For Comment - Temporary Post

Someone at Patterson visits this blog seeking information about Rachael's point of view. I herewith oblige, though they have to find it on their own. Comments are welcome. However, other than some proof reading this will not change. My intro to it explains why.

Introductory Essay 2 – By R. M. de Vienne

Editor’s Note

This is Rachael’s Essay as it stood on the day she died. Our agreement was that it was hers to write without my interference. She may be gone, but our agreement stands. So, though we discussed planned revisions, additions and changes, they weren’t made, and I present it to you as she left it. It includes some statements that I probably would not have made. However, while I do not see the wisdom behind a criticism or two, I do not see anything she presents as without basis in fact, though her interpretation may differ from mine.

An advance reader expressed upset at her description of the Watchtower Society product Jehovah’s Witnesses: Proclaimers of God’s Kingdom as hagiography. The person who found this offensive is not a native English speaker. Before you reject that description, I suggest consulting a dictionary.

            It’s taken longer to write this volume of Separate Identity than we anticipated, but as with the two previous books, few of our expectations have stood up under the light of better research. We believed that a second volume would complete our research. It has not done so. There will be, assuming we live long enough to complete it, a third and final volume.

            This volume differs in format from its predecessor. The first volume follows a loose chronological order. Because of its narrow focus primarily on the years 1879 to 1882, this volume is a series of essays each focusing on an aspect of Watch Tower transition into a separate, identifiable belief system. There is a looser chronological order here; and the chapters occasionally overlap each other in subject matter. You will find some repetition of points. We’ve tried to limit this, but that it occurs is unavoidable. As before, we elected to present this history in as much detail as we can, hoping thereby to take our readers into the spirit of the times. Omission seems to us to be misdirection.

            Volume 3 will focus on the fragmentation that followed 1881 and the issues surrounding the publication of The Plan of the Ages. It is partially written, but much hard research remains. Though some of the continuing issues between Barbour and Russell fall into the years we consider here, they are part of the history destined for volume 3 and will appear there. As always, we’re hampered by lack of resources. We have few issues of key magazines. We do not have anything like a complete run of A. P. Adams’ Spirit of the Word. We miss key years of J. H. Paton’s The World’s Hope. A paper published in California exists as a few clippings pasted into a scrapbook. A booklet written by Barbour seems to have been lost. We do not have any of the first issues of Jones’ Day Star. We appreciate help locating things like these.

            Now, let me tell you about volume two. We tell you about the Watch Tower’s principals’ struggle to preserve the body of believers, to transition Barbourite believers into Watch Tower adherents. We tell you about their earliest missionary journeys, drawing much of this from sources not referenced by anyone else. We introduce you to people mentioned only once or twice in Zion’s Watch Tower but who played an important role in its earliest years. We tell you about the nature of the earliest congregations and fellowships and how they were formed. Again, we draw on first-hand experiences not found in any history of the movement. We tell you about the reaffirmation of old doctrines and the discussions behind that.

            The movement attracted clergy. We discuss this in some detail, naming names, telling the story as we could uncover it of several clergy turned Watch Tower believers. In 1881 Russell and a few others organized and provided initial financing for the work. We provide details not found elsewhere, and we correct a widely-spread error. We tell you about the start of the publishing ministry and the development of the Priesthood of All Believers doctrine among Watch Tower adherents. A key event was the printing and circulation of Food for Thinking Christians. We offer our readers a full discussion of this small book’s circulation and its effects on readership. With the circulation of Food new workers entered the field. The Watchtower society has ignored these, especially John B. Adamson, in its histories. Adamson and some others among the earliest missionaries left the Watch Tower movement. Watchtower writers tend to ignore the contributions of those who defected from the movement. It is probably safe to say that much of this history is unknown to Watchtower researchers – or at least unacknowledged by them. It’s not their focus.

            An important part of this era’s story is the spread of Watch Tower doctrine to various ethnic groups within the United States and to other lands. So we tell you about work among foreign language groups in the United States. The von Zechs and a Norwegian sea captain are part of this story. We tell you about the early work in Canada, the United Kingdom, China, and other lands. We discuss at length the history of a man mentioned with favor in Jehovah’s Witnesses: Proclaimers of God’s Kingdom.[1] His story is far different from what the author of that book presumed. We tell you about the early work in Liberia. [This history appeared first as B. W. Schulz: “Watch Tower Faith in Liberia: A Conflict of Faith and Authority,” Nsukka Journal of History, University of Nigeria, Volume 4, 2017, page 31ff.] Almost none of this has been published anywhere except in the original documents.

            Eighteen eighty-one was a key year in Watch Tower history. Most of those who mention that year’s events misstate them. We do our best to correct the misdirection and misstatement common among recent writers. We think we provide a more complete picture of the Watch Tower’s earliest years, a more balanced picture than found elsewhere.

            Read Mr. Schulz’ Introductory Essay. It clarifies issues that confuse some writers. It puts Russell and the Watch Tower movement in a historical perspective often misstated or ignored by recent writers. A later chapter takes up attempts by some historians and sociologists to place the Watch Tower movement within one of the current theoretical frameworks. We suggest that they ignore key elements of the Watch Tower belief system so that their theories are questionable. 

the remainder of this post has been deleted.

CTR "in color"

(with grateful thanks to Brian K)

1906

1911

1911

1911

1914

From L to R - Robert Hollister, J A Bohnet, C T Russell.

1916

I'm off for emergency surgery

I will be unavailable for most of the next two weeks.

Translate this?

Can any of our German speakers translate and transcribe this. I can understand parts of it, but not all of it. Anyone?

Thanks and a Comment

This is a ‘card of thanks’ to those who recently contributed to my research fund. Your contributions allowed me to acquire some rare material, including a book that was available to me only as a partial and poorly done photocopy. Originals are fragile and rare, and they’re not available through Inter-Library Loan because of that. The last one I saw for sale cost four hundred dollars. With some considerable negotiation and by selling something to add to the fund, I was able to acquire this book for just under one hundred dollars. Yes, original research is expensive.

If I live long enough to write it, research for a book on the World War One era will entail massive expense. But that’s way in the future. Two other multi-volume books will come between Separate Identity and that. Probably, given my age, this simply will not happen.

Someone recommended A. Vandenberg’s article printed in the January 1986 Western Pennsylvania Historical Magazine. I am aware of it. Before I comment further, I should disclose that I knew Al Vandenberg. We worked for the same school district, and we discussed Witness history. My view of him is colored by our history, and, while I will be as fair as possible with my comments, you should know this. I saw him, despite his ‘awards,’ as a sloppy teacher and worse researcher. He declined access to original material that would have changed what he wrote. His personal behavior was questionable, and later he was convicted of child-rape and sent to prison. Not at all a good companion.

This does not mean I will not reference this article at some point. But his article is based on personal opinion and shallow research. It is based on secondary, faulty, and misleading sources, and though it is not as obvious, it is a Catholic apologetic. I won’t analyze his article in detail. But you should know that using it as authoritative perils your own research.

Vandenberg cites interviews with then living opposing clergy. None of them were authorities; they just said what he liked, what he wanted to hear. Similar interviews may put you on the right trail, but they do not and cannot prove anything. If one stops there, breathes a sigh of satisfaction, and uses the material, one provides to his readers very faulty work. It is similar to cutting out a photo of ice cream and trying to serve it as desert.

One of the items acquired ...

Recent support for my research fund allowed me to finally acquire this, and at a very reasonable price for the item. Thanks to those who support this project! [You may have to 'click' on the image to see the entire picture.]

Some of you will find this useful

Storrs and others

https://archive.org/details/18431880BibleExaminerGeorgeStorrs/page/n467

Books

There are three titles available to me, each costing about fifty dollars. I cannot pay this, even though the amount is relatively small.

Among those publications I need is Pearson's Six General Signs of Our Lord's Return. A good, clear scan would do. 

Thanks to the generosity of a faithful blog reader, I no longer need Pearson's booklet.

Also ... for those who are interested in Storrs, there is this:

https://www.ebay.com/itm/1817-NEWTON-DISSERTATIONS-ON-THE-PROPHECIES-2-VOLS-CALF-BINDINGS/323745662949?hash=item4b60bec7e5:g:49QAAOSwHNtckorz

I have this, purchased about twenty years ago. This is a very reasonable price. If you're interested. Storrs quoted from Newton. I do not know if Russell read this book, and I believe any influence from it came through Storrs.

John H Paton - Civil War Reunion

(reprinted)

This photo of men of the 22nd Michigan Infantry, Volunteer 1st Division Reserve Corps, was taken on the occasion of the dedication ceremonies of the Chicamauga and Chattanooga Military Park on September 18, 1895. The monument is located in the Chicamauga Battlefield section of the park, a little northwest of Snodgrass House.

The men appear to be wearing tags commemorating the dedication ceremonies and their reunion at the site where they engaged in a Civil War conflict 32 years earlier. Some are also wearing battle ribbons.

The man kneeling above where the photo is marked with an X is John H. Paton. Kneeling next to him is his brother David, and standing to the right of him is their brother William. The men were, respectfully, 52, 56, and 50 years old when the photo was taken.

Photograph and description kindly supplied some years ago by JPM, a great grandson of John H. Paton.

More on THAT picture

Here is a photograph of C T Russell in his study at the Pittsburgh Bible House c. 1906. Notice the picture on the wall in the top left hand corner of this photograph.

If you look very closely, this is the photograph under discussion. It is a picture taken of the workers at the Bible House. I now have two copies, one marked 1899 and the other 1902. Both came from a relative of W E Van Amburgh. As to which is the correct year, a lot would depend on when the Henninges were in America, between visits to Britain, then Germany, and finally Australia. Bernhard might have those details.

It's trivia - but fun.

Addenda

Bernhard kindly sent through a lot of information on the group photograph which establishes 1902 (or shortly thereafter) as the correct date.

You see on the group photo brother William Van Amburgh and left brother George Garman. Both became members of the Bible House family in autumn 1900. So the photo couldn’t be taken before 1900.

Ernest and Rosa (Rose) Henninges were in England from April 1900 till November 1901 and than he came back to Pittsburgh. They stayed there till June 1903; than they went to Germany. So the photo couldn’t be taken before November 1901.

Otto Koetitz and his wife Jennie succeeded Henninges in November 1903 in Germany. Otto was a coworker in Bethel from 1896 followed by his wife in 1900.

Albert Williamson became a member of the Bible House staff in 1899. Harriet Stark (who married him in 1905) and her mother Britee C. Stark began to work in the Bethel in 1900.

Laura Whitehouse lived also there since 1900.

Johannes Gotthold Kuehn came also in 1900 to the Bible House as a part-time worker. His wife Ottilie Friederike and son Alfred followed in 1902.

So this brings us to the date of 1902, maybe early 1903.

Full Photo with Identification - From Bernard

1902 Photo

Click on image to see entire.

Photo

Ernest Charles and Rose Ball Henninges at the rear. William E Van Amburgh in the front.

Rough Draft for Comments

This post is temporary. Do not copy it or share it off the blog. I'm posting it for comments. If you fail to comment you defeat the purpose of this post. If you can add to it in a meaningful way, please do so. Please keep comments on point. Remember this is not a controversialist web page. This is a history blog.

This will come down on Monday. If you intend to comment, now is the time.

Evangelical Voice

            Personal evangelism was characteristic of the age especially among millennialists. Belief in Christ’s near return meant that spreading the message was urgent. The New Testament suggests that Christians share that message, and millennialists saw doing so as an imperative obligation. Millennialist belief was widely spread in Churches, even when the pastor rejected it. Believers were susceptible to the message, no less so to the Watch Tower message. Post Civil War, mainline American churches reached a fragile peace among themselves with a tacit agreement, not always observed, to not criticize each other. Millennialists, including Watch Tower adherents, felt free – even obligated – to criticize the lack of moral and scriptural adherence among the denominations. Clergy reacted strongly and negatively, but for Milennialists, “imminence has meant that the individual must be ever-vigilant for the Lord’s return.”[1] This, in turn, meant that they shared their beliefs and expectations.

            Russell era evangelism is the foundation upon which the descendant religions – Jehovah’s Witnesses and Bible Student congregations – are built. Yet, its origins are left unexplored. Watchtower writers focus on a few key events: An article in the April 1881 Watch Tower, Rutherford’s Advertise the Kingdom speech; the circulation of Food for Thinking Christians. These events are related with minimal or no connection to their context. Secular and opposition writers do no better, drawing almost everything they say from Watchtower Society commentary, presenting an similar history. A regrettable exception is found in A. T. Rogerson’s D.Phil. thesis. He discusses Russell-era evangelism with the same carelessness that he demonstrated in his previously published book:

The remainder of this post was deleted.