Siegfried 1

Culture Wars in Reading A History of the Lancaster Mennonite Church in Reading during the 1920s and 1930s

By David Siegfried December 12, 2008

Siegfried 2 Introduction On any given Sunday on the Southwest side of Reading, Pennsylvania, thirty to forty people will meet together in a small building on South 7th Street. They sing and rejoice as they come together to worship, listen to the pastor preach a sermon, and pray for one another. Of course this description may just sound like a typical Sunday morning church meeting, but as with anything, there is a history beyond the surface level appearance of this small church and its members. Behind each person and each family there is a story; even the building itself has its own history. The history of the church includes all these aspects, but comprises of more than the mundane facts, names, dates, and chronologies. The South Seventh Street Mennonite Church finds its formation and existence in a unique series of cause and effect relationships within a specific historical, social, economic, political, and cultural context. But why research and write a history of this church at all? The significance behind this subject is not merely the establishment of South Seventh Street Mennonite Church, but the history preceding the establishment of the church. In fact, the focus of this paper is not on South Seventh Street at all, but on the origins of missions that came before the church. Almost twenty years before a mission was started on the south side of Reading, the Mennonites decided to begin some sort of mission in Reading. In 1922, they opened the first mission as a Sunday school and from there they slowly grew into a church. The era of the 1920s and 1930s in the United States was an era marked by numerous cultural changes, and for the conservative Mennonites of Lancaster Conference they were years of cultural conflict. They began missions in Reading for numerous cultural, practical, and religious reasons, but saw little success according to their own standards during there initial years of mission work.

Siegfried 3 Thesis and Argument When the Mennonites of Lancaster Conference first began missions in Reading, they did so in response to the perceived threat of a growing, national, secular culture, and the beginning of a crisis of faith and tradition within their own denomination. The move to Reading was both an obligation to fulfill the religious practice of proselytizing, and a pragmatic approach to inspire growth in a small and fading denomination. While the world modernized and popular culture changed around them, most Mennonites of Lancaster Conference clung to their own cultural traditions and their fundamentalist established interpretation of the Bible. When they began missions in Reading they came into contact with the diverse inhabitants of the city. In these interactions they encountered racial, ethnic, and cultural tensions between their traditional beliefs and the worldviews of those with whom they interacted. While a number of children and adults entered the doors of the Mennonite missions throughout the 1920s, 30s, and early 40s, few were ever counted as converts, and fewer still remained as active members of the Mennonite Church. Ultimately the experience of the Mennonite Church in Reading serves as a study of the influence of culture on the establishment of a religious organization and the wider understanding of the relationship between religion and culture. Their experience also serves as a case study of the wider American phenomenon of fundamentalism and its interaction with popular culture during the 20th century. The Mennonites adopted their traditions from theological beliefs originated in the Radical Reformation, but along with these theological beliefs they also tied cultural standards such as the acceptable dress and professions of the Radical Reformation era. In other words they clung to the cultural expectations of Germany and Switzerland in the 16th century and wove these standards into their theological concepts. They also clung to the fundamentalist beliefs of inerrancy and a literal reading of the Bible during a time period when

Siegfried 4 liberal scholars and churches were moving away from this interpretation in order to conform to the Modernist philosophies of the day. Therefore, as the Mennonites of Lancaster Conference continued these beliefs and cultural practices into the 1920s, and brought them to the Reading mission field, the cultures of African Americans and different ethnic groups in Reading as well as a growing secular culture of the Roaring Twenties caused the Mennonite’s evangelism to be ineffective for the most part. Rather than resulting in an imaginative response or altercation of their beliefs in order to reach the cultures confronting the missions, they instead reacted with a renewed zeal and attachment to their theology and cultural norms.

Outline This paper will first evaluate the history and origins of the Mennonites in 16th century Europe. The focus of this section will be on the creation of a unique Mennonite theology as well as the formation of the cultural moment that shaped Mennonite culture for the next three hundred years. Also this first section will evaluate the histories written in the 20th century and how the change in evangelical and fundamentalist culture influenced the writings of these histories. The second half of this paper will deal with the move of the Mennonites to missions in the early 1920s. Part of this section will evaluate the origins myth of the first missions including the influence of culture upon the story, the elements of Mennonite culture within the story, and the omitted facts of the story. Next it will relay the history of the Mennonite missions in the 1920s and 1930s and analyze the successes and failures according to the Mennonite standards. Finally, the last section of the paper will consider the cultural reasons for the lack of success in the Mennonite missions to Reading.

Siegfried 5 A Word on Church History, Method, and Sources The subject and focus of this paper is semi-unique to academic, historical scholarship. Traditionally, secular historical scholarship has not heavily investigated the area of religious or church history. Instead that task has been left to the historians of each particular denomination. In these cases the histories often seek to create a denominational identity or to trace the endless names of members in order to identify family members, key figures, and lists of names, places, and dates. Many times these histories will begin with a short biography of the founder of a denomination and then will work its way through the centuries documenting people, migrations, missions, and other facts deemed important by the author. In other words, these church histories often resemble a simple genealogy devoid of historical narrative and problematique. For this paper it was essential to read and use a few denominational histories of the Mennonite church and specifically of the Lancaster Mennonite Conference. They provide many of the key facts about the Mennonite church in Reading as well as information on the theology of the Mennonites, and they serve as both primary and secondary documents for this paper. A challenge and goal as I researched and wrote this paper was to bring the history of the Mennonites in Reading into the realm of historical scholarship and place it within a wider historiography. A key to writing this paper was to use the facts and the primary documents of the church in Reading and to interpret and write a history according to the tools and guidelines of academic historical scholarship. To do this it was necessary to critically evaluate the histories of the Mennonites while consulting the historiography and wider historical context of the subject for clues on determining a proper historical interpretation. The end product should be a

Siegfried 6 historical narrative that weaves together all of the above components to address the argument and thesis of this paper.

Who are the Mennonites? Evaluating Their History and Theology The Mennonites are a Protestant Christian church often confused with their theological cousins the Amish because of their similar beliefs and because of the similarity of appearance between Amish and Conservative or Old Order Mennonite practitioners. Despite the similarities there are actually numerous distinctions between the groups. In order to distinguish the Mennonites from the horse and buggy stereotype linked to the Amish and to best define the beliefs, practices, and lifestyle of the Mennonites of Lancaster County through the 1920s and 30s it is important to briefly address the history and development of theological beliefs of the Mennonite church from their origins to the 20th Century. Like all Protestant churches the Mennonites were originally a product of the Reformation in Europe during the 16th Century. Without divulging into a comprehensive study of the Reformation and its pre-history, the main point to understand from this era is that the Mennonites in the 20th century saw themselves as a product of a long line of reforming and cleansing the Christian church in Europe.1 They believed that they were ultimately a part of the wider movement attempting to return to the original interpretation of the Christian scriptures and a lifestyle similar to the early church.2 In fact, a 1930s history of the Mennonites of Lancaster County claims that their founder and namesake, Menno Simons, was a theological heir to pre-Reformation groups such as the

1

Cornelius J. Dyck ed., An Introduction to Mennonite History (Scottdale, Pennsylvania: Herald Press, 1967), 9.

2

Ibid., 9-10.

Siegfried 7 Waldensians who emphasized non-violence and non-conformity to the world.3 Through this line of reason Weaver seems to be arguing that the Mennonites come from a more pure and authentic Christian tradition and line of reformers that actually predated the Reformation of the 16th century. In the same way, a later historian uses a similar argument but takes the line of inheritance back even further, to the monastic leaders who fled to the desert when Rome became the head of the Western Christian church.4 These claims of exceptionalism are not unique to the Mennonite church.5 Indeed, many Protestant denominations from the time of the Reformation to the present used forms of this historical construct to explain their exceptional status as the true church or the possessor’s of the most accurate interpretation of the Bible and Christian faith. This historical construct for most of Protestantism was a reactionary proclamation against the Roman Catholic Church, in order to allow the Protestant denominations to distance themselves from the influence and importance of Romanism on the history of Christianity. The construct identified key figures and sub-sects of Christianity that made a stance against the Catholic Church or supported forms of the doctrines that Protestants of the Reformation would later adopt. While there were definitely similarities between these early reformers and those of the 16th century, this version of history tended to emphasize the similarities and a common stance against Romanism while remaining silent on the contradictions and differences between their doctrines and theologies. Altogether this historical construct served as an approach to trace a

3

Martin G. Weaver, Mennonites of Lancaster Conference (Scottdale, Pennsylvania: Mennonite Publishing House, 1931), 3. 4

5

Cornelius J. Dyck ed., An Introduction to Mennonite History,10-11.

For a more in depth study behind the concept of “execeptionalism” see the introduction to Robert Vitalis, America’s Kingdom: Mythmaking on the Saudi Oil Frontier (Stanford, California: Stanford University Press, 2007). Vitalis uses the idea of exceptionalism to describe the myth-making procedures and beliefs of ARAMCO in Saudi Arabia. The term is useful at this point in the paper to understand the beliefs of the Mennonites during the 1920s and 30s in their historical construction of a line of “true” Christianity passed down since the time of Jesus in 1st century Palestine.

Siegfried 8 pure line of Christianity back through the ages to the original teachings of Jesus and the church of 1st century Palestine. Much of this historical construct of Mennonite and Protestant history appears to be a product of a teaching known as dispensational premillennialism. This teaching grew out of a fundamentalist response to the growth of liberalism and modernism in the Protestant churches in the early Twentieth century. Dispensational premillennialism consisted of two essential components. The first component, known as dispensationalism, taught that all of history manifested itself in a number of ages, each providing a test of faith which mankind would fail, and ending in a judgment. Dispensationalists also taught that since the first century the world had been in the Church Age and that this age would end with the second coming of Jesus Christ. The second component, premillennialism, taught that the world would gradually degrade into moral decay and destitution and that the Christian church would suffer apostasy and the true church would split off from the rest because of these heretical teachings. The premillennialists claimed that this apostasy took form in the teaching of liberal and modernist scholars within the Protestant churches.6, 7 The Mennonite’s construction of their history as a pure line of Christianity is a projection of a form of dispensational premillennialism onto the past. The idea of a morally decaying church and society corresponded with fundamentalist thought in the early 20th century, but was also useful in making sense of the context of the 16th century Reformation. Therefore the fundamentalist theologies of the day largely influenced the histories of the Mennonites during 6

George M. Marsden, Understanding Fundamentalism and Evangelicalism. (Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1991), 39-41 & 67.

7

For a quick chart to help understand the four main branches of Protestant eschatology visit this link, http://www.spiritone.com/~wing/esc_chrt.htm.

Siegfried 9 the 20th century and may reflect more about the Mennonites of the 20th century than they do about those of the centuries before. Although some of Mennonite history is best understood as a retrojection of 20th century beliefs upon the 16th century, there are also key elements which describe the history of how the Mennonite belief system formed. These elements are important because they help set the tone for an understanding of historical Mennonite thought and theology coming into the 1920s and 1930s. To be clear, it is important to look at the histories of the Mennonite church form both angles, by interpreting the history as a product of its time and as an honest portrayal of the historical development of the Mennonite church. As the main characters of the European Reformation such as Martin Luther and Ulrich Zwingli separated themselves from the Roman Catholic Church there were those among the reformers who believed the Reformation leaders had not taken the transformation far enough. These radicals, as some labeled them, challenged Zwingli, Luther, and the other Reformation leaders to make further and greater changes to distance themselves from the Catholic Church and to follow more closely the authority of the Bible.8 Among the disciples of Zwingli in Zurich, Switzerland two young men named Conrad Grebel and Felix Manz led a group of followers to begin a church free and separate from the church of Zurich. They appealed to Zwingli about making certain changes regarding the worship service and the role of the civil magistrate in matters of church politics, but Zwingli was cautious of forcing such abrupt changes. Therefore Grebel, Manz, and the others officially split from the church in Zurich in January, 1525.9

8 9

Dyck, 30-32. Dyck, 33-34.

Siegfried 10 Other places throughout Europe read pamphlets and heard news of the split in Zurich and followed suit by breaking away from their local church and establishing new fellowships. The most significant figure for the Mennonites was Menno Simons. Ten years after the split in Switzerland, Simons led a theologically similar faction in the Netherlands to split away from the other denominations. As these factions grew throughout Europe, mainly in Switzerland, Germany, and the Netherlands they challenged the fathers of the Reformation such as Luther, Calvin, Zwingli and their respective denominations. These numerous splits became known as the Anabaptist or Radical Reformation.10 The main theological points separating the Anabaptists from the original Reformation churches were the issues of baptism, communion, church-government relationships, and nonviolence. The Anabaptists claimed first and foremost that the Bible was the Word of God and should be the sole authority in worship and Christian living. Therefore they adopted the same main beliefs of the Reformation, or the Five Solas of the Reformation. 1. Sola Scriptura- “by Scripture alone”—Meaning the scriptures were the Words of God and provided the final authority on doctrine and Christian living. 2. Sola fide- “by faith alone”—Justification could only be given through faith. 3. Sola gratia- “by grace alone”—God’s grace provided the only means of salvation.

10

Ira D. Landis, The Lancaster Mennonite Conference (The Christian Nurture Committee of the Lancaster Mennonite Conference, 1956), 21-25. See also Dyck, 36-110 and C. Henry Smith, The Story of the Mennonites (Newton, Kansas: Mennonite Publications Office, 1950), 25-346 for a more comprehensive history of the development of Anabaptism throughout Europe.

Siegfried 11 4. Solus Christus- “by Christ alone”—Jesus Christ was the only sacrifice and way to salvation. 5. Soli Deo gloria- “glory to God alone”—All things were to be done for God’s glory. However, as they read the scriptures they felt there were things wrong with the practice of Christianity in the Protestant Reformation.11 Baptism became the main issue between the Anabaptists and the other churches; it also gave them their title as Anabaptists, which means to baptize again. They claimed that infant baptism was wrong because it was not practiced in the New Testament church, so baptism should only be given to those who submitted themselves to the Lordship of Christ and committed themselves to becoming a disciple of Christ. Therefore followers in the Anabaptist movement were re-baptized as adults who committed to the fellowship, but according to their theology they saw it as the only one, true baptism and not a second baptism. The Anabaptists set communion as another issue, claiming that it was meant to be a commemoration of the death and sacrifice of Christ. They declared that the bread and wine were meant to be taken as a symbolic representation (memorialism) as opposed to literally becoming his body and blood (transubstantiation/consubstantiation). They also called for a separation of church and the civil magistrate, because they feared that disputing factions would use the government to gain more power and influence over other groups, or that one group may use the government to punish a dissenting group. Also, they argued that the government had no right determining theological issues, but that the church was to determine the meaning of the scriptures. Finally, from the beginning the Anabaptists distinguished themselves from the rest of Protestant movements in Europe by refraining from all means of violence and teaching that 11

Dyck, 28-35.

Siegfried 12 Christians should never use violence.12 They based this belief on Matthew 5:9, “Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God.”13 Also, the early leaders Conrad Grebel and Menno Simons both proclaimed this teaching of peacemaking as well. Conrad Grebel declared: True Christian believers are sheep among wolves, sheep for the slaughter; they must be baptized in anguish and affliction, tribulation, persecution, suffering, and death; they must be tried with fire, and must reach the fatherland of eternal rest, not by killing their bodily, but by mortifying their spiritual enemies. Neither do they use worldly sword or war, since all killing has ceased with them…14 While Menno Simons more concisely stated: The regenerated do not go to war, nor engage in strife. They are the children of peace who have beaten their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning hooks.15 It is essential at this point to distinguish the Mennonites from the Anabaptists. The Mennonites were officially the followers of Menno Simons and claim him as their Reformation patriarch. However, the Mennonites were a sub-sect of the wider Anabaptist movement. For the most part Mennonites conformed to the main tenants of the Anabaptist theological vision, and the main difference that separated the groups was geography. In 1555, the Anabaptists officially solidified their affiliation and agreement on doctrine at a Conference at Strassburg, Germany. As the years passed the differences in geography led to disagreements between the sub-sects, and while most groups held to the main tenants of Anabaptism, they disagreed on other areas of doctrine. The Mennonites for the most part were the Anabaptist groups located in the Netherlands, Germany, and Switzerland.16 12

Landis, 16-17. Matt. 5:9, English Standard Version. 14 Dyck, 32. 15 Mennonite Encyclopedia, s.v. “Conscientious Objector.” 16 Dyck, 63-73. 13

Siegfried 13 After separating from the other denominations in Europe the Mennonites were often met with furious disapproval and violence. A large amount of people who became Mennonites throughout Europe were persecuted and even killed for their beliefs. As early as the beginning of the 17th century many Mennonite families were looking for a chance to leave Europe for new lands where they would have greater economic opportunity and religious freedom.17 Some of the first Mennonites to move to North America came to the Pennsylvania colony and started farming communities in the southeastern region of Pennsylvania. In this region they formed two main conferences, the Franconia Conference located in what is now Montgomery County, and the Lancaster Conference in the Lebanon Valley area. From the 17th century to the 20th century the Mennonites expanded to different areas around the United States and Canada. The Mennonites in Lancaster Conference mainly remained in their local farming community, partitioning the land amongst their children and continuing in the simple and plain traditions of their forefathers.18 However, things began to change in the first half of the 20th century as some Mennonites chose to depart from the traditional lifestyle and respond to a new era and a call to missions. Into Reading 17

For a more in depth study of the Radical Reformation and the reactions of Protestants to the Anabaptist movement see C. Henry Smith, The Story of the Mennonites (Newton, Kansas: Mennonite Publications Office, 1950); Ira D. Landis, The Lancaster Mennonite Conference (The Christian Nurture Committee of the Lancaster Mennonite Conference, 1956); Cornelius J. Dyck ed., An Introduction to Mennonite History (Scottdale, Pennsylvania: Herald Press, 1967); and H. Frank Eshelman, Historic Background and Annals of the Swiss and German Pioneer Settlers of South-Eastern Pennsylvania and of Their Remote Ancestors From the Middle of the Dark Ages Down to the Time of the Revolutionary War (Lancaster, Pennsylvania: 1917). 18 For a better understanding of lifestyle of Mennonites in rural Pennsylvania and the migrations of the Mennonites throughout the United States see H. Frank Eshelman, Historic Background and Annals of the Swiss and German Pioneer Settlers of South-Eastern Pennsylvania and of Their Remote Ancestors From the Middle of the Dark Ages Down to the Time of the Revolutionary War (Lancaster, Pennsylvania: 1917); Martin G. Weaver, Mennonites of Lancaster Conference (Scottdale, Pennsylvania: Mennonite Publishing House, 1931); and “The Mennonite Immigration to Pennsylvania in the Eighteenth Century” The Pennsylvania German Society (The Pennsylvania German Society, 1924).

Siegfried 14 The Mennonites in Lancaster and parts of rural Berks County often times sold produce from their farms in the markets of Reading long before the 1920s. Carl J. Sensenig in his book Called of God: The Mennonite Churches of Reading, Pennsylvania claims that “when the conviction of missions came to these people, they naturally looked to Reading as a mission field.”19 This “conviction of missions” is the key concept of the origin story of the Reading missions. A similar story about the origins of the Reading missions is found in multiple sources. Each source retells the same story with minimal or no difference. A summary of the origin story is as follows: In 1919, some Mennonite families in the Gehmans Church District of the Lancaster Conference met weekly in the home of John and Larina Musser for prayer and Bible study. While studying the book of Acts one week the families in attendance fell under conviction of the Holy Spirit and were burdened to spread the Gospel of Jesus Christ to the people of the City of Reading. The group continued to pray about the calling and appointed four men among themselves to lead in preparations for missions to Reading. On January 8, 1922 the group opened the first of the Mennonite missions in Reading, a Sunday school at 13th and Douglass Streets.20 Deconstructing and Analyzing the Myth A study of this mythical origin story is full of important historical components of the era as well as significant components of Mennonite culture in the Lancaster Conference. The story 19

J. Carl Sensenig, Called of God: The Mennonite Church in Reading, Pennsylvania (Morgantown, Pennsylvania: Masthof Press, 2007), 17. 20 Story summarized from multiple sources, including: Susanna Musser, “History of the South Seventh Street Mennonite Church,” (Reading, Pa: unpublished manuscript, 1988); Sensenig, 17-21; J. B. Gehman, “History of Reading Mission,” Christian Monitor 14, no. 8 (August 1927); and Mennonite Encyclopedia, s.v. “Reading Mennonite Mission.”

Siegfried 15 is full of aspects of fundamentalist and evangelical language that was prominent in the early 20th century, including the concern for missions and the rise of Pentecostalism. Also the story portrays some important aspects of Mennonite religions and culture including the importance of faith practice outside of Sunday meetings and the need for approval from a hierarchical system. Finally, an essential component of this story is what the narrative fails to address explicitly. The story suggests that the move of the Mennonites to Reading was only because of a move of God or a supernatural call which a small group experienced in a Bible study. This claim remains silent on other trends occurring within the church which necessitated the missions to Reading. Research outside of this origin narrative reveals both a greater understanding of the narrative itself as well as an understanding of essential elements missing from the narrative.

Deconstructing and Analyzing the Myth: The Wider Fundamentalist and Evangelical Culture Some historians label the period from 1815 to 1914 as “the great century of Christian missions,” and according to historical records the greatest time of missions within that period was after 1890. At the turn of the 20th century American Christians approached missions with a fervent zeal at home and abroad. American Christians manifested this zeal with the development of religious based social reforms. Included in these movements were the temperance movement and the Sabbatarian movement. But to say this zeal for missions and evangelism died with the beginning of World War One would be a grave error. In fact, in the post-WWI era fundamentalism grew in response to cultural trends in America. The tenants of fundamentalism called for the salvation of the lost and emphasized missions at home to save marginal groups and

Siegfried 16 address diverse social problems as well as to preach a truthful gospel untainted with the liberalism and modernism of the 1910s and 1920s.21 Another element of the Mennonite narrative is the emphasis on a “conviction” or “burden” and a reference to a “move of the Holy Spirit.” These terms can be traced ultimately to the book of Acts in the Bible, but the emphasis on the “move of the Holy Spirit” more appropriately identifies with the growth of Pentecostalism in the United States. The Pentecostal movement in the early 20th century claimed that they were returning to the Christian faith of the book of Acts. Their main text, Acts 2:1-4 explained the core tenants of their faith, namely a total reliance on the Holy Spirit and the powers and miracles which the Spirit brought to believers. When the day of Pentecost arrived, they were all together in one place. And suddenly there came from heaven a sound like a mighty rushing wind, and it filled the entire house where they were sitting. And divided tongues as of fire appeared to them and rested on each one of them. And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues as the Spirit gave them utterance.22 Pentecostalism emphasized the baptism of the Holy Spirit, taken from the above verses in Acts, and the spiritual gifts associated with that baptism. The most common of these gifts was the gift of speaking in tongues (glossolalia).23 Pentecostalism is a “religion of the Spirit” and emphasized the felt presence and power of God.24 It began as a major 20th century movement at the Azusa Street Revivals in Los Angeles, California in 1906, but quickly spread throughout the United States and over fifty other nations.25 21

Marsden, 27-31, 32-38. Acts 2:1-4, ESV. 23 MacRobert, 43-47. 24 Iain MacRobert, The Black Roots and White Racism of Early Pentecostalism in the USA (New York City, New York: St. Marin’s Press, 1988), 14. 25 Ibid. p. 56 22

Siegfried 17 Due to the emphasis on the movement of the Holy Spirit on the Mennonites in their origins narrative, it seems apparent that elements of Pentecostalism influenced the group in 1919 to some degree. It is important to distinguish that the Mennonites were not a Pentecostal group, but rather that certain elements of the movement had influenced an emphasis on the Holy Spirit within these particular Mennonites’ personal theologies. This fact points to the wider influence of the historical context on the Mennonite’s decision to start missions in Reading.

Deconstructing and Analyzing the Myth: Mennonite Cultural Characteristics This origins narrative also explains some important cultural characteristics of the Mennonites of Lancaster Conference. The first aspect is the importance on Bible study and prayer. In the narrative, whole families are meeting together in a home, during the week, and outside of the church building to pray and study the Bible. This fact emphasizes that these Mennonite’s faith was not something contained to a church building or a single day of the week; but that it was something they focused on and lived throughout the week. Their faith saturated their whole lives. It also shows that they are a close community because they spent time together, even in one another’s homes, during the week and outside of church. Another cultural characteristic apparent in the narrative, though more implicit than explicit, is the structure of the Mennonite church government. There were nearly three years between the meeting at the Musser household and the opening of the mission in January of 1922. Part of the reason for this were the amount of preparations needed to begin the mission, such as collecting the funds, purchasing a building in Reading, furnishing that building, and preparing other materials needed to run the mission. However, during the initial phase of the planning the four men delegated to the preparation works, had to submit their idea and plans to the Eastern

Siegfried 18 Mennonite Board of Missions and Charities as well as to the Lancaster Mennonite Conference for approval and some funds. Part of the delay was waiting for approval form the wider Conference and mission board. This need for approval from the wider church community again shows the importance of the community of believers to the practicing Mennonite and the hierarchical system of the church.

Deconstructing and Analyzing the Myth: Evaluating the Silence Finally, this origins narrative speaks volume in its silence. It does not mention the more practical reasons for the missions in Reading, such as gaining more members to their denominational faith, and it ignores the wider historical context of the era the Mennonite’s response. Within the church the younger generation was beginning to become disillusioned with some of the rules of the conference. Some had grown up and left the church while others were becoming rebellious within the denomination. Also, as the world around them began to secularize and modernize rifts formed within the Lancaster Conference between groups who reacted to these changes both positively and negatively. Some groups welcomed the changes in society and felt that they were harmless enjoyments, while the other extreme group reacted with disgust to modernization and called for an extreme separation from the world.26 One such group, led by Joseph Wenger, eventually split from the Lancaster Conference in 1926 and developed a more strict conference in eastern Lancaster County.27 On the other side of the argument, some Mennonite families began to depart from the Lancaster Conference for more liberal denominations.

26

See John C. Wenger, Separated Unto God: A Plan for Christian Simplicity of Life and for a Scriptural Nonconformity to the World (Scottdale, Pennsylvania: Herald Press, 1955) for a study of this theology of separatism. 27 Mennonite Encyclopedia, s.v. “Wenger, Joseph.”

Siegfried 19 The reasons for these deportations form the conservative faith can be seen in the rules of the Lancaster Conference written in 1881, and still in effect in 1919. Rule Twenty dealt with Sunday schools and Sunday school libraries. In paragraph three the conference condemned the inclusion of fictional books, and in paragraph four they prohibited participation in major youth and children’s Christian ministries such as Young Men’s Christian Association, claiming that they did not “uphold the non-resistant doctrine of the Gospel.”28 Rule Twenty-Two dealt with the prohibition of engaging in “worldly amusements.”29 It states: Excursion parties, surprise parties, camping out parties by unmarried members, entertainments, all public contests in games, attending circuses, movies, theaters, helping to arrange for and attending festivals, fairs, picnics, literary societies, buying and selling of tickets of chance, as well as all other amusements of similar character are forbidden.30 As “worldly amusements” became more prevalent in American society and as youth and others came into contact with these attractions, they began to increasingly question whether the rules from 1881 should still apply. In 1926, at the height of disagreements and factionalism within the conference the church leaders passed additional rulings and amendments to the 1881 rules, which confirmed and strengthened the definite position of the conference on changes occurring in the culture. These rules specifically addressed the concern of “holding the young people…and having them respect the doctrine and discipline of the Church…”31 Main concerns for the new rules were matters of plain dress and organizing youth church meetings. The new rules left no doubt as to the

28

Martin G. Weaver, 358 Ibid., 359 30 Ibid., 359 31 Ibid. p. 361 29

Siegfried 20 appropriate and accepted dress of the church, and most of these rules focused on the women, urging utmost modesty. We reaffirm the ruling of a year ago, that the unbecoming styles in dress which have appeared in various parts of the Church are not to be tolerated, neither fancy bonnets nor stylish hairdressing. The Brethren too are to walk orderly in dress as become the representatives of the plain faith. A plain dress is made of plain goods, full to the neck, the sleeves long to the wrist, the skirts to be long enough to be modest in every way, the waist line to be properly observed and retained. The cape must not be omitted; transparent goods cannot be used in making plain dresses. Fancy colored stockings must not be worn. A plain bonnet must be made of plain goods, conforming to the size of the head, without trimming, corresponding to a plain devotional covering.32 The punishments for not following these specific rules were also outlined in the new rules. Those applicants who do not willingly submit to this order in dress cannot be received into fellowship. Those who are members and will not submit to this order shall be restrained from communion.33 Also, the new rules of 1926 discussed the establishment of new youth meetings that would replace certain educational meetings attended by youth prior to that time.

32 33

Ibid. p. 361 Ibid. p. 361

Siegfried 21 The Church has organized young people’s meetings and has outlined Bible and other useful subjects to the interest and benefit of the young people. The Church desires that the young people attend and support these meetings.34 Lastly, there was a debate amongst Mennonites throughout the United States and Canada about whether or not Mennonite colleges should provide degrees in secular training and occupations. Most agreed that this was a good idea because parents did not want to send students to secular schools for fear of liberal and modernist indoctrination. So most agreed that the colleges should include secular training in schools where the denomination could control the content of the courses.35 These reactions came at a time when American youth culture characterized itself by the symbol of carefree and flamboyant flapper. The styles and dress changed drastically during the post-WWI era and Roaring Twenties, especially among young women. Kathleen Drowne and Patrick Huber in The 1920s, describe the flapper as “uninhibited trendsetters” who “smoked cigarettes, wore fur-trimmed jackets, and gallivanted around town in Ford roadsters…attending ‘petting parties’.”36 Also, young people engaged in drinking, dating, and numerous leisure activities. Altogether, the popular youth culture caused a generation gap between themselves and their parents by challenging the Victorian moral codes of the previous decades.37 In similar ways, the Mennonite youth of Lancaster Conference challenged their parent’s conservative religion, though in smaller ways compared to the flapper image and the wider youth culture of the 1920s. While the young Mennonite men and women did 34

Ibid. p. 362 Chester K. Lehman, “The Importance of Secular Training in Our Church Schools,” Christian Monitor 14, no. 8 (August 1927) 36 Kathleen Drowne & Patrick Huber, The 1920s (Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood Press, 2004), 30. 37 Ibid. p. 30-31 35

Siegfried 22 not participate directly in the wider culture, they did imitate the culture by disputing their parent’s rules and religion. They altered their styles of dress and participated in some of the attractions and amusements of American popular culture. Although they did not directly imitate the style of the flapper, their changes in dress and mannerisms were shocking enough to worry their parents and denomination, and enough to cause a similar generation gap as well. Although some of these sources and examples come from the mid-1920s they characterize the concerns of the Mennonites of Lancaster Conference as early as 1919 and were on the minds of those who planned to establish the missions in Reading. Therefore as the small group of Mennonites decided to plant a mission in Reading they were aware of the emergency and crisis beginning within their own denomination and the culture at large. Certainly part of their reasoning behind establishing the mission was to gain more converts to the Mennonite faith, as even the traditional families that formed the core of the conference and denomination began to fall apart.

The First Mission The first mission was a Sunday school on the north side of Reading. The popular idea amongst the Mennonites was to reach the families of Reading through the children. Many of the original families who assisted in running the mission were also comfortable with children because they participated in foster care ministries in the past and brought children from all walks of life to live in their homes.38 Besides the Sunday school, throughout the week workers in the Mennonite mission would also visit the families in the surrounding neighborhood and the

38

Sensenig, 17.

Siegfried 23 families of those children who attended the Sunday school.39 The Sunday school served as the place to teach children Bible studies while the visitations allowed for connections and relationships to form with the families. From 1922 to 1926 the mission moved around numerous times to multiple houses and buildings until in 1926 they bought an old Lutheran church at Twelfth and Windsor Streets. However, throughout these first few years of the mission very few families they ministered to ever became members or even frequent attendees of the Sunday morning services. After five years of mission work things looked grim to many of the mission workers. In 1927, in an article for the Christian Monitor, a widely circulated Mennonite monthly magazine, Sunday school superintendant J. B. Gehman provided a morbid, yet hopeful, account of the missions in Reading. After describing the main events of the mission establishment over the previous years he stated, “We have not accomplished much. We would like to see more visible results.” Few committed their lives to the Gospel and the doctrines of the Mennonite church, and some who had, quickly fell away from the church as they saw the responsibilities of their commitment. Gheman went on to denounce the era as “a dark and sinful age” with “the forces of evil… everywhere present to hinder the work [of the mission].”40 However, he ended his treatise with words of hope in the faithfulness of God, a commitment to “continue to labor earnestly,” and an admonition to the readers to pray for the mission in Reading.41 During the 1930s things improved somewhat for the Mennonites in Reading. With a main mission base and church launched on the north side of Reading, some leaders felt it was time to spread their missions to other parts of the city, where perhaps they would be more

39

Lizzie Musser, “Experience in Visitation Work,” Christian Monitor 14, no. 8 (August 1927).

40

J. B. Gehman, “History of Reading Mission,” Christian Monitor 14, no. 8 (August 1927). Ibid.

41

Siegfried 24 successful. In 1932, they began tent meetings on Fairview Street on the south side of Reading. After gauging the reception of and response to their message as positive they decided to open a new mission on Fairview Street. The new mission opened in March of 1933 and saw an average of 100 attendees every Sunday for the first year.42 Also during the 1930s the Mennonites opened the Mennonite Girls Home. Throughout the 1920s and into the 1930s many Mennonite girls moved to the Reading area where they found employment as domestic servants to the wealthy families of the city. During the week they would split their time between working and helping with the mission tasks, doing visitations and other small jobs. On the weekends the girls assisted teaching in the Sunday schools. By 1934, the Eastern Mennonite Board of Missions and Charities felt it would be helpful to have a central place for these girls to stay, so they purchased a home on North Twelfth Street.43 With so many more Mennonite located in the city, opportunities for missions increased. The last major event in the 1930s for the Reading missions was the start of a third mission. However, the reasoning behind starting this mission was less about evangelistic fervor than it was about turmoil in the already existing mission at Twelfth and Windsor. Sometime during the mid-1930s a young African-American girl name Cleora moved to Birch Street, not far away from the Twelfth and Windsor mission. She began attending the mission every Sunday and enjoyed it so much that she invited her cousins from the south side of Reading to come along with her. Soon they began attending regularly and they also brought their friends along with them. Every Sunday morning a fairly sizeable group of African-American children could be seek walking the two mile trek from their homes to the mission.44

42

Sensenig, 31. Sensenig, 50. 44 Susanna Musser, unpublished manuscript. 43

Siegfried 25 Racial tensions quickly arose at the mission as more African-American children began to attend the Sunday meetings. One teenage girl committed to becoming a church member and was baptized soon after, but because of the racial tensions at the mission she stopped attending.45 Susanna Musser in her unpublished manuscript about the history of South Seventh Street Mennonite Church only refers to these racial tensions as “some difficulty.”46 Carl Sensenig explains that parents of the white children were uncomfortable with the black children attending the mission, and threatened to remove their children if actions were not taken.47 Other accounts cast blame on the children themselves claiming that the white and black children did not get along and fought too much, which made it impossible for them to conduct the missions.48 Still other accounts claim that the neighbors of the mission feared that their neighborhood would be overrun by Blacks.49 A final explanation could simply be that some of the Mennonite mission workers themselves were uncomfortable around the black children. This could be a possible explanation because many of the Mennonites grew up in rural areas and never saw or interacted with African-Americans before. For example, in an interview with Steve Good he relayed a story about his father, Jacob Good. In the late 1930s when Jacob was a young boy he came to the city for the first time and when he saw an African-American he was afraid and asked his dad why the man had a different skin color.50 Also, a number of the young women who came to help with the mission of Reading did so through the Lancaster Conference’s sister conference in Harrisonburg, Virginia. This conference passed a resolution in the early 1930s that enforced 45

Ibid. Ibid. 47 Sensenig, 39. 48 Lois Angstadt, interviewed by author, October 31, 2008. 46

49

Sheldon Good, interviewed by author, November 11, 2008.

50

Stephan J. Good, interviewed by author, October 5, 2008.

Siegfried 26 racial segregation in the Mennonite congregations of the Harrisonburg Conference. Therefore, some of these girls from the south may have been even more uncomfortable working with the African-American children.51 Whatever the case may be the leaders at Twelfth and Windsor decided to start a new mission in the neighborhood of their African American students. In 1938, they purchased a small house on Neversink Street and began Sunday school services in the building in November.52 The leaders officially named the Sunday school the Mennonite Gospel Mission, but it was more commonly known as the Neversink Mission or the Colored Mission. These new missions saw many children and even some adults attend on a Sunday, but they still lacked the “visible results” which J. B. Gehman had lamented over in 1927. These results he yearned for were public commitments to following Christ, a baptism affirming the commitment, and a change in lifestyle and adherence to the Mennonite Confession of Faith and the Lancaster Conference rules. Elsewhere in the country during the early 1920s and even into the 1930s, some fundamentalist denominations saw vast amounts of converts join their churches. The ministries of Billy Suyndy and Aimee Temple McPherson stand out amongst the rest as main figureheads of the fundamentalist movements during the era and as the leaders of successful ministries with thousands of followers. Although the Mennonites of Lancaster 51

Most of these stories have been compiled from various sources. It is interesting that there are numerous stories about the origins of the Neversink Mission. I think this shows that it is an uncomfortable topic for many of the older generation, and I observed that fact in speaking with a few people from S. 7th St. Mennonite church. For the most part the Lancaster Mennonite Conference prides itself in being a denomination of racial equality and reconciliation. As early as the 1600s the leaders of the conference wrote and signed a petition against slavery in Pennsylvania and the other colonies, and this is documented as one of the earliest statements in America against slavery (H. Frank Eshelman, Historic Background and Annals of the Swiss and German Pioneer Settlers of South-Eastern Pennsylvania and of Their Remote Ancestors From the Middle of the Dark Ages Down to the Time of the Revolutionary War (Lancaster, Pennsylvania: 1917). Also the denomination celebrates the fact that they have been some of the forerunners in racial segregation since the Civil Rights Era (J. Carl Sensenig, 195). Therefore I believe this shows a contradiction to their present stance on racial issues which makes it an uncomfortable and unclear history. I will admit that for the last explanation I took the academic liberty of interpretation to dig beyond the surface stories to another possible reasoning behind the racial tensions at the 12th and Windsor. 52

Sensenig, 39-40.

Siegfried 27 County were part of the general fundamentalist camp, their theology and culture differed from the wider movement. They employed the 20th century phenomenon of the “sinner’s prayer” into their theology, but they took the requirements for acceptance and salvation even further. In actually these requirements were part of the core tenants of their faith from their founding in the Radical Reformation, namely a commitment to and obedience to Christ and the fellowship, a non-violent life, a simple and plain lifestyle, and especially a believer’s baptism. Most people who felt convicted and went through a religious experience at the mission did not mind reciting the sinner’s prayer in order to gain salvation. Where many lost interest in their previous commitment was in the requirements to conform to the Mennonite rules. For people who grew up outside of the Mennonite culture, requirements for clothing and a change in lifestyle were especially unattractive and unwelcomed. In fact, some people who committed to live a Christian life later recanted of this commitment. These people made excuses about why they could not continue in their commitment, stopped attended meetings, or claimed that they had misunderstood the preacher and his message.53

Why Were They Unsuccessful? The reasons for the Mennonites unsuccessful attempts at missions in the 1920s and 1930s rest on two main cultural explanations. The first explanation deals with the elements of the wider fundamentalist culture throughout the United States. The second explanation deals with cultural differences between the Mennonite culture and the culture of the people with whom they interacted. In reality the explanation for the failure is not found in one or the other scenario, but rather in a combination of both.

53

J. B. Gehman, “History of Reading Mission.”

Siegfried 28 The fundamentalist movement thrived in post-WWI American society as a defensive and offensive reaction to the modernism and liberalism of the era. In the early 1920s it gained momentum through the defenses of fundamental scholars and a popular fear that if America did not expel the liberalist and modernist ideas plaguing society they would suffer the consequences of barbarism like the nation of Germany.54, 55 However, in 1925 the Scopes Trial in Tennessee altered the influence of fundamentalism throughout American culture. This event marked the downfall of fundamentalism and discredited the movement, as people read reports of the trial proceedings which cast the fundamentalists as unintelligent hicks.56, 57 From 1925 and through the 1930s the fundamentalist movement disappeared from national culture and operated as a marginal movement off the national radar.58 J. B. Gehman’s lament over a lack of visible results in 1927 fell in the midst of this refashioning of popular culture and the decline of fundamentalism as a national movement. Therefore, the people the Mennonites shared their message with, throughout the late 1920s and the 1930s in their missions and on the streets of Reading, responded indifferently. Many of them felt that evolution and modern scholarship discredited much of the Bible, and they shut their ears to the message of the Mennonites.

54

Marsden, 58-59 Fundamental scholars and antievolutionists blamed liberal ideas, modern philosophy, and Darwinism for leading the German culture into barbarism (Marsden, 59). It is interesting how they were able to play off of war-time propaganda and the popular conception of the Germans cast as Huns or barbarians in order to portray there message of anti-modernism, anti-evolution, and anti-liberalism. 56 Marsden, 60. 57 For a more in depth study of the Scopes “Monkey Trial,” and the fundamentalist view of evolution, including the proceedings and the effects of the trial on the fundamentalist movement see Michael Lienesch, In the Beginning: Fundamentalism, the Scopes Trial, and the Making of the Antievolution Movement (Chapel Hill, North Carolina: The University of North Carolina Press, 2007) and Peter J. Bowler, Monkey Trials and Gorilla Sermons (Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 2007). 58 See Joel A. Carpenter, Revive Us Again: The Reawakening of American Fundamentalism (New York City, New York: Oxford University Press, 1997) and David W. Lotz (ed.), Altered Landscapes: Christianity in America 19351985 (Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1989) for a study of fundamentalism in the years when it was out of the national spotlight, namely how it regrouped during the 1930s and reemerged decades later. 55

Siegfried 29 The cultural differences between the Mennonites and the people they shared their message with also exacerbated the problem of bringing more followers into the fellowship. First, quite simply, the many immigrant families who inhabited the city of Reading were usually at least nominally Catholic if not devout followers of Roman Catholicism. Therefore they already culturally tied themselves to a church based on their family heritage and ethnicity. In fact, there were numerous Catholic churches in Reading during the 1920s and 1930s and each existed for a particular ethnicity. On the south side alone there were churches for Irish, Polish, Slavic, and Ukrainian Catholics in the neighborhoods of the Fairview and Neversink Missions. In addition to the Catholics there were also other Protestant denominations competing with the Mennonites throughout the city. Some people were part of mainline churches that had been in the city since its founding. Others found fundamentalist churches that provided a similar message and similar beliefs to the Mennonites, but without the strict rules and requirements on lifestyle. Finally, the other group of people the Mennonites interacted was the African Americans. Many African Americans migrated to the North during the early 20th century as part of the Great Migration. They mostly moved into the Northern cities, taking up residence in cheaper housing units in the poorer sections of the city, and altering the ethnic and racial landscapes of North.59 These African Americans formed close communities in their respective neighborhoods and looked to one another for support. An example of this community of support was the Black Church. Since the emancipation of the slaves at the end of the Civil War the Black Church grew in membership and influence. It cast itself as the social vehicle for change and liberation for the

59

August Meier & Elliot Rudwick, From Plantation to Ghetto (New York: Hill & Wang, 1966) 213-218.

Siegfried 30 Black race.60 One reason for the Mennonite’s message not reaching large groups of African Americans was their preference to join Black churches, where they felt they could better identify with the spiritual and social issues of the church community. Other cultural differences were the rules of dress and simplicity taught by the Mennonites. In an interview with Mary Staples, who attended the Neversink Mission as a child in the 1930s, she identified the rules about clothing as the most difficult teaching to follow and accept, and that it acted as a hindrance to her joining the church.61 Referring to the pressure in changing her style of dress Mary stated, “…they wanted me to change everything… I didn’t feel too comfortable with that.”62 The issue of dress and simplicity as well as separation from the world did not conform to the cultures of the peoples with whom the Mennonites interacted. The 1920s and 1930s popular culture offered so many amusements and enjoyments that the Mennonites did not allow. Many times their message was counterintuitive to the American Dream and the desires of American consumerism. Overall their message faltered because they demanded more of a commitment than most people cared to make. Conclusion When the Mennonites of Lancaster Conference began missions in Reading they did so in response to what they perceived to be a growing secular culture, and in response to the beginning of a crisis of faith and tradition within their own denomination. Liberal and modernist scholars 60

For a more authoritative and comprehensive examination of the Black Church and African American spirituality in general see C. Eric Lincoln and Lawrence H. Mamiya, The Black Church in the African American Experience (Durham, North Carolina: Duke University Press, 1990); Andrew Billingsley, Mighty Like a River: The Black Church and Social Reform, (Oxford, England: Oxford University Press, 1999); Paul E. Johnson (ed.), AfricanAmerican Christianity: Essays in History (Berkeley, California: University of California Press, 1994); Michael Battle, The Black Church in America: African American Christian Spirituality (Malden, Massachusetts: Blackwell Publishing, 2006); Timothy E. Fulop (ed.), African-American Religion: Interpretive Essays in History and Culture (New York City, New York: Routledge, 1997). 61 Mary Staples, interviewed by author, October 25, 2008. 62

Mary Staples, interviewed by author, October 25, 2008.

Siegfried 31 and philosophers attacked the authority of the Bible, while scientists claimed that Darwinism debunked the account of biblical creation. The popular culture of the United States turned to secularized attractions during the Roaring Twenties, and the youth challenged the Victorian morality of their parents. All of these facts were threats to the traditional culture and religion of the Mennonites. Polarized schisms and factionalism arose as a result of the cultural trends and some people left the denomination. Mennonites of Lancaster Conference reacted along with a cultural and religious phenomenon within American Christianity known as fundamentalism. This movement defended the authority of the Bible and espoused a literal interpretation of the Bible. As a part of this wider cultural trend and through the influence of other religious movements within the fundamentalist movement the Mennonites responded to the challenges of popular culture as well as to the crisis within their own denomination by entering the mission field in Reading. Throughout the 1920s and 1930s the Mennonites interacted with racially and ethnically diverse people groups in the city of Reading. Though they brought a positive message about hopefulness and a changed lifestyle, they also demanded great commitment and an adherence to a number of strict and conservative rules. The people of the city of Reading largely rejected or ignored the Mennonite message because the culture of the Mennonites conflicted with the popular culture of the time. At the same time, in the middle of the 1920s the fundamentalism movement as a whole took a hit due to the Scopes Trial and it lost the relevancy it had earlier in the decade. The Mennonite missions continued to struggle to gain adherents to their denomination, but by the end of the 1930s had little to show in the way of converts to their church.

Siegfried 32 Taken as a whole, the history of the Mennonites in Reading is a narrative about the cultural trends of the 1920s and 1930s. Their successes and failures were ultimately determined by these wider cultural trends and the lack of relevancy of their message and doctrines. As they confronted a changing cultural landscape in hopes of saving a perverse and sinful generation, they failed to see the ineffectiveness of their message. They pursued their mission with hopefulness and zeal, but theirs was a message for another culture and another time.

Siegfried 33 Bibliography Angstadt, Lois. Interviewed by author, October 31, 2008. Battle, Michael. The Black Church in America: African American Christian Spirituality (Malden, Massachusetts: Blackwell Publishing, 2006). Billingsley, Andrew. Mighty Like a River: The Black Church and Social Reform, (Oxford, England: Oxford University Press, 1999). Bowler, Peter J. Monkey Trials and Gorilla Sermons (Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 2007). Brauer, Jerald C. Protestantism in America: A Narrative History (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: The Westminster Press, 1965). Carpenter, Joel A. Revive Us Again: The Reawakening of American Fundamentalism (New York City, New York: Oxford University Press, 1997). Drowne, Kathleen & Patrick Huber. The 1920s (Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood Press, 2004). Dyck, Cornelius J., ed. An Introduction to Mennonite History (Scottdale, Pennsylvania: Herald Press, 1967). “Eschatology Comparison” http://www.spiritone.com/~wing/esc_chrt.htm. Eshelman, H. Frank. Historic Background and Annals of the Swiss and German Pioneer Settlers of South-Eastern Pennsylvania and of Their Remote Ancestors From the Middle of the Dark Ages Down to the Time of the Revolutionary War (Lancaster, Pennsylvania: 1917).

Fox, Cyrus T. Reading and Berks County, Pennsylvania (New York: Lewis Historical

Siegfried 34 Publishing Co., 1925). Fulop, Timothy E., ed. African-American Religion: Interpretive Essays in History and Culture (New York City, New York: Routledge, 1997). Gehman, J. B. “History of Reading Mission,” Christian Monitor 14, no. 8 (August 1927). Good, Sheldon. Interviewed by author, November 11, 2008. Good, Stephan J. Interviewed by author, October 5, 2008. Henretta, James H. America: A Concise History (New York: Bedford/St. Martins, 2002). Johnson, Paul E., ed. African-American Christianity: Essays in History (Berkeley, California: University of California Press, 1994). Landis, Ira D. The Lancaster Mennonite Conference (The Christian Nurture Committee of the Lancaster Mennonite Conference, 1956). Lienesch, Michael. In the Beginning: Fundamentalism, the Scopes Trial, and the Making of the Antievolution Movement (Chapel Hill, North Carolina: The University of North Carolina Press, 2007). Lehman, Chester K. “The Importance of Secular Training in Our Church Schools,” Christian Monitor 14, no. 8 (August 1927). Lincoln, C. Eric & Lawrence H. Mamiya. The Black Church in the African American Experience (Durham, North Carolina: Duke University Press, 1990). Lotz, David W., ed. Altered Landscapes: Christianity in America 1935-1985 (Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1989). MacRobert, Iain. The Black Roots and White Racism of Early Pentecostalism in the USA (New York City, New York: St. Marin’s Press, 1988).

Siegfried 35 Marsden, George M. Understanding Fundamentalism and Evangelicalism. (Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1991). Meier, August & Elliot Rudwick. From Plantation to Ghetto (New York: Hill & Wang, 1966). Meier, August & Elliott Rudwick, eds. The Making of Black America, Volume II: The Black Community in Modern America (New York: Atheneum, 1974). Mennonite Encyclopedia (Scottsdale, Pennsylvania: The Mennonite Publishing House, 1959). Montagu, M. F. Ashley. Man’s Most Dangerous Myth (New York: Harper & Brothers, 1953). Musser, Lizzie. “Experience in Visitation Work,” Christian Monitor 14, no. 8 (August 1927). Musser, Susanna. “History of the South Seventh Street Mennonite Church,” (Reading, Pa: unpublished manuscript, 1988). Noll, Mark. American Evangelical Christianity (Malden, Massachusetts: Blackwell Publishers, 2001). Sensenig, J. Carl. Called of God: The Mennonite Church in Reading, Pennsylvania (Morgantown, Pennsylvania: Masthof Press, 2007). Simpson, Lesley Byrd. The Spiritual conquest of Mexico (Berkeley, California: University of California Press, 1966). Smith, C. Henry. The Story of the Mennonites (Newton, Kansas: Mennonite Publications Office, 1950). Staples, Mary. Interviewed by author, October 25, 2008.

“The Mennonite Immigration to Pennsylvania in the Eighteenth Century” The Pennsylvania German Society (The Pennsylvania German Society, 1924). Vitalis, Robert. America’s Kingdom: Mythmaking on the Saudi Oil Frontier (Stanford,

Siegfried 36 California: Stanford University Press, 2007). Weaver, Martin G. Mennonites of Lancaster Conference (Scottdale, Pennsylvania: Mennonite Publishing House, 1931). Wenger, John C. Separated Unto God: A Plan for Christian Simplicity of Life and for a Scriptural Non-conformity to the World (Scottdale, Pennsylvania: Herald Press, 1955). Young, William H. & Nancy K. The 1930s (Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood Press, 2004).

Literature Review Thesis and Argument To best understand the concept of my thesis and argument it is important to consult a few sources which I used to piece together my argument. For references on evangelicalism and fundamentalism in the United States and its influences on American culture in the early 20th century see George M. Marsden, Fundamentalism and American Culture. (Oxford, England: Oxford University Press, 2006); Mark Noll, American Evangelical Christianity (Malden, Massachusetts: Blackwell Publishers, 2001); George M. Marsden, Understanding Fundamentalism and Evangelicalism. (Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1991); and Jerald C. Brauer, Protestantism in America: A Narrative History (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: The Westminster Press, 1965). Marsden’s and Noll’s books helped me the most in understanding the rise of evangelicalism and fundamentalism as well as their impacts on American society, which in turn gave me a perspective on the wider historiography and historical context of my subject. Also, to understand the wider theme of missions in culturally diverse areas and imposition of one culture upon another through missionary activity see Lesley Byrd Simpson, The Spiritual conquest of Mexico (Berkeley,

Siegfried 37 California: University of California Press, 1966). Simpson’s book explores the Spanish Catholic Church in Mexico and the methods of mission used to gain converts and suppress the natives. This book helped me to understand the missions of the Mennonites from a new perspective.

The Mennonites Much of the focus of my paper relies on sources about the Mennonite church, especially in Lancaster Conference. For a comprehensive study of Mennonite history and theology see H. Frank Eshelman, Historic Background and Annals of the Swiss and German Pioneer Settlers of South-Eastern Pennsylvania and of Their Remote Ancestors From the Middle of the Dark Ages Down to the Time of the Revolutionary War (Lancaster, Pennsylvania: 1917); Martin G. Weaver, Mennonites of Lancaster Conference (Scottdale, Pennsylvania: Mennonite Publishing House, 1931); The Pennsylvania German Society, “The Mennonite Immigration to Pennsylvania in the Eighteenth Century” The Pennsylvania German Society (The Pennsylvania German Society, 1924); Cornelius J. Dyck ed., An Introduction to Mennonite History (Scottdale, Pennsylvania: Herald Press, 1967); Ira D. Landis, The Lancaster Mennonite Conference (The Christian Nurture Committee of the Lancaster Mennonite Conference, 1956); and C. Henry Smith, The Story of the Mennonites (Newton, Kansas: Mennonite Publications Office, 1950). Eshelmen, Dyck, Smith and The Pennsylvania German Society deal the Mennonites and Anabaptist tradition from the Reformation, through their migration to North America. Eshelmen ends his history at the Revolutionary War, but Dyck and Smith continue through to the 20th century. Weaver and Landis focus more directly on the formation of the Lancaster Mennonite Conference although they too investigate the origins of the Mennonites and their beliefs, and track their history through to the 20th century. Weaver is both a primary and a secondary source since his history

Siegfried 38 was written in the 1930s. In fact Dyck and Landis are also used as primary sources for an understanding of how the Mennonites interpreted their own history. To better understand my approach to the interpretation of these church histories see the note on “exceptionalism” and Robert Vitalis, America’s Kingdom: Mythmaking on the Saudi Oil Frontier (Stanford, California: Stanford University Press, 2007). Additionally, see John C. Wenger, Separated Unto God: A Plan for Christian Simplicity of Life and for a Scriptural Non-conformity to the World (Scottdale, Pennsylvania: Herald Press, 1955) to more fully understand the theology of separatism in relation to the secular world, and Mennonite Encyclopedia (Scottsdale, Pennsylvania: The Mennonite Publishing House, 1959) as a reference for a brief synopsis on other theological and historical matters concerning the Mennonites. Furthermore the main sources from which I derived my investigation of the Mennonites in the 1920s was a history recently written by the current bishop of the Reading-Bowmansville district of the Lancaster Mennonite Conference, see J. Carl Sensenig, Called of God: The Mennonite Church in Reading, Pennsylvania (Morgantown, Pennsylvania: Masthof Press, 2007), and primary sources mainly found at the Lancaster Mennonite Historical Society and through personal interviews. These sources were J. B. Gehman, “History of Reading Mission,” Christian Monitor 14, no. 8 (August 1927); Lizzie Musser, “Experience in Visitation Work,” Christian Monitor 14, no. 8 (August 1927); Chester K. Lehman, “The Importance of Secular Training in Our Church Schools,” Christian Monitor 14, no. 8 (August 1927); Susanna Musser, “History of the South Seventh Street Mennonite Church,” (Reading, Pa: unpublished manuscript, 1988); Mary Staples, interviewed by author, October 25, 2008; Lois Angstadt, interviewed by author, October 31, 2008; Stephan J. Good, interviewed by author, October 5, 2008; and Sheldon Good, interviewed by author, November 11, 2008.

Siegfried 39 General Historical Context For a general history of the historical context in the United States, Pennsylvania, and Reading during the 1920s and 1930s see James H. Henretta, America: A Concise History (New York: Bedford/St. Martins, 2002); Cyrus T. Fox, Reading and Berks County, Pennsylvania (New York: Lewis Historical Publishing Co., 1925); Kathleen Drowne & Patrick Huber, The 1920s (Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood Press, 2004); William H. Young & Nancy K. Young, The 1930s (Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood Press, 2004).

Evangelicalism and Fundamentalism For a study on evangelicalism and fundamentalism in American culture see George M. Marsden, Fundamentalism and American Culture. (Oxford, England: Oxford University Press, 2006); Mark Noll, American Evangelical Christianity (Malden, Massachusetts: Blackwell Publishers, 2001); George M. Marsden, Understanding Fundamentalism and Evangelicalism. (Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1991); and Jerald C. Brauer, Protestantism in America: A Narrative History (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: The Westminster Press, 1965). Also see Joel A. Carpenter, Revive Us Again: The Reawakening of American Fundamentalism (New York City, New York: Oxford University Press, 1997); David W. Lotz ed., Altered Landscapes: Christianity in America 1935-1985 (Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1989) for an analysis of fundamentalism as it went under the radar and reformulated during 1930s. Also see Iain MacRobert, The Black Roots and White Racism of Early Pentecostalism in the USA (New York City, New York: St. Marin’s Press, 1988). Finally, see Michael Lienesch, In the Beginning: Fundamentalism, the Scopes Trial, and the Making of the Antievolution Movement (Chapel Hill, North Carolina: The University of

Siegfried 40 North Carolina Press, 2007) and Peter J. Bowler, Monkey Trials and Gorilla Sermons (Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 2007) for an examination of the fundamentalist reaction to and stance against Darwinism.

Race, African Americans, and the Black Church For a further study in the origins of the Black Church and its relation to African American identity and spirituality see C. Eric Lincoln and Lawrence H. Mamiya, The Black Church in the African American Experience (Durham, North Carolina: Duke University Press, 1990); Andrew Billingsley, Mighty Like a River: The Black Church and Social Reform, (Oxford, England: Oxford University Press, 1999); Paul E. Johnson ed., African-American Christianity: Essays in History (Berkeley, California: University of California Press, 1994); Michael Battle, The Black Church in America: African American Christian Spirituality (Malden, Massachusetts: Blackwell Publishing, 2006); Timothy E. Fulop ed., African-American Religion: Interpretive Essays in History and Culture (New York City, New York: Routledge, 1997). For a survey on the complications of race in America see M.F. Ashley Montagu, Man’s Most Dangerous Myth (New York: Harper & Brothers, 1953), and for an analysis of African American lifestyle in the 20th century and an investigation of main factors helped to create the Black identity see August Meier & Elliot Rudwick, From Plantation to Ghetto (New York: Hill & Wang, 1966) and August Meier & Elliott Rudwick eds., The Making of Black America, Volume II: The Black Community in Modern America (New York: Atheneum, 1974).