Protestant Orthodoxy, Fundamentalism, and Political Conservatism

During the progressive era conservative orthodoxy, as defined by Augustine, Luther, and, most significantly in America, Calvin, along with a conservative political tradition became minority positions that lacked any significant presence in politics or in most of the major church denominations. Throughout most of the 1800’s these things had been closely linked with both monetary policy (Sound money) and foreign policy being fair game in Sunday sermons. In place of Protestant orthodoxy, which was to fair poorly during this period, a new form of conservative Christianity arose starting in the North and gradually moving south and west which was referred to as the “new fundamentalism” at the time. Many of the leaders of the new fundamentalism were previously believers in progressive postmillennialism who were able to transfer their veal for bringing about the millennial kingdom to a new theology. These belief systems were very nearly “de-institutionalized” which also meant that resources were being pumped into progressive institutions that were intent on crushing historically Christian beliefs and culture. Political conservatism eventually developed out of opposition to US participation in WWI and was anti-imperialist and isolationist.

The new Fundamentalism evolved from Northern Progressive Evangelicalism and was really a gradual blending of Biblical literalism, to combat liberalism and secularism, with a form of millenarianism that came to be known as dispensationalism. The degree to which the two movements were linked can be debated as can the point in time at which they could be considered to be effectively merged but they were co-dependent and spread together. Fundamentalism and its major component part of dispensationalism were new arrivals on the religious landscape and they originated from a relatively small group of believers. Fundamentalism spread Yankee or Puritan culture and some political beliefs to the South and West and helped to create over time a sort of conservative common Messianic national culture as progressive Christianity went into decline in the mid to late 20th century.

In an academic theological sense there was a keen interest within northern protestant or puritan religion in eschatology or the study of end time prophecies relating to the culmination of human history. This was most pronounced in the clergy and in prominent lay people, who would act as their financial sponsors, and went well beyond a general curiosity extending to actively trying to bring about a conclusion to history either by perfecting society or speeding its destruction. The latter option being a recent minority position taking shape in England and Scotland which evolved into what we now refer to as dispensationalism (1). In the South prior to and for some time after the war, theorizing about the end of time doesn’t appear to have been a particularly common topic much less scheming as to how to bring it about. This is significant as an academic point but it is also deeply ingrained in the respective cultures and unlike theology, this sort of characteristic doesn’t tend to shift with time.

The progressive millennialism held to an eschatology that saw collective man as playing a central role in bringing about the millennial kingdom of God described by Historian Forrest McDonald as follows:

An entirely different kind of millennialism, usually known as progressive millennialism, emerged in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, and that is the kind embraced by the Yankee. In this version there was no need for God to reverse the course of human history, for history represented a progression of human triumphs over evil: When the thousand years were done, man himself would have established God’s kingdom on earth. Jonathan Edwards, in the 1740s, reckoned that man had made it about three quarters of the way through, and thus that the millennium would arrive toward the end of the twentieth century. (2)

A similar account is given Ernest Sandeen from the Roots of Fundamentalism

“The eschatology of the United States Protestants, reflecting their brimming optimism and hope, was expressed most frequently as a blending of millennialism and American Nationalism. Stemming from the Puritan conviction that the colonies were a chosen people and their commonwealth a “city set upon a hill” reinforced by the War for Independence and the potentialities of the West, Americans vied with each other in producing grander and more glorious prospects for the United States. As early as the eighteenth century the concept of America’s destiny was influencing American theology…” (3 p. 43)

Within Northern Protestantism progressive millennialism provided a purpose but it was by definition a common purpose that society as a whole had to strive to obtain which meant that compliance and support must be extended to all of society whether specific individuals voluntarily accepted these teachings or not (4 p. 334). This was very much in keeping with the Puritan concept of being a “City on a Hill” however now the goal wasn’t a vague objective but actually seemed to be within grasp. Yet, some saw the events of the world and reasoned that man couldn’t bring about a millennial kingdom but concluded human society, due to its wickedness and corruption, could only be redeemed by God after a great judgment or tribulation foretold in Biblical prophecy. This sort of thinking generally originated in Europe following the French Revolution and gradually gained a strong minority position in America within the Northern evangelical base.

While the story starts in the North, during the time period associated with the establishment of dispensationalism and fundamentalism, the South played an ever increasing role as Protestant Christianity in the other regions of the country went into a gradual decline and Southern migrants spread across the industrialized states. Catholicism, on the other hand, flourished in the North and Northeast, due principally to immigration, keeping religious participation comparable between the different regions. During this era, however, the defense of faith associated with fundamentalism, orthodoxy, and resistance to scientism focused on Protestant groups and principally on Evangelicalism. According to US religious survey data from 1900 through the 1950’s, the South was home to over half the active Protestant population and, if only evangelical faiths are considered, that number would be well over 60%. This doesn’t even consider the large number of displaced Southern economic migrants in other parts of the country.

The following tables represent the two largest Evangelical groupings that can be consistently traced through the post-Antebellum time period and show the significance of the South and why Southern culture matters a great deal in studying the history of Protestant Christianity.

The Establishment and Spread of Fundamentalism

While dispensationalism left a rich and full literacy legacy from which to reconstruct specific events and beliefs, fundamentalism by itself did not. Fundamentalism lacked creeds, position papers, and, through most of its development, periodicals. While it is true that some significant dispensationalists were also Biblical fundamentalists with specific regard to the scientific and historical accuracy of the early Old Testament accounts, as we have seen, not all were. Likewise, those seeking to defend against the secularization of the church and atheistic philosophies draped in the appearance of science didn’t necessarily support or have a strong interest in dispensationalism or prophecy in general. The second point is harder to discern but can be derived from denominational positions on the subjects as well as writing from the time period from known conservative theologians.

The first and primary major magazine of Fundamentalism was funded and published by Lyman Stewart. Stewart was co-founder of Union Oil (Unocal, Union 76), co-founder of Bible Institute of Los Angeles (BIOLA), founder of Union Rescue Mission in LA, founder of “The Fundamentalist” magazine, and overall major philanthropist and backer of fundamentalism. He was born in Pennsylvania in 1840 and served with the 16th Pennsylvania Cavalry during the War Between the States. He, as the name of the magazine implied, was a fundamentalist intent on fighting the influences of modernism although Stewart was also an enthusiastic dispensationalist. For many others whose main concern was with modernism and secularism, the fundamentalist / dispensationalist union was useful but it isn’t clear in many cases to what extent lay fundamentalists really understood and supported dispensationalism. Scofield wrote a section for the Fundamentalist project addressing Christian liberalism titled “The Grace of God” which was a strong dispensational presentation. (3)

The Scofield Bible was instrumental in spreading dispensational beliefs and in solidifying the union of dispensationalism and fundamentalism. This belief system, however, was largely dropped by the denominational seminaries and other education institutions, many of which had liberalized, while others simply didn’t accept some aspects of these teachings. This would mean fundamentalism could never be mainstreamed and would remain a fringe movement linked mainly to grass roots followers and would also mean that clergy would not be available from recognized institutions. The solution for this was to develop a seminary network by growing the concept of the Bible schools that Moody and Scofield had established. The Dallas Theological Seminary was the first major link in the alternative seminary chain but its graduates were by no means immediately accepted by all protestant denominations.

Lewis Sperry Chafer was the founder of Dallas Theological Seminary and was closely associated with Scofield leveraging his existing footprint in the Dallas area. He was born in 1871 in Ohio and attended Oberlin College following the Yankee progressive stereotype almost perfectly. He was associated with the YMCA and was ordained as a Congregational minister in 1900 becoming minister of the first Congregational Church of Buffalo in 1903. During this time he became associated with Scofield who became his mentor and he worked with Scofield on his teaching and mission projects, including some efforts aimed specifically at penetrating the South, until Scofield died in 1921. He followed Scofield as pastor of the First Congregational Church of Dallas and, along with his friend William Henry Griffith Thomas (Welsh origins via Canada), founded Dallas Theological Seminary in 1924. His students who he mentored include a host of prominent dispensationalist ministers for the following couple of generations including Jim Rayburn (Young life Ministries), Kenneth N Taylor (Living Bible author), Howard Hendricks, Charles Ryrie (Ryrie Study Bible), Vernon McGee (well known radio minister), and John Walvoord who followed Chafer as president of Dallas Seminary from 1952 to 1982.

Some southern churches in particular wouldn’t hire graduates from Dallas Theological Seminary (5) and other dispensationalist schools but, as the fundamentalists’ teachings became more mainstream and the school network expanded, graduates from fundamentalists/dispensationalists seminaries became well represented across Evangelicalism (3 pp. 188-206). The Baptist Seminary in Clarks Summit Pennsylvania, Bible Institute of Los Angeles (BIOLA), and the Moody Bible Institute are other leading dispensational schools founded in the early 1900’s. The denominational seminaries and colleges with rare exception didn’t accept the fundamentalists / dispensationalist teaching so what we see here is really the creation of an alternative educational system. Clergy from this expanding network of schools eventually became the primary source of ministers and church workers apart from the liberalizing mainstream denominations. While most churches were primarily focused on defending the faith from modernism and secularism, some denominational position statements slowly adopted dispensationalism. The seminary ties frequently made dispensationalism part of the package. In time dispensationalism became part of the core statement of faith for many groups. (6)

Considering that virtually every notable person involved with the development and spread of the new Fundamentalism had solid Yankee Evangelical backgrounds explaining its mass acceptance over an extended period of time, primarily outside of the areas it originated in, is an important question (5). The spread of dispensationalism to the South, in particular, without the linkage to fundamentalism would have posed some almost insurmountable challenges. While progressive millennialism was definitely a group project whether you wanted to be part of the group or not, either form of eschatology was highly specific and required unwavering support of the faithful and both were highly evangelical in terms of spreading the message. In Protestantism and Evangelicalism in particular the church and clergy do not act as an interface between the believer and God in coming to faith. Once someone came to faith, the emphasis in the progressive church was outward and collective while in the Protestant Orthodox and Liturgical traditions the emphasis was internal and personal. As a result of that, people in the South were also far more religiously tolerant and were less inclined to separate all members of society into either the saved or the damned.

Fully understanding the rate and demographics of the spread of fundamentalism in the South isn’t a clear cut study that can be associated only with specific groups or denominations and is further clouded by the extent to which it became a grassroots movement, but, some things can be inferred. Black churches were not part of the fundamentalist camp, largely because they weren’t invited, but they appear to have been as inclined as White churches to hold to a fairly literal reading of scripture especially with regard to the Genesis accounts. The Methodists and other groups associated with the holiness movement did not initially align to fundamentalist teaching due to their association with the Wesleyan Christian perfectionism teachings nor did churches associated with the Christian Restoration movement like the Church of Christ (3 p. 206). Notably during this time period the Baptists were increasing while the Methodists were decreasing so this could be a causal factor but correlation doesn’t necessarily indicate causation.

A less direct indicator is support for World War I and draft resistance. Fundamentalists’ churches appear to have generally supported US involvement in WWI and these tended to be in towns and cities (7 pp. 2-5). Evangelist Billy Sunday, for example, was a strong promoter of the war. On the other hand, in the rural South there was both active and passive resistance to the draft. Active resistance with rare exception didn’t take the form of full armed rebellion but did include tactics that made it difficult for the draft board and assigned military personnel to move around or apprehend draft resisters and deserters. This included both black and white populations and churches. Churches associated with the Christian Restoration movement, most notably the Church or Christ, supported and may have helped organize this sort of resistance (7 pp. 2-6, 76-82). Churches associated with the Holiness Movement and Pentecostal churches didn’t have a long enough history at the time to reach a strong conclusion with regard to support for the war (7 pp. 80-2). Many of the arguments against the war in the South were fairly sophisticated stating that US involvement was for the purpose of supporting northeastern banking interests and Yankee anglophiles. Military enlistments were more urban and probably somewhat more Baptist.

Cultural Effects of Fundamentalism

Beyond standards for biblical interpretation, there were common characteristics that generally followed the fundamentalist movement in the latter 19th and early 20th century although they developed gradually and not all at the same time or pace. Most are quite close to progressive millennialism teaching, except those relating to science and the Genesis account, and can easily be seen as deriving from puritan or Yankee culture. Fundamentalism actually spread these to the south and West and reconstructed southern religion in particular to a much greater extent than political reconstruction and economic changes ever did.

More extreme forms or influences of Calvinism or Dutch Reformed theology regarding divine election became normalized amongst groups that leaned more to Armenian beliefs. Divine Election was a key original element of Puritanism but had gradually faded from Northern Protestantism (2) as the denominations secularized or liberalized. In Southern Christianity, the idea never really caught on to a significant extent except with some Presbyterians although neo-Calvinist beliefs that held a high view of the sovereignty of God were always a key component of protestant orthodoxy. In the new fundamentalism the concept of predestination never rose to the point of being a core essential teaching but was very much part of doctrinal discussions. While dispensationalism initially aligned more towards Dutch Reformed theology during the time of the conferences in the late 1800’s, in time the groups that did not accept dispensationalism would be largely Dutch Reformed (8) .

The duty to evangelize was a heavily emphasized obligation of all believers frequently using a narrowly defined and scripted message. Individual grass roots evangelism was and generally still is a basic tenet of evangelicalism and is also squarely in line with the legacy of the Northern Church that saw this as a path to overall societal change. While Southern and orthodox / liturgical believers did evangelize it was an outward presentation of an internal faith and wasn’t oriented at reshaping society (2). It is also a difficult point for many believers depending on their temperament, degree of social insecurity, and willingness to “dumb down” an otherwise complex message in an effort to close the sale and collect converts. As a business model, on the other hand, it makes a good deal of sense and many secular variants can be found.

Fundamentalism has generally supported the coercive power of the state. Normally what would be cited here are blue laws that required business to shut down on the Sabbath and the prohibition of alcohol. In fact the temperance movement was the dominant evangelical social cause in the North. In a broader sense though, there was a willingness and perhaps even a sense of duty to use the power of the state to impose moral or religious positions on the rest of society. Conceptually this has a less direct linkage to topics like public education, eugenics, zoning and land usage, and the expansion of federal power through federal agencies created during the Wilson administration and consistently expanded after that. Historian and economist Murray Rothbard described the use of the state to accomplish spiritual objectives as follows:

“Society, therefore, in the institution of the State, was to take it upon itself to aid the weaker brethren by various crusading actions of compulsory morality, and thus to purge the world of sin. The secular and the religious were to be conjoined. In the second half of the 19th century, the pietists concentrated on agitating for three such compulsory measures on the state and local level, to save liturgical sinners despite themselves: Prohibition, to eradicate the sin of alcohol; Sunday blue laws, to prevent people from violating the Sabbath; and, increasingly toward the end of the century, compulsory public schooling to “Americanize” the immigrants and “Christianize the Catholics” and to use schools to transform Catholics and immigrants (often one in the same) into pietistic Protestants and nativist molds" (4 p. 116)

Legalism, or strict moral standards voluntarily taken on by adherents, can be seen as an expansion of the previous point although there was never a clear line between choice and compulsion in the Puritan mindset. Typically in Northern Protestantism adherents didn’t smoke or use tobacco products, dressed in a “modest” manner meaning not trying to emphasize any sort of sexuality, didn’t dance, didn’t go to the theatre, generally avoided music outside of hymns, and the list goes on. All of this translated to the new fundamentalism. These sorts of notions were generally not followed or acknowledged in the South prior to the spread of fundamentalism. These restrictions , for the most part, didn’t address specific Biblical sins but were rules to avoid the temptation of sinning which relates to a key puritan objective of guiding the average sinner away from opportunities to sin.

Saving average sinners from themselves was a key element of puritan thought even if there was not voluntary acceptance of belief by the unrepentant sinner. The process actually showed a good deal of patience which can extend across multiple generations and reflects a sort of elitist paradigm that has remained very prevalent as history has moved on. Quoting again from Rothbard:

“.. And since each individual was responsible for his own salvation, the pietist concluded that society was duty-bound to aid each man in pursuing his salvation, on promoting his good behavior, and in seeing as best he can that can he doesn’t fall prey to temptation. The emphasis of the pietist was on converting the maximum number of persons, and in helping them to become and to remain sound.” (4 p. 115)

Puritanism was intensely anti-Catholic while this was not a part of Evangelicalism in the South. Puritanism also tended to be anti-Semitic at a local level which again wasn’t historically a characteristic of the South. Illustrating this point, while Jewish confederate soldiers and even clergy were common in the Confederacy, Jewish soldiers were banned from the Union army under Grant’s General Order 11. As immigrants were the source of the dramatic rise in the Catholic population from around 1840 to 1900 and overwhelmingly settled in the North, northern Evangelicals were strongly anti-immigrant. These points all translated to fundamentalism and also translated to the reborn Klan in the early 1900’s, which was principally an anti-immigrant, anti-Catholic organization similar to the Masons of that day. Anti-black violence can also be found in the north when Southerners, including a large percentage of Southern Blacks, migrated north to fill industrial jobs starting around 1910. (9)

Nationalism and patriotism became a key element of fundamentalism and has reached a high point in current times as an element of resistance to post-modernism and globalism along with its association with the “New Right” that formed in the late 50’s and 60’s. This would have initially been a hard sell in the South and doesn’t appear to have caught on very well until after WWII at the earliest. The nationalist vision in the North, on the other hand, was deeply integrated with Northern Evangelicalism prior to the war of 1861. This wasn’t fully compatible with Dispensationalism which tended to withdraw from society but was adapted to create a uniquely American variant as time passed.

While not being a sort of “prosperity gospel” fundamentalism took from Puritanism the concept that material prosperity was a blessing bestowed by God for living a Godly life. Work was held in very high regard although there really isn’t a lot of empirical data showing that those of Puritan background were more productive than any other group. This type of characteristic, like some of the previous points, is not readily traceable to statements of doctrine or creed but anyone living in or growing up in a fundamentalist tradition or culture can testify from personal experience that this was clearly apparent at least through the 1980’s. (5)

The Defense of Orthodox Protestantism

There was a good deal of Orthodox Protestant[1] pushback against Dispensationalism at the time. One notable author was Philip Mauro, who is probably most cited in this regard, and he was actually a former dispensationalist and became a fairly prolific religious author. Mauro was a well-known attorney specializing in patent law who argued before the Supreme Court and was also associated with Thomas Edison, who was a religious skeptic. Some of the correspondence between these two men has survived and can be accessed. He ties very directly into the story of Fundamentalism in the early 20th century in that he had a key role with the prosecution in the Scopes trial and prepared the brief that established the winning position in the case. As Scofield is a polarizing figure amongst those who reject dispensationalism, so is Mauro to those who advocate for Dispensational theology. (10)

The following are some excerpts from Mauro’s best known work, Gospel of the Kingdom, that largely address the Scofield Bible starting with a general summary from the introduction of his book where he notes the rapid and wide acceptance of dispensationalism amongst orthodox believers.

“Through an incident of recent occurrence I was made aware of the extent--far greater than I had imagined--to which the modern system of dispensationalism has found acceptance amongst orthodox Christians; and also of the extent correspondingly great--to which the recently published "Scofield Bible" (which is the main vehicle of the new system of doctrine referred to) has usurped the place of authority that belongs to God's Bible alone. The incident alluded to above is what prompted the writing of this book. For it awakened in my soul a sense of responsibility to the people of God to give them, in concise form, the results of the close examination I have been led to make of this novel system of doctrine ( dispensationalism). Let it be understood at the outset that my controversy is solely with the doctrine itself; and not at all with those who hold and teach it, or any of them. Indeed I was myself one of their number for so long a time that I can but feel a tender consideration, and a profound sympathy likewise, for all such.” (11 p. 5)

"First, the Scofield Bible outlines the Scriptures from the standpoint of DISPENSATIONAL TRUTH, and there can be no adequate understanding or rightly dividing of the Word of God except from the standpoint of dispensational truth."(11 p. 6)

Then Mauro proceeds to contrast the new dispensationalist understanding of the scripture to all the history of Christianity that has gone on before the current era which would infer that those of other time periods had a fundamentally false understanding of the faith.

What a slur is this upon the spiritual understanding of the ten thousands of men, "mighty in the Scriptures," whom God gave as teachers to His people during all the Christian centuries before "dispensational truth" (or dispensational error), was discovered! And what an affront to the thousands of men of God of our own day, workmen that need not to be ashamed, who have never accepted the newly invented system! Yet I was among those who eagerly embraced it (upon human authority solely, for there is none other) and who earnestly pressed it upon my fellow Christians. Am deeply thankful, however, that the time came (it was just ten years ago) when the inconsistencies and self-contradictions of the system itself, and above all, the impossibility of reconciling its main positions with the plain statements of the Word of God, became so glaringly evident that I could not do otherwise than renounce it (11 pp. 6-7).

From this point he addresses the concept of the kingdom being delayed as opposed to being at hand from the time of Jesus and then goes on to address his commentary on the specific doctrines of dispensationalism in individual chapters. He consistently associated the new teachings with modernism:

As I continued, however, to study this new system of teaching in its various details, I found there were more errors in it, and worse, than I had at first expected; and these, as they became evident to me, I have attempted, by occasional writings subsequently, to expose. The work, however, is not yet finished; and hence the need for the present volume. Indeed, the time is fully ripe for a thorough examination and frank exposure of this new and subtle form of modernism that has been spreading itself among those who have adopted the name "Fundamentalists." For Evangelical Christianity must purge itself of this leaven of dispensationalism ere it can display its former power and exert its former influence. (11 pp. 7-8)

For some of our readers a definition of modern dispensationalism will be a necessity, and for all it will be a convenience. It has been defined as "that system of doctrine which divides the history of God's dealings with the world into periods of time, called 'dispensations'." And it is an essential tenet of the system that "in each dispensation God deals with man upon a plan different from the plan of the other dispensations. Each dispensation is a thing entirely apart from the others, and, when one period succeeds another, there is a radical change of character and governing principles." (Rock or Sand, Which?, by Matthew Francis). For example, we are told that the present era is "the dispensation of Grace," and the last preceding was "the dispensation of Law"; and therefore the teachers of the new system strain their ingenuity to show that there was no grace in the preceding "dispensation," and there is no law now; whereas in fact there is all the law of God now that there ever was and there was abundance of the grace of God in the "former times." (11 p. 11)

As regards the origin of the system: the beginnings thereof and its leading features are found in the writings of those known as "Brethren" (sometimes called "Plymouth Brethren," from the name of the English city where the movement first attracted attention); though it is but fair to state that the best known and most spiritual leaders of that movement -- as Darby, Kelly, Newberry, Chapman, Mueller and others, "whose names are in the Book of Life" -- never held the "Jewish" character of the Kingdom preached by our Lord and John the Baptist, or the "Jewish" character of the Gospels (especially Matthew), or that the Sermon on the Mount is "law and not grace" and pertains to a future "Jewish" kingdom. (11 p. 13)

Azusa Street and the Pentecostal Churches

A related religious movement that shared some of the doctrinal teachings of fundamentalism of the time but developed a culturally unique identity along with some unique teachings was Pentecostalism. The principal doctrinal differences have to do with “baptism of the spirit” or speaking in tongues and emphasis on faith healing and prophesying. They also tended to adopt Dispensationalism which marked the point where the prophetic teaching crossed over from predominantly Dutch Reformed or Calvinist groups to groups associated with the Holiness Movement (8) but this wasn’t universal. The Pentecostal Movement arose in the Southern California area, which was a sort of developing ethno-religious melting pot that had a fairly large population of early economic migrants out of the South in the 1900’s and 1910’s when the faith exploded in terms of followers. It then spread back to the South and to other areas of the country as well as internationally. Pentecostalism was to eventually influence all forms of American religion, including Catholic worship, principally through the Jesus movements in the 1960’s, as well as having a major impact on American music.

The Pentecostal story starts with Charles Parham who was born in Iowa in 1873 and his family moved to Kansas in 1878. His mother died in 1885 and his father then married Harriet Miller who was the son of a Methodist circuit rider and the family then became more actively religious. Charles Parham married Sarah Twistlewaite, who had a Quaker family background, in 1896 in a Friends ceremony. Parham established his own independent ministry associated with the holiness movement. His ministry was based out of Topeka where he established Bethel Healing Home and the Apostolic Faith magazine. He took a sabbatical in 1900 to visit “various movements” to “know more fully the latest truths restored by the latter day movement” that took him as far away as Maine and Ontario (12). He started to incorporate speaking in tongues upon returning in 1901 but his ministry dissolved shortly after that, surrounded by a good deal of controversy. In 1903 his ministry was reestablished in Galena Kansas after he preached at a health resort in El Dorado Springs Missouri when the wife of a prominent citizen in Galena, Mary Arthur, claimed she was healed as a result of his ministry. In 1904 his first church was built in Keelville Kansas and then the ministry expanded to Texas, Kansas, and Oklahoma.(12)

Although a segregationist and a believer in British-Israelism, a strange belief that the inhabitants of England were the genetic descendants of the lost tribes (this is entirely discredited by modern genetics), he did reach out to potential African-American and Hispanic converts. Two key African-American converts were Lucy Farrow and William J Seymour. Parham initially sent Lucy Farrow to Los Angeles and later sent Seymour after he had demonstrated his capability as an evangelist in the Houston area. Seymour’s work in Southern California would develop into the Azusa Street Revival which is generally considered as the birthplace of the American Pentecostal Movement. Parham’s influence would fade as he became embroiled in allegations of financial irregularities, sexual (homosexual ) misconduct, and false doctrine while Seymour’s ministry would flourish.

Seymour was the son of former slaves who was raised Catholic near the Gulf Coast in Mississippi. As a young adult he spent time in Indianapolis and Cincinnati where he became involved with the Wesleyan Holiness Movement, and then Houston, where he enrolled in Parham’s six week Bible class. He had to sit in the hall because of his race but impressed Parham and joined him in evangelizing the Houston area. Shortly after completing the short course with Parham, Seymour was invited to come to Los Angeles and pastor a small store front mission at ninth and Santa Fe. This congregation had been founded by an African-American woman named Julia Hutchins. Parham didn’t want Seymour to go but eventually relented. Mrs. Hutchins effectively fired Seymour due to disagreements over “Baptism of the Spirit” leaving him without a job or home in a strange area in February 1906. He was taken in by Edward and Mattie Lee and started nightly prayer meetings in their home that quickly expanded and needed a larger home (Richard and Ruth Asberry) within a couple of months where speaking in tongues became common (13 pp. 2-6). The group continued to grow rapidly and in 1904 relocated to a former AME church building at 312 Azusa Street that became available when that church relocated. Seymour and his followers negotiated a short term lease and renamed the building the Apostolic Faith Mission but it was commonly known as the Azusa Street Mission. It continued to grow so rapidly that by 1906 it had gained the attention of major press outlets that began to provide press accounts. The Azusa Mission was aggressively evangelistic which ran contrary to the trends in denominational Protestantism at the time (13 p. 6).

Missionaries from the Azusa Street Mission spread the faith to local communities that were as far as 30 to 50 miles away using the streetcar system that made it easy for people from surrounding areas to get to the Azusa Street Mission and for missionaries from the mission to cover a fairly wide radius. Soon they had planted congregations in the surrounding communities Pasadena, Monrovia, Whittier, Anaheim, Long Beach, San Pedro, Terminal Island, and San Pedro (13 p. 7). Ironically the red car system in southern California was killed in the 1950’s. These towns are easily as far as an hour or more apart driving today depending on traffic so the streetcar system at the time was critical in spreading the influence of the mission.

By 1906 the Azusa Mission had sent missionaries throughout the west Coast and shortly thereafter across the country and then the world. Apart from their emphasis on missions and evangelism they had significant demographic advantages. Their congregations were mixed race and along with Black and white congregants, there were a large number of Hispanics and other European immigrants groups. The ties the Southern California congregations had to other regions and countries from which they came helped the faith spread rapidly and their structure didn’t impose bureaucracy. Pentecostals also allowed women in leadership positions and women have historically tended more strongly toward church affiliation and involvement than men. Unlike the other protestant denominations, they weren’t defined by a narrow ethno-religious demographic that left them in effective “preaching to the choir”.

The Azusa Street Revival started to decline around 1910 due to internal conflicts and disputes starting with Seymour and Parham and then Pentecostal evangelist William Durham. Azusa Street eventually dwindled to a small local congregation that Seymour pastored until his death. Despite these setbacks, Pentecostal denominations; including the Assemblies of God, Church of God in Christ, Church of God, Pentecostal Assemblies of the World, United Pentecostal Church, and Pentecostal Holiness Church all trace their origins to the Azusa Street Revival. Assemblies of God is the most significant of these groups and, in addition to California, has their heaviest representation in Texas, Arkansas, and Oklahoma but has a significant presence in most states.

Another major Pentecostal group that doesn’t trace their origins to Azusa Street but developed in Southern California around the same time and was associated with the revival is the Four Square Church that originated from the teachings and ministry of Aimee McPherson. McPherson was Pentecostal minister, evangelist, and media celebrity in the 1920’s and 30’s who established the Angelus Temple in Los Angeles which could be considered an early prototype of a megachurch (14). She was controversial which included a reported kidnapping that some believe to have been a hoax but she was probably the most prominent evangelist of her day eclipsing Billy Sunday. She used the media masterfully and tried to avoid the Pentecostal label while attempting to appeal to other faiths. Today the Foursquare church is predominantly in California with larger concentrations of followers in Midwestern or Northern states.

Pentecostal churches have always been known for vibrant worship music and have produced recognized performers in multiple musical genres. Elvis Presley would quietly enter into the 1st Assembly of God in Memphis on Sunday nights after service started and go into the balcony to listen to the music. This was earlier in his career when most people did not recognize him. Elvis would wait until most people were gone before he came down and then would shake the pastor's hand (James Hamill was the pastor at that time) and usually leave him a nice offering in the handshake.(15)

Footnotes

[1] Orthodox Protestantism in this context refers to beliefs and doctrines specifically traceable to either Luther or Calvin or indirectly to Augustine. They specifically exclude beliefs and teaching that originated after 1800.

Bibliography

1. “Religion and Social Thought: The Secularizing of Postmillenialism,”. Quandt, Jean B. 1973, American Quarterly Review, pp. 390-409.

2. McDonald, Forrest. Abbeville Institute. The Abbeville Institute. [Online] August 6, 2015. https://www.abbevilleinstitute.org/blog/why-yankees-wont-and-cant-leave-the-south-alone/.

3. Sandeen, Ernest R. The Roots of fundamentalism, British & American Millenarianism, 1800 - 1930. Chicago : The University of Chicago Press, 1970.

4. Rothbard, Murray. The Progressive Era. Auburn Alabama : Ludwig von Mises Institute, 2017.

5. Devanney, John. The Abbeville Institute. [Online] August 14, 2019. https://www.abbevilleinstitute.org/blog/where-the-grapes-of-wrath-are-stored/.

6. Christianity. [Online] January 28, 2016. https://christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/45230/is-there-any-denomination-that-fully-embraces-dispensational-premillennialism.

7. Keith, Jeanette. Rich Man's War, Poor Man's Fight. Chapel Hil North Carolina : University of North Carolina Press, 2004.

8. Eljasib. Eljasib Missions. [Online] April 2, 2018. https://eljasib.com/en/calvinistic-heritage-dispensationalism/.

9. Gordon, Linda. Th e Second Coming of the KKK. New York, New York : Liverwright Publishing Co., 2017.

10. Schoettle Publishing Company. [Online] 2019. https://www.schoettlepublishing.com/biographies/pmauro.htm.

11. Mauro, Philip. The Godpel of the Kingdom. s.l. : Pantianos Classics, 1927.

12. Goff, James R. Fields White Unto Harvest. s.l. : University of Arkansas Press, 1988.

13. Robeck, Cecil M. The Azusa Street Mission and Revival. Nashville, Tenn. : Thomas Nelson, 2006.

14. Epstein, Daniel Mark. Sister Aimee: The Like of Aimee Semple McPherson. Harcourt Brace & Co. : Orlando, Florida, 1993.

15. Hamill, James. Sr. Pastor 1st Assembly of God Memphis. N/A. 1980.