OR several years after Scott came before the people with his plea for the restoration of the primitive gospel, public discussions were frequent. Wherever he or his fellow-laborers came, the whole community was thrown into a ferment, which was but the natural result of views so long unquestioned being assailed and brought into doubt, and others, new and strange, presented and enforced with rare ability. But this was not all, the new views were readily adopted by many who had long rejected the orthodox views as contradictory; and even many of those who had previously accepted them fell in with the teaching of the men whom they regarded at first as turning the world upside down.

      This, more than all things else, aroused the leaders of the various religious parties to the defense of their long-cherished doctrines, and caused them to forget, for a season, their old rivalries, and unite against the Disciples whom they regarded as a common foe.

      Prior to this time, the contest had been between the partisans of the different and conflicting creeds--Calvinism against its opposite, Arminianism; Universalism against Partialism, or universal redemption [370] against particular redemption; sovereign and irresistible grace on one side, and free will on the other. Faith alone, against faith and works, and numberless other points of difference, exercised the skill and zeal of the various religious teachers, each of which was like a faithful watchman on the walls of his own little Zion, quick to perceive, and ready to repel any danger that might threaten, and equally ready to assail the weak points of the foe.

      Nothing can be clearer than that this state of things could not have prevailed had the Bible, as the only rule of faith and practice, never been departed from; for no one could for a moment entertain the thought that views perfectly contradictory could be found in the Bible, for that would destroy faith in it as the Word of God.

      The contest would have been interminable had not a new element been introduced; for the various creeds and religious systems were of equal authority--that is, they were equally the work of man; and the Bible was resorted to, not in order to find the system that was attempted to be established, but, if possible, to draw from it something that would seemingly sustain it. Calvinists would adduce passages taken out of their connection to prove unconditional election, and the Universalists others, to prove that the entire race would be saved unconditionally; while the conclusions of both were at utter variance with such clear and unmistakable declarations of conditionality as "He (Christ) became the author of an eternal salvation to all them that obey him," and "Blessed are they that do his commandments," which would be unmeaning if [371] Christ were the author of an eternal salvation to all the disobedient; and if those who did not do his commandments were as safe as those who did; both parties ignoring the decisions of the last day--the "well done" of final approval, and the "depart" to endless woe. Learned men would make the Mosaic covenant and the new covenant, or covenant in Christ, identical, in the face of all the various terms employed by an apostle to show that they were different and distinct. He calls the latter a "better covenant," a "second covenant," a "new covenant," one "not according to," or unlike the Mosaic--all of which clearly imply another; and yet it was the same! They could not fail, however, to perceive that two covenants were spoken of; and, as it would not suit their purpose to admit that the Mosaic was the first, they proved that a covenant, which they claimed had been made with Adam, was the first, by reference to Gal. iii: 12: "And the law is not of faith; but the man that doeth them shall live in them;" while Paul uses it with reference to the Mosaic covenant. With equal clearness and satisfaction to themselves, infant baptism was proved by the passage, "suffer little children to come unto me, and forbid them not, for of such is the kingdom of heaven; this was regarded as clear and unmistakable evidence that they were baptized, although the sacred record says, that "he took them in his arms, put his hands on them, and blessed them." But a great change took place when the Disciples said, show us your system in the Bible; you must not simply get your proof, but you must get the proposition--the thing to be proved--from that book; [372] it will not answer to get your doctrine or practice from other sources, and attempt to sustain them by texts of Scripture which were written with reference to entirely different matters; such a course is not treating the Word of God fairly, but rather to pervert it. Confident, however, of the strength of their positions and their hold upon the public mind, and regarding the Disciples as few and feeble, and easy to be crushed by a combined effort; the leaders of the various religious parties rather invited than shunned controversy, while the little band, armed with the Sword of the Spirit, which is the Word of God, were calm and confident.

      The strife soon waxed hot, and those who wielded the blade of heavenly temper soon showed the superiority of that weapon over all the arms of sectarian warfare. No armor of human device was proof against the old Jerusalem blade, and its quick, bright flashing in every contest against long-cherished and time-honored errors was ever the harbinger of speedy and glorious victory. No weapon formed against it could prosper; the learning and talent brought to sustain false and unscriptural views were of little avail in this struggle; men of the humblest attainments, destitute of the aids and adornments of learning, with minds replete with the Word of God, and hearts filled with the love for it, because it was His Word, met with those the most gifted in all other respects; but the Sword of the Spirit in their hands, like the famous Damascus blade, pierced through the mail of false logic, by which error was defended, and, like the same weapon, cut asunder the silken scarf of brilliant rhetoric, which was so often used to [373] render plausible the traditions of men, which long had usurped the place of the commandments of God. Or, to change the figure, the ponderous Goliaths of orthodoxy, clad in all the panoply of learning, libraries, and bodies of divinity, sustained by popular sentiment, and long and unquestioned usage, fell before the men of one book, as the mailed giant fell before the stripling David, armed only with his sling and a few smooth stones from the brook. A single, "thus saith the Lord" would sweep away a host of inferences, however plausible, and a single scriptural example outweigh the reasonings of a multitude, no matter how learned and pious they might be.

      The truth proved to be mighty, and many persons of influence, learning, and position, at the sacrifice of nearly all that men hold clear, changed their religious views and relations under the teachings of men every way their inferiors, save in purity of life, and an intimate acquaintance with the English Bible.

      Possessed, as Elder Scott was, of great learning, as well as of great and various talents, it is somewhat remarkable that he took but little part in the numerous discussions of the day which grew out of the plea which he was the first to advocate with such marked ability and success. He was not fond of controversy, although his preaching did much to provoke it, as it was in direct conflict with the prevalent religious teaching of the times; but he was so guarded and careful in his public addresses that those who differed from him were under the necessity of opposing, not a new theory or system of [374] the preacher's differing from and subversive of their own, but were compelled to deny what the Scriptures expressly affirmed. He was often interrupted and rudely assailed during his public ministrations; and at such times his answers were so ready, so much to the purpose, and, withal, in such a meek and gentle spirit, that he scarcely ever failed to leave a good impression on those who were present; and, during his long editorial career, whenever his views were called in question, he was always able to thrust or parry, as he was on the offensive or defensive, with a skill and temper truly admirable--and yet he was not a controversialist.

      This peculiarity, for such it doubtless was, when the spirit of investigation, which was every-where aroused by his preaching, is considered, arose not from any want of the logical and critical faculty, for few men of modern times have given better evidence of the possession of such power than he; but the personalities, and the desire for victory, apart from the interests of truth, were distasteful in the highest degree to his truthful and sensitive nature. He loved to preach the glad tidings, as found in the gospel message, more than disputation; to call sinners to repentance, more than to triumph over an adversary; he was willing to leave his views to the fate they deserved, well knowing that if true they could not be overthrown, and without a wish for their success if they were otherwise than true.

      Discussion, however, in those times was not only needful and beneficial, but unavoidable; rendered so by the revolutionary nature of his plea for an abandonment of all that was modern, new, and of human [375] device in religion, and a return to that which was ancient, old, and divine. The times demanded men of war, and such were many of his fellow-laborers; and, indeed, nearly all the preachers in the early period of this movement, like the Jews who came from captivity to restore the temple, were obliged to defend from the violence of their enemies the walls they were striving to uprear.

      One of these discussions took place in Portage County, between Stephen M. Hubbard, a Methodist minister, and William Hayden, as early as 1828, on the design of baptism; but the time, which was limited to a single afternoon, was not sufficient for a full examination of the subject. This debate, however, gave rise to another upon the same question, in which three speakers on each side participated; and the fact that the number of the Disciples was soon greatly increased in the region where the debate took place, showed very clearly which side was regarded as successful. Another very brief yet decisive contest was upon the proposition that "the sinner is justified by faith only." The minister who affirmed set forth his proof, and having consumed about half an hour took his seat. His opponent read in reply the following passage of Scripture: "Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only" (Jas. ii: 24), and, though not regarding or intending it as proof that justification was by works only, he saw that it was fatal to the position of his opponent, so, without a word of comment, he took his seat. Again the affirmative attempted to sustain his position, and again he was met by the reading of the same verse; an hour's labor had been spent and spent in vain; it had been [376] agreed that the Scriptures should decide, and the verse which denied the proposition under discussion had not been disposed of, and he wisely concluded to abandon a contest in which the way to success was so effectually closed by a single passage from the Book of God.

      The next case will be given more in detail, as it is a representative one, and well calculated to show the advantage which truth gives in a discussion, above all the aids and appliances of learning and culture when these are employed in the interests of error. The disputant in this instance, on the part of the Disciples, was Jonas Hartzel, a plain farmer, with little learning, but a man of strong native sense, who, by close thought and careful reading of the Scriptures, had become quite a forcible speaker, his strength consisting in his ability to show what the teaching of the Bible was upon any given theme. His opponent was the Rev. Mr. Waldo, a minister of the Congregational Church, a gentleman of fine literary attainments, a fluent speaker, well read upon the theological questions of the day, and at that time at the head of a literary institution on the Western Reserve.

      The circumstances were as follows: Mrs. Julia A. King, wife of judge King, of Warren, and a member of the Congregational Church, having heard Mr. Hartzel, became convinced of the truth as presented by him, and consequently that her own religious position was untenable; after examining the matter fully, she decided upon leaving the popular church of which she was a member and uniting with the Disciples, a step which required more moral courage and involved a greater sacrifice then than now. This [377] change caused quite an excitement, the social position of Mrs. King, her standing in the church, and cultivated manners causing her to be regarded as one of the most influential persons in the circle in which she moved. The Rev. Waldo, then residing at Farmington, Trumbull County, hearing of the defection of such a prominent personage, visited Warren, and sought an interview with Mrs. King, with the benevolent purpose of convincing her of her error, and of inducing her to return to the fold from whence she had strayed. The desired interview was readily granted, and Mr. Hartzel was invited to be present. Mr. Waldo, to his great astonishment, found the lady well prepared to defend the step she had taken, and Mr. Hartzel, in a short time, discovered that she needed no aid at his hands, and remained a silent and gratified listener. Mr. Waldo made "baptism for the remission of sins" the chief point of attack, declaring that it was a dangerous and most ruinous heresy. Mrs. King defended herself so skillfully that Mr. Waldo became somewhat irritated at being foiled by one of the weaker vessels, and, turning to Mr. Hartzel, who was quietly watching the progress of the contest, said: " Sir, I will debate this question with Alexander Campbell or yourself." Mr. Hartzel was too much gratified at the course matters were taking, to have any desire to interfere, and made no reply, and the conversation between Mr. Waldo and Mrs. King was resumed. At its close, Mr. Hartzel said to Mr. Waldo: "I now accept your invitation to a discussion, but it is now too late to settle the preliminaries; we can do that, however, by letter; and it will be proper for you to write first." In a short time [378] Mr. Hartzel received a letter, in which the time place, rules of order, and question to be debated were proposed, all of which were accepted without change.

      The discussion took place in the presence of a large and deeply interested audience. The question was: "Should penitent sinners be baptized for the remission of sins?" and, of course, Mr. Hartzel affirmed. The debate occupied two days, with night sessions. Mr. Waldo proved to be an honorable disputant; his opponent was not inferior to him in that respect, and the result was highly gratifying to Mrs. King and her friends. It was soon rumored that Mr. Waldo was not satisfied with his efforts, and rumor was soon converted into certainty as follows: Mr. Hartzel having occasion to visit Farmington, made a friendly call on his former antagonist, and was kindly received. After some general conversation, Mr. Waldo remarked, "I am not satisfied with my effort in our recent discussion; I needed more time, and I would like to discuss the same question with you again." Mr. Hartzel replied, that, as far as he was concerned, he was satisfied with the debate, but added, "If you desire further discussion, there are other differences between us; for instance, the mode and subjects of baptism." Mr. Waldo replied: "The mode is unimportant; and if baptism be for the remission of sins, infants can not be the subjects of the ordinance." This, of course, was Mr. Hartzel's own view of the case, so another discussion on the old issue was agreed on, and Youngstown as the place. They met according to agreement, the disputants each selected a moderator, and these selected Mr. Rockwell, an honorable lawyer, as president of the board. As Mr. Waldo had complained [379] of want of time at the former discussion, which was two days, it was agreed that this should continue three days. Yet, strange to tell, but one-half of the time was consumed when Mr. Waldo proposed that he should ask five questions, which Mr. Hartzel was to answer, and then the discussion should close. To this proposition Mr. Hartzel made no reply. Mr. Waldo then appealed to the audience to decide upon the merits of his proposal, but they declined to vote upon the matter. Mr. Hartzel then rose, and said: "Mr. Waldo, catechisms are for the edification of children; please refer your proposal to the board of moderators." He did so, but the moderators decided that they had nothing to do with any new arrangement, and that the discussion must be continued in accordance with the rules which had been agreed upon. A long and significant pause followed this decision, when Mr. Hartzel, who perceived where the difficulty lay, rose and said: "Mr. Waldo, I will now propose the condition on which you may retire from this discussion; if you will say to the audience that you have nothing more to offer, you may withdraw." This was a hard alternative, but he was defeated, and knew it, and, though it was exceedingly mortifying, it would have been worse to have attempted to maintain a useless contest, and he therefore rose and said: "Ladies and gentlemen, I have nothing more to offer."

      It must be remembered that Mr. Waldo gave the challenge, and that in education he had greatly the advantage of his opponent, and was, to say the least, his equal in controversial skill; and his defeat, nay, his utter failure, can only be explained on the ground [380] of the weakness of his own position and the strength of that which he had assailed.

      Sometimes the discussions, then so frequent, became somewhat ludicrous, as in the following instance: The question under discussion was the mode of baptism, and, as usual, the baptism of the Ethiopian eunuch was made a strong point by the advocate of immersion. His antagonist, who knew something of the power of ridicule, without thinking that it might be turned against himself, argued that the "certain water" must have been very limited in extent and deficient in quantity, and concluded by giving it as his opinion that the "certain water" was only a crawfish hole. Those who are familiar with the small mounds thrown up by this little shell-fish will remember that the hole is scarcely large enough to admit a good sized finger, and that the water is often a considerable distance below the surface, frequently entirely out of reach. With great adroitness, the advocate of immersion responded: "If the supposition of the gentleman be correct, it will make good sense to insert the term he has chosen in the place of water in the text." He then proceeded, with all the gravity possible, to read as follows: "And as they went on their way, they came to a certain crawfish hole, and the eunuch said, See, here is a crawfish hole, what doth hinder me to be baptized?" At this there was a slight titter in the audience, and the preacher proceeded with the reading, but when he came to read "and he commanded the chariot to stand still, and they went down into the crawfish hole, both Philip and the eunuch," the titter became a subdued laugh; but the inexorable preacher continued, [381] "and he baptized him; and when they were come up out of the crawfish hole"--this proved too much, and the audience burst into loud and long-continued laughter; and the preacher, when silence was in a measure restored, turning to his now discomfited opponent, very gravely observed: "Were we not discussing a serious and important matter, I should feel inclined to say that my friend here was crawfishing." This reference to the peculiar style of this animal's advancing backwards was too much; the audience again exploded, and the advocate of the crawfish hole theory had nothing more to offer.

      One of the most important of these encounters took place at Newton Falls, in the autumn of 1841. Messrs. Steadman and Luckock, ministers of the Methodist Episcopal Church, had taken a vow to root out the "heresy," as they termed the teaching of the Disciples, from the Western Reserve, and to this end a discussion was arranged between them and Elders A. B. Green and M. L. Wilcox. Rules of debate had been agreed upon and signed by both parties, but when the appointed time arrived, the champions of Methodism utterly refused to enter upon the discussion unless the Rev. Mr. Waldo, the Congregational minister already alluded to, should be added to their number. They regarded Messrs. Green and Wilcox as ignorant and unlearned men, and by adding to their own number a critic, scholar, and theologian, they hoped to make their expected victory a decisive one. Unjust and unexpected as this demand was, it was thought best by Elders Green and Wilcox to yield to it, knowing that a refusal to do so would be regarded by their opponents as yielding the points at issue [382] without a struggle. The choice of the Rev. Waldo made it necessary for the other party to choose another, and they selected John Henry, a wise choice on their part, but fatal, as the issue proved, to those who had rendered that choice needful.

      The disputants were all men of ability, but John Henry soon became chief in the esteem of the large assembly gathered on that occasion. Few men could command their resources better than he; his thoughts were well defined, and uttered with a rapidity which required the closest attention to keep up with them; so self-possessed that it was impossible to throw him off his guard; perfectly original in his treatment of his subject; without an equal in that region in a knowledge of the Scriptures, which he quoted from memory as readily and accurately as others could read from the open book; quick and keen in repartee, and able to preserve his gravity while giving utterance to things that convulsed his audience with laughter, and yet so deeply and solemnly in earnest as to often make his hearers feel as if the judgment day were at hand. All his life he had been a laborer in the forest and on his farm--was indeed a farmer still; was destitute of the advantages possessed by his opponents, claiming nothing save a moderate knowledge of his mother tongue--his theology, what he had learned from the English Bible.

      Mr. Waldo was a clergyman and magnified his office, showing that he held it as something not to be despised to belong to the clerical order; he was a classical scholar, the man of learning for this occasion, whose province was to introduce at the proper time the inevitable and indispensable Greek; he had [383] studied theology under the celebrated Moses Stuart, of Andover; was fully panoplied for the combat; and, under these circumstances, it would have been strange had he not felt toward his antagonist somewhat as did the mailed Philistine when the stripling David came out to meet him with a sling and stone.

      When he arose, he could neither conceal his confidence in his own abilities and advantages, nor his contempt for the views he was to assail and the foe over which he expected to gain an easy victory. Indeed, he did not regard the subject as one requiring serious argument; the views of the Disciples were only fit themes for ridicule, and to the use of this weapon he applied himself in a strain somewhat as follows: "The Campbellites have never understood the religion of Christ; they have never got into its heart; they are foolishly pecking away at the outside; they are sticking in the bark; they are like the old fiddler who was standing on a bridge looking at the stream flow by; his fiddle fell from its case into the river, and, as it floated away, one of the bystanders said, 'Your fiddle is gone.' 'Never mind,' said the fiddler, 'all is right; I have got the case all safe,' and he hugged the box that had contained the instrument closer than ever before." He then proceeded: "I give the Campbellites warning, that they may expect rough handling. I was accustomed as well as my opponent to swing the axe and the maul when I was young. I know how to give hard blows; let them look out. The Campbellites are like a parrot, ever repeating the same thing, always crying out 'water! water! it is water that purifies the heart!'--these poor creatures do not understand the Bible; [384] the Scriptures say: 'Faith that works by love purifies the heart.'" He for some other reason compared the Campbellites, as he called them, to a pair of sheep-shears, and with such material made himself merry, wholly unconscious of the reckoning so near at hand; and, having fully exhausted his quiver of every shaft of wit and satire, with an air of perfect complacency and self-satisfaction, he took his seat.

      John Henry's usually impassive features underwent frequent changes during this singular speech, and when he arose to reply, there was a dangerous light in his keen, piercing eyes. He was perfectly cool and collected, but it was the calm which precedes the blinding flash and the terrible thunder peal, and soon the bolt fell. He began by saying: "My brethren have appointed me as a true yoke-fellow with Mr. Waldo, and I intend to follow him jump for jump; he has told of his great learning, his long study, his knowledge of the Bible, and every thing connected with it; while we, listening to his threats and boasts, sat in wonder and amazement at the mighty things that we were to hear and see to-day. But alas! alas! how we have been disappointed! The sum and substance of his speech, the entire fat and marrow of it, the product of his great learning and preparation, absolutely all the points he brought forth for me to answer are these, which I have noted down on this bit of paper--namely: 'hickory bark,' 'an empty fiddle-case,' 'a parrot,' and 'a pair of sheepshears;' these are the potent arguments to which he expects me to reply"--and, holding up his left hand, he enumerated them upon his fingers: "First, hickory bark; second, an empty fiddle-case; third, a parrot; fourth, [385] a pair of sheepshears"--and upon these he rung the changes, and made the task of answering them seem so hopeless, and at the same time so ludicrous, that the audience was convulsed with mirth and his opponent overwhelmed with shame and mortification. But the end was not yet. He proceeded: "My friend Mr. Waldo has informed you that, though now a great scholar, he was once a laboring man; that in his youth he, swung the axe and mallet. All I have to say on that point is, that his being here to-day alive and well is a certain proof that he knew better how to use those tools than he does how to use the Bible; for if he had handled the axe and mallet as awkwardly as he does the Bible, it's a God's blessing that he did not beat his brains out long years ago." He then assailed, in the most merciless manner, Mr. Waldo's method of quoting Scripture. "My friend," said he, "has given us but little proof of his biblical knowledge; the little he did quote--'Faith that works by love purifies the heart'--was inaccurate; he took two unconnected passages and stuck them together, and quoted that for Scripture. You can make any thing you please out of the Bible in that way. Let me try. 'On the last great day of the feast, Jesus stood and cried, By the Gods of Pharaoh ye are all spies.' 'Thou shalt not muzzle the ox that treadeth out the corn, for of such is the kingdom of heaven.' 'Judas went out and hanged himself; go thou and do likewise, and what thou doest, do quickly.' There, that is the way Mr. Waldo quotes Scripture."

      The effect of this speech, rapid and sharp as the discharge of musketry, was truly wonderful; the audience was convulsed with laughter, and the blow came so [386] sudden and unexpected upon Mr. Waldo that he looked upon Henry in blank astonishment; the smiling and self-satisfied look with which he had taken his seat but a short time before gave place to such a sudden and ridiculous sobriety as was ludicrous in the extreme, and the most serious man in the house could not restrain himself at beholding his puzzled, amazed, and confounded look. This terrible onslaught Henry followed by a clear and convincing presentation of the teaching of the Bible on the points at issue, which was perfectly overwhelming.

      The discussion continued for four days, before the close of which Henry was compelled to leave in order to fulfill a previous engagement. The then youthful A. S. Hayden, one of Scott's early converts, was appointed to fill his place; and, though he had never before taken part in a public discussion, the cause which he defended lost nothing in his hands. Henry himself was one of Scott's earliest and most intimate associates, and not only understood the plea which he advocated, but defended it on many occasions with rare ability.

      The result of this and similar discussions was that the number of the Disciples was greatly increased; some who had been enemies and assailants were won over, and in some instances became preachers of the faith they had once striven to destroy. [387]

[LEWS 370-387]