The Church of the Brethren And The Brethren Church
The Church of the Brethren And The Brethren Church
|
Resolution on The Brethren Church Can We Confess the Sins of the Past?, Profile of The Brethren Church, Congregations of The Brethren Church Permission is granted to photocopy these articles as needed for use in congregational study and discussion. |
Dear Church of the Brethren leader,
Where do repentance and forgiveness figure in our lives today? In an era so defensive of borders—personal, spiritual, corporate, and national—these disciplines seem almost alien to us.
Yet repentance is what the Church of the Brethren is called to come to terms with in a query before the 2002 Annual Conference. The query addresses our relationship with The Brethren Church, past and present. It asks whether the day has come for a new understanding.
At the request of Standing Committee and in concert with The Brethren Church (Ashland, Ohio), the Church of the Brethren General Board presents you with the accompanying resources. These items are designed to assist you, your Annual Conference delegates, and your congregation in dialoging and praying about our relationship with The Brethren Church, seeking, as the resolution states, "an awareness of God's Spirit of grace and forgiveness."
In To Be the Church: Challenges and Hopes for a New Millennium, Konrad Raiser of the World Council of Churches reminds us,
There is no viable hope apart from memory; and the reconciliation of memories releases energies for new hope.
Here on the threshold of the 300th anniversary of the Brethren movement, we are prompted to examine the solidarity of our own spiritual family. May our study and reflection and the Spirit's leading serve to open each of us to the healing of memories and the release of energies for new hope.
For the General Board and Standing Committee,
|
Howard E. Royer
Interpretation |
Kenneth M. Shaffer, Jr.
Brethren Historical Library and Archives |
2001 Church of the Brethren Annual Conference
Resolution on The Brethren Church
The Committee on Interchurch Relations, through the General Board, calls upon the Annual Conference of the Church of the Brethren, meeting in Baltimore, Maryland, June 30-July 4, 2001, to celebrate and make good use of our opportunities for partnership in Christ's service with the Brethren Church headquartered in Ashland, Ohio.
At the July 18, 2000, Ecumenical Banquet, sponsored by the Committee on Interchurch Relations at the 2000 Annual Conference, Dr. Emanuel "Buzz" Sandberg brought greetings from the Brethren Church. Dr. Sandberg, Executive Director of the Brethren Church, spoke about his experiences in Schwarzenau, where the first Brethren (forbears of both denominations) remained faithful despite persecution. He reflected on the conflicts that divided the Brethren family in 1883 and how stubbornly each side has clung to its own ways for over 100 years, perpetuating the fragmentation of the Brethren family.
In an article published in the December 2000 Agenda, Dr. Sandberg wrote, "I do not believe that God is happy with the Brethren and our continuing efforts to justify our stubborn positions. I do not believe that God will bless the Brethren until we admit our wrongdoing and humbly ask God to forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those we feel have trespassed against us." In that article, as he had done in person at the Ecumenical Banquet at Annual Conference, Dr. Sandberg expressed his personal desire that Brethren might repent of our continuing efforts to justify our stubborn positions. He has asked God to forgive his denomination for not making the needed effort to heal the break in the family, a break which has damaged each of our denominations in numerous and major ways. Dr. Sandberg asked us, the Church of the Brethren, to forgive the Brethren Church branch of the family and to join with them as a renewed family to serve God together, to work together in harmony and love.
Such an humble expression of repentance and of the desire for forgiveness and for renewed partnership in serving the Lord together has had a powerful effect upon those of us who were privileged to hear Dr. Sandberg's message. The Committee on Interchurch Relations wants the Church of the Brethren as a whole to be aware of this overture inviting reconciliation and cooperation between our denominations. Further, we desire that the Church of the Brethren officially respond to the Ashland Brethren with similar repentance and eagerness to pursue working together in Christ's service wherever possible. To that end, we ask the Annual Conference to affirm the following statement:
In response to Dr. Sandberg's request for forgiveness and for renewed partnership in serving the Lord, the Church of the Brethren also repents of the stubbornness that has caused brokenness between our denomination and the Brethren Church over the past 120 years. We ask the Brethren Church to forgive us for attitudes and actions that have kept us from serving Christ together. We desire reconciliation and want to work together wherever possible. We celebrate our previous mission partnership in Nigeria, our current work together in New Life Ministries and in Brethren World Assemblies, and other ventures. We look forward to all that the Lord will yet lead us to do together!
Committee on Interchurch Relations:
|
Joseph L. Loomis, Chair
James M. Beckwith Steve D. Brady |
Barbara G. Cuffey
Timothy McElwee Belita D. Mitchell |
Background on the Division Between the Brethren Church and the Church of the Brethren
Adapting to Change. After the Civil War rapid changes in US society fueled tensions among the Brethren as they expanded across the continent. For example, increased communications through periodicals made it possible for Brethren to know more about the larger world and about Brethren in other parts of the country. Various groups of Brethren adapted to change in different ways. By 1880 there were three primary groups within the church. One group (the progressives) welcomed change; another group (the conservatives) sought to preserve tradition; and a third group (today known as the Church of the Brethren) approached change cautiously and described themselves as both conservative and progressive.
Divisions. The first formal division occurred in 1881 when the conservatives withdrew from the main body to become the Old German Baptist Brethren (sometimes called the Old Order Brethren). A second division occurred in 1883 when the progressives formed the Brethren Church (sometimes called Ashland Brethren) after their leader was expelled by the 1882 Annual Meeting. It is sometimes said that the 1881 division was unavoidable but the 1883 division might have been avoided if both sides could have been more patient with each other.
Henry Holsinger and the Progressives. The leader of the progressives was Henry R. Holsinger, a minister and publisher, from Middle Pennsylvania District. He learned the publishing business by working for a year with Henry Kurtz on The Monthly Gospel Visitor. Holsinger went on to publish the Christian Family Companion (1865-1873) and The Progressive Christian (1878-1883). In these papers he advocated reforms such as higher education for ministers; the salaried ministry; Sunday schools; evangelism by means of revival (protracted) meetings; foreign missions; and relaxation of the uniform dress code. Holsinger also challenged the authority of Annual Meeting. For him "the problem with the Brethren was that they were held back by the dead hand of the past, seeking to perpetuate the rulings of past leaders set out in minutes of the Annual Meetings and refusing to adopt or adapt new methods to move the church forward (Durnbaugh, Fruit of the Vine, p. 303). Those who supported such reforms rallied around Holsinger as their leader.
Brethren Church Organized. Holsinger has never been described as a tactful person. Articles in his papers often offended people, such as the dress reform article titled "Idolatrous Clothes Religion" and the article comparing Standing Committee to a secret society. Queries began coming to Annual Meeting complaining about Holsinger and his papers. The 1881 Annual Meeting sent a committee to visit him because of articles that disrupted the order of the church, questioned nonconformity, and criticized Annual Meeting. Because the committee met with Holsinger at his home church in Berlin, Pa., the meeting became known as the Berlin Trial. When the committee and Holsinger could not come to agreement on how the meeting was to be conducted, the committee left and recommended that Holsinger be disfellowshipped. Their recommendation was upheld by the 1882 Annual Meeting in spite of appeals for reconciliation. Holsinger and his supporters waited a year before organizing the Brethren Church in the hope that the 1883 Annual Meeting might relent, but no olive branch was forthcoming.
Later Developments. In the aftermath of the 1883 division, there were disputes over property in some local congregations as members chose between the Brethren Church and the Church of the Brethren. Sometimes one group locked the other group out of the meetinghouse. Sometimes ownership of the meetinghouse had be settled in court. And sometimes issues of property were settled amicably. It is worth noting that in the years following the 1883 division, the Church of the Brethren embraced all of the reforms espoused by Holsinger. But in the nearly 120 years since the division, each group has developed its own history, identity, and theological viewpoints. Today it is generally said that the Church of the Brethren is theologically more liberal than the Brethren Church. Occasionally the two groups have cooperated on projects. For example, they cooperated as mission partners in Nigeria, and the Brethren Church has cooperated with the Brethren Disaster Network. In the 1980s there were discussions between the two groups about nurturing cooperation on the local level.
Action of the General Board
At its March 2001 meeting, the General Board voted unanimously to recommend that Annual Conference receive the resolution and historical overview as a study paper in 2001—with special attention given to prayer and seeking an awareness of God's Spirit of grace and forgiveness—and to consider approval of the resolution in 2002.
Mary Jo Flory-Steury, chair
Judy Mills Reimer, executive director
Action of the 2001 Annual Conference
Jim Hardenbrook, Standing Committee member from Idaho/Western Montana, presented the Standing Committee recommendation that the 2001 Annual Conference receive the resolution and historical overview as a study paper in 2001—with special attention given to prayer and seeking an awareness of God's Spirit of grace and forgiveness—and to consider approval of the resolution in 2002. The delegate body unanimously adopted the Standing Committee recommendation.
A plea for forgiveness, a hope for serving God together
Emanuel "Buzz " Sandberg is executive director of The Brethren Church Offices, Ashland, Ohio. He first voiced this appeal for unity in the Brethren family at the Ecumenical Luncheon at the 2000 Annual Conference in Kansas City.
Can We Brethren Heal the Break?
by Emanuel "Buzz" Sandberg
Earlier this year my wife, Ann, and I had the great opportunity to visit Europe with a group of Christian believers, mostly from The Brethren Church (Ashland). Of the many special days, two will always stand out, for they deeply affected my heart and mind, and my appreciation of the larger Brethren family.
Schwarzenau. The first was the day in Schwarzenau, the small Black Forest town where the Brethren had their beginning. We sat by the river Eder at the spot where, in August 1708, Alexander Mack and seven followers were baptized by trine immersion. News of the "believers" baptism spread through political and religious circles. As the townspeople told us, the Brethren were bounded, threatened, economically punished, and physically abused for their beliefs and practices.
As I thought of the hardships and the tenacious way the early sisters and brothers clung to their Anabaptist beliefs, I wondered if we modern-day Brethren would do as well. I think not!
Oberammergau. The second special day was in Oberammergau, where we attended the famous Passion Play depicting Christ's last week. The characters became not actors reading lines, but personalities revealed in the gospel account. In watching the Bible come alive, I was struck by the realization that God sent his Son to live with us and to die on the cross, and to re-establish relations with his children on earth. What a price to pay!
As we walked to our hotel, I said to Ann, "You know, God just wants to bring his children closer to him. Why do we still rebel and pull away?" Ann replied, "Maybe it's human nature to rebel."
Fragmentation. I reflected on the human family and more particularly on our Brethren family—the great price the early Brethren paid in committing themselves to Christ and each other. The Brethren flourished after their arrival in America, but then conflicts arose—over paid ministry, Sunday schools, evangelism, manner of dress, and modes of feetwashing. On the one hand were the advocates for "maintaining the ancient order of the Brethren" and, on the other, those who argued the Brethren should change to keep pace with the times. Finally, in 1883 at a convention in Dayton, Ohio, the Brethren family was split and the progressives organized The Brethren Church as a separate denomination.
Who was right? In some respects both sides were right. Who was wrong? Both sides were stubborn and ill-advised in their actions. The Brethren family that had become a growing evangelical body was seriously injured. The family has been fragmented ever since, now over a hundred years.
Wrongdoing. I do not believe that God is happy with the Brethren and our continuing efforts to justify our stubborn positions. I do not believe God will bless the Brethren until we admit our wrongdoing and humbly ask God to forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those we feel have trespassed against us.
On a personal basis, I have admitted to God the stubbornness of the Ashland Brethren and the sin of our separation and failure to work with all segments of the Brethren family. I have asked God to forgive us for not making the needed effort to heal the break in the family and once again to work together in harmony and love. I feel like our failure to heal this break in the family has damaged each of our denominations in numerous and major ways.
Family. I ask the Church of the Brethren branch of our family to forgive us and join with us as a renewed family to serve God together. There is much we can do together!
In Schwarzenau and Oberammergau, I believe God was saying something simple but profound to me and to the Brethren:
"I love the Brethren—all of them."
Reprinted from Agenda, December 2000
Examining three biblical principles
Galen R. Hackman was a Standing Committee delegate to Annual Conference, 1999-2001. He is a former missionary in Nigeria, current pastor of the Conewago Church of the Brethren, Hershey, Pa., and pastor-elect of the Ephrata (Pa.) Church of the Brethren.
Can We Confess the Sins of the Past?
by Galen Hackman
The differences that led to the separation of the Church of the Brethren and The Brethren Church 120 years ago have long faded, yet the results linger. When Emanuel "Buzz" Sandberg, executive director of The Brethren Church, asked for our forgiveness for the ways in which his denomination contributed to the divisions of 1881-1883, he relied on time honored, though often forgotten, biblical principles.
None of us was alive during the events of the 1880s, so naturally we did nothing personally to contribute to the division of that era. Dr. Sandberg was not alive and thus had no role to play in those events. Many of us in the Church of the Brethren, myself included, do not live in areas where there are Brethren Church congregations and thus have had no personal contact with the sisters and brothers of that denomination. I do not think I have ever personally met anyone from The Brethren Church. Yet, when the new business item entitled Resolution on The Brethren Church came before Standing Committee, asking that we respond in some way to Dr. Sandberg's request to grant them forgiveness, I was strongly in favor of recommending to the Annual Conference that it be approved.
I was strongly in favor because of the biblical principles that come to play and undergird this somewhat unusual request. In this Bible Study I invite you to visit those principles with me. There are, I believe, three primary ones.
There is first of all the principle that in some mystical way the sins of the forbears are visited on the children into future generations. The second of the Ten Commandments, to not worship idols, is supported by the explanation that God is a jealous God who will "punish the children for the iniquity of parents, to the third and the forth generation" (Exod. 20:5, Deut. 5:8-10). That this principle finds wide support in scripture can be seen by comparing the following passages: Exodus 34:6-7, Numbers 14:18, Jeremiah 32:18, Matthew 23:32-35, 1 Peter 1:18.
We must be clear here as to what is being said and what is not. Scripture teaches that a person will not be held accountable (that is, will not die spiritually) for the sins of a parent. Jeremiah 31:27-34 makes this clear (see also Ezekiel 18:19-21), especially for us who live during the new covenant of which Jeremiah prophesied. But Exodus 20:5 does not say that a child will be held guilty for the sin of a parent, only that the iniquity of the parent will haunt the child. We will not die for the sins of our parents (nor will we be accounted righteous on the faith or righteousness of our parents). However, we will be influenced by the lifestyle, the sinful or righteous patterns, of our parents and grandparents. In some strange, mystical, way, the decisions, attitudes, and actions of those who have gone before us continue to haunt us in the present. I think we can agree that this is not only a biblical principle, but one that we see lived out in our families, churches, and communities today.
What does this have to do with the Church of the Brethren and The Brethren Church division? As I mentioned, though we are generations removed from the schism, the consequences of that happening linger with us. I have formed opinions about the event and attitudes about these sisters and brothers. My images have been formed largely by what those of former generations have written and said. The legacy of our division has continued to haunt me, even if only subconsciously. And these images rise up whenever The Brethren Church is mentioned. You see, the life patterns of previous generations have touched my life, and I must deal with it. Though I will not be held accountable for the specific sins of my forbears, I will be called to give an account for my attitudes and actions, which have been shaped to a large degree by those who have gone before.
A second biblical principle that comes to bear on Bro. Sandberg's request is the principle that persons alive today need to take some responsibility for the sins of former generations, at least to the degree that they haunt us today. The transparent prayer of Nehemiah in Chapter 1 of his book captivates me. The Babylonian exile to which the Jewish people had been banished as a punishment for their turning away from God was finally over. The exile ended in 539 BC with King Cyrus' decree permitting the exiled community to return home. Several groups did, and the temple was finally rebuilt and the city began to take form. In the year 445 BC, over a hundred years after the first people returned to Jerusalem, Nehemiah received a call from God to return to the city to rebuild its walls.
These dates are important because Nehemiah was not alive when Jerusalem fell to the Babylonians some 140 years earlier. Nehemiah was born in captivity. He was not personally responsible for the sins that led his people into captivity. Nevertheless, consider his prayer in Nehemiah 1. As he pours out his heart to God, he confesses the sins of the people of Israel and he acknowledges that he and his fathers had sinned and thus deeply offended God. In other words, he assumes some connection with the events that led to the captivity, which by his time was long ended.
Nehemiah is not the only one to pray this way, confessing and assuming responsibility for the sins of former generations. Ezra (9:5-15), Daniel (9:8, 20), and Jeremiah (3:25) all offered similar prayers. And Dr. Sandberg did a very similar thing when he confessed the sins of former Brethren and asked that we grant to his church forgiveness for the ways in which they have walked in the patterns of former generations' sin. In other words, though our forbears may be responsible for the division between our churches, we continue to propagate attitudes and actions that keep us apart. By confessing the sins of the past and taking responsibility for the attitudes of the present, we break the pattern of past sin and find freedom to live differently.
The third spiritual principle that comes to bear on our study of Church of the Brethren and Brethren Church relationships comes from the prayers of Jesus. John 17 contains the most intimate look into the heart of Jesus as he prays to God on the night of his betrayal. I love this prayer and have preached a whole series of sermons on it. For our study, look at verses 20-23. On the heart of Jesus that night before his betrayal was the unity of the church that would rise from his death and resurrection.
Obviously, it breaks the heart of Jesus when his prayer does not find fulfillment. The fellowship and unity of the church, in some mystical way, reflects the fellowship and unity enjoyed among the three persons we understand as composing the full nature of God—Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. When the church experiences division and separation, it reflects upon the unity and the purposes of God. That seems to be rather serious.
Now one must assume that Jesus knew there would be many denominations and many different ways of expressing the faith. This in itself is not necessarily bad. After all, the church would eventually be planted among every nation, tribe, people, and language (Rev. 5:9, 7:9, 11:9, 13:7, 14:6). Quite likely Jesus knew that no one denomination could ever span such a gulf. Yet, to have different organized fellowships does not necessarily mean a lack of unity. But when there is brokenness between the various communions of the church, then there is most certainly a lack of unity.
I do not know where the resolution before us will lead. Will there ever be a time when there is but one "Brethren Church of the Brethren?" And, very frankly, that is not the important question before us. Rather, the important question is this: Can we confess the sins of the past, take responsibility for the attitudes of the present, and thus repair the breach that exists between these two siblings of the Christian faith?
For discussion
The Progressive Brethren's response to cultural change
Dale R. Stoffer is professor of historical theology and interim academic dean at Ashland Theological Seminary, Ashland, Ohio.
1880s: Keeping Pace with the Times
by Dale Stoffer
Ever since Abraham was called by God into the midst of an alien culture in Canaan, the questions of how God's people should relate to their cultural setting has been a vital issue. To a great extent this issue underlies the dissension that the German Baptist Brethren Church (the Church of the Brethren) experienced during the 1870s and 1880s. This dissension resulted in the formation of two new organizations: the Old German Baptist Brethren or "Old Order Brethren" and The Brethren Church or "Progressive Brethren." This article presents an overview of the people known as Progressive Brethren and their spiritual heirs.
As the Brethren reluctantly began to leave behind their German subculture during the 1830s and 40s, they were forced to come to terms with an American culture which itself was undergoing rapid changes. Initially the Brethren sought to build a buffer around the church through the decisions of Annual Meeting. But by the 1850s some leading voices of the church—Henry Kurtz, James Quinter, John Kline—began to advocate the use of such modern practices as periodical literature, Sunday schools, higher education, and evangelism.
During the 1860s and 70s three distinct responses to the question of these "innovations" evolved. The Progressives sought to "keep pace with the times" and utilize any practice that would aid the church in its mission. The Old Orders viewed these practices as worldly departures from biblical Christianity and sought to uphold the traditional "order of the Brethren." The largest group, the Conservatives (the present-day Church of the Brethren), tried to maintain a middle ground. Though willing to see change, it had to be gradual. Their primary concern was the unity of the main body of the church.
Though men of a progressive bent could be found among the Conservatives (James Quinter, J. H. Moore, H. B. and J. B. Brumbaugh), the progressive movement seemed inevitably to gravitate around the life of one man—Henry Ritz Holsinger. This distinction arose from the power of his aggressive, outspoken, and impatient personality, which was extended through his two papers, The Christian Family Companion and The Progressive Christian. Both papers were published as open forums that allowed writers to express their opinions on a wide range of controversial topics with little editorial comment. The first paper was published from 1865 until 1873, when pressure from the church's leadership caused Holsinger to retire from denominational affairs for several years.
In 1878 Holsinger, feeling that the progressive movement needed a more forceful voice, returned to the publishing field with The Progressive Christian. From this point on Holsinger became the catalyst for the Progressive wing of the church, and The Progressive Christian became its mouthpiece. The guiding philosophy of Holsinger was well expressed in an 1881 editorial: "We hold it our duty to keep pace with the times. . . By keeping pace with the times, we have more direct reference to the using of such improvements as the advancement of science and art may introduce, for the promulgation of the religion of Christ."
In both 1879 and 1881, Annual Meeting heard grievances against Holsinger and his paper. In the latter year a committee was appointed by Annual Meeting to investigate the grievances. The committee began its hearing at Holsinger's home church in Berlin, Pa., on Aug. 9, 1881, but the proceedings never went beyond a discussion of the ground rules for the hearing. Holsinger and his home church insisted that the hearing be public since he had been publicly charged and that a stenographer be present. The committee contended, however, that both requests violated established usage.
When no compromise to the impasse could be reached, the committee issued the following decision: "That H. R. Holsinger cannot be held in fellowship in the brotherhood, and all who depart with him shall be held responsible to the action of the next Annual Meeting."
Tension mounted as the 1882 Annual Meeting approached, for it would be here that the question of Holsinger's expulsion would be resolved with the acceptance or rejection of the committee's report. Nearly the entire first day of the Conference was devoted to Holsinger's case. Some moderate voices were raised to delay action on the report and Holsinger himself even offered a compromise, conditioned upon the report's rejection, in which he promised to remain in harmony with church practice in the future. However, in the end the Berlin Committee's report was adopted and Holsinger and his sympathizers were expelled.
On the following day, the Progressives sent a memorial to the Standing Committee of Annual Meeting requesting a joint committee be established to "prepare a plan for a general reconciliation." They still hoped for a resolution of the difficulties and were very reluctant to move ahead until every means of reconciliation had been explored. The Standing Committee rejected the Progressives' memorial on the basis of the same technicality by which the Old Orders' Miami Valley Petition of 1881 had been ruled out—it had not come through a district meeting. No doubt the conservative leadership had been pushed beyond the point of compromise by Holsinger's long history of nonconformity to the church's established order.
At this point the Progressives felt that all avenues for reconciliation had been exhausted. They therefore decided to hold a convention at Ashland, Ohio, on June 29, 1882, to explore the future course of the Progressive movement. At the convention three important decisions were reached. Preliminary plans for a new denomination were laid (it was hoped the main body of the church might reconsider its position); overtures were sent out to groups that had separated from the Brethren (the Congregational and Leedy Brethren) suggesting a union; and the "Declaration of Principles" was adopted.
This document, modeled after the Declaration of Independence, contained several important themes:
Though the Progressives were moving ahead with reorganization, they did not formally organize until after the Conservatives held their 1883 Annual Meeting. They were still looking for some sign that might open the door to reconciliation. When no such sign came forth, the Progressives proceeded with the formal organization of The Brethren Church at a convention held at Dayton, Ohio, on June 6, 1883. In all about 6,000 members joined themselves to The Brethren Church.
The last century has seen both progress and discord in the church. The openness of the Progressives to new trends paved the way for the influence of both liberalism and fundamentalism. The sharp controversy which resulted between adherents of both positions from 1913 to 1921 ended when most of those with liberal viewpoints voluntarily left the church.
During the 1930s another controversy broke out between a group strongly influenced by fundamentalism, the Grace Brethren, and a group loyal to the historic doctrines and the existing institutions (Ashland College and Seminary; thus the Ashland Brethren) of the church. The denomination divided nearly in half with each group claiming about 15,000 members. In spite of this discord, both groups retain several of the key emphases of their Progressive forebears: limited congregational polity, a firm commitment to scripture, evangelism, and higher education. Currently the Brethren Church (Ashland) numbers 13,096, and the Fellowship of Grace Brethren Churches numbers 28,446.
Adapted from a July 1982 Messenger article titled "Keeping Pace with the Times" by Dale R. Stoffer.
Points of dissension, points of cooperation
Kenneth M. Shaffer, Jr. is librarian/archivist for the Brethren Historical Library and Archives at the Church of the Brethren General Offices in Elgin, Ill.
Developments after the 1883 Division
by Kenneth M. Shaffer, Jr.
Separation. After reconciliation did not materialize at the 1883 Annual Meeting, the Progressives organized as a separate denomination. They called themselves The Brethren Church. It now became necessary for some institutions, congregations, and individuals to choose between The Brethren Church and the German Baptist Brethren (now Church of the Brethren).
The Progressive Christian, the weekly paper published and edited by Henry Holsinger, became the unofficial paper of The Brethren Church and changed its name to The Brethren Evangelist. On the other hand, The Primitive Christian and The Brethren At Work merged to form The Gospel Messenger, which became the official paper of the German Baptists. Eventually both papers were owned by their respective groups. Ashland College (opened in 1879) became a Brethren Church institution, while Juniata College (1876), Mount Morris College (1879), and Bridgewater College (1880) remained with the German Baptists.
Local congregations also had to choose. In some congregations there were disputes over property between those who sided with The Brethren Church and those who sided with the German Baptists. For example, at a congregation in Ohio the German Baptists claimed the property and locked The Brethren Church adherents out of the meetinghouse. Since the congregation had two meetinghouses, the two groups eventually decided each to take one of the houses. At a congregation in Nebraska, the German Baptists brought suit to prevent The Brethren Church from using the meetinghouse. The court refused to grant exclusive use of the meetinghouse to the German Baptists and ordered the building sold. The Brethren Church purchased the half they did not originally own and continued using the meetinghouse. Sometimes a divided congregation worked things out amicably. In Kansas a congregation decided that members of either group would be welcome at communion. When charges were brought against their elder by elders from other states for supporting this decision, the congregation decided "to separate in peace and to treat each other as Christian friends."
Individuals were also faced with choosing between The Brethren Church and the German Baptists. R. H. Miller resigned as president of Ashland College in 1881 because he was not in sympathy with progressive views of the trustees. In Pennsylvania a German Baptist minister with progressive leanings was disowned by his congregation for preaching in a Brethren Church. Some months later a German Baptist deacon denied him use of a stream for a baptism.
Discussions. By the early twentieth century official communications between the two groups had begun. In 1904 a Brethren Church representative met with the German Baptist Brethren Standing Committee. The 1925 Annual Conference considered a query asking for the creation of a committee for the purpose of reuniting The Brethren Church and the Church of the Brethren. Conference did not create the committee, but they did encourage "that friendly relations be cultivated" with evangelical denominations. In 1933 C. H. Ashman, a Brethren Church minister, spoke at Annual Conference; and Otho Winger, president of Manchester College, spoke at The Brethren Church conference. During the 1930s the fraternal relations committee of each group began considering areas of cooperation. A 1943 meeting of the two fraternal relations committees identified additional ways to cooperate, such as foreign mission work and the exchange of articles in church publications.
In 1987 a query came to Annual Conference petitioning for the reunification of The Brethren Church and the Church of the Brethren. Conference referred the query to the Committee on Interchurch Relations (CIR). The CIR met with The Brethren Church Fraternal Relations Committee in 1987 and 1988. These meetings confirmed The Brethren Church's interest in continued cooperation with the Church of the Brethren. Some areas named were curriculum, leadership development, a new mission project, youth programs, and spiritual retreats.
Cooperation. Over the years The Brethren Church and the Church of the Brethren have not only called for cooperation, but they have engaged in cooperation. In 1944 the Church of the Brethren invited The Brethren Church to share in the mission work in Nigeria. Veda Liskey became the first Brethren Church missionary to go to Nigeria under this arrangement. Later Brethren Church missionaries worked extensively among the Higi people and focused on the Mbororo mission station. Writing in 1970, Albert Ronk, a Brethren Church historian, noted: "The cooperative relationship of our Brethren Church with the Church of the Brethren has been an unusually effective one."
Another area in which the two groups have successfully cooperated, along with other Brethren groups, is on the board of the Brethren Encyclopedia, Inc. The impetus for this cooperative effort can be traced to a 1973 meeting organized by M. R. Zigler at Tunker House in Broadway, Virginia. Zigler saw a the meeting as a peacemaking event. Several meetings followed and a decision was made to publish The Brethren Encyclopedia. Following the publication of the encyclopedia, the group continued publishing, sponsored European study tours, and organized two Brethren World Assemblies (1992 and 1998), with a third Assembly projected for 2003. A majority of board meetings have been held in Ashland, Ohio. The way Board members have come to know and trust one another is a model for future cooperative efforts.
In 1980 The Brethren Church and the Church of the Brethren began cooperating on disaster relief. Under this arrangement, members of the Brethren Church were included when there was a call for people to work on disaster projects. The Brethren Church cooperated with Passing on the Promise, an evangelistic outreach program developed by the Church of the Brethren in the 1980s. Today The Brethren Church is a partner with Church of the Brethren and other groups in New Life Ministries (formerly the Andrew Center), a cooperative initiative for church growth and evangelism. In the past couple years, staff of Ashland Seminary have conducted training events on new church development for nearly 100 Church of the Brethren pastors and lay leaders. Members of The Brethren Church have participated in On Earth Peace Assembly activities and have served on its board. Brethren Church representatives also serve on the Germantown Trust which was created by the Church of the Brethren to care for the Germantown meetinghouse, the first Brethren meetinghouse in America.
Reflections. Divisions among the Brethren are not unusual. In fact, there were nearly 20 divisions before the division that resulted in The Brethren Church in 1883. One early division occurred in 1728 when Conrad Beissel and his followers formed what became known as the German Seventh-Day Baptists. Even though divisions may not be unusual, they are painful and difficult to heal.
119 congregations, 13,096 members
Richard Winfield, Ashland, Ohio, is editor of The Brethren Evangelist and director of publications for The Brethren Church
Profile of The Brethren Church
by Richard Winfield
The Brethren Church began year 2001 with 119 congregations—107 fully-established churches and 12 missions. These congregations are located in nine districts and had a combined membership at the start of the year of 13,096. Worship attendance for the year 2000 averaged 12,386. Most of the congregations are located in the eastern half of the United States (just 15 west of the Mississippi), with the majority (76) in Indiana, Ohio, and Pennsylvania.
Though known as the "Progressives" in the late 1800s, The Brethren Church would now be considered the "conservatives," at least theologically, although many Brethren would prefer the term "evangelical." The church is Christ-centered, committed to the inspiration and authority of scripture, and puts more emphasis on evangelism than on social involvement, though not ignoring the latter.
While strongly congregational, the denominational unity of The Brethren Church is maintained through the General Conference. This Conference is held each August, usually at Ashland University in Ashland, Ohio, but occasionally in other locations.
An eleven-member Executive Board acts on behalf of the General Conference throughout the year. The board employs an Executive Director, who gives visionary leadership to The Brethren Church and guides and coordinates staff in fulfilling the priorities and ministries of the denomination. Two councils, the Congregational Ministries Council and the Missionary Ministries Council, each with its own director, implement the vision of the church by carrying out the priorities and functions assigned to it by the Executive Board.
Brethren youth also have a national organization (Brethren Youth In Christ) and hold a youth convention each August in conjunction with the General Conference. A Summer Ministries program provides young people an opportunity to serve in local districts or across the denomination in educational units, music groups, drama teams, or as ministry interns.
Both Ashland University and Ashland Theological Seminary are affiliated with The Brethren Church. Since 1948 the seminary has grown from the smallest to the largest seminary in Ohio, with a current enrollment of approximately 900 students.
The Brethren Church has an active US and international missions program. Nine new US congregations were started in the last five years, and the denomination has a goal of planting a total of 50 new congregations by the year 2010. The Brethren Church supports international mission work in Argentina, Colombia, Peru, Paraguay, Mexico, India, and Malaysia. Brethren missionaries in Argentina, Peru, India, and Malaysia are all nationals who receive support from the US.
The mission programs in Colombia and Paraguay are joint projects, with The Brethren Church in Argentina providing the missionaries and the US Brethren providing support. In 1999 Ashland Theological Seminary, The Brethren Church in the US, and The Brethren Church in Argentina jointly launched South American Theological Seminary in Colón, Argentina, to provide theological education for church leaders in Argentina and other South American countries.
Other missionary ministries of The Brethren Church include the Brethren Service Corps and World Relief. Brethren Service Corps provides Brethren people opportunities to use their skills and spiritual gifts in a variety of short-term or longer-term service opportunities in the US or in other countries. World Relief offers Brethren people a channel to help the poor and victims of war and disaster through World Relief Corporation of the National Association of Evangelicals.
Over the years The Brethren Church has cooperated with the Church of the Brethren in several areas. From 1948 to 1976 Brethren missionaries served with Church of the Brethren missionaries in Nigeria. Other areas of cooperation have included wartime relief efforts, writers' workshops on Brethren history, peace conferences, domestic disaster relief, the Brethren Encyclopedia, Brethren World Assemblies, The Andrew Center and more recently, New Life Ministries, and training leaders for new church development.
|
Listing by states and towns
Congregations of The Brethren Church
|
Arizona
Oasis Community Church (Mission) Gilbert Northwest Community Church Tucson First Brethren Church Tucson Iglesia De Los Hermanos (Mission) California Centro Cristiano Para La Familia (Mission) Carson Oaks Community Church Rock Springs Community Church (Mission) Delaware Florida Sarasota First Brethren Church Sarasota Iglesia De Los Hermanos (Mission) Illinois Lanark First Brethren Church Milledgeville Brethren Church Indiana Burlington First Brethren Church Elkhart First Brethren Church Winding Waters Brethren Church Flora First Brethren Church Meadow Crest Brethren Church Goshen First Brethren Church Jefferson Brethren Church Brighton Chapel Brethren Church Huntington First Brethren Church County Line Brethren Church Mexico First Brethren Church Milford First Brethren Church Mishawaka Community Brethren Church Cornerstone Brethren Church Muncie First Brethren Church Nappanee First Brethren Church New Paris First Brethren Church North Manchester First Brethren Church Oakville First Brethren Church Center Chapel Brethren Church Eagle's Nest Christian Fellowship (Mission) Peru First Brethren Church Teegarden First Brethren Church Tiosa Brethren Church Roann First Brethren Church Roanoke Brethren Church Ardmore First Brethren Church South Bend First Brethren Church Corinth Brethren Church College Comer Brethren Church Wabash First Brethren Church Dutchtown Brethren Church Warsaw First Brethren Church Iowa Kansas Fort Scott Brethren Church Mulvane Brethren Church Kentucky Drushal Memorial Brethren Church Maryland Hagerstown First Brethren Church Linwood Brethren Church St. James Brethren Church Listing provided by The Brethren Church, September 2001 |
Michigan
Matteson Brethren Church Bronson Nebraska New Jersey Ohio Park Street Brethren Church University Church Gretna Brethren Church Bryan First Brethren Church Columbus First Brethren Church Smoky Row Brethren Church Hillcrest Church of Sandalwood Park Vinyard Community Church (Mission) Fremont Brethren Church Gratis Brethren Church Living Word Brethren Fellowship (Mission) Brethren Bible Church of Louisville Louisville First Brethren Church Living Waters Community Church (Mission) New Hope Christian Fellowship (Mission) New Lebanon Brethren Church Newark Brethren Church Trinity Brethren Church North Georgetown First Brethren Church Pleasant Hill First Brethren Church Smithville Brethren Church West Alexandria First Brethren Church Williamstown First Brethren Church Pennsylvania Quiet Dell Brethren Church Berlin Brethren Church Three Seasons Community Church Johnstown Second Brethren Church Johnstown Third Brethren Church Valley Brethren Church Highland Park Community Brethren Church Highland Brethren Church Masontown Brethren Church Main Street Brethren Church Vinco Brethren Church Mount Pleasant First Brethren Church Pittsburgh First Brethren Church Sarver Brethren Church Raystown Brethren Church Pleasant View Brethren Church Wayne Heights Brethren Church Virginia Bethlehem Brethren Church Maurertown Brethren Church Mount Olive Brethren Church Cross Keys Worship Center (Mission) Grace Community Church Liberty Brethren Church St. Luke Brethren Church West Virginia Gatewood Brethren Church Mathias Brethren Church White Dale Brethren Church Oak Hill First Brethren Church Wyoming |
|
For dialog and reflection
Questions for Discussion
|
Chronicling the Brethren story
Study Resources
Durnbaugh, Donald F. Fruit of the Vine: A History of the Brethren, 1708-1995. Elgin, Ill.: Brethren Press, 1997. In-depth history of the Church of the Brethren. Pp. 291-315, 455-458, and 585-586 focus on the divisions of the early 1880s and later relations between The Brethren Church and the Church of the Brethren.
Eller, David B. "Church of the Brethren." In Meet the Brethren, ed. Donald F. Durnbaugh, pp. 69-91. Philadelphia: Brethren Encyclopedia, Inc., 1995. A summary of Church of the Brethren history and beliefs. This article is also found in The Brethren Encyclopedia, Volume 1, pp. 289-305.
Flora, Jerry R. "Brethren Church." In Meet the Brethren, ed. Donald F. Brumbaugh, pp. 41-52. Philadelphia: Brethren Encyclopedia, Inc., 1995. A summary of The Brethren Church history and beliefs. This article is also found in The Brethren Encyclopedia, Volume 1, pp. 181-185.
Holsinger, H. R. Holsinger's History of the Tankers and The Brethren Church. Lathrop, Calif.: Pacific Press Publishing Co., 1901. A history of the Brethren by the leader of the Progressive Brethren. Pp. 470-551 focus on the history of The Brethren Church up to 1901. Out of print.
Kraybill, Donald B., and C. Nelson Hostetter. Anabaptist World USA. Scottdale, Pa. Herald Press, 2001. Detailed information on four Anabaptist groups-Amish, Brethren, Hutterites, and Mennonites.
Ronk, Albert T. History of The Brethren Church: Its Life, Thought, Mission. Ashland, Ohio: Brethren Publishing Company, 1968. In-depth history of The Brethren Church.
Stoffer, Dale R. Background and Development of Brethren Doctrines, 1650-1987. Philadelphia: Brethren Encyclopedia, Inc., 1989. Pp. 165-241 present an in-depth discussion of Brethren Church doctrines since 1883.
Stoffer, Dale R. "Beliefs." In Church of the Brethren: Yesterday and Today, ed. Donald F. Durnbaugh, pp. 43-60. Elgin, Ill.: Brethren Press, 1986. Stoffer's article summarizes Church of the Brethren beliefs as seen by a Brethren Church scholar.
Video, By Water and the Word: The Birth of the Brethren. Describes the founding and early years of the Brethren movement in Europe, roots common to both the Church of the Brethren and The Brethren Church. Narrated by Jill Eikenberry. 25 minutes. Produced in 1996 by David Sollenberger for the Church of the Brethren General Board.
CD Rom, Without Fear or Hesitation. This interactive encounter with the early Brethren invites exploration of the stories, people, places, practices, and topics in the period from 1689 to 1736. Available December 2001 from Brethren Press, which co-produced the resource with eMountain Communications.
Resources in print available from Brethren Press. Call 800-441-3712 or visit www.BrethrenPress.com.
Link to CIR Home Page | Link to Brethren Historical Library and Archives Home Page
Link to General Board Home Page | Link to Annual Conference Home Page
Link to Church of the Brethren Home Page
© 2002 Church of the Brethren. All rights reserved.
Please e-mail the web administrator with your questions and comments