|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 
|
작성일 : 05-04-23 17:06
|
The Concept of "Church" among Churches of Christ
|
 |
|
글쓴이 :
구재천
 조회 : 8,024
|
http://www.mun.ca/rels/restmov/people/acampbell.html
위 사이트로 들어가면 모드 자료를 다운 받을 수 있죠. .
The Concept of "Church" among Churches of Christ
A Paper Prepared for the Southern Baptist--Churches of Christ Conversation
Pepperdine University, January 26-27, 1996
by Jim Howard
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Introduction
"Oh wad some power the giftie gie us to see oursels as others see us!"(1) For most of us it is a difficult challenge honestly to look at ourselves. Especially is this true when it comes to ecclesiastical matters. But honest introspection can lead to positive growth and should never be feared. The purpose of this paper is to present an accurate picture of the way we of churches of Christ define the church (big C and little c).
Most religious movements would share the hope that their theology would shape their history. Among churches of Christ the reverse may be true. In a real sense and to a great degree our history seems to have shaped our theology, especially our ecclesiology. Because of that fact, this paper will be as much historical as theological. It is hoped that this look into both dimensions will give a clear picture of how we understand ourselves.
Our Roots
Four tributaries are commonly understood as having formed the stream of the American Restoration movement of which churches of Christ are a major component. All four of these tributaries were smaller movements led by men characterized by a burning passion to restore the earliest Christian community. Their conviction was that the means to accomplish this restoration was to separate themselves from all man-made creeds and to go back to the New Testament which they saw as a pattern of the church's life and worship. They believed that Christian unity could be achieved by this approach and by no other. By taking this approach the leaders of these four movements were but men of their time. Richard Hughes and Leonard Allen have documented the pervasiveness of the yearning for primitivism through restoration as a basic component of the politics of the Colonial period in American History.(2) This yearning for the new, the pure, the original was coupled with a fiercely independent spirit of those who came to America to find freedom from the tyranny of the bondage of the religious establishment in Europe. This pioneering spirit was suspicious of anything "established" and very susceptible to religious expressions characterized by the stated desire to get back beyond the established churches in search of the simplicity of primitive Christianity which, it was thought, would allow for the freedom of individual religious expression. The American Restoration ideal was born of this mindset.
The first of the tributaries of the stream of American Restorationism was that of Elias Smith and Abner Jones, two New England Baptists, who rebelled against the strictures of Calvinism. In 1808 Smith began a new publication, the Herald of Christian Liberty, calling for a return to primitive Christianity.(3) Jones is credited with starting the first free Christian church in New England where members simply called themselves Christians.(4)
About the time that Smith and Jones were doing their reforming work in New England, James O'Kelly, a Methodist preacher, was initiating the second tributary in Maryland, Virginia, and North Carolina. When in 1792 the Methodist General Conference defeated O'Kelly sponsored resolutions demanding the right to appeal unfair edicts of Bishop Francis Asbury, the Republican Methodist church was formed.(5) In 1794 these dissidents adopted the name "Christian church," declaring that the Bible should be their only creed and adopting a measure of congregational polity.(6)
A far more significant tributary of American Restorationism, however, was the result of the work of Barton W. Stone. Though for a hundred years American restorationists were derisively called "Cambellites" because of Alexander Campbell's leadership of the movement, it is significant that Barton Stone was already busy with restorationism several years before Campbell came on the scene.
Stone was born December 24, 1772, near Port Tobacco, Maryland. Though Stone's family were members of the Church of England, as part of his education he was sent to David Caldwell's academy near Greensboro, North Carolina where Calvinism was the order of the day. It was here that a great many of the area's Presbyterian preachers were trained. Stone fell under conviction at the hell-fire Calvinistic preaching of James McGready, but it remained for the softer, love-oriented preaching of William Hodge to lead the young Stone to a conversion experience. His heart warmed at the proclamation of God's love. In his own words:
I . . . sunk at his feet a willing subject. I loved him--I adored him--I praised him aloud . . . I confessed to the Lord my sin in disbelieving his word so long and in following so long the devices of men. I now saw that a poor sinner was as much authorized to believe in Jesus at first, as at last--and now was the accepted time, and the day of salvation.(7)
After briefly coming under the influence of Georgia Methodist Hope Hull, Stone received his license as a Presbyterian preacher. After serving as a supply minister at Cane Ridge and Concord near Lexington, Kentucky, in 1798 it was necessary that he be examined by the Presbytery of Transylvania if he were to continue to serving the two churches. But Stone was concerned that some of his unorthodox views might present problems. When, however, asked by his examiners how far he was willing to go in receiving the Westminster Confession, he responded, "As far as I see it consistent with the Word of God."(8) His answer seemed satisfactory and he was ordained.
Without question one of the great formative events in Stone's life was his participation in August, 1801 in the Great Revival at Cane Ridge. He was perhaps prepared for that experience by continuing misgivings concerning Calvinism's approach to salvation. If the Presbyterian doctrine of total depravity were true, how could such a view be reconciled with persuading men to repent and believe? Cane Ridge helped him concretize his view of salvation. During this great revival, attended by a crowd estimated to approach twenty thousand, eighteen Presbyterian preachers plus some Methodist and Baptist preachers expounded the gospel.(9) A tremendous awareness of the Spirit and emotional outpouring resulted as the masses found salvation. Listeners were characterized by the jerks, dancing, falling down, barking, laughter and singing while five or six revivals went on simultaneously. Stone was deeply moved by the universality of salvation he witnessed as well as the ecumenical tone of the whole experience.
Cane Ridge and his response quickly got him in trouble with the Presbyterian Church. As Murch put it:
Stone had come to know the importance and the joy of a firsthand Christian experience. He believed it was possible for the Holy Spirit to enlighten and guide men in the study of the Word of God apart from the traditional creeds . . . He saw the sinfulness of division in the body of Christ. He shared the democratic liberty of the frontier and was growing restive under ecclesiastical authority. He had seen a demonstration of Christian unity among men of common faith in a common objective.(10)
In 1803 Stone along with four associates who shared his views--Robert Marshall, John Dunlavy, Richard McNemar, and John Thompson--formed the Springfield Presbytery in reaction against the narrowness of the Synod of Kentucky. Though the presbytery lasted only nine months, it did survive long enough to provide a forum for the creation of one of the most important documents of the Restoration Movement--The Last Will and Testament of the Springfield Presbytery. Written tongue and cheek yet totally serious this document serves as a preamble for the future direction of restorationism:
. . . We will, that this body die, be dissolved, and sink into union with the Body of Christ at large . . . We will, that our name of distinction, with its Reverend title, be forgotten . . . We will, that people may have free course to the Bible, and adopt the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus . . . We will, that candidates for the Gospel ministry . . . obtain license from God to preach...We will, that the church of Christ resume her native right of internal government . . . We will, that each particular church, as a body . . . choose her own preacher, and support him by a free will offering . . . We will, that the people henceforth take the Bible as the only sure guide to heaven . . . We will, that preachers and people, cultivate a spirit of mutual forbearance; pray more and dispute less; and while they behold the signs of the times, look up, and confidently expect that redemption draweth nigh . . .(11)
Congregations made up of those sympathetic to Stone's teachings flourished and by 1830 had approximately fifteen thousand members.(12) Rice Haggard suggested that members be called Christians.(13) Stone's movement was known either as the "Christian Connection"(14) or the "New Light Christian Church."(15) In 1826 Stone initiated a journal called The Christian Messenger to disseminate his views. He was not university educated, but made a tremendous contribution to the vibrancy of the movement with his emphasis on the power of the Holy Spirit, his evangelistic fervor (evidenced in the number of outstanding evangelists he trained), and his demand for spirituality in the lives of those he led to the Lord. Stone passed from this life November 9, 1844 following a life of fruitful, dedicated service. He was first buried at Hannibal, Missouri but later his body was re-buried at Cane Ridge.
The fourth tributary of the stream of the American Restoration Movement, and a most major one, is that attributable to Thomas and Alexander Campbell. Thomas was born February 1, 1763 in County Down Ireland.(16) He was a devoted scholar and studied for three years at the University of Glasgow. Thomas Campbell was an Old-LightAnti-Burgher Seceder Presbyterian. Perhaps Campbell's passion for unity can be traced, at least to some extent, to the fact that each of these terms represents one more division in the Presbyterian Church in Ireland in Campbell's day. After his studies at Glasgow Thomas was licensed to preach and served several different churches in Ireland.
On September 12, 1788 a son, Alexander, was born to Campbell and his wife Jane. Alexander early showed great promise. The Campbell home life was deeply religious, each child being required to memorize a verse of scripture each day to be recited at the dinner table.
Thomas overworked himself in his devotion as a preacher and developed stomach trouble that caused him great pain. His doctors recommended a trip abroad. So in 1807 he crossed the Atlantic to America, apparently planning to bring his family over later. Campbell located in western Pennsylvania and presented his preaching license to the Chartiers Presbytery. His unity views quickly got him in trouble. While preaching at Cannamaugh, on the Allegheny River, a number of Presbyterians who were not Old LightAnti-Burgher Seceder were present and desired to share in the Lord's Supper. After a few words on unity, Campbell opened the Supper to all who wished to participate. Another preacher who was present, William Wilson, reported this act of heterodoxy. Campbell was tried by the Associate Synod of North America and on May 23, 1809 severed relations with the Synod.(17)
Back in Ireland the Campbell family waited for news from Thomas that would call them to America. In March, 1808 they received the desired communication but were delayed until late September by a smallpox outbreak. After sailing September 28, however, they were shipwrecked off the coast of Scotland. This event is widely interpreted as providential. For during the following year young Alexander not only matriculated to the University of Glasgow, but also came under the influence of such restoration and unity advocates as John Glass, Robert Sandeman, Greville Ewing and James and Robert Haldane as well as the dominant thought world of the Common Sense School of Scottish philosophy.(18) All of these influences were to have a major impact on Alexander's worldview.
Finally on July 31, 1809 the Campbell family sailed for America. After arriving in Philadelphia October 7, the family began the long trek westward just as Thomas headed eastward to meet them. It must have been a wonderful reunion when they met. One tradition has it that Thomas carried in his saddlebags the rough draft of the document which was, more than any other, to shape the American Restoration Movement.
To be the creation of such a strong proponent of anti-creedalism the Declaration and Address looks very much like a creed. Yet, it was not so intended. Actually the document was the product of twenty-one members of a newly created religious fellowship called The Christian Association of Washington. It was a statement of purpose and principles for this new organization.(19) In the Declaration and Address are to be found the basic ingredients of the concept of the church espoused, or at least given lip service, by the three wings of the Restoration Movement. Note the strong anti-creedal note as well the stress on the all sufficiency of scripture and freedom of individual conscience:
. . . the Church of Christ upon earth is essentially, intentionally, and constitutionally one; consisting of all those in every place that profess their faith in Christ and obedience to him in all things according to the Scriptures . . . nothing ought to be inculcated upon Christians as articles of faith; nor required of them as terms of communion, but what is expressly taught and enjoined upon them in the word of God . . . the New Testament is as perfect a constitution for the worship, discipline, and government of the New Testament Church . . . as the Old Testament was for the worship, discipline, and government of the Old Testament Church . . . although inferences and deductions from Scripture premises, when fairly inferred, may be truly called the doctrine of God's holy word, yet are they not formally binding upon the consciences of Christians farther than they perceive the connection, and evidently see that they are so . . . all that are enabled through grace to make such a profession . . . should consider each other as the precious saints of God . . . division among the Christians is a horrid evil, fraught with many evils . . . it is antichristian . . . it is antiscriptural . . . it is antinatural . . . all that is necessary to the highest state of perfection and purity of the Church upon earth is . . . that none be received as members but such as having that due measure of Scriptural self-knowledge described above, do profess their faith in Christ and obedience to him in all things according to the Scriptures . . .(20)
As father and son discussed the newly penned document, Thomas surely must have been amazed at Alexander's total acceptance of the concepts therein expressed. The Declaration and Address became the polar star for the spiritual pilgrimage of the Campbells. Its principles led them away from the strictures of Presbyterianism, through the initiation of several overtures toward the Baptists (at different times the Campbells were part of both the Redstone and Mahoning Baptist Associations), and finally into the initiation of a restoration movement that would become at one time perhaps the fastest growing religious movement in America. Alexander become the unquestioned leader of the movement. He became a nationally prominent figure, expounding his views through numerous religious debates and through two religious newspapers, the Christian Baptist (1823-30) and the Millennial Harbinger begun in 1830.
It should not have been a matter of surprise that the Stone movement (predominant in Kentucky, Tennessee, and North Carolina) and the Campbell movement (predominant in Pennsylvania, Virginia, and the Ohio Valley) should move closer to each other. Though there were several theological differences (specifically Stone's questionable view of the Trinity and denial of the substitutionary view of atonement as well as the lateness of his acceptance of the crucial role of immersion in salvation),(21) both men believed strongly in the restoration of the New Testament church on the basis of returning to the pure teachings of the New Testament as the means of bringing a divided Christendom into unity. Though those of Campbell's movement preferred to be called "disciples" and Stone's followers the name "Christians," that difference in and of itself did not seem to preclude unity. In a joyous meeting at the brand new Hill Street Church building at Lexington, Kentucky December 30, 1931 through January 2, 1832, under the leadership of Barton W. Stone, John Rogers, "Raccoon John Smith," and John T. Johnson, the right hand of fellowship was extended and unity between the two movements became a reality. The classic statement of John Smith on that occasion lives on:
Let us, then, my brethren, be no longer Campbellites, or Stonites, New Lights or Old Lights, or any other kind of lights, but let us come to the Bible alone, as the only book in the world that can give us all the light that we need.(22)
Although Alexander Campbell was prevented from being present at the unity meeting because of illness, he gave the union his strong endorsement and continued to support the merger, especially in the pages of the Millennial Harbinger. As he grew older Campbell, the recognized leader of the united movement, moved away from his earlier strong emphasis on unity through truth (he had been a "strict constructionist" as regards finding and returning to the New Testament pattern for the worship and life of the church) and seemed more concerned with unity through fellowship.(23) He continued to exert enormous influence on the movement until his death March 4, 1866. His father had passed from the scene January 4, 1854, a month before his 91st birthday.(24
Our Shape
Having taken a look at our roots, it is now our intention to survey the "shape" of churches of Christ as one of the three wings of the American Restoration Movement resulting from the work of Stone and the Campbells.(25) As has been true throughout history, movements are much easier to deal with than institutions. When movements begin there is a great enthusiasm and excitement on the part of its adherents which sometimes cloaks the necessity to come to grips with the nitty-gritty issues of daily lifestyle. In historical retrospect it seems to have been much easier to propose unity in the abstract than to make it happen in the concrete give-and-take of daily life among the congregations. Stone and the Campbells never proposed or desired to create another denomination. Theirs was the call for all Christians to come out of the morass of dead denominationalism and dogma and to be "just Christians." Their plea was "to speak where the Bible speaks, and to be silent where the Bible is silent." They borrowed Meldenius earlier dictum, "In matters of faith, unity; in matters of opinion, liberty; in all things, charity." As congregations came to be formed, these Christians tried to adhere closely to Thomas Campbell's own platform as mandated in the Declaration and Address:
Nor ought anything to be admitted, as of Divine obligation, in their Church constitution and managements, but what is expressly enjoined by the authority of our Lord Jesus Christ and his apostles upon the New Testament Church; either in express terms or by approved precedent.(26)
It is obvious that Campbell found in the New Testament a pattern by which the church of the New Testament era might conveniently be recreated.
This contention in itself raises some questions. Which picture of the church in the New Testament? The writings of early (and some not so early) Restoration fathers reflect in many cases a simplistic and tacit identification of churches of Christ with the Kingdom of God. The picture of the Church as God's glorious ideal presented so beautifully in the Book of Ephesians does not seem to have received much attention in our earlier history. The Johannine ecclesiology received even less emphasis. Rather the Church portrayed in the early chapters of the Book of Acts was taken as a model. It was from this picture that churches of Christ attempted the business of re-creation. Other scriptures were called into service as needed. The church recreated was almost always an individual, local congregation. As Alexander Campbell put it, "An independent church or congregation of Christ's disciples is the only ecclesiastical body recognized in the New Testament."(27)
What kind of picture of the church would be presented by the model set forth in the earliest chapters of Acts? How would it be governed? What would be its ordinances? In what would its worship and life consist? Is it possible that the life and worship of the earliest Christian community could be recreated nineteen or twenty centuries later?(28)
Many in the Restoration Movement confidently answer these questions in the affirmative. Others see the restoring of the early church as a goal toward which one moves with great humility.
First, the ordinances of the church (though that term would not be used because it is not found in the New Testament; only Biblical language can be used). Baptism is at the heart of our faith. At our historical "worst" there have been some who have come dangerously close to a "water salvation." At our best we have seen baptism (always immersion based on New Testament Greek terminology) as the completing of one's faith. It is to be preceded by faith (Acts 16:31), repentance (Acts 2:38), and confession (Rom. 10:9-10). It is a trusting response to God's grace, not a work of righteousness. Salvation is conferred following one's immersion into Christ (Rom. 6:3). Baptism saves not as "the removal of dirt from the body but the pledge of a good conscience toward God (I Pet. 3:21). It is a clothing of oneself with Christ (Gal. 3:27). Baptism adds one to the universal fellowship of the redeemed as well as to a local fellowship of the saved. It likewise provides the medium for the Holy Spirit to enter the forgiven individual (Acts 2:38) so as to empower the defeat of sin.(29) Though in recent years the age of those coming to request baptism has gotten younger, it is still the belief that one is not a suitable subject for this practice before having reached "the age of accountability" which usually comes somewhere between the ages of ten and twelve. One is not considered to be a Christian and thus would not be accepted into church membership until he or she is immersed. The practice of receiving those from other religious groups depending on their baptism experience (especially from Baptist churches and always by immersion) varies from congregation to congregation.(30)
The Lord's Supper (never called the Eucharist) is observed every Sunday based especially on the reference in Acts 20:7. For at least the last hundred years in churches of Christ communion has been open to all who wish to participate. The practical rationale for such frequent sharing in the Supper is based on the apostle Paul's discussion in I Corinthians 11 where spiritual sickness or death seem to have resulted from the perversion or neglect of the Supper. The elements of the observance are unfermented (for the most part) grape juice and unleavened bread. The observance is ordinarily preceded by prayer and perhaps suitable comment.
The Lord's Supper, also called "communion," is considered a major item of corporate worship. Other primary elements in shared worship are found in Acts 2:42: "They devoted themselves to the apostles' teaching and to the fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to prayer."(31) "Teaching" is interpreted to include preaching. "Fellowship" refers not only to the koinonia of shared worship but also to the contribution(32) which is taken each Sunday consistent with the time frame of I Corinthians 16:1. Because of our concern to "speak where the Bible speaks" we of the churches of Christ have traditionally taken a dim view of any church fundraising activity other than the freewill offerings we see reflected in I Corinthians 16 and II Corinthians 8 and 9. Interestingly singing, such a vital part of the worship in churches of Christ, is not mentioned in Acts 2:42. Our singing (always a cappella) finds its authorization in Ephesians 5:19 and Colossians 3:16 as well as the whole discussion of worship in I Corinthians 14.
In the area of polity or church government churches of Christ have also looked for a Biblical undergirding. We believe that the terms "elders" (presbuteroi), "bishops" (episkopoi), and shepherds (from poimainein) all refer to the same office of spiritual leadership in the church. We interpret the plural use of these terms in the New Testament (e.g. Acts 14:23) to imply that the earliest congregations that had elders always had a plurality. We take the terms to refer to the qualities of spiritual maturity, oversight ability, and shepherding ability and take the list of qualifications detailed in I Timothy 3 and Titus 1 very seriously in selecting leaders. In practice most churches of Christ vest in the elders authority over all facets of the church's life. "Deacon" refers to a "special servant" and the qualifications for this church office given in I Timothy 3:8-13 are also taken quite seriously. "Evangelists" found in Ephesians 4:11 are also seen as church office-holders. In the early days of the Movement they were always of the traveling variety, but since the early 1900's this office more and more has come to define the minister employed by a local church often in a full-time capacity. Among some congregations, especially predominantly black ones, it is held that the evangelist has the authority to appoint the congregation's elders.
Churches of Christ have given lip service to the "priesthood of all believers" (though again that terminology, not being found in scripture, is rarely used) in attempting to erase any distinction between clergy and laity. Most congregations do, however, stress that every member is endowed with at least one spiritual gift from those listed in I Corinthians 12, Romans 12, and Ephesians 4 (though those lists are not seen as being exhaustive). Some gifts, such as "speaking in tongues," are thought to have passed out of usage in the first century.
At certain points in our history (e.g. in the period following the Second World War) we have demonstrated greater concern for world evangelism. In theory churches of Christ have always placed a high priority on evangelism.
Churches of Christ, in contrast to the other wings of the Restoration Movement, have always fiercely defended the autonomy of the local church. Cooperation among local congregations on an informal (and often disorganized) basis has not been questioned. Throughout our history whenever any cooperative venture has appeared to be too well organized, too well financed, or taking on any traits of a "missionary society," that venture has been questioned. Our educational institutions operate under boards of directors made up predominantly of members of churches of Christ but rarely request financial support directly from local congregations. Many of our benevolent institutions (e.g. children's homes) operate again under boards composed of members of churches of Christ and do go directly to congregations for support, but other of these institutions are operated directly under elderships of local churches. While local congregations have not been part of associations or conventions, such entities as college lectureships, newspapers, and big-name preachers have had an inordinate role in shaping the uniformity of our thought. We have always believed that congregational independence has served to safeguard us from the destructive effects of brotherhood "power politics" as well as from destructive heresies which could much more effectively be propagated through large groupings of congregations.
Our Struggles
Unfortunately every enterprise impacted by human beings will find itself partaking of the foibles, weaknesses, prejudices, and ignorances of those human beings. None of us questions the perfection of the divine side of the church. It is the human side that causes us problems. Such a principle is unquestionably true of the American Restoration Movement. I would like to list a few of our major struggles.
In my opinion from its inception our movement has struggled to maintain a proper balance between the emphases of the Stone and Campbell sides of the movement which was formally united New Year's of 1832. To put it another way, we have had a hard time keeping a proper balance between the "head" religion of Campbell and the "heart" religion of Stone. For a long time Alexander Campbell has been defined as a product of Lockian rationalism by way of the Scottish Common Sense movement. More recent research, however, indicates that Campbell was a product of Baconian philosophy. There is strong evidence that Campbell appropriated a Scottish form of Baconianism to a considerable degree and utilized it in the service of his primitivist theology.(33) Accepting Francis Bacon's definition of "fact" as "something said" or "something done," Campbell maintained: "The Bible is a book of facts, not of opinions, theories, abstract generalities, nor of verbal definitions . . . The meaning of the Bible facts is the true biblical doctrine."(34) Just as Bacon wanted to place science on an inductive basis, "Campbell wanted to abolish the dogmatic creeds and systems of religion and place Christianity on an inductive basis."(35) It was almost as if Campbell felt that the mastery of Bible "facts" was equivalent to the achieving of spiritual maturity. This hyper rationalism is evidenced by the restorer's virtual denial of any working of the Holy Spirit outside the word.(36) This trait of Campbell is in stark contrast to Barton Stone's emphasis on the active working of the Spirit, especially in the work of conversion, but also in his continuing to do His sanctifying work in the life of the Christian. Campbell's rationalism became a far more dominant thought-form in the movement that Stone's emphasis on the active working of the Spirit in the life of the Christian.(37) The practical result of Campbell's philosophy was the view that the gospel could easily be proclaimed and received "factually." Walter Scott, the "Golden Oracle" of the early days, as an evangelist on the Western Reserve believed that the gospel could be summed up with a five (or six) finger exercise: to believe, to repent, and to submit to immersion for the remission of sins (man's part), and the granting of forgiveness, the gift of the Holy Spirit, and eternal life (God's part).(38) Scott believed that he had restored the proper preaching of the ancient gospel and, interestingly, dated his discovery to the year 1827.(39)
Barton Stone's emphasis, in contrast, was more heart than head. He stressed to his followers the importance of emulating the simplicity of Jesus' lifestyle and inculcating the values of consecration. Stone urged his followers "to be willing to decrease, that Christ may increase--to be willing for truth's sake, to be rejected by all, even to be excluded from the society, with which we may be associated, however popular and respectable it may be . . . [and to] be willing to give up all worldly gain or wealth, for the sake of truth."(40) He urged his brothers and sisters to care for the widow and orphan, the poor and the hungry, to avoid extravagant dress, and to love one another.(41) Perhaps the most moving example of Stone's teaching was Joseph Thomas, known as the "White Pilgrim." This preacher sold his farm and horse, donned a long, white robe which he wore for the rest of his life to symbolize his rejection of worldly values, and went out to proclaim the scandal of the cross.(42) Stone's somewhat mystical strain of spirituality lived on in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries in the likes of David Lipscomb (especially in his pacifism and eschewal of any kind of political involvement), James A. Harding (with his firm convictions of God's providence), and J. N. Armstrong (who placed great stress on freedom in Christ).
Churches of Christ have also struggled with innovations. While the "centrist" wing of the Restoration Movement has seen the "law of silence" in the interpretation of scripture as being permissive, churches of Christ have always taken this law to be prohibitive. Only that which is found in scripture as example, command, or "necessary inference" has been incorporated into the church's life and worship (At least that has been our goal). It has been our contention that human innovations have been divisive and have not contributed to our goal of achieving unity.
Whereas our worship in song had always been a cappella, in 1859 an organ was introduced into the worship of the congregation at Midway, Kentucky.(43) Over the next half century the presence of mechanical instruments in worship would become a visible issue that would divide congregation after congregation.
Even earlier, in 1849, the American Christian Missionary Society had been formed in Cincinnati. For several years the aging Alexander Campbell had argued in the pages of the Millennial Harbinger for some method larger than the local congregation for world evangelism. In his reasoning Campbell started with the universal, the church in the aggregate, and its Biblical obligation to evangelize the world. He maintained that "matters of prudential arrangement for the evangelizing of the world, for the better application of our means and resources, according to the exigencies of society and the ever-varying complexion of things around us--are left without a single law, statute, ordinance, or enactment in the New Testament."(44) Reasoning that the church has the responsibility of evangelizing the world, and that scripture gives no divine plan for so doing, he believed that the church is left free to devise its own plan. For Campbell, "it was expediency pure and simple and on that ground could be defended."(45) Most scholars of the churches of Christ in analyzing the work of the American Christian Missionary Society would conclude that a great deal of money from the congregations went to maintaining the society's expensive overhead and that very little of the money sent actually ended up on the foreign mission field.
Another struggle had to do with the impact of the Civil War on the movement. It was at first thought that because churches of Christ were autonomous with no geographical or organization headquarters the congregations would be exempt from the radical division which characterized so many denominations. The fact was, however, that strong sectional feelings drove a deep wedge between northern and southern churches of Christ. These feelings came to a climax when, in 1861-63, the American Christian Missionary Society passed resolutions condemning all who supported the southern rebellion.(46) Brotherhood relations were not helped when, following the War, members of southern congregations in positions of leadership, specifically David Lipscomb, appealed to their northern brethren for financial aid for the southern destitute with little positive response.
Churches of Christ have also struggled with extremism. Of many possible illustrations I will share two. The unity thrust of the movement was dealt a major setback when, on August 18, 1889, at Sand Creek, Illinois, radically conservative northern editor and preacher Daniel Sommer delivered his "Address and Declaration." In his terse speech Sommer threw down the gauntlet, calling for total separation from the Disciples with their liberal innovators.(47)
A second landmark of extremism was the year 1930. It was in that year that Foy E. Wallace became the editor of the Gospel Advocate, the dominant publication of churches of Christ in the South.(48) Until the death of longtime editor David Lipscomb in 1917 it had been the Advocate's practice to air both sides of every issue. There was a genuine search for truth. Perhaps through the editorships of A. B. Lipscomb (1912-1920), H. Leo Boles (1920-23), and James A. Allen (1923-30), but certainly during the Wallace years (1930-34)(49), the Advocate suffered a reentrenchment and only the editor's view on every issue made it to press.
Many other struggles among churches of Christ could be noted. These should be sufficient to indicate how very difficult has been the practical implementation of the restoration plea--a continuing challenge of great proportions.
Our Hopes
This paper has attempted to present the concept of "church" characteristic of churches of Christ. Churches of Christ have been depicted as one wing of a tripartite American Restoration Movement--an attempt to bring about unity through the restoration of New Testament Christianity. Looking back on almost two hundred years of this restoration or restitution enterprise, the pivotal question remains: Can unity be achieved by restoring the worship, polity, lifestyle, and spirit of the earliest Christian community? Or to put the question another way, Since it is obvious that unity in Christendom has not been achieved, is that failure because of a flawed foundation premise, or is that failure because the plea in its purity and power has never really been implemented?
In their best moments members of churches of Christ have always lived by the dictum of the early fathers, "We are Christians only, not the only Christians." But, as we have tried to show, the movement has had its extremes. The Disciples' side of the movement, intent on unity at almost any cost, has practically concluded that almost everyone is a Christian. The radical right side of churches of Christ has concluded that no one is a Christian outside the very narrow confines of churches of Christ, defined as The Church.(50)
In researching this project it has been personally fascinating to discover how very similar the primitivistic impulses of the radical right of churches of Christ have proven to be to the approach of the Landmark Baptist Movement. The arguments made by Landmark founder James R. Graves in attempting to trace his movement back in specific detail to the Jerusalem church sound extremely familiar to anyone who has been in churches of Christ for very long.(51)
For the last twenty years or so churches of Christ have been enmeshed in an identity crisis of major proportions. The restoration plea is being questioned as never before. Many within our movement still see great pragmatic value in Thomas Campbell's position in the Declaration and Address that the Bible should be the only rule of faith and practice for Christians. For example, our plea for a plurality of elders in every congregation has guarded us from usurpation of power; our demand that stewardship be only by freewill giving, we feel, has been more conducive to spiritual growth than approaches that demand no sacrifice ("I will not sacrifice to the Lord my God burnt offerings that cost me nothing" [II Sam. 24:24]); our refusal to incorporate mechanical instruments in our worship, we feel, has produced greater spirituality by forcing us to play on the instruments of our hearts. At the same time there are many among churches of Christ who would be just as happy to jettison the whole restoration concept and meld right into the broad stream of evangelical Christianity.(52)
Overall, however, I feel that there are strong and legitimate grounds for optimism. Among the grounds for such positive assessment are a cadre of young Christian scholars who, while loving the churches of Christ and committed to their purposes, are not afraid, lovingly, to point out our movement's foibles and point us toward a recapturing of the spiritual vigor of the earliest Christian community.(53)
There is a far better understanding and acceptance of grace among churches of Christ than was true in earlier years. Our movement is demonstrating a greater and more active concern for the poor and downtrodden especially in our inner cities. Within the American Restoration Movement churches of Christ and independent Christian churches are increasing fellowship and embarking on joint mission, educational, and benevolent projects.
Restorationism is by its very nature always an unfinished enterprise. May the Lord help us to be honest in self-assessment, fill us with his Spirit, and empower us with courage and faith to press on to be the people he has created us to be.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NOTES
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Robert Burns, To A Louse, Stanza 8.
2. Richard T. Hughes and C. Leonard Allen, Illusions of Innocence. Protestant Primitivism in America, 1630-1875 (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1988), pp. 1-24.
3. Earl I. West, The Search for the Ancient Order, Vol. I (Nashville: Gospel Advocate Company, 1964), pp. 10-17.
4. Ibid.
5. James D. Murch, Christians Only (Cincinnati: Standard Publishing Company, 1962), p. 32.
6. Ibid.
7. Ibid., p. 84.
8. Ibid., p. 85.
9. West, p. 23.
10. Murch, pp. 86-87.
11. B.J. Humble, Readings in Restoration History (Abilene: Abilene Christian University, 1985), pp. 5A-5B.
12. Murch, p. 94.
13. 0Ibid., p. 89.
14. Ibid., pp. 90-91.
15. West, p. 29.
16. Ibid., p. 39.
17. Murch, p. 39.
18. West, pp. 50-51.
19. Murch, p. 41.
20. Humble, pp. 11-12.
21. Murch, p. 114ff.
22. Murch, p. 112.
23. Cf. Douglas A. Foster, The Struggle for Unity During the Period of Division of the Restoration Movement: 1875-1900 (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Vanderbilt University, 1987), p. 68.
24. Humble, p. 10.
25. This study is limited to churches of Christ. The saddest of ironies is the failure of this movement initiated to bring about unity to succeed. Two major divisions resulted in three separate groups. The first "officially recognized" schism is dated from the national census of 1906 and resulted in the churches of Christ and Disciples of Christ. The second struggle within Disciples took place beginning in the 1920's and resulted in 1955 in the formation out of the Disciples of the independent Christian churches, sometimes designated "Christian Churches/Churches of Christ" or "Church of Christ Number Two" [Cf. A. T. DeGroot, Church of Christ Number Two (Birmingham, England: The Birmingham Printers, 1956)]. See Murch, p. 268 for a good definition of the three wings: "(1) The Legalistic Right Wing: Biblical exclusivists, who while accepting the Holy Scriptures as authoritative and normative, on the basis of a literalistic interpretation of the Scriptures, refused to have fellowship with those with whom they disagreed; (2) The Conservative Center: Biblical inclusivists who accepted the Holy Scriptures as authoritative and normative and sought communication with all Christians; (3) The Liberal Left Wing: non-Biblical inclusivists who rejected the Holy Scriptures as authoritative and normative and were prepared to accept a non-Biblical basis for an ecumenical church."
26. Humble, p. 11.
27. Alexander Campbell, "Essays on Ecclesiastical Characters, Councils, Creeds, and Sects--No. III," Christian Baptist, Vol. I (1823), 224.
28. Cf. Leroy Brownlow, Why I Am a Member of the Church of Christ (Ft. Worth: Leroy Brownlow Publications, 1945). Only with great hesitancy do I mention this work and then only to illustrate a particular mindset among some members of churches of Christ who see it as a simple matter to reconstruct the New Testament church. It is an embarrassment that a fellow member of the Restoration Movement, in penning this volume, would totally ignore the cross, God's suffering love, and other such crucial doctrines and would define discipleship exclusively in terms of externals. The author claims to be a member of the "Church of Christ" because it "is scriptural in name," "has scriptural music in the worship," "is undenominational," and "administers scriptural baptism" (pp. 5 & 6).
29. Cf. Jimmy Allen, Rebaptism (West Monroe, LA: Howard Publishing Company, 1991). Allen argues that while the New Testament teaches that forgiveness of sins is one of the reasons for baptism, there are more than twenty other scriptural reasons for this act of faith.
30. Rebaptism or "shaking in the Baptists" as it was called was such a major issue in the late 1870's that the controversy precipitated the founding of a major church paper, the Firm Foundation, in Austin, Texas in 1880.
31. This verse has been taken so seriously in our movement that several years ago there was a group of churches of Christ, located primarily in Indiana, whose members were called "Acts 2:42 Christians" because they believed not only that these four elements are the core of worship, but that the four must take place in the Biblical order.
32. See II Cor. 9:13 where koinonia is the term used for the contribution Paul is collecting.
33. Hughes and Allen, Illusions, pp. 158-160.
34. Ibid.
35. Ibid.
36. Alexander Campbell, The Christian System (Nashville: The Gospel Advocate Company, 1964), p. 48. "Whatever the word does, the Spirit does; and whatever the Spirit does in the work of converting men, the word does. We neither believe nor teach abstract Spirit nor abstract word, but word and Spirit, Spirit and word."
37. This rational emphasis has continued in some quarters even down to the present day in a kind of hyper-logical approach to the interpretation of the Bible and definition of the church. Thomas B. Warren has in recent years been the most vocal advocate of this approach [See Thomas B. Warren, When Is An "Example" Binding? (Jonesboro, AR: National Christian Press, 1975); Logic and the Bible (Jonesboro, AR: National Christian Press, 1982)].
38. Hughes and Allen, Illusions, p. 123.
39. Ibid.
40. C. Leonard Allen, Richard T. Hughes, and Michael R. Weed, The Worldly Church, 2nd edition (Abilene: ACU Press, 1991).
41. Ibid.
42. Ibid. A scathing indictment of our movement's failure to give due emphasis to the cross and a lifestyle commensurate with the cross, especially in our preaching, is Bill Love, The Core Gospel (Abilene: ACU Press, 1992). Love documents that in the preaching of the movement's dominant spokesmen from 1800 to 1950 from one third to two thirds of the sermons do not so much as refer to the cross.
43. West, p. 311.
44. Ibid., p. 169.
45. Ibid.
46. David Edwin Harrell, Jr. Quest for a Christian America: The Disciples of Christ and American Society to 1866 (Nashville: The Disciples of Christ Historical Society, 1966), pp. 27ff.; cf. Foster, pp. 74ff.
47. Matthew C. Morrison, Daniel Sommer's Seventy Years of Religious Controversy (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Indiana University, 1972), pp. 135-165.
48. B.C. Goodpasture (ed.), The Gospel Advocate Centennial Volume (Nashville: Gospel Advocate Company, 1956), p. 76.
49. Ibid., pp. 51-75.
50. Cf. T.W. Brents, The Gospel Plan of Salvation, 13th ed. (Nashville: Gospel Advocate Publishing Company, 1950), pp. 167ff. Brents' work comes as close as anything produced among churches of Christ to being a "faith and order" statement or a "systematic theology." In his discussion of the church, Brents tacitly identifies churches of Christ with the Kingdom of God (p. 167), dates the beginning of the Kingdom to A.D. 33, dates the beginning of most Protestant denominations centuries later, and disputes the claim that denominations are "branches of the one church," claiming that if such were the case the "trunk" of the Church would have existed branchless for centuries.
51. James R. Graves, Old Landmarkism: What Is It? (Texarkana, TX: Bogard Press, 1880). Cf. C. Leonard Allen and Richard T. Hughes, Discovering Our Roots: The Ancestry of Churches of Christ (Abilene: ACU Press, 1988), pp. 63-73.
52. Many of these have pointed to our inconsistent standards of inclusion or exclusion of New Testament church practices. For example, we have, for the most part, chosen not to "restore" the laying on of hands, the right hand of fellowship, the love feast, footwashing, the kiss of charity, anointing the sick, tongue speaking, and fasting to name a few. Their argument carries cogency.
53. Among the published works of these young scholars I would include in addition to works earlier cited in this paper the following: C. Leonard Allen, The Cruciform Church, 2nd ed. (Abilene: ACU Press, 1990); James S. Woodroof, The Church in Transition (Searcy, AR: The Bible House, 1990); Douglas A. Foster, Will the Cycle Be Unbroken? (Abilene: ACU Press, 1994); Rubel Shelly, I Just Want to Be a Christian, rev. ed. (Nashville: 20th Century Christian, 1986); and Rubel Shelly and Randall J. Harris, The Second Incarnation (West Monroe, LA: Howard Publishing Company, 1992).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Back to Issues & Themes P
|
|
|
| | |
