---

Essay 66 (3-28-05)

IV. The Aggressive Years (1823-1830)

"My very soul is stirred within me when I think of the mischief of the clergy."

Becomes an Editor

In 1823 he became an editor -- the forte of his ministry for the rest of his life. If it was as a debater that he launched his reformation, it was as an editor that he solidified it. While he may be thought of as young and brash when editor of The Christian Baptist, he was in fact almost thirty-five when he began the journal and forty-one when he concluded it -- the mid-years of one's career in his time. Nor was he brash or reckless, considering the maturity and sophistication of his writings during those seven years. But he was bold and aggressive - and sometimes offensive, especially to the clergy - or "tart and severe" as he himself put it.

From the outset he more than hinted that the new journal would be a hard-hitting publication. In the prospectus to The Christian Baptist he announced that the "sole object" was not only "the eviction of truth" but "the exposing of error in doctrine and practice." In the preface to the first issue he admitted that it was rare for an editor to do what he had in mind - to oppose the errors of those with whom he was identified and looked to for support. If such a one appears in any party, he ventured, he would be met with frowns, and would either have to lay his hand upon his mouth or be shown the door. He made it clear that he intended neither to keep his mouth shut nor to walk out the door!

He suspected that his efforts might "be blasted by the poisonous breath of sectarian zeal and of an aspiring priesthood." He was persuaded that the church had seriously departed from the apostolic faith and was in deep apostasy -- and that the clergy was largely responsible for this condition. He explained in later years that he sometimes spoke with "asperity" of the clergy - which he considered contrary to his nature - because he thought it took that to get their attention as to the seriousness of their transgressions.

He sometimes wrote with the anger of an Old Testament prophet: "My very soul is stirred within me when I think of what a world of mischief the popular clergy have done. They have shut up everybody's mouth but their own; and theirs they will not open unless they are paid for it." He not only called them "hirelings" and "stall-fed clergy," but even "antichrist." He ventured that if he could not prove that the clergy -- "as a body collective" (He allowed for exceptions) -- are not antichrist, then he could not prove any proposition at all!

The clergy also "hanker after titles" - the D. D. degree in particular - and when a Baptist clergy friend of his turned down the honor, Campbell commented: "When the degree was conferred on him, he, like a Christian, declined it." In his "Third Epistle of Peter" -- published in The Christian Baptist in 1824 -- he excoriated the clergy to the point of appearing to be deliberately offensive. He not only charged that the clergy "fleece the flock" for money, but that they feigned to make the people think they cared for their souls while they did it. They also "make the people blind in the midst of light." He also chided them for allowing the women to glorify them - an unexpected inclusion since he himself enjoyed such glory!

Some of his readers - including some of his own people - saw this as unnecessarily offensive. Students in a New York seminary cancelled their subscriptions, charging that he was on "a confirmed course of ridicule and sarcasm." A Baptist minister -- whom Campbell respected and often quoted -- urged that he be "not so strong and extreme," observing that he had two personalities - gracious in the social circle, but otherwise when writing. Another respected correspondent wrote to him that "it is thought that your feelings are not of the most peaceful nature" and accused him of forgetting such Christian virtues as gentleness and kindness. His severest critics called up such adjectives as "mischievous," "incendiary," and "dangerous to our children." His journal "sowed seeds of discord among brethren."

But Campbell did not retract or apologize, and he showed little interest in defending himself. He pointed out that there are instances in which a reformer may have to use severe language - as did John the Baptist and even Jesus himself - in order to alert the church to "the moral malady" that consumes its spiritual life. But he did in time tone down his rhetoric, and he became more conciliatory toward the clergy.

The Christian Baptist was far more than the editor's occasional anti-clerical diatribes. It was concerned for the reformation of both the church and society - "the art of living well" as the editor expressed it. The source of such well-being is found in "the ancient gospel." There was, therefore, an extended series on "A Restoration of the Ancient Order of Things" -- and another on "The Ancient Gospel" -- in which the editor sought to correct the deficiencies of the modern church by way of a restoration of primitive Christianity. A restoration of ordinances - baptism, the Lord's Supper, the Lord's Day, the Bible - received special attention. Restoration was a basic motif - such as restoration of pure speech, proper church discipline, church offices, the spirit of the primitive Christians, and even love feasts.

The editor appears to have gone out of his way to be fair and open. He invited his readers to write to him their objections to anything in the paper. He promised to respond. Much of the journal is made up of correspondence - letters from readers and his responses. He allowed "the other side" to be heard - including scathing criticism of himself. He was cooperative and conciliatory towards other religious papers, even when they were critical. He quoted from seventy-nine different journals during those seven years, often commending what they had to say. He was an editor sensitive to the church at large, one who had an ecumenical outlook. But he was always a reformer and an agent for change. He often pled with his detractors to consider the rewards of an appeal to the primitive faith.

Sectarianism Is "The Offspring of Hell"

While he was sometimes caustic in The Christian Baptist, he was never sectarian - if that means he saw his movement as exclusively the body of Christ and his people as the only true Christians. In 1825, in response to a reader, he made it clear that he had put that kind of thinking behind him: "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 any one who was not as perfect as I supposed myself." He went on to brand such exclusiveness as "Protestant mockery" and sectarianism as "the offspring of hell."

Throughout the seven volumes of The Christian Baptist he was eminently ecumenical in his plea for the unity of all believers. To a reader with whom he did not agree on a number of issues, he wrote: "I will esteem you and love you, as I do every man, of whatever name, who believes sincerely that Jesus is the Messiah, and hopes in his salvation." To another correspondent he said: "I declare non-fellowship with no man who owns the Lord in word and deed. Such is a Christian. He that denies the Lord in word and deed is not a Christian."

Again in 1825, while yet with the Baptists -- and before he had a separate movement -- he explained: "I have no idea of adding to the catalogue of new sects. This game has been played too long. I labor to see sectarianism abolished, and all Christians of every name united upon the one foundation on which the apostolic church was founded." He was confident that the church would one day be united again -- as it was in apostolic times --but only through a restoration of the ancient order of things. The reformed church would be a united church, and the united church would be "the millennial church."

When he brought The Christian Baptist to a close in July, 1830, he had already begun a new journal with a significant name change. It was called The Millennial Harbinger. The journal would anticipate - and help to usher in - the coming millennium by pleading for the unity of all Christians through the restoration of primitive Christianity. The new journal would take up where the old one left off. It is to be noted that he closed down The Christian Baptist lest its name should compromise his non-sectarian plea: "Hating sects and sectarian names, I resolved to keep the name of The Christian Baptist from being fixed on us."

The Living Oracles: Translation of the New Testament

It was during these years -- in 1826 -- that he published his own translation of the New Testament. Titled The Living Oracles, it was based on a translation by Scottish scholars, and it included extensive critical notes. He made some daring changes - some of which did not go well with his own people - such as omitting Acts 8:39, which was a favorite proof text. The use of "immerse" for baptism might have pleased the Baptists, but "John, the Immerser" removed their name from the Bible! That "church" never appears - he used "congregation" -- nor thy, thou, and thine - and such changes as "reform" for repent and "proclaim" for preach made it too different for most people.

While the new version went through several editions and revisions, even after his death, it enjoyed only modest acceptance. But it further established Alexander Campbell as a reformer and strengthened both his reputation and his Movement. It was, however, an achievement that on one occasion turned on him. Three years later, when he served as a delegate to the Virginia Constitutional Convention, a fellow delegate opposed one of his measures with: "Mr. Chairman, even the God of heaven cannot please this man, for he has a Bible all his own."

Virginia Constitutional Convention

The 1829 Virginia Constitutional Convention -- Campbell's first and only venture into politics -- placed him in the company of two former presidents - James Madison and James Monroe - as well as Chief Justice John Randolph and Virginia's governor, William B. Giles. While the experience had little bearing on his role as a reformer, it gave him the unique opportunity to preach in various churches while in Richmond those several months - and to be heard by the great and the near great.

James Madison was one who heard him, and while he spoke highly of Campbell's role in the Convention, he added, "But it is as a theologian that Mr. Campbell must be known. It was my pleasure to hear him very often as a preacher of the gospel, and I regard him as the ablest and most original expounder of the Scriptures I have ever heard."

Campbell-Owen Debate

It was also in 1829 that he had his third debate. This time his opponent was an eminent socialist named Robert Owen, and the issue was infidelity -- which was then pouring into America from Europe. But the debate was as much about hope as anything - as Campbell saw it - for he held that however successful Owen's socialistic enterprises might be one cannot be happy in this world without the hope of immortality beyond the grave.

Observers were impressed that two men - radically different in their views - could be as gracious towards each other as were Campbell and Owen. The debate gave prestige and visibility to the new church that was emerging, especially since Campbell was defending the entire religious community against infidelity.

First Meets Barton W. Stone

It was during this time -- in 1824 -- that Alexander Campbell first met Barton W. Stone. It was during the second of Campbell's many visits to Kentucky, and it was the beginning of a long and fruitful friendship. But it proved to be more than friendship, for together they forged a unity movement that was unique to American church history. Stone had priority in time in that his efforts had begun as early as the Cane Ridge Revival in 1801. Campbell had priority in leadership in that he had the qualifications to lead such a movement.

Stone recognized this early in their work together: "I am constrained, and willingly constrained, to acknowledge him as the greatest promoter of this reformation of any man living." Campbell, in turn, referred to Stone as "the honored instrument of bringing many out of the ranks of human tradition and putting into their hands the Book of Books as their only confession of faith and rule of life."

Stone esteemed Campbell as having fewer faults than any man he knew, while Campbell referred to him as "the venerable Barton W. Stone." While they were not side-by-side co-laborers, they were both editors who led parallel movements that eventually united. They corresponded - publishing their exchanges in each other's papers - and they sometimes disagreed. When an opponent in a debate with Campbell took advantage of this, the reformer replied, referring to his relationship to Stone: "Our bond of union is not opinion, nor unity of opinion. It is one Lord, one faith, one baptism." He went on to say that their relationship to each other - and to their entire movement - was "so sacred" and "so perfectly catholic" that anyone who loves Christ could unite with them.

This was the genius of the plea advocated by both of them - Christians may differ on opinions and marginal issues and be united on the essentials. They exemplified this in their own rather uneven relationship. In spite of vigorous differences, they found oneness in their common devotion to Jesus Christ, and in their mutual passion for the unity of all God's people. It was because of this kind of example and leadership that the Stone and Campbell movements became one unity movement in 1832.

[TOP].