THE friendly overtures of the Christian Association to the various denominations to confer with them on a plan for the union of religious parties was not cordially received. The plan of union which was so captivating to the mind of Thomas Campbell and seemed to many others who joined with him a panacea for many religious ills, was bitterly opposed by all Christian bodies. They presumed too much upon the openness of the denominational mind to new teachings, and too little upon the devotion of religious parties to their customs and traditions. The denominations were not ready then for a union which contemplated any change in their usages or loss of their identity, and a hundred years of growth since then has not sufficed to dispose [80] them any more kindly towards the destruction of their systems as a condition of union. The instinct of self-preservation is about as strong in religious bodies as in living creatures. As a program of union it seemed to be born out of due time. No body was fond of it or saw anything in it to admire, but its progenitors.

      The members of the Christian Association fell at once under the odium and ostracism of a new sect. It was the one thing they desired to prevent and regarded with the bitterest regret. That a society set for the termination of sectarianism should itself become another sect in the eyes of the world, was a position they could not tolerate. Their aim and character as a Christian union society must be maintained. Nothing would satisfy their expectations but a reduction of the number of religious parties, while they were in danger of increasing the number by one. To permit themselves [81] unwittingly to assume a denominational form of existence would be a travesty upon their principles. The unity of the people of God had become the highest obligation in their ideal of Christian duty. They made haste to get under cover of some existing denominational roof, rather than suffer the charge of building another.

      In this state of mind proposals came to the Association asking them to unite with the Presbyterian church. They had come out of one kind of Presbyterianism and still shared the fundamental beliefs of the Presbyterians. They were urged in private by members of the Presbyterian church to cast in their lot with them and were led to believe that they would be a welcome accession to the ranks of that church. Thomas Campbell, against the advice of Alexander, made application to the Synod of Pittsburg, October 4, 1810, "to be taken into Christian and ministerial communion." He went before the Synod and made a full statement [82] of the plans and purposes of the Christian Association and of his own views on religious subjects. After questioning him carefully, and deliberating on the advisability of receiving him, the Synod decided that his views and the purposes of the Association were so baleful in their tendency and so destructive of the interests of religion, that they could not receive him into their fellowship. He made the application as a representative of the Association, so that his reception to fellowship would have included the entire Association. They did not propose to abandon the Association with its plans and purposes, but to bring it over and carry on their work of reformation under shelter of the Presbyterian church.

      This rebuff received at the hands of the Presbyterian Synod was a serious blow to the hope and zeal of the Association in the cause of Christian union. They discovered that Christian union was not so simple a [83] matter as to be accomplished by offering to submit to the Scriptures alone. It completely changed the course of the Association. From being a society for the promotion of union and reformation among the churches, they saw that they would be obliged to form themselves into a church or be deprived of the benefits and offices of church fellowship. The hostile attitude of the Presbyterian Synod, their criticisms upon the position and principles of the Association, taught them to look no further for sympathy among the denominations. A public controversy arose between the Presbyterians and the members of the Association, in which Alexander Campbell took the leading part.

      Both of the Campbells continued to preach regularly at various places in and around Washington, to members of the Association and their friends who began to take interest in the new religious teachings. Criticised by other parties, they felt called [84] upon to reply, and the replies were not conducive to harmony or mutual understanding between them. The leaders of the Association now took an aggressive attitude of criticism and arraignment of the sectarianism and errors of the denominations, and challenged them to test their forms and terms of communion by the express precepts and examples of the New Testament. A war upon the unscriptural faiths and practices of the churches from the standpoint of a severe conformity to the teachings of Scripture, began, which grew in extent and influence until it separated them completely as a new party from all other parties.

      The time had now come for the Association to constitute itself into a church for "the enjoyment of those privileges and the performance of those duties which belong to the church relation." A church was organized out of the members of the Association, May 4, 1811, at Brush Run, Pa. Thomas [85] Campbell was appointed elder and Alexander Campbell was licensed to preach the gospel. Four deacons were chosen, consisting of John Dawson, George Sharpe, William Gilchrist, and John Foster; "and amidst the prayers and solemn services of the day, they united in singing Psalm 118, from the thirteenth to the twenty-ninth verses, in the old metrical version, which as Seceders, they had been in the habit of using." The following day being Sunday, they celebrated their first communion service and both Alexander Campbell and his father preached. The Lord's supper from the first was celebrated every first day of the week, as had been done in the Independent churches in Scotland. One or two persons were observed not to partake of the supper, and when asked, said they had never been immersed and did not consider themselves authorized to partake without a proper form of baptism.

      The question of baptism now came up [86] for discussion in the new church. It is not the first time the question has been raised among them for it was pointed out to them by James Foster, and to Alexander Campbell by a Presbyterian minister, that upon the principles of the Declaration and Address, there was no place for infant baptism in their practice. Joseph Bryant, one of those who refused to commune, insisted on being immersed, which was done by Thomas Campbell in a creek near Brush Run, July 4, 1811.

      Alexander Campbell was engaged in making preaching tours, with ever widening circuits, into the neighboring parts of Pennsylvania, Ohio, and West Virginia. He was developing a body of Christian doctrines and practices under the principle, "Where the Scriptures speak, we speak; where they are silent, we are silent." He was ordained to the office of the ministry January 1, 1812, by the elders and deacons of the Brush Run church. He was married [87] to the daughter of a Mr. John Brown, a Presbyterian, by the Rev. Mr. Hughes, a Presbyterian minister, March 13, 1811. Their first child was born March 13, 1812. The duty of the parents towards the child with respect to baptism, which was recognized by every Presbyterian, must have been raised in the home of Alexander Campbell. Whether this precipitated the inquiry or not, it is certain that immediately after the birth of the child, he instituted a careful inquiry into the scripturalness of both infant baptism and sprinkling, which up to this time had been treated as matters of forbearance. He came to the conclusion that the immersion of a believer was the only proper scriptural mode of baptism, and that consequently, he himself had never been properly baptized. He applied to a Baptist preacher by the name of Matthias Luce to perform the rite of baptism for himself and wife; and when his father learned of his determination he also concluded to be [88] immersed, and with him his wife and daughter, and James Hanen and wife. At the place of baptism the greater part of the Brush Run church had assembled and Thomas Campbell delivered a discourse upon the principles of the new reformation. In arranging with Mr. Luce to perform the rite, Alexander had stipulated that no other condition should be required of them than a simple confession of their faith that Jesus is the Son of God.

      From the time that the group of friends and sympathizers of Thomas Campbell adopted the principle, "Where the Scriptures speak, we speak; and where they are silent, we are silent," the direction of the movement seemed to be towards the Independent and the Baptist position. This fact is singularly like the tendency of the new parties that arose in Scotland in the last years of the eighteenth century; they gravitated towards the position of the Independents and the Baptists. Within a week [89] of the immersion of the Campbells and their group, thirteen other members of the Brush Run church asked to be immersed, and it was done by Thomas Campbell, upon a simple confession of their faith in Jesus as the Christ, the Son of God. It was not long before the entire church of thirty or more members were immersed, for those who did not accept immersion withdrew from the church. The organization of the first church thus forced upon them a settlement of the terms of Christian fellowship. Immersion became a condition of union and communion with the Brush Run church. Its conversion into a society of immersed believers did not bring them any favor from the Pedobaptist churches of the region, but it did bring them into recognition and sympathy with the Baptist churches.

      The Brush Run church had come to their position under the guidance of primitive Christian example and its application to [90] every item of religious faith and practice which they adopted in their order. They were not seeking agreement with any body of Christians. They were "a party of progress," bound, they knew not where, but ready to go where their principles led them; whether into agreement with Methodists, Baptists, or Quakers of modern parties, they could not tell, but they fell into agreement with a very ancient party of believers, "first called Christians at Antioch." They were seeking "the old paths," agreement with the "original standard," "that they might come fairly and firmly to original ground upon clear and certain premises, and take up things just as the Apostles left them." They were feeling their way and making sure of their ground as they went. They knew of no religious party that stood upon original ground; none that dared return to the original standard. The sense of freedom which they enjoyed in being bound only by the New [91] Testament with respect to all doctrines and usages, was equalled only by the sense of certainty they enjoyed in being infallibly guided by the New Testament to the true conditions of Christian union and communion. So keen was their sense of deliverance from the narrowness of sectarian testimonies and the tyranny of sectarian courts, that they would never again permit themselves to be bound by any party or creed. They now breathed the free air of liberty. They felt the call of destiny to the religious world.

      When the Baptists of the region heard of the action of the Brush Run church in submitting to immersion and adopting it in their practice, they were highly elated and began to urge the church to join the Baptist association of churches. Alexander Campbell had not been favorably impressed with the Baptists, either as ministers or people, and had no idea of uniting with them. He, however, liked the people better, and the [92] ministers less, the more he got acquainted with them. He did not press himself upon their attention, but they knew his power as a speaker and often sent for him to preach for them. He visited their association at Uniontown, Pennsylvania, in the autumn of 1812, and being less pleased than ever with the Baptists, resolved never to go again. The question of a union with the Baptists was laid before the Brush Run church in the fall of 1813. "We discussed the propriety of the measure," says Alexander Campbell. "After much discussion and earnest desire to be directed by the wisdom which cometh from above, we finally concluded to make an overture to that effect, and to write out a full view of our sentiments, wishes and determinations on the subject. We did so in some eight or ten pages of large dimensions, exhibiting our remonstrance against all human creeds as bonds of communion or union among Christian churches, and expressing a [93] willingness, upon certain conditions, to cooperate or to unite with that association, provided always that we should be allowed to teach and preach whatever we learned from the Holy Scriptures, regardless of any human creed or formula in Christendom."

      The significant thing to observe in the terms of this union is the attitude of the Campbells towards their own liberty of teaching under the guidance of the Scriptures. They had really begun to shift the emphasis from the obligation of Christian union to the authority of primitive Christianity. This was due to a certain loss of confidence in the practicability of Christian union under existing religious conditions, but more to the growing influence and leadership of Alexander Campbell, who never was so much of a Christian unionist as his father. Leadership was then passing from father to son, and emphasis from the principle of unity to the principle of apostolicity. They were not now ready for union at the [94] cost of their liberty or any conviction. Truth as they were led to see it in the light of the Scriptures was better than any union. Yet union was still desirable, though not immediately practicable, and sectarianism and division were still sinful. They had come, however, to justify their separation as a distinct party and were reconciled to it, if it must be. Under these circumstances and upon these conditions they were received into the Redstone Association of Baptist churches. But not without objection on the part of a few Baptist preachers who were either jealous or suspicious of Mr. Campbell.

      The Campbells were conscious that they were not in full agreement with the Baptists at the time of the union, and gave them full warning as to the policy and principles of the Brush Run church. Not even on the subject of baptism, which was the most apparent point of resemblance, was there entire agreement. Alexander Campbell had [95] developed a doctrine of the design of baptism by 1812 which was opposed to the Baptist doctrine. He had already declared baptism to be "the first formal and comprehensive act of the obedience of faith." A very sacred custom in Baptist usage was the requirement of an examination and the relation of an experience previous to baptism; but Campbell declined to accept any other requirement as a condition of baptism at the hands of Mr. Luce than a simple confession of faith in Christ, as he thought was done in apostolic times.

      The Brush Run church differed from Baptist churches in its practice with respect to the Lord's supper. It had become an essential part of the worship of the Brush Run church every first day of the week, while among Baptist churches it was celebrated once a quarter. So essential to the Lord's day worship seemed the Supper that Thomas Campbell declared as early as 1812 that "instituted worship can be nowhere [96] performed upon the Lord's day, where the Lord's supper is not administered. Wherever this is neglected, there New Testament worship ceases." The Brush Run church inclined at first to adopt the custom of close communion, and admit only immersed believers, but did not settle into the practice.

      The Campbells held another doctrine which was soon to become the cause of the first and of a continuous controversy between them and the Baptists. They taught that there was a difference in the authority of the Old and New Testaments for the Christian. Thomas Campbell had drawn the distinction in 1809 in the Declaration and Address by declaring that "the New Testament is as perfect a constitution for the worship, discipline and government of the New Testament church," "as the Old Testament was for the worship, discipline and government of the Old Testament church"; and again in 1812: "How many disciples of Moses are to be found in the [97] professed school of Jesus Christ! and how few among the teachers of the New Testament seem to know that Christ's ministers are not able ministers of the Old Testament but of the New." To a Baptist of that time every part of the Scriptures was equally authoritative.

      Their view of the meaning and value of ordination differed. While Alexander Campbell submitted to the ceremony, it was not regarded as indispensable to the ministerial character and office. It was pointed out that many in the New Testament were said to have preached and baptized, yet there is no record of their ordination. The Baptists insisted on it as essential to the exercise of the ministerial function.

      The most serious departure of the Campbells from a Baptist point of view was in their conception of faith. They held to the orthodox, Calvinistic conception of faith, as "of the operation of God and effect of almighty power and regenerating grace," as [98] late as 1812; but in the same year their conception underwent a change and they declared that "the word of God is a means of regeneration" and that faith is "the full and firm persuasion, or hearty belief of the divine testimony concerning Jesus."

      It is not probable that all these views held by the Campbells at the time of the union were known to the Baptists of the Redstone Association. They were glad to have their forces strengthened and their ranks filled by the accession of the Campbells and the Brush Run church, and were not disposed to lay down rigid conditions of fellowship. Accepted as a member of the Redstone Association, the Brush Run church was entitled to send messengers to the annual meetings and have a voice in all of its affairs. [99]

[TDOC 80-99]