Hello Everyone:
In the past two months or so, I’ve read a decent amount of pages regarding Barton W. Stone. I started with his latest biography, Barton Stone: A Spiritual Biography, by D. Newell Williams. Williams answered small, nagging questions I’ve had since reading many of the general histories of the movement and the Churches of Christ. However, like any good book, he left more questions that I need answers for. It also convinced me of the fact that our general histories don’t provide nearly as much coverage of Stone as they ought to. After finishing Williams account, I moved on to a PhD dissertation by James Cook, who I believe provides some insight into why this is.
Cook argues that the Stone-Campbell Movement is a myth, mostly because Stone failed to have a key leadership role in the movement once the Christians and the Reformed Baptists united in 1832. Cook failed to convince me of the “Stone-Campbell myth,” however I think he makes a decent case that Campbell’s ideas crowded out the ideas belonging to Stone, so that Stone-ite ideas became a minority view in the movement. I think its obvious to anyone who has done any reading in our history that Stone disappears quickly in the story, and Campbell becomes a main focus until his death. I think that is because Campbell’s views and influence had such a dominating effect that historians don’t feel like there is much profit in spending a lot of time with Stone.
While reading Cook’s dissertation, I read a chapter on Restorationists from Paul Conkin’s book American Originals: Homemade Varieties of Christianity. Conkin, who spent some time as a Disciple, has some interesting insights into the Stone-Campbell Movement. Conkin spent a good amount of time covering the Christian Connexion, the more or less loose movement of “Christian Churches” that Stone’s movement was a part of before his merger with Campbell’s churches in the 1830’s. Cook and Williams also spend time on the Connexion, but it was Conkin’s book, reading in conjunction with Cook, that really made me interested in this section of the movement. Conkin makes the argument in his chapter on restorationists that the legitimate heir of the Christian Connexion, because of their interest in Christian liberty and unity, is none other than the United Church of Christ. In many ways, I think he is correct, especially since the Connexion eventually merged and merged and merged into the UCC.
After finishing these texts, I was fortunate enough to find a copy of Barton Stone’s memoirs. I’m about half way through reading these. Stone’s autobiography, which is a part of his memoirs, was an easy read, and now I am wading through the apology of the Springfield Presbytery, which provides an in-depth view of Stone’s views on faith and atonement. That has been a harder read, but I’m not sure I’ve actually come across a more detailed depiction of the difference between “our” view of faith and the Calvinist view of faith, or at least, what was the Calvinist view of faith.
When I finish reading Stone’s memoirs, I have copies of two works by B.F. Burnett, of the Christian Connexion. One is a 40 page booklet on Stone, and another is a booklet which asks if Barton Stone joined the Disciples of Christ. I still need to find a way to read Stone’s Christian Messenger.
After all that, will I find the real Barton Stone? I don’t know. But I’ll keep looking.
Josh