OON after his return from the meeting of the Mahoning Association in September, 1824, Mr. Campbell paid his promised visit to Kentucky. During his tour, which occupied nearly three months, he visited a large portion of the State, addressing everywhere large audiences, and greatly extending his influence and acquaintance with the Baptists. The notions he had entertained concerning them as a people in the early part of his ministry had been greatly changed by his intercourse with them, so that he had learned to esteem them very highly, and to regard them as much nearer the primitive pattern than any other religious denomination. He regarded their conceptions of the Church of Christ as essentially correct, and thought it would not be difficult to eliminate from the Baptist churches such erroneous theories and usages as had gained admission.

      It was with these convictions that he now visited the Baptists of Kentucky, in order to impart to them, as well as to the community at large, those clearer views of the gospel to which his own mind had been conducted by the careful study of the Sacred Oracles. These, to some extent, he had already presented during the past year in the successive numbers of the "Christian Baptist," [103] which had been read throughout Kentucky with great avidity, and had produced considerable excitement among the churches. Some individuals were favorably impressed with the plea for reform; others remained in perplexity and doubt, while not a few were disposed to cling tenaciously to their cherished opinions. All were ready to admit that a bright star had risen in the East among the Baptists, but whether it would guide them nearer to Jesus, or, like a passing meteor, leave them in greater darkness, none seemed as yet able to determine. When at length, in the March number of the first volume, with that truthful candor so characteristic of him, Mr. Campbell discussed the subject of "Experimental Religion," showing the expression itself, as well as the popular notion connected with it, to be unscriptural, a great number became offended, and many misrepresentations of his real sentiments were circulated abroad. He was charged with "denying the necessity of being born again by the Spirit of God;" with "confining all grace to the apostolic age;" with being "an enemy to heart-religion," etc.

      It will not appear strange, indeed, to one familiar with human nature, that such impressions should have been made in the existing condition of religious society by so direct an assault upon one of the most favorite notions of the time. Theological systems had then entire control of the public mind. Through these alone men were accustomed to look at the Scripture, which in all cases received its law of interpretation from the particular theory which had been previously adopted. The various points of Calvinism or of Arminianism, and the metaphysical speculations of ingenious theological writers, such as John Gill and Andrew Fuller, were then the great themes of public discourses and of private [104] converse. Among the theories in vogue there was no one so generally popular as that which attributed conversion to "the direct and irresistible power of the Holy Spirit." Such were the views entertained of man's utter depravity and inability that he was supposed to be incapable even of receiving the gospel, or of believing aright the testimony of God without a special operation of the Spirit, which was supposed to be withheld or granted according to the sovereign will and pleasure of God. It was conceived to be the great and chief work of the Holy Spirit in the salvation of men thus to create the soul anew by an overwhelming power, a sudden and mysterious spiritual baptism, wholly apart from the influence of the word of God, which, like the sinner himself, was supposed to be "dead" until specially applied and made effective by the Spirit. The minds of men were thus directed, not to the evidences and assurances furnished by the word of God, but to the varying moods of the mind and the fitful feelings of the heart. On these, when adjudged by some fanciful standard to be genuine, they were led to rely, and hence to such inward impressions was naturally transferred the office which baptism subserved in the primitive Church, and of which it had been divested in the modern; and every one who had a "religious experience," as it was termed, was accustomed to refer to it as the assurance of his pardon and acceptance with God, as well as his title to church membership and Christian fellowship. It can be easily seen, therefore, how a free criticism upon that which, in the popular view, constituted the very essence of true religion, must necessarily give offence and create misapprehension.

      Mr. Campbell, however, desired simply to vindicate the claims of the word of God, which he believed to be [105] set entirely aside by the doctrine in question, and to induce men to "look off to Christ," rather than to trust in their own frames and feelings. Like the Haldanes and their pious coadjutor, John Campbell, he had learned to rest on the promises of God, and desired that all should enjoy the permanent and blessed assurance thus afforded. He occupied, indeed, a very different point of view from the preachers of the time, and his mind ranged in a much wider sphere. As, before the time of Bacon, the facts of nature were explained or perverted to suit the theories of philosophers, so now the facts and teachings of the Bible were applied and interpreted to suit the various systems of theology. Living himself above all human theories and speculations, Mr. Campbell strictly applied the inductive method to the Bible, and made its facts and revelations the great basis of religious thought and the sure foundation of all religious trust. His method of discoursing was hence totally unlike that of other preachers. In discussing the great themes of salvation, he manifested a breadth of view, a depth of biblical knowledge, a freshness of thought and a grandeur in his combinations of facts and arguments which imparted instruction and delight. At his bidding, the facts of Scripture seemed to acquire new force and meaning; a connected train of scriptural truths and illustrations opened up unexpected and lofty views of the Divine plan of redemption; while, ascending to higher planes of thought, he left far beneath him the controversies and difficulties of all human systems, as the eagle soaring aloft in the sunlight leaves far below him the stormy clouds that darken the mountain's brow or overspread the valley with gloom and desolation.

      Under the circumstances above detailed, Mr. [106] Campbell's tour among the Baptist churches in Kentucky gave rise to a great diversity of feeling. This may be best conceived, however, from the impressions he made on some prominent individuals who subsequently acted an important part in favoring or opposing the Reformation. Among the former, John Smith deserves particular mention. He was a Baptist preacher, who without education, and amidst many difficulties and trials, had raised himself, by his extraordinary natural abilities, to great and merited distinction. He possessed a practical sagacity, a largeness of heart and mind and a clearness and quickness of insight such as are rarely found. To these he added an unfailing memory, a remarkable talent for genial humor and unequaled skill at repartee, so that his witty replies became familiarly known throughout the State. He possessed withal great candor, a deep and fervent love of truth, and had a mind so constituted that he could not feel satisfied with any doctrine or system if it appeared to him in any way inconsistent with itself. Hence, it was that although he had adopted the Calvinian theory held by the Baptists, and was thoroughly conversant with the points of controversy debated with Arminians, he never could fairly reconcile in his own mind, in their practical aspects, some of the tenets which his system obliged him to teach. On one occasion in 1822, at Spencer Creek meeting-house, while in the midst of a warm exhortation, he was suddenly so struck with one of these inconsistencies of doctrine, between the freeness of the gospel and the Calvinian theory, that he stopped short, and after a pause, exclaimed to the surprised audience, "Something is wrong among us, but how to get it right I know not!" Well assured, however, that no such contradictions could [107] exist in the Scriptures, he from this time devoted himself to a more careful examination of the word of God, in order to discover, if possible, where his theological system had departed from it.

      He had heard of Mr. Campbell's debate with Walker, and had desired to attend the McCalla debate, but was hindered by sickness in his family. Being presented with a prospectus of the "Christian Baptist" by Buckner H. Payne of Mount Sterling, and finding that Mr. Campbell intended to discuss certain questions which had given him much trouble, he at once subscribed for it, and read the numbers with much interest, though greatly doubting many of the positions which were taken. When the essay on "Experimental Religion" appeared, he hardly knew what to think of it, but, though some of his Baptist friends were much displeased and withdrew their subscriptions, he was so fascinated by Mr. Campbell's perspicuous and lively style of writing that he continued to take the paper. When he heard of Mr. Campbell's arrival in Kentucky in 1824, and learned that he designed to visit Flemingsburg, he thought it proper to go and meet him there and conduct him to Mount Sterling, where he himself then lived, and where Mr. Campbell had his next appointment. On entering the town, he met with William Vaughan, who had been with Mr. Campbell for eight days and nights, during his tour through Mason and Bracken counties, and had heard him preach every day. The introduction that followed, and the succeeding incidents, may be best given as related by John Smith, himself, to his friend Albert Allen of Fayette county:

      "'Well,' said I to Elder Vaughan, 'what are his religious views on doctrinal points? Is he a Calvinist or Arminian, an Arian or a Trinitarian?' [108]

      "His answer was, 'I do not know; he has nothing to do with any of these things.'

      "I answered, I could tell when I heard him, what he was.

      "'How?' said he.

      "I replied, he is a man of sense, and, if he takes a position and does not run out into any of these isms, I can tell where he would land if it was run out. I asked again, 'But do you think he knows anything about heartfelt religion?'

      "'God bless you, Brother John!' said he; 'he is one of the most pious, godly men I was ever in company with in my life.'

      "'But do you think he knows anything about a Christian experience?'

      "'Why, Lord bless you! he knows every thing. Come, I want to introduce you to him.'

      "We went to the house. Says Brother Vaughan, 'Brother Campbell, I want to introduce you to Brother John Smith.'

      "'Ah,' said he, 'is this Brother Smith? Well, I know Brother Smith pretty well, although I have never seen him before.'

      "I then felt as if I wanted to sit down and look at him for one hour, without hearing a word from any one. I wanted to scan him who had been so much talked of, and who had, in the 'Christian Baptist,' and in his debates, introduced so many new thoughts into my mind. Time had now come, however, to start to the meeting-house, and we all started. On reaching there, the house being small, we found preparations had been made for seating the congregation on logs and planks in the rear of the house. A small stand of planks, laid on blocks against the wall, had been erected for the speaker. These accommodations, however, were not sufficient for the immense crowd, and many had to stand up. I took my seat on one end of the plank on which he stood, determined now to find out to what ism he belonged in point of doctrine, for I was full of doubt and suspicion.

      "He commenced in the usual way, and read the allegory of Sarah and Hagar in the fourth chapter of Galatians. [109] After a general outline of the whole epistle, and how it ought to be read, in order to a correct understanding of the apostle's meaning, he commenced directly on the allegory. I watched all the time with my whole mind to find out to what ism he belonged, but he seemed to move in a higher sphere than that in which these isms abounded. In a simple, plain and artless manner, leaning with one hand on the head of his cane, he went through his discourse. No gesture or any kind of mannerism characterized him, or served to call off the mind from what was being said.

      "The congregation being dismissed, I said to Brother Vaughan, 'Is it not a little hard to ride thirty miles to hear a man preach thirty minutes?'

      "'Oh,' said he, 'he has been longer than that. Look at your watch.'

      "On looking, I found it had been two hours and thirty minutes. and simply said, 'Two hours of my time are gone and I know not how, though wide awake.'

      "Returning to Brother Reynolds', Brother Vaughan asked me, 'Did you find out whether he was a Calvinist or an Arminian?'

      "'No; I know, nothing about him, but, be he devil or saint, he has thrown more light on that epistle and the whole Scriptures than I have heard in all the sermons I ever listened to before.' Soon after dinner, in company with four or five other preachers, among whom were Brothers Payne, Vaughan and old William Moss, we started for Brother Cannon's, who lived some three or four miles off, on the road to Mt. Sterling.

      "Going along, I threw myself in company with Brother Campbell, to ride with him. In the commencement of our conversation, I made a remark to him like this: 'Brother Campbell, I do not wish to meet any man in judgment, having entertained an unfavorable opinion of him without good grounds, and I will now say to you what I have never said to any man before--that, religiously speaking, I am suspicious of you, and having an unfavorable opinion of you, I am willing to give the reasons why.' [110] "'Well, Brother John,' said he, 'if all my Baptist brethren would treat me as candidly as you have done, I would think more of them, as it would afford me an opportunity to explain my views.'

      "But before I could reply, he laughed and said, 'I expected when I saw you, to know all you thought of me;' and then told me he had heard that during the Bracken Association, held in Carlisle last September, a number of preachers went to a certain house for dinner, and were abusing me terribly for the attack I had made upon the clergy, when you said that 'the clergy needed so much of such abuse that you were willing to be whipped almost to death to get the others killed.'

      "I told him I had so said, and did it sincerely, too. I then mentioned the strange piece before alluded to, on 'experimental religion,' and suggested that something must be hidden behind that, as I knew he understood as well as any one what the 'populars' meant by experimental religion, and was not so ignorant as the piece would seem to intimate.

      "'My father,' said he, 'gave me a scolding for publishing that piece too soon, as he thought the people were not ready for it. But I have a series of essays on hand on the work of the Holy Spirit, which will explain the whole matter, and this was only thrown out to call the attention of the clergy.'

      "On the next morning we parted company with the balance of the preachers, and Brother Campbell and myself started for Mt. Sterling. Much interesting conversation took place on the way, and conduced much to my correct understanding of his views. I will not attempt to relate all that passed. One little incident I will relate. Having crossed Licking River and riding slowly up the bank, I asked Brother Campbell to tell me his experience. He readily did so, and in turn asked a relation of mine, which was given.

      "After hearing his experience, I would cheerfully have given him the hand of fellowship. It was one which any Baptist church would have cheerfully received, and was almost substantially such as mine. He took occasion to say [111] that he had never discarded the existence of such experience on the part of the sinner, but objected to the use made of such things, as determining the proper prerequisites of baptism, and went on to explain the necessity of taking the word of God, rather than our feelings, as guides in such things.

      "Many other questions were asked by me, and explained by him, till we reached Mt. Sterling. Here I heard from him three discourses, and going on as far as North Middleton, I parted with him.

      "This, to me, interesting sojourn with Brother Campbell, led to the removal of many obstacles and to the solution of many difficulties of a religious kind, and left me persuaded of better things of him than when we first met. But it was not until after a year of careful examination of the Scriptures that I was fully convinced of the scripturality of his views, and commenced the advocacy of the Bible as a sufficient rule of faith and practice."

      From this narrative it will be seen that Mr. Campbell was not opposed to "religious experiences," but to the use made of them as substitutes for that assurance which is derived from the word of God--that simple trust in Jesus which the gospel requires. He believed, as Moses Stuart, of Andover, said upon his deathbed, that "feelings in religious experience are deceptive;" and, like that eminent man, sought to rescue the Bible from its slavery to theological systems, to restore its free meaning as the true reliance of the soul, and to direct the attention to the life as the proper evidence of faith and the true test of fealty. He was convinced, to use the language of the great and good Dr. Wayland, that "the moral sense of men and the Bible were, by the power that originated both, adapted to each other." Hence, he believed with the latter "that if the truths of the word of God were brought near to [112] the soul, the effect must be felt," and in harmony with this belief, like the primitive laborers, he "ceased not to preach and to teach CHRIST," being divinely assured that "faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God." Whatever metaphysical theories men might adopt as to the operations of the mind, he could see no propriety in the attempt to make conversion, in all its details, conform to such human systems, in order to secure an acceptance which, in the beginning, was accorded to all those who "hearing, believed and were baptized."¹ [113]

      Continuing, during his tour, to meet his daily appointments, and occupied at night often to a late hour with crowds of anxious inquirers who sought religious [114] information or counsel, Mr. Campbell spent, during more than two months, at least five hours per day in these arduous labors. He formed thus a very extensive acquaintance, both with the people and with the state of religion among them, which corroborated more and more his sense of the importance of a return to the simplicity of the primitive faith. Yet he found the Baptists of Kentucky a highly-intelligent people, deeply interested in the subject of religion, and having amongst them many pious and devoted preachers, some of whom were eminently distinguished for their abilities. The pioneers of the Kentucky Baptists had come from the eastern part of Mr. Campbell's own State, Virginia; from whence, indeed, the greater part of the early settlers in Kentucky had emigrated, carrying with them their princely hospitality, their indomitable energy and their love of civil and religious freedom. David Thomas, [115] who, about 1750, planted the first regular Baptist church in Virginia, had emigrated to Kentucky when he was nearly seventy years of age, and had become, in June, 1799, the second pastor of the church at Washington, where, a quarter of a century later, Mr. Campbell had held his debate with Mr. McCalla. David Thomas was of Welsh parentage, but a native of Pennsylvania, and had been highly educated, receiving the degree of A. M. from Rhode Island College, now Brown University. Abundant in his labors, amidst many persecutions, he had established the Baptist cause along the shores of the Shenandoah and Rappahannock, from the Potomac to James' River, from the unsettled wilderness of the West to Richmond. Following some of his children to Kentucky, he found here his friend and former fellow-laborer, John Gano, and being sent as one of the first messengers from the newly-formed Braken Association to that of Elkhorn, he there found the eloquent David Barrow, known for his sufferings in Virginia--John Shackelford, also, who had been there imprisoned for his faith, together with the Craigs, and John Taylor and the influential Dudley. Most of these early laborers had long since gone to their reward--the mortal remains of David Thomas, who became blind during the later years of his ministry, and was known as the "Blind Preacher," reposed a few miles from Nicholasville--but their names were held in grateful remembrance, and the doctrines and usages they had advocated still retained their hold of the Baptist community.

      Among the preachers from Virginia still living in Kentucky at the time of his visit, Mr. Campbell formed an agreeable acquaintance with Jacob Creath, Sr., who was born in Nova Scotia, Feb. 27, 1777, but [116] emigrating to North Carolina when ten years of age, united with the Baptists at twelve and commenced preaching at eighteen. He was ordained at Roundabout meeting-house, in Louisa county, Virginia, by John Poindexter and Wm. Basket, in 1798, and was a member of the Dover Association with Robert B. Semple and Andrew Broaddus, but emigrated to Fayette county, Kentucky, in 1803, succeeding John Gano as pastor of the Town Fork Church. He was a man of fine personal appearance, regular features, an ample forehead and remarkably keen and penetrating dark eyes. He had a musical yet strong and commanding voice, and, though quite uneducated, possessed such command of language and such fertility of fancy and illustration that he had been pronounced by Henry Clay to be the finest natural orator he had ever heard.² Another [117] preacher of considerable influence was his nephew, also from Virginia, Jacob Creath, Jr., a man of less mildness of disposition, but of earnest purpose and fearless in his advocacy of what he believed to be the truth.

      Mr. Campbell during this tour became acquainted also with Silas M. Noel, a Baptist Doctor of Divinity, who seemed at first to coincide with him in views, but soon after became a virulent opposer. The Warders, the Wallers, the Paynes and Thomas Bullock, long moderator of the Elkhorn Association, with many other influential Baptists, were introduced to him and heard him courteously. While at Georgetown he formed the acquaintance of" Barton W. Stone, already noted as well for his eminent Christian virtues as for his efforts to effect in Kentucky a religious reformation almost identical in its leading principles and aims with that in which Mr. Campbell was himself engaged. The two laborers in the same great field formed at once a warm, personal attachment to each other, which continued through life, which tended greatly to promote a subsequent union between the two yet distinct bands of reformers.

      One of the political papers, "The Monitor," at Lexington, where Mr. Campbell was to preach, had recently published the third Epistle of Peter, which had greatly exasperated the clergy, and they had endeavored to close the ears of the people against Mr. Campbell by publishing in return a portion of Mr. Greatrake's [118] defamatory pamphlet. This, however, only excited the more the curiosity of the people to hear, and brought together an immense audience, comprising the best educated and most intelligent persons in all that section. Among them was a young man, about the medium height, with dark hair and eyes and thoughtful aspect, who, on account of the crowd, stood up just before the pulpit, looking up at the speaker and drinking in his words with such avidity that a discourse of two hours seemed to him to have lasted only a few minutes. This was a student of Transylvania University, who was a Baptist and preparing himself for the ministry. He had read several numbers of the "Christian Baptist," and was a good deal prejudiced against Mr. Campbell on account of what he had said against the clergy and other matters; but the discourse to which he then listened, which was in reference to Christ as the Rock (Matt. xvi.), so enlarged his vision with respect to Christianity that all his prejudices were swept away as by a torrent, and he became quite captivated with the principles of the Reformation. This youth was James Challen, who subsequently, by his faithful and valuable labors, rendered most efficient aid to the cause.

      Mr. Campbell having an appointment at Versailles and one also two miles in the country, Mr. Challen attended on the latter occasion. A pretty large audience was present, and Jeremiah Vardeman was with Mr. Campbell in the pulpit. The text was, "Now the end of the commandment is charity," etc. 1 Tim. i. 5. Entering at once into the very of heart of his subject, as was his wont, Mr. Campbell presented such a magnificent view of the simplicity and glorious purposes of the Christian institution as perfectly entranced his auditors. At the close, Elder Vardeman dismissed the [119] people, remarking, "We have heard strange things today My advice to you is, Search the Scriptures and see if these things be so."

      On the way to dine with a gentleman living in the vicinity, Mr. Challen was riding in company with Elders Vardeman and Creath, conversing about the strange light that had risen among them, when Mr. Campbell, on a fleet horse, overtook and passed them. Elder Vardeman then remarked: "I once thought I could preach, but since I have heard this man I do not seem, in my own estimation, to be any larger than my little finger." As he said this he held up his hand, and the comparison drawn from the contrast between the enormous bulk of the gigantic elder and his little finger, was at the time and ever afterward, when referred to, a source of great amusement to his companions.

      Upon reaching Louisville in November, Mr. Campbell called at the residence of P. S. Fall, with whom he had had some correspondence, but no previous personal acquaintance.

      "After a slight repast," says Mr. Fall, "he attended our regular Friday night meeting. The services were opened by me, by singing the hymn, 'The law by Moses came,' etc., and prayer. Brother Campbell, a total stranger, was then asked to address the audience. My school-room was well filled, and five Presbyterian ministers, Dr. Gideon Blackburn, his two sons and two sons-in-law, were present. Brother Campbell read a portion of the epistle to the Hebrews and spoke nearly two hours, every person present giving him the utmost attention. His method of reading the Scriptures, of investigating their truths and of exhibiting their statements, was so entirely new and so perfectly clear as to command the respect if not the approval of all that listened. Dr. Blackburn was asked to offer prayer at the close, which he did. On our return to the house, Brother Campbell remarked: [120]

      'Dr. Blackburn does not understand the Christian religion.' He was asked how he knew.' Oh,' said he, 'his praying clearly declares that.'

      "On Lord's day morning he addressed a large congregation in the old court-house, on the subject of spiritual gifts. This discourse was listened to with the same admiration as the other by all who had the power to discriminate between proving doctrines already assumed and sitting at the feet of our Lord and his ambassadors to hear their words.

      "At night, agreeably to the invitation of Dr. Blackburn, he addressed, in the Presbyterian church on Fourth street, a large and attentive audience upon the evidences of the Messiahship. He had contracted a bad cold and sore throat in his rambles about the city on Saturday, and spoke with much difficulty, but he enchained the attention of the audience by his masterly exhibition of the claims of our Lord to the homage of mankind. These discourses, all that were delivered at that time, opened up to the thoughtful a new field of exploration, and developed a method of studying the Scriptures so thoroughly superior to the textuary system that it commended the truth to every man's conscience in the sight of God. It was seen at once that it was the duty of the speaker and the privilege of the hearer to ascertain simply what the divine Word says, and why it is said. We had been accustomed to make the Scriptures a book of text-proofs of our doctrines. We now saw that we had everything to learn, but nothing to prove in using God's word. On the former plan we knew as much when we came to the Bible as when we left it. We might have been more fully confirmed in what we had accepted as scientific religious truth, but this was all. For the connection in which every proof-text stood we had not much use, and thus a great portion of God's word was not only neutralized, but rendered absolutely worthless. Upon the new plan we had use for every word the Holy Spirit had spoken. We supposed ourselves to know nothing when we approached the sacred books, and were to be mere listeners and thereby learners. We had no [121] proof-texts before us, implying a preoccupied mind, but accepted simply the statements of divine truth in the connection in which the Holy Spirit had placed the words and sentences he had uttered. We now became followers of our Lord and of his apostles, of the churches of God, and of those who through faith had inherited the promises. 1 Thess. i. 6; ii. 14; Heb. iv. 12."

      After this visit, Mr. Fall continued to advocate earnestly the Reformation. Visiting soon after, by request, the Enon Baptist Church in Cincinnati, he there delivered several discourses upon the themes then under discussion, which excited great interest not only among the Baptists there, but with other parties, and led to various interesting private discussions with their ministers. During this visit, Mr. Fall was invited to dine with Jacob Burnet, Esq., the Mayor of the city, and witnessed the baptism of his son David S. Burnet, who soon after, entering the ministry at the age of sixteen, became known as the "boy-preacher." He was quite low in stature, but erect in carriage. His head was large and finely formed; his eyes prominent, full and sparkling, his features regular with a mouth somewhat large, but firmly set, while in his bearing he was remarkably self-possessed, dignified and courteous. Giving himself wholly to the cause of the Reformation, after a few years he became one of its most distinguished and successful advocates, delighting large audiences by his elegant and copious diction, and his able presentations of the principles of the gospel, which he widely disseminated, not only in Cincinnati, but through many of the States, from Maryland and Virginia to Kansas.

      About three weeks after his return from his Kentucky tour, Mr. Campbell was presented (Dec. 16, 1824) with [122] another daughter, who was named Margaretta, being the eighth child in less than thirteen years. During the ensuing year (1825) he devoted himself with renewed earnestness to the "Christian Baptist," the circulation of which was rapidly extending. Among the prominent subjects then under discussion may be mentioned "The work of the Holy Spirit in the salvation of men." This theme Mr. Campbell had already introduced during the preceding year, and continued now to treat in a manner altogether novel. Utterly disregarding all theological theories and all speculations in reference to the work of the Holy Spirit, he confined his inquiries to the office which the Spirit of God occupies in the salvation revealed in the New Testament. Without calling in question directly any of the popular notions of the operations of the Spirit, he presented alone the simple teaching of the Scriptures, showing occasionally where these had been perverted and misapplied in order to sustain modern errors. Dealing alone with facts and express Scripture statements, he traced the work of the Spirit in revealing all that was known of God, and in attesting and confirming, by prophecy, by miracle and by supernatural gifts, the mission of Christ and of the apostles, thus providing the infallible testimony by which alone faith can be produced. Stating that these manifestations of Divine wisdom and power were confined to the apostolic age, and to a portion of the saints then living, he shows, further, that "the influences of the Spirit as the Spirit of all goodness were felt and realized by all the primitive saints, and are now felt by all true believers." He was ever cautious and reticent as to views of the manner in which the Holy Spirit accomplished his work. He rejoiced in the promise that God would "give his Holy Spirit to them that ask [123] him;" he believed in the reality of this gift as the true seal of the covenant and the source of the fruits that adorn the Christian life, but he forbore to offer any opinion or to propound any theory as to the manner in which the Holy Spirit exerted its power, except so far as this could be seen in the moral fitness or adaptation of the truth itself revealed by the Spirit, when this was presented to men and sincerely believed. What special or added influences might be exerted he presumed not to say, though he clearly admitted the existence of such influences.

      "I am not to be understood," said he, speaking of converting influences (C. B. for April, 1825), "as asserting that there is no divine influence exercised over the minds and bodies of men. This would be to assert in contradiction to a thousand facts and declarations in the volume of revelation; this would be to destroy the idea of any divine revelation; this would be to destroy the idea of any divine government exercised over the human race; this would be to make prayer a useless and irrational exercise; this would be to deprive Christians of all the consolations derived from a sense of the superintending care, guidance and protection of the Most High. But to resolve everything into a 'divine influence' is the other extreme. This divests man of every attribute that renders him accountable to his Maker, and assimilates all his actions to the bending of the trees or the tumults of the ocean occasioned by the tempest.

      "There are many things which are evident, yet altogether inexplicable. . . . Until we know more of God than can be revealed or known in this mortal state, we must be content to say of a thousand things, a thousand times, we cannot understand how, or why, or wherefore they are so. But he would be a foolish husbandman who, going forth with precious seed to cast upon his field, would cease to scatter it because a philosopher had asked him some questions about its germination and the influences requisite to its vegetation which he [124] could not explain. As foolish would a hungry man be who would refuse to eat bread because he could not explain the process of digestion, nor tell how it conduces to the preservation of life. And just as foolish he who refuses to meditate upon the revelation of God, and to practice its injunctions, because there are some whys or wherefores for which he cannot give a reason."

      He thus sought to confine the attention to that which was immediately necessary to faith, and to avoid unprofitable discussions respecting remote or accessory causes.

      During this year Mr. Campbell began to publish a series of articles entitled "A Restoration of the Ancient Order of Things," in which he urged, first, the abandonment of everything not in use among the early Christians, as creeds and confessions, unscriptural words and phrases, theological theories, etc.; and second, the adoption of everything sanctioned by primitive practice, as the weekly breaking of the loaf, the fellowship, the simple order of public worship and the independence of each church under the care of its bishops and deacons. This "ancient order" had, as yet, been introduced only into the churches at Brush Run, Wellsburg and Pittsburg, though the church at Louisville, over which Mr. Fall presided, was induced this year to replace its covenant and confession of faith by the New Testament as the only and all-sufficient law of life, and to break the loaf and attend to the contribution for the poor at every Lord's day meeting. As most of the active members of the church at Pittsburg were from Scotland and Ireland, and sympathized largely with the views of church order adopted by some of the Haldaneans, the practice of mutual exhortation and teaching on the Lord's day was here fully carried out, with much the same effect as occurred in [125] Scotland upon its first introduction by William Ballantine. Debates and dissensions arose frequently between members, while that watchful surveillance, amounting almost to inquisitorial scrutiny, which each thought it his duty to exercise over others occasioned numerous cases of discipline, by which the public religious meetings were disturbed and the cause discredited. These things were warmly disapproved by Mr. Campbell and Walter Scott, who, although they fully admitted the perfect equality of all members, and their liberty to speak in the church at proper times and under proper regulations, insisted that a proper direction should be given to the gifts of all, and that none should teach publicly except those capable of edifying the church.

      The new-born spirit of liberty, however, was for a while not to be repressed; the less competent proved often the most forward, and, converting a mere privilege into a duty, felt it incumbent on them to occupy much of the time allotted to the Lord's day meeting, to little profit. About this period Mr. Scott was one day accompanying Mr. Campbell on his way from Pittsburg home, and they attended together the meeting of the church at the Cross Roads, in which the order of the Pittsburg Church had been to a considerable extent adopted. A number of the members having read various Scriptures and spoken at length, Mr. Scott was finally called on to say something. With this invitation he at once complied, by boldly taking the ground that it was unscriptural to have so many teachers, that the liberty conceded was carried to license, and that each member should be confined, according to the Scripture analogy of the human body, to the particular function for which he was best fitted. At the close of his remarks he inquired with emphasis, in the broad Scotch [126] he sometimes used, "What, my brethren! is the Church to be a' mouth?" " But," said James Foster to him after meeting, "what will you do with the apostle's declaration to the Church, 1 Cor. xiv. 31: 'Ye may all prophesy, one by one, that all may learn and all may be comforted?' The answer given to this inquiry was not fully satisfactory to James Foster, who earnestly desired that everything should be conducted strictly according to Scripture precedent, and who leaned considerably to the views of the Scottish Independents.

      Mr. Campbell, however, fully concurred in the justness of Mr. Scott's admonitions on this occasion, being exceedingly desirous that everything should be conducted according to the ultimate or higher law given by the apostle: "Let all things be done to edification." He entirely approved of mutual exhortation and instruction, but thought it best that a general permission to speak should be confined to private or social meetings of the church, and that at the Lord's day meetings, when the public were expected to attend, only those should be set forward who were best able, from their knowledge of the Bible and their natural gifts, to speak acceptably and profitably to the assembly. To discharge this duty properly required, he thought, careful previous study and preparation. In overthrowing clerical power, he sought to check the tendency to an extreme in the direction of individual independency. He endeavored, therefore, to secure to the elders or bishops of the church not only their proper position and authority, but also the pecuniary support enjoined in Scripture. This, accordingly, he took care again to urge in his "Essays on the Ancient Order of Things."

      "The bishop of a Christian congregation?" said he, "will find much to do that never enters into the mind of a modern [127] preacher or minister. The duties he is to discharge to Christ's flock in the capacity of teacher and president will engross much of his time and attention. Therefore, the idea of remuneration for his services was attached to the office from the first institution. This is indisputably plain, not only from the positive commands delivered to the congregations, but from the hints uttered with reference to the office itself. Why should it be so much as hinted that the bishops were not to take the oversight of the flock 'for the sake of sordid gain,' if no emolument or remuneration was attached to the office? The abuses of the principle have led many to oppose even the principle itself." ("Christian Baptist," vol. iii., No. 9, p. 360.)

      In the case of the church at Pittsburg, however, it was some time before this portion of the "ancient order of things" was practically recognized, and before the disorders incident to the transition state were fully corrected. During this year (1825) Sidney Rigdon returned to Ohio, and the church there continued under the care of Walter Scott, who was still engaged in school-teaching, and had some time before been united in marriage to a highly-esteemed member of the church, a Miss Whitsett, who had formerly been a Covenanter. In 1826, however, he removed to Steubenville, Ohio, where he opened a school and lectured to the small Baptist church there. After his departure from Pittsburg, the contentions in the church increased, and unruly and vain talkers, as in the primitive ages, occasioned discord and strife. Repudiating the clergy and the pope, each member became not only his own pope, but disposed to assume this office in regard to others; and it was not until after many dissensions, which greatly hindered the spread of the truth in this region, that Samuel Church, leaving the Independent congregation under Mr. Tassey, united with the disciples at [128] Pittsburg, and succeeded finally in reducing them to order.

      Another custom, zealously adopted by the church in Pittsburg, which also extended to other churches, was the use of the "holy kiss" as the proper Christian salutation. To this Mr. Campbell was opposed, alleging that the Scripture injunction, "Salute one another with a holy kiss," merely indicated the feelings and motives which were to govern the use of the mode of salutation then common in the East, ana which were equally applicable to whatever kind of salutation obtained in other countries, in which he thought Christianity designed to make no change. The practice, accordingly, was after some time abandoned. The washing of feet was also a custom observed by the Pittsburg Church, not, however, as a church ordinance, but privately, as an act of brotherly affection, humility and hospitality. In this Mr. Campbell agreed, although he did not think that proper occasions for such a duty could often arise in Europe or America, as they did in regions where men wore sandals, and where washing of the feet was a common and daily observance.

      The introduction of the primitive order of Christian worship, and especially of the weekly observance of the Lord's Supper, engaged at this time much attention among those Baptist churches which had adopted the principles of the Reformation. Several of them in Ohio and the western part of Pennsylvania, rejecting the Philadelphia Confession, decided to take the Bible as the only standard of faith and practice. A meeting was held also at Warren, Ohio, at the close of May, composed of preachers and brethren from different parts of the country, in order to discuss the "ancient order of things." Mr. Campbell attended this meeting, and [129] was gratified to find that so much zeal, candor and harmony obtained throughout the investigation, and that most of those present were very desirous of seeing the primitive order fully restored.

      In his essays on this subject, Mr. Campbell had confined himself entirely to the interior affairs of the Church, and had not dwelt upon the instrumentalities to be employed in sending the gospel abroad. He seemed, indeed, for a short time to have favored the views of those who thought the mere internal order of the Church itself sufficient for the conversion of the world, but he soon became sensible of the correctness of his former view, that the practice of committing this work to evangelists or special messengers of the Church was essential to success. When questioned, soon after, by one of his correspondents on this subject, he said:

      "'That the work of an evangelist or a preacher is requisite, not to the order of a Christian Church, but to the present state of the new dispensation,' is a position on which I will not contend with you. The Holy Spirit saith, 'Let him that heareth say, Come,' and why should I say to him that heareth, 'Do not say, Come; hold your tongue.' No: forbid it, Heaven! 'Let him that heareth say, Come,' is a license which the Holy One gave when he was closing the canon, sealing up the law and the testimony. And, thanks be to his name, he left no tribunal on earth to contravene this decision. While then there are any who have not come to the fountain of life, and when any one who has heard and come and tasted and findeth such an opportunity to say, Come, let him say it in word and deed." C. B., vol. iv., p. 37.

      In the summer, he made a short visit to Eastern Virginia, where he was kindly received, and where he formed an acquaintance with Robert B. Semple, Andrew Broaddus and other eminent Baptist ministers. The few [130] discourses he delivered during his visit made quite a strong impression. The leaders of the Baptists in Eastern Virginia, however, though struck with Mr. Campbell's great abilities, were by no means prepared to receive his reformatory views. They earnestly desired, on the other hand, to win him over to their own sentiments and usages, in order that his influence might enure to the benefit of the Baptist cause.

      After his return home, he received a kind letter from Bishop Semple, objecting to the spirit in which the "Christian Baptist" seemed to be conducted, and to some of the sentiments attributed to Mr. Campbell, intimating that he seemed to be a Sandemanian or a Haldanean both in his views and spirit.

      "Among the Haldaneans," said he "(judging from writings), a gentle spirit is rarely to be found. Harsh and bitter sarcasms are the weapons with which they fight their opponents. This, too, I am the more disposed to think applies to them as a sect, because I have known some of their party, who have appeared in private conversation to be mild and gentle indeed and every way pleasant, but when brought out in writing or public speaking, seemed to have another kind of temper. If you will bear with me, it seems to me that this is the case with the editor of the 'Christian Baptist.' As a man, in private circles, mild, pleasant and affectionate--as a writer, rigid and satirical beyond all the bounds of Scripture allowance."

      Bishop Semple was a most estimable man, and stood deservedly high in influence and reputation. Being of a very mild and amiable temperament, Mr. Campbell's strictures seemed to him quite too severe. In reply, the latter reminded him that while the general spirit of the New Testament was mild, its denunciations of those who corrupted the gospel were severe, and that Christians [131] were even enjoined in certain cases to rebuke with sharpness. He also remarked that the class of subjects discussed in the "Christian Baptist" necessarily gave a general character to the work, whose limited size prevented him from introducing, as fully as he desired, such other topics as might exhibit the Christian spirit to a better advantage. Utterly denying that he was a follower of Sandeman or any other human leader, and expressing the opinion that there "lived not upon the earth a more pious, godly, primitive Christian than James Haldane, of Edinburgh, and few, if any, more intelligent in the Christian Scriptures," he thus spoke of the charge of want of forbearance alleged by the Bishop against the Haldaneans:

      "You say, 'those people have many excellent things among them--things you would gladly see among us.' So say I. You think 'they are very defective in forbearance.' This may be still true, for anything I know; but one thing I do know, that several congregations in this connection are far more 'forbearing' than the Baptists of Virginia; for several of them receive unbaptized persons to the Lord's table on the ground of forbearance. The congregation in Edinburgh in connection with James Haldane, and that in Tubermore in connection with Alexander Carson, two of the most prominent congregations in the connection, do actually dispense with baptism on the ground of 'forbearance.' I believe there are some others who carry 'forbearance' thus far. These people have been much slandered at home and abroad by an interested priesthood, and I do know that many things reported of them are false. They say that when a Pædobaptist gives evidence that he is a Christian, and cannot be convinced that infant baptism is a human tradition, he ought to be received into a Christian congregation as a brother, if he desires it, irrespective of this weakness. They were once more tenacious of their peculiar views than at present. [132]

      "But on the subject of forbearance, I have to remark that there is not a greater misapplication of a word in our language than of this one. In strict propriety, it does not apply at all to the subject in relation to which it is commonly used. No man can be said to forbear with another except in such cases as he has done him an injury. Now when Christians differ in opinion on any subject, unless it can be made to appear that the opinion of B is injurious to A, the latter cannot forbear with the former. There is no room or occasion for forbearance, for A is not injured by the opinion of B. To say that Christians must exercise forbearance with one another because of difference of opinion, is admitting that they have a right to consider themselves injured, or that one Christian has a right to consider himself injured because of another man's difference in opinion. It is precisely the same mistake which is committed by those who ask the civil authorities to tolerate all or any religious opinions. The mere asking for toleration recognizes a right which no civil authority possesses, and establishes a principle of calamitous consequences--viz., that opinions contrary to the majority or the national creed are a public injury, which it is in the power of government to punish or tolerate according to their intelligence and forbearance. Civil rulers have no right to tolerate or punish men on account of their opinions in matters of religion. Neither have Christians a right to condemn their brethren for difference of opinion, nor even talk of forbearing with one another in matters of opinion. The Scriptures speak of the forbearance of God, and teach that Christians should forbear with one another in cases of injury sustained, but never, that I can see, on account of matters of opinion. A person might as well be said to forbear with his natural brother because he was only ten years old or five feet high or because he had gray eyes, as to forbear with a Christian brother because he differed from him in some of his opinions. I know that we all use the term forbearance in a very unwarrantable sense, and that it is difficult to find a term appropriate to communicate correct ideas on this subject. To [133] bear with or allow a brother to exercise his own judgment is no doubt all that you can intend by the term, and this is certainly inculcated in the apostolic writings. And I am willing to carry this principle to its greatest possible extent, though, as you say, 'there is and must be a stopping-place.' So long as any man, woman or child declares his confidence in Jesus of Nazareth as God's own Son, that he was delivered for our offences and raised again for our justification--or, in other words, that Jesus is the Messiah, the Saviour of men--and so long as he exhibits a willingness to obey him in all things so far as his knowledge extends, so long will I receive him as a Christian brother and treat him as such."

      The novel position which Mr. Campbell now occupied in relation to the religious community, and especially to the Baptists, exposed him to criticisms and attacks from all quarters. Charges of Socinianism and heterodox were diligently circulated among the Baptist churches in different places, in order to deprive him of influence and create a feeling of hostility. These, when brought to his notice, Mr. Campbell promptly repelled, and candidly and manfully avowed his real sentiments. In regard to the Baptists, indeed, he had always exercised the greatest frankness, concealing neither his views nor his purposes. While he desired to lead them on to clearer views of the gospel, and was cheered by many tokens of success, he was yet well aware that his position among them was precarious, and that there remained yet much to do in order to overcome existing denominational prejudices. Of his wishes and designs in relation to the Baptists he thus openly speaks to a correspondent from Missouri:

      "I do intend to continue in connection with this people so long as they will permit me to say what I believe; to teach what I am assured of, and to censure what is amiss in their views or practices. I have no idea of adding to the catalogue [134] of new sects. . . . I labor to see sectarianism abolished and all Christians of every name united upon the one foundation upon which the apostolic Church was founded. To bring Baptists and Pædobaptists to this is my supreme end. But to connect myself with any people who would require me to sacrifice one item of revealed truth, to subscribe any creed of human device, or to restrain me from publishing my sentiments as discretion and conscience direct, is now, and I hope ever will be, the farthest from my desires and the most incompatible with my views. And I hope I will not be accused of sectarian partiality when I avow my conviction that the Baptist society have as much liberality in their views, as much of the ancient simplicity of the Christian Church, as much of the spirit of Christianity about them, as are to be found among any other people. To say nothing of the things in which they excel, this may be said of them without prejudice to any. And that they have always been as eminent friends of civil and religious liberty as any sect in Christendom will not, I presume, be denied by any. But that there are among them some mighty Regulars who are as intolerant as the great pontiff of good order and regularity, no person will deny. But that there is in the views and practices of this large and widely-extended community a great need of reformation and of a restoration of the ancient order of things, few will contradict. In one thing they may appear, in time to come, proudly singular and pre-eminently distinguished. Mark it well. Their historian, in the year 1900, may say, 'We are the only people who would tolerate, or who ever did tolerate, any person to continue as a reformer or restorer among us. While other sects excluded all who would have enlarged their views and exalted their virtues, while every Jerusalem in Christendom stoned its own prophets, and exiled its own best friends and compelled them to set up for themselves, we constitute the only exception of this kind in the annals of Christianity--nay, in the annals of the world.' I think it not a very precarious perhaps that this may yet be said of this ancient and singular people. But [135] should it come to pass that neither they nor any other people could say that of themselves, then, most assuredly, if ever there be a united and a happy state of the Church upon this earth--if ever there be a millennium--the Baptist society, as well as every other, will have to be immersed in that general catastrophe which awaits every sect which holds a principle incompatible with this millennial state of the Church." (C. B., vol. iii., p. 320.)

      While Mr. Campbell thus felt and expressed a special regard for that religious community which, in his judgment, approached most nearly to the apostolic standard, and desired to continue in communion with it, he constantly maintained his own independent position. When accused of inconsistency as a restorer of primitive Christianity in having communion with the Baptists, who had not adopted the ancient order of things, he thus plainly expressed his views of what is called "full communion:"

      "When I unite in prayer with a society of disciples, I have full communion with them in certain petitions, confessions and thanksgivings, but requests may be presented, confessions made and thanksgivings offered in which I have not full communion. The same may be said of any other social act of worship. All that I intend by the phrase is, that I will unite with any Baptist society in the United States in any act of social worship, such as prayer, praise or breaking bread in commemoration of the Lord's death, if they confess the one Lord, the one faith, the one hope and the one baptism; provided always that, as far as I can judge, they piously and morally conform to their profession. . . . I consider every act as only expressing approbation of the thing represented, and of them in so far as they conform to it. Therefore, I frankly and boldly declare to them, as Paul did to the Corinthians, the things in which I praise them, and the things in which I praise them not. And I know of no way, of no course that any Christian can pursue consistently with the [136] New Testament, consistently with his serving God and his own generation, but this one. Therefore, I advocate it and practice it."

      Referring to the more rigid views to which he was led in 1811 on the subject of religious fellowship, he continues:

      "I have tried the pharisaic plan and the monastic. I was once so straight that, like the Indian's tree, 'I leaned a little the other way.' And however much I maybe slandered now as seeking 'popularity' or a popular course, I have to rejoice that to my own satisfaction, as well as to others', I proved that truth and not popularity was my object; for I was once so strict a separatist that I would neither pray nor sing praises with any one who was not as perfect as I supposed myself. In this most unpopular course I persisted until I discovered the mistake, and saw that on the principle embraced in my conduct there never could be a congregation or church upon the earth." (C. B., vol. iii., p. 373.)

      Mr. Campbell thus thought there was great inconsistency among professors of religion in regard to the subject of communion. He did not think this confined to a participation in the Lord's Supper, but that there was also Christian communion in uniting in prayer or praise, or other acts of religious worship.

      "There is," said he, "a certain place, called The Family Altar. Baptists and Pædobaptists of different name often meet at this 'family altar,' and there unite all in one communion. In their monthly concerts for prayer, etc., there is another 'altar,' at which all sects sometimes meet, and all have full communion in prayer and praise. But if, on the next day, the Lord's table was furnished, they would rather be caught in company with publicans and sinners than sit at the side of those with whom they had full communion in prayer and praise a few hours before. Their consciences would shudder at the idea of breaking bread in full [137] communion with those with whom, yesterday or last night, they had full communion in adoring, venerating, invoking and praising the same God and Redeemer. . . . It must be confessed, too, that the New Testament presents baptism as prior to social prayer and praise, as indispensably preceding these as the Lord's Supper." . . .

      These passages afford a clear insight into the state of Mr. Campbell's convictions at this time in regard to the vexed question of communion. Remembering the earnestness and faith in which the church at Brush Run sought to know and to do the will of God, while yet mistaken in regard to baptism, his feelings led him to wish to have communion with any similar churches, though they might be yet Pædobaptist. Nevertheless, he remained fully satisfied that the New Testament presented baptism as "indispensably preceding" social communion in religious acts. Thus he was placed in a strait between his conviction on the one hand that there were saints of God in all parties, and on the other that obedience to the ordinances of the Gospel was necessary to church membership. His feelings led him to recognize all as Christians who gave evidence of faith and piety, while his views of the Gospel restricted him to formal communion with those only who had publicly professed to put on Christ in baptism. In practice he was governed exclusively by his conscientious convictions, and was thus often obliged to do violence to his feelings; nor was it until after some years that a somewhat different view of the subject finally relieved him from the practical difficulties connected with this communion question.

      Mr. Campbell was, upon the whole, during this year (1825) greatly encouraged by the progress of the views he advocated. [138]

      "We are happy to find," said he, after his return from a tour (C. B., iii., 267), "that, in spite of the reigning doctors of tradition, the people are gradually awakening to a sense of their religious rights and privileges. We find a large majority of most religious communities are quite unsettled in their views of religious principles and practices. They have lost the greatest part of that confidence which was the characteristic of every sect some quarter of a century ago. Many who thought their Church almost infallible readily admit that she not only may, but that she frequently does, err. And there is a spirit of inquiry marching forth, before which, most assuredly, the rotten systems of tradition and error must and will fall."

      These anticipations were strongly corroborated by passing events. John M. Duncan, pastor of the Presbyterian church in Tammany street, Baltimore, about this time published a book "On the Rise, Use and Unlawfulness of Creeds and Confessions of Faith in the Church of God." He boldly controverted the doctrine taught by Dr. Miller of Princeton a short time before, in a pamphlet advocating creeds, and declared his view to be that "God alone is lord of the conscience, and that his Bible is the only rule of faith and practice; or, if the reader pleases, that church courts and human creeds are not entitled, in any shape or form, to control the human conscience." This able and conclusive work of Mr. Duncan created considerable excitement, which was in no wise lessened when he and Charles McLean, pastor of the Presbyterian church in Gettysburg, both declined the jurisdiction of the Presbyterian Church in the United States, on the ground of their objections to creeds and confessions of faith. The Synod of Baltimore then declared their congregations "vacant;" but these, with great unanimity, took part with their pastors, who continued to minister to them as usual. Not long [139] afterward, for similar reasons, the Presbyterian church on Thirteenth street, Philadelphia, renounced the authority of creeds and Presbyterian church courts, and with their pastor, Mr. Chambers, continued to meet as before, receiving numerous accessions.

      In several Baptist associations which Mr. Campbell visited during the fall he was also much pleased to observe the progress of liberal views and the good spirit which prevailed. On the Western Reserve, all things seemed to be moving on favorably, and in the Stillwater Association, which had been shortly before formed of churches in the counties of the same State contiguous to the Ohio river, he found most of the messengers disposed to adopt the reformatory views. The case was far different in the Redstone Association, to which James Philips, a Welsh Baptist preacher, was sent as a messenger from Stillwater, and denied admission because of his open opposition to creeds. The Redstone Association, indeed, under the leadership of Mr. Brownfield and others, refused at their meeting to receive the messengers from any churches which did not in their letters expressly recognize the Philadelphia Confession of Faith. They undoubtedly had the constitution of the Association in their favor, for in this there was a clause requiring the churches to recognize the Philadelphia Confession. This, however, had not been adopted by the majority of the churches of the Association individually, and had remained heretofore entirely inoperative.

      In Kentucky a spirit somewhat similar to this marked the course of the Long Run Association, meeting in Bullitt county. P. S. Fall, who, from ill health, had given up his charge in Louisville, and was now in Frankfort, had been clerk of this Association, to which the Louisville Church belonged in 1824, and had been [140] appointed to write the circular letter for 1825, and to deliver the introductory address. This address, which was on the "Opening of the Reign of the Messiah," was so novel in its subject, and so different from the usual theological disquisitions in its style, that it excited much remark. The Circular Letter, however, which maintained that "the Scriptures of the New Testament were the only and all-sufficient rule of faith and manners," was regarded with still greater suspicion, and met with much hostility. After having been violently assailed and placed in the hands of a committee for investigation, by whom some slight verbal changes were made and an explanatory sentence added, it was again read and discussed in the Association, and finally rejected by the casting vote of the moderator, Elder George Waller. On his return to Frankfort, Mr. Fall read the letter to Dr. Noel and Jacob Creath, Sr., who both warmly approved it, the former remarking, "If I had been there, it should have passed."

      The opposition, however, of a few leaders among the Baptists, who feared innovation, and desired to maintain the usages of the party, had but little effect in arresting the progress of the reformatory principles among the churches. At the very meeting of the Long Run Association which rejected the circular letter advocating the Bible as the only rule of faith and manners, the queries presented by some of the churches were quite significant of approaching change. Among those referred to the churches for investigation were the following:

      "1. Is there any authority in the New Testament for religious bodies to make human creeds and confessions of faith the constitutions or directories of such bodies in matters of faith or practice?

      "2. Is there any authority in the New Testament for [141] Associations? If so, what is it? If not, why are they held?

      "3. Are our Associations, as annually attended, of general utility?"

      Such inquiries indicated that the New Testament was beginning to be recognized among the Kentucky churches also as the true religious standard, and that there was a waning faith in the existing order of things.

      Soon afterward, in the beginning of 1826, Mr. Fall removed to Nashville at the earnest invitation of the church in that city. Some of its members were already deeply interested in the proper method of studying the New Testament. Others had become alarmed at a rumor that Mr. Fall was abandoning the Baptist faith. Dr. John C. Ewing, however, the clerk of the church, wrote to him (Aug. 28, 1825): "You need have no apprehensions on this ground, and you will find enough here to support you who are tied to no doctrines but those that are indubitably scriptural." He accordingly removed to Nashville, and in addition to his labors in the church, which soon became entirely favorable to the reformatory principles, took charge of a female academy--an occupation for which he was eminently fitted, and in which he became highly distinguished both here and at Frankfort, to which he returned after some years. [142]

[MAC2 103-142]