|
Return to Table of Contents Return to Landmark Baptist Church Homepage
Landmarkism Under Fire
A Study of Landmark Baptist
by Elder J.C. Settlemoir
Appendix IV. - Did Armitage Write about EMDA? The statement of Armitage in his History of the Baptists concerning a mother church, is thought by some to be a reference to EMDA. Armitage says: THAT CHRIST NEVER ESTABLISHED A LAW OF CHRISTIAN PRIMOGENITURE BY
WHICH HE ENDOWED LOCAL CHURCHES WITH THE EXCLUSIVE POWER OF MORAL REGENERATION,
MAKING IT Those who organized the churches in apostolic times went forth
simply with the lines of doctrine and order in their hands, and formed new
churches without the authority or even the knowledge of other churches. Some of
these men were neither apostles nor pastors, but private Christians. Men are
born of God in regeneration and not of the Church. They have no ancestry in
regeneration, much less are they the offspring of an organic ancestry. The men
who composed the true Churches at What is Armitage referring to? Some men have asked me if Armitage was here writing against EMDA as a tenant of Landmarkism. I do not believe this is possible for the following reasons. 1. His terms are opposed to EMDA. He says, all in caps: That Christ never established a law of Christian primogeniture by which he endowed local churches with the exclusive power of moral regeneration ... Armitage is clearly describing those who believed regeneration was essentially connected to the church! 2. No EMDA advocate (so far as I know) believes a church is endowed with exclusive power of moral regeneration! Do they not know what their own position is? How then can they claim this has reference to EMDA unless they take the position no one can be regenerated who is not a member of one of their churches! EMDA advocates have gone a long way from the truth, but I was not aware they had gone this far! Armitage seems to mean that no church has the power to bring about regeneration as Romanism claims it does. Notice he says: “Men are born of God in regeneration and not of the Church.”[594] No Baptist ever believed this! But Roman Catholicism holds to this position and Armitage makes this clear when he says: The men who composed the true Churches of Antioch and Again he says: As it is not a Gospel truth that Christ has lodged the power of spiritual procreation in his Churches, so it is not true that all who come not of any given line of Church stock are alien and illegitimate. 3. The EMDA doctrine had not been developed at the time Armitage wrote, at least among Baptists! No EMDA advocate has ever produced a single Baptist document which sets forth EMDA at this early date. It seems unlikely that Armitage is describing a tradition not then developed. 4. No Landmarkers at this time[596] held to EMDA. 5. Armitage certainly knew what Landmarkers believed and not one of the leading men of the Landmark movement believed in EMDA! Consequently, it is unlikely that a man as learned as Armitage would attribute to Landmarkers a doctrine which he knew they did not believe. 6. He does not mention Landmarkers nor any other particular group except Catholics in this chapter. Those who say he is referring to Landmarkers must come to this position without any direct evidence. 7. When he does discuss J.R. Graves and Landmarkism, he is far from being caustic or censorious as others have been. He says: Dr. Graves is endowed with marked qualifications for an editor. As a writer and speaker he is remarkably direct and copious, like all men in downright earnest, infusing his spirit and principles into the mind of his constant readers and hearers. Restless and aggressive, his pen is ever busy, not only as an editor, leaving his own stamp upon his paper, but as an author his works teem from the press perpetually in the form of books and pamphlets. His life has been devoted with quenchless zeal to the cause of higher education, and the literature of the Southern Baptist Sunday-School Union and Publication Society has been built up chiefly under his untiring labors. In the South and South-west the ‘Baptist’ is an indisputable power in the advocacy of the most pronounced Baptist principles and practices.....He [Graves] has been its vigorous editor in an unbroken connection for forty years, and stands at his post, at nearly three score and ten, the unfaltering advocate of the old landmarks of Baptist life, decided and distinct in all its denominational trends and interests.[597] But, if, in spite of these facts, Armitage was writing specifically about Landmarkism and claiming Landmarkers held to EMDA, he was certainly wrong, just as wrong as Robert Ashcraft, Bob Ross, Milburn Cockrell, Tom Ross, Patterson, Tull and Barnes are, who all attribute EMDA to the old Landmarkism, yet not one of them has ever produced a quote of Landmarker who believed this doctrine! The organic succession and the mother church of which Armitage wrote were tied to the mother church connection of Roman Catholics. It was a church which had regeneration under its control. Those who embrace EMDA are welcome to all the comfort they can find in Armitage. If this is EMDA which Armitage described, then it is a greater blight than I first thought it to be! Footnotes [593] Armitage, The History of The Baptists, vol. I, p. 3. [594] Ibid. [595] Ibid. [596] Circa 1886.
[597]
Armitage, History of the Baptists, vol. II, p. 884-5. |