Highlights in Restoration History …

CATHOLICITY: “THE RULE OF UNION”

This is one of the most neglected features of our heritage from our forebears, the ideal of unity based upon what is generally conceded by all Christians. On several occasions Alexander Campbell set forth the principle of catholicity as the basis of union among Christians, even to the point of making it a challenge to the Christian world.

In 1839 in his Millennial Harbinger he began a series on “Union of Christians” in which he admitted that the subject had long been with him a darling theme. But he granted that for a long time he could not see clearly the grounds upon which the union of all Christians could be realized, though he believed he now had the answer. He set it forth in the first essay of the series in the form of a three point proposal:

1. “That a congress of all Protestant parties (and if anyone choose to add the Greek and Roman sects, I will vote for it) be convened in some central place, and that this congress be composed of delegates appointed by all parties in the ratio of their entire population.”

2. “When convened according to appointment, the rule of union shall be, that whatever in faith. in piety, and morality is catholic, or universally admitted by all parties, shall be adopted as the basis of union; and whatever is not by all parties admitted as of divine authority, shall be rejected as schismatical and human.”

3. “That all parties shall, by their delegates, solemnly pledge themselves to submit to all things that are purely catholic, or universally accredited by all parties; and to abandon whatever tenets, forms, or usages they may have which are not admitted as of divine authority by all Christendom.”

Campbell was so sure of the reasonableness of what he called “the rule of union” that he challenged “him’ that is of contrary opinion” to give one good reason against it. He was not asking for two reasons against it, he insisted, but just one!

Within two years of this proposal John T. Johnson, who one time wrote to Campbell that the union of Christians could be effected if it weren’t for the preachers!, arranged a unity meeting in Lexington where Campbell could set forth before the Christian world his catholic principle. Johnson was also largely responsible for the gathering in the same city back in 1832 that resulted in the union of the Stone and Campbell movements. All the denominations were invited to this one in April of 1841 “at which all the religious parties will enjoy equal privileges.” The invitation, signed by Johnson, assured all the churches that “The olive branch of peace is held out to all religious parties.”

It was a meeting in which resolutions were introduced and then passed or rejected by the audience. A president was selected to preside over the proceedings and two secretaries to report them to the public. Except for a short intermission for dinner, Campbell spoke one of the days from 10 a.m. until4:30 p.m.! During the address he put forth this resolution:

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.”

The secretaries reported that Dr. James Fishback, then a leading Baptist who later became a reformer, proposed union upon the Bible alone and on Christ as Lord. On baptism he said, “There is scriptural ground for an honest difference of opinion among the sincere disciples and followers of Jesus Christ, laid in the weakness and imperfection of man, and that they ought not to disown one another at the Lord’s table as Christians on account of their difference.” He did not present this as a resolution and the secretaries do not tell how the audience reacted, which was made up of many Disciple leaders. But Campbell, writing about It later, said it was the best discourse he had ever heard from a Baptist and wished it had been printed and published to the world.

Campbell’s catholic rule of union was set forth as a resolution and was passed unanimously by the immense audience.

One wonders how such a resolution would fare before some of our huge Church of Christ-Christian Church audiences today. Borrowing a page from John T. Johnson, one might conclude that it would pass with flying colors among our rank and file if the preachers would stay out of it! I can just see some well-meaning brother from Fort Worth insisting that a cappella music is a catholic principle of the apostolic faith, though he might hesitate to use the word catholic! It is noteworthy that Campbell includes in his proposal that whenever a party insists upon something that cannot be admitted by all parties as universal, it is to be rejected as schismatical. Campbell’s position would, of course, allow a church to have practices unique to itself such as a cappella music, but since they are not catholic in nature they cannot be made tests of communion.

Years later, in the Rice debate, Campbell again referred to his catholic position: “Our doctrine is catholic, very catholic,” he told Rice and the audience. “Not Roman catholic nor Greek catholic, but simply catholic.”

And so it is. We have a catholic creed, the confession that Jesus is the Christ the Son of God; a catholic name, Christian; a catholic authority, the Bible; a catholic baptism, immersion into the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit; a catholic Table, spread for all Christians, and we neither invite nor debar.

Campbell had his answer to the place of opinion and differences: “Where we cannot agree in opinion, we will agree to differ; and a free intercourse will do more to enlighten us and to reform all abuses than years of controversy and volumes of defamation,” he said in the 1834 Millennial Harbinger. He also said to Rice in their debate: “It is not the object of my efforts to make men think alike on a thousand themes. Let men think as they please on any matter of human opinion, and even upon the doctrines of religion, provided only that they hold the head Christ and keep His commandments.”

He was not always so catholic, for he wrote in the Christian Baptist of 1826:

I was once so straight that, like the Indian’s tree, I leaned a little the other way. I was so strict a Separatist that I would neither pray nor sing praises with anyone who was not as perfect as I supposed myself to be. In this most unpopular course I persisted until I discovered the mistake and saw that on the principle embraced in my conduct, there never could be a congregation or a church upon the earth … This plan of making my own nest, and fluttering over my own brood; of building our own tent, and confining all goodness and grace to our noble selves and the “elect few” who are like us, is the quintessence of sublimated pharisaism.


The catholic faith of our pioneers is that for which we plead: a fellowship made up of all those who believe in and respond to our common faith, and liberty of opinion in all those things not generally conceded to be universal. —the Editor