RESTORATION REVIEW IN PROSPECT
This new journal has the dual purpose of encouraging
the study of the great ideal of the restoration of early Christianity
to modern religion and of promoting moral and spiritual values in
modern education. The first purpose is a continuum of that movement
begun by the Stones and Campbells in America during the last century,
which was itself the expression of an ideal envisaged by every
reformatory effort since the birth of apostasy. The second purpose is
the reverberation of philosophy that has been enunciated by leading
educators since the time of Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle, but one
which we feel has come to be neglected in our materialistic age.
RESTORATION AN UNFINISHED TASK
This journal assumes that the restoration of primitive
Christianity is not yet a reality. There is no religious communion
that can lay claim on being the church
of Jesus Christ as revealed in the New Testament scriptures. The
unity for which Christ died is not yet realized and the restoration
of his ekklesia as
ordained by his apostles is still incomplete. There are those
disciples within the historic framework of the Restoration Movement
who assume that the work of restoration is complete and that they
themselves (and none others) are the church
of Christ. Such ones are wrong. There is no ideology in the Disciple
brotherhood that has been more destructive to our basic plea than the
one that asserts that Alexander Campbell and his movement ushered us
from Babylon to Jerusalem in one great leap. Campbell himself
realized that the work of restoration had only begun in his day, and
he felt that the completion of the task would be long and arduous.
By 1833 Campbell’s efforts had enjoyed such
success that some of his followers suggested that he write a history
of the movement. His reply reflects an attitude that we feel is
imperative if a true restoration is to be effected.
In reply to frequent enquires and suggestions about writing the history of the present reformation, we would at this time only observe, that, in our judgment, it would be wholly premature now to attempt any thing of the sort. Let us first see a reformation in fact—reformation in sentiment, in practice—a reformation in faith and manners, before we talk of writing a history of it.
All that could now be written would be rather the history of a
struggle for reformation than the history of reformation. When
it shall have been ascertained how far the primitive institutions
have been restored and a gospel reformation effected, it will be time
enough to enquire how it was effected. (Mill. Har. 4, p. 94)
Let us insist with Campbell that the “struggle
for reformation” continue on, and let us not be remiss in the
great work because of the false notion that the task is done. As for
a history of our work, despite the noble efforts in that direction
since Campbell’s day, we are inclined to agree with the sage of
Bethany once more when he says: “Let us, then, every man to his
post, do the work of the Lord faithfully, and leave it to others to
tell of it; or rather, let us wait the day when every man shall have
his praise from God, who judges not after the man-ner of men, and who
will most certainly render to every man his proper reward.”
THE TASK BEFORE US
It is fitting that at this early hour of Restoration
Review we set forth what we conceive to be
the general character of the task before us. Once more we refer to
Alexander Campbell who postulated his “Synopsis of Reformation”
as the ideal of restoration. We present his out-line here because we
feel that it will not only reveal what Campbell was trying to do, but
it will likewise enlighten us as to what all is involved in the
Restoration Movement.
1. The restoration of a pure speech, or the
calling of Bible things by Bible names.
2. The Bible must be proposed as a book of facts, not of doctrines,
nor opinions; it must be understood and regarded as arranged upon the
principle of cause and effect, or that action is to produce
corresponding action.
3. The Bible alone, instead of any human creed, as the only rational
and solid foundation of Christian union and communion.
4. The reading and expounding of the sacred scriptures in public
assemblies instead of text preaching, sermonizing, and
philosophizing.
5. The right of private opinion in all matters not revealed in
contradistinction from the common faith, without the forfeiture of
Christian character or Christian privilege.
6. The church of Jesus Christ is constitutionally composed of those
who have confessed their faith in the celestial proposition—that
Jesus of Nazareth is the Messiah, the Son of God, and the only
Saviour of the world, and have put him on by a baptism into his
death.
7. The administration of the internal and external affairs of the
church is placed in the hands of bishops, deacons, and messengers
extraordinary.
8. The sanctification of the Lord’s day by meeting in honor of
the resurrection of the Saviour, and especially with a reference to
the celebration of the Lord’s supper, is essential to the
edification, to the spirituality, holiness, usefulness, and happiness
of the Christian community.
9. The church not being of this world, cannot levy any contribution
on those without for any religious or political purpose, neither
ought she to go a begging to the world for aid to support or extend
Christianity.
10. The gospel is the proclamation in the name of God of remission
of sins and eternal life through the sacrifice and mediation of Jesus
Christ to every one that obeys him in the instituted way. The gospel
is not preaching about faith, repentance, baptism, regeneration, or
any other word or phrase or thing in the Bible. It is rather the
authoritative statement of pardon and eternal life from the
philanthropy of God through the interposition of Jesus.
11. Three things are essential to a Christian—a peculiar
disposition, state, and character. These must be changed from a
preternatural or fleshly state to that which is spiritual and
heavenly.
12. The resurrection of the just, the coming of the Lord Jesus in
his own proper glorified person, and eternal life, constitute the
grand objects of the Christian’s hope.
13. No theory of spiritual influence in conversion is the influence
of the Spirit. Therefore, to deny any theory, is not to deny the
influence of the Spirit. (Campbell here has reference to the
Calvinistic idea of the Spirit’s influence in conversion apart
from the word of God, which the Restoration Movement vigorously
opposed.)
14. As personal intelligence, purity, and happiness is the end of
all public and private, theoretic or practical reformation, the
present standard of personal knowledge, faith, piety, and morality
being too low, must be greatly elevated.
15. Family education and domestic religion must be greatly advanced.
These 15 theses might be called “the restoration
ideal.” At least they point in the direction that Restoration
Review plans to go. While this journal will
not always agree with Campbell and other early restorationists, it
does believe that a foundation has been laid upon which a beautiful
superstructure can be erected. Restoration
Review will study, and evaluate “the
struggle for reformation” thus far in our history, and, like
Nehemiah who removed rubbish from the streets of Jerusalem in his
restoration effort, it will discard any interpretations and oppose
any practices that rape the Restoration Movement. And yet it will
assume the sacred duty of advancing any new idea or fresh
interpretation that will enhance our cause, and it will help to
safeguard those great truths that have long since been realized by
the pioneers by re-echoing them in its columns.
MORAL EDUCATION
The second purpose of this quarterly is closely related
to the first. The work of restoration is an educative process.
Religion and education are closely allied, for both establish a
unifying basis for life. Other journals can treat better than we the
general theories and principles of education, just as other
periodicals are more adequate and better equipped for technical
studies in religion. Our purpose is different. We wish to show the
relevance between the principles of moral education and the
restoration ideal. For example, the concept of mutual ministry in the
Restoration Movement is likewise vital to an educational philosophy.
Our special appeal is to teachers because we believe they are
potentially restorationists. Those things that will wake us up
educationally and transform our schools into citadels of learning
will likewise jar us religiously and c h a n g e our churches into
the pillar and ground of truth.
We feel that the basic problem in both education and
religion is a moral one. We have forgotten what Aristotle, the
world’s greatest thinker, told us about education. He said that
the end of all education must be moral. Even the teaching of physics
and mathematics has moral ends, and the study of logic takes one near
to God. His teacher, Plato, insisted that knowledge is virtue and
that the immoral man is an uneducated man. Socrates contended that
“the unexamined life is not worth living” and that one is
not truly educated unless he knows himself and is directed by forces
within rather than by forces without. Modern education has
things—students, teachers, buildings, equipment—but it
lacks meaning and direction. The Greek philosophers had almost no
equipment, much of their instruction being in the out-of-doors, but
they did have strong moral goals. They talked about the good life in
terms that would sound strange to our secularistic ears. We insist
that the great moral thinkers shall be heard once more in the pages
of Restoration Review.
So we shall have our encounter with Socrates as well as
with the primitive Christians and Jesus of Nazareth. We shall visit
the Academy of Plato as well as the octagon study of Alexander
Campbell. We shall sit with Aristotle in his Lyceum as well as with
Barton Stone at Cane Ridge. We shall walk with Epictetus on his Stoa
Poikile (Painted Porch), and in the “Garden
of Epicurus” as well as with Luther at Wittenberg and Calvin at
Geneva.
Come along, won’t you? Let us spend the next few
years learning what restoration means in respect to both religion and
education in the light of the history of human thought.
JOHN LOCKE ON EDUCATION
Locke was the insistent opponent of absolutism in all
spheres—especially in religion, politics, and education. He was
distrustful of fanaticism, of men who are carried away by their
“enthusiasm.” He demanded a reconstruction of philosophy,
for we are to realize that we are limited and that we do not have a
monopoly on wisdom. Most of the disputes, according to Locke, arise
from a misunderstanding of language; we are overwhelmed by technical
terms; we do not clarify our meanings; we mistake the word for the
object which it is supposed to symbolize . . .
The goals of education of Locke are virtue, wisdom, breeding, and knowledge. Virtue implies conformity to moral laws, faith in righteousness, a recognition of the justice of God. Wisdom includes sound deliberation, the ability to evaluate and not to be tempted by the passions of the moment. Breeding implies excellent manners, courtesy, and dignity in our way of life. Character and knowledge are closely identified. Learning, to Locke, is of less importance than virtue, for to Locke the scholar plays a secondary role in civilization. He admired the man of action rather than the theorist whose viewpoint is essentially impractical.—Frederick Mayer, Philosophy of Education for Our Time, p. 32