her ministry, play out in the New World where such a union does not exist? The responses of the German Reformed Church to these challenges “exhibit both the essence of the faith tradition it represented and the way in which the sociocultural ethos of the growing nation defined limits as well as opportunities for that tradition.”64
The Church Question Answered
In America, opposing answers to the Church Question prompted the rise of two parties: the Revivalists, characterized by a willingness to adapt to the demands of the New World, and the Conservatives who warned of compromising basic precepts of their theological traditions. Contemporary scholars often refer to the Revivalists as evangelicals and the Conservatives as confessionalists. Evangelicals embraced both the need for revival, as well as the “new measures” of revivalism.65 While answering the Church Question, they tended to reduce God’s normative strategy to Romans 10:13–17:
For “everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.” How then will they call on him in whom they have not believed? And how are they to believe in him of whom they have never heard? And how are they to hear without someone preaching? And how are they to preach unless they are sent? As it is written, “How beautiful are the feet of those who preach the good news!” But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Isaiah says, “Lord, who has believed what he has heard from us?” So faith comes from hearing, and hearing through the word of Christ.66
On that foundation, as well as the apparent success of itinerant preachers during the Second Great Awakening, evangelicals believed that the normative pattern by which God brings individuals to salvation is through the preaching of the Gospel, an act that can take place anywhere, anytime, and by anyone. Fueled by the democratization of American Christianity, which included the conviction that every Christian could and should read and interpret Scripture for him or herself, they also believed that Christians could grow in the grace and knowledge of the Lord outside of the ministry of the local church.67 Hence, the sacraments or ordinances, catechesis, and regular participation in the weekly gathering of the local church were viewed as optional.
The Confessional Movement in America took shape in three traditions: the Lutheran, the Episcopalian, and the Reformed. The most notable Lutheran confessionalist was Carl Ferdinand Wilhelm Walther (1811–1887), the founder of the Missouri Synod. Bishop John Henry Hobart (1775–1830) led the Episcopalian confessional or high church movement. John Williamson Nevin and Philip Schaff led the Reformed movement from within their German Reformed Church. According to Walter Conser, four themes characterized the beliefs of American confessional theologians.68 First, although they strongly opposed revivalism and “new measures,” confessionalists still considered themselves supporters of the evangelical faith. Second, they rejected the subjectivism of revivalism, which included an ardent defense of the right of private interpretation of Scripture and, in its place, they affirmed the need for historic statements of faith to guide Christians in their interpretations of the Bible. Third, they were social and political conservatives, fearful of the excesses of Jacksonian policies. Fourth, they challenged all who would listen to rethink the doctrine of the church, a challenge which brought the Church Question to the top of the theological agenda of most scholars in the first half of the nineteenth century. While answering that question, confessionalists affirmed the essential role of the local church and her ministry in God’s plan for the salvation of the world. With the evangelicals, they affirmed the importance of preaching but insisted that such preaching take place under the supervision of the local church and be delivered by individuals authorized by that same church and its denomination. In their estimation, however, the ministry of preaching was but one of many ministries the Triune God employs for the redemption of the people of God. More specifically, confessionalists asserted that the church is the authorized dispenser of ministry that leads individuals to salvation and, then as a spiritual mother, nurtures them in the faith. All that is to say that, in their estimation, there was no salvation outside of the church.
The German Reformed Church included both evangelicals and confessionalists. Joseph F. Berg (1812–1871) and Elias Heiner were two of the more outspoken evangelicals while John Nevin and Philip Schaff served as their confessional counterparts. These individuals, joined by others, engaged in an intense debate through the printed page.69 As James Hastings Nichols observed, Nevin insisted that “salvation in Christ does not reach souls in isolation.” Salvation comes to humanity through Christ who is present in the world through the church. Since the agency of the church is essential to salvation, there is no salvation outside of the church.70 In contrast, Heiner suggested that salvation is normally received outside the church: “Personal, individual piety is to be preferred to any outward connection with the church whatever. . . . There are thousands in the world who belong to Christ, and yet they have no outward form or formal connexion with his visible church.”71 Berg agreed: “Religion is a personal matter from beginning to end. . . . The church does not make the believer. Believers constitute the church.”72 Naturally, both evangelicals and confessionalists “claimed to uphold old standards of Reformed faith and denounced the opponent as the innovator.”73 At the same time, the Reformed Germans in America began defining themselves as a denomination.
The first synod of the German Reformed Church organized in 1793 at Lancaster. In 1820 the synod divided itself into classes, the equivalent of districts or regions, and decided to found a theological seminary which opened in 1825. From 1822 to 1865 the Synod experienced several divisions. In 1822 the free synod of Pennsylvania broke away but returned in 1837. The Ohio classis broke off in 1824 and organized itself into an independent synod in 1846. In 1863, the General Synod of the German Reformed Church was formed, uniting the two regional Synods.
Richards chronicles the manner by which the German Reformed Church navigated the internal debate over the Church Question by examining the denomination’s annual “Report on the State of Religion.”74 The Synod of 1836 complained about the “neglect of responsibility of those who profess religion” whose “power of godliness is sunk and lost in forms.” The Synod of 1838 offers “good news from the churches” in their battle with the “revival system” as “brethren in every section of Zion seem alike animated to come to the help of the Lord against the mighty, though there may be a diversity of views and feelings with respect to the instrumentalities to be employed.” The Synod also encouraged its pastors and people to “adhere to the ancient doctrinal standards of our Church,” even while cooperating with non-German Reformed agencies. The Synod of 1840 affirmed the value of union and cooperation with other Christians and encouraged its members to “seek to be one in the reception of the truth, one in spirit, and one in our efforts against the common enemy.” The Synod of 1841 encouraged its congregations to “to keep firm hold upon the past, to cling faithfully to our ancient doctrines, order and customs.” The Synod report of 1843 warned of two forms of false religion: formalism and fanaticism. It admitted that “in the past in this country mere form of religion usurped the place of vital godliness, alongside of ardent and devout piety in many parts of our Church.” That same report acknowledged that during the “last ten or twelve years a marked improvement has taken place,” and warned that there is now “much danger of passing over to the other extreme and to repose trust in the ecstasies of fanatical feelings. . . . Congregations were in danger of being swept into the current of revivalism of the emotional type.”75
While
