Churches of Christ established themselves in Ballarat as early as 1859. In that year, G. R. Divers and his wife, who had been in membership with the church in Melbourne and had shifted to Ballarat, began "attending to the weekly observance of the Lord's Supper, reading the Scriptures, prayer and praise' in their home in Peel Street, Ballarat East.¹ They were joined shortly afterwards by the Bushs from the Prahran Church, and by G. Neish, A Rankine, Lyall, and a Mr. Collins, who was associated with the Plymouth Brethren.²

In January, 1862 the group invited a number of Close Communion Baptists to join them. Four of the latter, Charles Martin and his wife, Bro. Spring and Sr. Reid, agreed to meet with the Church of Christ group for a month or two, by which time they would be better acquainted with the views of the Disciples and be able to decide whether or not to unite with them.³ Following the two-month trial, the four threw in their lot with those meeting in Divers' home.⁴ In February, 1862 the congregation was augmented with the arrival of the Bardwells, Sampson Diver and his wife and Sr. Johnston, of the Prahran Church.⁵ In August of the same year, they were joined by H. G. Picton, also from Prahran.⁶

Shortly after Picton arrived, and undoubtedly due to his initiative, the group formally organised itself into a church. Picton was elected pastor and Divers, Martin and Neish were voted in as deacons. It was also decided that the group should worship in the Temperance Hall, rather than in Divers home. The young congregation also decided to advertise their presence and hold gospel services in the Temperance Hall.⁷

Attendance

The members of the young Ballarat congregation were consistent in their attendance and were encouraged by early developments.

After a few months' labour the brethren's hearts were rejoiced by several additions, some by letters of commendation, some from the denominations, and some by immersion. Brethren W. M. Long and G. O. Reid, Bro. and Sister W. Davey, Bro. and Sister Theodore Wright, Bro. and Sister Barrett, Bro. and Sister Smith from the Baptists, (the three last named were deacons with the Baptists); Bro. and Sister Neil from the Free Methodists; Bro. J. B. Cathcart by letter from Dunedin, and Bro. and Sister Knights by letters from England. By immersion--Bro. and Sister Renton, Bro. and Sister Anthony, Bro. and Sister Porter, Bro. and Sister Hooker, Sisters Annie Wran (Mrs. MacGowan) Bessie Win (Mrs. C. Morris), and Bro. Peter Cassidy--the latter a convert from Romanism.⁸

Cassidy's conversion, considered a notable victory, convinced the young church that the truth would prevail. The account of Cassidy's conversion became part of the folk tradition of the Ballarat congregation. Picton's narrative ran:

One Sunday night while passing the Temperance Hall his attention was arrested by the voice of the preacher, and prompted by curiosity he came up the steps to the door and there listened to the discourse, his Romish bias, however, preventing him from coming inside. The next Sunday night he came, and ventured into the porch and listened. The following two or three Sundays I saw him inside the hall on the back seat close to the door. Then he came a seat or two nearer. The brethren having noticed his regular attendance and the interest he evinced in the services, spoke to him, expressing the pleasure they felt at his presence. He then informed them that he was a Roman Catholic, but that the discourses he had listened to, and his search of the Scriptures, (even the Douay Version), had led him to see things in an altogether different light to what he had been taught. After a few conversations with brethren Martin and Picton the Romish scale fell from his eyes. He received the truth in the love of it, and joyfully was buried with Christ in baptism, and became a most devoted, zealous and consistent disciple.⁹

Changes

The organisation of the Ballarat congregation underwent several changes in the first decade of its history. Several deacons resigned because they were frequently out of town and a second elder was appointed to assist Picton.¹⁰

The possibility of appointing a second elder was raised at a church meeting on the 2nd October, 1863. Two weeks later Charles Martin was appointed to the position.¹¹

Martin was born in Islington, London, on the 23rd December, 1827. He was baptised in the John Street Baptist Chapel, Bedford Road, London, by the Hon. B. W. Noel, on Friday evening the 20th December, 1850. He afterwards united with the John Street Church and taught in its Sunday School. In his teens Martin grew under the influence of John Roberts, a journeyman tailor, who conducted a Bible class in the Calythorpe Street Sunday school. working late into the evening on six nights of the week, Roberts gave himself unstintingly to his students, a number of whom ended up on the mission field.

Martin immigrated to Victoria in 1853, moving to Ballarat in 1857. He was one of the founders of the Baptist Church in Yuille Street, which had united with the Church of Christ nucleus then meeting in Divers' home in Peel Street.¹²

A Chapel

The Church in Ballarat, which first met in Divers' home in Peel Street, and afterwards in the Temperance Hall, was keen to have a building of its own. As early

as November, 1862 it was moved that "fellowship funds, of £1/4/9 be set apart for a building fund"¹³. At the church meeting on January 14th 1863:

Bro. Diver stated that Bros. Martin, Neale and Divers had purchased land in Peel Street for £35 and were offering to sell it to the church at the same price if the latter wanted it.¹⁴

The offer was accepted.

While the church purchased the Peel Street site, some members had second thoughts about the location. By June, 1863 the church was looking at securing land in Barkly Street.¹⁵ In the end, this was not preceded with. This did not mean, however, that they had come to look more favourably at the Peel Street site.

In January 1864 it was decided to dispose of the Peel Street block and to look for a more eligible site.¹⁶ No action was taken, and, in March, it was reported that nothing definite had been done "with the site of land held by the church".¹⁷

Realising that prompt action was called for, the officers advised the church, in April, that a collection would be taken on every alternate Lord's Day after the 9th May for a building fund.¹⁸

At a meeting held on the 19th October

Bro. Martin mentioned that a piece of ground in Dawson Street was for sale, and that he thought it would be an eligible site for a chapel.¹⁹

A committee was formed and empowered to purchase the property. However, in order to ensure that they were getting the best site available, the church requested several members to "ascertain what other land may be for sale in the neighbourhood and report to the church". If a more suitable site than that to which Martin had drawn their attention was unavailable, the church was to purchase the "piece of ground in Dawson Street".²⁰ his property was eventually purchased in Martin's name and a building committee appointed on the 7th December, 1864.²¹

On the 18th January, 1865 the building committee recommended to the church

That if possible £100 be raised by subscription towards the building fund within 3 months: that a chapel of brick and stone be built size 40 by 35 with wooden back: that a portable baptistery be made: that some of the brethren be authorised to contract a loan of £300 or £400 on behalf of the church: and that upon completion of the building all the collections but one per month be set apart for the reduction of the debt and that one be kept as a sick fund.²²

Once it was decided to press ahead with the building, the church fell to debating the relative merits of wood, stone or brick. Charles Martin offered to loan the church

£100 for 12 months free of interest on condition that the building was brick. His offer was accepted. A subscription list was immediately opened and £62.10 was promised by those present. The building committee was empowered to contract a loan of between £200 and £300. The construction of the chapel was placed in the hands of Doane, a local architect. In line with the committee's recommendations, it was agreed that three collections out of four should be reserved for the debt reduction. Martin was appointed treasurer of the fund.²³

On the 8th February a building plan and estimate were submitted to the church, which decided "that the plans with the Gothic roof be adopted", and "that the building be proceeded with without delay so as not to be overtaken by the winter rains".²⁴ At a further meeting, held on 1st March, tenders were submitted and that of Nicholls and Alice, being the lowest, was accepted.²⁵ The question of seating was debated on 26th March, when the church decided to construct seats similar to those in the Dawson Street Baptist Chapel or the Temperance Hall. They were to be secured to the floor by cleats. The placement of aisles and the size of the lobby were also discussed.²⁶

While waiting for the completion of the project, the Temperance Hall, where the church had been meeting, became too dilapidated to be used for services. The church shifted into a room belonging to Charles Martin.²⁷

The total cost of the building, when completed, was £664/4/10. By October 1865, £130 had been contributed, leaving a debt of £535/11/8.²⁸

Vestries were later added, which were authorised at a church meeting held on April 7th, 1870.²⁹

The building was opened in June, 1865. To mark the occasion, and to draw attention to their cause, the Ballarat Church of Christ, or the Disciples, as they were calling themselves, invited Henry S. Earl, an American evangelist, to the official opening. Commenting on the chapel, Earl wrote:

The chapel is a neat and substantial brick building, eligibly situated, and calculated to hold, I should think from 250 to 300 persons. The prospects of the cause at Ballarat are cheering.³⁰

British Influence

Despite their enthusiasm over Earl's visit, and the obvious advantage of his American education, the Ballarat Church of Christ aligned itself, like other Australian congregations, far more closely with the British Movement. This is not surprising. Both Martin and Picton, the two pastors, had been born in Britain. Martin, though a little less dogmatic than Picton, which can probably be attributed

to his Baptist background, was none-the-less as convinced a Restorationist as Picton.

In August, 1864 the church remitted £5 to the British churches for copies of their hymn book.³¹ The Ballarat congregation, like the parent movement in Britain, considered themselves commissioned to call the Christian world back to the Primitive Christianity of the New Testament. This was highlighted in a news item in the April, 1866 British Millennial Harbinger, in which a Ballarat correspondent concluded his report with the comment--"we have inquirers still in our midst, asking for the good old way, whom we expect will shortly follow in the footsteps of Christ".³² Later that year, Charles Martin concluded his narrative, in the Harbinger, of the progress of the work at Ballarat with the prayer that God would "continue to give wisdom to those brethren whom from time to time endeavour to make known 'The Old Paths', an expression characteristic of the British churches.³³

Beliefs

The early Ballarat Disciples regarded the Bible as the authority for their beliefs and practices. Most did not argue that Christians should only use the Bible in their devotions and worship, though some pushed this view.

In the early days, the worship services of the church followed the pattern of the British Churches of Christ, which featured the Lord's supper and mutual edification, where opportunity was given to the assembled males, who were considered or who considered themselves qualified to exhort. Their emphasis on mutuality, however, meant that their worship was sometimes disorganised. This was evident from a motion, passed shortly after Earl's visit, and at his suggestion,

That for the better ordering of our morning meetings any brother desiring to speak to give out a hymn or to take any part in the proceedings should intimate the same to the presiding brother by handing in a slip of paper before the commencement of the service.³⁴

A further development was the decision in April, 1870 to make the communion wine of the "pure fruit of the vine".³⁵ This came a little too late for some who had been excluded from the membership because of drunkenness, which, in some cases, could have been provoked by the use of wine at the Supper.

Baptism was central to the preaching of the young congregation. Members were frequently drawn into debate over the issue. It was also the usual practice at this time for prospective baptismal candidates to be visited by "the preaching brother in conjunction with the deacons" to determine their suitability.³⁶

The Ballarat Disciples, like their American, British and Melbourne counterparts, aimed their message at the mind. Their appeal was directed to the self-educated petty-bourgeois, and, in particular, independent tradesmen, who were flattered by the notion that they were capable of understanding and responding to the gospel without priestly help or supernatural aid. Additional evidence, highlighting this appeal to reason, was the fact that they made great use of tracts and Restoration literature in advertising their position around the town.³⁷

With increasing additions from other Christian groups, and from "the world", the leadership of the young Church of Christ was concerned that the members were adequately tutored in the basics of the Restoration plea. In July, 1864 it was decided

that, in order that the members of this church be thoroughly built up in the truth of the principles of the New Testament for which we contend, as soon as practicable a library be formed in connection with the church, of works written by eminent brethren or others imminent for the truth.³⁸

At a meeting held on the 31st January, 1866 the nucleus of a lending library was formed from a number of books "remaining unsold from the contribution of Bro. McGarey".³⁹

Tea Meetings

The church in Ballarat, like sister churches in Victoria, made much of tea meetings. Almost any excuse offered an opportunity for getting together. In May, 1866 it was decided to hold a social tea meeting every year.⁴⁰

H. G. Picton argued that the purpose of such tea meetings, held by the Disciples,

differed from that of tea meetings ordinarily, which was that of raising money, their aim being to enable the inhabitants of the locality, to hear from the Disciples a statement of what it is that they do preach and uphold.⁴¹

Evangelism

The Ballarat Disciples took every opportunity to let the community know what they believed and to win individuals to an allegiance to Christ.

In July, 1864 home meetings were organised on weeknights "for prayer, exhortation or conversation in a house of any or every member who shall be willing to come to the help of the Lord against the mighty".⁴² Bro. Jenkins, who proposed the home meetings, seconded a motion in October of the same year, which was proposed by Bro. Neish, "that twelve or more of the members of the church proceed to Sebastopol

and hold an open air meeting the first fine Lord's Day afternoon".⁴³

The first of the evening meetings, to which outsiders were invited, were held in the Temperance Hall. With the completion of the Dawson Street Chapel, the meetings were transferred there.

While the church agreed that gospel services be held, the question of who should preach was hotly debated. Some wanted Picton to do the bulk of the preaching. Others were keener to share it around. In July, 1865 it was decided that Picton should preach every alternate Lord's Day. Neish, Wright and Jenkins were to take turns at the pulpit on each of the other Sunday evenings.⁴⁴

It was not long, however, before Wright and Neish withdrew from this arrangement. Wright became dissatisfied "with the long interval that elapsed with his being called upon to proclaim the Gospel and his wish for an alteration in the plan".⁴⁵ He obviously wanted to preach more frequently. In September, 1866, deeply hurt over some issue or action, Neish withdrew "his services in connection with the proclamation of the Gospel in this place".⁴⁶ Attempts were made to win him around and it was moved at the same meeting that there be a monthly preachers' meeting to try and resolve the mounting tensions.⁴⁷

Pastoral Care

Members in the young congregation enjoyed a unique sense of togetherness. This was evident in a practical concern for indigent members.

Several illustrations will point this up.

In May 1863 the church determined to remit to Bro. Rankine, who was in a state of continual ill health, what remained of the offering after the reduction of current weekly expenses, provided that it didn't exceed the average rate of 7/6.⁴⁸ Three months later the church purchased a mangle for £2/16/10 to lend to Sister Rankine.⁴⁹ The Rankines, however, were dissatisfied with the mangle. At a meeting on the 2nd September, Picton mentioned that he believed that the couple were anxious to move to a house situated on the Yarrawee Creek. Several days later the church voted them a £10 loan, accepting the house and the land on the Yarrawee Creek as security.⁵⁰

The Rankines weren't the only ones helped. In January 1864, after Sister Greaves lost her husband, the deacons waited on her to see whether she needed financial assistance.⁵¹ They presented her with £2/10, which she considered would adequately supply her immediate needs.⁵²

In January, 1868 a poor fund was established from monies from a general fund.⁵³ When repayments on the building depleted the poor fund, special provision was made, in July, 1868, for the setting aside of £8/4/2, the balance in hand for the quarter, to replenish it.⁵⁴

The church also recognised faithful service. In January, 1869 it expressed its sympathy towards Bro. Kugleman, who had lost his wife, by erecting a tombstone over her grave.⁵⁵

Discipline

While the practical care of fellow believers, in the absence of social welfare provisions, was comforting, the closeness of the young congregation also had its awesome aspect. The lives of members were carefully scrutinised, and, where they were found to be in error, doctrinally unsound or morally unfit, they were reprimanded. If they were unrepentant, they were withdrawn from and their names struck from the roll. Such discipline was common in the early days.

Attendance was also carefully monitored. Those who absented themselves from worship for more than two Sundays were followed up. Some were unwell or in need of care. Others lost interest or were offended by the behaviour of other members. Others again, particularly those who had previously belonged to other churches, contested with leaders over doctrinal issues.

Some of the imports from other churches, however, could not abide what they considered the narrowness of the Disciples. On the 28th February, 1864, the church was informed that James Mason wished to withdraw his name from the roll and to resign his membership. When asked why he had taken this action, Mason replied "that he had done so, because he differed from the brethren on several doctrinal questions, chiefly, the work of the Holy Spirit, baptism for the remission of sins, and strict communion". He refused to discuss these issues, stating that he was determined to leave the church.⁵⁶

Others were disciplined for anger.

Repentance, however, was not always forthcoming. In October, 1863 several officers, endeavouring to remonstrate with Sister Divers, found themselves checkmated. At a church meeting held on the 27th, Bren Martin and Neish reported

That having witnessed a very unseemly display of anger on the part of Sister Divers at the meeting of the church on the Wednesday previous, they had endeavoured to expostulate with her on the impropriety of such conduct, but they were very sorry to say that she expressed no contrition for her conduct.⁵⁷

Subsequent minutes testify to the fact that Sister Divers was not one to be easily reigned in.

Untruthfulness was also considered sufficiently heinous to warrant discipline. Two deacons reported to the church meeting, called on January 8th, 1868, "that Sister Murphy had been guilty of untruthfulness and slander and that she would not confess her fault nor attend any meeting for further inquiry". Like Sister Divers, she did not intend to face the public humiliation of a church inquiry into her conduct. She was not convinced that there was need for repentance. Those who wanted to have her name removed from the church roll were defeated, and an amendment accepted, that Bardwell and Neish "try again to bring her to repentance".⁵⁸ They were unsuccessful. They were not able to catch her, "she being so much away from home". Her husband, to save them further trouble, offered the opinion that "he did not think that any good could result from seeing her". Her name was struck from the roll.⁵⁹

While they gave up on Sister Murphy, it was suggested that two brethren be appointed to interview Bro. Murphy, "as they thought he might be induced to return to us".⁶⁰ Mr. Murphy was "waited on" but to no avail. In talking with him they asked whether the report they had been given of his being intoxicated was true. His reply was purposefully ambiguous. "He denied the charge, yet at the same time he partly admitted it". He asked whether he "would have to be rebuked before all." When Hutchinson and Cathcart replied that this was so, he pointed out that he was unwilling to submit to such an ordeal.⁶¹

In April, 1869 Bro. MacGowan alerted the church to the fact that he suspected Bro. Jenkins of dishonesty in certain of his business transactions.⁶² The following evening a special meeting was held to consider a statement of the case presented by MacGowan. Jenkins defended himself. A motion to clear Jenkins of the charge of dishonesty was lost and the issue was postponed for a month.⁶³ When the church met on May 31st, the following motion was carried on a vote of 5 for to one against,

That seeing that Bro. Jenkins contracted a debt with Alfred Shaw and Co. of Melbourne for two hundred and twenty-one pounds, £221 without any reasonable prospect of being able to pay the same (the whole amount being payable in five months from the time of purchase) and at the same time representing himself as clear, when he was involved in debt to a very considerable extent and as he failed to pay anything to Shaw and Co. of their bills, and has thus been guilty of conduct unbecoming a Christian "in not providing things honest in the sight of all men"--as demanded by the word of God and moreover--being guilty of gross misconduct towards this church--in acting in defiance of its officers and offering them gross insults, this church withdraw from Brother Jenkins until such time as he make amends for his conduct, and repentance be manifest in him.⁶⁴

In practice, if not in theory, immorality was regardless the worst of all possible sins.

In March 1863 it was brought to the attention of the church that Sister Porter had left her husband and child. Picton was asked to write to her 'calling upon her to repent and return".⁶⁵ In May the church learnt that she would not hear the letter read and had since returned to her husband. She was to be visited to ascertain the truth of the matter.⁶⁶ The following month Picton reported "that he had been unable to get any satisfactory reply from Sister Elizabeth Porter". He was asked to visit her again.⁶⁷ In response to a second request "Mrs. Elizabeth Porter" was waited on by Sisters Divers and Martin in order, if possible, to induce her to consider her ways". They were disappointed to find "that she showed no symptoms of repentance".⁶⁸

In those days, little allowance was made for youthful passion. At a church meeting held in September, 1865 Sister Annie Johnson was charged with "the sin of fornication". She had given birth to a child four months after she was married. She was visited by the wives of two of the deacons "to inquire into the circumstances of the case". The result of their visit "was anything but satisfactory being entirely wanting in anything approaching contrition for the sin of which she had been guilty". It was finally agreed that she "be excluded from the fellowship of the church for the sin of which she had proved guilty until repentance be manifested". It was further moved that "Sister Johnson be acquainted with the decision of the church by letter, first laying before her the enormity of her guilt with the intent of bringing her to repentance". Martin was asked to write the letter.⁶⁹

It is noteworthy, given the strength of human sexuality and the degree to which the church supervised members' conduct, that there were no more incidents of immorality cited in the minutes. The next and only other sexual lapse reported was in September, 1868.⁷⁰ The higher standard of morality demanded of Christians, and the strength of group pressure, must both have had something to do with it.

While the close supervision of members conduct, and the disciplinary measures this entailed, both of which carried with them fear of exposure and punishment, helped the church maintain a high standard of personal and public morality, the process had its dysfunctions. Individuals were not easily forgiven and public repentance was an ordeal. The practice of discipline and/ or excommunication fostered considerable contention.

It also encouraged antagonists into the open. Some took their grievances to the church to secure judgement against others.

In April 1864 Mr. Divers, of the Prahran Church, laid a complaint against Sister Divers.⁷¹ The deacons tried to bring about a reconciliation and failed. They put

the matter before the church on Mr. Diver's behalf and suggested that a special committee be appointed to investigate the matter and deal with it as it saw fit. There were those who wanted the charge to be investigated by the whole church, but these had insufficient numbers to carry the day.⁷² The committee reported its findings to the church at the close of the morning worship on the 1st May. At this meeting it was resolved

That Sister Divers having circulated certain reports prejudicial to the character of Bro. Divers of Prahran and having failed to substantiate such statements, and refused to withdraw them, moreover having manifested throughout an unchristian spirit, she be excluded from the fellowship of the church until repentance be manifested.⁷³

Spats between husbands and wives were sometimes brought into the open in this way. On the 11th January, 1865 a special meeting was convened to investigate charges made against one of the brethren by his wife. The gentleman was present in the meeting and professed repentance. He was "requested to express his contrition to his wife in the presence of Brethren Picton and Bardwell".⁷⁴

Growth

Growth was steady but not rapid, with an ebb and flow in both numbers and enthusiasm.

D. Willder, who was building up a congregation in Maryborough, spent some time in Ballarat in April, 1864. He commented that

A strong church has been planted there, numbering over fifty members, under the pastoral care of Brethren Picton and Martin, with every prospect of additions. We held meetings almost every night in the open air--large attendance and great attention. The brethren are full of zeal and good works.⁷⁵

On the Sunday morning he attended the small church at Mt. Clear, between Ballarat and Buninyong, which had associated itself with the Ballarat Disciples. In the evening he preached in the Temperance Hall, Ballarat, "to a good audience, and immediately after held an open air service, where crowds listened with eager attention to the words of eternal life".⁷⁶

Reporting in November, 1864 a Ballarat correspondent reported that "the church in Ballarat is also making progress, the difficulties thrown across its path not withstanding . . .there is a spirit of inquiry manifesting itself". Despite this enthusiasm, and the indication of better times ahead, "a considerable period of fruitless labour" ensured.⁷⁷

This dry was broken in June, 1865 when Earl visited the city to open the new chapel, when one person was baptised, one received from the Baptists and three

others "decided for Christ."⁷⁸ Enthusiasm and results maintained, at least into the early months of 1866. In March, it was reported that, since the commencement of the year, six males and four females had acknowledged "Christ as their Lord" and professed "their willingness to submit to him as their teacher and guide for time and eternity".⁷⁹ The church was making progress.

In April, 1866 Ballarat listed its membership at 70. At that time it shared with a Melbourne church the honour of being the third largest congregation in the state. Lygon Street Carlton was the largest, with a membership of 264 and Bulleen had 77.⁸⁰ In 1868, Ballarat, with a membership of 115, boasted the second highest membership in the state behind Lygon Street, which had crept up to 523.⁸¹ The number of Disciples in Ballarat in 1869 was 128.⁸² Considering that Ballarat had no paid evangelist, and that the church at Lygon Street Carlton had enjoyed the assistance of a succession of American evangelists, Ballarat had every reason to boast.

In the early years small congregations of Disciples were to be found in the surrounding areas. Places listed in the minutes include Mt. Clear, Sebastopol, Scarsdale, Smeaton, Buninyong and Durham Lead. Apart from the church at Mt. Clear, with which the Dawson Street Church was closely associated, the connection between the latter and clusters of Disciples in outlying areas was tenuous.

Wider Co-operation

During the period under review there was a close association between Dawson Street and the larger Melbourne churches.

In 1863 Robert Service, on behalf of the church in Melbourne, had written to sister congregations in Victoria urging them to collect for "poor brethren in England". Ballarat did not at that time consider that they were "in a position to render any assistance".⁸³

In August of the same year, the church received a letter from Bro. A. Thompson of Fitzroy, asking whether Ballarat would be able to contribute towards the expense of bringing "Bro. Earl from England to labour in the colonies for three years". Thomas Magarey of Adelaide had raised the issue and was seeking support from sister churches. On Picton's suggestion, a guaranteed minimum of 3/- a week was promised.⁸⁴

Three of the colonies, South Australia, New South Wales and Victoria, were keen to secure the services of an evangelist. In Victoria, an Evangelistic Committee was formed to pursue this aim.

In September, 1863 the church in Ballarat received a letter from the Secretary of this committee asking for assistance. The church at that time did not feel itself in a

position to help.⁸⁵ The following year they were differently situated. In August, 1864 they remitted £3.⁸⁶ Later that month they were again approached by the Evangelistic Committee and guaranteed 10/- weekly for three months.⁸⁷ In October they wrote to the Committee to ask whether "Bro. Earl is to be sent to Ballarat".⁸⁸ Another letter was received from the Evangelistic Committee in November, asking for further aid "and stating that Bro. Earl would be sent to Ballarat in due course".⁸⁹ It was obvious that Ballarat was keen for Earl to visit them and they considered that their contribution would give them leverage. However, the church, after purchasing the Dawson Street site, were in less of a position than previously to assist. Approached again by the Committee, they asked "for a full financial statement" of the Committee's position.⁹⁰ While there were those who were reluctant to give more until Earl visited Ballarat, the majority were willing to continue contributing.

Early in 1865 the Evangelistic Committee thought of sending Earl to Ballarat. By then, however, the church was proceeding with its building. They mentioned that it would be better to wait until the chapel was completed. He was invited to the opening.

H. S. Earl in Ballarat

In addition to opening the building, Earl conducted a brief evangelistic mission.⁹¹

Earl was the first of a number of American evangelists to be invited to Australia.

While he trained in America, Earl was British. Born in Northampton England, in 1831, he was 17 before he migrated with his parents to America. Converted in 1853, he trained for the ministry at Bethany, Virginia, at a Liberal Arts College that had been established by Alexander Campbell.

Earl graduated in 1858, and thereafter spent three years with the Waverley City Christian Church in Missouri. Earl preached in Britain, while on leave, and was invited to remain for three years. It was while in Britain that he received invitations from city churches in Adelaide and Melbourne. He decided to accept the Melbourne challenge and arrived in 1864.

In Melbourne, Earl attracted huge crowds of between one and two thousand and drew favourable press comment. In his first year with the church at Lygon Street he added 200 to a Victorian membership of 400.⁹²

Earl travelled to Ballarat on June 27th, 1865. The trip took four and a half-hours. Earl remained ten days in Ballarat, delivering six discourses "which were listened to with marked attention by crowded audiences". Four of the addresses were given in the Dawson Street chapel and the remaining two "in the large and capacious hall of

the Mechanics Institute, to an audience numbering from 800 to 1000". Earl was excited by the numbers who came, particularly on the first night, which was cold and rainy. His subjects were

"The Messiah", "The Wisdom and Perfection of the Gospel of Christ", "Christ the Great Teacher", "The Rich Fool", "Eternal Life", "The Longings of the Soul Satisfied".

Several ministers belonging to other churches attended the meetings, during the course of which "one person was baptised, one received from the Baptists and three others decided for Christ."

Another notable feature of Earl's visit was the holding of a prayer meeting which drew 200, and at which addresses were delivered by "Brethren Martin, Picton and Neish of Ballarat; Burt of Melbourne; and Bro. Earl".⁹³

The leaders of the young Ballarat congregation were more than happy with the results of Earl's visit. Though there weren't a great number of conversions, they considered that much good had been accomplished because of the attention drawn to them, the increasing number of inquiries made concerning what they believed and the removal of a good deal of prejudice.

Representation on the Melbourne Evangelistic Committee

The Melbourne Evangelistic Committee, deciding to formalise their proceedings, suggested to churches that they appoint delegates to the committee. Those churches, that were too far distant to be represented by their own members, were urged to appoint delegates from Melbourne to represent them. This process was under way by July, 1865, when the Ballarat church was informed that they were entitled to one representative on the committee for every 40 members, or part thereof. Bro. Burt, who was already representing them, was joined by Robert Service, who was appointed to act as their second delegate.⁹⁴

Earl's Adelphian Society

Earl was at this time in the process of forming an Adelphian Society to train colonial talent. When they became aware of this proposal, the Ballarat officers explained the project to members and invited those interested to submit their names as participants.⁹⁵

The first Ballarat member to apply for training was Bro. Wright. When asked to comment regarding his fitness, early in 1868, the church responded with the following recommendation:

That we have the highest opinion of Bro. Wright's integrity and his earnestness in the cause of Christ, he has only occasionally taken part in the preaching services when in Ballarat; but as to his style of preaching and general fitness we think the Melbourne brethren are now in a better

- 21 -

position of judging in this matter than we are. We know also that he has shown himself earnest as a visitor in endeavouring to lead men and women to the footstool of Jesus and that his labours in this direction have not been without fruit.⁹⁶

Conferences

From the development of an Evangelistic Committee soliciting the support of all churches throughout Victoria to an annual conference of the churches was only a short step. The possibility of developing an annual conference, after the British model, was raised in 1865 by J. W. Webb.⁹⁷ Because of the enthusiasm over the proposal, it was quickly taken up and the first annual meeting of the Victorian churches was held on April 2nd, 1866. Schedules were received from the churches, the evangelistic activities of Earl and Webb reported on, and the need of "talented, earnest evangelistic labourers" stressed.⁹⁸

When news of the intending conference reached Ballarat the church elected their two pastors, Picton and Martin, together with Divers, as delegates. The Melbourne churches organising the conference also asked them to list what they felt to be "hindrances to further progress". They mentioned "lack of personal effort" and "failure to exhibit a Christian life".⁹⁹

A second conference of "the churches in Victoria and the other colonies", called in April 1866, besides receiving schedules from the churches, raised, as additional issues, the need for a book depot in Melbourne to supply Restoration literature, the need to provide colonial churches with a new hymn book and the need to train local evangelists.

A notable feature of the second annual meeting was the transaction of the business of the conference by 20 delegates of the churches.¹⁰⁰

A third conference of the Churches of Christ in Victoria "and adjoining colonies", held in 1868, ran into difficulties. Debate developed over the question of "how far the resolutions or recommendations passed at the Annual Meeting effected representatives and churches".¹⁰¹ The issue was taken up again on November 9th, when a sharp division of opinion led to the meeting adjourning sine die. It was three years before conferences resumed. Pitted against each other were those who said that conferences should have more legislative power and others

very wary of even the appearance of establishing a body of brethren--call it what you may--vested with power to control the action of the churches, or to legislate for them in matters of expediency, believing such would be wrong in principle and injurious and evil in its results.¹⁰²

Divers, MacGowan and Picton had been appointed to represent Ballarat at the 1868 Conference. They had been asked to bring to the conference their church's answer to the persistent question, "what are the chief obstacles to greater success?" Their reply, reflecting their own situation, as well as that of the conference, listed "the want of union among us", and the lack of a wholehearted "co-operation of the churches".¹⁰³

While conferences lapsed after 1868, the churches were kept in touch with each other by means of journals that circulated among local congregations. The British Millennial Harbinger, edited first by James Wallis and later by David King, was an early favourite. Both men pastored the lay ministry of the colonies. The publication of an Australian periodical, midway through 1868, also helped to foster the flagging co-operative spirit. It also helped the Australian churches achieve an identity of their own, despite the fact that it was Americans who edited the journal.

The prospectus for the new magazine appeared in the October 1 edition of the British Millennial Harbinger. The Australian Christian Pioneer, as the new magazine was to be called, was published monthly and guaranteed to "unflinchingly oppose all departures from the simplicity of apostolic Christianity" and to plead for unity through a "restoration of the ancient order of things". In order to achieve this, it was decided that the magazine would

advocate the Bible, and the Bible alone, as our only rule of faith and practice, believing that if its teachings were more widely known and better understood, the progress of Christianity would be accelerated and Christian union promoted.

The aim of the editors, T. J. Gore, H. S. Earl, and G. L. Surber, was to

set forth the "truth as it is in Christ"; oppose error wherever found; and reprove unrighteousness with Christian fidelity, regardless of pleasing or displeasing men.

The editorial team promised to write without party bias.¹⁰⁴

It was to be through this periodical, and to a lesser extent through the Harbinger, that the churches kept in touch with each other while conferences were in abeyance. The church at Dawson Street, Ballarat, like others in Victoria, reported to sister churches on progress by publishing news items in the Pioneer. When conferences were resumed in 1872, the Pioneer and Australian Christian Advocate continued to supplement their work.

An Evangelist

From the beginning, the Ballarat church was keen to engage an evangelist when circumstances allowed.

In August, 1863 Picton mentioned that the Temperance Society was keen to employ a missionary, but was unable to wholly support him themselves. They wanted to know if the Disciples could engage him for three days a week. The church decided to write to J. W. Webb of Melbourne, an Australian who was shaping up as an outstanding evangelist, to see whether he would be "open to a suggestion of this description".¹⁰⁵ Though Webb's reply was favourable, the project was not proceeded with, as the church could not finance it.¹⁰⁶

At a church meeting held on 16th May, 1866, the appointment of an evangelist was again raised. After considerable discussion the matter was put to the vote and lost.¹⁰⁷ Several years later the issue was raised again.

In April, 1869 the church considered the possibility of obtaining the services of one of a number of American evangelists working with the Melbourne churches. They felt they could cope with a three-month engagement. They were keen to repeat their success with Earl.¹⁰⁸ When the matter was put to the church in May, those present decided to attempt to "obtain the services of one of the American brethren" and undertook "to provide board and lodging and £2 per week for him".¹⁰⁹

Enthusiasm over the prospect of having an evangelist of their own encouraged the members, who had not had the experience of having to support a paid evangelist, to commit themselves to provide a fund to make the two or three month engagement a possibility. Despite their enthusiasm, and their willingness to give, the church was unable to engage any of the Americans. After further discussion of the issue on June 6th, it was decided that

the matter be postponed for a month, and that in the meantime we write to ascertain whether it is likely that we can have the services of Bro. Surber or Carr and that the money collected last quarter for the evangelist fund, be held in hand until after the next meeting.¹¹⁰

Realising that the American evangelists did not consider it the best use of their talent to vacate their Melbourne pulpits for months at a time, and that to look in this direction for evangelistic help was futile, the congregation decided to see if they could engage J. A. Hamill, a recently arrived British evangelist. They invited him to work with them for three months, with the option of a further three months. They offered to meet the cost of his rail fares and to pay him £2/10 per week.¹¹¹ As Hamill was engaged at the time by the Prahran Church, Ballarat agreed to contribute £8 to Prahran's coffers to compensate them for Hamill's two months absence.¹¹²

Because they were anxious to follow-up the anticipated success of Hamill's visit, the church wrote to the congregation meeting in the Unity Hall, Melbourne, to ask whether it would be possible for them to release either William Hindle or Matthew

Wood-Green, at the conclusion of Hamill's ministry, for a four-month ministry in Ballarat, with the option of a further two months. They offered to pay £3 a week towards the support of either.¹¹³ While nothing came of this inquiry, it was evidence of a growing enthusiasm on the part of the leadership at Ballarat, an enthusiasm that augured well for the future.

James A. Hamill

James A. Hamill was born in County Antrim in Northern Ireland on the 28th March, 1940. Brought up a Presbyterian, he was influenced by the simple message of the British Churches of Christ. He was baptised in 1860 and took up membership with the Church of Christ congregation in Liverpool, England. When his health began to deteriorate, a change of climate was suggested.

With his young wife and family, and in company with another member of Churches of Christ, William Moffit, and his family, Hamill left the Liverpool docks for Melbourne on the 20th August 1867. The passage took 86 days.

On the way out the two young men conducted worship services and proclaimed the gospel. The ship's surgeon, an Anglican, lent his surgery for meetings. Though the Anglican Chaplain attempted to close these down, feeling that they competed with his ministrations, the doctor, far from being intimidated, put at their disposal the larger quarters of the male hospital. Hamill and Moffit were well treated by both the doctor and the captain, who were interested to read copies of the Harbinger. Furthermore, they encouraged their open air preaching on the cabin deck.

The two young men squeezed two Bible classes into their Sunday programme.

Hamill and Moffit's weekly programme was also heavy. They held Bible classes on Monday, Wednesday and Friday evenings. On Thursday evenings they took to the cabin deck to preach the gospel.

While the Anglican Chaplain was put out by their independent initiative, the stiffest opposition to the ministry of the two came from Catholics, with whom they fell into animated discussion. In the course of these altercations, they felt themselves honour-bound to "say hard things of popes, priests and priestcraft". Little wonder that the two enthusiasts were sometimes doused with water and had their lives threatened.

When the two families arrived in Melbourne they were warmly welcomed. The ship was scarcely anchored in Hobson's Bay before they were greeted by church members "in the most warm-hearted manner".

The Victorian churches were soon aware of Hamill's ability as an evangelist. He was engaged by the Victorian Evangelistic Committee shortly after his arrival. In the space of ten years he baptised 600 people.

Hamill arrived in Melbourne in November, 1967. In February of the following year he was engaged by the Prahran Church, under the direction of the Evangelistic Committee. By June of that year, after five months work, 43 had been baptised, four received in from the Baptists, eight by letter of transfer from other churches. Six had also been restored to the faith. The church was in a flourishing condition and there was talk of extending the chapel. Hamill had also been busy at Beaumaris, Chesterfield and Mordialloc.¹¹⁴

On the 4th May, 1870 Charles Martin reported to the editor of the Australian Christian Pioneer that Hamill was with the Ballarat Church, where he would remain for a further two months.¹¹⁵

Hamill more than justified the expectations of the Ballarat congregation. He was indefatigable and soon had the attention of the city. A report from Martin, of Ballarat, published in the August number of the Australian Christian Pioneer, read:

BALLAARAT, DAWSON STREET--We take pleasure in reporting that the labours of our Bro. Hamill in this town have been instrumental in exciting a spirit of inquiry respecting the New Testament order. Our brother has been doing "the work of an evangelist" by visiting from house to house, and has there disturbed the quiet that was existing in the minds of several who, up to that time, had paid no more attention to the words of man than to those of God, and the issue has been that they have left their party leaders and determined to follow Christ. These again have acted as missionaries, and introduced our brother to others who have followed a good example, until, including some from our Lord's Day School, forty have since our last report, come forward and obeyed their Lord, in baptism. Our brother's teachings are plain and practical; he shows the people that the Lord requires his followers to be baptised--that baptism is immersion, that it is for the remission of sins, and that then rejoicing in the liberty wherewith Christ makes his people free, their motto should ever afterwards be onward, upward!¹¹⁶

During the several months he spent in Ballarat, Hamill planted churches at Buninyong and Durham Lead. He went from Ballarat to Geelong, where he remained until death claimed him prematurely at the age of 37 ¹¹⁷, on January 13th, 1878.¹¹⁸

Opposition

In the first ten years of their existence the Disciples of Ballarat were under fire from other communions. There were several reasons for this.

First, they were new and unknown. They were regarded as an upstart group, lacked an accredited clergy and were critical of other communions, whom they charged

with having apostatised from the beliefs and practices of the New Testament church.

Second, they were narrowly conservative and convinced that they alone were right. This alienated many, even some who joined their ranks.

One of the early members, a Bro. Neish, who had been associated with the United Methodist Free Church, accepted an office in that church shortly after joining the Disciples.¹¹⁹ He must have seen no inconsistency in being a member of two bodies that differed in certain important particulars. When wind of his appointment to office with the United Methodist Free Church reached the Disciples, they decided that he should be written to and informed "that the brethren could not hold fellowship with him while he walked disorderly".¹²⁰ While pulled into line, Neish was unhappy with the inflexible dogmatism of the Church of Christ.

Third, the Disciples were not beyond proselytising, though this was not the way that they regarded their evangelism. They were concerned to share their message with other communions, particularly their belief that baptism ie. the immersion of repentant believers, was an important step in a person's becoming a Christian. They could not agree that infant baptism, for which they argued there was no Scriptural support, could be regarded as equivalent to immersion, for which the proper candidates were individuals who had repented of their sin. While they did not contend that those who had not been immersed were not Christians, to most observers their theology implied this.

Enthusiasts among the Disciples were not afraid to approach the ministers of other churches and lay their position before them. In 1866, while visiting Castlemaine, an enterprising Ballarat Disciple visited a Bible Christian minister. When the latter moved with his family to Ballarat, in April, 1867, he spoke with several Churches of Christ members about baptism. He was both interested and off-put. He explained:

I attended a few meetings, and had no objections to the order; but it appeared strange to me that no professing Christian was allowed to partake of the Lord's Supper unless he had been immersed. Two things kept me from joining the church at that time. (1)--the want of sufficient light on two or three truths; and, (2)--the discord which at that time existed in the church, contrary to professed principles. I am an ardent lover of consistency.

In 1869 Bro. Divers gave him a copy of O. A. Carr's Answer to the Rev. James Ballantyne's Tract on Baptism. The tract impressed him and led to his studying the New Testament teaching on baptism. It also left him suspended between two opinions. He was eventually won to the Churches of Christ position and took up membership with them.¹²¹

Debates

Late in 1869 the Disciples were drawn into public debate on the question of baptism. The formal debate was preceded by a war of words, in the columns of the Courier, between the Disciples and the minister of Wesley Church in Lydiard Street. The debate, to which all denominations were invited, was held in the large supper room of the Alfred Hall. The Rev. Mr. Fursman, a Bible Christian minister, was invited to chair the meeting. Fursman described the debate thus:

Bro. Picton would generally open the discussion in a short, clear speech, and was followed by speakers on both sides of the question alternatively, each being allowed so many minutes to speak and answer questions. The "Disciples" spoke their sentiments candidly and boldly, proving from the Holy Scriptures immersion and believers baptism, and gave the fullest opportunity to anyone to refute what had been advanced.

The debate was conducted in a friendly spirit. Fursman, who was well read, was afterwards immersed and joined the Disciples. Explaining what impressed him about their position, he wrote:

Through the whole discussion. . . . not one text of Scripture could be produced either subverting believers baptism, or establishing infant baptism. One great point was gained: that in apostolic days believers' baptism was practised. It was admitted on all sides that believers' baptism was taught in the New Testament but not one passage could be produced in which infant sprinkling was commanded by Christ. No proof was adduced either for (1) sprinkling or (2) for infant baptism. On the other side, proof was adduced for (1) immersion; and (2) for believers' immersion. Many texts were advanced proving these, such as Matthew 3:16, 28:19; Mark 6:16; Luke 3:16; Acts 2:38-41. 8:12, 36-40, 9:18, 10:47,48; Romans 6:314; Colossians 2:12; Galatians 3:27; Ephesians 4: 5.

Feeling that their position had not been adequately argued, the Paedo-Baptists announced that the Rev. Mr. Copeland, a Primitive Methodist minister from Clunes, who was considered to be a clever anti-Baptist champion, would deliver a lecture on the mode of baptism in the room in the Albert Hall that had been engaged for the debate". Mr. Dimsey, a schoolmaster and local Wesleyan preacher, who chaired the meeting and introduced the lecturer, intimated that no discussion would be permitted following the lecture. Picton, who was present, announced that he would, on the following week, reply to Mr. Copeland's lecture in the same room, and invited the latter to be present. Picton delivered his lecture but Copeland didn't put in an appearance. A public debate between Picton and Copeland was arranged, but, after the exchange of letters, Copeland withdrew.¹²²

Mt. Clear

The manner in which a Union Church at Mt Clear came into the hands of the Disciples also illustrates the inflamed relationship existing at the time between the Disciples and other communions.

The Ballarat Disciples were scarcely established before they were asked to help to supply the pulpit at a Union Church at Mt Clear.

A wooden chapel, the successor to a canvas tent,¹²³ had been erected on Crown Land at Mt Clear, some three miles from Ballarat. There is some dispute as to who actually erected it. W. Potter, a Congregationalist turned Baptist, who had been the previous pastor, claiming that he had the documentation, argued that it had been built by the Congregationalists and subscribed to by Baptists, Independents, Presbyterians, Episcopalians and Wesleyans.¹²⁴ William Clark, a major protagonist in acrimonious debate over the ownership of the property, contended that Episcopalians and Presbyterians were the major subscribers.¹²⁵

This "Union Church" was used mainly by Congregationalists and Baptists, whose preachers originally supplied the pulpit. The supplies soon became very irregular, however, and the congregation often had to be dismissed. This led to a fall-off in attendance. The committee decided to close the chapel for four months to give them time to arrange for the services to be carried on regularly.

One member of the committee happened to mention the difficulty the church had in ensuring a regular supply of preachers to Mr. Long, who was in membership with the Ballarat Disciples. He assured them that Mr. Picton would be happy to take the services for them occasionally, if invited.

When Potter, who had been the minister at the Union Church before his "defection" to the Baptists and his transfer to Emerald Hill,¹²⁶ heard what had happened, he was alarmed. "Those terrible Disciples have got to Mt Clear!" The congregation was severely reprimanded for "having anything to do with such dangerous people--the teachers of heretical doctrines!" He assured them that he would arrange for a regular pulpit supply. He didn't keep his word. The congregation assembled full of anticipation on the two succeeding Sundays, but no one turned up.

Checkmated again, the small congregation decided to offer the chapel to one of the denominations for a twelve-month period. It was pointless offering it to either the Baptists or Congregationalists, as they were not in a position to take up the offer. A proposal to offer it to the Wesleyans was objected to on the grounds that they would require the building to be made over to their Conference.

In the end it was decided to offer it to the Disciples for a year, but only after Picton's preaching had been carefully scrutinised. Picton, himself, was completely in the dark as to what was happening. He preached at Mt Clear in the afternoon, and then returned for the evening service at Ballarat. At the conclusion of the evening service the committee approached him and offered him the church, provided that a debt

incurred for the construction of the baptistery was paid off.

Picton lost no time in convening a meeting of those living in the Mt Clear area to put before them the distinctive position of the Disciples and to explain to them the turn of events that had led to their being invited to take charge of the ministry.

At a meeting held in the Mt. Clear Chapel, Nov 12, 1863, Mr. H. G. Picton and friends from Ballarat explained the doctrines held by the Disciples of Christ. Those who complied with the Saviour's commends, "Believe and be baptised," were then invited to form a Church at Mt. Clear.¹²⁷

The Ballarat Star, reporting the same event, commented:

On Last Sunday 8th. November 1863, [note the different date] the Ordinance of Immersion was administered in the Mt. Clear Chapel, Buninyong Rd. by Mr. Picton, one of the Pastors of the Disciples of Christ. The place was well-filled on the occasion and the audience listened with marked attention to the address on "Believers' Baptism." The Disciples have entered into an arrangement with the committee of the Union Chapel for the use thereof as a meeting place and Preaching Station.¹²⁸

The large crowd attending the meeting endorsed the action taken by the committee. Among those who were strongly in favour of this move were a number of immersed believers, who included Joseph Davidson and his wife, the Andersons, the McHutchinsons and the Gullocks. Within a few weeks the baptistery was in use and the neighbourhood aroused.

The success of the Disciples in the area stirred up the local Anglicans, who attempted to get possession of the building. They made approaches to the individual in whose name the ground was registered on behalf of the Union Church, urging him to transfer the trusteeship to them.

William Clark took the initiative in this and applied to have the land on which the church stood registered as residential and listed the dispute for hearing before the warden. Explaining his action and his position, Clark wrote to the editor of the Ballarat Star:

Sir--You will permit me to place before your readers the true version of the proceedings connected with (the Church at Mt. Clear). The church was erected principally by the subscriptions of members of the Church of England and the Church of Scotland. It was to be free and open to the use of every Protestant denomination. Mr. W. Potter was in the habit of officiating in it, and he appears to have given satisfaction to all denominations on doctrinal points. Mr. Potter left, and a small knot of very demonstrative religionists recently sprung into existence, denominated "disciples", and led on by a law clerk and a Geelong shoemaker, having secured the building, actually refuse and have refused its use to the very people whose money erected it, namely Episcopalians, Presbyterians and Wesleyans. A Public meeting was held

- 30 -

in the building some time ago. Mr. Potter was present, and endeavoured to secure the building for its original purpose and arrange the matter satisfactorily. The meek and lowly "disciples" would not listen to any compromise, and they would have the building, the whole building and nothing but the building. I was then voted to the chair, when Mr. Northage moved, Mr. Hales seconded, and it was carried unanimously--"That the church revert back to the purpose for which it was erected." Carrying out the views of the meeting, I got registered for the ground, so as to secure it for the residents in the locality, and came to some arrangement with Mr. Potter, so that every Protestant denomination, without let or hindrance, can have the free use of it for religious purposes when required. Now, Sir, why should half-a-dozen noisy persons, most of them from Ballarat, exclude from the building alluded to the very persons whose money erected it? With as much propriety they might take possession of a man's house and bundle him out of doors.¹²⁹

The Disciples, however, refused to relinquish occupancy until their term had expired. Furthermore, they made it clear that they would surrender it to none other than the committee. When the twelve months was up they returned possession of the building to the committee and arranged with them to use it every week until they could erect a building of their own. The arrangement did not last long. One Sunday morning a group of Anglicans "broke into the building, kept possession and defied the committee".¹³⁰

This action in no way dampened the enthusiasm of the Disciples. It only served to spur on the effort they were making to erect a building of their own. The needed sum was promptly raised, partly by subscription and partly by loan. The cost was further reduced by the fact that several offered their services free of charge to help with the erection. The building finally constructed was a wooden structure, comfortably seating 100 persons.

A tea meeting that followed the opening was addressed by numerous speakers, who congratulated the church on the speedy erection of their premises. Picton ranged wider, giving "an exceedingly interesting and encouraging account of the progress of the cause in Melbourne and its suburbs, through the blessing of God upon Bro. Earl's labours, and expressed the hope that ere long he would at Ballarat". Bro. Anderson, on behalf of the church that now numbered 20, commented

that not only was the building free to the inhabitants of that locality for the preaching of the Gospel, but also for any object that would contribute to the happiness and well-being of mankind, mentioning especially the Temperance cause.¹³¹

As a sequel to the battle of tactics between the Disciples and Anglicans, a paper war broke out between the two churches, which gave further publicity to the cause of Churches of Christ in Ballarat.

In March 1867 the congregation decided to build a vestry at the rear of the chapel.¹³² However, when the baptistery was built, in January, 1869, it was constructed under the platform.¹³³ At that time the chapel was lit by a carbide gas lamp, installed by

Bro. Alf Bailey.

The first recorded regular Wednesday night prayer meeting was held in August, 1968.¹³⁴

Concluding Comment

From tentative beginnings in 1862 the Disciples in Ballarat had grown into a considerable congregation by the early 1870's. This growth was achieved largely through the initiative of lay pastors, assisted by a vigorous body of deacons, who took what they considered a Pristine New Testament faith to the Ballarat community, which was developing in numbers, importance and decorum. They were not universally liked, nor were they really understood. Though they were frequently maligned, they were determined to grow. The major obstacle in the way of growth was disunity.

[BCOC 7-31]