EXAMINATION OF A PAMPHLET TITLED "TRUTH AS IT IS" Circulated Among the Members of the Agingdon Ass'n With a Refutation of false statements and misrepresentations where in contained, in regard to the Warwick and Abington Associations 4

This is a pamphlet that was published by Elder Gabriel Conklin in 1839. To our knowledge it has never been posted on the internet (typed) before. Here, Elder Conklin lays out clearly the classic argument made by New School Baptists, even today, that Old School Baptists departed from their original principles when they became antimissionary societies, and refutes the argument.  These arguments are still used today by New School Baptists to demonstrate that it was the Old School Baptists who departed from the historical Baptist position. - ed.

I pursue the pamphlet again in its quotations, from the Minutes of 1814: "Brother Miller presented a letter from the Missionary Society, for Foreign Missions, which after some consultation was postponed for further consideration, at our next meeting."  It will be observed, that here, in the Minutes of 1814, is the first time a Missionary Society is named in the Abington Minutes, from its commencement, (taking the little pamphlet as a witness) and in this case, it is not used in reference to the Abington Association.  Is it possible, then, that it was a Missionary Society previous to, or at this time?  Beside, the postponing of the consideration of the above letter, is evidence that the Association were slow to believe and move in the thing.  In the Minutes of 1815, the pamphlet observes: "We learn that the Abington Association, took a more public stand in favor of direct Missionary effort."  This, more public stand, consisted in taking into consideration, the above letter from the Foreign Missionary Society, together with another of the same import; and voting that Elder J. Miller, be standing Secretary, to correspond with the Corresponding Secretary of the Board of Foreign Missions; and that he purchase six copies of reports, for the use of the Churches, to be paid out for the money raised by the Churches for that purpose.  In 1816, the Corresponding Secretary was directed to send for ten copies of reports, as above; and in the Circular, an expression of great satisfaction, in finding that great efforts are making to spread the gospel in Asia and the western wiles of America.  In 1817, contributions in the Churches and congregations for Domestic Missions are recommended; and in 1818, it is said the MInutes are decidedly of a MIssionary cast - but no Missionary Society yet.  In the Minutes of 1819, the pamphlet observes: A Letter from Brother Luther Rice (Agent of the Baptist Board of Foreign Missions) was received; that the Association feel grateful for the respects of the Board, wish to continue their correspondence, approve of their measures, further their views, &c.  In 1821, (according to the pamphlet) the Association appointed a committee, to prepare the minds of the members of the Churches composing the Association; for the formation of a Domestic Missionary Society, &c.  The same committee had leave to report the following year, with an addition of nine brethren to their number.  Query.  Why did this committee thus delay, from year to year, their report?  And did they ever report?  If they did, how and when?  It's quite probable, if we had the Truth as it is, or as ir was, it would appear in that capacity, and under those instructions.  At all events, we are sure, that the minds of the members of the Churches, were not prepared to go into Missionary Society operations, from the circumstance of the committee being appointed to prepare their mind, &c. as above states, from the pamphlet.  Hence the putting off the business, from year to year, by the committee.

The above resolutions, recommendations, correspondence, &c. extracted by the little pamphlet from the Abington Minutes, seem to favor Society operations in religion; and are represented as the doings of the Association, and in some instances unanimously.  I have no doubt there were a few restless spirits, like Sheldon Norton, who were very unanimous in those new schemes, and were determined to use every effort, for union of effort in the Association.  And when the committee seemed to be rather Anti-effort in this business, by an addition of nine brethren to the committee intended to give an impetus to the action of the committee, in preparing the minds of the brethren, &c.  But that the Association at this period of time [1823] were unanimous in recommending any of the New Societies in religious matters, is very far from the Truth as it is.  And now withstanding in 1819, (according to the pamphlet).  The Association feel grateful for the respects of the Board, &c; (which expression of gratefulness, sounds very much like the flattery of Elder John Miller).  

It is a notorious fact, that this same Elder John himself, was hostile to the doctrine and practice, advocated and pursued by the Agents of the Board; or, of the Mission Society.  And that he was in the habit, frequently, or occasionally of publicly exposing their measures, and of sounding the alarm among his brethren.  I could give perhaps, nearly verbatim, some of this sentences or expressions in preaching, (if it were necessary, but I forbear) showing his opposition, and disapprobation of their course.  Alas!  the scene is changed with him!  He is now the zealous advocate of the measures; he is building the things he once destroyed, - and thus making himself a transgressor.  May the Lord open his eyes, and give him repentance to the acknowledging of the truth.  There is nothing surprising in the circumstance of Sheldon Norton and others, pressing the adoption of the various Societies upon the Association, with so much zeal, from year to year; supporting those institutions, seems to be the life and soul of religion, also the test, or touch-stone of the genuineness of religion with them.  Beside, as Agent, their hundreds a year, are suspended upon this brittle thread.  But, to the little pamphlet again; it does not inform us, whether or not, the committee before named reported at all; from which I infer, either, either the committee never did report, or they reported against the new measures, if they had reported favourably, the pamphlet would have told us the truth at it is.  Instead of telling us yea or nay, the pamphlet slides off, by saying that, the same year, [1832].  

"The Association resolved to take up a collection annually, for the benefit of the Theological Seminary at Hamilton".  And it adds: Thus we see that ministerial education, as well as the Missionary cause, was early patronized by the Association.  Here the committee are lost in sight of in the blending with, or rather tacking to it, the Hamilton resolve.  The Minutes of the nest year, [1824] are not noticed in the pamphlet.  Why not?  Could it not be found, or would it not answer the purpose of the truth teller?  In 1825, the pamphlet informs us; A Committee of correspondence was appointed on Domestic Missions, and a recommending of committees to be appointed by the Churches to ascertain what may be done on the subject, &c.  In the Minutes of 1826, 8, 8, 9, 1830, 1, we have recommendations, resolutions, contributions and compliments voted in relation to the various Societies.  It is somewhat singular with all those things before us, that up to [1832] the Association had not become a Missionary Society, or at least auxiliary.  As sure as the little pamphlet tells the truth as it is in this matter, it was not a Missionary Society then.  Though the pamphlet would have this impression made upon the minds of the people.  I say it would make this impression, because it frequently throws out the insinuation, after having quoted from the Minutes, from year to year.  Again, because it has passed by in silence, the resolution in the Minutes of [1833] in which the Association declares itself to be auxiliary to the Home Missionary Society; which resolution, together with a view of the Minutes of former Association, is evidence beyond contradiction, that it ever was a Missionary before.

In reviewing the subject a little I discover that, from about the year 1814 or 15, the Abington Association has been more or less troubled with those who lie in wait to deceive; she has been perplexed and plagued, at early every yearly meeting, with Missionary Society Letters, Agents, &c.; and while they have had a very few advocates, but perhaps rather an increase from year to year, and notwithstanding the resolutions, recommendations, &c., from time to time in the Minutes, as extracted by the pamphlet, that the Association, a large portion of it were holding back as with a bit and bridle, that they were doubtful, in their minds, as to the propriety of the measures urged upon them by the few who seemed to have their eye upon the fleece rather than the flock.  But, from the circumstance of being beset from year to year, and growing quite weary perhaps, and not possessing that clear view of the hidden things of dishonesty under a cloak of religious zeal, external sanctity and the worth of souls, the brethren, in many instances, have hesitated to act, and remained neutral in the Association when those resolutions embracing the various Societies were introduced, feeling their weakness and insufficiency, and a lack of confidence to speak in public debate in opposition to those Missionary Agents, &c, who scarcely ever fail of possessing a good degree of self confidence, with a large portion of brass and not a little sap.  Hence those brethren who are decidedly opposed to those new measures, and their adoption by the Association, have had them palmed upon them, their names standing recorded in the Minutes side by side with the movers and advocates of them.