USA > Pennsylvania > Change and challenge: a history of the Church of the Brethren in the southern district of Pennsylvania, 1940-1972 > Part 20
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27 | Part 28 | Part 29 | Part 30 | Part 31 | Part 32 | Part 33 | Part 34 | Part 35 | Part 36 | Part 37 | Part 38 | Part 39 | Part 40 | Part 41 | Part 42 | Part 43 | Part 44 | Part 45 | Part 46 | Part 47
Historically, the Christian Church has been involved in social action movements. Serious efforts at social welfare and reform work began in American in the 1850s in what was known as "the Second Awakening".2 The first reforms were directed toward personal morality. Gradually the efforts were broadened to include such issues as world peace, human rights, the abolition of slavery, women's rights and prison reforms. A Protestant newspaper in 1853 proposed a program of "urban renewal" aimed at the lowering of rents, the clearing of buildings and the development of healthy surroundings.
The Church of the Brethren gradually became involved with the insti- tutions of our society. Martin Grove Brumbaugh, who had been active as an educational leader, became governor of the state of Pennsylvania (1915-1919). The Annual Conference of the denomination (1902) peti- tioned the King of Denmark against the exile and the imprisonment of those who were conscientiously opposed to war. In 1916, a committee was appointed to appear before President Wilson to explain the peace position of the Church of the Brethren. This committee did not succeed in meeting with the President. The movements of the Brethren were hesitating and cautious. Social action articles in The Gospel Messenger in the early part of this century appear only rarely. What actions the church did take were embedded in the Christian heritage of a deep con- cern for human need.3
In the past several decades there has been an increasing tempo of attacks on the church itself. New pagan religions arose to challenge the right of the church to the souls of men.4 Some critics said that the church had lived too long with words; its phrases and words resounded with a hollow ring. People began to look to organizations which resorted to direct action. Some of the critics were within the church itself. The conviction dawned that the mission of the church could not be completed within the walls of the building.5 One critic suggested, since the church was freed of its previously majestic position, it could now become the ser- vant of society.6 Others adopted the Scriptural ideal: "the kingdoms of this world must become the Kingdom of our Lord and of His Christ."7
A serious mood pervaded the world of the 1940s and the 1950s. All human society was living under the radioactive clouds of the bombs dropped on Japan in 1945. People had grown less secure with the war's ending than they had been during the war itself. The editor of the maga- zine, Christianity Today, warned the world was "one mistake away from
one hundred thirty-seven
vast destruction".8 The catalogue of concerns began to grow to great length as the church tried to become involved in a ministry to its world. The Peace Churches set an example during the war years for other denomi- nations in the sphere of social action.
The easy optimism of the 1920s, with its stress on inevitable progress, was gone. In its place came convictions about the need to build bridges of understanding, to minister justice in many walks of life and to develop dialogue between peoples of differing faiths and ethnic backgrounds. A poll of Annual Conference participants in 1947 indicated most Brethren believed there should be more political action by the denomination.9
By 1964, the conference was speaking forthrightly on many issues of current concern. It rejoiced in the passage of the Civil Rights Act and urged Brethren to observe carefully the positions which presidential candidates took on vital issues. It called for the "support of the United Nations", "effective enforcement of the Civil Rights Act" and "continued aid of a peaceful and constructive nature to developing countries".10
When the Southern District of Pennsylvania effected a new organiza- tion in 1958, the first Social Education and Action Committee was formed. Prior to this time, much of the work was accomplished by such groups as the District Missions Board, the Board of Christian Education, the C.B.Y.F. Cabinet, the Women's Work and the Men's Work Organizations.
Members of the first Social Education and Action Commission in the district were: M. Guy West, chairman, Cyrus B. Bucher, vice-chair- man, Robert Turner, secretary, Murray P. Lehman and David H. Markey. In the period since its beginnings, this commission has been involved in many useful projects. In 1965, Norman F. Reber, the chairman of the commission, reported to the District Board some of the areas of concern of commission members: work with local jails; work with underprivileged families in communities; aid to alcoholics; aid to patients in mental hosiptals; work days at State Hospitals; information services to draft- age youth; peace emphasis programs and the Fresh Air Project.
The renowned church historian, Kenneth Scott Latourette, suggested the great tides of the Holy Spirit have been more evident in earlier centuries than in our own. We have not witnessed the great upsurges of the Christian faith such as we have seen in the Pietistic movement in Europe or in the Great Awakening in America. He quickly added, how- ever, it may be that we are too close to the events of our time and there- fore cannot see with true perspective. It may be the rising objection to militarism or the wide variety of relief activities in our day are robust shoots which indicate the church is very much alive.11
THE FRESH AIR PROGRAM
By mid-century, the dislocation of the population created new prob- lems for America. The nation had gradually become urban in outlook. 12 One author commented: "Our people are fleeing from the land as refugees flee from war".13 As people forsook their traditional communities they also began to forsake some of their traditional connections with the church. The Church of the Brethren found the problem so significant by 1953 it began a study on urban strategies.14
Early in its career the Brethren Service Committee of the brother- hood sponsored projects in race relations. Work camps, inner city rehabili- tation work and community redevelopment programs were fostered. Brethren worked with peoples of many ethnic backgrounds. Some Breth- ren Volunteers began to work in a Pilot House in Baltimore's East End in February, 1951. The volunteers staffed the office to form a social serv- ice and referral center. Home repairs received the major attention. In 1955, this East End project was sold.
one hundred thirty-eight
Some men of the Baltimore First Church of the Brethren decided to do something constructive about the inner city problem. They organized themselves into a group known as Brotherhood Service Inc. (1953). They purchased the worst home in a block on West Lafayette Street. Three families, with a total of èight children, lived in this house and shared one bathroom. The men of the church renovated the house as attractively and as inexpensively as possible to serve as a demonstration center for the community. The name "Pilot House" was assigned to the project. This was done at a time when one in five houses in Baltimore was judged to be substandard.
In its beginning years, the Pilot House program conducted weekend work camps monthly throughout the year. Invitations were send to surrounding districts requesting youth groups and other workers to live in fellowship with black peoples of the Baltimore community. In March, 1964, some youth and adults of several York Churches worked with black youth of the Providence Baptist Church in repairing a home.15 Rooms were plastered, painted, papered and repaired under the guidance of the director of the Pilot House. The Mayor of Baltimore cited the Pilot House program for its special ministry in rehabilitation and human relations.
The program has been a venture in interracial cooperation and hous- ing renewal. The program was expanded eventually and assumed the name Inter-Cultural Exchange Program. The directors of Pilot House tried to involve the children of the inner city in a wide variety of cultural experiences. Excursions were planned; nature hiking was conducted; photography, theater performances, trips to industrial and historical centers, creative arts and crafts, charm classes, vocational studies and sports constituted some of the interests of the new program. In the early 1960s the Southern District of Pennsylvania began to cooperate with the Fresh Air Ministry to these inner-city children and their families.
The Witness Commission of the District wrote letters to congrega- tions urging Brethren to "adopt" for a week or more a child or two of the inner city. The program was designed to incorporate a child into the atmosphere of a Christian home so that he became, for a brief time, at least, a part of a family unit. Suggestions were offered to encourage children to become part of the family. They were to assume their fair share of chores around the house, yard, barn or field. In this manner the inner city child would learn that clean sheets, mowed green lawns and three square meals per day require the work and cooperation of every- one within the household.16
As the program grew, the District Witness Commission sponsored bus trips to and from Baltimore over several mid-summer weekends. In this manner some of the children were brought to centers within the district where they met the "foster parents" assigned to them. Some parents preferred to drive to Baltimore to meet the child's parents. The New Fair- view Church of the Brethren, the Madison Avenue Church and the First Church of the Brethren of York were used as church centers for the distribution of the Pilot House children.
Since the program has been in operation, many hundreds of inner city children have lived in Brethren homes of the Southern District. In addition, many junior-age children from Baltimore have shared camping experiences at Camp Eder. Arrangements were made for several years to send the children by train to York. From here a district representative delivered the children to camp and returned them to the railroad depot for the return to Baltimore on the following weekend. The District Chil- dren's Aid Society soon began to sponsor these children at the camp as
one hundred thirty-nine
part of its service to children. Although the camping experience was desirable, the Social Education and Action Commission strongly recom- mended a program which remained family-centered.
Some judgment concerning the acceptance of the program may be gathered from these statistics:
1963 .- Twenty-four children came into nineteen congregations of the district;
1964 .- Fifty-four children came into homes of thirty-one "foster parents" of the district;
1965 .- Sixty-one children came into forty homes of the district;
1966 .- Thirty children came to the district;
1967 .- Thirty-six Pilot House children were hosted by sixteen congregations and twenty-eight families;
1968 .- Thirty-five children came into the district.
1969 .- Twenty Pilot House children came into the camping pro- gram at Camp Eder.
1970 .- Thirty-one Pilot House children participated in camping experiences at Camp Eder.
The total program was designed to expose inner city children to a new style of life. Most of the children came from situations in which family life was disorganized. Many "foster parents", knowing this, reserved vacation experiences, trips and special events for the time when the Fresh Air children would arrive. Some families said: "We did not change our style of living when the children came."
There were attempts to render a similar service to underprivileged children within the district. In 1968, the Mechanicsburg Church opened its homes to provide a "fresh air" program for inner city children of the Harrisburg area. The need to foster better racial understanding is as urgent between people within the district as it is between Baltimore's citizens and our district membership.
The contrast between the style of life in ghetto conditions and those within the district is marked. The district's experience with the program has revealed that this is merely one of a wide variety of approaches which must be used to meet the needs of the urban ghetto. All major United States cities and most minor ones have sizable numbers of ethnic groups in the downtown areas, living in ghettos and breathing in increas- ingly foul urban air. A multi-pronged approach must be used to help these people overcome the growing consciousness that they are an en- trapped underclass.17
A BRETHREN PRESENCE IN WASHINGTON
For many years, a myth has existed among church people with reference to politics. It is the belief that politics centers primarily in personalities. This view led gradually to a low estimate of politics and to a separation of the Christian faith from the political scene. By refusing to make its voice heard in any consistent manner, the church abandoned a large segment of society to the professional politicians.
The pressures of the war years became the catalyst which changed this view. Christian men and women began to sense the Christian Gospel is addressed to the whole man. The gospel touches life in all its relation- ships, beginning with the individual's relationship to God, but most certainly including his ties with the states. Ralph Smeltzer, Director of Peace and Social Action for the Church of the Brethren, made this point clear when he observed:
"Our Christian faith teaches that God is concerned about all aspects of life. Some political decisions affect life so extensively and deeply, we believe that God is concerned about an action in the political realm. Our task is to recognize what God has done and is
one hundred forty
doing and to respond by joining in his ministry of love, justice, freedom and peace for all men as revealed through Jesus Christ".18
Brethren began to grow more vocal on social and political issues dur- ing and following World War II. Brethren representatives appeared in Washington, D. C., to testify against conscription and Universal Military Training. Others joined in writing letters of protest to magazines, news- papers and to Congressmen in the nation's capital. W. Glenn McFadden, for example, protested the destruction of potatoes and surplus by our national leaders at a time when people were hungry.19 The trend began to grow within many denominations to form a continuing representation at the nation's capital. The church turned from occasional and special lobby- ing to full-time representation.20
Many Brethren, including some from the Southern District, showed keen interest in the impact of religion upon the political scene. As early as 1957, Ernest Lefever published a volume entitled, Ethics and the United States Foreign Policy. Dr. Lefever was one of a very few persons who combined the study of theology with the findings of political science. He also prepared a mimeographed pamphlet on the administration of social action, social service and social education in American Protestantism.21
Luke E. Ebersole published his doctoral dissertation in 1951.22 This was one of the first accounts of the activities of many church organizations which function in Washington, D. C., to influence legislation. In his work, Church Lobbying in the Nation's Capital, Dr. Ebersole observed that the church has only been drawn into lobbying in recent decades. However, he viewed church lobbying as an established and growing institution.
Perhaps one of the men who deeply influenced the growing political awareness of the Church of the Brethren was Kermit Eby. His book, For Brethren Only, is to be found in many personal libraries and Brethren book shelves. Clearly his own anti-statism and deep pacifism stemmed from the "anti-German" persecutions of World War I in the United States. His experiences in defending the causes of unionized groups helped to formulate the views he held about the relations of church and state.
Kermit Eby made an appeal for a very positive program of political action by the Christian Churches. He wanted men of recognized religious stature and character to participate in politics at all levels. The more Christian men and women at primary decision-making levels the better it would be for the church and the state.
"Spelled out, it means more brethren should be in Congress making the decisions and fewer Brethren should be operating through churches as pressure groups."23
There have been widespread divisions of thought on the propriety of the church acting as a pressure group. The church is stepping out of line if it purports to speak authoritatively on matters where honest men disagree. Everyone is against injustice, but there is diversity of opinion as to the remedy for it in specific areas of human relationships. Truth is not decided by a majority vote. Furthermore, it would be unethical if the church were to use its resources to secure legislation which would im- pose on people practices which some people honestly cannot accept. American history is filled with incidents in which ecclesiastical power has been used to forward Blue Laws, the Volstead Act or antibirth con- trol legislation. It is unethical for organized religion to substitute outward compulsion for inner conviction.24
A request for a Church of the Brethren lobby in Washington, D. C., was refused by the Annual Conference.25 The cost seemed prohibitive. The conference recommended in its place a strong Protestant approach in cooperation with other denominations. In January, 1962, Miss Ruth Early
one hundred forty-one
became the Church of the Brethren representative in Washington. Miss Early met with visiting Brethren groups, acquainted the brotherhood with events and legislation at the nation's capital and made a "Brethren pres- ence" felt in the halls of government.
The Church of the Brethren offices in Washington kept the brotherhood informed through a column in The Gospel Messenger. Once per month the Washington scene was described in the column "Comment". The Brethren office in Washington arranged for testimonies before various House and Senate Committees. In 1963, Edward K. Ziegler gave testimony against the extension of the draft before the Senate Armed Services Committee. M. Guy West testified before the subcommittee of the House Armed Forces against civil defense in the same year. Oral or written presentations before the various committees of Congress for 1963 involved fourteen from the Church of the Brethren. In this same year, the Society of Friends Committee on National Legislation presented twenty-one papers or reports; the Lutherans presented three; and the Methodists presented eleven.26
Soon Brethren in large numbers were going to Washington to attend seminars sponsored by the denomination. The seminars were formed to develop Christian political intelligence and to train the Christian conscience in matters of political and civic life. One government official described the Brethren social education program as "a perfectly magnificent job of edu- cation on world affairs".27 By 1971, the Church of the Brethren sponsored twenty-five Washington seminars on behalf of Christian citizenship and government. More than 5,000 youth and adults attended these seminars in a single decade (1955-1965).28
In 1972, the Citizenship Seminars were instituted on a regional basis. Mrs. Cyrus G. Bucher was selected as the liaison person from the district to handle registrations and publicity for these events.
The early 1960s witnessed a variety of programs centering on the peace theme. A Peace Walk in June, 1962 engaged more than 500 mem- bers of the Church of the Brethren. Forrest B. Gordon and his family were participants in this event. The Washington March for Jobs and Equality in August, 1963, was supported by more than 200 Brethren. Some rumbles of opposition were heard concerning these marches from persons within the district. People objected to the carrying of placards and to protest walks since this was rather closely identified with the methods of the radical and pressure groups and was not the usual methods of concerned citizens.29
There are people who object to the attempts on the part of the church to influence government. These people argue we still have the freedom to write a letter to an editor or to complain to a Congressman. It is true there are many such elementary privileges which belong to our democratic heritage. These must be safeguarded! The fact remains, in spite of the privileges Americans enjoy in a democracy, the people have often been left crying in the wilderness. There has been no system of direct communication between the voting public and the major decisions which are made by the national government. A "Brethren presence" in Washington is an attempt to deal with this political gap.
RUSSIAN ORTHODOX-BRETHREN EXCHANGE
As part of a special peace emphasis campaign in 1962, the Church of the Brethren felt it must take the initiative in building bridges of understanding. The Gospel Messenger (1947) proposed an aggressive pro- gram of goodwill toward Russia and suggested reconstruction and repara- tions.30 The Annual Conference of 1955 voted to make contacts with
one hundred forty-two
the "Chinese, Russians and all other people for the purpose of mutual acquaintance and sharing".31 By 1963, plans were carefully developed for reconciliation teams to visit China and Russia. These teams were to seek peace, brotherhood and understanding among peoples "apart from or in addition to official state relationships".32
It is significant to note that the Eastern Orthodox Church was also beginning to seek for greater cooperation with other church groups about this time. In 1956, the church in America took steps to secure legal recognition in seven states. Metropolitan Nicholas died early in 1961. Even before his death in Russia, he had been succeeded by two younger men. The more remarkable of these successors was a thirty-one year old Bishop from Podolsk. His name was Bishop Nikodim. He was being groomed for an international role for his church.33
The Eastern Orthodox Church had begun to search for recognition in the United States as a native American Church along with Protestants, Roman Catholics and Jews.34 Its leaders and writers became more vocal on the issues of the day. At the Montreal Conference on Faith and Order, its leaders found themselves in agreement at many points with Protestants on the nature of the church, on worship and with respect to tradition.35 Many representatives came away from this conference with the feeling the world's churches were rapidly moving toward the healing of their divisions.36
A number of facets of the Eastern Orthodox faith appealed to Breth- ren. For one thing, Eastern Orthodoxy was showing a revival of social awareness on social issues at a time when a similar renewal was occurring in the Church of the Brethren. The belief that the Orthodox Church was otherworldly was a mistaken conception which had carried over from the days when Adolf Harnack wrote about it.37 The interest of the Eastern Orthodox Church in peace also encouraged dialogue with the Breth- ren. This is an old Orthodox adage to the effect that man may perish alone, but he can only be saved with all other men.38 Such interest in brotherhood made the Eastern Orthodox group worthy of further investi- gations.
There were other areas of mutual interest. In many ways the Eastern Church reflected a democratic church life. The Orthodox laymen's view of church authority is nearer to the Congregationalist's than to the Roman Catholic's view. Many prominent laymen have sprung from Orthodoxy and have played significant roles in the church's decision- making bodies.39 There is a deep respect for laymen and believers in the church. Members of the Church of the Brethren, with their own respect for lay leadership, grew interested in this facet of the Orthodox Church's life.
In its emphasis on love, Eastern Orthodoxy stands closer to Protes- tantism that it does to Catholicism. Orthodoxy is not a legal system based on law and its continuous reinterpretation. There are no detailed rules for the guidance and the discipline of individual Christians. In fact, there is a tolerance in the church's life and a positive appreciation for differences. There is also a high degree of flexibility in the polity of the church.
Generally there have been great gaps in our understanding of other peoples of the world. In no small measure this has been at the root of many tensions and disturbances between the nations. In a determined effort to deal with these information gaps, the Church of the Brethren officially decided to make "nonpolitical contacts between the average peoples of the nations" as a method of fostering world peace. Delegates from the Eastern Orthodox Church were invited to be guests of the Church
one hundred forty-three
of the Brethren in America as one measure of building bridges of under- standing.
When Norman J. Baugher, General Secretary of the Brotherhood, went to the Third Assembly of the World Council of Churches at New Delhi, India, he went by the way of Russia. He spent three days in Moscow making arrangements for an American visit by the Russian Orthodox delegates. Further plans were formulated at the New Delhi Conference, and the exchange was finally arranged for 1963.
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.