Restoration History - Part 1

Mark Dunagan
10/12/08 - Sunday Evening

"Thus says the Lord, 'Stand by the ways and see and ask for the ancient paths, where the good way is, and walk in it'" (Jeremiah 6:16)

Earl Irvin West in the first volume of the series The Search For The Ancient Order, observes that the revolt of the American colonies against England was as much for religious freedom as for political. Prior to the Revolutionary War, the most popular and well-known church in America was the Church of England, which ruled daily life in the colonies to the point that anyone who missed services on Sunday without an acceptable excuse was fined a pound of coffee, and no man was allowed to sell his tobacco until the clergy gave him permission. As early as 1729, John Wesley proposed forming societies within the church, dedicated to cleaning up the corruption within the Church of England. "Wesleyan Societies" were established by persons demanding a holier life on the part of church members. By the end of the Revolutionary War, most of the English clergy in America had gone back home to England leaving the colonies short of preachers. The Church of England, like Catholicism, had taught the doctrine of "apostolic succession", the idea that no preacher could be ordained unless he was ordained by a duly ordained minister who himself was ordained by another duly ordained minister on back to the apostles. Thus, no man could conduct funerals, serve communion, baptize or perform marriages unless he had this supposed pedigree. Since none of the Wesleyan preachers were ordained, this created a problem. As a result, the Wesleyan societies grew into a separate denomination from the Church of England. In 1784 it was called the "Methodist Episcopal Church", a name that even John Wesley admitted was not biblical — but he considered it to be practical under the circumstances. Yet as soon as the Methodist Church started, there were those within it who looked upon its organizational structure as contrary to Scripture.

James O'Kelley

The exact date of Mr. O'Kelley's birth is unknown, yet he died October 16, 1826. O'Kelley listened to sermons written by Wesley and read by others, and was struck by the fact that the sermons viewed the Bible as being all-sufficient. O'Kelley wrote, "They (certain ministers) come to us under the direction of John Wesley... His writings magnified the Bible, and gave it preference and honor; he declared he regarded the authority of no writings but the inspired. He urged the sufficiency of the Scriptures for faith and practice, saying, 'We will be downright Bible Christians'" (J. Pressley Barrett, The Centennial of Religious Journalism (Dayton, Ohio: Christian Publishing Association, 1908), p. 19). O'Kelley later became dissatisfied with the Methodist Church and on August 4thin 1794, during a meeting at Old Lebanon in Surry County, Virginia, O'Kelley and others, after laying aside all other books and turning only to the Bible came up with the following precepts for what they considered a biblical church government:

• The Bible should be the only creed and the only sufficient rule for faith and practice

• The Lord Jesus is the sole head of the church

• The name Christian to the exclusion of all party and denominational names.

• Christian character the only test for church membership

• The right of private judgment and a liberty of conscience for all

Thus, among the Methodists in Virginia and North Carolina, people were seeking to find the New Testament Church.

Elias Smith

Elias Smith was born June 17, 1769 at Lyme, Connecticut. In May, 1779, Smith became greatly concerned about the subject of baptism. He finally convinced himself that believers were the only people to be baptized, and that immersion was the proper method. Smith became a preacher in the Baptist church. Earl West writes, "A man cannot study the Bible long intelligently and independently without coming to some definite convictions about the truth. So, Smith writes: 'When in my twenty-fourth year, I believed there would be a people bearing a name different from all the denominations then in this country; but what would they be called, I then could not tell. In the spring of 1802, having rejected the doctrine of Calvin and universalism, to search the Scriptures to find the truth, I found the name which the followers of Christ ought to wear; which was Christians (Acts 11:26). My mind being fixed upon this as the right name, to the exclusion of all the popular names in the world, in the month of May, at a man's house in Epping, N.H. by the name of Laurence, where I held a meeting and spoke upon the text, Acts 11:26, I ventured for the first time, softly to tell the people that the name, Christian was enough for the followers of Christ without addition of the words, Baptist, Methodist, etc" (The Search for the Ancient Order, Volume 1, Earl Irvin West, p. 13). At this same meeting Smith spoke against creed books as being the invention of men. Opposition to his points grew, especially among the Baptist clergy. During this time Smith and others came up with a name for the church, "When our number was some short of twenty, we agreed to consider ourselves a church of Christ, owning him as our only Master" (Elias Smith, The Life and Conversion of Elias Smith, pp. 313,314).

Barton Warren Stone

Barton Warren Stone was born December 24, 1772 in southern Maryland. West writes, "Every person sooner or later faces the thought of religion and wonders what to do about it" (p. 19). After the Revolutionary War, as previously noted, there was a huge religious void left in this country. Most of the clergy had gone back to England, Sunday had become a day of secular pleasure, and most church buildings were vacant. In these years Stone listened to the Methodists, Episcopalians and Baptists as they engaged each other in doctrinal debates. For a while he got disgusted and became apathetic about religion. Yet in time Stone became a Presbyterian and had been greatly influenced by James McGready. West writes, "McGready could dangle people over the fires of hell, causing great anxiety. But at such preaching, Stone was greatly concerned. According to Presbyterian doctrine, man was totally depraved, and had no ability to believe. Yet, how could this doctrine be reconciled with the persuading of men to repent and believe? Why preach to men to believe if they were totally depraved and couldn't? For the next few years this dilemma was to cause Stone no little anxiety" (p. 23). Eventually Stone broke with the Presbyterian Church, and in his autobiography he writes, "The distinguished doctrine preached by us, was, that God loved the world — he whole world, and sent His Son to save them, on condition that they believed in him — that the gospel was the means of salvation — but that this means would never be effectual to this end, until believed and obeyed by us — that God required us to believe in His Son, and had given us sufficient evidence in His word to produce faith in us, if attended by us — that sinners were capable of understanding and believing this testimony, and of acting upon it by coming to the Saviour and obeying Him and from Him obtaining salvation" (Barton W. Stone, Biography of Elder Barton Warren Stone, p. 45). Yet Calvinism, which had influenced so many denominational creeds and confessions of faith, declared that man was so depraved that he could not hear the gospel and believe, rather, a man would have to wait and see if God called him, if God did not call him; he was lost. Along these lines Stone was upset with the whole mourners bench system. Late in 1821 Stone announced to an audience, "Brethren, something must be wrong; we have been laboring with these mourners earnestly, and they are deeply penitent; why have they not found relief? We all know that God is willing to pardon them, and certainly they are anxious to receive it. The cause must be that we do not preach as the apostles did. On the day of Pentecost those who were 'pierced to the heart', were promptly told what to do for the remission of sins. And 'they gladly received the word and were baptized; and the same day about three thousand added unto them'" (John I. Rogers, Autobiography of Samuel Rogers (Cincinnati: Standard Publishing Co., 1880), pp. 55,56).

Stone and four other men withdrew themselves from the Presbyterian Synod of Kentucky, and they set up a Presbytery of their own. In doing this Stone sacrificed the friendship of two large congregations and a large salary, yet in less than a year Stone and the others realized that their new presbytery also was not biblical. As they investigated the subject of "Church Government" they found, "That there was neither precept nor example in the New Testament for such confederacies as modern Church Sessions, Presbyteries, Synods, General Assemblies, etc. Hence they concluded, that while they continued in the connection in which they then stood, they were off the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets" (West p. 28). Thus, on June 28, 1804 they issued, "The Last Will and Testament of the Springfield Presbytery". It is less than 800 words, yet it reveals the honesty and dedication of Stone in wanting to give up everything of human origin in religion and rest simply on the Bible. Among other things, this document stated:

• "We will, that our name of distinction, with its Reverend title, be forgotten, that there be but one Lord over God's heritage"

• "We will, that this body (the Springfield Presbytery) die, be dissolved, and sink into union with the Body of Christ at large; for there is but one Body"

• "We will, that candidates for the Gospel ministry henceforth study the Holy Scriptures with fervent prayer, and obtain license from God to preach the simple Gospel... without any mixture of philosophy, vain deceit, traditions of men, or the rudiments of the world"

• "We will, that the people henceforth take the Bible as the only sure guide to heaven; and as many as are offended with other books, which stand in competition with it, may cast them into the fire if they choose; for it is better to enter into life having one book, then having many to be cast into hell"

• "We will that each particular church resume her native right of internal government... choose her own preacher, and support him by a free will offering... admit members — remove offences; and never henceforth delegate her right of government to any man or set of men whatever"