A particularly distressing time in Watch Tower history was after Charles Taze Russell died and Joseph Franklyn Rutherford was elected as president of the Watch Tower Society. It resulted in splits in ecclesias and even families at times, as people had to decide whether to stay with the Watch Tower Society in the path it now trod, or stay with a view of the ministry of CTR that had now come to an end by his death. As detailed in all histories, some chose to cease association with the Watch Tower Society or International Bible Students Association (IBSA), from 1917 onward.
One can imagine the
divided loyalties some individuals faced.
Did they hope for reconciliation between the Society and those who left
it? No doubt. And no doubt some who left, later returned to the IBSA fold as is
documented in the St Paul/New Era
Enterprise newspaper.
An immediate problem facing
those who left association with the IBSA was that people just couldn’t agree
what to do. Fragmentation in various ways continued quite quickly.
The original split came
from supporters of the four directors who were replaced in summer of 1917. This resulted in a group called The Pastoral
Bible Institute (PBI).
As well as gradual adjustments in theology, the Watch Tower Society was soon promoting vigorous evangelism for all. In the mind of one loyal Watch Tower Society adherent, John Adam Bohnet, this was a key difference in the mindset of the two groups. He gave his opinion on the differences in the New Era newspaper for August 21, 1921. His letter was headed “God Blessing the Society” which sort of nailed his colors to the wall:
But the Pastoral Bible Institute was to provide no united alternative to the Watch Tower Society.
Almost immediately
after the PBI was formed in 1917-18, Paul Johnson’s group (later called the Layman’s
Home Missionary Movement) broke away to emphasize his self-view, which others refused
to accept. When he as his movement’s special “messenger” died, his group soon fragmented
further. Then going back to 1918 the Standfast Movement also broke away from
the IBSA. They set up communes, but then fragmented as these failed, leading to
other groups like the Elijah Voice Society. As early as around 1920 the PBI began
questioning the date 1914 for the end of the Gentile Times and started
promoting a date in the 1930s. This led to further splits. There was a group
called the Eagle Society that is mentioned in passing in the St Paul/New Era Enterprise. Then there was The Watchers of the Morning that later
split from the PBI. When in 1929 an attempt was made to bring all seceding
groups up to that time together at a Pittsburgh “reunion” convention, the
introduction to their report mentioned yet other groups that then existed.
So did a “reunion
convention” reunite them? The short answer was no. All that happened was that
yet another group appeared as a result - the Dawn. They wanted to proselytize,
whereas the PBI were not keen - hence attempt to unite the Dawn and PBI foundered.
At one point there were two rival groups hiring space in the old Bible House
Chapel in Allegheny in the late 1930s, and for good measure, they also welcomed
a Universalist Concordant Bible Society speaker (who was himself a former IBSA
adherent). So Concordant was yet another group that seceding Bible Students
gravitated towards. Throw into the mix all those who had sided with Henninges,
McPhail and others from the 1909 “new covenant” controversy, who were still
very much around, and it is even more a tale of division. And as soon as any
group tried to question or update CTR’s theology and chronology there would be
yet more splits. And that is just
America!
When J F Rutherford
presented a resolution for a new name “Jehovah’s Witnesses” in 1931 one of the
reasons explained in the full resolution was to clearly show the difference
between those supporting the Watch Tower Society and the groups who had chosen
elsewhere who continued to split and split.
Obviously individuals could do whatever they chose. No doubt some shopped around, and as noted above, no doubt some ultimately returned to the Watchtower Society which, unlike its rivals, would prosper and grow.
That’s an interesting article, Jerome. Thank you.
ReplyDeleteDo I detect some irony here in that the PBI, while being keen to promote themselves as genuine followers of Pastor Russell, were also, it seems, keen to drop his chronology at the earliest opportunity? Also, as I understand it, the reason for many groups failing to proselytise after leaving the IBSA was because they conveniently considered the harvest work completed by Russell. If, as you suggest, around 1920 the PBI promoted the idea that the Gentile Times wouldn’t end until the 1930s, rather than downing tools one might have reasonably expected them to have been reinvigorated. However, the opposite appears to have occurred. Out of interest, did the Dawn Bible Students drop Russell’s 1914 chronology also?
Please be sure to correct me if I have misunderstood anything here Jerome. I look forward also, perhaps, to hearing more about the Eagle Society, a group unfamiliar to me.
I am not an expert on the teachings of the various groups that split from the IBSA, but I believe that, while still keeping 1914, the Dawn dropped many other chronological calculations in the 1960s. One of my correspondents had family who left that group over that issue. I know nothing more about the Eagle Society, other than the name that is mentioned in the Enterprise newspaper. In those days, anyone could produce their own paper and get a few supporters, and many did. Most of course died out when the prime movers died.
DeleteThe aforementioned Bohnet was very enthusiastic about many things, as his letters in the Watchtower show:
ReplyDeleteThe Watchtower February 1, 1922 p. 47.
The Watchtower Novenber 1, 1925 p. 333.
The Watchtower April 1, 1931 p. 111.