N the century and a quarter since 1809, there have sprung into existence several scores of new sects and parties, denominations and communions, under the Christian banner. So what? The older Christianity becomes, the more plagued by partyism does it become? The more Christian union is advocated, the more it is disregarded and shown to be impossible of attainment? In a sense, there is a gain in the very multiplication of divisions, for it demonstrates that human creeds are unable to unite Christians. So was the contention of Thomas Campbell. The Apostles' Creed, the Athanasian Creed, the Lutheran Creed, the Schmalkald Articles, the Westminster Confession of Faith, the Thirty-nine Articles of Religion, the Methodist Discipline, the Philadelphia Confession of Faith--not to mention others, determined orthodoxy and declared heterodoxy, but division has followed in the wake of all. And in the last century there has been a gradual weakening of the use of creeds as tests of faith and bonds of fellowship. Not only are church members quite often excused from knowing and subscribing to the creed, but even ministers in creedal churches hold themselves in numerous cases above and beyond the creed. So it is that church members and ministers are left free to make [215] quite free, if not sole use of the Scriptures as the book for faith. This was a cardinal desire and principle of Thomas Campbell. "Thine own wickedness shall correct thee, and thy backslidings shall reprove thee," declared Jeremiah in the long ago (Jer. 2:19). The unity that was the yearning ideal of Jesus the Christ and the goal of the apostolic ministers has been turned into the disunity that has weakened Christianity, that has become a rock of offense to believers and unbelievers, that has wasted our substance and shortened our vision. The wickedness of division among Christians and backsliding from the union ideals of the Head of the church are set to correct us and reprove us until we return. In a century of multiplying divisions there has been an increasing cry for remedying the evils of division and establishing union. Only here and there will be lifted a dissonant and anachronistic voice which thanks God for our divisions and glorifies Him as the author of religious confusion. The breaking up of denominations and the breaking down of denominational walls would seem to be incidental to the making of one fellowship, one church, not a huge ecclesiasticism, but in Christ.

      Furthermore, the last century has witnessed the coming to the fore of many plans to disarm, ally and unite Christians. The projection of the Evangelical Alliance in London in 1846, came too late to receive the vigorous mental attention of Thomas Campbell. Its aim was to ally for action; not to unite, as against the Campbellian method of [216] the dissolution and ending of denominations. The second doctrinal article of the Alliance insisted on the right and duty of private judgment as to the Scriptures, and the succeeding articles vitiate that right by specifying things about the Trinity, total depravity, justification by faith alone and so on. The Evangelical Alliance felt obligated to pay tribute to theological systems and the deliverances of the creeds. It was open to the same objections that Mr. Campbell had lodged against the union effort in New York in 1838 and 1839. The Federal Council of Churches of Christ in America was established in 1908 to act for twenty-eight Protestant bodies in matters of common interest, but the great matter of Christian union seems forestalled by the recognition of the bodies as fixed, unchanging entities. Indeed the organization sometimes seems to make demands that call for setting aside the word of the Scriptures. There have been conferences on faith and order, on the manufacture of new creeds, but always the salvaging of denominations has stood in the way of great advance and results.

      Since the death of Thomas Campbell there have been accomplished the union of some several religious bodies in parts of the whole world. Various motives have entered to determine methods and results, and there has nearly always been left behind one or more dissatisfied groups. These can scarcely be termed unions on the Bible, for they have too often perpetuated one or more denominational names and have continued an old or [217] formulated a new creed. There have been great religious bodies seeking for years to heal the divisions incident to the Civil War. A larger denomination would result, but would leave the question of the gathering together of all the fragmentary peoples of Jesus Christ untouched. The followers of Christ out in distant lands that are largely virgin to Christianity have had to face the problems of union and have striven in one way or another to get together and present a united front to other religions and cultures. An inherent weakness has been an over-emphasis on the creedal, and an under-emphasis on the clear voice of Jesus Christ in the Scriptures.

      The eternal God alone knows how much Thomas Campbell, lifting up his pen and voice for Christian union in 1809, is responsible for present-day sentiment for and conviction as to the confluence of the followers of the Son of God. It may be much or little, but there is a live question that can not be allowed to lie unanswered. It is this: Is Thomas Campbell's plan and method for the union of Christians valid for today? He desired "an entire union of all the churches, in faith and practice, according to the word of God." It was to him "a pleasing consideration that all the churches of Christ which mutually acknowledge each other as such, are not only agreed in the great doctrines of faith and holiness, but are also materially agreed as to the positive ordinances of the gospel institution; so that our differences, at most, are about the things in which the kingdom of God does not consist; [218] that is, about matters of private opinion or human invention. What a pity that the kingdom of God should be divided about such things." Was Thomas Campbell proud and ambitious of personal fame? "Our dear brethren of all denominations will please to consider that we have our educational prejudices and particular customs to struggle against as, well as they. But this we do sincerely declare, that there is nothing we have hitherto received as matters of faith or practice, which is not expressly taught and enjoined in the word of God, either in express terms or approved precedent, that we would not heartily relinquish, that so we might return to the original constitutional unity of the Christian church; and in this happy unity, enjoy full communion with all our brethren in peace and charity." And how his heart burned within him as he touched upon the way! "You are all, dear brethren, equally included as objects of our love and esteem. With you all we desire to unite in the bonds of an entire Christian unity--Christ alone being the head, the center; his word the rule; an explicit belief of and manifest conformity to it, in all things--the terms. More than this, you will not require of us; and less we can not require of you; nor, indeed, can we reasonably suppose any would desire it, for what good purpose would it serve? We dare neither assume nor propose the trite indefinite distinction between essentials and non-essentials, in matters of revealed truth and duty; firmly persuaded, that, whatever may be their comparative importance, simply considered, the high obligation of [219] the, divine authority revealing or enjoining them, renders the belief or performance of them absolutely essential to us, in so far as we know them. And to be ignorant of anything God has revealed can neither be our duty or our privilege."

      And what audacity! The voice of Thomas Campbell and a few others calling to large denominations of Christians! "And we again beseech you, let it be known that it is the invitation of but a few; by your accession we shall be many; and, whether few or many, in the first instance, it is all one with respect to the event which must ultimately await the full information and concurrence of all. Besides, whatever is to be done, must begin sometime, somewhere, and no matter where, nor by whom, if the Lord puts his hand to the work, it must surely prosper. And has he not been graciously pleased, upon many signal occasions, to bring to pass the greatest events from very small beginnings, and even by means of the most unlikely? Duty then is ours; but events belong to God.^{10}

      That the idea of authority bulks too large in the plan of Thomas Campbell may be an objection to it in these days when the word "authority" is too often uttered with a sneer. Our generation might humbly meditate on the thesis that it is wrong on the subject of obedience. No one can study the records of the life of Jesus Christ and with fairness miss the idea of authority. He recognized His duty to obey God. He called Himself Lord and [220] fastened obedience to himself upon his disciples. A test of their love for him was obedience to his commandments. In his own mind, he, Jesus, was the sovereign, commanding, authoritative Lord and Christ. The writing apostles bear testimony that they received him as such. God had made him (Jesus Christ) "head over all things to the church." The gospel and its preaching came by him who said, "All authority in heaven and on earth has been given unto me." Grace and apostleship were given unto Paul of Tarsus, unto the obedience of faith among all the, nations for the sake of Jesus' name. Christ was the Head of every man and subjection to him a jeweled virtue. It would seem that if the plan of Christian union, which was the burden of the latter part of Mr. Campbell's life, is defective and unsuited to our times, it borrowed its defects from Jesus the Christ and his apostles; and its unsuitability attaches to our unwillingness to humble ourselves under the mighty hand of God. We do well to use to the full the Christian union method of him whose life we have been studying, until some one proposes a better.

      Thomas Campbell, of you we say with J. N. Maffitt:

      Thomas Campbell, of your great purpose and burning desire, we say with M. C. Kurfees:

      ^{10} Quotations from "Declaration and Address." [220]

[TCSCUA 215-222]