John Locke -
Alexander Campbell - Spirituality
|
|
 |
"The philosophy of
John Lock with which Bro. Campbell's mind was deeply imbued in youth
has insidiously mingled itself with almost all great points in the
reformation and has been all the whole like an iceberg in the way -
chilling the heart and benumbing the hands, and impeding all progress
in the right direction." Indeed, in 1824 Alexander
Campbell himself writes, "I reasoned in this way, that if the spirit
of a man dwells in his head, then head religion must be better than
heart religion..." This spirit, or so-called lack of spirit, has
created innumerable problems for the Disciples tradition, although
the extent of the Lockian influence is debatable. But Alexander
Campbell cannot be reduced to such a heartless image: "Religion in the
heart," he also wrote, "or rooted in the
moral nature of man, transfuses itself through the whole frame and
identity of its happy and holy subject...It distills the dews of
heaven on the heart..." "Now if the Gospel dwell in a
man...like a fruitful vine it yields in his heart, and in his life,
the heavenly clustre of love, joy, peace, long suffering, gentleness,
goodness, fidelity, meekness, temperance...Like precious ointment it
diffuses in his heart heavenly odours, and the sweetness of its
prefume exhales in his life." And in answer to his critics he adds,
"I have never denied it, yea, I have always taught it." These are not the words of a
cold, heartless, intellectual Christian. Eva Jean Wrather says of
him, "far from being deficient in Spiritual insight or feeling,
Campbell's whole life was encompassed 'round with a deep sense of
'the mystery of godliness." So what is the truth? What are
we to make of these contradictory images? It is incumbent upon the
heirs of Campbell to understand this puzzling aspect of our founder's
religion, and then to discover or rediscover a form of spirituality
appropriate to our context. But this problem does not exist
for Disciples alone. David Tracy writes for our era: "A fair
generalization is the following: modern Christian liberal theologies
have been strong on the apologetic task and hermeneutically and
historically conscious on the modern complexities in the
interpretation of the heart of the tradition. But, as the recent
explosion of interest in the role of praxis for all theory and the
role of piety, spirituality, or existential religious awareness make
clear, Christian liberal theology has become relatively
under-developed in its attempted critical retrievals of Christian
spirituality." Thus the urgency is even
greater to unlock a form of spirituality for those who are deeply
rational but also wish for a deeply heartfelt spirituality.
I will attempt to move toward
that task by seeking a clearer understanding of Alexander Campbell's
system of spirituality. I use the term system quite deliberately,
because for Campbell, "If naturebe a system, religion is no less so."
Campbell was a systematic man, and so his practice of spirituality
would inevitably have been systematic. It is my thesis that Campbell
was a deeply heartfelt, spiritual man, and that he had a systematic
practice of distinctly sacramental spirituality which brought him a
meaningful experience of the presence of God. Sacrament is defined as "a rite in which it is
believed God's saving grace is uniquely active...In general, Roman
Catholics regard the Sacraments as themselves channels
(means) of Sanctifying (habitual)
grace." We will find that this
definition exactly
matches Campbell's understanding of how the Holy Spirit works, though he will not use
the term "sacrament."
However, Campbell
connected grace to the manner in which the supper is administered.
All quotations are From Alexander Campbell's The Christian
System But much depends upon the
manner of celebrating the supper, as well as upon the frequency. The
simplicity of the Christian institution runs through every part of
it. While there is the form of doing every thing, there is all
attention to the thing signified. But there is the form as well as
the substance, and every thing that is done, must be done in some
manner. The well bred Christian is like the well bred gentleman--his
manners are graceful, easy, artless, and simple. All stiffness and
forced formality are as graceless in the Christian as in the
gentleman. A courteous and polite family differs exceedingly from a
soldier's mess mates or a ship's crew, in all the ceremonies of the
table. There is a Christian decency and a Christian order, as well as
political courtesy and complaisance. Campbell did not make the
physical act the means of God's grace: If, then, in the
emblematic house of God, to which corresponds the Christian
house of God, there was not only a table overlaid with gold, always
spread, and on it displayed twelve large loaves, or cakes, sacred
memorials and emblems
of God's bounty and grace;
shall we say that
in that house, over which Jesus is a Son, there is not to stand
always a table more precious than gold, covered with a richer repast
for the holy and royal priesthood which the Lord has instituted, who
may always enter into the holy place consecrated by himself.
D. Newell Williams explains
that the ordinances are what Campbell termed "means of grace," which are ways of "impressing the
proposition that God is love upon the understanding and
affections. Thus, it is my claim that by what he calls "means of
grace," Campbell is practicing what might be termed "Sacramental
Spirituality." We will follow this theme through the paper and
reexamine it at the conclusion. As the calling of
Bible things by Bible names is an important item in the present
reformation, we may here take the occasion to remark, that
both "the Sacrament" and "the Eucharist" are of human origin. The former was a
name adopted by the Latin church; because the observance was supposed
to be an oath or vow to the Lord; and, as the term [p. 320]
sacramentum signified an oath
taken by a Roman soldier, to be true to his general and his country,
the presumed to call this institution a sacrament or oath to the
Lord. By the Greek church it is
called the Eucharist, which word imports the giving of thanks, because
before participating, thanks were presented for the loaf and the cup.
It is also called the communion, or "the communion of the saints;"
but this might indicate that it is exclusively the communion of
saints; and, therefore, it is more consistent to denominate it
literally 'the breaking of the loaf.' But this is the only
preliminary to the illustration and proof of our fifth
proposition. Next we shall introduce an
American Rabbi
of very great celebrity, Dr. John Mason, of New York. The passages
which I quote are found in a note attached to page 188th of the New
York Edition of Fuller's Strictures on Sandemanianism. "Mr. Fuller does not deny that
the Lord's Supper was observed by the first Christians every Lord's
day, (nor will this be denied by any man who has candidly
investigated the subject,) but he seems to think that Acts xx. 7.
does not prove that it was so; others, eminent for
piety and depth of research, have considered this passage as
affording a complete proof of the weekly observance of the Lord's
supper. Dr. Scott, in
his valuable Commentary, observes on this passage, 'Breaking of
bread, or commemorating the death of Christ in the eucharist, was one chief end of their
assembling; this
ordinance seems to have been constantly administered every Lord's day, and probably no professed Christians
absented themselves from it, after they had been admitted into the
church; unless they lay under some censure, or had some real
hindrance.' "Objection
3. If the Lord's supper
were frequently administered, it would become less solemn, and, in
time, quite contemptible, as we see is the case with baptism, through
the frequency of the administration of that ordinance. "Answer. Is this means of keeping up the credit
of the Lord's supper, of God's devising or not? If it is, where is
that part of his word that warrants it? The contrary I have already
proved from Scripture. Since, then, it is only of man's invention,
what ground is there to hope it will really maintain the credit and
solemnity of the ordinance? Did not the Papists
of old, pretend to maintain and advance its solemnity, by
reduction of the
frequency of administration? Did they not take away the cup from the
people, which Calvin
says was the native consequence of the former? Did [331] they not annex the
administration of this ordinance to those seasons which superstition
had aggrandized; namely, Easter, Pentecost, and Christmas? Did they
not annex a world of ceremonies to it? Did they not pretend that it
was a real
sacrifice, and that the
elements were changed
by consecration, into the real body and blood of Christ? And, did all this tend to the
support of the proper credit of this ordinance? On the contrary, did
it not destroy it? Though the doctrine of
transubstantiation procured a kind of reverence for it, yet, was this
reverence divine? or, was it not rather devilish, in worshipping the
elements? Now, how are we sure that our unfrequent administration of
this ordinance will more effectually support its solemnity? Is it not
strange that we should have so much encouragement from the practice
of the Apostles, the primitive Christians, and the whole of the
reformed churches, to profane this solemn ordinance; while the most
ignorant and abandoned Papists are our original pattern, for the
course that tends to support its proper honor and credit? What a
strange case this must be, if, in order to support the credit of
God's ordinance, we must forsake the footsteps of the flock, and walk
in the paths originally chalked out by the most ignorant and wicked
antichristians? Upon the loaf and upon the cup
of the Lord, in letters which speak not to the eye, but to the heart
of every disciple, is inscribed, "When this you see, remember me." Indeed, the Lord says to each disciple, when he
receives the symbols into his hand, 'This is my body broken for you.
This is my blood shed for you.' The loaf is thus constituted a
representation of his body--first whole, then wounded for our sins.
The cup is thus instituted a representation of his blood--once his life, but now poured out to
cleanse us from our sins. To every
disciple he says, For you my body was wounded; for you my life was
taken. In receiving it the disciple says, "Lord, I believe it. My
life sprung from thy suffering; my joy from thy sorrows; and my hope
of glory everlasting from thy humiliation and abasement even to
death." Each disciple, in handing the symbols to his fellow-disciple,
says, in effect, "You, my brother, once an alien, are now a citizen
of heaven; once a stranger, are now brought home to the family of
God. You have owned my Lord as your Lord, my people as your people.
Under Jesus the Messiah we are one. Mutually embraced in the
everlasting arms, I embrace you in mine: thy sorrows shall be my
sorrows, and [322] thy joys my joys. Joint debtors to the favor of
God and the love of Jesus, we shall jointly suffer with him, that we
may jointly reign with him. Let us, then, renew our strength,
remember our King, and hold fast our boasted hope unshaken to the
end." Here he knows no man after
the flesh. Ties that
spring from eternal love, revealed in blood, and addressed to his senses, draw forth all that is
within him of complacent affection and feeling, to those joint heirs
with him of the grace of eternal life. While it represents to him 'the bread of life'--all the salvation of the
Lord--it is the strength of his faith, the joy of his hope, and the
life of his love. Preliminary
Considerations But before examining each of
the specific sacraments he held dear, there is a need to pause for
two considerations; Alexander Campbell is often misunderstood for two
major reasons. The first is that Campbell spent his life opposing the
understanding of conversion practiced in experimental religion.
Experimental religion taught that the Holy Spirit works "immediately"
upon the unconverted, producing a sequence of emotional upheavals
leading to salvation, and that this happened "apart from means of
grace such as prayer, meditation, reading the Scriptures, and church
attendance." Against this, Campbell argued
that the Holy Spirit "puts forth its moral power in arguments and
motives, that is, in 'words', which Campbell broadly defines as
'significant signs' addressed to the mind." Campbell felt that the
Holy Spirit could not work directly on an unconverted sinner in any
capacity, that, as Paulsell describes Campbell's understanding, "God
does not hear the prayers of people without faith." In fact, then, it
was reason, rational persuasion based on the facts of the Gospel that
brought about conversion. (The Christian System explains this understanding in great detail.)
But once the sinner is
converted, there is every possibility for the Holy Spirit to work in
the hearts and minds of the believer. However, because Campbell is
usually writing about the process of conversion, he is often
misunderstood to
deny the work of the
Holy Spirit, and thus to deny any personal experience of God. Thus
every statement Campbell makes should be carefully located: is he
speaking of before or after conversion? Before leaving this issue, it
should be recognized that there is an open question whether Campbell
thought that the Holy Spirit could work in the mind of the believer
in any other way but rational argument using language. Nonetheless,
Campbell will be seen to be clear that the Holy Spirit is active in
the believer to bring about heartfelt graces. Secondly, for Campbell the
deepest and most powerful emotional experiences are found through
rationality, through the rational testimony to facts. He writes
"Fact, testimony, faith, feeling, action are therefore bound
together," and in that order - fact, then reasonable explanation
(testimony) of the fact, then feelings from the heart. "He that
believes the facts testified...feels according to their nature..."
The cognitive schools of psychology explain this process; Albert
Ellis' "Rational-Emotive Therapy" (R.E.T.) suggests that all emotions
derive from our minds, from the self-talk we engage in internally,
e.g. we convince ourselves that our situation is hopeless, then we
become depressed, and we can reason ourselves out of depression by
convincing internal debate. For Campbell, the most emotionally
powerful force he knew was a well-reasoned argument. He was incapable
of comprehending the division that many of us make between head and
heart. He was perhaps equally incapable of getting emotional about
anything that was not rational. I recently sat in on a class my
wife is taking at another college, from a professor who would
practically jump out of his chair with joy over a clearly stated
syllogism of Plato; he was moved to a nearly religious ecstasy by
elegant reasoning. Campbell was such a man. As we look at Campbell's
spiritual lifestyle, I believe the reader will be able to see how
Campbell's heart was reached through his intellect. When reading him,
then, we must be wary of making too much of a distinction between
mind/intellect, and heart/emotion. With these two considerations
in mind, then, I propose to examine Campbell's sacramental approach
to the Scriptures, to prayer, to family worship, to public worship,
to the Lord's Day, to the Lord's Supper, and to baptism. Scriptures With Campbell, one can hardly
separate the topic of Scripture from the topic of prayer. For him,
studying Scriptures was a part of prayer, a form of prayer. Consider
the following: "Speech with us is
the channel of thought...it is the medium of converse 'twixt God and
man. Arranged in words of human language the Eternal Spirit appears
to man not now only; for in Eden, blooming in primeval beauty and
innocence, the voice of God in harmonies sweeter than nature knows,
fell upon the ear not yet polluted with the serpent's poisonous
breath...God now speaks to us in his written word, and we speak to
him in our prayers. Thus we have communion with God through his Holy
Spirit which is imparted to us. If we listen to God when he speaks
(for he speaks first as becomes him) he promises to listen to us...we
hear the recorded words of God spoken by him through angels...and
thus having given our ears for a while to the voice of God, we lift
up our voice to him." There are two critical themes
to unpack in this powerful paragraph. First is the central power of
words. As stated earlier, for Campbell, the Spirit reached his heart through reasoning, and reasoning
was through words.
In all of Campbell's writing, I find this theme recurring,
that
words are the medium through which the Spirit
works and through which God communicates. Words, for Campbell, are
holy, sacramental. Secondly, but derived from the first, reading
Scriptures is a holy act, it is to be in the very presence of God.
Campbell goes directly to Eden,
to God walking with the first couple in the evenings to make the
powerful claim that words are God's means to be present to us.
Campbell's public writings seem to make the claim that the only way
God communicates with us in this age is through the Scriptures. Thus
prayer is first listening to God by Bible study, then, petitioning
God through verbal prayer. We will later find that Campbell privately
held experiences of more mysterious communication from God, but he
was reluctant to make this into a public stance. For public
consumption, Campbell seemed to claim that the Holy Spirit worked
exclusively through the means of grace of Christian ordinances, which
I am calling sacraments, all of which had the Bible at their center.
The act of Bible study, then, was a primary sacrament. In Bethany, Campbell read to
the students from the Bible and expounded on it every morning. He did
the same in family worship. In the medieval, monastic world was the
practice of lectio
divina, "reading for
holiness." Campbell's method was certainly not the same as the
monastics, but I would claim that his aim was similar; he aimed to be
in the very presence of God throughreading the Bible carefully, and
he believed he was. Thus, Campbell's very intellectual and voluminous
Bible study was far from merely intellectual, it was for him
spiritual, and a work of the heart. It goes without saying that
Bible study for Campbell also involved a rigorous exegetical method
which has often been imitated. For Campbell the Bible was to be
understood using the same rational methods as one would use for any
other ancient manuscript, but the message, once understood
thoroughly, was the presence and power of God to the believer.
Prayer After listening to God, he
would talk to God. Campbell wrote a great deal about prayer, and as
we sample a few of his thoughts, it is important to keep in mind that
to a remarkable degree, prayer and Bible study overlap.
"Meditation on what God
has spoken to us [Bible
study], and the outpourings of our spirit to him, is to the moral man
what free respiration in a pure atmosphere is to the physical man -
health, vigor, beauty." In the same article, he provides an example
of a long dialogue an individual had with God, while reading Romans
12. The dialogue consists of reading a passage, and then praying out
loud to God about that passage, then reading another passage. Then,
Campbell writes, "This is a pretty fair specimen of that communion
with God...This is a way of reading the holy oracles." I would add
that this example is not that different from lectio divina. In terms of the part of prayer
where the believer talks to God, Campbell urges great humility.
Speaking to students at Bethany, he said "Prayer is begging -
supplicating - asking favors...Gentlemen, we are royal beggars." He
then emphasizes the role of Christ as our mediator in prayer.
Richardson says that "Alexander's style of prayer might at first
appear too composed and calm; but his manner was the natural
expression of a high intellectual nature, necessarily
undemonstrative, as holding the feelings in abeyance, but not on that
account less deep, fervid and sincere. In a word his manner was
reverential without being abject; deliberate, but not frigid,
earnest, but not impassioned..." Prayer was of tantamount
importance, "A prayerless Christian is, to the eye of reason, an
absurdity, as it is the eye of faith an impossibility. I could not
imagine a prayerless Christian, any more than a breathless man.
Prayer is but the Christian's breath." In her reminiscences, his wife
recalls that "he was often known to stand and soliloquize, in
addresses to God and about Him, when he thought no one heard him."
She adds, "It was his usual practice when singing either in the
family or in the church to look up heavenward - his prayers were ever
abounding. In the night time, when he would awake I have heard him
reverentially address the throne of grace, and so habitual was this
fervor of devotion that he fell into the habit of praying aloud in
his sleep and most connectedly too." Even further, "And not long
before his departure I heard him, while profoundly asleep, give a
discourse on the second coming of our Lord; it was thrilling. O, that
it could have been penned, for Mr. C. was very cautious in giving his
views on this topic!" Allowing for some familial hyperbole, it still
seems that Campbell treated prayer as a powerful spiritual
discipline! Family Worship
Closely connected to prayer, it
appears that Campbell took family worship as a sacramental duty. The
entire family was gathered morning and evening, including servants.
Mrs. Campbell remembers: "Nothing was
permitted to interrupt the regularity of this sublime privilege. It
was not attended to as a cold, formal duty, but it was made inspiring
to all in attendance, by wife and children taking part, either in
reading verses, turn about, in the precious book, or reciting
passages of Scripture. Hymns were often recited, and sometimes
chapters and parts of chapters." Here again, we see the
Scriptures play a heavy sacramental role in worship. The regularity
of the practice was unfailing, indicating his serious commitment to
the practice, as well as the systematic approach to life that
characterized Alexander Campbell. Of course, the sacramental reading
of Scriptures was an important part of the event. Further, Mrs.
Campbell writes that when he was preparing for a trip and would be
away from home for a time, he would call the family together for
special prayers and supplications. The Lord's Day
The proper observance of the
Lord's Day, sometimes called the Sabbath, was a normal, and one might
say generic duty of Christians in Campbell's era. But it was not
without its controversies in practice. Given Campbell's devotion to
eliminating all but the primitive, apostolic practices, he would not
have observed the Lord's Day carefully unless he were convinced of
its significance. Indeed, he writes, "Baptism, the Lord's Day, and
the Holy Supper are indispensable provisions of remedial remedy."
Given the volumes of literature devoted to baptism and the Holy
Supper, one might wonder at Campbell's including the Lord's Day in
this list of three - he obviously did not write about it as often as
the others. He did occasionally engage in dialogue with Sabbatarians
about the seventh-day Sabbath proposal, and with Christians who
wondered why he used the term "The Lord's Day," rather than the
"Sabbath," but these were really minor discussions. Nonetheless, the sacramental
practice of the day was important. According to Richardson, Campbell
tried to avoid travel on Sunday except to religious meetings, and he
discouraged Sunday visiting, prefering to devote the day to "joyful
memory of the resurrection of Christ: "The morning of the
day we freely consecrate to the Lord in reading, meditation, prayer,
with other necessary duties. During the day we assemble to
commemorate the death, resurrection and works of Christ - to pray, to
praise, to comfort and edify one another, and to converse
only on such things as stand connected with
our Church relations and relative duties, and if ever anything of a
worldly nature is introduced, it is not of choice, but of
necessity...In the evening of the day we conclude as we
began." From personal experience I can
say that to practice a Sabbath or Lord's Day in this manner allows
one to enter into a quasi-meditative state, a sort of sanctified time
which clearly can be described as spiritual. Public Worship
It is only by arbitrary choice
that I discuss public worship before addressing the Lord's Supper.
For Campbell, they were intertwined, yet separate, and of the two,
the Supper was supreme. In fact, "it must be said that the desire for
meeting together is for the Lord's Supper. The sermon would be one of
those means of edification and comfort connected with it." Preaching,
in fact, is of doubtful propriety. Nevertheless, Campbell had
definite views on what constituted proper public worship. He suggests
that worship include prayer, praise, the Supper, reading the
Scriptures, teaching, exhortations, but Campbell was not by any means
rigidly fixed on a certain format or liturgy. His descriptions of
services he approved of are various, but themes include a certain
reverence (he often uses the word solemn, but will contrast that word
with gloom to say that worship should not be gloomy), simplicity,
periods of silentreflection, and lack of pomposity of any kind.
Campbell's preaching style was
described as deeply logical and reasonable (naturally), but also
conversational, with a lack of gestures or drama. Steffer says,
"According to the sources, we have seen that his sermons really were
themselves devotional exercises." Steffer then quotes Evelyn
Underhill, the famous authority on mysticism, who places the sermon
in worship as in the "category of prayer, and is to be classed as a
supernatural act: bringing all those who submit themselves to its
influence into communion with God." Having already seen how strongly
Campbell describes prayer as communion (including Bible study in his
system of prayer), and how strongly Campbell feels that
words are the main means used by the Holy
Spirit to reach humanity, the Underhill quotation seems very
appropriate for Campbell. Steffer goes on to say, "When the sermon is
non-liturgical, and not placed in a worshipful setting...it becomes
intellectualism, moralism, or emotionalism." Here I believe Steffer
understands the reason why Campbell puzzles us. The same words,
practices, and events may seem dry or heartless, or on the other end
of the scale, mere emotionalism unless one experiences them in the
liturgical or sacramental attitude. The Lord's Supper
Breaking the Loaf, as Campbell
liked to call it, was for him one of the most sublime sacraments.
"Spiritual health, as well as corporal health, is dependent on food."
Campbell would adamantly
deny any hint of a belief in literal
transubstantiation, but
in a more Protestant manner, he clearly believed that the sacrament
of the Lord's Supper was to be performed every Lord's Day as in the
apostolic church, and not just for ceremony or to be obedient or
simply to remember the Lord's Passion. Rather, it was spiritual food,
a means by which grace enters the soul. "But much depends
upon the manner of celebrating the supper, as well as upon the
frequency. The simplicity of the Christian institution runs
through every part of it. While there is the form of doing every
thing, there is all attention to the thing signified. But there is
the form as well as the substance, and every thing that is done must
be done in some manner." He goes on to write "There is a saintishness
in demeanor and appearance, which differs as much from sanctity, as
foppery from politeness." In this passage we can discern
the reason for Campbell's insistence on simplicity. Campbell was seeking the reality of the
presence of God in these sacraments, and he felt that an emphasis on elaborate forms
would detract from the realization of the presence. Where Roman
Catholics in their way sought intensify the affective experience of
participants through more elaborate liturgy, and frontier experimental
religion sought to bring forth powerful emotions in participants as a
sign of the presence of God, Campbell felt that each approach drew
attention to the human activity, not the divine presence in the
sacrament, a presence which Campbell accepted as a matter of faith.
?? Similarly, in his preaching we
have seen that he is characterized as calm, conversational, with a
lack of gestures or emotive flair. In both his preaching and his
approach to the Lord's Table Campbell is deliberately simple, keeping
the human element to a minimum, getting out of the way, so to speak,
so as to let the sacrament work. But it should not be doubted that
his reason for a simple, unemotional practice was precisely to make
room for the experience of the presence of God. Continuing his discussion of
breaking the loaf, he addresses feelings, but not as emotionalism.
"But to act right in any thing, we must feel right. If we would show
love, we must first possess it. If a person would walk humbly, he
must be humble; and if one would act the Christian on any occasion,
he must always live the Christian. Persons who daily converse with
God, and who constantly meditate upon salvation, will not need to be
told how they should demean themselves at the Lord's table."
For Campbell, I believe
emotionalism or overly formal liturgies distracted the soul from
paying "all attention to the thing signified." This may, in fact, be
the precise key needed to unlock Campbell's spirituality, the word
attention. If emotionalism in excess distracts from a concentrated
attention to the presence of God, the spiritual discipline Campbell
held most dear was concentration, focus, attention. I am reminded that
contemplative Christian meditation, or the popular Asian meditative
religions are both often misunderstood to be emotional states. In
fact, such contemplation or meditation when practiced by most mystics
throughout the world, involves a form of concentrated attention that
is distinctly without emotions, though not hostile to the heart at
all. Jacob Needleman in Lost Christianity speaks of "the power of gathered attention, the
power of the soul, and says "'Lost Christianity' is the lost or
forgotten power of man to extract the pure energy of the soul from
the experiences that make up his life." Needleman also reminds the
reader of the ancient contemplative Christian practiceof a form of
attention known as "apatheia", which literally means without or
freedom from emotions, and writes that "Apatheia...marks a decisive
turning point in the spiritual itinerary of the Christian. It is the
door to contemplation, or more exactly, its vestibule." Campbell was in debate with a
mysticism that in his age was characterized by emotional excess and
sensationalism. For that reason, he would no doubt object to any
association of his name with mystic traditions. But it may well be
that he believed in a form of paying attention to the presence of God
that is quite compatible with apatheia. For Campbell, and for the contemplatives, the heart
is something deeper than the emotions. Baptism Campbell was concerned with the
experience which baptism brought, not simply a dry, heartless
ceremony. Speaking of remission of sins, of which baptism is to him
the means of this grace, he writes, "It is the salvation of the soul
in the present life
of which we speak.
Baptism is to be an emotional cleansing: "From the
conscience, I say, for there its malignity is felt; and it is only in
releasing the conscience from guilt, and its consequences - fear and
shame, that we are released from the dominion of sin, or washed from
its pollution in this world. Thus immersion, says Peter,
saves us, not by cleansing the body from its
filth, but the conscience from its guilt; yes, immersion saves us by
burying us with Christ, raising us with him, and so our consciences
are purified from dead works to serve the living God." Remembering that for him, facts
(or well reasoned conclusions based on facts) had emotional power,
Campbell is here claiming that if the believer believes (is persuaded
fully by reason from the facts of the Gospel) in the sacrament of
baptism, there will be a real-life result in the heart, in the
experience. But the emotion does not precede, or precipitate the
grace of God. Rational acceptance of this grace brings forth the
heartfelt experience. Still, it is typical of
Campbell's personality that he describes a cleansing of negative
emotions more than an experience of positive emotions. Despite the
fact that I am claiming Campbell to be a deeply heartfelt Christian
practicing deep spiritual presence, it must be acknowledged that he,
like many great intellectuals, often found emotions to be a
distraction to an experience of God that was - for him - deeper, and
thus closer to the heart, and that deeper experience of God was - for
him - more often precipitated by overwhelming rational
conviction. Conclusion I have characterized Campbell
as a Sacramental Christian. After looking at how he practices what I
believe were for him seven primary sacramental practices, I would
like to reconsider this sacramental thesis. One objection to the use of the
term sacrament may be that it is unnecessary, and that Campbell might
more appropriately be termed a pietist. Certainly piety places
Campbell within his Presbyterian and Scottish history. However, T.
Hartley Hall IV states that piety "focuses upon a person's behavior
as regards the duties and obligations inherent to religion," and that
"for Presbyterians its primary focus is always upon a manner of
living that is consonant with and responsible in relation to one's
religious commitments." There is in the term piety, then, a distinct
lack of interest in the inward experience of the believer, it
self-consciously de-emphasizes the religion of the heart. I believe
our evidence suggests that Campbell was in fact very interested in
the inward experience, and in transformation of the heart. To be
sure, there is a strong pietistic current in Campbell, but I believe
that we have also discovered a strong and central sacramental
current. This thesis is not unique. In
the same article quoted in the beginning by Eva Jean Wrather, she
writes: "On the other hand,
Campbell had no patience with the type of liberal who was tolerant of
all things and firm in none, who substituted a social ethic for a
vital transcendental religion. Sometimes differing widely from
liberal Protestantism, Campbell held a sacramental view of
religion...like the Catholics, Campbell realized the dramatic value
of the sacraments...Moreover, the sacraments, Campbell felt, were the
divinely appointed means by which man reaches mystic union with God -
a more important thing, after all, than union with man." Wrather's words, written in
1938, resonate strikingly with Tracy's criticism of modern liberals.
She may be interjecting a criticism of liberals of her era back into
Campbell's time inappropriately, but still, I believe the evidence
shows that she reads Campbell correctly. Williams interprets Campbell to
believe that "Prayer, meditation, the Lord's Day, the Lord's Supper,
fasting, confession of sins, and praise are all distinctive
means by which the transforming proposition
disclosed in the gospel - that God is love - triumphs in the
believer's heart and life." He goes on to say that "The
consequent blessings, which result from faith in the gospel and
use of the means of
grace, are
transformation of the will from alienation towards God to love of God
and neighbor and eternal happiness." Note the centrality of means,
which connotes a sacramental understanding. Notice also the often
misunderstood relationship to experimental religion. Williams claims
that "Campbell believed that 'popular beliefs' related to the term
experimental religion were preventing the progress of experimental
religion!" Williams then quotes Campbell himself from pp. 358-359 of
Richardson's Memoirs, "How often have we said that the greatest objection
we have against the whole system we oppose is because of its
impotency on the heart." But Campbell makes the point
unavoidably explicit in a very sacramental view of "bodily
acts:" "Reader, be
admonished how you speak of bodily acts in obedience to divine
institutions. Remember Eve, Adam, and all transgressors on the one
hand. Remember Abel, Noah, Enoch, Moses, Abraham, down to the harlot
Rahab, on the other, and be cautious how you speak of bodily acts!
Rather remember the sacrifice of a body on Mount Calvary, and talk
not lightly of bodily acts. There is no such thing as outward bodily acts in the
Christian institution;
and less than all others, in the act of immersion. Then it is the
spirit, soul, and body of man become one with the Lord. Then it is
that the power of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit come upon
us." It is difficult for me to read
this passage and not understand Campbell as describing certain bodily
acts in the Christian institution as powerful sacraments (and not
just baptism), and also that real inward, powerful experience is to
be expected from these sacraments. He also writes, "And can eating
bread and drinking wine not influence nor affect the soul? And cannot
the
breath of one man
pierce the heart of another, and move his blood, as to make his head
a fountain of tears?" But there is need here for a
disclaimer; the list of seven sacramental acts practiced by Campbell
as noted in this paper is not exhaustive. Williams notes above that
Campbell spoke favorably of fasting and confession of sins. He also
spoke favorably of foot washing, at least in some situations. My list
only means to suggest the principal and central sacraments of his
daily life. In one sense, all of life is sacramental for a
sacramental Christian. Another issue needs revisited,
as well. Earlier, on page five of this paper, it seemed that Campbell
believed that "Speech...is the medium of converse 'twixt God and
man," and that the Holy Spirit only communicates through words, and
in this age the words of the Gospel. Is Scripture the only means by
which the Holy Spirit communicates to us? In one sense, all of the
sacraments and "bodily acts" we have examined are ways of
experiencing the presence of the Spirit of God. Campbell at least
means that the Holy Spirit is present not only through the words of
Scripture, but also through the ordinances Scriptures commands us to
practice. But there is a deeper issue at
stake here. Campbell was at all times in controversy with what he
believed was rampant, excessive emotionalism, mysticism, and
superstition. In that context, I believe that Campbell was reluctant
to put anything into print which might lead people to conclude
erroneously that they have had special revelations from God. Campbell
went to extra effort to expose what he thought was the fraudulent
Book of Mormon, which is one indication of the importance he attached
to this issue in the context of his day. One must remember that this
was the era not only of Mormonism, but of the Millerite movement and
the Great Disappointment therein, and a virtual cornucopia of other
religious delusions and folk superstitions. In this context, it
appears that Campbell chose to keep private a certain openness to the
possibility of special revelation. Campbell believed he often had
premonitions of important events. Just before the shipwreck, he
dreamed of it, and chose to sleep in his clothes in order to be
prepared. Later during that year in Glasgow, he received a visitation
from a small, dark-visaged woman with no tongue or ears, who
communicated to him by gestures that he was going to a foreign
country where he would be shipwrecked,and that he would preach to
large audiences, and that he would be twice married. Then she
disappeared. To be sure, we have this report
from Mrs. Campbell, and the sequence of events may be confused, for
if it occurred in Glasgow, it occurred after the shipwreck, not
before. Nonetheless, it does seem safe to say that Alexander Campbell
was open to the possibility of such communication from God. However,
he was noticeably reticent to talk much about such things. Richardson
writes that "He was ever cautious and reticent as to his views of the
manner in which the Holy Spirit accomplished
his work." Despite this reticence, it is
clear that Alexander Campbell believed in and practiced a form of
spirituality that brought to him a deep and abiding sense of the
presence of God. This communion with God brought him a great deal of
joy and happiness. This communion with God was sacramental in nature,
in that Campbell sought through a simple practice of attention to the
facts of the gospel, through listening to God through the Scriptures,
through incessant conversation with God in prayer, through family and
public worship, through the sacraments of baptism (once) and the
Lord's Supper (weekly), to experience God. And he did experience God,
in a way that was heartfelt and resulted in positive emotional
experiences. Perhaps Campbell's weakness was
embedded in his strength. He was a man of words and ideas. Words
expressing rational and elegant ideas were power, to him, they were
things of passion, they were divine. We make an artificial
distinction when we separate logic and passion in the life of someone
like Campbell, for him logic was a passion, and brought forth his
deepest, most passionate feelings. The powerful logic and rationality
of the proposition in three words - God is love - carried him away
with a passionate loving response which consumed his life.
And yet not everyone
understands this kind of personality. Some find their passions in
ways other than words. For some it is community, some are visual,
some musical. Some find God most clearly in nature or in laughter.
These souls will have great difficulty finding in Alexander
Campbell's personality the emotionality they are expecting. In the
final analysis, Campbell must be accepted for who he was, probably a
rather undemonstrative Scotsman of great intellect and strong
personality who would never understand those of the human family who
are more sentimental. In modern parlance, he can never be construed
to be a "touchy-feely" kind of Christian. But he was an experiential
(experimental was the term in his day) Christian in his own way, and
there is room in his movement for all personality types to experience
the presence of God. There is room in his understanding of
sacramental Christianity for all of us to find a portal of access to
the heart of God, and to our own inner hearts, particularly if we
understand that there is an inner heart that is deeper than surface
emotion.
Campbell, Alexander.
Christian Baptism With
its Antecedents and Consequents. Bethany, Virginia, 1851. Campbell, Alexander.
The Christian
Baptist, I:VIII, March
1, 1824. Campbell, Alexander.
The Christian
Evangelist. LXXVI
September 8, 1838. Campbell, Alexander.
The Christian
System. Salem, New
Hampshire, Ayer Company, reprint edition 1988. Campbell, Alexander.
The Millennial
Harbinger:1830, 1832,
1833, 1838, 1842, 1854, 1862. Campbell, Selina Huntington.
Home Life and
Reminiscences of Alexander Campbell by His Wife, Selina Huntington
Campbell, St. Louis:
John Burns, Publisher, 1882. Ellis, Albert, and Grieger,
Russell, with contributors. Handbook of Rational-Emotive Therapy.
New York, Springer
Publishing Co. 1977. Goodnight, Cloyd, and
Stevenson, Dwight E. Home to Bethpage: A Biography of Robert
Richardson. St. Louis,
Christian Board of Publication, 1949. Hall, T. Hartley IV., "The
Shape of Reformed Piety," in Spiritual Traditions for the Contemporary
Church, edited by Robin
Maas and Gabriel O'Donnell, Nashville, Abington Press, 1990.
Harvey, Van A. A Handbook of Theological
Terms. New York,
Collier Books, MacMillan Publishing Co. 1964. Needleman, Jacob.
Lost Christianity: A
Journey of Rediscovery to the Centre of Christian
Experience. Rockport,
Massachusetts, Element, 1980. O'Donnell, Gabriel. "Reading
for Holiness: Lectio
Divina." in
Spiritual Traditions for
the Contemporary Church, edited by Robin Maas and Gabriel O'Donnell,
Nashville, Abington Press, 1990. Paulsell, William O.
Disciples at Prayer: The
Spirituality of the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ).
St. Louis, Missouri,
Chalice Press, 1995. Richardson, Robert.
Memoirs of Alexander
Campbell. Philadelphia,
Lippincott & Co. 1868, volumes I and II. Steffer, Robert Wesley.
Alexander Campbell as
Preacher and Worshipper: His Influence Upon Contemporary
Preaching. (thesis)
1959, College of the Bible. Tracy, David, "Kenosis,
Sunyata, and Trinity: A Dialogue with Masao Abe," in The Emptying God: A
Buddhist-Jewish-Christian Conversation, edited by John B. Cobb, Jr. and Christopher Ives,
Mryknoll, New York, Orbis Books, 1994. Underhill, Evelyn.
Worship. New York, Harper, 1957. Williams, D. Newell., "The
Gospel on the Power of God to Salvation: Alexander Campbell and
Experimental Religion," in Lectures in Honor of the Alexander Campbell
Bicentennial, 1788-1988, Nashville, Disciples of Christ Historical Society,
1988. Wrather, Eva Jean. "Alexander
Campbell - Portrait of a Soul: A Quest for Freedom," Christian Evangelist, LXXVI, September 8, 1938. Alexander Campbell: The Christian
System