There was an article in The Christadelphian, November 1993, about the “lost” Christadelphian Meeting place in Lanesville, Virginia. In the article it was reported that this ecclesia was quite unknown before being discovered by accident when a brother was delivering a mail order in rural Virginia. He noticed a Christadelphian Hall on the property, and on inquiring was told that indeed the house owner was a Christadelphian, but had not any contact with any other Christadelphian for over 40 years. And so this “lost” ecclesia was re-discovered. But why was it “lost”?
In fact, it is not the only lost Christadelphian Hall, for elsewhere in Virginia is an isolated hall, obviously disused, with a new signpost saying “Bethany Christadelphian Church, Est. 1895”. And near Baltimore, MD, is another building, still active, with a sign outside saying “First Christadelphian Chapel of Maryland”, but which is listed in no directory of Christadelphian ecclesias.
In fact, all these ecclesias share a common history, and their background does illuminate, in a small way, some of the background of Christadelphians in North America. I am not going to give a history of the individual ecclesias, but use their common origins to describe some of the background of the divisions among us.
AH Zilmer
Born in 1868, Albert Herman Zilmer was initially associated with the “Church of God”, the forerunner of what is today known as the Church of God of the Abrahamic Faith. By 1896 he was a pastor there, and was later appointed evangelist. However, on July 26, 1906 he was baptized into the Christadelphian Faith at Plymouth, IN. As elaborated in “A Minister’s Reason for Leaving his Church”, the reasons were a general dissatisfaction with the looseness over baptismal requirements, and also disagreement over judgment (the “Immortal Emergence” problem).
He rapidly became as prominent among the Christadelphians as he had been among the “Church of God”, and upon the death of Thomas Williams in early 1914 was appointed editor of “The Advocate”: he had since about 1910 been associated with John Lea in editing “The Faith”, a magazine designed strictly for proclaiming the Truth to strangers.
Zilmer’s editorship of The Advocate ceased with the issue of June, 1917, reportedly because the committee could no longer afford to pay Zilmer his stipend of $50 per month (about $1,000 per month in 2014 dollars). It was not long before he became sole editor of The Faith, which he turned into a fraternal magazine.
When Zilmer in 1927 published a small book entitled “Sin: A Treatise”, he seemed to endorse an “Amended” view of the atonement, and was therefore accused by many voices of endorsing Strickler’s views, and hence of “Clean Flesh”. Since Zilmer lived in Morrilton, Arkansas, where the Unamended had long had an active ecclesia, he exerted considerable influence there, and several ecclesias lent support to his views. The pages of The Advocate for a time bristled with debates between “orthodox” Unamended writers and Zilmer or those sympathetic to his perspective. However, at the end of 1933 the then editor of The Advocate, Albert Hall, was removed from editorship: when the magazine resumed after an absence of a year, Bro. Zilmer totally disappeared from its pages. In fact, both Zilmer and the ecclesias associated with him were ostracized from the broader Unamended community.
Zilmer continued The Faith until his death in 1949, and his wife, Anna, continued it until her death in April, 1959. He maintained his views on the Atonement, and also a much more loose view on fellowship than was customary within either the Amended or Unamended groups at the time. His “Statement of Faith” consisted of the “Synopsis of the One Faith” (although only the positive statements), as written by John Thomas in 1867, and he was prepared to fellowship anyone who agreed with it. He strongly disagreed with the Amended community making belief in “responsibility” a requirement for fellowship, maintaining the belief in the “synopsis” a necessary, but sufficient, condition for fellowship.
Germany1
Zilmer’s background was German, in which language he was fluent. It was therefore natural that he served as one of the main conduits to the German brethren. The little German ecclesias, which have continuously witnessed the Truth for almost 100 years, was essentially founded by a Bro. Albert Maier, who emigrated to the USA from Germany, and was converted around the turn of the nineteenth century. Maier returned to Germany for good by 1914, and spread the gospel there. Bro. Zilmer became the main contact of the little group when it became a viable group soon after the First World War, and many letters from the German ecclesias can be found in the pages of The Faith, including the sad note in the issue for 1946 noting the execution of Bro. Albert Merz for refusing military service under the Nazis.
Zilmer’s beliefs
It is hard to summarize his beliefs, but clearly he strongly disagreed with the notion that mankind, as well as Jesus, is born in a perishing condition, prone to sin i.e. that they all possess “sin in the flesh” as a physical reality. Zilmer held that “we are morally bound to exempt him [Jesus] from the necessity of making a sin offering for himself”. In this he seemed to reflect the type of ideas that Strickler, a contemporary, held. His views are therefore more extreme in this than Amended beliefs, but they are much closer to that of the Amended than the views of the majority of Unamended.
The Faith ecclesias
The ecclesias associated with him were known as “Faith” or “Zilmer” ecclesias, and as you might have guessed the three ecclesias discussed in the first paragraph all were part of the group. Lanesville membership appeared to have slowly
shrunk: in 1951 was the last recorded intelligence by a Sis. Edwards, although I have an old newspaper clipping from 1954 describing the church, as told by Bro. Charles Edwards, great-grandson of the founder, Lemuel Edwards. Bethany shut down in the 1980’s, with the remaining members transferring to other ecclesias. So Baltimore remained, along with a group led by Bro. Ernest Robinson in the Richmond “Faith” Ecclesia. Upon his death around 2000 this ecclesia disbanded, with members joining the three other Unamended ecclesias in town. The few other ecclesias either dwindled to nothing or joined the Unamended. The only (early) exception was the Washington DC Ecclesia, which had joined the Amended Community in 1954. A few others survived for a while: Waterloo, Iowa, Marion, Illinois, and San Saba, Texas: these also either returned to the Unamended fold or, like Lanesville, disappeared.
Thus the number of Faith ecclesias slowly dwindled: the last remaining one in Baltimore is prepared to fellowship any Christadelphian, but because of this is not officially welcomed anywhere among our community, although it maintains ties with the Church of God of Abrahamic Faith, particularly the Cleveland church.
Going back to 1956, the last issue of The Faith I can find lists 22 ecclesias: this list is interesting for several reasons:
- Of the ecclesias listed, eight also appear in The Advocate for the same year, although fourteen do not.
- The geographical spread is illuminating, for only one isolated ecclesia is reported in Texas, and no others in the Southern United States at all.
- Several “Faith” ecclesias are reported in Ontario, including two duplicate with The Advocate
- Similarly, Western Canada has two “Dual” ecclesias.
Among the members of ex-Faith Unamended ((Advocate) Ecclesias, even those with relatives of Bro. Zilmer, all I have talked to would disassociate themselves from the views put forth by Bro. Zilmer. But is seems clear that the current geographical grouping among the Unamended is somewhat similar to that one can discern from The Advocate versus The Faith grouping from 50 years ago. Very few in the southern USA endorsed the NASU, for example, while most with old connections to Zilmer did when is was voted on in 2005.
Conclusion
I believe Zilmer influenced many in the Unamended ecclesias with whom he was associated to embrace views on the atonement somewhat close to those of the Amended. I believe that traces of those views still linger in some Unamended ecclesias, particularly those disposed to unity with the Amended community. However, it is also probable that along with those views comes a view of fellowship boundaries that differ from that of the Amended community, and it is this latter problem that has proved to be the harder problem to solve in the current unity discussions.
As we consider the current state, I hope a little historical background shows why many in the Unamended community have historically held views on the atonement (and hence “responsibility”) compatible with those of the Amended, while recognizing how different were the views of Zilmer on fellowship.
The Origin of the Organic World – Part One