UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Studies of eight Canadian fundamentalists Elliott, David Raymond 1989

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata


831-UBC_1989_A1 E44.pdf [ 22.98MB ]
JSON: 831-1.0098291.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0098291-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0098291-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0098291-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0098291-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0098291-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0098291-source.json
Full Text

Full Text

STUDIES OF EIGHT CANADIAN FUNDAMENTALISTS By DAVID RAYMOND ELLIOTT B.A. (Hons,), The University of Calgary (1973) M.A., The University of Calgary (1375) A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY in THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES Department of History We accept this thesis as conforming to the required standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA APRIL 1939 © D A V I D RAYMOND ELLIOTT In presenting this thesis in partial fulfilment of the requirements for an advanced degree at the University of British Columbia, I agree that the Library shall make it freely available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensive copying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the head of my department or by his or her representatives. It is understood that copying or publication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission. Department of The University of British Columbia Vancouver, Canada DE-6 (2/88) ii ABSTRACT The fundamentalist movement, which became prominent in North America during the 1920s and 1930s, has often been depicted by scholars as a populist reaction against urbanism, industrialism, immigration, and modern thought. Undoubtedly those elements contributed to the rise of fundamentalism, but fundamentalism must be seen against the broader background of intellectual and ecclesiastical history. Building on the previous works of Ernest R. Sandeen, Bruce Shelley, and George Marsden this study finds the roots of fundamentalism in eighteenth- and nineteenth-century schismatic movements—Quietism, the Plymouth Brethren, Keswick holiness, the Salvation Army, B r i t i s h - I s r a e l i s m , and pentecostalism—which had structural, intellectual, and behavioural similarities to earlier medieval heresies. The leaders of the above-mentioned schismatic movements and the twentieth-century fundamentalist leaders did not accept ecclesiastical authority. Like medieval heretics they were often charismatic individuals who promoted popular theologies whose major emphases were not part of the creeds of established Protestant churches. Even though fundamentalists had a self-perception of being conservatives, they were far more radical than nineteenth-century theological conservatives. The fundamentalists, to use a phrase used by John Maynard Keynes, iii operated in an "intellectual underworld." Fundamentalism was dominated by a dualist theologyi which was influenced by the views of the second-century heretic Marcion, who over-emphasized Pauline theology and rejected the Old Testament, and the third-century heretic Mani, who mixed aspects of Zoroastrianism, Buddhism) and Marcionite Christianity. Some of the fundamentalists even linked themselves with the medieval Cathars or Albigensians and other dualists who were neo-Manichaeans. Fundamentalism can therefore be called neo-Manichaean because of its dualistic theology. Satan was seen as a real personality who could possess individuals physically, control the weather, and cause accidents. Minor incidents were seen in cosmic proportions. Fundamentalists often denied the human personality and sexuality, but those suppressed elements often found expression in bizarre ways. The neo-Manichaen views of the fundamentalists contributed to conspiracy theories and schismatic behaviour. Other features of fundamentalism, such as premillenniah'sm, separatism, and pentecostalism, had their antecedents in the thinking and behaviour of another second-century heretic, Montanus. Fundamentalist leaders were most often "new" men and women. Often they lacked the usual credentials possessed by members of the clergy; usually they did not have university and seminary educations, and frequently they came from family backgrounds where organized religion did not play a great role. Lacking ties with the religious "establishment," the fundamentalists, in their contest with "modernism," frequently turned to popular theology, which had been influenced by medieval heresies. The ideas from this "intellectual underworld" became the controlling features of their theologies. iv This dissertation examines the intellectual development, careers, theologies, and ideologies of eight Canadian religious sectarians: A.B. Simpson, P.W. Philpott, Aimee Semple McPherson, T.T. Shields, William Aberhart, Clem Davies, L.E. Maxwell, and Oswald J. Smith. The ideas of these sectarians demonstrate the intellectual heterodoxy which characterized fundamentalism. The Keswick holiness movement, the most neo-Manichaean of the networks, seems to have been the largest and had the greatest influence. Fundamentalist leaders were extremely authoritarian. By breaking their followers away from established institutions and forms of thought, the leaders of fundamentalism created a new sub-culture which had a great psychological hold over its adherents. Through their creative use of the modern media and unusual ideas these sectarians were able to attract many away from the mainline churches which had become quite secularized through their promotion of the "national gospel." Simpson, McPherson, Maxwell, and Smith built religious "empires" which had an international influence. Of the eight sectarians studied all, but Aberhart and Davies, had a great impact upon American fundamentalism. Fundamentalism was more than a conservative reaction to modernism! it was a different religion from mainline Christianity. Its ecclesiology, eschatology, hermeneutics, forms of worship, music, and architecture were quite divergent from what had characterized Protestantism. V TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract ii Table of Contents v List of Figures vi Introduction 1 Chapter One: The Historiography of Fundamentalism 13 Chapter Two: The Intellectual Underworld of Fundamentalism 27 Chapter Three: Theological Trends in Canada, 1867 to 1945 60 Chapter Four." A.B. Simpson: Proto-Fundamentalist 87 Chapter Five: P.W. Philpott: Patriarch of Fundamentalism 106 Chapter Six: Aimee Semple McPherson: Goddess of Evangelism 114 Chapter Seven: T.T. Shields: The Baptist "Pope" 138 Chapter Eight: William Aberhart: Demagogue of the Depression 170 Chapter Nine: Clem Davies: Canada's Prophetic Salesman 214 Chapter Ten: L.E. Maxwell: Prairie Pietist 258 Chapter Eleven: Oswald J. Smith: Promoter of "Faith" Missions 277 Chapter Twelve: Conclusion 305 Epilogue 318 Notes 323 Bibliography 413 vi LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE I: SOME INFLUENCES ON FUNDAMENTALISM.. - 1 -INTRODUCTION The fifty-year period covering the last quarter of the nineteenth and the first quarter of the twentieth centuries was a period of great cultural, social, and intellectual change. The Second Industrial Revolution had introduced new technologies which radically transformed the shape of transportation and communication. Iron-hulled steam ships, railroads, automobiles, and airplanes reduced the size of the globe. The invention of telegraphy, trans-Atlantic cables, telephones, and radio broadcasting created instant communication. Not since Gutenberg had there been such a rapid spread of knowledge. The increasing industrialization and urbanization which accompanied these developments radically transformed the shape of society. Progress and individualism were slogans of that period which has been described as the "gilded age."1 However, it was not a golden period for the average man. As giant corporations swallowed up smaller firms, workers had less and less control over their own lives. The doctrines of Marx, the evolutionary concepts of Darwin, and the sexual theories of Freud also revolutionized thought. The intellectual crisis resulting from these new ideas and the pace at which history was moving created great stresses in the societies of North America and Europe. Those who could not or would not adapt to the new ideas and institutions because of lack of education or opportunity turned their backs on modernity (but not necessarily on technology) and 2 sought refuge in their perceptions of the past. As Peter Viereck has 3 noted, the conservative has often had a distorted sense of past history. Following the devastation of World War I, which did much to destroy the hopes of liberalismi Protestant religious institutions in North America were torn asunder by a t h e o l o g i c a l c i v i l war known as the modernist/fundamentalist controversy. Fundamentalists tried to remove new and liberal thought from the churchesj colleges, and seminaries. Many fundamentalists linked liberalism with all of society's ills: urbanism, secularism, and big business. Those who held to conservative views during this troubled period often felt that they were unable to control their own lives. As the modernist/fundamentalist controversy was being defined, the reluctant fundamentalist, J. Gresham Machen, professor of New Testament at Princeton Theological Seminary, in 1923 described liberalism or modernism as "a totally diverse type of religious faith," a non-redemptive religion," which "makes use of traditional Christian terminology" but lacks its 4 content. He added, "that despite the liberal use of traditional phraseology modern liberalism not only is a different religion from Christianity but <belonged> in a totally different class of religions. On the other hand, the liberal Christian Century noted in 1924: Christianity according to fundamentalism is one religion, and Christianity according to modernism is another. There is a clash here as profound and grim as between Christianity and Confucianism. The God of fundamentalism is gne God, and the God of the modernist is another. -3-Thus the battle lines were drawn and popular religion became polarized with both extremes, the fundamentalists and the modernists, each anathematizing the other, each describing the other as a new heretical religion. Those who existed between those camps were often overlooked by the participants and by subsequent historians. Robert T. Handy has identified at least five distinct groups existing at that time: modernists, evangelical liberals, evangelical conservatives, strict conservatives, and fundamentalists.'' The fundamentalists usually posed as theological conservatives, but they were often religious radicals who lacked standard university and seminary educations. Many of the fundamentalist leaders had been raised in homes where organized religion had never been important. Thus they lacked denominational loyalties. In place of standard theologies they often inadvertently substituted ideas from various medieval heresies (Donatism, Marcionism, Montanism, Gnosticism, and Manichaeism) and presented them as their orthodoxies. Some of the fundamentalist sects such as the Plymouth Brethren and William Aberhart and his religious followers indeed identified some of the medieval heretics as their spiritual mentors. The constellation of ideas which characterized fundamentalism can best be described as an "intellectual underworld." John Maynard Keynes used the term "underworld" to describe the ideas of the economic "heretics" q of his own day.v Like medieval heretics the fundamentalists rejected the established denominations and substituted other theologies. Many of the fundamentalists became ecclesiastical "outlaws." Most of the ideas which the fundamentalists emphasized (dispensationalism, the secret Rapture, Keswick holiness, pentecostalism, British-Israelism, and biblical inerrancy) - 4 -had never been part of the historic creeds of Christendom and were often extra-biblical. Not only did the fundamentalists attack the modernists but they also lashed out at the "false cults" of the Mormonsi Jehovah's Witnesses, and Seventh-Day Adventists. However, the fundamentalists often shared many behavioural and theological characteristics with those sectarian groups. Recently, Oxford theologian James Barr has described fundamentalism, and by extension, new evangelicalism, as a "pathological condition of Christianity"—a religion of fear built on an inconsistent, indefensible doctrine of biblical inerrancy.^ The fundamentalists' world view was generally dominated by conspiracy theories and they taught an antinomian ethical system which generally avoided the social implications of Christianity. Conspiracy theories were attractive to fundamentalists because they soothed their own feelings of failure. They saw their plight in grandiose proportions! they were pawns in a cosmic chess game between the forces of good and evil. Often they blamed their problems on the Devil. Their concept of the Devil went beyond the Bible and depended more upon popular theology which had been influenced by Manichaeism, a third century heresy which had originated in Persia. Manichaeism in its various forms was characterized by a dualist theology: good versus evil, God versus Satan, light versus darkness, spirit versus flesh, etc. While not accepting all of Manichaen theology, fundamentalists functioned very similarly. They often adopted ascetic lives in their attempts to fight "the world, the flesh, and the Devil." By using the Devil as a scapegoat fundamentalists were able to avoid owning their own responsibilities and failures. This form of neo-Manichaeism became attractive to many frustrated conservatives in the twentieth century. Even at that time, when fundamentalists were painting themselves as orthodox, they were seen as something new by the theological conservatives at Princeton Theological Seminary, Concordia Seminary, Northern Baptist Seminary in Chicago, and Southern Baptist Seminary in Louisville, Kentucky.11 The conservative theologian Benjamin B. War field at Princeton was largely responsible for the fundamentalists' doctrine of biblical inerrancy, yet he rejected their perfectionism, pentecostalism, dispensationalism, premillennialism, and revivalism as heresies.1^ At the same time, theological liberals were trying to accommodate their Christianity to modern thought, but the more radical modernists rejected theology for spiritualism, pseudo-science, metaphysics, pop-psychology, and socialism. Ramsay Cook has shown how the modernists, in their rejection of dogma, fostered the growth of a secularized society, 13 instead of creating the Kingdom of God. However, for all of their ideological differences, the fundamentalists and the modernists had much in common. Many of their leaders had left the major denominations of their own accord or had been defrocked for insubordination or heresy. Between World War I and World War II both fundamentalists and modernists created a multitude of new religious sects and cults which had ecclesiologies, eschatologies, hermeneutics, historiographies, hymns, liturgies, philosophies of missions, and church architecture different from what had characterized Catholic, Lutheran, Reformed, and even Wesleyan forms of Christianity. While fundamentalists in North America were rejecting much of the thought and the institutions of Christendom, similarly Europe was experiencing the rise of various forms of fascism. Standard epistemologies and religious views were being challenged and scapegoats found. In Germany 14 the pagan religions of the past were resurrected by Wagner and the Nazis. The Jews were blamed for the world's problems. Both reactions, fundamentalism and fascism, were authoritarian, backward-looking, popularly-based movements led by highly individualistic, highly creative, but poorly-educated "new" men who used the new communication media of radio broadcasting and advertising very effectively in their seizure of power and their promotion of themselves. Just as the use of the printing press facilitated the rise of new sects during the Reformation, so did radio and television in the twentieth century. The kind of religious leadership exercised by these fundamentalist leaders was peculiar to North America? similar kinds of religious empires did not emerge in twentieth-century Europe because of the existence of state churches and a more defined social structure. The closest European manifestation of similar charismatic leadership was found in the fascist movements. Indeed some un-named fundamentalists in Germany, who were visited by Oswald J. Smith in 1936, were part of the "German" Christian movement which supported Hitler.^ A number of American fundamentalists, including some in this study, were admirers of Hitler and Mussolini (prior to World War II) because they were fascinated by, and obsessed with, power. Fundamentalism and fascism both grew out of the social and economic malaise of World War 15 both movements rejected established institutions and ways of thinking. Fundamentalist publishers far surpassed the denominational presses -7-in their production of religious literature during the period from 1870 to 1950, as they still do. This study surveys a large proportion of that popular religious literature. An interesting historiographical situation exists in regard to fundamentalism. There has been much written about American fundamen-talism, but less about American liberalism and the social gospel. Canadian church history is still at a very early stage! most of what has been written has dealt with church union and the social gospel. Much of it has been highly parochial. 1 6 Fundamentalism has not received much attention. Biographies of the sectarian leaders have been mostly hagiography. Academic studies of religious sectarianism have been largely confined to the sociological approaches of S.D. Clark and W.E. Mann who used the frontier thesis and the church/sect theory to explain the phenomenon.1^ William Aberhart has been the most studied of Canadian religious sectarians, but he had a very small impact on Canadian and American fundamentalism. More knowledge of Canada's fundamentalists is greatly needed. This dissertation attempts to fill part of that historiographical void. It is a study of the personalities, the leadership styles, and the intellectual world Lf Canada's leading fundamentalists who rejected mainline Christianity and its theology during the early to mid-twentieth century. Because most of the fundamentalist leaders were so highly individualistic this study treats them and their ideas in a biographical format which explores their backgrounds, their education, the development of their ideas, and their religious careers. It examines their responses and reactions to the major issues and events of the first half of the twentieth century. George H. Williams' exhaustive study of the radical reformers of the - 8 -18 sixteenth century provided the initial idea for this study. Several studies in Canadian intellectual history have also served as models: Carl Berger's Sense of Power: Studies in the Ideas of Canadian Imperialism! 1867-1914i S.E.D. Shortt's Search for an Ideal: Six Canadian Intellectuals and Their Convictions in the Age of Transition! 139Q-193Q, and Ramsay Cook's, The 19 Regenerators: Social Criticism in late Victorian English Canada. This study might also be considered as a Canadian equivalent to C. Allyn 20 Russell's, Voices of American Fundamentalism, but with more attention paid to the history of ideas. It also explores the intellectual underworld, which characterized grass-roots fundamentalism, in greater detail than 21 George Marsden's Fundamentalism and American Culture. The definition of 22 fundamentalism, with which Ernest R. Sandeen's Roots of Fundamentalism, and George Marsden's study have struggled, will also be further refined. Popular religion in Canada has often been assumed to have been highly influenced by religion in the United States. It has, but Canadians have also gone to the United States and established sects and cults there and played a significant role in the modernist/fundamentalist controversy. The intellectual flow across the border has been both ways. Chapter One traces the historiography of fundamentalism and modernism and shows it to have been an authoritarian reaction to the rapidly-changing social and economic situation which accompanied the Second Industrial Revolution. Chapter Two examines the intellectual underworld of popular religion in Europe and the United States which formed the basis of fundamentalism. Most of the ideas which characterized popular fundamentalism were not part of the official creeds of any mainline Christian denomination. Those ideas - 9 -were: Plymouth Brethren dispensationalism, neo-Manichaeism, the self-deprecatory mysticism of Madame Guyon upon which the Keswick holiness movement was based, the esoteric theories of British-Israelism, the neo-scholasticism of the Princeton theology, the "celebrity" religion of the Salvation Army, and the "democratic" attitudes of American revivalism. Chapter Three examines religious life in Canada following Confederation in 1867. Church life became very much attached to nation building and resulted in the creation of the United Church of Canada in 1925. However, the great emphasis placed by the Methodist and Presbyterian churches on nationalism, prohibition, church union, and the social gospel led to a de-emphasis on the transcendent aspects of religion. This created a spiritual vacuum which the fundamentalists quickly filled through their skillful use of radio broadcasting, religious drama, and lay education. Chapter Four is the first major biographical study. It outlines the career and ideas of A.B. Simpson, the Canadian-born Presbyterian minister who became founder of the Christian and Missionary Alliance. In Simpson can be found almost all of the sectarian features which later characterized fundamentalism. Most of the other sectarians studied below were influenced by his thought. Chapter Five examines the career of Peter W. Philpott, an early leader in the Salvation Army. In 1392 Philpott led a schismatic group out of the Salvation Army, then became ordained by Simpson's Christian and Missionary Alliance. Within a short time Philpott established an independent Gospel Tabernacle in Hamilton. During the 1920s he was a major Canadian figure in the fundamentalist movement. He became the minister of Moody Memorial Church in Chicago and the Church of the Open Door, which was part -10-of the Bible Institute of Los Angeles. Then, for the next twenty-six years his ministry was carried on across North America. He was responsible for establishing the Associated Gospel Churches sect in Canada. Chapter Six deals with Aimee Semple McPhersoni the Canadian farm girl who established an international religious empire centred in Los Angeles. Her energy, promotional gimmicks, and scandals made her, at the time, one of the most newsworthy women in North America. Chapter Seven examines the life of the Reverend T.T. Shields, the self-appointed Baptist "pope" who disrupted Baptist church life in both Canada and the United States. Shields became a rabid anti-Catholic, founded the Protestant League, and organized the Protestant Party during World War II. Chapter Eight discusses the activities of William Aberhart, the Calgary-centered high school principal and radio evangelist who created the world's first Social Credit government in Alberta in 1935. In doing so, he moved from dispensational premillennial fundamentalism into a type of modernistic post-millennial social gospel. He came close to establishing a fascist regime. Chapter Nine focuses on the career of Clem Davies, a British-born Methodist who worked with that denomination in Canada and the United States. Davies was a committed modernist and was expelled from the Methodist Church in Victoria, B.C. in 1924, after which he formed his own cult, the Victoria City Temple which mixed elements of the social gospel, racism, spiritualism, Christian Science, and New Thought. Later he formed another cult which adopted a form of fundamentalism emphasizing prophecy, British-Israelism, and faith healing. Chapter Ten examines the activities of the Rev. L.E. Maxwell* a Kansas-born pietist who founded Prairie Bible Institute at Three Hillsi Alberta, which became the largest institution of its type in North America, and which drew the majority of its students from the United States. In that atmospherei which resembled a Protestant monastery, Maxwell trained many of the fundamentalist missionaries who left North America for foreign assignments. Chapter Eleven is the story of the Rev. Oswald J. Smith, a restless individual who moved through a series of churches and sects in Canada and the United States until he formed his own authoritarian sect, the Peoples Church in Toronto in 1928. Using that church as his base Smith gained a wide reputation as an international evangelist, hymn writer, and promoter of foreign missions. Billy Graham has credited Smith as being one of the major influences on his life. In conclusion, Chapter Twelve agrees with C. Allyn Russell that it is very difficult to find a theological stereotype among the fundamentalist leaders. They represented a great variety of ideas and theological systems. All of them were influenced by and perpetuated the intellectual underworld of popular theology which had been influenced by neo-Manichaeism. All of these leaders were also involved in a quest for personal power? they could even switch to the other theological extreme as did Aberhart and Davies. As eccentrics, their theologies were often moulded by their personalities. The more militant and dogmatic movements, founded by Shields and Aberhart, have had the least numerical growth and are actually now diminishing. The organizations of the more mystical fundamentalists, who were influenced by A.B. Simpson, have continued to -12-grow and have created what George Marsden has called the "evangelical denomination." An Epilogue makes comparisons between past fundamentalist leaders and the current state of fundamentalism in the 1980s. Fundamentalism continues to be authoritarian) led by poorly educated "new" men and women. The recent financial and sexual scandals of the American televangelists reinforce what has been said about the intellectual underworld) the empire building, and the lack of accountability which has characterized fundamentalist leadership. Primary research for this study was based upon the published works of the above sectarians, their correspondence (when available), church records, archival collections, their newspaper advertisements, and press coverage of their meetings and controversies. Personal interviews were conducted with two of the major subjects, L.E. Maxwell and Oswald J. Smith. Professor Richard Allen of McMaster University first encouraged this topic as a thesis project. The dissertation was later guided by Professors Margaret Prang, John Conway, and N. Keith Clifford of the University of British Columbia. Financial assistance for this project came from several sources: an Explorations Grant from the Canada Council in 1980 assisted in the research on William Aberhart as did a travel grant from the Canadian Plains Study Center in Regina. Another travel grant, from the Macmillan Fund of the Vancouver School of Theology, helped cover the cost of research in California on P.W. Philpott, Clem Davies, and Aimee Semple McPherson. -13-CHAPTER ONE THE HISTORIOGRAPHY OF FUNDAMENTALISM Following World War One? fundamentalists, who were aggressive, intransigent, and "certain that they had the whole truth and their opponents had none,"^  sought to control their denominations, theological seminaries, .colleges, and foreign mission societies, and were prepared to oust anyone who differed with them. When they were not successful in having their own way, many fundamentalists withdrew and formed their own churches, academic institutions, and missionary organizations. The fundamentalists posed as theological conservatives, defending the "old time religion" and the "faith once delivered unto the saints," whereas in reality, they had created a new religion markedly different from Reformed theology and even nineteenth century American revivalism, and had more in common with ancient and medieval heresies. Fundamentalism was a religion characterized by highly individualistic leaders, most often authoritarian, who built their theologies around their own eccentric personalities. The fundamentalists carried on a "holy war" against the modernists. The term modernist had arisen within Roman Catholicism and identified those - 1 4 -who rejected the newly-proclaimed doctrine of papal infallibility and desired to liberalize Catholic theology. Liberal Protestants adopted the term to describe their use of the new physical and social sciences. Shailer Mathewsi a modernist Baptist teaching at the University of ChicagoI described modernism as "the use of scientific, historical, and social method in understanding and applying evangelical Christianity to the needs of living persons." Often the terms liberalism and modernism were used interchangeably by friends and foes alike, but as William R. Hutchison has shown, they were q two distinct traditions which sometimes overlapped.- Liberalism, as the heir of the Enlightenment, had a positive view of man and was characterized by pluralism and rationalism. Liberalism had many expressions ranging from Unitarianism to a simple willingness to allow differences cf opinion to exist within denominational settings. Mathews, who was a conservative modernist, felt that liberalism tended "toward the emphasis of intellectual 4 belief and the criticism and repudiation of doctrines per se," Liberalism was more of an attitude? modernism was a methodology. To most fundamentalists the arch-heretic was the popular liberal Baptist preacher, Harry Emerson Fosdick, who emphasized modernist thought.^ Modernism has been described by Hutchison as a conscious adaptation of religious ideas to modern culture, with God being seen as immanent in human cultural development, which was progressing towards the realization of the Kingdom of God. Sociology often replaced theology as the "queen of the sciences" and the modernist definition of science sometimes included the intellectual periphery: Christian Science, quack medicine, chiropractic medicine, "pop" psychology, and occasionally, spiritualism.6 During the mid-1930s Fosdick was forced to admit that modernism had been too accommodating to the surrounding culture. In his sermon, "A Fundamentalist Sermon by a Modernist Preacher," he noted the religious shallowness of much modernist thought which was not serving as an anchor in difficult times: ...in comparison with the candor and fearlessness with which the old-time Christianity faced these facts, our superficial modernism, with its sing-song from Coue that every day, in every way, we are getting better and better, sounds soft and lush and sentimental. The term "fundamentalist" was coined in 1920 by Curtis Lee Laws, the editor of the Baptist publication, Watchman-Examiner. He defined a fundamentalist as one who was ready to do "battle royal" for the fundamentals of the faith. The mission of the fundamentalists was to get control of the churches away from the "rationalists," a term he used for the q liberals and modernists."" In coining the term "fundamentalist," Laws also had in mind a series of twelve paperback books called The Fundamentals, which appeared between 1910 and 1915. These books held certain doctrines to be sine qua non to the Christian faith: the inerrancy of the Scriptures, the Trinity, the virgin birth of Jesus, the substitutionary atonement, and Christ's resurrection. The Fundamentals, each about the size of a Readers' Digest, were financed by two California oil millionaires, and were sent to "every pastor, evangelist, missionary, theological professor, theological student, Sunday School superintentent, Y.M.C.A. and Y.W.C.A secretary in the English q speaking world."" Their editors hoped that the 3,000,000 distributed copies would stem the rising tide of theological liberalism, and the waves of new sects and cults such as the Seventh-Day Adventists, Christian Science, Mormons, and the International Bible Students (Jehovah's Witnesses), who were introducing extra-biblical authorities and doctrines. The authors of The Fundamentals represented conservative members of the Protestant community from the United States, Canada, and Great Britain, but among the contributors, Presbyterians were over-represented. It is thus not surprising that The Fundamentals were doctrinally oriented and conservative in tone, 1 0 but some of the articles allowed certain liberality of thought on biblical criticism and theistic evolution.^ It is important to note that many of the contributors were members of what will be called the intellectual underworld of fundamentalism', they were dispensationalists and followers of Keswick holiness. The selection by Jessie Penn-Lewis, the only female contributor, written about Satan was markedly Manichaean in its emphasis.^ In spite of its orthodox pretensions, the series received little 13 academic attention, even from the conservative theological journals. Fundamentalism, which we are about to describe, was not so much a matter of doctrine, but rather of attitude, a mind-set which was influenced by a whole constellation of ideas and attitudes which became increasingly authoritarian. Many of the leaders of fundamentalism deliberately created theological controversies as a cloak for the promotion of their own personal power and the doctrinal peculiarities of dispensationalism, neo-Mani-14 chaeism, British-Israelism, Keswick holiness, or pentecostalisrn. These views were hardly orthodoxy. Fundamentalism went through several stages or generations. Even so, at any given time between 1870 and 1950, all phases were concurrent, with some of the more r a d i c a l a s p e c t s to be found in the proto-fundamentalists such as D.L. Moody and A.B. Simpson. George Marsden has noted four phases of fundamentalism, the first extending from 1870 to 1918,15 Many of the authors of The Fundamentals were theologically conservative, denominationally loyal churchmen who had taken university and seminary training. Following World War I a new generation of fundamentalist leaders emerged; they were less educated, often trained only at Bible Institutes, and they had weaker denominational loyalties. They struggled to control the denominations, theological schools, and mission boards. Because of the conflict over the new ideologies most Protestant denominations became divided into rival camps.16 After 1925 the fundamentalist movement was characterized by those who withdrew from the denominations and formed their own sects and religious empires. That third generation of fundamentalists became increasingly militant in their refusal to compromise. Theirs was a religious totalitarianism which allowed little latitude of thought and behaviour. These powerful and very dynamic leaders were often non-denominational or anti-denominational and created a new counter-culture with their Bible Institutes whose theological fare was usually dispensationalism and Keswick holiness.1^ They also established new magazines and publishing companies, and were in the forefront of the new communications medium: radio broadcasting. They were very skillful advertisers and unashamed self-advertisers. The movement had a marked anti-intellectualism even though its leaders often paraded honorary doctorates. They called theological seminaries "cemeteries" and parodied St. Paul: "I have finished 18 my course, I have got my degree, I have lost my faith." It is these fundamentalist leaders, who flourished between 1925 and 1950, which this dissertation addresses particularly. A fourth phase of fundamentalism emerged in the late 1940s when neo-fundamentalists or self-styled evangelicals? such as Carl F.H. Henry) 19 Edward J. Carnell) and Bernard Ramm at Fuller Theological Seminary) rejected the separatism) lack of social concern and anti-intellectualism of their brethren) who were usually associated with the radical right in politics.^ All of the above phases of fundamentalism have continued to the 21 present day. / Ernest R. Sandeen notes that fundamentalism has had a poor 22 historiography. Early students of the fundamentalist controversy such as Stewart G. Cole and Norman F, Furniss interpret fundamentalism as a revival of conservative Protestantism. Following H. Richard Niebuhr they see it as a manifestation of southern pre-industrial rural opposition to 23 northern industrial bourgeois life? in other words) a revolt against modernity. Sandeen argues against that identification by noting the bitter schisms over fundamentalism and modernism which had occurred in the 24 churches of the northern urban cities. He suggests that fundamentalism had existed long before the fundamentalist controversy of the 1920s and had had its roots in two nineteenth-century theological movements. One was premillennial dispensationalism) invented in the 1830s by the Plymouth Brethren sect) who solved biblical difficulties by dividing the Bible up into various sections applicable to various peoples and time periods) and who stressed the return of Christ before the establishment of the millennium—a literal thousand-year reign of peace on earth. The other was a particular belief in biblical inspiration and inerrancy which was taught at Princeton Theological Seminary. Sandeen claims that fundamentalism was born from a mixed marriage of dispensationalism and the Princeton theology. Fundamentalism inherited from its dispensational parent a radical critique of the churches and a method of biblical interpretation which was far from conservative.'""' Their other -worldliness was reinforced by the anti-reformist attitudes of Princeton Calvinism. For the most parti Sandeen sees fundamentalism as millenarianism renamed.4"^ Sandeen's seminal study of the roots of fundamentalism stimulated many other scholars. Milton Rudnick, in studying his own Missouri Synod Lutheran denomination, concludes that it was a conservative body which remained virtually untouched by fundamentalism. Although Missouri Synod Lutherans were sympathetic to some aspects of fundamentalism, they retained their own identity by means of a strong bureaucracy and the use of officially-approved literature in their churches. They also tried to attract fundamentalists by offering their own denomination as a conservative alternative to modernism/"^ Sandeen's equation of fundamentalism with premillennialism, however, is challenged by others who believe that equating it with millenarianism is too simplistic. "Leroy Moore, Jr. finds a number of fundamentalists who were 28 not premillennialists. " The range of diversity within the fundamentalist movement is further demonstrated by C. Allyn Russell's biographical study of seven American fundamentalists who rose to fame in the 1920s; he finds no 29 common theological stereotype. George M. Marsden also.has d i f f i c u l t i e s with Sandeen's interpretation. While noting that Sandeen has made a valuable contribution to our understanding of fundamentalism by seeing it as an intellectual movement with deeper theological routes than previously realized, he argues -20-that Sandeen overlooked other important religious and cultural rootsi such as pietism, revivalism, the holiness movement] Americanism, and a scientific view employing Baconian methodology which stressed classification of facts, but avoided speculative hypotheses.^ When fundamentalists combined Baconism with "Scottish Common Sense Realism," their intellectual system became quite removed from twentieth-century scientific approaches.^1 Marsden defines fundamentalism as militantly anti-modernist Protestant evangelicalism, but not necessarily premillennial. In a nutshell, Marsden views fundamentalism as a sub-species of nineteenth-century revivalism.^*" While Marsden's in t e r p r e t a t i o n has again broadened our understanding of fundamentalism, certain weaknesses remain in his definition of fundamentalism. There were marked differences in the ecclesiologies and eschatologies of nineteenth-century revivalists and twentieth-century fundamentalists. Timothy L. Smith's classic study, Revivalism and Social Reform, notes that the majority of nineteenth-century revivalists were post-millennialists and were on the forefront of social reform. As abolitionists, feminists, and prohibitionists they were the 3 q forerunners of the social gospel movement. " Donald W. Dayton also observes that many nineteenth-century revivalists demanded racial 34 integration, Amerindian rights and international peace. After the Civil War those emphases changed. Following on a theme developed by Timothy L. Smith, sociologist David 0. Moberg indicates that the rejection of social reform by revivalists came after Dw'ight L. Moody was influenced by 3 5 premillennialism. Whereas revivalists before Moody had been predominantly post-millennial and reformist, revivalists after Moody were predominantly premillennial and anti-reformist. Revivalism became -21-other-worldly, that is, it moved its focus from this world to the next. It is here that Sandeen's thesis is stronger than Marsden's? prernillennial dispensationalism was dominated by social and religious pessimism. When bonded with the anti-reformist "Old School" Presbyterianism of Princeton, a n t i - r e f o r m became the dominant s o c i a l expression of most 36 fundamentalists. Another problem with Marsden's study is that he does not deal with fundamentalism directly; he approaches it by means of modern evangelical-ism. He admits as much in the introduction to his book, Fundamentalism and  American Culture whose subtitle. The Shaping of Twentieth-Century  Evangelicalism, 1870-1925, would have been a more appropriate title. ...in this study we are not looking for the roots of the separatist and empire building evangelists who call themselves "fundamentalists" today, but more importantly we are concerned with the background of the wider coalition of contemporary evangelicals whose common identity is substantially grounded in the fundamentalist experience of an earlier era. As the subtitle suggests, the fundamentalist experience was a major f a c t o r in shaping twentieth-century evangelicalism; though as the subsequent analysis should make clear, evangelicalism is ap,_plder tradition that has been shaped by other factors." Only in his epilogue does Marsden really address the essential characteristics of fundamentalism—the separatist and empire-building evangelists who flourished between 1925 and 1950: William Bell Riley, Gerald B. Winrod, Carl Mclntire, Bob Jones Sr., Frank Norn's, Aimee Semple McPherson, Oswald J. Smith, and T.T. Shields who replaced the denominationally-oriented leaders. Often their new organizations were rent by schism as they exerted their authoritarian leadership and adopted new ideologies. While praising Marsden's study Timothy L. Smith criticizes it for -22-leaving the impression that fundamentalism became the dominant evangelical anti-modernist response. Smith found vast numbers of theological conservatives among the Mennonitest the Disciples of Christ, the Christian Reformed Church, the Southern Baptists, the Missouri Synod Lutherans, the Holiness churches, and black Methodists, Baptists, and Pentecostals who were outside the network of fundamentalism.1" Smith also noted that Marsden did not stress sufficiently that fundamentalists "borrowed only the most narrow and, in many cases, the most divisive versions of particular 39 doctrines" from the nineteenth century. Marsden's definition of fundamentalism also excludes the white Pentecostals, even though they possessed most, if not all, of the characteristics which he believes Sandeen overlooks. They were revivalistic, pietistic, often dispensational and most often premillennial; they believed in an inerrant Bible, and fought the theory of evolution. Pentecostals were in the World Christian Fundamentalists Association until 1923. Aimee Semple McPherson, who combined fundamentalism and pentecostalism, worked with William Jennings Bryan, L.H. Muhhall, Paul Rader, and Oswald J. Smith. A number of fundamentalists, such as A.B. Simpson, John Roach Straton, and William Aberhart, dabbled in pentecostalism. After 1923 the Pentecostals were expelled because of their 40 emphasis on "speaking in tongues" and doctrinal innovations. Their expulsion may also have represented the growing influence of the dispensationalists who did not accept those practices. Another reviewer of Marsden's work, Robert Moats Miller, suggests that more attention might have been paid to the eccentric personalities of the leading fundamentalists. He asks the question: Would Marsden agree that a curious number of the fundamentalist leaders...—one thinks of Straton, Macartney, Shields, Winrod, Norris, yes, and even the great Machen—appear to be appropriate subjects for psychobiography? I do not suggest a vain search for a "paranoid style" or indeed any single "style" at all. I do mean that each of these men in his own way was quite looney and that their religious beliefs are not the only avenue to an understanding of their curious personalities and behavior. Stewart Cole observes that the fundamentalist movement was characterized by "the unyielding individualism of its leaders" who regarded no themselves as the "authoritarian agents of the supernatural." George Dollar, himself a militant fundamentalist, notes that these fundamentalist 4q leaders were mainly highly individualistic prima donnas. " Another historian of fundamentalism, Ferenc M. Szasz, claims that the second and third generation fundamentalist leaders had little contact with each other, in contrast to the first generation who often worked together. Fundamentalism was not an organized movement in its second and third 44 phases. To use a simile coined by George Marsden, the third generation of fundamentalists were like feudal knights, professing allegiance to the same king, but busy expanding their own competitive fiefdoms. Marsden's description of fundamentalism as a "loose, diverse, and changing federation of co-belligerents united in their fierce opposition to modernist thought" is quite appropriate/^ It might be added that it was also characterized by individualistic, often authoritarian leaders. Timothy P. Weber has produced another important study of premillennialism and fundamentalism. By building on Sandeen and using a behavioural approach, his Living in the Shadow of the Second Coming notes the psychological tensions created in those who believed in the any-rnoment return of Christ. Premillennialism, as an integral part of fundamentalism, -24-produced a spirit of overassurance and divisiveness, and had a lack of social concern. One of the latest studies of fundamentalism by Douglas W. Frank examines the influences of the Scofield Reference Bible, the Keswick holiness movement, and the career of Billy Sunday upon American fundamentalism. Frank has identified strong gnostic infuences in Scofield's writings and the Keswick ideas. The dualist nature of that theology created neurotic individuals who craved after power hungry leaders. He sees Billy 48 Sunday as a man drunk with his own power. Many recent historians of fundamentalism and self-styled 49 evangelicalism have tried to distinguish between the two movements. Fundamentalists are those who will not work with Billy Graham! evangelicals are those who will. However, Oxford theologian James Barr treats their differences as minimal and the conflicts as a family feud. He feels that both groups have essentially the same inadequate methods of biblical interpretation."1^ However real their differences, both fundamentalism and modern evangelicalism have been characterized by authoritarian leaders and empire building.j1 Both are characterized by personality cults which have made very effective use of the electronic media. Since 1925 fundamentalism in the United States has become characterized by a militancy which was often connected with the political radical right. Ralph Lord Roy's Apostles of Discord and Leo P. Ribuffo's Old Christian Right notes the racism, anti-Semitism, and authoritarianism of many of the militant fundamentalists and their active links with fascist movements. Marsden has claimed that fundamentalism was a distinctly North American phenomenon! religious denominations in contemporary Britain did not go through the same schisms in the twentieth century and British 53 fundamentalists did not establish the same kinds of empires.1" That may have been so, but many of the ideas and the religious sectarianism which characterized North American fundamentalism were borrowed from nineteenth-century schismatic movements in Britain: Plymouth Brethren dispensationalismi the Salvation Army, British-Israelism, and the Keswick holiness movement. The North American phenomenon appears to have been related to a democratic spirit, lack of state churches, and a less stratified social structure. . . When comparing North American fundamentalism with the religious scene in continental Europe we find that the fundamentalist religious empires founded by charismatic leaders did not exist there. The only comparable charismatic leadership was found in the fascist movements, which raises the question whether militant fundamentalism and European fascism were somewhat similar products of the same economic, social, and intellectual malaise which followed the Second Industrial Revolution and World War I. The theologies of those movements were completely different, 54 but some of Germany's fundamentalists were supporters of Hitler, and American fundamentalist publications such as the Sunday School Times and Moody Monthly often saw Hitler prior to World War II as a bullwark against Communism and Catholicism.^ Gerald B. Winrod's The Defender became so pro-Nazi that he was prosecuted for un-American activites. J^ There were some structural and ideological sirnilarites between fundamentalism and fascism. Besides being contemporary, both movements had leaders who demanded a high degree of allegiance and who usually lacked higher education and professional credentials. Their supporte rs wee primarily of the lower-middle and working classes, angry at themselves and others because of a world changing more rapidly than they could accept. Both movements were founded upon conspiracy theories: the Nazis blamed all of their problems on the Jews; the fundamentalists were highly influenced by conspiracy theories which often saw the Jews in a negative light. Militant fundamentalists such as Gerald B. Winrod and William Bell Riley mixed anti-Semitism into their eschatology and reprinted the spurious Protocols of  Zion. 5 7 In their reaction to "modernism" both fascists and fundamentalists turned their backs on the usual features of western civilization. Sociologist S.D. Clark has observed a relationship between religious sectarians, monetary cranks, political rebels, vigilantes, and medical 53 59 quacks. u Both fascism and fundamentalism rejected modernity, but at the same time, were very "modern" in their use of advertising and new communications techniques. Mussolini controlled Italy's newspapers.6^ Hitler did the same and used the radio and cinema for propaganda purposes. In North America many of the early radio stations were owned by fundamentalists who used this new technology to great advantage. The world of fundamentalism as it evolved in the 1920s and 1930s was a definite sub-culture and was far more than a conservative reaction to modern theology. Fundamentalism replaced conventional thinking with its own intellectual underworld, which as we will see in the following chapter, was drawn from various medieval heresies. It became a totalitarian religion in that it had its own distinctive style of worship and music, its own books, magazines, colleges, radio stations, clubs and cult figures, and allowed little latitude for opposing thought. CHAPTER TWO THE INTELLECTUAL UNDERWORLD OF FUNDAMENTALISM Fundamentalism has often been portrayed as theologically conservative, but that was not the case! it was extremely radical.1 In rejecting conventional learning and institutions, fundamentalists often adopted ideas and practices which had great similarities to the medieval heresies of Donatism, Marcionism, Manichaeism, Montanisrn, Gnosticism, and extreme forms of mysticism. In suggesting a connection between fundamentalism and medieval heresies certain caution must be exercised. For example, Steven Runciman faced this problem when he called the medieval Albigensians and other dualist groups Manichaean. Ruciman prefaced his discussion by saying: Theologically speaking, the title which I have given to the book is unjustifiable! for Christian Dualism and Manichaeism were two distinct and separate religions. But to the ordinary Medieval churchman, in the East as in the West, all Dualists were Manichaean! and I have used a name that they would have found intelligible and natural. And indeed in many ways this popular misnomer was reasonable, for the Christian Dualists, though they would never have acknowledged Mani's system, were fundamentally nearer to it^than ever they were to Medieval or Modern Christianity. Direct intellectual links are often very difficult to establish. However, U.C.L.A. historian Claus-Peter Clasen argues that when two different groups, separated by time, possess a number of similar doctrines, 3 some connection between them is suggested. Even if it cannot be proven that the proto-fundamentalists and the fundamentalists directly borrowed from the medieval heretics, they did share similar ideas and behaved in much the same way as did the medieval heretics. As a result, fundamentalism had a different ecclesiology, eschatology, hermeneutic system, leadership style, form of worship, and church architecture than the mainline denominations. Unknown to many of their followers, many of the leaders of fundamentalism had been dismissed from their denominations because of heresyi or they had left of their own accord before they were tried by ecclesiastical courts. Heresy has been defined by church historians as having two characteristics: heterodox ideas and an obstinate refusal to come under church discipline. Medieval historian Gordon Leff has described heresy in the following manner: "...heresy was not just a matter of doctrine but also 4 one of discipline—pertinacious error." Heresy had a particular development: Whatever its forms, medieval heresy differed from orthodoxy and mere heterodoxy less in assumption than in emphasis and conclusions. It became heresy from pressing these too far....What ultimately turned it into heresy was the failure to gain ecclesiastical sanction. It was usually then, in a group's subsequent development as a proscribed sect, that its original impulse took on a d i r e c t l y a n t i - s a c e r d o t a l character...what...began as an accentuation of a particular aspect of belief, or life, became a rival outlook! its adherents came to regard themselves as Christ's true apostles and their struggle against the church as part of the wider struggle between the forces of Christ and Antichrist. As such, even if it did not lead to the formulation of an independent church, it meant the sect's transformation into an autonomous body with its own tenets/ -29-Many of the ancient and medieval heresies had organizational characteristics which we now associate with religious cults. Most prominent was the style of leadership. Medieval heretics were often highly individualistic people who built religious empires around themselves. Their behaviour was similar to many present-day cult leaders. According to Stoner and Parke some of the characteristics of religious cults are: A cult has a living leader. Cult doctrine is based on his or her revelations which either .supplant or supplement traditional religious doctrine and practice....The cult leader is the sole judge of the quality or a member's faith and he enjoys absolute authority over the members....A cult promises a system in which a convert may work to save the world and humanity, but actually sponsors no community improvement programs. The daily work of nearly all cult members is demeaning and u t i l i z e s l i t t l e of their potential in terms of intelligence, training or education. Religious cults are exclusive social systems, claiming that their members will achieve salvation or happiness. Members are taught to believe that they are "superior" to those outside the group. To be a member of a cult a person must remove himself from society, cut himself off from job, education, friends, and family. Methods of ego-destruction and thought control are part of a religious cult's recruiting and indoctrination practices. Cults discourage critical analysis by dictating the suppression of negative thoughts, therefore fostering a dependancy on the quit's authority that arrests the maturation process. We can find many of these trends in the schismatic groups which were the progenitors of fundamentalism. Ernest R. Sandeen correctly identifies John Nelson Darby and his Plymouth Brethren group as one of the major influences upon twentieth-century fundamentalism.7 John Nelson Darby (1800-1882) was trained as a lawyer, but soon left the bar to enter the ministry of the Church of Ireland. After two years he became disillusioned by the influence of the state over the church and the resulting secularism. As a high-churchman he even contemplated becoming a Roman Catholic, but in 1827 he rejected the institutional church entirely. He came to believe that all churches, even the non-conformist ones, were apostate. He taught that all true Christians should withdraw from the denominations and form their own "assemblies" for fellowship and Bible study. Darby and his associates identified themselves as "the Brethren" and called their meeting places q gospel halls, chapels, or tabernacles. The word "church" was anathema.'" Brethrenism bore similarities to the second-century separatist group, the Montanists, and the fourth-century heresy, Donatism, which developed in North Africa. Donatists refused to recognize the clergy of the Catholic Church who had recanted or who had appeared to have recanted during the recent persecutions. The Donatists, who regarded themselves as the "pure Christians," established their own clergy and congregations, and rebaptized those who had been baptized as Catholics. In commenting on St. 9 Augustine's debate with the Donatists, Darby sided with the Donatists. The Brethren rejected an organized clergy and had an egalitarian membership in which everyone preached as "the Spirit led." In spite of these principles Darby continued to hold the dominant position of leadership. When some of the Brethren disagreed with some of the finer points of his doctrines, he excommunicated them. Strife within the group led to the formation of two major divisions which later produced other splinter groups. The "Exclusive" Brethren, who followed Darby, anathematized everyone who refused to join with them or those who had fellowship outside the immediate circle. The other group, the "Open" Brethren, had limited contact with other Christian groups. -31-Darby's group was very other-worldly. William Blair Neatby has said of them: Still, so far as the law left them a bare choice) they avoided all the offices upon which society depends for its maintenance. They filled no civil or municipal office, if they could help it; they never sat in Parliament, and if by some rare self-assertion one of them voted at an electiOjOj he was regarded with the most intense disapproval. The bar and services were absolutely banned, and barristers and military and naval officers generally abandoned their careers if they joined the Brethren. Brethren might be s o l i c i t e r s if they confined themselves to conveyancing! some ventured tp^  plead in court, but they were considered "unspiritual." And as for the doings of the great world, it may suffice to say that it was considered more or less^jof mark of lack of spirituality to read the newspapers. *" In the field of theology Darby is best known as the originator of dispensationalism. Simply put, dispensationalism was a system of interpretation whereby biblical history was divided into a series of time periods, each having a distinct method of salvation. Dispensationalists apportioned various parts of the Bible to Jews, Gentiles, and Christians. The key to understanding the Bible, Darby taught, was to "rightly divide" its 13 verses into the appropriate dispensations. In this way apparent 14 contradictions could be resolved. Dispensationalists shared some ideas in common with the thinking of the second century heretic Marcion who emphasized Pauline theology and rejected the Old Testament and much of the New, which he described as Jewish. Marcion's views also influenced the attitudes of nineteenth-century anti-Semitic German biblical scholars who explained away Old Testament practices and ethical systems which they felt were archaic or inferior.1"' Dispensationalists addressed the same problems and arrived at much the same conclusions, but used a different methodology. Darby, who read Luther, 1 7 focused on Pauline theology and created sharp dichotomies between the Testaments, Jews and Gentiles, works and faith, and law and grace, as did Luther. By clever casuistry the dispensationalists claimed that the Synoptic Gospels, the Epistle of James, and the Epistle to the Hebrews did not apply to Christians because they were addressed to Jews. Therefore the Old Testament, the Sermon on the Mount, the Beatitudes, and other passages having heavy ethical content were conveniently avoided. Oxford theologian James Barr, who feels that the concept of heresy has little relevance in today's society, has noted that if the word heresy has any meaning at all, dispensationalism was a heresy, u for it proposed two 19 systems of salvation and depicted God as a fickle tyrant. Besides being a system of biblical interpretation, dispensationalism was actually a cyclical philosophy of history, with history depicted as being on a downward spiral. Each dispensation commenced with God making a covenant with man. The covenant was broken by man and judgment followed. Each time the failure of man was of increased magnitude. This system of interpetation reflected Darby's pessimism which extended to institutional Christianity. Closely connected with Darby's ecclesiology and his hermeneutic system was his eschatology. Darby introduced new concepts into premillennialism, but before that can be discussed, the various eschatological systems within Christendom need to be sketched in order to put Darby's additions into context. Premillennialists expected Christ to return to earth to establish the kingdom of God, a literal period of peace on earth which would last one thousand years. Premillennialism, which arose during the second Christian century, found its fullest expression in the thought of the heretic Montanus. Montanus was anti-clerical. His followers in Asia Minor believed they were the "elite" of Christians, they "spoke in tongues," and fasted in expectation of the New Jerusalem. Because of the heretical excesses of Montanus and others, premillennialism never became the standard eschatology of the ante-Nicene, Nicene, or post-Nicene church and found expression in only a few scattered church fathers. Tertullian, one of the patristic authors, actually joined Montanus's community. By the fifth century amillennialism emerged. It rejected the idea of a literal earthly millennium. This system of eschatology originated with Augustine who saw the kingdom of God being realized in the Christian church and the life of the Christian. Jesus had said "the Kingdom of God is within you." Amillennialism became the dominant eschatology of both the Catholic and Reformed churches. A variant form of eschatology called post-millennialism was created in the seventeenth century by Daniel Whitby, an Anglican divine who believed that it was the duty of Christians to create the kingdom of God on earth by evangelism and progressive legislation. Post-millennialism fitted in well with progessive liberalism and thus post-millennialism became the dominant 20 religious and political eschatology in the United States. It found among its most outspoken advocates Jonathan Edwards, the social gospeller Walter Rauschenbusch, and even William Jennings Bryan, Evangelical post-millennialists believed that after Christians had achieved peace on 21 earth for one thousand years Christ would then return. Premillennialism had periodically reappeared during periods of intense social and economic upheaval. For example, it was present at the time of the Crusades and the debacle at Munster during the Reformation. The Fifth Monarchy Men who participated in the English Revolution believed in it, and following the French Revolution, men saw the "prophecies" of Daniel and Revelation as being fulfilled in their own day. They made various attempts at calculating the date of Christ's return based on the numerical figures found in those books/'" -In returning to Darby's contributions to eschatology, it must be noted that he was particularly affected by the French Revolution and the Napoleonic Era. From his reading of Tertullian, Darby may have been influenced in his views on the separation of church and state, hermeneutics, 23 and premillennialism. Darby was active in several prophetic conferences which sought to understand current events through the Bible. Among his circle of friends were those who thought that Napoleon was the Antichrist and that the Great Tribulation, a period of unprecedented troubles before the return of Christ, had begun. Darby and Edward Irving (see infra) added 24 a new twist, which they called the Rapture. About 1830 Darby, Irving, and others visited the home of Margaret Macdonald in Scotland. She claimed to have been miraculously healed, was "speaking in tongues," and having visions. In one of those visions she is said to have had a revelation that God would not allow his saints to pass through the Tribulation, but that they would be spirited away/""' Darby and Irving expanded on that idea which became known as the pre-tribulation Rapture. Before the Tribulation Christ would appear in the clouds and snatch away the "true" Christians", they would not die, but like Enoch and Elijah they would be translated to heaven. After seven years Christ would return with his saints at the Second Coming to begin the Millennium. The date of the Rapture could not be calculated? it could happen at any moment.*"*' The impact of this teaching upon Darby's followers has been analyzed by one of his former friends and followers, Francis W. Newman, the brother of Cardinal Newman. The importance of this doctrine is, that it totally forbids all working for earthly objects distant in time....For instance, if a youth had a natural aptitude for mathematics, and he asked, ought he to give himself to its study, in hope that he might diffuse a serviceable knowledge of it, or possibly even enlarge the boundaries of the science? my friend would have replied, that such .a purpose was very proper, if entertained by a worldly man....But such studies cannot be followed by the Christian, except when he yields to unbelief ....In fact, what would it avail even to become a second La Place after thirty years' study, if in five and thirty years the Lord descended from heaven, snatching up all His saints to meet him, and burning to ashes all the works of the earth?...the highest Christian must necessarily decline the pursuit of science, knowledge, art, history,—except so far as any of .these things might be made useful tools for immediate spiritual results. He only wanted men to submit their understanding to God, that js^to the Bible, that is to his understanding of the Bible.*" That apocalyptic mentality, which was devoid of social concern, has been captured by the autobiography of the literary critic Edmund Gosse, whose father, Phillip Gosse, an eminent naturalist, was part of Darby's movement/y The other promoter of the Rapture concept, Edward Irving (1792-1334), was a Presbyterian minister who had been the assistant of Thomas Chalmers. Irving not only adopted the Rapture idea, but also Margaret Macdonald's "pentecostalism" (which Darby had rejected). Soon "speaking in tongues," private revelations, and the pre-tribulation Rapture -36-idea became part of Irving's services in London. In 1833 Irving was tried by the Church of Scotland for heresy and defrocked because he had claimed that Christ's human nature was sinful. ~ Irving's followers established a new cult similar to the Plymouth Brethren and aimed at restoring primitive Christianity. Known as the Catholic Apostolic Church, it mixed pentecostalism, divine healing, prophecy, and high-church ritual. It also re-established an order of apostles, sent out missionaries around the world, and expected the Rapture to occur in the 1860s. The Irvingites, as they were also called, did not have the same success as Darby's followers in the propagation of their beliefs. Their "Pentecostal" practices were considered 30 heretical by many dispensationalists, and their Catholic ritual offended most Protestants. They were also discredited by their failed attempts at setting dates for the return of Christ. Although the Plymouth Brethren remained small in numerical size their influence far exceeded their numbers. Darby made repeated trips to Europe and North America where his dispensationalism was adopted by many laymen and some clergymen.Jl Darby's most famous convert was the self-taught American evangelist Dwight L. Moody. After Moody attended a Brethren conference in Dublin in 1867 he brought back Brethren literature to distribute to his audiences. Concerning the writings of Darby's associate C.H. Mackintosh, Moody is quoted as saying: <I> was so pleased and at the same time so profited by the way they opened up the Scripture truths that I secured all the writings of the same author, and if they could not be replaced, would rather part with my entire library, excepting my Bible, than with these writings. They have been to me a very key to the Scriptures. The Plymouth Brethren and their splinter groups developed a new historiography. Since they had rejected the established Catholic, Greek -37-Orthodox, Lutheran, Reformed, and Wesleyan. forms of Christianity they looked elsewhere for their roots. They found them in the popular medieval heresies, particularly the Paulicians, Bogomils, Waldensians and the dualist Albigensians who were persecuted by the Catholic Church. All of those groups had been influenced in some way by Marcion's extreme Pauline and dualistic theology, and by the Manichaeans to some extent. The Paulicians, Bogomils, Waldensians, and Albigensians received an honoured place in 33 Brethren historiography. Another contemporary restorationist cult, the Seventh-Day Adventists, found its roots in the Waldensians and Albigensians.^ Because the Albigensians in southern France and northern Italy had been persecuted by the Catholic church during the 13th and 14th centuries, Brethren writers assumed that they were part of the "true" church which had been uncorrupted by Catholicism. The Albigensians or Cathars (the pure ones) were actually neo-Manichaens because they had a strong dualist theology,^ Even though many of the Albigensians were killed and their works burned, their ideas went underground and periodically reappeared in popular theology. In his Institutes John Calvin condemned some of the Manichaen ideas which had crept into Christian theology in his own day. He maintained that people were attributing more powers to Satan than were warranted from the Bible." For sake of clarity we will call this thinking neo-Manichean. Consciously or unconsciously the Brethren adopted aspects of that dualistic theology and sought to renounce "the world, the flesh and the Devil." That dualist mentality was soon manifested in a heightened demonology. The Devil was seen everywhere playing havoc with people's lives. That view was popularized in the works of the Brethren writer, George H. Pember, who wrote in the 1870s and whose books are still being printed by fundamentalist publishing houses. Pember accepted the reality of spiritualism, witchcraft, and the possibility of sexual intercourse between humans and demons. He may also have invented the "gap" theory for Genesis, which taught that there had been a pre-Adamic creation which had been destroyed by God after the fall of Lucifer, and which had occurred between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2. The gap may have lasted millions of years and was used by Pember to reconcile the geological record with the biblical account of creation.^ Another Brethren writer, Jessie Penn-Lewis, who followed Pember's views, maintained that Christians could become demon possessed. Her book, 38 War on the Saints, is still in print and sold in Christian bookstores." She 33 also wrote the only chapter on Satan in The Fundamentals. The books of Pember and Penn-Lewis created a condition of collective paranoia among their readers. The neo-Manichaean views of Pember and Penn-Lewis 411 received a fuller treatment in Lewis Sperry Chafer's Systematic Theology, the main theological text of Dallas Theological Seminary, the leading dispensational school in North America. That heightened sense of demonology also found expression in eschatology, particularly in reference to the Antichrist, a pseudo-messiah who was to appear in the Last Days. Since the thirteenth century the papacy, as an institution, had been labelled the Antichrist by various Holy Roman emperors, heretics, and reformers, including Luther. That view became the standard premillennial view. Catholic eschatology, on the other hand, saw the Antichrist as a distinct individual. Within medieval Catholicism there was a popular belief that the antichrist would be a J e w . 42 This no doubt) reflected the anti-Judaism of the period. During the Counter-Reformation the Jesuit theologians Bellarmine and Ribera postulated that the Antichrist was still a future personage. He would be a Jew. The Darbyite dispensationalists] whose eschatology was no doubt heightened by the exploits of Napoleonj also rejected the identification of the papacy with the Antichrist. Darby] who read Bellarmine, adopted his 44 futuristic eschatology. Darby and his followers saw the Antichrist as a coming political "superman," an apostate Jew. This idea was developed in the works of Sir Robert Anderson] sometime head of Scotland Yard and an early follower of Darby. Anderson's book) The Coming Prince: The Last  Great Monarch of Christendom, depicted the Antichrist as having the characteristics of Alexander the Great) Antiochus E p i p h e n e S ) Judas, Neroi and Napoleon,^ '"' The Antichrist "myth" saw further development at the Prophetic Conference held in Chicago in 188S. Rev. W.G. Moorehead of Xenia (United Presbyterian) Theological Seminary presented a paper in which he stated that the Antichrist would be the Devil incarnate. 4 6 Other commentators in that "prophetic circle" let their imaginations run wild and suggested that 47 the Antichrist would be Judas reincarnated. These ideas gained wider circulation at the Niagara Bible 48 Conferences which were held yearly at Niagara-on-the-Lake) Ontario and through the apocalyptic novels of Sydney Watson. Watson (1847-1917), a former waif and sailor] became a Primitive Methodist preacher who held 49 meetings throughout England. •" He was highly influenced by Brethren - 4 0 -writers, particularly Sir Robert Anderson. In 1910 Watson published a romantic novel set in Victorian England. Entitled, In The Twinkling of An Eye, the book described the events leading up to the Rapture."'0 That book was followed in 1911 by The Mark of the Beast, which described the terrors of those living through the reign of the Antichrist during the Tribulation. j 1 Another a p o c a l y p t i c novel, The New Europe, was f i l l e d with 52 dispensationalism and fears of a Revived Roman Empire." Watson's books were also marked by a strong anti-clericalism and anti-Roman Catholicism. Watson's In the Twinkling of an Eye and The Mark of the Beast are still published by Fleming H. Revel!, one of the leading fundamentalist publishers. .Another book of similar genre was Constancia Serjeant's When the Saints are Gone, which was set during the Tribulation and had the Antichrist as being able to materialize at will. Her book also reflected Brethren anti-clerical attitudes which saw the established church as 53 worldly. Watson and Serjeant's books were early attempts at writing Christian "science fiction" and were, on the whole, better written than those 54 which followed." Unfortunately, many of their readers regarded their novels as doctrinal treatises. Another aspect of neo-Manichaeism which formed the background of fundamentalism was the Keswick holiness movement which developed in Britain in 1875, and in which many Brethren members and writers such as Jessie Penn-Lewis and Sydney Watson participated. That movement ultimately originated from the beliefs and activities of certain Catholic mystics, particularly Jeanne Marie Bcuvier de la Mothe Guyon (1648-1717). Madame Guyon was born into a wealthy, aristocratic French family. In her autobiography she claimed that she was rejected by her mother and -41-was shuffled from convent to convent. Her relationship with her half-siblings was also poor and she claimed that they physically abused her.5"' At the age of fifteen she was married) against her wishes) to a man twenty-two years older than herself. Her marriage was exceedingly unhappy and she found solace in the mystical writings of St. Teresa of Avila] Francis de Sales) Thomas A'Kempis, and Ignatius Loyola! but she carried their ideas to extremes. Guyon's thinking was very neo-Manichaean. She may have been influenced in this regard by the Catholic mystics. Runciman notes that St. Francis had been influenced by the Cathars and that their neo-Manichaean views had been perpetuated by the Spiritual Franciscans. 5 5 Guyon may also have come into direct contact with Albigensian ideas which still persisted in the regions of southern France where she travelled. As one reads Guyon's autobiography one is struck by her morbidity. As a child she had a strong death wish and hoped for martyrdom. After her marriage she tried to cut out her tongue.57 Everywhere she saw enemies and persecutors: her mother, her half-brothers and sisters, her husband, her mother-in-law, her maids, and the priests. Her comments make one suspect that she was a paranoid schisophrenic. As Madame Guyon pursued her mysticism she came to believe that she could achieve union with God through "self-crucifixion" and by becoming 58 "nothing." She dispensed with her jewelry, neglected her hair, wore plain clothing, and gave away vast amounts of her wealth. Her belief in sanctification (being made holy) or union with the divine became so extreme that she believed that she personally would become the physical bride of Christ. While still married to Guyon, she composed a marriage contract with =19 Christ." As she read her Bible she believed that the description of the "corner-stone of the New Jerusalem" referred to herself. She would be the Queen of Heaven. Yes, I will be in Him dominatrice of those who dominate! those who are subjugated to me by the force of His divine authority, from which they will never be able to separate themselves without separating themselves from God, Himself! what I will bind, shall be bound! what I will untie, shall be untied! and I am this stone fixed to the cross...in whom the Lord has Himself chosen to embody this Jerusalem, descending from Heaven, pompous ana^triumphant, as a wife who leaves the wedding bed. After Guyon's husband died in 1676 she travelled throughout France, Switzerland, and Italy preaching her version of mysticism in various convents. Among her followers were a Barnabite friar named La Combe, Archbishop Fenelon (1651-1715), and Madame de Maintenon, the mistress of Louis XIV. Guyon and her circle became known as Quietists because they believed the "still small voice of God" could be heard within them if they had crucified "self." Possibly because of her undue influence on his mistress, Louis XIV sought to silence Guyon and her followers. La Combe, condemned as a heretic by the Inquisition, died in prison. Fenelon was banished. His Quietism later developed into pantheism and he became one of the forerunners of the French Enlightenment. Louis XIV ordered the arrest of Madame Guyon and she was put in the Bastille for four years. In 1701 she was released but spent the rest of her life under arrest in religious houses. Madame Guyon's writings were examined by Bishop Bossuet who condemned thirty of her propositions as heretical or inclined to be misleading. Because of her belief in divine union she had dispensed with prayer! since she taught that one could arrive at a state of sinlessness, confession, and penance were also unnecessary.^'1 The writings and ideas of Madame Guyon were adopted by various Protestants because they saw her as a Protestant, which she was not. John ' 62 Wesley had read both Guyon and Fenelon in his search Tor holiness. The Quakers were also infuenced by her writings. In the United States Thomas C. Upham (1799-1372), a Congregational minister and philosophy professor in New England, found sanctification at a Methodist meeting. He began to promote Madame Guyon's mysticism and became her biographer . 6 w For many years Moody Press in Chicago published her autobiography. Guyon's mysticism became a major feature of the Keswick holiness movement which had been developed by three Americans and transferred to Britain. William E. Boardman, a Presbyterian minister from Illinois, who had been influenced by the Wesleyan writings of Charles G. Finney and Asa Mahan, advocated the doctrine of sanctification in his book, The Higher  Christian Life, which was published in 1859. His ideas gained a wide following as he held holiness conferences throughout the United States and Britain. The two other persons responsible for developing the concepts of the Higher Christian Life (also known as the Deeper Christian Life, the Victorious Christian Life, and the Overcoming Life) were Robert Pearsall Smith and his wife, Hannah Whitall Smith (1332-1911). Hannah was the more dominant and famous of the two. Both of them came from staunch Quaker families and Hannah was particularly inclined towards mysticism; she had read Madame Guyon, Fenelon, and other mystics who advocated "a life of introspection and self-abandonment."65 The Smiths remained Quakers until they were baptized by a Baptist minister in 1859.66 For some time afterwards they came under the influence of the Plymouth Brethren.67 Then in 1868 they became exposed to a Methodist Holiness group which taught -44-sanctification and a post-conversion experience which they called the second blessing or the Baptism of the Holy Spirit. While the Smiths sought thisi Robert had an ecstatic experience which Hannah later described: Suddenly from head to foot, Robert was shaken with what seemed like a magnetic thrill of heavenly delight and floods of glory seemed to pour through him, soul and body, with the inward assurance that his was the longed-for Baptism of the Holy Spirit. The whole world seemed transformed to him, every leaf and blade of grass quivered with exquisite colour and heaven seemed to open out before him as a blissful possession. Everything looked beautiful to him, for he seemed to see the divine spirit wit.hin each one without regard to their outward seemings. Hannah tried prayer and fasting, but she never experienced the S3 "blessing" which Robert had received, one possible reason being that it may have had more to do with his mental illness than with his spirituality. For some time Robert had been suffering from some form of schizophrenia or manic-depressive illness. In 1861 Hannah had written in her diary, "He <Robert> doesn't sleep at night. His thinking is disordered. He takes endless walks up and down the beach, returning all dishevelled, with a wild look in his eyes."70 In 1872 Robert suffered another nervous breakdown and went to a private sanitarium at Clifton Springs, New York. While there the Smiths were told by his "doctor" that sexual feelings and orgasms were manifestations of the Holy Spirit. 7 1 This "revelation" became part of their 72 theology and both Robert and Hannah taught this to their acquaintances. The following year Robert went to another mental clinic in Switzerland. Shortly afterwards Hannah learned that he was holding evangelistic meetings in England and receiving large crowds. His depression seemed to have disappeared. She joined him and together with W.E. Boardman they spread the message of the "Higher Christian Life." -45-Robert Pearsall Smith became a religious celebrity as he toured Britain. His picture was prominently displayed on posters around the 73 country and he was making a tidy profit from the sales of his photograph. In 1875, at Brighton, the Smiths addressed eight thousand people who had assembled to hear their messages on holiness. The contents of Hannah's sermons no doubt resembled the ideas in her second book which was published that year. The Christian's Secret of a Happy Life emphasized 74 "self-crucifixion" and the Brethren concept of separation from the world. / 7=; Although she did not mention Guyon by name, she quoted from Fenelon. While in England Hannah kept some of her more radical views to herself; she believed in universalism and denied the existence of eternal punishment.76 Hannah's book became a Christian classic and more than two million copies have been sold. 7 7 While the Smiths were spreading their message of holiness, D.L. Moody was also holding meetings in England. He sent his blessings to the conference at Brighton. It developed into the annual Keswick conferences which attracted "Open" Brethren, Methodists, evangelical Anglicans, Baptists, and many others. Before the conference was over Hannah went to Switzerland for a holiday and then learned that Robert had suddenly gone to Paris after suffering another nervous breakdown. He had, but only when forced to leave the convention after being found late at night in the bedroom of one of his young female admirers. She accused him of attempted rape. He explained to Hannah that he had only been explaining to the girl "the precious doctrine" he had picked up at Clifton Springs. "I told her how Christ wanted us to feel thrills up and down our bodies because this would make us feel closer to -46-78 Him." u The British press made much of the scandal. The Smiths left Europe in disgrace) but it was not long before they were again holding holiness meetings in the United States. Robert's scandal was conveniently covered up. Hannah continued to search for the baptism of the Holy Spirit and personally investigated the multiplicity of cults that taught divine union and divine guidance. Her search took her into various Utopian communities and free-love societies. In a manuscript which was published post-humously by her grand-daughter, Hannah described her search for religious guidance.7^ In 1879 Hannah met a Methodist minister who rented the house next door to them. He and his female disciples followed the Guyonese theology of "death-to-self" and divine guidance. Hannah found their views convincing. The thing which interested me at first was the remarkable way in which they seemed to understand the guidance of the Holy Spirit in all the little daily affairs of life....their way of looking continually, moment by moment, to the Lord for His Guidance, and their perfect certainty that He did indeed, according to His promise direct their every step, seemed to invest them with an atmosphere of holiness and conscious presence of the Lord in such a way that made itself felt by everyone who came into their presence. They seemed literally to live and move and have their being in God. And to a soul, hungering as mine was to know the utmost possibilities of the life hid with Christ in God, it seemed that it ought to be almost like entering the very gates of Heaven to be in their presence, and I '-threw myself with int_pnse eagerness into their teaching and their influence. Hannah's neighbours sought God's guidance in everything they did. She interpreted their neurosis as spirituality, but she could not make their 81 system of divine guidance work for her.u Hannah also acquired a creedless type of pantheism from that cult: "the great thing in religion is to live and move and have our being in God. Not in experience, not in views, nor in doctrines, nor in anything of any kind, but simply in God alone."wi" However, within six months Hannah became disillusioned after hearing that the Methodist minister had impregnated his female disciples, telling 3^ them that they were going to bear a special divine race of children. " By December 1879 Hannah ceased her search for the "inner voice" and the Baptism of the Holy Spirit, but hung on to the pantheistic views which she ' 34 had picked up from these friends and from the works of Fenelon. From her quest for holiness Hannah turned to the women's suffrage and the temperance campaigns, working with feminists Susan B. Anthony and Frances Willard. In 1883 the Smiths moved to England to be near their daughter Mary who was married to a member of Parliament. The Smith's friends included many of the Fabian circle and famous literati: the Webbs, Oscar Wilde, George Santayana, George Bernard Shaw, and Bertrand Russell. But Hannah Whitall Smith experienced little of the happiness of which her book spoke. Robert had several mistresses and became an atheist. Four of their seven children had died as youngsters. The surviving children also caused her grief. They appeared to have inherited their father's mental illness which Hannah's biographer has identified as manic-depression. Mary had a breakdown and shortly afterwards deserted her husband and children, and became the mistress and later wife of the art critic Bernard Berenson. Alys married atheist Bertrand Russell. Logan, who became a noted literary critic, was also afflicted with manic-depression. " To comfort herself in those tragedies Hannah Whitall Smith returned to the mysticism of Fenelon. Her "secret of the happy Christian life" was to "crucify self" and to distrust the emotions. Although Hannah and Robert Pearsall Smith had little contact with -48-the Keswick movement after the scandal of 1375, Hannah's books were widely read by that group. Madame Guyon and Fenelon's mysticism which emphasized the "crucified life," divine union, and divine guidance became a prominent part of the teaching at the annual Keswick conferences and in the writings of members of that group. The Keswick theology rejected the Wesleyan perfectionism! the focus centered on"victory over sin by "letting go and letting God" live your life. In his critique of the Keswick movement Anglican theologian J.I. Packer has noted some characteristics of its participants: Their tendency is to grow legalistic, making tight rules for themselves and others about abstaining from things indifferent, imposing rigid and restrictive behaviour patterns as bulwarks against worldliness and attaching great importance to observing these man-made taboos. They become Pharisaic, more concerned to avoid what defiles and adhere to principle without compromise than to practice the love of Christ. They become scrupulous, unreasonably fearful of pollution where none threatens and obstinately unwilling to be reassured. They become joyless, being so preoccupied with thoughts of how grim and unrelenting the battle is. They become morbid, always introspective and dwelling on the rottenness of their hearts in a way that breeds only gloom and apathy. They become pessimistic about the possibility of moral progress, both for themselves and for others! they settle for low expectations of deliverance from sin, as if the best they can hope for is to be kept from getting worse. Such attitudes are, however, spiritual neurosis, distorting, disfiguring, diminishing and so in reality d i s h o n o r i n g the sanctifying work of God's Spirit in our lives." The same attitudes were reflected in the music which was popularized by the Keswick meetings. Hymns of worship and praise were replaced by syrupy, sentimental, and introspective "gospel" songs written by Frances Ridley Havergal (1836-1879), Fanny Crosby (1323-1915), Philip Bliss (1838-1876), and Ira David Sankey (1840-1908). Havergal's Take My Life and Let It Be, Crosby's Jesus Keep Me Near the Cross and I am Thine Q Lord, -49-and Georgiana M. Taylor's Oh, to be Nothing reflected the Guyonese themes of "self-crucifixion" and passive surrender. Concerning the latter song? Qh> to be Nothingi Harry Emerson Fosdick noted that those following that 98 theology often achieved what they sang.u These songs reflected a siege or lifeboat mentality which reflected premillennial pessimism. Gone were the themes of the church militant and triumphant. Sandra Sizer notes that such songs depicted the individual "as the passive recipient of blows dealt by inimical impersonal forces." This is indeed the first important stategic move of gospel-hymn rhetoric: to portray the human condition as that of a passive victim. The solution to the difficulty is equally passive: to rest in some safe place. Those who are saved hide "in the hollow of God's hand," in the bosom of Jesus, or the cleft of the Rock of Ages! they find safety in a lifeboat which lands^at a quiet shore or harbor! the journey ends at "home."'"" Fanny Crosby's Safe in the Arms of Jesus was representative of that mood. Sizer has further noted: We find, then, some distinctive and mutually reinforcing patterns in the gospel hymns collected by Ira Sankey. They portray human beings as passive victims, tossed about in an evil world! saved by passive, passionate, and almost erotic surrender to an equally passive deity. The hymns focus on the emotional life, in which Christians pour out their hearts in supplication, join with Jesus in intimate union, and qshare their experiences by witnessing to one another." Another characteristic of that music was the preponderance of first-person pronouns. Even with all of the talk of self-crucifixion which characterized the Keswick movement there was a strong element of narcissism in its songs. An extreme example of that' can be seen in C. Austin Miles' song, I Walk in the Garden Alone, which was strongly erotic. Through the activities of D.L. Moody and his associate Ira D. Sankey, the Keswick emphasis became very prominent in evangelicalism and its music became incorporated into many denominational hymnbooks. Another schismatic sect influenced by the Keswick movement was the Salvation Army. William Booth, its founder, left the Methodist ministry because he refused to accept ecclesiastical direction. His wife, who had a 91 considerable influence upon his theology, came from a Quaker background." They followed and promoted a practice of using the Bible as a personal oracle. In seeking divine guidance they would let a Bible fall open and the 92 first verse they read would be regarded as a divine message to them." Their unorthodox theology was heightened when they visited with the Robert Pearsall Smiths during the 1875 holiness meetings at Brighton."" The theology which the Booths created was feminist, holiness oriented, anti-sacramental, elitist, and neo-ManichaeanJ they were engaged in a war against the Devil and regarded themselves as the only "true" Christians. The Salvation Army quickly became a family corporation! most of the leadership positions were held by the Booth children. William Booth assumed the position of "General" and his followers donned other military titles. The Booths became religious celebrities and marketed Salvation Army china and 94 pocket watches, both of which displayed their pictures." The Salvation Army had a marked lower class appeal. The military titles and uniforms of the Salvationists, along with their social work programs among the poor, attracted those who desired to improve their status. The Salvation Army offered them an unconventional religion. Formal worship and the sacraments were discarded. The tunes of popular songs were often converted into gospel songs. To attract attention to their message the Salvationists often staged bizarre spectacles with their marching bands and frequently they were thrown into jail for deliberately disturbing the peace.""' That kind of sensationalism was later copied by many of the fundamentalists. A further aspect of the intellectual underworld which found expression in fundamentalism was British-Israelism, a chauvenistic belief which maintained that the British peoples were the descendants of ten tribes of Israel, that members of the British royal family were literal descendants of King David, and that Britain had a special place in the divine economy. British-Israelism developed at end of the eighteenth century, although portions of the theory had existed for two centuries earlier. A significant person in the development of British-Israelism was Richard Brothers (1757-1825) who was born at Placentia, Newfoundland. After a career in the Royal Navy, Brothers began writing on biblical prophecy and claiming to be the divinely-appointed ruler of England. He was tried and convicted for treason and sent to a lunatic asylum after he had demanded 96 that King George III turn over the British crown to him. Brothers, however, was able to gain a following and his ideas gained circulation. As the theory developed, its advocates split over the question of whether the Teutons and others could be identified with the Ten Lost Tribes of Israel. The dominant group, led by Edward Hine (1825-1391), employed a curious mixture of biblical prophecy, heraldry, numerology, racism, and a specious use of philology to identify the Teh Lost Tribes as the British peoples and 9 7 Americans. British-Isaelites also claimed that the measurements of the Great Pyramid of Egypt contained prophetic messages concerning the role of Britain and the United States in world affairs, and the Second Coming of -52-98 Christ. Closely linked with pyramidology was a belief that the signs of the Zodiac had originally been given by God to tell the gospel message before the Bible was written) but that astrologers had corrupted their meanings. After the accretions were removed] the gospel could be read in the stars. These ideas were, picked up and propogated by various dispensationalists including an American Lutheran minister Joseph A Seiss (1823-1904), the Anglican divine Ethelbert Bullinger (1337-19135, and the 99 apocalyptic novelist Sydney Watson." The star studies by Bullinger and Seiss are still being reprinted. Another strange feature of British-Isaelism was its use of numerology which found numerical significances in words. The most extravagant numerological theory was propounded by Ivan Panin (1355-1942), a Russian exile who lived outside of Burlington, Ontario. Panin moved in British-Israel c i r c l e s 1 ^ and claimed that there was a divinely planned mathematical formula stretching throughout the Hebrew and Greek manuscripts of the Bible. Textual errors could be identified when the proper number sequence was missing.1^ With his theory Panin produced his own 102 corrected New Testament. Panin's numerical ideas were reprinted in the monthly publication of the Bible Institute of Los Angeles and were hailed as an apologetic wonder. B r i t i s h - I s r a e l i s m or A n g l o - I s r a e l i s m was normally a supra-denominational organization, not forming a separate church or sect, but working within the existing Protestant churches, hoping to persuade their members of their "true" identity and their automatic salvation based on their "Israelite" ancestry. Because their meetings were not usually held in competition with regular Sunday church services, allegiance to British-Israelite beliefs did not in that way conflict with denominational loyalties, A number of Anglican, Methodist, and Presbyterian ministers were active in the organization and made their church facilities available for its 104 use. The organization appears to have had a stronger membership outside of Britain, particularly in Canada, Australia, and the United States. Some sects and cults, such as the Jehovah's Witnesses and Herbert W. Armstrong's Worldwide Church of God, borrowed heavily from British-Israelism. It also heavily influenced a number of those fundamentalists whose biographies are included in this study: Airnee Semple McPherson, William Aberhart, and Clem Davies. Because of their identification of themselves as the "elect" descendents of Israel, British-Israelites were frequently anti-Semitic, making a distinction between Israelites and post-exilic Jews whom they regarded as racially and religiously inferior. Jesus, according-to their theories, was not a J e w J ^ The concept of the Aryan origin of Jesus was invented by Theodor Fritsch and popularized in England by Houston Stewart Chamberlain's Foundations of the Nineteenth Century, which spread the Aryan myth of Anglo-Saxon racial superiority. 1 0 6 As the son-in-law of Richard Wagner, Chamberlain was much read in Germany and his book was one of the few books which Hitler acknowledged as being important in his intellectual development.107 While most British-Israelites rejected Nazism, there was a common basis in their ideologies of racial supremacy. It is interesting to note that today, the neo-Nazi Aryan Nations group is a British-Israel sect.10** 109 While some dispensationalists denounced British-Israelism and some British-Israelites denounced dispensationalism,110 there was a great degree of cross-fertilization of their ideas at the popular level. William Aberhart accepted both ideologies. Ernest R. Sandeen identifies the "Princeton Theology" as another major influence on fundamentalism.111 Several of the professors at Princeton Theological Seminary) especially A.A. Hodge and B.B. Warfield) had developed' in the late nineteenth century a very complicated theory of biblical inspiration and inerrancy.11^ Christians over the ages had believed that the Bible had been divinely inspired) but they had differences about what was inspired and what was not. • Luther considered the Epistle of James to be the "epistle of straw." Calvin had his doubts about the Book of Revelation. However) Hodge and Warfield developed a new form of scholasticism to compete with the current theories of papal infallibility and the negative attitudes of the higher critics. Hodge and Warfield created a "paper pope" by claiming that the Bibles in its original autographs, had been divinely inspired even to the words used and was without error. Their theory of plenary verbal inspiration suggested a mechanical dictation from God without the writers' personalities playing any part. Yet, they denied that implication.11^ However, since the original autographs were not extant, these Princeton theologians found themselves in an intellectual cul  de sac. To argue as they did about the infallible, inerrant, and inspired original autographs was as productive as the medieval question of how many angels could dance on the head of a pin. Even though many fundamentalists did not understand the views of Hodge and Warfield) they adopted their term} "plenary verbal inspiration!" it became a shibboleth in fundamentalist literature and discouraged biblical criticism. It should be noted however) that the "Princeton theology" was the minority view among American Presbyterians. Many of the above-mentioned ideas—dispensationalism! apocalypt-icism, neo-Manichaeism, Pember's "gap" theory! Keswick holiness, British-Israelism, and plenary verbal inspiration—found expression in the 1903 publication of the Scofield Reference Bible, an annotated Bible which became the Bible of fundamentalism. It sold millions of copies. 1 1^ Cyrus Ingersol Scofield (1343-1921) was a self-taught lawyer who became a politician and district attorney in Kansas. His personal history is rather cloudy, but recent evidence suggests that he was fired and sent to prison for forgery and perjury. 1 1 6 Scofield came to the attention of the religious public after he became an associate of D.L. Moody. Most of Scofield's theology came from Plymouth Brethren sources and he produced a King James Version of the Bible with dispensational notes. Through Plymouth Brethren contacts in Britain he was able to get Oxford University Press to publish it. For many of those who were raised in fundamentalist churches and Bible institutes the Scofield Reference Bible became their only Bible and commentary. The experience of William E. Cox, quoted below, was the experience of many of them. ...in <my> Baptist church...almost everyone carried a Scofield Bible. My spiritual tutors knew the footnotes and headings placed in the Bible by C.I. Scofield, as well as they knew the Bible itself. Indeed, the two became almost synonymous in their minds even as they were destined to become in my own mind. Even today it is difficult at times to clear my mind of some of Scofield's presuppositions...acting on the advice of Scofield, himself, I had distrusted the outstanding Bible commentaries and had felt that all I needed for a thorough understanding of th^ Bible was supplied by the notes of my favorite "Bible." The Scofield Reference Bible was rejected by the mainline churches because of its anti-clericalisrrn its two systems of salvation, and its anti-nomianism," its notes stated that the Synoptic Gospels and certain of the Epistles did not apply to Christians because they were addressed to Jews. Fundamentalist attitudes towards the Jews were paradoxical. On the one hand the leading fundamentalist authors including Scofield, W;E. Blackstone (1841-1935), James M. Gray (1851-1935), and Arno C. Gaebelein (1 SSI-1945) claimed that the Jews were God's chosen people and they 119 actively promoted the return of the Jews to Palelstine. ' However, their dispensational attitude dispensed with most of the Bible because it was "Jewish." In their eschatology they also depicted the Jews as the dupes of the Antichrist. Those contradictions can be partly explained by centuries of Catholic and Protestant antipathy towards the Jews as Christ-killers in league with the Devil,1 ^  Christian "triumphalism," and negative socio-economic situations into which Jews had been forced.1^1 It is also significant, that Sir Robert Anderson, the dispensationalist who contributed so heavily to fundamentalist eschatology, was personally known for his 122 anti-Semitism. When it came to the notorious Protocols of the Wise Men of Zion, which purported to be the transcript of a secret meeting between the Devil and leading Jews at which a machiavellian plot was hatched to rule the 123 world, James M. Gray, the editor of the Moody Monthly, accepted them as 124 substantially genuine because they fitted his view of eschatology. Indeed some fundamentalist publishers reprinted the Protocols side by side 125 with their premillennial eschatology. Gray also argued that even though Henry Ford had published the Protocols in his Dearborn Independent, he was not anti-Semitic. *" Yet, for all of their denunciations of anti-Semitism, fundamentalists contained a latent anti-Semitism in their views. • That curiosity was very evident in the life and career of Arno C. Gaebelein, one of the consulting editors of the Scofield Reference Bible and a leading fundamentalist.1^7 Gaebelein, a German immigrant, was self-taught. He became an ordained Methodist minister and operated a successful mission to the Jews in New York City. However, after he came into contact with Scofield and Plymouth Brethren views he left the Methodist i ••JO Church and advised Hebrew-Christians to renounce their Jewish culture. For many years Gaebelein produced a monthly magazine, Our Hope, which stressed Jewish evangelism and premillennial eschatology. His views became increasingly neo-Manichaean and his 1933 book The Conflict of the Ages: The Mystery of Lawlessness: Its Origin, Historic Development and Coming Defeat accepted the authenticity of the Protocols and the 129 conspiracy theories of Nesta Webster, " a British anti-Semitic writer, who saw the Jews behind most of the revolutions and disasters of history. However, when Gaebelein learned the real fate of Jews in Germany under Hitler, he attempted to get the American government to act on their behalf. Because fundamentalists had limited education and their views were so dominated by conspiracy theories their understanding of world politics was rather limited. Their strong anti-Catholicism led them very early to see 1 31 Mussolini as a hero. "' Later they saw him as the Antichrist or his 132 predecessor. During the early years of Hitler's activities they were noticeably silent and when they did mention him, he was seen as a bulwark 133 against Catholicism and Communism. " The same anti-catholic attitude appears to have been responsible for Moody Monthly's publication of articles by Robert (Bob) Shuler of Trinity Methodist Church in Los Angeles and 134 others, which supported the Ku Klux Rlan. In the world that was changing too fast for them, the fundamentalists grasped at intellectual straws, medieval heresies, and conspiracy theories. Some of those intellectual sources are charted on page 59 infra. Many of the books of the intellectual underworld upon which they built their theology—books by Madame Guyon, George H. Pember, Sir Robert Anderson, Jessie Penn-Lewis, Hannah Whitall Smith, Ethelbert Bullinger, Joseph Seiss, Sidney Watson, and Cyrus Scofield—are still being published by fundamentalist publishers. Those books have had a great impact upon the popular theology of fundamentalism and have created an attitude of passivity, mysticism, sectarianism and anti-intellectualism, and a lack of social concern. Fundamentalism was considerably different from established Christianity. This was also reflected in its music and forms of worship. Its music was often superficial and lacking in theological depth. Gospel choruses replaced the hymns of the faith. As fundamentalists moved out of the established churches they held their meetings in halls, storefronts, 13S tents, and theatres. When fundamentalists built their own buildings they were often architecturally different from standard churches and were modelled after theatres, with the stage and pulpit, rather than the altar, being the pivotal point of attention. Rather than worship services, their meetings became performances with the attention directed upon sectarian leaders who often taught bizarre ideas which were not part of conventional Christianity. FIGURE I -59-SOME INFLUENCES ON FUNDAMENTALISM P E N T E C O S T A L I S M F U N D A M E N T A L I S M B R m S H - I S R A E L I S M - 6 0 -CHAPTER THREE THEOLOGICAL TRENDS IN CANADA, 1367 to 1945 Fundamentalism in Canada received much of its thrust from an aggressive spread of the underworld of ideas discussed in the previous chapter, particularly dispensational premillennialism and the Keswick holiness movement. Its success also had much to do with a reaction to the religious climate in the country following Confederation. Although an exhaustive study of mainline Protestant religion in Canada is beyond the scope of this chapter, the major theological and political trends which shaped the religious life of Canada in the first half of the twentieth century are traced. Those trends were church union, the national and social gospel, biblical criticism, and modernism. By examining in this chapter the ideas and careers of several well-known Canadian church leaders, the contrasts between mainline Christianity and the fundamentalist movement can be demonstrated. Goldwin French has stated that the "dominant strand in Canadian Protestantism" in nineteenth-century Canada "was evangelical."1 However, during the last quarter of the century, that theological consensus began to breakdown with the rise of liberalism and fundamentalism. The underworld of ideas which shaped fundamentalism came into Canada largely through the annual prophetic Bible conferences which were < 2 held at Miagara-on-the-Lake, Ontario, from 1833 to 1897. At those meetings dispensational premillennialism and Keswick holiness ideas became increasingly popular and attracted a wide range of Anglican, Presbyterian, and Baptist clergy from the Niagara peninsula and the Toronto area. Among the active participants were the Reverend Samuel Henry Kellogg (1839-1339) 3 of St. James' Square Presbyterian Church, Toronto, the Reverend Henry M. Parsons (1828-1913) of Knox Presbyterian Church, Toronto, the Reverend Elmore Harris (1854-1911) of Walmer Road Baptist Church, Toronto, son of a prominent industrialist, the Reverend Robert Cameron of Park Baptist Church in Brantford, the Right Reverend Maurice Baldwin (133S-1904), bishop of Huron, and Canon Dyson Hague (1357-1935) of London. The Niagara Bible Conferences helped create the network for fundamentalism throughout North America! some of its prominent participants were contributors to the Scofield Reference Bible, The  Fundamentals, Moody Monthly, and the Sunday School Times. Elmore Harris also organized a group of wealthy evangelicals which included Joseph Flavelle the banker and meat packer, and they established Toronto Bible Training School in 1894 as an alternative to regular theological education.4 The prophetic conferences attracted a considerable number of Anglican laymen,5 who were often well-educated, upper-middle class, and sophisticated. In spite of their exposure to the sectarian ideas associated with premillennialism, most remained churchmen and were active in social reform programs.6 Wycliffe College was founded by thern in 1877 to promote low-church Anglican conservative evangelicalism/ Wycliffe College contributed to the spread of the newly emerging fundamentalist ideas through several of its faculty, Dyson Hague and William Henry Griffith Thomas (1861-1924), in particular. As already mentioned, Hague was a participant in the Prophetic Conferences and the author of three contributions to The Fundamentals." Thomas was a leading dispensationalist, an advocate of Keswick holiness, and also a contributor q to The Fundamentals. ' Both men were contributors to Moody Monthly, the official organ of Moody Bible Institute, and the Sunday School Times, a Keswick publication. Thomas also taught at Toronto Bible College. In 1919 he became unhappy at Wycliffe and left to teach at Moody Bible Institute and become one of the founders of what became Dallas Theological Seminary, the major dispensational school in the world. Through the prophetic conferences, the Scofield Reference Bible, The  Fundamentals, various premillennial, dispensational, and Keswick periodicals, and visiting speakers from the United States who were part of the fundamentalist network, many evangelical Anglicans, Presbyterians, and Baptists in Canada were influenced by the popular ideas of fundamentalism. These influences had a much slighter effect upon Canadian Methodism, for premillennarian eschatology was at cross purposes with theological trends within Methodism which was aspiring to become the national church. One of the major religious currents in Canada beginning during the latter half of the nineteenth century was the emergence of what has been described as the "national gospel."10 It was a mixture of the social gospel movement and emerging Canadian nationalism. Especially within Methodism the themes of Christianizing and Canadianizing often became mixed and confused. As the Methodists experienced upward social mobility they lost much -63-of their revivalist image. Much more emphasis was placed on Horace BushnelVs concept of "Christian nurture" through education rather than upon conversion arising out of evangelistic campaigns.11 However i evangelistic campaigns did not entirely disappear? the well-known Methodist team of Crossley and Hunter remained active into the twentieth century. But) as the Methodists became more identified with the "establishment)" their ministry among the lower classes was replaced by the newly imported 12 Salvation Army. Inspired by Confederation various Methodist) Presbyterian, and Baptist groups united under denominational umbrellas to establish separate Canadian identities apart from their British or American parent groups. The 1 "3 formation of the Presbyterian Church in Canada took place in 1875. Various Methodists united by 1884. In 1388 open and closed communion Baptists formed the Baptist Convention of Ontario and Quebec J 4 Wider denominational union had been proposed before the turn of the century> but the concept received further substance in 1902. At the General Conference of the Methodist Church) held in Winnipeg) fraternal greetings were brought by the Reverend William Patrick) a Presbyterian minister who was the principal of Manitoba College. Without permission from the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church) Patrick proposed that talks towards church union be started between their two denominations. He saw this as a means by which Canada could lead the world in Christian unity, 1 5 By 1904 the Methodistst Presbyterians) and Congregationalists were involved in formal union talks. In 1906 the Anglicans and the Baptists were also invited) but each declined. The former would participate only if their episcopal system were adopted, and the latter preferred to keep their own -64-autonoimy. The fact that unification talks could take place even between the Presbyterians and Methodists demonstrated how far those denominations had moved away from their theological roots. Presbyterians were Calvinistic, while Methodistis were Arminian. Both groups also tended to represent different social classes and had different worship forms and polities. Many Presbyterians tended to be "wet," while Methodists were almost always "dry" on the temperance question. Nevertheless, the union talks reflected the spirit of theological liberalism, which emphasized religious co-operation rather than competition, and practical Christian living rather than quibbles over fine points of dogma.'6 Long before the creation of the United Church of Canada in 1925 union churches had been established on the Canadian prairies. When ministers were in short supply rural Methodist and Presbyterian churches temporarily joined. Even in western Canadian urban centres, such as Calgary, the costs of heating two different churches caused the Presbyterians and the Methodists in East Calgary to join for the winter months.17 This led to the wider feeling that if union could be achieved for necessity or economy, it could be achieved permanently. Organic union of the Methodist, Presbyterian, and Congregational churches was partly delayed by World War I. Almost all of the Methodists and Congregationalists were ready for union, but a strong vocal minority of Presbyterians resisted union. Many conservative Presbyterians feared that a creedless church was being created. Liberal Presbyterians expected the new church to be too revivalistic and "dry." Both poles of thought were also opposed to the coercive features of the union, for upon union the -65-Presbyterian Church would legally cease to exist and most of its property would be absorbed into the United Church of Canada, Much of the Presbyterian resistance to church union was located in urban central 18 Canada and the larger cities in the west. The push for church union was related to the social gospel movement which taught that Christianity had a social dimension: the church had to be involved in caring for man's physical welfare as well as his soul. Early pioneers in the American social gospel, such as Walter Rauschenbusch and Washington Gladden combined a deep evangelical piety with their efforts to 19 reform society. " In Canada the social gospel assumed its own distinct forms as it was mixed with Canadian nationalism. Richard Allen, in his momumental study, The Social Passion, has identified three streams of the social gospel. The conservative branch emphasized spiritual conversion as well as social reform, The progressive social gospellers felt that coercive legislation was required to bring in Prohibition, combat vice, and enforce eugenics and Sabbath observance. The radical social gospellers who emphasized social salvation over individual salvation, called for a restructuring of economic life along socialist principles, and in most cases left the organized church because they could not agree with its conservative theology and its links with the capitalist and political establishment.'"'"1 The social gospel had its advocates in the Methodist, Presbyterian, and Baptist denominations,*"1 but its strongest expression was found in the Methodist Church. The social gospel became most prominent in western Canada where newly formed communities did not have the necessary infra-structures to deal with the vast waves of immigrants who descended -66-upon the Canadian plains. Western Canada had a very transient population. Adequate housing, health care, and educational facilities were often lacking even for those who settled down. The resulting urban conditions forced many of the social gospellers to evolve into the first sociologists and social workers in western Canada, Two of the prominent social gospellers in western Canada were J.S. Woodsworth (1874-1942) and Hugh Wesley Dobson (1879-1956). Woodsworth was the more radical of the two. The Dobson Papers are a mine of information for the social history of western Canada and illustrate how the Methodist bureaucracy related to the issues of the . . 22 times. Dobson's voluminous correspondence suggests almost nothing of the traditional Methodist themes of anxiety over personal sin, a search for salvation, repentance, forgiveness, and sanctification, and involvement in personal prayer and Bible reading. It appears as if his emphasis on social service had pre-empted evangelistic concerns.-Dobson was a typical progressive social gospeller. He believed that the church should achieve its ends through lobbying governments and using the coercive power of the state. When the 1918 influenza epidemic paralyzed the city of Regina, Dobson almost singlehandedly organized emergency services. He wrote to his superior T. Albert Moore stating that city 23 officials needed to be guided by a firm hand. Within the Methodist church there were conficts between the advocates of the old-time religion and those, like Dobson, who mostly emphasized social work. A letter written to Dobson by a fellow Methodist minister in 1919 revealed that tension: Our biggest need in the valley is the regeneration of the individual—until considerably more have been -67-soundly converted and placed themselves definitely on the side of Christ for unselfish service—it does not seem muc,^  sense trying out- any community welfare schemes. Dobson responded) suggesting that religion had to be more than a private affair: •Jesus presented to the minds of his listeners the idea of the Kingdom. The Kingdom is always a society. That vision that he gave of the Kingdom led many to repent of their sins on their hearing of the Gospel to step out of their selfishness into a new commitment to the larger s,eal, and to commit themselves to its program, *"J Dobson's audiences saw little of old Methodist traditions in his sermons when he visited the prairie churches, One woman wrote to him in How I would like to see you out on an evangelistic campaign pleading with our Young People to give themselves to the Lord Jesus Christ. Do not think that I undervalue your work but someday I hope you will venture out on a campaign for souls. You know Legislation won't dp it. Education won't do it, but Salvation will do it." Dobson replied to her in a rather ambiguous fashion: I must say I do enjoy evangelistic work. I do not know any one way of saving humanity. God's ways are as complex as life itself is complex. What the future may have for me remains for the future and I shall endeavor to follow the guidance of God's spirit as the days come. Much of Dobson's time was also spent in promoting church union. He, like the Presbyertian novelist, C.W. Gordon (Ralph Connor), and many others believed that governments would have to yield to the dictates of a united o q church.*"u However, these emphases did not satisfy the conservatives and fundamentalists who remained within the mainline denominations. They seem to have felt that too much time was being spent by many of their church leaders on the social gospel, prohibition, and church union. The emerging secularized version of Christianity had lost its concept of the transcendence of God and had failed to answer the eternal questions: "who 29 am I, why am I here, and where am I going?" The secularized eschatology of the social gospellers was also repugnant to the majority of fundamentalists. The creation of the United Church of Canada became a fact on 10 June 1925. Although church union united some Christians it also caused further division. About one third of the Presbyterians remained out and considered themselves the ongoing Presbyterian Church. Most of their ministers had joined the United Church, leaving the Presbyterians with a critical manpower shortage and few churches. New Presbyterian churches had to be built. This created many hard feelings. Replacement ministers had to be secured from England, Scotland, and the United States. The terms of union for the United Church of Canada had many features which created more disunity. The United Church failed to deal adequately with the settlement of ministers. Sometimes Presbyterian churches which had joined the union, but whose ministers had stayed out, were assigned Methodist ministers. Former Presbyterian ministers who joined the United Church were often assigned to Methodist churches. Many congregations found themselves in uncomfortable situations because of new worship forms and some people quit going to church completely or they joined one of the many fundamentalist sects which promised them "the old-time qn religion."1" For those members of the congregations whose theology had been informed by dispensational premillennialism, Keswick holiness, or pentecostalism, the lack of focus on those issues by their United Church -69-31 ministers was seen as evidence of their "modernism." Others had more legitimate complaints. Some of their ministers had abandoned biblical preaching and were giving lectures on English literature." The United Church clergy was a mixed group, containing conservatives, liberals, and a few modernists. W. Harold Young's Great Canadian Preaching, which appeared in 1925, contained sermons by many United Church ministers and ministers of other mainline churches. While the selections may not have been completely representative, they were fairly 33 orthodox. " However, fundamentalists accused the mainline churches and especially the United Church of Canada of modernism. That "modernism" was more often perceived than real. Toward the end of the nineteenth century most of the colleges had been influenced by higher criticism of the Bible and theological liberalism. Queen's Theological College, under the direction of George Monro Grant, was 34 very "modernistic." But, even at the beginning of the twentieth century, biblical criticism in the Canadian theological colleges was mild compared to what was happening in Germany. The Canadian situation has been described as "reverent criticism".'^"' Even then there was a marked difference between what went on in the theological classroom and what was propounded from the pulpit. Theory and practice were usually kept separate.^6 Theological modernism accepted higher criticism of the Bible and the theory of evolution. Some modernists, however, went far beyond that. Extreme modernists, who were in a minority, completely rejected the traditional features of Christian theology. Christianity was just one of the many religions! its exclusiveness was denied. Man did not need a Saviour! social reform was the answer to society's problems. Christian theology was -70-replaced by spiritualism, pop-psychology, Christian Science, and New Thought. Ramsay Cook's Regenerators has traced these tendencies among some late nineteenth-century Canadian modernists.^ Such extreme modernism, however, was never officially accepted by the mainline denominations. Modernism was the most pronounced within Methodism in western Canada, particularly at Wesley College, where the social gospel emphasis predominated. Salem Bland, one of its star professors, rejected most 39 traditional Christian doctrines. u -So did J.S. Woodsworth. In 1902 Woodsworth wrote: At present life is to me a terrible tangle. My position sometimes seems almost unbearable. I am again in the woods--deeper than ever--and see no daylight ahe3d...Next Sunday is Easter. Think of doubting the Resurrection and then having to stand in a pulpit. The position is utterly ^ Ise. It drives me half-crazy at times to think of it. When Woodsworth submitted his resignation to the Manitoba Conference of the Methodist Church in 1307, and outlined his inability to accept traditional doctrines and Methodist practices, he was told by the Stationing Committee that his lack of belief did not stand in the way of his being a minister of 40 their denomination, and his resignation was not accepted. That response only intensified his theological perplexity. World War I was a crucial point in Canadian theological development. The war took on the character of a medieval crusade, a holy war to preserve British and Christian civilization. Almost all Protestant groups—liberal, conservative and fundamentalist—actively supported the war effort. They shared to some extent parts of a national gospel which mixed the social gospel, Canadian nationalism, and British imperialism. Before the war a strong pacifist stance was emerging among some of 41 the social gospellers. Methodist activist and novelist Nellie McClung believed that if women around the world had the vote there would be no more 42 war. But even she caved in to the war propaganda. So did Salem Bland. All but the most radical social gospellers heartily supported the war effort. In their efforts to prove themselves worthy of becoming a national church 43 most Methodists threw themselves into the war effort. The Presbyterians were equally patriotic. The Reverend C.W. Gordon, in his capacity as senior Protestant military chaplain for Canada, was an eager recruiter and promised eternal salvation to all those who lost their lives on the battlefield. 4 4 The painting of the war as a Christian crusade had drastic effects upon the churches. David Marshall has noted that many of the Methodist ministers and seminarians who went to the front as chaplains became 45 disillusioned and left the church. For those who remained in the church the barbarism of the war dampened but did not destroy their liberal optimism for the progress of civilization. The war also reinforced the conservatives' view of the sinfulness of man. By the end of World War I, when the modernist/fundamentalist controversy became more pronounced, most of the self-proclaimed "modernists" had been removed from the theological colleges or had left the mainline churches. Heresy charges had been levelled against George Workman at Victoria College in 1890-31 and at Wesleyan Theological College in 1907. He was removed from both institutions. George Jackson left Victoria College in 1913; there had been conflicts over his teaching in 1909 and 1910, but he was upheld by the Methodist General Conference.46 J.S. Woodsworth, who was far more radical in his theology, left the Methodist Church during World War I after a long struggle over his own beliefs and his 47 opposition to Methodist involvement in the war. , He and fellow Methodists William Ivens and A.E. Smith founded unitarian-style Labour churches which 48 were the epitome of modernism. William Irvine was aquitted of a heresy charge by the Presbyterian Church. He has described his modernist theology at that time. I was preaching sheer humanism. The supernatural had vanished. There were no miracles, no virgin birth, no atonement and no resurrection. Of course I did not put it to my congregation that way. I used everything in the Bible which could in any way support the Social Gospel. I did not mention nor criticize church doctrine except by inference to those who could follow logic. It took nearly two years for it to dawn on the people of Emo that I was not preaching to get people into heaven but that I w^s much more interested in getting heaven into people. Irvine left the Presbyterians in 1916 to become a Unitarian minister in Calgary and later formed a Labour Church. His former professor Salem Bland was fired by Wesley College in 1917. Following World War I milder shades of higher criticism remained in the theological classrooms,"*0 but still little of it was proclaimed from the pulpits. Even the Basis of Union, the 1908 document which established the theology and polity of the United Church of Canada was a very conservative document; it avoided questions of biblical criticism and the more advanced 51 forms of theological liberalism. It was hardly "modernistic." But, for the unlearned fundamentalist, any form of biblical criticism was threatening. It was seen as tampering with the Word of God and was to be avoided. In the heady atmosphere of World War I and afterwards biblical criticism was branded as one of the "arts of the Germans." Note the letter of the Reverend E.E. Shields, brother of T.T. Shields, to the editor of the Canadian Baptist in 1313. He defined a "destructive critic" as one who kicks Daniel forward several centuries, accepts a theory of some German critic with regard to Jonah, rather than the plain teaching of Christ, ajjd generally "plays German" with the whole Book of God.' The modernist/fundamentalist controversy affected denominations throughout North America. The real battle began in the mission fields in Asia. Shortly after leaving Wycliffe College, W.H. Griffith Thomas visited Protestant missionaries in China. He observed an undue emphasis on education and social service rather than evangelism. He claimed that most of the graduates of Christian schools were going back into heathenism. He blamed this upon "modernistic" missionaries and teachers who were soft on Buddhism and who were promoting a syncretistic religion which denied the 53 exclusiveness of Christianity." Thomas wanted pressure put on mission 54 boards so that only fundamentalists should be sent out as missionaries. When the fundamentalists could not achieve this they established new missionary societies. Thomas's activities led to the formation of the Bible Union of China in 1920. Its members wanted to purge non-Christian and modernist teachers from the denominational schools in China and North America. They also tried to impose a pietistic style of holiness upon all missionaries there."'"* When Harry Emerson Fosdick visited missionaries in the Orient he found a strong spirit of intolerance. This and other conflicts with fundamentalists led to his famous protest, "Shall the Fundamentalists Win?" Fundamentalists interpreted his sermon as a declaration of war."'6 S.D. Chown (1853-1933), the general superintendent of the Methodist Church of Canada saw the activities of the fundamentalists as a divisive -74-and evil work: Really serious people turn away from such theological arrogancy as Pharisaic piffle, believing it to be rebuked by the testimony of Jesus—"By their fruits ye shall know them," We learn from Him that the fundamental thing is not theology, but li f e — l i f e inspired by faith, hows and charity—"but the greatest of these is charity." Chown argued that the fundamentalists were trying to add something new to Christianity with their doctrine of plenary verbal inspiration and inerrancy. They charge, for instance that those who believe in a scientific interpretation of the Scriptures, disbelieve in the Virgin Birth, the heinous reality of sin, the necessity and value of an atonement for human transgression, and other doctrines historically associated with evangelical Christianity. In this, at least, so far as the Methodist Church in Canada is concerned, they are not well-informed. My somewhat intimate acquaintance with our ministers warrants me in saying without hesitation that though they do not accept the verbal inspiration of the Bible, they hold in profound and undiminished faith the great historical doctrines of evangelical orthodoxy. There is no hydra-headed heterodoxy in our Church, such as the Fundamentalists would make the world believe.... The Methodist Church has never felt it necessary to establish as a portion of its creed any particular rule of interpretation of the Scriptures. Such a proposal would be anti-Protestant and reactionary. According-ly, a variety of opinions concerning inspiration^are held in the freedom of the spirit within our Church.J^ Chown himself had been a prominent social gospeller and liberal, but just prior to World War I he had returned to evangelicalism. His theology was orthodox enough that he was able to serve as an external examiner for Toronto Bible College, a fundamentalist institution which had maintained 59 ties with the established churches. The modernist/fundamentalist controversy was also addressed by the Reverend J.R.P Sclater, minister of the Old St. Andrew's United Church in Toronto, in the pages of the New Outlook. Sclater, who described himself as a liberal evangelical, was one of the -most influential and respected preachers in the United Church. He owned the name "modernist" only under protest. He saw theological dangers in any "modernism" which avoided the Cross and prided itself in intellect. He warned that "modernism" had to be connected with vital religion, i.e. dealing with realistic life and death 60 issues. The Baptist denomination was particularly affected by the modernist/fundamentalist controversy. Both "modernists" and fundamentalists wanted to change the nature of that denomination. Historically Baptists had been non-conformists. They were liberals. They accepted no outside authority or creed. Membership in Baptist churches was based upon faith in Christ and adult baptism by immersion as a sign of discipleship. Individual Baptist churches were autonomous. In nineteenth-century Britain the "modernists" were moving toward denominational control and open membership, that is, membership was not restricted to immersed adults. On the other hand, the fundamentalists wanted to preserve the autonomy of the individual church, which in spite of their claims, was not a New Testament practice. Episcopacy was. At the same time they wanted to introduce a creed something like the Westminister Confession, but without the articles dealing with infant baptism. The fundamentalists, who often called themselves Particular Baptists or Regular Baptists, restricted church membership to immersed adults and restricted communion to the latter as well. Many of them also wanted to make biblical inerrancy, premillennialism, dispensationalism, Keswick holiness, and even pentecostalism part of the creed. In that loose organizational structure, -76-demagogues such as T.T. Shields, William Aberhart, and J. Frank Norris 6 1 were able to build their own religious empires. McMaster and Acadia Universities, both Baptist institutions, had reputations as centres of liberal theology. Graduates from those schools staffed an inordinate number of positions in the liberal seminaries of the 62 United States. Current McMaster theologian Clark Pinnock has claimed that a modernist impulse was present at McMaster from its inception in lS87. 6 u Unfortunately, Pinnock does not really define what he means by the "modernist" impulse! he appears to have been too much influenced by the 64 rhetoric of the 1920s. There is no doubt that at both McMaster and Acadia liberal theology was taught, but they were hardly "modernist" when compared to the views of George Monro Grant, John Watson, Salem Bland, or Harry Emerson Fosdick. Baptist parents wanted their colleges to instill religious faith in their young people. They feared that liberal theology would create agnostics. One alumnus of McMaster, who became an agnostic, the economist Harold Innis, found McMaster to be too fundamentalist^!65 Innis's impression was the opposite of what T.T. Shields perceived McMaster to be. One of the most liberal theological schools remaining in Canada was Brandon College, a Baptist institution founded in 1898. It was a centre of liberal thought and the social gospel, patterning itself after the liberal University of Chicago and drawing much of its staff from there. 6 6 Although Brandon was a Baptist college, Baptist students were in the minority and a broad liberal humanism rather than Baptist doctrines were taught. 6 7 For several years following World War I controversy surrounded the -77-teaching of Dr. H.L. MacNeiTI. In 1922 the Reverend W. Arnold Bennett, a graduate of Brandon, and minister of Emmanuel Baptist Church in Vancouver wrote an inflamatory pamphlet entitled: "Facts Concerning Brandon College: Un-Qrthodox and Faith Wrecking Teaching." He was censured by the denomination and soon he produced another pamphlet, "Jesuit Methods Used 68 by Baptist Union of Western Canada." The Baptist Union of Western Canada eventually established a commission to investigate Dr. MacNeill and the college, and exonerated both in 1923. That, and MacNeilVs equivocal respons