission to one institution, expressive of it, is all 
 that is required of heaven to admission into the
 
 CAMPBELLISM RE-EXAMINED. 3^ 
 
 church." With equal zeal he opposed certain 
 measures and practices deemed by the Baptists 
 important for the prosperity of the churches and 
 the extension of the Redeemer's kingdom. But 
 this subject demands a more careful examination. 
 
 One of the concessions by which Mr. Campbell 
 seeks to justify his reformation is the following : 
 
 " Among the Baptist churches there were some 
 sad evils. . In parts of the country, the churches were 
 infected with an antinomian spirit, and blighted by 
 a heartless, speculative, hair-splitting orthodoxy. 
 These churches were mostly penurious, opposed to 
 Christian missions, and all enlarged plans and self- 
 denying efforts, for promoting the cause of Christ." 
 Camp. Ex. pp. 25, 26. 
 
 The class of Baptists described in the above ex- 
 tract, were called in some places "Old School," and 
 in others, from the name of the place at which they 
 held their seceding Convention, "Black-rock" Bap- 
 tists. They separated themselves from the regular 
 Baptists about the time of the rise of Mr. Camp- 
 bell's reformation. This class of Baptists prevailed 
 considerably in the region of Bethany. That the 
 reviewer should have adduced the conceded evils 
 among this small fragment of Baptists to vindicate 
 his efforts at reformation fills me with surprise. I 
 wonder that when he did so his cheeks had not been 
 tinged with a blush. 
 
 Now, it is full) conceded that these antiuomian
 
 34 CAMPBELLISM RE-EXAMINED. 
 
 Baptists greatly needed reformation ; but, unfor- 
 tunately, Mr. C. has done little, or nothing, tc 
 eradicate the evils among them. A few of them 
 adopted his doctrinal peculiarities, because he con- 
 curred with them in certain cherished opinions ; 
 but the mass of them are as ignorant, bigoted and 
 fruitless, as -they were at the dawn of the Bethany 
 Reformation. But this is not all. Mr. Campbell, 
 far from endeavoring to correct the evils prevalent 
 among them, catered to their corrupt taste, defended 
 their erroneous views, and confirmed them in their 
 opposition to "all enlarged plans and self-denying 
 efforts for promoting the cause of Christ." But, I 
 must notice particulars. 
 
 " These churches were mostly penurious." 
 Their covetousness was a great evil, and much 
 needed correction. How did Mr. Campbell propose 
 to remove it ? Let any one read the pages of the 
 Christian Baptist, and he will learn. By insinu- 
 ating that the clergy ministers of Christ, not en- 
 listed under the banner of his reformation not 
 some of them merely, but the cla s were selfish 
 and mercenary ; and that all benevolent schemes 
 for promoting the interests of religion were inge- 
 nious priestly devices to fleece the flock of Christ. 
 " Look," said he, " again at the sums of money 
 squandered at home and abroad under the pretext 
 of converting the world ; and again, wherein is the
 
 CAMPBELLISM RE-EXAMINED. 35 
 
 heathen world benefited by such conversions ?" 
 Chris. Bap., p. 72. 
 
 These antinomian Baptist churches " were op- 
 posed to Christian missions." This was a sore 
 evil, which many of our brethren lamented, and en- 
 deavored by their faithful instruction, and by their 
 consistent example, to correct. But by what method 
 did Mr. Campbell aim to remove it ? By proclaim- 
 ing that Christian missions which distinguished the 
 age were unauthorized sectarian-rebellion against 
 the throne and government of Messiah like the 
 Catholic missions and in many instances " a sys- 
 tem of iniquitous peculation and speculation." For 
 condensed proof on these points the reader may con- 
 sult Campbellism Examined, pp. 42-59. The suc- 
 cess of this method Mr. Campbell triumphantly 
 published from a Kentucky correspondent, in the 
 Christian Baptist, p. 144. " Your paper has well 
 nigh stopped missionary operations in this state." 
 
 These hair-splitting Baptist churches, self-styled 
 " orthodox," were opposed to "all enlarged plans 
 and self-denying efforts for promoting the cause of 
 Christ." 
 
 They were opposed to all plans for the education 
 of young ministers. They looked upon them as 
 tending to corrupt the ministry, to destroy the best 
 interests of souls, and to dishonor Christ. This evil, 
 though not confined to antinomian Baptists, was, 
 hrouarh the faithful labors, and benign influence of
 
 36 CAMPBELLISM HE-EXAMINED. 
 
 our fathers, beginning, at the period of Mr. Camp- 
 bell's coming among us, to disappear in the regular 
 Baptist churches. How clid the reformer propose to 
 aid in the correction of the evil ? Not by condemn- 
 ing the education of ungodly young men for the Chris- 
 tian ministry --as he now would have the world to 
 believe a practice which has never received the 
 slightest countenance among Baptists but by pub- 
 lishing concerning a discourse by the Kev. Gideon 
 Blackburn, D. D., as follows " His sermon is in- 
 tended to proclaim that it is the duty of the church 
 to prepare in^her bosom pious youth" note this, 
 2iious youth " for the gospel ministry. Now this 
 is really a new message from the skies, for there is 
 not one word from Genesis to John, which says that 
 it is the duty of the church to prepare pious youth 
 for the gospel ministry." Christian Baptist, p. 221. 
 By such instruction did Mr. C. endeavor to reform 
 the antinomian Baptists ; and, truly, it was most 
 refreshing to their spirits, and, deeply averse as 
 they were to progress, it was the means of bring- 
 ing a few of them to embrace the "ancient gospel." 
 These churches were opposed to the "reasonable 
 support of pastors." This evil was not confined to 
 this class of Baptists, but was " too much neglected" 
 in all the churches. Before Mr. Campbell made 
 his debut in Eastern Virginia, many Baptist min- 
 isters had perceived the evil, and made vigorous 
 efforts to arrest it The Kev. Abner W. Clopton
 
 CAMPBELLISM RE-EXAMINED. 37 
 
 is worthy of a monument for his fearkts, earnest, 
 and successful labors in correcting it. Then the 
 Bethany Keformer, learned, eloqueit and distin- 
 guished, came to his aid, not proclaiming with 
 Christ, "the workman is worthy of his hire" but 
 in his own peculiar style, " that every man who re- 
 ceives money for preaching the gospel, or for ser- 
 mons, by the day, month, or year, is a hireling in 
 the language of truth and soberness." Chn. Bap. 
 p. 233. And then he urged on the churches the 
 duty of supporting their pastors, in the following 
 manner : " The modern clergy say they do not 
 preach for money. Very well ; let the people pay 
 them none, and they will have as much of their 
 preaching still."---Chn. Bap. p* 43. 
 
 By such efforts did Mr. Campbell seek to pro- 
 mote the reformation, the necessity of which I con- 
 ceded, and which concession, he says, is " all that 
 we ask, and all that our position before the living 
 age requires." He is welcome to the concession ! 
 
 THE INFLUENCE OF THE HOLY SPIRIT IN CONVERSION. 
 
 The larger part of Mr. Campbell's review is de- 
 roted to the discussion of this important topic. Be- 
 gin where he might, he was sure to glide into this 
 subject. It is no easy matter to answer his argu- 
 ments, because they are without arrangement, fre- 
 quently on collateral issues, and not always perspi- 
 cuous. Confusion, which in an army makes defeat
 
 38 CAHPBELLISM RE-EXAMINED. 
 
 easy, in an argument renders it difficult. I will 
 briefly notice the most important points in the dis- 
 cussion. 
 
 In CampbeUism Examined, I attempted to show 
 that Mr. Campbell's teaching on the subject of the 
 Spirit's agency, in the conversion of sinners, is in- 
 consistent and contradictory. I admitted that he 
 had put forth orthodox views on this subject that 
 he had maintained the popular doctrine that the 
 Spirit and the "Word co-operate in conversion. I 
 also stated that, he taught, with equal clearness, 
 that the Spirit in conversion does nothing more 
 than persuade the sinner, by words or other signs, 
 addressed to the understanding, to turn to Grocl. 
 Numerous quotations were furnished from his wri- 
 tings to confirm these statements. I was not alone 
 in this interpretation of his language. It was so 
 understood by the Kev. A. Broaddus, distinguished 
 for his intelligence and candor. Dr. Lynd, whose 
 "scholar-like epistle" reminds Mr. Campbell "so 
 much in matter, manner and spirit, of the learned, 
 and liberal, and gentlemanly Dr. Staughton," says, 
 in his brief notice of Campbellism Examined, "It is 
 clearly shown by the quotations that Mr. Campbell's 
 views certainly destroyed the agency of the Holy 
 Spirit in regeneration."- Mill. Har. 141. Indeed, 
 I do not remember to have found an intelligent 
 Christian, not a Reformer, who has paid attention 
 to the subject, that does not concur in this view ;
 
 CAMFBELLISM RE-EXAMINED. 39 
 
 and many of the Reformers not only admit :hat it 
 was taught by Mr. Campbell, but most heartily em- 
 brace and defend it. As I regarded this doctrine 
 as erroneous and of injurious tendency, it was dis- 
 cussed at considerable length. 
 
 I had no wish to convict Mr. Campbell of hetero- 
 doxy ; but sincerely hoped that he would endeavor 
 to set himself right on this vital principle of Chris- 
 tianity. If his views on this point are in harmony 
 with those of evangelical Christians generally, no- 
 thing can be easier than to make it appear. He 
 owes it to himself, and the cause of truth, to say 
 nothing of those who have been perplexed by his 
 apparently conflicting positions, not merely to state 
 his views on this momentous subject without ambi- 
 guity, but to show, if it can be shown, how these 
 views can be harmonized with teaching, which in 
 the estimation of everybody, except Mr. Campbell, 
 and his peculiar friends, is flatly contradictory ; and 
 if this cannot be shown, to acknowledge that he has 
 put forth indefensible statements. How easy it 
 would be for him to evince that he holds substan- 
 tially the views that have been generally entertained 
 on this subject by intelligent, evangelical Christians, 
 such as those recorded in Campbellism Examined, 
 pp. 183-185, and that he repudiates whatever 
 he may have written not in agreement with this 
 teaching. 
 
 I will now fully illustrate my meaning. In the
 
 40 CAMPBELLISM RE-EX LMINED. 
 
 Debate with Mr. Rice, Mr. Campbell says, " There 
 is the Word alone system, and there is the Spirit 
 alone system. I believe in neither." In Chris- 
 tianity Restored, he says, " All the power of God 
 or man is exhibited in the truth which they propose. 
 Therefore, we may say, that if the light, or the truth, 
 contain all the moral power of God, then truth alone 
 is all that is necessary to the conversion of men, for 
 we have before argued and proved, that the convert- 
 ing power is moral power." p. 362. Now, Mr. 
 Campbell may blame my head or my heart, but I 
 am not alone in my infirmity ; there are many who 
 are convinced that when he says, in one place, I do 
 not believe in "the Word alone system," and, in 
 another place, that "truth alone is all that is neces- 
 sary to the conversion of men," he puts forth con- 
 tradictory statements. I cannot reconcile them ; 
 if Mr. Campbell can, does he not owe it to the Be- 
 formation for which he pleads, and to the weakness, 
 or prejudice of its opponents, to do so ? But if he 
 cannot, does he not owe it to the cause of truth 
 and piety, to confess his error, and to inform the 
 world by which position he is resolved to abide ? 
 " There lies the rub." It may be unpleasant and 
 humiliating to him to admit that he has contradicted 
 himself; but in no other way, can he so highly 
 elevate himself in the estimation of the Christian 
 public, as by a frank and manly confession of his 
 error.
 
 CAMPBELLISM RE-EXAMINED. 41 
 
 /*? X 
 
 Mr. Campbell has his own methcd of treating 
 this subject, and I must attend to it. He has ob- 
 served no order in the discussion, but I will reduce 
 it to the best form I can. 
 
 First , then, Mr. C. sitbstantialfy concurs wltli me 
 in my main position on this suly'cct. He writes, 
 " He (I) propose to prove ' that there is an influ- 
 ence of the Spirit, internal, mighty, and efficacious, 
 differing from moral suasion, but ordinarily ex- 
 erted through the inspired Word in the conversion 
 of sinners.' Ordinarily, yes, ordinarily. We say 
 always ; he (I) says ordinarily; therefore the con- 
 troversy is narrowed down to the extraordinary 
 cases." pp. 131, 132. 
 
 These extraordinary cases shall be considered ii> 
 due time. I understand Mr. Campbell as agreeing 
 with me that the conversion of sinners is effected 
 not by moral suasion alone not merely by argu- 
 ments addressed to the eye or ear but by an inter- 
 nal, mighty, efficacious influence of tlie Spirit through 
 the written Word. This is the orthodox belief. fBut 
 it was not for maintaining this truth that Mr. Camp- 
 bell was censured and opposed by the Baptists. 
 They did not call in question this doctrine. He 
 cannot find in all their controversies with him, a 
 single sentence in condemnation of it. But he, and 
 his adherents were condemned for teaching that 
 nothing but truth addressed to the understanding 
 is necessary in conversion indeed, that there is no
 
 42 CAMPBELLISM 5.E-EXAMINED. 
 
 influence of the Holy Spirit until after baptism. 
 When Mr. Campbell establishes his orthodoxy on 
 this point, he abandons his Reformation. All that 
 he has written against the speculations, theories 
 and mysticism of the " populars" and he has writ- 
 ten volumes on these subjects must be understood 
 as directed against the crudities of a few visionaries, 
 the extravagancies of a still smaller number of ultra- 
 Calvinists, or men of straw of his own creation. 
 But he does not stop at the admission that my chief 
 proposition, with the exception of a single word, is 
 sound, and I must follow his devious course. 
 
 Secondly Mr. Campbell utterly misconceives the 
 design of my argument on the influence of the Spirit. 
 He says, " To gather out of one hundred and fifty 
 pages of his work any issue at all, it must be expressed 
 in this formula The Holy Spirit wor~ks upon the 
 human spirit, l>y actual contact, or impact) without 
 and independent of either law or gospel. I repeat 
 it, if there be either sense or reason, argument or 
 point, in his book, it is this." pp. 258, 259. 
 
 This may do well enough for those whose infor- 
 mation on this subject is derived solely from the 
 pages of the Millennial Harbinger ; but I am quite 
 persuaded that of all the readers of my book he is 
 the only one who has fallen into this strange mis- 
 apprehension. Nothing can be more explicit than 
 my statements on this subject. " It is fully admit- 
 ted," I say, "that the Spirit operates through the
 
 OAMPBBLLISM KE-EXAMIKED. 43 
 
 Word in the conversion and sanctification of men. 
 But I understand Mr. Campbell to maintain that 
 the influence of the Spirit in the work of conversion 
 is limited, and of necessity, to the simple presenta- 
 tion of arguments, motives, truth, to the minds of 
 men, by means of words, and other signs that all 
 the power of the Spirit in the conversion of men is 
 moral suasion." Camp. Ex., p. 123. On the 
 position above ascribed to Mr. Campbell a posi- 
 tion which he did maintain, if language can express 
 it I took issue ; and I do not think that he can 
 find a sentence in the seventy-seven pages devoted 
 to the discussion inconsistent with my chief aim. 
 True, I did maintain that the Spirit operates in 
 conversion ordinarily through the Word ; but as 
 the exceptional cases were not material in the dis- 
 cussion, I did not dwell on them. To preclude any 
 misconception of my views on this subject,' however, 
 I penned the following passage " On- one merely 
 speculative point" supposing that Mr. Campbell 
 admitted ' that conversion is effected by the per- 
 sonal agency of the Spirit' " he differs from most 
 or all of his brethren. They believe that this is 
 God's ordinary, or usual way of converting sinners ; 
 the only way in which we should hope, labor and 
 pray for their conversion; but that He is not lim- 
 ited to this way." Now, mark the extraordinary 
 instances contended for. " In the case of dying in- 
 fants or idiots, they believe that a moral change,
 
 44 CAMPBELLISM RE-EXAMINED. 
 
 equivalent to regeneration, is effected by the direct, 
 personal agency of the Holy Spirit, without the 
 fFord."--Camp. Ex. p. 186. How Mr. Campbell 
 could have so egregiously misapprehended my aim 
 and argument, I cannot comprehend. 
 
 Thirdly Mr. Campbell, not only misstates my 
 position in the discussion, but insists that I offered 
 no argument in support of my true position. He 
 quotes from Campbellism Examined, " Mr, Camp- 
 bell maintains, or did maintain, that all the con- 
 verting power of the Holy Spirit is in the arguments 
 or motives which he presents to the mind in the 
 written Word. On this point I take issue with him. 
 I maintain that there is an influence of the Spirit, 
 internal, mighty, and effi-cacious, differing from 
 moral suasion, but ordinarily exerted through the 
 inspired Word, in the conversion of sinners."]). 
 125. Mr. Campbell having furnished this extract, 
 proceeds to* remark, " Now, with what argument 
 does he (Mr. Jeter) assail or refute what he assumes 
 and affirms I did. or I do maintain, concerning the 
 converting power ? He makes an issue, but what 
 does he prove ? What arguments ? What is the 
 first, the second, the third ? I ask what is the 
 first? I cannot find it, unless it be the quotation 
 of " the wind bloweth where it pleases ;" and " so is 
 every one that is lorn of the Spirit." So what ? 
 Like the wind blowing ? ! I again ask How is 
 evwry one so like the wind blowing ? &c. If Mr.
 
 CAMPBELLISM RE-EXAMINED. 45 
 
 Jeter's salvation depended on it, I question if he 
 could explain the word so in this case. How is he 
 BO as the wind ? ! He had hetter send this ques- 
 tion to Boston/' Mill. Ear. p. 131. 
 
 The ahove passage from the pen of Mr. Campbell 
 is an enigma, explicable only on the supposition 
 that he had not read my book. He fairly states 
 the issues which I made with him. Having endea- 
 vored to show that his chief argument against my 
 position the inability of the Spirit to do more in 
 conversion than present arguments to the mind 
 was fallacious ; I proceeded to present at consider- 
 able length, five arguments against Mr. Campbell's 
 theory ot conversion. Concerning this theory, I 
 endeavored to prove 
 
 1. That it overlooks, or at least, under-estimates 
 the inveteracy of human depravity. 2. Tliat it is 
 incompatible with prayer for the conversion of sin- 
 ners. 3. That it is inconsistent with the introduc- 
 tion of the Millennium. 4. That it is contradicted 
 l>y the plain teaching of the Scriptures. And 5. 
 That it is inconsistent with the plainly revealed, 
 and, by Mr. Campbell, fairly conceded influence of 
 the Holy Spirit in believerft after baptism. These 
 positions the reader will, I think, find fully con- 
 firmed in my book. pp. 125-174. Now, That the 
 reviewer should have pronounced these arguments 
 illogical, inconclusive, weak, absurd, or obscure would 
 no 1 . Imvc surprised mo such an estimate of my
 
 46 CAMPBELLI SH HE-EXAMINED. 
 
 labors I was prepared to expect from him but I 
 confess, that, after all the strange things which he 
 has affirmed in this discussion, I was surprised to 
 read this language, " He (Mr. Jeter) makes an is- 
 sue, but what does he prove ? What arguments ? 
 What is the first, the second, the third ? I ask 
 what is fas first ? I cannot find it, unless it be the 
 quotation of l the wind bloweth where it pleases,' 
 and e so is every one that is born of the Spirit.' " The 
 reader will perceive by referring to Campbellism 
 Examined, p. 126, that the quotation, which Mr. 
 Campbell considers my only argument, was inci- 
 dentally introduced, without comment, in reply to 
 an assumption of his. And yet he can find no 
 argument but this in favor of my position. I will 
 only say, the arguments are visible. A well taught 
 school boy may be convinced of their existence. 
 But Mr. Campbell cannot see tJiem. I will not 
 affirm of him as he does of me, " There are not a 
 few things in science, in learning, and in religion. 
 which Mr. Jeter will not understand till he get 
 another head or heart. We are, indeed, sorry for 
 his sake, that we cannot create the one or the 
 other." pp. 73, 74. But I will affirm that some 
 influence has obscured the mental vision of the re- 
 viewer. He does not display in this matter his 
 usual perspicacity. And, I will also state that 
 multitudes have seen the arguments, invisible to 
 nm, and have the full conviction that they have not
 
 CAMPBELLISM RE-EXAMINED. 47 
 
 been answered. It is to be hoped that I >fore Mr. 
 Campbell shall write his promised book, he will put 
 on his spectacles, and make diligent search for them, 
 that he may not only find, hut refute them, if they 
 are fallacious, lest some suspicious persons should 
 surmise that the difficulty of finding a reply to the 
 arguments was the real cause of their obscuration. 
 
 But suppose I offered no argument to sustain my 
 position " that there is an influence of the Sjnrit, 
 internal, mighty, and efficacious, differing from 
 moral suasion, but ordinarily exerted through the in- 
 spired Word, in the conversion of sinners does not 
 Mr. Campbell concur with me in it, except as to 
 the extraordinary cases, which I deemed of little 
 importance in the controversy ? Why, then, does 
 he seek to conceal or disparage the arguments by 
 which I aimed to establish, not the exceptional 
 cases about which we differ, but the main proposi- 
 tion in which he asserts that we agree ? True, he 
 has ignored, rathe?- than refuted these arguments ; 
 but by censuring a sentence here and there by 
 carrying on a mere logomachy he has betrayed a 
 willingness to refute them, though that refutation 
 would be, as he concedes, at the expense of a vital 
 doctrine of Christianity, 
 
 Fourthly. I will now notice the extraordinary 
 cases of conversion to which Mr. Campbell takes ex- 
 ception. He agrees with me that there is an influ- 
 ence f>f the Spirit, internal, mighty, and efficacious,
 
 48 CAMPBELL1SM RE-EXAMINED. 
 
 exerted through the inspired Word, in the conversion 
 of sinners. I maintain, however, that the Spirit 
 ordinarily, and Mr. Campbell that the Spirit al- 
 ways operates in this manner. 
 
 Before I enter on the discussion of this point, I 
 will premise two things 
 
 1. The exceptions to God's usual method of con- 
 version are distinctly stated in my book. " In the 
 case of dying infants, or idiots, they (evangelical 
 Christians,) believe that a moral change, equiva- 
 lent to regeneration, is effected by the direct, per- 
 sonal agency of the Holy Spirit, without the Word." 
 Camp. Ex., p. 186. This point I did not discuss, 
 deeming it of no practical importance, as we are 
 called to labor and pray for the conversion of sin- 
 ners only in the ordinary way. A more careful con- 
 sideration of the matter, however, has convinced me 
 that it is more important than I formerly thought. 
 Truth is a unit. Speculative, may readily lead to 
 practical error. A mistake on this point under ex- 
 amination must tend to Pelagianism on the one 
 hand, or the denial of spiritual influence on the 
 other ; and both these extremes are subversive of 
 Christianity. 
 
 2. Mr. Campbell, who was anxious to turn to 
 his advantage my position that the Spirit ordinari- 
 ly converts sinners through the inspired Word, was 
 very careful to keep\mt of sight that the plainly 
 stated exceptions wer& " dying infants or idiots/''
 
 CAMrBELLISlI RE-EXAMINED. 49 
 
 I do not charge Mr. Campbell with intentional mis- 
 representation ; but no reader of the Harbinger could 
 learn my views on this subject. He would certainly 
 suppose, contrary to the explicit statements of my 
 book, that I teach that adults in a probationary 
 state, are converted by the Spirit, sometimes through 
 the Word, and sometimes without the Word. If 
 the reviewer had informed his readers of the excep- 
 tional cases for which I pleaded, much that he wrote 
 of " a purely physical, or metaphysical regenera- 
 tion" would have appeared to be worse than useless. 
 
 I shall now proceed to show that in the case of 
 dying infants and idiots, regeneration takes place 
 by the agency of the Spirit without the Word. 
 
 I use the term "regeneration" in its well under- 
 stood moral sense as equivalent to conversion or 
 a spiritual renovation that change by which the 
 depraved soul of man is fitted for the heavenly king- 
 dom. 
 
 In support of my position, I remark 
 
 1. That whatever may be legitimately inferred 
 from the Scriptures is a part of divine revelation, 
 and worthy of our belief. For illustration We are 
 expressly informed that when the angel announced 
 the birth of John the Baptist to Zacharias, he was 
 struck dumb ; Lu. 1 : 20 ; we infer from the fact 
 that at the birth of the promised child, the family 
 made signs to the father " how he would have him 
 called," that Zacharias was deaf Lu. 1: 62 ; and his
 
 50 CAMPBELLISM BE-EXAMINED. 
 
 deafness and dumbness are equally matters of revela- 
 tion, and equally entitled to our credence. If, there- 
 fore, it can be fairly inferred from the teaching of the 
 Scriptures that dying infants and idiots need a moral 
 change to fit them for heaven, and that this change 
 is effected by the Holy Spirit, without the Word, 
 these truths are a part of revelation, and worthy of 
 our belief. 
 
 2. That infants are born with depraved natures. 
 This is the orthodox belief ; and on this point Mr. 
 Campbell is orthodox. In the Christian System, 
 we read, " True, indeed, it is ; our nature was cor- 
 rupted by the fall of Adam before it was transmit- 
 ted to us ; and hence that hereditary imbecility to do 
 good, and that proneness to do evil, so universally ap- 
 parent in all human beings. * * * All inherit a 
 fallen, consequently a sinful nature, though all are 
 not equally depraved." pp. 28, 29. Every child 
 of Adam enters the world with a nature, fallen 
 sinful impotent to do good, and prone to do evil, 
 
 3. That dying infants and idiots are saved. 
 This is the popular doctrine ; and, whether true or 
 false, is held by Mr. Campbell. I quote from the 
 Christian System, p. 29. " Condemned to natural 
 death, and greatly fallen and depraved in our whole 
 moral constitution though we certainly are, in con- 
 sequence of the sin of Adam ; still, because of the 
 interposition of the second Adam, none are pun- 
 ished with everlasting destruction from the presence
 
 CAMPBELLISM BE-EXAMINED. 51 
 
 of the Lord, but those who actually and voluntarily 
 sin against a dispensation of mercy under which 
 they are placed." 
 
 Take another" quotation from the Debate with 
 Rice, p. 655. " The atonement of the Messiah has 
 made it compatible with God, with the honor of 
 his throne and government, to save all those infants 
 who die in Adam. He has made an .am pie provi- 
 sion for extending salvation from all the conse- 
 quences of Adam's sin to whomsoever he will." I 
 have italicized the important clause in the extract. 
 
 These passages, though they do not directly af- 
 firm, plainly imply the salvation of infants, dying 
 in infancy ; an inference, to which, if I understand 
 Mr. Campbell, he will fully assent. 
 
 4. That the salvation of dying infants, and by 
 a parity of reason, of dying idiots, implies regene- 
 ration, or a spiritual change. The salvation by 
 Christ is deliverance from sin. In the case of an 
 adult, it is deliverance from liability to punishment, 
 by the remission of sins ; and from moral corrup- 
 tion, by regeneration, and sanctification. In the 
 case of an infant, dying before the commission of 
 sin, it is deliverance from depravity, or what Mr. 
 Campbell terms "fallen sinful nature." Less than 
 this it cannot imply. Heaven is a holy place, and 
 none but the holy are admitted to its enjoyments, 
 or can appreciate them. Without holiness "no 
 man shall see the Lord." Infants, dying in infancy,
 
 52 CAMPBELLISM KE-EXAMIIs.i5L>. 
 
 must by some process, known or unknown, be freed 
 from depravity morally renewed regenerated, or 
 they can never be saved never participate in the 
 joys of heaven. This point is so 'generally admit- 
 ted so clear so accordant with all that is revealed 
 of the heavenly state, and the moral condition of 
 humanity, that, I presume, Mr. Campbell will riot 
 dispute it. If, however, he does, the proof of it is 
 at hand. Jesus said to Nicodemus, " Verily, verily, 
 I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, lie 
 cannot see the kingdom of God." John 3: 3. The 
 term " man," in this place, is used in its generic 
 sense, to denote any one possessing human nature 
 any man, woman, or child. No human being, of 
 any sex, age, or condition, can discern the nature, 
 or enjoy the blessings of Messiah's reign, without 
 this new, or divine birth ; and this is true of his 
 future as well as of his present reign true of his ce- 
 lestial as well as of his earthly reign. A spiritual 
 change a holy nature is indispensable to our en- 
 trance into the kingdom of God. If any doubt ex- 
 isted as to the correctness of the interpretation, it 
 would vanish on a careful examination of the sixth 
 verse, " That which is born of the flesh is flesh ; and 
 that which is born of the Spirit is spirit." Jesus 
 here explains the nature of that change, which he 
 had affirmed was a pre-requisite to admission into 
 the kingdom of God. It is not a fleshly birth. " That 
 which is born of the flesh is flesh" is carnal, cle-
 
 CAMPBELLISM RE-EXAMINED. 53 
 
 praved, sinful. This sense of the text is so obvious 
 that it will not, I am sure, be denied. Every child 
 that has been born, except the adorable Jesus, has 
 inherited, and every child that shall hereafter be 
 born will inherit this fleshly, depraved nature ; and 
 this corrupt nature cannot, without a n iritual reno- 
 vation, participate in the blessings of Messiah's 
 reign. Are infants, idiots, or any other class of hu- 
 man beings exempt from this necessity a necessity 
 which has its foundation, not in an arbitrary ap- 
 pointment, but in the depravity of human nature, 
 and the essential principles of the divine govern- 
 ment ? Let the intelligent and candid answer. 
 
 Having shown that the salvation of infants clear- 
 ly implies their regeneration, or moral renovation, 
 I remark, 
 
 5. That this change is effected in the case of dy- 
 ing infants and idiots by the agency of the Holy 
 Spirit without the Word. If these classes of hu- 
 man beings are saved, which Mr. Campbell admits, 
 they are converted morally renovated. If they 
 are renewed, it is neither by human nor angelic 
 agency. The atonement of Christ, though it may 
 procure, is not the agency which effects this change. 
 In the scheme of human salvation revealed in the 
 Scriptures, the Spirit is the agent, through whoso 
 power and grace, depraved man is renewed made 
 meet for the inheritance of tne saints in light. There 
 is a "renewing of the Holy Ghost," by which men
 
 54 CAMPBELLISM RE-EXAMINED. 
 
 are saved, but I know of no other renewing agency 
 adequate to such' a result. This saving renewal, in 
 the case of dying infants and idiots, must take place 
 without the influence of the written .Word, for of 
 this Word they are ignorant. Of the process of this 
 renewal, I know nothing ; but its reality seems to 
 be plainly inferable from the acknowledged and 
 fundamental doctrines of Christianity ; and so have 
 reasoned and taught the enlightened guides of the 
 church. Mr. Campbell will, I presume, admit that 
 if the class of persons under consideration are re- 
 generated, they are regenerated by the Spirit, 
 without the Word. 
 
 I will now furnish an instance of the regenera- 
 tion of an infant. It was predicted, by the angel, 
 of John the Baptist, that he should "be filled with 
 the Holy Ghost, even from his mother's womb." 
 Lu.'l: 15. To "be filled with the Spirit" is a 
 high Christian privilege, (Ep. 5: 18.) implying, 
 among other things, a pure heart. " The infant Bap- 
 tist was filled ivith the Holy Ghost." For what 
 purpose was -the Spirit richly bestowed on him ? 
 Obviously, to fit him for his mission ; and this fit- 
 ness included moral purity, and this moral purity 
 supposed regeneration. It cannot be imagined, 
 without irreverence, that the Holy Spirit dwelt in 
 an unregenerate, sinful heart. Where he dwells 
 there must be holiness. The influence of the Spirit 
 on the infant, John the Baptist, was not, in all re~
 
 CAMPBELLISM RE-EXAMINED. 55 
 
 spects, what it is on believers. On believers, the 
 Spirit operates through the Word ; on the infant 
 harbinger, He operated without the Word ; but in 
 both cases the result was the same moral purity. 
 Will Mr. Campbell deny that the Baptist was made 
 holy from his birth ? Will he maintain that ho 
 was filled with the Spirit by means of the written 
 Word ? The fact that this unconscious babe was 
 richly imbued with the Holy Spirit, scatters to the 
 winds a whole volume of Mr. Campbell's sophistries 
 on spiritual influence. The Spirit, that by an ex- 
 traordinary method, fitted the infant John for his 
 mission, can, in the same manner, fit dying infants 
 for heaven. 
 
 On the subject of infant regeneration Mr. Camp- 
 bell holds peculiar views they constitute an im- 
 portant part of the "Ancient Gospel" disinterred 
 at Bethany and they shall receive special atten- 
 tion. 
 
 I quote from the Review, p. 123. " Regenera- 
 tion without knowledge, faith or repentance," in 
 the case of infants, dying in infancy, he should, in 
 fairness have said, " is the confessed doctrine of the 
 Baptist Confession of Faith, and of all the ' ortho- 
 dox Baptists' in the United States. * ** To 
 such a purely physical or metaphysical regenera- 
 tion, we do, indeed, object." * * # " It amounts to 
 neither more nor less than the impact of Spirit upon 
 it of the naked Spirit of God upon the naked
 
 56 CAMPBELLISM RE-EXAMINED. 
 
 spirit of man, without argument, reason, or motived 
 Such are Mr. Campbell's views of the Baptist doc- 
 trine of the regeneration of infants, dying in in- 
 fancy. 
 
 Let us now attend to his arguments against in- 
 fant regeneration. I continue the extract from the 
 Review " Need we assume, that whatever consti- 
 tutes regeneration in any case infant or adult, Jew 
 or Gentile constitutes it in all cases ? Are not 
 conception and birth the same in all ages of the 
 world, and in all cases ?" I will give him a fuller 
 statement of the argument from the Debate with 
 Rice p. 620. "Whatever is essential to regene- 
 ration in "any case, is essential to it in all cases. 
 The change, called regeneration, is a specific change. 
 It consists of certain elements, and is effected by a 
 specific agency. If it be a new heart given, a new 
 life communicated, it is accomplished in all cases, 
 as generation is, by the same agency and instru- 
 mentality. If, then, the Spirit of God, without 
 faith, without the knowledge of the Gospel, in any 
 case regenerates an individual, he does so in all 
 cases." 
 
 As Mr. Campbell frequently introduces this ar- 
 gument, and lays great stress on it, it is proper to 
 test its strength. There is a manifest sophism 
 lurking in the language of the argument. " What- 
 ever is essential to regeneration in any case, is essen- 
 tial to it in all cases." This is a mere truism
 
 CAMPBELLISM RE-EXAMINED. 57 
 
 equivalent to saying, "Wliztever is essential to re- 
 generation, is essential to it. Now, nothing is es- 
 sential to regeneration, except that, without which,, 
 if there he any such thing, God cannot effect it. 
 We must distinguish he t ween an ordinary and an 
 essential instrumentality. The products of the 
 earth are the ordinary, the almost universal means 
 of human sustenance ; hut God, when it suited 
 him to do so, fed the Israelites with manna from 
 heaven. A human father is the ordinary, and so 
 far as we know, with a single exception, the uni- 
 versal, hut not the essential means of generation 
 Mr. Camphell's assumption to the contrary notwith- 
 standing for that holy thing which was horn of the 
 virgin Mary was conceived of the Holy Ghost. Lu. 
 1: 35. Generation is the universal means of rear- 
 ing up a family ; hut God is ahle of the * stones to 
 raise up children unto Abraham/ " Mat. 3:9. The 
 argument under consideration assumes the very 
 point in debate that the Word is essential to re- 
 generation. That the Word the preaching of the 
 Word the ordinances of Christ the example and 
 prayers of Christians and the providences of God, 
 both merciful and severe, are the ordinary, and, so 
 far as we can judge, the only means of regeneration, 
 except in the case of dying infants, and individuals 
 in a similar condition, I concede and fully teach ; 
 but that these important means are indispensable to 
 conversion, I deny, and Mr. Campbell cannot prove.
 
 58 CAMPBELLISM RE-EXAMINED. 
 
 The fallacy of the reasoning under consideration 
 may be shown by the application of the argumen- 
 tum ad hominem. Mr. Campbell maintains the 
 doctrine of the salvation of infants, dying in infan- 
 cy if he does not, let him say so, and I will sus- 
 pend him on the other horn of the dilemma. To 
 this doctrine we will apply his logic. "Whatever 
 is essential to" salvation "in any case, is essential 
 to it in all cases." But faith, repentance, and bap- 
 tism, as he teaches, are essential to salvation in some 
 cases. Therefore, faith, repentance and baptism 
 are essential to it in every case. Now, it is clear 
 that Mr. Campbell must renounce, either his argu- 
 ment, or the salvation of infants. As infants can 
 neither believe, repent, nor properly be baptized, 
 and if these are essential to salvation, they cannot 
 possibly be saved. Clearly, he should relinquish 
 his reasoning. To affirm that because faith, repen- 
 tance and baptism are essential to the salvation of 
 an intelligent, moral agent, to whom the Gospel is 
 preached, it is essential to the salvation of uncon- 
 scious infants, is new sophistry but sophistry of 
 precisely the kind by which the reviewer opposes 
 infant regeneration. 
 
 Mr. Campbell maintains that God does nothing 
 without means ; and concludes, therefore, that he 
 does not regenerate dying infants. In Campbellism 
 Examined, I stated incidentally that God can ivork 
 with means or without them. This is a favorite
 
 CAMPBELLISM RE-EXAMINED. 59 
 
 text with the reviewer, and he expatiates on it, 
 frequently, largely, and eloquently. I quote from 
 pp. 132, 133. " I will charge myself and credit 
 Mr. Jeter for a proof, even one proof, of the propo- 
 sition, that 'God ivorks without means,' in creation, 
 providence or redemption ! Moses forgot to name 
 any of those things which God created without 
 means ! ! But my friend, Mr. Jeter, is the man 
 to set him right, or at least, to fill up that chasm 
 in the account of creation. Paul says that ' by 
 faith we understand that the worlds were framed by 
 the word of God.' This statement is fatal to Eld. 
 Jeter's speculation. If God did not, for reasons 
 good and valid, create anything without his word^ 
 or without means, what shall we say of the wisdom 
 or the presumption of the affirmation, that ' God 
 who made man without means, can renew him with- 
 out means !' 
 
 " I knew that creatures, even the mightiest, 
 could do nothing without means ; but I had sup- 
 posed, in my simplicity, or, perhaps, in my "pre- 
 sumption" that God, greater than creatures, can, 
 and sometimes, does work without means. I had 
 never doubted but that he created the world that 
 he inspired holy men to write the scriptures that 
 Christ wrought miracles that God will raise the 
 dead, without means ; and, if I had been convinced 
 that all these things have been done, or will be 
 done, by means, I should still have thought, that
 
 60 CAMPBELLISM RE-EXAMINED. 
 
 he" formed by mere power the means, or instrument, 
 whatever it may be, by which he did, or will accom- 
 plish these things. But it appears that I was en- 
 tirely mistaken. " Paul says that by faith we un- 
 derstand that the worlds were framed by the word 
 of God." And this statement, it seems, is fatal to 
 my speculation. I am surprised that Mr. Camp- 
 bell should so bewilder himself on this subject. I 
 do not charge him with quibbling, but it is not 
 easy to see how quibbling could be more futile than 
 his reasoning. I can easily comprehend that words 
 may be a means of good or evil, when there are ears 
 to hear, and hearts to understand them. The 
 scriptures are called the word of God, not because 
 they are words which he uttered, but human words 
 employed by the ' Spirit of inspiration for the in- 
 struction of mankind. They are appropriately 
 called the means of conversion. They are adapted 
 to enlighten, awaken, and purify the hearts of men. 
 Words are, literally, significant sounds, formed by 
 the human voice. It is obvious that words are as- 
 cribed to God only in a figurative sense. As words 
 are indicative of man's will or purpose ; God is said 
 to do that by his word, which he does by his will, 
 or the direct exercise of his power. So the language 
 is understood, as far as I have seen, by all commen- 
 tators and critics, except Mr. Campbell ; and this 
 interpretation is in harmony with God's incorporeal 
 nature. But suppose, for the sake of the argument,
 
 CAMPBELLISM RE-fcXAMINED. 61 
 
 that the infinite Spirit did, before language was 
 formed, without organs of speech, and without air 
 to modulate, utter words in empty space ; to call 
 them the means of creation is to ignore the import 
 of the word. Means signifies an instrument fitted 
 to accomplish an end. What fitness was there in 
 words to effect the creation of the world? There 
 were no ears to listen to them, no hearts to be im- 
 presed by them, and on inert matter, had it ex- 
 isted, they were not suited to act. But suppose, 
 for the sake of the argument, that God did utter, 
 in no matter what language, in the infinitude of 
 space, words as a means of creation. I would in- 
 quire, Were these words uttered by means, or with- 
 out them ? Man utters words by means of his 
 vocal organs. But has the infinite Spirit vocal or- 
 gans ? If he spake, it must have been by the 
 mere force of his will without organs of speech, or 
 any means whatever. Mr. Campbell's exposition 
 of the language of Paul is as abhorrent to sound 
 philosophy, as it is to just principles of philology. 
 The word of God, employed in creation, can mean 
 nothing more than his fiat, or almighty power, as 
 Mr. Campbell, fated to contradict himself on every 
 important point, plainly affirms. " We know," he 
 says, " that God is spirit and not matter yet he 
 created matter, and moulded and animated portions 
 of it, by mere volition" yes, " by mere volition" 
 and, consequently, not by instrumentality. p. 123.
 
 62 CAMPBELLISM RE-EXAMINED. 
 
 After all, when the mist is dispersed from the sub- 
 ject, the reviewer will be found to agree with me. 
 T cheerfully admit that infants dying in infancy, 
 are regenerated by the word of God not tfce written 
 word, nor any word spoken by the human voice- but 
 the very word by which the worlds were framed the 
 almighty fiat the word of God's power. Heb. I : 3. 
 
 But says Mr. Campbell, " How spirit acts on 
 spirit, or mind upon mind, otherwise than by argu 
 ments, reasons, or motives, we have never met witL 
 the man or book that could explain or demonstrate 
 by any species of argument, analogy, or proof." 
 p. 123. This may be true. I do not understand, 
 much less can I explain, how God " created matter, 
 and moulded and animated portions of it, by mere 
 volition." That he should act on mind, "by mere 
 volition," is certainly as plain and philosophical as 
 that he should thus act on matter. I cannot 
 abandon the truth because of Mr. Campbell's ina- 
 bility to comprehend it ; nor will I insinuate as he 
 does, in another case, with reference to myself, that 
 because " there are not a few things in science, in 
 learning and in religion," which he cannot under- 
 stand, that his inability indicates a peculiar defect in 
 his " head or heart." 
 
 I freely admit that the regeneration of an infant, 
 at death, does not imply all that is comprehended 
 in the regeneration of an adult. The enlightenment 
 of the mind,, repentance, and faith in Christ are of
 
 CAMrBELLISM RE-EX AMI XED. 63 
 
 necessity excluded* from infantile regeneration ; but 
 in this change a new, holy nature is imparted, by 
 which the infant soul is fitted for the heavenly feli- 
 city. The salvation of an infant and of an adult, 
 though differing in some respects, is substantially 
 the same. Redeemed by the same blood, sanctified 
 by the same spirit, and made partakers of the same 
 inheritance, they will unite their voices in the same 
 doxology, " Unto him that hath loved us, and 
 washed us from our sins in his own blood, and made 
 us kings and priests unto God and his Father ; to 
 him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. 
 Amen." 
 
 I close this part of the discussion with a reason- 
 able request that Mr. Campbell, in his forth-com- 
 ing book, will distinctly inform his readers that I 
 believe and maintain that the regeneration of sin- 
 ners is ordinarily effected by the Spirit through the 
 Word, and that the only exceptions for lohich I con- 
 tend are dying infants, and persons in a similar 
 moral condition, and that they are regenerated not 
 before, but in "the article of death." I make this 
 request, because I am quite sure that the review 
 is calculated to mislead as to my opinions on these 
 points those of his readers vho have not examined 
 my book.
 
 64 CAMPBELLISM RE-EXAMINED. 
 
 MR. CAMPBELL'S NEW PLAN OF INFANT SALVATION. 
 
 The Kefqrmer, having repudiated the popular 
 doctrine, that dying infants are, by a direct influ- 
 ence of the Holy Spirit, renewed, and fitted foi 
 heaven, found it necessary to adopt another method 
 of explaining the process of their salvation. This 
 process is more fully developed in the Debate with 
 Dr. Kice than anywhere else. I will permit Mr. 
 Campbell to furnish, in his own language, a full 
 statement of it : 
 
 " What then, let me ask, is the philosophy of re- 
 generation according to Mr. Kice ? It is a change 
 of heart. There we agree again. What sort of 
 change? not of the flesh, but of the spirit a 
 change of the affections, of the feelings and sympa- 
 thies of the soul. Agreed ! a change so great that 
 we love our former hates, and hate our former loves. 
 We love God and our Saviour supremely, and our 
 brethren fervently. We hate Satan, falsehood, and 
 sin. Hence comes the annihilation of his hypothe- 
 sis can an infant love or hate, without previous 
 knowledge, faith or apprehension of things amiable 
 and hateful ! ! No, says every man ; where there 
 is no light, no understanding, no intelligence, there 
 can be no disposition at all, no moral feeling, no 
 change of affections, no change of heart ; conse- 
 quently no infant moral or spiritual regeneration. 
 It is impossible it is inconceivable ! No man can 
 demonstrate, illustrate, or prove it." p. 654.
 
 CAMPBELLISM RE-EXAMIXED. 65 
 
 " If moral disposition be a part of regeneration, 
 and if moral disposidou be to love God and hate 
 Satan ; to love righteousness and hate" iniquity 
 Query Can an infant then be regenerated ? Can it 
 love or hate a being or a thing, concerning which it 
 knows nothing more than a rock ? Mr. E. cannot 
 explain this difficulty, and it is fatal to his theory. 
 If a child be regenerate, it must love holiness and 
 hate iniquity ; but .this catmot be without knowl- 
 edge because in religion, as in everything else, in- 
 tellect pioneers the way, while the affections and 
 the heart follow. We must see beauty before we* 
 can love it. "We must see deformity before we can 
 hate it. And, therefore, ' the love of holiness and 
 the hatred of sin' are impossible to an infant." 
 p. 668. 
 
 " But now with regard to our physical regenera- 
 tion of infants, my faith is in the Lamb of God, who 
 hath taken away the sin of the world. The atone- 
 ment of the Messiah has made it compatible with 
 God, with the honor of his throne and government, 
 to save all those infants who die in Adam. He has 
 made an ample provision for extending salvation 
 from all the consequences of Adam's sin tc whom- 
 soever he will. Ever blessed be his adorable name ! 
 THE LAMB OF GOD HAS BORNE AWAY THE SIN OP 
 THE WORLD. Infante then need that same kind of 
 regeneration that Paul, and Peter, and James, and 
 John, and all saints needthe entire destruction
 
 66 CAMPBELLISM KE-EXAMINED. 
 
 of this body of sin and death. The most perfect 
 Christian that I have ever seen, needs a regenera- 
 tion to fit nim for the immediate presence of God. 
 The infant that falls asleep in its mother's bosom, 
 and after a few short days breathes out its spirit 
 gently there, needs no more change to fit it for 
 Abraham's bosom, than that which the Spirit of God 
 will effect in the resurrection of the dead, or in the 
 transformation of the living saints at the time of 
 his coming. Philosophy, reason, and faith, are alike 
 silent on the subject of -any infant regeneration be- 
 fore death. It is all theory idle, empty, suicidal 
 theory. Experience lifts her ten thousand voices 
 against it. Whoever saw a child regenerated grow- 
 ing up from birth a pure and exemplary Christian ! 
 Persons have been sanctified, that is, set apart to 
 the Lord from their birth ; but that any one was, 
 in our sense of regeneration, changed in heart from 
 birth, reason, revelation, experience, observation de- 
 pose not ; on this subject they are all as silent as 
 death. While, then, I believe in the physical re- 
 generation of infants after death, I repudiate their 
 spiritual or moral regeneration in life, because un- 
 scriptural, irrational, and absurd." p. 655. 
 
 " Man, with me, when contemplated in his whole 
 person is a plural unit. He is one man, having a 
 body, a soul, and a spirit. So both my philosophy 
 and my Bible teach. Paul prayed for the Thessa- 
 'oniuns that God would sanctify them wholly (holo-
 
 CAMPBELLISM RE-EXAMINED. 67 
 
 teleis) their body, soul, and spirit. Their pneuma, 
 psuche, soma. Not only have the Greeks these 
 three names, but the Latins also. They had their 
 animus., their anima, and their corpus. So had the 
 Hebrews. So have the moderns, as we have body, 
 soul, spirit. The body is a mere organized mate- 
 rial machine the soul is the seat of all the passions 
 and instincts of our nature, and is intimately con- 
 nected with the blood. It is the animal life. The 
 spirit is a purely intellectual principle, as intimate- 
 ly connected with the soul, as the soul with the 
 blood, and the vital principle. Now the spirit, or 
 intellectual principle in man, is not the seat of cor- 
 ruption, or of depravity abstractly, any more than 
 the mere materials of human flesh. The under- 
 standing or intellect is indeed weakened, and some- 
 times perverted by the passions, the animal in- 
 stincts and impulses. But the soul is the great 
 seat of all those corrupting and debasing propen- 
 sities and affections that involve the whole man in 
 sin and misery. Man was not condemned for reas- 
 oning illogically ; nor was he condemned because 
 he was either hungry or thirsty, or had these ap- 
 petites, but because captivated by his passions, 
 he was led into actual rebellion. This is still the 
 depravity of man. His spirit is enslaved to his pas- 
 sions and appetites. Its approvings and disap- 
 provings are all more or less contaminated, biassed, 
 mid tinged by these rebellious elements, this ' law
 
 68 CAMPBELLISM RE-EXAMINED. 
 
 of sin which is in his members/ warring against 
 the law of his mind, reason and conscience. Now 
 these not being developed in infancy, any more 
 than reason or conscience, places them under quite 
 a different dispensation and destiny. Dying in that 
 undeveloped state, they are not the subjects of con- 
 demnation eternal, never having disobeyed Grod, 
 nor refused the Gospel. They need not those ope- 
 rations of the Spirit of which the theory of Mr. 
 Eice so often speaks, and with which it is so replete, 
 all of which originated too in the brain of one Saint 
 Augustine. 
 
 " Hours might be consumed in the development 
 of these principles ; and without a full development, 
 perhaps they ought not to be introduced. I have, 
 indeed, spoken thus far, merely to show, that we 
 have reason to repudiate the notion of the abstract, 
 undefinable metaphysical regeneration of an infant, 
 as essential to its salvation. It only needs, as before 
 observed, a physical regeneration ; a destruction of 
 that body in which those seeds of passion and sinful 
 appetites are so thickly sown, in consequence of the 
 animal and sensitive having triumphed over the in- 
 tellectual and moral man, and so entailing upon 
 our race this natural proneness to evil. Hence the 
 necessity of physical regeneration. The adult saint 
 needs it as much as the infant. ' That law (or 
 power) of sin/ in the members, of which Paul com- 
 plained that 'body of sin and death/ under which
 
 CAMPBELLISM RE-EXAMINED. 69 
 
 he groaned, and which made him, in his own esteem, 
 a 'wretched man/ must be destroyed. ' While 'the 
 inward man delighted in the law of God, he saw 
 another law in his members, warring against that 
 law of his mind, and bringing him into captivity to 
 the law of sin, which was in his members.' This 
 will be destroyed in the saint before admission into 
 heaven and that is what I mean by physical re- 
 generation ; and this is destroyed before develop- 
 ment in the dying infant, and, therefore, through the 
 Lord Messiah ; the EESURRECTION and the LIFE ; 
 the sin-atoning Lamb of God; the SECOND ADAM 
 it slumbers in the bosom of its Father and God, 
 till the great regeneration of heaveii and earth." 
 pp. 675, 676. 
 
 The above extracts contain a pretty full state- 
 ment of Mr. Campbell's views on the subject of in- 
 fant salvation ; and they are entitled to careful ex- 
 amination. The subject is abstruce, and, in the 
 absence of direct revelation to guide me, I shall 
 aim to write with becoming modesty. 
 
 The first point that strikes my attention in Mr. 
 Campbell's scheme of infant salvation is, that it is 
 a mere assumption. He speciously objects to the 
 doctrine of infant regeneration, that it is not taught 
 in the Sciiptures. Its advocates admit that the 
 Scripture proof of it is not direct but inferential. 
 They deem it, however, clear and decisive. He re- 
 jects their doctrine, as a vain speculation, and sets up
 
 70 CAMPBELLISM RE-EXAMINED. 
 
 in opposition to it a plan of infant salvation, for 
 which the word of God furnishes neither direct nor 
 inferential evidence ; and which, so far as I can 
 perceive, has nothing to recommend it but novelty. 
 Let us, however, examine it in detail. 
 
 I have already remarked that the denial of the 
 regeneration of dying infants tends to Pelagianism. 
 or a rejection of the doctrine of inherent depravity. 
 That tendency is, if I mistake not, clearly involved in 
 the above quotations. I do not charge Mr. Campbell 
 with holding the doctrine of Pelagius. In passages 
 already cited from the Christian System, he distinctly 
 and fully endorses the popular doctrine of man's in- 
 nate moral corruption. I exculpate him, therefore, 
 from the charge of teaching Pelagianism ; but shall 
 be able, nevertheless, to show that the seeds of 
 this pernicious system are wrapped up in his 
 scheme. He may not, I presume, he does not per- 
 ceive the consequences of his positions ; but still 
 they are of Pelagian tendency ; and it may be well 
 to point out this tendency that he may have an 
 opportunity of counteracting it in his promised 
 book. 
 
 In the foregoing extracts, Mr. Campbell, if I un- 
 derstand him, teaches that man has a body, a soul 
 and a spirit that the body is a mere organized 
 material machine--- that the soul is the seat of the pas- 
 sions and instincts of our nature, and is intimately 
 connected with the blood that the spirit is a pure-
 
 CAMPBELLISM RE-EXAMINED. 71 
 
 ly intellectual principle that depravity exists pri- 
 marily in the soul, and not in the spirit, any moie 
 than in the mere materials of human flesh that 
 the spirit, or higher nature of man, can he denied 
 only through the passions and appetites of the 
 soul that these, not being developed in infancy, 
 the spirit escapes conception and that the infant, 
 dying hefore the contamination of the spirit, is 
 placed under " quite a different destiny" needs no 
 moral renovation hut will he saved " a physical 
 regeneration," or the resurrection from the dead, 
 just as the saints will be saved. " The spirit is 
 not the seat of corruption or depravity abstractly, 
 any more than the mere materials of human flesh." 
 " But the soul is the great seat of all those corrupt- 
 ing and debasing propensities and affections which 
 involve the whole man in sin and misery." It would 
 seem then that the spirit is not corrupt abstractly, 
 or by itself, but only through the impure affections 
 of the soul ; and these " not being developed in in- 
 fancy, any more than reason or conscience, places 
 them," (infants, I presume, though the pronoun 
 has no antecedent,) " under quite a different dis- 
 pensation and destiny." " Dying in that undevelop- 
 ed state they need not the operations of the Spirit " 
 An inspired apostle distinguishes between " spi- 
 rit, and soul, and body ;" but the precise distinc- 
 tion between irv;jp.a ) spirit, and -^wf, soul, which 
 he intended, it is n^t easy to perceive. The terms
 
 72 ^AMPBELLISM RE-EXAMINED. 
 
 seem to be used frequently in the New Testament, 
 as their corresponding terms are among us, in the 
 same sense. We cannot, perhaps, better define 
 them than by saying that spirit denotes the intel- 
 lectual, and soul the emotional nature of man : 
 but these are not separate, or separable parts. 
 but the same part contemplated under different 
 aspects. Be this as it may, the spirit of man is. 
 undoubtedly, his highest nature. Spirit is placed 
 by the apostle Paul before soul and body. Thess. 
 5 : 23. It is the inward eye of man. "For what 
 man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit 
 of man which is in him ?" Mr. Campbell assigns 
 to the spirit a pre-eminence over the soul and the 
 body. The spirit is the responsible, and controll- 
 ing agent the seat of the understanding, memory, 
 will and conscience. It does not act independently 
 of the soul, nor of the body, while it is incarnate, 
 but is appointed to govern them. If there is de- 
 pravity in man, it is in his spirit. We are taught 
 that bodiless spirits may be corrupt. We read of 
 " seducing spirits," " a foul spirit," and " lying 
 spirits/' Satan is a depraved spirit. I can see no 
 reason why embodied spirits may not be corrupt. 
 The Bible informs us that there is & filtliiness of the 
 spirit, as well as of the flesh. 2 Cor. 7:1. Into 
 some sins man is seduced by the solicitations of the 
 flesh the animal nature but others have their 
 jrLin in the spirit. Pride, ambition, envy, malice,
 
 CAMPBELLISM RE-EXAMINED. 73 
 
 and such things, arc the filthiness of the spirit. 
 Scatan infuses his evil dispositions into the spirit 
 of men. " Ye are of your father, the devil," said 
 Jesus, to the wicked Jews, " and the lusts of your 
 father ye will do." What I maintain is, that man's 
 spirit his highest nature the indestructible inner 
 man is, at birth, and undoubtedly to the develop- 
 ment of the " passions and appetites" depraved. By 
 what authority, of revelation or of reason, Mr. C. 
 maintains that the spirit is free from sin until it is 
 perverted by the propensities of the soul, he has not 
 informed us. He will, perhaps, do so in his expect- 
 ed volume. It may be well for him to consider the 
 import of the Saviour's words, " That which is 
 born of the flesh is flesh." Is not the whole man 
 body, soul and spirit, born of the flesh ? and are 
 not all involved in a common corruption and ruin ? 
 I have not yet disposed of this matter Mr. 
 Campbell assumes a principle which, if carried to 
 its legitimate result, is utterly subversive of the 
 doctrine of infant depravity. " Where there is no 
 light," he says, " no understanding, no intelligence, 
 there can be no disposition at all, no moral feeling, 
 no change of affections, no change of heart'; conse- 
 quently no infant moral or spiritual regeneration." 
 Again, he writes, "We must see beauty before we can 
 love it. We must see deformity before we can hate it. 
 And, therefore, ' the love of holiness and the hatred 
 of sin' are impossible to an infant." According to
 
 74 CAMPBELLISM RE-EXAMINED. 
 
 this theory, knowledge must precede all dispositions, 
 good or bad, all moral bias, right or wrong. " In 
 religion, as in every thing else, intellect pioneers 
 the way, while the affections and the heart follow." 
 These statements are incompatible with the doc- 
 trine of inherent corruption. What is depravity 
 but an evil disposition or tendency of the heart ? 
 Some moral quality of the inner man of the soul 
 and spirit which inclines it to do evil ? In the 
 infant the moral quality, or disposition, is latent, 
 undeveloped, but real and innate, depending not on 
 knowledge, education, or circumstances. Just as 
 certainly as the young mind is developed, it will, 
 impelled by this evil disposition, hate holiness and 
 love sin. We find in the history of the primeval 
 father of mankind the illustration and proof of this 
 position. God created man in his own image, and 
 that image consisted in " righteousness and true 
 'holiness." Or, as Mr. Campbell expresses it, " Man, 
 then, in his natural state, was not merely an ani- 
 mal, but an intellectual, moral, pure, and holy 
 being." Christian System, p. 26. If man was 
 created holy, then it follows that knowledge is not 
 indispensable to the existence of holiness. Adam 
 was holy in the very moment of his creation. His 
 moral constitution was sound. His dispositions were 
 all turned in the right direction. When light 
 dawned on his mind, he rejoiced in truth, loved what 
 was lovely, chose what was good, and did what
 
 CAMPBELLISM RE-EXAMINED. 75 
 
 was right. It is true, that the conscious, joyous 
 exercise of the affections was consequent on the 
 acquisition of knowledge ; but it was the readiness, 
 or tendency of the affections to flow in the right 
 direction that constituted his holiness. Now, it is 
 the opposite disposition the readiness of the affec- 
 tions to pursue the wrong direction that consti- 
 tutes depravity ; and this disposition dormant in 
 infants, is certain, if their faculties are unfolded, to 
 be aroused into active exercise. Now, I readily 
 grant that by Mr. Campbell's theory, he fairly pre- 
 cludes the necessity, and, indeed, the possibility of 
 " infant moral or spiritual regeneration ;" but in 
 evading this necessity, he aims a serious blow at 
 the foundation of Christianity. This reasoning 
 when fairly carried out, runs thus Where there 
 is no knowledge, there is no disposition, or moral 
 character where there is no disposition, there is no 
 depravity where there is no depravity, there is 
 no need of spiritual regeneration and, what is 
 equally clear, no need of an atonement. Infants 
 have no knowledge, consequently no disposition no 
 depravity no need of regeneration or of an atone- 
 ment. Where then, so far as infants are concerned, is 
 the necessity of Christianity ? I know Mr. Camp- 
 bell will repudiate these consequences, but they are 
 b. und to his principles by hooks of steel. 
 
 It is now time that we should examine more 
 cU eely Mr. Campbell's theory of infant salvation
 
 76 CAMPBELLISM RE-EXAMINED. 
 
 a theory that seems to have been adopted, from no 
 reverence for the teaching of revelation, but merely 
 to evade the necessity of admitting the regeneration 
 of dying infants. 
 
 Having shown, as he supposes, that the soul, 
 which is " intimately connected with the blood," is 
 primarily the seat of depravity, and that the Spirit, 
 "a purely intellectual principle," is free from sin, 
 until the " corrupting and debasing propensities and 
 affections " of the soul are developed, which de- 
 velopment cannot occur in infancy he thus unfolds 
 his scheme of infant salvation. " We have reason 
 to repudiate the notion of the abstract, undefmable, 
 metaphysical regeneration, of an infant as essential 
 to its salvation. It only needs a physical regenera- 
 tion; a destruction of that body in which those 
 seeds of passion and sinful appetites are so thickly 
 sown, -The adult saint needs it as much as the 
 infant." " Infants then need that same kind of 
 regeneration that Paul, and Peter, and James, and 
 John, and all saints need the entire destruction 
 of this body of sin and death." "What Mr. Camp- 
 bell means by ' physical regeneration" a phrase 
 which I am surprised to see used by one whose 
 avowed mission is the restoration of a pure speech 
 he explains in the following language. " The in- 
 fant that falls asleep in its mother's bosom, and 
 after a few short days breathes out its spirit gently 
 there, needs no more change to. fit it for Abraham's
 
 CAMPBELLISM RE-EXAMINED. 77 
 
 bosom than that which the Spirit of God will effect 
 in the resurrection of the dead, or in the transform- 
 ation of the living saints at the time of His com- 
 ing" Christ's coming, I suppose he means, though 
 the " Spirit of God" is the grammatical antecedent 
 of the pronoun. 
 
 For this scheme of infant salvation, the reader 
 hardly needs to be informed, Mr. Campbell is in- 
 debted solely to human invention. It is as much a 
 work of -imagination as any tale of fiction. From 
 the Scriptures it receives no support, either direct 
 or inferential. It has no basis in sownd philoso- 
 phy. The doctrine that man is at birth depraved 
 in his spiritual nature, and that he needs a spiritual 
 renovation, is the dictate of philosophy as well as of 
 revelation. Mr. Campbell does, indeed, furnish a 
 comparison, but a most unfortunate one, in support 
 of his scheme. " Infants need the same kind of re- 
 generation that Paul, and Peter, and James, and 
 John, &c., need." The Scriptures teach that the 
 saints at death, freed from bodily appetites and 
 passions, will enter into Paradise. For them "to 
 bo absent from the body (is) to be present with the 
 Lord." There is, however, an essential and most 
 important difference between dying saints and dy- 
 ing infants. The saints have in them a principle 
 of life of spiritual, divine, eternal life. " Who- 
 soever," says Jesus, " drinketh of the water that I 
 rhall give him shall never thirst ; but the water
 
 78 CAMPBELLISM RE-EXAMINED. 
 
 that I shall give him shall be in him a well of water 
 springing up into everlasting life." When the 
 saints die they find, in heaven, society, occupation, 
 and enjoyments for which they have been fitted by 
 regeneration, and a course of moral discipline. 
 Freed from the encumbrance of their bodies, and 
 the temptations arising from their connexion with 
 them, their spiritual life is fully developed and ma- 
 tured. But what agreement is there between the 
 condition pf dying, regenerated men, and dying, un- 
 regenerated infants. Surely, the dying infant needs 
 a regeneration different from that of the dying 
 saint not merely of physical, or bodily, but a moral, 
 or spiritual regeneration. The infant has, as Mr. 
 Campbell teaches, in one place, a sinful nature, and 
 it cannot, without a moral renovation, be otherwise 
 than corrupt, either before or after death. 
 
 To one of two conclusions, Mr. Campbell is, by 
 his theory, fairly driven. 
 
 First Infants are not sinful, in their higher, 
 immortal nature, previous to the development of the 
 corrupt propensities of tlieir inferior, mortal nature ; 
 and consequently, they need, in the evangelical sense, 
 no salvation. This conclusion is irresistible. Where 
 there is no sin, there can be salvation. Christ 
 came to save sinners, and only sinners. If infants 
 are not sinners, they may, indeed, be, as Mr. Camp- 
 bell calls it, physically regenerated, but they can- 
 not be saved bv the blood of Christ.
 
 CAMPBELLISM RE-EXAMINED. 79 
 
 Secondly If sinful infants are, in any case, fit- 
 ted for heaven by physical regeneration, sinful adults 
 may be prepared for it by the same process. If 
 the resurrection of the dead can cure the spiritual 
 maladies of an infant, why may not the spiritual 
 maladies of an adult be cured by the same process ? 
 If this reasoning is false, Mr. Campbell cannot ob- 
 ject to it. I will refresh his memory by recalling 
 his own method of reasoning. " Whatever is essen- 
 tial to regeneration in any case, is essential in all 
 cases. * * * If it be a new heart given, a new life 
 communicated, it is accomplished in all cases, as 
 generation is, by the same agency and instrumen- 
 tality." Now, according to the theory under dis- 
 cussion, sinful infants, dying in infancy, are fitted 
 for "Abraham's bosom," by & physical regeneration; 
 and as whatever is necessary to produce this fitness, 
 in any case, is necessary in every case ; it follows, 
 with logiciil certainty, that all who are fitted for 
 "Abraham's bosom," are fitted for it, as dying in- 
 fants are, by a physical regeneration. Mr. Camp- 
 bell is welcome to either horn of the dilemma. Take 
 which he may, he will find himself involved in se- 
 rious difficulties ; from. which, howerer, he is well 
 fitted to extricate himself.
 
 80 CAMPBELLISM RE-EXAMINED. 
 
 THE IDENTITY OF BAPTISM, REGENERATION AND 
 CONVERSION. 
 
 In his various works, Mr. Campbell has earnestly, 
 and unequivocally insisted that, in Scriptural use, 
 the above words have precisely the same import. 
 In Campbellism Examined, pp. 191-216, I endeav- 
 ored, after acquitting him of the charge of holding, 
 in its popular sense, the doctrine of baptismal' 
 regeneration, to prove " that neither the term re- 
 generation^ nor conversion, nor any equivalent term, 
 nor the Greek words which they properly represent, 
 nor any of their cognates, are ever used in the Scrip- 
 tures to denote baptism." p. 199. I have the 
 most unwavering conviction that this position was 
 sustained by incontrovertible arguments. On this 
 point, at least, I did sincerely hope that Mr. Camp- 
 bell would confess his error, and return to the Scrip- 
 tural use of terms ; but I was disappointed. Hav- 
 ing taken his position, he is exceedingly reluctant 
 to abandon it. Well, what has he done ? He has 
 not so much as made an attempt to answer the ar- 
 guments by which I sustained my position, and 
 showed that his use of these terms is incorrect. Let 
 us hear what he says. " We will proceed to notice 
 his (Mr. Jeter's) declarations on Christian Baptism. 
 We say his declarations, for on this subject he has 
 not adduced the Christian doctrine" certainly, not 
 the doctrine of the Christian System "but his 
 own conceptions of it. and speculations upon it.
 
 CAMIBELLISM RE-EXAMINED. 81 
 
 Prior to any analysis of his dogmata, we must 
 claim the right to complain of his garbled quota- 
 tions, from ' Christianity Restored/ and his calling 
 my quotations c unintelligible jargon.' That is, to 
 be sure, quite complimentary to me, and quite as 
 much so to the diction of the Holy Spirit, whose 
 language we have employed." Mill. Har., p. 438. 
 There are three counts in this indictment 
 First That I made " garbled quotations from 
 Christianity Restored." Mr. Campbell furnishes an 
 extract of two pages from that work as " an expo- 
 sition alike of his (my) taste, and of his (my) un- 
 derstanding." He might with equal propriety have 
 printed a dozen pages for the purpose. Let the in- 
 telligent reader compare the quotations in my book, 
 p. 203, with the context given in the review, and 
 satisfy himself of the correctness of my " taste," 
 and the soundness of my " understanding," in ma- 
 king my selections. I ask nothing more. Will Mr. 
 Campbell pretend that the passages as in my book 
 do not bear precisely the same meaning which they 
 bear in his? Having disposed of the charge of 
 garbling in another place, I will not dwell on it 
 here. 
 
 Secondly That I called Mr. Campbell's language 
 " unintelHyUe jargon" To this count I must plead 
 Guilty. I ought, perhaps, in view of his age, learn- 
 ing and reputation, to apologize for the use of such 
 an epithet. But "great men are not always wise."
 
 82 CAMPBELLISM RE-EXAMINED. 
 
 If the terms, however, are libelous, I may be per- 
 mitted to plead their truthfulness in abatement of 
 damages. Let us re-examine the passages pro- 
 nounced to be " unintelligible jargon." " Persons 
 are begotten by the Spirit of God, impregnated 
 with the Word, and born of water." It is admit- 
 ted that physiologically there is a distinction between 
 begotten and born; but Mr. Campbell, and every 
 tryo in Greek, know that these terms in the New 
 Testament represent precisely the same word. 
 Whether believers are said to be "begotten of God," 
 or "born of God," depends merely on the taste of 
 the translators. Whosoever, in Scripture phrase- 
 ology, is " begotten of God," is " born of God." 
 When a person, according to Mr. Campbell's theory, 
 is " begotten," or, which is precisely the same thing, 
 born of God, he is next impregnated by the Word. 
 Conformably to physiological laws the mother and 
 not the foetus is impregnated. But Mr. Campbell 
 inverts the order of nature, and insists that " per- 
 sons begotten of God (are) impregnated by the 
 Word ;" and they are begotten, and become preg- 
 nant, before they are " born of water," " Now, as 
 soon as, and not before," he affirms, " a disciple, 
 who has been begotten," that is, born of God, " is 
 born of water" immersed "he is born of God, or 
 of the Spirit." Who has ever noted a greater con- 
 fusion of metaphors, or a greater obscurity of con- 
 ception. If this is not jargon, I have misconceived
 
 'AMPBELLISM RE-EXAM.NED. 83 
 
 the meaning of the term, and how the extended con- 
 text, quoted by Mr. Campbell, mends the matter, 
 I do not perceive. I am constrained to admit that 
 it is to me "yet unintelligible jargon." p. 438. 
 
 Thirdly That I was quite complimentary, in an 
 ironical sense, " to the diction of the Holy Spirit." 
 To this count I plead, Not guilty. For the "dic- 
 tion- of the Holy Spirit," I would cherish the most 
 profound reverence. If Mr. Campbell will only 
 point to the chapter and verse in which the lan- 
 guage is recorded, I will promptly retract all that 
 I have written on the subject. It is bad for him to 
 use unintelligible language himself, but to make 
 the Holy Spirit responsible for it is far worse. 
 
 Mr. Campbell having made a quotation " from 
 the Book of Common prayer of the Church of Eng- 
 land, showing," as he conceived, " unequivocally 
 that the learned Doctors of that church used the 
 words regeneration and baptism as synonymous," 
 adds " This ' unintelligible jargon ' belongs to 
 the Church of England, the Protestant Episcopal 
 Church of the United States, and to the Presbyte- 
 rian formulas, confessions of faith, and catechisms/'* 
 The extract from the Book of Common Prayer, 
 seems to rue to teach the doctrine of baptismal 
 regeneration of a spiritual renovation through 
 the influence of baptism which I understand Mr. 
 Campbell to repudiate ; but, certainly, not the 
 identity of baptism and regeneration, much less
 
 84 CAMPBELLISM RE-EXAMINED. 
 
 that a disciple who is begotten, or born of God, 
 is not born of God, until he is baptized ; and 
 if it is taught in any " formulas, confessions of 
 faith, or catechisms of the Presbyterian," or any 
 other church, orthodox, or heterodox, Latin, Greek, 
 or Protestant, I have not seen it. 
 
 " These extracts," says Mr. Campbell, referring 
 to the quotations by which I showed that he taught 
 the identity of baptism, regeneration, and conver- 
 sion, " are true and faithful ; and in their context- 
 ual import I do not, I would not, change one word. 
 And yet they are made to do me the greatest injus- 
 tice just as much as if, while maintaining that the 
 Scriptures teach that ' a man is justified by faith/ 
 some envious, querulous, discontent, fro say nothing 
 of his pride of opinion, or vanity of mind, should 
 quote, ' was not Abraham our father justified by 
 works' " ! ! Yes, the Father of all believers was 
 justified by works ! ! James 11:3. Again : Paul 
 says, ' the doers of the law shall be justified. Rom. 
 11 : 3. Again : Paul says, ' Being now justified by 
 his blood, we shall be saved/ Eom. 7 : 9. Once 
 more, we are said to be 'justified freely by his 
 grace/ Tit. 3:7. What can we think what 
 could we think of, the man that would quote any of 
 these passages as conflicting with justification by 
 faith ? And need we add, what can we think, or 
 what need we say, of Mr. Jeter and his New York 
 encomiasts ?'' p. 455.
 
 CAMPBELLISM RE-EXAMINED. 85 
 
 The above is a favorite line of defence with Mr. 
 Campbell he frequently resorts to it. It amounts 
 to this In the Scriptures, and in my writings, 
 there are seeming contradictions, but they may all 
 be reconciled. It is conceded that the Scriptures, 
 written by different penmen, .at different times, un- 
 der different circumstances, and for different purpo- 
 ses, contain some statements which are apparently 
 inconsistent, but which are easily harmonized by 
 sound principles of interpretation. They have 
 been satisfactorily reconciled by the labors of the 
 learned. But it does not follow that because the 
 contradictions of the Scriptures are seeming, those 
 of Mr. Campbell are not real. For my own part, I 
 have far greater confidence in the intelligence, dis- 
 crimination and stability of the inspired writers than 
 I have in those of the Bethany reviewer. Besides, 
 the cases are not parallel. The different state- 
 ments of the apostles concerning justification are 
 apparently, but not really contradictory they have 
 been reconciledbutthe contradictions in Mr. Camp- 
 bell's books are real, not imaginary in no contex- 
 tual light, and by no just laws of interpretation, can 
 human ingenuity harmonize them, either with them- 
 selves, or the teaching of Revelation. Had Paul, in 
 the same epistle, affirmed, in one place, that we arc 
 justified by faith, and, in another place, that we are 
 not justified by faith a supposition wholly incompa- 
 tible with his plenary inspiration the contradiction
 
 86 CAMPBELLISM EE- EXAMINED. 
 
 would have been of the kind with which Mr. Camp- 
 bell's writings abound. Take a proof of this remark 
 from the review under consideration. He writes, 
 p. 185, " Eegeneration is found but twice in the 
 whole Bible Old Testament and New. Once it 
 indicates the resurrection epoch, or the announce- 
 ment of the reign of Christ, and once Christian 
 baptism." Reader, mark this " Regeneration 
 indicates once Christian baptism." He 'refers to 
 Titus 3 : 5. Now turn over to p. 308, and read 
 " Baptism is once called in the epistles, not re- 
 generation, but ' the ivasliing of the new birth/ or 
 of regeneration. It was not by Paul presented as 
 the new birth, but only the washing of those 
 already born by the Spirit." " Regeneration indi- 
 cates Christian baptism," says Mr. Campbell : 
 " baptism is not regeneration," says- Mr. Campbell. 
 I may, surely, be excused from any farther examina- 
 tion of this subject. 
 
 PROGRESSIVE SANCTIFICATION. 
 
 " I am really sorry," says Mr. Campbell, " to 
 have to expose a second radical error in his (Mr. 
 Jeter's) second proof, more serious, though less pal- 
 pable, than the first. His words are : ' My second 
 proof is derived from the nature of sanctification. 
 It is progressive holiness. * * * Elder Jeter needs 
 to pray save me from my friends ! ! Sanctification, 
 progressive holiness ! ! ! Why, my dear doctor, did
 
 CAMPBELLISM EE-EXAMJNED. 87 
 
 you not consult your Greek Concordance ! We 
 have the word sanctijication but Jive times in the 
 New Testament, and the word holiness also but^ve 
 times, and one and the same word, hagiasmos, repre- 
 sents them both. * * * No state in the universe 
 paternal, maternal, filial, conjugal, political, eccle- 
 siastic changes. They terminate. A child of one 
 day and of one hundred years, are equally children. 
 There is no progression in relations. * * * Sanc- 
 tification is, therefore, no more than justification, a 
 work of progression . Whenever a believer is bap- 
 tized, he is sanctified." 
 
 The intelligent reader, by turning back to pp. 
 260, 261, will find that the above extract is almost 
 a verbatim repetition of the note recorded there. 
 It would seem from this repetition of his remarks 
 and the batallions of exclamatory notes with which 
 they are escorted, that Mr. Campbell deems them 
 exceedingly important. Well, I acknowledge my- 
 self indebted to him for the information that the 
 Greek word hagiasmos is rendered sometimes holi- 
 ness, and sometimes sanctijication. Overlooking 
 this obvious truth, I adopted a slightly inaccurate 
 definition of the term sanctijication. I stated that 
 sanctification is progressive holiness. It is, indeed, 
 progressive, and is, of course, progressive holiness, 
 but the last word is redundant. It is sufficient to 
 say that sanctijication is progressive. So much in 
 deference to the criticism of the reviewer. Now, let
 
 88 CAMPBELLISM RE-EX A.MINED. 
 
 us examine his theology. He teaches that sanctifi- 
 cation denotes a state, by which he means a relation. 
 11 There is no progression in relations." I may not 
 clearly understand what he means by state or rela- 
 tion ; but it ft, I think, clear that hagiasmos, and 
 its cognates, have reference, not to any legal state or 
 relation, but to moral qualities. The word signi- 
 fies " separated, consecrated." The believer is se- 
 parated, consecrated to God. This consecration 
 involves moral purity. The Saviour says, " Bless- 
 ed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God ;" 
 and Paul does but repeat this truth when he 
 writes, " Follow holiness without which no man 
 shall see the Lord." Consecration to God may be 
 partial or entire and, consequently, may progress 
 from one measure to another. This has certainly 
 been the prevailing, almost universal, doctrine of 
 theologians. But, says the reviewer, " Sanctifica- 
 tion is, no more than justification, a work of pro- 
 gression." It always affords me sincere pleasure to 
 be able to adduce in support of my teaching the 
 authority of some renowned Biblicist, whose name 
 will secure for him an influence to which I can lay no 
 claim. That pleasure I now enjoy. I quote the 
 words of Mr. Alexander Camjbell, the Bethany 
 Reformer, in opposition to the position of the re- 
 viewer. " Sanctification in one point of view, is 
 unquestionably a progressive work. To sanctify is 
 to set apart ; this may be ^one in a moment, and
 
 CAMPBELLISM HE-EXAMINED. 89 
 
 so far as state or relation is concerned, it is as in- 
 stantaneous as baptism. But there is the forma- 
 tion of a holy character as well as a holy state. The 
 formation of such a character is the work of means ; 
 Holy Father," said Jesus, " sanctify them, (my dis- 
 ciples,) through the truth ; thy word is truth." Of 
 the sanctification of state, I know nothing, and be- 
 lieve nothing. It was of that sanctification which 
 consists in moral purity the proper ordering of the 
 affections and conduct towards God the only sanc- 
 tification, so far as I can perceive, revealed in the 
 Bible that I affirmed progression ; and on this 
 point Mr. Campbell fully concurs with me. This 
 being established, my argument in the premises re- 
 mains, intact. See Camp. Examined, p. 171. 
 
 MISCELLANIES. 
 
 It would be easy to pass over all the Nos. of the 
 review, and point out mistakes, and sophistries, 
 which abound on almost every page, but the labor 
 would be bootless. I will, however, notice very 
 briefly a few more of them. 
 
 A false quotation. Mr. Campbell maintained 
 that the church of Christ, described Eph. 4 : 6, is a 
 body not a mass, but an organized, beautiful and 
 visible body that he has but one body and that 
 this body is not the Romish, Episcopalian, Presby- 
 terian, Methodist, or Baptist body but, he would 
 have us to infer 'hat it is the body embracing tho
 
 90 CAMPBELLISM RE-EXAMINED. 
 
 " ancient Gospel/' or the " Disciples." In the ex- 
 amination of this high claim, I inquired, " If the 
 party adopting the peculiar views of Mr. 0., is 
 really the body of Christ, where was his body before 
 the light shone from Bethany?" Camp. Ex. p. 
 41. The question was important and respectful. 
 Believing, as I did, that the body of Christ is spirit- 
 ual and invisible, I was under no necessity of at- 
 tempting the solution of the question. But Mr. 
 Campbell maintaining that the body is organized 
 and visible, was under pressing obligation to show 
 that Christ, the Head, was not without a body, for 
 centuries before the " light shone from Bethany." 
 In the absence of information on this point, the in- 
 telligent reader would be apt to conclude that the 
 Reformer had misconceived the meaning of the text 
 in the epistle to the Ephesians. Where ivas Christ's 
 body before the light shone from Bethany ? That 
 was the question, and no man could answer it bet- 
 ter than he from whom that light emanated. Let 
 us read his reply. p. 72. 
 
 " There is another argument against our posi- 
 tion, and with the notice of it we shall conclude our 
 present article in review of 'Campbellism Examined/ 
 by Elder Jeter. ' Where was Christianity before 
 the light shone from Bethany ?' ' : These questions 
 are, by means, identical ; but Mr. Campbell, quo- 
 ting, I presume, from memory, unintentionally sub- 
 stituted " Christianity," which could always be
 
 CAMPBELLISM RE-EXAMINED. 91 
 
 found in the Scriptures, for the " body of Christ," 
 which, according to his definition of it,, could be 
 found nowhere. But let us hear his reply to this 
 isolated and perverted question, which he terms my 
 "grand argument" against hie position. Here it 
 follows " It is only necessary to put a ' fool's cap' 
 on any head, however wise, to create a fool's grin. 
 So Mr. Jeter might ask a question about the man 
 in the moon, which no astronomer, star-gazer, or 
 moon-gazer, could at all answer to Mr. Jeter's sat- 
 isfaction. But what of that ? If, as Solomon has 
 said, ' that which is wanting cannot be numbered,' 
 where good sense, or genius, or even common sense 
 is wanting, there is no one can give it or create it. 
 There are not a few things in science, in learning, 
 and in religion, which Mr. Jeter will not under- 
 stand until he get another head or heart." I 
 acknowledge myself fairly confounded, but not con- 
 vinced. "I will lay mine hand upon my mouth. 
 Once have I spoken ; but I will not answer : yea, 
 twice ; but I will proceed no further." 
 
 A slight mistake. Mr. Campbell says, p. 372, 
 "Being refuted line for line in the Religious Herald, 
 we tender to Elder Jeremiah B. Jeter page for page 
 with us in the Harbinger, with this motto, l He that 
 doeth truth comes to the light, that his deeds may 
 be made manifest that they are wrought in God.' " 
 The truth is that the Editor of the Religious Herald 
 expressed a willingness that the controversy should
 
 92 CAMPBELLISM RE-EXAMINED. 
 
 be published in his paper, and that fact had been 
 printed in the preceding No. of the Harbinger, p. 
 339 ; but having chosen my method of bringing my 
 views of Mr. Campbell's system before the public, 
 I did not deem it expedient to change it, for his 
 convenience. 
 
 An insinuation . Speaking of my book, the re- 
 viewer says, " It is, indeed, mechanically viewed, a 
 merchantable duodecimo of 369 leaded pica pages ; 
 the whole of which we could, in quite a legible type, 
 print in two numbers of the Harbinger. But it 
 was made to sell for one dollar ; and being endorsed 
 by anti-revisionist Baptists, will have quite a broad 
 circulation. But this, by the way, only proves that 
 there is, even yet, some policy in ecclesiastic war." 
 p. 549. The "insinuation seems to be that the 
 book was published from a mercenary motive. It 
 comes, however, with ill grace from one who has 
 spent his life in writing books, and publishing them 
 under the protection of copy-rights. It is a pity 
 that Mr. C. should have resorted to such an insinua- 
 tion for the support of his cause ; but necessity has 
 no law, and taste cannot be opposed by argument. 
 
 My reformation. We read on page 144 of the 
 review, as follows " But has not Mr. Jeter him- 
 self become a reformer, in the fair import of the 
 term ?" It is a great reproach to me, if I have 
 made no progress in knowledge and piety, within 
 the last thirty years ; but I certainly have not be- 
 come a reformer in the Bethanv sense of the term
 
 CAMPBELLI8M RE-EXAMINED. 93 
 
 " Does he now baptize upon or into an experi- 
 ence ?" I have already confessed my ignorance of 
 what Mr. Campbell means by baptizing into an eoc- 
 perience. " Does he require every candidate to 
 relate his Christian experience before he will dis- 
 pense to him the ordinance ?" Certainly I either 
 require a connected relation of the Christian expe- 
 rience of the applicant, or propound to him such 
 questions as will elicit the best evidence the case 
 will admit of, that he is acquainted with the funda- 
 mental principles of the Gospel, and is a true peni- 
 tent. "Does he bring him before the Church, and 
 take a vote upon his experience before he baptizes 
 him ?" By all means "Does he immerse him into a 
 faith, or into an experience ?" Mr. Campbell must 
 explain his terminology before I can answer. I 
 fear by this time, he will be ready to conclude that 
 I am not quite so much reformed as he had hoped 
 I was, and to repeat the inquiry, printed p. 550, 
 " Is Dr. Jeter yet standing where I first saw him, 
 at the Dover Association, in 1825, gazing at some 
 spasmodic negroes, displaying experimental religion 
 by muscular twitches and embraces ! Is he yet an 
 jidvocate for such fearful delusions 1" I proceed 
 with the first extract " Does he immerse into the 
 name, or f in the name of the Father ?' &c." This 
 is an important point, in speculation, with Mr. C. 
 He dwells on it frequently, learnedly, and earnestly. 
 In the use of the formula in baptism, I am not re- 
 formed. His criticism on this subject is probably
 
 94 CAMPBELLISM RE-EXAMINED. 
 
 correct. I am unwilling, however, to chauge, my 
 practice on ray own imperfect knowledge of the 
 Greek ; and the learned have not yet spoken on this 
 point with such distinctness and harmony as to dis- 
 sipate all my doubts. And I have no respect for 
 the authority of a critic who asserts, as Mr. Camp- 
 bell does, that regeneration, conversion and. bap- 
 tism, all mean, in Scripture usage, the same act 
 that active participles, in Greek, when united with a 
 command, invariably express the meaning of the 
 command, or the manner of obeying it ; and who 
 supports the criticism by a long string of English 
 sentences, coined by himself in harmony with the 
 rule and who bases an important doctrine on the 
 distinction between " begotten of God," and "born 
 of God," though both phrases represent the same 
 terms of the original ; and persists in sending forth 
 these stereotyped criticisms, without correction or 
 retraction, in spite of unanswered and unanswerable 
 refutations of them spread before his own eyes, and 
 the eyes of the world. And especially does all the 
 learned ado about substituting " into the name," 
 for, " in the name," in the formula of Christian 
 baptism, seem unimportant, when the critic himself, 
 baptized, as I doubt not he was, " in the name," 
 &c. does not repeat the ordinance. He must, fol- 
 lowing the example of his quondam co-adjutor, Dr. 
 Thomas, be re-immersed, before I can be convinced 
 that even he attaches any serious importance to his 
 labored criticisms on this point. ^
 
 THE LIBRARY 
 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA 
 
 Santa Barbara 
 
 THIS BOOK IS DUE ON THE LAST DATE 
 STAMPED BELOW. 
 
 Series 9482
 
 3 1205 00250 8131