AN UNFRIENDLY APPRAISAL OF ALEXANDER CAMPBELL

J. B. Jeter issued a book entitled Campbellism Examined back in 1855. Shortly thereafter he published another book against Campbell’s teaching. Moses E. Lard wrote a review of Jeter’s criticisms since Campbell was too busy to attend to it himself. So Mr. Jeter is known as one of the greatest of the antagonists to the Restoration Movement. In a very rare volume dealing with his own biography Mr. Jeter devotes a chapter to Alexander Campbell, which I believe to be one of the most interesting accounts of Campbell, perhaps because of its mixture of praise and criticism.

You will notice that Jeter states that even when Campbell was an old man he still believed that without immersion there can be no regeneration. The account of Campbell’s views on missions and the way he interpreted scriptures are also interesting. One wonders how far his prejudice against Campbell colored his views of Campbell’s role in the State Convention in 1829-30. Perhaps the most interesting of all is Jeter’s concept of Campbell’s speculative mind, especially the idea that his mind was so visionary and disordered that it accounted for his many inconsistencies.

The reader should bear in mind that Jeter himself had now grown old. He was trying hard to be fair to a man that he had devoted much of his life opposing. He seems to pity, admire, resent, and fear Campbell all at the same time. The Campbellites were one big problem to Jeter, to be sure, and the Disciples who reviewed his criticisms felt that he was most unfair. Now as an old man he says many complimentary things about Campbell along with the criticisms that he had been making for a lifetime. —the Editor.

I first saw Mr. Campbell at the Dover Association, held at Upper Essex meeting-house, Essex county, Va., in October, 1825. His fame had preceded him. His debate on Baptism with Rev. William L. McCalla, a Presbyterian minister, had been pretty widely circulated, and produced the impression that he was a man of great learning and an invincible defender of Baptist principles. His preaching at several places in the upper counties of the State, as he approached the Association, had increased his reputation and the desire to hear him preach. He was thirty-six years old, above the ordinary height, rather spare, and not particularly attractive in appearance. There was a general desire at the Association to see him and to hear him preach.

John Bryce (if my memory is not at fault), John Kerr, and Alexander Campbell were appointed to occupy the stage on Lords-day. The congregation, as usual on such occasions, was very large. Bryce preached first. Kerr, as was invariably the case, preached last, for the reason that no minister was willing to preach after him. Campbell delivered the second discourse, which, in those days, was generally considered the post of honor. The sermon of Bryce was short, and made but little impression on the audience. Campbell had a favorable opportunity for displaying his powers. On a calm autumnal day a vast crowd was intent to hear the renowned stranger. After the lapse of more than half a century I can furnish but a meagre report of his discourse.

Mr. Campbell read the twenty-eighth chapter of Matthew, and took for his text the apostolic commission, verses 19, 20: “Go ye, therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you; and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen.” His sermon was not expository, but discursive. It contained nothing on the import of baptism or the subjects of the ordinance, but was a discussion of the methods of evangelizing the world in the apostolic age. He dwelt largely on the fact that the disciples, preaching the world.” He drew a graphic description of the conversations of the wandering disciples concerning the things which they had seen and learned in the city of Jerusalem and the effects produced by them. The promise—“lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world”—he expounded as having exclusive reference to the apostles, and the “end of the world” as meaning the end of the age—that is, the lives of the apostles. The sermon was probably from an hour to an hour and a half in length, and was heard to the close with unflagging attention.

The impressions made by the discourse were quite diverse. The old and experienced Baptists generally shook their heads in disapprobation of it. It was not the kind of preaching to which they had been accustomed and by which they had been nourished. To them it lacked the marrow and fatness of the gospel. Semple, Broaddus, and the fathers of the Association stood in doubt of Brother Campbell. They saw that he had abilities which might be usefully employed, but his preaching was not distinctively evangelical. It was notable rather for what it concealed than for what it revealed. It might have been delivered by a Unitarian, or a mere formalist, without any incongruity. It was hoped, however, that association with Baptists and a more careful study of the Scriptures would soon correct any errors into which he had fallen. For my own part I was quite captured by the sermon. It contained food for thought, and my mind was so occupied by its speculations that I scarcely paid respectful attention to the preaching of Kerr, which immediately followed it, though I had never heard him before. Some allowance must be made for my inexperience and my imperfect knowledge of the Scriptures. I was but little more than twenty-three years old, and my theological training had been very defective. The discourse was new in its style, fresh in its matter, and well suited to interest the young and speculative.

The day after the close of the Association Mr. Campbell preached at Bruington meeting-house, King and Queen country. His text was 1 Corinthians xiii:13: “Now abideth faith, hope, charity, these three; but the greatest of these is charity.” Of the sermon I remember nothing, except that is was of the same indefinite sort as the former. There was nothing to indicate whether he was a Trinitarian or a Unitarian, a Calvinist or an Arminian, a believer in spiritual or baptismal regeneration.

On the next day I travelled with him and several of the delegates to the Association from the neighborhood of Bruington to the city of Richmond. He rode in a buggy, having a daughter nearly grown with him. As I was on horseback I had a favorable opportunity of cultivating his acquaintance. I can recollect but little that occurred on the route, except a discussion we had on the subject of missions. It was a fresh and stirring theme of conversation and of public discourse. Mr. Campbell was not avowedly opposed to missions, but he condemned all the methods of propagating the knowledge of the gospel then adopted by evangelical Christians. He believed, so far as I could understand and can now remember his views, that the progress of Christianity must be by a natural outgrowth. Men should teach their neighbors the word of God, and they in turn should communicate it to persons nearest to them, and thus it would gradually be spread throughout the world. His method of evangelization had been shadowed forth in his remarks at the Association on the labors of the disciples scattered by the death of Stephen. He maintained that the sending of missionaries to preach the gospel to the heathen was utterly futile. He compared it to an attempt to cut down a majestic oak with a pen-knife. I heartily dissented from his views, and we entered into an earnest discussion on the subject, which ended as most discussions do, without any change of opinion. I know not what judgement he formed of my argument. I certainly received the impression that his were not invincible.

In Richmond he preached at night in the Second Baptist church. to a small congregation, assembled for the stated service, from Matthew xvi:18: “And I say unto thee, that thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.” He maintained that the Church was founded on the doctrine expressed in Peter’s confession: “Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.” The sermon gave no uncertain sound as to his views of the character of Roman Catholicism.

Here I parted with Mr. Campbell, and saw him no more till he sat in the State Convention for amending the constitution in 1929-‘30. I spent a few days in Richmond during its session, but saw very little of him. He added nothing to his fame by his labors as a statesman. Some persons thought that he did not receive due respect in the convention. because he was a clergyman. It is more probable that his want of influence in the body arose from his lack of training in statesmanship and the speculative character of his mind. I have a vague recollection that in a speech before the convention he laid down a number of propositions, drawn from the Scriptures, which, whether true or false, were of little importance in drafting a State constitution.

Before I saw Mr. Campbell again great religious changes had taken place. His followers, or those who adopted his views, had been separated from the Baptist churches and organized into an independent denomination. I had written Campbellism Examined and Campbellism Reexamined. The Disciples held a meeting in Richmond some twenty years ago, and Mr. Campbell was present. I expressed to some of his friends my readiness to call on him as a matter of courtesy, if the call would be agreeable to him. Receiving the assurance that the courtesy would be accepted with pleasure, I visited him at his lodgings, in company with Dr. J. L. Burrows. We were received with civility, but with evident restraint. He was greatly changed in appearance since I first saw him. He was increased in flesh, but bore the unmistakable marks of old age and growing infirmities. I had resolved that I would not refer to our past controversies, or to points concerning which we differed, but that, if he should introduce them, I would not plead on the defensive. He very soon alluded to these matters. His views, he said, had been misunderstood and misrepresented; he had been treated with great injustice. To these complaints I made no reply, but proceeded at once to say that he had propagated one doctrine which he owed it to himself, to his friends, and to the Christian world, to correct—it is, that baptism and regeneration in the Scriptures meant the same thing. On this subject our conversation turned. He did not retract the statement, but offered such explanation of it as may be found in his voluminous writings. It is, in substance, that baptism is nor the whole, but the finishing act of regeneration; that there can be no regeneration without baptism. His explanation was as unsatisfactory to me as my criticisms were to him. With this discussion we closed our interview, with due courtesy without cordiality.

It may, perhaps, be proper for me to give briefly my views of the talents and character of Mr. Campbell. Due allowance should be made for the perversion of my judgment, which may have resulted from our long-continued controversy and sparring. We were earnest and sharp, but not bitter, in our discussions. I was never his enemy, and now that he is incapable of self-defense, I would surely do his memory no known influence, I may speak of him with candor and caution.

Mr. Campbell was a man of learning, of much miscellaneous information, and of great readiness and fecundity of mind. His learning, as already stated, was various rather than profound, and his imaginative far exceeded his ratiocinative power. There was, in my humble judgement, a screw loose in his mental machinery, which became more obvious as he grew older, and terminated in downright monomania. No writer within my knowledge ever repeated his thoughts so frequently, wrote so much that needed explanation, or so glaringly and often contradicted himself, as he did. This is all explicable on the supposition that he labored under an idiosyncrasy which was gradually developed into mental derangement. This supposition, too, vindicates him in making statements which could hardly have been made by a sound and well-balanced mind without guilt. With this ground of defense, I have no hesitation in expressing the opinion that he was a good man. His Life was devoted to an earnest and fearless advocacy of principles which, in the main, were right. The supreme and exclusive authority of the Scriptures in religion, immersion the only baptism, and believers the only subjects of the ordinance, and church independence, are important doctrines which he held in common with Baptists, and most zealously defended. He wrote, too, many valuable articles on matters of faith and practice, along, we must think, with much that was visionary and erratic. With the exception of statements easily traced to a disordered imagination, his life was pure and in perfect harmony with the principles he espoused and spent his long life in defending.

(from The Recollections of a Long Life by Jeremiah Bell Jeter Chapter XXVII “Alexander Campbell”)