The Organization of the Congregation in the Early Lutheran Churches in America
B >> Beale M. Schmucker >> The Organization of the Congregation in the Early Lutheran Churches in AmericaTHE
ORGANIZATION OF THE CONGREGATION
IN THE
EARLY LUTHERAN CHURCHES
IN AMERICA.
by
BEALE M. SCHMUCKER, D.D.
From the Lutheran Church Review, July, 1887.
Philadelphia:
1887.
The Organization of the Congregation
in the Early Lutheran Churches in America.
The Lutheran Church in this country has had an opportunity, as never
before in its history, to determine for itself the whole form of its
organization, uncontrolled by any external forces. In the old world the
intimate and organic union of the church with the State left little
liberty in this respect. When, therefore, the early Lutheran immigrants
in this country were disposed to form themselves into congregations, to
adopt regulations for their own government, to settle their relations to
other Lutheran congregations, to determine the order of worship to be
observed, they had to feel their way in the dark. No little time passed
before all these matters became settled on a permanent basis. To follow
them in their efforts to obtain a satisfactory organization of the
congregation, is what I propose now to do.
There is grave reason to doubt whether, prior to the arrival in
Pennsylvania of Henry Melchior Muehlenberg, any of the German Lutheran
congregations in Pennsylvania had a well-developed, clearly defined,
written constitution. I have carefully examined all the written records
of nearly all the congregations which were in existence at that time,
and have failed to find evidence of any such constitution. The first
known written constitution of the church at Philadelphia was introduced
in 1746 by Brunnholtz and Muehlenberg, and it was brief and rudimentary.
The congregation at the Swamp, New Hanover, was the earliest German
congregation in America, begun in 1703 by Justus Falckner, but whatever
the form of organization which it may have received from him, or his
immediate successor, no record of it is known to exist, and the first
written constitution now known is in the hand-writing Muehlenberg. The
Tulpehocken congregations were established by Palatinates from the
Hudson and Mohawk, who came to Pennsylvania in 1723 and 1729. They were
familiar with the congregational organizations in New York under
Kocherthal and Falckner, which were formed under the counsel of Court
Preacher Boehm, probably after the similitude of the Savoy Church in
London, and under the influence of the long established Dutch Lutheran
constitution in New York, based on that at Amsterdam. But no written
constitution is now known in Tulpehocken earlier than that introduced by
Muehlenberg. In all the old congregations the case is the same, so far
as any known evidence proves.
In all the German congregations in Pennsylvania, however, an
organization was found when Muehlenberg came, which had arisen out of
the necessities of the case, and in all of them it had the same
character. There were two orders of officers in each congregation,
called Elders and Vorsteher, elected by the members for a definite term.
The open letter given by the congregations at Philadelphia, Trappe and
New Hanover, to their representatives sent to Europe in 1733, is signed
by the Vorsteher and Elders of the congregations, and there were like
officers in these congregations when Muehlenberg arrived, to whom he
presented his credentials. The form of power of attorney sent by Dr.
Francke to be signed by the congregations in 1734, is addressed to the
Elders and Vorsteher, and the letter sent to Dr. Ziegenhagen in 1739, is
signed by the Elders and Vorsteher. The proceedings of the first meeting
of the Ministerium of Pennsylvania show the presence of Deputy Elders
and Vorsteher from the ten congregations represented. Indeed, it may be
said that in all the congregations there were these two classes of
officers. The distinction between the two classes may not have been very
clear, and sometimes both are spoken of as Vorsteher, but after a
general examination of their records, we are persuaded that it was a
prevalent, if not universal usage of the congregations, before
Muehlenberg's arrival, to elect these two classes of officers, to whom
the direction of their affairs was intrusted. In the congregational
constitution furnished the Salzburg emigrants to Georgia in 1733 by Drs.
Urlsperger, Ziegenhagen and Francke, based on that of the Savoy Church
at London, Elders and Deacons, annually elected by a majority of the
members, were provided for.
The question very naturally arises and claims consideration, Whence came
this usage of the Pennsylvania German Lutheran congregations? This
arrangement is almost entirely unknown in the Lutheran Church in
Germany, where the church is united with the State, and has little right
of self-government. That the same mode of organization should have been
adopted at the outset by them all is not only in itself strange, but
shows that this arrangement must have been brought to their notice from
some quarter, and having been tested commended itself to them. We
believe that this provision of Elders and Vorsteher or Deacons, was
accepted by them from the Swedish Lutheran Churches on the Delaware, the
early Dutch Reformed and German Reformed Churches in Pennsylvania, and
the Dutch Lutheran Churches in New York and New Jersey, and ultimately
from the German Lutheran Church in London, and the Dutch Lutheran Church
in Amsterdam. And as these earlier organizations exerted an influence
not merely upon the first shaping of the German Lutheran congregations,
but continuously upon the whole formation of their congregational
constitutions, until they assumed their final complete condition, it is
the more proper that they should receive careful consideration.
ORIGINAL SOURCES OF ORGANIZATION IN THE GERMAN LUTHERAN CHURCHES IN
PENNSYLVANIA.
1. _The Swedish Congregations._ Acrelius, in his history of New Sweden,
does not describe the earliest organization of the congregation. The
instructions given by the crown to Gov. Printz, 1642, simply say: "Above
all things, shall the governor consider to see to it that a true and due
worship, becoming honor, laud and praise be paid to the Most High God in
all things, and to that end all proper care shall be taken that divine
service be zealously performed according to the Unaltered Augsburg
Confession, the Council of Upsala, and the ceremonies of the Swedish
Church; and all persons, but especially the young, shall be duly
instructed in all the articles of their Christian faith, and all good
discipline shall in like manner be duly exercised and received." The
earliest mention Acrelius makes of congregational officers, is in the
time of Fabritius in 1684, when Church Wardens made an appeal to the
members with reference to the pastor's salary. In Sandel's time, 1702,
new Church Wardens and Church Councilmen were installed, which suggests
that these two offices were found in the time of Fabritius, so short a
time previous. If this be a correct conclusion, the question would
arise, whether this arrangement was introduced by Fabritius, or was in
existence from the beginning? Fabritius was sent out from Amsterdam as
the first settled pastor of the Dutch Lutheran congregations in New
York. If those congregations were not fully organized before he came,
they were certainly organized by him, and in either case after the type
of that at Amsterdam. Fabritius founded the Swedish congregation at
Philadelphia, and it is very possible that he may have given it a
constitution like that of New York and Amsterdam. I do not know whether
the congregations in Sweden have any such arrangement as is found in the
churches on the Delaware. I find the office of Church Wardens mentioned
in the Kirchen-Ordnung of Charles XI. in 1686, but am not sure of the
extent to which the office agrees with that in the Wicaco Church.
Acrelius describes the organization of this last-named congregation in
Sandel's time, p. 216. "Pastor Sandel held a parish meeting, installed
new Church Wardens (Kyrkowaerdar) and Church Councilmen (Kyrkoraeder),
and at the same time explained to each of these their duties. Thus, 1.)
The Councilmen were to have the oversight of the preservation and
improvement of the church and parsonage. 2.) That each in his turn
should look after the life of the people, and if any one should conduct
himself improperly, give timely notice of it to the pastor, so that with
his concurrence and advice, and according to the circumstances of the
persons and their deeds, they might be brought before the Church Council
(Kyrkoraedet), and either admonished, placed on trial, or excluded from
the congregation. The office of the Church Wardens was: 1.) To collect
and pay over the Priests' salary twice a year; 2.) To take up the
collections in the church, and the other church dues, as for marriages,
churching of women, burials, etc.; 3.) To take care of the poor of the
congregation; 4.) To keep the accounts of the church in good order and
exhibit them annually on the 1st of May; 5.) To provide the pay for the
sexton, etc."
This whole arrangement bears a close resemblance to that of the Dutch
Lutheran Churches, and is virtually that found in the German Churches in
Pennsylvania when Muehlenberg came. The Church Council consisted of the
minister, the councilmen and wardens. These lay officers served for a
fixed time, and were installed in their offices; but, unfortunately, it
cannot be learned from this account in what manner they were chosen. The
above arrangement continued in force until, in 1765, Provost Wrangel
prepared a new constitution and secured a charter. In the new instrument
the officers of the congregation are styled Rector, Church Wardens and
Vestrymen, after the Anglican style. This constitution was wrought out
by Wrangel in conference with Muehlenberg, and the mode of selection of
officers is almost precisely the same as in the German Constitution of
1762: twice the number are nominated by those in office, and the
election is by a majority of votes of the congregation.
The Swedish congregation at Philadelphia, as well as those at Morlatton
and Merion to a less extent, undoubtedly exercised a marked influence on
the German Lutheran congregations. It was well organized long before
establishment of the first German Lutheran congregation in America. The
pastor of the Wicaco Church from 1677 to 1693, Fabritius, was a German,
and cared for such German Lutherans as settled near the city. Rudman,
who succeeded him, showed his interest in the Germans by bringing
Falckner into the ministry, and his successor, Sandel, united with him
in this act. Rudman preached in Dutch, and may have also understood
German. The first regular ministrant to the German congregation at
Philadelphia was the Swede, John Eneberg, and it is probable that it was
organized by him. Pastor Dylander held service for the Germans regularly
in the Wicaco Church, and Muehlenberg's services were held there mainly
until the erection of St. Michael's. The Swedish ministers met with the
Germans in the earlier meetings of the ministerium. The relations
between Provost Wrangel and Muehlenberg were of the most intimate
nature; they labored together as brothers in the superintendence of the
congregations under their care, and finally when Muehlenberg was working
out the enduring constitution of the German Church, Wrangel wrought out
that of the Swedish Church. The German Church constitution was prepared
with the co-operation of Wrangel, and he attended the meeting of the
congregation at which it was accepted, and made an address. From the
earliest times to the completion of the final constitution, the
influence of the Swedish organization was strongly felt.
2. _The Reformed Churches in Pennsylvania._ The _Dutch Reformed_
congregations at Bensalem and Neshaminy in Bucks County and at
Whitemarsh, Montgomery County, were the earliest Reformed Churches in
Pennsylvania, and antedate all the German Lutheran congregations except
that at New Hanover. These Churches were organized in 1710 by Domine
Paulus Van Vlecq, and in each of them a senior and a senior elder and
deacon were elected to serve for two years. The senior went out of
office annually, and the junior became senior, while the newly-elected
officer became the junior. The mode of election is not entirely clear.
The record simply says at Bensalem: "The Church Council, both Elders and
Deacons, of Sammeny and Bensalem, were installed (_bevestight_) by Dom.
Van Vlecq May 21, 1710," the day after that given for the organization.
They may have been elected the previous day. At White Marsh the record
says: "The church at Wytmess was organized June 4, 1710, the same day
the Church Council there was installed." The record of the Dutch
Reformed Church at Six Mile Run, near New Brunswick, N. J., organized
November 15, 1710, says: "The Church Council was elected Nov. 15, and
after having been announced three times, was installed." At the next
election it is said: "Anno 1711, Oct. 23, the Church Council was
elected, and after having been three times announced without objection
made, they were installed Oct. 24," on which date also the treasurer
presented his account. There must have been several services on those
two days, at each of which the names of those elected were published.
It does not appear in what manner the choice was made. They may have
been selected by those in office, and when no objection was made after
publication, the consent of the congregation was supposed to be given,
or they may have been chosen by vote of the congregation. I am assured
by Dr. Talbot W. Chambers, of the Collegiate Church in New York, that
both of these modes are and have long been usual in the Reformed
Churches, and that in the old mother congregation at New York, now
enlarged to be the Collegiate Church, the former mode of selection has
been used ever since its establishment. These officers were named Elders
(_Ouderlinge_) and Deacons (_Diaconen_), who, with the Pastor, formed
the Church Council (_Kerckenraet_). They were not chosen for life, but
in this country, as in Holland, for a fixed term, usually two years.
This organization of the Dutch Reformed congregations in this country
agrees, entirely with that of the Reformed Church in Holland, as
described by Benthem in his "_Hollaendische Kirchen und Schul Staat,_"
except that in Holland the pastors and elders alone form the Church
Council; but there the deacons are also admitted to it in feeble
congregations where the number of elders was small. Another feature of
the organization of the Dutch Reformed Churches is that, in important
cases, all who have ever held the office of elder or deacon are called
together to give counsel. The Dutch churches here named were situated
near to our Lutheran people, and they were the earliest formed among the
Reformed or Lutherans, and must naturally have had an influence on their
neighbors. In the Neshaminy settlement were found representatives of
three religious bodies: there were Dutch Lutherans, who were afterward
visited by Muehlenberg, Swedish Lutherans ministered to by the Wicaco
pastors, and in largest numbers Dutch Reformed, with resident pastors,
with whom the Scotch-Irish Presbyterian settlers coalesced. The Swedish
pastors certainly held services in the Reformed Church, and I have no
doubt that Muehlenberg's services were held in the same church, as the
Lutherans were few and never had a separate building.
The _German Reformed_ congregations in Philadelphia, 1727, Germantown,
Skippach, 1720, Goschenhoppen, 1731, Saucon, 1731, Egypt, 1731, Oley,
1731, Mosellem, 1731, and therefore in general throughout the district
between the Schuylkill and Delaware, were formed somewhat earlier than
the Lutheran congregations in their vicinity. As the members of the two
religious bodies were closely intermarried and often worshipped in the
same buildings, it is self-evident that the earlier organizations must
have had an important influence on the later. Beside this, in Europe,
especially in Holland, but also in Germany, there was a fuller
self-government in the Reformed congregations than prevailed in the
Lutheran in Germany. Their system was, therefore, better adapted for
transplanting to a new country, where there was no connection between
Church and State. The earliest German Reformed pastors came by way of
Holland, and were aided by the church of that country, so that we may
expect to find a close similarity between the Reformed organizations in
this country, both German and Dutch, and we will not be disappointed in
this. In his "Historic Manual of the Reformed Church," Rev. Dr. J. H.
Dubbs shows such familiarity with the condition and history of the
Reformed congregations from the beginning, that it was natural that we
should turn to him, as a personal friend through many years, for
reliable information as to the form of organization in the older
congregation. In answer he says: "There can, I think, be no doubt that
the offices of elder and deacon were brought over from the Fatherland,
precisely as we have them at present. Max Goebel informs us (_Geschichte
des Chr. Lebens,_ vol. ii., p. 76) that in the Reformed Churches of the
Rhine country, in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, elders were
always elected with prayer in the presence of the most prominent members
of the congregation. Ordinarily the election was conducted by the
Consistory: sometimes by the congregation itself, a double number of
candidates being proposed by the retiring members of the Consistory.
Every year one-half of the elders retired from office. The deacons were
elected in the same manner as the elders. Their office had special
reference to the wants of the poor. The election of elders for life was
entirely unknown in the Dutch and German churches. Such is Goebel's
account. I have few documents of an earlier date than 1740; but between
that date and 1760 there are many in which both offices are mentioned. I
have a document of 1730 signed by the '_AEltesten_' of the Reformed
Church at Philadelphia. A petition in English, addressed in 1732 to
Governor Gordon, is signed by seven 'Ancients' of the same congregation.
Here four of the names are new, showing an intervening election. The
deacons are not mentioned, but would naturally not appear in a document
of that kind. Most of the early letters are addressed to the '_AElteste
und Diaconen_' of the several churches. The rules for the Government of
the Reformed Church at Amwell, N. J., 1749, are signed by the '_AElteste
und Diaconen oder Vorsteher._' It seems, therefore, that the two terms
were used interchangeably. With regard to the points of doubt you
suggest, I can only say:
"1. The two distinct orders, elders and deacons, have certainly existed
from the beginning in the American churches.
"2. The name of the second order in German is either Diacon or
Vorsteher; the former name probably more ecclesiastical, the latter more
popular.
"3. The term of office was always fixed, but the period varied in
different congregations. There was no life term, except in the ministry.
"4. The mode of selection probably varied in different churches as it
does now. I imagine that in most churches the most prominent members met
on an appointed day to hold the annual 'Kirchenrechnung,' and then
quietly 'made out,' without a formal election, who were to fill the
vacancies in the consistory. Very frequently, no doubt, retiring members
nominated their own successors, to be approved or rejected by the
congregational meeting." This clear description of German Reformed usage
shows how great similarity there was in this respect between the
American Reformed descendants of Hollanders and Germans. These Swedish
and Reformed modes of congregational organization were here fully in
operation in the territory on which our earliest German congregations
were established.
3. _The Lutheran Congregations at Amsterdam and London._ The
constitution of the Lutheran Church at Amsterdam is the most important
and influential original source of Lutheran congregational organizations
in America. It is the model from which the constitution of the Dutch
Lutheran Churches in New York and New Jersey are directly derived. It is
the original source of the constitution of the Savoy Church in London,
which claims to be a simple translation of it, with some modifications.
The Amsterdam constitution was, therefore, the immediate basis of the
congregations in New York City, Albany, Loonenburg, Hackensack, on the
Raritan, and of other congregations in New York founded by Falckner,
Berkenmeyer and Knoll. The London constitution was the on which the
congregations founded by Kocherthal at East and West Camp, Rhinebeck,
Newburg, Schoharie, and those which grew out of them all along the
Hudson and Mohawk rested, modified by the influence of the previously
existing organizations, based on the Amsterdam constitution. So that is
may be said that the Amsterdam constitution, with the modifications made
at London, is the source of organization for all the older congregations
in New York and upper New Jersey. In Pennsylvania, if my surmise that
the Swedish Wicaco Church received its constitution through Fabritius
from New York be correct, the Amsterdam constitution underlies the
Swedish organization, the influence of which on the German churches we
have described. The London book was in the hands of Muehlenberg and the
other German pastors in Penna., given to them by Ziegenhagen in London.
Muehlenberg became acquainted with the Dutch Lutheran constitution,
based on that of Amsterdam, in 1745, at the Raritan, and in 1750-1752 at
New York and Hackensack, where for two summers he was pastor of
congregations in which it prevailed. His estimate of it was very
favorable; he says: "These Pastors (of the Dutch Church in New York)
introduced a constitution, which they have prepared after the model of
that of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in Amsterdam, and it was
subscribed by them, as well as by the Elders and Deacons, and hitherto
the Agende of Amsterdam has been used, all which were very well suited
to the circumstances in America, and served to edification." The
influence of these two constitutions, of Amsterdam and London, on those
by whom the gradual completion of the work of organization in Penna. was
made was very prominent. The London Constitution was the basis of that
furnished by Ziegenhagen, Urlsperger and Francke to the Salzburgers, who
settled in Georgia, and exerted an important influence on later
congregations in that State and in the Carolinas. Having had the
continuous approbation and commendation of Boehme and Ziegenhagen, court
preachers at London, by whom, to so large an extent, the German
immigration to this country was directed and counselled in religious
matters, to whom nearly all correspondence was primarily directed, and
who stood so near to the sovereign of the colonies, by whom also the
calls to the Halle Missionaries were given them though the men were
chosen at Halle; this constitution came to the Halle Missionaries
clothed with great weight of authority. It is, therefore, right and
proper, that above all others, these two constitutions should receive
our careful examination. As that of Amsterdam is the earlier, and the
original basis of the other, we will first describe it, and then show
the modifications made at London.
The _Constitution of Amsterdam_ was originally adopted in 1597 and bore
the title "Kerkelijke Ordonnantie, for the government, in the doctrines
of the Divine Word, administration of the Sacraments and other matters
pertaining to the administration of the Church, of the Congregation and
Church at Amsterdam, which assembles in a house and adheres to the
genuine unaltered Augsburg Confession, prepared and established by the
Ministers and Deputies there, in the year of Christ 1597." The
congregation dates from about 1588, and built its first church in 1632,
before which time it worshiped in a house arranged for its use, but not
having the form of a church. This constitution was revised in 1614, and
in 1644 it was accepted as the general constitution for the Lutheran
churches in the Netherlands. In 1682 it was materially changed and
brought in the shape which it afterwards retained. The original form of
1597, with the changes made in 1614 and 1682 indicated in foot notes, is
given in full in the "Geschiedenis der Amsterdamsche Luthersche
Gemecnte, door F. J. Domela Nieuwenhuis, Amsterdam, 1876, 8vo. pp. 298,
124." Appendix pp.32-62. It is very full and minute in its provisions
and covers thirty octavo pages. A German translation of the edition of
1682 is given in Benthem's Hollaendische Kirch und Schul Staat,
Francfurt, 1698. It is divided into two parts.
Part I. Chapter I. Of Doctrine. "The pastors of this congregation shall
regulate and determine all their teaching and preaching by the rule of
the divine Word, the biblical, prophetical and apostolical writings, and
according to our Symbolical Books, to wit:--the unaltered Augsburg
Confession, delivered to Charles V., Anno 30, the Apology of the same,
the Smalcald Articles, and Formula of Concord, together with both
Catechisms of Luther throughout, and shall not teach or preach anything
contrary to the same, be it privately or publicly, nor shall they
introduce or use new phrases (forms of statement) which are at variance
with the same, or contradict them. In like manner in all points in
dispute between us and others, they shall be guided and governed by the
aforesaid Scriptures and also the aforesaid Symbolical Books, and shall
decide and judge them by these alone, and shall plainly declare the
foundation and understanding thereof to the congregation. They shall
also order and direct all their preaching to the edification of the
congregation, in such wise that the Word of God may be taught purely and
clearly, the true doctrine be distinguished from the false and the true
doctrine be urged on the people so that they may understand how to guard
themselves against false teaching and teachers." This chapter is long
and defines the whole obligations of the preachers of the Word. Chapter
2. Of the times and places of assemblage for the preaching of the divine
Word. Chapter 3. Of the Sacrament of Holy Baptism. Chapter 4. Of the
Sermon of Repentance (Boetpredicatien) and the absolution before the
administration of the Lord's Supper. Chapter 5. Of the administration of
the Most Holy Supper. Chapter 6. Of Christian Discipline and the Ban.
Chapter 7. Of Marriage. Chapter 8. Of the Visitation of the Sick and of
the Poor, who cannot come to church. Chapter 9. Of the Burial of the
Dead.