21. See, for instance, the passage from The Letters of John Nelson Darby, 2nd ed. (London, n. d.), 3: 298–301, quoted in Sandeen, Roots, pp. 32–34.
VI. Dispensationalism and the Baconian Ideal
1. “The Coming of the Lord: The Doctrinal Center of the Bible,” Addresses on the Second Coming of the Lord: Delivered at the Prophetic Conference, Allegheny, Pa., December 3–6. 1895 (Pittsburgh, 1895), p. 82.
2. Theodore Dwight Bozeman, Protestants in an Age of Science: The Baconian Ideal and Antebellum American Religious Thought (Chapel Hill, 1977), is a very important work which points out the widespread appeal to Bacon. See especially his summary of the above themes, pp. 3–31.
3. Cf. Merle Curti, “The Great Mr. Locke: America’s Philosopher, 1783–1861,” Huntington Library Bulletin 11 (1937), pp. 107–51. Bozeman, Age of Science, pp. 23–27, argues persuasively, however, that Bacon had replaced Locke by early in the nineteenth century.
4. Cf. Ralph H. Gabriel, “Evangelical Religion and Popular Romanticism in Early Nineteenth Century America,” Church History XIX (March, 1950), pp. 34–47. Bozeman, Age of Science, suggests also the importance of doxology as a conclusion of scientific investigation.
5. These views are clearly presented and documented in Bozeman, Age of Science, pp. 8–21. Similar treatment is found in Herbert Hovenkamp, Science and Religion in America, 1800–1860 (Philadelphia, 1978).
6. “I Am Coming,”: A Setting Forth of the Second Coming of Our Lord Jesus Christ as Personal—Private—Premillennial, 7th ed., rev. (London, n. d. [ca. 1890]), p. 121.
7. “Questions Concerning Inspiration,” The Inspired Word: A Series of Papers (London, 1888), pp. 17, 23, cf. p. 20. Cf. Chapter XIII below for similar tendencies toward dictation analogies in The Fundamentals.
A. J. Gordon suggests a more balanced image of light through stained glass to describe the divine and human elements in inspiration, The Ministry of the Spirit (Valley Forge, 1895), pp. 175–76, quoted in Bruce Shelley, “A. J. Gordon and Biblical Criticism,” Foundations XIV (January–March, 1971), p. 74.
Shelley points out that Ernest Sandeen overemphasizes the influence of Princeton theologians in formulating fundamentalist views of Scripture, ibid., p. 77n. Cf. Norman H. Maring, “Baptists and Changing Views of the Bible, 1865–1918,” Foundations I (July, 1958), pp. 52–75, (October, 1958), pp. 30–62, for similarly rather independent developments among conservative Northern Baptists. Among conservative and “fundamentalist” Baptists views of inspiration varied far more than among dispensationalists or militant conservative Presbyterians. See, for instance, Grant A. Wacker, Jr., “Augustus H. Strong: A Conservative Confrontation with History,” Ph.D. dissertation, Harvard, 1978.
8. The Thousand Years: Studies in Eschatology in Both Testaments (Fincastle, Va., n. d. [1889]), pp. 339, 343–44.
9. “Many Infallible Proofs:” The Evidence of Christianity or The Written and Living Word of God (New York, 1886), pp. 11, 13, 14. Pierson himself appeals to the exact analogy between the design of nature and that of the Bible, p. 110.
10. Ibid., pp. 129–35.
11. Cf. C. Norman Kraus, Dispensationalism in America: Its Rise and Development (Richmond, Va., 1958), who perceptively relates dispensationalism to its intellectual context with good observations on this point, e.g., p. 132.
12. Revell paper edition (Westwood, N.J., n. d. [1896]), p. 3.
13. Ibid., p. 34.
14. Kraus, Dispensationalism, p. 122.
15. The Scofield Reference Bible, C. I. Scofield, ed. (New York, 1917 [1909]), Introduction, p. iii.
16. What the Bible Teaches: A Thorough and Comprehensive Study of What the Bible has to Say Concerning the Great Doctrines of which it Treats, 17th ed. (New York, 1933 [1898]), p. 1.
17. E.g., W.E.B. [William E. Blackstone], Jesus is Coming (Chicago, 1908 [1878]), p. 21.
18. Scofield Bible, p. 1349, notes.
19. William Ames, The Marrow of Theology, John D. Eusden, ed. (Boston, 1968 [1623]), p. 188. Cf. the Puritan interest in the “method” of Petrus Ramus. Although this system was deductive, rather than inductive, it reflected the tendencies toward encyclopedic classification based on identifying mutually exclusive categories. Cf. Perry Miller, The New England Mind: The Seventeenth Century (New York, 1939).
20. Ernest R. Sandeen, The Roots of Fundamentalism (Chicago, 1970), pp. 136–39.
21. I am very much indebted to Harry Stout for pointing out to me this theme in American religious history. On the Puritans, see his “Puritanism Considered as a Profane Movement,” The Newberry Papers in Family and Community History (Chicago, 1977).
22. See Stout, “Religion, Communications, and the Ideological Origins of the American Revolution,” William and Mary Quarterly, 3rd series, XXXIV (October, 1977), pp. 519–41.
23. “Christ’s Coming: Personal and Visible,” Premillennial Essays, Nathaniel West, ed. (Chicago, 1879), pp. 25–26.
24. “Christ’s Predictions and Their Interpretation,” Prophetic Studies of the International Prophetic Conference (Chicago, 1886), p. 46.
25. Quoted in William G. McLoughlin, Jr., Modern Revivalism (New York, 1959), p. 372. Original source not clear, from 1906.
26. Richard Hofstadter, Anti-Intellectualism in American Life (New York, 1962) provides much documentation of this side of the outlook.
27. These themes are suggested in Joel A. Carpenter, “A Shelter in the Time of Storm: Fundamentalist Institutions and the Rise of Evangelical Protestantism, 1929–1942,” ms., cf., Church History (March, 1980).
VII. History, Society, and the Church
1. C. Norman Kraus, Dispensationalism in America (Richmond, 1958), p. 1.
2. Cf. Lewis Sperry Chafer, Satan (Chicago, 1935 [1909]) and Reuben A. Torrey, What the Bible Teaches (New York, 1933 [1898]), pp. 513–35.
3. “Rightly Dividing the Word of Truth,” Revell paper edition (New York, n. d. [1896]), p. 12.
4. Again, this analysis is based on an analogy to the processes Thomas Kuhn describes in The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (Chicago, 1970 [1962]).
5. Karl Dieterich Pfisterer, The Prism of Scripture: Studies on History and Historicity in the Work of Jonathan Edwards (Bern, Switzerland, 1975) has helpful insights on the shift to modern historiographical views. See also Ernest Lee Tuveson, Redeemer Nation: The Idea of America’s Millennial Role (Chicago, 1968), for many examples of supernaturalistic views of history in nineteenth-century America.
6. Theodore Dwight Bozeman, Protestants in the Age of Science (Chapel Hill, 1977), pp. 119–24; John C. Greene, “Science and Religion, The Rise of Adventism: Religion and Society in Mid-Nineteenth-Century America, Edwin S. Gaustad, ed. (New York, 1974), pp. 50–69; Michael Ruse, “The Relationship between Science and Religion in Britain, 1830–1870,” Church History 44 (Dec, 1975)., pp. 505–22. Orthodox Protestant versions of catastrophism were taught in America by prominent scientists such as Edward Hitchcock, Benjamin Silliman, James Dwight Dana, and Louis Aggasiz. Greene describes Hitchcock’s The Religion of Geology (1851) as “a resounding success,” p. 58. Bozeman finds Presbyterian scholars of the era relating the geological theories to postmillennialism.
7. Scofield, Rightly Dividing, pp. 12–16. Of course, catastrophism as such was not wholly novel in Christian apocalyptic views.
8. The Scofield Reference Bible, C. I. Scofield, ed. (New York, 1917 [1909]), p. 3, notes.
9. “Condition of the Church and World at Christ’s Second Advent; or, Are the Church and the World to Grow Better or Worse Until He Comes?” Prophetic Studies of the International Prophetic Conference (held in Chicago, November, 1886) (Chicago, 1887?), pp. 173–76. For another statement of such frequently stated themes see W. G. Moorehead, “The Final Issue of the Age,” “Our Lord Shall Come,” Addresses on the Second Coming of the Lord, delivered at the Prophetic Conference, Allegheny, Pa., Dec. 3–6, 1895 (Pittsburgh, 1896), pp. 25–27.
10. “The Second Coming of Christ as Related to the Establishment of the Coming Kingd
om,” The Second Coming of Our Lord; Being Papers read at a Conference held at Niagara, Ontario, July 14th to 17th, 1885, James H. Brookes, ed. (Toronto, 1885), p. 135.
11. Modern Delusions,” Prophetic Studies (1886), p. 71.
12. The Thousand Years: Studies in Eschatology in Both Testaments (Fincastle, Va., n. d. [1889]), pp. 445–452. Again, statements similar to these are not hard to find. On disillusion with reform movements, see for instance, W.E.B. [William E. Blackstone], Jesus is Coming (Chicago, 1908 [1878]), pp. 148–150. On cities, cf. Arthur T. Pierson, in Addresses of the International Prophetic Conference Held Dec. 10–15, 1901 in the Clarendon Baptist Church Boston, Mass. (Boston, 1902), p. 157.
13. West, Thousand Years, pp. 439–48; Scofield Bible, pp. 900–901, 907–13, 1342–43, notes.
14. Howard Mumford Jones, The Age of Energy: Varieties of American Experience 1865–1915 (New York, 1970), p. 338. Of course, the same might be said of almost any quarter century in modern history.
15. For example, see Frederic Cople Jaher, Doubters and Dissenters: Cataclysmic Thought in America, 1885–1918 (New York, 1964), which treats this subject rather exclusively in terms of social thought.
16. Frost, “Condition …,” Prophetic Studies (1886), p. 174; cf. James Brookes, “I am Coming,” (London, n. d. [ca. 1890]), p. 118–19; West, Thousand Years, pp. 448–53; Arthur T. Pierson, The Second Coming of Our Lord (Philadelphia, 1896), pp. 28–29.
17. Blackstone, Jesus is Coming, pp. 243–44; Brookes, “I am Coming,” p. 119.
18. “How I Became a Premillennialist: Symposium,” The Coming and Kingdom of Christ: A Stenographic Report of the Prophetic Bible Conference Held at the Moody Bible Institute of Chicago, Feb. 24–27, 1914 (Chicago, 1914), pp. 65–79. Cf. Arthur F. Wesley, a defector from premillennialism, who said that his original reasons for adopting it had been the argument that the world population was growing faster than the Christian population as well as the simplicity, clarity, and definiteness of the system, “Why I Became a Post Millennialist,” Winona Echoes: Notable Addresses Delivered at the Twenty-Fourth Annual Bible Conference (Winona Lake, Ind., 1918). Postmillennialists were still claiming that the motto of the Student Volunteer Association, “the world for Christ in our day,” was likely of fulfillment and that soon Christianity would be the dominant world religion, e. g., David Haegle, “Signs of the Times: Is the World Growing Better or Worse,” Winona Echoes (1918), p. 237.
19. Talmadge Wilson, “A History of Dispensationalism in the United States of America: The Nineteenth Century,” M.A. Thesis, Pittsburgh Theological Seminary, 1956. Cf. Ernest Sandeen, The Roots of Fundamentalism (Chicago, 1970), pp. 79–80.
20. Sidney Mead, “Denominationalism: The Shape of Protestantism in America,” The Lively Experiment: The Shaping of Christianity in America (New York, 1963), pp. 103–33 for a helpful discussion of this subject.
21. “Condition …,” Prophetic Studies (1886), p. 177.
22. The Truth or Testimony for Christ XX (Jan., 1894), p. 3; and XXI (Oct., 1895), pp. 522–624, and passim.
23. Arno Gaebelein is a notable exception. He left the Methodists in 1899 and established a militant journal, Our Hope, in which he preached ecclesiastical separation. Gabelein’s career is summarized in Sandeen, Roots, pp. 214–17, 220–25.
24. Jesus is Coming, p. 95 and p. 87.
25. Timothy P. Weber, Living in the Shadow of the Second Coming; American Premillennialism 1875–1925 (New York, 1979) provides much helpful material on almost all the subjects covered in this chapter, as well as on some other important points. As far as I can see, however, he does not question the assumption, which seems to come from Sandeen, that premillennialism was the central category dominating the thought of the movement.
VIII. The Victorious Life
1. Scofield, Plain Papers on the Doctrine of the Holy Spirit (New York, 1899), preface, quoted in Donald W. Dayton, “The Doctrine of the Baptism of the Holy Spirit: Its Emergence and Significance,” Wesleyan Theological Journal XIII (Spring, 1978), p. 120.
2. Donald Dayton, to whom I am greatly indebted for help and insight on this entire subject, has collected enough holiness works from this and surrounding periods to fill from floor to ceiling shelves on all four walls of an office. See, for instance, Dayton, The American Holiness Movement: A Bibliographic Introduction, David W. Faupel, The American Pentecostal Movement; A Bibliographical Introduction, and David D. Bundy, Keswick: A Bibligraphical Introduction to the Higher Life Movements, all published by the B. L. Fisher Library, Asbury Theological Seminary, Wilmore, Ky., 1971, 1972, 1975 respectively.
3. See, for instance, Vinson Synan, ed., Aspects of Pentecostal-Charismatic Origins (Plainfield, N.J., 1975).
4. “Holiness” is here capitalized when referring to the Methodistic Holiness movements and the denominations growing from them. When referring to the wider holiness teachings or movement, including that usually associated with fundamentalism, “holiness” will be lower case.
5. Bruce Shelley, “Sources of Pietistic Fundamentalism,” Fides et Historia V (Fall, 1972; Spring, 1973), pp. 68–78, points out this connection. Ernest Sandeen, The Roots of Fundamentalism (Chicago, 1970), provides a good bit of information on the ties, but gives holiness teaching a role more incidental to millenarianism, which he sees as primary.
6. Those actively promoting the holiness movement, almost all of whom wrote works on the Holy Spirit, include Charles Blanchard, James Brookes, J. Wilbur Chapman, A. C. Dixon, William J. Erdman, Henry W. Frost, A. J. Gordon, James M. Gray, I. M. Haldeman, L. W. Munhall, George Needham, Bishop William R. Nicholson, A. T. Pierson, C. I. Scofield, William H. Griffith Thomas, and Reuben Torrey. See also Edith Lydia Waldvogel, “The ‘Overcoming Life’: A Study in the Reformed Evangelical Origins of Pentecostalism,” Ph.D. dissertation. Harvard, 1977.
7. For instance, at the Northfield conferences holiness doctrines were regularly presented, while premillennialism was kept in the background. In the large premillennial conferences, by contrast, the holiness doctrines were often presented. Similarly, in The Fundamentals (see Chapter 14 below) holiness teachings were prominent while premillennialism was almost absent.
8. Timothy P. Weber, Living in the Shadow of the Second Coming (New York, 1979), describes this and other practical implications of premillennialism.
9. Wesley recognized that if one defined sin as “any coming short of the law of love” Christians could not be sinless, and he admitted that they were not sinless in such a sense. John Leland Peters, Christian Perfection and American Methodism (New York, 1956), p. 46.
10. John Wesley, A Plain Account of Christian Perfection, Epworth Press edition (London, 1952 [1766]), pp. 106–8; John Peters, Christian Perfection, pp. 32–66.
11. Westminister Confession of Faith, chapt. XIII, “Of Sanctification;” cf. James Fisher, The Assembly’s Shorter Catechism Explained by way of Question and Answer (Edinburgh, 1835 [1753]), p. 181–88.
12. On Common Sense philosophy in Taylor see George Marsden, The Evangelical Mind and the New School Presbyterian Experience (New Haven, 1970). On Common Sense in the Methodist Holiness tradition of the same period see James E. Hamilton, “Epistemology and Theology in American Methodism,” Wesleyan Theological Journal X (Spring, 1975), pp. 70–79. On Common Sense in Mahan, see James E. Hamilton, “Nineteenth Century Holiness Theology: A Study of the Thought of Asa Mahan,” Wesleyan Theological Journal XIII (Spring, 1978), pp. 51–64.
13. Finney, Lectures on Systematic Theology, J. H. Fairchild, ed. (New York, 1878–1846]), pp. 115–79; 204–281; cf. Asa Mahan, Scripture Doctrine of Christian Perfection (Boston, 1839); J. H. Fairchild in “Oberlin Theology,” Cyclopaedia of Biblical Theological and Ecclesiastical Literature, John M’Clintock and James Strong, eds. (New York, 1891), vol. II, pp. 277–78 provides a valuable summary; cf. Timothy L. Smith, Revivalism and Social Reform: American Protestantism on the Eve of the Civil War (New York, 1965 [1957]), pp. 103–13. See also Smith’s very valuable “The Doctrine of the San
ctifying Spirit: Charles G. Finney’s Synthesis of Wesleyan and Convenant Theology,” Wesleyan Theological Journal XIII (Spring, 1978), pp. 92–113.
14. Sandra Sizer, Gospel Hymns and Social Religion (Philadelphia, 1978) explores the importance of such gatherings.
15. W. B. Godbey, Christian Perfection (Louisville, 1898), p. 14.
16. Vinson Synan, The Holiness-Pentecostal Movement in the United States (Grand Rapids, 1971), pp. 59–60. Some of these groups became directly connected with later fundamentalism. See, for instance, Donald W. Dayton, Discovering an Evangelical Heritage (New York, 1976).
17. Hannah Whitall Smith, The Christian’s Secret to the Happy Life, Spire paper edition (Old Tappan, N.J., 1966 [1875]), p. 28; cf. Benjamin Breckinridge Warfield’s summary in “The ‘Higher Life’ Movement,” Perfectionism vol. II (New York, 1931), p. 512. Warfield, who often was not generous about those with whom he disagreed, attacked Boardman’s volume, ibid., pp. 466–94, calling it “a ragtime book,” p. 473.
18. Mahan, The Baptism of the Holy Ghost (Noblesville, Ind., 1972 [1870]), p. 7. Cf. Charles Finney’s similar statements in “The Enduement of Power,” (c. 1871). Donald Dayton, “From Christian Perfection to the ‘Baptism of the Holy Ghost,’” Aspects of Pentecostal-Charismatic Origins, Vinson Synan, ed., pp. 39–54, develops this theme.
19. Sizer, Gospel Hymns, pp. 20–49, explores such themes perceptively. The songs of Philip Bliss, “Hold the Fort,” and Moody’s favorite, “Dare to be a Daniel,” and many premillennial hymns are less passive than those of the women writers.
Fundamentalism and American Culture Page 40