Mormon Classics | Spalding Library | Bookshelf | Newspapers | History Vault
Sidney Rigdon,
The Real Founder of Mormonism
by:
William H. Whitsitt
BOOK THE SECOND:
BAPTIST PERIOD: June 1, 1817 - Oct. 11, 1823
(Sections I & II, pp. 007-148)
Contents | Book I | Book II: 1 2 | Book III | Book IV | Book V
"Wm. Whitsitt: Insights into Early Mormonism" | Times & Seasons' Rigdon History
D. Benedict's 1813 History of the Baptists | The Christian Baptist
|
Both these churches were founded under the labors of the Rev. John Sutton (Benedict vol. I:595). Mr. Sutton, who is believed to have been a native of New Jersey, received his education at the famous academy that was kept by the Rev. Isaac Eaten at Hopewell, New Jersey from 1750 to 1767 (Benedict II:449) and then appears for a brief season in the character of an itinerant minister in Nova Scotia. Shortly before the year 1770 he is found at Providence, Rhode Island, where in keeping with a widely publicized policy of some of the leading members of the General Baptist church of that place, to convert it into a Particular Baptist church, he was engaged as an assistant of the General Baptist pastor, the Rev. Samuel Winsor. Their relation did not long subsist; the General Baptist element are supposed to have been still vigorous enough to combine against Mr. Sutton and to (get quit of him) at the close of a six month engagement (Benedict I:479). On being released from his position at Providence, Mr. Sutton next made his way southward to the Jerseys (Benedict I:479), whence he shortly afterwards drifted into Western Penn. (Benedict I:598) and laid the foundation of the Redstone fraternity. Towards the close of his life he appears in Kentucky, and takes a part in the Emancipation movement that for a season was rife among the Baptists of that State (Benedict II:516.fn.). The Rev. John Corbley, a native of Ireland, who had been brought into the Baptist church under the ministrations of the Rev. James Ireland in Virginia, was also a partaker with Mr. Sutton in these early labors in Western Pennsylvania (Benedict I:598). It will be apparent from the above historical survey, that Baptist views must have become familiar to the people of this section of the country, by the time that Sidney Rigdon came upon the scene of action. The church at Peter's Creek had continued to enjoy a measure of prosperity under the oversight of the Rev. David Phillips, a native of Wales, who removing to this country in his childhood, had resided in Chester county, Penn. until he attained middle life when he went to reside on Peter's Creek in Allegheny county, and took charge of the church (Benedict I:601). The Redstone Association, which at this time embraced a considerable area of territory, was of "Regular Baptist" affinities, adhering to the Philadelphia Confession of Faith, and displaying small sympathy for those who in the contemporary parlance of the denomination, were designated "Separate Baptists." In the year 1809 the number of churches belonging to it is given as 33, of which the greater portion were in Pennsylvania, though a few were from Virginia and several from Ohio (Benedict I:516). Seven years later, in the year 1816, there were 32 names on the list of churches, two of which had only recently entered the organization. The First Baptist Church in Pittsburgh, which had been organized in 1812, is set down among the rest with only 8 members. Sidney Rigdon was destined to assume the pastoral care of that small interest, then grown to larger dimensions, in January, 1822. The Brush Run church, under Alexander Campbell, had sought and gained entrance to the Association in the year 1813 (Rich., Memoirs of A. Campbell, Phila., 1868, vol. I:438). It is found in the catalogue of the year 1816 and credited with 23 communicants (Richardson, v. I:469-70). Mr. Philips, who presided at Peter's Creek church, was now well advanced in years. So highly were his virtues in esteem that he was called "Father Philips" through out the country-side. A fair proportion of respectable and, for that community, influential people were found among his parishioners. The Estep family were in good repute, as also the McCrearys. The Rigdons, who for reasons already suggested were possibly in their turn included among his constituents are believed to have occupied a decent social position. 
360 acre Wm. Rigdon farm on Piney Fork, in the S. W. corner of Mifflin twp. The map is from 1826, just after Sidney sold his inheritance (yellow portion) View Rigdon property location transposed to 1876 area map
Chapter II.
this time, or whether the accession of Sidney was in consequence of the ordinary ministrations of the pastor. Revival occasions were not in the least uncommon in the various religious communities of that portion of the country, and it is possible that in connection with one of these he was induced to embrace religion. The intensity of his experience of religious truth would appear to favor the conclusion suggested. It was intimated, and perhaps Rigdon himself believed, that there was an extraordinary process in his case. Indeed there was such a prominent display of what were conceived to be the miraculous features of his conversion that it is claimed the suspicions of his pastor were excited and "serious doubts were entertained in regard to the genuineness of the work" (Patterson, p. 13). Whether the suspicions of Mr. Philips were communicated to the church, or rested quietly in his own bosom, is a point that has not been made clear. It is, however most likely that these were never publicly mooted until afterwards, when the object of them had for other reasons become unwelcome to his pastor and to the congregation. It is every way worth while to take account of the intensity of this earliest religious demonstration on the part of Rigdon. It supplies an explanation of his character, and an index to much of his subsequent conduct. He was capable of the most extreme paroxysms of religious fervor, in the progress of which his bearing was highly singular, if not offensive. On the other hand his zeal was not commonly steady and continuous. If it had possessed this quality in addition, there can be small question that it would have speedily consumed his health and closed his life. His native inertia -- what his neighbors plumply denounced as "laziness" -- could always be relied upon to appear for the relief of his too highly strained faculties.
Chapter III.
it is frequently undertaken by persons who possess no suitable qualifications for the task. Certainly, those who assumed to put forward Mr. Rigdon could not have been distinguished as judicious counselors. On the other hand it must be remembered that Sidney required a very trivial amount of encouragement. He was of a temper that may fairly be stated irrepressible. There was perhaps, no authority and no power in the constitution of a Baptist church that would have availed to keep him quiet. The suspicions of the venerable pastor, however, had likely by this time become so decided as to affect the plans and wishes of the ardent young convert. It is customary for the church which he chances to be a communicant to issue a person in Rigdon's position a license to "exercise his gifts" in the gospel; but this formality seems to have been neglected in the present instance. There is no record of his obtaining any license from his brethren at Peter's Creek. Even if he had applied for such a favor in that quarter, it is possible that the request would have been denied (Patterson, pp. 9 & 3). It could not have been a great while after Rigdon commenced to exercise his capacities for public address before he conceived the project of supplanting Mr. Philips in the pastoral charge of the church. Under the circumstances this would appear to have been a very serious enterprise, but the burning zeal and the impassioned preaching of the younger man were of a style to captivate the fancy of a considerable portion of the community, and he was not far from carrying his point. The taste for ascendancy was likewise one of his most clearly pronounced peculiarities. It will often come to view in the subsequent portions of his history. The friends of Mr. Philips, while they might not have been so numerous as those who applauded the effort of Rigdon, were of superior influence and standing. These were speedily allied to the support of their long tried spiritual guide, and the intruder was put to flight (Patterson, p. 13). The occurrences hitherto described bring down our narrative as far as the winter of 1818-19. Having been defeated in his attack against the position and the peace of his pastor, Rigdon now decides that it will no longer be agreeable to his feelings to keep his residence in the vicinity of Peter's Creek. [012]
With this plan in view he resorted to the instructions of the Rev. Mr. Clark, a Baptist minister of the adjoining county of Beaver, (Patterson, p. 3). This gentleman was (considered) one of the leading preachers of the Beaver Association of Baptists, a body which had been constituted in the year 1809 (Benedict, History the Baptists, N.Y. 1856 ?, p. 618), of churches that were situated partly in the state of Pennsylvania and partly in Ohio. In Pennsylvania its boundaries embraced the counties of Beaver, Mercer and Butler. It was near the approach of winter when he made his entry into Beaver county, where it is likely that he was received as an inmate of the family of his preceptor (Patterson, p. 9). His studious mood was of brief duration, hardly as long as the winter of 1818-19. The amount of advantage he obtained from it must have been small in every other respect except in the access of conceit, a commodity of which Sidney already possessed a sufficient store. The spring of 1814 finds him at Sharon, Mercer county, where the Baptist church was under the pastoral care of Rev. Thomas G. Jones. Here he succeeds in obtaining a license to enter upon the work of the ministry (Patterson, pp. 8-9). Joseph Smith affirms that the license was issued in March, 1819 (Tullidge, p. 102). From this point it was an easy matter for him to drift across the line of Pennsylvania into the State of Ohio. During the month of May, 1819 he appears at Warren the county seat of Trumbull county in the latter state (Tullidge, Life of Joseph Smith, Plano Illinois, 1880, p. 102). [014]
Accordingly in the early summer of 1819 Sidney goes to try his fortune in Ohio. In Warren, where was one of the churches of the Beaver Association, he would naturally be accorded a kindly welcome. The church bore the name of Concord (Hayden, p. 25) and was presided over by the well known Adamson Bentley, with whom as a leader of Baptist interests in that part of the world (and as a native of his own county of Allegheny in Penn.) he would enjoy a measure of acquaintance. His services were probably in good request, since he was an orator of the Boanerges type; it is possible that means were taken to have it known that he was fresh from a course of lucubrations in theology. In his newly attained capacity as an expert in theology he would be welcome to Adamson Bentley, who had induced the preachers of the various Baptist churches in that section of the country to unite in holding annually a minister's meeting, for the purpose of conversing upon the scriptures and their own religious progress, and for mutual improvement by criticisms upon each others' sermons (Richardson II:44). The intimacy which by this means arose between the couple was soon to ripen into a more important result. Bentley, who resided in Warren since 1810, where he was also engaged in mercantile pursuits (Richardson I:217), had married there a daughter of a prominent citizen named Richard Brooks, a member of the Baptist church, whose house was always open to the preachers (Hayden pp. 95-6). His wife had a sister who was just then in the bloom of her beauty and loveliness. Miss Phoebe Brooks was born on the 3rd of May 1800 (Rigdon family Bible), and was in every sense a person of weight and worth of character. Esteeming Mr. Rigdon as a prodigy of learning and eloquence and satisfied both from an extended acquaintance with his cousin, the Rev. Thomas Rigdon, who was pastor of the New Lisbon church which was at that time connected with the Beaver Association, and from his own early knowledge of them in Allegheny county, Pennsylvania, that the Rigdon family was of good report, he probably conceived the notion of trying to secure the future happiness of his beautiful sister-in-law by bringing about her marriage with the engaging visitor from his own former home. Sidney lingered very contentedly among his friends in the vicinity of Warren, where he had easily assumed a leading position in the pulpit and was far and near esteemed and admired. During the progress of the winter of 1819-20, in the rush of his other engagements, he was at pains to cultivate the affections of Miss Brooks. This occupation was in no sense irksome, and perhaps with the countenance and the councils of Bentley, it was also not expressly difficult. The spring found him far on the way to success. On Monday the 12th of June, 1820 the day of his triumph dawned, and he was permitted to call Miss Phoebe his bride (Rigdon family Bible). The circumstance that the nuptials were celebrated on Monday, a day that is not usually chosen for festivities of this kind, might give rise to the conjecture that Mr. Brooks could not be persuaded to give his consent to the step that his daughter was taking, and that the couple were thereby constrained to resort to the expedient of an elopement. However that may be, Mr. Bentley, who it is possible was privy to the proceedings, and may have performed the ceremony, was on good terms with his new brother-in-law, and apparently full of lively hopes that success would attend the path of the wedded pair. It was perhaps a piece of good fortune for Mr. Bentley that he was in a situation to confer upon Mr. Rigdon such binding obligations. Otherwise his consuming passion for conflict and ascendancy might have given as serious annoyance to the pastor of Concord church in Warren as they had recently brought to the venerable Welshman who had been so long established at Peter's Creek. Rigdon's vulgar penchant to try conclusions with any person who might be the least in his way was one of the prominent features of his life, his vanity often consumed his peace. To his thinking the honors of supremacy and control belonged of right to his own merits. It was likewise a happy circumstance that Mr. Bentley or some other person was skillful to excite his interest for the struggles of an infant church which had been organized in the township of Bazetta, within the limits of Trumbull county, on the 22nd of January 1820. (Hayden, History of the Disciples on the Western Reserve, Cincinnati, 1876, p. 281). On the 4th of March, 1820 Rigdon was received into membership at Bazetta (Hayden, p. 93), possibly by this act transferring his membership from the church of Bentley in Warren. If his residence was at the same time established in the vicinity of the Bazetta church he would be further removed from opportunities for intrigue. Hayden states in addition that he was licensed to preach at Bazetta on the 1st of April, 1820. It is possible a stricter examination might show that this was the date and place of Sidney's ordination to the full work of the ministry. The authority on which Patterson, as cited above, assigns the event of his licensure to Sharon, in Pennsylvania, would appear to be reasonably trustworthy.
Chapter VI.
(Rich., II:34). in the early part of the year 1821 (Hayden, p. 21). At this period the sentiment of the opposition between different religious denominations was not so decided as it has now become. There was a comfortable extent of Christian union, which later events have availed to reduce to a far narrower compass consequently, the breach of Christian union which was implied and also occasioned by the public encounter of these two champions was the topic of remark in many quarters. At present, when public debates are a part of the established order in many sections of the country, a transaction like that at Mount Pleasant would scarcely be observed beyond the narrow limits of the community where it might befall. It would only be regarded in the light of another addition to an almost endless series of battles, which as they (are) being waged almost every day, do not require to be noted in detail. The debate between Campbell and Walker, however, was not in this way neglected. It was something new and sensational. Tidings concerning it were heralded to every corner of the adjacent States, and the details of it were devoured with eagerness. Mr. Campbell's book had scarcely left the press when it fell into the hands of Adamson Bentley at Warren. He was delighted with its defense of the biblical origin of the rite of immersion, and was greatly drawn towards the author of it. Doubtless Mr. Rigdon was equally attracted by the ability of this champion of an ancient and honored observance, and may have perused the debate with the same degree of interest as Bentley had displayed. The latter, having heard of the tribulations of Mr. Campbell, in the Redstone Baptist Association of which he was a member, resolved to make him a visit at the earliest opportunity, to express his thanks for what he had accomplished and to give him cheer in the trials to which he was exposed (Rich., II:44). It was natural that the youthful and ardent Rigdon should sympathize with the more experienced pastor of the Warren church in this purpose, and that he should desire to be of the party on the pilgrimage to Bethany, the home of the newly risen light. But before the printed records of the Mount Pleasant debate could be given to the public, there was an important change in the posture of Baptist interests in which Rigdon must have borne a leading part. The ministers' meeting whose direction was chiefly in the hands of Adamson Bentley, was regularly held in the month of June of each year (Hayden p. 39). It is possible that the nuptials of Sidney and Miss Brooks were performed in connection with its session in the month of June 1820. In this same meeting a resolution was passed which shortly resulted in the separation from the Beaver association of all the churches which had their seats in the State of Ohio. The body agreed that these churches should write to form an association of their own on the 30th day of August, 1820. The project was duly effected, and at the date suggested the Mahoning Association was brought into existence. Here Adamson Bentley would be the prevailing influence, but Rigdon stood only next below him being recognized as "the great orator of the Mahoning Association" (Rich., II:45). It was much in vogue at that period for Baptist ministers and those of other denominations also to go upon lengthy evangelizing at their own charges, which were commonly very slight, since the people to whom they chanced to preach were glad to supply their wants and bring them on their journey. After organizing the Mahoning Association in August 1820, Bentley and Rigdon set themselves to plan a progress of this kind. They were not able to carry out their wishes, however, until the Spring of 1821, at which date they made a lengthy circuit, passing quite across the State of Ohio, probably touching at Cincinnati, and also entering the State of Kentucky. As they were returning from this protracted visit they resolved to embrace an occasion they had sometime desired to make the acquaintance of Mr. Campbell at his place of residence (Hayden, p. 19 & 104 cf. Rich., II:44). Both Rigdon and Bentley had been brought up within the bounds of the Redstone Baptist Association in Penn. The former, however had come from his early home in Allegheny county much more recently than the latter. It was possible, therefore, that Bentley got all the special information he had regarding the opposition which was there felt against Mr. Campbell, from the relations given forth by Rigdon himself. Sidney may have been from the outset favorably disposed towards Campbell, by reason of the circumstance that he was already the occasion of partisan division in the Association, where numbers inclined to favor him and others held the professed reformer in no esteem. Still it does not appear that Rigdon had previously enjoyed the honor of an intimate personal acquaintance with Mr. Campbell. That gentleman was a pretty diligent attendant at the sessions of the Redstone (Association, however and) he was a prominent figure at the meeting that occurred at Peter's Creek in August 1817 (Rich., II:47), and was appointed its secretary for the meeting in August 1818 (Benedict, 2nd ed. p. 615), more than a year after Sidney had become a communicant among the Baptists; but Rigdon was likely at that early time not in the custom of giving strict attention to the proceedings of the body. The two companions in travel arrived at the house of Mr. Campbell somewhere about the first of July 1821 (Rich., II:46), and, after passing a night under his roof, where they were hospitably refreshed, they pursued their way to their home in Warren. For both of them this visit was an important event. Though they remained in outward fellowship with the Baptist church for a season after it befell, they were each estranged from the Baptist faith by what they had learned from their host. To show the process and the completeness of this conversion it may be well to bring forward the account which Mr. Campbell himself gives of the affair, about 27 years after it was enacted. Writing in the "Millennial Harbinger" for 1848 (See also (Rich., II:44-46). Mr. Campbell says: In the summer of 1821, while sitting in my portico after dinner, two gentlemen in the costume of clergymen, as then technically called, appeared in my yard, advancing to the house. The elder of them, on approaching me, first introduced himself, saying, 'My name, sir, is Adamson Bentley, this is Elder Sidney Rigdon, both of Warren, Ohio.' On entering my house and being introduced to my family, after some refreshment, Elder Bentley said, 'Having just read your debate with Mr. John Walker of the State of Ohio, with considerable interest, and having been deputed by the Mahoning Association last year to ordain some elders and to set some churches in order, which brought us within little more than a day's ride of you, we concluded to make a special visit, to inquire of you particularly on sundry matters of much interest to us set forth in the debate, and would be glad, when perfectly at your leisure, to have an opportunity to do so. I replied that, as soon as the afternoon duties of my seminary were discharged I would take pleasure in hearing from them fully on such matters. After tea, in the evening, we commenced and prolonged our discourse till the next morning. Beginning with the baptism that John preached we went back to Adam and forward to the final judgment. The dispensations -- Adamic, Abrahamic, Jewish and Christian -- passed and repassed before us. Mount Sinai in Arabia, Mount Zion, Mount Tabor, the Red Sea and the Jordan, the Passovers and the Pentacosts, the Law and the Gospel, but especially the ancient order of things and the modern, occasionally engaged our attention. hand. They went on their way rejoicing, and in the course of a single year prepared their whole Association to bear us with earnestness and candor. The above lively representation seems to be tolerably correct except in what it says relating to the special circumstances under which the journey was performed to the residence of Mr. Campbell. In this respect it has been considered preferable to be guided by the information of Hayden who it is suggested enjoyed better means of information than the editor of the "Millennial Harbinger," concerning the details of Bentley's history. |
|
(Skip Campbellite roots section and continue with Sidney Rigdon material)
[ 026a - this section removed from original manuscript - 01 - [ 027 ] by this means she had lost the right to be styled a Church of Christ. In order to meet the objections of these adversaries, Mr. Glas resolved to investigate the whole question of national covenanting in the light of the Scriptures. The issue of these researches was different from anything he had anticipated. By means of them he not only withdrew the foundation of strict biblical precept from beneath the feet of the Cameronians, but the support upon which his own Church was established were, in his judgment, likewise destroyed. These covenants, whether in their ancient or their modern observation, proceeded all alike upon the supposition that a connection between Church and State is in accordance with the teachings of the Sacred Word. (Glas's Narrative, pp. 1-25, also p. 139.) On his attaining to the conviction that a union of this nature was not provided for in the New Testament, Mr. Glas became displeased with his own position in the Established Church, as well as with the representations of the Cameronians. He was more than ever confirmed in the resolution "to make himself no other rule but the word of God." His reflections upon that Word now speedily made him aware that the rite of communion, as it was observed in his own and other parishes, was not strictly in accordance with the pattern of the apostolic churches. Many persons of the weakest pretensions to pious living, and many more who made no claims to any special renewal by the Spirit of [ 028 ] holiness were entitled, in virtue of their birthright, to the benefits of a position at the table of the Lord. This posture of circumstances had become unendurable to him. Accordingly, on the 13th of July 1725, he sought to relieve his conscience by organizing a coventicle within the boundaries of his parish, composed of those only who he believed had experienced a complete change of heart. (Memoranda of John Glas and Robert Sandeman, collected from MS notes of the late James Scott, member of the church in Dundee; in, Letters and Discourses of Robert Sandeman, Dundee, 1851, p. 118. Compare also Glas's Narrative, pp. 103 and 113.) When the literalistic tendency of Mr. Glas had resulted in this ecclesiola in ecclesia, it became the means of directing public attention to his proceedings. A communion occasion at Strathmartine, on the 6th of August, 1726, served to bring him face to face with the opposition that was gathering head against him. Echoes of the rising strife were also heard in the Presbytery of Dundee, at its session on the 7th of September following. The affair likewise came to discussion, after an informal fashion, in the Synod of Augus and Mearns when it convened in October 1726. Nothing of consequence was done in the premises until the 17th of October 1727, at which date the Synod of Augus and Mearns laid upon the Presbytery if Dundee, to which the parish of Tealing [ 029 ] belonged, the duty of bringing Mr. Glas to trial at a special session which they should convene for that purpose; and ordered that these in turn should bring the results of their investigations before the Synod, at its next session at Brechin in April 1728. This mandate was observed; and after due deliberation was had, the Synod of Augus and Mearns, on the 18th of April 1728, pronounced a sentence of suspension from the ministry against Mr. Glas, for promulgating sentiments hostile to the National Covenants and to the union of Church and State in any form. An appeal was taken to the General Assembly, which convened about a fortnight later, on the 2d of May, which, however, confirmed the action of the Synod. Meanwhile, Mr. Glas having laid himself liable to the charge of contumacy by continuing to preach the obnoxious doctrine after his suspension from office, a sentence of deposition was passed against him by the Synod in October 1728. An appeal being taken against this new sentence, it was likewise confirmed by decision of the Commission of the Assembly, at a meeting appointed to consider the case, on the 12th of March 1730. (The above facts are taken from, Glas's Narrative, as cited on a preceding page.) The brief outlines which have just been given will avail, in some sort, to bring before the reader a view of the special occasion that induced Mr. Glas to rebel against the Kirk of Scotland, and of the main indictments of the process that was thereupon entered against him. His own reflections concerning the [ 030 ] teachings of the Scriptures had brought him to embrace the position of the English Independents in relation to the question concerning the proper church order, while the action of the constituted authorities had already destroyed his sympathy for the National Establishment. Though his followers and himself were in the custom of designating themselves, and the churches they subsequently organized, by the name of "Independents" (Glas, Narrative, p. 110; also Memoir of Mr. John Glas, prefixed to the Narrative, p. xvii), or some times Congregationalists (Memoir of Mr. John Glas, prefixed to the Narrative, p. xxvi), yet they made no effort to form relations with the people who in England bear those names. On the contrary, they stood wholly aloof; and guided by the Scriptures, they resolved to work out from this source, alone and without any assistance, the more minute details of the constitution, life, worship, and discipline of the churches of the New Testament period. The passion they had acquired for contradicting the usages and the doctrines of the "popular clergy" was so keen that they were soon driven into excesses; and before they progressed very far there had arisen so large a variety of convictions and useages, that many of the individual bodies differed from each other in regard to a number of particulars, while each single item, though never so insignificant in appearances, was likely to become an occasion of separation. - 06 - The tithing of mint anise and cummin, it has been suggested, became the principal concern of Mr. Glas and his believers. The work was begun only a few months after the sentence of deposition from the Kirk of Scotland had been confirmed. Mr. Glas had in uncommon amount of confidence in the capacity of the poorest of the brethren to divine the truth of God from the biblical word, and often boasted that he got hints from them which served to open and explain many things which he had not previously understood. During the summer of 1730, while he was absent in the Highlands for the benefit of his health, these humble people raised a scruple in the church over which he now presided in Dundee, regarding the ruling elders, which, as former Presbyterians, they had adopted from the constitution of the Established Church. The pastor was speedily fetched from his summer retreat for the purpose of adjusting the difficulty. This enterprise was accomplished by abolishing the office of ruling elders, and substituting in their stead a plurality of elders, whose duty it should be both to preach and to teach, (Memoranda of John [ 032 ] Glas and Robert Sandeman, as found in the Letters and Discourses of Robert Sandeman, pp. 118-119.) The fashion of employing a plurality of elders is likewise found among the Disciples of America, To an aged member of the church, also presumably one of the poorest of the people, is due the innovation of weekly communion in the Lord's Supper. The conventicle which Mr. Glas had gathered around him was at first in the habit of monthly celebrating the Lord's Supper. The person referred to suggested the inquiry why they should meet every mouth for that purpose, and not once or twice in the year, as the churches of the Establishment were in the custom of doing. A debate was held regarding the business, by means of which it was concluded that both of these practices were without example in the New Testament; and therefore the weekly service was enjoined. (Memoranda of John Glas and Robert Sandeman in the place above cited, p. 119.) The Disciples also observe this usage. In the beginning of the movement it was expected that the elders of whom there were indispensably two or three in every church, should sustain themselves, by their own exertions in some trade or profession outside of the ministry. This peculiarity has been retained, with considerable tenacity, in some of the Sandemanian churches (An Account of the Christian Practices of the Church in Barnsbury Grove, Barnsbury, London. 1878, p. 10.) The early Disciples in their turn, laid much stress upon this point [ 033 ] (Christian Baptist, edit. 6, p. 91, pp. 8, 29, 43, 37, 46); but of late they are becoming less strenuous regarding it. Seeing that he was now fairly launched upon a career of literalism, Mr. Glas would soon perceive that it was impossible to find in the New Testament writings any documents like the Longer and Shorter Catechisms of the Kirk of Scotland. Accordingly, in the year 1736, he published a pamphlet under the title of "The Usefulness of Catechisms Considered," and takes the occasion to discourage the employment of them by his followers. The Confession of Faith, in its turn, was abolished. Besides the fact that there was directly no Divine command enjoining its existence, the Westminster Confession had been, in some sort, the occasion of his displacement from the perish at Tealing. The attention of the party was soon directed to the love-feast which prevailed in the early Christian Church; and, with the courage of their convictions, this observance was also added as an indispensable mark of a genuine Church of Christ. Their successors in England are quite as stringent as were the Sandemanians of the eighteenth century in requiring the presence of each and every member on these occasions. (Barnsbury Grove, as above, p. 10.) Mr. Campbell the founder of the Disciples, seriously considered this matter; but, while he allowed that the custom was of biblical authority, and might be "found useful when the ancient order of things is restored" [ 034 ] (Christian Baptist, edit. 6, pp. 283-284), he yet lacked a sufficient amount of courage to enjoin the observation of it. On the other hand, he was fully as clear as the Sandemanians in his denunciations of church catechisms, creeds and confessions of faith, The Sandemanians were easily able to discover that the kiss of charity was several times enjoined in the apostolical letters, and hence this observance was frequently found among them. Mr. Campbell's courage and devotion to the distinct commands of the word of God failed him entirely at this point. (Christian Baptist, edit. 6, 224, Compare also Richardson, vol. ii. p. 129 where Mr. Campbell had an opportunity to resist this observance in a small church at Pittsburgh, which professed Sandemanian views.) The conditions were almost the same in the case of foot-washing. This practice was also regarded by numbers of the Sandemanians as an important mark of a true Church of Christ. It is still observed by them (Barnsbury Grove, p. 8), but they do not now appear to consider it of the same binding necessity as formerly. Mr. Campbell rejected it entirely (Christian Baptist, pp. 222-223), as a church observance, though he was not adverse that it should be performed as an expression of private hospitality. The Sandemanians early became convinced that it was an article of capital concern, that their adherents should abstain from eating blood. In this connection they insisted upon the letter of the passage at Acts xv. 20,28-29. No distinct allusion, on the part [ 035 ] of the Disciples, to the binding force of this apostolical prohibition, can be remembered. The Sandemanians laid unusual stress upon the intercessory prayer of our Lord, in the seventeenth chapter of the Gospel according to John; holding that it inculcates the necessity of absolute unanimity, on the part of the various members, in every transaction by an individual church. In order to obtain this indispensable unanimity. the parties who may entertain such objections as they are unable to surrender are incontinently expelled from the communion. (Barnsbury Grove, p. 14.) The Disciples likewise insist with earnestness upon the passage in question; but they understand that it refers to the organic union of all who profess and call themselves Christians, on the basis of the plea which themselves have a charge to urge upon the attention of the religious public. A modified type of communism prevailed, and is still professed, among the Sandemanians. (Richardson, Vol. I. p. 71.) The personal estate of a communicant could be retained by him after entering the fraternity, but always with the understanding that it was subject to the demands of the necessitous, especially those of them who chanced to be of the household of faith. Accordingly it was expected that their brethren should not lay up any further treasures on earth than such as they were possessed of at the time of their reception. (Andrew Fuller, Strictures on Sandemanism. Letter IX.) In order to prevent this from taking place, the surplus above their actual [ 036 ] necessities in the way of subsistence was to be contributed to the "Fellowship," which is the name they derived from Acts ii. 42, for the collection for the poor. (Barnsbury Grove, pp. 6-7, also pp. 8-9 cf. Letters and Discourses of R. Sandeman, p. 42) The Disciples, on the contrary, have never pressed the principle of communism to the same extent; but they have adopted the nomenclature of the Sandemanians in the matter of the weekly collection (Christian Baptist, edit. 6, pp. 209,166,359) which is ordinarily designated as "the Fellowship" in their literature. (See also Christian Baptist, pp. 339,391,408,413, for other instances of the employment of this term in the writings of Sandemanian churches.) The custom of mutual exhortation, as a regular part of religious worship, was in vogue among many of the Sandemanian fraternities. They justified this proceeding by a literal interpretation of 1 Cor. xiv. 31. It was often assigned a place in the observances of the Sabbath day; but the church of Barnsbury Grove, London, has now removed it to the Wednesday-evening meeting. (Barnsbury Grove p. 7.) The business of exhortation was likewise attended to in the first church that was organized by the Disciples in America, as also in the kindred Sandemanian church under the charge of Walter Scott in Pittsburgh, Penn,; but so many evils grew out of it, that after a series of years Mr. Campbell became impatient of it, and succeeded in persuading his followers to surrender their liberty in this regard. [ 037 ] (Richardson, Memoirs of A. Campbell, Vol. II. pp. 125-129.) A portion of the Sandemanian fraternity were so strict in their literalism, that, because there is no direct injunction commanding the observance of family prayer, and because there is a Divine command to enter into the closet and pray in secret, they would inveigh against this practice as savoring of a tendency to proselytism. (Christian Baptist, edit. 2, Buffalo, Va., 1827, p. 76.) Others of the party discouraged the habit of family prayer, on the ground that it is "unlawful, provided any part of the family be unbelievers, seeing it is holding communion with them." (Braidwood's Letters, as cited by AndrewFuller in his Strictures on Sandemanianism, Letter IX.) In his earlier years Mr. Campbell was influenced by this latter view of the subject, and at one time seriously proposed to his father the inquiry " whether family prayer is proper in a family composed in part of unbelievers." (Richardson, vol. i. p. 449.) Unlike the Sandemanians, however, who could find "no precept or precedent for family worship" in the biblical writings (Fuller, Strictures on Sandemanianism, Letter IX.), Mr. Campbell was fortunate enough to discover a justification of the practice in the patriarchal dispensation, which he denominated "the family worship institution" (Christian System, Bethany, Va., 1840, pp. 128-133); and, notwithstandingthe youthful scruples referred to above, he appears [ 038 ] to have performed the duty with a commendable degree of diligence and spirit. The same people who could not reconcile it to their views to pray or to enjoy any kind of religious observance in the family circle with those who mere not in communion with them at the Lord's Supper, yet had no scruples against accompanying respectable persons of whatever creed, or of no creed at all, to the theatre, or against joining with them in the dance or other social amusements which are commonly condemned by the more serious portion of the religious community, (Barnsbury-Grove, p. 9; compare Fuller's Strictures on Sandemanianism, Letter II; and Letter of John Glas to Edward Gorril, in Letters and Discourses of R. S., p. 88.) Mr. Campbell was not guilty of this kind of extravagance; but the sentiment of the Sandemanians in the matters of theatres, dancing; and other diversions, appears to have survived in the Mormon community, who, as will be suggested later on, are connected, through the Disciples, with the Sandemanian stock. It would he natural to expect that those who were unwilling to engage in family prayer where unbelieving members might belong to the household, should also be forward to propose objections to the presence of any but communicants at the public services of the Church. A portion of the Sandemanian Churches acceded to the demand of their peculiar logic in this particular, and were solicitous to exclude from their public worship all who might not belong to their own [ 039 ] community. (Christian Baptist, edit. 6, p. 389; also a Letter from the Elders of the Church in Dundee to the Elders of the Church in Edinburgh, as found inThe Letters and Discourses of Robert Sandeman, Dundee, 1851, pp. 116-117.) Mr. Campbell, in his turn, was much taken with this peculiarity of the Sandemanians. His biographer is our authority for the statement that the first church he organized -- at Brush Run in Pennsylvania -- did not recognize as duly prepared to partake in religious services any persons except such as had professed to put on Christ in baptism; or, in other words, those who chanced to be members of that special organization. Later in life he was persuaded to recede from this extreme position; but he appears to have always regretted his course in that regard, longing in vain for the exclusive attitude of his youthful time. (Richardson, vol. i. p. 454.) The Sandemanians made a deal of noise over the point that the first day of the week is not properly a Sabbath, at least holding that it is not a duty incumbent upon Christian people to observe it in the same fashion us the Sabbath was observed by the Jewish nation under the Old Testament economy. They regarded the Christian Sabbath as merely designed for the celebration of divine ordinances, (Barnsbury Grove p. 4.). and did not conceive that they were engaged to sanctify the day according to the strict usage of the Scottish Kirk. When the concerns of public worship had been duly cared for, the [ 040 ] balance of the day might be passed in such pleasures as would scarcely comport with the claim that it was anyway more holy than other days. (Andrew Fuller, Strictures on Sandemanianism, Letter IX.) The Disciples likewise decline to regard the first day of the week as a Sabbath, or even to call it by that name. The fourth command of the Decalogue, they hold, is applicable to the seventh day, but it does not refer to Sunday. On this account they have now and then been charged with the crime of paying no respect to the Fourth Commandment. Claims of that nature, however, are commonly based upon a misconception. The public worship which the Disciples, like the Sandemanians, consider it their duty to observe on the Lord's day, occupies about as many hours of time and service as customarily are passed in that way by those who are willing to consider the day as a Sabbath. The only matter worthy of attention in this connection is, that the party are in the habit of proposing the same distinction regarding the subject that was urged, before their time, by the Sandemanians. (Richardson, vol. i. pp. 432-435.) - 16 -
In brief, the Sandemanians were almost always and [ 042 ] everywhere in the opposition. This spirit of opposition displayed itself when, in due course of time, they found it desirable to give a portion of their attention to the doctrines which their Church should maintain, The influence of the Methodist movement was by that time beginning to be recognized in Scotland. While the Calvinistic theologians felt impelled to resist the views of Mr. Wesley at various points in the department of soteriology, it is none the less true that, through the influence of Whitefield, these had gained some degree of currency in the land of Knox. Methodist influences were very much extended in the party of Seceders, who went away from the Established Church in 1735 only a few years after the expulsion of Mr. Glas. Mr. James Hervey, a member of Wesley'a "godly club" at Oxford, who subsequently adhered to the predestinarian views of Whitefield, in the year 1755 had published a work under the title of "Dialognes between Theron and Aspasio," that were received with much popularity. The views that were there set forth regarding the nature of justifying faith and the process of salvation were pretty strongly tinctured with Methodist sentiment, but they were not on that account any the less welcome to wide circles of his readers in Scotland. Two years later a son-in-law of Mr. Glas's -- Mr. Robert Sandeman, who likewise had a sort of mission to contend against the "popular preachers" and "popular doctrines'- came forward with a review [ 043 ] of the performance of Mr. Hervey, entitled " Letters on Theron and Aspasio." In this production he strictly combats the notion advanced by Hervey, that saving faith embraces in its contents any "real persuasion that the blessed Jesus has shed his blood for me, or has fulfilled all righteousness in my stead;" and also the position that any "appropriation of Christ is essential to faith." (Sandeman, Letters on Theron and Aspasio, New York, 1838, p. 4.) What he several times christens as "the ancient gospel" (pp. 117,297,412; Epistolary Correspondence, pp. 25,83), recognizes as "involved in the contents of justifying faith nothing else than simply believing the record, or crediting the testimony of God." (Letters, as above, p. 21.) In order to believe the record, Mr. Sandeman wholly discredits the notion that there is a necessity for the operation of the Spirit (pp. 29,30). He suggests that the Spirit "who breathes in the Scriptures never speaks a word to any man beside what he publicly speaks there; and he "will not bear to hear the living and powerful Word of God, on any pretense or under color of any distinction whatsoever, called a dead letter." In the " Letters on Theron and Aspasio," though his tone is extremely bitter and arrogant, he is nevertheless more moderate than he exhibits himself in some of his subsequent productions. The "Epistolary Correspondence between S. P(ike) and R. S(andeman)" transcends all the previous limits which he had assigned to his passion. There he claims that [ 044 ] faith is "the bare belief of the bare truth," and that it does not even imply so much as a hearty persuasion. In this bare belief he was also at pains to specify that the mind of the subject is not active, but passive; for, if the mind were active in the matter of crediting the testimony of Christ, this would be the same as to allow that we are justified by an act of the human mind. Mr. Sandeman, who invented the phrase "ancient gospel," is likewise believed to be the inventor of the very common Disciple phrase, "the good confession," which several times occurs in the "Letters on Theron and Aspasio" (p. 487). In another part of the same work he gives himself the pains to explain what are the contents of this confession: "There is but one genuine truth that can save men. To illustrate this matter, let it he remembered that the saving truth which the apostles believed was, That Jesus is the Christ. The apostles had one uniform fixed sense to these words; and the whole New Testament is writ to ascertain to us in what sense they understood them" (Letters etc., p. 258.) Nearly all of these peculiarities come to sight in the theology of the Disciples. Their gospel is commonly denominated "the ancient gospel." In the "Christian Baptist," of which he was the editor, may be found a series of ten different essays from the hand of Mr. Campbell, under that title. The "popular doctrine " and the "popular preachers" are as liberally denounced, and commonly with the same [ 045 ] cant expressions, in the pages of that periodical, as in any of the writings of the Sandemanians. Mr. Campbell is also as clear as his teacher was, that the root and substance of religion is found in knowledge, exclusive of approbation: "evidence alone: produces faith, or testimony is all that is necessary to faith." (Christian Baptist, edit. 6, p. 58.) In his "Dialogue between Timothy and Austin," He is believed to come near to the position of Sandeman, that the Spirit never speaks a word to any man besides what he publicly speaks in the Scriptures. Waiter Scott, one of his leading assistants, was also a diligent disciple of Sandeman's. In that character he affirms that "the body of Christ is increased by the belief of the bare truth that Jesus is the Son of God and our Saviour." (Christian Baptist, edit. 6, p. 21.) The distinction which Mr. Sandeman acquired by means of his labors in the department of Christian doctrine was so great, that in a brief season he began to outshine Mr. Glas, who was the founder of the sect. In England and other countries where his writings were circulated, they produced a somewhat violent controversy, in which the name of Glas was but seldom heard. By degrees, therefore, it befell that the adherents of the fraternity came to be known as Sandemanians almost everywhere outside of the limits of Scotland; and even there the customary designation has come to be Glasites or Sandemanians, a circumstance which allows that the [ 046 ] impression produced by Sandeman was profound and enduring. It is not important to the purpose in hand, to lay before the reader any detailed account of the literary opponents who entered the lists against the principles that were advanced by Mr. Sandeman. The names of a few of the most prominent will be sufficient to show that he was not neglected. Mr. John Wesley was among the first to come forward with a brief essay, which he published anonymously as "A Sufficient Answer to the Author of the Letters on Theron and Aspasio." Mr. W. Cudworth, a, Dissenting minister of prominence in London, first entered into a private correspondence with Sandeman (Letters and Discourses of R. Sandeman, p. 37), and afterwards published a couple of volumes against him. The earliest of these, printed in the year 1760, at London, was entitled "A Defence of Theron and Aspasio against the Objections contained in a Late Treatise, entitled Letters on Theron and Aspasio." The next year appeared "The Polyglot, or Hope of Eternal Life according to the Various Sentiments of the Present Day." In America, the Rev. Joseph Bellamy, D.D., took part in the conflict with a work entitled, "Theron, Paulinus, and Aspasio; or, Letters and Dialogues on the Nature of Love to God, Faith in Christ, and Assurance of a Title to Eternal Life," 1758,1759; as also in the year 1762, with "An Essay on the Nature and Glory of the Gospel; designed as a Supplement to the Letters and Dialogues." [ 047 ] Mr. Isaac Backus likewise gave attention to the issues involved, in a volume published at Boston in 1767, under the title, "True Faith will Produce Good Works. A Discourse wherein are opened the Nature of Faith, and its Powerful Influence on the Heart and Life: together with the Contrary Nature and Effects of Unbelief: and Answers to Various Objections. To which are prefixed, A Brief View of the Present State of the Protestant World, with some Remarks on the Writings of Mr. Sandeman." Some years afterwards, Mr. Andrew Fuller of England was drawn into the controversy by means of an attack upon his position, in the second edition of a work by Mr. Archibald M'Lean of Edinburgh, entitled "The Commission of Christ." In this treatise, Mr. M'Lean having set forth some objections to the views of Fuller, the latter replied in an appendix to his book called "The Gospel Worthy of All Acceptation." The answer of Mr. M'Lean appeared under the tile of "A Reply to Mr. Fuller's Appendix to his Book on the Gospel Worthy of All Acceptation." This performance on the part of M'Lean subsequently called forth Fuller's "Strictures on Sandemanianism," which is, perhaps, the most satisfactory treatment of the whole subject that has yet been published on either side of the question. - 23 - Carmichael was forthwith assigned to duty in the ranks of the sect to which he had attached his fortunes, and placed in charge of a church in Glasgow. Here it appears that he enjoyed a degree of success; at any rate, he is supposed to have been the means of perverting from his loyalty to Scottish Kirk, Mr. Archibald M'Lean, who entered the fraternity of the Sandemanian Independents in the year 1762 (Memoir of M'Lean, pp. xxii-xxiii). [ 049 ] The satisfaction of the Sandemanians with their Anti-Burgher convert was of brief duration. The hand of Mr. Glas was found to be very heavy. Upon the occasion of a case of discipline in which Glas interfered (Letters and Discourses, p. 83). Carmichael became disgusted with his situation, and laid down the charge of the Independent Church in Glasgow. (Letters and Discourses, p. 44, note.) Archibald M'Lean, apparently a protege of Carmichael's, also retired from the sect on the same occasion. (Memioir, p. xxiii.) After this pair of friends had fallen into a condition of separation from the Sandemanians, it was not singular that they should have qualms of conscience touching some of the tenets that were maintained by that fraternity. In this instance criticism was leveled against the doctrine of infant-baptism, which Mr. Glas had retained as a prominent item of the "ancient order of things." (Memoir, p. xxiii.) As a natural consequence, both of them in due season renounced the practice of infant-baptism. Carmichael speedily removed from Glasgow to Edinburgh, where he seems to have had charge of an Independent Church that had likely seceded from the community over which Mr. Robert Sandeman was then presiding in that city; it is believed to have been composed of people who took the part of Carmichael in the controversy that he had waged with Glas and Sandeman in Glasgow. They were only seven in number, but they invited Carmichael [ 050 ] from Glasgow to be their pastor. (Memoirs of M'Lean, p. xxiii.) As he was on the point of setting out for Edinburgh, Mr. M'Lean promised his old pastor that he would compose a letter, in which should be laid down in full his views on the subject of baptism. When this document was completed, it was dated on the 2d of July, 1764. Mr. Carmichael obtained it by due course of mail; but as he was now comfortably established in Edinburgh, over a church that was still in doctrinal agreement with Mr. Sandeman, he was uncertain what might be the result in case he should suddenly profess his conversion to the views of those who opposed infant-baptism. It was more than possible that his adherents would refuse to give attention to his reasons; they might even dismiss him on the spot, and return to the community from which they had but recently taken their leave. Consequently Mr. Carmichael, who is suspected to have been devoid of any thing like stability of character, still persisted in the practice of baptizing infants. (Memoirs of M'Lean, pp. xxiii and xxiv.) After the lapse of a twelvemonth, however, Carmichael had succeeded in convincing five of his seven parishioners of the unlawfulness, of infant- baptism, and of the propriety of immersion as the act of baptism. Apparently by their vote or consent, he was dispatched to London for the purpose of obtaining immersion at the hands of some of the Baptist miniters [ 051 ] of England. He was immersed at the baptistery in the Barbican, by Dr. John Gill, on the 9th of October 1765. On his return to Edinburgh, he in his turn immersed the five persons who had consorted with him, and two others; thus laying the foundations of the Sandemanian Church of the immersion observance, who are otherwise designated by the name of "Scotch Baptists." (Memoirs, p. xxiv.) The Sandemanians of the aspersion observance, under the lead of Sandeman and Glas, were in the custom of expressing their disgust against this unwelcome conduct on the part of a portion of their adherents, by denouncing the same as Anabaptists. (Letters and Discourses of Robert Sandeman, Dundee, 1851, p. 48, note.) After a few weeks, M'Lean drew nigh from Glasgow and caused himself to be immersed. In the month of July 1767, he went to London for the purpose of trying his fortunes as a printer (Memoirs, p. xix); but failing to meet with such a degree of encouragement as he desired, he accepted a position in Edinburgh which brought him into immediate contact with Carmichael and the immersed Sandemanians of that place. He entered Edinburgh in December 1767: in June 1768 he was raised from his station as a private member, to the dignity of fellow elder with Carmichael. (Memoirs, pp. xxiv, xxi, xxv.) Although they were only nine members in the community (Benedict, ed. 2, p. 355), Sandemanian literalism was very strenuous to re- [ 052 ] quire that they should maintain a plurality of elders. It was only a brief season before Carmichael found it convenient to quit the immersed Sandemanians, and to return to the Sandemanians of the aspersion observance; in the year 1773, he was presiding over such a church in Edinburgh. (Memoir of Mr. William Braidwood, p. xvii.) It was perhaps the same church which Robert Sandeman left behind when he came to America in the year 1764. (Biography of Sandeman, prefixed to his Discourses, Dundee, 1857, p. xi.) The founder of the so-called "Scotch Baptists" was therefore, one of the first to leave the church which he had established; it is suspected that his convictions were either not very strong or not very sincere. By the defection of Carmichael, Mr. M'Lean was immediately recognized as the undisputed leader of the immersed Sandemanians. M'Lean had not been long installed in his position at Edinburgh before his mind was persuaded that it would be a feasible enterprise to make some improvement upon "the ancient gospel" as invented by the philosophy of Mr. Sandeman. The latter gentleman appeared to consider that he was set to oppose every prominent tenet that had come to be advocated by the Seceders or by others, who, within the limits of Scotland or elsewhere, had in any way been influenced by the progress of the Wesleyan revival. While the Westminster Confession had inculcated the doctrine of assurance of faith, it had been studious to [ 053 ] avoid including that grace in the contents of saving faith. On the contrary, it expressly provides (chap. xviii. sec. 3) that "this infallible assurance doth not so belong to the essence of faith, but that a true believer may wait long, and conflict with many difficulties, before he be partaker of it; yet, being enabled by the Spirit to know the things which are freely given him of God, he may, without extraordinary revelation, in the right use of ordinary means, attain thereunto." The Seceders and many others, including some of the more zealous pastors within the Established Church, had now begun to reckon a fixed assurance of one's personal acceptance as belonging among the invariable elements of saving faith. Sandeman naturally took umbrage against this innovation on the part of the "popular preachers;" and, in keeping with his character and position, he was soon found at the opposite extreme, not only denying that assurance is of the essence of saving faith, but also affirming that the Christian could never attain to any better estate in this world than an assurance of the possibility of his personal salvation. He understands the "ancient gospel" to be that "divine truth which affords hope to the vilest transgressor, that he may be justified, that he may escape the curse." (Letter on Theron and Aspasio, N.Y., 1838, p. 290; cf. M'Lean's Commission of Jesus Christ, Edinburgh, 1786, p. 96, footnote.) Sandeman likewise adds (p. 295) that "the simple belief of the gospel" (which, according to him, [ 054 ] is all that faith implies or embraces) "leaves a man, even in the full assurance of faith, or when the truth is most present to his thoughts, entirely at the mercy of God for salvation, and leads him to the greatest reverence for, and submission to, the Divine sovereignty, without having any claim upon God whatsoever, or finding any reason why God should regard him more than those who perish." Mr. M'Lean was not well content with this comfortless view of his master's. Accordingly, in the work on the "Commission of Jesus Christ," already mentioned, while he continues to accept Sandeman's conceit; about the nature of evangelical faith (p. 80), he demurs to the conclusion that "the bare belief of the bare truth" will do nothing more than Sandeman affirmed for the benefit of the individual subject, and assumes the ground that this bare belief is just as capable of conveying the immediate assurance of salvation as was the saving faith advocated by the most ardent Seceder. (Commission, as above pp. 90-98.) The hyper-Calvinist opinions of Sandeman likewise no longer acceptable to M'Lean, seeing that they were employed not as ordinarily to confirm the assurance of the faithful, but on tho contrary to prevent them from cherishing any stronger faith than that which affirms a possibility that the most devout and correct of them may be justified. That was, indeed a distressing prospect which others besides M'Lean -- persons who stood much nearer to master -- were pained to accept. [ 055 ] From considerations of this kind the leader of the immersed wing of the Sandemanian fraternity appears to have conceived a certain distaste for the extreme views regarding the Calvinistic system of truth, which prevailed in the opposing camp. He was, therefore, able to content himself with a somewhat moderate position in relation to questions of that nature. Professing to hold in good esteem the bare belief by means of which Sandeman had relegated the origin of personal religion to the sphere of the intellect, excluding any right operations of the emotions or of the will, he was nevertheless, as a matter of fact, unable to obtain a very high degree of confidence in the efficacy of an agent that was so attenuated. The assurance which this mere belief might be competent to bestow was cried up, indeed, as the best article in that line which was then offered to the favor of the "professing world" but flaming commendations of this kind had long since become familiar, and they were generally estimated at their proper value. In order, therefore, to improve his emasculated faith, -- "to make assurance double sure, and take a bond of fate"-- M'Lean resolved to provide this mere intellectual exercise with a buttress that was designed to support its weakness and secure its existence. This buttress consisted of an addition to the design of baptism, which necessarily had escaped the attention of the party which continued in the practice of infant-baptism. What mere belief could [ 056 ] not do, in that it was weak, it was hoped might be performed by the immersion of believers in water. Accordingly Mr. M'Lean advances the peculiar theory of baptism for the remission of sins. (Commission of Jesus Christ, Edinburgh, 1786, pp. 129-137). Baptism was clearly asserted to be necessary to salvation (pp. 131-132); not in the way of baptismal regeneration, however, but in the way of effecting the remission of sins after the act of mere belief. Another feature of Mr. M'Lean's teaching on the subject of baptism is found in the fact that he insisted that it should be performed, not "in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost," as (is) the custom of the balance of the Christian world, but on the contrary "into the name, etc." (Commission, as above, pp. 110-114). He likewise maintains (in) the same connection (p. 113), that "the Holy Spirit was not given, in a way peculiar to the gospel dispensation, during John's baptism, nor till Christ was glorified." Each of the peculiarities above described has been reproduced by the Disciples (or Campbellites) in America. 'They reject infant-baptism; they practice immersion exclusively for baptism; they hold to the necessity of baptism for the remission of sins; urged the very same passages of Scripture, and in the same way, as Archibald M'Lean, in support of that (notion) they insist upon the propriety of baptizing "into the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit;" and (they) declare that the kingdom of heaven was not completely [ 057 ] set up until the Day of Pentecost. If the above were not matters of common fame, it would be in order to produce citations from their literature in each case; but, as nobody will think or care to call in question the fact that these things are now customary in the ranks of the Disciples, it may not be necessary to bring forward any such special proofs of the statements here advanced. - 33 - On the 6th of May 1797, nearly two and twenty years after the establishment of the first society of "Scotch Baptists" or immersed Sandemanians, the tongue of James Alexander Haldane was loosed. he delivered his maiden discourse to a company of colliers at the village of Gilmerton, in the vicinity of Edinburgh. His social position, combined with his previous experience of life, and his remarkable [ 059 ] abilities ill the line of popular preaching, imparted a high degree of interest and importance to this event. (Memoirs of Robert and James Alexander Haldane, by Alexander Haldane, Esq., New York, 1853, pp. 140-141.) James Alexander Haldane followed the sea in his earlier years, where he had attained the dignity of captain in the merchant marine, and only a short while previously had resigned command of the ship, "Melville Castle," that was engaged in the East-India service. (Memoirs, as above, p. 74.) After his introduction to the work of lay-preaching at Gilmerton, Mr. Haldane was suited with an unwonted degree of religious fervor and pious solicitude. A little more than two months from that date, on the 12th of July, he set forward on a missionary journey to the Highlands of Scotland, which was rewarded with so large a share of encouragement and success, that, before it was concluded on the 7th of November 1797, his name and his enterprise were the occasion of general remark. Events now fell out with much rapidity in the progress of the revival. Instead of remaining quietly in the bosom of the Kirk, where was ample room for them, and many gave their sympathy, the Haldane brothers were soon taking steps which looked in the direction of a secession from that institution. On the 11th of January, 1798, was formed by them and such of their friends as would allow their names to be used in that relation, a "Society for Propagating the [ 060 ] Gospel at Home." (Memoirs, pp. 178-179.) A single year was space enough, after this step had been performed, for the movement to develop into a church organization. In January 1799, the first Haldane society was constituted at Edinburgh, and on the 3d of February they publicly ordained James A. Haldane to be their pastor, (Memoirs, p. 217.) The public are familiar with the marvels that were accomplished by the promoters of this enterprise in the period between the years 1797 and 1808, as likewise with the lamentable declension which then set in and almost in a day destroyed its usefulness and promise. The causes of that unhappy catastrophe are pretty clearly suggested in the biography of the Haldanes already cited; by the aid of the light which is there supplied, it is possible to trace the operation of these causes from stage to stage in the downward course At the very beginning of the undertaking, James A Haldane chanced to be on an intimate footing with a certain Dr. Charles Stuart of Dunearn (Memoirs, p. 140). This gentleman was likewise of noble blood, of excellent learning, many attractive social qualities, and of the queerest kind of a head. He had begun life as a minister in the Established Kirk. After his accession to the parish of Cramond, near Edinburgh, he was united in marriage to a daughter of the venerable John Erskine, the leader of the evangelical wing in that in that institution (Memoirs, pp. 125-126); but he was not appointed to pursue his [ 061 ] career in peace and usefulness. The biographer of the Haldanes (p. 141) declares that "in his thirst for general information and the society of good men, Mr. Stuart had gone from the Divinity Hall in Edinburgh, to some of the Dissenting Academies in London, and there imbibed notions unfavorable to the union between Church and State." Whatever may be the fact regarding his visits to London, the notions which he entertained and propagated on that topic were to be had much nearer home; they were the leading article of the Independents, or Sandemanians, and might be read any day in the "Testimony of the King of Martyrs," the principal work of Mr. John Glas It was published in Edinburgh, just under the nose of Mr. Stuart, and was kept on sale in most of the booksellers' shops of the country. More than this, Dr. Stuart had acquired convictions against the propriety of the practice of infant-baptism and against the mode of baptism by aspersion; and at the moment when he conceived his perhaps interested admiration for James A. Haldane, he was duly numbered in the lists of the "Scotch Baptists," or Sandemanians of the immersion observance (Memoirs, pp. 141,338,511-512); and was a member of Archibald M'Lean's Church (Memoirs of William Braidwood, p. 36,note). When James A. Haldane preached his first sermon in the evening of the 6th of May 1787, this ardent and excellent "Scotch Baptist" was present to [ 062 ] applaud the effort. He seems almost upon the spot to have conceived the ambition to make a proselyte of his friend. He declared that to see him a Baptist would be the consummation of his earthly felicity. He "took much pains to inculcate Baptist views upon Haldane; attended his ministry; listened to his preaching with rapt admiration, and called on him two or three times every week to discuss the topics which were delivered from the pulpit." No art or blandishment of the determined and skillful proselytizer was neglected. It is with justice that the biographer admits (p. 141), "There is no doubt that Dr. Stuart's influence on Mr. James Haldane was considerable, as it was also on several other eminent men." In sad truth this excellent, wrong-headed gentleman was the evil genius of the Haldanes and of their cause. Had they at the outset possessed a sufficient amount of insight and foresight to have bestowed upon him a firm and enduring repulse, they might have escaped the shipwreck which shortly stranded themselves and their movement on the shallows of Sandemanian literalism. We are given to understand that there were '"several other eminent men" over whom Dr. Stuart exerted a degree of injurious influence. Notable among these was Mr. Greville Ewing, one of the leading co-adjutors of the Haldanes. Already before the year 1795 there were possibly some relations of intimacy between Stuart and Ewing, for in that year we find the latter advocating the practice of "mutual [ 063 ] exhortation" from the pulpit of Lady Glenorchy's chapel in Edinburgh, where he was assistant to the Rev. Dr. Jones. (Facts and Documents respecting the Connections which have subsisted between Robert Haldane, Esq., and Greville Ewing. By Greville Ewing. Glasgow, 1809, pp,127,128, note.) Mr. Ewing likewise declares elsewhere in the same work (p. 8), that the origin of his dissatisfaction with the Church of Scotland, of which he was a minister, was the exercise of a power by church courts over ministers and congregations, which restrained the former from preaching wherever they had an opportunity, and the latter from adopting any plan for mutual edification and comfort," -- a kind of scruple which, in the latter instance, has a decided odor of Dr. Stuart and the Sandemanians. In the year 1796, a twelvemonth before the project of the Haldanes was mooted, the celebrated; "Missionary Magazine" was commenced "under the auspices of Dr. Stuart, with Mr. Ewing as editor." (Memoirs, p. 141) A connection of this kind, in which an active and prominent minister of the Kirk allowed himself to become, in a certain sort, the spokesman, if not the creature, of a leading character among the "Scotch Baptists," could not fail to excite remark and to give offense. It was, therefore, in no way singular that Mr. Ewing's position in the Establishment should every day become more untenable. (Memoirs, p. 179.) In the progress of time and instruction, his conversion to the practices and tenets [064] of the immersed Sandemanians might have become as complete and extensive as that of the brothers Haldane subsequently was, if the relation with Stuart had not been early broken off by changes which will be mentioned in their place farther on. The "Missionary Magazine" was not infrequently supplied with articles which suggested that the editor was making fair advances in the doctrines of the proprietor, (Memoirs, p. 214.) When it is brought to mind that this same "Missionary Magazine" "under the auspices of Dr. Stuart," and whose editor was, after a fashion, his disciple, became from the became from the beginning the official organ of the Haldanean enterprise, it will be apparent how large a hold the immersed wing of the Sandemanian sect had acquired upon the fortunes and the future of a promising cause. T some minds it may seem a fair conclusion that it was never possible for the new church to have attained permanent success. Too many elements which could signify no other fate than early disaster, were present at its inception. None of the least of these may be perceived in the circumstance that when, in the month of December 1798, the project of founding a church was broached, Mr. Ewing, "as being most familiar with, such matters, was requested to draw up a plan for its government" (Memoirs, p. 214.) For a season after the inauguration of the earliest church, in January 1799, the best wishes of the Haldanes were fulfilled; but it was a sadly brief season. [ 065 ] The storms which they had not the wisdom and experience to forecast speedily began to gather about their heads. As soon as Mr. Ewing had seceded from the Church of Scotland, he placed himself at the service of Robert Haldane to be employed in forwarding the plans that gentleman had in mind. Mr. Haldane had made arrangements to send a class of students to Gosport, England, where they might, remain for a time under the care of the well-known Dr. Bogue, as a means of preparing them for the work of the ministry. But it was given to Mr. Ewing to persuade his friend that it would be wiser to commit these students to his own care, since there were somewhat decided objections against Dr. Bogue in Scotland, and perhaps elsewhere, on the score of his liberal politics. On the 2d of January 1799, Greville Ewing opened his seminary of theology in Edinburgh. The number of pupils at first was twenty-four, derived from various denominations, except the Congregationalists or Sandemanians; but before the course was ended one of their number affirms that they all found themselves decided and intelligent Congregationalists. (Memoirs, p. 228.) This was a marked degree of success. Few men are to be found who had a surer command of the arts of proselytizing than Mr. Ewing. Yet there were reasons why Robert Haldane should not be highly elated by the triumphs of his subordinate. Mr. Ewing was much addicted to the writings of Glas and Sandeman; but at this particular [ 066 ] period of his career Mr. Haldane was less favorably inclined towards those theologians than he subsequently came to be, through the unhappy influence of Mr. Stuart upon the mind of James A. Haldane. Accordingly, when Ewing put the books that have been referred to in the hands of the students (Facts and Documents, as above, p. 79, cf. p. 82), Mr. Haldane considered he was entitled to interpose, which step he took immediately, while Ewing and the students were still in the city of Edinburgh (Facts and Documents, pp. 131,135.)This must have been the beginning of the troubles which for so many years wasted the strength and spirits of the two men, and ultimately brought calamities on the cause they had engaged to promote. When his attention was first directed to the danger that existed in Edinburgh, Robert Haldane assumed a wise position. If he had but pressed forward vigorously in the sentiments which he then entertained, he might have rescued his interests from ruin. He was opposed even to the notions of Church order inculcated by Glas and Sandeman, as well as to their "ancient gospel" (Facts and Documents, pp. 134-135); but on this side of the subject his sentiments later underwent an unhappy modification (Facts and Documents, p. 81), and he embraced with decision, and in some cases with passion, a great many items of the desolating scheme of the Sandemanians. There was a curious play of cross purposes in this [ 067 ] business. After the unpleasantness which occurred at Edinburgh, Mr. Ewing seemed to consider it the main concern of his existence to find a place in every question which should be on the opposite side from that which Robert Haldane was led to assume. Therefore, at the moment when Haldane in his turn began to dabble considerably in the "ancient order of things" Ewing was beginning to insist on occupying the old ground. Yet, notwithstanding all the counsel which he had brought himself to accept from Glas and Sandeman in the details of Church order, Robert Haldane could never prevail upon himself to receive as true what they had inculcated regarding the nature of saving faith. Observing this peculiarity, Ewing, always in the opposition, became more and more attached to the Sandemanian notion that faith is nothing else than bare belief. According to the legally formulated terms of an arrangement that had been fixed upon already before he was given charge of the students, Ewing removed to Glasgow at Whitsunday 1799, to take the pastoral oversight of a church which he was expected to organize in the Circus, a large building there which Robert Haldane had recently purchased for three thousand pounds, and fitted up for the purpose of religious worship. The seminary was also removed with him. Confidence between the two men being now to a large extent destroyed, it was the earnest desire of Ewing to become entirely independent of Mr. Haldane (Facts and Documents, p. 24), by [ 068 ] securing the Circus building for himself and for those people who should join his society. He hoped to effect this purpose by inducing Haldane to make over the house to his people in the way of a gift: but the latter was not in the least disposed to accede to that proposal. Ewing persisted for a number of years, always becoming more and more embittered and unreasonable, until at last both parties appeared before the public in volumes of abusive charges directed against each other. But the difference is believed to have started from nothing else than a contrariety of opinions regarding the merits of the Sandemanians. Except for this issue the two might have passed their whole lives without a word of conflict. Not in the least willing to respect the wishes of Haldane, Mr. Ewing, after his removal to the West, still kept the writings of Glas and Sandeman prominently before his students. Robert Haldane was much chafed by that usage. When James A. Haldane went to Dumfries in the summer of the year 1801, being now at a distance from Edinburgh and from his brother, he wrote Ewing a letter which had possibly been suggested before he left home, warning him against the retention of these books in the seminary, and complaining of his enthusiastic manner of speaking of those frigid and bitter theologians (Memoirs, pp. 321-322). This resource which was perhaps immediately suspected, did not in the least avail: Ewing kept on his way. At last [ 069 ] In the year 1802, hopeless of his ability to reduce him to terms by any other means, Robert Haldane incontinently removed the seminary from Glasgow back to Edinburgh and placed it in other hands. (Memoirs, pp. 299-300.) When the institution was opened in the latter place, Mr. Haldane not only forbade the books of Glas and Sandeman in the library, but laid upon the students an express prohibition against reading them anywhere else. (Facts and Documents, p. 82.) But the time was far past for such precautions. Sandemanian principles were already too deeply established in the minds of his people, to admit of their successful eviction by that or by any other method. Dr. Stuart, especially, was whispering them into the ear of James A. Haldane in two or three private interviews every week; and Robert Haldane himself appears after a few years, through the influence of his brother, to perform the role of an exceedingly tenacious stickler for some of the most fantastic features of the "ancient order of things." (Facts and Documents, pp. 93-95; Memoirs, pp. 322-327.) In this regard he outstripped Mr. Ewing by many degrees and sometimes sorely harassed the consciences of his adherents; but in regard to the nature of faith, Ewing was much in the lead of both the brothers. When, in the summer of the year 1800, Mr. Ewing at length, on the occasion of a temporary truce with Haldane (Facts and Documents, pp. 58-64), got the [ 070 ] consent of his mind to organize a church among the people who attended upon his ministry at Glasgow he issued a handbill for the instruction of his congregation and of the public, entitled "Regulations of the Church, Jamaica Street," in which were included two items of the "ancient order;" namely, the mutual exhortation of the members of the Church, and the weekly celebration of the Lord's Supper. With regard to the former of these, however, the document seems to indicate that it was to be held not on Sunday, but upon some other day of the week. It is also strict to insist upon what must have been a highly necessary provision: "that no personal remarks or injurious reports respecting character were to be allowed in the Church." (Facts and Documents, pp. 65-65.) The custom of "mutual exhortation," the absence of which from the Scottish Kirk had given him an amount of uneasiness, had likewise been duly introduced by Mr. Ewing into the constitution of the Edinburgh society in December 1798. (Address by James A, Haldane to the Church of Christ, Leith Walk, Edinburgh, Edinburgh 1808, p. 11. This address is bound up at the back of Mr. Haldane's volume entitled "A View of the Social Worship and Ordinances of the First Christians," Edinburgh, 1806.) But the Church in Edinburgh gave no practical heed to that portion of their ecclesiastical chart until a later period, when the practice was inaugurated with a degree of success that was disgusting [ 071 ] even to such a stanch advocate of "primitive Christianity" as Dr. Stuart himself. (Memoirs, p. 340.) On the other hand, the custom of weekly communion was not introduced by Mr. Ewing, at the outset, into the constitution which he had drawn up for the use of the Edinburgh society, since it was for several years the habit of that body to celebrate the Lord's Supper only once in the month. (Facts and Documents, p. 129.) When, however, the improved example of the Glasgow Church became known to the disciples in Edinburgh, they likewise soon began to break the loaf every Sunday. But the Haldanes were not prepared to stop at this point. James Haldane, being constantly in receipt of new light from Dr. Stuart and other Sandemanian sources, could not abide that his brilliancy should be concealed under a bushel. Accordingly, in the year 1805, he sent forth the first edition of his "View of the Social Worship and Ordinances," the second edition of which has just been cited above. There it is evident that he had made decided progress in the lore of the Sandemanians. Their dialect is in very fine flow upon his pen. He stands forth like a man for the "express precept or approved precedent," about which Thomas Campbell was to speak with so much pathos a few years later in the wilds of Pennsylvania. There should be no creed nor confession of faith but the Scriptures. Here was the first distinct demand for a presbytery with a plurality of elders, that had been openly uttered [ 072 ] in the Haldanean connection. The collection that was always customary at the Lord's Supper now became designated as "the fellowship," after the best approved Sandemanian fashion. But what gave Mr. Ewing particular offense was the circumstance that "mutual exhortation," which he had confined to Wednesday evening, was raised by Haldane to the dignity of a divine ordinance, and assigned to a place among the regular Sunday observances of the congregation. Thereupon he began to draw back, and went so far the other way, that, in the end, he was seriously accused of entirely deserting his darling innovation. (Facts and Documents, pp. 126-129.) Matters finally got to such a pass that apparently almost the only principle upon which the two parties were heartily at one (united) related to the rejection of creeds. Though they were daily pleading for a union on the Bible, by some kind of means they were daily receding farther from each other, while each faction was accusing the other of a passion for change. Unhappily for all concerned Robert Haldane was too much impressed by a sense of the correctness and importance of the Sandemanian notions that had been propounded in his brother's recent publication. James had not expected or desired to produce any immediate results beyond "inciting his brethren in Christ to study the Scriptures on this and every other subject, and to appeal only to the law and to the testimony." (Preface. p. vii.) But shortly after the [ 073 ] book left the press in June 1805, Robert Haldane and Mr. Ballantyne were on a visit to England; and, stopping on their way at Newcastle, they remained for some time practicing the views of social worship that were developed in it. Memoirs, p. 324.) Their conduct in this regard gave much offense, (Memoirs, p. 327.) Ballantyne and Haldane, while not excluding those who were not of their own party, publicly exhorted one another in the forenoons, and mutually dispensed the Lord's Supper, without directing their remarks in the least to the audience who had assembled for worship, while in the afternoons and evenings they preached to the multitudes as usual. (Facts and Documents, p. 248.) No person was bold enough to express the dissatisfaction which many felt against the conduct of the Haldanes, until the year 1807, when Ballantyne issued a "Treatise on the Elder's Office," in which the position of James Haldane and the Sandemanians was duly enforced regarding the necessity of a plurality of these functionaries to the existence of a gospel Church. There is rarely any thing sadder to witness than the spectacle of Robert Haldane, unquestionably a splendid mind and spirit, leading the way in the puerile figures of the dance which John Glas had instructed his own followers. Mr. Haldane became, in an offensive sense, responsible for the work of Ballantyne (Facts and Documents, pp. 97-98), doing every thing that lay in his power to give it countenance and circulation. [ 074 ] In answer to the challenge which he conceived had by this means been laid upon his own wing of the party, Mr. Ewing forthwith prepared and published an "Attempt towards a Statement of the Doctrine of Scripture on some disputed points respecting the Constitution, Government, Worship, and Discipline of the Church of Christ," Glasgow 1808. The breach between the factions was now first made public: it had long been incurable. The party of Ewing, which perhaps, was numerically the smaller, became henceforth practically isolated; but their sentiments on the subjects of faith, infant-baptism, the mode of baptism, the duty of weekly communion and of mutual exhortation, placed them in closer sympathy and relations with the Sandemanians of the aspersion observance. On the other hand, the Haldanes were now become, in a measure, reckless. In order that the Edinburgh Church might conform to the apostolic model in the matter of a plurality of elders, Robert was speedily ordained to occupy a place by the side of James Alexander in that function. (Memoirs, p. 341). Possibly it was not without reference to the circumstance that Mr. Ewing was leaning far to the side of the Sandemanian Independents, that James Haldane now began to turn towards the "Scotch Baptists." The patient labors of Charles Stuart were about to be crowned with success. This consummation was promoted by the action of Mr. John Campbell, a beloved associate of the Haldanes, who [ 075 ] had gone over to the "Scotch Baptist" fraternity as early as the year 1803, since which time he had been pastor of a church at Kingsland, near London. (Memoirs, p. 297.) In a letter to this gentleman under date of Feb. 19, 1808, Haldane expresses strong scruples regarding the propriety of infant-baptism. (Memoirs, p. 325.) The 21st of April, 1808, was the date of another communication which announced that he had been immersed. (Memoirs, p. 325.) In a few months Robert also followed his brother in these changes. This action did not result in any kind of organic union between the Haldaneans and the party that was led by Mr. Archibald M'Lean, but it was not many weeks until it had produced a hopeless disruption of the Edinburgh Church and of the entire Haldanean body. The enterprise which started forth with so much promise was brought to hopeless desolation. There has been scarcely anywhere in modern Church history a more lame and impotent conclusion. The Sandemanians had ruined the cause and Church of the Haldanes. - 51 - Alexander Campbell was born near Ballymena, County Antrim, Ireland, on the 12th of September, 1788. (Memoirs, as above, vol. i. p. 19.) His father, Thomas Campbell was a Seceder minister of The Anti-Burgher branch (vol. i. p. 25), and lived in [ 077 ] quite humble circumstances. After suffering the ills of a probationer's existence for about ten years, his patience was at length rewarded by the pastoral charge of a new church at Ahorey, near Armagh (vol. i. pp. 29-30). With the hope of eking out an insufficient salary, the young pastor took a farm near the village of Rich Hill, where he fixed his residence (vol. i. p. 30). The farm proving a failure, he went back to his early occupation of teaching school (vol. i. p. 47), removing for this purpose into the village. As his family increased in number, the individual advantages of the several children were in a corresponding degree curtailed. Alexander got what education he might at hap-hazard (vol. i. pp. 31-35,48); but for several years, owing to the loss of most of his studious inclinations, his powers went to waste. At length his attention was directed to the importance of cultivation, and he set about the business of self-education (vol. i. p. 76), but with no unusual amount of success. Most of the time was passed in the capacity of an assistant in his father's school at Rich Hill, or in the performance of similar labors at the school of one of his uncles at Newry (vol. i. p. 88). The circumstances of the family became at length so much straitened that they began to turn their eyes to the United States for "deliverance" (vol. i. pp. 80-81,86). The father preceded the balance of the household, setting sail from Londonderry on the 8th of April, 1807 (vol. i. p. 81). In the course of time [ 078 ] he was enabled to provide means for their passage; and they took ship to follow him on the 1st of October, 1808 (vol. i. p. 95). The funds for this purpose were likely procured by means of public contributions obtained from the different Presbyterian Churches of Western Pennsylvania. (Debate upon Campbellism, between Alexander Campbell and Obediah Jennings, Pittsburgh 1832, pp. 246-247; compare Richardson, vol. i. pp. 306-307.) Six days after their embarkation, the family were wrecked on the island of Islay on the coast of Scotland. Mrs. Campbell, his mother, being unwilling to intrust herself to the hazards of an ocean voyage in the winter season of the year, and Alexander being naturally desirous to repair in some measure the defects of his early education, it was arranged that they should pass the time until the approaching spring should open upon them, at Glasgow, where he might employ his leisure in attending the university. Meanwhile Thomas Campbell was actively engaged at his home in Washington County, Penn., in trying to relieve their distresses, and, in due time, to procure their transfer to the country of his adoption. Already in their home at Rich Hill, Ireland, they had become familiar with the Scottish Independents. A somewhat flourishing Church of the Glasites, or Sandemanians of the aspersion observance existed there (vol. i. pp. 60,82). Professor Richardson admits (vol. i. p. 59) that "the Independents exerted a most important influence upon the religious views [ 079 ] of both Thomas Campbell and his son Alexander; but this influence did not become apparent during the period of their residence at Rich Hill. The former, it is true, had much pleasure in attending the religious services of the Sandemanian Church; but he was all the while in the full odor of Seceder orthodoxy, and it is not likely that he would ever have forsaken his own people but for the somewhat extraordinary experiences that he was now called to encounter. Even the membership he held in the Haldane "Society for Propagating the Gospel at Home" (vol. i. p. 73) does not necessarily signify any lack of devotion to his lifelong connections in the Presbyterian body. Many persons in various portions of the country had yielded to the eloquent and impassioned solicitations of James A. Haldane so far as to permit themselves to be enrolled in that organization, who had no thought or wish to be known as followers of the Haldanes. The only perceptible influence exerted by the Sandemanians of Rich Hill upon the Presbyterian pastor of the place may be observed in the fact that he is reported to have made an overture either before the Presbytery of Market Hill or the Synod of Ireland, "in favor of a more frequent celebration of the Lord's Supper" (vol. i. p. 69); but it is not stated that he was bold enough to advocate a weekly observance. For the rest, he must have been at this time almost unaffected by the ordinary Sandemanian considerations in favor of the "mutual exhortation" of [ 080 ] church-members, or of the various other preposterous imitations of Christ that were peculiar to the people in question. In brief, Alexander is believed to have been the leader in the unhappy progress that was later made by both father and son in the direction of the Independents. When they were wrecked on the island of Islay, one of the most influential persons with whom Alexander became acquainted was Mr. George Fulton, who, in addition to hi |