Evangelicalism & the Stone-Campbell Movement

Editor William Baker has collated an anthology of papers presented during proceedings of the Evangelical Theological Society by members of two of three "wings" of the Stone-Campbell or Restoration Movement (RM), a capella Churches of Christ and Independent Christian Churches/Churches of Christ. The third, the Disciples of Christ, is not represented.The RM and the evangelical movement (EM) have much in common. As organized, identifiable movements (oxymoron?) in North America, they follow roughly parallel chronologies, springing as they did from the Second Awakening of ca. 1800. The "Stone" in "Stone-Campbell," Barton W. Stone, was one of the organizers of a Presbyterian camp meeting that is known to historiographers as the Cane Ridge Revival. One of the Campbells in "Stone-Campbell," Alexander Campbell, editorially followed the organization of the American evangelical movement early in the 19th century favourably noting points of intersection between it and the RM.In the 20th century, like so many American Protestant bodies, the RM was split by the modernist-fundamentalist controversy into opposing camps -- one becoming the Disciples of Christ and the other the Independent Christian Churches/Churches of Christ. The editorial flagship of the modernist side, "The Christian Century," was of RM construction, and the first managing editor of "Christianity Today," launched by Billy Graham to lead the other side of the debate, was RM-adherent James DeForest Murch.Over the past thirty years, many a capella Church of Christ exegetes have joined the Evangelical Theological Society, latterly joined by Independents. Independent leaders have been given prominence in the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association.Although association between the RM and EM, and Baker's editorial introduction suggest a sort of "harmonic convergence" between the RM and evangelical movement (EM), the papers as published suggest otherwise. Theologically, the papers make clear significant points of divergence between the Princeton Theology-influenced Calvinism of much of North American evangelicalism and the RM on their understandings of conversion, faith, and baptism. Despite Baker's introduction, if one did not know anything of the significant interaction and sharing of resources among the RM and the EM, one might be surprised to learn of it.A further point of divergence not highlighted is the prominence given to celebration of the Lord's Supper or Eucharist in the RM versus the EM. For the EM, faith and the book are the sole centre of attention and focus. While RM adherents claim the nickname "people of the book," the Lord's Supper is, still, given prominence and celebrated weekly (albeit, sometimes "weakly"). The absence of a paper dealing with differing views of the Lord's Supper is a weakness of the anthology.That said, Baker does us a service by provoking discussion between two groups with parallel commitments to the book who interact at so many levels. One minor critic

I grew up and am still a member within the Church of Christ (a capella) branch of the Stone-Campbell movement. I found the book to be very thoughtful and engaging without being too scholarly or too polemic. The "evangelical response" chapters were nice reminders that theology is most profitably done in community. I imagine the book may not catch the interest of those outside the Stone-Campbell heritage, though I believe the book would be an excellent source of information for anyone wanting to know more about the claims and characteristics of this branch of the evangelical family.