The Story of ‘The
Evangelist of Kentucky”
.
. .
THE ROLE OF JOHN T.
JOHNSON IN THE RESTORATION MOVEMENT
By Leroy
Garrett
The subject of this study
once proclaimed the gospel for two full weeks in Richmond, Virginia,
without any visible response from his audiences, but as he continued
his efforts a few days longer there were 55 additions to the church!
It was not unusual for John T. Johnson to immerse 30 or 40, or even
70 or 80 souls during his protracted meetings that would last from a
few days to several weeks, depending on the particular need of the
locality.
It was just after this
Richmond meeting in 1846 that he visited Bethany for the only time in
his life, at which time he spent a few days with Alexander Campbell,
the old sage with whom he had already shared many thrilling
experiences and with whom he was to share many more. Only two years
before he was at Campbell’s side during the Rice debate in
Lexington, and in 1841 he arranged an important union meeting in the
same city in which Campbell was a featured speaker. The two men often
traveled together among the churches in several states, but
especially during Campbell’s frequent visits to Kentucky.
In the next issue of the
Millennial
Harbinger following
Johnson’s visit, Campbell attempts to account for the success
of the evangelist, who in only 15 years had immersed thousands into
Christ, and who had earned the reputation among the Disciples as “the
Evangelist of Kentucky.” Even though most of Bethany’s
students had gone home for the summer at the time of Johnson’s
visit, he still immersed six of those who were still there! So
President Campbell was moved to write:
The great secret of brother Johnson’s
great success, is his evident sincerity, honesty, and great
earnestness-gifts of transcendent value, superadded to good sense and
a clear perception of the gospel facts, arguments, precepts, and
promises, and a plain, clear, and emphatic expression of them in a
familiar and intelligible style. (Mill,
Harb. 1846, p. 477)
We shall see in this
study that John T. Johnson’s role in the Restoration Movement
was significant, first of all, due to his unusual powers as an
evangelist. He was probably the most successful induction officer for
God’s kingdom of any man in Disciple history. Even though he
worked in virgin fields and where the cause of Restoration suffered
so much hardship and opposition, he still enlisted upward of 600
souls annually for a period of 25 years. The story of his work should
help us to recover our passion for lost souls and to regain our
understanding as to the nature of evangelistic work.
He is also important
because of his contribution to the unity achieved, first in Kentucky
and then throughout the brotherhood, between the “Christians”
(Stoneites) and the Reformers (Campbellites). Had it not been for
this union which presented the Disciples to the world as a united
people, the Movement would never have gotten off the ground, and had
it not been for John T. Johnson the union would hardly have been
possible, as we shall see.
His role is also
significant due to the many other pioneer preachers with whom he
worked. There was old Jacob Creath, Sr., who was pastor of the
Baptist church where Johnson was a member. Johnson was present when
Creath made his defense to the elders for his leanings toward
Campbellism, which helped to turn Johnson in the same direction.
There was Barton W. Stone with whom our evangelist served as an
editor and with whom he worked for unity with the Reformers.
Benjamin Franklin is
another. The evangelist served with him as an editor of the
Monthly
Review. Franklin
once wrote of him: “No man that we ever saw was better
calculated to inspire confidence and hope in all around him.”
He also worked with James Shannon, the president of Bacon College,
the Movement’s first institution of learning. He also labored
with John and Samuel Rogers (brothers), who were successful
evangelists in Kentucky also, and who helped to effect the union
between Stone and Campbell.
There was Dr. L. L.
Pinkerton, who might be called the first
liberal
in our
Movement. He ministered to the congregation at Lexington, which had
one of the finest buildings in the brotherhood in 1842. Johnson not
only preached with him, but assisted him in establishing a school for
girls at Midway, Ky. “Racoon” John Smith is another
Kentuckian, who, like Johnson, was a Baptist that turned Campbellite.
He too, was instrumental in uniting the forces of Stone and Campbell.
He and Johnson labored together in planting many churches throughout
Kentucky. Like Johnson, Smith was one of the reasons behind the
Campbell-Rice Debate.
John A. Gano, immersed by
Stone and a frequent companion of Campbell for forty years, was
another able Kentucky evangelist, having turned to the Lord from a
career in law after a brush with death. He and Johnson conducted many
meetings together, and the letters between them is an important
source of information on the life of Johnson.
T. M. Allen and B. F.
Hall are others, both of whom were won by Campbell’s writings,
which circulated widely in Kentucky. They were frequent laborers with
Johnson. So were James Henshall and R. C. Rice, important names in
the history of Kentucky Disciples. Carroll Kendrick was another.
Arthur Crihfield was editor of the Christian
Journal, the
Movement’s first paper in Kentucky. Our evangelist often wrote
to him, sending reports of his labors to the journal. Even J. B.
Ferguson, the dashing young preacher of Nashville who became enamored
with “spiritualism,” was touched by the influence of
Johnson. Though they never met, they were in frequent communication.
One is moved to read Johnson’s letter to Campbell in which
loving concern is expressed for the promising young minister, whose
editorial speculations on the state of the dead was of no little
worry to the leader of the Movement. Johnson feared that Ferguson was
giving the enemy an occasion.
Important names in
Disciple history continue to pass unendingly in the life of Johnson.
J. W. McGarvey was with him when he died and later wrote an account
of his last days. Judson Barclay, our first missionary, said of him:
“There is so much honesty in his face and earnestness in this
manner, that, hold what opinion you may, while
he
is
preaching, you feel yourself concluding: ‘Well, I reckon it
must be about as he says --- you never think of debating anything
with that honest face and earnest man.’”
While the sources for our
study of the Evangelist of Kentucky are limited, they are revealing.
The most important is The
Biography of John T. Johnson by
John Rogers, published by the author in 1861. Measured by literary
standards, it is a poor biography, being mostly a compilation of
letters appearing in the brotherhood journals of this time,
especially Johnson’s reports to Campbell for the
Millennial
Harbinger. While
our evangelist did not do much writing, we do have some things from
him in Stone’s Christian
Evangelist, Franklin’s
Monthly
Review, and
the Christian
Journal, edited
by Arthur Crihfield, Carroll Kendrick and others.
Besides serving with
Elder Ben Franklin as an editor of the
Monthly
Review for
a short while, Johnson served briefly and spasmodically as co-editor
of four other papers: Gospel
Advocate, 1835-1836
with B. H. Hall in Georgetown, Ky. (not the same paper as the current
Gospel
Advocate); Christian Messenger, 1832-1834,
with Barton W. Stone, also of Georgetown, Ky. (Johnson withdrew as
co-editor when Stone moved the paper with him to Jacksonville,
Illinois); The
Christian, 1837,
with Walter Scott in Georgetown, Ky.; and
The
Christian Preacher, 1838,
with D. S. Burnett, also in Georgetown, Ky.
It is interesting to note
that Johnson and Stone identified themselves on the masthead of their
journal as “Elders of the Church of Christ,” which must
be one of the very earliest, if not the earliest, definitive use of
“Church of Christ” in our history.
While in all these papers
Johnson did some writing, it is not extensive. They are nonetheless
important sources in the study of his life. He wrote more in the old
Gospel
Advocate than
in any of the others.
Robert Richardson’s
Memoirs
of Alexander Campbell has
a half dozen references to Johnson, and of course the
Millennial
Harbinger, with
its many reports from Johnson, is the most reliable and rewarding
source of all.
FROM CONGRESS TO THE
PULPIT
Our subject was Kentucky
born, arriving in this world on October 5, 1788, near Georgetown,
which was to be his home throughout his busy evangelistic career. His
parents were Virginians by birth, a fact that he relates to Alexander
Campbell with apparent pride. His paternal grandfather had come from
England. Both his father and grandfather were military men of some
distinction, and he himself became a major in the United States Army.
Even after he became an evangelist a number of brethren continued to
call him “Major Johnson.” His brother, Richard M.
Johnson, was Vice-President of the United States under Martin Van
Buren, 1837-1841.
Educated at Transylvania
University, he was admitted to the bar when only 21. He was married
two years later to 15-year-old Sophia Lewis, and settled on a
Georgetown farm until he volunteered for the War of 1812. He was an
aide to General Harrison, who later became president, and had such
experiences as having his horse shot out from under him. He himself
was also shot while standing ---but a few feet from the general.
General Harrison was cognizant of his heroism and once spoke to him
about the incident of having his horse killed from under him. He
returned from the war a sick man and almost died of the fever.
In 1815 he was elected to
Kentucky state legislature and was reelected every year thereafter
until 1819. By this time his real estate holdings had increased so
that he enjoyed a measure of wealth, but he lost all he had, which
then
amounted
to $50,000, in the financial crisis of 1819, not because of his own
debts, but for the debts of others whose notes he had signed.
In 1820 he was elected to
the Congress of the United States, and he was reelected in 1822. The
most important vote he cast as a legislator, he says, was the one for
Andrew Jackson as president, the election that year being decided by
the House of Representatives since the popular election was not
decisive. Since Jackson was the people’s choice, Congressman
Johnson passed by Kentucky-favorite Henry Clay to become one of the
four legislators whose votes proved decisive for Jackson. “It
was one of the proudest acts of my life,” he said. To him it
was a matter of whether the people could be trusted. He was returned
to congress in 1828 for still another term, after which he withdrew
from political life in preference for quiet farm life and practice at
the bar.
Mention has been made of
Jacob Creath’s judgment before the tribunal of the Baptist
Church where Major Johnson was a member. The Major was won over to
what was called Campbellism:
The
public mind was much excited in regard to what was vulgarly called
Campbellism, and I resolved to examine it in the light of the Bible.
I was won over, and contended for it with all my might in the private
circle. I was astonished at the ignorance and perversity of learned
men who were reputed pious and otherwise esteemed honorable. My eyes
were opened and I was made perfectly free by the truth. And the debt
of gratitude I owe to that man of God, Alexander Campbell, no
language can tell. (Richardson, Memoirs, p. 381)
He then set out to reform
his own congregation at Cross Creek, Ky., his birthplace, and being
met with the same opposition that Jacob Creath had to face, he
withdrew himself with certain others and started a congregation based
upon primitive Christianity. At this time he immersed his wife, his
first convert, a brother of his and his wife. From that moment on he
gave his life to evangelism, giving up a lucrative practice in law
which he had followed since retiring from Congress.
There is no indication
that Major Johnson was baptized again. This conforms to his own
practice as an evangelist, for there is no evidence that he ever
re-immersed a Baptist. Such was also the practice of the pioneers
generally. It would be interesting to ascertain just when any group
in discipledom began to insist on the reimmersion of the Baptists.
Probably it was not until the 1880’s, for it is then that the
“Church of Christ” group began to debate the issue in the
Gospel
Advocate and
the Firm
Foundation.
Johnson’s reports
on his evangelistic results indicate that he accepted the Baptists as
Christians:
For five days we labored hard twice each day publicly; also from house to house. Two volunteered from the world, and four worthy members united from the Baptists . . . (Mill. Harb. 1841, p. 210)
The result of the meeting was 25
additions; of these 18 were from the world, one from the Baptists,
and six of the brethren living in the vicinity. (Rogers, Biography, p. 253)
Another interesting
report from Johnson, found in the Gospel
Advocate of
1835, which he edited for one year along with B. H. Hall, reads quite
unlike the reports we would expect to find in the more recent
Gospel
Advocate.
We
had the unspeakable pleasure of receiving four persons among the
King’s friends. One was an aged, most respectable and
intelligent leader of the Methodist congregation, who had been
previously immersed. Two females of the same sect united with us and
were immersed. (p. 106)
This conforms to a report
by another evangelist, Henry Thomas, on the same page of the
Harbinger
with one
from Johnson:
Within
the last three months I have had the happiness to baptize 77
believers, and receive 5 from the Baptists, 3 from the Methodists, 1
from the Presbyterians, and 2 restored. (Mill.
Harb. 1842, p. 322)
Evangelist Thomas, like
Major Johnson, accepted Baptists, Methodists, and Presbyterians who
had already
been
immersed. It would be difficult to find a case of re-immersion of one
who was already an immersed believer in all the annals of early
Disciple history. So adamant was Alexander Campbell on this point
that he wrote: “The only thing which can justify re-immersion
into the name of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, is a
confession on the part of the candidate that he did not believe that
Jesus was the Messiah, the Son of God.”
(Mill.
Harb. 1836,
p. 63)
By this time John T.
Johnson was 43 years old, the same age as Alexander Campbell
incidentally, and it was a rather late hour to venture out into the
evangelistic field on sheer faith that God would supply his needs.
Other evangelists his age had many years of experience behind them
and were much better established. But for the next 25 years the
reputation of “the Evangelist of Kentucky” was to shine
brightly in discipledom. He had moved from the halls of Congress to
the work of an evangelist.
THE WORK OF AN
EVANGELIST
As much as any man in our
history John T. Johnson understood the force of Paul’s
injunction to Timothy: “Do the work of an evangelist.”
Though he did not preach what we now call
sermons,
his
witness for the Christ was so warm, clear, and forceful that his
success was phenomenal. With the open Bible in one hand he would work
his way through the subject at hand, which may not have been well
organized, but which always pointed to the Christ as Lord. Being a
man of the Spirit there was much fervor in his testimony, and it was
difficult for the worldly-minded to hear him without becoming
disturbed.
The common denominator in
the several descriptions of his preaching is reference to his great
fervor. C. B. Tharp, in a letter to Alexander Campbell tried to
explain the evangelist’s unusual powers in such terms as
forceful vigorous, and “he speaks with great earnestness.”
Tharp added: “His praise is in all the churches.” (Roger,
Biography,
p. 306)
Even at age 62 he continued to speak with the vigor of a man of
thirty. Those who have written of his evangelistic zeal certainly
describe him as no “hands in pocket” preacher. His
message was vital and he proclaimed it with a sense of urgency.
In his preaching he spoke
often of the salvation of man as it developed, through the
Patriarchal, Jewish, and Christian eras. He drew lessons from the
types and shadows of the Old Testament scriptures. To him there was
on great question in any age of the world:
Will
you choose God as your Rule or the Devil?
This
question he drove home to his audiences over and over again. “Will
you serve God and live forever, or serve the Devil and perish
everlastingly? Oh, let the goodness of God lead you to repentance ---
the dying love of the Saviour reconcile you to God!”
In a letter to Elder
Franklin he gave his views on austerity as the mean: of settling
difficulties; “Some seem to imagine that tight-lacing and a
rigid discipline would heal all the difficulties that beset us. What
a grand mistake!’ He goes on to give his prescription for a
sick church:
A
self-sacrificing disposition on the part of preachers and people is
indispensable. Personal piety and devotion, springing from a heart
leavened by the gospel, need not much tight lacing, watching or rigid
discipline. A fatherly watch and care on the part of shepherds of the
flock are needed. A visiting of the families, urging them into family
worship, alluring the members to the regular meetings on the Lord’s
day --- at prayer meetings and Bible classes . . . (Rogers, p. 357)
Whether it was the
proclamation of Jesus to a lost world or the edification of a young
and awkward Restoration Movement, the role of John T. Johnson was
significant. It is said of him that he probably did more public
preaching within the ten busiest years of his life than any man in
history. One of his friends calculated that the evangelist averaged
one public discourse a day for a period of 25 years. His reports from
the field, most of which are published in
Millennial
Harbinger, suggests
that he must have immersed something like 400 to 500 souls annually
throughout his long ministry. He reported over 500 additions for 1839
(Rogers, p. 147), which appears to be typical of his success.
Excerpts lifted at random
from his many reports in Campbell’s journal will indicate both
his busy schedule and his success in reaching souls for the Christ.
I have recently taken two excursions in the cause of the Lord . . . 17 additions . . . The harvest is ripe and much good can be done by continual effort; but incessant labor and toil is indispensable to success. (Mill. Harb. 12, 439)
I have just reached home from a trip of 19 days. I had the assistance of brother A. Kendrick at Harrodsburg where we gained 20 additions . . . I then made my way to Louisville . . . fortunate to gain 28 additions . . . May the Lord bless the efforts of all the holy brethren in this best of all causes . . . (Mill. Harb. 13, p. 40)
I have just returned from a trip to May’s Lick and Minerva, where I labored for 19 days. . . 32 additions. . . The sects tremble and shut their doors; but there are some noble spirits amongst them, like the Bereans of old, who will hear and examine for themselves. (Mill. Harb. 13, 142)
For the last two weeks I have been engaged in Henry and Shelby counties in conjunction with brother R. C. Rice.
We
established a congregation of about forty members six miles southwest
of New Castle and gained five valuable additions . . . The times call
for all our powers if we would succeed as formerly. The brethren are
arming for the contest, and we pray the Lord that a victory worthy of
so great and good a cause may be the result. (Mill.
Harb. 15, p. 334)
Our meeting has progressed most gloriously. We had four confessions last night, making thirteen up to this time. This morning brother Ricketts buried those four by baptism, and raised them to walk in newness of life. What a delightful picture it was! . . .
The
morning light begins to appear, and I do look for a great harvest if
we labor faithfully. I feel the spirit of evangelizing burning within
me . . . I pray the Lord that the churches may awake in all their
strength and put forth their energies for the conversion of the
world! (Mill. Harb. 16,
p. 140)
“I feel the spirit
of evangelizing burning within me!” aptly represents the zeal
of this unusual man. He himself estimated that the disciples in
Kentucky numbered 30,000 by 1840. There were upward of 200,000
altogether. Johnson’s success, in other states (especially
Virginia) as well as Kentucky, is one major cause of this rapid
growth.
In the
Biography
John
Rogers attempts a running account of the evangelist’s
accessions in the field. A few at random run as follows, which
originally appeared in different journals.
New Albany and Charlestown (Indiana) . . . 30 accessions to the good of the Lord.
Within seven days we gained 77 additions to the cause of heaven and heaven’s King. It was a most glorious victory. . .
We gained 14 during the meeting, making 71 in all at this place, and 30 at Republican (Kentucky).
Brother Thomas Smith and myself started in the rain and reached Hopkinsville in six days through wind, rain and heat. On Lord’s day morning we commenced operations and labored four days. Thence to Elkton, 20 miles this way, where we labored four days. Thence ten miles above Russelville, two days in the rain. Thence at Bowling Green, three and a half days. Thence at Smith’s Grove, near brother Ford’s, three days. Thence at Glasgow, nine days. We had a glorious time ! We gathered 129 noble additions to the great cause, and in several places we left matters in 100% better condition . . .
Brother Gano and myself have just closed a protracted meeting at Mayslick of seven days with brother Ricketts their evangelist. We gained 81 additions to the joy and astonishment of all. It seemed as if every person was prepared to bow to the Lord. We gained several Baptists, Presbyterians and Methodists. Indeed, I expect a union with the majority of the Baptists at this place within a few weeks . . .
I have just returned from a visit to Jeffersonville, opposite the city of Louisville . . . Fifty additions were made . . . The Methodists kept up an opposition meeting during the time we were there; but it was of no avail --- the people would hear. The pillars of the sects are tottering in that city.
Brother Gano and myself reached here last Friday night (Mt. Sterling, Ky.) and commenced operations . . . Up to last night we have had 52 most excellent additions.
Report
from Arkansas: Visits Little Rock, Van Buren, Fayetteville and
Clarksville. Organizes a church at Fayetteville, composed of some 50
members --- among which were 4 lawyers, one physician, and one
distinguished preacher from the Presbyterians; organized a church at
Oakland with some 40 members --- the whole neighborhood being with us
in sentiment and feeling.
No wonder that Alexander
Campbell reportedly said something like “Give me a few men like
John T. Johnson and we” convert the world.” I have not
yet, however, been able to find that exact reference. We can also
agree that the artist who painted the gallery of pioneer preachers,
which is on display at our Historical Society in Nashville, placed
John T. Johnson in proper setting. The artist has Thomas Campbell
serving the Lord’s Supper, which is apropos. Alexander
Campbell, Robert Richardson, and Walter Scott are standing in a
central place before an open Bible. The bearded Isaac Errett and W.
K. Pendleton also have conspicuous places. In the background are
scores of other pioneers, each of which is so well characterized as
to be identified. But where does the artist put John T. Johnson? He
stands in the most prominent place of all, out in front of the entire
gallery of nobles. He is baptizing!
ORDINATION AND LAYING
ON OF HANDS
In an 1844 report to the
Millennial
Harbinger Major
Johnson refers to a service in Athens, Tenn., in which two elders,
one deacon, and an evangelist were ordained to their respective
offices. “Having been selected by the congregation, they were
most solemnly ordained by fasting, prayer, and the imposition of
hands.
Campbell and Johnson, as
leaders of a new reformatory movement, were plagued by negative and
troublesome men who sought to impose themselves upon the churches as
public preachers worthy of support. In a letter to Campbell the
evangelist pointed to the need to adhere more rigidly to the
instructions of the apostles in selecting and ordaining evangelists.
He told Campbell that it is a misunderstanding of the Christian
religion for one to travel over the country as an evangelist without
authority from a congregation. He insisted that such a one should be
sent home.
He went on to say: “The
evangelist should feel it his indispensable duty to have his letters
of credit and authority always at command; and he should never
approach a strange neighborhood without producing them.”
Campbell had expressed
similar views only a few years earlier. His suggestion for handling
those who “run wholly unsent and uncalled” is to let them
alone, for “they will soon find their level in society.”
To one inquirer who had
unfortunate experiences with freelance preachers Campbell explained:
“These comets of which you speak belong not to our system . . .
Our system is not a system of comets, or wandering stars, though one
or two may now and then appear amidst the regular planets as omens of
what may be expected should we depart from the ancient order of
things.” (Mill.
Harb., 3,
p. 502)
He perhaps overstated
himself when he went on to say: “All who act for our societies,
either within them or abroad, have the suffrage of the society. This
is our fixed and well defined rule . . .” This was perhaps the
intended policy, but the fragmented character of the new movement
made it impossible. Johnson’s concern for
authorized
agents
indicates that five years after Campbell’s reassuring words a
number of men continued to work as unsent, unauthorized, unordained,
and perhaps even unwanted.
This
poses a real problem for all students of the ancient order.
How
are the thousands of disciple congregations to control their public
functionaries with their present loosely constructed organization?
COOPERATION
The question of
cooperation among churches, and the necessary organization to make
such possible, has been perhaps the most gnawing problem in the
Campbell movement almost since its inception. Even today both major
wings of discipledom are dividing or have already divided over this
issue. This makes it interesting to go back into our early history to
see what practices then prevailed. We must at the very outset concede
that the subject of this study was a pronounced cooperative.
For a number of years he
was sustained in the field by a cooperation of churches (at least
three), with his home church of Georgetown, Ky., serving as a kind of
sponsoring church. The officers of that congregation issued the
following public statement in Campbell’s journal:
The congregations of the Lord in Georgetown, at Hebron, and Dry Run, have made arrangements to have the gospel preached in destitute places, and it is hoped and expected that the other churches in the country will cooperate in this benevolent evangelistic enterprise. We have already raised several hundred dollars for this purpose, and the brethren seem resolved to act worthy of the high profession which they have made.
The general plan is as follows: The fund is raised and committed to the Officers of the congregation. These Officers are to and make all necessary arrangements for the expenditure agreeable to the design of the donors. Reports to be submitted regularly to the respective congregations, setting forth the manner in which the fund has been expended.
On
the 1st of January, 1842, we commenced operations. We selected
brother J. T. Johnson for the first mission. . . (Mill.
Harb. 13, p. 90)
On the day after
Christmas of that year the major wrote the following to Alexander
Campbell:
“I have closed my
labors as an evangelist for the present year, and have reported to
the churches composing the cooperation in this county, 582 additions
as the result of their benevolent enterprise.”
(Biography,
p. 191)
Johnson explained one
interesting phase of the financial structure of the cooperation:
“Whatever is received by the evangelist is deposited in the
evangelistical fund, subject to the appropriation of the
congregations to advance the general cause.”
(Biography,
p. 193)
In a description of
Johnson’s financial situation through biographer shows why the
cooperation idea was acceptable to especially to the evangelists;
J.
T. Johnson was a most benevolent, unselfish, generous-hearted,
self-sacrificing man, as all who knew him, will attest. For many
years he labored without fee or reward; but his slender means forbade
that he should continue that course. He could not think of confining
his labors to a few churches; he felt it to be his duty, as I have no
doubt it was, to occupy a wider field. In the main, he was very
liberally sustained; but occasionally he was shamefully neglected.
(Biography, p. 163)
Even though Johnson was
perhaps the most sought after evangelist in the field, support was
still a problem to him as it is to every preacher who does not choose
to preach for
those
that have the money. The subject of evangelistic support also
concerned him because of the woeful neglect of his co-laborers. “We
should say something definite in regard to the support of
evangelists,” he wrote to Campbell. “I am convinced that
the people would do their duty if it were distinctly marked out and
the appeal were made to them. I am of the opinion that the
evangelists have been making the sacrifice instead of the
congregations.”
He went on to express
what every evangelist must feel: “After supporting his family
as decently as those in comfortable circumstances, he should have a
few hundred dollars more to lay up for his wife and children, in case
of his sickness or death; for you know the matter generally ends at
sickness or death.”
As we have said,
cooperative efforts have always had difficulty among our people.
Johnson made some effort to defend these efforts when they were
questioned in the various journals. His main point was that the work
must be done, so let us be at it. There is too much talk, not enough
action. He quieted some opposition by asking how congregations would
fare should they be summoned by the Lord next July 4 to give an
account of what they had done in two grand items:
the
distribution of the Bible and in sustaining evangelists.
Aware of the danger of
going beyond the authority of God’s word, he was cautious in
pointing
out that
a cooperation of churches or a central fund for evangelistic support
did no violence to the scriptures. He too, of course, opposed
ecclesiastical councils and confederations. He thought all such was
avoided so long as each cooperating church was
free
to
participate or not participate, and when each church had a voice in
the decisions made. As for the control of the evangelist in the
field, he was always responsible to the congregation where he held
membership, the one whose letter he carried, and not to the
cooperative agency. The evangelist was, however, supported by the
agency and made reports to it.
Admittedly, Johnson saw
the fields that were white unto harvest more clearly than the fine
points of argument. He wanted action! “I am firmly convinced
that there is more written than is profitable, and a vast deficiency
in action.” (Biography,
p. 269)
These reports that the
evangelists would make to the cooperation had one very interesting
aspect, the various designations used in referring to the churches:
“To the Congregations of Disciples . . .” began one
report. Another read “To the Congregations of Christ . . .”
RELATIONS WITH
ALEXANDER CAMPBELL
There can be no question
about the great admiration that Johnson had for Alexander Campbell.
The church today could use more of the kindly words on the part of
its leaders that Johnson used towards Campbell in the following
letter:
Many ungodly preachers and professors are endeavoring to prevent the holy alliance and union of the brotherhood into one glorious family on earth. But their efforts are as imbecile as the roarings and dashings of the mighty surges of the ocean against the rocks of Gibraltar.
Some
of them seem to hate Alexander Campbell with a hatred that should
only be directed against the arch fiend of the lower regions. But all
their envenomed shafts fall harmless at his feet. His piety, his
goodness, and his greatness, will be properly appreciated by the good
and great of succeeding generations. And his fame will stand like the
pyramids of Egypt, defying the assaults of all his opposers, and even
the destructive power of time. (Biography, p. 236)
In one of his reports to
the cooperation of churches he urged that the brethren “unite
and send brother Campbell on a mission to England; and during the
trip he could select a valuable library for Bethany College.”
(Mill.
Harb. 14,
p. 377) Johnson had a missionary concern for Europe, often referring
to its need of the gospel. He believed Campbell could do for Europe
what he had done for America.
It is understandable,
therefore, why Johnson was so elated when the
Millennial
Harbinger enjoyed
such influence in England as to be published in a British edition.
Speaking of this, Johnson wrote as follows by way of rebuking the
unfriendly critics of Campbell:
.
. . while he is slandered by his opponents in this country, he has a
source of high gratification in being recognized and addressed in the
most affectionate terms as a brother by one of the most distinguished
and pious men in any country, to-wit: the beloved William Jones of
London. Added to this, brother Jones is new publishing a Millennial
Harbinger in England. and
giving circulation to brother Campbell’s writings. Ah! envy,
green-eyed envy . . . (Gospel
Advocate, 1836, p. 3)
Throughout this period of
the Restoration Movement there was a question about Campbell’s
position on the Holy Spirit. In 1843 he debated the work of the
Spirit in conversion of the sinner with N. L. Rice, a Presbyterian.
Even after this extended presentation of his views on the Spirit,
Campbell’s position was still identified as essentially that of
the Baptists. It disturbed Johnson that some considered the debate as
a mere “war of words without a substantial disagreement. This
led him to write: “How a person possessing discriminating
powers of mind could come to such a conclusion is astonishing to me.
If I understand the matter, they were and are as wide apart as the
poles.” He went on to urge Editor Kendrick of the
Christian
Journal to
run parallel columns of Baptist doctrine on the Spirit and
Campbell’s, so that people could see the difference. It seems
that he felt obligated to defend Campbell.
For
myself, I can most unhesitatingly say that one of the chief
excellencies of brother Campbell is that he possesses, in a most eminent degree,
discriminating powers of mind. And this is one of the very reasons
why he refused to notice many things in the discussion (with Rice),
If ever gigantic powers of mind were exhibited, they were manifested
by Alexander Campbell in that discussion in Lexington. The debate
will hand his name down to posterity as one of God’s most
gifted sons. His goodness and his greatness will outlive all the
malice of his enemies. His fame defies the insidious attacks of envy.
And the mighty work he has accomplished will constitute one of the
greenest spots in the world’s history, when his opponents are
dead and forgotten. (Biography, p. 241)
That he felt indebted to
Campbell for bringing him to truth is obvious. In a letter from Van
Buren, Ark., in 1848 he wrote to the Sage of Bethany as follows:
“Thank the Lord that your writings ever fell in my way! I shall
ever feel the debt of gratitude that you taught me how to read the
Bible, the book of the Lord. It imparts to me a happiness that no
language can tell.” (Biography,
p. 277)
In a letter to Campbell
just after his return from Europe, during which time he lost his
promising young son, Wycliffe, the evangelist wrote as follows: “Oh,
that I could see you and sympathize with you in your afflictions, and
hear you recount your tour over the ocean and back again to the field
of your labors of love. In America your triumphs are recorded and
your riches are in the heavens! Oh! how many of your beloved ones are
there!” (Biography,
p. 286)
Campbell made far more
trips to Johnson’s native Kentucky than anywhere else, going
there perhaps as many as 70 or 80 times during his ministry. Johnson
often called upon him for special work. In 1850 he wrote to him: “We
more than half claim you in Kentucky, and I think it is your duty to
be there.” (Mill.
Harb. 21,
p. 239) As Campbell grew older he wrote to him: “As life is
precarious, I would urge you, brother Campbell, to complete your
labors as soon as possible, in furnishing the mean of a faithful and
perspicuous translation of the Bible, for I am persuaded that no man
or set of men, can furnish such an one, unless they perfectly
understand the genius
and
spirit
of
the Christian religion.” (Mill.
Harb. 23,
p. 113)
Even though Johnson
failed by a decade to live as long as Campbell, he seems to have felt
obligated to eulogize the Reformer as they both grew older. In a
speech before the Revision Association a short time before his death
in 1856, the evangelist said of Campbell:
And
I trust it will not be considered indelicate or out of place to name
Alexander Campbell as one of those distinguished pioneers of this
century, who risked all that was dear to him of worldly interest at a
most perilous crisis. His life and labors are on record here and in
heaven. Snarlers may snarl, infidels may gnash their teeth, false
professors may defame, and the envious may scowl at him with
green-eyed hate and malice; he stands erect, and as firm as the Rock
of Gibraltar, defying Ocean’s foaming, dashing billows. He is
on the rock. (Biography. p.
400)
Campbell reciprocated
these kindly feelings toward Johnson, but he was most impressed with
his ability as an evangelist. There is almost a sense of awe towards
Johnson’s ability in the field. He did not often use the
superlatives that he did in speaking of Johnson. He described him as
“one of the most laborious, useful, exemplary and successful
evangelists in America.” (Biography,
p. 298)
We have already noted that he considered “sincerity, honesty,
and great earnestness” as the secret of his success.
Not the least of their
work together was the Christian
Hymn Book, which
went through many editions and circulated widely among the Disciples.
My own copy of this hymnal is the fifth edition (1856). The fly-leaf
reads in part: “Compiled by A. Campbell, W. Scott, B. W. Stone,
and J. T. Johnson. Elders of the Christian Church.”
Another interesting
collaboration was one of the very first “unity meetings”
conducted by our people. In a note to Campbell in 1841 the evangelist
said: “When do you visit Kentucky? And will you spend any time
with us here? Oh! that we could have a meeting to discuss the
principles of Union, and give public notice for all parties to
attend! the meeting to be conducted in all good feeling, free from
all harsh remark. Incalculable good might be the result. A week or
two spent in this way would give an impetus to the cause never to be
forgotten. Think of this, and take such course as your judgment may
approve.” (Mill.
Harb. 12,
p. 92)
Campbell published the
note with this attending promise: “Your motion is an excellent
one; and I will travel 100 miles out of my way to attend such a
meeting in Kentucky on my return from Nashville the ensuing Spring.”
The meeting was conducted
in Lexington in April of 1841 and it
attracted
a very large audience, including representatives from several sects,
especially Baptists. The influential Elder W. F. Broddus, almost a
lifetime antagonist of Campbell, issued an edict that the Kentucky
Baptists were not to attend the unity meeting, though he himself
attended! The meeting was an open one with anyone free to speak and
criticize. Broddus was invited to say what he would, but he chose to
be what Campbell called “a silent spectator.” Campbell
later wrote that he hoped Broddus might experience what Goldsmith
spoke of-”some who came to laugh remain’d to pray”
--- but he remained critical of the effort, even by pen following the
sessions. So the meeting had its repercussions in the press,
including Campbell’s journal.
One noteworthy resolution
was passed by this union meeting which we of today might give pause
to consider in view of our own divisions:
Resolved,
That the union of Christians can be scripturally effected by
requiring a practical acknowledgment of such articles of belief and
such rules of piety and morality as are admitted by all Christian
denominations.
In a recent conversation
in Nashville with Eva Jean Wrather, who is perhaps our greatest
authority on the life of Alexander Campbell, the question was raised
as to when and where Campbell and Johnson first met. Miss Wrather
suggested that it might have been when Johnson was in Congress. I
have since found documentation to support her position.
In the 1857
Millennial
Harbinger an
account is given of Johnson’s death. In this connection
Campbell relates his first meeting with Johnson:
I
cannot now give the precise date of my first introduction to Elder J.
T. Johnson. I had the pleasure of forming his acquaintance when a
Baptist. On dining with him at his own house, whilst he was a Member
of Congress, in company with some gentlemen of the Bar, and other
friends, I was most favorably impressed with his manner of giving
thanks at the table, and the spirit of piety and devotion exhibited
on the occasion. (Mill. Harb.
28, p. 109)
He goes on to tell how
two years later he was urged by Johnson to deliver a discourse in
Georgetown. He was still engaged at the Bar, but Campbell was
impressed with his “concentrated and deeply interested
attention.” After the discourse he invited Johnson to walk with
him in the yard around the meetinghouse. “Brother Johnson, you
are aware that the Baptists are occasionally wont to say that they
sometimes ‘feel a deep and solemn impression on their minds.’
I now
feel such an impression on my mind, and it is concerning not myself,
but you.” Campbell
said to him as they paused in the churchyard.
They were quiet for a
moment. Then Johnson said, “And what is it?” Campbell
measured the man with his piercing eyes and said,
“It
is that you should abandon politics and the law, and go and preach
the gospel.”
Campbell goes on to say:
“A solemn pause ensued. He broke silence by saying something of
his feelings and desires, which I cannot state; but concluded,
saying, ‘I will promise you that I will give to the subject a
grave and solemn reflection, and will respond to you again’.”
Campbell goes on to explain how he passed through Georgetown a few months afterwards and inquired of the brethren how things were going. A brother Bryan replied: “Nothing remarkable, save that John T. Johnson has given up politics and is now preaching the gospel.”