"WE NEVER PREACHED NOR TAUGHT ANYTHING, AS A PORTION OF OUR FAITH, SINCE THE DAY OF THE FIRST VOLUME OF THE CHRISTIAN BAPTIST, THAT WE HAVE RETRACTED." - A. Campbell
The following is rather a singular document from Prof. Farnam, and though it is intended to implicate us, we cheerfully publish it. The figures we insert in the article will call the reader’s attention to the notes we append.__________
For the Tennessee Baptist.Several months ago, it was announced by the editor of the Tennessee Baptist, that he was about to republish those letters in a permanent form for general distribution. (1) Upon the appearance of this notice, I was asked by numerous friends of Bro. [John L.] Waller whether Bro. [J. R.] Graves had consulted his legal representative or the individual who had been selected by those representatives, to compile a volume of the miscellaneous writings of Bro. W. to be published in connection with his life for the benefit of his orphan children. A good deal of surprise was expressed by such inquirers, on learning that Bro. Graves consulted the wishes of none of those who had a direct pecuniary interest in the publication of Bro. W's writings, or those who were appointed who were appointed to superintend their publication. (2) Bro. Ford, one of the committee appointed to advise with the compiler, on seeing the notice in the Tennessee Baptist, published a paragraph informing Brother Graves that arrangements had already been made for the publication of these letters, and intimating that their publication by brother G. did not meet the wishes of brother Waller's friends.
It is due to brother Ford to remark here, that he immediately wrote to myself, stating that the paragraph was designed by him rather to prevent brother G. from publishing the letters, than to commit the committee to their publication; for he had not conferred with them on the subject; nor did he know that it would be expedient to include those letters in the volume or volumes intended to be published by them; nor was he sure that they ought to be published at all, not having read them for several years. (3)
Notwithstanding all this, brother Graves proceeds to publish the letters; intimating, however, a purpose to appropriate the net profits of their publication, if any, to the benefit of brother Waller’s children.
Whether brother Graves knew, when he commenced the publication of those letters, that bro. Waller's relatives were unwilling that they should be re-published in any form, and that those selected to decide what portion of his writings should be published, deemed that publication of these letters inexpedient and improper, I am not advised; but I had supposed him to be fully apprised of these facts. (4)
But why should not these letters be re-published?
They should not be re-published because bro. Waller himself would never re-publish them when solicited to do so, and would never consent to their being re-published by others. When some of them were published a few years since in the Western Watchman, bro. Waller rebuked its editor for having attempted thereby to place him in a false position, by not accompanying their publication with such explanations as were required by honor and justice. Such explanations have not yet appeared in the Tennessee Baptist
These letters should not be re-published, because they were written when their author was a mere youth, ignorant, as he has since acknowledged, of very much that it was necessary for him to know, before writing upon subjects discussed in those letters. (5) I presume it is well known to bro. Graves that several passages in Alexander Campbell's version of the New Testament (as it is generally styled) commented upon with great severity in the letters referred to, and affirmed to be gross corruptions of the original Greek, have since been endorsed by bro. Waller as faithful versions of the original. (6) These alterations were not, however, made BY Mr. Campbell, but were adopted by him as the results of the investigations of some of the most eminent Biblical critics of the present century.
These letters ought not to be re-published because, whilst it is true that, for twenty years thereafter. Bro. Waller defended the doctrines of the Baptist Church, their faith and practices, as set forth in these letters, it is at the same time true, and well known to brother W’s intimate friends, and clearly indicated by his later writings, that he disapproved of the spirit and tone which so strongly marked this his first public onslaught upon "Campbellism" and "Campbellites." (7) He has long since admitted that these letters impute, by implication at least, to Mr. Campbell and his followers, motivation with which they were not justly charged.
These being facts, what possible good can result from the re-publication of this almost forgotten pamphlet of letters, written twenty years ago, before its author was a member of the Church, and of which there are not, perhaps a dozen copies I existence. (8) Without these explanations, its publication in the Tennessee Baptist is an act of injustice to its author, with them, what needful purpose could it serve? [blurred]
If Bro. Graves feels it to be necessary to call upon John L. Waller to aid him in demolishing "Campbellism" in Tennessee, and to illustrate the importance of bible revision, I would suggest that ample materials for these purposes may be found in Western Baptist Review and the Christian Repository. (9)
J. E. FARNAM
Georgetown, Ky, July 11, 1855.__________ Notes
(1) We thought we had a right to do so. There was no copyright to the Letters, and we entertained the opinion that Bro. Waller's biographer would not publish them. And it now appears that we were right for once. Those who believe no "good thing can come out of Nazareth" must admit this. We did not believe the publication of the Letters would injure Bro. W's reputation; and how could we in view of the following language used by Prof. Farnam in the Western Recorder of May 2nd? "I know, however, that, as has been stated by Rev. S. H. Ford, Dr. Waller, to the day of his death held firmly to the views set forth in his "Letters to a Campbellite" written some twenty years ago."
What harm is there in publishing "views" which Bro. W. not only held firmly, "but held to the day of his death."
(2) Does not our opinion that the Letters would not be published by consent of the biographer [2 words blurred] him? What would have been the use of commitment? If asked why we believed the letters would not be published, we frankly say we saw, or thought we saw in some portions of Kentucky's [blurred] the unwillingness to give offense to Campbellites.
(3) We cannot well conceive how anything of [blurred] could operate more prejudicially to Bro. ford than this explanation.
Mark the plain facts. Let Bro. Ford or one of the Committee [blurred words on m/f] published in the Recorder that ADVERTISEMENTS HAD ALREADY BEEN MADE FOR THE PUBLICATION of the letters. By whom? By the Committee of [blurred words on m/f] that their publication by us did not meet the wishes of Bro. Waller's friends.
He immediately sets [sic] down and writes to Prof. Farnam, that what he wrote in the Recorder was only written to prevent us from publishing them!! that he had not consulted the Committee that he even was not sure they ought to be published at all - not having read them himself for several years! Of course he had not consulted Bro. Waller's relatives when he declared by intimation, their unwillingness for us to publish them. These, we say are the facts touching Bro. Ford's course in the matter. We make no comments here.
(4) Our information has been derived chiefly from the foregoing article, and from a letter of Bro. Pendleton to us, dated August 4th, 1855, in which he says, "I, perhaps ought to have said to you before now, that Prof. Farnam, in a letter to me of May 8, says that Bro. Waller's relatives and friends are unwilling for this Letters to be republished by any one. This is the substance of the statement. I believe I have never alluded to it before in any of my letters to you." It will be seen, therefore, that when we began to publish the Letters we had not so much information as we now have.
(5) The Letters do not indicate ignorance. We question whether Bro. W. ever wrote more ably on Campbellism in after life.
(6) This, we presume, refers to matters of Greek criticism, and not to "views" which Bro. W. "held firmly to the day of his death."
(7) We do not think the 'spirit and tone' of these Letters so objectionable as the 'spirit and tone' of some of Bro. W's subsequent writings against Campbellism. Letters to Eld. J. T. Johnsons which we will republish so soon as these are out.
(8) What harm can result from the republication of "views" which Bro. W. held "firmly to the day of his death?" Is Prof. Farnam sure Bro. W. was not a "member of the church" when he write some articles in the old Baptist Chronicle, of Georgetown, Ky., signed Juvenis," but let Prof. F. examine dates and see if he was not a member of the church before the Letters were written. They are dated May, 1855.
Will someone settle these disputed points for us? We shall publish all Letters in our paper. Whether we shall put them in pamphlet form we will not now say. We shall consult judicious friends, and wait to hear from our subscribers generally. Are they wanted?
(9) What can be found in the Western Baptist Review and Christian Repository, better than "views" which Bro. W. considered worthy of being "held firmly to the day of his death?" Prof. F. is in a predicament. He cannot possibly show that it is wrong to republish what Bro. W. held so firmly so long as he lived. And he cannot retrace what we have quoted from him in endorsement of Bro. Ford.
In conclusion, we ask Prof F., for whom we have great respect, if he does not think it would have been well if Bro. W's "Letters to a Reformer" had been accessible to Walnut Street Church, Louisville, when Mr. Henderson commenced his meeting?
============ [From the Tennessee Baptist, August 18, 1855, p. 2. Scanned and formatted by Jim Duvall.]
Baptist Biographies
Baptist History Homepage