WE COULD UNITE EXCEPT FOR PREACHERS

Were it not for the preachers Christians would unite upon the Bible alone in less than a year, in my judgment.—Letter from John T. Johnson to Alexander Campbell, Millennial Harbinger, 1842, p. 479.

One can learn a lot about our heritage in the Stone-Campbell movement by reading the belles lettres written on the frontier. These were often reports from evangelists in the field, and they appeared in most of the early journals. Alexander Campbell’s paper, the Millennial Harbinger, published hundreds of these through the years under such titles as “Reports From the Churches” and “Progress of Reform.” It might be said that in these letters one sees the guts of the Movement, for workers in the field were pouring out their hearts in reference to the gnawing problems they faced combating sectarianism, infidelity, and ungodliness on the American frontier.

One problem they faced, for instance, was the lack of workers. B. F. Hall wrote to Campbell in 1839 and asked, “How shall we procure preachers and pastors to take care of the numerous flocks we already have?” An evangelist wrote from Minerva, Ohio that “the deceitfulness of riches and the spirit of speculation” were obstacles to his ministry, but by the power of the gospel he was overcoming. He reported 35 additions in a few weeks of preaching. Such reports were typical, for they were eager to share their successes and failures, their hopes and misgivings. Their letters were like war bulletins from the battlefield to headquarters. Our people had no hierarchy to report to, so they turned to “the editor bishops.”

In the letter quoted above from John T. Johnson, who, having once served in the U.S. Congress, resigned to become “the evangelist of Kentucky” who brought thousands to Christ, tells of preaching every day for eight weeks in a row and baptizing 238! He plead for more evangelists in the field. “We are under obligation to have evangelists preaching the gospel allover the United States,” he told Campbell.

It is in that context that he tells Campbell that they would be able to unite all the Christians in only a year except for the preachers. Johnson was the kind of man that deserved to be heard. On another occasion he wrote Campbell that their efforts needed better organization. Now he scores the preachers as being the real cause for the divisions among Christians. But for them we could unite the Christians without delay, he complains. We are to understand that he was talking about the clergy of the established churches of his day, not his own colaborers.

This aside to Campbell is one more small clue as to the purpose of the Movement, as those who launched it saw it. Evangelist Johnson was in the field not only to win them but to blend them. Like other leaders of the Movement, Johnson wanted to unite the Christians in all the sects. This confirms Robert Richardson’s statement that the Movement was “born with a passion for Christian unity, and unity has been its consuming theme.” We are to assume that Johnson was dead serious in what he said about the preachers. They not only do not help in the work of unity, as one might suppose, they are a hindrance, he was telling Campbell.

As one views the history of the church in all its factions and fragments, she can tell that Johnson has a point. It is nearly always some preacher who starts another sect. It is the clergy that creates the issues and keeps them alive, drawing lines of fellowship along the way. It is ministers that create parties and make themselves wing commanders. Johnson would have smiled understandingly over the statement made by a brother who was attending one of our unity meetings. In response to a question of what might be done to restore unity in our ranks, he blurted out, “Shoot all the preachers!”

And yet we must acknowledge that Johnson, not to mention the brother at the unity meeting, was indulging in overstatement, especially when we relate it to our own time. We all know many preachers who are part of the answer rather than the problem when it comes to a concern for unity. Lots of good work has been done toward healing our divisions, and it is often led by preachers.

But still we should take heed to what truth there is in what Johnson said to Campbell. It could serve as a warning to preachers to take heed lest they contribute to our ugly habit of making divisions and preserving them. Preachers can be busy preaching the gospel and edifying the saints without having to create issues that are divisive. A minister can be Christ’s man without being a party man. He may have opinions so long as he holds them as opinions, and not be pushy with them. Preachers might also get out of the way more than they do and let lay people take the lead.

Johnson’s judgment may strike close to home when we look at all the schisms that have occurred among Churches of Christ/Christian Churches this century. A new tract by one Ralph L. Wilson of Talco, Texas entitled “The Church of Christ and The Unwritten Creed” reminded me of what Johnson said about preachers. The tract charges that while the Churches of Christ have no written creed they are nonetheless creed-bound with many unwritten creeds. This is what it has to say about preachers:

The preacher gets the unwritten Creed at college or from some influential preacher and he spreads it the same as other denominations with their Creeds; with one exception, it is unwritten. At least it is not compiled and labeled. As a result there are 20 different Churches of Christ. You see, our Creeds differ. We differ in some ways, but we each say: “We are not a denomination, we are the true and only church.” Isn’t that nice? We all now have a Church of Christ of our choice. What egotism! What a shame!

The author of the tract places much of the blame on the preachers. They tell us what to think and believe, he charges, and they cut off any discussion that questions their assumed prerogatives. He names a number of issues that cannot be freely discussed in many Churches of Christ, such as marriage and divorce, on which he takes a more liberal view. When we are wrong, he says, we can’t effect a change because we are creed-bound, with the preachers standing guard.

The brother does have a case to make, doesn’t he? These days we have “the pulpit minister,” an oddity for a people who claim to follow the New Testament pattern. And “the pulpit” belongs to “the pulpit minister,” and he always fills it. If he is out of town, someone of like kind is imported to fill the pulpit, often one of his choice. The preacher usually controls what is said. If elders get in his way, he is often able to replace them with men of his own choice. The intelligent “layman,” however gifted and however spiritual, is hardly ever heard in a Church of Christ pulpit, for it is the professional minister’s domain. When creeds are made and enforced as tests of fellowship, it is usually the work of preachers.

In the tradition of our great evangelist, John T. Johnson, we must face up to the sobering biblical truth that division is a sin. It is a sin to create division within the Body of Christ and it is a sin to preserve those divisions. To the extent that the preachers have been responsible, to that extent the preachers must repent and change their ways. They must cease being piece-makers and become peacemakers. They must pursue the things that make for peace among sisters and brothers, not discord. And how the God of heaven will bless them when they make such a change in their ministry! And how much more joyous their ministry will be!

We have many preachers among us who urge our people “to preserve the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace,” and, like the apostle Paul, they call upon our churches to manifest forbearing love toward those who differ with them. May their tribe increase! And down the road there will be note taken and letters written about how the preachers of our generation became, like Thomas Campbell, “sick and tired of sectarian strife,” and joined ranks to restore that Christlike spirit that joins us together in joyous fellowship.—the Editor