Sivvah Mennah, kfild mit em
Heilicha Geisht
or
The
Founding Fathers of the Bible Fellowship Church
The
title for this paper comes from Acts 6:3.
You remember the story. The young
church was in transition. Factions began
to form and tension was high. The
Hellenists, the progressive element, complained against the Hebraists, the more
traditional element, that their folks were not being treated equitably. The Twelve called the disciples into session
and recommended that the brethren look for seven honest, reputable men who were
filled with the Spirit, wise men whom they could put
in charge of this business. “Nau dann, leevi breedah, suchet eich sivvah
Mennah, vo en goot zeichns henn,
un kfild mit em Heilicha Geisht
un veisheit, es si nohch sayna
kenna ivvah dess ” (Di Apostelgeschichte 6: 3). The seven founding fathers of our fellowship
– William Gehman, William Shelly, David Henning,
Henry Diehl, David Gehman, Joseph Schneider and Jacob
Gottschall –
would have understood these words perfectly, better than if they were in
English. On the other hand, they
probably would not catch a lot of what we say here today. Language then is one essential difference
between us and them, but is there more?
It
is not my intent to replicate “Deacon and Schreiber
David Gehman, 1802 - 1881" by his great, great
granddaughter Ardis Grosjean
Dreisbach, or “Father Gehman”
by Richard
Taylor. Little more need be said about
William Gehman and his distant, older cousin David Gehman. My purpose
is simply to poke around the data once more.
Perhaps this will stir up fresh insights and illuminate the “spirit”
that filled and fueled our seven founding fathers.
Seven Men, Three Congregations, One Spirit
Die Sivvah Mennah, founding fathers of the Bible
Fellowship Church were all Mennonites, affiliated or influenced by the “New”
Mennonite movement led by John H. Oberholtzer of
Milford Township, Bucks County. His
adherents would constitute the foundation of the General Conference Mennonite
Church. The seven included one bishop,
three “preachers of the word” and three deacons. (Categories not long in use in
the new
Evangelical Mennonite Fellowship.) This
reflected three levels of ordination in the Mennonite Church. The seven came from three congregations in
three counties in eastern Pennsylvania, Lehigh, Bucks, and Northampton. Specifically (1) Upper Milford Township,
near Old Zionsville, Lehigh County; (2) Richland and/or Haycock Township, near
Quakertown, Bucks County; and (3) Mt. Bethel, Bangor in Northampton
County. Their new Evangelical Mennonite
Fellowship (EMF) commenced with four preachers, William Gehman,
William Shelly (former bishop), Henry Diehl and David Henning. These were supported by three deacons, David Gehman, Joseph Schneider; Jacob Gottschall. Observe:
Upper
Milford,
Lehigh County
Preacher William Gehman
Deacon David Gehman
Flatland,
Bucks County
Preacher William Shelly
Preacher Henry Diehl
Deacon Joseph Schneider
Bangor, Northampton County
Preacher David Henning
Deacon Jacob Gottschall
These were significant men of the
first generation. Another dynamic of the
first generation would have been the fiery Eusebius Hershey who first appears in
the 1861 minutes. Other new persons at
the 1861 assembly were Abraham W. Stauffer, Jonas Musselman, Abraham Kauffman,
and Abel Strawn. Were all these
preachers from the Upper Milford congregation?
Hershey was not. He came from
Centre County, Pa., a distance from the center of the EMF; his roots were in
the United Brethren, a like-minded revivalist association. Above all they were one in the spirit,
animated by the Holy Spirit.
The Year Eighteen Fifty-eight
The
year 1858 was decisive. The story of the
“prayer meeting” controversy in the Oberholtzer
Mennonite fellowship has been rehearsed often.
The issue was not new, but in 1858 the decisive moment arrived and a new
Fellowship was born. The spirit of
revival was burning across the United States.
At the same time, the States were on the edge of an awful civil
war. It might be said, “it was the worst of times; it was the best of times.”
Indeed,
the year 1858 was ominous for the America.
The States were on the precipice of war. As an opponent of slavery, Abraham Lincoln
was running for congress from Illinois against Stephen Douglas. In a speech that summer he had argued that
the Union could not endure half slave and half free. But Lincoln lost to
Douglas. In reflection he wrote,
I am glad I
made the late race. It gave me a hearing
on the great and durable questions of the age which I could have made in no
other way, and though I now sink out of view, and shall be
forgotten, I believe I have made some marks which will tell for the cause of civil liberty long after I am gone.[1]
Conditions in America were precarious,
not benevolent, but Lincoln did not sink
out of view; two years later he was elected president of the United States.
Although
the doings of the Seven in Upper Milford Township may pale in comparison with
later accomplishments of Abraham Lincoln, it is unlikely that they expected
much more than a fraternal fellowship of kindred Mennonite preachers to emerge
from their gathering. Did they believe
they might make “some marks which will tell for the cause of the Gospel long
after they were gone?” They did see
themselves as a “small branch” of a much larger entity, the Christian Church
and a “small division”of a larger Mennonite
fellowship. The 1866 constitution of the
Evangelical Mennonite Fellowship includes the following:
We as a small branch of the
Christian Church, feel in duty bound to render obedience to the precepts of our
Lord and Savior, who offered up his life out of love toward us, in order to
redeem us from eternal death . .. we,
as a small
division of the Mennonite Society [Gemeinschaft] feel it is also our
duty to organize a missionary society to contribute our mite [not might] to the
great work of our Lord.[2]
They saw themselves as Christians and
as Mennonites, although they were doing their own thing.
The
Year 1858
– Annus Mirabilis– The year 1858 was also the Annus Mirabilis
according to historian Timothy Smith.[3] Contagious revival fires were burning across
the United States just as the nation was drifting into a dreadful civil war
between the states. Meanwhile, the
nation was praying, perhaps as never before.
The news media had caught hold of the noon day meetings for prayer in
downtown Manhattan. Smith provides a
good description of
the noontime interdenominational prayer meetings, begun by
Jeremiah Lanphier, a neighborhood missionary of the
Old Dutch Church on Fulton Street, in
September 1857. In 1858 they burned brightly in New York City and were
spreading like a wildfire across the United States. The New York Herald and the New York Tribune
sensationalized these daily prayer meetings as they intensified. One is reminded how William Randolf Hearst decided to hype young Billy Graham some 90
years later. Soon newspapers across the
country were running stories on these daily prayer meetings. In Philadelphia prayer meetings were held in
numerous halls which “finally gave way in the summer to those held for four
months under a great tent” (Smith, 64).
Surely
even reclusive, conservative Pennsylvania Mennonites heard about these meetings
or perhaps even ventured to sneak a peak. As they sat around the kitchen table
discussing the news in the outside world, they doubtless wondered why so many
people were going for such new measures not found in their Bibles or in their
traditions. Staid Mennonites could have
thought here we go once again. Eleven
years before John Oberholtzer had led a movement to
adapt new more structured ways. The
rolled collar and written minutes had not preserved unity. Some in his group wanted more progress; some
wanted to require foot washing. And now
they heard that a small group of New Mennonites even copied “the English” in
these newfangled prayer meetings. As a
matter of fact, the New Mennonites led by John H. Oberholtzer
were already frustrated with this tumultuous phenomenon.
What
were these prayer meetings among the English like? Smith tells us that “The mode of worship was
the same in all meetings. There was no
ritual or prepared plan. Any person
present might pray, exhort, lead in song, or give a
testimony as he felt ‘led,’ only keeping within five-minute time limit and
avoiding controversial subjects like water baptism or slavery” (Smith 64,
italics added).[4] The format sounds awfully similar to prayer
meetings among the M. B. in C. in past generations.
Union
Tabernacle or Moveable Tent-Church – Eighteen fifty-eight was also a highwater mark for the Moveable Tent of Edwin Long. Long worked in Philadelphia and no doubt
brought the enthusiasm for prayer meetings to the Mennonite heartland of
southeastern Pennsylvania. Many preachers
in the mainline denominations promoted the revival. Mennonites historically have been shy over
precepts and practices that suggest one is not a disciple of Jesus Christ
without some memorable, heartfelt conversion experience. In the main Mennonites had resisted the
Pietistic “moves of the Spirit” that impacted and warmed the old Protestant
denominations all around them. As Smith
comments, “In
the record of the climactic five months from February to June, two facts stand
out. Small towns and rural communities
were as powerfully affected as the great cities; and support and participation
came from major portions of every Protestant sect” (Smith, 67). Surely Edwin Long was an apostle of this new
enthusiasm. One has only to look at the list of those who preached in Long’s
moveable tent to see a wide cross section of “every Protestant sect” (Long,
28).[5] Jumping ahead three years to June 1861, one
perceives this same spirit in the fourth semiannual conference of the
Evangelical Mennonite Fellowship. Present
were preachers from the River Brethren, the German Reformed Church, the
Evangelical Lutheran Church, the Methodist Episcopal Church, and the
Evangelical Association (Verhandlungen,
27). Long promoted
prayer meetings in the Hosensack Valley, Lehigh County,
and in upper Bucks County.
Long
describes a prayer meeting among German speaking folks in Quakertown about this
time:
After the story of the cross had
been repeated a number of times to large crowds in the Tent, many were pricked
in heart, and of their own accord followed the Superintendent to his dwelling
in such numbers as to fill the house.
The tide of feeling continued to rise, until another house had to be
opened, where two rooms were also well filled.
These meetings were not announced in the Tent, owing to the prejudice against prayer-meetings. An eyewitness, speaking of them, says, ‘There
were seen kneeling side by side a mother, son, and daughter, a young married
woman, her husband, her mother, two brothers and two sisters; and in another
house a father, mother, four adult sons, and a daughter, — constituting, with
the exception of a little child, the entire family. The scene in this German meeting was such a
one as has been seldom witnessed.
Filling the front room, the back room, the entry, the staircase, the
porch, and some of them standing out of doors, were more than a hundred
persons, putting the earnest inquiry, ‘What must I do to be saved?’” (Long,
162-63, italics added).
Noteworthy is that Long characterized
this as a prayer-meeting. One of his adherents related this to the
aforementioned urban prayer-meetings.
“Last winter or spring [1858]” he writes, “I had been reading about the
daily prayer-meetings and the great revival in the city. The thought entered my mind that was just
what we wanted here. But how was it to
be commenced? . . . . In these
Tent-services here there was no money asked, nor were any requested to join any
particular church; and God’s Spirit was evidently at work in the hearts of the
people. I could not help but think,
‘This is certainly answering prayer’” (Long, 169).
So
how does this relate to the Evangelical Mennonite Fellowship? Long pitched his tent in Quakertown after he
had been to the Hosensack Valley – Upper Milford Township, Lehigh
County. He notes that apart from the
Quaker meeting house, “There is no other place for worship in the village, and
never before this summer had there been either a regular Sabbath-school or
prayer-meeting held.” Hear that,
Sabbath school and prayer-meeting! “The
surrounding population is almost entirely German” he adds (Long, 160). There were Mennonite
meeting houses in the area surrounding Quakertown, but Long is right, at least
about the Mennonites, there was no meeting-house in the village of
Quakertown. But there was another reason
for Quakertown, “This village” he asserts “is the nearest point by railroad
[from Philadelphia] to the Hosensack Valley, the
residence of the people who so promptly furnished funds toward procuring the
Tent. (The railroad from Reading to
Allentown passing through the Hosensack Valley
arrived within a year.) At the time they
did this, a pledge was given that at an early period it should be brought to
their vicinity also” (Long, 161-62). One
can only speculate that store owner David Gehman
might have been one of those contributors.
In
the Hosensack Valley Long observes, “Not being
accustomed to prayer-meetings or night-meetings, I accepted of invitations to
preach in their private dwellings” (Long, 80)
He preached there among the Mennonites and the Schwenkfelders
among whom he found a kindred spirit, Jonas Yeakel
Schultz. He calls him “my beloved
companion in the gospel both in the pulpit and in the Tent” who “was of great
service in this revival among his friends and relatives” (Long, 81). Without a doubt Long is referring to
Schultz’s relatives and friends in the Hosensack
Valley. This same Jonas Schultz had his
religious roots in the Schwenkfelder sect and later
associated with the Evangelical Mennonites.
Long
was also quite aware of the Evangelical Mennonites and the issues that led to
their separation from the “New Mennonites.”
This he describes at some length.
After a brief introduction to the Mennonites and a note about their
diverse schism, he writes, “But the most singular cause of division is a recent
one in regard to prayer-meetings” (Long, 82).
References
to Long are also found in the Diary of John B. Gehman. On the 4th of October 1857, he
notes that “Rev. Long held a sermon here (Gehman,
17). In the month of October 1858, two
weeks after the founding of the Evangelical Mennonite fellowship, Gehman tells us that “Union Tabernacle Meeting opened at
Greenville” (28). The evenings of the 15th
and the 17th he was at the tabernacle. The latter evening he reports “About 4000
people”– a
serious number even if he inflated the number slightly. Again he was at the tabernacle on the 24th
and then on the 28th the “Union Tabernacle closed”(28). Where is Greenville? If he means “East Greenville,” since there is
no Greenville in the area, the Union Tabernacle was less than ten miles south
of his home and less than 15 miles west of Quakertown where Long
also preached. If only we knew more
about these snippets. If nothing more,
they show that some folks among the Evangelical Mennonites followed Long.
And
so it was that after several years of fussing within the “New” Mennonite
Fellowship that the Seven got together.
It was Friday
afternoon, September 24, 1858, that the seven co-conspirators gathered in a
private home on a rural road in Upper
Milford Township, Lehigh County, PA..
The home belonged to David Musselman, uncle by marriage of William Gehman, whose insistence on continuing prayer-meetings had
brought about a crisis among the young Oberholtzer
Mennonites.[6] The oldest member of the conspiracy was David
Musselman’s neighbor Deacon David Gehman
from Hosensack.[7] We already know the others, preachers William
Gehman, David Henning, William N. Shelly and Henry
Diehl, and deacons Jacob Gottschall
and Joseph Schneider.
One
might contend that these Seven were up to no good. Were they not insubordinate and unsubmissive to authority, the authority of the bishops’
council of the recently formed New Mennonites, the Oberholtzer
Mennonites? Of course, these “New”
Mennonites were in like manner themselves rebels, having strayed from the
conservative path of the Franconia Conference.
One
had been actually been a bishop among the “New” Mennonites, but they had
expelled him several months before this meeting. Two were told to submit or they would be
expelled at the November meeting. They
would not wait. The two who were on the
northern fringe were not yet members of the New Mennonite Conference; now for
sure they would not be accepted.
If
the brethren were excited about the prospects of their new fellowship, a shadow
was cast over this meeting, the death of David Gehman’s
last living son, fourteen year old David, Jr., that very day.[8]
The Spirit of the Fellowship
The
Seven Founding Fathers were unwilling to be bound by human constraints. The Spirit had blessed their prayer meetings
and they would rather obey God than men.
The bishops had said that prayer meetings in good order were acceptable,
but they could not find any place in the Bible where meetings solely for prayer
were enjoined. This was the Scriptural
answer, but doubtless the enthusiasm and fiery spirit of the meetings was a
more serious issue. Once the seven were
gone, the fire was under control. The
Evangelical Mennonites wanted freedom of the spirit, entire freedom.
Entire freedom. –
In the minutes of the first semiannual conference of the Evangelical Mennonite
Fellowship, November 1, 1859, they decided, “Each child of the Lord, having
proved himself such by his walk and conversation [behavior], shall have entire
freedom to express himself according to the inspiration of the Holy Ghost” (Verhandlungen,
24). How well this fits into the spirit
of the times. Freedom of Spirit is a
theme that resonated in the era. A
Unitarian editor, after a sojourn in a Methodist camp meeting, known for
outrageous “holy pandemonium,” observed, “how much more efficient is the Word
when free from the restraints
primness and formality in breaking up the fountains of the heart and convincing
and converting souls” (Smith, 75.
Italics added). Even the conservative National Congregational Council meeting in
Boston in June 1865 called for “revivals of religion in our churches and
colleges . . . deep and powerful in their effect” and “steeped in devout affection,
and consecrated by the baptism and rich indwelling of the Holy Spirit of God”
(Smith 75). That
June the EMF adopted a statement of faith that was not unlike those espoused by
Mennonites since the seventeenth century.[9] This Glaubenslehre contained an introduction that suggests
departure from conventual Mennonite ways. The following delineates their beginnings:
“The number of those, that desired to attend such meetings, soon increased.
Such, that now received the Word, felt
repentance and sorrow on account of their sins, that were inwardly renewed, born again, and baptized with
the Holy Spirit of God, and became willing according to the will of God to
lay down a true confession before God and men, upon their true faith according
to God’s ordinance, were baptized and added to the society” (Stones, 23,
italics added). Note the ordo.: 1.
received the Word, 2. felt repentance and sorrow on account of their
sins, 3. were inwardly renewed, 4. born again, and 5. baptized with the Holy
Spirit of God, 6. made a true confession before God and men, 7. were
baptized. After evidence of these they
were then (8) added to the society.
The
first in order “Received the Word” seems to refer to the preached word and the
acceptance of it as the truth concerning their need of (2) repentance.
This
also fits with the note in the first semiannual preachers
conference of the EMF. “Each child of
the Lord, having proved himself such by his walk and conversation, shall have
entire freedom to express himself according the inspiration of the Holy Ghost”
(Verhandlungen,
24). The whole statement is
experiential. They were concerned about
holiness [personal walk and behavior] and the impulse of the Holy Spirit.
Prayer
meetings did not begin in 1858. Nor did the controversy in the New Mennonite Conference. There were movements promoting evangelism and
the Methodist camp meetings which grew out of the Second Great Awakening (ca.,
1800 to 1830s) stirring the fires of revival that continued to burn for
decades. In 1857 Baptist Henry Clay Fish
published his Primitive Piety Revived, or
the Aggressive Power of the Church. A Premium Essay.
In his plea for a return to soul-winning piety he called for “a powerful
revival” and “the descent of the Holy Ghost.
He exclaimed, “What can save our large cities but a powerful revival of
religion. . . . What one thing does this
whole country so loudly call for, as the descent of the Holy Ghost upon the
churches?” (In Smith, 49). Wesleyans and Calvinists were influenced and
involved in the revivals. Smith relates
that the Orthodox Puritan Recorder and
the liberal Congregationalist both
reported on the awakenings of the 1850s.
“Accounts of them in both papers differed from similar Methodist reports
only in that here sinners were “hopefully converted’ instead of confident of
‘the witness of the Spirit’” (Smith, 51).
One
can only speculate what the preachers of the EMF would have reported. In 1857 Boston pastors invited the less
urbane Charles G. Finney – later called the “Father of Modern revivalism” – to conduct a
six-week union campaign in historic Park Street Church. Finney had developed the so-called “new
measures” such as the “anxious bench” and “protracted meetings.”[10] Many staid urbanite preachers were troubled
by these measures and alleged excesses.
EMF preachers simply adopted Finney’s New Measures, especially
Protracted Meetings. No wonder the more
conservative New Mennonites looked askance at the Seven “Evangelical
Mennonites. When the Evangelical United Mennonites first developed their
Reading Course, they included Finney’s Lectures
in Revivals, among the required list of texts (Gospel Banner15 October
1882, 145). Clearly Finney’ New Measures
were being recommended. Finney also
subscribed to the doctrine of entire sanctification, [11]“That
a soul entirely sanctified . . .does not and will not
sin.” While there may be no evidence
that the Evangelical Mennonites preached this, they did rejoice in the presence
of the Spirit in their midst.
The
secretary reported, “God’s Spirit permeated the meeting so that joyful visions
were flowing” (Verhandlungen,
29). Again he wrote, “On Sunday morning
at 8:00 a.m. an hour of testimony was held where the presence of God’s Spirit
was felt. Then Brother William Gehman preached in spirit and power” (Verhandlungen, 48). And yet again, “The opening sermon was
preached by Brother David Henning with the power of the Spirit and with
blessing (Verhandlungen,
91).
Sanctification
Whereas
the 1867 articles of faith contain no definitive statement on Sanctification,
the 1880 articles that the Pennsylvania brethren accepted do include a
pronounced statement on the matter. One
may assume that by 1880 their understanding of sanctification had developed further
along Wesleyan-holiness lines. Thus they
were willing to accept a new tenet of faith, “ARTICLE XII: of sanctification,” as a true
reflection of their beliefs. The
following is that article:
Sanctification necessarily follows
justification and regeneration; for, by it, is implied a setting apart for the
continual service of God, the individual, justified and regenerated; also a
cleansing from inbred or original depravity; which is removed only by the
application and cleansing process of Christ’s blood. It is an instantaneous act of God, through
the Holy Ghost, by faith, in the cleansing merits of Christ’s blood; and
constitutes the believer holy: inasmuch, as it excludes depravity and all
unrighteousness from the heart. He,
therefore, is perfect–perfectly saved–the will of God perfectly performed in
the soul.
By sanctification, or perfect love,
is also implied a development, or perfection of those heaven-born principles,
imparted to us, or imbibed in the heart in regeneration; and it is a state,
which is not only the privilege of Christians to enjoy, but the duty of every
child of God, to seek after and attain unto, which is evident from the word of
God, as it is said: “For this is the will of God, even your sanctification” and
again: “Be holy, for I am holy.” – Mat. 22:37, 38; Lev. 19:2, Heb. 12:14, 1
Cor. 1:30, and Eph. 1:4 (1880, 20-21).
Did the first generation of our
Fellowship understand and accept the full implications of this article? One can only speculate; however, there was
not a tremendous abundance of theological sophistication among the
brethren. The next generation seems to
have a greater grasp of doctrine and the article on sanctification was much
debated for many years. Within a
generation the following phrase was removed: “inasmuch, as it excludes
depravity and all unrighteousness from the heart.” Likewise the second paragraph was replaced by
another with somewhat different thoughts on “entire
sanctification.” The BFC today
has a much different understanding of sanctification. But I digress. The initial emphasis on the experience of
sanctification, nonetheless, was in the direction of Article Twelve above. That David Henning professed entire
sanctification has been documented as will be noted below. Speaking of David Henning, let’s go to his
territory.
Mount Bethel, Bangor, Northampton County
The
story of Bangor – in a nutshell the deacon moved away; the congregation faded
away; the
preacher passed away; and the church was given away. So what can we say? The ministry in this remote area of the
fellowship seems to have been ineffectual.
For
the record, two preachers appear in the Mt. Bethel congregation, Bangor,
Northampton County, Jacob Godshalk, who appears first
as a deacon and later as a preacher, and Preacher David Henning. First the deacon.
Jacob Godshalk
– Jacob Godshalk
(1808/09-1881) was the son of Harmon Hendricks Godshalk
who “was born August 25, 1767 in Bucks County, PA and died 1843 in Northampton
County” (Descendants of Harmon Hendricks Godshalk, 1).
Harmon “moved to Northampton County in 1803 and purchased land from
Michael Smith.” He and his wife
Catherine had five children. The fifth Jacob was born in Northampton County six
or seven years later.[12]
Jacob
“married (1) Magdalena Ackerman 1832, daughter of Jacob Ackerman and Margaret
Kolb. He married (2) Elizabeth Auracher 1844, daughter of Christian Auracher.” From his two marriages he had ten children,
Josiah, Rebecca, Catherine, Ann, Caroline, Mary Ann, Matilda, Fredericka,
Clarissa, and Theodore (Descendants, 2).
Another document says “Jacob Godshalk was
married 3 times and was supposed to have had 17 children in all. There is no data on the 3rd wife”
(Godshalk Family History, 1). Additional children were: Lindohr,
to which the chronicler adds “we used to call him Uncle Thede”
[probably the same as Theodore], Brizilla [“Dutch” for
Priscilla], Christina, Tobias, Yrmandos, and Mano
[sic] Simon. Adding the last five, the
total comes to 17. One cannot help but
speculate that if Jacob and all his children had remained in the area, the
congregation in Bangor might not have faded away!
The
genealogist gives us a snapshot of Godshalk:
Dad and Aunt Anna used to tell about
Jacob Godshalk being such a great fisherman. When he moved to St. Joseph County, Michigan,
he bought a farm adjoining the St. Joe River just east and north of the present
Three Rivers airport. . . . He and his
wife are supposed to have had $70,000.00 sewed in their clothing for safe
keeping when they moved from Pennsylvania.
It was said he gave each of his 17 children $1,000.00 the day they
married. Farming must have been pretty
good in those days. They said he was a
good manager and didn’t work too hard himself but spent his time fishing. (Godshalk family History, 2).
So
Jacob went fishing while others worked for him.
What can be learned about Jacob Godshalk from
the minutes of the Evangelical Mennonites?[13] We are already aware that he was one of the
original seven. At that time he was
listed as a deacon, but by 1861 he is listed with the preachers. Most other references to him indicate that he
was “absent” or “not present”. But on
one occasion, November 1861, “Brother Jacob Gottschall
urged the members on and closed the meeting with a hymn and prayer” (Verhandlungen,
28). On another, June 1863, he simply “closed
with prayer” (Verhandlungen,
33). And then, two years later, there is
the cryptic reference of June 5 “Absent: Jacob Gottschall (who has moved away)” [German,“der aus der Gegend gezogen”] (Verhandlungen, 45).
That he had moved out of the area sometime around1865 surely agrees with
the story that subsequently he may be found fishing in Michigan.
Mt.
Bethel, Bangor, Northampton County was a northern frontier for Pennsylvania
Mennonites in the early nineteenth century.
As early as 1798 there is a record of a Mennonite Church in the
area.
Another deed
bears the date December 28, 1832.
Abraham Bickley of the township of Smithfield
in the county of Northampton conveyed two acres of land in Lower Bethel
Township to Herman Godshalk and Jacob Ackerman of the
township[s] of Plainfield and Lower Mt. Bethel, “ . . . trustees of the Mennonist Society in Plainfield Upper and Lower Mount
Bethel Township . . .” for a consideration of one dollar. This is. . . . near
the intersection of Broadway and South Fourth Street, Bangor, Pennsylvania.
On this two-acre lot of land the
Mennonites erected a brick meeting-house, twenty by twenty feet in 1822. It was torn down many years ago, sometime
between 1878 and 1928![14]
Of
particular interest is that one of the trustees named above was Herman Godshalk (1769-1843), father of Jacob Godshalk. Jacob’s birthplace is listed as Plainfield
Township (Family, 1). The other
trustee was Jacob Ackerman, possibly the father of Jacobs
first wife, Magdalena Ackerman. In any
case Jacob was truly a son of this church.
David Henning – According to
Mennonite historian J.C. Wenger, “the only known resident pastor of the Mt
Bethel congregation was David Henning (1806-1881).” He continues, “But Henning was not able to
build up his congregation. The young
people united with other denominations, chiefly the Lutherans, and the old
members died. By 1870 the only members
remaining were David and Elizabeth Henning and a Mrs. George Warwick. . .
. Finally Henning urged the Lutherans to
accept the property” (Wenger, 234). On
May 15, 1878, the deed was conveyed to the newly organized Lutheran
Church. The cemetery continued to be
used; names found in it include, Ackerman, Auracher
and Henning.
It
is not that the Conference did not try to strengthen their fellow congregation
in the area. At Conference June 1872 a
resolution was passed, “That attention shall be paid to see, that every
official brother shall earnestly strive to carry out his important calling
according to the contents of God’s Word in regard to the spreading of the
Gospel to look for new preaching places so that the kingdom of Jesus will be
spread and souls won for heaven and eternal life” (Verhandlungen, 72). Although the resolution primarily focused on
new places, it is clear that older areas were not to be overlooked. Thus, the following resolution: “That William
N. Shelly and Abraham Kauffman shall be in charge of holding special meetings
in Mt. Bethel” (Verhandlungen,
72). In spite of such efforts, the
congregation continued to dwindle. In
Conference November 1873 the various congregations were organized, but Mt.
Bethel was not even named (Verhandlungen, 81-82).
Henning
had served as Chairman of the semiannual conferences eleven times between 1861
and 1878 and had traveled about preaching, but as a church builder he was not
adept. Year after year he reported from
Bangor, e.g., “David Henning – preached 33 times, families visited 26, miles
traveled 335, expenditures $5.35" (Verhandlungen, 1879, 124).
This indicates that he preached less than two times a week, only visited
one family a week, and
traveled about 12 miles per week. And
then came his final assignment at the
Second Annual Conference, March 7, 1881, “That David Henning shall remain in
Bangor and Richmond, Northampton County, Pennsylvania and preach as
heretofore” (Verhandlungen, 130). While others were being moved about,
Conference simply allowed Henning to “preach as heretofore.”
So
what did happened to David Henning? Daniel Cassel tells us,
Minister David Henning of the above
place [Bangor] died July 2d, 1881, from injuries received about six weeks
before. [The] Deceased had been
preaching in Bucks County, and on his way home was thrown against the seat of a
car while getting on the train at Bethlehem; he was injured internally and had
been confined to his bed most of the time since the accident. Father Henning was respected by the whole
community, and his death, which was quiet and peaceful, was in keeping with his
life. He was seventy-five years of age
and had been engaged in preaching for the past twenty-five years; he was the
last of the Mennonites in this vicinity.[15]
Henning’s funeral was conducted by
William Gehman, Evangelical Mennonite, B.F. Apple,
Lutheran and James M. Salmon, a Presbyterian, a truly ecumenical funeral
(Cassel, 276).
The
1882 Annual Conference of the Pennsylvania Conference of the E.U.M. reports,
Since it has pleased God to remove
from our midst, by death, our aged and beloved brother, Elder David Henning, of
Bangor, Northampton, County, Pennsylvania, during the Conference year,
therefore RESOLVED: That we as a Conference and church members in
general take it to heart, and especially his desire, expressed on his death
bed, that his brethren in ministry (in particular) and the members in general,
should redeem their time in leading godly lives. He professed entire sanctification and had a
desire to be “absent from the body, and present with the Lord.” We wish the sister as a widow and the
children of the deceased brother the “grace of God,’ so that they may also be
ready to meet death – and that their latter end may be in peace” (Verhandlungen,
134. M.A. Zyner,
Secretary).
Henning appears to be a faithful
preacher and well liked, but the demise of his congregation suggests a lack of
impact. There is no mention that his
children were among the remaining members of the Bangor congregation
either. There is almost a hint that “the
children of the deceased brother” may not be “ready to meet death . . . that
their latter end may [not] be in peace.”
There
is evidence that David Henning and other preachers connected with the
Evangelical Mennonite fellowship preached at numerous places north of
Allentown, e.g., Allen Township, Settlement.
As Henning traveled about preaching, perhaps to the neglect of his own
congregation, the
flock at Bangor declined and eventually the meetinghouse was deeded to the
Lutheran Church. One of the three original preaching points of the Evangelical
Mennonite Fellowship was no more. The
conclusion of Wenger is appropriate, “The author wishes further research were possible” (Wenger, 235).
Let’s
move southward to Bucks County to the Flatland.
Flatland Evangelical Mennonite Meetinghouse
That
there existed a meetinghouse claimed by the evangelical Mennonites for the very
beginning of the Fellowship is not denied.
Where it was, when it began, and what happened to it is a puzzle. We know that the very first semiannual
preachers' conference of the Evangelical Mennonite Society was held in the
Evangelical Mennonite Meeting House in Haycock Township on the first Tuesday in
November 1859.[16] Eleven days later the newly built Evangelical
Mennonite Church in Upper Milford was dedicated.
Among
the men from the Quakertown area was Deacon Joseph Schneider (1822-1889). The
1880 census reports that he was 58 years old.
His wife Maria was 56; they had two sons David, age twenty, and Lewis,
age 25.[17]
William
N. Shelly – Another leader in the area was William Shelly (1814-1893) former
bishop among the Oberholtzer Mennonites and preacher
at the Flatland Mennonite Church. He was
among the bishops who rescinded the right to hold prayer meetings in 1856. This permission had been first granted in
1853 at an Oberholtzer Mennonite preacher's conference
at which Daniel Hoch of Canada had been present. For unspecified reasons Bishop Shelly changed
his mind and sought to defend the prayer meetings and was excommunicated in May
of 1858. By way of introduction, William
N. [Newcomer] Shelly was born October 8, 1814 in Milford Township, Bucks
County, Pa. He died in Allentown August
4, 1893, two months shy of 79 full years. He was married three times. First, 23 September 1838, he married Sarah Geissinger (6July1856, born 1821). They had three children, Amanda, who married
John L. Moyer, an insurance agent, Philip and third, Elizabeth who married
William M. Landis. After the death of
Sarah, William married Mrs. Anna Taylor Weikel (24
December 1856), daughter of Henry Taylor.
They had a son Edwin who became a medical doctor. Anna died in 1881 after which William
married Julia Slough or Schlauch (b.1820), January
18, 1886.[18]
Henry
Diehl – The third member of the Bucks County trio was Heinrich or Henry
Diehl. We know very little about
him. We were told he and Abel Strawn
built the Haycock meetinghouse. We know
that he was at the founding meeting. The
1880 census tells us that he was 64 years old (born 1816). His wife Eleanora was also 64.
They had two children, Susanna, age 24, and Menno, age 21. Diehl lists his occupation as a farmer. In
1873 he was assigned to Ironville with David Henning
and S. Lambert; in1884 conference minutes list him as a “local Missionary.”
Jonas
Musselman – About the year 1868 Jonas Musselman, son of David Musselman, purchased
a farm on the California Road north of Quakertown.[19] He began to hold meetings in homes and halls
and meeting houses in the area. One of
those in whose home he held meetings was Jacob Horn. Musselman's
following grew. Meanwhile, the numbers
in the more remote Haycock meeting house declined. The last semiannual preachers’ conference to
be held in the Haycock meeting house was in June of 1869. It seems the two groups decided to pool their
resources. Together they purchased a
piece of land on Third Street in Quakertown near the new railroad station. A charter was signed in 1872.[20] The name at the top was Jonas Musselman; at
the bottom was William N. Shelly. The
name of Henry Diehl [21]
appeared near the top and the name of Joseph B. Taylor near the bottom.[22] The name of Jacob Horn appears near the top
with Henry M. Smith. These two along
with Jonas Musselman were the trustees of the new congregation. Schneider remained with the church until his
death, serving faithfully a delegates, deacon and steward. Evidently Shelly and Diehl were also
associated with the new congregation in the town of Quakertown, but not for
long.
Der Lebesversicherungsgesellschaft
Now
let’s talk about life insurance, Der Lebesversicherungsgesellschaft. Probably every one of us has at least one
life insurance policy. But if you had
such an iniquitous affiliation in 1878, you could not have been a member of the
Evangelical Mennonite Fellowship. The
issue needs to be put into the proper historical perspective. The first successful insurance company in
America was in 1843.[23] Mennonite historian Harold Bender states,
At first practically all American
Mennonites were radically opposed to life insurance, as were many other
Christian denominations. The more conservative Mennonite groups . . . forbade
their members all forms of life insurance from the beginning, usually making
excommunication the penalty (Mennonite
Encyclopedia, III, 343).
This ban was virtually nonexistent by
the middle of the twentieth century.
Some of the arguments against life insurance are as follows:
It reflects
trust in man rather than in God; it means becoming “unequally yoked together
with unbelievers”; it is equivalent to merchandising in human life; it is
putting a monetary price on human life, which is considered unscriptural since
man is the “temple of the Holy Ghost.”
These objections were bolstered by a powerful practical argument,
namely, that the commercial insurance companies did not really help the needy,
but sought only to protect the healthy and rejected as poor risks the weak and
ill who really needed protection. Many Mennonites also objected to taking out
life insurance because it was contrary to the spirit of genuine mutual aid and
brotherhood. Finally, the corrupt
practices of many earlier life insurance companies; and truly the history of
life insurance has been marked by many and large scandals, so much so that
rigid legislative control was necessary to curb the greed of the fraudulent
practices which appeared (ME, III, 343-44).
So it was a matter of trust. Whom do you trust, a manmade company
determined to make a profit or the Creator and Sustainer of the universe, the
Good Shepherd?
The
Semiannual Conference June 1878 discussed life insurance and resolved, “That we
add to our doctrine the following: It shall not be allowed for preachers or
members of our denomination [Fellowship, Gemeinschaft] to hold a life
insurance policy." The German
minutes read “daß es nicht erlaubt sei,
für Prediger oder Gleider
unserer Gemeinschaft in einer Lebensversicherunsgesellschaft
zu stehen.” This might also be translated “That it not be allowed for preachers
or members of our Fellowship to be in a life-insurance-society.”
This
was followed by another resolution, “RESOLVED :
That since some brethren hold life insurance policies, they shall have time
until the next Conference (the first Monday in October 1878) to think about
whether they will give up this life insurance [jene Gesellschaft, “that society”] or
not." William N. Shelly and Henry
Diehl did not submit to the Conference and leave off their
“life-insurance-society.” Four months
later they were absent from the conference although Shelly sent in his report,
“preached 19 times, families visited 33, miles traveled 269, [travel] expenses
$3.25” (Verhandlungen,
118). Resolution Eleven, October 1879
reads,
It was resolved that the resolution
made at the last Conference in Quakertown, Bucks County, shall continue in full
force in regard to life insurance policies [Lebesversicherungs-gesellschaften]
as an addition to our Doctrine of Faith [Glaubenslehre]. According to this
resolution, those who had taken refuge in life insurance companies [Lebesversicherungs-gesellschaft]
had time until this Conference to reconsider and leave the company or to
forfeit membership in our denomination [Gemeinschaft] in the future.
Brother Winsch stood up publicly and said,
with tears, he would leave his life insurance company and put his trust in God
and God’s children. However, the
preachers, Brethren [Predigtbrüder]
William N. Shelly and Henry Diehl from Quakertown, do not want to leave the
life insurance company and do not want to submit to this resolution. Consequently, in the future they shall not be
considered members of our denomination [fellowship, Gemeinschaft] or conference [Conferenz] (Verhandlungen,
119).
Is it not ironic that the conference
that passed the resolution that led to the exodus of Shelly and Diehl was
assembled in their home town, Quakertown?
Now of the three original men from Quakertown among the seven founders
of the EMS only Joseph B. Schneider [Taylor] remained.
As
suggested above, many conservative people, especially nineteenth century
Mennonites would have heartily sided with the Conference. Daniel Brenneman
of the Indiana Conference of the United Mennonites did. Actually this may have been a factor that
made the Pennsylvania Fellowship more attractive to him. Listen to his editorial comment:
The Minutes
of the Evangelical Mennonite Conference, held in Coopersburg, Lecha [Lehigh] County, Pa., Oct. 7th [1878], have been sent
to us, in which we learn that two of their ministers, rather than withdraw
their connection with and give up their interest in the life insurance company,
they would yield their position and membership in the church. Our own impression, is that the sooner a church gets rid of
ministers and members whose attachment
to life insurance companies, etc.[!] has a
stronger bearing upon them than the church they represent, the better it
is. We are glad to learn that our
Evangelical Mennonite brethren show their integrity and "faith by their
works" (Gospel Banner, November,
1878,1).
The Conference was willing to stand by
its convictions even if it meant that two of its founding fathers would be cut
off from the Fellowship they helped to create.
Soon the only active member of the original Seven Founding Fathers that
remained was Father William Gehman. Shortly he would become the first Presiding
Elder of the Evangelical United Mennonites, Pennsylvania Conference.
Conclusion
Seven
men filled with the Holy Spirit, Aelteste, William Schelly, William Gehmann, Prediger des Wortes,
David Henning, Heinrich Diehl, Vorsteher, David Gehmann, Joseph
Schneider and Jacob Gottschall met September 24, 1858
and created the Evangelischen Mennoniten Gemeinschaft.
From the outset they desired entire freedom to follow the impulse of the
Spirit. The whole country was taken up
with an unnamed awakening with a focus on prayer. These prayer meetings consisted of prayer,
exhortation, hymn-singing, and testimony.
The same expressions of worship flourished among the Evangelical
Mennonites. A major influence on these men was the ministry of traveling
preacher Edwin Long and His Union Tabernacle, or movable tent.
The
Seven continued to think of themselves as Mennonites, but their spirits were
more in tune with the revival and holiness movements swirling around them. Gradually they became more and more Wesleyan.
Not
every congregation prospered. Mt.
Bethel, Bangor just faded away. Jacob Gottschall moved away very early in our story. David Henning hung on, but appears to be less
than dynamic. The Haycock congregation
needed renewal which came with the arrival of Jonas Musselman to the area. Upper Milford flourished and provided the
majority of the new preachers for the expanding Fellowship. The oldest meeting house in Bangor was deeded
to Lutherans and razed; the Haycock meeting house was dismantled and rebuilt in
Quakertown; only the Upper Milford meetinghouse is still in use.
As
with all organizations issues arise that try men’s
souls. They had to face the new
phenomena of life insurance.
Conservative Christians, Mennonites especially, shied away from worldly
entanglements. To purchase life
insurance indicated failure to trust the Lord and his children. A choice has to be made. William Shelly and Henry Diehl chose their
life insurance over the Fellowship.
Within a few years David Henning passed away and Joseph Schneider ceased
to be active in the Fellowship. Father William Gehman,
the last surviving member of the original Seven Founding Fathers lived into the
twentieth century. He alone would see
the Pennsylvania Conference begin its period of rapid growth.
Selected Bibliography of Writings Utilized or Relevant to the Subject
Brenneman, Daniel, et al eds. Gospel Banner.
Buck,
Leonard E., ed.
What Mean These Stones.
Coopersburg, PA: The Historical Committee, 1983.
Burgess,
Stanley M., ed.
Dictionary of
Pentecostal and Charismatic Movements. Grand Rapids: Regency, Zondervan, 1988.
Cassel, Daniel K. History of the Mennonites.
Philadelphia, ca. 1890.
Dreisbach, Ardis Grosjean. Deacon
and Schreiber David Gehman, 1802-1881.
Unpublished manuscript, 2005.
Gehman, John B.
Diary of John B. Gehman, Herford Township, Berks County, compiled by
Wilmer L. Rerinford.
Elverson, PA: Olde Springfield Shoppe, n.d.
Glaubenslehre und Kirchenzucht-Ordnung
der Evangel. Mennoniten Gemeinschaft
von Ost-Pennsylvanien mit beigefügter Constitution der Missions-Gesellschaft. Skippacksville, PA:
A.E. Dambly, 1866.
An English translation appeared in 1867 entitled, Doctrine of Faith and Church Discipline of the Evangelical Mennonite Society of East Pennsylvania with Subjoined
Constitution of the Missionary Society.
Kraus, C. Norman. Evangelicalism and Anabaptism. Scottdale, PA: Herald Press, 1979.
Long,
Edwin M. The Union Tabernacle; or Moveable Tent-Church: Showing in Its Rise and
Success a New Department of Christian Enterprise. Philadelphia: Parry & McMillan, 1859.
Mennonite Encyclopedia. Scottdale, PA:
Herald Press.
Musselman,
William B., ed.
Gospel Worker Society Herald, also known as the Gospel Herald.
Proceedings
of the Annual Conference(s) of the Mennonite Brethren in Christ. Various
cities, PA: Published by Order of Annual Conference, 1896-1958.
Reid,
Daniel, R. Linder, B. Shelly, H. Stout, eds. Dictionary of Christianity in America. Downers Grove: InterVarsity,
1990.
Shelly,
Harold P. The Bible Fellowship Church: formerly Mennonite Brethren in Christ,
Originally die Evangelische Mennoniten
Gemeinschaft von Ost-Pennsylvanien. Bethlehem, PA: The Historical Committee,
1992.
Smith,
Timothy L. Revivalism and Social Reform:
In Mid-Ninteenth-Century America. New York and Nashville: Abingdon P, 1957.
Storms,
Everek R. History of the United
Missionary Church. Elkhart,
IN: Bethel Publishing Co., 1958.
Taylor,
Richard E. ed. Verhandlungen (1859-1895): Proceedings of the Evangelical
Mennonite Society also Known as the Mennonite Brethren in Christ Now Known as
the Bible Fellowship Church. Trans. Frank Litty. Coopersburg, PA: The Historical Committee,
1989.
Taylor,
Richard, ed.. Minutes of the General Conferences of the
Mennonite Brethren in Christ Church 1879-1916. Wallingford, PA: The Historical
Committee of the Bible Fellowship Church, n.d.
The
Doctrines and Disciplines of the Evangelical United Mennonites of Canada and
the United States.
Goshen, IN: The E. U. Mennonite Pub. Soc’y, 1880.
Unpublished papers and manuscripts. Bible Fellowship Church Archives. Wallingford, PA.
Verhandlungen, Ost-Pennsylvanien
Conference. Minutes of
the East-Pennsylvania Conference of the Mennonite Church, General Conference. (1847-1872)
Watson,
Robert C. Chronological and Background Charts of Church History. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1986.
Wenger,
John C. History of the Mennonites of the Franconia
Conference. Telford, PA: Franconia Mennonite Historical
Society, 1937.
Ziefle, Helmut W. Dictionary of Modern Theological German.
Grand Rapids: Baker, 1982.
[1]Abraham Lincoln, November 18, 1858, “On his Future, after losing the 1858 Illinois Senatorial Election. www.nps.gov/liho/writer/writer.htm. Accessed 2 Sept 2005. Italics added.
[2]Doctrine of Faith, 1867, 45. Italics added. The German edition uses the phrase kleines Zweiglein, a little small-twig, and kleine Abtheilung der Mennonite-Gemeinschaft. (Glaubenslehre, 1866)
[3]Timothy L. Smith, Revivalism and Social Reform in Mid-nineteenth-century America (New York and Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1957). Much of the material in this section was gleaned from Smith.
[4]Baptism was off limits in the NYC prayer meetings. In 1860 the Evangelical Mennonites discussed baptism and resolved to follow God’s Word and the teachings of Menno Simons on the question (Verhandlungen, 29).
[5]But it should be noted that only two Mennonites “Rev. Messrs. Gilman and Shelley” were on his list (Long, 28). The writer is persuaded that these were indeed the renegade Mennonite preachers William Gehman and William N. Shelly. Scribal error or proofreader failure, no doubt.
[6]David Musselman was the
uncle of Anna, wife of William Gehman and the father
of Abraham and Jonas. Jonas married Lucy
Brunner and had three sons who preached in the Fellowship that would arise from
this clandestine meeting, namely W.B., H.B., and A.B. Musselman. David’s brother Abraham was the father of
Sarah Catherine, wife of CH. Brunner.
She would be one of the women preachers in the Fellowship. Consequently
he was related to all the Presiding Elders up to 1945. Could he have any idea that day what his
extended family would become?
[7]David Gehman’s grandson was Charles Henry Brunner, who was to be the husband of David Musselman’s granddaughter Sarah Catherine Musselman.
[8]In the Diary of John B. Gehman, notes for September 1858 include the following: “21 ... David Gehman’s Jim [sic] fell from ‘ober ten’ (loft above the threshing floor) . . . . 24 D.B. Gehman died at 1 a.m. 25 D.B. Gehman’s funeral” (Gehman, 28). David Gehman’s son Abraham Gehman lived only 17 years. Other sons Johannes lived four hours, Heinrich 13 months, Elias 13 hours. Twin daughter Sarah also lived only 13 hours. Lydia lived seven years. Only daughters Catherine and Rebecca lived to adulthood. David and Sarah had a hard row to hoe. Rebecca married Joel Brunner and became the mother of two sons and three daughters. One of their sons was Charles Henry Brunner. Their daughter Norah Gehman Brunner married Robert Dreisbach; they are the grandparents of Ardis Grosjean Dreisbach.
[9]Observe the following in November 1861: “RESOLVED: That each preacher and especially and each member of our society [Gemeinschaft / fellowship], shall make himself familiar with the doctrines [mit den Glaubenslehren] of the earlier Mennonites in order to take into consideration at the next conference [Conferenz] whether to have it printed in German and English” (Verhandlungen, 29).
[10]Garth Rosell opines, “His Lectures on Systematic Theology (1846) reflect his special brand of ‘arminianized Calvinism.’” “Charles Gradison Finney (1792-1875)” Dictionary of Christianity in America (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity P, 1990), 440. Certainly his doctrine of sanctification smacks of perfectionism not unlike that of his Methodist contemporaries. He had moved from traditional Puritan, Congregational Calvinism. New Measures continued to make inroads into Calvinistic groups. See Smith, 62.
[11]Charles G. Finney, Lectures on Systematic Theology, (Wittier, CA: Colporter Kemp, 1946, originally published in 1846), 406.
[12]Descendants says that Jacob Godshalk was born in 1809; Godshalk Family History says he was born 8 October 1808. Both agree that he died February 15, 1881, St Joseph County, Michigan).
[13]Another part of the elusive Jacob G. is that there are several spellings for the name. In the German Glaubenslehre (1866) it is Jacob Gottschall; in the English Doctrine of faith, it is Jacob Gottshall. In the Verhandlungen one finds “Jacob Gottschall” (pp. 28, 43, 45, 49, 51), “J. Gottschall” (pp. 33, 55), and “J. Gottschalk” (p. 30). The secretary for the last was A.W. Stauffer; otherwise, David Gehman. But the geneologies use Godshalk.. Nevertheless, it seems safe to assume this is one and the same person.
[14]John C. Wenger, History of the Mennonites of the Franconia Conference (Telford, PA: Franconia Mennonite Historical Society, 1937) 234.
[15]Daniel K. Cassel, History of the Mennonites ( Philadelphia, n.d.), 270.
[16]Semiannual conferences were also held in the Flatland Evangelical Mennonite meeting house, Nov. 1861, Oct. 1863, Nov. 1864, Nov. 1865, June 1867, June 1868, and June 1869. This is nine of the first . Three years later conference was held in Quakertown in Nov. 1872; William N. Shelly of Quakertown was the chairman. The Mennonite Encyclopedia says Shelly left Flatland Mennonite in 1857 with his followers.
[17] Also in the 1880 census is Lewis Taylor, who was 45 years of age, his wife Susanna (Gehman). Their children were Annie, 16, Amandes, 14, and Charles, 12. Lewis Taylor (1834-1911) was an advisory member of Conference in 1891. Lewis Taylor was a younger brother of Joseph Schneider or so the writer was told by Raymond Musselman Taylor, son of Lewis Taylor’s son Charles.
[18]Information comes from Joyce Heist and census data. Shelly traces his pedigree back to Abraham Shelly or Schelle who arrived in America about 1730..
[19]The bulk of the land was purchased from Joseph Schneider according to James Roth, "In the Heart of Quakertown . . .," unpublished paper, November 4, 1989.
[20]The land in Haycock was to be sold in 1877 according to the minutes of the preachers' conference. “This Conference, held November 12, 1877, unanimously agreed that the Brethren Henry V. Smith, William Hixon, and Milton Kauffman, as trustees in charge, shall be authorized to give a purchase deed for the Ruthen of land, which was bought May 21, 1850, from Jacob Ziegenfuss and his wife, hannah, in Haycock Township, Bucks County, Pennsylvania, as church ground.” (Verhandlungen, 111).
[21]On the 1872 Articles of
Incorporation for the Evangelical Mennonite Church of Quakertown the following
were listed on page two: Jonas Musselman
D, Henry M. Smith, Jacob Horn [in his home Musselman began meetings],
Henry Diehl D, Henry G. Musselman, David S. Basler,
Charles Frick D, John L. Moyer D, Joseph B. Taylor D, Augustus Seiple, William N. Shelly
D. [what does the D mean?]
NB: Three of the original Seven are on the “Articles of Incorporation” viz., Henry Diehl, Joseph B. Taylor [Schneider], and William N. Shelly! And all three are “D”. Where do you suppose these men worshiped between 1858 and 1872? They all attended the Semi-annual Preacher’s conference regularly.
[22]Joseph B. Taylor undoubtedly is the same as Joseph B. Schneider. For documents appearing in the court house he would use his English name, Taylor; for the church where they spoke German he was Schneider, German for tailor. The name of Schneider is prominent in the story of the Quakertown congregation. Quarterly Conference minutes have “Bruder Joseph Schneider” as Vorsteher (deacon), Verwalter (steward) and Delegaten (delegate to Annual Conference) in 1885. In Quarterly Conference 11 November, David M. Taylor was elected delegate to Annual Conference (p. 143). The minutes of the February, 1894 Annual Conference list David M. Taylor among the delegates (Verhandlungen, 226).
[23]For information on life insurance the writer is indebted to an article on life insurance by Harold S. Bender in the Mennonite Encyclopedia, III, 343-44.