|
 When
Alexander Campbell began the “Christian Baptist” (1823) he
had much to say about the domination of churches by clergy,
councils, Synods, and Associations. He wrote, “the church of
Christ is, inpropria forma, the only institution of God left on
earth to illuminate and reform the world...“ and “in their
church capacity alone they moved...“ He was, at the time of
this writing, member of a church which was in the Redstone
Baptist Association. Later he became a member of the Wellsburg
church, which joined the Mahoning Association with his approval.
He even published, without comment, “Carson’s Reply to Brown”
which said that churches assembled to give advice to other
churches “will degenerate into an engine of Satan.” He then
opposed the dissolution of the Mahoning Association. How is such
seeming vacillation explained?
His
explanations indicate that in his objections to Associations,
etc., he thought only in terms of ecclesiastical domination (as
was seen in Roman Catholicism and State or Creed-bound
Protestant churches.) It never seemed to occur to Campbell that
the mechanical structure itself (a plurality of churches seeking
to act as one, even if only in limited fields) necessitated an
“executive board” or oversight that “dominated” (wisely
or unwisely) the churches in the team.
Campbell’s
power of reasoning was not faulty; he began with a false base.
He thought of the universal church as a functional organization,
made up of local churches. The scriptures describe the universal
church by many figures, all of which picture individual saints
as the units.
|
|
The body is made up of members (Rom.
12:4-f; 1 Cor. 12:12-f), branches on the vine are individuals
(Jn. 15:1-6), the family consists of brothers and sisters.
Campbell even said “The kingdom of Jesus Christ consists of
numerous communities...“ when scriptures say it consists of
citizens (Eph. 2:19). Couple Campbell’s first error with his
concept of “the church” (univ.) as having some organized
function to perform, and we see why he sought some means for the
collective action of churches. He freely acknowledged that the
scriptures gave no instructions along this line, but concluded
it was therefore a matter of expediency, to be determined by
men.
To
avoid apparent inconsistency with his earlier attacks on
associations, he said his strictures on such applied only to “internal”
affairs of the churches. Of course scriptures make no such
distinctions in the work of overseers. Paul thanked a local
church with local government (Phil. 1:1) for their “fellowship
in the gospel” (1:5, 4:15). He was recommended to an “external”
work by a local church (Acts 14:26-27; 15:40), and reported “external”
work to James and the elders in Jerusalem (21:17-19). Campbell
was grasping at straws.
His
persistence in this course led him to “approval of the Baptist
associational formulas, pruned of certain.“ abuses. He was
president of the American Christian Missionary Society (1849),
and advocated a far more general church organization. Must we of
this generation remain blind to the lessons of our own history?
[Previous
Article] [Next
Article]
|
