The History of Christianity in America

The History of Christianity in America CH503 LESSON 20 of 24 John D. Hannah, PhD, ThD Experience: Professor of Historical Theology at Dallas Theological Seminary in Dallas, Texas We begin today with the twentieth in our series of our Survey of American Religious History. Our subject today is actually a continuation of our story of events in the 1920s. What I would like to do in our time together is to say just a couple of additional things about the clash of the 1920s and then proceed on to the dilemma of the 1930s and 1940s. In the 1920s, the mainline Northern denominations polarized over the factions within the church. The emergent influence of New Theology tended to want to redefine historical Christianity to make it more up-to-date and authentic (in their judgment). Traditional Theology tended to see the innovations as horrible and nonproductive, if not detrimental to the church. The clash occurred among Northern Baptists, and at the end it was clear that latitudinarian forces had prevailed in the church. The church now would have to tolerate these polarized opinions within the same ecclesiastical body. The same occurred among Northern Presbyterians that these polarized opinions would now be mutually tolerated and the issue was really among the more evangelical, conservative, fundamentalist sorts by 1920s definition of those terms. whether or not they would really be content to be now in a world that was indeed a dissident contrary conflicting within their denominations. So we ve talked about the Baptists and we ve talked about Northern Presbyterians. Briefly, I would like to say a word about latitudinal strife among Northern Methodists, and then, after saying something on the Scopes Trial, move into the 1930s. What I would like to argue among Northern Methodists is that scholars of Methodism in the 1920s have observed that while there was a striving clash among Baptists over these things and Presbyterians over the issues of Narrowism and Liberalism, that ugly clash did not actually occur among Northern Methodists. 1 of 12

The tensions over the New Theology (as opposed to the Old Theology) was fairly subdued among Northern Methodists. Methodist tensions did boil over what is the called the Buckner Case who was a cleric in the early 1920s, tensions boiled in the New Jersey Conference of Methodism led by Harold Sloan, but the Methodists for a variety of reasons did not deeply struggle with the Fundamentalist/Modernist problem. There was discussion over book lists that pastors were required to read. Conservatives wanted to restrict the list of books and things of that nature but, by and large, Northern Methodists did not go through the catharsis of a Fundamentalist/Modernist major clash. But gradually the church apart from the resistance of Sloan and the Bible League and the periodical called, The Colors, quietly drifted into an increasingly latitudinal stance. In 1939, they did affect the end of their Civil War schism; Methodism (Southern and Northern) and the Methodist Protestant Church merged, creating the Methodist Church in 1939. We ll say something about that story in a moment. Now just a passing word about the John T. Scopes Trial, the conflict between science and religion. The great trial occurred in July 1926. How much to make of the Scopes Trial is debatable. I think it was monumentally important from the point of view of how Christianity would be perceived by the press and what image Christianity would receive. In many ways the John T. Scopes Trial was something like the Salem Witch Trials, in that scholars later used both of those events to discredit movements that they found to be disgusting to them. John T. Scopes Trial was actually a test case of the Tennessee Antievolution Laws brought by three men, the center of which was John T. Scopes, a biology teacher in a high school in Dayton, Tennessee. The essence of it is that he taught biological evolution contrary to Tennessee state law, and his friends accused him of violating law; that set up the testing of the propriety of that state law. The American Civil Liberties Union Clarence Darrow, one of many very competent lawyers came to the cause of John T. Scopes. The other side was poorly manned; William Jennings Bryan, the great Presbyterian commoner and politician, defended religion against science, as we would say. When the trial case was over John T. Scopes was found guilty and fined $100. But the issue of science and the Bible was portrayed before a nation, and Christianity 2 of 12

seemed to be portrayed as an archaic, backward, sociologically deprived religious movement which no person of competence and integrity could embrace intellectually. So beyond all the symbols of the John T. Scopes Trial was a very deeper tragedy that seems to have been perpetrated by the secular press as they recorded the events. H.L. Mencken, the famous editor from Baltimore who, while he attended the trial from a distance did not actually sit in the trial, wrote commentary to major periodicals across the country. In many ways, the John T. Scopes Trial was a tragic bitter end to a rather bitter controversy. Now having said all that, what I would argue is this: in the early 1930s, you enter a period in which the strife within those denominations in the North Baptist, Presbyterian, to a minor degree, Methodists, and to a minor degree Disciples of Christ was over. And when you come to the 1930s or thereabouts, there s a settling sense that the denominations now, like it or not, will be to some degree more latitudinal than before. The characteristic of those denominations would now be tolerance of opposing and conflicting opinions. So many evangelicals in the 1930s felt constrained to make a choice of remaining in those denominations or separating out of them and establishing new separatist denominations; they, of course, would believe that they are lineal heir of the true denomination. Now in all fairness, many felt compelled to leave their denominations because of what they perceived to be the tragic latitudinalizing of their denomination. Others, who were equally conservative, felt the necessity of staying in and trying to bring changes from inside. So there was a division of opinion. In all fairness, a good man had very hard decisions to make. What I would like to do then is to talk for a brief time about the attempt at reorganization, or an era of conservative restructuring. What I am saying is that in the aftermath of the 1920s and the 1920s was a tragic period from a conservative, narrowist point of view you have in the 1930s and 1940s the emergence of a whole new expression of evangelicalism in American history. The emergence of new denominational groups (now look at the diagram at this point; it may be helpful), new interdenominational groups, new nondenominational groups. And you have the birth, or at least the coalescing, into a larger movement of what is called the Independent Church Movement. 3 of 12

What I would like to do is begin a discussion of each of these things; new denominational groups, new interdenominational groups, new nondenominational groups called the Para-Ecclesiastical Movement and the Independent Church Movement or the Bible church, community church, fellowship church movement, but essentially independent, nondenominational organization. So the background for it is that after the failure of the 1920s when conservatives felt the sting of the loss of their traditional denominations, they were faced with a choice. Some took the position of Separatism or separating from the mainline churches, and you have the birth of a huge infrastructure of organizations for home and foreign missions. So on that separate out from the traditional American denominationalism, and that is what I would like to describe, just really give you some examples. So first, the organization of new denominations. Here are three examples of new Presbyterian groups. The Orthodox Presbyterian Church was organized by the great Presbyterian J. Gresham Machen. We have not said much about Machen, but in the clashes of this period, J. Gresham Machen stands out as one of the strong central figures. So let me digress just a moment and say something of him. Machen, of course, was of strong Presbyterian heritage. Privately trained, he obtained a scholarship to Johns Hopkins University, graduated from Johns Hopkins University. After finishing university, he came to Princeton Theological Seminary where he completed his training. Later, he was able to study in Germany at Marburg and and then in 1906 he became professor at Princeton Theological Seminary. He was professor at Princeton from 1906 to 1929, when he separated from the seminary at the time of the reorganization and was one of the founders of Westminster Theological Seminary in Philadelphia. In the context of the debate over the foreign missions program of the church and the establishment of the independent board of missions, Dr. Machen was defrocked from the Presbyterian Church. He died a short time after that, of course. Now in 1936, Machen founded with others what is called the OPC, the Orthodox Presbyterian Church. It had a different name in its beginning, but it then took this title, the OPC. It was founded because of the Auburn Affirmation, the reorganization of Princeton, the uproar over the Independent Foreign Missionary Society, and the defrocking of Machen and others from the church. 4 of 12

This is the first of the Presbyterian splinter groups. The second is the Bible Presbyterian Church, the BPC as it is sometimes called, founded in 1937 by Carl McIntire, whose story we will somewhat suggest later. The Bible Presbyterian Church was founded after the death of J. Gresham Machen and many ways was precipitated over a clash as to the leadership of the splintering Presbyterian movement after the death of that great leader. For a variety of reasons, McIntire felt constrained to leave the OPC and establish the Bible Presbyterian Church. In contradistinction to the direction of the Orthodox Church, he was himself premillennial, and that was part of the division between the two splinter groups, as well as other factors. The seminary that was erected to serve the Bible Presbyterian Church was, of course, Faith Theological Seminary in the suburbs of Philadelphia. The seminary that generally served the OPC, though it is actually independent, of course, is Westminster Theological Seminary. A third splinter group that emerged in 1965 is called the Reformed Presbyterian Church, the RPCES. That represents a fracturing from Carl McIntire s movement led by J. Oliver Buswell and the merger with another small Presbyterian group which created in 1965, the RPCES. The RPCES merged in the 1980s with a Presbyterian splinter group called the Presbyterian Church of America, and today is the RPCES and merging with the Presbyterian Church of America has assumed that title. So if you look at examples of splinter groups, in the 1930s there s the Orthodox Presbyterian Church, the Bible Presbyterian Church, and the Reformed Presbyterian Church Evangelical Synod, which is now merged with the Southern PCA to become the Presbyterian Church of America. By the 1930s, there was such a consternation because of the clash and the failure to maintain the narrowism of the denomination that many separated out and just simply tried to start over again. That s true with the emergence of new Presbyterian splinter groups the OPC, the Bible Presbyterians, the Reformed Presbyterian Church Evangelical Synod, which is now a part of the Presbyterian Church of America. Here s some examples of new Baptist groups. In the 1930s, there s a huge new birth of an evangelical movement emanating from the chaos of the 1920s and represents a departure from the mainline denominations. The example of new Baptist groups would be the coming of the GARBC, General Association of Regular Baptists. This movement is actually a lineal continuation of what is called 5 of 12

the Baptist Bible Union. At the eighth annual meeting of the Baptist Bible Union, which was a caucus group founded in the wake of the disappointment of the Indianapolis anniversary in 1922, the GARBC is simply a lineal continuation of the BBF. Now, it is technically not a denomination; it is made up of a large fellowship group, they would say. It has a board or general council that directs its sanctions and it approves foreign missionary agencies; it approves schools that send their young people to, so it s really a fellowship of churches and is quite large several thousand, about 180,000. The Conservative Baptist Association was formed in the late 1940s. A Conservative Baptist Association is the lineal heir of the Fundamentalist Fellowship, which was an earlier caucus group formed after the wake of the Denver anniversary. The General Association of Regular Baptists pulled out Northern Baptist Convention in 1932. The Conservative Baptists remained in their convention until the 1940s, and then because of strife, they pulled out. Actually it was over a mission s policy and the decline of missions in the Northern Baptist Convention as well as the inclusive policy of admitting missionaries to foreign missionary service that precipitated this group to finally pull out and form a splinter denominational body. So we have from the Northern Baptist Convention two fairly large splinter groups the General Association of Regular Baptists, which looks more like the BBU and its founding in the 1920s, more militant and strident in its expression of Christian faith, and the CBA, the Conservative Baptist Association, which takes more of a conventional approach as a denomination which did not pull out of the Northern Convention until the 1940s. Like the GARBC, the CBA is quite large. It is served by two fine seminaries Western Conservative Portland and Denver Seminary in Denver, Colorado. Men from other conservative seminaries obviously can join it. A third new Baptist group is the largest called the Baptist Bible Fellowship, which was formed in the early 1950s. It is actually a splinter from the work of a prolific, noisy Southern Baptist/ Northern Baptist, J. Frank Norris. The upshot of the Baptist Bible Fellowship is J. Frank Norris of Fort Worth, Texas pastored simultaneously a church in the Southern denomination, Southern Baptist, and Northern denomination one in Detroit and one in Fort Worth, Texas. Because of his strong separatist leanings and fundamentalist persuasion, he drew both of those churches and many others out of their respective denominations. In the 1950s, 6 of 12

many of the churches began to tire of J. Frank Norris leadership (its militancy). In 1952, many of the churches in the Detroit, Michigan area broke away from him and formed the Baptist Bible Fellowship. It s a very large group of loosely-knit Baptists; some claim a population of over one million. It s served by a Bible college in Springfield, Missouri Baptist Bible College. In the 1930s, what happened was that many tired of their denomination and new denominations were formed new Presbyterian groups, of which I gave three examples; the OPC, the BPC, the RBCES, which is now the Presbyterian Church of America. Secondly, there were new Baptist groups the GARBC, the Conservative Baptist Association, and the Bible Baptist Fellowship which emerged out of the separatist ministry of J. Frank Norris when he separated and formed the World Baptist Fellowship. Now there are also new Methodist groups that emerged, but the Methodist groups emerged not so much over the fundamentalist/ modernist clash of the 1920s, but of the great merger of Methodist bodies that occurred in 1939. In 1939, the Southern Methodist Episcopal Church, the Northern Methodist Episcopal Church together they had a constituency of about nine million merged with the Methodist Protestant Church of about 200,000. The Methodist Protestant Church was an 1830s schism from Methodism over the issues of church government in America. So these three major bodies Northern Church, Southern Church, and the Methodist Protestant Church merged in 1939. As a result of that merger, many who did not appreciate the merger or saw dangers in the merger separated out in the late 1930s and early 1940s into a variety of Methodist splinter groups. For example, the Methodist Protestant Church or the Southern Methodist Church; there s just really a whole group of separatist, small Methodist bodies that separated not so much over the issues of the 1920s, but over some of those same issues as applied to the major healing merger of the Civil War conflict in 1939, creating the Methodist Church. What I am saying is that after the 1920s, many felt compelled to leave their denominations that now, in their estimation, were broader in their theological toleration than they could appreciate; they formed a variety of new organizations. They formed new denominational groups new Presbyterian, new Baptist, new Methodist erecting new schools and new seminaries to train a 7 of 12

competent ministry and so on. Secondly, there emerged new interdenominational groups. The background for that is simply that many felt that the fracturing that was going on by conservatives in the 1930s had a detrimental side to it. And it had a detrimental side to it for at least a couple of major reasons. One, radio was somewhat new and the government was allotting free usage of radio time to religious groups in America. The Federal Council of Churches, a large organization of churches of more latitudinal persuasion, sought that radio time. As a large organized body with several millions of constituents, they could perhaps gain all that radio time for their views. Separatist small groups of evangelical narrowists wanted to be a part of that radio time, but they needed to demonstrate their size. That s one of the reasons for these interdenominational groups of bodies. Another reason was placing men into the military chaplaincies because you had to be of a recognized entity large enough to be able to place men into the quotas of the chaplaincy. There were other reasons, fellowship and things of that nature. But in the 1930s and 1940s, there emerged three major interdenominational or umbrella groups, and they actually reflect the spectrum of the emerging Separatist Evangelical Movement. Already by the 1930s and 1940s, there were shades of opinion among these separatists, some being more separate than others, as we will see later. One example of the new interdenominational group was led by Carl McIntire, the most militant of the groups, called the American Council of Christian Churches. It actually swirls around the ministry of Carl McIntire, who might be called a political, religious leader of right wing Fundamentalism. The American Council of Christian Churches is made up of a number of smaller denominations, denominations that have only joined together for policy making and for direction and things of that nature. Another umbrella group that emerged at this time was the Independent Fundamental Churches of America, out of which came the IFMA the Independent Fundamental Missions Association. Formed in Cicero, Illinois in 1930, the Independent Fundamental Churches of America is composed of a loose federation of pastors and churches that subscribes to an evangelical statement of faith. So while you might be either an independent or in a small denomination, you could join a national umbrella group if you desire to. 8 of 12

The largest of the umbrella groups was the National Association of Evangelicals, founded in 1942; it is the broadest of the umbrella groups and really the most prolific and the largest. It is made up of individuals, denominations, and certain para-ecclesiastical groups. It s a fairly large and broad agency that seeks to give direction and continuity to the enterprise of evangelical activities in America a really profound group. It s made up of a large variety of denominations that represents the theological spectrum of evangelical faith and commitment in America. It sponsors, for instance, the EFMA, the Evangelical Fundamentalist Missionary organization which coordinates missions. So we have the IFMA and the EFMA, depending on your particular understandings of evangelical faith. So what I am saying very briefly is that as a result of the trauma of the 1920s, many evangelicals, but not all of them, felt compelled to separate from their denominations and create new agencies and new denominations in the 1930s and 1940s. So you have the emergence of new denominational groups Baptist, Presbyterian, Methodist. You have the growth of umbrella cooperative agencies where there could be strength in numbers etc., like the ACCC founded by the more militant evangelical, Carl McIntire. There s the IFCA, the Independent Fundamental Churches of America, and there s the NAE, the most prolific and largest of the groups that stands in contrast to the other two by their evangelical broadness called the National Association of Evangelicals. Thirdly, there emerged what is called nondenominational groups, or the para-ecclesiastical groups of the 1930s and the 1940s. There s been much discussion as to the biblical propriety of para-ecclesiastical groups. But I think as people reflect upon the history of the 1930s and 1940s in light of the 1920s, they will see that many of the churches who pulled out their mainline denominations were so concerned to reorganize. Energies were poured into starting all over again, and there were many areas that the church was not able to reach. One has simply commented that the rescue missions received a steady line of workers from the churches, but very few were going to the college campuses. So there were some special interest groups that were not being reached as they perhaps could have been by the Christian influence, so these organizations began to emerge. Para-ecclesiastical groups could be argued to have begun in the nineteenth century with the YMCA or the Salvation Army. But these para-ecclesiastical groups were created to help the church 9 of 12

in the mission (at least theoretically). Some examples are, for instance, in youth work in 1942, the beginning of what is called Youth for Christ, founded in Indianapolis and Chicago area by Torrey Johnson. It became a prolific organization through the work of Torrey Johnson and Dr. Billy Graham who, in a sense, began his ministry as an official representative of Youth for Christ. It became the great youth organization of the 1940s and 1950s. It had large youth rallies. There was also what is called Word of Life, still in existence and founded by Jack Wyrtzen in Schroon Lake, New York. Another organization that dealt with youth was Young Life (high school age) founded by Jim Rayburn in 1938 in Texas. There emerged in the 1930s and 1940s para-ecclesiastical groups, great groups that organized certain segments for evangelism. There s Youth for Christ, there is Word of Life, and there s Young Life. I often say now there s all kinds of these para-ecclesiastical agencies Young Life, New Life, Neo-Life, Life Life just all kinds of them that try to work in certain segments of our population. There is also para-ecclesiastical college work that emerged at this time. The two great para-ecclesiastical agencies founded in this era but one was not actually founded, but it came here and that s called Intervarsity Christian Fellowship. Intervarsity was founded in Britain in the 1870s, and it reached America through Canada in the 1940s. It was a prolific agency for the propagating of the gospel within the context of the colleges and universities. Also founded in the early 1950s was what is called Campus Crusade for Christ, founded by Dr. Bill Bright in 1952. You might also add an agency that doesn t quite fit this, but in a way does. In the late 1930s, Navigators was founded by Dawson Trotman, who labored certainly with US servicemen, as well as entering into the sphere of the college campus. What emerged simply in my judgment is that after the tragedy of the 1920s and men I have talked to who lived through that change of the 1920s have seemingly always expressed to me that it was a dark day that suddenly they came to the realization that the historical denominations of their parents, grandparents, and great grandparents suddenly was becoming more and more tolerant of things that appeared contrary to the historic Christian gospel. The gospel was being redefined. By the end of the 1920s, after the polarized clash, many felt that they had a choice to make either continue in a world 10 of 12

that seemed to be latitudinal and frustrating or to separate and organize anew. Now, in all fairness, good men had to make both of those decisions. Some went and organized new agencies. Others stayed in their denomination serving their flocks, enduring the increasing continuity; they honestly believed that God would have them do that and not abandon the investment of evangelical monies for decades upon decades upon decades. And one cannot judge the propriety of one course of action above another course of action. Each man had to make a decision. Now, for those who felt the necessity of separating and pulling out, you have the creation in the 1930s and the 1940s of a movement that took many manifestations. First, the rise of new denominational groups Baptist, Presbyterian, Methodist splinter groups emerging. There are many, many of those in America today. I would recommend the little book, Mead s Handbook of American Denominations. If you come across a group that you re not aware of, that little handbook would give you some valuable information about these groups. Second, there came a proliferation of umbrella groups or agencies of cooperation among these separating evangelicals. They represent a spectrum among these evangelicals from a very militant posture to a more conciliatory posture; from the ACCC (give or take a few Cs) to the IFCA to the great NAE. There also emerged para-ecclesiastical works; college work like Intervarsity, Campus Crusade, Navigators and high school work Young Life, Word of Life, Youth for Christ. Radio work emerges at this time. The Old Fashion Revival Hour was born in the 1920s with Charles E. Fuller; it was the first gospel radio program. Back to the Bible emerged from Lincoln, Nebraska in this era, along with the Radio Bible Class of M. R. De Haan and the great Hour of Decision under Dr. Billy Graham. In the same era, there also emerged what is called the Independent Church Movement or Bible Church Movement. This movement sort of emerges because of two things: One, the takeover of Latitudinalism in the mainline denominations; second, a fear that the loss of those denominations was in part caused by the machinery of denominationalism. So when some separated from their latitudinal churches, they did not enter a new denomination. They simply remained as independent churches. These begin to emerge, actually, at the turn of the century. But these become prolific in the 1930s, 1940s, and 1950s all the way up today. So across America you can find independent churches, 11 of 12

nondenominational churches, not really Baptist, not really Presbyterian, not really Methodist, but individual independent assemblies or churches. They might be called Bible Churches, they might be called Independent Churches, Fellowship Churches, Community Churches, or Federated Churches. But they simply are independent, and men from the evangelical seminaries across America and colleges serve those churches in their ministerial capacity. So following the 1930s, there is simply a pulling out by many and the forming of a new infrastructure of evangelical effort new denominations, new umbrella groups, the Independent Church Movement, the rise of the great para-ecclesiastical groups. These merged with great hope of changing the course of American Christianity. They hoped that they could do in their separation what they could not do within their mainline denominations. Christ-Centered Learning Anytime, Anywhere 12 of 12