THE ORIGIN OF THE CHURCH OF CHRIST IS NOT MODERN.
By Tolbert Fanning
There is no better plan in arriving at the authority of a church, than by a careful examination into its origin. Men often become wedded to a sect, before searching the Scriptures as to its authority in the Bible, and their prejudices strengthen so fast that they are soon incapable of fair investigation; and the consequence is, they generally live and die in ignorance of the true religion.
No modern system or church is of God, and he who professes to believe a system, formed since the Apostolic age, or to be a member of a church founded since the memorable Pentecost after the ascension of the Messiah, to say the least, must be in great error. I have been led to these reflections by readings book published in the year 1844, in Philadelphia, “projected, compiled, and arranged” by Daniel Rupp, of Lancaster, Pa., styled “An Original History of the Religious Denominations of the United States, containing authentic accounts of their rise, progress, and doctrines, written expressly for the work, by eminent Theological Professors, Ministers and Lay members, of the respective denominations.” My attention has been particularly called to this subject, from perusing an article from the pen of “The Rev. Robt. Richardson” of Bethany, Va., in which the author attempts to give the “ORIGIN OF A SOCIETY” which he says took its rise on “Brush Run in Washington County, Pa., September 7th, 1810, under the superintendence of Thomas Campbell of the Presbyterian Religion.” This he calls “The humble origin of a reformation now widely extended.”
If Brother Robt. Richardson of Bethany College, be the author of these sentiments, all Christians have just cause of grief. The disciples of Christ farther west, profess to be members of no new society. We claim to be members of the Church of Christ, which had its origin at Jerusalem, on the day of Pentecost, and not on Brush Run creek, in 1810. So long as we believe the Scriptures, which teach that on Christ as a rock, the church which was to stand forever, was built 1800 years since, and against which the gates of hell were not allowed to prevail, we cannot fellowship modern inventions. I hope the author intended not to convey such ideas as are found in his sketch. Do those who confess the name of Christ in the United States, trace their origin back to the hills of Pennsylvania, and to Thomas or Alexander Campbell? Do these brethren desire to be known as the founders of a new “Society,” called “This Reformation?” If this be a fair representation of the disciples, why not confess ourselves a sect or heresy in fact, and recognize all our heretical neighbors, as fully authorized by the Bible as ourselves?
It may seem presumptuous in me to ask the brotherhood to look at this subject; but I wish to know if I am to be placed in a society that originated in 1810? Come, brethren, we had better investigate this matter, before the church of Christ is sectarianized. I am not disposed at present, to call in question many of the doctrines of the author, but in kindness I would propound to him a few plain questions.
1st. Is the church composed of those throughout the world, who bear the name of Christ,—Christian, a society of recent origin?
2d. Is a peculiar view of baptism, as the writer asserts, p. 259, “One of the prominent features of this reformation?”
3d. Is it true, as the author says, “the disciples, with regard to the Divine Being, hold no sentiments incongruous with those of the parties who call themselves “evangelical?”
So far as I am acquainted with the Christians east and west, they differ tote salo from all the self-styled “evangelical sects” on this subject. They all worship a mysterious,—an unknown god, while christians contend, in the language of the Savior, “This is life eternal to know thee, the only true God; and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent?’ It is with reluctance I have brought myself to the determination to call this subject up, and it is with deep mortification, I reflect, the glorious cause of Christ, for which so many thousands are contending, has been set down in such a work as the one to which I have alluded, and that by a friend, as a modern “society,” with peculiarities unknown in all the record of divine truth.
If Luther, Calvin and Wesley had persevered in their study of the Scriptures, and had honestly obeyed what they understood, they would have escaped from the smoke of the mother of denominations or “societies,” and arrived in the precincts of Christ’s fold; but, unfortunate men! when they had learned a few truths, they imagined themselves at the very bottom of the ocean, and their last and fatal work, was to lift up standards of their own for the people. The proud thought of originating respectable parties, was not only their ruin, but the complete destruction of the cause of which they had, in word, at least, been the zealous advocates.
The followers of these great men have made no advances, but from the days of their founders to the present, they have been on the constant retrograde. If the ancient christians had published to the world, any of their practices as “prominent features,” there would have been danger of collecting these prominent features into form and system, add complete apostasy might have been the result. Shall we call any practice of the New Testament a “prominent feature?” If this practice be adopted, some of us may live to see the day, and may weep when tears will be unavailing, when a large collection of prominent features will constitute, in fact, a new system, and of a new society. This is the open road, in the language of Peter, to “damnable heresy,”’ I speak this to forewarn my beloved brethren who are my seigniors, of the fatal rock on which so many have split. “What I say unto one, I say unto all, WATCH!”