"Timothy" on Christian Communion and the Lord's Supper, The Christian Messenger, 1828 (Part 2 of 2)

My first post about a certain series in The Christian Messenger, written by "Timothy," and dealing with the Lord's Supper, took up preliminary questions.

To repeat, our best evidence indicates that the author of the three articles, "Timothy," was one Thomas Smith. In addition, the evidence suggests that Smith was a leader in the early-nineteenth century Christian movement associated with the names Barton W. Stone and Alexander Campbell. Apparently, Smith was a Kentuckian who, at the time he wrote this series, served as a preacher in Lexington. In fact, he was an old friend and associate of Stone's, and also was acquainted with Alexander Campbell. So, it is reasonable to suppose that Thomas Smith was present when, on New Year's Day, 1832, at the Hill Street Church in Lexington, Kentucky, "Raccoon" John Smith and Barton W. Stone shook hands, symbolically uniting two early-American restoration movements.

On that occasion, John Smith called upon the assembled to no longer be "Campbellites or Stoneites, New Lights or Old Lights, or any other kind of lights." If believers would simply come together on the basis of the Bible alone, that would provide "all the light we need."[1] Having established the context of Smith's three articles, then, we turn our attention to the material itself.

Timothy, "The Communion of Christians at the Lord's Table--No. I." The Christian Messenger 2, no. 12 (October 1828), 271-75.

In his first article, Smith, writing as "Timothy," begins with the question, "Who have a divine right to partake of the Lord's Supper?" (271).

Smith observes that "Paedo-baptists" practice open communion, while Baptists do not. I take the author's mention of Paedo-baptists as a reference primarily to Methodists and Presbyterians, two prominent denominations in the South and West at that time. Both groups practiced infant baptism. Of course, the same could be said about Lutherans, Episcopalians, and Congregationalists. But they were not nearly as prominent at that time and place. (See Smith's own designations on p. 273).

By contrast, Baptists, at least the fellowship known as "United Baptists," practice close(d) communion. Smith announces his conclusion: when it comes to the practical question of open versus closed communion, the right way lies somewhere between these two extremes, "which, I conceive, all christians [sic] would do well to avoid" (271).

Smith asserts that the practice of open communion by a "sect" is inconsistent. For, by definition, a sect establishes strict qualifications for membership. And, a sect treats all who do not meet those qualifications as outsiders. Smith raises the question of why "Paedo-baptists" practice open communion. He answers that the practice attempts to ingratiate those who are not a part of the sect, with the hope that this will bring the outsider around to appreciating and perhaps joining them. Essentially, as they invite people who do not subscribe to their creed to share the Lord's Supper with them, they pray:

O Lord, our creed contains the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth;--we beseech thee, therefore, convert our neighbors and the world to our sect (272).

But, Smith writes, the practice is entirely inconsistent, because when Methodists and Presbyterians serve the Lord's Supper to all sorts of believers, they admit in practice that members of other groups are genuine Christians, the children of God. Thus, it is as if Christ has a Presbyterian Church, a Methodist Church, a United Baptist Church, and so on. The "free communion" of the Paedo-baptists is, thus, inconsistent. Furthermore, it is less than honest, "a mere sectarian engine" (272). So long as these groups cleave to their cherished sectarian names and human creeds, their claims to ecumenicism are, at best, temporary, hollow, and ineffectual.

Smith celebrates that there are thousands of people "in the different sects" who deplore current conditions "in the church." His critical remarks do not apply to those people, he writes, for they are the very ones who recognize and resist the problem (272-73).

At this point, Smith transitions into the second half of his article, in which he draws a comparison between Christianity in the Roman Empire and anti-sectarian Christianity in the contemporary world. He states that in the Roman Empire, all religions were welcome and encouraged, provided that were not seditious or intolerant; provided that they did not deny the legitimacy of other religions or speak against Rome authority.

When Christianity came onto the scene, it did both. Christians denied the legitimacy of every other religious persuasion. Christians were absolutely convinced that they were following the truth. And, they spoke and lived as though they truly meant it. Quoting his source on Roman history, Smith writes

They (the christians) dared to ridicule the absurdities of the Pagan superstition, and they were ardent and assiduous in gaining proselytes to the truth. Nor did they only attack the religion of Rome, but also all the different shapes and forms under which superstition appeared in the various countries where they exercised their ministry (274).[2]

Consequently, all religious and imperial power came together in an attempt to destroy Christianity. What else might explain the deadly persecution of the church from the New Testament era to the time of Constantine?

Then, Smith draws his analogy. The various modern religious sects tend to get along just fine with one another, even to the point of claiming communion with each other as they openly serve the Lord's Supper to members of any mainstream group. But, if a movement should emerge that stands consistently against all of the sects with their creeds and dogmas, at that moment all of the groups will line up together in strong opposition to them.

Smith intimates that this is exactly what has happened in his own time. Paedo-baptists and all other sectarians have lined up against mere "Christians," believers who reject all systems of theology and human traditions, and who insist on the authority of the Bible alone. Leaders of the sects have made themselves the enemies of "the sons of religious liberty" (274).

Hence, those who have christian courage, fortitude and piety enough to stand up and oppose the desolating tide of popular and and [sic] fashionable religion, are every where (like the ancient christians) spoken against (275).

Timothy, "The Communion of Christians at the Lord's Table--No. II." The Christian Messenger 3, no. 1 (November 1828), 11-14.

Having identified in his first article the inconsistencies of the "Paedo-baptists," Thomas Smith now turns to to the Baptists and their practice of closed communion. Against such practice, Smith states, he has three objections:

First, Baptists teach that faith in Christ and immersion in water are the two essential requirements for becoming a child of God. If one has this status, of course he or she should be welcome to partake of the Lord's Supper. But, writes Smith, the group known as "United Baptists" withhold the Lord's Supper from "Separate Baptists," even though all of their members, like other sorts of Baptists, believe in Christ and have been baptized! Smith adds that United Baptists treat not only Separates but also other sorts of Baptists in the same way. In fact, there are at least potentially many others who would qualify as children of God according to the Baptist understanding, who would be denied the Lord's Supper by United Baptists. Thus, in this regard, the United Baptists are as rigid as the Roman Catholics.

Second, writes Smith, there are sometimes more differences among the United Baptists than there are between United Baptists and other groups. How ironic! So then, how can their practice of closed communion be consistent? As it is, their distinctions are in fact completely inconsistent, obviously sectarian. Apparently, their rule is, only if one is in the good graces of a United Baptist congregation is that believer worthy to partake of the Lord's Supper. If not, then one should be debarred from the Supper.

Third, the United Baptist practice of closed communion forces them to say, in effect, that they are the only Christians. Otherwise, how could they insist on closed communion?

The Baptists are thus hung on the horns of a dilemma: they teach that anyone who comes to the Lord as they have are thereby true children of God. At the same time, they teach that only members in good standing of United Baptist congregation should take the Lord's Supper. While their doctrine of salvation is biblical, their observance of the Lord's Supper is sectarian. Smith concludes, then, that the United Baptists will never be relieved of their problem until "they abandon the ground they occupy" (14).

Timothy, "The Communion of Christians at the Lord's Table--No. III." The Christian Messenger 3, no. 2 (December 1828), 33-37.

Having dealt with both Paedo-baptists and Baptists in the first two installments of his series, in the third and final installment Thomas Smith sets out to explain his own convictions.

Interestingly, he uses the phrase "the ancient order of things" and identifies the Lord's Supper is "an ordinance of the Church." Smith states that the church should "spread the Lord's table," believing and knowing that there are Christians, pious and God-fearing people, among the various sects (33). He goes so far as to say that many unimmersed "Paedo-baptists" certainly are true Christians, as their lives and devotion attest:

For who that has had any considerable acquaintance and intercourse with religious society can doubt  the piety of many Paedo-Baptists? The contrary opinion is too shocking to be admitted. The purity of many of their hearts, evinced by the holiness of their lives, proclaims them loudly and clearly to be the children of God. Their humility, the benevolence, their humanity, and unreserved devotion to the interests of Christianity, present many of them as patterns of piety and good works, whom, even those who have been immersed, would do well to imitate (34). 

Their error is not one of will, but of understanding. They therefore have every right to the Lord's table. Citing 2 Corinthians 8:12--"For if there be first a willing mind, it is accepted according to that a man hath, and not according to that he hath not"--Smith concludes that the Lord does not demand of people an understanding that they do not have. Rather, they are judged by the Lord according to the understanding they do have (35).

But how or why would someone be ignorant of the will of God? Smith answers that the King James Bible does not translate the word that means immerse as such. Instead, that translation consistently uses the much more pliable word baptize. Paedo-baptists have been taught by their revered teachers that their sprinkling as infants matches that meaning of baptize. These people, Smith suggests, are stuck in Babylon. They might not make it out of Babylon as soon as one would like. Human nature being what it is, who would expect that they would? Not to mention that those who have been immersed as believers most assuredly have their own set misunderstandings.

But what about the Baptists, asks Smith? They would likely say, "If we take the position of 'Timothy,' how will we ever convince a Paedo-baptist that there is something defective about his understanding? We must exclude him until he learns what is true, agrees with the doctrine and follows it.

Smith rejects such thinking and its practical approach because, he says, the excluded Paedo-baptist will not feel challenged by rejection. Rather, he will feel disrespected. He will conclude that those who deny him the Supper must not recognize his true piety and Christian character.  In other words, the United Baptist approach is bound to backfire. On the other hand, if a Paedo-baptist is received as a brother at the Lord's table, then

he feels the cords of Christian affection binding him to you; he has confidence in you, and therefore every avenue to his mind is open to you; and thus you pave the way to his conversion to the truth (37).

Four Observations

For me, this series written by Thomas Smith provokes at least four observations.

First, although judging from its title this series might seem to be primarily about the "Lord's Supper," in fact it has everything to do with that other phrase: "Christian Communion." Here, those words clearly refer to what is sometimes called "fellowship." Smith's leading question, "Who have a divine right to partake of the Lord's Supper?" does not address typical questions like frequency of the Lord's Supper, the meaning of the ordinance, etc. Much more broadly, Smith is asking, Who is a Christian? The practical concern is the issue of how a church's quiet observance of the Lord's Supper loudly responds to that question. What does the church's practice imply about what identifies a true Christian?

Second, the central question in Smith's series is two-sided. That is, it not only asks about the Christian identity of individuals, more to the point it asks about the character of the movement of which Smith is a part. He seeks to raise and respond to the question, Will we "Christians" (or "Disciples" or "Reformers") practice open or closed communion, or will we take a third alternative? That is to say, the series is not so much about the Christian identity of individuals. Rather, it deals with the Christian identity of the "Christians."

Third, Smith's rejection of both open and closed communion indicates that the practice in many, likely most, of today's Restoration churches regarding the Lord's Supper reaches all the way back to the very first generation of the movement. Many restorationists today have heard and repeated statements like, "It is not our supper, it is the Lord's Supper" and "We neither invite nor debar." Such mottoes do not fully explain the rationale behind the custom to which they point. Such is the nature of mottoes. Yet, these words do express and emphasize an approach to the Lord's Supper that is consistent with the goal of being Christians only, while never claiming to be the only Christians.

In my own experience growing up among the acappella Churches of Christ, though we did not repeat the mottoes I have quoted here, we essentially followed them. In the congregations of my youth, it was understood that the Lord's Supper was for baptized believers. It was also understood to be a duty and a blessing for Christians to partake. Yet, no one was especially welcomed or discouraged to participate. Individuals made the decision for themselves.

Fourth, it appears that one reason why the Stone and Campbell movements were able to converge sometime around the early 1830s is that they took the same view of Christian identity, the same view of communion or fellowship in the broadest meaning of those words.

Famously, in the pages of the 1837 The Millennial Harbinger, Alexander Campbell replied to "a conscientious sister" who wrote from Lunenburg, Virginia. A brief quote from letter reveals the essential question: "Does the name of Christ or Christian belong to any but those who believe the gospel, repent, and are buried by baptism into the death of Christ?"

In his reply, Campbell wrote:

But who is a Christian? I answer, Every one that believes in his heart that Jesus of Nazareth is the Messiah, the Son of God; repents of his sins, and obeys him in all things according to this measure of knowledge of his will.

Later, and reminiscent of Thomas Smith's statements from nearly a decade before in The Christian Messenger, Campbell made the following comparison:

Should I find a Pedobaptist more intelligent in the Christian Scriptures, more spiritually-minded and more devoted to the Lord than a Baptist, or one immersed on a profession of the ancient faith, I could not hesitate a moment in giving the preference of my heart to him that loveth much. Did I act otherwise I would be a pure sectarian, a Pharisee among Christians.[3]

Notes

[1] Lester G. McAllister and William E. Tucker, Journey in Faith: A History of the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ) (St. Louis: Bethany Press, 1975), pp. 151-52. The full discussion of attempts to unite the "Disciples" and "Christians" appears on pp. 146-55.

[2] Along this line, the eminent historian G. W. Bowersock, Martyrdom and Rome (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995), points out that Christianity of the second to fourth centuries invented the words martyr and martyrdom, and that these words uniquely belong to the early church. For a good overview of this period, see Diarmaid MacCulloch, Christianity: The First Three Thousand Years (New York: Viking Press, 2009), ch. 5. MacCulloch offers a fine description of how, to the Romans, the boldness of the early Christians seemed like a provocation, how their aloofness created suspicion, and how their distinctive use of political language represented an affront to imperial authority. The Christians worshiped none of the traditional gods. Were they atheists? In their assemblies, it was rumored, they ate flesh and drank blood. Were they cannibals? Suspicion and resentment sometimes resulted in the martyrdom of Christians, terrible ordeals that generated for the church more and more heroes. One can only wonder why MacCulloch ignores one of the earliest and most-interesting episodes in the history of Rome's various encounters with early Christianity: the conflict over the Cult of the Emperor in the province of Asia during the reign of Domitian, the unmistakable back story of the New Testament's Book of Revelation.

[3] For the initial exchange between the lady from Lunenburg and Campbell, see The Millennial Harbinger, New Series, Vol. 1 (1837), 411-14.

Assassinations, American Indians, Van Halen, and More! My 17 Favorite Books of 2017

I spent the first week of 2018 sick. The next thing I knew, we were halfway through January! So, a little later than I had meant to post it, here's my annual list of "best books." I'd love to hear about what you read last year. So please leave a note about some of your 2017 books, and why you liked them, or didn't.

U.S. Presidents

1. Destiny of the Republic: A Tale of Madness, Medicine,and the Murder of a President, by Candice Millard (2011). A well-written, easy-reading book about President James A. Garfield, his assassin, and the political world they lived in. From the bibliography, it's clear that Millard knows much more about Garfield's religious life, and how it made him the great man he was. But for some reason, she neglects this vital theme. Why?

2. The Kennedy Assassination--24 Hours After: Lyndon B. Johnson's Pivotal First Day as President, by Steven M. Gillon (2009). Take the TV series "24" and make it about the first day after the Kennedy assassination. That's what Gillon does in this interesting, detailed book. Gillon provides plenty of insight for those who want to understand Kennedy, Johnson, their politics, and their presidencies.

American Indians

3. The Chickasaws, Arrell M. Gibson (1971). The old acknowledged masterwork on the subject. Gibson often cities interesting primary sources. Still, Richard D. Green, the current historian of the Chickasaw Nation, notes that Gibson produced this book without interviewing a single Chickasaw. Since then, of course, a newer day in the historiography of American Indians has dawned.

4. American Indians in U.S. History, by Roger L. Nichols (2003). An engaging, brief survey by an expert. Longer and, in my opinion, more useful than the introduction by Perdue and Green (see next entry). Like them, Nichols takes a chronological approach. His text is not accompanied by reference notes, but each chapter ends with a brief list of “Suggested Readings” that represent the classic titles for that historical period.

5. North American Indians: A Very Short Introduction, by Theda Perdue and Michael D. Green (2010). More serviceable than most of the other volumes in the Very Short Introductions series that I’ve read. Chapter 4, “Indians in the West,” corresponds closely to Robert M. Utley, The Indian Frontier, 1846-1890, listed below.

6. The Indian Frontier, 1846-1890, by Robert M. Utley (2003). An interesting survey. The author essentially says, “For the moment, let’s hold onto the Frederick Jackson Turner thesis, but include Indians along that all-important frontier.” Just after I finished reading Utley, I posted a full summary of his book.

Mostly Just for Fun

7. Van Halen Rising: How a Southern California Backyard Party Band Saved Heavy Metal, by Greg Renoff (2015). Renoff begins with the early lives of the original members of Van Halen, and ends with the 11-month world tour that followed the release of their first album in 1978. The book is mostly about Van Halen before hardly anyone outside of Southern California knew who they were. I read it just after passing my qualifying exams, which made the experience that much better. Anyway, if you're interested here's a bit more about it.

8. Ford County: Stories, by John Grisham (2009). This book is Grisham's only published collection of short stories. Not many people like short stories anymore. I've always liked them. With novels, you sometimes don't know if you're going to like them until you're several pages in. With a short story, by that point you're done, and you know not to necessarily trust that author. For one thing, Grisham tends to write long short stories. I know, that's a weird description. But for comparison, check out one of the really-short short stories by Raymond Carver.

9. Bound for Glory, by Woody Guthrie (1943). Woody Guthrie's unique and colorful descriptions of early-twentieth century America will sometimes make you smile and laugh. At other times, his recollections of personal struggles--a family ravaged by disease, financial disaster, house fires, and destitution--might just make you cry. Through it all, you will admire and appreciate Guthrie's unbreakable spirit. Here we have on full display the mind and heart of a creative genius who never took himself too seriously.

Restoration Movement History

10. Among the Early Evangelicals: The Transatlantic Origins of the Stone-Campbell Movement, by James L. Gorman (2017). This is the most significant monograph dealing with the Stone-Campbell Restoration Movement to be published in the last several years. In this revision of his doctoral dissertation, Gorman reveals the transatlantic, pre-American roots of the Campbell Movement in America. A signal achievement, Gorman's work breaks new ground and resets the agenda for studying "Campbellism" in America.

11. The Sun Will Shine Again, Someday: A History of the Non-Class, One Cup Churches of Christ, by Ronny F. Wade (1986). The subtitle says it all: “A History of the Non-Class, One Cup Churches of Christ.” The author, Ronny F. Wade, is a long-time, widely-regarded preacher within this group. As one might expect, the history he writes is characterized by advocacy. He is much like the sports announcer who, while calling the game, always cheers for his team. Sometime back, I posted a brief review of Wade's book.

12. Oklahoma Christians: A History of Christian Churches and of the Start of the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ) in Oklahoma, by Stephen J. England (1975). England was a great biblical scholar, teacher, and leader within the Disciples denomination during the 20th century. Because he spent so much of his career serving as a professor and school administrator in Oklahoma, he took an interest in the history of his people in the Sooner State. For that particular topic, this book is a unique resource.

Still Other Sorts of History

13. Albion's Seed: Four British Folkways in America, by David Hackett Fischer (1989). The pick of the litter. This book, all by itself, is an education in several broad streams of American history. Fischer is one of those force-of-nature historians, and Albion's Seed is a delightful masterpiece. You'll never think of the various regions of the U.S. the same way after reading it.

14. Contesting the Reformation, by C. Scott Dixon (2012). Dixon has done a great service to students of the Protestant Reformation. A true expert on the literature, he writes each chapter as a detailed historiographical essay on some aspect of this massive topic. I found it to be an indispensable resource, especially as I prepared for qualifying exams on the Reformation! So, if you're getting ready for exams, or you just want to get a handle on the secondary literature about, say, Calvinism or the Radical Reformation, Dixon's book should be your first stop. It is both thorough and detailed. At least in English, there's nothing else quite like it.

15. Heading South to Teach: The World of Susan Nye Hutchison, 1815-1845, by Kim Tolley (2015). An outstanding new example of microhistory American style. By closely examining the life of an ordinary woman who did extraordinary things, Tolley is able to identify something of how the early U.S. changed especially as a result of the Second Great Awakening.

Texas History

16. Gone To Texas: A History of the Lone Star State, by Randolph B. Campbell (2003). This is likely the very best general survey of Texas history. Campbell relates the story of Texas "from prehistoric times to the beginning of the twenty-first century" (ix). The book is easy-reading, and is complemented by dozens of maps and illustrations. The history of the Lone Star State has often been told according to the traditional, great-people-and-events model. Some readers, especially Texans, might argue that given the topic, this approach is only natural. Either way, Campbell's book is no exception to the rule. Immigration, politics, and conflict, often violent conflict, are major features of the coverage. Neither footnotes nor endnotes accompany the text. Instead, each chapter has its own selected bibliography.

17. Sleuthing the Alamo: Davy Crockett's Last Stand and Other Mysteries of the Texas Revolution, by James E. Crisp (2005). In this delightful, unusual little book, a native Texan combines memoir and original research as he takes up two specific questions about the Texas Revolution. First, was Sam Houston, a president of the Republic of Texas, an anti-Mexican racist? Or, did someone else put words in his mouth? Second, did Davy Crockett really go down fighting at the Alamo, or did he surrender to Santa Anna's troops? Along the way, Crisp uncovers long-lost evidence, detects mistranslations, reveals secrets, and teaches the reader some of the deeper significance of history. He concludes that when, for whatever reason, we attempt to bury and silence the past we just wind up diminishing ourselves.

"Timothy" on Christian Communion and the Lord's Supper, The Christian Messenger, 1828 (Part 1 of 2)

What did leaders of the early Restoration Movement believe and teach about the Lord's Supper? And, how did their teachings influence Christian churches affiliated with the movement when it came to their participation in the Supper?

As part of my attempt to get a handle on this topic, I decided that my next project would be a survey of a three-part series of articles that appeared in successive issues of Barton W. Stone's monthly magazine, The Christian Messenger. The series can be found in the following numbers:

Volume 2, number 12
Volume 3, number 1
Volume 3, number 2

These three issues are dated October, November, and December 1828, respectively.

Observation and Disclaimer

There are a few books and doctoral dissertations that have been written about nineteenth-century Restoration Movement thought on the Lord's Supper. But before reading them, I've chosen to get acquainted with the primary literature on my own.

Related to this, there are some who say that one should read the historiography first, and then go digging through the primary sources and archives. When it comes to graduate training in the discipline of History, this is the American model.

I have to say that I much prefer the European model, according to which students are turned loose in the archives before they are required to begin mastering some of the secondary literature. Why? For one thing, there is a certain authority, confidence, and set of questions that come as a result of having "been there and done that." When you know that you know what you know because you've seen it for yourself, that's indispensable. There is just no substitute for it.

On the practical side, this also helps you to know whether you're going to like archival research, or at least have the stomach for it. This, I believe, ought to come early. I myself enjoy going to new places and looking around in archives, courthouses, cemeteries, etc. But I realize that this is not for everyone. If interested in a vicarious experience along this line, one might consult a book by the French social historian Arlette Farge titled The Allure of the Archives.

So, Who Was "Timothy"?

Before getting into the material, the reader is immediately confronted by an unusual question about these three articles: Who wrote them? The author identifies himself as "Timothy," the name of the Apostle Paul's favorite son in the faith.

To those familiar with nineteenth-century Stone-Campbell journalism, the use of the pseudonym comes as no surprise. As historian David I. McWhirter observes, writers in the early Stone-Campbell Movement often published their thoughts using cryptic names in order to veil or completely conceal their identities.[1]

Although false names satisfied the playfulness, or the genuine concerns of the writers for anonymity, not all of the readers were amused or appreciative. In fact, several months before he published the series authored by "Timothy," editor Barton Stone acknowledged that some who subscribed to The Christian Messenger disliked pseudonyms, and he asked his contributors to stop using them:

We have many letters addressed to us by our patrons, requesting our correspondents to affix their proper names to their communications, and no longer conceal themselves under fictitious names. I cannot see the impropriety of the request, and therefore urge my correspondents to comply with it.[2]

Clearly, Stone agreed with his readers dissatisfied by pseudonyms. This was a significant complaint against a magazine that constantly struggled to survive. After three years of publishing the Messenger, Stone lamented that although he had 2,000 subscribers, paid receipts barely covered the costs of paper and printing.[3] Nevertheless, when it came to the articles under study in this post, Stone permitted the author to use the pseudonym "Timothy." Who was he?

In their index to The Christian Messenger, Barry A. Jones and Charles C. Dorsey provide a list of all of the pseudonyms that appear in the magazine. Interestingly, they identify only one of the pseudonymous writers, even though a handful of others are fairly well known. Jones and Dorsey indicate that "Timothy" was one Thomas Smith.[4] Naturally, this raises the next question: Who was he?

At least a few primary sources fill in some of the blanks and provide a partial answer. The Biography of Elder Barton Warren Stone includes part of a letter written to Stone by "Elder Thomas Smith, of Fayette county, Kentucky." Smith is described as "one of the oldest preachers in Kentucky," who "for talents and piety . . . occupies a very enviable position." It is further said of Smith that he knew Stone for forty years.[5]

In his Memoirs of Alexander Campbell, Robert Richardson states that in late 1831 and early 1832-- around the time of the formal union at Lexington between the Kentucky "Christians" and the "Disciples" or "Reformers"--the most prominent minister of the Christian Church in Lexington was Thomas Smith. Richardson notes that Smith was

a man of more than ordinary abilities and attainments, and long associated with the movement of B. W. Stone. He was an excellent preacher and was considered a skillful debater. He possessed withal a very amiable disposition, and was highly esteemed by Mr. Campbell, whom he often accompanied during his visits in Kentucky.[6]

Thomas Smith, the author of our series, was a friend and co-worker of Barton Stone's, and an acquaintance of Alexander Campbell's. He served as a prominent leader among those connected to the "Christian" movement in Kentucky, especially in Lexington, a city highly significant to the Stone-Campbell Movement.

In my next post on the topic, I will briefly survey the contents of Smith's series, and suggest a few ideas about its historical significance.

Notes

[1] David I. McWhirter, "Pseudonyms," in Encyclopedia of the Stone-Campbell Movement, (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 2004), p. 614.

[2] The Christian Messenger, 2, no. 3 (January 1828), p. 72. See also Lewis L. Snyder, "Speaking from the Shadows: Pen Names of Pioneers," Discipliana 51, no. 1 (Spring 1991), p. 7.

[3] Carl W. Cheatham, "Christian Messenger," in Encyclopedia of the Stone-Campbell Movement, p. 194.

[4] Barry A. Jones and Charles C. Dorsey, eds., An Index to the Christian Messenger (N.p.: 1984), 85-86, list all of the pseudonyms that appeared in Stone's magazine. Interestingly, they identify only one of the pseudonymous writers: "Timothy," they tell us, was Thomas Smith. James L. McMillan, [james.l.mcmillan@gmail.com], "REPLY: 'Timothy' in The Christian Messenger," in Stone-Campbell Group, [stone-campbell@acu.edu], 11 January 2018, notes that there are more pseudonyms in the Christian Messenger for which we know the true name. McMillan gives three examples: "Candidus" is Alexander Campbell, "Archippus" is James Fishback, and "Philip" is Walter Scott. Thirty years before Jones and Dorsey identified "Timothy" as Thomas Smith, archivist and historian Claude Spencer, "Pseudonyms," Discipliana 11 (1951-52), 36, listed "Timothy" as one of the pseudonyms which had not been identified.

[5] Barton Warren Stone, The Biography of Elder Barton Warren Stone, Written by Himself, with Additions and Reflections by Eld. John Rogers (Cincinnati: J. A. and U. P. James, 1847), 118. For this reference, I am indebted to Michael Strickland, [michaelstrickland92@gmail.com], "REPLY: 'Timothy' in The Christian Messenger," in Stone-Campbell Group, [stone-campbell@acu.edu], 11 January 2018.

[6] Robert Richardson, Memoirs of Alexander Campbell. Two Volumes in One (Cincinnati: R. W. Carroll, 1872), II, 384. For this reference, I am indebted to Bruce Hudson, [bhgoose@aol.com], "REPLY: 'Timothy' in The Christian Messenger," in Stone-Campbell Group, [stone-campbell@acu.edu], 11 January 2018.

The Majesty of the Great Plains

"There was nothing but land: not a country at all, but the material out of which countries are made. No, there was nothing but land--slightly undulating, I knew, because often our wheels ground against the brake as we went down into a hollow and lurched up again on the other side. I had the feeling that the world was left behind, that we had got over the edge of it, and were outside man's jurisdiction. I had never looked up at the sky when there was not a familiar mountain ridge against it. But this was the complete dome of heaven, all there was of it."

-- the character named Jim Burden recalls what it was like when, still a boy, he moved from Virginia to the plains of Nebraska in Willa Sibert Cather's novel My Antonia. How great is that?

Source: Willa Sibert Cather, My Antonia (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1918), 8.

A Simple Introduction to 2 Peter

This post is a simple, one-page introduction to the New Testament letter known as 2nd Peter. I wrote this as a study handout for a Sunday-morning adult Bible class that I teach occasionally.

In this study, I set out to resist the reputation of 2nd Peter as a "paranoid" or "combative" rant characterized by "mud slinging." Instead, I approach 2nd Peter as a letter in which the enemies of truth should be taken seriously, and according to which truth and goodness will defeat error and ungodliness when the Lord's people "double down" on their commitment to develop virtue (2 Peter 1:3-11) and grow in the grace and knowledge of the Lord (3:18).

Who Wrote This Letter?

The writer identifies himself as “Simon Peter” (1:1). If our translations were more exacting, they would have it "Simeon," a rare spelling for the Apostle’s name (the only other occurrence is found in Acts 15:14). In 2 Peter 1:16-18, the author recalls his experience of the Transfiguration (Matthew 17:1-7). According to 3:15, he seems to know very well the man he calls “our dear brother Paul.” And, the author refers to the writing of Paul as “Scriptures” (3:16). We can only imagine that Peter and Paul had reconciled after their public controversy reported in Galatians 2:11-21.

To Whom Was the Letter Written?

The recipients of 1 Peter are identified as Christians living in what we might call a five-state region: "Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia" (1 Peter 1:1). 2 Peter is different. The letter is addressed in a much more universal way: it is to “those who through the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ have received a faith as precious as ours” (2 Peter 1:1). This is a bit of a puzzle since 2 Peter 3:1 might lead us to believe that 2 Peter was written to the same group as the first letter.

  

When Was It Written?

2 Peter 1:12-15 makes it clear that Peter wrote this letter not long before he died. A broad and consistent tradition has it that Peter was executed outside the city walls of Rome during the reign of the particularly cruel and depraved Emperor Nero. That likely happened around the year 66. An educated guess is that 2 Peter was written in 65.

Why Was It Written?

Here we might compare 2 Peter to 1 Peter. In his first letter, Peter instructs his readers about how to deal with outsiders who misunderstand and persecute Christians (1 Peter 4:4, 12). But in 2 Peter, he’s teaching them how to deal with insiders who are evil and who teach what is false (2 Peter 2:1; 3:3-4). The beginning and the end of 2 Peter suggest that, when it comes to spiritual warfare, “the best defense is a good offense” (see 2 Peter 1:3-11 and 3:17-18). This is the central the theme of our study.

P.S. The more extensive and detailed introduction to 2 Peter linked here comes from the NIV Study Bible.

"Indian Mission," by J. Ellis, The Christian Standard, Vol. IX, No. 21 (May 23, 1874), p. 162

With many thanks to Michael C. Mack, editor of the Christian Standard magazine, I've been able to read and transcribe all of J. Ellis's 1874 article on the "Indian Mission." The significance of this piece is that it is, I believe, the earliest report we have from a preacher of the Restoration Movement conducting mission work among the Chickasaws in Indian Territory, now Oklahoma. In its entirety, it follows here.

Dear Bro. Errett: -- As I write on business, I will say that I have been evangelizing for about three months past in northern Texas, and the southern part of the Indian Territory, and enjoying some refreshing seasons from the presence of the Lord. In northern Texas, I have gathered into the different congregations where I have proclaimed the word of life, about eighty-five members, a large proportion of whom are heads of families.

And since crossing the Red River into the Indian nation, I have been very successful for the time I have labored. I gathered up a very pleasant congregation of Indians and whites, and organized them into a Christian church under the name "Chickasaw Christian Church," appointed the proper officers, and setting the machinery to work in good order. And after leaving them to run alone awhile, I have returned among them, and thus far my visit has been blessed to their good. About twelve more have been added, and the good work is still going on.  We enjoyed a blessed good time at the water last Lord's day, as a goodly number of promising young men obeyed the gospel in being buried with Christ in baptism.

I have engaged to preach for them for one fourth of the time, for six months, and hope to see many more become obedient to the faith. I have engaged to preach half of the time in the nation, and if I could obtain a little aid from the churches of Christ, or from a few benevolent members, I could devote my whole time among them. And from what I know of them, I have no doubt I could turn many from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan to God, and build up large self-sustaining churches, in the course of a year. For our teaching takes finely with these unsophisticated children of nature, and they say they can understand it. They like it because, as they say, we "have but one Book," and we tell them to "go and do something, instead of sitting down to feel."

I preached last night at the Orphan Academy, to about thirty bright little fatherless Indian children, together with a goodly number of older people, and had a good time. I expect to preach there one fourth of my time. A large number of the Indians are "half-breeds," pretty well civilized, occupying fine lands, and are becoming quite enterprising; and they certainly offer us a most interesting field for missionary work. I am in the field, and would like to remain, but can not without aid.

There are five nations of Indians here (Chickasaws, Choctaws, Cherokees, Creeks, and Seminoles), occupying the best lands in the United States, all uttering the Macedonian cry, "Come over and help us," and shall we let them cry in vain?

If any of our brethren feel interest enough in our Indian missionary work, to write us, we certainly would be happy to answer. Or if you please, write to B. F. Overton, Esq., our elder (an Indian), at Cedar Mills, Grayson County, Texas. Pray for us.
                                                                                 J. Ellis.
Chickasaw Nation, May, 1874.
P.S.  Bro. B. F. Overton, who is one of our elders, and an Indian, we expect will be Governor of the Nation pretty soon.

J. Ellis and the "Chickasaw Christian Church"

I have been evangelizing about three months in northern Texas and the southern part of the Indian Territory. . . . Since crossing the Red River into the Indian Nation, I have been very successful. I gathered up a very pleasant congregation of Indians and whites and organized them into a Christian Church under the name "Chickasaw Christian Church."

--J. Ellis, Christian Standard 9, no. 21 (May 23, 1874), pp. 162-63, as quoted in Stephen J. England, Oklahoma Christians (Bethany Press, 1975), p. 41.

1874. England suggests that this marks the very beginning of missionary activity among the Chickasaws in Indian Territory conducted by anyone with connections to the Restoration Movement. Note that Ellis's report quoted above comes years before Murrell Askew's arrival in I.T. (1881).

Are We Living in the Last Days? (3rd of 3)

New Testament Teaching

What the Old Testament might have left in doubt, the New Testament makes absolutely clear: when the Scriptures speak of the last days, that expression refers to the entire Christian age, from the first appearance and saving work of Christ to his Second Coming.

One of the earliest examples of this is found in Acts 2. Quick to answer the slur that the Spirit-filled apostles were full of new wine, Peter announced to his hearers that what they were witnessing was the fulfillment of the prophecy recorded in Joel 2:28-32. It is important to note that Peter clearly says that the words of the prophet were, at that time, being fulfilled "in the last days" (Acts 2:17).

In much the same way, 1 Peter 1:20 reports that Christ "was revealed in these last times." The passage places the recipients of the letter, the first-century readers, in "these last times." Peter, along with his first-century audience, lived in the last days.

By themselves, these two passages would make the case. But even more revealing is Hebrews 1:1-2:

In the past God spoke to our forefathers through the prophets at many times and in various ways, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom he made the universe.

These first few words from Hebrews are especially important because they place Old Testament times and "these last days" side by side, identifying the second and concluding period as the time in which God has spoken to humanity by his Son. Because this was the common understanding and teaching in New Testament times, Paul could speak of Christians as those "on whom the ends of the ages have come" (1 Corinthians 10:11 NRSV).

Conclusion

What the Old Testament prophets saw as the future last days has become present reality through the work of God through Christ. According to the New Testament, the last days began with the ministry of Jesus and will conclude at his Second Coming. The biblical expression the last days refers to the entire Christian age, not merely to the very end of that age.

Without losing the edge of expectation, Christians must remember and teach that "no one knows about that day and hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father" (Matthew 24:36). It is best to remain ready by consistently living as we should before God.

Are We Living in the Last Days (2nd of 3)

Old Testament Teaching

The prophets of ancient Israel occasionally referred to the last days. In the New International Version, a common translation of the Bible, those exact words occur only in Isaiah 2:2, Hosea 3:5, and Micah 4:1.

Often, oracles of the prophets were scorching rebukes against sin, including threats of coming judgment. The positive side of their message was that a time was coming when people of all nations would eagerly seek God and his Messiah, a king like David. Hosea 3 provides a good example. At first, the prophet predicts the coming destruction of the northern kingdom of Israel:

For the Israelites will live many days without king or prince, without sacrifice or sacred stones, without ephod or idol (verse 4).

Having mentioned those consequences of sin, Hosea extends a promise:

Afterward the Israelites will return and seek the Lord their God and David their king. They will come trembling to the Lord and to his blessings in the last days (verse 5).

Similarly, Micah 4:1 points to a glorious future in the city of Jerusalem:

In the last days the mountain of the Lord's temple will be established as chief among the mountains; it will be raised above the hills, and peoples will stream to it.

The first of those two examples refers to a great king descended from David. The New Testament identifies this person as Jesus of Nazareth (Luke 1:29-33 and Acts 15:12-18). Passages like Hosea 3 were the basis upon which first-century Judeans beckoned to Jesus as "Son of David" (Mark 10:46-48).

The second passage mentions "peoples" streaming to the mountain of the Lord, a reference to the age of the Messiah, the time in which individuals from all nations could be made a part of Israel through faith in Jesus Christ. Note the large number of nations represented at Pentecost in Acts 2:5-11.

In the Old Testament, the expression "the last days" refers to the coming age of the Messiah, the Christ, and not merely the last weeks and months of earthly time.

Are We Living in the Last Days? (Part 1 of 3)

Hurricanes. Earthquakes. Wildfires. Mass shootings. And a power-hungry man in North Korea with nuclear weapons.

In recent months these, combined with all sorts of other supposed signs, have generated a good bit of speculation about the end of the world.

We've been here before. In 1999, for example, as we approached the turn of the millennium, a large billboard along Interstate 85 in South Carolina depicted a hand reaching down out of the clouds. The caption announced, "Jesus is coming for a soul near you." A survey conducted by Time and Cable News Network revealed that 20 percent of adults in the U.S. believed that 2000 would mark the beginning of the end. And who could have missed the news about the mass suicide of the apocalyptic Heaven's Gate cult?

The Four Horsemen of The Apocalypse, Albrecht Durer, 1498

Most of the excitement, then and now, can be traced to various millennial views, especially premillennialism. What is that?

"Millennium" stems from the two Latin words for "one thousand" and "year." Premillennialism is the belief that Christ's return will precede His literal reign on earth for 1000 years. This teaching in part derives from a literal reading of Revelation 20.

During the 20th century, a relatively new variety of this doctrine--called dispensational premillennialism--was popularized by a number of preachers who effectively used the media of print, radio, and television. The success of their work can be seen in America's reaction to the Persian Gulf War in 1990 and '91. During the height of that conflict, 15 percent of people in the United States believed that a literal Battle of Armageddon, a hallmark of dispensational teaching, was just around the corner. (See George H. Gallup Jr., Religion in America [Princeton, NJ: Princeton Religion Research Center, 1996], p. 26).

Another distinction of the dispensational view revolves around the expression "the last days." Based on a certain reading of Matthew 24, some taught that this biblical phrase points to the days immediately preceding the Second Coming. According to them, "the last days" will include many signs, including wars, famines, and earthquakes.

But is this what the Bible teaches? It would require a book to present a full-length review of dispensational premillennialism. The more modest goal of this series of posts is to identify what the Bible means by "the last days."

24: The LBJ Edition

Steven M. Gillon, The Kennedy Assassination--24 Hours Later: Lyndon B. Johnson's Pivotal First Day as President. New York: Basic Books, 2009. pp. xvii + 294.

Maybe you suspect that history is boring. Or, maybe you know that it's important and interesting, but it just seems like books take all the fun out of it. If any of that sounds familiar, then this book is for you.

The author, Steven M. Gillon is a fantastic researcher and a good writer, too. His topic is absolutely fascinating, and he's looked at tons of documents only recently declassified.

Most books about the Kennedy assassination deal with questions like: Who shot JFK? Was there more than one gunman? Was the assassination the result of a conspiracy? On and on it goes. Gillon's book is different. The author assumes that the Warren Commission got it right. There was one gunman, Lee Harvey Oswald. And even though Oswald would have loved more attention from the Soviet Union and from Cuban authorities, he did what he did on his own.

Instead of dealing with those questions for the ten thousandth time, Gillon investigates what the new president, Lyndon B. Johnson, experienced and what he did during the 24 hours after the assassination. Gillon reveals an LBJ who tried to do several things all at once:

• He tried to assure the American people that the devastating assassination of their president had not destroyed their government. For example, Johnson invited photographers to capture those moments that revealed continuity, as when he took the oath of office aboard Air Force One.
• He did his best to show deference to the people who were closest to the slain president, especially to his widow, Jackie Kennedy. Johnson told Mrs. Kennedy that there was no need for her to quickly vacate the White House. He reportedly said to her, "You stay as long as you want."
• He sought to connect his brand new presidency to the legacy of John Kennedy, and worked to consolidate his authority as the head of the executive branch of the U.S. government. During the first 24 following the assassination, Johnson repeatedly told White House staffers that he wanted them to stay on the job, and that he needed them more than they needed him.

Two of Gillon's main themes are Johnson's personal insecurities and the real disdain that many people who were closest to JFK felt for him. Above all, the dead president's brother and closest confidant, Robert F. Kennedy, hated Johnson.

The book comes packaged in seventeen short chapters, which makes it easy to take in one chapter at a time. It includes 14 black-and-white photos, 30 pages of endnotes, a brief "Note on Sources," and a good index.

Here's a C-SPAN video of Gillon talking about his book not long after it was published. Here is the New Books Network podcast interview with Gillon.

Stone-Campbell Restoration History and Teaching: A Brief Survey

The following is a brief overview of the history and outlook of the Stone-Campbell Restoration Movement. I wrote it in order provide basic information to readers of an academic paper who are not of Disciples heritage, who are not members of the Christian Church or Churches of Christ. My goal here is to evaluate and improve this statement. I welcome all respectful questions and comments: 

The phrase Stone-Campbell Restoration Movement refers to a back-to-the-Bible tradition that grew out of the teachings of Barton W. Stone (1772-1844, pictured here), Thomas Campbell (1763-1854), and, above all, his illustrious son, Alexander Campbell (1788-1866). The great evangelist of the movement was Walter Scott (1796-1861), a distant relative of the famous Scottish novelist by that name.[1] These leaders and their followers pursued a distinct religious goal: the restoration of primitive Christianity. They spoke of restoring “the ancient gospel,” the Bible’s most basic claims about Christ which everyone must believe and respond to in obedience. They sought to discover the biblical progression by which one becomes a Christian, and they identified the following steps: faith, an assent to the claim that "Jesus is the Christ, the son of God" (Matthew 16:16); repentance, a radical turn from sin and self, and a turn toward God; baptism by immersion for the forgiveness of sins, the gift of God's Holy Spirit, and the promise of eternal life.[2] They also set out to restore what Alexander Campbell called “the ancient order of things,” especially the Bible's teaching about baptism, the Lord’s Supper, the congregational offices of elder and deacon, church discipline, and approved names for believers and for the church. Additionally, restoration pertained to matters more personal and inward: to self-control, pure speech, right living, the love of mercy, and the hopeful spirit of the New Testament.[3]

The project of restoration involved tearing down as well as building up. Christians of the Stone-Campbell movement sought to erase all distinctions between clergy and laity. Along with what often seemed to them the arbitrary authority of religious elites, they also rejected the authority of creeds, confessions, extra-biblical traditions, and specialized, learned theology. They replaced all such traditions with a populist hermeneutic according to which every person was welcomed, even expected, to read and understand the Bible for oneself. Having embraced the tenets of Enlightenment philosophy and American freedom, Stone, the Campbells, and like-minded believers acted upon their conviction that the imposition of illegitimate authority in matters of faith provoked disunity and amounted to a certain type of idolatry, a defiance of Almighty God. Such pseudo-authorities were never needed anyway, since the essential teachings of the Bible, the Word of God, could be understood and agreed upon by all responsible people who were truly seeking the Lord.[4]

The movement both commended and critiqued the Christian past. For his part, Alexander Campbell celebrated the goals and achievements of sixteenth-century reformers like Martin Luther, John Calvin, and Martin Bucer.[5] "The Protestant Reformation," he wrote, "is proved to have been one of the most splendid eras in the history of the world, and must long be regarded by the philosopher and the philanthropist as one of the most gracious interpositions in behalf of the whole human race."[6] Yet much like the Puritans, Campbell complained that the earlier reformers had not gone far enough. They were certainly on the right track. But to have a restored church, the initiatives of the sixteenth century would have to be "carried out to their legitimate issue."[7] In Campbell's view, no group in Christian history had ever truly united by building "upon the Bible alone." But that had changed "during the present generation."

Tired of new creeds and new parties in religion, and of the numerous abortive efforts to reform the reformation; convinced from the Holy Scriptures, from observation and experience, that the union of the disciples of Christ is essential to the conversion of the world, and that the correction and improvement of no creed, or partisan establishment in Christendom, could ever become the basis of such a union, communion, and co-operation, as would restore peace to a church militant against itself, or triumph to the common salvation; a few individuals, about the commencement of the present century, began to reflect upon the ways and means to restore primitive Christianity.[8]

As the foregoing suggests, the ultimate goal of the Stone-Campbell Movement was the unity of all believers in Christ, a oneness that was essential the Lord's plan to redeem the entire world. Leaders often noted that on the night when Jesus was betrayed into the hands of the authorities, he prayed that his followers would be one, even as he and God the Father were one. According to Jesus as he prayed to God the Father, the purpose of Christian unity was that “the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me” (John 17:23). The unity of the church was necessary for a lost world to believe the gospel, to recognize the true identity of Jesus Christ as well as God’s unique love for those who follow Christ [9]

Ironically, sometime after the Civil War, Christians associated with what Alexander Campbell called “the current reformation,” a movement designed to unify all true believers on the basis of the simple gospel and plain Bible teaching, splintered into two distinct groups. On one side stood those Christian Churches that would eventually give rise to the Disciples of Christ denomination and the independent Christian Churches. (Those two now-distinct churches emerged as separate groups during the late-nineteenth and early-twentieth centuries). Predominately, these congregations were in northern states, with power centers in places like Cincinnati and Indianapolis. They tended to value the later Alexander Campbell’s emphasis on Christian forbearance and unity at the expense of doctrinal particulars. However, influenced by then soldier-preacher and future U.S. President James A. Garfield (1831-1881), representatives of the northern congregations used resolutions issued by the Disciples’ American Christian Missionary Society to officially endorse the Union.

On the other side stood congregations that typically wore the name Church of Christ. Following the war, these churches were influenced by leaders like Tolbert Fanning (1810-1874)—who as a young man had been mentored by Alexander Campbell—and especially Fanning’s protégé, David Lipscomb (1831-1917). Both Fanning and Lipscomb resided in Middle Tennessee. The Churches of Christ were characterized by their commitment to the earlier Alexander Campbell’s emphasis on biblical primitivism and strict doctrine. For them, this specifically meant opposition to instrumental music in worship, and to all para-church institutions like the Disciples’ American Christian Missionary Society, which members of the Churches of Christ insisted were not authorized by Scripture. Unlike the Disciples of Christ, who prized Christian unity, the Churches of Christ more often saw the restoration of the faith and practice of the New Testament church not as a means, but as an end.[10]

With two fellowships of autonomous congregations having gone their separate ways and having begun to grow apart from one another, it fell to the federal Census Bureau in 1906 to enquire, call attention to the fact of division, and finally provide, at least for their purposes, distinct names for the groups. Nowadays, three discrete church bodies trace their roots back to Stone and Campbell: the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ), which embraces its denominational identity, the independent Christian Churches/Churches of Christ (sometimes referred to as Independents), and the acappella Churches of Christ.[11]

Beginning in the early decades of the twentieth century, historians referred to this tradition as the American Restoration Movement, or simply the Restoration Movement.[12] The more recent moniker, Stone-Campbell Movement, first appeared more as a descriptor than as a title per se, in, for example, Lester G. McAllister and William E. Tucker’s 1975 history of the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ) titled Journey in Faith.[13] The newer name has had some success in replacing the older one, especially among scholars, ever since 1981, when Leroy Garrett published the first edition of his interpretive survey, The Stone-Campbell Movement: An Anecdotal History of Three Churches.[14]

Notes

[1] Perhaps the best source for becoming acquainted with the Stone-Campbell Movement is Christian History 106 (2013), an issue of the magazine titled "The church to end all churches? The unifying vision of the Stone-Campbell Movement." All four leading figures of the early movement have entries in both the Encyclopedia of the Stone-Campbell Movement and Oxford's multivolume American National Biography. Although the Restoration Movement, sometimes called the Stone-Campbell Movement, is often considered an American phenomenon, it is significant that three of the four founders mentioned here were not born in America. Both Thomas and Alexander Campbell were born in Northern Ireland, and Walter Scott was born in Scotland. More to the point, as James L. Gorman has recently argued, "[t]he influences of the evangelical missionary movement that emerged throughout the transatlantic region in the 1790s was the clearest and most comprehensive context that produced the earliest manifestation of the Campbell Movement in 1809." See Gorman, Among the Early Evangelicals: The Transatlantic Origins of the Stone-Campbell Movement (Abilene, TX: Abilene Christian University Press, 2017), 15. For a summary of Gorman's important work, see the author's review in the Journal of Ecclesiastical History 70, no. 1 (January 2019), 203-04.

[2] See, for example, Walter Scott, The Gospel Restored, A Discourse of the True Gospel of Jesus Christ in which the Facts, Principles, Duties, and Privileges of Christianity are Arranged, Defined, and Discussed, and the Gospel in Its Various Parts Shewn to Be Adapted to the Nature and Necessities of Man in His Present Condition (Cincinnati, OH: Donogh, 1836).

[3] Here, the best primary source is Alexander Campbell's thirty-two-part series titled "A Restoration of the Ancient Order of Things," installments of which appeared in his monthly magazine The Christian Baptist from 1823 to 1829. The first appeared in The Christian Baptist 2, no. 7 (February 7, 1825): 124-28. The final installment, "Official Names and Titles," appeared in Volume 7, no. 2 (September 7, 1829): 585-86.

[4] See Nathan O. Hatch, The Democratization of American Christianity (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1989), esp. 3-46 and 67-80. For an explanation of the Puritan roots of the Stone-Campbell Movement, especially its Bible-centered primitivism, see Theodore Dwight Bozeman, To Live Ancient Lives: The Primitivist Dimension of Puritanism (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1988). A good overview of the basic theological outlook of American restorationist leaders can be found E. Brooks Holifield, Theology in America: Christian Thought from the Age of the Puritans to the Civil War (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2003), ch. 14. Paul M. Blowers, Douglas A. Foster, and D. Newell Williams provide a fine review of the historiography of the movement in “Stone-Campbell History Over Three Centuries: A Survey and Analysis,” in the Encyclopedia of the Stone-Campbell Movement, xxi-xxxv. For a good historical summary of the worldwide Restoration Movement, see Douglas A. Foster, "Disciples of Christ," Encyclopedia of Protestantism, ed. Hans J. Hillerbrand (New York: Routledge, 2004), 2:593-97.

[5] Richard L. Harrison, Jr., "Alexander Campbell on Luther and the Reformation," Lexington Theological Quarterly 19, no. 4 (1984), 131-32. See also my article, "Why Should We Care about Martin Luther?" Christian Chronicle 74, no. 10 (October 2017), 26.

[6] Alexander Campbell, The Christian System, 2nd ed. (Pittsburgh, PA: Forrester & Campbell, 1839), 3.

[7] Ibid., 179.

[8] Ibid., 5.

[9] The unity of the church is a prominent theme in the two great “charter documents” of the Stone-Campbell Movement. The Last Will and Testament of the Springfield Presbytery, signed by, among others, Barton W. Stone in 1804, quotes from “the seven ones” passage found in Paul’s Epistle of the Ephesians, chapter 4. The “Imprimis” of The Last Will and Testament reads: “We will, that this body die, be dissolved, and sink into union with the Body of Christ at large; for there is but one body, and one Spirit, even as we are called in one hope of our calling.” Similarly, Thomas Campbell’s 1809 Declaration and Address cites or alludes to Christ’s prayer for the unity of his followers, recorded in John 17, as well as to “the seven ones” passage several times. See Christopher R. Hutson, “Scripture Index to the Declaration and Address,” in The Quest for Christian Unity, Peace, and Purity in Thomas Campbell’s Declaration and Address: Text and Studies, eds. Thomas H. Olbricht and Hans Rollmann (Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press, 2000), 129-47. See also Alexander Campbell, "A Restoration of the Ancient Order of Things. No. III," Christian Baptist 2, no. 9 (April 4, 1825), 198-205.

[10] On the earlier versus later Alexander Campbell as a key to understanding some of the differences between Churches of Christ and the Disciples of Christ, see Richard T. Hughes, Reviving the Ancient Faith: The Story of Churches of Christ in America (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1996), 32-44. For some of his insights, Hughes credits an unpublished manuscript by Don Haymes, “A Battle of Giants: Alexander Campbell and Bishop John Baptist Purcell in Cincinnati, 1837.” For restoration as the means to unity versus restoration serving the goal of purity and, thus, salvation, see Jay Smith, “Notes on Thomas Campbell’s Declaration and Address,” Restoration Quarterly 5, no. 3 (Third Quarter, 1961): 113-18.

[11] The names used in the Library of Congress subject authority records are: Christian Church (Disciples of Christ), Christian Churches and Churches of Christ, and Churches of Christ. Catalogers and researchers sometimes refer to these three groups simply as Disciples, 4Cs, and 2Cs. Although restorationist champions of undenominational Christianity would no doubt object to the use of such terms, everyone conversant with the history understands exactly what they mean. The state-of-the-art treatment of the worldwide history of the entire movement can be found in D. Newell Williams, Douglas A. Foster, and Paul M. Blowers, eds. The Stone-Campbell Movement: A Global History (St. Louis: Chalice Press, 2013), especially chaps. 1-5. The history of the nineteenth-century American Restoration Movement and, after division, the twentieth-century Churches of Christ is best told by Richard T. Hughes, Reviving the Ancient Faith.

[12] See, for example, M. M. Davis, The Restoration Movement of the Nineteenth Century (Cincinnati, OH: Standard Publishing Company, 1913); Charles Crossfield Ware, North Carolina Disciples of Christ: A History of Their Rise and Progress, and Their Contribution to Their General Brotherhood (St. Louis, MO: Christian Board of Publication, 1927), 23, 52, 62, 78, 137, 323, 333, 343, and 372; Homer Hailey, Attitudes and Consequences in the Restoration Movement (Los Angeles: Citizen Print Shop, 1945); Enos E. Dowling, The Restoration Movement (Cincinnati: Standard Publishing, 1964); and, more recently, Henry E. Webb, In Search of Christian Unity: A History of the Restoration Movement (Cincinnati: Standard Publishing, 1990).

[13] Lester G. McAllister and William E. Tucker, Journey in Faith: A History of the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ) (Saint Louis: Bethany Press, 1975), 149, 253, 443.

[14] Leroy Garrett, The Stone-Campbell Movement: An Anecdotal History of Three Churches (Joplin, MO: College Press, 1981). Because Garrett's book contained "Stone-Campbell" in its title, some have assumed that Garrett coined the phrase. Yet it actually predates even McAllister and Tucker. For example, Allie Vandaripe, "Perryville: Motorcade to Cane Ridge," (Danville) Kentucky Advocate, July 31, 1955, describes the Cane Ridge Meeting House as follows: "This historic spot is greatly revered by all congregations of the Christian Church, since it was at this place more than a century and a half ago that the Stone-Campbell Movement began in the one-room structure." The author seems to be using what was to her a familiar term.