V f) W, /ca, "by which (Spirit) also ;" fa' Ma?, through the Water Justification by Works, and James ii, 21-24 Paul and James reconciled The At- tempt to reconcile on Campbell's Theory Gal. ii, 16 " Obeying the Gospel " not Baptism, 116 CHAPTER XI. CAMPBELL'S SEVEN CAUSES OF JUSTIFICATION. Confusion in Thought Five of his Causes but One Cause " Works " not a Cause Faith then the Only Conditional Cause Repentance and Godly Sorrow Godly Sorrow the Sorrow of a Baptized Person " Bath of Regeneration," so- called, an Exegetical Mistake " Pure Water," in Heb. x, 22, not Water for cleansing In the New Birth Water called by Mr. Campbell the Mother John iii reviewed The New Birth Essentially Spiritual, . 128 10 CONTENTS. CHAPTER XII. AN APPEAL TO AUTHORITIES. Attempts to support the theory by the Teaching of the Primi- tive Christian Fathers By the Creeds and Symbols of Prot- estant Churches Also Eminent Christian Teachers of the Reformation Luther, Calvin, Wesley, Clarke, and Others, PAGE 139 CHAPTER XIII. SUNDRY OBJECTIONS TO THE DOCTRINE. It declares the Whole Evangelical Dispensation a Failure for Centuries The Doctrine makes it impossible to account for Virtue and Holiness in Other Christians Contradicts Christian Experience It requires Rebaptistn in the Back- slider, and when the Conditions have not been intelligently fulfilled It can not be preached and applied to all Condi- tions and Circumstances It makes the Outbreaking Back- slider a Child of the Kingdom It makes that a Condition to Pardon of Sin a Person can not perform for Himself, . 160 CHAPTER XIV. JUSTIFICATION BY FAITH VERSUS WORKS. Article IX, Methodist Articles of Religion, misrepresented The Question the Justification of the Sinner What fie must do James and Paul again Baptism Works and not Works Justification by Works, that is, by Baptism, con- tradicted by many Passages of Scripture The Meaning of Faith only Justification of Abraham the Type of the Jus- tification of All Mr. Braden's Attempt at the Explanation of Rom. iii and iv, 175 CHAPTER XV. CAMPBELLISM ON THE OPERATION OP THE HOLY GHOST. Consistency requires that they deny it Mr. Campbell's Con- fusion and Contradiction of Himself Defines Himself more fully in the Debate with Professor Rice An Attempt to maintain Experimental Religion after Some Sort Review of Campbell's Objections Objections aimed at an Imag- inary Idea, .... 186 CONTENTS. 11 CHAPTER XVI. OBJECTIONS FURTHER CONSIDERED. The Immediate Operation of the Spirit does not imply Inspira- tion or Miracle-working Power His Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, and Seventh Arguments assume the Point in Dispute a Pelilio Principii The Personal Spirit promised The Com- forter His Offices defined An Illegitimate Deduction made from those Passages that ascribe Regeneration, Sanctifica- tion, and Salvation to the Word Paul's Commission mis- interpreted, PAGE 200 CHAPTER XVII. OFFICE AND WORK OF THE HOLY GHOST. Their System beset with Difficulties The Spirit reproves, re- generates, baptizes, cleanses, purifies, seals, sanctifies, anoints, witnesses, comforts, helps Lydia, " whose Heart the Lord opened" Regeneration and "born from Above," " born again," " begotten of God," Same Thing Perversion of John iii, 8 "Born of that he receives" a Supposed Diffi- culty Titus iii, 5, explained Quickening by the Spirit, . 213 CHAPTER XVIII. BAPTISM OF THE HOLY GHOST. An Effort to limit to Apostolic Days The Twelve Apostles only baptized at Pentecost contradicted by the Scrip- tures The Promise of the Father the Baptism of the Holy Ghost A Perversion of 1 Cor. xii, 13 The Rendering " pour out from my Spirit " to meet the Difficulty Rom. vi, 3, 4; Col. ii, 11, 12, Spiritual Baptism, 229 CHAPTER XIX. IMMEDIATE OPERATION OF THE SPIRIT CONTINUED SYNONYMS OF BAPTISM. Wash, cleanse, purify, sanctify, seal, anoint Cleansing by the Word refuted So also saving by the Gospel Gospel de- fined Ps. li, Ezek. xxxvi, 25-27 The Witness of the Spirit, This alone Sufficient Testimony to pardon The Holy Ghost as an Abiding Comforter Numerous Forms of Expression for the Immediate Influence of the Spirit Objections to the 12 CONTENTS. Doctrine of Campbellism It destroys the Efficacy of Prayer It leaves the Backslider without Evidence of Par- don, PAGE 243 CHAPTER XX. OBJECTIONS OF CASIFBELLITE TEACHERS TO METHODIST DOCTRINES AND POLITY. A System of Proselytisin Objection to the Name Methodist Episcopal Church A Plea for Unity The Name Christian Church not Divine Christians, all Followers of Christ such The True Name of the Church, Church of God The New Name of Followers of Christ, " Sons " of God As- sault upon Article VIII of Methodist Discipline Camp- bellism on Reconciliation refuted, Article II sustained The Sinner seeking Christ The Penitent Publican's Prayer, 257 CHAPTER XXI. CAMPBELLISM ON CREEDS, ETC. Originally aimed at Christian Unity Disavows Creeds, but has one A Creed Exceedingly Narrow Will exclude the Greatest Number of Christians of any Creed in Christen- dom Their Church Polity: Campbell its Author Their Discipline Probationers in their Church Their Assurance and Confidence, 277 ERRORS OF CAMPBELLISM. CHAPTER I. THE FOUNDERS OF CAMPBELWSM. IN entering upon the investigation of that system of religious doctrine or faith called Campbellism, it is proper and right that we give a brief sketch of its founder, or, more properly, founders; for it was the evolution not of one mind alone, but of two those of father and son, Thomas Campbell and Alexander Campbell. The doctrinal system of this so-called reformation is the sole product of these two men, in- somuch that since their day it has rigidly adhered to the principles taught by these men ; and in no mate- rial respect, and in scarcely any minor points also, is there the slightest particle of difference between the representative teachers of to-day and the great ex- pounders of its creed at first. It may be said, without fear of successful denial, that Alexander Campbell has impressed his doctrinal ideas, and even the methods of elucidating and en- forcing them, upon his followers as no other great religious leader in modern times has done. He is a 13 14 ERRORS OF CAMPBELLISM. very forceful illustration of the power possessed by a man of commanding genius and force of character over his fellow-men. Creeds of other Christian de- nominations have usually been the productions of many minds, and the result of the deliberations of councils of learned men. But not so Campbellism ; it is the work of one, or, at most, of two minds. The assumed rejection of all human creeds gave the Campbells a peculiarly favorable opportunity to impress their doctrinal ideas upon those to whom they were addressed, as the very essence of Bible teaching. The marvel is, that the astute founder of the system and his more intelligent followers have deceived them- selves with the belief that their doctrine is anything more than another human creed, though not presented to the world in articles of religion or definite formu- las of doctrine a creed as really commanding assent of every one who seeks to ally himself with them, as any creed in the broad domain of Christendom. Alexander Campbell, the man who more especially, by his force of character, executive ability, and firm faith in his own convictions, was the founder of the sys- tem under consideration, was the eldest son of Thomas Campbell, and was born in County Antrim, Ireland, September 12, 1788. Thomas Campbell became, in early life, a preacher in the Presbyterian Church of Ireland, and while in the old country was engaged in either preaching or teaching. In 1807 he emigrated to America, leaving FOUNDERS OF. 15 his family still in Ireland, to follow him subsequently to his new home, when once he had provided for them. In 1808, however, his family, under the con^ duct of Alexander, embarked for America, but were shipwrecked on the coast of Scotland, which caused them to tarry in that country for awhile, until, under auspices more favorable, they might essay to start again for their new home. While in Scotland, he was brought into contact with many leading minds in Scot- tish religious circles, and enjoyed the opportunity of about one year's tuition in the University of Glasgow. In September, 1809, they safely reached New York, and shortly after joined their father in Western Penn- sylvania. Thomas Campbell, on his arrival in America, iden- tified himself with the Seceder Synod and Presbytery of Chartres, in Western Pennsylvania, which his son Alexander likewise did upon his arrival. In a short time after his uniting with this Presbytery, Thomas Campbell was arraigned for a violation of the usages of the Church with regard to the Lord's Supper, and was condemned, whereupon he appealed unto the Synod, and was released from condemnation, because of informali- ties in the proceedings ; but the matter was at the same time referred to a committee, which reported, censur- ing him. This caused him to withdraw from the Se- ceders, and in 1809 he and other disaffected parties or- ganized " The Christian Association of Washington," in Western Pennsylvania. The purpose of this soci- 16 ERRORS OF CAMPBELLISM. ety, from its " Declaration " of principles formulated and published, seems to have been an effort to fra- ternize Christians of divergent views upon the funda- mental truths of the Christian Scriptures, and was cer- tainly a commendable undertaking. The fourth article of the Declaration especially disclaims the pur- pose of creating a new Church organization. It is one of the marvels of human inconsistency that an institu- tion that had its origin in a protest against party spirit and dogmatism in the Church, should culminate in one of the most imperiously dogmatic of the re- ligious organizations of modern times, and at the same time foster a spirit of controversy that is most un- qualifiedly condemned in the preamble of the " Dec- laration." Alexander Campbell began preaching in 1810. He does not seem at first to have received any spe- cial authorization from any society, Church, or asso- ciation. About this time Thomas Campbell made a propo- sition to unite with the Synod of Pittsburg of the Regular Presbyterian Church, but was refused. Among the reasons assigned was this, that Alexander Campbell "had been allowed to exercise his gifts of public speaking without any regular ordination." This refusal resulted in the foundation of the " Chris- tian Association of Brush Run," on the 4th of May, 1811. After the organization of this small denomina- tion, for such it was, Alexander Campbell was, by its FOUNDERS OF. 17 first council, session, or whatever it may be styled, licensed to preach. On the 12th day of June, 1812, he was baptized by immersion, by Elder Luce, of the Baptist Church, after having made, as he supposed, the proper con- fession, namely : " I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God." And it was about this time he began to regard faith as simply " the belief of the Scrip- tures on the testimony of the apostles." In the fall of 1813, Alexander Campbell and the Brush Run organization formed a union with the Red-Stone Association of the Baptist Church. In August, 1823, he withdrew from this Baptist Associa- tion, in order to escape arraignment and trial by it, and expulsion therefrom for heresy. It was in the fall of this same year that he had his discussion, in the State of Kentucky, with Mr. McCalla, in which he, according to his own statement,* first fully and maturely espoused his distinguishing tenet of baptism as a necessary condition in order to the pardon of sin. It may be said that the system, as a new doctrinal adventure, was now successfully launched upon the arena of conflict with all other sister denominations; and that which had its birth professedly as a protest against ecclesiastical domination, dissension, and dog- matism, came into existence as a very theological Ish- mael, its hand against all others. *" Christian System," p. 180. 9 18 ERRORS OF CAMPBELLISM. Mr. Campbell began, in the spring of 1823, the publication of a periodical, which he entitled The Christian Baptist, which, however, ultimately gave place to The Millennial Harbinger. These papers were the exponents of his new theories ; and in Ken- tucky, Western Pennsylvania, South-eastern Ohio, and Western Virginia, the new Church grew quite rapidly, by accessions from the Baptist Church and the Christian Church, so-called, embracing many of the followers of James O'Kelly, and that branch of Arian Baptists usually called " New Lights." Alexander Campbell was a kind of theological gladiator. He rejoiced in a theological discussion as a means of disseminating his peculiar views. And at first he was quite successful, inasmuch as his oppo- nents were not well enough acquainted with his system, and the course adopted in its maintenance, to combat it successfully. They struck in the dark, while he was able, through the published polemical theology and formularies of his opponents, to know just where and how to make his assaults. His enthusiastic followers boast much of his prowess in this direction, and affect to believe that he was victor in every contest ; but his debate with Professor N. L. Rice, of the Presbyterian Church, held in Lexington, Kentucky, was anything but a victory for this new system. In this long dis- cussion, which was fully published, Campbellism, in its distinctive tenets and methods of defense, was en- tirely brought to light, so that future defenders of FOUNDERS OF. 19 evangelical truth were advised as to just what they were called upon to meet. The founder of this system of faith, in his work entitled " The Christian System/' has given to the world his doctrinal views, as well as the polity of his Church. We shall have occasion to make frequent reference to this work, which presents the system com- pletely as devised, elucidated, and promulgated by its author. And every careful reader of the work will observe, by comparison with the present polity and doctrinal teachings of its societies, as represented by the leading preachers of the denomination, that " The Christian System" is a full and complete disciplinary and doctrinal guide for the people of this faith, as much so as any discipline or confession of faith of any sister Church, although it has not been formally adopted by the Church at large as such ; for, according to the teach- ing of its founder, each particular society is independ- ent of all others. (See "Christian System," p. 73, sec. 4.*) And therefore it is always possible for *" Still, all these particular congregations of the Lord, whether at Rome, Corinth, or Ephesus, though equally inde- pendent of one another as to the management of their own peculiar affairs, are, by virtue of one common Lord, one faith, one baptism, and one common salvation, but one kingdom or Church of God, and, as such, are under obligations to co-op- erate with one another in all measures promotive of the great ends of Christ's death and resurrection." The edition of " The Christian System " from which the author quotes, is the fourth edition, published at Cincinnati. The definition of Church polity begins with p. 72. 20 ERRORS OF CAMPBELLISM. them to deny the existence among them of any au- thoritative discipline, such as Churches that have a central or connectional form of government have. But it nevertheless is true that there is no society among them that is not governed by the disciplinary rules laid down by Mr. Campbell in " The Christian System." It will also be seen, by the discriminating reader of his chapters on "Church Order" and " Christian Dis- cipline," that he expects the doctrines he inculcates to form the bond of union among Churches. It is there- fore a very natural evolution of faith in his followers to hold that their interpretations of the Scriptures are infallibly correct, since they have so eminent an ex- ample set for them in their great leader. A system that arraigns all Christendom as pro- foundly and fundamentally wrong, must, in the very nature of the case, predicate a great deal upon the as- sumed correctness of its interpretations of Scripture. And these must be met by an appeal to the truth and reason. No flattering unction, that error, left to itself will perish, will meet this case. It is a large, vigorous, healthy system of religious formalism, that makes no hesitation in assaulting other denominations. And if spiritual Christianity would maintain its own, it must not take refuge in that coward's plea of, Let error alone and preach the truth. The truth is often- times most successfully preached by showing where the pitfalls of error are. THE CENTRAL IDEA. 21 CHAPTER II. THE CENTRAL IDEA OF CAMPBELLISM. THE key-note of this system of faith is the doc- trine of baptism by water as a necessary condition to the remission of sins. This doctrine Alexander Camp- bell specifically states in the following language :* " The apostle Peter, when first publishing the gospel for the Jews, taught them that they were not for- given their sins by faith, but by an act of faith, by a believing immersion into the Lord Jesus." His fol- lowers, in their discussions with representatives of other confessions of faith, usually affirm it in the fol- lowing language : " Christian baptism is a necessary condition in order to the remission of the past sins of the penitent believer." The writer has had several joint discussions with different representative men among them, and this was, in all material respects, their method of stating this fundamental doctrine ot their creed. By Christian baptism they mean dipping in water in the name of Christ, or what they are pleased to call immersion. By "condition" they mean the personal act of the free moral agent, by which he accepts of the salvation provided him in * " Christian System," p. 194. 22 ERRORS OF CAMPBELLISM. Christ. By " necessary " is meant that without which no one can be saved, whatever else he may have or may not have. Remission of sins they regard as the same as pardon, justification, reconciliation, adoption, wash- ing away of sin,* and the like. By " past sins " they mean the sins committed before baptism. In their dialect the unbaptized is an "alien," and as such has not the right of prayer or petition. In this phrase " past sins " they think they avoid the force of the argument that, if baptism is a condition to pardon, it ought to be repeated at every recovery from backsliding. This fanciful distinction of sinners into aliens and rebellious members of Christ's kingdom, is a sheer invention, to counteract the doctrinal embarrassments they are thrown into by the system. By penitent be- liever they mean the believer who, after believing, is penitent. Faith must precede repentance, and with them is simply the belief of testimony. " No testimony, no faith ; for faith is only the belief of testimony." f This doctrine, thus briefly defined, is the key-stone to the whole doctrinal superstructure of Campbellism. It is to this all the system has been conformed ; their views of faith and prayer, the operation of the Holy Ghost, the gifts of the Spirit, the witness of the Spirit, assurance, reconciliation, inherited depravity, even Church polity, all are interpreted in the light of this idea. For example, if the immediate office of the *" Christian System," p. 187. t Id. p. 113. THE CENTRAL IDEA. 23 Holy Ghost in conviction and conversion were ac- cepted as it is by other evangelical Christians, and if the Spirit's direct witness to conversion were allowed, they could not well, in the face of the positive testi- mony of those who had received the assurance of par- don without baptism, explain how such could take place without the previous fulfillment of this assumed " necessary condition ;" hence they must deny the im- mediate operation of the Spirit, and hold that the witness of the Spirit, as claimed by others, is a delu- sion. Because of this logical necessity their ministry generally are unsparing in their ridicule of the idea of the direct witness of the Spirit. In this, however, they do not exhibit the moderation and good taste of Mr. Campbell, for it is difficult to make out clearly his views on this matter from his writings. At one time he seems to deny the doctrine, at another to ad- mit it. But one thing is certain, he denied the immediate operation of the Spirit upon the heart of the sinner in conviction and conversion ; but how the Holy Ghost can impress the heart of a child of God so as to give help, strength, joy,* and not be a direct witness to his salvation, is something difficult to understand. For, most evidently, if the child of God receives the Holy Spirit as a " helper," " comforter," " sanctifier," giving "love, joy, peace, long-suffering, gentleness, '" Christian System," pp. 64, 66. 24 ERRORS OF CAMPBELLJSM. goodness, fidelity, meekness, temperance," as Camp- bell seems to teach,* he must be able to recognize this as a fact in his experience, and therefore be able to testify to it. But in this we have simply the illus- tration that his followers are very much more ultra Campbellites than the founder of the system ; for the only "joy, peace, goodness," etc., they will admit of is entirely subjective, or such as the mind obtains through its own beliefs and convictions. For ex- ample, the advocate of this doctrine believes that he must first believe the Bible ; secondly, repent of his sins ; thirdly, confess that " Jesus Christ is the Son of God," and be baptized on this confession. This having done, his conscience approves him in it, be- cause he has done what he believes to be right; and now, upon this purely subjective conviction, he be- lieves himself to be in the kingdom of God and an heir of heaven ; this furnishes him a degree of rest, satisfaction, or peace. It is altogether in the mind, and every proposition may be false upon which it is founded, and yet the same confidence exist. The dev- otee of Islam or papistic absurdities may have, and often does have, the same. If there is no immediate witness of the Holy Spirit, * Christian System," p. 66. See also pp. 354-356, Vol. II, " Richardson's Memoirs of A. Campbell." His biographer here proves that Mr. Campbell accepted the belief that " those who are sons of God receive the Holy Spirit promised through faith." See Appendix A. THE CENTRAL IDEA. 25 then his assurance of pardon is altogether subjective, and to be sure of it he must postulate his infallibility in interpreting the Scriptures. Hence there can be but little marvel that the advocate of this faith is sure he is right and all others wrong ; for his conviction that he is a child of God depends upon the certainty that he is not mistaken in his interpretation. But this will be treated of in all its bearings when we come to deal with the errors of this system, relative to the offices of the Spirit. We have called attention thus fully to this, at this juncture, that the reader may see how relatively all-important is this central idea, and, in the discussion of it, realize that it does not stand or fall for itself alone, but for a whole system of belief that is built up around it. The doctrine of baptism as a condition to the re- mission of sin is papistic, in fact. While they dis- claim this, and are very bitter in denunciation of those who so charge them, yet it is impossible to minds not under the bonds of the system to distinguish the dif- ference. They and the papists quote the same pas- sages of Scripture, and, allowing for the difference in ecclesiastical systems, put the same construction upon them. As, for example, Matt, xvi, 18: "Thou art Peter, and upon this rock will I build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it !" This is used by them to show that the Church was not founded until the day of Pentecost ; that Peter opened the door to it by his sermon on that occasion in the supposed 26 ERRORS OF CAMPBELLISM. announcement of the condition of baptism for the re- mission of sins. And in reference to the confession that Peter made, " Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God," which called forth the Savior's remark, it is assumed that this confession is the "rock" upon which Christ proposed to establish his Church. Hence they require it of all candidates for baptism. Along with this passage from the Gospel of Mat- thew, they usually join one from John xx, 23 : " Whose- soever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them ; and whosesoever sins ye retain, they are retained !" This, they claim, is the commission as given by John, and that the disciples were to remit sins by baptism. When pressed to define this latter passage, they usually de- fine it as the conferring power to remit sins by bap- tism, which evidently makes a perpetual priesthood out of the ministry, and confers upon them marvelous powers. Compare the following canons of the Church of Rome with A. Campbell's claims for the adminis- trator in the rite of baptism (Council of Trent, Seventh Session :) Canon IV : " If any one saith that the sacraments of the New Law are not necessary unto salvation, but superfluous, and that without them, or without a de- sire thereof, men obtain of God, through faith alone, the grace of justification though all the sacraments are not indeed necessary for every individual let him be anathema." Canon VI: "If any one saith that the sacraments THE CENTRAL IDEA. 27 of the New Law do not contain the grace which they signify, or that they do not confer the grace on those who do not place an obstacle thereunto, as though they were merely outward signs of grace or justice re- ceived through faith, and certain marks of Christian profession, whereby believers are distinguished amongst men from unbelievers, let him be anathema." Canon VIII : " If any one saith that, by the said sacraments of the New Law, grace is not conferred through the act performed (ex opere operate), but that faith alone in the divine promises suffices for obtain- ing the grace, let him be anathema." On page 128 of the Catechism of the Council of Trent we have the following : " The remission of all sin, original and actual, is therefore the peculiar effect of baptism. That this was the object of its institution by the Lord and Savior, is a truth clearly deduced from the testimony of St. Peter, to say nothing of the array of evidence that might be adduced from other sources. ( Do penance/ says he, 'and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ, for the remis- sion of your sins.' " Further on we read : " But in baptism not only is sin forgiven, but with it all the punishment due to sin is remitted by a merciful God ;" and " Baptism remits all punishment due to original sin in the next life." On page 123 we have the following: "If, then, through the transgression of Adam, children inherit 28 ERRORS OF CAMPBELLISM. the stains of primeval guilt, is there not stronger reason to conclude that the efficacious merits of Christ the Lord must impart to them that justice and those graces which will give them a title to reign in life eternal ? This happy consummation baptism alone can accomplish. The pastor, therefore, will inculcate the absolute necessity of administering baptism to in- fants." * Beside this place the following from A. Camp- bell (Christian System, pages 194 and 195), and it could be duplicated from most any of their authors. Campbell says : " The apostle Peter, when first pub- lishing the gospel to the Jews, taught them that they were not forgiven their sins by faith, but by an act of faith, by a believing immersion into the Lord Jesus. That this may appear evident to all, we shall examine his Pentecostian address and his Pentecostian hearers." " Peter, now holding the keys of the kingdom of Jesus, and speaking under the commission for con- verting the world, and by the authority of the Lord Jesus, . . . may be expected to speak the truth, the whole truth, plainly and intelligibly to his breth- ren, the Jews. He had that day declared the gos- pel facts, and proven the resurrection and ascension of Jesus to the conviction of thousands. They be- lieved and repented. . . . Being full of this faith, they inquired of Peter and other apostles what they *NOTE. The writer is indebted to Dr. G. W. Hughey's work on " Baptismal Remission " for this compilation. THE CENTRAL IDEA. 29 ought to do to obtain remission of sins. They were informed that, though they now believed and re- pented, they were not pardoned, but must ' reform and be immersed for the remission of sins.' . . . This act of faith was presented as that act by which a change in their state could be effected; or, in other words, by which alone they could be pardoned." Again, page 197, he says: u All these testimonies con- cur with each other in presenting the act of faith Christian immersion frequently called conversion as that act inseparably connected with the remission of sins." Again, page 208 : " Remission of sins, or coming into a state of acceptance, being one of the present immunities of the kingdom of heaven, can not be Scripturally enjoyed by any person before im- mersion." These quotations we might multiply to weariness, were it necessary. But wherein consists the difference between the averments of Mr. Campbell and the canons of Rome ? Both affirm that baptism is neces- sary to the pardon of sin. Both lay stress on the " act performed," only Rome is the more liberal of the two. With Rome a little water will do, but Campbellism demands enough for an immersion, and an immersion at whatever cost. Both claim that St. Peter received the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and both claim that Peter's successors use these keys in admitting persons into this kingdom. There is some little difference between them as to just who are the 30 ERRORS OF CAMPBELLISM. successors of St. Peter, but this difference is not fun- damental. They agree in the fundamentals. It will be seen also, by the parallels above given, that this doctrine is but a slight modification of the old doctrine of baptismal regeneration. It is true that this charge is resented with considerable vehe- mence by the advocates of this doctrine, yet, as in the case before given, it is very difficult to make a dis- tinction. The two parties use the same passages in identically the same way. Dr. Pusey, of the Anglican High Church party, may be regarded as very good authority as to the doctrine of baptismal regeneration. In "Holy Baptism," page 48, he comments on Titus iii, 5: "'The washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Ghost/ i. e., a baptizing accompanied by or conveying a reproduction, a second birth, a resto- n of our decayed nature by the new and first life, imparted by the Holy Ghost. The apostle has been ^^ directed both to limit the imparting of the inward grace by the mention of the outward washing, and to raise our conceptions of the greatness of this second birth by the addition of the spiritual grace. The gift, moreover, is the gift of God in and by baptism : every thing but God's mercy is excluded 'not by works of righteousness which we have done ' they only who believe will come to the ' washing of regeneration ;' yet not belief alone, but God, ' according to his mercy, saves them by the washing of regeneration ;' by faith are we saved, not by works ; and by baptism we are THE CENTRAL IDEA. 31 saved, not by faith only, for so God hath said ; not the necessity of preparation, but its efficiency in itself is excluded ; baptism comes neither as ' grace of congruity,' nor as an outward seal of benefits before conveyed ; we are saved neither by faith only, nor by baptism only, but faith bringing us to baptism, and by baptism God saves us." Put beside this some utterances of Campbell :* 4 ' Wherever water, faith, and the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are, there will be found the efficacy of the blood of Jesus. Yes, as God first gave the efficacy of water to blood, he has now given the efficacy of blood to water. This, as was said, is figura- tive ; but it is not a figure which misleads, for the meaning is given without a figure, viz., immersion for the remission of sins. And to him that made the washing of clay from the eyes the washing away of blindness, it is competent to make the immersion of the body in water efficacious to the washing away of sin from the conscience" Again: f "Being born of water in the Savior's style, and the bath of regenera- tion in the apostle's style, in the judgment of all writers and critics of eminence, refer to one and the same act, viz., Christian baptism. Hence it came to pass that all the ancients used the word regeneration as synony- mous with Immersion" Similar quotations might be produced in numbers, showing that the difference * " Christian System," p. 215. t Id. 32 ERRORS OF CAMPBELLISM. between the advocates of baptismal regeneration and those of baptismal remission is more a difference of words than of real principles. Campbell and his fol- lowers quote without hesitation the writings of the advocates of baptismal regeneration as supporting their view, yet when charged with advocating baptismal regeneration they become very indignant, and accuse " the sects," as they style other Christian denomina- tions, of traducing them. A. Campbell, in a foot-note on page 272 of the " Christian System," attempts to meet the charge and explain the difference. The ex- planation amounts to this : The advocates of baptismal regeneration contend for a regeneration effected by baptism alone, while Campbell contends that baptism is but the last step in the process. The so-called dif- ference upon which this explanation is grounded does not exist in fact. In the case of adults the advo- cates of baptismal regeneration require, as antecedent conditions, faith and repentance; also, belief in the presence of the Holy Spirit, imparted in the act of baptism. In the case of infants, the difference may exist ; but the doctrine does not by any means apply to infants alone. This doctrine also teaches justification by works. This is also disavowed by them, but with no better reason than the two former. Baptism they are always ready to set forth as a command, and the observance of it as obedience; and when their theory of doctrine is met by the repeated declaration of the apostle Paul THE CENTRAL IDEA. 33 viz., that justification is by faith " without works/' and " without the deeds of the law " they are ever ready to quote St. James to the contrary, leaving a positive conflict between these apostles, when a rea- sonable method of interpretation would show complete agreement. A.Campbell, in treating of the justification of sin- ners, says : * " As an act of favor it is done by the blood of Jesus, as the rightful and efficient cause; by the faith as the instrumental cause; by the name of Jesus the Lord as the immediate cause; and by works as the demonstrative and conclusive cause." In what sense this jargon of supposed distinctions ex- plains the justification of the sinner, it is difficult for any one not looking at the Scriptures through a theory to understand. The question still remains for expla- nation, How is the sinner justified by works of right- eousness, and not by works of righteousness, at one and the same time? Until this question is answered, the charge of teaching a doctrine of justification by works must stand unimpeached. It is at once apparent to the student of Church history that this scheme of doctrine is in square antag- onism, in this respect, to the fundamental doctrine of the Reformation, and in harmony with Rome on the ground of justification. The watch-cry of the Refor- mation was, Sola fides justificat faith alone justifies; *" Christian System," p. 183. 54 ERRORS OF CAMPBELLISM. while Rome shouted back, not faith alone, but works also. Hageubach (History of Doctrines, Vol. II, page 281) says : "Both Roman Catholics and Protest- ants ascribe to faith a justifying power in the case of the sinner ; but there was this great difference be- tween them, that the former maintained that, in ad- dition to faith, good works are a necessary condition of salvation, and ascribe to them a certain degree of meritoriousness ; while the latter adhere rigidly to the proposition, ' Sola fides justificat.' ' If this emi- nent German ecclesiastical historian had sought to define the doctrinal conflict between Campbellism and other evangelical denominations, he could not have found better words to distinguish them than the words given above. Campbellism always defines baptism as a necessary condition to the salvation of the sinner, and they class it with the "works" spoken of by St. James ii, 24. It is throughout a system of salvation by works and nothing else ; and while they do not as- cribe to works meritoriousness, yet they make them essential antecedently to justification. And if they are " good works," merit can not be denied to them any more before than after justification. God ascribes merit to all good works ; but good works are wrought in faith, and faith justifies; good works, therefore, be- long to a justified state, and not antecedently to it. DIALECT OF. 35 CHAPTER III. THE DIALECT OF CAMPBELUSM. THIS system bas a doctrinal dialect peculiarly its own, and by whicli it may be readily recognized any- wbere. This dialect is made up of Scripture phrase- ology, used in a certain dogmatic sense, which dis- tinctively indexes the characteristic interpretation of this school in dealing with certain passages of Scrip- ture. This its author calls " purity of speech/' " speaking of Bible things by Bible words." * But it is plain to the unsophisticated that this Bible terminology is given a meaning different from that attached to it by others. Bible terms may be used in a certain ar- bitrary sense that is not legitimately to be attached to them, and thereby be made to propagate error of the most destructive consequences and character. In this Scriptural phraseology, used in this pecu- liar sense, we have another forceful illustration of the unbounded influence of this man Campbell ; for the dialect is his own style of speech beyond all question. We doubt it possible in the history of the entire Church of the Christian centuries to parallel this with another example exactly similar. And yet his follow- ing affect to believe that they, in their system, are * " Christian System," p. 125. 36 ERRORS OF CAMPBELLISM. independent of all human leadership. Their creed is the Bible, and their doctrines are infallible deductions from the Scriptures. This must be so, else their claim to take the Scriptures as their sole guide falls to the ground, and they only take their interpretation of the Scriptures, which is just what all other Chris- tians do, and no more. Let us consider some of this characteristic termi- nology. For example, " reign of heaven," as a trans- lation of the phrase " kingdom of heaven," first pro- posed by Mr. Campbell, is now with great unanimity used by the doctrinal teachers of this system. Under this form of translation they usually follow Mr. Campbell's discussion of it, under the heads of "Name," "Constitution," "King," "Subjects/' " Laws," " Territory." An entirely fanciful treat- ment, made use of to make it co-ordinate with a pre- conceived system of doctrine. But of this more sub- sequently. According to this dialect the unbaptized are styled "aliens," while the baptized, by parity of reasoning, however backslidden, however besotted in sin, are naturalized citizens, and may be saved by repentance, faith, and prayer, at any time, while the " alien " can not be saved without baptism. The Scriptures do use the term "aliens," but never to signify the unbap- tized. In Eph. ii, 12, and iv, 18, the term undoubt- edly refers to the Gentiles in their condition anterior to the publication of the gospel, and as compared with DIALECT OF. 37 Israel under the Levitical dispensation. One thing, however, is certain. The Scriptures nowhere recog- nize the unbaptized person as an alien simply because he is uubaptized. "In Christ," is another Scriptural phrase that is given in this system a peculiar signification. A. Campbell says : * " When are persons in Christ ? I choose this phrase in accommodation to the familiar style of this day. No person is in a house, or in a ship, or in a state, or in a kingdom, but he that is gone, or is introduced into a state, into a kingdom ; so no person is in Christ but he who has been intro- duced into Christ. . . . But the phrase, into Christ, is always connected with conversion, regenera- tion, immersion, or putting on Christ. Before we are justified in Christ, live in Christ, or fall asleep in Christ, we must come, be introduced or immersed into Christ." What can teach more explicitly than this that baptism is that which puts the sinner into Christ, and that the baptized state is the state of being " in Christ?" An interpretation that contains a whole brood of destructive fallacies. If baptisin puts the sinner into Christ, then all who are baptized are in Christ, whatever may be their present morals. If immorality will put the baptized person out of Christ, then this whole theory falls to the ground. If it does not, then the backslider is sure *" Christian System," pp. 188-189. 38 ERRORS OF CAMPBELLISM. of final salvation; for, according to Rom. viii, 38, 39, " Nothing can separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord;" and 2 Cor. v, 17: " If any man be in Christ, he is a new creature." It does not help the matter at all to say, " We require sincere repentance and faith in order to baptism;" for these qualities may have existed, and the individual be now "in the gall of bitterness and bond of in- iquity." He is either in Christ or out of Christ. If in Christ, he is safe; if out of Christ, how does he now get into Christ? By baptism? If so, then con- stant re-baptism will be required. If not now by baptism, then baptism does not put all sinners into Christ. To this absurdity does this misapplication of the Scriptures inevitably lead. The whole theory is fallacious. Water baptism is not baptism into Christ, but baptism into the name of Christ; that is, into a profession of his name for the remission of sins. Baptism into Christ is entirely spiritual, and does not result in this congeries of absurdities. "Obedience of faith," and "obeying the gospel," are choice phrases in the dialect of this system. They mean, as used by them, but one thing, namely, bap- tism. As, in the golden age of the Roman empire, all roads were said to lead to Rome, so, according to these teachers, all routes of Scripture exegesis inev- itably lead to baptism. And yet there is not one sin- gle passage that either directly or inferentially refers to baptism as " the obedience of faith," or " obeying DIALECT OF. 39 the gospel." This is a very pertinent illustration of the persistency of preconceived opinions in causing individuals to see the Scriptures through the medium of a theory. The obedience of faith is faith itself; or, in other words, faith is obedience to the command to believe in, on, or upon Christ. In Rom. x, 16, we have "obeying the gospel" defined: "But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Esaias saith, Lord, who hath believed our report?" In what respect did they not " obey the gospel?" Plainly in not believing the " report " of the prophets. " Obedience to the faith," in Rom. i, 5, is obedience to the whole system of faith. Yet despite these plain and obvious interpretations of these phrases, they have become a veritable doctrinal shibboleth of the followers of Campbell, and they in- vite sinners to believe, repent, and confess Christ, and obey the gospel. The word "confession" has also a peculiar sig- nificance attached to it in this dialect. With them it means the oral confession that " Jesus Christ is the Son of God." Alexander Campbell says : * " The only apostolic and divine confession of faith which God the Father of all the Church, and that upon which Jesus himself said he would build it, is the sublime and supreme proposition, That Jesus of Naz- areth is the Messiah, the Son of the living God. This is the peculiarity of the Christian system, its specific ' " Christian System," p. 58. 40 ERRORS OF CAMPBELLISM. attribute." This, then, is confession, according to their teaching, and is one of the requisites of baptism, and one of the works of righteousness. That such, an oral confession was ever required by the apostles as a pre- requisite to baptism, has not one particle of proof in the Acts of the Apostles or their Epistles. The only passage they will attempt to cite is Acts viii, 37, which is rejected as wanting in genuineness by the Revised Ver- sion. Critical scholars have for a long time with perfect unanimity held its spuriousness, an addition that crept into some manuscripts from an ecclesiastical formula. The words 6/j.o),o-j-Maiid b/jtolofiaare rendered indif- ferently confess, profess, confession, profession, and refer to faith or belief in almost every instance, without any formulated statement or oral declaration. Confession " with the mouth " is only spoken of in Rom. x, 9, 10, and it requires an unlimited stretch of the imagination to put into the words, as here used, the formal con- fession that Mr. Campbell and his following require. Again, "the action of baptism" is a prominent technic in this dialect. Mr. Campbell, in "The Chris- tian System," devotes a chapter to this subject. By this word "action," it is sought to maintain the posi- tion that the word in the original defines a specific action, rather than a result to be brought about by different acts* or influences. What is the "action of baptism" as defined by their mode of procedure? Whose action is it? It is evidently the action of the administrator after the immersion is partially secured DIALECT OF. 4l by the action of the subject. At this juncture the individual, passive in the hands of the administrator, is actively dipped by him, or immersed and emersed by him. The object is not by this description to bur- lesque their mode of procedure in immersion, so-called, but to bring out clearly to logical discrimination this " action " idea. Baptism is the passive receiving of water, administered in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, as a Christian rite ; and the active party, so far as physical action is concerned, is the administrator. And when Mr. Campbell talks of baptism as "an action commanded to be done,"* he talks of a command that never was given. The com- mand to baptize was only given to apostles and ad- ministrators the "action" was to be their action. The subjects of baptism were commanded to be bap- tized i. e., receive baptism and this whole theory of " action," and talk about the " action of baptism," is a pertinent illustration of that want of" purity of speech " that Campbell so unsparingly condemns in others. With the same limited meaning the term "gospel" is used. With them it means, preaching baptism in order to the remission of sins. Whatever of repent- ance, faith, love, or duty a sermon may have in it, if it have not baptism as a condition to pardon, it is not the gospel.f In this case it is true, as in the case of " obedience " before spoken of, that there is not a *" Christian System," p. 55. t See " Memoirs of A. Campbell," pp. 208-218, 224, 229. 4 42 ERRORS OF CAMPELLISM. single passage that refers to baptism by water as any part of the gospel. The fact is, the gospel was preached during Christ's stay here upon the earth, and that was before the institution of Christian bap- tism according to Mr. Campbell. Again, the gospel was preached unto Abraham, Gal. iii, 8 : " And the Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the hea- then through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed." So also was it preached in the wilderness, Heb. iv, 2 : " For unto us was the gospel preached as well as unto them." Certainly, in this gospel as well as in that preached by Christ unto " the poor " (Luke vii, 22), there was no water baptism as a condition to its bene- fits. Again, Paul especially disclaims baptism as a part of the gospel of remission, 1 Cor. i, 17: "For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gos- pel." What is here set by antithesis to the gospel? Water baptism. It is, therefore, no part of the gospel of salvation to sinners. It belongs to those who are saved, as a symbol of the grace whereby they were saved ; to wit, spiritual baptism, which is a fundamen- tal part of the gospel of Christ, for it is purification from sin. 1 Cor. xii, 13 : " By one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gen- tiles, whether we be bond or free, and have all been made to drink into one spirit." " The loaf in the house of the Lord " is a some- what unique and original method of presenting the DIALECT OF. 43 communion of the Lord's Supper. This idea of "one loaf" * is founded on a fanciful rendering of the Greek a^oroc, in 1 Cor. x, 16, 17 a word which, in the great majority of instances, is translated bread. But Mr. Campbell conceived that, at the ancient or primitive communion occasions, each member broke a piece from the common " loaf." So he translates dproi; " loaf" to accord with this idea. Justin Martyr, in his first Apol- ogy (ch. 67, A. D. 140) gives an account of the Chris- tian assemblies, in which he says of the elements of the Eucharist : " There is a distribution to each." Of course, this is a matter of but minor moment ; but it serves to point the illustration of Campbell's doc- trinal dialect, and the unparalleled authority his opin- ions held, and do now hold, over his followers. * " Christian System," pp. 303-331. 44 ERRORS OF CAMPBELLISM. CHAPTER IV. THE THEORY OF POSITIVE INSTITUTES. ALEXANDER CAMPBELL and his followers, in order to make their scheme of doctrine co-ordinate with unity of purpose and plan in the divine economy under all dispensations and in all ages, have pro- mulgated the theory of salvation by obedience to positive institutes or precepts. The theory in brief is this : Under each dispensation God enjoined some positive act of obedience as the final condition upon which remission of sin was procured by the penitent believer. But we prefer to let Mr. Campbell him- self set forth his theory of doctrine. He says :* " From Abel to the resurrection of Jesus trans- gressors obtained remission of sins at the altar through priests and sin-offerings; but it was an im- perfect remission as respected the conscience. 'For the law/ says Paul (more perfect in this respect than the preceding economy), ' containing a shadow only of the good things to come, and not the very image of these things, never can, with the same sacrifices which they offered yearly, forever make those who *" Christian System," p. 179. THEORY OF POSITIVE INSTITUTES. 45 come to them perfect. Since being offered, would they not have ceased? because the worshipers, being once purified, should have no longer conscience of sins/ ' This passage is remarkable, especially for the assumption that " transgressors obtained remission at the altar through priests and sin-offerings " under pre-Christian dispensations. There is not one particle of proof offered for it. In fact, there is not one single passage in the Old Testament that enjoins the offering of a sacrifice as a condition to the pardon of sin. Sacrifices were generally offered by priests; hence the only thing that could be properly the act of the in- dividual would be the bringing of the sacrifice. Again, sacrifices were offered for families, or for the people at large; therefore if pardon of sin were obtained through them, it was, in the vast majority of instances, pred- icated on the mental act, the state of the mind or heart of the worshiper, which must be a state of re- pentance and faith. No; this is a lame attempt to offer support to this theory of positive institutes as being required in all ages in order to the remission of sin. The Old Testament nowhere sustains it. Salvation in numerous instances is predicated on faith, trust, repentance, prayer, calling unto the Lord, and these are each and all mental acts. In a discussion with a minister of this denomina- tion, where the utterances of the psalmists and proph- ets with reference to prayer for the remission of sins was cited by the writer, the attempt was made to 46 ERRORS OF CAMPBELLISM. break the force of these proofs by saying faith and prayer, and faith and calling upon God, is not faith alone, as the Methodist Discipline, in Article IX of the Articles of Religion, teaches. To this the reply was made that it was the faith in the prayer, and not the faith and the prayer, that brought the remission of sin. Wherever the heart exercised an implicit faith in God, there, at that very moment, salvation was realized. Prayer, or calling upon God for pardon of sin, is proof of the fact that pardon was not suspended on obedience to positive institutes, and proof that it was suspended upon a state of mind and heart, which was essential in prayer, without which there could be no genuine prayer. We will give a couple of examples out of the Old Testament out of the large number that might be given: Psalms Ixxxvi, 5: "For thou Lord, art good and ready to forgive; and plenteous in mercy to all them that call upon thee." Isa. Iv, 6, 7: "Seek ye the Lord while he may be found, call upon him while he is near. Let the wicked for- sake his way, and the unrighteous man his thoughts : and let him return unto the Lord, and he will have mercy upon him; and to our God, for he will abun- dantly pardon." These explicitly set forth the con- dition upon which pardon was obtained by sinners under the Old Testament dispensation. Sometimes the trespass offerings enjoined in Leviticus, chapters iv and v, are cited as examples of sins forgiven upon the offering of sacrifices, but THEORl OF ^POSITIVE INSTITUTES. 47 the unbiased reader will see that these sins of igno- rance, that are atoned for by certain sacrifices, are not the sins from which sinners generally need to be justified. The Levitical law nowhere offers any sup- port to this theory, and it must be badly pressed for a foundation to stand upon through the fifteen hun- dred years of the Mosaic dispensation, to turn to the trespass offerings as an example of positive institutes as conditions to the remission of sin. Again, this theory seeks to present a parallel be- tween the fall of our first parents and the recovery of the sinner. Mr. Braclen, in his debate with Dr. G. "W. Hughey, of the Methodist Episcopal Church, states the theory in full, of which we will quote enough to bring out in clear view this particular phase of their doctrinal teaching. He says : *"Let us now analyze the successive steps" that is, of the fall " and learn when she became guilty in the sight of God. " 1. There was a preacher of falsehood and diso- bedience ; falsehood and disobedience were preached and heard ; but she had not become guilty, she had not fallen. " 2. Next she disbelieved God in believing the tempter ; but she had not yet fallen. Suppose she had said to him, ' What you say is reasonable indeed I believe it but God has said, " You shall not eat of it," * "Hnghey and Braden Debate," pp. 189, 190. 48 ERRORS OF CAMPBELLISM. and I will obey God,' would she have fallen ? Cer- tainly not. It would have been an error of the judg- ment, but not a sin of the heart. " 3. She desired the result of disobedience and be- came dissatisfied with the reward of obedience; but she had not yet fallen or become guilty. Suppose she had said to the tempter, ' Sir, I feel a strong desire to eat such pleasant fruit, and to become as God, know- ing good and evil ; I do n't see why I am restricted in this way ; but God has said, " You shall not eat of it," and I will not eat,' would she have fallen ? Cer- tainly not. "4. She next arrayed the best part of her nature not already in rebellion against God, in opposition to his law. She resolved to disobey, and as the act and volition were in her case simultaneous nearly, the Bible makes them so, and says, ' She ate, and her eyes were opened and she was ashamed,' or guilty ; ' then she fell, and not till then." 3 Now, as to the recovery of the sinner, we have this : " 1. The gospel must be preached, and man must hear it. He is not yet pardoned. " 2. He must believe the gospel, or have faith. He is not yet returned; he is not yet pardoned. " 3. Man must repent, he must cease to love sin. . . . He is not yet pardoned. . . . " 4. Since man has been living in rebellion against God, he must now confess Christ before men, as did the eunuch to Philip; but he is not yet saved. THEORY OF POSITIVE INSTITUTES. 49 " 5. He must next obey the positive command of God, or submit bis will to the will of God in his positive ordinance baptism." Let us look at the first side of this attempted par- allel, and see how many absurdities are compressed in the compass of its assumptions. Acccording to the second item in the category, Eve could believe the tempter and disbelieve God, and yet have no sin in her heart. To make God willfully a liar, is more than " an error of judgment." We are told that in addition to this "she desired the result of disobe- dience," and yet was not fallen. A monstrous doctrine, squarely in contradiction to the teaching of Jesus, Matt, v, 21-27, where hatred and lust are made murder and adultery. Desire sin in the heart, and yet not sin ! How completely in conflict with all our ideas of the nature of sin, that there must be the overt act before there can be sin ! The fact is, sin existed before the act was put forth, and had something occurred to prevent the act, there would not have been any less of sin in the heart. Sin existed in Eve when she dis- believed God's word, and doubted his goodness in the prohibition given. And her recovery from the guilt of sin was secured by her heart-faith in the divine faithfulness and goodness in the provision to be made for the forgiveness of sin. But were it conceded that the first sin consisted only in an overt act of disobe- dience, it does not follow that the restoration shall be through one formal act of obedience. The restoration 5 50 ERRORS OF CAHPBELLISM. must have underlying it a principle from which all obedience may spring, and that principle is faith, or heart-obedience, " the obedience of faith." Under the dispensation of the Baptist, Campbell and his followers teach that baptism became the posi- tive institute for the remission of sin, and in this there was a preparation for the Christian dispensation. Braden, on the design of baptism, says:* "Our fourth argument is, that John the Harbinger was preparing the way for the coming of Christ ; baptism was for the remission of sins, and in this he prepared the way for the great law of pardon in Christ. Mark i, 4 : l John did baptize in the wilderness, and preach the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins/ Luke iii, 3 : ' John came into all the coun- try about Jordan, preaching the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins/ Matt. iii. 5, 6 : ' Then went out to John all Jerusalem and Judea, and all the region round about Jordan, and were baptized of him in Jordan, confessing their sins.' This baptism was one which could only be administered to peni- tent believers of John's preaching. To all such it was for the remission of sins, for Matthew assures us he required confession before baptism. Then followed baptism for the remission of their sins." Here we have the last step from the supposed positive institutes of the patriarchal and Mosaic dis- pensation to the Christian dispensation, and the theory 1 " Hughey and Braden Debate," p. 193. THEORY OF POSITIVE INSTITUTES. 51 is equally without foundation here. When its im- proved assumptions are taken away, it stands out as a sheer fabrication. 1. It is sought to connect John's baptism with remission of sins in causal relation; that is, his baptism was /or, meaning in order, to remission of sins. Now, not one passage that is cited by Mr. Braden, and none other that can be cited, connects these two baptism and remission of sins as ante- cedent and sequent, cause and effect. One passage will forever set this matter at rest, Matt. iii. 11: "I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance ; but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear; he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with fire." Here we have baptism connected with repentance by the preposition C, the same preposition that, according to Campbell's teaching, connects baptism and remission in Acts ii. 38. John specifically states that the baptism he per- formed was e/c for, or in order to repentance. Now, what is the obvious and common-sense interpretation of this language ? This evidently : " I indeed baptize you with water into [a profession of] repentance." John preached the baptism of repentance etc for (into) the remission of sin. The repentance was for or, in order to remission of sin ; baptism was for or, in order to repentance. Now, let it be borne in mind that it was what John preached that was for remission of sin. He preached a baptism, not a baptism of water, but a baptism of repentance. Repentance itself baptized into the remission of sin. It was a repent- 52 ERRORS OF CAMPBELLISM. ance that was crowned with faith. Acts xix, 4: " Then said Paul, John verily baptized with the bap- tism of repentance, saying unto the people that they should believe in him that should come after, that is Christ." Now, whatever construction we give to the phrase, "baptism of repentance," it is an unwar- ranted liberty to construe it as baptism into remis- sion. It can not be into repentance and into remis- sion at the same time. The words, 6a7iri^(o, Sdjcrcff/jta, and fiaTmafjibz, in the original Greek, are by no means limited in their signification to a submergence into something, or an overwhelming with something. In fact, anything that could bring about a changed condition had the power of baptism, as grief, calamities, sufferings, in- iquities, drunkenness, and the like. Hence Jesus says, Luke xii, 50 : "I have a baptism to be baptized with ; and how am I straitened until it be accom- plished!" So also Matt, xx, 22, 23, and Mark x, 38, 39. Christ's cup, baptism. The baptism by drink- ing the cup of suffering in sacrifice for sin. Isa. xxi, 4, in the Septuagint, reads : " My heart panted, iniq- uity baptizes me." To these may be added, from classical and patristic sources in the Greek, an in- definite number of like examples, as: *Chariton Baptized by desire. Plutarch Baptized by worldly affairs. Chrysostom Baptized by passion. * Dale's " Johannic Baptism/' pp. 208, 209. THEOR Y OF P 08ITI VE INSTIT UTES. 53 Themistius Baptized by grief. Josephus Baptized by drunkenness. Chrysostora Baptized by poverty. Proclus Baptized with wautouiiess. Plotiuus Baptized with diseases, or with arts of ma- gicians. Conon Baptized with much wine. Justin Martyr, who suffered martyrdom about the year A. D. 166, says, in his dialogue with Trypho the Jew: "By reason therefore of this laver of repentance and knowledge of God, which has been ordained on account of the transgression of God's people, as Isaiah cries, we have believed, and testify that that very baptism which he announced is alone able to purify those who have re- pented ; and this is the water of life. But the cisterns which you have dug for yourselves are broken and profit- less to you. For what is the use of that baptism that cleanseth the body alone. Baptize the soul from wrath and from covetousness, and lo, the body is pure." These Greeks, speaking and using the Greek lan- guage as their vernacular, most certainly understood the power of this word 6tBcrita t and these instances show how wide is the range given to the application of the term. And Justin the Martyr shows how re- pentance will " baptize the soul from wrath, covetous- ness, envy, hatred." It was this baptism or purifica- tion by means of repentance that John preached ; and it was /or, in order to represent this " baptism of re- pentance," that John baptized with water. But let it not be forgotten that John's baptism was e^c, " unto 54 ERRORS OF CAMPBELL1SM. repentance," and " repentance " was e/c, " unto remis- sion of sins," and not, as Campbell and his followers have it, " baptism with water for remission of sins." Baptism with water and remission of sins are not con- nected together by the preposition c, unto, into, or /or, and it does violence to the text so to construe them. The idea put forth by these teachers is, that John went throughout Judea and Galilee preaching to the people to come and be baptized with water by him; while the Scriptures represent him as preaching re- pentance, which purifies or baptizes the soul from sin ; and having done this, he administered a symbolical cleansing with water, which, in harmony with the ideas in vogue, represented the repentance. Mr. Braden says in the quotation above given, that "Matthew assures us he required confession before baptism." Where does Matthew assure us of such a relation as that between confession and baptism ? I suppose he thought he found it in ch. iii, vi : " And were baptized of him in Jordan, confessing their sins." But the very structure of the language indicates that the public confession was made by the baptism. It was a baptism for confession of sin, and genuine con- fession of sin is the public expression of repentance. No language could more explicitly set forth the relation between baptism by water and repentance than this text. It requires blindness, superinduced by a theory, to make confession in order to water baptism out of the text, and that baptism in order to the remission THEORY OF POSITIVE INSTITUTES. 55 of sin out of any thing or all that is said about John's baptism in the New Testament. But the absurdity of this theory of positive insti- tutes, as applied to the dispensation of the Baptist, is further manifest in the fact that Jesus, while minis- tering here on earth, uniformly forgave sins without any postive acts of obedience, but directly upon an exercise of faith. For example, the sick of the palsy, Matt, ix, 2: " And Jesus seeing their faith, said unto the sick of the palsy, Son, be of good cheer ; thy sins be forgiven thee." To the sinning woman in the house of Simon, Luke vii, 44-50: "Thy faith hath saved thee ; go in peace." Here Jesus commanded no obe- dience to positive institutes, in order to remission. He did not command baptism or any thing else. It can not be said obedience was impossible to them, as it is said of the thief on the cross. The only attempted reply is, that the Master himself was present, and had a right to prescribe such conditions as he saw fit. To this it is sufficient to reply that Jesus never contra- vened any of the fundamental demands of his law. What he requires of one sinner he requires of all, as conditions to pardon of sin. He lays down the con- ditions in order to justification, in the parable of the Pharisee and the publican. Luke xviii, 10-14 : The publican simply prayed, "God be merciful to me a sinner, . . . and he went down to his house justified rather than the other." The Pharisee had obedience to positive institutes to present as the 56 ERRORS OF CAMPBELLISM. grounds of his justification. He could have even said, as was said of his brethren, Mark vii, 4 : " And when I come from the market, except I baptize I eat not." * But he was not justified. Jesus, in his conversation with Nicodemus, laid down explicitly the conditions in order to salvation, justification, or pardon of sin, John iii, 1418: " And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life. For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. He that believeth on him is not condemned ; but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God." This language is definite as to what Jesus required, in order to the remission of sin the removal of condemnation. This conversation was had during the so-called dispensation of John the Baptist, and manifestly laid down the conditions to salvation at that time. This scheme of doctrine teaches that the kingdom of heaven, or "reign of heaven" in the dialect of *In this text the verb fair rifa and the noun /3a"ma,u6 s - both occur, and are translated wash, washing. Had they been trans- lated baptize and baptism, the ordinary reader would have had some light that he does not now have on this subject of baptism. THEORY OF POSITIVE INSTITUTES. 57 Campbellism, was not set up until on the clay of Pen- tecost ; and that to Peter was intrusted the keys of the kingdom, and that he opened its doors in his ser- mon on that occasion. Mr. Campbell puts it in this Avay : * " Peter, now holding the keys of the kingdom of Jesus, and speaking under the commission for converting the world, and by the authority of the Lord Jesus guided, inspired, and accompanied by the Spirit may be expected to speak the truth, the whole truth plainly and intelligibly, to his brethren, the Jews." Again : f "Thus commenced the reign of heaven on the day of Pentecost, in the person of the Messiah, the Sou of God, and the anointed monarch of the universe." Of course, harmonious with this theory, the decla- rations concerning the Church of God which we find in the Gospels must be explained away, as well as those also about the kingdom of heaven, or kingdom of God, which do not quadrate with it. For example, the proclamation of the Baptist, and also of the Master himself, that " the kingdom of heaven is at hand," is always interpreted " the king- dom of heaven has come nigh," because the Greek 6-)"fia) has also that meaning. But in two instances the verb yddvco occurs Matt, xii, 28, and Luke xi, 20 : " The kingdom of God is come unto you/' and "The kingdom of God has come upon you." It will ''"Christian System," p. 194. Md. p. 171. 58 ERRORS OF CAMPBELL1SM. hardly be maintained that in these instances the Savior meant to teach these carping, fault-finding Jews that in a few years the kingdom of God would come. But there are other passages which can not, by any torture or critical emendation, be made to teach that the kingdom of heaven had not yet begun. Matt, xxi, 31 : " Verily I say unto you, that the publicans and harlots go into the kingdom of God before you." Matt, xxi, 43: " Therefore I say unto you, the king- dom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof." Matt, xxiii, 13 : " Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites, for ye shut up the kingdom of heaven against men : for ye neither go in yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in." So also Mark i, 15 ; iii, 24 ; Luke xvi, 16, et al. It is true these phrases " kingdom of heaven," " kingdom of God " are used in the Gospels with somewhat of a diversity of signi- fication, at one time referring to the divine economy of grace established among men in the calling of Israel to be the depositors of the divine plan of salvation and the conservators of revelation ; at another refer- ring to the era of the Messiah ; at another referring to his complete conquest of the world to himself; at an- other to the reign of Christ in the heart; and at another to his glorious perfect kingdom above. But these are all grounded in the same great thought the sov- ereignty of Christ. It is therefore unreasonable and confusing to attempt to make these terms to describe THEORY OF POSITIVE INSTITUTES. 59 any one epoch in the scheme of divine grace as Pen- tecost. The kingdom of heaven in every essential sense was established, or " set up," among men long be- fore this. But this idea is a part of a scheme of doc- trine that has for its aim the complete isolation and separation of the divine economy into parts, to show that at one time God had plans and purposes that at another he completely changed; in other words, that the Christian dispensation presents a thorough emen- dation of the divine procedure and requirements from what they were under the Mosaic dispensation. Let it be not forgotten, that if this theory of the " setting up" of the kingdom on Pentecost falls to the ground, a principal stone in the foundation upon which Campbellism builds is gone, and the theory necessarily falls with it. Mr. Campbell says : * " Having, from all these considerations, seen that until the death of the Messiah his kingdom could not commence, and having seen from the record itself that it did not commence, before his resurrection, we proceed to the develop- ment of things after his resurrection, to ascertain the day upon which the kingdom was set up, or the reign of heaven begun." Now, all this is necessary to prepare the way for the doctrine of the commission, as propounded by him and his followers, and the idea also that Peter, having the keys of the kingdom, opened it in the thirty-eighth verse of the second * " Christian System," p. 167. 60 ERRORS OF CAMPBELLISM. chapter of Acts, and laid down the inflexible con- ditions to admission into it for the entire Christian dispensation. Hence, Campbell tells us : * " The stat- utes and laws of the Christian kingdom are not to be sought in the Jewish Scriptures, or antecedent to the day of Pentecost." A more completely artificial system of faith could not well be evolved. The crucial point of the whole is baptism by immersion as a necessary condition to the pardon of sin. To it the Scriptures must all be made to conform, whatever violence of translation or interpretation may be required. * " Christian System," p. 157. THE COMMISSION. 61 CHAPTER V. THE COMMISSION. AN immediate doctrinal correlate of Campbell's theory of the kingdom of heaven, is his doctrine of the commission given to the disciples. It is at once as- sumed that the whole system is to be found here in the narrow compass of a positive precept. Campbell says : * " The commission for converting the world teaches that immersion was necessary for discipleship ; for Jesus said, ( Convert the nations, immersing them into the name/ etc., and f teaching them to observe/ etc. The construction of the sentence fairly indicates that no person can be a disciple according to the com- mission who has not been immersed; for the active participle, in connection with the imperative, either declares the manner in which the imperative shall be obeyed, or explains the meaning of the command ; . . . for example, 'cleanse the house, sweeping it;' thus, { convert (or disciple) the nations, immersing them.'' Also, according to this system, the commission is to be found in modified form in the other three Gos- pels, Mark xvi, 15, 16 : "And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world and preach the gospel to *" Christian Sys'em," p. 198. 62 ERRORS OF CAMPBELLISM. every creature. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved, and he that believeth not shall be damned." Luke xxiv, 46, 47 : "And said unto them, Thus it is written, and thus it behooved Christ to suf- fer, and to rise from the dead the third day : and that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusa- lem." John xx, 22, 23 : " And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost : whosesoever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them ; and whosesoever sins ye retain, they are retained." A careful comparison of these passages in the light of subsequent Scripture teachings and facts, will show that they lend no support whatever to the ideas that these teachers assume to educe from them. There are a number of assumptions usually made here that need to be examined, in the first place, the assumption, in the face of the larger part of the Chris- tian world, that immersion alone is baptism, and that the Savior said, " Go ye therefore, and teach all na- tions, immersing them." * It is sufficient to dismiss *It appears very certain to the author that if the assump- tion that God commanded an immersion is true, he would most certainly have commanded an emersion. Immersion never takes its subject out of the water. If he is immersed, he is there yet, unless he has been emersed, and with emersion the immersion has ended. This fundamental meaning of the word immerse is here brought out that the reader may see that baptism and immersion are not equivalents, as is assumed THE COMMISSION. 63 this with the remark, inasmuch as we do not at pres- ent propose to discuss the mode of baptism, that if immersion is an essential condition to the remission of sin, is it not passing strange that the act was not carefully denned, so that multiplied millions of intel- ligent, honest people could not be so greatly mistaken as they have been through the Christian ages? A second assumption is that /laOr/Tewo to disciple or make disciples, rendered " teach " in the Author- ized Version is synonymous with convert, and remit sins. This idea is a very forcible illustration of the close affinity between the theories of Campbell and the doctrine of Rome. Both assume that they are com- manded to go and remit sins, and both claim to do so by baptism. This is the only difference : Rome con- tinues to exercise the prerogative after baptism ; Camp- bellism assumes to go no further than baptism. Con- version is a word of quite a latitude of meaning. An individual is converted when he has changed his faith or opinions. This a purely intellectual process. He may do this himself by investigation or inquiry after the truth; or the teaching of another may be the by Campbell and his followers. A person may be in a bap- tized state ; but he can not be in a state of immersion without being hopelessly drowned. Baptism and immersion are not syn- onymous. Baptism is the rite of cleansing or purification, and its ideas are wholly spiritual ; immersion is a physical act of submergence underneath a physical substance or fluid. Earlier advocates of this theory called it dipping, and dipping it is ; for the word dip takes out again. 64 ERRORS OF CAMPBELL1SM. principal agency in it. In the second case, the teacher may be said to have converted the other. But to con- vert by the mere act of baptism, is an extension to the meaning of the word that certainly has no warrant whatever in Scripture. It will be observed that the teaching comes after the baptism in the only commission where baptism is mentioned. First, "disciple them by baptism;" then, " teach " them. But does " disciple " and " convert " mean the same thing? Alexander Campbell was the first to broach such an idea. To make a disciple means to make a learner, a pupil. To convert means to change in heart, life, character. The first is an outward act of profession; the second is an inward spiritual change. So the great body of the Church for ages, even from apostolical times, has understood the commission in Matt, xxviii, 19, to authorize the baptism of infants. There can be no conversion, the followers of Camp- bell admit, without faith, repentance, confession. If so, how could the disciples "convert by baptism?" If, on the other hand, as Mr. Campbell says, conver- sion and immersion are the same thing,* then repent- ance, faith, and confession are no part of it. In this hopeless confusion are we left by this attempt to har- monize these ideas. In the Scripture use of the term, conversion refers *" Christian System," p. 195. THE COMMISSION. 65 to all that change that takes place in a sinner to turn him from sin to the service of God ; that is, conviction of sin, repentance, faith, pardon, regeneration, adoption. The work is both divine and human, conviction, pardon, regeneration, adoption are the divine side; "repent- ance towards God and faith towards the Lord Jesus Christ " * are the human side. There is not one sin- gle passage of Scripture that, either directly or by fair inference, calls baptism conversion. Mr. Campbell quotes Acts xxvi, 17, 18: "Unto whom now I send thee, to open their eyes, and to turn them from dark- ness unto light, and from the power of Satan unto God, that they may receive forgiveness or sins, and inher- itance among the sanctified." Luke xxii, 32 : " When thou art converted, strengthen thy brethren ;" and James v, 19, 20: " If any of you err from the truth, and one convert him, let him know that he who con- verteth the sinner from the error of his way, shall save a soul from death, and hide a multitude of sins." If we had been selecting passages of Scripture to show the utter fallacy of this doctrine, we could have se- lected none better for such purpose. In the first the apostle Paul most clearly sets forth that he was sent to the Gentiles to convert them by teaching; and as to the divine side of the work, the forgiveness of sins and sanctificatiou was predicated upon faith as the individual act. There is no water baptism in the * Acts xx, 21. 66 ERRORS OF CAMPBELLISM. passage, and the inference that places it in the verb l7rtffT(>d a ^ so to those who fell in the wilderness. % So, it was not the "word" as understood by Campbell and his fol- lowers, but the truth of the gospel simply in germ, but vitalized by the Holy Spirit, that saved them. Again, James i, 18, presents these two agencies the personal Spirit and the instrumentality together: " Of his own will begat he us with the word of truth." So the apostle Paul says: "In Christ Jesus I have begotten you through the gospel." Here are three agencies a divine meritorious agency, a human preacher, and the gospel truth. In 1 Peter i, 22, 23, we have the relation of the efficacious agency and the instrumentality most clearly presented : " See- ing ye have purified your souls in obeying the truth through the Spirit unto unfeigned love of the breth- *2 Cor. v, 19. TGal. iii, 8. J Keb. iv, 2 and 6. OBJECTIONS CONSIDERED. 209 ren, love one another with a pure heart fervently; being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of in- corruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth forever." Here it is distinctly stated that their purification was through the agency of the Spirit "purified your souls through the Spirit in obeying the truth." What is this "incorruptible seed," of which they were born again ? Not the word, for they were "born of" this "through the word;" that is, by two agencies " the incorruptible seed " and " the word " one efficacious, the other instrumental. But it may be asked: "Is it not the teaching of the passage that 'the incorruptible seed' is 'the word?' for it is said to 'live and abide forever." The Revised Version, in the margin, undoubtedly gives the true reading: "Through the word of God, who liveth and abideth." It is " God who liveth and abideth." Cer- tain it is that if " living and abiding " defines the "word," then "incorruptible seed" does not define it. "Born of God,"* "born of the Spirit,"! and "born from above," % are the Divine expressions for the blessed state described by Peter. Never " born of the word," but " through the word " " by the gos- pel," clearly discriminating between instrumentality and efficacious agency. Mr. Campbell, in his discussion with Professor Rice, offers five more so-called arguments. It may be here 1 John v, 1. t John iii, 6. t John iii, 3 18 210 ERRORS OF CAMPBELL1SM. stated that his arguments are selected for review, be- cause he usually presents them in a better style than subsequent exponents of his theory, who have slav- ishly patterned after this man both in doctrines and methods of defense. He who reads " Campbell and Rice's Debate," "Christianity Restored," or "The Millennial Harbinger," will have absolutely all of Campbellism, both creed and arguments. The five arguments referred to above, are in brief as follows: First. Paul was commissioned to " open the blind eyes " of the Gentiles, and turn them from darkness unto light. * Second. " Whatever is as- cribed to the Holy Spirit in the work of salvation is ascribed to the word." f Third. " Those who resisted the word of God are said to resist the Spirit of God." J Fourth. " That the strivings of the prophets by their words, are represented as the strivings of the Holy Spirit." % Fifth. "God nowhere has operated with- out his word, either in the old creation or in the new." | The first four of these supposed arguments are only a repetition in a slightly different form of the idea, that the affirmation of mediate instrumentality contradicts the personal agency of the Spirit, and proves that he operates only by means of his word. This has been so fully refuted before that only a passing glance at the new examples cited is required. If Paul as an instrumentality opening the blind eyes of the * Acts xxvi, 18. t " Campbell and Rice," p. 749. j Id. 750. OBJECTIONS CONSIDERED. 211 Gentiles proves that mediate means alone were used, it proves too much, for that would exclude the word, for the work is all ascribed to Paul. But it may be said that he was to preach the word. So he was, but with power sent down from above. He "received the Holy Ghost " when Ananias laid his hand on him, and received his sight at the same time. (Acts ix, 17.) He tells us, in 1 Cor. ii, 4, how he preached the gos- pel, and what made it efficacious. " And my speech and my preaching was not with enticing words of man's wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power ;" iii, 6, " I planted, Apollos watered, but God gave the increase." And so also, in pre-Christian ages, "the Spirit of the Lord God anointed" prophets " to preach the gos- pel."* It was not naked word or words unattended by spiritual power, but the word made efficient by the Holy Ghost. The last of these five alleged arguments is simply the wholesale denial of one part of the question at issue; namely, that the Holy Ghost does operate separate and apart from any knowledge, moral or spiritual, but not, as he alleges, apart from the Bible plan of salva- tion. If this position is true, then it follows that the heathen are all lost ; or if any are saved, they are saved without any spiritual interposition whatever in their behalf, and without any regeneration, as already shown. * Isa. Ixi, 1. 212 ERRORS OF CAMPBELLISM. And, furthermore, the devil has more influence in this world than the Almighty; for he can, according to the teaching of the Bible, tempt men to sin, while God can not help them, except he can secure some one to go to them with the Bible. All the arguments of Campbellism have passed in review, and they are to be summed up in just two assumptions : 1. That the presentation of the mediate means the word sets aside the immediate agency of the Holy Spirit. 2. That none have been impressed or regenerated by the Spirit, who have not had the Bible or some part of it. The first of these is a very obvious non sequitur, and the second is false as to fact, and leaves the vast majority of men in absolute darkness, and without the possibility of any fitness for heaven. WORK OF THE HOLY GHOST. 213 CHAPTER XVII. OFFICES AND WORK OF THE HOLY GHOST. THE writer is constrained to believe that had not logical consistency required it, Alexander Campbell would never have put himself so squarely in antago- nism to all other evangelical Christians, as he has done in reference to the offices and work of the Holy Ghost. His whole argument in the discussion with Professor Rice, as well as his treatment of the subject in " The Christian System," seems to be shaped so as to fence against the inevitable charge of a denial of all spiritual impression outside of the moral and in- tellectual influence of the Scriptures upon the minds of men. But consistency compels the elimination of all spiritual impression or impact from a system that has for a fundamental condition to salvation a mere rite, as baptism ; and makes the performance of that rite along with intellectual belief, repentance, and con- fession the evidence of pardon. For were the witness of the Spirit admitted, and were the conditions per- formed, and the witness of the Spirit did not follow, then this fact would be proof that the conditions were not fulfilled, and the person seeking remission of sins would be compelled to repeat them until the Spirit's 214 ERRORS OF CAMPBELLISM. witness was given. And, on the other hand, there would be left no room for a denial of the witness of the Spirit, as claimed by those who, according to this theory have not fulfilled the conditions ; that is, have not been baptized by immersion for the remission of sins. But it is marvelous that a system so beset with difficulties in explaining the Scripture teachings con- cerning the work of the Holy Ghost, and that de- mands that the Church of the Christian dispensation be robbed of the personal divine presence, should find so many supporters. The system runs atilt against very many plain and obvious passages of Scripture, and is out of harmony with the whole scope of the divine plan for the world's evangelization. The Scrip- tures teach that Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are each in his divine personality engaged in the work of bring- ing sinners back to righteousness and the favor of God. The Father provides the plan and sends the Son, and Father and Son send the Holy Ghost. If the Holy Ghost is in the world in any sense different from the divine omnipresence, it must be by spiritual manifestation, and this spiritual manifestation is not simply the presence of some words revealed eighteen hundred years ago ; for in that sense he has been in the world from the time of the promise made to our first parents. It is hard to conceive that any one can really bring himself to believe that the only presence of the Holy WORK OF THE HOLY GHOST. 215 Ghost in the world is the presence of the Bible in the world. The Bible is no more the Spirit of God than the writings of a man are his spirit, and yet when the doctrine of Campbellism in this respect is disrobed of the Scriptural verbiage in which they seek to clothe it, the sum and substance of it is this: The Holy Spirit gave the Word, and put all the power and effectiveness that it has in it when he gave it; and since then in no sense is he with it any more than the deceased writer is in his words now. So that whatever of conviction the sinner is made to receive comes from the Word alone; and whatever of comfort, joy, and peace the prayerful saint receives, is derived from the naked promises of the Word, by process ot intellectual deduction a very cold and cheerless doc- trine, sufficient to chill the ardor of the most devout saint. But, thanks be to our gracious Father, the saint knows it is not true. We will now consider the offices of the Holy Ghost, as set forth in the Scriptures: 1. The source of in- spiration. 2. The source of miraculous gifts. Thes^ are special manifestations, and ceased with the giving of divine revelation. 3. Reproving the sinner. 4. Regenerating, baptizing, cleansing, purifying, sancti- fying, sealing the penitent believer. 5. Witnessing to his adoption. 6. Comforting, helping, teaching the saint. Now, all these offices, except the first two, are in a diversity of ways set forth in the Scriptures as be- 216 ' ERRORS OF CAMPBELLISM, longing to the entire gospel dispensation. Far back, toward the morning of human history, God said : " My Spirit shall not always strive with men."* So the Psalmist, David, under intense conviction for his great sin, prayed : " Take not thy Holy Spirit from me." f This was the reproving Spirit to which he was cling- ing, for he immediately prays : " Restore unto me the joy of thy salvation, and uphold me with thy free Spirit." I So also the Savior promised that when the Holy Ghost came in fuller manifestation on the day of Pentecost, he should thereafter " reprove the world of sin, of righteousness, and of judgment." The im- possibility of this being in any other sense than by personal impression is seen in the fact that it was the Comforter that was to come on Pentecost, that was to do this work ; and that manifestation is confessedly a personality. The word as an instrumentality had al- ready in great measure come. This also is the same office that is set forth in 2 Thess. ii, 13: "God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth ;" and 1 Peter, i, 2 : " Elect according to the foreknowledge of God, the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit unto obedience, and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ." In these two passages the Holy Spirit, by his convicting agency, is said to set apart the sinner to faith, cleansing, and salvation. Both the Holy * Gen. vi, 3. t Psa. li, 11. t Psa. li, 12. WORK OF THE HOLY GHOST. 217 Spirit and the truth are mentioned ; the inference is therefore necessary, that these refer to two separate agencies, the one operating on the mind and judgment, the other on heart and conscience. It is appropriate to remark at this juncture that the Spirit's sanctifying work is continuous, so long as the sinner permits; that is, begun in consecration, it continues, on through regen- eration and throughout the entire life. It is the Spirit's work to sanctify, to make holy sanctus, holy ; facere, to make. And this begins with the first impression made by the Spirit and yielded to by the sinner, and continues on until the great work is wrought in a character symmetrical in righteousness. In Acts xvi, 14, we have a most unanswerable example of an immediate divine influence operating upon the hearts outside the word, and even before the word, as a preparation for its honest reception. "And a certain woman named Lydia, a seller of purple, of the city of Thyatira, which worshiped God, heard us : whose heart the Lord opened, that she attended unto the things that were spoken of Paul." Could the preparatory influence of the Divine Spirit be more clearly set forth ? The Lord opened her heart, so that she attended to the word of truth. It was not the w r ord that " opened her heart," for that came afterward ; and the divine influence was the cause of her listen- ing with attention to that word. With this fact of inspired history agree the declarations of Paul con- cerning the success of his ministry in reaching men. 19 218 ERRORS OF CAMPBELLISM. In 1 Cor. iii, 6, he says : " I have planted, Apollos watered ; but God gave the increase." How did Paul plant ? The word of truth in the minds of his hearers ; and in the same manner Apollos watered it. How did God give the increase? By his Spirit operating with this word on human hearts in conviction, en- treaty, and reproof. He " reproved of sin " because they believed not in Christ ; " of righteousness," be- cause the Son of God was no longer in the world as a teacher of men, but had committed this work to the Holy Ghost; "of judgment," because the prince of this world that is, the ruling spirit of this world should be brought under condemnation in the hearts of men by the Spirit of God. The Scriptures ascribe to the immediate work of the Spirit regeneration, baptism, cleansing, purifying, sanctifying, sealing. These terms represent aspects of the same work wrought in the heart of the believ- ing penitent, and present an overwhelming body of proof of personal contact of the Divine Spirit with the spirit of the believer. The terms, with possibly one exception, sanctification, contain the idea of actual impact. Regeneration is a radical change implying divine power ; baptism is an impartation of the bap- tismal element to the subject; cleansing and purify- ing, as conceptions, have their origin in the fact of actual contact with a cleansing element; and sealing is the direct impression of the seal upon the instru- ment attested thereby. Unless we have, in the plain WORK OF THE HOLY GHOST. 219 narratives and in the unembellished discussions of the Scriptures, the boldest metaphors and the wildest hy- perboles, we must regard these expressions as setting forth facts of personal experience, and as referring to impressions made not by an instrumentality, but by the personal spirit. Regeneration is the translation of the Greek Ka\rrfzvs.aia, which occurs twice in the New Testa- ment (Matt, xix, 28 ; Titus iii, 5) ; but it can scarcely be called in question that fewdio avcodev (" born from above ") of John iii ; Ix roi> 6eoi> fevvdio (" born of God ") of John v, 1, and others ; and d-vay-swda) ("be- ing born again ") of 1 Peter i, 23, refer to precisely the same thing. The phrases, " begotten of God," in John v, 1, and 18, are translations of the same word that in that chapter and elsewhere is translated " born of God." So also " begotten again" in 1 Peter i, 3, is a translation of the same word rendered "born again" in 1 Pet. i, 23. When, therefore, Mr. Camp- bell attempts to make a distinction between being " begotten of God," and being " born of God," as he does in " Christian System," pp. 201 and 207, he makes a distinction where there is absolutely no difference. Being born of God and being begotten of God are one and the same thing, and present the whole divine process from the first to the last, r&vdio, in the active voice, may express the divine side, the Spirit's work, while the passive voice expresses the result, which is a new birth ; not a mere begetting, a begin- 220 ERRORS OF CAMPBELLISM. ning of life, but the transition into the complete new life. It is but little short of ridiculous to talk of " first begotten with Spirit,impregnated with the word, and then born of the water."* It may support his theory, but it is a long remove from being Scriptural. Regeneration is essentially a spiritual process. The Savior's first declaration is: "Except a man be born from above, he can not see the kingdom of God." "AvioQtv does not mean again ; and how any one can say that " Nicodemus plainly understood it in the sense of again," because he replies, " How can a man be born again when he is old ? He can not enter a second time into his mother's womb and be born," is to the writer marvelous. If avtodev was understood by him in the sense of again, he would have repeated it both times with the verb fewdio. But the render- ing is not necessarily essential to the argument. " Born again," as defined by the Savior, is a spiritual work : " That which is born of the flesh, is flesh ; and that which is born of the Spirit, is spirit." As has been shown in a former chapter, " born of the water," spoken of in verse 5, is no part of the spiritual pro- cess, for it is not named where the result of the work is spoken of in verse 6 ; namely, " that which is born of the Spirit, is spirit," or spiritual. It should read, " That which is born of water and the Spirit, is spirit," if water is anything more than a symbol in the pro- *" Christian System," p. 201. WORK OF THE HOLY GHOST. 221 cess, and the essential part of it, according to Camp- bell and his followers. In verse 8 the mysteriousness of the spiritual pro- cess is evinced by the Divine Teacher. " The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou nearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cotneth or whither it goeth ; so is every one that is born of the Spirit." Mr. Braden, in his debate with Dr. Hughey, of the Methodist Episcopal Church, rendered this: "The Spirit breathes where he pleases, and you hear his voice ; you can not tell whence he comes and whither he goes. In this way is every one begotten who is begotten of the Spirit." * For a wholly gratuitous manipulation of the sacred record to make it fit into a preconceived theory, it is doubtful if its like can be found. What is the imaginary basis of this render- ing? Uveofjia, translated wind, is also the word used for spirit; and then it is assumed that TWCCH may be translated to breathe, although uncompounded with the preposition v } it is never used for breathe in the New Testament; and yiovrp may be translated voice. But let us look at this translation, and see if it teaches anything. In what sense does the Spirit "breathe where he pleases," and how do we " hear his voice ;" how is it that we "are not able to tell whence he comes and whither he goes;" and how does all this describe the spiritual birth wrought by water ? It is * " Hughey and Braden Debate," p. 461. 222 ERRORS OF CAMPBELLISM. to be observed, if their theory of regeneration is the correct one, we know all about the breathing, going, and coming of the Spirit. Again, what unjustifiable liberty is taken with the text, when the last sentence is translated " in this way is every one begotten who is begotten of the Spirit." Where, in the text, does he find the words " who is begotten ?" There is not one word in the text to answer to this phrase. A theory must be badly beset to be compelled to resort to such a handling of the inspired text. The obvious meaning to any one who has not a theory to sustain, is, that the mysterious movement of the wind recognized by the physical hearing as fact, is a symbol of the operation of the Spirit in the work of regeneration, felt in the experience of the soul, but still incomprehensible in the mode of its im- partation. Mr. Campbell has a saying in regard to this matter that is uniformly repeated by his followers, and is believed by them to be finally crushing as an argu- ment. It is this : " All must admit that no one can be born again of that which he receives." * So also " To call the receiving of any Spirit, or any influence, or energy, or any operation on the heart of man, re- generation, is an abuse of speech, as well as a depart- ure from the diction of the Holy Spirit, who calls noth- ing regeneration, except the act of immersion." f The * " Christian System," p. 20. t Id. pp. 202, 202. WORK OF THE HOLY GHOST. 223 writer has carefully pondered the dictum, to get, if possible, an inkling of its meaning, and an apprehen- sion of some of the logical force that is supposed to belong to it; but has entirely failed. Why can not the dead sinner be born again out of sin unto right- eousness by receiving the quickening Spirit? "For it is the Spirit that quickeneth." * " Even when we were dead in sins hath quickened us together with Christ." f So also Col. ii, 13; 2 Cor. iii, 6. But let us apply this dictum to Mr. Campbell's theory. Peni- tent believers receive the word of the gospel. Acts viii, 14; xi, 1; xvii, 11, et al.; and yet these persons tell us that we are born again of the word. " The word of God is the seed of which we are born again, or renewed in heart and life." J So, Mr. Campbell being judge, we can be born of what we receive. More than this, baptism is something received, some- thing in which the candidate is passive. Hence the command to sinners is to be baptized. He speaks of the "act of immersion" being the new birth; but whose act? the candidate's? No. The administra- tor's. The candidate receives the immersion at his hands, and if this is a new birth he is born of what he receives. , In entire agreement with the essential spirituality of this new birth is the teaching of the apostle Paul in Titus iii, 5, 6. "Not by works of righteousness * John vi, 63. t Eph. ii, 5. t " Campbell and Rice," p. 664. 224 ERRORS OF CAMPBELLISM. which we have done, but according to his mercy hath he saved us by the washing of regeneration, and the renewing of the Holy Ghost, which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Savior." Mr. Campbell and his followers may make much of the fact that commentators generally understand that a reference is made to baptism in the phrase "washing of regeneration." It is far from being clear that such is the case. Commentators generally follow in the trend of thought or opinion marked out by their predecessors. Baptismal regeneration has been taught for many centuries by the Church of Rome. It was therefore natural that her commen- tators should see this doctrine in all passages where regeneration was spoken of, and especially where it was spoken of as a " washing." The Church of Eng- land, and the Protestant bodies of Europe generally adopted this error of the Church of Rome. Hence it is not at all strange that commentators generally should conceive that baptism is here referred to; and their successors who were in Churches that do not accept the dogma of baptismal regeneration, should be in- clined, if possible, to accommodate their opinions with views so uniformly put forth. But is it not time that we should break away from the trammels of mediaeval interpretation, and determine these by common sense principles? The very language of the text implies that nothing physical is referred to. " The washing of regeneration" is put in direct antithesis to " works of WORK OF THE HOLY GHOST. 225 righteousness" which we have done. If so, it (bap- tism) is not "the washing of regeneration/' because that is contrasted with it. Also, we are told that this "washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Ghost" is something God has done; now, what we have done and what God has done are in con- trast in logical antithesis. Again, whatever it was that saved us, was of him. " He saved us" How? By what " he shed on us abundantly/' through Jesus Christ our Savior. Our baptism by water is some- thing he did not do ; but the washing of regeneration was something that he did perform. It really does appear that no stronger language or more forceful presentation could be used to exclude baptism by water. But it may be asked, Why use the term " wash- ing?" To answer this it is sufficient to ask why not use the term baptism, if that is what is meant? Camp- bell and his followers say "baptism is the washing ot regeneration." The fact is, washing is used with jus- tification when it is clearly defined, as by the Spirit, 1 Cor. vi, 11: "And such were some of you, but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit ot our God." But suppose, for the sake of the argument, that baptism is alluded to in the phrase "washing of re- generation," does the passage not emphatically teach us that " the Holy Ghost is shed " upon those that 226 ERRORS OF CAMPBELL1SM. are saved, and that it is by this we are saved, because this is what God does of " his mercy ?" Now, if this doctrine that denies the immediate impression of the Holy Ghost in the work of regeneration be true, and the " renewing of the Holy Ghost " is the influ- ence of the word, leading to faith and repentance, it follows that we are saved first by the renewing of the Holy Ghost, then by the " washing of regeneration ;" that is, the renewing must come before the baptism. In other words, as before shown, we must be born of the Spirit, or " begotten of the Word," in the style of these teachers before we are " born of the water." In fact, no theory of interpretation is more pro- foundly beset with difficulties, and more effectually plunges its advocates into an inextricable tangle of absurdities than does this that makes baptism an es- sential part of the work of regeneration, and, because of this, eliminates the immediate influence of the Spirit from any part of the work. In harmony with this conception of a spiritual birth into the kingdom of Christ, is the conception of quickening, met with in several instances in the Scrip- tures. Eph. ii, 4, 5 : " But God, who is rich in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved us, even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ." The Greek awJtoe(0 really means to give life ; a term of very radical significance when ap- plied to the new birth. It is also clearly defined in the context, in the trend of the apostle's discussion. WORK OF THE HOLY GHOST. 227 The apostle parenthetically says, in the same verse: " By grace are ye saved ;" and then, in verses 810, says : " For by grace are ye saved, through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God: not of works, lest any man should boast. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works." Now, here it is first said our salvation is not of ourselves ; and in the second place, " not of works ;" and in the third place, that spiritually " we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works." No language could more effectually teach the immediate work of the Spirit in our salva- tion than does this. Then, following on in the same discussion, the apostle says, verse 18: "For through him we both have access by one Spirit unto the Father." " Through him" means through Christ. It is through Christ, and by the agency of the Spirit, we are saved, and, as children, are permitted to approach the Father; lor " likewise the Spirit also helpeth our infirmities : for we know not what we should pray for as we ought; but the Spirit itself maketh intercession for us with groanings which can not be uttered."* If the apos- tle is here simply aiming to teach the mediate work of the Spirit through the word alone, he has certainly employed strange language for a subject so easy of statement as this "quickened/' "created," "access * Kom. viii, 26. 228 ERRORS OF CAMPBELLISM. to God," and in verse 20, "a habitation of God through the Spirit." It is difficult to find language, even in the visions of the prophets, more purely hyperbolical than this, if the apostle only means the effect of the word on the judgments and consciences of men. BAPTISM OF THE HOLY GHOST. 229 CHAPTER XVIII. BAPTISM OF THE HOLY GHOST. THE baptism of the Holy Ghost, which, according to the Inspired Word, " washes," " cleanses," " puri- fies," "sanctifies," "seals," and "anoints," is em- ployed in these several forms of representation to teach the immediate contact of the Holy Spirit with the soul in the work of regeneration and sanctification. But right at this point Campbellism is prolific of contradictions. First, its followers deny that the bap- tism of the Holy Ghost is the "gift of the Holy Ghost" promised to the Church. Secondly, that this baptism was designed to be perpetual in the Church. There are some very cogent reasons, in the scheme of doctrine they advocate, why they should maintain this. The baptism of the Holy Ghost is something that makes sad havoc with the idea of an exclusive, dipping baptism; and to perpetuate the baptism of the Holy Ghost in the Church as a reality would make very forceful the doctrine inculcated by the ad- vocates of affusion in general, that water baptism is designed to be a perpetual symbol of the purifying ministration of the Spirit, and not a representation of a death and burial and that the death and burial of Christ. And, again, a baptism of the Holy Ghost, 230 ERRORS OF CAMPBELLISM. cleansing from sin, stands in the way of remission of sin, grounded in water baptism as an essential con- dition. For if a direct communication of the Spirit were a requisite in each case of regeneration, such communication must be a necessary concomitant of water baptism, else there would be a conflict. So that it is true that, with logical consistency, Campbell- ism must deny to the Church this her heritage in the gospel. But lest it be thought that this is a misrepresenta- tion of their views, a few quotations from approved authors among them will be given. Mr. Braden says : * " All who pray for a baptism of the Spirit now, pray not according to knowledge of the word, for that they never will receive. Those who pray for it and claim it, should show that it was promised to all be- lievers in all time ; that they can work miracles, as all could who were thus baptized anciently. This baptism was extraordinary, and has ceased." Another author saysif "In the first place, the work of the Holy Spirit in the salvation of sinners, is not once, in all the Bible, called the baptism of the Spirit. Let the reader remember this. Secondly, the baptism of the Holy Spirit was only promised to the apostles; and, thirdly, Jesus emphatically said the world could not receive the Holy Spirit in this form. (See John *" Hughey and Braden Debate," p. 458. TBrowder's "Pulpit," pp. 96, 97. BAPTISM OF THE HOLY GHOST. 231 xiv, 16,17.)" The writer has had several discus- sions with accepted exponents of their doctrine, and has found them uniformly to maintain the theory above given. It is very evident to the thoughtful reader that if the baptism of the Holy Ghost is, as these persons claim, a miracle-working endowment alone, it must not only be limited to the apostolical days, but must be limited in those days to those who wrought miracles. Hence, an effort is made to show that the baptism given on Pentecost was confined to the twelve apostles. Professor McGarvey, in his com- mentary on Acts, sub loco, says that the antecedent of they in Acts ii is the twelve apostles. " It would read thus: 'The lot fell upon Matthias, and he was numbered together with the eleven apostles. And when the day of Pentecost was fully come, they were all with one accord in one place.' It is indisputable that the antecedent to they is the term apostles." This entirely gratuitous assumption is made to save a theory. If they is limited to the twelve apostles, where, at this time, were Mary, the mother of Jesus, and the rest of the one hundred and twenty mentioned in ch. i, 15? Were they with one accord in another place? They had been meeting with the apostles. On what author- ity are they now counted out? Be it remembered that the pronoun they, in the first verse of this chapter, de- fines simply the assembly, and, if this comment is cor- rect, the rest of the one hundred and twenty must be excluded from the assembly. It will be a startling 232 ERRORS OF CAMPBELLISM. revelation to many Christians to learn that only the twelve apostles were present on the day of Pentecost. But there are other insuperable objections to this interpretation. In ch. i, 4, 5, Jesus said to the as- sembled disciples on the day of ascension : " But wait for the promise of the Father, which, saith he, ye have heard of me. For John truly baptized with water ; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost, not many days hence." When and how was this promise made ? By the prophets Joel and John the Baptist. Joel ii, 28 : "And it shall come to pass after- ward that I will pour out my Spirit upon all flesh ; and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, your old men shall dream dreams, and your young men shall see visions." The Baptist, in Matt, iii, 11: "Tin- deed baptize you with water unto repentance; but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear : he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with fire." Observe now to whom this promise was made, and the tenor of it: "I will pour out my Spirit upon all flesh" Not upon the twelve apostles, nor upon a few Jews, and then upon a few Gentiles of the household of Cornelius, but " upon all flesh" So also in the promise, as given by the Baptist, we have the same comprehensiveness: " He shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost." Did the Baptist teach that Christ should only baptize the twelve apostles? Here is another troublesome pro- noun for Professor McGarvey, which it will be ex- BAPTISM OF THE HOLY GHOST. 233 ceedingly difficult to limit sufficiently to save the theory from helpless ruin. Again, "the promise" that is spoken of in ch. i, 4, is also spoken of in ch. ii, 38, 39 : "And ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord your God shall call." Now, Campbell- ite expositors are wont to make a distinction between the gift of the Holy Ghost and the baptism of the Holy Ghost.* But the promise spoken of by the Sav- ior was the baptism of the Holy Ghost; this promise Peter told his hearers was unto them and unto their children, "and to all that are afar off," and this promise he had just called the "gift of the Holy Ghost." He certainly did not mean the word of di- vine truth, for if they repented and confessed Christ, and were baptized, as these persons teach, they had before these acts received the word of truth. The promise was something they were to receive as a re- alization afterwards. Again, the baptism of the Holy Ghost on the household of Cornelius is Acts x, 45 called the "gift of the Holy Ghost," and in ch. xv, 8, it is called the witness to their hearts of their adoption into the kingdom of Christ. "And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us." In ch. xi, 16, 17, this outpouring of the Holy Ghost is *See " McGarvey on Acts," Browder's " Pulpit," p. 51. 20 234 ERRORS OF CAMPBELLISM. both called a baptism and " the like gift as unto us/' and the promise of the Savior was especially referred to. So also the apostle Paul says to his Ephesian brethren, Eph. i, 13: "After that ye believed ye were also sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise." The promised baptism, or gift of the Holy Spirit, is a seal and witness to all Christians. But to make assurance on this matter overwhelm- ingly sure, we have the universality of this baptism affirmed in language so complete that it is marvelous that any one should attempt to advocate a theory so squarely contradicted by divine inspiration. It is not possible to make a stronger statement of the univer- sality of Holy Ghost baptism on the Church of Christ than is found in 1 Cor. xii, 13 : " For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free ; and have all been made to drink into one Spirit." Here is a formulated statement of a truth. The " one body " is the Church of Christ; that is, his spiritual body. And all who are " in Christ " have obtained this blessed relation by baptism, " by one Spirit," " whether Jews or Gentiles, bond or free." It is sought to break the force of this plain text by a new rendering of the text. Mr. Braden hints at it:* "By the direction of one Spirit, or in accordance to the command of the Spirit, we are baptized," that * "Hnghey and Braden," p. 462. BAPTISM OF THE HOLY GHOST. 235 is, by water. Mr. Browder says : * " The Greek preposition en is employed to express agency or au- thority; hence, by the authority of one Spirit you were all baptized into one body." In the first place, by the agency of, and by the authority of, are two rad- ically different ideas, and the " therefore" of the sup- posed explanation is a total non sequitur. To confound author and agent is a piece of exegetical legerdemain that we can not permit to pass unnoticed. In the second place, the preposition Iv, with the dative iv kui HusufjtaTi, defines instrumentality, and is precisely the phraseology that is used everywhere the baptism of the Holy Ghost is spoken of. In Matt, iii, 11, iv Uvsonan 6.fiw. So also Mark i, 8; Luke iii, 16 ; John i, 33; Acts i, 5, and xi, 16. If, then, iv means "by the authority of," we shall have some choice reading in these passages. Take a sample, Matt, iii, 11:" He shall baptize you by the authority of the Holy Ghost and fire." The reader may ask, Are these scholars that attempt these manipulations of the text in the interest of a theory ? They claim to be, and are put forward as exponents of this doctrine. They also speak witli great positiveness in promulgating their interpretations of the inspired text. But there is still another way of a more recent dis- covery, by which it is sought to avoid the difficulty. D. R. Dungan, president of Drake University, at Des t Browder's " Pulpit," p. 77. 236 ERRORS OF CAMPBELLISM. Moines, Iowa, in a little romance written by him in advocacy of this theory of doctrine, makes his heroine to say * of the promise contained in Acts ii, 17 : " With a literal translation it would read, ' I will pour out from my Spirit.' r ' This rendition we have heard from some of their ministers, so that it seems to be thought by them to be a way out of the dif- ficulty. This rendering is founded upon the supposed mean- ing of the preposition cbro in Acts ii, 17 : Ix^saj d~6 TOU IJve'jfjiaTOz [JLOI>. This is made use of in this way : It is not the Holy Spirit that is poured out, but his truth or revelation that comes from him. Hence what is poured out is the word. But it is difficult to see how this helps the case ; for if it is the word of inspi- ration which is here " poured out " in this baptism, then it follows that not only Christians are baptized by the Holy Ghost, but impenitent sinners also, for they receive this word, which comes from the Holy Ghost. But admitting, for the sake of the argument, that this rendering is proper, does it not follow that what is "poured out" is a spiritual influence coming after the word has been received and accepted ? It came upon the household of Cornelius after they re- ceived the word. No evangelical Christian whatever holds to a conception so gross as this, that the entire Third Person in the Trinity was " poured out " upon * " On the Rock," p. 222. BAPTISM OF THE HOLl GHOST. 237 the disciples or any one else ; but what they do main- tain is, that in the baptism of the Holy Ghost there is an immediate impartation of the Holy Ghost, in his baptizing or purifying influence, to the soul of the believer. Wonderful discovery this the baptism of words ! Why, our Heavenly Father had been doing this from the time of the first revelation to men. Strange that at the time the revelation was about completed the frag- ment that remained should be called a baptism. But in Titus iii, 5, 6, we have the Holy Ghost "poured out abundantly." The preposition cbro is not in this text. The relative oy, " which," must either agree with kourpoi), " washing," or with IJveuftaroz &ftou, Holy Ghost; for they are both in the neuter gender, while " renewing " is in the feminine gender. To construe the relative " which" in the text with " washing," will scarcely be admitted by these theorists. If, then, construed with the " Holy Ghost," the text declares that it was poured out on the believer abun- dantly. Now, they tell us, in interpreting this text, that " the renewing of the Holy Ghost " is the influ- ence of the word upon the minds and consciences of men. If so,, how does it come that this relative is not in the feminine gender, to agree with renewing? It seems to the writer that the very grammatical struc- ture is made to teach that it is not mediate agency that comes in contact with the soul, but the Spirit himself, and the result is a washing and renewing. 238 ERRORS OF CAMPBELLISM. With this interpretation fully agree other declara- tions of the apostle Paul concerning spiritual baptism. As for example, Eph. iv, 5: "One Lord, one faith, one baptism ;" Rom. vi, 3, 4 : " Know ye not that so many of us -as were baptized in Jesus Christ, were baptized into his death ? Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death : that like as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life ;" and Col. ii, 11,12: " In whom also ye are circumcised with the cir- cumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ : buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead." Now, it is a very reasonable rule of interpretation to hold that the forms of expression peculiar to a writer have the same interpretation in all places, that he has given to them in one or a few instances. The characteristic expressions here are " one body," " one baptism," and " baptism into Christ." The one body is Christ, or rather Christ's spiritual Church. The " one baptism " is by the Spirit, and " baptism into Christ" is spiritual baptism. Water baptism never baptizes any one " into Christ," but only into the name of Christ ; that is into a profession of the name of Christ. Therefore, these facts exclude water baptism from all these texts, only as it is implied in the antitype, the baptism of the Spirit. How do we make this out? Paul defines the " one BAPTISM OF THE HOLY GHOST. 239 body " and the " one baptism," in 1 Cor. xii, 13 : " For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body." Apply, then, this definition of the "one baptism" to the three texts before given, and you make spiritual baptism out of all of them. Baptism does precisely the same thing in Rom. vi, 3 and 4, and Col. ii, 11, 12, that baptism by the Spirit is said to do in 1 Cor. xii, 13; that is, it baptizes us into "one body" "into Christ." Hence if water baptism does the same thing, it follows that there are two baptisms effecting the same result ; but there is but " one baptism," and that baptism is by "one Spirit." The persistent tendency of man to ritualism in religion is seen in the deter- mination to read water into texts wherever baptism is mentioned, unless it is specifically excluded. The forms of expression used in Rom. vi, 3-6, and Col. ii, 11, 12, do not agree with the idea of a refer- ence to water baptism. The controlling thought here is a death to sin, and a life to righteousness. It is a baptism into Christ, into his death, into death. Now, we know that water baptism is "into the name of Christ " (Acts xix, 5), and we know, as shown above, that the baptizing of the Spirit is "into Christ." Baptism " into his death" is into the saving power of his death, and into death is into a death to sin and a life to righteousness. How preposterous to attribute such overwhelming results to mere ritual baptism ! If, as the followers of Campbell claim, water baptism produces death to sin in the penitent believer, 240 ERRORS OF CAMPBELLISM. what produces death to sin in the penitent backslider ? For he must be buried by baptism into death also, if he would live again unto righteousness. But note that this baptism is not, as immersionists claim, in the " likeness " of a burial, but " in the likeness of his death ;" so " our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed." "The likeness of his death " is crucifixion. There is still another like- ness indicated in verse 3 : " That like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life." Now, the true interpretation of this depends upon the agency by which Christ was raised from the dead. In chapter viii, 11, we are told that Christ was raised by the Spirit: "But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Jesus from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you." So also 1 Peter iii, 18 : "Being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit." There is, then, a likeness as to agency between our spiritual resurrection, and the resurrection of Christ from the dead. The likeness of his death is crucifixion; the likeness of resurrection is spiritual power. A consideration of the parallel passage Col. ii, 11, 12 will reveal principles in harmony with the interpretation just given. Here -we are told that this baptism is a circumcision " the circumcision of Christ " " made without hands." This circumcision BAPTISM OF THE HOLY GHOST. 241 is most certainly a spiritual circumcision ; for it is not physical in its mode it is made without hands. Then the burial with Christ and the resurrection are spoken of. The resurrection is through the faith of the operation or energy (Ivep-fetaz) of God, and here his resurrection from the dead is again grounded on the operation of the Holy Spirit ; and not only so, but the quickening power of the Spirit is spoken of in the next verse as the immediate effect of this baptism : " And you, being dead in your sins, and the uncircum- cision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him." That is, the same power that raised him quickened you in baptism. There can be no question, therefore, that the resurrection is a spiritual resurrec- tion; and if so, the burial must be spiritual. The burial can not be physical, and the resurrection spir- itual ; they must be similar in this respect. But again, we call attention to the fact that the point of compari- son is not a likeness of burial and resurrection to which a physical immersion and emersion is made to have some remote resemblance, but a likeness of death and resurrection. In Col. ii, 11, 12, the "put- ting off the body the sins of the flesh," that is death ; and " risen through the faith of the operation of God," quickened together with him. In Rom. vi, 5 : " In the likeness of his death," " our old man crucified with him that the body of sin might be destroyed," and " like as Christ was raised from the dead, even so also we should walk in newness of life." 21 242 ERRORS OF CAMPBELLISM. The followers of A. Campbell contend that the baptism of the Holy Ghost was a miracle-working gift. This is an assumption wholly gratuitous. It is for this reason, however, that they seek to confine it to the apostles and to the household of Cornelius. They point to the fact that, in both these instances of Holy Ghost baptism, there was a speaking with tongues. But in 1 Cor. xii, the various gifts of the Spirit are set forth, and these are all summed up in verse 13, as the result of the baptism of the Holy Ghost which came upon all. The assertion that the baptism of the Holy Ghost is only a miracle-working ministration, is tantamount to the denial that there is any gift of the Spirit with the Church to-day; for it was in this form that it was promised to the entire Church. " The Holy Spirit of promise," " the Comforter," " the gift of the Spirit," each and all came in a baptism on Pen- tecost. Hence, to deny the baptism of the Spirit to the Church to-day, is to deny each and all of these, and is to leave the Church comfortless. SYNONYMS OF BAPTISM. 243 CHAPTER XIX. THE IMMEDIATE OPERATION OF THE SPIRIT CON- TINUEDSYNONYMS OF BAPTISM. THE words wash, cleanse, purify, sanctify, seal, and anoint, as used in the Scriptures as synonyms for the baptism of the Spirit, imply direct and immediate impression upon the hearts and consciences of be- lievers. In but a very few instances are any of these ascribed, even in a secondary and remote sense, to the word. But we will examine these supposed instances, lest it be thought that there is more in them in favor of this theory than really is. John xv, 3, is often quoted as setting forth the cleansing power of the word : " Now ye are clean, through the word which I have spoken unto you." It depends entirely upon what is meant by " the word which I have spoken unto you." It is maintained that it refers to the gen- eral teaching of Christ going before. If such were the case, it would be the plural words, instead of word. This " word," speaking them clean, will be found in ch. xiii, 10: "Jesus saith to him, He that is washed needeth not save to wash his feet, but is clean every whit; and ye are clean, but not all." It is manifest that the Savior here simply speaks them clean by an exercise of that power he had to speak sins 244 ERRORS OF CAMPBELLISM. forgiven. So by the Holy Ghost he speaks to humau hearts, "Be thou clean." John xvii, 17, is also cited as a proof of sanctifi- cation by means of the truth. It was extensively quoted by Campbell in his debate with Professor Rice, and Braden in his debate with Dr. Hughey. "Sanctify them through the truth; thy word is truth." Now it must be admitted that the word sanctify iu this case means the same, as applied to the disciples, that it does as applied to Christ; for the Savior says, verse 19 : "And for their sakes I sanctify myself, that they also might be sanctified through the truth." The word sanctify therefore means consecrate, or set apart. It can not mean to cleanse from, sin, for they were already " clean," ch. xiii, 10, and xv, 3. And besides, the Savior did not mean, " even so cleanse / myself" for he had no sin to be cleansed from. The Revised Version gives the key to the whole matter in reading the text, " Sanctify them in the truth ;" that is, in the use of the truth for their office as teachers; and verse 19 may be paraphrased thus: "And for their sakes I set myself apart as their teacher, that they might also be set apart as teachers of the truth." This is the plain and obvious mean- ing of the prayer. One thing, however, is excluded; it can not be a prayer for the salvation of the apos- tles, and hence is misemployed when used in this sense. Another passage used by them in the same way is SYNONYMS OF BAPTISM. 245 Rom. i, 16 : "I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ, for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth." In the first place, the pas- sage does not affirm that the gospel is the only power of God unto salvation, and it would be sufficient for all purposes of argument to dismiss it with this remark. In the second place, what is the meaning of the term gospel here? These parties seem to take it for granted that it means the whole New Testament canon. The gospel is the glad tidings of salvation through Christ and his gifts unto men. Helice the "gospel was preached unto Abraham,"* and preached to the children of Israel in the wilderness. f It there- fore is this simple truth that " God is in Christ rec- onciling the world unto himself," and has no water baptism in it whatever. For a similar purpose, Eph. v, 25, 26, is cited: " Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ loved the Church and gave himself for it, that he might sanc- tify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word." In reply to the argument attempted from this, it is only necessary to call attention to the fact that those who contend for the immediate influence of the Spirit do not deny his mediate work. But the words iv fjijjuaTi may, with equal propriety, be trans- lated "in the word" that is, according to. the word. What word? The word of the prophet Ezekiel, ch. *Gal. Hi, 8. tHcb. iv, 2. 246 ERRORS OF CAMPBELLISM. xxxvi, 25-27: "Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you and ye shall be clean, and from all your filthiness and idols will I cleanse you. A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you. I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you a heart of flesh. And I will put my Spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments to do them." Now, all other passages, where the word of truth is spoken of in connection with cleansing, washing, and the like, can be explained in the same way. No supposed difficulty for the doctrine of evan- gelical Christians has been evaded. In fact, all their arguments proceed upon the assumptions, already re- ferred to, that the instrumentality of the word is de- nied. It is not. Simply the additional fact of the direct impression and immediate efficacy of the Holy Spirit is asserted, and this latter the followers of A. Campbell deny. The psalmist David prays, after his great sin (Psa. li, 7) : " Purge me with hyssop, and I shall be clean ; wash me, and I shall be whiter than snow." And again, in verse 10: "Create in me a clean heart, O God, and renew a right spirit within me." Now, was the psalmist praying for the word for the law of God to be given him to "purge and wash him," "to create in him a clean heart and renew a right spirit within him?" In his debate with Professor Rice, Mr. Campbell was wont to quote from Psa. xix : " The law SYNONYMS OF J3APTISM. 247 of God is perfect, converting the soul." David al- ready bad this converting law; what more was he praying for? This law had done its work, "for by it was the knowledge of sin." It accused him and con- demned him, and he now felt he needed a direct com- munication from the great Author of the law, saying to his heart : " Thy sins are forgiven thee " " thou art clean." Mr. Campbell and his followers teach that the nat- uralized citizen of the kingdom of Christ has a right to petition or pray. Now, in the case of a backslider, like David, a petition for pardon and cleansing is of- fered, how 7 is it obtained ? Does God pardon? How does the sinner know it? Does he cleanse? By what agency does he do it? If it is all done by the word, it is a decided waste of time, even a presump- tion, to pray for that he already has in the Book of Truth. The cleansing spoken of in Ezekiel xxxvi, 25-27, manifests the same unmistakable marks of divine, im- mediate interposition. The promise to " sprinkle clean water" upon Israel for the purpose of cleans- ing, can scarcely be taken in a physical sense. And it is certain that " clean water," as a symbol, does not stand for the word. The "new heart" and "new spirit" promised require an exercise of divine power, and the promise of the gift of his Spirit is to "cause" them " to walk in his statutes and keep his judgments." No words could better set forth the wide difference 248 ERRORS OF CAMPBELLISM. between God's operation upon the hearts of men and the office of the law of God. The law is in their minds already. His Spirit causes them to walk in it. The same great trpth is taught in Acts xv, 8, 9 : "And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them wit- ness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as unto us; and put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith." Let it be noted that this re- fers to the baptism of the household of Cornelius by the Holy Ghost, and that God thus gave them the Holy Ghost to "bear them witness," and to purify their hearts, upon their faith in Christ. And in 1 Cor. vi, 11, we have, in formulated statement, the presentation of the agency by which this washing, cleansing, and sanctification are brought about : " And such were some of you, but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified, in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God." So, also, sanctification of the Spirit is spoken of as distinct from the office of the truth, in 2 Thess. ii, 13 : " But we are bound to give thanks always to God for you, brethren, beloved of the Lord, because God hath, from the beginning, chosen you to salvation, through sanc- tification of the Spirit and belief of the truth." With an equally forceful import are those pas- sages of divine truth which attribute sealing and anointing to the Holy Ghost 2 Cor. i, 21, 22 : " Now he which stablisheth us with you in Christ and hath anointed us, is God ; who hath also sealed us and given SYNONYMS OF BAPTISM. 249 the earnest of the Spirit in our hearts." Eph. i, 13 : " In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of the truth of the gospel of your salvation ; in whom also, after that ye believed, ye were sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise, which is the earnest of our inheritance, until the redemption of the purchased possession, unto the praise of his glory." Eph. iv, 30 : " And grieve not the Holy Spirit of God, whereby ye were sealed unto the day of redemption." 1 John ii, 20 and 27 :" But ye have an unction from the Holy One, and ye know all things. . . . But the anoint- ing which ye have received from him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you ; but as the same anointing teacheth you all things, and is truth and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him." Now there are several points to be noted with ref- erence to these passages: 1. Sealing is by direct im- press on wax, or the substance sealed. 2. As a seal it is a perpetual attestation of the instrument sealed. 3. Anointing is the direct application of the anointing oil to the person anointed. 4. The seal of the Holy Ghost, in the first two passages, is called an " earnest " a pledge 16 their acceptance with God. 5. This anointing, sealing, and earnest came after the truth ; that is, the office of the truth is clearly defined, and having received the truth, they afterward were sealed and anointed of God by the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit, in his office of a witness, a com- 250 ERRORS OF CAMPSELLISAf. forter, a helper, abides with the Church of Christ through all ages to the end of time. These blessed influences are set forth in a quite extensive variety of statement in the Scriptures, statement totally in- explicable if the immediate ( impact of the Spirit is denied. In the eighth chapter of Romans the apos- tle Paul very fully presents the office and work of the Holy Ghost in the Christian Church, emphatically setting forth the indwelling of the Spirit in the hearts of all who are truly children of God, saying, in verses 1416 : " For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God. For ye have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear ; but ye have re- ceived the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father. The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit that we are the children of God." It would seem that this needs no comment, that language could not more explicitly teach a direct impression of the Spirit. Yet such is the blinding influence of preconceived theories, that in their interest these plain utterances of inspiration are explained away. We are told that the Spirit bears witness by the word. Then " the Spirit itself" is the word. If so, by what combina- tion of words in language will we be able to designate the Holy Ghost apart from the word ? The " earnest of the Spirit," spoken of in 2 Cor. i, 22, and v, 5 ; Eph. i, 13, 14, and iv, 30, is of like import. This doctrine of the direct witness of the Spirit is in consonance with the soundest dictates of reason. SYNONYMS OF BAPTISM. 251 Sin is a fact of personal experience, and felt in the condemnation of conscience. The knowledge of sin comes from a personal consciousness of its existence. Without this, no amount of reasoning could convince of sin. Repentance is a godly sorrow for sin, a deep, pungent feeling of the justice of divine displeasure at it. Now, what can be the witness of the removal of guilt and condemnation, and a sense of restoration to divine favor, but an impression made in con- sciousness? The same divine voice that speaks in conscience, and says, Thou art guilty, thou art con- demned, must say, Thou art pardoned, thou art clear. The first is the voice of God in man, the sec- ond must likewise be his voice ; " for who can forgive sins but God alone?" But it may be said, Conscience simply condemns or approves according to the knowledge of the right, and violation of it or conformity to it; that the individ- ual who does what he believes to be right, whether it be right or not, will have the approval of conscience. This is readily conceded, and, as a fact, lies directly against the theory that makes the only witness of pardon to consist in a subjective process of reasoning, which amounts to this alone : I have done what I be- Jieve to be right in believing, repenting, confessing Christ, and being baptized ; I may therefore conclude I am pardoned. But suppose this is a mistake ; what then ? I have the approval of conscience to an error in judgment, and yet have no evidence of acceptance 252 ERRORS OF CAMPBELLISM. with God. The very fact that human reason is liable to err, is a reason why God should say to the truly believing penitent heart, "Thy sins are forgiven thee," and not leave him to the uncertainty arising from consciousness of human fallibility. But the Holy Spirit, as an abiding companion, comforter, helper, and teacher, is taught in numerous passages in the Scriptures. John vii, 38, 39 : " He that believeth on me, as the Scripture hath said, out of his belly ['from within him/ marginal reading of the Revised Version] shall flow rivers of living water. But this he spake of the Spirit which they that be- lieve on him should receive : for the Holy Ghost was not yet given ; because that Jesus was not yet glori- fied." Of similar import are the promises of the Paraclete, in John xiv, 16, 17, and 26; xv, 26; and xvi, 713, on which extensive comment has already been made. Rom. viii, 26 : " Likewise the Spirit also helpeth our infirmities, for we know not what we should pray for as we ought: but the Spirit itself maketh intercession for us with groanings which can not be uttered." 2 Cor. iii, 3 : " Forasmuch as ye are manifestly declared to be the epistle of Christ, ministered by us, written not with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God ; not in tables of stone, but m fleshly tables of the heart." 1 Cor. iii, 16:" Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the SpiritofGoddwellethinyou?" Also vi, 19 : "What! know ye not that your body is the temple of the SYNONYMS OF BAPTISM. 253 Holy Ghost, which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own ?" Rom. v, 5 : "And hope maketh not ashamed, because the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost, which is given unto us." These are some of the passages selected out of many of a similar import, to be found in the Scrip- tures, setting forth the positive presence of the Holy Ghost in the hearts of Christians as a helper, com- forter, teacher. No amount of exegetical manipula- tion can break their force in this direction. There are other passages that speak of " access by the Spirit," Eph. ii, 18 ; " Habitation of God through the Spirit," Eph. ii, 22 ; " Strengthened with might by the Spirit in the inner man," Eph. iii, 16 ; "Grieving the Spirit," Eph. iv. 30; "Filled with the Spirit," Eph. v, 18; "Supply of the Spirit," Phil, i, 19; "Fellowship of the Spirit," Phil, ii, 1; "Quench not the Spirit," 1 Thess. v, 19; "Made par- takers of the Holy Ghost," Heb. vi, 4; "Despite to the Spirit of grace," Heb. x, 26 ; " Praying in the Holy Ghost," Jude 20. There is the actual embarrass- ment of riches on this great and blessed truth in the Scriptures. It is with difficulty that the writer is able to select, out of the many passages teaching, as shown above by a great diversity of expression, this truth, to set forth the fact of the immediate presence of the Holy Spirit with the child of God. A few have been selected from the smaller epis- 254 , ERRORS OF CAMPBELLISM. ties to give the reader an idea of how ample the proof of this doctrine in the Book of divine in- spiration. In fact, the gift of the Holy Ghost is the one great gift through which all other good is to come to us. In Luke xi, 13, the Master says: " If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children ; how much more shall your heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to them that ask him !" Here the Holy Spirit is given in answer to prayer. Can this mean ihe word of truth? If not, what does it mean? Why the Holy Spirit first? Because that implies the gift of pardon, regeneration, adoption, comfort, help, all the blessings that belong to the children of God. In closing up the discussion upon this theme, we note some objections that are fatal to the doctrine that the Spirit only operates through the word, as Mr. Campbell says : * "As all the influence which my spirit has exerted upon other spirits, at home or abroad, has been the stipulated signs of ideas, of spir- itual operations by my written or spoken word; so believe I that all the influence of God's good Spirit, now felt in the way of conviction or consolation, in the four quarters of the globe, is by the Word written, read, and heard, which is called the living oracles." The italics are my own, to call the reader's attention to how comprehensive the statement. It could be * " Millennial Harbinger," Vol. VI, p. 356. SYNONYMS OF BAPTISM. 255 duplicated from a number of their most able doc- trinal exponents. If this is true doctrine, it follows that prayer for spiritual blessings is useless. If God does not impress himself upon human hearts aside from the word of truth, and in addition to it, then the only comfort the Christian can get is by meditation on this word and a subjective feeling of satisfaction or peace wrought within himself by his cogitations. And a prayer for the conversion of sinners would be a sinful waste of time, inasmuch as it would be mere idle asking of God to do what he has commanded the Christian to do by the use of the word, and which can only be done by bringing its truths home to human judgments, or getting those who know the truth to reflect on it. Again, from the stand-point of this doctrine there is no knowledge of forgiveness of sins ; there may be belief of forgiveness, but this is founded on fallible reasoning, predicated on uncertain premises. For the advocates of this doctrine will scarcely assert in the face of nine-tenths of the Christian world who think differently, that they know they are right as to the conditions of pardon ; nor can they claim that they are infallibly certain they have completely fulfilled all the conditions. No deductions can be more certain than the premises upon which they are founded. Then, if there is uncertainty in the premises, and uncertainty in their process of fulfillment, there is a cumulative uncertainty in the conclusion. No consistent follower 256 ERRORS OF CAMPBELLISM. of A. Campbell can say, I know that Jesus hath power on earth to forgive sins. He may say, " I think so, I believe so." Nor can he say, " Abba Father," for the Spirit himself does not bear witness with him. He can say, My fallible interpretation of the Word leads me to believe that I have obeyed the gospel, and because I have done so, I may believe I am accepted of him. But then, as shown before, if he become a back- slider, and repents, he is absolutely without evidence of his reinstatement to divine favor, if there is no wit- nessing spirit; for he can not go back to his baptism, which he claimed was for the remission of his past sins, for the sins he now seeks remission for are sub- sequent sins. He may pray ; but praying will bring no sense of reconciliation, save and except such as he may predicate simply on the fact that he prayed more or less earnestly. It is truly a doctrine beset with difficulties many and profound, and were it not for the theory of bap- tismal remission or justification, which anchors the scheme to these fatal rocks, it is to be believed that the maturer thought of broader scholarship would ultimately drift these people over into the wide ocean of an all-pervading, gracious spiritual influence, and put them into fraternal harmony with the great bodies of Protestantism in one fellowship of the Spirit. CAMPBELLITE OBJECTIONS TO METHODISM. 257 CHAPTER XX. SUNDRY OBJECTIONS OF CAMPBELLITE TEACHERS TO METHODIST DOCTRINES. IT is customary with the exponents of this system of faith to formulate a general proposition against both the polity and doctrines of the Methodist Episco- pal Church, and call upon our ministry to defend them in discussion. The writer, on two occasions, has been required to respond to the following proposition ; namely, " The Methodist Episcopal Church teaches doctrines, and enjoins usages that are contrary to the Word of God." This gives them opportunity to make a general attack on the doctrines and economy of the Methodist Episcopal Church, and at the same time present the supposed simplicity and scripturalness of the creed devised and promulgated by Alexander Campbell. When it is remembered by the reader that this so- called reformation started out with the laudable pur- pose of bringing about Christian unity among the various denominations of Christians, and then the fact is taken into consideration that it is a very de- nominational Ishmael among the Churches, waging a perpetual war of denunciation and proselytism against 258 ERRORS OF CAMPBELLISM. them, it is a sad comment upon the inability of our humanity, ordinarily, to take the proper gauge of its own motives, impulses, and principles. It is doubtful if there is to be found among the denominations of Protestantism one more imperious in its claims, narrower in its creed, and more unchar- itable toward the honest principles of others, than this one that claims to offer to the Christian world a basis upon which all can unite. But we will deal more fully with this subject when we come to treat of the distinctive creed and polity of Campbellism. At present attention will be given to their assault on Methodism an assault that is made wherever their ministers seek to make converts to their faith. It is always with them a matter of great rejoicing when they succeed in winning a convert from some one of " the sects," as they are wont to style the other Christian bodies. The first point of attack is usually the denominational name Methodist Episcopal Church. The assumption is, that to take any other name than that of Christian Church, is to violate a divine injunction, and build up a division and schism in the body of Christ. It is usually main- tained by them that Christian Church is a name of divine appointment and sanction. In support of these assumptions, the following Scriptures are uniformily cited : Isa. Ixii, 2 : " Thou shalt be called by a new name, which the mouth of the Lord shall name." Then, Acts xi, 26 : " The disciples were called Chris- CAMPBELLITE OBJECTIONS TO METHODISM. 259 tians first at Antioch." Acts xxvi, 28 : " Almost thou pcrsuadest me to be a Christian." 1 Peter iv, 16: " Yet if any man suffer as a Christian, let him be not ashamed." James ii, 7 : " Do not they blaspheme that worthy name by the which ye are called?" Eph. iii, 14: "Of whom the whole family in heaven and earth is named." Rev. ii, 13: "I know thy works, and that thou holdest fast my name." It is held also that the taking of distinctive denominational names is condemned in 1 Cor. i, where the apostle Paul cen- sures his brethren of the Corinthian Church for say- ing, " I am of Paul, and I of Apollos, and I of Ce- phas, and I of Christ." These quotations make up the entire body of Scriptural proof that is offered on this point. In the determination of a question in dispute, it always helps to get a clear idea of the point at issue, and what is claimed by the disputants. Let it be un- derstood here that it is not a question as to what the individual followers of Christ should be called, for all agree that they should be called Christians; not per- haps as a name specifically enjoined by divine inspira- tion, but as an appropriate descriptive appellation. Hence Baptists, Presbyterians, Congregationalists, Methodists, and all other denominations call them- selves Christians, and it is only when they wish to discriminate between their several beliefs that they use the term Baptist, Methodist, and the like. Every citizen within the United States may be called a citi- 260 ERRORS OF CAMPBELLISM. zen of the same. And yet there are times when his State citizenship is required properly to designate him. It is not dishonoring the name of American citizen to say that he is a Pennsylvaniau, a Virginian, an Ohioan. So a Baptist or a Methodist, in avowing his distinctive denominational relationship, does not dis- avow his relationship to Christ or the name Christian. Those who take the name Christian as their distinctive denominational name, and refuse to be discriminated by their peculiar characteristics or otherwise, display an arrogance toward other Christians that should not be tolerated. It is this exclusiveness that makes division and schism. The Methodist can style the Presbyterian or Baptist or Congregationalist his Chris- tian brother; but the followers of Alexander Camp- bell can not consistently do so. Therefore, the idea that Christians who are of Methodist belief, and Christians who are of Baptist belief, in taking these denominational appellations properly to distinguish themselves, ignore the name of Christ, is a total mis- apprehension of the real facts in the case. For an individual to have said, " I am of the Church of Ephesus, or of the Church of Smyrna, or of the Church of Pergamos," would not have been to deny the name of Christ or Christian; for these local appellations were necessary as designations, but no more so thaii is Baptist, Lutheran, Presbyterian, Methodist, to-day. But the question is not, What shall the individual CAMPBELLITE OBJECTIONS TO METHODISM. 261 followers of Christ call themselves? for they all call themselves Christians but, What shall the Church in its organic capacity call itself? The followers of Campbell say Christian Church, and no other denom- inational designation, for this is a divinely ordained name. In the first place, this may be met with a square contradiction. The name Christian Church has no existence in the Scriptures. The individual followers of Christ were called Christians, probably at first as a nickname; but certainly not objectionable to one who had espoused the cause of Christ ; but the Church, as an organization, was not called the Chris- tian Church ; and for any denomination of professing Christians to make use of this false assumption to ar- rogate to themselves the exclusive name of Christian Church, and therefore demand to be called the Chris- tian Church, is something that proper self-respect in other Christians requires that they should promptly resent. The Church as a divine institution in its univer- sality that is, the body of those whose " names are written in heaven " has a divine name uniformly given to it in the Scriptures, and that is " the Church of God" The term Church of Christ does not even once occur in the Scriptures " Churches of Christ " in one instance Rom. xvi, 16. There is a significance in this fact. The Church existed before the Sou of God became the Christ, and therefore its generic name, which belonged to it in all the past ages, was per- 262 ERRORS OF CAMPBELLISM. petuated with it, in order that its unity might be maintained. But it may be asked, Is not Christian Church an appropriate appellation? Most certainly, as an appel- lation designating the Church in its catholicity under the Christian dispensation, it is appropriate. Still it is not a divinely appointed name ; and when this as- sertion is made, as it often is by these teachers, there is not one particle of Scripture warrant for it. Yet it is uncharitable and arrogant for any denomina- tion distinctively to style itself the Christian Church, as though other denominations were not Christian in their faith and doctrines. Having thus cleared away the false assumptions underlying their arguments, it will be seen that the passages of Scripture they are wont to cite are in no sense relevant, and need but little further elucidation. Isa. Ixii, 2, does not refer either to the name Christian or Christian Church, and only such as have a precon- ceived theory to maintain would attempt to broach such an opinion. In verse 4 of this chapter, we have both the old name and the new name given in the prophetic symbolism : " Thou shalt no more be termed Forsaken ; neither shall thy land any more be termed Desolate; but thou shalt be called Hephzibah, and thy land Beulah : for the Lord delighteth in thee, and thy land shall be married." Eph. ii, 14, 15: "For this cause I bow my knees unto the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, of whom the whole family in CAMPBELLITE OBJECTIONS TO METHODISM. 263 heaven and earth is named." It will suffice to ask, Does this refer to the name Christian Church ? Is there here even a remote allusion to this name as an appellation of the Church ? If it were conceded that reference here is had to the term Christian as a per- sonal designation of the individual followers of Christ, that would in no sense prove that the Church of God should be called by no other name than Christian Church, and certainly would give no warrant for the assumption of the name the Christian Church by any one small fraction of the body of Christ. The fact is, the expression " of whom the whole family in heaven and earth is named," refers to the Father. Many ex- cellent ancient MSS. and versions omit the words " of our Lord Jesus Christ" in verse 14. But the terms Father and family have a mutual relation to each other; they are correlative terms, and should be so construed in the interpretation of the text. Saints in heaven and saints on earth might properly be called Christians; but would Christian be a proper designation of the angels of God ? The term Christ is an official appellation, and belongs to him as our anointed prophet, priest, and king. The name referred to in the text is " sons of God." 1 John iii, 1 : " Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God." So also Gal. iv, 6, 7 : " And be- cause ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father. Where- 264 ERRORS OF CAMPBELLISM. fore thou art no more a servant, but a son ; and if a son, then an heir of God through Christ." Thus we think the Methodist Episcopal Church, in having the modesty, and also the Christian charity, to take a distinctive denominational appellation among the organizations that compose the Church of God, in so do- ing neither yields up their right to be called Christians, nor violates any mandate of the Scriptures ; while, on the contrary, those who arrogate to themselves that name alone, put themselves in a place where other Christians are compelled to give them a distinctive appellation which may not be acceptable to them. It is certainly in the worst kind of taste for the fol- lowers of A. Campbell, or any other denomination, to style themselves the Christian Church. The writer, out of respect for his own personal rights, and out of courtesy to other Christian denominations, begs to be excused. Following this, there are several objections that they usually make to our book of Discipline and Articles of Religion, to which we will reply when the subject of Discipline and Creeds is considered the objections not being made to the doctrines as false, but only to the form of their promulgation, they claiming that they are not enjoined in the Scriptures as mat- ters of faith. But Article VIII of our Articles of Religion is often by them held up as teaching a doctrine con- CAMPBELLITE OBJECTIONS TO METHODISM. 265 trary to the teaching of the Scriptures. The article reads : " The condition of man, after the fall of Adam is such that he can not turn and prepare himself, by his own natural strength and works, to faith, and call- ing upon God; wherefore we have no power to do good works, pleasant and acceptable to God, without the grace of God by Christ preventing us, that we may have a good will." The reason for their stout objection to this article is the fact that it teaches the immediate influence of the Divine Spirit and grace upon human hearts, and, as shown in former chapters, that they can not admit, without upsetting the very foundation-stones of Camp- bellism, baptism as a condition to justification, and its witness to the fact of justification; for if the Divine Spirit helps the sinner, why may he not witness to the believer? But in this respect the followers of A. Campbett are more consistent, but less orthodox, than was their great teacher. He taught inherent de- pravity and human sinful helplessness. After speak- ing of Adam's transgression and its effects upon his race, he says : * " There is therefore a sin of our na- ture, as well as personal transgression. Some inap- positely call the sin of our nature our ' original sin/ as if the sin of Adam was the personal offense of all his children. True, indeed, it is; our nature was cor- rupted by the fall of Adam before it was transmitted * " Christian System," p. 28. 23 26G ERRORS OF CAMPBELLISM. to us, and hence that hereditary imbecility to do good, and that proneness to do evil, so universally apparent in all human beings. Let no man open his mouth against the transmission of moral distemper until he satisfactorily explain the fact that the special charac- teristic vices of parents appear in their children, as much as the color of their skin, their hair, or the con- tour of their faces. A disease in the moral constitu- tion of man is as clearly transmissible as any physical taint, if there be any truth in history, biography, or human observation." Here is language clearly asserting inherited de- pravity, "hereditary imbecility to do good, and proneness to do evil." Now, if such be the condition of the human heart, no mere appeal to the intellect will meet the demands of the case ; " hereditary imbe- cility" can only be overcome by the immediate influ- ence of' the Divine Spirit. With this agrees the teaching of the Scriptures in the use of such terms as express the utter helplessness of a race of sinners without immediate divine assistance, such as "dead in trespasses and in sins ;" * " the whole head sick," " the whole heart faint ;" f " enchained to the putre- fying body of sin." J In inveighing against the doctrine of this Article of Religion, it is customary for these teachers to hold it up as teaching total depravity. The words total depravity *Eph. ii, 1. lisa, i, 5. J Rom. vii, 24. CAMPBELLITE OBJECTIONS TO METHODISM. 267 have no existence in any Article of Religion of the Meth- odist Episcopal Church; and while in orthodox theology they have a very definite import, yet there is nothing in our Articles of Religion requiring our use of them, or a defense of them as a proper theological technic. The term, however, as defined by those that use it, simply means "hereditary imbecility to do good/' a total bent and inclination to sin, so that the sinner, left to himself, would never turn to seek after righteousness. But man has not been left to himself; but provisions, gracious and ample, have been made for the salvation of the entire race, and the only question of difference between the followers of A. Campbell and Methodists is this: What constitutes these provisions? They say they are the atonement and the word alone. Methodists say, in addition to these is a manifestation of the Spirit, given to every man to profit withal.* They say because of man's " hereditary imbecility to good, and proneness to evil," he needs the help of God. Mr. Braden f says: "This teaches the doctrine of election and reprobation." Let us see. Mr. Bra- den believes that the word of divine truth is the di- vine gracious provision for the salvation of men. If this alone, then only those who have it are elected to the gracious possibility of salvation. In other words, God has passed by to this date the greater part of the human race, making no provision what- 1 Cor. xii, 7. t " Hughey and Braden Debate," p. 522. 268 ERRORS OF CAMPBELLISM. ever for them ; and if any of the heathen are saved, they are saved through a morality that is wholly their own. The Methodist Church believes that God has made it possible for every child of man to be saved who will use the grace given, while Campbell- ism must either deny this, or else save some outside of any manifestation of grace whatever. The simple truth is, the article asserts man's natural inability to a righteousness that will meet the divine requirements, and also indicates that a gracious ability is given unto him, that his salvation may be of " grace, and not of works;" of God, and not of man. Man's work is sim- ply the employment of the grace supplied. That part of Article II of the Articles of Re- ligion which says Christ " was crucified, dead, and buried, to reconcile his Father to us," is also very ve- hemently assailed by them. The animus of this antag- onism is found in the fact that it is thought that the doctrine of a divine side to the work of reconciliation leaves open a way of prayer to the sinner, and a wit- nessing spirit to the believer. Much of their oppo- sition is either founded upon a misapprehension of the import of the language here used, or is a mere con- tention about words. The article only asserts that Christ suffered and died to reconcile the administra- tion of divine justice to the pardon of our sin; that is, to reconcile divine justice with divine mercy. Surely it will not be contended that Christ did not die to " make it possible for God to be just, and the CAMPBELLITE OBJECTIONS TO METHODISM. 269 justifier of sinners."* If it is contended that this propitiation of divine justice is in no sense a recon- ciliation of God to the sinner, then this is a question to be decided by an appeal to the Word of God. Though it is with some difficulty we get at the exact meaning of these persons, yet their methods of rea- soning lead to the conclusion that they mean to deny in toto the application of the term reconciliation in the plan of redemption to God ; that is, God was in no sense reconciled to man. He never was unrecon- ciled. What does the word reconcile mean ? Web- ster defines it " to bring together, to unite." There are two parties in every reconciliation, and they are only reconciled when they are brought into harmony. Can God be in a state of reconciliation with man in sin and willful disobedience? Can it be said that God is well pleased with him ? If not, then he needs to be reconciled to him by man's repentance and faith. The Scriptures teach that the wrath of God abides on the unbeliever. John iii, 36 : " He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life : and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life ; but the wrath of God abideth on him." Can God be said to be reconciled to that individual upon whom his wrath abides? But this shall be treated of more fully when we consider the individual sinner's reconciliation to God. The reconciliation in the article especially spoken of, *Rom. iii, 26. 270 ERRORS OF CAMPBELLISM. is the reconciliation of the Father to man's justification in the sacrificial death of Christ. The fundamental idea contained in the word sacrifice is the placating of divine justice, and this placating is called in the Scriptures "making reconciliation for iniquity." Daniel ix, 24: " Seventy weeks are determined upon thy holy city to finish the transgression, and to make reconciliation for iniquity." This, without question, refers to the sac- rificial work of Christ, and that most certainly was made to divine justice. What, then, was reconciled on Calvary? Divine justice. The Hebrew word for reconcile is kaphar to cover, to make atonement. It would be marvelously absurd to maintain that man is the party that is to be reconciled here. The word reconcile and its derivatives occur in the New Testament twelve times, where it signifies the restoration of man again to favor with God. These are translations of four different Greek words, xaraMdaaa), cbroxaraX/^rrw, xara/Jayij, Ddoxouat. The first three indicate or signify the change of relations brought about between God and the sinner. Our reconciliation is not spoken of until it is a reconcilia- tion in fact, by bringing the alienated parties to- gether. The first employment of the term reconcile (xara^Xdaaio) in reference to the relation in grace be- tween God and man, is in Rom. v, 10 : " For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son ; much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life." Now, what was rec- CAMPBELLITE OBJECTIONS TO METHODISM. 271 onciled by the death of Christ? Most certainly di- vine justice; not man, for this reconciliation took place when " we were enemies." Reconciliation is the divine side of the work of Christ, salvation is our side ; that is, he reconciles God and saves us. In 2 Cor. v, 18, 19 : "And all things are of God, who hath reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ, and hath given us the ministry of reconciliation ; to wit, that God was in Christ reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them, and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation." Note that this reconciliation " hath " been completed through Jesus Christ. It therefore can not be the reconciliation of the sinner to God. Verse 19 de- fines this reconciliation ; to wit, " that God was in Christ reconciling the world unto himself." When was this done? In the incarnation. Notice the past tense " was." If the reconciliation were that of man, then it would be in the present tense. The past tense refers to the atoning sacrifice of Christ. The recon- ciliation was in the past; the "ministry" of divine "reconciliation" is future. Of like import are Eph. ii, 16 : "And that he might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby;" and Col. i, 20, 21: "And, having made peace through the blood of the cross, by him to rec- oncile all things unto himself; by him, I say, whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven. And you, that were sometime alienated and enemies in 272 ERRORS OF CAMPBELLISM. your mind by wicked works, yet now hath he recon- ciled in the body of his flesh through death." Now, in both of these quotations the reconciliation is by the cross, and is in the past tense. In Eph. ii, 16, it is in the aorist subjunctive, and in Col. i, 20 in the aorist infinitive. This fact most conclusively demon- strates that it does not refer to the future reconcilia- tion of the sinner. Winer, in his "New Testament Grammar," says that it " is only in appearance that the aorist is used for the future." If, then, the reconcilia- tion took place in past time, through Christ's death and by the cross, it was not the sinner that was recon- ciled, for he is yet to be reconciled. It must there- fore be God who has been reconciled to the justifica- tion of the sinner. In Heb. ii, 17, we have it distinctly stated that Christ came to reconcile the Father. " Wherefore in all things it behooved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make recon- ciliation for the sins of the people." It will be ob- served that the word pertaining has been supplied by the translators, and is not in the text. It should read "a merciful and faithful high priest in things to God, to make reconciliation." The only way that they at- tempt to meet this text is by saying that recoricilia- tion is not the proper translation of the verb ttdaxo/iai, that it should be propitiation. But what is propitia- CAMPBELLITE OBJECTIONS TO METHODISM. 273 tion but a stronger term for the same fact the recon- ciliation of divine justice to the pardon of man's sin? It in no wise meets the issues of the case to cite, as Mr. Braden does, and as other exponents of Camp- bellism do, the parable of the Prodigal Son, and such passages as John iii, 16: "God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him might not perish, but have everlast- ing life." For the question still remains, What was Christ given for ? What was propitiated by his death ? When these questions are answered, there will be the recognition of the fact that, before man could be saved, divine justice must be reconciled. But the inspiration of their strenuous objection to this Article of Religion is the belief that it teaches that God must be reconciled to each individual sinner through his (the sinner's) fulfillment of the conditions to salvation, and that the seeking of such reconcilia- tion opens the way for penitential, importunate prayer a seeking of God with the whole heart. It is at this point of opposition that Methodist mourners' benches, anxious seats, inquiry meetings, seeking salvation, calling on the Lord for salvation, and the like, arc assaulted and excoriated as a manifestation of folly a course unwarranted by the Scriptures. Now, in numerous passages of Scripture we are taught that God is angry with the sinner. (Eph. ii, 3, and v, G ; Col. iii, 6.) If angry, certainly not reconciled. 274 ERRORS OF CAMPBELLISM. Now, whatever will remove his righteous w r rath, will reconcile God to the sinner. \Ve are told in John iii, 36, that faith will do this. But the Savior, in Luke xviii, 9-14, related a par- able to show how God becomes propitious is recon- ciled to the sinner the Pharisee and the Publican. Notice the description of the prayer of the publican : " And the publican, standing afar off, would not so much as lift up his eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast, saying, God be merciful to me a sinner." Here is the representation of some very earnest seeking seeking which nowadays incurs considerable criticism, contempt, and condemnation from these reformers. Let it be noticed again that the word translated " be merci- ful" is tidaxo/jtae, which is translated by reconcile in Heb.ii, 17; and the verbal cognate of the noun llaofjLoz, propitiation, in 1 John ii, 2, and iv, 10. If, therefore, it had been translated " God be reconciled to me a sin- ner," it would have been far more in harmony with the Scriptural use of the word. The marginal read- ing in the Revised Version has it " be propitiated to me the sinner." So that a crying to God for personal reconciliation has the divinest of all sanctions. With the teaching of this parable agree other teachings of the Savior concerning the value of inter- cessory prayer to the seeker of righteousness. In this same chapter he spake another parable to teach the value of importunity in prayer, " to this end, that men ought always to pray and not to faint;" then follows CAMPBELL1TE OBJECTIONS TO METHODISM. 275 the parable of the Unjust Judge and the Widow, which, if it teaches anything, teaches that God will wait, no doubt for the seeker's good, to be importuned. With this agrees Luke xiii, 24, when the Master says : " Strive [original, agonize] to enter into the strait gate ; for many, I say unto you, will seek to enter in, and shall not be able." Also Matt, v, 6 : " Blessed are they which do hunger and thirst after righteousness, for they shall be filled." A hungering and thirsting after righteousness, that is not character- ized by earnest, importunate prayer, would be exceed- ingly peculiar. All this opposition is predicated upon the theory that it is the duty of the penitent believer not to pray, but to obey. But the Word of God teaches him to pray, both in the examples above given, and in numer- ous clear and explicit precepts. Psa. xxvii, 8 : " When thou saidst, Seek ye my face; my heart said, Thy face, Lord, will I seek ;" Isa. Iv, 6 : " Seek ye the Lord while he may be found, call ye upon him while he is near;" Lam. iii, 25; Amos v, 4 and 6; Acts xvii, 27, and others. With this agrees the comprehensive promise given by the apostle in Rom. x, 13, and quoted from Joel ii, 32 : " Whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved." If this is not warrant sufficient for the penitent seeker's earnest praying, it is hard to conceive what would be suffi- cient for these teachers. But it is asked, " Is not God willing to forgive 276 ERRORS OF CAMPBELLISM. whenever the conditions are complied with ?" Most surely. But mark, when the conditions are complied with, when repentance is genuine, thorough, complete ; that is, godly sorrow for sin, faithful confession of sin, willingness to make all possible reparation for sin. The man who has injured his neighbor in person, property, or character, does not truly repent until he is willing to make it all right, so far as is in his power. After this, implicit faith in Jesus Christ. And it is right and wise for God to withhold the blessing until all the conditions are fulfilled, until the whole heart is enlisted in seeking and in the faith. If it requires importunacy in prayer to bring the soul of the disciple of Christ into the proper attitude of submission and faith, is it not likely to require self- examination, earnest seeking, and fervent prayer, to lead the seeker to that completeness of repentance that is called godly sorrow, and that implicitness of trust called faith of the heart? In the sinner's con- version " faith towards [or upon] the Lord Jesus Christ " must crown repentance toward God. He who ridicules intense earnestness in seeking pardon of sin, has but an excedingly limited idea of what God re- quires of personal self-surrender in order to a godly life. ON CREEDS AND DISCIPLINE. CHAPTER XXI. CAMPBELLISM ON CREEDS AND DISCIPLINE. ATTENTION has already been called to the fact that Alexander Campbell at first started out with the laudable purpose of bringing the Christian denomina- tions into unity. The first organized effort made in this direction was in August, 1809, by his father, Thomas Campbell, and resulted in the formation of "The Christian Association of Washington/'* in Washington County, Pennsylvania. This association promulgated a " Declaration " of principles, or an " Ad- dress/' as it was styled, which, to the writer, as a bond of union, has, as far as it goes, all the characteristics of a creed ; and when it proclaims in the concluding sentence that nothing shall be required of any one as a " matter of Christian faith or duty, for which there can not be expressly produced a 'Thus saith the Lord/ either in expressed terms or by approved precedent/' the question naturally arises, Who will be the judge when a "Thus saith the Lord/' either directly or by "approved precedent," is pro- duced ? It is right here where Christian creeds have *" Richardson's Memoirs of A. Campbell," p. 240, 278 ERRORS OF CAMPBELLISM. had their origin. It is a question of considerable possible disagreement as to what is an " approved precedent ;" for all are compelled to concede that ob- ligation rests not alone upon a specific and explicit " Thus saith the Lord/' but upon inspired example, reasonable inference, and the analogy of faith. There is no doubt but the purpose originally was to bring about Christian union, and establish a plat- form upon which all that do truly love the Lord Jesus Christ may stand. But Mr. Campbell was a man of strong convictions, and it was not long after the for- mation of his societies, until it was manifest that he was simply the founder of another denomination, that took the peculiar type of its faith from the teachings of its founder. The marvel is, however, that the self-deception has been perpetuated in the belief that they offer a basis broad enough for all true Christiaus to unite upon, and that they are any thing more than another denomination, with a peculiar creed, so nar- row that nine-tenths of the Christian world can not subscribe to it. The facts prove this; either the Christian world in the main are hopelessly blind or peculiarly obstinate, or the oral creed of Campbell ism is too circumscribed for anything like Christian unity. But Mr. Campbell was, and his followers, treading exactly in his foot-steps, are wont to inveigh against human creeds. Mr. Campbell, in his debate with Professor Rice, affirmed the following proposition : " Human creeds, as bonds of union and communion, ON CREEDS AND DISCIPLINE. 279 are necessarily heretical and schismatical." This, in substance, the exponents of his doctrines are to-day ready to affirm. It is, however, entirely unnecessary to follow them through their argument against creeds; for these arguments are, by parity of reasoning, proven to be fallacious by their own promulgation and en- forcement of a human creed. It is only a question between an oral and a written creed. The followers of Campbell have a very narrow oral creed, which they thrust at the individual who seeks admission among them a creed that is very far from having any " Thus saith the Lord " for either one of its two fundamental requisitions, " Confession that Jesus Christ is the Son of God," and immersion in order to remis- sion of sin. Creed is from credo, I believe. Now, I can print this belief in short, formulated propositions, or I cart simply publish it orally ; but neither printing nor oral pub- lication is necessary to make it a creed. It is a creed when it is a matter of belief. Most Christians print, in Confessions of Faith or Articles of Religion, what they believe the Bible to teach in certain matters re- garded as fundamental or essential. This A. Camp- bell and his followers refuse to do. Is what they believe and require, because unpublished in a printed confession, any more the truth necessarily than what others believe? Every one of Mr. Campbell's arguments against human creeds lies with equal force against his unpub- 280 ERRORS OF CAMPBELLISM. lished creed ; for by this unpublished creed his people will arraign, try, and exclude from their fellowship the individual who should teach otherwise among them. Take, for an example, the minister of the gos- pel among them who should come to the belief that sprinkling and pouring are proper modes of baptism, and go to preaching the same. Would they not ex- clude him, or sever connection with him ? From what stand-point would this be done ? From that of an oral creed, which certainly they can only claim to be their interpretation of the Scripture. The only difference between them and others consists in this, that the interpretation in other Churches has been formulated beforehand in a printed statement ; in their case it is a written consensus of opinion among them, found in their doctrinal authors. It has already been said that to every one who comes seeking admission among them they present their creed, asking of them a certain verbal confes- sion, and immersion for a certain purpose. And this creed, though of few articles, is so narrow that nine- teuths or more of as devout, holy, faithful, self-sacri- ficing Christians as are to be found in the world, will be excluded fey it. Without fear of successful con- tradiction, it is the narrowest creed of all Protestant Christendom. It will even exclude the honest Baptist, though a believer in exclusive immersion. The confession, " I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God," is nowhere in the Scriptures required ON CREEDS AND DISCIPLINE. 281 as a condition to salvation. The only place that in this form it exists is in Acts viii, 37, and this passage is rejected by the best commentators as spurious, and is not to be found in the Revised Version. Let it be remarked that the expression of the belief that "Jesus Christ is the Son of God" is not saving faith, but is a mere article of intellectual belief. Wicked men may, and some wicked men do, believe this. Devils believe it. There is a wide difference between this mere act of intellectual faith, and " believing O7i the Son of God." (John ix, 35.) The propo- sition that " Jesus Christ is the Son of God " is incomprehensible by mortals, for it involves the un- derstanding of the mode of Divine existence. Mr. Braden, * in opposing Article I of our Articles of Religion, says concerning its affirmation of the Trinity in Unity : " The Scriptures declare there is Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. These, then, are in some sense one ; but they nowhere teach or explain how they are one. I do not know how they are one. I do not believe they are one; for I know nothing about it, and lean not be- lieve what I do not understand." The italics are given to call attention to the principle laid down. If faith must be an intelligent understanding of the subject believed, then the belief that " Jesus Christ is the Son of God " is a requirement utterly impossible. Now, while we do not agree with the idea that a proposi- " * Hughey and Braden Debate," p. 518. 24 XW*tXLA*Ot/ &* 282 ERRORS OF CAMPBELLISM. tion that is not comprehensible, can not be the subject of belief, yet it is true that the Scriptures do not require the belief of an incomprehensible proposition in order to salvation. To "believe on the Son of God" is to rest the faith of the heart for salvation on this divine personage whom the Bible calls " the Son of God." The second article of this creed is to believe that immersion alone is baptism ; and the third is to be- lieve that it is a necessary condition for the remission of sins. Suppose, now, to illustrate the exclusiveness of this creed, a person who believes that baptism is necessary to the remission of sins, should believe that sprinkling is baptism, could he pass the narrow doc- trinal gate ? Who believes he could ? Suppose, again, he should believe immersion is baptism, but at the same time believe it is not a condition to the remis- sion of sin. He probably would pass because of being immersed ; if so, it illustrates that the matter of form is omnipotent in this scheme, while the matter of be- lief is entirely unimportant. We are compelled to this view, because Alexander Campbell himself was not baptized with reference to obtaining the remission of sins by baptism ; and also Baptist baptism is accepted by them to-day. Could any creed put salvation more absolutely in the outward form? In fact, immersion may go before faith, before repentance, and be for any other religious purpose, and the individual afterward get the benefit of it as a saving ordinance, but it must not be omitted. ON CREEDS AND DISCIPLINE. 283 But the creed of any denomination is not its printed and published Articles of Religion; for these arc usually but partial, and limited to affirmations antago- nizing what were believed to be errors at the time of their formulation. For example, the doctrines of the Methodist Episcopal Church are not all found in the Articles of Religion. But the doctrines of the various denominations are to be found in the general consensus of their doctrinal writers. Campbellism has a distinct and marked consensus. No leader ! in Protestantism in modern times has more completely stamped his peculiar doctrinal beliefs, and their mode of inculca- tion and defense, upon his followers, than has this man. It would not be difficult to write out his and their creed from his controversial affirmations and de- nials. It is true that all of this creed is not made a bond of union or communion among his followers ; but enough of it is used to put a very specific de- nominational stamp upon the communicants of their Churches, and to make a doctrinal shibboleth, which is readily recognized anywhere, and discriminated from other Christian beliefs. The writer has fre- quently had occasion to note how completely in forms of statement, methods of argumentation, and interpre- tation, his followers conform to the model set for them by this their great leader, and yet no people have more to say about the trammels of creed and preconceived opinions. It is quite amusing at times to those who are familiar with Mr. Campbell's writings, to hear these 284 ERRORS OF CAMPBELL1SM. men proclaim their entire independence of human creeds while they are retailing even his exegetical blunders. We have now shown that Campbellism has a creed in the consensus of its writers, and in the uniform usage of its societies a creed that, in some of its doc- trinal requirements, will bar a large part of the Chris- tian Church out of its societies, and that in others will prohibit its teachers from inculcating among them numerous doctrines and beliefs held by other Chris- tians; such as infant baptism, sprinkling and pouring as baptism, the necessity for the immediate witness of the Spirit, and the like. Of course they claim that they condemn these by the Word of God. But who is the interpreter of the Word of God ? They, themselves. And this is by implication to claim infallibility for their interpreta- tion. It is a little singular that this Church that be- gins with a doctrine of salvation by works, must land at least in another of the claims of the Church of Rome, the infallibility of her doctrinal opinions. There is no doubt but human creeds have been al- together too minute in their attempted definitions of doctrine, and too exacting ; and that efforts were made to define some things that were incapable of defini- tion, because beyond human comprehension ; still this concession does not change the fact that creeds that are purely and only human such because they are ON CREEDS AND DISCIPLINE. 285 men's opinions must be made tests of faith and bonds of union and communion. Campbellism has just such a creed, and it is not any the less effectively used for this purpose, even though it is only to be found in the consensus of its writers. And yet their pulpits un- ceasingly ring with denunciations against the tyranny of creeds and their hindrance to Church union. The altogether nonchalant air with which they present their doctrinal scheme and Church polity as the one of divine institution, and as offering the only basis of Church union, is exceedingly surprising to people who have not the same confidence in their deductions that they seem to have. Their evangelistic propagan- dists generally dwell long and earnestly upon the evils of sectarian divisions, the divisive influence of printed creeds, the enthralling character of disciplinary requirements, and the sinfulness of sectarian names; and with an assurance that is truly amazing they will invite people to leave or avoid the sects, and join the Christian Church, as though their small organi- zation of but yesterday defined the whole limits of the Church of Christ. What a comment on sectarian blindness ! Again, the same infallible certitude that they claim for their doctrinal teachings, they likewise claim for their Church polity. Their Church polity is what might be styled independent; that is, each local society has absolute control over all its affairs, both as to doc- 286 ERRORS OF CAMPBELLISM. trine and government. Members pass between these separate societies by " letters of formal introduction." * The rulers of these societies are called by them " eld- ers," and they have about the entire government in their hands, except as they find it necessary to appeal to the congregation upon any question of general moment. The question of Church polity is one that has been a subject of much discussion. This we do not intend to enter into. We believe there is no divinely instituted form of Church government. God has left this in its details to the Church; and whether it shall be connectional, as the Methodist Episcopal and the Presbyterian Churches, or Congregational, or Inde- pendent, we believe to be a matter of indifference. But it does, however, look reasonable that the Church, being a divinely ordained organization for the evan- gelization of the world, should have throughout that organic bond that will most effectually bring all its parts into unified effort for this purpose. Independ- ency certainly can not do this, only as it organizes societies independently of the Church, and of which the Church at large is itself independent. While the polity of the Methodist Episcopal Church is subject to modification by its legislative body, the General Conference, the polity of the Church founded by Alexander Campbell must remain forever * "Christian System," ch. "Christian Discipline." ON CREEDS AND DISCIPLINE. 287 unchanged, for that is claimed by them to be of di- vine appointment. Should any bodies springing up among them come to believe that the polity might be lawfully changed, there would be two Churches, each claiming to be the Christian Church. Mr. Campbell has been the sole legislator for this Church. He is the founder of its economy, as well as the author of its doctrines. " The Christian Discipline," contained in " The Christian System," pages 85 to 90, lays down the discipline of this Church, that by which it must be governed for all time; for it was evolved by Mr. Campbell out of the New Testament. If so, it must be forever and unchangeably obligatory, according to their teaching. Is not this putting a great amount of confidence in one man? To-day the exact form of discipline presented in the " Chris- tian System" by this one man is the absolute law of the Church. And yet they are wont to claim they have no discipline. It is true their societies have never adopted formally any form of discipline. Why? Be- cause, in all essential matters of government, that was evolved out of the Word, according to their belief and teachings by Alexander Campbell, and all that is necessary now for them to do, is to go to the " Chris- tian System," and ascertain what are its directions, when needed. Now, suppose that, in some future period, some so- cieties among them come to the conclusion that this discipline is not of divine ordainment, but that there 288 ERRORS OF CAMPBELL1SM. may be, and ought to be, some modifications of it; what is left for them but the establishment of another " Christian Church ?" The writer is aware of the fact that they, to some extent, recognize the law of expediency ; but only in minor things; not in the matter of Church govern- ment, such as the entire independency of each society, the authority of the elders, and the exclusion of mem- bers for immorality or heresy. Again, even in mat- ters of expediency Mr. Campbell has furnished them with disciplinary rules that they uniformly find it ex^ pedient to observe. Methodists no more carefully follow the forms of order in business laid down in our Book of Discipline than the followers of Campbell follow his directions in matters merely expedient. The preachers of this denomination are accus- tomed to hold up to ridicule and public condemnation the system of probationship in the Methodist Episco- pal Church, a system merely prudential, and that does not deprive any one of any of the spiritual priv- ileges belonging to Church membership, such as the means of grace, the sacrament, and the helps of Chris- tian fellowship; but "only limits as to official priv- ileges, such as holding certain offices, sitting in cases of Church trial, etc.; and accords the right of with- drawal without question, if dissatisfied with doctrines or polity, and accords the Church the right, without formal trial, if she is not satisfied with the Christian life or character of the probationer, to dismiss him. ON CREEDS AND DISCIPLINE. 289 This has been variously characterized as the "back porch " or " kitchen," or " anteroom " of the Meth- odist Church. After all this, would it be thought a matter within the range of possibility that this Church has a system of probationship also ? Yet such is the fact an indefinite probationship or novitiate. In their Discipline, " Christian System," page 88, " Chris- tian Discipline," section 10, we have the following: "The whole community act, and ought to act, in receiving and excluding persons; but in the aggregate it can never become judges of offenses and a tribunal of trial. Such an institution never was set up by Di- vine authority. No community is composed only of wise and discreet full-grown men. The Christian Church engrosses old men, young men, and babes in Christ. Shall the voice of a babe be heard or counted as a vote in a case oj discipline? What is the use of bishops in a Church, if all are to rule ; of judges, if all are to be judges of fact and law? No wonder that broils and heart-burnings and scandals of all sorts disturb those communities ruled by a democracy of the whole where everything is to be judged in pub- lic and full assembly. Such is not the Christian sys- tem. It ordains that certain persons shall judge and rule, and that ' all things shall be done decently and in order.' ' I have italicized to call attention to the recogni- tion of mere novitiates in the Church and the limita- tions put on them. Limitations, the exact counter- 25 290 ERRORS OF CAMPBELLISM. part of those put upon probationers in the Meth- odist Church. But Methodists never regarded it a matter of Divine injunction, but only of Church ex- pediency. Mr. Wesley laid down at the head of the " Gen- eral Rules" of the societies formed by him, the only true basis of Christian unity ; namely, " A desire to flee the wrath to come and to be saved from their sins, and an evidencing of such desire by an avoid- ance of all manner of evil, and doing good in every possible way." The General Rules he wrote out are rules of Christian morality. He laid down no doc- trinal test, as did Alexander Campbell ; much less did he require conformity to a mere ordinance, in one special form, as a condition to Christian fellowship and also a condition to salvation. Mr. Wesley's "General Rules" could unite all Christians in one, through seeking after righteousness, until they come to unity in knowledge of the truth. Mr. Campbell's scheme would exclude, by a mere ritualistic perform- ance, the vast majority of the Christian world, and keep them apart until they could see eye to eye in the mode of the observance of an ordinance. When their attention is called to this fact, with sublime innocency they tell us they require this because the Bible re- quires it; at once, by an inevitable implication, in the face of the honest convictions of a majority of Chris- tians, claiming that their interpretation of the Scrip- tures is infallible. ON CREEDS AND DISCIPLINE. 291 Again, they are continually descanting upon union and Christian liberty, while, at the same time, they in- sist upon union in their own terms, and refuse to in- telligent, conscientious, free, moral agents the deter- mination of the mode in which, and the end for which, they shall receive a mere ritualistic ordinance. For centuries the Christian world has been contending about the mode, design, and import of water baptism; the best of Christians have been enlisted upon all sides of this question. The grace of God, in its effect on Christian character, life, and spirituality, has made no distinction among the disputants. Affusionists psedobaptists have manifested just as much faith, de- votion, self-sacrificing, and have had just as much success, have died just as triumphant, as have those who fought for exclusive immersion and adult bap- tism alone. And yet, despite these indisputable facts, in this nineteenth century, there springs up a denom- ination that maintains that the only bond of Christian unity is immersion as a necessary condition to the re- mission of sins. In other words, that very ritualistic symbolism that has been the cause of more discussion, and about which there has been more honest division of opinion in the Church of all ages, is at once definitely settled by them in one mode, for one design, and to one import; and the Christian world are called upon to stop their disputing and come forward and accept the final settlement of this ques- tion. It is doubtful if it is possible to find 292 ERRORS OF CAMPBELLISM. another example of more audacious dogmatism, of more profound confidence in their theories, and, necessarily because of these, uncharitableness to- wards other Christians, than this. And this is Campbellism ! r CSB LIBRARY UC SOUTHERN REGIONAL LIBRARY FACILITY A 000 590 835 5