Grateful
thanks are due to Bernhard who has provided all the information and the
graphics in this article on the situation faced by Bible Students in Germany
during the First World War.
Recent
posts and comments have dealt with how the Bible Students coped with
conscription in World War 1. Prior to the war, the Watchtower magazine had
given this advice on joining the military. From the Watch Tower for August 1,
1898 (reprints page 2345) CTR wrote:
"If, therefore, we were drafted, and if the government refused to accept
our conscientious scruples against warfare (as they have heretofore done with
"Friends," called Quakers), we should request to be assigned to the
hospital service or to the Commissary department or to some other non-combatant
place of usefulness; and such requests would no doubt be granted. If not, and
we ever got into battle, we might help to terrify the enemy, but need not shoot
anybody."
How
could you avoid shooting anyone? Perhaps you could do this by shooting over
their heads? In the Watch Tower for July 15, 1915 (reprints page 5728) CTR
expanded on this:
"In Volume Six of SCRIPTURE STUDIES, the friends are instructed to avoid
taking life. If they were ever drafted into the army they should go. If they
could be sent to the Quartermaster's Department to take care of the food, that
would be desirable, or into the hospital work. They should endeavor to get such
positions. They could not be expected to do service in the way of killing. If
they were obliged to go on the firing line, they could shoot over the enemy's
head, if they wished."
The
problem for Bible Students dealing with this well-intentioned advice would only
come to the forefront if and when conscription was introduced. So it came to
the fore in Britain in 1916 and in America in 1917 when the draft was
introduced. In Germany however, universal conscription was there from the start
of the war.
There
was a German Watch Tower magazine that gave some details of the situation and
also gave the names of many of those involved. The two images below are from
the German WT for July and August 1915.
This
explains that more than 200 brothers were now in the military and lists many of
their names. They are on land, on sea, some in garrisons, some in hospitals.
One of them was Max Freschel who we will come back to later.
The
numbers increased as the months went by. From the November 1915 German Watch
Tower:
Translated
it reads:
From
our brothers on the field (i.e. battlefield)
“It is of interest to all brothers and
sisters to know that there are currently about 350 of our brothers in the
military. As a result of close correspondence with many of the loved ones, we
receive many evidences of joyful faith and trust and patient perseverance in
many difficulties. Some brothers wrote us that they feel strong knowing that so
much is being thought of in prayer.”
The article then details the deaths in
“the theater of war” of two Bible Students, Fritz Kownatzki from Zollernhöhe,
East Prussia, and Johannes Finger from Barmen. Fritz was 23 and Johannes
was 33.
The article concludes: “Both brothers had
written to us with expressions of love until shortly before their deaths, from
which we could see that these dear ones sought to walk with Jesus ......”
Little
is known about how individual Bible Students coped with being in the military
while striving to adhere to their principles. One experience though is found in
the German Watch Tower for June 1915.
In a letter August Kraftzig wrote: “I'm
not directly at the front, but in the baggage (stores?) and consequently by
God's grace not directly involved in the war.”
Years later in 1938 August became Branch
overseer in Austria. He died in the Mauthausen concentration camp in 1940.
As noted above, one name in the lists of
Bible Student conscripts was Max Freschel. Freschel was an Austrian of
Jewish parentage. (The area is now part of Poland but was then Austria). At the
outbreak of war his parents were in Switzerland while he was in the German
Bethel. Max chose to stay in Germany, but this meant that, with universal
conscription, he was called up for the German army.
In
1915 he wrote to CTR at least twice. We don’t know what he wrote but there is a
letter in the German Watch Tower for October 1915 from Fred Leon Scheerer from
Brooklyn. Friedrich Leonhardt Scheerer was a German Bible Student responsible for the German foreign work
and he translated Max’s letters so that CTR could read them.
Max Freschel moved to America in 1926 and
lived for the rest of his life in Brooklyn Bethel. He changed his name to
Maxwell Friend. He would become heavily involved in radio dramas for the
Society’s Station WBBR, and was one of the first instructors at Gilead School.
When dramas were introduced to convention programs from the late 1960s onwards,
many readers may remember his voice playing various patriarchs. His life story appeared in the Watchtower in April 15, 1967, and is well worth reading. However, he skirts over the years of WW1. All he basically says is that when everything was revived after the war in 1919, he was too.
This is very raw, not even 'rough' draft, of a chapter currently planned for volume 3. We may include it in volume 2. This is only a few paragraphs from it. It is mostly unfinished. It will not stay up.
Labor
Issues
In this as in everything else,
Russell and his associates interpreted current events as fulfilled or
fulfilling prophecy. He said that he had been doing that since 1875 which seems
perfectly plausible.[1] Russell’s
interpretation of social and labor movements derived entirely from Adventist
and Millenarian belief. During the Worchester Conference in 1872, organized to
examine date specific predictions including Barbour’s, the Paris Commune was
presented as a Last-Times event.
If one looked to social unrest as a
sign of Christ’s impending judgment, they were easy to find. A riot or
insurrection occurred in the United States nearly every year since 1850. Some
were anti-immigrant, some had underlying religious elements, some were over
restrictions on liquor and beer sales; many were over labor and social
injustices. Most often historians write about difficulties between large
employers such as the railroads or meat packers, but the problems extended to
small business and farm employment. A correspondent for The Restitution
sermonized: “How about the profession of honesty which withholds from your poor
neighbor, year after year, the ten, fifteen or twenty dollars due him for
labor, under the flimsy plea of hard times, when the price of your tea, coffee
and tobacco for one year would more than pay the debt.”[2]
Wages and working conditions were
deplorable. Shop girls turned to prostitution to supplement wages that did not
cover their basic needs. The forty-hour work week was a distant dream, worker
safety was nonexistent. Labor grievances often turned violent. In April 1859,
striking brickyard workers in St. Louis, Missouri, armed themselves and fired
on police. Two officers and some of the strikers were wounded. The mob
reassembled the next day, and the Army was called in to quell the strike. A
pattern of labor violence was established, and it escalated until labor unrest
was seen as an element of Last Time events. Russell and his associates saw the
Railroad Insurrection of 1877 in that light. world calls as such) is commendable if practiced with a view to
paying what we owe.”d more than pay the debt. buisinesormune
Relation to secular society
They
viewed world conditions through the lens of prophecy. It is not an uncommon
phenomenon for someone to see the era in which they live as worse than other
ages. Writers have quoted Hesiod, Socrates, and Aristotle as believing
similarly. However, those quotations are of recent manufacture. As unethical as
this is, they did so to support the view point that the current age is worse
than past ages. Greeks looked backwards to a Golden Age. New Testament
Christians and believers through successive ages look forward to a restored
paradise. The New Testament view is that the last days are crisis years. So
Russell and his associates looked to contemporary events for proof they were
living at the end of the age.
Their
response to what they saw can be parsed into three areas: Christian
behavior;behavior of non-believers; and
world affairs.
Christian Behavior
Christians
were to be holy and take the Gospel message to their neighbors. They were to
maintain a correct relationship to the state. Russell discussed a Christian’s
relationship to governments in 1886. Writing in The Plan of the Ages he
said:
Man’s
extremity will become God's opportunity,[3]
and “the desire of all nations shall come” – the Kingdom of God, in power and
great glory. (Hag. 2:7) Knowing this to be the purpose of God, neither Jesus
nor the apostles interfered with earthly rulers in any way. On the contrary,
they taught the Church to submit to these powers, even though they often
suffered under their abuse of power. They taught the Church to obey the laws,
and to respect those in authority because of their office, even if they were
not personally worthy of esteem; to pay their appointed taxes, and, except
where they conflicted with God's laws (Acts 4:19; 5:29), to offer no resistance
to any established law. (Rom. 13:1-7; Matt. 22:21) The Lord Jesus and the
apostles and the early Church were all law-abiding, though they were separate
from, and took no share in, the governments of this world.
Though
the powers that be, the governments of this world, were ordained or arranged
for by God, that mankind might gain a needed experience under them, yet the Church,
the consecrated ones who aspire to office in the coming Kingdom of God, should
neither covet the honors and the emoluments of office in the kingdoms of this
world, nor should they oppose these powers. They are fellow citizens and heirs
of the heavenly kingdom (Eph. 2:19), and as such should claim only such rights
and privileges under the kingdoms of this world as are accorded to aliens.
Their mission is not to help the world to improve its present condition, nor to
have anything to do with its affairs at present. To attempt to do so would be
but a waste of effort; for the world's course and its termination are both
clearly defined in the Scriptures and are fully under the control of him who in
his own time will give us the kingdom. The influence of the true Church is now
and always has been small – so small as to count practically nothing
politically; but however great it might appear, we should follow the example and
teaching of our Lord and the apostles. Knowing that the purpose of God is to
let the world fully test its own ability to govern itself, the true Church
should not, while in it, be of the world. The saints may influence the world
only by their separateness from it, by letting their light shine; and thus
through their lives the spirit of truth reproves
the world. Thus – as peaceable, orderly obeyers and commenders of every
righteous law, reprovers of lawlessness and sin, and pointers forward to the
promised Kingdom of God and the blessings to be expected under it, and not by
the method commonly adopted of mingling in politics and scheming with the world
for power, and thus being drawn into wars and sins and the general degradation –
in glorious chastity should the prospective Bride of the Prince of Peace be a
power for good, as her Lord's representative in the world.
The
Church of God should give its entire attention and effort to preaching the
Kingdom of God, and to the advancement of the interests of that Kingdom
according to the plan laid down in the Scriptures. If this is faithfully done, there
will be no time nor [sic] disposition to dabble in the politics of present
governments. The Lord had no time for it; the apostles had no time for it; nor
have any of the saints who are following their example.
The
early Church, shortly after the death of the apostles, fell a prey [sic] to
this very temptation. The preaching of the coming Kingdom of God, which would
displace all earthly kingdoms, and of the crucified Christ as the heir of that Kingdom,
was unpopular, and brought with it persecution, scorn and contempt. But some
thought to improve on God's plan, and, instead of suffering, to get the Church
into a position of favor with the world. By a combination with earthly powers
they succeeded. As a result Papacy was developed, and in time became the
mistress and queen of nations. – Rev. 17:3-5; 18:7.
By
this policy everything was changed: instead of suffering, came honor; instead
of humility, came pride; instead of truth, came error; and instead of being
persecuted, she became the persecutor of all who condemned her new and illegal
honors.[4]
[Analysis
here]
Social Conditions
In the early 1880s most Watch
Tower comments on social issues reflected events in the United States. Writing
in the May 1882 issue of Zion’s Watch Tower, J. C. Sunderlin used social
conditions as proof that they were living in the Last Days. Many American intellectuals
adopted Darwinism without understanding it. They suggested that evolution meant
improvement; the world was improving, and so were the people living in it. Sunderlin
disagreed:
The
wise (of this world) say the world is growing better and better. Let us look at
that for a moment ... . We will ask the questions, and you can answer
them for yourselves. Can men leave their buildings open now more safely than
formerly? Are there less locks and safes sold? Is there less murder and
bloodshed than usual? Are there fewer prisons and convicts, less theft and arson?
Are the instruments of war fewer and less formidable, are there less revolvers
sold? [sic] Do men, by their actions, show that they love each other
better than formerly? Do they legislate to benefit the poor more? Do capitalists
make it easier for the laborer? Do they love the laborer (or his labor) and
give him a nice, large slice from the loaf? Does the laborer love the
capitalist, and do they work for each other’s interest? Are the churches purer
and better and less worldly, plainer and more simple, and true and good, so
that the worldly man is rebuked by their good works and has he confidence more
than formerly in church members? Are there no grasping monopolies; if so, are
there less of them, and are they working for the general good of mankind?
There is much here that is undeniable,
though American intellectuals, including clergy continued to parrot the idea of
social progress into the 20th Century, often to their embarrassment.
One of these was Ephraim Llewellyn Eaton, a Methodist clergyman. Eaton and
Russell debated in 1903, and Eaton did not fare well. He published a book in
1911 to defend his beliefs, writing:
Before
the birth of Christ the world was a military camp, and wars were waged for
conquest and reprisal. The Christian spirit has so far permeated the world that
it would not to-day tolerate another war for either of these causes. Japan yielded
to the Christian moral sense of the world when she relinquished her demand for
indemnity of Russia; and America wrote the parable of the Good Samaritan into
the law of nations when it espoused the cause of Cuba. If there shall be any
war in the future, its only cause can be fear, distrust, or misunderstanding;
and Christianity is rapidly making it impossible for one nation to fear,
distrust or misunderstand another.
Japan did not “yield to the
Christian moral sense of the world.” It yielded to political influence. Justifying
the Spanish American War as writing Jesus parable into international law seems disingenuous.
In any event, the events of 1914 proved Eaton wrong. The entire philosophy of
social improvement either by religion or evolution was and is false.
He was correct. Locks and safes had
proliferated. Many were exhibited at the World’s Columbian Exhibition in 1876.
The official report said:
Viewing the best American safes, with
their massive casework, heavy bolts, and ingenious lock-construction, we find a
wonderful contrast with the American safe of fifty years ago. What was then
called a safe was little more than a box with a hollow frame of heavy
sheet-iron, between the outer and inner walls of which was deposited either
(so-called) asbestos, plaster, or some other preparation deemed sufficient for
protection in an ordinary fire. It was commonly made with corner- and
edge-bands, which were riveted with ordinary rivets, and the whole outer
surface of the safe, except the bottom, laid at regular intervals with
cast-iron knobs, to add to the appearance of weight and strength. The locks were of the plainest character; and it is believed
an expert burglar of the present day could enter them with very ordinary tools
in a very few minutes. One of these “safes” is
occasionally brought to light at public sale, where they are so little esteemed
for their powers of protection as to make their price not greatly above that of
a wooden box of similar dimensions.[5]
The proliferation of more secure locks and safe testify
to an increase in burglary, not to an increase in Christian morality. Neither
was that of arson. Sunderlin would have read many reports of arson and other
crimes. A single example will do, since we’re not writing a history of American
social troubles. One of the New York papers from the era reported: ““Wednesday,
the grand jury presented nine indictments, viz.: Assault with intent to ravish
[ie: rape], one; burglary, first degree, one; burglary, second degree, one; burglary,
third degree, three; arson, second degree, one; maltreatment of a girl under
ten years of age, one.”[6]
Sunderlin included gun issues as a
sign of the last days and proof that the world was not improving. This was the
era of wild-west gunfights. They are overblown by media presentations and
cowboy movies which owe more to 19th Century dime novels than accurate
history. But they did happen. On October 26, 1881, a few months before
Sunderlin wrote, Tombstone, Arizona Territory, walked into history over events
at the O. K. Corral. But we think this is not what Sunderlin had in mind. Gun violence,
especially with a pistol, was much closer to home. In a speech dated to October
20, 1880, Emery A. Storrs [1835-1885], a noted Republican politician and
orator, touched on the gang and political violence in New York City, blaming it
on corrupt Democrat operatives:
All
parties represent some interest. What does that party represent? Not the manufacturing
interest. They have sought the destruction of it since 1832. It is not the
financial interests of the country. They would overturn our entire system. Is
it the educational interest? [Laughter.] That’s a solemn question. I grieve to
see it treated with so much levity. [Laughter.] Is it the moral interest? As
representatives of great moral ideas, how does the average Democratic
procession in the City of New York look? [Prolonged laughter.] I am constrained
to think they don't represent any interest. [A Voice – The whiskey interest.”]
My friend is mistaken; that’s not an interest. That is a calamity. They
represent every single one of the calamities. They represent a stuffed
ballot-box; they represent the assassination of revenue officers.[7]
New York gangs were part of the
Democrat machine in the 1880s and full of violence. This is history, not a
modern political statement, though similarities to contemporary issues found in
Sunderlin’s remarks are self-evident. Civil War Reconstruction, really the
military occupation of former Confederate States, ended in 1877. Violence erupted
in the South. Democrats were free to reassert political dominance and abuse and
marginalize former slaves. At the end of the Reconstruction Era the South was
in the hands of Republican voters most of whom were former slaves. Democrats
did not end that, couldn’t not end that, without turning to violence. In
Alabama, ninety thousand Republican votes were cast in 1872; there were almost
none in 1878. Emery Storrs pointed to the cause: “Terrorism did it, fraud did
it, the false count and the no-count did it, the flaming cabin did it, the shot-gun did it.” In 1872 there were 41,000, Republican
voters in Arkansas, and in 1878 they cast 115 votes. Storrs said: “The shot-gun, terrorism, fraud, violence,
did it.” In 1872 Republicans in
Mississippi, Republicans cast 82,000 votes, but in 1878 they cast 1,168. Storrs
said: “The shot-gun reduced it; the bludgeon reduced
it; the gentle ministrations of the White Leaguers and the Ku-Klux reduced it.
His remarks were partisan, made in a political year, but they are accurate.[8]
[1]C. T. Russell: God's Chosen People - Part II, Overland
Monthly, March 1910, page 323.
[2]J. I . Wince: Christian Conduct and Conversation, The
Restitution, May 21, 1879.
[3]The expression “Man’s extremity will become God’s
opportunity” traces back to at least 1629 and is found in Adam’s Works published
that year. Defoe used it, and in a 1798 George Whitfield described the
phrase as “an old saying.” [An Extract of a Letter from a Gentleman in Ireland;
to Mr. William Thompson, London, page 8.] It was still in common usage in
the late 19th Century.
[4]C. T. Russell: The Plan of the Ages, Millennial
Dawn, volume 1, Tower Publishing, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, 1886, pages
266-268.
[5]F.
A. Walker: United States Centennial Commission, International Exhibition, 1878.
Reports and Awards – Group XV. , J. B. Lippencott, Philadelphia, 1877, page 4.
[6]Circuit Court and Oyer and Terminer, The Saratoga,
New York, Sentinel, October 7, 1880.
[7]The Great Republican Speeches of the Campaign of
1880, Staten Island Publishing Company, Stapleton, New York, 1881, pages 38ff.
I need your comments sooner rather than later. Please.
Christians
were to be holy and take the Gospel message to their neighbors. They were to
maintain a correct relationship to the state. Russell discussed a Christian’s
relationship to governments in 1886. Writing in The Plan of the Ages he
said:
Man’s extremity will become
God's opportunity,[1] and “the desire of all
nations shall come” – the Kingdom of God, in power and great glory. (Hag. 2:7) Knowing
this to be the purpose of God, neither Jesus nor the apostles interfered with
earthly rulers in any way. On the contrary, they taught the Church to submit to
these powers, even though they often suffered under their abuse of power. They
taught the Church to obey the laws, and to respect those in authority because
of their office, even if they were not personally worthy of esteem; to pay
their appointed taxes, and, except where they conflicted with God's laws (Acts
4:19; 5:29), to offer no resistance to any established law. (Rom. 13:1-7; Matt.
22:21) The Lord Jesus and the apostles and the early Church were all law-abiding,
though they were separate from, and took no share in, the governments of this
world.
Though the powers that be, the
governments of this world, were ordained or arranged for by God, that mankind might
gain a needed experience under them, yet the Church, the consecrated ones who
aspire to office in the coming Kingdom of God, should neither covet the honors and
the emoluments of office in the kingdoms of this world, nor should they oppose
these powers. They are fellow citizens and heirs of the heavenly kingdom (Eph. 2:19),
and as such should claim only such rights and privileges under the kingdoms of
this world as are accorded to aliens. Their mission is not to help the world to
improve its present condition, nor to have anything to do with its affairs at
present. To attempt to do so would be but a waste of effort; for the world's
course and its termination are both clearly defined in the Scriptures and are
fully under the control of him who in his own time will give us the kingdom. The
influence of the true Church is now and always has been small – so small as to
count practically nothing politically; but however great it might appear, we
should follow the example and teaching of our Lord and the apostles. Knowing that
the purpose of God is to let the world fully test its own ability to govern
itself, the true Church should not, while in it, be of the world. The saints
may influence the world only by their separateness from it, by letting their
light shine; and thus through their lives the spirit of truth reproves the world. Thus – as peaceable,
orderly obeyers and commenders of every righteous law, reprovers of lawlessness
and sin, and pointers forward to the promised Kingdom of God and the blessings
to be expected under it, and not by the method commonly adopted of mingling in
politics and scheming with the world for power, and thus being drawn into wars
and sins and the general degradation – in glorious chastity should the
prospective Bride of the Prince of Peace be a power for good, as her Lord's
representative in the world.
The Church of God should give
its entire attention and effort to preaching the Kingdom of God, and to the
advancement of the interests of that Kingdom according to the plan laid down in
the Scriptures. If this is faithfully done, there will be no time nor [sic] disposition
to dabble in the politics of present governments. The Lord had no time for it;
the apostles had no time for it; nor have any of the saints who are following
their example.
The early Church, shortly after
the death of the apostles, fell a prey [sic] to this very temptation. The
preaching of the coming Kingdom of God, which would displace all earthly kingdoms,
and of the crucified Christ as the heir of that Kingdom, was unpopular, and
brought with it persecution, scorn and contempt. But some thought to improve on
God's plan, and, instead of suffering, to get the Church into a position of
favor with the world. By a combination with earthly powers they succeeded. As a
result Papacy was developed, and in time became the mistress and queen of
nations. – Rev. 17:3-5; 18:7.
By this policy everything was
changed: instead of suffering, came honor; instead of humility, came pride;
instead of truth, came error; and instead of being persecuted, she became the
persecutor of all who condemned her new and illegal honors.[2]
[Analysis here]
[1]The expression “Man’s extremity will become God’s
opportunity” traces back to at least 1629 and is found in Adam’s Works published
that year. Defoe used it, and in a 1798 George Whitfield described the
phrase as “an old saying.” [An Extract of a Letter from a Gentleman in
Ireland; to Mr. William Thompson, London, page 8.] It was still in common
usage in the late 19th Century.
[2]C. T. Russell: The Plan of the Ages, Millennial
Dawn, volume 1, Tower Publishing, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, 1886, pages
266-268.
The 1919 date is from the library that owns a copy of this photo. But Bernard points out that this is really from 1922. Herewith another view, courtesy of Bernard. Note the 1922 date:
A recent article on this blog discussed the Russells’
(father and son) business venture as music publishers in 1872. This was known
in Separate Identity volume 1, which reproduced the one known piece of sheet
music they published on page 333. It was called The Evening Prayer. The recent article
discussed the background of this piece, written by Blessner and Pershing for a
local Pittsburgh college.
It is curious that out of all the different
businesses CTR and his father tried, this one was still viewed as worthy of
mention in a court case over forty years later!
The case was the famous 1913 Russell vs. Brooklyn
Eagle trial, generally known as the “miracle wheat” trial. In a review of
Russell’s various business ventures, W E Van Amburgh included a music business.
The reference is in the transcript on page 320, section 959.
Van Amberg (sic) did not become a director of the
corporation until 1901, and this exchange took place in 1913, both events
decades after the 1872 music publishing. He would have had no first-hand
knowledge of Russell’s stores. Yet out of all of Russell’s past business
ventures it is curious that the music store should still be referenced.
Maybe somewhere there is still more to be
discovered.
Accordingly,
evangelization of the majority of mankind was reserved for the Millennial Age. In
what he called “the gospel age,” the age in which they lived, the heaven-bound
Bride of Christ was the target of their evangelism. They would be transformed,
counted as justified, perfect humans, and then counted as the sprit creatures
they would become in fact on their translation or resurrection to heaven:
During this age, as many as now hear (“He that
hath an ear let him hear,”) the good news are by it informed that Christ
died for our sins, that the price of sin has been paid, and they are justified,
if they believe it, and that they can come unto God not as sinners but
as righteous persons, and by faith call God “Father.” It is as justified
(perfect) fleshly beings that they now call God Father – because
in God’s sight restored to the condition occupied by Adam before he became a
sinner ... . The next step for these justified beings to take, is to consecrate
their justified flesh (being) to God. “Present your bodies a living
sacrifice,” present it to God alive, for his service.[1]
That
salvation for the majority of mankind would await salvation until after Christ’s
return was not original to Russell. None of his theology was. His belief that
the world of mankind came to salvation after Christ’s second advent was an
extension of Reform [in this case Congregationalist] theology as represented by
Jonathan Edwards [1703-1758] and other American colonial era participants in
the first Great Awakening. Edwards’ view of the matter was:
It is very dangerous for God's professing people to
lie still, and not to come to the help of the Lord, whenever he remarkably
pours out his Spirit, to carry on the work of redemption in the application of
it; but above all, when he comes forth, to introduce that happy day of God's power
and salvation, so often spoken of.' That is especially the appointed season of
the application of redemption. The appointed time of Christ's reign. The reign
of Satan as god of this world lasts till then; but afterwards will be the
proper time of actual redemption, or new creation, as is evident bv Isa. Ixv.
17, 18, &c. and Ixvi. 12. and Heb. xxi. 1. All the outpourings of the
Spirit of God before this, are as it were by way of anticipation. There was
indeed a glorious season of the application of redemption in the first ages of
the Christian church, which began at Jerusalem, on the day of Pentacost;but that was not the proper time of ingathering. It was only as it were the
feast of first-fruits; the ingathering is at the end of the year, or in the
last ages of the Christian church, as is represented, Rev. xiv. 14-16. and will
probably as much exceed what was in the first ages of the Christian church,
though that filled the Roman empire, as that exceeded all that had been
before, under the Old Testament, confined only to the land of Judea.[2]
Edwards
thoughts echoed through American Congregationalism into Russell’s day. It is
hard to imagine that Russell did not hear preaching that restated Edwards. He
accepted it a soundly Biblical.
With
some considerable quibbling and qualification, traditional churches found
Russell’s explanation of justification questionable. For William Coit Stevens,
objections derived from the non-Trinitarianism behind Watch Tower theology, and
Watch Tower teaching that the Bride has a role in the sacrifice of Christ.[3]
Current Watchtower teaching strongly resembles Russell’s exposition here,
though it rejects any thought of the heavenly Bride of Christ as part of the
ransom sacrifice. The key point, however, is that Watch Tower adherents were to
present their bodies as a living sacrifice to God, doing his will and seeking
others of God’s choosing.
[1]C. T. Russell: In the Flesh, Zion’s Watch Tower¸
April 1881, pages 3-4.
[2]The Works of Jonathan Edwards, William Ball,
London, 1839, Volume 1, page 383.
[3]W. C. Stevens: Why I Reject the “Helping Hand” of
Millennial Dawn, M. G. McClinton & Co., San Francisco, California,
1915, pages 111-112.
It
seems to me that there is a lot of discussion about what Russel was teaching
but much of it is left out. In particular, what he was professing would soon
occur and the dates he put forward. Much of the focus is on his teachings which
do have a lot of Biblical backing for them but little or no discussion on his
false teachings. For instance, what exactly was this upcoming 'gospel age' that
he was advocating and did he set a date for this or for Armageddon?
As
side issues, this presents us with interesting fare. The tracts were free, paid
for primarily out of Russell’s pocket and secondarily by contributions to the
Tract Fund. The modern Watchtower Society declined to allow us access to the
ledger book from this period, which still exists. We do not know why.
Do you have any proof that the tracts were primarily paid for from Russell's
pocket primarily? This is especially in view of the fact that you admit to not
having access to the ledgers of that time.
It is possible that what was printed in publications about the
funding at that time was deceptive, just as the current Watchtower is today. So
much discussion is made about the free tracts and little on the publications/bibles
he sold.
The tracts served the purpose of advertising and it was
through them that individuals were encouraged to purchase more substantial
publications.
But
in terms of income levels in the 1880s, an immense amount of money was expended
to provide evangelizers with free tracts. This gives the lie to the claims of
some former-adherents that the Watch Tower was founded by Russell as a money
making scheme. It was a money-losing proposition
The fact that the tracts were distributed at no cost in no way proves that
Russell was not establishing a money making scheme. In many businesses you've
got to create a market who is ready and willing to part with their money for
more of your products. Many businessmen expect a loss in the initial years in
order to reap profits in the following years. There are various methods that
businesses use to encourage people to purchase their products. Providing free
samples or advertising in brochures are just two, both methods being used by
Russell and who knows what else because there is little discussion about this.
His venture into his Photo-Drama of Creation was another
innovative project which he was prepared to gamble on.
The
message of God’s Love contrasted with the message of fear preached in
Christendom. In Russell’s view God would save the bulk of humanity, in what
some call “near-universal salvation.”
I cannot see any substantiation regarding the claim that his message did not
include a measure of fear, just as Christendom's does. If the idea is that more
humans would be saved under Russell's idea's than under Christendom’s, this
doesn't mean you can claim there was no fear being taught through his
doctrines. To also claim that all of Christendom were preaching fear is not
proven and may well be false.
His
passion for individual and public testimony shows through despite his
questionable punctuation and grammar. And to his readership it was the passion
that mattered. They saw it as founded on Biblical “truth.”
I find this comment intriguing. It would have been more correct to claim
"His passion for individual and public testimony shows through despite his
questionable teachings of Biblical 'truth'." And then you follow on with a
significant comment in saying that it was his passion that mattered to his
readers. That seems to be very much the case because his teachings could not
hold water on their own.
In
conclusion, I find the blog very biased and it seems that the writer has been
moved by his passion.
de vienne
Dear Listener,
You misapprehend the
nature of what you read. We do not write either a polemic or defense of the
Watch Tower. We write history based on the original documents. What you read is
a partial of a much larger work, not even a complete chapter. We deal with
Russell’s predictive failure elsewhere. For instance in volume one of Separate
Identity we included a chapter entitled Aftermath of Failure. That chapter
discusses the 1878 failure. We have another that will appear in volume two [the
extract you read is part of vol. 2] that discusses Russellite expectations for
1881.
You ask about the
Gospel Age, calling it “up-coming.” Our text makes it clear that in Russell’s
dispensationalist view it was ending. He thought it would end at or near 1914.
We deal with that in another chapter.
Do we have proof
that the tracts were primarily paid for by Russell? Yes, we do, and we include
a chapter [vol. 2, nearing completion] entitled Organizing and Financing the
Work. Put briefly, in the 1880s Russell’s readers were relatively poor due
to a series of post-Civil War recessions and depressions. We have some pages
from the Watch Tower ledger, sent to us by someone connected to the
Watchtower’s writing department and by the Watchtower itself. Most of these
list expenses. One lists the major contributors by name and amount. Russell
leads the list by far. We include the full text of that page in a later
chapter. Additionally, over his lifetime Russell contributed a quarter million
dollars to the WTS. WT ‘shares’ were issued if requested for each ten dollars
in contributions. The number of Russell’s shares reveals the amount he
contributed. He was majority share-holder until his death, and outstanding
shares did not pass his in number until near his death.
Court testimony
(Russell v. Russell and Russell v. Brooklyn Eagle] shows that Society
publications were sold at a loss or simply given away. The partial chapter you
read concentrates on the years 1879-1886. All publications were given away free
except for a few remaining copies of Object and Manner which were available in
large lots for ten cents. Colporteurs got everything for free, keeping money
from subscriptions obtained to defray expenses. In this period there were no “more
substantial publications.” Money for Paton’s Day Dawn went to Paton and A. D.
Jones, his publisher; not to Russell. Russell paid for copies and gave them
away at no cost to those who would circulate them. This was at a financial loss
to Russell.
He offered a few
Bibles and concordances at a break-even discount. From 1881 when Zion’s Watch
Tower Tract Society was founded until 1887, the cut off year for Separate
Identity, our book, the Society was deeply in debt. A donation of Florida lands
by the Russells reduced the debt but did not put the Society in the black.
You write: “It is
possible that what was printed ... about the funding at that time was
deceptive.” Historians shouldn’t speculate. And that’s what this is. Ethically,
we can’t make things up. We must be guided by available documentation – by that
I mean original material, not secondary sources – unless there is a compelling
reason to reject the original claims. If you can find proof that the WTS
financial statements are deceptive, we will happily include it in this chapter.
But ‘proof’ isn’t speculation; it is something in a trustworthy contemporary
document.
In the period on
which we concentrate [to 1887] ZWT operated at a loss. Later when forced to
open the books in the two court cases I mentioned earlier, it was demonstrated
that even Studies in the Scriptures circulated at a net loss. The books did not
pay their way.
By message of
“fear,” Russell meant Hell-Fire doctrine. We should clarify that. You wrote:
“This doesn’t mean there was no fear being taught through his doctrine.” You
mistake current Watchtower practice with Russell era practice. Your statement
exemplifies a common logic fault. You presume something was true because you
want it to be true. At this point you give us unfounded speculation.
Speculation drives research, but alone it is unsound. If you can find in
something Russell wrote some form of fear mongering, point me to it. We’ll
happily use it in the next volume of Separate Identity.
Simply because the
narrowly focused extract from this chapter leads to a conclusion differing from
a commonly expressed opposition narrative is no reason to call us biased. We
present in footnotes our sources. You have no sources except personal opinion.
“Could be” and speculation are not a refutation. Evidence from original sources
would be.
I
should add that admission to the Photo Drama was free, at considerable
expense to the Watch Tower Society. So, how does it contribute to your
belief that Russell made money off of it?
“Put briefly, in the 1880s Russell’s readers were relatively poor due to
a series of post-Civil War recessions and depressions.”
Were these the "Panics" of the latter 19th century? (Crop
failures, financial speculation, unemployment, etc.)
de Vienne
Contributions were
not as forthcoming as he wished. The January 1885 Zion’s Watch Tower reported on the state of the tract fund for the two
previous years, starting with the deficit of $2571.34 that existed at the start
of 1883. Expenditures for the period from January 1, 1882 – December 31, 1884,
totaled $2,366.10. The fund remained in deficit nearly twenty-five hundred
dollars. The loss of ‘two or more’ significant contributors unquestionably
affected the work, as did an economic downturn that started in 1884 and
continued into the next year. Russell commented on it and its effects:
The opening year finds the whole world in a state of
financial depression which will doubtless be worse before improvement comes.
Since we are advised in Scripture that the Day of the Lord’s presence will be a
time of trouble such as was not since there was a nation, some may be inclined
to anticipate too much, too speedily. This is a tendency which all need to
guard against. We should not for a moment lose sight of the apostles striking
illustration of the trouble of this day, as recorded in 1 Thes. 5:3. From this
illustration we should expect spasmodic trouble and distress of nations: and
that these will become more frequent and more serious until they reach the
climax stated by the prophet, and result in the death of present systems and
the delivery of the children of this world into the New and better, the ‘golden’
Millennial age, in which the King of righteousness shall rule and reign Lord of
all, blessing all the families of earth.[1]
The
financial depression of 1885 was the culmination of several years of
compounding problems in the United States, Canada and elsewhere. Edwin Earl
Sparks, a contemporary historian, summarized the complex crisis this way:
The crops of 1883 although surpassing the unfortunate
yield of 1881 were scarcely up to the average, and the corn crop fell nearly
four hundred million bushels behind. Large quantities of stocks and bonds had
been watered by extensions and consolidations which could not be expected to
yield immediate dividends, and they declined steadily during the year. Northern
Pacific threw on the market in October 1883 an issue of twenty million dollars
and created a mild panic. More than ten thousand firms became bankrupt during
1882, a larger number than marked any year since 1873. Causes for the
depression were found in over-production, financial troubles abroad, over-railroad
building, and capital lying idle because rates of interest were unattractive.[2]
This
dry summary doesn’t contribute as much to our understanding as does Russell’s
caution against seeing in the world’s financial travail a prophetic
fulfillment. People were hurting financially. Many Watch Tower readers were not well off, and even those who were had
to watch their pennies. The basics, food to eat and coal to heat with, were
scarce and expensive. Jobs dissipated. A United States government report said:
Out of the total
number of establishments, such as factories, mines, etc., existing in the
country, about eight per cent were absolutely idle during the year ending July
1, 1885, and perhaps five per cent more were idle a part of such time; or, for
a just estimate, seven and a half per cent of the whole number of such
establishments were idle, or equivalent to idle, during the year named. . . .
Making allowance for the persons engaged in other occupations, 998,839
constituted ‘the best estimate’ of the possibly unemployed in the United States
during the year ending July 1, 1885 (many of the unemployed, those who under
prosperous times would be fully employed, and who during the time mentioned
were seeking employment), that it has been possible for the Bureau to make. ...
A million people out of employment, crippling all dependent upon them, means a
loss to the consumptive power of the country of at least $1,000,000 per day, or
a crippling of the trade of the country of over $300,000,000 per annum.[3]
If God supported the work, he
supported it out of the pockets of believers who were in straightened
circumstances. Contributions lagged. With the publication of The Plan of the Ages in 1886, Russell
changed his approach to circulating Watch Tower publications. It soon became
apparent that The Plan of the Ages would
not pay its own way. The volumes of Millennial
Dawn were sold at a loss through most of their printing life. This was a
result of philosophy and practicality. Russell turned to a colportage to circulate
Millennial Dawn and the Tract Society’s
books and booklets. The booklets were often given away freely, and the
agreement with the colporteurs allowed them as much support from the
circulation of books as the Watch Tower Society could manage.
de Vienne:
Dear Eye,
Much of what is written about both men is not exactly true, sometimes
blatantly false. But I'd never claim that their belief systems were Biblical or
that their personal lives were without fault. Because there is so much written
by both sides that is wrong, or incomplete, or misleading, we're taking extreme
care to be accurate; to tell the story as bluntly and plainly as we can. We
base our work on original sources, some of which have been buried for 100 years
or more.
We've found and continue to find material hidden in archives leading us to
places where Proclaimers will not take you. We've also found astounding
misrepresentation in books some of which are seen as authoritative. And example
is a book written in 1945 by a Presbyterian minister who wrote as a
sociologist. He manufactured quotations. Following his work to the sources he
cites shows him to be pretty much a bloody liar.
Then there is plain ignorance. Watchtower books mention people favorably who
never were adherents or who left for other belief systems and they do not tell
you that. I think they do not know it. Watchtower 'histories' are unfootnoted
except for Jehovah's Witnesses in the Divine Purpose; I have an instant
distrust of something that presents itself as a history that fails to footnote.
In fairness, I should observe that there are respected authors who've done the
same.
We footnote everything because we want our readers to be able to follow our
train. We think those who read our books have working minds. I am never
disturbed by someone making a decision off available information.. We want the
narrative to be refreshed and accurate. As I said earlier, most of what is out
there on the Internet and in already published books is false or misleading.
There are exceptions. Zoe Knox's new book is worth a read. It is very
expensive, but you should be able to read it via interlibrary loan. The trend
among historians now is to question everything. And to dig deeper. No history
is without a least minor faults, but Besier and Stokosa's Jehovah's
Witnesses in Europe Past and Present, a multi volume work with essays be
'experts' in their field is as close as one comes. If we make a decision based
on a group's history, we should verify what we read.
[1]View from the Tower, Zion’s Watch Tower, January 1885, page
1.
[2]E. E. Sparks: The American Nation: A History. National Development, 1877-1885, Harper & Bros. New York, 1907,
pages 328-329.
[3]Report on Industrial Depression,
United States Bureau of Labor, 1886, as quoted in David A. Wells: Recent Economic Changes and Their Effect on
the Production and Distribution of Wealth and the Well Being of Society, D.
Appleton & Co., New York, 1899, page 18.
