Answer to an email from another historian ...

If he gives me permission, I'll post his email too, but I don't have permission yet. So herewith is my answer sans the original email:

Update: I now have permision to post it. Here it is:

Just wanted to update you on my progress. I received your book last week. I have read it including almost all the footnotes. And have highlighted most every page with red pen so that I can go back and zero in on certain points, which I plan to do.
 

I very much appreciate your labor of love on this project. From my own areas of research, I understand how much work and tedious effort goes into such a production. As authors and researchers, you excel at this task.
 

Through your hard work I am beginning to perceive that the type of people interested in the issues and the various publications that dealt with them represented a broad Circle or “network” of truth seekers, rather than simply “Adventists” or “Age to Come” folk. It seems to me that several papers churned various doctrinal discussions back and forth, with replies and republications of articles shared between them all.
 

I would think that many of the readership(s) subscribed not to just one of the papers, but to two or more. Even though each paper “represented” a particular slant or interpretation, nevertheless subscribers not fully attached to that view read and often replied to articles appearing in various papers. In this way, it seems that there was a body of truth seekers spanning several “churches”/”parties”/”ministries”/”works” including those tending to One Faith, Age to Come, Bible Students, Church of God groups, or even Sabbatarian Age to Comers who were strongly opposed to SDA E. G. White’s control. 
 

Seems most of these shared a common belief in the literal Millennium with Israel restored at some point to lead the nations under the transformed Elect. Within this Circle there was intense interest in restoring Biblical truths concerning such areas as: restoration, restitution, probation, Lords Supper, feet washing, Passover, OT types, state of dead, fate of the wicked, role and fate of Satan, identity of Israel and return to Land, name of church, nature of Jesus, preexistence, trinity, holy Spirit, etc. The papers served to keep all these “hot” issues “popping” before the churches and scattered individuals within this network/Circle.
 

What is becoming apparent to me is that the borders between these participants were “soft” as members migrated from one part of the Circle and in some case back around again. Even when the groups themselves wanted harder boundaries, members within those closed groups would often find themselves moving on and around over time.
 

Thus, the labels we tend to use, such as Life and Advent, Church of God, One Faith, Christadelphian, Jehovah Witnesses, Age to Come, etc. may be rather artificial attempts to pigeon-hole members of the faithful Circle so as to forge some kind of device by which to fix them in place for examination. From what I read from your work, even the “leaders” and “founders” and publishers of these “groups” over time often developed new ideas and took new directions, within the larger Circle.
 

During this period of the nineteenth century, in order for truth seekers within this larger Circle to communicate their studies and ideas, they had recourse to attending church, conferences, guest speakers and receiving items by snail mail such as paper publications. This was there “connectivity.” This was their means to a “network.” Had they been here today, they would be using the internet and participating in “discussion groups” and “list servers.” Too, they would likely be meeting on the weekend with local people of like minds, but would hasten back to their internet connections at home to share ideas and debate with others within this broader, and often divergent Circle. During the period of the early Russell, this broader network functions similarly, but by means of the dozens of publications and itinerant teachers, instead of the internet and dozens of list servers.

The model that I am trying to describe may be contrasted to my previous view which did not see the connectivity between all these many groups, but saw each of them as sealed off from the others more tightly than they actually were. That wrong perception probably arose due to my reading about each of these groups, churches, sects in handbooks of denominations which would have each one located in its own chapter with its own doctrines categorized. This presented a static “cookie cutter” version of reality that hid the dynamic organic nature of these people whose lives were dedicated to searching and seeking the “kingdom of God” wherever there seemed to be a revelation of it.
 

Please feel free to correct or modify my current perceptions of these issues.
 

I will continue to reflect on your book and the material in it.

Best Regards,

Phil Arnold, Ph.D.

My reply:

Yes, there was drift between the two primary millennialist groups, Adventists and Literalist Age-to-Come believers. Age to come was in turn divided into smaller parties which included on one side the Christadelphians and on the other small independent congregations, sometimes the only representative of their unique doctrine. The Restitution represented the most active and committed and most numerous of the age to come bodies in this era.

They did read each other’s papers and magazines, often commenting on something found in other papers. This practice decreased some after 1880. Advent Christians and Church of Christ (age to come, not Campbellite) believers broke off association in that era. References to World’s Crisis, the main AC publication, decline in The Restitution after that. This would change again, somewhat by mid 20^th Century.

We find Watch Tower adherents reading a number of Adventist and Age to Come journals. Interest in Advent Christian and Life and Advent Union periodicals seems to die sometime near 1883-1885. They continued to read Restitution for several more years, to sometime near 1900. By 1882 Watch Tower readers usually also read Herald of the Morning, and J. H. Paton’s World’s Hope. The Herald suspended publication about 1885. A. P. Adams’ Spirit of the Word commenced about then, and saw a limited readership among Watch Tower readers. The number who read these three magazines was small in comparison to the total Watch Tower readership, but it was significant enough that Russell continued to address issues raised in these competing magazines until the mid 1890s.

Until about 1887, many of the congregations which drew Watch Tower interest also drew others with millenarian views, sometimes with opposing views. This was occasionally disastrous. The Newark, New Jersey, probably the second largest group in 1881, dwindled to nearly nothing after A. D. Jones defected. Morals issues, doctrinal division and personalities nearly killed the congregation.

Truly new congregations developed after 1882. This accelerated with the publication of Plan of the Ages in 1886. After 1886 we meet the first exclusively Watch Tower congregations. Where Paton’s followers were active, they often attended Watch Tower meetings because there were no others. Paton never had a large following. My best guess is that he had fewer than 1000 readers. The Watch Tower had about 10,000 or more by 1886. (Figures differ, but that’s close.)

If you read Day of Vengeance, you will note that Russell read widely. He cites a surprising number of religious periodicals. While this is true of him, it was becoming less common among Watch Tower readers. By 1903, when one of Paton’s sons picketed a convention in Denver, few delegates knew who he was. Fewer still cared that he was there.

Many who’ve written about millennialist movements suggest that those drawn to them were disaffected and alienated. This isn’t so. The suggestion that they were poor and uneducated is also false. The period in which the Watch Tower movement developed is sometimes called the Age of Optimism. The suggestion that God’s judgment impended seemed in contrast to be pessimistic, and we find Adventist and similar theologies described as “pessimistic sects.” This is false too. Though they had differing beliefs, they believed God intended ultimate Good for man. This was more clearly so of Age to Come believers, among whom we must class Watch Tower adherents. They believed in a sharp judgment, but a blessing to the bulk of mankind. So wide was their view of salvation that opponents called them Universal Salvationists, which is not at all accurate.

The first chapter of Clarke Garrett’s Respectable Folly (John Hopkins U. Press, 1975) has a useful review of historical perspectives. There is much to disagree with, but anyone interested in the broader history should read that.

May I post your letter and my reply on our history blog? Doing so may generate comments from others with insight into this history.

Wake Up!

We need a clear photocopy or scan of No. 3 and No. 5 of E. C. Henninges’ Wake Up! This newsletter style sheet was published in 1909-1910.  

Can you help?

Current work

I wrote this for my personal blog. Mr. Schulz asked me to post it here too. So, herewith, is my rambling post ...

            I continue to research our last chapter. (Don’t get all excited. We’re writing it out of order.) Our outline for it will change. Parts of it will be tucked into other chapters, and part of it may become a separate chapter. That’s not unusual. Since ours is original research, changes will come as we see persons and events more clearly.

            In volume one, we deconstructed a myth based on Russell’s Adventist associations, introducing our readers to Literalist belief and its influence. The last chapter of volume two discusses the place of Christian Mysticism in the broader movement and within the Watch Tower movement especially. We will not give this the space given to Literalists. Its influence, while distinctive, was narrow. We want to explain it in a few paragraphs without leaving our readers puzzled, outraged, or with many unanswered questions.

            Christian Mysticism is rooted in First Century sects. Paul speaks of them with disfavor. I believe one of the Seven Letters (in Revelation) does as well. But we start with the late 18^th Century. The 1790s were closer in time to our story than World War I is to us. We take this narrative up to Russell’s personal experience. Striking a balance between needed detail and equally needed brevity is difficult. I may need a double dose of hot coffee and chocolate!

            Christian Mystics invariable urged chiliastic belief. The principal actors in our story had first hand contact with mystical belief, rejecting most of it, but adopting its characteristic belief in specially appointed last-days messengers.

            So … we have a partial first draft of this section. It’s interesting but needs work –

both more research and clarification. This, more than most of our story, will need unquestionable clarity. It will make some uncomfortable and unhappy. (We seem to have that effect on some.) Because Christian Mysticism is often associated with “spirit manifestations” and prophecy, we want to clearly define the very narrow way it touched believers in the 1870-1890 period. I don’t want the point misused by polemicists or rejected by current adherents. I want a “just the facts, ma’am,” clearly stated, unequivocal explanation.

            Writing is hard work.

            Current historiographic practice is to rehash all the analysis done by others. This is a carry over from dissertation writing. A rehash proves that you consulted all the appropriate material. Unfortunately, (or conveniently, depending on your viewpoint) it allows writers to escape responsibility for their opinions. Reflexive, passive voice writing plagues academic writing. We avoid passive voice and third person reflexive writing. It’s poor work, even if it is the standard among British and UK influenced academics. We assume responsibility for our conclusions. We won’t blame others for them, and if we share them with those who preceded us we will credit them or note the similarity. But we avoid the long “he said, they said, it said” summaries characteristic of many writers.

            In this last chapter we are forced to review the research of others to a greater extent than usual. I wish there was an alternative. There isn’t. We confront opinions widely held by sociologists (who think of themselves as scientists because they love graphs and charts) and historians of the millennialist movements. When applied to the movements we consider, some of their theories are partially correct. Others are wholly false but accepted uncritically by four or five generations of writers. They are, what ever the quality of the theory, an issue we cannot avoid.

Faces from the Past

Most will be familiar with this picture of the first convention away from Pittsburgh, taken in Chicago in 1893. The picture comes from the brochure Our Temple published by the Chicago Bible Students in 1914 to highlight their building for Photodrama showings.

 

Have a closer look at the bottom right hand corner. There you will see a young Rose Ball and her future husband Ernest Henninges.

 

 

 (Originally published on Blog 2)

 

 

By Mary Cleveland Jewell

Jewell's poems were also published on postcards and in a book and at least two booklets.

Inside the Pyramid

The photographs that accompany this article may be somewhat disappointing if you were perhaps expecting the lost sarcophagus of Cheops.

However, the pyramid in question is one very applicable to this blog – namely the monument to the Watch Tower Society positioned quite close to the grave of Charles Taze Russell in the United Cemeteries, Pittsburgh.

These photographs were taken when the monument was vandalised and one whole section prized open. The structure is made up of four triangular sides, all balancing towards each other, with a capstone on top to hold it all together. It was therefore designed to be hollow, on a concrete base of about five feet in depth. The base is level, whereas the land on which it is built is sloping – hence part of the base can be seen at certain edges of the monument.

All readers should be familiar with this pyramid monument, with its open books on all four sides. It was designed to be in the center of the plot reserved for Bethel family members and WT Society pilgrims. Future articles will provide more detail of what was intended, and how thing ultimately worked out.

As originally planned, the monument was going to hold a special cache of WT Society publications relating to the era of Pastor Russell.

This was mentioned when the idea was first mooted in the 1919 convention report. The relevant paragraph was a statement of intent: “Within the structure, incased (sic) in a block of granite, will be a sealed metal box in which is a complete set of Karatol Scripture Studies, the Memorial Tower, and one of every tract, photographs of Pastor Russell, a copy of the Society’s charter, and many other things to interest the people who at some future date may open the pyramid and find them.”

When the monument was completed and the event covered in the New Era Enterprise for February 10, 1920, the plan had not changed. The Enterprise reported:  “Within the monument is a hollowed stone which contains a copy of all the Society’s literature, photographs of the Pastor, a copy of the Society’s charter and other data which some day in the not far distant future may perchance come to light, now effectually sealed up.”

Years later, when George Swetnam wrote an article A Man and His Monument for the Pittsburgh Press in its Family Magazine section for June 25, 1967, page 7, he wrote about this cache of material: “Near the top of the hill on Cemetery Lane, between Babcock Boulevard and U.S. 19 in Ross Township, is one of the strangest monuments to be seen in all the Pittsylvania County. It is a granite pyramid, perhaps ten feet square, and it is filled with books and magazines and other papers, hermetically sealed to await the end of time.”

For a certain type of person – and I must stress that I would not include either practicing JWs or Bible Students in this – it all proved to be a temptation too far.

The monument has had its share of difficulties, for example there are marks on one side which suggest a meeting of monument and sledgehammer at one point. But once someone worked out that it really was hollow, and that the four sides leaned in towards each other, it wasn’t rocket science to then prize open one side and topple it over, to reveal the hollow area and any contents.

The monument was very quickly repaired, but not before the above photographs were taken.

Shards of stonework were found in the area, suggesting that there had indeed been a container inside it, which had been broken open and the contents stolen.

Personally, in spite of all the accounts, I had always wondered whether or not the box of publications really had been placed inside the pyramid? Maybe at the last minute someone had thought better of it? Maybe they were entombed in the concrete base built by J Adam Bohnet originally? Having now visited the site in person, and seen the photographs of the interior, and also having spoken personally with those responsible for the pyramid’s repair and resealing, I am now convinced that, yes, there was a container of publications in there, and yes, they were stolen when the pyramid was vandalized.

What does this mean? Actually, on sober reflection, not a lot.

The cache of material was only added in 1920 when the monument was completed and sealed. It would therefore only contain material that could be obtained by conventional means at that time. Since the Society’s offices had moved to Brooklyn, then back to Pittsburgh, then back to Brooklyn in this era, and since attempts to complete the reprint volumes at this time involved pleading with the public to loan certain issues, it is unlikely that anything unique would have ended up entombed. In reality this means that any serious collector today would likely have all the material in duplicate form already. The only thing that made the material special was that it came from the pyramid. But you can’t exactly advertise that on eBay can you? You can imagine the advertisement - what will you bid for materials stolen by defacing and breaking into a cemetery monument? There are no doubt a couple of crimes there.

So someone somewhere may have a cache of materials. But nothing that couldn’t be obtained from elsewhere, with an illegal provenance – and even then, how do you prove that provenance? Of course, there may be some sad individual gloating over his hoard out there somewhere. If he is reading this, all I can suggest is that he might consider seeking medical help.

Mt. Vernon, New York, 1892

New York City.

DEAR BROTHER RUSSELL:--

 

I have been working in Mount Vernon during the past week: sold 160 DAWNS--making about 800 sold there in a little less than a month's time. Many of them, I trust, are in good hands, and will bring forth fruit to the Master's praise. I expect to deliver in Mount Vernon tomorrow and part of Tuesday, and desire to spend the remainder of the week in the interests of the meetings--calling on some of those to whom I sold the books last winter, giving out notices, etc. I have hopes that the meetings on the 27th will be quite well attended and that you will have large, intelligent and appreciative audiences. The package of Tracts has been received. They will, I think, come in very good.

Truly yours, S. D. ROGERS.

Allegheny Cemetery update

One of the problems of writing articles about historic sites from a distance is that you have to rely on photographic evidence, or statements given you by others who have actually visited the sites in question.

On both this blog and blog 2 I wrote articles about the Allegheny cemetery, where nine of CTR’s close relatives are buried, these include his parents, three siblings, and assorted uncles and aunts.

I stand by the information presented in the articles except for one point. I stated in good faith that there were only five grave markers lying flat on the ground on the site – those for CTR’s parents, two siblings, and then his Uncle Charles Tays Russell. Having finally been able to visit the site in person, I can now more accurately report that a total of eight grave markers exist. Likely many of them had been covered in part by grass and earth encroaching over them over the decades.

In the top row, next to Charles Tays Russell, are the graves of James and Sarah. James purchased the family plot originally, and his wife Sarah was the first to be buried there in 1846.

Sarah’s stone reads: Sarah, wife of Jas. G. Russell, died Dec 14, 1846. James’ stone next to her simply reads James G Russell. Both stones are much smaller than the later ones for CTR’s parents or his uncle Charles Tays.

There used to be a family tree of the Russells in circulation that made the assumption that Sarah was James’ sister. However, the grave stone plainly shows her to be his wife.

Then in the front row are the immediate family of CTR. They were buried as they died from right to left. First to die was Thomas, aged 5 years and 3 months. There is a small stone visible there. Sadly it is worn completely smooth, so it is not possible now to make out any inscription. Next are the two larger stones for Lucinda and Joseph Lytle Jr. – both very worn and indistinct now, and finally the stones for his parents. Joseph Lytle was the last to be buried here in 1897 and the site then became forgotten for nearly a century.

The only family member who appears to have never had a gravestone was Mary Russell, Joseph Lytle’s sister, who died in 1886.

 

 

One other feature of this site may be of interest and I am indebted to my Pittsburgh guide for the information. If you are on the road, facing the family plot which verges on the road, behind the site and a little to your left are two old monuments, both sadly somewhat vandalised today. One is of a pyramid shape – albeit a rather thin one. The other, behind it, is of books on which names were originally intended. A pyramid and open books for names should bring to mind the cemetery where CTR was buried in 1916 – in what became known as United Cemeteries. The monument to the WT Society (not CTR) was of course a pyramid, with open books on its sides. Installed several years after CTR’s death, it was reported that he had approved the design in 1914. If that is true, maybe the vista at his parents’ final resting place gave him the idea.

Maybe.

Pittsburgh Daily Gazette and Advertiser - July 5, 1870

M. F. Ackely - Certificate 660

Notice in The Pennsylvania School Journal

October 1870

Pittsburgh Central High School as it was when M. F. Ackley attended

 

Maria Russell was admited in 1864 with the class starting in the 1864-1865 school year.

Research assistance

If you’re so inclined, we have several areas of real need. We need help finding some things, and for others we do not have funds to pursue them.

We’ve located a run of A. D. Jones’ paper. It’s the last year of publication, and it’s oversized. The only way to duplicate it is by expensive microfilm. The cost is over three hundred dollars. The best approach would be for someone in the Washington, D. C. area to visit the library and turn pages seeking relevant material. Then only that would need duplication, some of which could be done by hand.       

Jones tried to duplicate Russell’s mass circulation of Food for Thinking Christians. We have very little record of that. We could use more detail. We have only one issue of Day Star earlier than 1886. We need the first two years. They seem not to exist. If you have them, tell us.

We have a solid, representative collection of World’s Hope, Paton’s magazine. We would like a complete run. If you have any issues, please let us know the dates.

Early evangelism is a key part of this story. Details and biographies are helpful. Even though Separate Identity focuses on the years up to 1887, workers who entered the field after that period are important too. If you want to pursue that and pass information to us, we would appreciate it greatly. This was Ton’s last project. I am still mourning Ton and miss his daily emails.

The Watch Tower message entered Norway, Germany, and (we think) Italy far earlier than the Yearbook histories suggest. We need details. These are hard for us to find, probably easier for someone in Europe to find. Anyone? This will require patient and inventive search. The message reached Australia in 1881, Singapore in 1882 at least. We have few details. The work entered Ireland in 1881. We have one real reference from outside the Watch Tower. We’d like more detail.

The message entered Liberia in 1884. We have one original document. There are many letters in a library of congress archival file. Finding pertinent letters requires a visit. We can’t afford that. If you live in the area, and want to take on some really intense research, contact me.

Pittsburgh clergy opposed Russell. Some of this is documented in Pittsburgh papers. We do not have access. This search would take patient page turning. The papers are on microfilm. This is best done by someone in the Pittsburgh area. We can offer some research guidance.

Tracts and pamphlets written to refute Russell are rare before 1910. We can use any anti-Russell tracts published before 1920, but especially need those from his first years.

We are seeking the location of Disciples of Christ archives for West Virginia and Virginia. There does not seem to be a central repository.

Never assume we know what you know. We might, but we might not. Tell us, if you have an interesting bit of detail.

A recent email

I don't have permission to publish this with the writer's name, but the content made me happy so I'm sharing it with you:

I have recently discovered your site on History of the Watchtower. You and your associates have a wonderful site. It evidences your commitment to discovering historical insights and understanding.

As a “church historian” I am interested in the various Adventist groups that followed in the wake of the Millerite disappointment. My main interest is in tracking some of the doctrinal beliefs that appeared in some of these groups. For example, the conditionalist understanding of the mortality of the soul as expressed by George Storrs. Although clearly not a Millerite or Adventist, Charles Russell shared some ideas with those circles as well as meetings with Storrs and others, as you document.

One of the most intriguing issues for me is brought out in the White/Russell debate of 1908 in which the subject of a first opportunity for salvation being offered during the Millennium to those living at that time as well as the resurrected dead who had had no first chance of salvation. I understand the arguments Russell presents.

But I am very much interested in knowing who else in his earlier circles advocated this understanding of a future chance for salvation, including the idea that the vast majority of the world is now blinded, until the predestined elect are gathered and prepared.

This understanding presented in such a detailed and careful way is rare in church history, but I have glimpsed it in some few “Adventist” circles; but not before Russell.

Would you be so kind as to shed some light on the origins of this teachings for Charles Russell; as to when did he come into this view and from whom or with whom was it first discussed/formulated for Russell?

I look forward to your comments, and I value your research very much; and certainly intend to purchase your book(s) soon.

Because a friend of our reserch asked ...

This is the original filing for United Cemeteries, or an extract of it showing the original trustees. Our friend asks if it were possible for a trustee to not know who was involved in the project. I think the list speaks for itself. C. T. Russell's name is on the list along with well known Bible Students. If another trustee failed to notice, he was dense and inattentive. The short answer is no.

Click on image to view

My thanks to Jerome for providing the copy.

Thanks to

Thanks to a friend of this research, we've located the original organizing doucments for the United Cemeteries. We are in the process of raising money to acquire them. I'll keep you posted.

R. M. de Vienne

Jones' Divorce

September 2, 1889

W. T. Bown, sworn

            I live in 32^nd Ward, Pittsburgh, Pa (Mount Washington) 67 years of age last January – am a Merchandise Broker. I know the Libellant in this case (Carrie M. Jones). She is my daughter. I also know the Respondent (Albert Delmont Jones). My daughter Carrie M. Bown was married to him (Respondent) the Eighth day of January, A. D. Eighteen Hundred and Seventy Eight. (1878) They were married in the Mt. Washington Baptist Church, 32^nd Ward, Pittsburgh. I was present at the marriage. The Rev. W. H. McKinney performed the marriage ceremony. They first resided in Pittsburgh after their marriage for several years (some 3 or 4 years, I believe) before moving to New York. My daughter (the Libellant) is no living with me – she has been living with me for some time – it will be 3 years net May since she came to live with me. 

W. T. Bown [Signed]

Samuel E. Bown, sworn 

           I reside in the 13^th ward, am 50 years of age. I am in the Coffee and Peanut Roasting business. I know the Libellant (Carrie M. Jones) and also the Respondent (Albert D. Jones) – was present at the marriage of the Libellant and Respondent. There were married in Mount Washington Baptists Church, 32^nd Ward, Pittsburgh, Pa. on January Eighth, A. D. 1878 – the Rev. W. H. McKinney performed the ceremony. After their marriage the couple resided in Pittsburgh, here, for three or four years. They then removed from Pittsburgh to New York City. Carrie M Jones, the Libellant, now lives with her Father, W. T. Bown, in the 32^nd Ward, Pittsburgh, Pa. She has been living with her father I think between 2 and 3 years last past.

S. E. Bown [signed]

December 21, 1889

William H. Conley, sworn 

            I reside in Allegheny City. I know Albert D. Jones, the Respondent – I should judge I have known him about 8 or 10 years – I have had dealings with him and known him in a business way. I also know Mrs. Jones, the Libellant. I have no knowledge of Mr. Jones’s keeping some other woman besides his wife. About 2 years ago last June in New York City I saw him one night about 9 o’clock walking on 5^th Avenue with a woman other than his wife – did not know who the woman was. I believe I have heard that he had got into trouble with some woman and had to pay her a large sum of money to get rid of her – am not sure that I have the letter now – I burned about a bushel of letters – but I did get from him such a letter. I cannot state what the amount was but it was a large sum he had to pay – I judge that the reason for sending this letter must have been that I had written him a dunning letter as he had dealings, with us and owed us considerable money, and that would be his excuse (that he had to pay so much money on account of this woman) for not remitting to us. This letter I spoke of was received by me from him before I saw him walking with a woman as above mentioned. I think it must have been from 6 to 9 months before that.

             I had a conversation in Albert Jones’s presence with H. B. Adams and Eugene F. Smith of New York and Thomas B. Riter of Allegheny City, Penna – there were three of us together at Mr. Jones’s offices in New York City about 2 years ago. During this conversation Mr. Adams and Mr. Smith accused Mr. Jones of keeping the woman besides his wife – They called him all kinds of vile names and he did not deny the accusation. He was accused of maintaining a house and a woman other than his wife in it in the upper end of New York, and Mr. Adams (who was in the House Furnishing business then) stated in Mr. Jones’s presence that he (Adams) had furnished the house and he (Mr. Jones) admitted the whole thing. I cannot state from recollection the precise location of the house spoken of. 

W. H. Conley [signed]

Can you help us identify Annie J. Raleigh?

June 2, 1890

Delmont Jones affirmed:

 

            I am about 58 years old; live in Mount Washington, 32^nd Ward, Pittsburgh. I know Albert D. Jones, the Respondent in this suit. He is my son. I do not know a woman named Annie Raleigh, H. A. Raleigh or Annie J. Raleigh. I have no relative of that name that I know of. I never heard of such a woman – except that day before yesterday I heard Mrs. Carrie M. Jones the Libellant mention her name. MY son has no such relative either by blood or marriage that I know of.

Delmont Jones [signed]

Tattling

We seldom become personal on this blog. I have a for fun blog where I do that, but none of us does that here. This is an exception.

Bruce would never tell you this story. I will. If he doesn't like it, he can delete the post. When I was very young I attended a meeting with Bruce and his wife (We'll call her Aunt S. here). The song I've posted below was called and the congregation sang it. B forgot his songbook. He claims a very poor memory. (as if!) But he was singing it from memory. Except his memory took him back to this songbook and these words, drawing a puzzled look from Aunt S. and me and - well - everyone around him. It was funny. Enjoy the old version.

A sideline from history

From the Pittsburgh Press for July 29, 1921.

When the Pittsburgh Press for July 29, 1921, carried this brief news story from Chicago they missed a trick. Lemuel Hackley (sic), the attorney who was murdered in court was a native son of Allegheny. Born Lemuel Mahlon Ackley, he was actually the younger brother of Maria (Ackley) Russell, CTR’s wife.

When Maria left CTR she first went to Chicago to stay with Lemuel. He had lived in Allegheny until adulthood, working first as a reporter, before studying law and moving to Chicago in the 1880s.

He apparently did well in the law apart from getting himself murdered in court. The disgruntled police sergeant who fired the fatal shots failed to kill himself at the time, but later committed suicide by cyanide poisoning while in jail awaiting trial.

(This will probably not make it into Bruce and Rachael’s books, but I found it an interesting sideline to history).

(adapted from a brief article on blog 2)

 

Sacramento, California, Daily Union, September 17, 1868.

Part of a longer article, none of which is relevant to this history:

An Advent Camp Meeting

            This is the season of camp meetings, and our journals are daily filled with reports of these gatherings, which are taking place in all parts of the State. They are so much alike, as a general rule, and most of your readers are so familiar with their proceedings, that it is hardly worth while to describe them. But last week of a camp meeting a camp meeting of Adventists was in session near Springfield, which presented some features of interest. The attendance was very large – some thousands of people being present from near and far. The Adventists, you know, believe in the speedy second coming of Christ. The daily exercises at the camp meeting open with a love feast, somewhat similar in general character to the Methodist exercises of the same name. Then follow sermons, baptisms, etc. The proceedings of one day will give an idea of the whole meeting. On Friday Rev. Jonas Wendell, of Western New York, preached a sermon on Paul’s character and the Jews. He declared that where the Jews had one item of testimony in reference to the first coming of Christ, we, of the present day, have six signs of his second. Rev. George Storrs, of New York, was the next sermonizer. He is one of a small sect of Adventists who believe that only the righteous will rise from the dead, while the wicked die …

Des Res no.2?

This was William Conley's place. Like the Russells' Cedar Avenue properties, it is also unoccupied at present, and the current owner has gutted the inside. So, alas, we will not be able to check the size of Conley's parlor that was used for the Memorial celebration when ZWT began. If anyone has an early photograph of the interior as it was in Conley's day, it might give an indication of how many attended the Memorial celebration in those early days.

Quick note

Remember the clipping from the Buffalo newspaper a few posts back? Further research shows the speaker to have been John B. Adamson. His visit there is noted in the February 1887 Watch Tower.

We need better information about Adamson than we have. Can you help?

Des Res?

 

These two properties are currently for sale. The owners will turn them into whatever you want for a price tag of over $400,000 per plot. Sadly, this means that the interiors have been gutted, which would have given a feel for how they were well over 100 years ago.

These are the original two houses in Cedar Avenue owned by the Russell family. Joseph L Russell and wife Emma owned the house on the left, and Charles T Russell and wife Maria owned the one on the right. Joseph L died in his property in 1897.

When Maria left CTR, she moved back into one of the houses and rented rooms out to lodgers. When CTR took the property back, Maria simply moved back in with Emma next door.

 

Sydney, Australia, Sunday Times - August 20, 1899

Where research starts ...

Much of our research outside Watch Tower publications starts with an educated guess. The newspaper clipping below is an example

Click Image for Full View.

 

Finding this article wasn't an accident. But we looked for it based on little more than a good guess. Finding a record this early is difficult, sometimes impossible. Finding this one makes me happy.

What happens next? Sometimes nothing. Sometimes this is all we find. But ... I'll look for additional record. We want to put a name to this. Who was the speaker? How long were they there? Is this mentioned in Zion's Watch Tower?

You can do this too. There are many newspaper archives on the Internet. Try phrases and names and ideas. Often you won't find anything helpful, but you may. Pass it on, even if you think we have it or think it's trivial.

Some of the most interesting discussion has come from what first seemed unimportant. We return again and again to original source material, especially Zion's Watch Tower. Details that seemed unimportant or puzzling become clear if we reassess and review. There is no secret here. Any determined person can do this. Try it.

Principles of Opperation

            I understand that those who visit our blog arrive here with differing viewpoints and experiences – and with differing views of Russell, the Bible Students and Jehovah’s Witnesses. You are entitled to your views, and, while in another context, I may debate them with you, none of our blog contributors will debate doctrine here. Our principal moderator is Dr. de Vienne. Her word is final.

            The world is often an unhappy place. We are sorry for your unhappy experiences, and we’ve had our own. In the last eighteen months two or three have come here with religious or personal issues. This blog is not the place to vent those. We can’t weigh the merits of your complaint. We weren’t witnesses to your difficulty. And this is a history blog.

            Please don’t come here believing we owe you anything more than courtesy and do not come expecting us to hurt you. If you come here expecting hurt, you will find it even if it is unintended. If you assume a belligerent attitude, you’re views and questions will find no place on this blog. I’ve instructed our resident Pixie to delete your comments and additional comments by you will not appear no matter what the content.

            If you’ve been hurt by religion, some self-analysis may be in order. You may want to revisit the issue, especially if it is an old one. If you reject what some call the authoritarian structure of your religion, you are free to do so. The three of us who edit this blog cannot address those issues. Jesus suggests you talk the issues out with the one who offended you. Even if the issue is decades old, it is not too late.

            If you don’t want to live by your religion’s standards, that is your choice. This is not the place to vent. Comments that fall into that area don’t show up here. The comments that concern me most are those from people who are suffering in some way. Because most of those are anonymous, we can do nothing to alleviate it. Explore your resources. I’m a great believer in prayer. It works. For those who are Witnesses, I recommend a now very-old Watchtower article from 1958 entitled Your Prayers Tell on You. It is, I think, the best article on prayer ever to come out of the Watchtower.

            In the past we’ve had three at least who believed themselves more knowledgeable than we are. If you are, share your knowledge. We share. You should too. Rude comments won’t show up in the comment trail. We’ve had one who believed himself a true genius saying he was in the top 99 percent nationally. Almost everyone is in the top 99 percent. Think about it. Rachael and Jerome are – to borrow a line from a very old movie – smart cookies. There is no lack of genius on this blog if that’s the measure.

            Our measure isn’t personal genius. It’s adept, accurate presentation of facts. If we sometimes plod to get the facts, that’s okay. If we depend on others to rub our nose in them, that’s good. It’s the facts that matter, not how we get to them.

            We don’t acknowledge every comment. If you come here for personal validation, we probably can’t give it to you. The Internet is a very poor place in which to seek that. We appreciate the comments we get. We moderate out about five percent of the comments because of the issues stated above.

            Those with personal issues, no matter what they are, have my deepest sympathy. As a Christian, I suggest you peer deeply and prayerfully into the issue, even though that is always a painful experience. As a fellow human, I suggest you find a confidant who will give you honest feedback. Resist blaming God for the actions of his human worshipers. If I could help you at this distance, I would. It is impracticable, and that’s not what this blog is about. If we don’t separate the blog from other issues, it loses its value.

R. Cossar

Mentioned in reprints page 541. We need help identifying him. He might be Robert R. Cossars an immigrant from Canada, later resident in Niagara Falls, New York. He may have been born in Scotland. We have no firm proof of this. Can you help?

A note.

The section about interested clergy will move to an earlier chapter. It does not fit well here, but it does elsewhere. That chatper exists mostly as notes.

Russell Quoted from this hymn in 1882

It was song 4 in Songs of the Bride, and it appears in Watch Tower songbooks until 1928

More work in progress

This is very rough draft. Some of it will change dramatically I think. But this is where we are now. Just remember this is very rough draft and work in progress. In the past another quoted from some of our work that was equally rough that we later revised. Our corrected research appears in Separate Identity, Volume 1, their web page is in error because they failed to take seriously a similar notice. 

Herewith (at Mr. Schulz' insistence) is more of current work, even if it isn't nearly finished:

View of Religion 

            A committee report delivered to the thirtieth annual YMCA convention in October 1882 reported Zion’s Watch Tower as “of doubtful character owing to its opposition to church organization.”[1] Russell, and Storrs before him, didn’t oppose organization at the local level, but they opposed denominational organization. They saw it as “Babylon,” the whore of Revelation which they interpreted as nominal Christianity. Russell defined the True Church in the October 1882 Watch Tower.[2] His article, entitled “The Ekklesia,” addressed two issues: Barbour’s claims to divine appointment and the definition of the true church. Many falsely claimed to be the true Church of Christ: 

To-day there are many organizations claiming to be the church, and having various bonds of  union; but we wish to know, upon the authority of God’s Word, what ekklesia, body, or church, Jesus established, and what are its bonds of union; secondly, we wish to show that every Christian should belong to that church; thirdly, the injurious effects of joining the wrong ekklesia or church; and fourthly, having joined the right church, what are the results of losing our membership. 

Russell believed the true church was organized by Jesus. It was “the little company of disciples who had consecrated earthly time, talents and life a sacrifice to God.” They were “members of one society” with “laws and government, and consequently a head or recognized ruling authority.” They were united by “bonds of love and common interest.” Jesus was their head, their captain. They shared “hopes, fears, joys and sorrows, and aims … and thus they had a far more perfect union of heart than could possibly be had from a union on the basis of any man-made creed.” It was an organization “of the Spirit;” their law was love and they were under the “law of the Sprit” as “expressed in the life, actions, and words of their Lord.”

This was an idealized view of First Century Christianity. The unity of belief and sympathy Russell postulated often existed in the breach rather than in reality. He wrote about what should have been, rather than what was. Russell and Watch Tower adherents saw the True Church in contrast to denominational structure. Russell wrote:

 

Thus we see the early church organized, governed, and in perfect unity and harmony under the rulership or headship of Jesus. Contrast this church organization with what now affects to be a continuance of the same – viz.: the various denominational organizations, each of which binds its members to a mental union on the basis of some creed or dogma of its own (many of them anything but lovely) and each having its own laws.

These laws emanate from their heads, or rulers and law-givers; so it is clearly seen that these present day churches, have and recognize as heads, or directing, ruling powers over them, the ancient founders of their various creeds, each contradicting the other, while their clergy, in conferences, councils, synods and presbyteries, variously interpret and enforce the “traditions of the elders” which “make void the Word of God.” These take the place of the true head of the church – Jesus – and the true teacher and guide into all truth, the Holy Spirit. … And the whole nominal system is described in the Revelation as “Babylon” – confusion – Papal mother and Protestant daughters. Will they own this to be so? No, for the lukewarm nominal church of today believes herself to be rich and increased with goods, having need of nothing; not knowing that she is wretched and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked. (Rev. 3:17.) … 

The True church of Christ was composed of those “fully consecrated to the doing of our Father’s will, amenable only to Christ’s will and government, recognizing and obeying none other.” It is the composite of all “saints” from the beginning of “the Gospel Age … to its close.” Jesus is “the head and ruler of the entire living church, and in every assembly where two or three meet in his name he is the head, ruler, and teacher.” Jesus teaches “by using one or more of those present as exercising the qualities of the head, or teacher; by using one or more of those present as His mouthpiece in unfolding truth, strengthening faith, encouraging hope, inspiring zeal, etc.” Russell saw himself and others prominent in the movement in this role; they functioned “just as the head of your body can call upon one member to minister to another.” He cautioned prominent preachers, saying:  

If one becomes as useful an instrument as a right hand, he should take care that he aspire not to become the head. Be not puffed up; pride will paralyze and render useless. “Be not ye called Rabbi (master, teacher) for one is your master (head) even Christ, and all ye are brethren.” And let not the least member despise his office, “for if all were one member, where ere the body?” “Nay, those members of the body which seem to be more feeble are necessary”  “God hath set the members every one of them, in the body as it hath pleased him.” …. 

It is evident that if you have given up all your will, talent, time, etc., you are recognized by Jesus as a follower, and member of the ekklesia, or body of which he is the head. But says one: Must I not join some organization on earth, assent to some creed, and have my name written on earth? No; remember that Jesus is your pattern and teacher, and neither in his words nor acts will you find any authority for binding yourselves with creeds and traditions of the elders, which all tend to make the word of God of none effect, and bring you under a bondage which will hinder your growth in grace and knowledge … . But say some: If it is not proper to unite with any of the present nominal churches, would it not be well to form a visible organization of our own? Yes, this is what we have – an organization modeled after that of the early church. We think we have come back to primitive simplicity. The Lord Jesus alone is our head or lawgiver; the Holy Spirit is our interpreter and guide into truth; our names are all written in heaven; we are bound together by love and common interest. 

Do you inquire--how shall we know one another? We reply, how could we help knowing one another when the Spirit of our Master is made manifest in word and act, and manner and look? Yes, the living faith, the unfeigned love, the long-suffering meekness, the childlike simplicity coupled with the constancy and zeal of maturity, make manifest the sons of God, and we need no earthly record, for the names of all such are written in the Lamb’s book of life. 

            Members of the True Church visit the sick, finance the Lord’s work, are willing to “sacrifice reputation” and suffer “the reproach of the world and a degenerate nominal church.” Russell addressed the issue of the “disorderly” among them. Some sought organization to confront the issue. His reply was: “If we have no organization such as we see about us, how can we free ourselves from such, as the Lord requires us to do? We answer: Do just as Jesus and Paul directed.” There are, he wrote, “various degrees of advancement among the individual members, and Paul says (1 Thes. 5:14,) some are feeble-minded, comfort them; some are weak, support them; but while you should be patient toward all, warn the disorderly (those who are drifting away from the true spirit of Christ). Don’t mistake the disorderly for the weak, and comfort them; nor for the feebleminded, and support them.” He advised applying Jesus’ counsel at Matthew 18:15, 18.

Christ’s church “has its evangelists, pastors and teachers appointed and directed by the Lord.” There was no Apostolic Succession, but they were anointed by Holy Spirit to preach. He restated the General Priesthood of All Believers doctrine, writing that Jesus has “all the members of the body to preach … and it is the duty of every member of the body to exercise his office for the edification of the other members.”

Russell seldom concisely explained doctrines such as this. He believed direct statements tended to close ears. So if one finds this article prolix, it is not surprising. Put bluntly, Russell rejected creedal churches because they were populated by those who proved false to their obligations to God and brethren. The churches were worldly and not spiritual. Their creeds stifled scriptural inquiry, and, though he does not say so in this article, rejected his key doctrines. Most of this article considers mutual obligations. It is commentary on the shift in the post Civil War shift in American religion to secular interests and the adoption of misunderstood Darwinism with its idea of progress rather than the need for divine redemption. Teachers were known by their fruits and by subjection to Christ. Substituting oneself for Christ, as he believed Barbour had done, marked on as outside the fellowship. At the article’s end, he retuned to the contrast he saw between the true and the false church:

How complete is the organization of the church of Christ with its heaven-written, love-bound and Spirit-ruled membership, and how sad the error of mistaking the nominal for the real church! … It would indeed, be a dreadful calamity to lose our membership in the true church or body of Christ. And no member is out of this danger except when keeping a vigilant watch over the old nature, counted dead, lest it come to life again, and assert itself in the form of pride, selfishness, envy, evil-speaking – or what not? But if filled with love (the love that prompts to sacrifice) and clothed with humility, and under cover of the redeeming blood, we are safe in the church (body), having the assurance that it is our “Father’s good pleasure to give us the kingdom.” … 

We may have our names cast out as evil by those of the nominal church, and yet “rejoice and be exceeding glad because our names are written in heaven.” They may frown upon you and despitefully use you and say all manner of evil against you falsely, or they may seek to win you back by flattery, saying they cannot afford to lose your influence—you could do so much good by remaining among them. Oh, how necessary in this “evil day” is the faith-- That bears unmoved the world’s dread frown, Nor heeds its flattering smile; That seas of trouble cannot drown, Nor Satan’s arts beguile.”  

            Belief in the guidance by Holy Spirit is New Testament doctrine, and it was characteristic of Christian sects, especially the socially conservative, in this era. It remains so among Christians who truly believe. For instance, The Christian Workers Magazine, published by Moody Bible Institute, issued a call for world-wide prayer signed by prominent clergy, among them James Gray, Robert Russell, A. T. Robertson and R. A. Torrey.  The believed, said their joint letter, that they “were led by the Spirit of God to make this recommendation.”[3]

Early in 1883 someone asked Russell: “Would not an earnest, aggressive organization (or sect), built upon scriptural lines, be the best means of spreading and publishing the real Good Tidings? We must have fellowship and sympathy. Union is strength. It is not the skirmishers that win the battle, but the disciplined and solid battalions.” Russell suggested otherwise: 

We believe that a visible organization, and the adopting of some particular name, would tend to increase our numbers and make us appear more respectable in the estimation of the world. The natural man can see that a visibly organized body, with a definite purpose, is a thing of more or less power; therefore, they esteem the various organizations, from which we have come out, in obedience to the Master’s call. But the natural man cannot understand how a company of people, with no organization which they can see, is ever going to accomplish anything. As they look upon us, they regard us simply as a few scattered skirmishers – a “peculiar people” – with very peculiar ideas and hopes, but not worthy of special notice. 

But, though it is impossible for the natural man to see our organization … we trust that you can see that the true Church is most effectually organized, and in the best possible working order …. The Apostle Paul urges all to unity of faith and purpose (Phil. 3:15, 16 – Diaglott.) All led by the same Spirit may and do come to a knowledge of the same truth. Under our Captain, all the truly sanctified, however few or far separated in person, are closely united by the Spirit of Christ, in faith, hope and love; and, in following the Master’s command, are moving in solid battalions for the accomplishment of his purposes. … 

Recognizing this organization, which is of the Spirit, and desiring no assimilation whatever with the worldly, who cannot see or understand it, we are quite willing to bear the reproach of a peculiar people. We always refuse to be called by any other name than that of our Head – Christians – continually claiming that their can be no division among those continually led by his Spirit and example as made known through his Word. 

We disown none of our Lord’s dear children. The weakest child of the household of faith (in Christ, our Redeemer) we gladly recognize as our brother. Some, in ignorance of their privilege of the communion of saints, are mixed with the various worldly organizations, to their great detriment. Though we cannot follow them there, we gladly welcome them when they come among us. …[4] 

            Much as Campbellites had before them, Watch Tower adherents saw themselves as restored to New Testament doctrine and practice. This gave them a distinct identity. Russell addressed this in October 1883..

 

---

[1]               Associated as Christians: Buffalo, New York, Evening News, October 11, 1882.

[2]               C. T. Russell: The Ekklesia, Zion’s Watch Tower¸ October 1882, page 5.

[3]               A Call for World-Wide Prayer, The Christian Workers Magazine¸ March 1917, page 529.

[4]               C. T. Russell: Questions and Answers, Zion’s Watch Tower, March 1883, page 6.

We get ...

We get about 100 visits a day. It seems to me that out of that 100 visits, at least one helpful comment would show up. If you have a comment, even if it is only, "Keep up the good work!" We'd appreciate it.
R