Search This Blog

Monday, May 2, 2016

To answer Roberto's question

Rough Draft extracted from a chapter entitled "Out of Babylon":



Called by His Name

Two issues attached to the earliest congregations and small fellowships: Their self- identity, and how outsiders identified them. Russell and many of his earliest associates came from traditions that rejected any name but Christian or some version of a Bible-based name.[1] They saw sectarianism as of the Devil. That left them nameless. Augustus Bergner told The New York Sun that he belonged “to a company of Christians who have no common name. We are not Second Adventists, and we are not the ‘Holiness’ or ‘Higher Life’ sect.”[2]
Maria Russell said that most if not all early fellowships met in homes. She spoke of the true church as “scattered all over the world, many of them standing alone, and some in little companies, often numbering only two or three, and meeting from house to house.”[3]  When Frank Draper, an early-days evangelist spoke at Glens Falls, New York, it was in the home of W. H. Gildersleeve, who was willing to invite the public into his home.[4] Somewhat later the Glens Falls meetings moved to the home of Mrs. C. W. Long, but within two years they returned to the Gildersleve home on Birch Avenue.[5] H. Samson, for a while a Watch Tower evangelist, seldom spoke in a public facility. A newspaper noted that “most of his meetings … have been held in the parlor of some member of the church.”[6] There are many other examples of home-churches, but most of that history is more suitable for the third book in this series.
Individual congregations experimented with names. Most of the congregational names that have come down to us are from outside the period we cover in these two volumes, but we should note some examples. The congregation in St. Louis, Missouri, styled itself “Seekers After Truth.”[7] The newly-formed congregation at Salem, Oregon, called itself “The Church of the Living God,” a Biblical phrase. They met in the Women’s Christian Temperance Hall.[8] Believers in Akron, Ohio, organized regular meetings in late 1902. A representative told a reporter that they “may be called Dawn Students, or members of the Church of the Living God.” Their meetings were held in the homes of members.[9] The Watch Tower congregation in Grants Pass, Oregon, also used the name.[10] The Cedar Rapids congregation used it too, as did the congregation in Saratoga, New York. W. Hope Hay, a Watch Tower representative, used it as well.[11] In Cortland, New York, they called themselves the “Church of the Living God and Church of the Little Flock.” Occasionally, gatherings were described as “a meeting of the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society.”[12] Though Church of the Living God was appealing because it is derived from scripture, it was also used by a politically radical Black church, and Watch Tower congregations distanced themselves from the name.

Illustration
Advertisement: Scranton Tribune¸ July 26, 1902.
           
Church of the Little Flock designated the congregation in Cortland, New York. When R. E. Streeter spoke there in December 1902, it was on the well used topics of “The Coming Kingdom,” and “Restitution of all Things.” An advertisement for his sermons used the Little Flock designator. He spoke in the Women’s Christian Temperance Union hall, and the congregation was still meeting there in 1904 and still using the name. Work of the North Carolina evangelists, many of whom were former clergy, bore fruit, and a small congregation formed in Nicolas County near Elizabeth City. The local paper reported: A new religious sect has been started in the wilds of Nicholas county. [sic] The New sect is called the “New Lights.” The sect is said to have arisen from the influence of Rev. Russell, of Allegheny City, where he conducts a newspaper called Zion’s Watch Tower. The members of the New Light sect profess to believe there is no hell.”[13] The New Light name was reused in West Virginia.

Illustration here

As noted, when the Scranton, Pennsylvania, congregation was formed they used the name The Watch Tower Bible Class.[14] When Russell spoke there, the press release used adjective laden phrasing: “Readers and students of the ‘Millennial Dawn’ series and all others who are interest in the subject of the pre-millennial advent.” When the Richmond, Indiana, congregation was organized by J. G. Wright, a Watch Tower “pilgrim,” it was called The Millennial Dawn Society.[15] A meeting-time announcement for the Richmond, Virginia, congregation called them Believers in the Dawning Millennium. They met Sundays in Marshal Hall on East Broad Street.[16] The announcement did not capitalize as we have, and the name seems more of a description of belief than a title. Using some form of “Millennial Dawn” in advertisements resulted in some calling them “Millennial Dawners.”[17] In Elmira, New York, they were the Millennial Dawn Bible Class.[18] In Flushing, New York, they were “the Millennial Dawn Society.”[19] In December 1900, Russell spoke to the congregation in Washington, D. C. The newspaper ad described them as “Millennial Dawn and Zion’s Watch Tower friends.”

Illustration
The Washington, D.C., Evening Times, December 1, 1900.


When a Watch Tower convention was held in Philadelphia in June 1900, they described themselves as Believers in the Atonement through the Blood of Christ.[20] A convention held in Denver, Colorado, in 1903 was of “Believers in the Second Coming.”[21] When Russell addressed a convention in Omaha, Nebraska, in 1898, they were simply called the “Believers.” The abbreviation “Believers” was used again the next year in Boston.[22] Watch Tower conventions continued to use the “Believers” designation until about 1908. A convention held at Manchester, England, the last two days of 1906 and the first two days of 1907 billed itself as “the Convention of Believers in the Ransom for all.” A convention held in St. Paul, Minnesota, in 1906 was for “Believers in the Atonement Sacrifice of Christ.” This was used again at Indianapolis, Indiana; Niagara Falls, New York; and Norfolk, Virginia, in 1907. It was used in Cincinnati, Ohio, in 1908. A convention held at Put-in-Bay, Ohio, in 1908 was designated a “Bible Student’s Convention,” but the invitation was to “all believers in the ransom for all.” Afterwards most conventions were “Bible Student’s Conventions.”[23]

Illustration here
The Courtland, New York, Standard
November 29, 1902.

            In Albany, New York, Believers in the Restitution met in Fredrick J. Clapham’s home at 288 First Street. Earlier, at least one meeting was held in a “Bro. Fletcher’s home.”[24] Elsewhere the name Millennial Dawn Readers was used.[25] In Omaha, Nebraska, a newspaper called them Believers, without saying what they believed.[26] When a one-day convention featuring C. T. Russell and C. A. Owen, “the local minister,” was announced for Indianapolis, Indiana, they use a long descriptor instead of a pithy name, calling themselves “believers on the lines of Millennial dawn [sic], and of the ransom of the whole human race by the blood of Jesus Christ.”[27]
            The Cincinnati, Ohio, congregation advertised meetings as The Church of Believers. In 1891 they met at 170 Walnut Street, Room 8, for “instruction and fellowship.”[28] In late 1891, J. B. Adamson held weekly meetings there. Russell reported that Adamson had circulated “about 4000 Millennial Dawns,” adding that Adamson and wife “have done and are doing a good work –gathering ripe wheat and witnessing to others. Sunday Meetings held by Brother A. help to water the good word of present truth which he scatters during the week by circulating MILLENNIAL DAWN.”[29] By May 1892 the Cincinnati Believers were meeting at 227 Main Street, and inviting people to “free lectures on present truths, in accord with the Bible, explained by Millennial Dawn.” The Believer’s advertisement said that “these lectures show the grand harmony of our Creator’s plan of the ages, the high calling and the restitution of all.”[30]
            Adamson found interest in a “Dr. A _____.”[31] While we can’t identify him more specifically, he testified to others in the Cincinnati medical community. An advertisement in the December 27, 1894, Enquirer placed by a W. Val Stark read: “I should like to meet a young man familiar with the ‘Millennial Dawns’ who desires to actively further their notice on the churches.”[32] Stark gave his address as 44 West 9th Street, the address of the Cincinnati Sanitarium, a private hospital treating insanity and addiction. Despite a fairly large circulation of Millennial Dawn volumes, the congregation remained small. In 1902, thirty-seven were present for the annual communion celebration; eleven of these were newly interested.[33]
            At Los Angeles, California, in 1899 they advertised themselves as The Gospel Church (Millennial Dawn). By 1902 they were using Millennial Dawn Readers, and in 1903 they were Millennial Dawn Friends. There are several examples of Russell suggesting that they were The Christians. For instance, when he spoke for an extended period on Boston Commons in 1897, The Cato, New York, Citizen described him as “the leader of a new sect called simply ‘The Christians.’”[34] An invitation for a Watch Tower meeting late in 1901, described it as “a convention of believers in the great redemption sacrifice of our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ.”[35] When the Flint, Michigan, congregation listed itself in the newspaper church directory it was as “Zion’s Watchtower People.”[36] In Warfdale, England, they called themselves The Church of Christ. The London Daily News said they were more commonly known as “Millennial Dawn.”[37]

Illustrations
The Los Angeles Herald, December 31, 1899.

The Los Angeles Herald, July 4, 1902.

The Los Angeles Herald, May 10, 1903

The Los Angeles Herald, November 8, 1903

            Outsiders were pressed to find descriptors. When Sam Williams, one of the organizers of the Huston, Texas, congregation preached there in 1903, The Huston Daily Post described the movement as “those of Mr. Williams’ faith,” attaching no other name. Earlier The Post described it as Millennial Dawn faith.[38] The 1912 Morrison and Fourmy Directory of Houston listed them as Millennial Dawn Church. This difficulty continued for some years.


[1]               This is true of Russell for the decade he associated with Age-to-Come believers.
[2]               Churchgoers Astonished: The New York Sun, August 15, 1881.
[3]               M. F. Russell: Discipline in the Church, Zion’s Watch Tower, July 1887, page 4.
[4]               Extracts from the Bible, The Glens Falls, New York, Morning Star¸ November 11, 1897. According to the 1870 Census, William H. Gildersleeve was born in New York about 1842, or according to the 1892 New York State Census he was born near 1837. [Census record birth dates often conflict.] He seems to have been related to H. H. Gildersleeve, a cigar manufacturer in Glens Falls. In April 1884, a devastating fire broke out in rental space in a building he owned. [New York Times, April 29, 1884.] A newspaper article [Glens Falls Morning Star¸ January 22, 1895] notes him as prominent in the Methodist Episcopal Church.
[5]               Untitled notices, The Glens Falls, New York, Morning Star, June 26, 1899 and October 21, 1901.
[6]               Untitled notice, The Washington, D. C., Evening Star, August 18, 1900.
[7]               Hypnotism Thinks Boy’s Father, The Cincinnati Enquirer, May 17, 1907.
[8]               All Are Welcome to Attend, Salem, Oregon, Daily Capital Journal, November 2, 1900.
[9]               Dawn Students, a New Religious Sect, In Akron, The Akron, Ohio, Daily Democrat, January 17, 1902.
[10]             Free Lecture, The Grants Pass, Oregon, Rogue River Courier, March 17, 1904. The announcement was inserted by J. O. Sandberg. His first name may have been John. We are uncertain at this time.
[11]             Untitled notice: Cedar Rapids, Iowa, Evening Gazette, March 20, 1901. Untitled notice: The Ithaca, New York, Saratogan¸ January 18, 1902.
[12]             Untitled announcements, The Utica, New York, Press, March 21 and 28, 1902.
[13]             The Elizabeth City, North Carolina, Falcon, Oct. 12, 1888.
[14]             Hessler was born about 1848. The 1880 Census tells us that he was widowed. He subsequently remarried. He was a cabinet maker, and later a contractor. Advertisements for his remodeling and cabinet and flooring business appear in the Scranton Tribune [eg. October 7, 1898, and June 5, 1899 issues].
[15]             End of the World in 1914, The Brazil, Indiana, Weekly Democrat, October 17, 1912.
[16]             The Millennium, The Richmond, Virginia, Times, June 7, 1902.
[17]             Sermon by Pastor Russell, The Bolivar, New York, Breeze, March 11, 1915.
[18]             Millennial Dawn Bible Class, The Elmira, New York, Evening Telegram¸ April 14, 1906.
[19]             Consigned to a Private Hospital, The Cincinnati, Ohio, Enquirer, June 13, 1904.
[20]             Believers in Atonement Services, The Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, Inquirer¸ June 18, 1900. This name was used for several conventions. Another example is, also from Philadelphia, is mentioned in The Fort Wayne, Indiana, Sentinel, December 30, 1902.
[21]             Millennium in Sight, The Brooklyn, New York, Daily Eagle, July 12, 1903.
[22]             “Believer in Session,” The Omaha, Nebraska, Daily Bee, October 3, 1898; National Believers’ Convention, The Duluth, Minnesota, Labor World, December 23, 1899.
[23]             See the convention reports for those locations and years.
[24]             His Second Coming, The Albany, New York, Evening Journal, May 28, 1900. Various New York State Census records tell us Clapham was born in England between 1833 and 1834. He was a shoemaker. We do not know to what degree Clapham was interested in the Watch Tower message. A newspaper report from 1906 noted that he faithfully attended the Tabernacle Baptist Church “every Sunday but one in seven years.” [Albany Evening Journal, June 11, 1906.] We cannot identify Fletcher.
[25]             Notice, The Minneapolis, Minnesota, Journal, February 18, 1905.
[26]             Untitled notice, The Omaha, Nebraska, Daily Bee, August 23, 1899.
[27]             Millennial Dawn, The Indianapolis, Indiana, Journal, July 13, 1902.
[28]             Advertisement, The Cincinnati, Ohio, Enquirer, November 1, 1891.
[29]             C. T. Russell: Harvest Laborers: Pray for Them, Zion’s Watch Tower, February 15, 1892, page 50.
[30]             See announcement in the May 4, 1892, Cincinnati Enquirer.
[31]             See Adamson’s letter to Russell in Extracts from Interesting Letters, Zion’s Watch Tower, February 1891, page 30. [Not in Reprints.]
[32]             Advertisement, The Cincinnati, Ohio, Enquirer, December 27, 1894.
[33]             Letter from E. F. R. to Russell appended to: The Memorial Supper Celebrated, Zion’s Watch Tower, May 15, 1902, page 157. [Omitted from Reprints.]
[34]             Continuous Sermon, The Cato Citizen, August 28, 1897.
[35]             Not Known by Name, Rochester, New York, Democrat and Chronicle¸ September 30, 1901.
[36]             Among the Churches, The Flint, Michigan, Daily Journal¸ March 28, 1903
[37]             See the March 7, 1906, issue.
[38]             Untitled notice, The Huston, Texas, Daily Post, May 29, 1901; Evangelist Sam Williams, February 22, 1903.

Out of Babylon

Some of you may remember the temporary post "Out of Babylon," which was most of a chapter of that name. One section considers the struggle to find an appropriate name. A friend of our research sent Bruce this for an illustration:


Saturday, April 30, 2016

Spanish Hymns of Dawn





Miquel has kindly sent through the two interesting photographs above. This is the Spanish version of Hymns of Dawn, and as such is extremely rare. This version was published in 1925. It differs from the English language version in that some hymns were taken from the original, while others were taken from Spanish evangelical hymnals of the day.

This is a second or new edition of the Himnario de la Aurora del Milenio. The first edition dates from 1919, and may have been published as a supplement to the Spanish Watch Tower. This subject is Miquel’s speciality, but he has never seen a copy.


Wednesday, April 27, 2016

Find More Graves


A little over a year ago this blog carried an article on Find a Grave, highlighting the history resource that can be found in graveyards. Any new readers can easily find it by typing in Find a Grave in the search terms. They will find the original article, along with an article about Malcom Rutherford’s grave (with his two wives) and also one on the Allegheny Cemetery, where most of the Russell family were buried, and several on the Society’s plot in the United Cemeteries.

The actual article Find a Grave had photographs of graves of the extended Russell family, including CTR’s parents, siblings, wife, in-laws, etc. It covered graves from those who were influences before the founding of Zion’s Watch Tower, Benjamin Wilson, Jonas Wendell, George Stetson, and George Storrs, and then graves of those who were once in fellowship but parted company - Nelson Barbour, William Conley, John Paton, Hugh B Rice, Arthur P Adams, Otto von Zech, and Ernest Henninges. It ended with modern grave markers for Nathan Knorr and Fred Franz.


Thanks to the research work of Bernard, here are five more photographs. Four are for men who were original directors of the Society in 1884, along with Charles and Maria. 

William Imrie Mann was a director from December 15, 1884 to April 11, 1892.


Joseph Firth Smith was a director from December 15, 1884 to April 11, 1892. He is buried in the same cemetery as CTR’s parents.


Add caption
John Bartlet Adamson was a director from December 15, 1884 to January 5, 1895.



 William Cook MacMillen was a director from December 15, 1884 to May 13, 1898.




Benjamin Wallace Keith was an associate of Nelson Barbour, and one of the original contributors to Zion's Watch Tower, who ultimately sided with John Paton. His history is discussed in Separate Identity volume 1. 


Tuesday, April 26, 2016

When you help.

Crimsonrose pointed us to a clipping from the November 1886 Chicago Daily Inter-Ocean. As a result we rewrote a section of the volume 2 chapter we're calling Advertising the Message. Herewith is the revised work:



A Prophetic Conference was held in Chicago in November 1886, and it was well-attended by prominent pre-millennialists. John H. Brown, describe by a later Watchtower writer as a “faithful Bible Student,” petitioned the organizers for space to sell Russell’s Plan of the Ages. Permission was refused, and Brown protested through the press. The Chicago Inter-Ocean printed his letter:

Would it not seem as though the managers of the Prophetic Convention, now being held in the city, in view of the prejudice against them in the church at large on account of their advanced views, would be remarkably tolerant toward others who, while holding some views in common with them, differ, we think essentially and honesty on some others?

Permit me to state that on the opening of the convention representing the Tower Publishing Company, Allegheny, Pa; I applied for space for the sale of “Millennial Dawn,” willing, of course, to pay for the privilege. Mr. Needham was the one to whom I had to apply finally, and I was flatly refused even a chance to distribute circulars in the hallway, with comments most decidedly unfavorable to the character of the book.

A seller of religious books declined to have even his name mentioned in connection with it, not wishing “to scare people with views of too pronounced a character.” Not feeling inclined to give up entirely, we sought and obtained privilege from the proprietor of a liquor store for permission to stand in front of his place and call attention to the book. The weather, of course, has interfered with work under such conditions, and the party we employed has made himself quietly useful in the hallway, distributing circulars, although several times warned to quit it.

Why is it that so many religious (?) people think theirs is the only plan of salvation? This book we offer, teaches (as per the Bible, we think) that all who will, may be saved, if not in this life, in the next; that is the point that staggers them.[1]

That Watch Tower evangelists handed out tracts outside the conference hall, prompted one of the clergymen attending to seek an official statement separating the conference from any association with The Plan of the Ages. A newspaper report said:

The Rev. Henry M. Parsons, of Toronto, offered the following minute, which received the sanction of the management and friends to the true spirit of the conference:

The committee, having responsible authority for the calling and arrangement of the Bible and Prophetic Conference disclaims any connection with the book entitled “The Millennial Dawn,” believing it to contain much deadly error, insidiously mingled with the main truths constituting the testimony of the present conference. Nor is the committee in any way responsible for tracts and circulars distributed at Farwell Hall.[2]

            Though the statement was presented by Parsons, it was signed by George C. Needham, conference secretary.
G. C. Needham wanted the world to know that the 1886 Prophetic Conference Abhorred Millennial Dawn


[1]               J. H. Brown: Millennial Dawn, A Grievance, The Chicago Daily Inter-Ocean, November 22, 1886.
[2]               The Prophetic Conference. Papers Read at the Fifth Day's Session of the Convention, Chicago Daily Inter-Ocean, November 22, 1886.

Wednesday, April 20, 2016

A Review



Jehovah’s Witnesses: Continuity and Change
by George Chryssides
A Review by R. M. de Vienne, PhD.

            Chryssides’ new book sets the standard for generalist studies of Jehovah’s Witnesses. It is free of polemic, largely accurate and well written. Its outline is orderly and easy to follow. In these respects it is superior to almost every book written about the Bible Student and Witness movements since 1920. This is especially true when compared to ‘studies’ written by those with ‘academic credentials.’ Chryssides book isn’t colored by the ignorant sectarianism of Gruss. It is vastly more informed than Stroup’s sloppy research; it avoids the condescending, human-progress point of view found in Elmer Clark’s Small Sects. And I believe it is more informed that Beckford’s Trumpet of Prophecy.
            Chryssides did not have access to Separate Identity while preparing his manuscript, so he was unfamiliar with Russell’s immersion into Age-to-Come belief or how Literalist/Age-to-Come doctrine differs from Millerite Adventism. He occasionally confuses Millenarianism with Adventism, leaving chapter two slightly flawed and weak.
            Writing of J. A. Brown’s role in Watchtower history, he says: “Neither Russell nor Barbour mention Brown ... Probably he was not known to these to leaders.” If Russell knew of Brown, I’d be surprised. However Wellcome suggests that Barbour did, and Barbour was familiar with a vast array of prophetic literature. Chryssides says that the earliest published attempt at predictive chronology was John Aquila Brown’s Even Tide. This is inaccurate. Bengal, Newton and many others preceded Brown. An examination of Froom’s Prophetic Faith shows this. Chryssides is confused about Brown’s occupation, noting that he is sometimes described as a silversmith and sometimes as a clergyman. He was a silversmith. His will and court documents make this clear.
            Chryssides calls Elias Smith “an early Adventist.” He was not. He was a Literalist, a Millenarian. He did not teach characteristic Millerite doctrine. Chryssides suggests that Barbour ‘discovered’ Bowen’s chronology in the British Library. He consulted it to refresh his memory. It was not a new discovery. Elliott’s Horae in which it is found was a familiar work.
            He calls Stetson and Storrs Adventists. This was true enough at one period in their lives, but not at all true when Russell met them. When Russell met them, both were advocating Literalist doctrine and writing for Age-to-Come journals. Both were actively opposed by Adventists.
            Chryssides suggests that Barbour was born in Louisiana. He confuses a Confederate veteran of similar name with Nelson Barbour who was born in Throopsville, New York. Barbour had no connection to the American South, but descended from a colonial era Connecticut family.
            On page 48, Chryssides suggests that Russell’s doctrines were derived from Adventism. As we demonstrate in Separate Identity, none of his ideas derive from Adventism. On page 51 he suggests that Barbour sent Russell a letter in 1876. Barbour sent Russell his magazine in December 1875. There is no suggestion that he enclosed a letter. Russell’s account of events suggests that he did not, and that it was Russell who first wrote to Barbour. On page 52, citing Maurice Barnett, Chryssides writes of W. H. Conley: “He is said to have donated $40,000 for the publication of Russell’s Food for Thinking Christians.” Relying on secondary web sources is nearly always a bad idea. Original documents say that Conley donated $4000, not $40,000. The bulk of the forty thousand dollars poured into circulation of Food came from Russell’s pocket. I should note too that Stetson died at his own home, not at the Conley’s residence.
            The use of the descriptor “pioneers” (page 54) is an anachronism.
            On page 56 Chryssides suggests Russell abandoned commercial printing in 1880 and “purchased his own printing house.” Watch Tower publications were printed commercially into the 1920s. Russell originated the imprint Tower Publishing Company, later donating it with all the copyrights to Zion’s Watch Tower Tract Society.
            On page 56 we find the suggestion that John Corbin Sunderlin and Joseph Jacob Bender traveled to the UK together in 1881. Bender was sent later to replace the ill Sunderlin.
            On page 57 he suggests that Russell moved his operation to Brooklyn seeking larger, better quarters. He omits issues connected with Russell’s divorce which, despite Russellite assertions to the contrary, seem to be the primary reason for the move.
            This may seem like a daunting and debilitating list of errors. It’s not. One can turn page after page and nod agreement to what one finds there. Chryssides handles “the scandals” without hyperbole or polemics. He considers Miracle Wheat, the Russell marriage, the von Zech issues and the 1908-1909 schism reasonably and accurately. The 1917-1918 schism is presented with equal clarity. The huge volume of material related to the Olin Moyle incident is digested and fairly presented. His account of the 1933 Declaration of Facts addressed to Hitler is stellar. However, neither Chryssides nor Penton seem to be familiar with the details of the Watchtower’s shifting doctrine regarding the Jewish nation. Of the two presentations, Chryssides’ account is the better.
            The section on The New World Translation is very well done. However, he takes Mantey’s scolding letter at face value. It is a seriously flawed, misleading letter. Mantey claims work that belonged to the original author of The Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament, a paragraph to which Mantey contributed nothing. Chryssides does not address the reasons for Watchtower intellectual “disconnect” when using Greber’s translation. Yet one sees it in other areas. I would, have used this as an occasion to point to flawed Watchtower research in the 1960s that included citing a publisher as an author and not consulting publications afresh but simply re-quoting from previously published citations. This is not a flaw in Chryssides’ book. It’s just my preference.
            Chapter eight, “Ethics and Lifestyle,” is particularly well done. Chapter nine, “Worship and Rites of Passage,” notes Watchtower use of A. Hislop’s The Two Babylons without noting that Watchtower writers have for some time seen it as seriously flawed. Chryssides says (page 200) that rejection of birthdays came from Hislop. This is arguably incorrect, though Two Babylons was used to support that view. He attributes an annual Memorial Celebration (communion) to Adventist influence. In fact it is a centuries old tradition and came to Russell through his Age-to-Come connections, not Adventism.
            Chapter eleven examines changes in Watchtower doctrines, which were sometimes dogmatically stated and dogmatically retracted. This is a very well-done, accurate chapter. Many who are sympathetic to the Watchtower but puzzled by dogmatism in areas where caution would be the better course will find much of interest. This chapter comments on pedophilia issues. Finally, a rational statement from someone.
            While I believe it necessary to point out some flaws, I restate my opening point. This is an exceptional book, well worth the time spent reading it (four times.) It is impossible, or nearly so, to write a book like this and not have errors appear. That some have appeared in this book does not remove it from serious consideration by anyone interested in religious movements such as Jehovah’s Witnesses. It is very expensive. Hopefully a cheaper, revised edition awaits us in the future.
            When H. G. Wells’ Outline of History was published, specialist historians praised the book, often adding that he should have elaborated on their areas of specialty. I’ve tried to resist doing that here. I don’t write generalist history, but detail-laden, narrowly-focused history. If Dr. Schulz and I live long enough to carry our history into the Rutherford era, we will consult Jehovah’s Witnesses: Continuity and Change.
            One last pick: The bibliography lists John Storrs. It’s George Storrs.
           

Tuesday, April 19, 2016

Dear Crims



Dear Crimsonrose,

While we have some of the clippings you send, never consider it wasted effort. You’ve also sent clippings we do not have and that will enlarge or change the story we tell. This is excellent. I’m on a personal day for a doctor’s appointment. While I’m sitting here waiting to see her, I’m downloading the files.

Especially important are the articles about Brown and Needham; Paton’s Pittsburgh lecture; and the Presbyterian’s meeting in 1882. We had parts of those stories but not all of them. We’ll rewrite bits as a result. This is good.

If you can, please search for a report of Russell’s 1877 lectures in Pittsburgh and of a second series some believe he gave in 1879. More about Coovert’s debate challenge would be good. We have the basics, but there is supposed to be a letter from Coovert to one of the Pittsburgh papers we’ve never found.

Keep up the good work. This is immensely helpful.

Rachael

1874-75 Allegheny-Pittsburgh – Adventist or Age to Come? The case of George Storrs and Elder Owen.


by Jerome

Recently accessed on this blog has been this old article written back in 2011. It is nice when things from way back still get read on occasion. However, the article in question was actually abridged from a longer article on the now defunct Blog 2, and omitted all the references. So the original from Blog 2 is reprinted here. The subject matter has of course now been covered in some detail in volume 1 of Separate Identity.



Illustrated above are George Stetson’s meetings at Quincy Hall, Allegheny, as reported in The Advent Christian Times on November 11, 1873, page 112, and George Clowes’ meetings at the same location as reported in The Restitution (Age to Come/One Faith) on November 5, 1874, page 3.



As previously established on this blog, the Allegheny meetings of the early 1870s had an eclectic mix. In the early days Advent Christians and Age to Come believers would often meet together. They were united on their keen interest in the return of Christ and conditional immortality, while generally divided over such subjects as the destiny of natural Israel, how many would benefit from future probation through the resurrection, which key events yet to happen were timed for the start or the end of the millennium, and the advisability (or otherwise) of date setting.

As long as everyone remains tolerant and unofficial and generally disorganised the situation could continue. But while Age to Come believers of the 1870s were independent groups who were generally averse to organization, the Second Adventists were increasingly anxious for recognition as an established religion. This required an official statement of belief covering not just vague generalities but specifics.  As George Storrs would put it, writing in Bible Examiner for June 1876, page 263, about his distaste for Advent Conferences, (quote) I have seen this process of organizing conferences, especially, with deep sorrow. Next come “Resolutions”, theory of course, at first; but presently dictatorial, next penal, excluding everyone from their body who presumes to preach and teach what the majority of their body do not wish to have preached among them (end of quote).

The logical outcome from this was described in Bible Examiner (hereafter abbreviated to BE) for October 1877, page 52, where Elder S W Bishop quotes from a resolution passed at the last session of The Advent Christian Association, to the effect that (quote) appointments to preach shall not be passed in their organ, The World’s Crisis, for anyone who believes...the following doctrines...viz...age to come (end quote). Bishop relates tales of those preaching future probation being forced out of churches, and generously peppers his description of the Advent Christian Church with expressions like “unmitigated bigotry” and “daughters of Rome”.

In spite of the drift from fellowship to disfellowship, some individuals still managed to straddle the divide through the 1870s. George Stetson was a case in point. Ordained by the Advent Christian Church they claimed him as one of their own, and published his obituary in The World’s Crisis. Stetson wrote many articles for the Crisis and some of his preaching activities are in its pages. But in the last few years of his life he probably wrote more articles for The Restitution, and his meetings in Edinboro were regularly announced there.

As noted above, Stetson’s 1873 meetings at Quincy Hall in Allegheny were billed as Advent Christian. The local man, George Clowes, had also been claimed as Advent Christian (see for example Jonas Wendell’s letter in The World’s Crisis for December 27, 1871 where Clowes, recently expelled from the Methodists, was appointed as undershepherd of the (Advent) church in Pittsburgh. But as also noted above, by 1874, Clowes’ ministry at Quincy Hall was now claimed as One Faith, Age to Come.

So which was it to be? Advent Christian or Age to Come?

While the group associated with the Russell family no doubt retained its independence, allowing the majority to link up with Nelson Barbour later, if you had to attach a label, Age to Come believers in future probation (rather than Advent Christian) would be it.

This article will present three lines of evidence to establish this. First, the way their meetings were advertised in the religious press, and then two key visitors whose preaching was accepted by the group.

The first point we have already covered. The November 1874 meetings where Elder Clowes preached were advertised in the Restitution Church Directory as Age to Come. As we will see later, the meetings Clowes attended were also attended by Joseph Lytel Russell, William H Conley, and Charles Taze Russell (hereafter abbreviated to CTR). When Clowes died in 1889 Zion’s Watch Tower published an obituary for him in the March issue (reprints 1110). In response to a tribute from Joseph Lytel, CTR wrote:

On Jan’y 25th our dear Brother Clowes, with whom some of our readers were acquainted, having heard him preach the word of truth at various points near Pittsburgh, passed away
full of triumphant faith and glorious hope. “Blessed are the dead who die in the Lord from hencefotih. Yea, saith the spirit, they shall rest from their labors, but their works follow with them.”

Second and third, we have two known visitors to the group.

The first was George Storrs himself, who spent two Sundays with them in May 1874 and wrote quite a detailed account of his experiences. Before we try and pigeon-hole Storrs’ theology, it would be useful to outline what happened both before, during and after his visit to Pittsburgh.

Shortly after his magazine became a monthly again, Storrs offered his services. As outlined in his March 1874 editorial on page 162, Storrs offered to preach on the subject of Vindication of the Divine Character and Government to any group who would welcome him and offer a convenient Hall. The next issue, April 1874, page 224, noted that C T Russell and Son had been in touch, as had George Stetson in Edinboro. Another regular Pittsburgh correspondent was C W Buvinger, M.D. (for example, see BE March 1874, page 192 and February 1877, page 158). Whoever gave the invitation, it was given promptly and Storrs responded promptly. In the May 1874 BE, page 226, Storrs announced that he would be in Pittsburgh on the first and second Sundays of that month to speak on The Divine Character and Government, details of venue to be announced in the local press.

In the June 1874 BE, page 259, Storrs’ editorial gives a detailed review of his trip to Pittsburgh over the first two Sundays of May. Storrs (quote) found there a small but noble band of friends who upheld with the full hearts the truths advocated by himself. Among them is a preacher who was formerly of the Methodists, but is now firmly settled in the character of the Divine Government as set forth in this periodical (end quote). The preacher in question would appear to be Elder George D Clowes.

Storrs reproduced a newspaper review from The Pittsburgh Leader on his talk at the Library Hall. It mentioned a large audience, although a few left shortly after he began speaking. In his talk Storrs refers to “the ages to come” (rather than “age to come”) and stresses that (quote) all men have will have an opportunity, if not in this life, in another one...Some may call me Universalist. I am in one sense; I believe that a universal opportunity will be accorded to every son and daughter of Adam (end of quote).

Storrs ended his review by thanking the friends in Pittsburgh for their generous support sustaining him and sending him on his way.

Storrs’ visit had an immediate impact. In the same June 1874 issue of BE on page 288, under the heading Parcels Sent up to May 25 are several well-known names: Wm H Conley (2 parcels), G D Clowes Snr. and  J L Russell and Son (by Express). Sandwiched between the names of Clowes and Russell in the list is a B F Land. It is only conjecture on this writer’s part, but CTR’s sister Margaret, who was about twenty years old at this time, was to marry a Benjamin Land. They had their first child c. 1876. One wonders when and where they met. 

Missing of course from this list of eager recipients of Storrs’ materials is CTR – other than the letterhead of J L Russell and Son. However, the very next issue of BE for July 1874, page 320, under Letters Received up to June 25, lists C T Russell.

So key characters were all in place when Storrs’ visited in May 1874 and preached about the Ages to Come, and when the Restitution advertised Allegheny meetings conducted by Clowes as One Faith in November 1874.

In the December 1874 BE, page 66, a belated letter from Joseph Lytel Russell to Storrs was published about the May meeting, apologising for the delay and expressing Joseph’s appreciation for it. Storrs’ responded by saying (quote) Brother Russell is one of our elder brethren, with whom I formed a most agreeable acquaintance while in Pittsburgh last May, and I think of him only to love and respect him (end of quote).

This suggests that Storrs and Joseph Lytel only met in the flesh for the first time at those meetings in May 1874. And there is no mention of CTR in the correspondence, or in Storrs’ review of his visit back in the June BE. However, assuming CTR was actually there and not away on business in early May, Storrs would naturally relate more to those nearer his own age.

So George Storrs was a welcomed speaker at Pittsburgh, with whom some at least continued in warm fellowship afterwards.

So, returning to our main point, what does this tell us about the leaning of the group he visited?

Was Storrs Age to Come or Advent Christian?

Storrs would probably have denied that he was either.  However, his sympathies certainly lay in one direction.

Storrs was fiercely independent, and had left religious groups more than once already on matters of principle. One of the founders of the Life and Advent Union in 1863, he left that body and restarted Bible Examiner in 1871, after accepting future probation with an inclusiveness that prompted others to accuse him of being universalist. As noted in the review of Storrs’ speech at Pittsburgh, his standard retort would be that he did not believe in universal salvation, but rather universal opportunity.

Future probation had been a hot potato for both Age to Come believers and Adventists, with widely differing views within each group. But in the 1870s the Restitution newspaper at least allowed some debate on what friend and foe would variously label as the One Chance, Second Chance, Better Chance, Fair Chance choice of scenario in God’s Divine Plan.

Storrs wrote a number of articles for the Restitution on this subject – for examples, see December 9, 1874 (Christ Gave Himself a Ransom for All), December 23, 1874 (Justice and Love) and August 24, 1875 (There is a Flaw). These were part of an ongoing debate, where some readers accepted the general outline of Storrs’ views. For example, see the letter from John Foore, published in the Restitution for October 3, 1877, where Foore writes (quote )  I still get The Restitution, and like it very much; but should like it much better if it could be opened for the advanced views such as the blessing of all nations and all kindreds in the age to come (end quote). No doubt Foore, and others of like mind, would slip this “advanced view” into their sermons.

Storrs’ journal quoted approvingly from The Restitution on a number of occasions (for example see Nov 1874, page 46, August 1877, page 238, March 1878, page 167 – a gentle critique of CTR’s Object and Manner, and August 1878, page 327.

Both BE and The Restitution related the preaching activities of people like the already mentioned John Foore and his sometime companion John S Lawver. (the latter was later mentioned in ZWT July 1882, reprints page 367). When a begging letter was sent to “Dear Brethren of the Abrahamic Faith” (April 1874, page 194) Storrs printed it, and sent the writer a parcel.  Even when disagreeing with the Restitution he still addressed them as “dear fellow-laborers” and beseeched them to give greater weight to his views (BE January 1876, page 103).

So Age to Come groups would generally feel kindly towards Storrs. When illness took hold in 1879, the Restitution published news about Storrs’ condition quite regularly expressing a genuine concern. (see for example Restitution for June 11, July 30, and November 5, 1879). When he died he was described as “late lamented” (March 10, 1880) and “highly venerated” (April 7, 1880) in its pages.

So it would be logical for an independent Age to Come group like the one in Pittsburgh to welcome Storrs as a speaker.

No such rapport can be found between Storrs and the Advent Christian Church throughout the 1870s. One can look in vain for kind words about them in BE.

A few comments directly from Storrs himself about the Advent Christian Church and its organs like The World’s Crisis: (quote) Poor old Rome has some very foolish children...I have nothing but pity for such ...out of their own mouths they are condemned (March 1875) – the Lord only can restore a diseased mind (March 1876) – the synagogue of Adventists with the spirit of the ancient Pharasees (December 1876) – the same spirit crucified the Lord Jesus (January 1877) – God dishonouring theories (October 1877) – perversions of the word of God (March 1878) – I leave them with their own master (July 1878) and on an article in The World’s Crisis - very close to blaspheming against the Holy Spirit (October 1877) (end of quotes).

Some of Storrs’ correspondents were almost apoplectic when mentioning the Advent Christian Church, and their comments were printed in BE unchallenged. In addition to Elder Bishop’s “unmitigated bigotry” and “daughters of Rome” salvos (noted above) we have such epithets as – covenant breakers (June 1874) – appalling doctrine (July 1875) – most sectarian body...ever found (April 1876) – bigoted and proscriptive...they sustain wicked and unscrupulous people (May 1876) – (making others) subject to the most inveterate malice and hatred (April 1876) – as bigoted and sectarian as any other “ists” (September 1876)

Correspondents sent in material on the assumption that Storrs did not receive The World’s Crisis (for example see March 1878 BE, page 173), and Storrs himself gave a succinct response to one correspondent in September 1874 BE, page 380: I never see the A(dvent) C(Christian) Times!
                                                                                               
In a quieter moment, Storrs summed up his views of both Adventists and Age to Come believers in an article published in July 1876 BE, page 298, entitled Adventist View in Error on the End of Probation. He stated (quote) these are painful dilemmas for humane and conscientious Adventists...it makes them secretly hope...that the Age to Come advocates are right (end quote). Then, writing about the Age to Come believer (quote) as he believes in the restoration of Israel and the conversion of them and the Gentile nations, and allows both salvation and probation for such beyond the second advent, he does not burn up the promises of God before they can be fulfilled, like the Adventist (end of quote).

Reading all the above, I think we can safely assume that, had the Allegheny-Pittsburgh group been staunch Advent Christian, there is no way George Storrs would have been on their guest list!

So we have two lines of evidence as to the leanings of the Allegheny-Pittsburgh group in 1874-75 – first, how they were advertised in the religious press and second – a point we have labored – how a maverick like Storrs was welcomed.

The third line of evidence is another visitor they had – this time in 1875. And here we come to the interesting case of Elder E Owen.

The November 1875 BE contains a trove of familiar names. Under Letters Received on page 64, Storrs notes two from CTR and one from W H Conley. But a little earlier in this issue Storrs published the contents of two other letters, one from Elder G D Clowes of Pittsburgh on page 61 and one from J L Russell of Pittsburgh on page 62.

Both letters expressed support for Storrs’ labours and showed clearly that Clowes and Joseph Lytel were still attending the same meetings and remained in tune with Storrs’ theology. They also give a clue as to the continuing character of those meetings. Clowes (still addressed as Elder Clowes) writes “Brother Owen is labouring with us”. Joseph Lytel gives a little more detail: “Brother E Owens (sic) of Portsmouth N.H. has been with us on a visit. We were very much pleased with him. I think he is truly a servant of the Lord’s, sent to preach the gospel.”

Elder E Owen (like George Clowes before him) had been claimed as Advent Christian a few years before. He is listed in the World’s Crisis’ speaking lists for November and December 1871, including his home city of Portsmouth, N.H. (The same listing has a certain Nelson Barbour preaching in Wakefield, Mass. about the second coming due to occur in 1873). Owen also had a poem published in the Crisis for January 14, 1874 entitled “We Want a Pastor”. But by 1875, if not before, he appears to have come to a parting of the ways.

Storrs published two of his poems in BE in February and December 1875 as well as several letters. The key one was in the issue for April 1874 page 216, where, to use a modern expression, Owen has a bit of a rant.

(quote) When so called “men of God” advise congregations to exclude from their houses, and churches, all who believe in the “age to come”, (as was reverently done in this place), I feel to say, God have mercy upon such leaders of the people: for if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch. I am fully satisfied the Advent people are growing more and more contracted in sentiment, more and more adverse to investigation; and I am fully aware that spiritual death and declension is inevitable. May God preserve me and as many as can be preserved from imbibing so unfruitful a frame of mind. (end of quote)

Elder Owen had strong feelings over the increasing gulf between Adventists and Age to Come believers and how he had personally fared in the controversy. Storrs was more than happy to print these views; as shown by his comments above, they obviously mirrored his own.

The next year, Owen wrote again in similar vein. The situation as he saw it had not improved. The August 1875 BE on page 330 contains another polemic from him: (quote) The war wages fiercely. Misrepresentation, legislation, disfellowship and kindred arguments are brought vigorously to bear...In our State the spirit of intolerance in rampant, some men refusing to labor with those who entertain the faith of “Ages to Come”. Poor men...It requires strong decision and moral courage to face the tide (end of quote). In Storrs’ response, he writes: (quote) if those are the best (arguments) they can furnish their triumph will be short (end of quote).

On the issue of Advent Christians and Age to Come believers, Owen clearly eschewed any woolly ecumenical feelings and nailed his colors firmly to the wall. In this he had Storrs’ public support. So when George Clowes and Joseph Lytel welcomed Owen with open arms in late 1875 and spoke appreciatively of his ministry, it is obvious which side of the mounting divide they continued to support.

So while the Allegheny-Pittsburgh group connected with Joseph Lytel Russell, George D Clowes, William H Conley and CTR may have been independent, its natural home was in the Age to Come family.

And then events took an unexpected turn. Charles Taze Russell met Nelson Barbour.

Monday, April 11, 2016

Expect ...

George Chryssides's publisher sent me a review copy of his new book, Jehovah's Witnesses: Continuity and Change. Expect a review after I've read it through twice or thrice. I'm on page 55 on the first reading. Up to page 55 this is a stellar generalist book. It puts to shame many of the earlier books treating this subject. I'll keep you updated.

So far I've found one minor grammar fault, meaningless. And one place where he would have benefited from our second book, not in print when his mss was finished. It is a very expensive book, but at page 55, and no further, I'd recommend it.


Sunday, April 10, 2016

Photodrama Advertisement Car - Detective Work Completed.


By Professorbigmac


Many readers will have seen the photograph of a Model T Ford being used to advertise the Photodrama of Creation as depicted below.



There is also another view from the other side, which has been colorized.



It would be nice to know where this scene was located and when it happened don’t you think?

Zion’s Watch Tower dated February 15, 1914 contains an article about the Photodrama and where it was being exhibited. This included Cleveland, Ohio, at the Temple, Prospect Avenue and E. 22nd Street. This is the address seen on the side of the display.

Research on the internet about churches allowed us to identify the actual building. It was previously the Plymouth Congregational Church as shown in the postcard below.



Comparing this picture with the drama advertisement we can see exactly where the car was placed.



Correspondent Brian pointed out that, if you examine a high definition copy of the original photograph, there is a poster advertising the Photodrama in the doorway behind the car.

According to Wikipedia the Plymouth Congregational Church owes its name to Henry Ward Beecher. The Church disbanded in 1913 due to a loss of members and a lack of money. The Bible Students obviously were using it as their Temple for Photodrama showings in February 1914. Wikipedia suggests that the Congregationalists got it back and reconstituted it as a Community Church in 1916.



Extra note by Jerome:

Following on from meeting places being called Tabernacles (e.g. Brooklyn Tabernacle, London Tabernacle) it was easy to see why some large halls would be called Temples. So there was the New York City Temple, where the Photodrama was shown in New York. Probably most famous of all was the Chicago City Temple (formerly the old Globe Theater), which again was used for the Photodrama. 


The Chicago class produced a special brochure entitled Our Temple, which is highly collectable today. It shows how the Photodrama presentation worked, and as a bonus had a photograph from the first Bible Student convention held in Chicago in 1893. If you visited the Chicago Temple you would likely have been given a tour by Albert Franz, whose photograph is in the Temple brochure. As a link with more recent times, his younger brother, Fred Franz, was president of the Watchtower Society from 1977-1992.


Saturday, April 9, 2016

Mailed from Watch Tower office - 1898.


Alas, we're selling this one too. It's on ebay.

Not good images

Bruce has listed this on ebay. I'm posting the images for you to see before it goes poof.