USA > Pennsylvania > Change and challenge: a history of the Church of the Brethren in the southern district of Pennsylvania, 1940-1972 > Part 7
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
The Annual Conference of 1866 recommended that each state should form itself into convenient District Meetings. The recommendation stated in part:
"These meetings shall be formed by one or two representatives from each organized church, and we recommend that each church be represented in the District Meeting, either by representative or by letter ... A record of the District Meeting may be kept, but not pub-
thirty-nine
lished. They should endeavour to answer all questions of a local character. But those of a general character, or those that concern the brotherhood in general, should be taken to Annual Meeting.3
The decision to keep the Minutes unpublished was altered in 1876 to permit distribution among members with the respective districts.
District Meetings enabled Brethren to maintain fellowship by face-to- face contacts in geographic regions. The Annual Conference of 1912 authorized a principle of representation at these meetings:
"Each church of two hundred members or less should be repre- sented at District Meeting by two delegates. Churches of over two hundred members may have an extra delegate for each additional two hundred members or fraction thereof. The delegates thus chosen shall constitute the voting power of the District Meeting."4
In 1925, the principle was accepted that no district may be formed with less than 750 members.5
As the churches realized the importance of the decisions which were made at the district level, encouragement was given to secure the finest delegates from the churches as was reasonably possible. In addition, dele- gates should be chosen to represent all age levels and the various interests of the congregation.6 The basis of representation was altered to allow for increased representation. Each congregation was now permitted two delegates for each hundred members.
"Realizing the importance of the role of the district in the life of the church, it is imperative that the delegates from the churches be carefully chosen, properly commissioned, and well-informed as to their responsibility."7
In 1911, the Falling Spring congregation petitioned the Annual District Conference to rotate meetings from congregation to congregation in alpha- betical order. In order to support the costs of these meetings, local congregations lifted special offerings. In recent years, the time of meeting has been established early in the fall of each year, usually the last week- end of September. Over the past decades, however, the District Confer- ences have been held at various times in the spring, summer and fall.
The 1958 Annual Conference received queries concerning a realign- ment of districts. The report received at the 1959 Annual Conference recommended the reduction of districts from forty-eight to eighteen. How well this goal has been achieved may be seen in this chart:
Number of
Number of
Year
U. S. Districts
Year
U. S. Districts
1941
48
1960
48
1945
49
1965
39
1950
49
1970
26
1955
49
1971
24
The Annual District Conference of Southern Pennsylvania assigned to a committee the task of evaluating the District Conference (1959). This committee reported the following basic purposes of the conference:
"The primary purpose of the District Conference is to transact the business of the district. This business should accomplish primarily the setting of basic policy and philosophy and establish goals together with the implementation of program to accomplish the goals. The second important function is that of general inspiration for the church and the district."8
The Gospel Messenger went beyond the purposes outlined by the district committee. It defined the functions of the district in these terms:
"The district is an important unit in our brotherhood organization. It should initiate and support a district-wide program of church ex- tension. It should provide training opportunities for church leaders. It should maintain, through district-wide gatherings, the face-to-face
forty
contacts that enable us to function as a fellowship. At the same time it should be the means whereby the local church and the brother- hood program are kept in touch with each other."9
The district organization is one of the methods by which the church seeks to promote its mission in the world. The 1965 Annual Conference approved the church polity which indicated that "the district enables the member congregations to do together what they cannot do separately and helps them to carry out in better fashion their major function."10 Each district develops a set of by-laws to promote efficiency and to accomplish its purposes.
The Southern District has adopted these objectives for its conference: 1 .- To review achievements; 2 .- To analyze procedures and results; 3 .- To survey continuing opportunities and needs; 4 .- To outline objectives, determine priorities and set goals; 5 .- To approve strategy and adopt policy; 6 .- To organize for action and to delegate responsibilities; 7 .- To dedicate resources; and 8 .- To go forth in service.
In the past thirty years the honor of serving as district moderator has been accorded only to ministers and elders of the Church of the Breth- ren. The decision to permit laymen to serve in this office was made by the Annual Conference as early as 1959. From 1941 until 1972, twenty different district personalities have presided as moderators. Of the thirty-two moderators, fifteen have served under the salaried pastoral sys- tem. Only to three men has fallen the distinction of three or more terms in the office: George L. Detweiler (4), Noah S. Sellers (3) and M. Guy West (3). In 1972, the Annual District Conference at Greencastle chose Cyrus G. Bucher as moderator-elect. When he assumes office at the close of the 1973 Annual District Conference, he will be the first layman selected for the position.
At one time the chief function of the moderator was simply to preside at the District Meeting. Gradually his duties have increased. He now serves as an ex-officio member of the District Board, chairman of the Conference Program and Arrangements Committee and a member of the Nominating and Personnel Committee. The latest set of district by-laws further defines the duties of the district moderator:
"The moderator shall study the needs of the district and give his interpretation and counsel regarding them to the Board and District Conference, and to any other appropriate district agency."11
By recommendation of the Elders', Pastors' and Moderators' Council, the office of alternate moderator was changed to moderator-elect, begin- ning with the 1967-1968 church year. The moderator-elect assists the district moderator and prepares himself for his duties in the succeeding year. He also serves as an ex-officio member of the District Board and acts as the chairman of the Nominating and Personnel Committee. He as- sists in planning for the District Conference.
THE DISTRICT BOARD
The district organization of 1940 clustered around a series of small boards. The plan which the district followed was proposed by the 1928 La Verne Conference. This conference suggested that
"the general activities of the brotherhood shall be administered by the following boards and committees: The General Mission Board; the Board of Religious Education; the General Education Board; the General Ministerial Board; and the Annual Conference Program Com- mittee.'
In addition to these specified groups there were cabinets to implement the causes of youth, children and adults. The Southern District adopted this
forty-one
plan of conducting its business through separate boards. The members were generally elected for three-year terms.
In 1941 the Church of the Brethren had sixteen districts under the
supervision of boards of administration. Most districts continued to operate with smaller boards. Twenty-six districts had mission boards, six had joint mission and ministerial boards and thirty-three had boards of Christian Education. The need for a coordinated program at the district level led to the formation of the Council of Boards. This Council was composed of the mission board, the ministerial board and the board of Christian Education. The first such Council of Boards meeting was held in the Gettysburg Church on December 7, 1945 with C. E. Grapes presiding. The need for such joint endeavors was expressed in a report to the district as early as 1941.
The work of the District Mission and Ministerial Boards were discov- ered to be closely related. Both groups were responsible for surveys to establish new congregations in new territories. In some instances, both the mission and the ministerial groups were responsible for the placement of pastors in churches. Both groups also handled difficulties which arose within the churches. These common interests led gradually to cooperative efforts.
Although the Annual Conference recommended a district reorganiza- tion in 1947, the Southern District did not appoint its reorganization com- mittee until 1955. A plan of reorganization was adopted by the 1956 District Conference. The plan was similar to the brotherhood organization: commissions cared for the work of the ministry, missions, Christian Educa- tion, social action and stewardship. The annual assessment rate to support this new program was $1.50 per capita.
The district also had an Elders' Body which met prior to the District Conferences to prepare an agenda and to formulate recommendations for queries. This body at one time was second only in authority to the District Conference itself. All district elders were members of this organization. The Elders' Body also cared for the nominating procedures for the District Conference officers.
The Annual Conference of 1890 ruled that no minister could be ordained to the eldership unless his nomination was approved by the majority of the elders in the Elders' Body. In 1956, the Southern District Elders' Body approved the plan of reorganization which led to the retire- ment of the Elders' Meeting. In 1969, under a new plan of organization, the functions of the Elders' Body were assumed by the District Board.
The creation of the Southern District Board in 1957 enlarged the repre- sentation and expanded the range of interests of the district at the execu- tive level. In 1940, for example, fifteen persons were responsible for the major interests and activities of the district. By 1957, the number of representatives increased to twenty-five.
The Church of the Brethren gradually changed from a congregational, autonomous type of church government to one which was more dependent upon district organization and brotherhood decisions. Calvert N. Ellis, president of Juniata College, once observed that the government of the Church of the Brethren is neither episcopal nor congregational in nature. It is representative and the Annual Conference legislates for the congre- gations. Congregations, however, endorse the conference regulations be- fore they are regarded as binding.12
The first regular meeting of the new District Board assembled in the board room of the National Bank of Gettysburg on November 23, 1957. George L. Detweiler, district moderator for 1957, convened the board and helped to organize it. At this meeting, Joseph M. Long was chosen
forty-two
as chairman, M. Guy West as vice-chairman, and Ross D. Murphy as secretary. Other members of the board included Howard A. Whitacre, Glen E. Norris, W. Hartman Rice, Joseph M. Baugher, Noah S. Sellers, Robert L. Cocklin, Samuel A. Meyers, Chester H. Royer, Clarence B. Sollenberger, Milton M. Baugher, Jesse O. Jenkins, Earl S. Kipp, Jacob L. Miller, Ronald H. Rowland, Henry E. Miller, Walter A. Keeney, J. Vernon Grim, Cyrus G. Bucher, Robert Turner, Murray P. Lehman and David H. Markey.
The new board immediately took action to incorporate. The District Mission Board and the Board of Christian Education remitted their funds to Walter A. Keeney, the district treasurer, to be held until a decision was made concerning the disposal of the funds.
By April 19, 1958, a report stated that the incorporation of the board had been completed. The legal name was: "Southern District of Pennsylvania, Church of the Brethren", with offices registered at 113 South Church Street, Waynesboro, Pennsylvania. The incorporators were Joseph M. Long, George L. Detweiler, W. Hartman Rice, Ross D. Murphy and Robert L. Cocklin. The Stewardship and Finance Commis- sion was authorized to secure appropriate stationery for the board mem- bers. A seal was created for the district in 1961 at which time it was entrusted to the care of the secretary of the board.
The board serves as the executive agency of the District Conference. It manages and administers the work of the district as authorized by the Conference.
"The board is the legal agent of the district and shall be em- powered to act on behalf of the District Conference ad interim except for those actions which specifically are reserved for the District Conference."13
The board makes surveys, prepares reports and employs district personnel. It cares for district properties, district funds, prepares the district budget, handles queries, appoints mediation committees and helps to establish district goals and programs.
Much of the work of the board is performed through its commissions. From 1957 to 1969, the Southern District Board was composed of five commissions: Christian Education, Ministry and Evangelism, Missions and Church Extension, Social Education and Action and Stewardship and Finance. Each member of the board owes his loyalty to the total board and through the board to the district. The board approves the separate actions of each of the commissions.
Following the initiative of the Annual Conference (1968), the district proceeded to reorganize. From 1970 to the present, the District Board has been formed of four commissions: Ministry, Nurture, Stewardship and Witness. The representation of the board has been reduced from twenty- five persons to twenty-one persons. Each representative, with the excep- tion of the board chairman, is a member of a commission.
Since its inception, the Southern District Board has been presided over by the following chairmen: Joseph M. Long (1958, 1959), Robert L. Cocklin (1960-1962), Glenn E. Kinsel (1963-1967) and Elmer Q. Gleim (1968-1972). In 1972, Samuel H. Flora Jr. became the new board chair- man (1973- ).
When the district board was created, it was composed chiefly of min- isters. Twenty-three of the original members were ministers and two were laymen. Eight of the original board members were businessmen and four were teachers. This pattern of strong ministerial representa- tion has continued to the present time. The free ministry congregations have usually been well-represented at the board level. Beginning with
forty-three
sixteen percent of the membership in 1958, the percentage has increased to thirty-two by 1970.
One of the concerns centering in the board was the breadth of rep- resentation. In 1964, the Pleasant View congregation requested the District Conference for "a plan for better distribution of district offi- cers."14 A study committee appointed by the board surveyed the repre- sentation and discovered that some areas of the district were not ade- quately represented on the District Board or on the District Nominating Committee. As a result of this study, the board recommended to the District Conference the creation of three zones: Eastern (York County), Western (Adams, Franklin, Fulton Counties) and Northern (Perry, Cum- berland, Juniata, Union and Clinton Counties). Ten members of the . District Board were to be represented at-large from the district, seven members were to come from the Eastern zone, five from the Western zone and three from the Northern zone. This plan of representation was approved by the District Conference in 1966.
The board has adopted many methods to keep the district informed concerning its proceedings. In 1963, it voted to rotate its meeting from place to place throughout the district in the hope that non-board members would be able to attend these quarterly meetings. The practice of "The Order of the Day" was begun to hear in-depth reports from commissions and institutions, and to share with one another the concerns and problems of the district. Resumes of the board actions have been mailed through the Tri-District and the District Offices to pastors and moderators and other church leaders to maintain a spirit of openness.
Since its beginnings, the District Board has confronted many prob- lems. Acting on behalf of the district and the District Conference, the board spent many hours discussing possible solutions to the increasing church-related problems. In 1967, Norman Baugher delivered an address to the North Atlantic District in which he outlined some areas of concern within the Church of the Brethren. Many of the concerns he listed were also concerns of congregations and individuals of the Southern District of Pennsylvania.
The concerns he discussed were: 1 .- Anxiety over the nature and the method of evangelism; 2 .- Anxiety about the conciliar movement and the whole question of the possible merger of churches; 3 .- Concern over the recovery of the peculiar values of the Church of the Brethren; 4 .- Disquiet about new approaches to Christian Education and curriculum development; and 5 .- Differences about the church's relationship to public and social affairs.
In the following sections, many of these concerns will be discussed in their relationship to the district. In this chapter, we list some of the concerns of the board over the past decades: The Anniversary Call Pro- gram; Church Extension and Membership; the National Council of Churches Issue; Finances and the Institutions of the District; and the Field Program.
THE ANNIVERSARY CALL PROGRAM
The leadership of the denomination was aware of a distressingly needy world in the post-war period. The General Brotherhood Board proposed to the Orlando Conference in 1947 that the church should commit itself to a program of Advance With Christ. "The time seems now here for the church to swing into aggressive action on all fronts." The Annual Conference suggested that each congregation should call a special council to consider some possible goals for its own church. Among suggested
forty-four
goals were the following: winning new members, reactivating inactive members, encouraging promising young people to enter the Christian min- istry, enlistment of every member in some responsible place in the church's life and encouraging financial support from every member.15.
The program gave promise of individual and congregational growth. In the Southern District many members joined the Fellowship of Tithers in their local churches. Many of these continue faithfully as tithers to the present time. Other congregations met to consider congregational goals for church advance. The church began to sense that it could no longer be content with mediocre attainments but must become aggressive and vigor- ous with its unique ministry to the world.
Congregations of the York area united in a Christian Education School in the York First Church in 1948. The Codorus, Upper Codorus, Bermudian, New Fairview, Madison Avenue, Second Church and First Church united in this school for self-improvement and biblical growth.16
The happy experience of the brotherhood with the Advance program provided a prelude to the Call to Discipleship emphasis. One member of the denomination described the decision of the Grand Rapids Confer- ence (1957) to enter the Call to Discipleship as a pentecostal experience:
"At this meeting there was a restlessness that seemed to increase until the delegate body suggested that every member of the church be challenged to a greater commitment of his life and of all his resources."17
The plan of the conference was to launch the new emphasis near the close of the 250th anniversary year of the denomination. The Call to Discipleship would begin as an Anniversary Call on October 1, 1958.
Ron H. Rowland
Ronald H. Rowland, a lay leader of the Hanover congregation, and a member of the Southern District Board, was select- ed as the Anniversary Call chairman. The entire brotherhood was organized with lay leaders at regional, district and congrega- tional levels to encourage the churches to a program of church extension, advance- ment in the cause of peace and commit- ment of life and leadership to the mission of the church. It was estimated that never before had the Church of the Breth- ren launched such an aggressive and united program under the leadership of conse- crated laymen. An estimated 12,000 lay- men were involved in an examination of the mission and the stewardship of the church.18
Under the Call program, training meet- ings were conducted for local Church mis- sioners. Prayer-vigils were conducted and visitations were made to local church members; calls were also made upon the unchurched. On May 14, 1958, district pastors and congregational Call chairmen met with Ronald H. Rowland in an interpretative session and dinner at the Carlisle Church. A second training session was also conducted at the same location on June 29, 1958.
The decision was made by the District Board to use the Anniversary Call approach to churches to present the total program of the church through the district budget. The unified budget system was heartily endorsed for each local congregation. Minutes of the Commission on
forty-five
Ministry and Evangelism reveal how the members of the commission ex- plored ways to make the church more sensitive to evangelism.
The Call to Discipleship program was proposed as a way to fulfill the Great Commission to "go, baptize, and teach". Resources and leader- ship scarcities were hindering the church in its attempt to fulfill its mission. The program did result in an increased commitment of self and resources to the denomination and to the local church. As part of the emphasis, the Brotherhood Board encouraged each congregation to engage in an evangelistic emphasis from Lent to Pentecost in 1959. Many congregations of the Southern District cooperated in this program.
The District Commission on Ministry and Evangelism continued the emphasis into 1959-1960. A retreat was called for the Gettysburg Church on December 12, 1959. At this time, Frank S. Carper, M. Guy West, Harold Z. Bomberger, Donald E. Miller and C. Reynolds Simmons Jr. helped laymen and ministers to think seriously of the Call to Discipleship and to explore the possibilities of the program for the local congregation.
CHURCH EXTENSION
The war years presented serious financial and organizational prob- lems for many churches. Members of churches were uprooted from their communities by the demands of industry and the conscription acts. Churches often were unable to secure the leadership of laymen because they were involved in the demands of factories and war industries. A report appeared before the Annual Conference in 1945 indicating that one-third of the churches of the brotherhood were in need of, or were already receiving, financial aid.
The District Mission Board of Southern Pennsylvania met in the Three Springs congregation on July 5, 1943. The pastors of the mission churches were present to give reports of their work and to discuss the problems they were facing. This was the first meeting of its kind to be held in the district. Families of the pastors and families of the Mis- sion Board members were present for the fellowship meeting. The problems these people discussed centered on organization, Church School work, the evangelistic program, church property improvements, possible community surveys and the nature of church administration. The pastors who met with the Mission Board were Earl S. Kipp (Mt. Olivet), Cletus S. Myers (Three Springs) and Robert L. Ditmer (Van Dyke).19
The nation witnessed a new church growth in the 1950s. A. Stauffer Curry urged the denomination to establish no less than eighteen congre- gations each year simply to keep pace with the growing population. However, the budgets allocated for Home Mission work were distressingly small. Congregations were spending large sums of money on their local needs but were not giving proportionately to outreach programs. In 1952-1953, Jacob L. Miller was appointed to act as a fieldman to make surveys of possible new areas to conduct mission work in the district. A report to the Annual Conference in Colorado Springs (1953) placed primary emphasis for church extension with the District Boards of Ad- ministration or with the District Mission Boards.
Occasional complaints indicated that the churches of the district and the brotherhood were not confronting their challenges:
"Many churches are inadequate to meet the needs of the day, both in leadership and in physical equipment; there is disinterest in the brotherhood and the district promotional program; large territories are not being worked by the Brethren, especially in some of the Southern states; Brethren literature is not widely used as it should be; and the evangelism program is weak."20
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.