CHAPTER VII.JOHN SMITH

In consequence of the views presented in this sermon, Mr. Campbell was “brought up for trial and condemnation” at the next meeting of the association in the autumn of 1817. At that time but few were ready to accept the conclusion in the sermon, and the actual adherents of the teaching, scattered among the Baptists of three States, did not number more than one hundred and fifty persons; but notwithstanding this feeble support, upon investigation he was acquitted of the charge made against him. Opposition to him increased in the Redstone Association, and some of the preachers determined to manufacture a sentiment that would thrust him out when the association should meet in September, 1823. In pursuance of this purpose certain influential men canvassed all the churches and secured the appointment of messengers who were in sympathy with themselves in opposition to Mr. Campbell; and when the association met all things were in readiness to exclude the author of the “Sermon on the Law” from the fellowship of the association. But to the astonishment and chagrin of the plotters, when the letter from the Brush Run Church was read, Mr. Campbell, though present, was not mentioned as a messenger. This cooled the ardor of his enemies who had hoped to close Baptist ears against him by a decree of excommunication, and crush his influence generally by putting him in the discreditable position of one expelled from the association. A motion being made to invite him to a seat in the body, his enemies opposed it, and demanded to know why he had not been sent as a messenger. After much discussion Mr. Campbell relieved the situation by stating that the church of which he was then a member did not belong to the Redstone Association. In describing the chagrin of his enemies when this announcement was made, Mr. Campbell says:

Never did hunters, on seeing the game unexpectedly escape from their toils at the moment when its capture was sure, glare upon each other a more mortifying disappointment than that indicated by my pursuers at that instant, on hearing that I was out of their bailiwick, and consequently out of their jurisdiction. A solemn stillness ensued, and for a time all parties seemed to have nothing to do.

Never did hunters, on seeing the game unexpectedly escape from their toils at the moment when its capture was sure, glare upon each other a more mortifying disappointment than that indicated by my pursuers at that instant, on hearing that I was out of their bailiwick, and consequently out of their jurisdiction. A solemn stillness ensued, and for a time all parties seemed to have nothing to do.

Foreseeing the storm that was gathering, and learning, just a few weeks before the time for the association to convene, the plans that were being so industriously laid to exclude him from the association, he determined to defeat the project in a way which his enemies little expected, but which was in strict accordance with Baptist usage. As he had been frequently solicited by Adomson Bently to leave the Redstone Association and unite with the Mahoning, and as a number of the members of the Brush Run Church lived in Wellsburg and vicinity, he decided this was an opportune time to form a separate congregation in which he would have his membership, and which might afterward unite with the Mahoning Association. He announced, therefore, to the church at Brush Run that he desired from them letters of dismission for himself and some thirty other members in order to constitute a church at Wellsburg. This request was granted and a congregation was at once formed in the town of Wellsburg, and continued to assemble regularly ever afterward in the house which had been previously erected for that purpose. Thus were the unrighteous attempts of wicked men defeated.

Shortly before the events already mentioned, Mr. Campbell was very unexpectedly drawn into a discussion with John Walker, a minister of the Seceder Presbyterian Church. It came about in this way: The jealousy of rival religious parties at Mount Pleasant, Ohio, led to a controversy between Mr. Walker and Mr. Birch, a Baptist preacher, which ended in a challenge by Mr. Walker to meet any Baptist preacher of good standing in the public discussion of the question of baptism. The high opinion entertained throughout that region for Mr. Campbell’s ability led to his selection as the most suitable champion of the Baptist cause. Owing to the circumstances under which he was placed, he did not give an immediate answer. In the meantime Mr. Birch renewed the appeal, and finally made it more urgent by stating that it was the unanimous wish of all the Baptist churches throughout that region that he should be their representativein the discussion. Being thus called upon by the church, and urged by personal friends, he could no longer refuse to yield to his own convictions of public duty.

His hesitancy was not due to his own disinclination, but in deference to his father, who did not regard “public debates the proper method of proceeding in contending for the faith once delivered to the saints.” He, however, finally succeeded in convincing his father that, however much the usual unprofitable debates upon human theories were to be deplored and avoided, no objection could lie against a public defense of revealed truth, for which the Scriptures afforded abundant precedent. Having gained this point with his father, he finally informed Mr. Birch of his willingness to enter the discussion.

All preliminaries having been arranged, the discussion began on Monday morning, June 19, 1820, at Mount Pleasant, Ohio. It was attended by a large concourse of people and created great interest. Mr. Walker’s first speech was very brief, and as it gives the gist of his whole contention throughout the debate, I will give it in full:

My friends, I do not intend to speak long at one time, perhaps not more than five or ten minutes, and will, therefore, come to the point at once: I maintain that baptism came into the room of circumcision; that the covenant on which the Jewish Church was built, and to which circumcision is the seal, is the same with the covenant on which the Christian Church is built, and to which baptism is the seal; that the Jews and the Christians are the same body politic under the same lawgiver and husband; hence the Jews were called the congregation of the Lord; and the bridegroom of the church says, “My love, my undefiled is one”—consequently the infants of believers have a right to baptism.

My friends, I do not intend to speak long at one time, perhaps not more than five or ten minutes, and will, therefore, come to the point at once: I maintain that baptism came into the room of circumcision; that the covenant on which the Jewish Church was built, and to which circumcision is the seal, is the same with the covenant on which the Christian Church is built, and to which baptism is the seal; that the Jews and the Christians are the same body politic under the same lawgiver and husband; hence the Jews were called the congregation of the Lord; and the bridegroom of the church says, “My love, my undefiled is one”—consequently the infants of believers have a right to baptism.

In response to this speech Mr. Campbell said that the pedobaptists acted as if they did not themselves believe infant baptism to be true, since, in point of fact, they did not put baptism in the room of circumcision, as they did not confine it to males only and extend it to servants as well as to children, perform it on the eighth day, etc.; and then proceeded to point out various differences between the twoinstitutions which rendered the supposed substitution of the one for the other impossible. Among these he particularizes the fact that circumcision required only carnal descent from Abraham, but that baptism demanded faith in Christ as its indispensable prerequisite; and that baptism differed from circumcision in the nature of the blessings it conveyed, which were spiritual and not temporal: “Baptism is connected with the promise of the remission of sins and the gift of the Holy Spirit.” This utterance is his first public recognition of the importance of baptism. While he then distinctly perceived and asserted a scriptural connection between baptism and remission of sins, he seems at this time to have viewed it only in the light of an argument and to have but a faint conception of its great practical importance in the economy of grace.

As the discussion proceeded, all recognized that he was an invincible defender of what he believed the Scriptures taught. His whole training had fitted him for such an arena. His liberal education, his extensive reading, his wonderful memory, his faultless diction, his remarkable self-control, sustained as they were by deep earnestness of purpose, gave him at once a vantage ground which he never relinquished. But such was the originality of his method in handling the truth and his freedom from the accepted terms of the theological schools that even the victory, which was universally admitted to be with him, was not accepted by many of the Baptists as an unmixed blessing. The opportunities and issues of the debate were such as to convince Mr. Campbell of its practical utility in disseminating the truth and he gave the following challenge in his concluding speech.

I this day publish to all present that I feel disposed to meet any pedobaptist minister of any denomination, of good standing in his party, and I engage to prove in a debate with him, either orally or with the pen, that infant sprinkling is a human tradition and injurious to the well-being of society, religious and political.

I this day publish to all present that I feel disposed to meet any pedobaptist minister of any denomination, of good standing in his party, and I engage to prove in a debate with him, either orally or with the pen, that infant sprinkling is a human tradition and injurious to the well-being of society, religious and political.

Such a challenge was well calculated to make a deep impression on all who heard it, and this was what he designedit to do. In the frankness of his independent spirit he, from that time forward, held himself in readiness to meet in public discussion any worthy champion who might rise in opposition to the truths he taught, or in defense of popular religious error.

The effect of this discussion, however, was to aid Mr. Campbell’s growing reputation. His fame was widely extended by the publication of the debate, which was read by thousands, and began soon to produce results far beyond his fondest hopes. The printed debate circulated very widely among the Baptists, who felt that they had the best of the argument. While some Baptists “remained extremely dubious in regard to the orthodoxy of their champion,” others took grateful pride in him, and felt, as one Baptist declared, that “he had done more for the Baptists in the West than any other man.”

The printing and circulation of the debate opened the eyes of Mr. Campbell to the power and usefulness of the press. From that time forward he cherished the hope that he might do something upon a more extended scale to rouse the people from their spiritual lethargy. Step by step he had been brought to an eminence from which he could survey the wide field in which he was destined to labor, and he now nerved himself for the undertaking. After maturing his plans, he conferred with his father and others concerning the advisability of issuing a monthly publication in the interest of religious truth. They heartily approved his plan, and he issued in the spring of 1823 a prospectus for the work which he proposed to call “The Christian Baptist.” In this prospectus the nature and objects of the publication were candidly and clearly stated, as follows:

The “Christian Baptist” shall espouse the cause of no religious sect, excepting that ancient sect “called Christians first at Antioch.” Its sole object shall be the eviction of the truth and the exposing of error in doctrine and practice. The editor, acknowledging no standard of religious faith or works other than the Old and New Testament, and the latter as the only standard of the religion of Jesus Christ, will, intentionally at least, oppose nothing which it contains, and recommend nothing which it does not enjoin. Having no worldlyinterest at stake from the adoption or reprobation of any articles of faith or religious practice, having no gift nor religious emolument to blind his eyes or to pervert his judgment, he hopes to manifest that he is an impartial advocate of truth.

The “Christian Baptist” shall espouse the cause of no religious sect, excepting that ancient sect “called Christians first at Antioch.” Its sole object shall be the eviction of the truth and the exposing of error in doctrine and practice. The editor, acknowledging no standard of religious faith or works other than the Old and New Testament, and the latter as the only standard of the religion of Jesus Christ, will, intentionally at least, oppose nothing which it contains, and recommend nothing which it does not enjoin. Having no worldlyinterest at stake from the adoption or reprobation of any articles of faith or religious practice, having no gift nor religious emolument to blind his eyes or to pervert his judgment, he hopes to manifest that he is an impartial advocate of truth.

He dedicated the work “to all those, without distinction, who acknowledge the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments to be a true revelation from God, and the New Testament as containing the religion of Jesus Christ; who, willing to have all religious tenets and practices tried by the divine Word, and who, feeling themselves in duty bound to search the Scripture for themselves in all matters of religion, are disposed to reject all doctrine and commandments of men, and to obey the truth, holding fast the faith once delivered to the saints.”

While making preparations to issue The Christian Baptist, he received a letter from Mr. McCalla, a Presbyterian preacher of Augusta, Ky., accepting his challenge given at the conclusion of the Walker debate. Mr. McCalla had been a lawyer and had gained a high reputation among the Presbyterians for his polemical powers. It was therefore greatly desired by his friends and the pedobaptists of the community that he should have an opportunity to retrieve, if possible, the injury which had been done to their cause by the generally-admitted failure of Mr. Walker. After having ascertained his standing, Mr. Campbell agreed to meet him, and arrangements were made for the discussion to take place at Washington, Ky., beginning October 15, 1823. As the Ohio River was too low for navigation at the time, Mr. Campbell made the entire distance of about three hundred miles on horseback.

Here, as in his former discussion, the entire bearing of the baptismal question was carefully canvassed. Each controverted point was hotly contested in the presence of a vast assemblage, which had been drawn together by Mr. Campbell’s reputation and their own interest in the question at issue. During this discussion, which continued seven days, in addition to his defense of the scriptural act and subject of baptism, the design and importance were set forth andexamined in a systematic form, and with such critical ability as to astonish his hearers. In the discussion with Walker he barely touched the design of baptism, but either during that debate or while transcribing it for publication, an impression was made on his mind that it had a very important meaning and that it was in some way connected with remission of sins, but he was so engaged in other matters that it passed out of his mind till he received the challenge to meet McCalla in debate, when he resolved to settle its true import before he ever debated the subject again. In the investigation, he examined the New Testament with great care and discussed the subject with his father for several months, and formed his conclusion after thorough examination and reflection, and after he saw that it was the way marked out by the Holy Spirit he had no hesitancy, on the second day of the debate with McCalla, in saying:

Our third argument is deduced from the design or import of baptism. On this topic of argument we shall be as full as possible, because of its great importance, and because perhaps neither Baptists nor Pedobaptists sufficiently appreciate it. I will first merely refer to the oracles of God, which show that baptism is an ordinance of the greatest importance and of momentous significance. Never was there an ordinance of so great import or design. It is to be but once administered. We are to pray often, praise often, show forth the Lord’s death often, commemorate his resurrection every week, but we are to be baptized but once. Its great significance can be seen from the following testimonies: The Lord saith, “He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved” (Mark 16:16). He does not say, “He that believeth and keeps my commandments shall be saved,” but he saith, “He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved.” He placeth baptism on the right hand of faith. Again, he tells Nicodemus that “unless a man be born of water and of the Spirit he can not enter into the kingdom of God.” Peter, on the day of Pentecost, places baptism in the same exalted place. “Repent,” says he, “and be baptized, every one of you, for the remission of sins” (Acts 2:38). Ananias saith to Paul, “Arise and be baptized and wash away thy sins, calling upon the name of the Lord” (Acts 22:16). Paul saith to the Corinthians, “Ye were once fornicators, idolaters, adulterers, effeminate, thieves, covetous, drunkards, rioters, extortioners, but ye are washed in the name of the Lord Jesus,” doubtless referring to their baptism. He tells Titus, “God our Father saved us by the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit” (Titus 3:5).See again its dignified importance. Peter finishes the grand climax in praise of baptism: “Baptism doth now also save us ... by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead” (I Peter 3:21).It was this view of baptism misapplied that originated infant baptism. The first errorists on this subject argued that if baptism was so necessary for the remission of sins, it should be administered to infants, whom they represented as in great need of it on account of their “original sin.” Affectionate parents, believing their children to be guilty of “original sin,” were easily persuaded to have them baptized for the remission of “original sin,” not for washing away sins actually committed. Faith in Christ is necessary to forgiveness of sins, therefore baptism without faith is an unmeaning ceremony.Our argument from this topic is, that baptism being ordained to be to a believer a formal and personal remission of all his sins, can not be administered unto an infant without the gravest perversion and abuse of the nature and import of this ordinance. Indeed, why should an infant that never sinned—that, as Calvinists say, is guilty only of “original sin,” which is a unit—be baptized for the remission of sins? (“Campbell-McCalla Debate,” pages 116, 117, 136.)

Our third argument is deduced from the design or import of baptism. On this topic of argument we shall be as full as possible, because of its great importance, and because perhaps neither Baptists nor Pedobaptists sufficiently appreciate it. I will first merely refer to the oracles of God, which show that baptism is an ordinance of the greatest importance and of momentous significance. Never was there an ordinance of so great import or design. It is to be but once administered. We are to pray often, praise often, show forth the Lord’s death often, commemorate his resurrection every week, but we are to be baptized but once. Its great significance can be seen from the following testimonies: The Lord saith, “He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved” (Mark 16:16). He does not say, “He that believeth and keeps my commandments shall be saved,” but he saith, “He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved.” He placeth baptism on the right hand of faith. Again, he tells Nicodemus that “unless a man be born of water and of the Spirit he can not enter into the kingdom of God.” Peter, on the day of Pentecost, places baptism in the same exalted place. “Repent,” says he, “and be baptized, every one of you, for the remission of sins” (Acts 2:38). Ananias saith to Paul, “Arise and be baptized and wash away thy sins, calling upon the name of the Lord” (Acts 22:16). Paul saith to the Corinthians, “Ye were once fornicators, idolaters, adulterers, effeminate, thieves, covetous, drunkards, rioters, extortioners, but ye are washed in the name of the Lord Jesus,” doubtless referring to their baptism. He tells Titus, “God our Father saved us by the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit” (Titus 3:5).See again its dignified importance. Peter finishes the grand climax in praise of baptism: “Baptism doth now also save us ... by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead” (I Peter 3:21).

It was this view of baptism misapplied that originated infant baptism. The first errorists on this subject argued that if baptism was so necessary for the remission of sins, it should be administered to infants, whom they represented as in great need of it on account of their “original sin.” Affectionate parents, believing their children to be guilty of “original sin,” were easily persuaded to have them baptized for the remission of “original sin,” not for washing away sins actually committed. Faith in Christ is necessary to forgiveness of sins, therefore baptism without faith is an unmeaning ceremony.

Our argument from this topic is, that baptism being ordained to be to a believer a formal and personal remission of all his sins, can not be administered unto an infant without the gravest perversion and abuse of the nature and import of this ordinance. Indeed, why should an infant that never sinned—that, as Calvinists say, is guilty only of “original sin,” which is a unit—be baptized for the remission of sins? (“Campbell-McCalla Debate,” pages 116, 117, 136.)

For a number of years prior to the debate Mr. McCalla had taken great delight in assailing the distinctive tenets of the Baptists, and gave them no little annoyance. As the debate progressed his defeat became more and more manifest and raised Mr. Campbell to great popularity among them; but as it was not his intention to seek popularity among them by catering to their admiration, by fostering their favorite but defective views of the Gospel and its institutions, he deemed it wise on the evening of the fifth day of the debate to candidly inform the principal Baptist preachers present of the exact position which he occupied. Being assembled in a room where he had called them together, he introduced himself fully to their acquaintance in the following manner, as related by himself:

“Brethren, I fear that if you knew me better you would esteem and love me less. For let me tell you that I have almost as much against you Baptists as I have against the Presbyterians. They err in one thing and you in another; and you are each nearly equidistant from original apostolic Christianity.” I paused; and such a silence as ensued, accompanied by a piercing look from all sides of the room, I seldom before witnessed. Elder Vardeman at length broke the silence by saying: “Well, sir, we want to know our errors or your heterodoxy. Do letus hear it. Keep nothing back.” I replied: “I know not where to begin; nor am I in health and vigor after the toils of the day to undertake so heavy a task; but I am commencing a publication called The Christian Baptist, to be devoted to all such matters, a few copies of which are in my portmanteau, and, with your permission, I will read you a few specimens of my heterodoxy.” They all said: “Let us hear—let us hear the worst error you have against us.” I went upstairs and unwrapped the first three numbers of the Christian Baptist that ever saw the light in Kentucky. I had just ten copies of the first three numbers. I carried them into the parlor and read a sample, the first essay on the clergy—so much of it as respected the “call to the ministry” as then taught in the “kingdom of the clergy,” and especially among the Baptists. This was the first essay ever read from it in Kentucky. After a sigh and a long silence, Elder Vardeman said: “Is that your worst error, your chief heterodoxy? I do not care so much about that, as you admit that we have a providential call, without a voice from heaven or a special visit from some angel or spirit. If you have anything worse, for my part I wish to hear it.” The cry was, “Let us hear something more.” On turning to and fro, I read an article on “Modern Missionaries.” This, with the “Capital Mistake of Modern Missionaries,” finished my reading for the evening. On closing this essay, Elder Vardeman said: I am not so great a missionary man as to fall out with you on that subject. I must hear more before I condemn or approve.” I then distributed my ten copies among the ten most distinguished and advanced elders in the room, requesting them to read these numbers during the recess of the debate, and to communicate freely to me their objections. We separated. So the matter ended at that time. (“Memoirs of A. Campbell,” Vol. II, page 88.)

“Brethren, I fear that if you knew me better you would esteem and love me less. For let me tell you that I have almost as much against you Baptists as I have against the Presbyterians. They err in one thing and you in another; and you are each nearly equidistant from original apostolic Christianity.” I paused; and such a silence as ensued, accompanied by a piercing look from all sides of the room, I seldom before witnessed. Elder Vardeman at length broke the silence by saying: “Well, sir, we want to know our errors or your heterodoxy. Do letus hear it. Keep nothing back.” I replied: “I know not where to begin; nor am I in health and vigor after the toils of the day to undertake so heavy a task; but I am commencing a publication called The Christian Baptist, to be devoted to all such matters, a few copies of which are in my portmanteau, and, with your permission, I will read you a few specimens of my heterodoxy.” They all said: “Let us hear—let us hear the worst error you have against us.” I went upstairs and unwrapped the first three numbers of the Christian Baptist that ever saw the light in Kentucky. I had just ten copies of the first three numbers. I carried them into the parlor and read a sample, the first essay on the clergy—so much of it as respected the “call to the ministry” as then taught in the “kingdom of the clergy,” and especially among the Baptists. This was the first essay ever read from it in Kentucky. After a sigh and a long silence, Elder Vardeman said: “Is that your worst error, your chief heterodoxy? I do not care so much about that, as you admit that we have a providential call, without a voice from heaven or a special visit from some angel or spirit. If you have anything worse, for my part I wish to hear it.” The cry was, “Let us hear something more.” On turning to and fro, I read an article on “Modern Missionaries.” This, with the “Capital Mistake of Modern Missionaries,” finished my reading for the evening. On closing this essay, Elder Vardeman said: I am not so great a missionary man as to fall out with you on that subject. I must hear more before I condemn or approve.” I then distributed my ten copies among the ten most distinguished and advanced elders in the room, requesting them to read these numbers during the recess of the debate, and to communicate freely to me their objections. We separated. So the matter ended at that time. (“Memoirs of A. Campbell,” Vol. II, page 88.)

At the close of the debate the Baptist preachers were so much pleased with the results, and so tolerant of what they found in the “Christian Baptist,” that they requested Mr. Campbell to furnish them with the printed proposals for its publication, in order to extend its circulation, and urged him to make an immediate tour through the State.

Previous engagements prevented, and he could only comply with their wishes so far as to visit Bryan’s Station, Mayslick, and Lexington; promising, if possible, to make a more extended tour through the State the following year.

As Mr. McCalla’s character for ability was well established and equally well sustained by his Presbyterian brethren, the results of the discussion were less damaging to hisreputation than to the cause which he advocated, which to this day has never recovered from the withering defeat which it then suffered. But Mr. McCalla labored for some time after the debate to change public sentiment by preaching on the subjects discussed in various parts of Kentucky, endeavoring at the same time to prejudice the minds of the people in advance against the report of the debate which Mr. Campbell was soon to publish.

Mr. Campbell was fully satisfied with his part in the discussion, and was now thoroughly satisfied that debates were a great means of reaching the people with the truth, for he wrote:

Public discussion, is, we are convinced, one of the best means of propagating the truth and of exposing error in doctrine or practice. We now reap the benefits of public debates of former times, and we have witnessed the beneficial results of those in our own time. And we are fully persuaded that a week’s debating is worth a year’s preaching, such as we generally have, for the purpose of disseminating truth and putting error out of countenance. There is nothing like meeting face to face in the presence of many witnesses and “talking the matter over”; and the man that can not govern his spirit in the midst of opposition and contradiction is a poor Christian indeed. (Christian Baptist, Vol. 1, page 189.)

Public discussion, is, we are convinced, one of the best means of propagating the truth and of exposing error in doctrine or practice. We now reap the benefits of public debates of former times, and we have witnessed the beneficial results of those in our own time. And we are fully persuaded that a week’s debating is worth a year’s preaching, such as we generally have, for the purpose of disseminating truth and putting error out of countenance. There is nothing like meeting face to face in the presence of many witnesses and “talking the matter over”; and the man that can not govern his spirit in the midst of opposition and contradiction is a poor Christian indeed. (Christian Baptist, Vol. 1, page 189.)

The debate was attended by great crowds of people from far and near. Mr. Campbell’s reputation as one of the first pulpit orators of the day was fully established; and wherever he could be induced to speak he was met by throngs of hearers. His most important reception on this trip was at Lexington, where he spoke in the Baptist meetinghouse, of which Dr. Fishback was minister. At the hour for the meeting the house was crowded to its utmost capacity. When Mr. Campbell rose he was not able to stand erect during the delivery of his discourse. “This was based on the first chapter of Hebrews, and led him to dwell upon the divine glory of the Son of God—a theme on which he was almost surpassingly eloquent. It lasted two hours, during which the audience sat in rapt attention.” He made a very profound impression on the entire audience. They recognized in him the mightiest intellect that had ever visited theircity. The freshness of his thoughts, the extent and accuracy of his Biblical knowledge and his grand generalizations of the wonderful fact of redemption opened up trains of reflection wholly new, and presented the subject of Christianity in a form so simple and yet so comprehensive as to fill every one with admiration; so that from this time forward Mr. Campbell was esteemed by the people of Kentucky as great among the greatest of her public men, and without a rival in the department to which he had devoted his powers.

Immediately after the close of the debate with Mr. McCalla, Mr. Campbell made preparations for its publication. This was done from his own notes and those taken by Sydney Rigdon during the debate, and notwithstanding Mr. McCalla’s effort to discredit it before its appearance, its general accuracy was attested by those who heard the discussion. Its publication and circulation proved the severest blow that pedobaptism ever received.

In the fall of 1824 Mr. Campbell made his promised visit to Kentucky, visiting a large portion of the State, addressing everywhere large audiences, and extending his acquaintance and influence with the Baptists. This more intimate acquaintance led him to esteem them very highly, and to regard them as much nearer the apostolic model than any other of the denominations with which he had formed acquaintance, and he felt that it would not be difficult to eliminate from the Baptist churches such erroneous theories and usages as had gained currency among them. With these convictions in mind, he now visited the Baptists in Kentucky, to impart to them, as well as to the community at large, those clearer views of the Gospel to which he had been led by diligent and prayerful study of the Bible. These he had, to some extent, already presented through the pages of The Christian Baptist, which, since the debate, had been read throughout Kentucky with interest and had produced intense excitement among the churches. “Some individuals were favorably impressed with the plea for reform; others remained in perplexity and doubt, while not a few were disposed to cling tenaciously to their cherished opinions.”

Among the Baptist preachers whom Mr. Campbell met on this visit was John Smith, who, on account of the prominent part he afterwards had in presenting apostolic Christianity to the people, deserves more than a passing notice. He was born October 15, 1784, in a log cabin in East Tennessee, whither his parents had moved a short time before his birth on account of religious persecution. His father and mother had espoused the Baptist faith. But as Virginia, at that time, had an established form of religion, the Episcopal, Baptists were a despised, hunted, persecuted people. They were described by their persecutors as “schismatical persons, so averse to the established religion, and so filled with new-fangled conceits of their heretical inventions, as to refuse to have their children baptized.” To escape from this galling oppression and to secure religious privileges which were so dear to him, George Smith took his little flock into the wilderness, seeking mercy at the hands of the savage tribes of the forest, which was not accorded him by the savage spirit of religious intolerance. In his new home he was at least free to work out the great problem of his own destiny in harmony with “the dictates of conscience” and the leadings of Providence. He was humble-minded and earnestly pious. He held firmly every dogma of the Philadelphia Confession of Faith as it was expounded in his day. “He conscientiously sought, too, to impress his own severe faith on the minds of his children. To labor for their daily bread and to wait, with humbleness of heart, for the Holy Ghost, were the two great commandments on which hung all his precepts and admonitions. He exhorted them to seek after God, if, haply, they might find him; yet to esteem themselves dead and to abide the good time when, unless predestinated to eternal wrath, the mysterious Spirit would give them life and open their eyes to the beauties of the Saviour.”

When John was in his twelfth year the migratory spirit again seized George Smith, who determined to plunge into the wilderness once more, with a view of securing cheap lands and providing for the future of his growing family. Having sold his Tennessee farm, he set out, in the autumn of 1795, accompanied by John and an older brother, on the trail that led across the Cumberland Mountains in the unsettled territory of Kentucky, in search of a “goodly spot where he might build a cabin, plant a patch of corn, and prepare as well as he could for the family” that was to join him in the coming summer.

In the new home the life of the boy continued its developments along such lines as its rude surroundings stimulated. Of work there was plenty, and from his daily tasks he never shrank. Of opportunity for intellectual development there was none, and the thirst of the ambitious youth was unquenched. At this period John Smith’s spiritual nature gave promise of being as untamed as the forest that surrounded his home. Unhallowed sports crept into the backwoods. Sunday horse races and card-playing became the pastime of the young men. For the latter John had a fondness, and would creep away on Sundays to spend the day with idle companions in his favorite game; but the grief and patience of the father at last touched his heart, and he threw away his cards, saying, “It is wrong to distress so good a father as ours; it is a sin and a shame!”

This proved to be the turning point in the young man’s career, and with it came the question of religion demanding his consideration. Indeed the subject had been kept before him in some form from his earliest recollection. But the doctrine taught at that time was not very attractive to young hearts. Calvinism in its severest type was prevalent. It taught a “hell of the most appalling type, into which even little children might be cast; an unalterable destiny for every one, regardless of his conduct or his creed, as God might have chosen him for heaven or doomed him to hell before he was born; a dread uncertainty that rested on his fate;his utter inability to understand the Scriptures, to believe or repent, to love God or to obey him, until endued with power from on high; the necessity of some supernatural sign or sensation, some miraculous voice or vision, as an evidence of pardon and acceptance with God.”

It was natural that John should imbibe the spirit of his father’s creed and for him to expect, should he be among the elect, that some visible or audible manifestation of divine approval should be given him. The great revival which swept the country in the beginning years of the nineteenth century was at its height as he began seriously to think upon the subject of religion. It was the theme he heard discussed on every hand, and he determined to investigate it as far as his limited resources would permit. Failing to find the way to assured salvation, he at last appealed to a Baptist preacher, Isaac Denton, a friend of the family, for light upon the subject which was beginning to agitate his mind. According to the prevailing notion, conversion was a change of a mysterious nature wrought out in the soul by supernatural agency. This change young Smith now most sincerely desired to experience. With this in mind the following conversation took place:

Smith—What must I do in order to have this change of which you speak?Denton—Nothing, John; God’s grace is sovereign and unconditional. If you are his sheep you will be called, and you will hear his voice and follow him.Smith—But when, Mr. Denton, will the Lord call?Denton—In his own good time, John. He has worked out your whole life, and determined your destiny according to his own wise, but hidden and eternal, purpose.Smith—How then may I know whether I am one of his sheep or not?Benton—You will know it by your change when it comes; till then you can only wait on the Lord and hope.Smith—If I am left to perish I know it will be on account of my sins; but if I should be saved, will it not be on account of my goodness?Denton—The Lord sees no goodness in you, John. If you are ever brought to life, it will be solely because it was his good pleasure to choose you before the foundation of the world, and that, too, without any reference to your character or works foreseen by him. True, if you should be lost, if you perish,it will be on account of your sins, and to the praise of his glorious justice.Smith—My destiny, you say, is fixed and I can not change it. I need not, then, give myself any concern; I have nothing to do.Denton—Ah, great is the mystery of godliness. There is something for you to do.Smith—What is it, Mr. Denton?Denton—You must pray, pray, pray in the dust and ashes to the Lord.Smith—Pray for what, sir?Denton—That the blinding scales may fall from your eyes, and that you may see and feel what you really are in the sight of God; for you are yet in the gall of bitterness and the bonds of iniquity.

Smith—What must I do in order to have this change of which you speak?

Denton—Nothing, John; God’s grace is sovereign and unconditional. If you are his sheep you will be called, and you will hear his voice and follow him.

Smith—But when, Mr. Denton, will the Lord call?

Denton—In his own good time, John. He has worked out your whole life, and determined your destiny according to his own wise, but hidden and eternal, purpose.

Smith—How then may I know whether I am one of his sheep or not?

Benton—You will know it by your change when it comes; till then you can only wait on the Lord and hope.

Smith—If I am left to perish I know it will be on account of my sins; but if I should be saved, will it not be on account of my goodness?

Denton—The Lord sees no goodness in you, John. If you are ever brought to life, it will be solely because it was his good pleasure to choose you before the foundation of the world, and that, too, without any reference to your character or works foreseen by him. True, if you should be lost, if you perish,it will be on account of your sins, and to the praise of his glorious justice.

Smith—My destiny, you say, is fixed and I can not change it. I need not, then, give myself any concern; I have nothing to do.

Denton—Ah, great is the mystery of godliness. There is something for you to do.

Smith—What is it, Mr. Denton?

Denton—You must pray, pray, pray in the dust and ashes to the Lord.

Smith—Pray for what, sir?

Denton—That the blinding scales may fall from your eyes, and that you may see and feel what you really are in the sight of God; for you are yet in the gall of bitterness and the bonds of iniquity.

It is not strange that a young man with keen intellect of John Smith should have turned from such instruction, saying, “Since my destiny is fixed and I can not change it, I need not, then, give myself any concern. I have nothing to do.”

But his heart was not to be stifled by the forbidding theology. While stoutly for a season he maintained his unbelief, his position was not satisfactory to himself, and he resolved at last to examine the subject in the light of the Scriptures. Though failing to find proof of the doctrines taught, he became convinced of his duty to be a Christian, and, knowing no way to approach to Christ, he began earnestly and persistently to seek religion after the manner of the times. The illness and death of his venerable father in the spring of 1804, deepened his interest in personal salvation, and from that time through many weary months he sought for assurance of saving grace. In his fruitless search his agony was indescribable.

He had been taught that an indispensable step to salvation was to feel himself the greatest of sinners. This he desired to do, and then despaired of salvation, simply because he could not feel that he was “too wicked to be saved.” A gloomy cloud overshadowed his sunny temper. His nights were sleepless and his days filled with torment. In vain he prostrated himself alone in the forest and prayed for the blessed assurance of his pardon. Finally, after a night spent in agonizing prayer, his heart seemed to throwoff its burden, and he was happy. Returning home and relating his experience to his brother William, the latter replied with joy, “You are converted, John, at last.” He went to a meeting, expecting to offer himself for membership, but the weird experience of others sent him away in sorrow and disgust. His mind was again beclouded by doubts and despair, and he prayed the Lord to keep his poor heart from error and to lead him by the right way into the everlasting kingdom.

Religious friends who had watched with solicitude the long and painful struggle of the young man believed that a work of grace had already been wrought in his heart, and urged him to relate the facts before the congregation. This he did on December 26, 1804, giving a plain statement of his religious struggles, and though his experience was lacking in the marvelous element which characterized the conversion of that time, the congregation unanimously voted him the subject of a work of grace. The next day he was baptized, and at once entered into the active service of the Master to find in doing the peace he had failed to receive in seeking.

No sooner had John Smith been received into the Baptist Church than he became exceedingly anxious to preach the unsearchable riches of Christ. But two obstacles rose before him which seemed an insurmountable barrier to the realization of his desires. One was his ignorance. In his brief term of schooling he had barely learned to read and his surroundings and occupation had left him without further means of self-improvement, as he looked with yearning heart toward the ministry, he “wept at the thought that he was now a man without an education.” No less was the hindrance which the popular sentiment of the day threw across his pathway. It was regarded as an almost unpardonable act of presumption to stand before the people as an expounder of the Scriptures without a supernatural call, and yet he was without evidence of such a call to preach thegospel. No voice spoke to his listening ear. No answer came to his earnest prayer. No sign met his expectant vision.

In the face of these obstacles the way seemed completely blocked, so nothing remained for him to do but to continue in his labors on the farm. At last circumstances opened up before him for larger usefulness for God. His widely scattered neighbors were pious people, and, in the absence of churches and ministers, often gathered at night after a day of toil, in each other’s cabins, to sing and pray, and talk about their religious interests. At these meetings he was present, when circumstances would permit, and his native ability, gave him pre-eminence among them. As they met from house to house they often constrained him to lead in prayer. In these religious meetings his confidence increased, his heart warmed, and he greatly desired to enter into more active service. But still he waited for some audible call which should assure him of the Lord’s will. His brethren urged that when God gave man a talent, he gives the right to use it. He was finally persuaded to lay aside his scruples, and at the prayer meeting he consented to make a short talk. The appointment was made, the people came together, filling the house to its utmost capacity, the light from the fire fell full upon his face as he arose and stood near the table, but as he looked into the faces of his neighbors, he was seized with stage fright, and forgot everything he had hoped to say. He fled from the house and sought the darkness outside, but in his hurried flight he stumbled and fell to the ground. As he arose his mind cleared, and he returned and delivered a thrilling address, and from that time he continued in his humble way to lead those who were as sheep without a shepherd.

He waited anxiously for the call, but it came not. But the call from his brethren was so strong that he continued to exercise the gift of exhortation, with increasing desire to devote his life to the work of proclaiming the Gospel to his fellowmen. In deference to the judgment of his brethren, who urged him to lay aside all scruples and become their preacher, he at last consented to be ordained, and enteredat once upon the duties of his new calling, while continuing to provide for his family by his labors on the farm. He was marvelously endowed for the work of a pioneer preacher. “His well-toned voice and earnest manner, his fine common sense and unaffected piety, rendered him pre-eminently popular as a speaker; his genial humor, too, threw its sunny influence on all around him and made him the delight of every fireside.” As his reputation spread flattering offers came to him from the more favored portions of Kentucky, through which he was induced to travel on a preaching tour. Wealthy congregations, pleased with his originality and genius, offered him what was then regarded as a handsome salary to labor with them. But, conscious of his lack of education and culture, he declined these offers, while his soul, for the time lifted up with pride, planned ambitiously for the future.

Just here occurred the saddest episode of his life. The South was being opened up, and many were drawn thither by what seemed to be a most promising picture. He sold his farm and stock for $1,500, with which he hoped to enter ten thousand acres of land, which, with the advance in price, he was sure would make him a wealthy man. In the fall of 1814, he located his family in a log hut, in what is now Madison County, Alabama, and went out to select his land. During his absence, in one awful night, his hopes and happiness were dashed to pieces. The house which contained his possessions and wife and children, was burned to the ground, and two of his children and all his money were consumed in the flames of that awful night. His poor wife escaped, only to die of a broken heart and be buried with the ashes of her children. The husband, though a strong man, was so shocked that he was at last stricken with fever, and for weeks lingered near the grave. But he finally recovered, and with a sad heart, he retraced his steps, empty-handed and alone, to the old home in Kentucky.

Immediately after his return to Kentucky he began preaching again; but he was from that time harassed bydoctrinal difficulties which gave him no rest until he turned from his creed to the Bible in its primitive simplicity. His appearance, as he joined his brethren in the meeting of the Baptist Association, shortly after his return, is thus described by his biographer:

He reached Crab Orchard on Saturday, with the dust of the journey thick upon him. He wore a pair of homespun cotton pantaloons, striped with coperas—loose enough, but far too short for him—and a cotton coat, once checked with blue and white, but now of undistinguishable colors; these had been given him in Alabama. His shapeless hat was streaked with sweat and dust. His socks, too large for his shrunken ankles, hung down upon his worn shoes. His shirt was coarse and dirty and unbuttoned at the neck; his white cravat was in the coffin with his wife. (Life of John Smith, page 96.)

He reached Crab Orchard on Saturday, with the dust of the journey thick upon him. He wore a pair of homespun cotton pantaloons, striped with coperas—loose enough, but far too short for him—and a cotton coat, once checked with blue and white, but now of undistinguishable colors; these had been given him in Alabama. His shapeless hat was streaked with sweat and dust. His socks, too large for his shrunken ankles, hung down upon his worn shoes. His shirt was coarse and dirty and unbuttoned at the neck; his white cravat was in the coffin with his wife. (Life of John Smith, page 96.)

But if the exterior of this vessel was rough, within it was garnished and adorned with all the graces of truth. He was pressed upon to speak on the occasion. He lifted his head and sat erect, he arose, and, with firm step, walked to the stand and stood up before the people. As he looked around upon them his eyes kindled and his spirit was stirred within him. The multitude stared curiously for a moment at the uncouth figure before them. Some laughed outright, while others were withdrawn from the assembly. His first work was to stop them. Raising his voice so that all could hear, he said: “Stay, friends, and hear what the Great Augustine said. Augustine wished to see three things before he died: Rome in her glory, Paul on Mars’ Hill, and Jesus in the flesh.” A few sat down, but many moved on.

In louder tones he cried: “Will you not stay and see what the great Cato said. Cato repented of three things before his death: First that he had ever spent an idle day; second, that he had ever gone on a voyage by water when he might have made the same journey by land; and, third, that he had ever told the secrets of his bosom to a woman.” Many more were seated.

But he continued: “Come, friends, and hear what the great Thales thanked the gods for. He thanked the gods for three things: First, that he was endowed with reason, and was not a brute; second, that he as a Greek, and not abarbarian; and third, that he was a man, and not a woman.” By this time all were seated and the sermon began.

His theme was redemption. His analysis was threefold: (1) Redemption as conceived; (2) Redemption as applied; (3) Redemption as completed. He seemed inspired for the occasion. His voice like a trumpet reached and thrilled the most distant hearer, and his thought swept the audience like the storm sweeps the sea. The people crowded closer to hear him, and some who could find neither sitting nor standing room, climbed the trees, so that even the forest swayed to and fro as if under the magic spell in the third division, and portrayed the final glory of the redeemed, every heart was filled with emotion, every eye as weeping, every face was radiant with hope, and at the close one loud “Amen” ascended to the heavens.

In the course of time he again married, choosing as a companion a sensible and consecrated woman who lived in the neighborhood where he ministered, and who cheerfully joined him in all his plans for the betterment of human society.

Though preaching the doctrine of the Philadelphia Confession of Faith, he now found himself ill at ease. The strange inconsistency of his position embarrassed him. Why urge sinners to repent if they were already safe, and if among the non-elect they could not repent. As the situation flashed upon him in the midst of an impassioned exhortation, he immediately closed his remarks and sat down, saying: “Brethren, something is wrong; I am in the dark—we are all in the dark; but how to lead you to the light, or to find the way myself, before God I know not.” Retiring on his knees he prayed that he would take God’s Word as his only guide, examine it carefully, and follow its teachings wherever they might lead him. In the keeping of this pledge he began anew to study the Bible. When his day’s work in the field was done, he would sit by his candle with his Bible upon his knees, and often spend the whole night in solemn meditation in his search for light.

It was while in this state of mind that the prospectus of The Christian Baptist fell into his hands, and he read it with profound interest. He ordered the paper sent to him and induced others to subscribe for it. He hoped that Mr. Campbell’s discussion of scriptural themes would greatly assist him in solving his own doctrinal difficulties. The first numbers were read with great interest, and through them light began to break along his darkened pathway. He read each succeeding number with great care to ascertain to which of the contending parties Mr. Campbell belonged, and soon found himself in a realm of truth entirely beyond the range of the popular systems. Among other things that specially appealed to him was the following from the trenchant pen of Mr. Campbell:

We have no system of our own, nor of others, to substitute in lieu of the reigning systems. We only aim at substituting the New Testament in lieu of every creed in existence; whether Mohametan, Pagan, Jewish or Presbyterian. We wish to call Christians to consider that Jesus Christ has made them kings and priests to God. We neither advocate Calvinism, Arminianism, Arianism, Socinianism, Trinitarianism, Unitarianism, Deism, or Sectarianism, but New Testamentism. We wish, we cordially wish, to take the New Testament out of the abuses of the clergy, and put it into the hands of the people. (Christian Baptist, Vol. 1, page 90.)

We have no system of our own, nor of others, to substitute in lieu of the reigning systems. We only aim at substituting the New Testament in lieu of every creed in existence; whether Mohametan, Pagan, Jewish or Presbyterian. We wish to call Christians to consider that Jesus Christ has made them kings and priests to God. We neither advocate Calvinism, Arminianism, Arianism, Socinianism, Trinitarianism, Unitarianism, Deism, or Sectarianism, but New Testamentism. We wish, we cordially wish, to take the New Testament out of the abuses of the clergy, and put it into the hands of the people. (Christian Baptist, Vol. 1, page 90.)

So thorough did these views accord with his that he determined at the first opportunity to meet Mr. Campbell and learn from him by personal interview more of the new order that he was advocating. During his visit to Kentucky in 1824, to which I have already referred, the opportunity presented itself. Mr. Campbell was to speak at Flemingsburg, and Smith rode twenty miles on horseback that he might see and hear him. He reached the town on the day that Mr. Campbell was to preach. Shortly after his arrival he met William Vaughn, a Baptist preacher, with whom he was well acquainted, when the following conversation took place:

Vaughn—Brother John, have you met Bro. Campbell yet?Smith—No, sir, I have not. Have you seen him?Vaughn—Why, I have been with him for eight days and nights, through Mason and Bracken counties, and have heard him every day.Smith—Do, then, tell me what his views are on doctrinal points. Is he a Calvinist or an Arminian, or Arian, or a Trinitarian?Vaughn—I do not know. He has nothing to do with any of these things.Smith—Well, I can tell when I hear him just what he is.Vaughn—How?Smith—If a man of sense and takes a position, even though he should not run it out into any ism, I can do it for him, and tell exactly where he would land. But tell me, Bro. Vaughn, does he know anything about heartfelt religion?Vaughn—Lord bless you, he is one of the most pious, godly men that I was ever in company with in all my life.Smith—But do you think he knows anything about a Christian experience?Vaughn—Bless you, he knows everything. Come, I want to introduce you to him.

Vaughn—Brother John, have you met Bro. Campbell yet?

Smith—No, sir, I have not. Have you seen him?

Vaughn—Why, I have been with him for eight days and nights, through Mason and Bracken counties, and have heard him every day.

Smith—Do, then, tell me what his views are on doctrinal points. Is he a Calvinist or an Arminian, or Arian, or a Trinitarian?

Vaughn—I do not know. He has nothing to do with any of these things.

Smith—Well, I can tell when I hear him just what he is.

Vaughn—How?

Smith—If a man of sense and takes a position, even though he should not run it out into any ism, I can do it for him, and tell exactly where he would land. But tell me, Bro. Vaughn, does he know anything about heartfelt religion?

Vaughn—Lord bless you, he is one of the most pious, godly men that I was ever in company with in all my life.

Smith—But do you think he knows anything about a Christian experience?

Vaughn—Bless you, he knows everything. Come, I want to introduce you to him.

Of this meeting with Mr. Campbell he afterward said: “I then felt as if I wanted to sit down and look at him for one hour, without hearing a word from any one. I wanted to scan him who had been so much talked of, and who had inThe Christian Baptistand in his debates introduced so many new thoughts.” But the hour appointed for the address had come, and they walked into the house together. Smith was determined now to ascertain the theory of religion to which he held, if, indeed, he held to any; for he was still full of doubt and suspicion.

Mr. Campbell read the fourth chapter of Galatians. After giving a general outline of the whole epistle, he took up the allegory of Sarah and Hagar, and in a simple, plain and artless manner, leaning with one hand on his cane, he delivered his discourse. “He seemed,” as Smith afterward remarked, “to move in a higher sphere or latitude than that in which the isms of the day abounded.” At the conclusion of the services Smith remarked to Mr. Vaughn, “Is it not hard, Bro. Vaughn, to ride twenty miles, as I have done, just to hear a man preach thirty minutes?” “You are mistaken,” said Mr. Vaughn; “look at your watch, for it certainly has been longer than that.” He looked at his watch, and, to his surprise, saw that the discourse had beentwo hours and a half long. On discovering this he said, “I have never been more deceived. Two hours of my life are gone, I know not how, though wide awake, too, all the time!” On being questioned as to whether he had ascertained whether he was a Calvinist or an Arminian, he replied: “No, I know nothing about the man; but be he saint or devil, he has thrown more light on that epistle, and on the whole Scripture, than I have received in all the sermons that I have ever heard before.”

For several days he accompanied Mr. Campbell from place to place, an enraptured listener to every discourse, and earnestly engaged him in conversation as they traveled along the way or sat under some hospitable roof. At last his mind cast off its fetters. The way hitherto so clouded became plain, and he left the company of Mr. Campbell, resolved henceforth to devote his life to preaching the simple Gospel as exhibited in the New Testament.

The step was, as he had anticipated, attended with great sacrifices. Old friends forsook him. He had always stood high among his preaching brethren, but now he was regarded with undisguised suspicion. Soon the storm gathered furiously about him. At the annual meeting of the association in which he held his membership charges were preferred against him, among the most serious of which was that, instead of the King James translation of the Scriptures, “he had on two or three occasions in public, and often in his family, read from Alexander Campbell’s translation.” Without being given an opportunity to defend himself, he was placed under censure, and given a year in which to correct his views and change his ways.

Returning to his home, the way for a time seemed to close before him. The little farm was covered with a heavy mortgage. The churches that had obligated themselves to pay his debt in compensation of his services, now refused to make further payment. Nothing apparently remained but for him to cultivate his farm with his own hands, and for a time to abandon the work of the ministry. Taking his ax he went into the forest with the heroic purpose,first to free himself from debt, and then to return to the defense of the faith which he now felt to be the teaching of the Word of God. But one day as he was bending to his labors he thought of the cause that he loved, and remembered that there was no one in all the land to advocate it but himself. He also thought of the construction that would be put on his silence by his enemies. He dropped the ax, went to the house, and threw down his coarse apron at the feet of his wife, exclaiming:

Nancy, I shall work no more! Get whom you please to carry on the farm, but do not call on me! In all the land there is not one soul to open his mouth in defense of the best cause under the sun! I am determined, from this time forth, to preach the Gospel, and leave the consequences to God.

Nancy, I shall work no more! Get whom you please to carry on the farm, but do not call on me! In all the land there is not one soul to open his mouth in defense of the best cause under the sun! I am determined, from this time forth, to preach the Gospel, and leave the consequences to God.

With the courage of his convictions, he immediately began to preach the truth as he now felt it and saw it. No personal consideration was allowed to interfere with the course he had marked out for himself. His heroic wife readily caught his spirit and as cheerfully accepted the responsibilities of her new position—agreeing to take the oversight of the farm, care for the family, and to relieve him of every temporal care, while he should give himself wholly to the ministry of the Word.

But from a course so radical and perilous his friends earnestly sought to dissuade him. They argued: “Your more influential brethren will abandon you; you will get nothing for your preaching; your debts will press you to the earth, and your farm and house eventually given up.” “Conscience,” said he, “is an article that I have never yet brought into the market; but should I offer it for sale, Montgomery County, with all its lands and houses, would not be enough to buy it, much less that farm of one hundred acres.”

As he now went from house to house, and neighborhood, to plant the cause of Christ, his zeal knew no bounds. His heart was all aglow with his new-born knowledge of the truth, and with tireless effort he sought to win men to respect and obey the simple claims of the Gospel. So intense was his desire that he scarcely allowed himself timeto eat and sleep. After a busy day he would often spend a greater part of the night answering questions or meeting objections which his public discourses had aroused, or in helping some half-persuaded inquirer to a full acceptance of the Gospel; often going the same hour of the night to some near-by stream to administer baptism, when a surrender had been made. Or, if at home, the burden that was upon his heart, and his thirst for the knowledge of the Word of God, would often interfere with his sleep, and he would arise and light his candle at midnight “to examine some word or text not yet understood, and which, perhaps, had confused him in his dreams.”

The preaching of John Smith, so different from that of the times, so far removed from the conventional forms, and so new and strange in doctrine, at once awakened new interest in languishing churches. Calls now came to him from so many quarters that he seldom had an opportunity to enjoy the fellowship of his family, to which he was warmly attached. He endeavored, if possible, to visit his home once a week; but this purpose he was not always able to accomplish. “He would tarry at some distant place, preaching and baptizing till the week was nearly gone, and then, dismissing the people at a late hour, ride hurriedly through the darkness, sometimes through mud and cold and tempest, in order to keep his promise with his wife. At other times, when going from one part of the district to another, he would pass along by his own house, but, too much hurried to stop and rest, would linger a while at the gate, and, gathering strength from her words of cheer, press on to his distant appointment.” On one occasion, as he thus hurried from one appointment to another, he stopped at home just long enough to change his soiled linen for clean. As he was about to leave his wife remarked with a touch of sadness in her tone, “Is it not time that you were having your washing done somewhere else? We have attended to it for you a long time.” “No, Nancy, I am pleased with your way of doing things, and I do not wish to make any change.” After a kind good-bye to her and a few playful words to the little ones, he passed on to meet the congregationthat would wait for him that day in some young convert’s house, or perhaps, in some hospitable grove.

The patient heroism of faith finds few better illustrations than in the wife of this tireless pioneer. Upon Nancy Smith rested the burden of the family and the farm. When help could not be secured, she would go forth herself into the busy field to tend the growing crop, or to superintend the gathering of the harvest, that her faithful husband might devote all his energies to the cause to which they were both so much devoted. His preaching brought no material recompense to relieve their pinching poverty. Though he labored incessantly for the salvation of his fellow men, no one ever thought of contributing to his support, or if they felt inclined to minister to him in temporal things were probably too poor. During the years 1825-1830, in which he laid the foundation of primitive Christianity in Kentucky, he never received a dollar for his services, or compensation of any kind, save the remittance to a friendly merchant in a neighboring town for a small bill of goods.

The result of such zeal, such labor, such sacrifice, brought its reward to this devoted messenger of truth in a richer blessing than any that material prosperity had to offer. His message was gladly received. Multitudes gathered to hear him, and many received with joy the glorious Gospel of the Son of God which he now felt himself commissioned to preach. A revival of religious interest began to follow the track of his ministry, and he had the satisfaction of seeing hundreds, who had held aloof from the religious systems of the day, now turn to the Lord. So fruitful were his labors that within a short period of six months he was able to report seven hundred conversions and five new churches organized. But greater still, he had established a great cause in the hearts of the people.

Although he had renounced the Calvinistic theory of conversion, and had laid aside its unyielding creed for the New Testament, he still considered himself a Baptist, and lived in fellowship with those who “stood resolutely by the old church covenant”, hoping that his brethren would one day accept the primitive Gospel. But his genial fraternal spiritwas far from being reciprocated by the Baptist preachers with whom he associated. Once, meeting an old acquaintance, Smith said to him, kindly, “Good morning, my brother.” To which the other scornfully replied, “Don’t call me brother, sir! I would rather claim kinship with the devil himself.” “Go, then,” said Smith, “and honor thy father.”

But the bitterness of opposition did not always end in harmless railery. It too frequently resorted to misrepresentations and other unchristian means to check his growing popularity and influence. Churches were closed against him, compelling him to take his audience to some neighboring house, or hall, or, in fair weather, to a grove. But, whatever the discouragement or hindrance, he continued to preach. “Usually he divided his discourses, which were two or three hours long, into three divisions, according to the objects he had in view; in the first he corrected misrepresentations; in the second he exposed popular errors, and in the third he presented the simple Gospel to the people.” Having taken his stand upon the Bible, he felt himself secure. The truth made him fearless, and his courage at last won respect for the unpopular position to which he held.

The years 1828-1830 were great years in the ministry of John Smith. In them was witnessed the fruition of years of self-sacrificing labor, and the triumph of the ancient Gospel on the soil of Kentucky. The year 1828 was a notable one among the Baptist associations. At the meetings of three of the largest associations the Reformers were in control, due in a very large degree to Smith’s preaching. As we have already seen, his influence over the people was tremendous. The churches for which he preached regularly—Spencer’s Creek, Grassy Lick and Mount Sterling—reported in their annual letters of 1828 to the North District Association of which they were members, the baptism of 392 persons during the year. The twenty-four churches of the Association reported the baptism of about nine hundredpersons, “the greater part of whom had been immersed by Smith.” Five new churches had been organized by Smith on the Bible alone and became members of the Association.

The North District Association met in July, 1828. At its meeting the previous year the Lulbegrud Church had sent the following charges aimed at John Smith, but veiling the object of their charge under the designation, “one of their preachers.” The accusations were:

1. That, while it is the custom of Baptists to use as the Word of God the King James translation, he had on two or three occasions in public, and often privately in his family, read from Alexander Campbell’s translation.2. That while it is the custom in the ceremony of baptism to pronounce, “I baptize you”, he, on the contrary, is in the habit of saying, “immerse you”.3. That in administering the Lord’s Supper, while it is the custom to break the loaf into bits, small enough to be readily taken into the mouth, yet he leaves the bread in large pieces, teaching that each communicant shall break it for himself.

1. That, while it is the custom of Baptists to use as the Word of God the King James translation, he had on two or three occasions in public, and often privately in his family, read from Alexander Campbell’s translation.

2. That while it is the custom in the ceremony of baptism to pronounce, “I baptize you”, he, on the contrary, is in the habit of saying, “immerse you”.

3. That in administering the Lord’s Supper, while it is the custom to break the loaf into bits, small enough to be readily taken into the mouth, yet he leaves the bread in large pieces, teaching that each communicant shall break it for himself.

Without waiting for himself to be singled out, Smith arose and said, “I plead guilty to them all.” After bitter debating and wrangling over the charges it was finally voted that they be laid over for another year. The meeting of 1828 was the time when these charges should be brought up. Smith had been unceasingly engaged in preaching, and marvelously successful in winning men to Christ during the years. Still, when the Association met, he was in doubt at first as to which side had the majority of messengers. In the registration of messengers, it was soon found that the majority were favorable to him. The messengers, from the five new churches he had established turned the scale in his favor. The charges were not mentioned on the floor of the Association. In 1830 this Association divided, ten churches voluntarily withdrawing and forming a new association on Baptist principles. The North District Association met for the last time as an advisory council in 1831, and was dissolved one year later. Fourteen churches and four parts of churches were enrolled on the occasion of the dissolution. On the same day thechurches that had withdrawn from the Association two years before met and formed a new association under the same name.

The Bracken Association was the next to meet, in 1828. Licking Association, rigidly Calvinistic and devoted to the Philadelphia Confession of Faith, desired to enter into mutual correspondence with Bracken, but had determined as a condition of it to require from Bracken a pledge to support the Philadelphia Confession of Faith, which no doubt would have been given in 1827; but in the meantime Smith had gone into that district, and preached among the churches; and such men as Walter Warden and Jesse Holton, already moved by the plea of Alexander Campbell, and encouraged by the boldness and success of Smith, were already favoring the return to the “ancient order of things.” The letter came from Licking requiring the pledge and was read before the Association. After a prolonged discussion by various members, during which Smith sat in silence, he finally saw his opportunity to speak. This opportunity was given when James Arnold, a messenger from the North Bend Association, moved that the terms proposed by Licking be rejected, and that all further correspondence with that body be dropped. Smith supported the proposition, and as he rose to do so took from his saddle bags a copy of the Confession of Faith, and said.

Brethren, Licking requires of Bracken an utter impossibility. No one can maintain inviolate the doctrine of grace as revealed in the Scriptures, and at the same time, defend that which is taught in the Philadelphia Confession of Faith; for the doctrine of the creed is not the doctrine of the Bible. No two books in the world differ more than these; and in no point do they differ more widely than on the doctrine of salvation by grace.

Brethren, Licking requires of Bracken an utter impossibility. No one can maintain inviolate the doctrine of grace as revealed in the Scriptures, and at the same time, defend that which is taught in the Philadelphia Confession of Faith; for the doctrine of the creed is not the doctrine of the Bible. No two books in the world differ more than these; and in no point do they differ more widely than on the doctrine of salvation by grace.

He then contrasted the teaching of the New Testament with that of the Confession of Faith, and his argument was so convincing that practically all seemed satisfied that the terms proposed by Licking were contradictory, and whenthe vote was taken the proposition to reject was carried almost unanimously. A prominent witness of these events said:

It was John Smith that gave impulse and tone to the reformation in Bracken, as he had already done in North District, Boone’s Creek and other associations.

It was John Smith that gave impulse and tone to the reformation in Bracken, as he had already done in North District, Boone’s Creek and other associations.

It was decided while the Association was in session that Bracken would recommend no creed or confession of faith but the New Testament. Bracken did not, however, remain long of this mind; but went back into regular fellowship in 1830; yet not without great loss by defection to the side of those contending for the “ancient order of things”. Benedict, the Baptist historian, informs us that “the number of members was reduced from 2,200 to 900 on account of the sweeping inroads of the Reformers.”

The next association to take action in 1828 was the Boone’s Creek. The letter sent out by the Association in 1827 said to the churches composing it: “We hear from some of the churches that they are endeavoring to return to ‘the ancient order of things’, and they recognize the Scriptures alone as an entire and sufficient rule of faith and practice.” During the spring and summer of 1828 there was an increase of about 870 members by immersion, many of whom had been brought in through the preaching of John Smith. The Association, composed of thirteen churches, met on the third Sunday in September. The question before it, raised in letters of two churches, was concerning an amendment to the constitution to bring it into harmony with the Word of God. The following action was taken by the Association and reported back to all the churches:

We, therefore, recommend to the churches an abolition of the present constitution, and, in lieu thereof, an adoption of this resolution: Resolved, That we the Churches of Jesus Christ, believing the Scriptures of the Old and New Testament to be the Word of God, and the only rule of faith and obedience given by the great Head of the Church for its government, do agree to meet annually on every third Saturday, Lord’s day, and Monday in September of each year, for the worship of God, and on such occasions voluntarily communicate the state of religion amongst us by letter and messenger. (Christian Baptist, Vol. 6. page 420.)

We, therefore, recommend to the churches an abolition of the present constitution, and, in lieu thereof, an adoption of this resolution: Resolved, That we the Churches of Jesus Christ, believing the Scriptures of the Old and New Testament to be the Word of God, and the only rule of faith and obedience given by the great Head of the Church for its government, do agree to meet annually on every third Saturday, Lord’s day, and Monday in September of each year, for the worship of God, and on such occasions voluntarily communicate the state of religion amongst us by letter and messenger. (Christian Baptist, Vol. 6. page 420.)


Back to IndexNext