Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T06:30:53.239Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Race Problem and Presbyterian Union

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 July 2009

David M. Reimers
David M. Reimers
Affiliation:
Hunter College (Bronx)
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

After nearly a century of division the Presbyterian Church in the United States (the southern church) and the Presbyterian Church in the United States of America (the northern church) attempted to unite in 1954. The southern Presbyterians voted against the merger and kept America's two largest Presbyterian bodies divided. Although little was said concerning race relations during the debates on unification, there is reason to believe that the race issue was extremely important in the defeat of the plan in the South. Two sociologists, perhaps exaggerating, have concluded that it was the key factor in the failure of union. In 1955 the moderator of the southern church told the General Assembly of the North that he felt the Negro question, in particular the Supreme Court's decision on school desegregation, affected the vote; and the organ of the North, Presbyterian Life, echoed this opinion.

Type
Research Article
Information
Church History , Volume 31 , Issue 2 , June 1962 , pp. 203 - 215
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of Church History 1962

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 The proposed merger also included the smaller United Presbyterian church in North America which did unite with the northern Presbyterian church in 1958.

2 Dornbusch, Sanford and Irle, Roger, “The Failure of Presbyterian Union,” American Journal of Sociology, LXIV (Jan., 1959), 352–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

3 Presbyterian Life, VIII (June 11, 1955), 14, and ibid., VIII (Feb. 19, 1955), 21. Presbyterian Life said the “real” reason for the defeat of union was apathy on the part of the prounion forces.

4 Christian Century, LXXII (Feb. 2, 1955), 135.

5 Staiger, C. Bruce, “Abolitionism and the Presbyterian Schism of 1837–1838,” Mississippi Valley Historical Review, XXXVI (Dec, 1949), 391–414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

6 Velde, Lewis Vander, The Presbyterian Churches and the Federal Union, 1861–1869 (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1932), pp. 15 and 25–27Google Scholar; and Robert Thompson, A History of the Presbyterian Church in the United States (New York: The Christian Literature Co., 1895), pp. 135–37.

7 Vander Velde, op. cit., p. 58.

8 In 1866 this denomination was renamed The Presbyterian Church in the United States (the southern Presbyterian church).

9 Vander Velde, op. cit., chapter 2; and Thompson, op. cit., pp. 380–406.

10 Watson, T. Street, The Story of Southern Presbyterians (Richmond: John Knox Press, 1960), pp. 88–92.Google Scholar

11 Minutes of the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in the U. S., 1870, pp. 529–30.

12 ibid., 1894, pp. 211–12.

13 This was a reversal of the position taken by the General Assembly of 1866 which said it was “highly inexpedient that there should be an ecclesiastical separation of the white and colored races.” Minutes of the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in the U. S., 1866, p. 35.

14 For a strong statement against Negro ecclesiastical equality in the church see the Rev. Robert L. Dabney, Speech in the Synod of Virginia, Nov. 9, 1867, Against the Ecclesiastical Equality of Negro Preachers in Our Church and Their Right to Rule Over White Churches (Richmond, 1868), pamphlet.

15 Minutes of the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in the U. S., 1898, pp. 236 and 273–74; and ibid., 1900, p. 665.

16 The Negro work had not prospered in a separate denomination. The Negro membership of the church at that time was less than two thousand.

17 Minutes of the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in the U. S., 1885, p. 403; ibid., 1887, p. 208; ibid., 1888, p. 461; and ibid., 1894, p. 211.

18 The social gospel movement, for example, paid little attention, to the Negro problem during this period. See Hopkins, Charles, The Rise of the Social Gospel in American Protestantism 1865–1915 (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1940), p. 319Google Scholar; and Guy and Johnson, Guion, “The Church and the Race Problem in the United States” (unpublished monograph for the Myrdal study: The Schomburg Collection, 1940), chapter 6.Google Scholar

19 Minutes of the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in the U. S. A., 1903, p. 129.

20 Hon. E. E. Beard, “ Recommendation No. 1, ” Cumberland Presbyterian, LXVII (March 17, 1904), 328. In 1869 the Cumberland Presbyterian Church had organized its Negro members into a separate denomination, the Colored Cumberland Presbyterian Church.

21 Landrith, Ira, “Later Lights on the Buffalo Assembly,” Cumberland Presbyterian, LXVII ( June 9, 1904), 713.Google Scholar

22 Minutes of the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in the U. S. A., 1904, pp. 141–47.

23 ibid., pp. 147 and 158; The Presbyterian, LXXIV (May 4, 1904), 4–5; ibid., LXXIV (Nov. 9, 1904), 10; and Johnson, Herrick, “A Protest Against Separate Presbyteries,” Interior, XXXV (Dec. 29, 1904), 1699–1700.Google Scholar In some areas of the South the church had no white members; hence, there existed several all-Negro prebyteries.

24 Assembly Herald, XIV (March, 1908), 135; and The Presbyterian, LXXXVI (Feb. 7, 1906), 4–5.

25 Minutes of the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in the U.S., 1918, pp. 148–49.

26 Ibid.

27 Gaston, William B., “Efforts Toward Union of the Presbyterian Church in the U.S.A. and the Presbyterian Church in the U.S. Since 1917” (Unpublished M.S.T. thesis: Union Theological Seminary, Richmond, 1944), p. 25Google Scholar; and Minutes of the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in the U.S., 1929, p. 83.

28 ibid., 1930, p. 57.

29 ibid., 1931, p. 68.

30 ibid., 1937, p. 123.

31 Minutes of the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in the U.S.A., 1939, p. 63.

32 The Plan Providing for Reunion of the Presbyterian Church in the U.S.A. and the Presbyterian Church in the U.S. as the Presbyterian Church of the U.S., May, 1943 p. 13.

33 Robinson, James H., “Northern Lights,” The New Advance, VII (Nov., 1944), 6–7Google Scholar; and J. W. Barnett, “A Thought on the Proposed Union of the Presbyterian Church U.S.A. and U.S.,” ibid., 7–8.

34 William Simpson, “Statement of the Proposed Plan of Union of the Presbyterian Church in the U.S.A. and U.S.,” ibid., 8.

35 ibid., IX (Sept., 1947), 3.

36 Minutes of the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in the U.S.A., 1946, pp. 306–307 and 312.

37 Minutes of the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in the U.S., 1948, p. 63.

38 Christian Observer, CXXXVI (June 16, 1948), 2. The previous year the presbyteries had approved the church's remaining in the Federal Council of Churches by a decided majority though not by a three-fourths majority. Since union required a three-fourths majority and since it was less popular than membership in the Federal Council of Churches, the proponents of union realized that union would be defeated at that time; hence, they were willing to see a vote on union postponed.

39 The Plan Providing for the Reunion of the Presbyterian Church in the U.S.A. and the Presbyterian Church in the U.S. and the United Presbyterian Church in North America as the Presbyterian Church of the U.S., issued in 1954 as revised in Nov., 1953, pp. 17–18 and 132.

40 Presbyterian Outlook, CXXXII (April 10, 1950), 3.

41 Minutes of the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in the U.S., 1950, pp. 31 and 70.

42 Presbyterian Outlook, CXXXIII (June 25, 1951), 11–12 and 15. The Board of Church Extension had discovered strong opposition to integration among white churchmen in the presbyteries of Birmingham and Tuscaloosa. See also the comments of lay leader Dr. Bell, L. Nelson in the Southern Presbyterian Journal, IX (June 15, 1950), 2–3.Google Scholar

43 Minutes of the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in the U.S., 1951, p. 84.

44 ibid., 1952, p. 17; and Presbyterian Outlook, CXXXIII (Oct. 15, 1951), 3. When the Synod of Alabama voted to accept Negro churches it noted that the issue was one of administrative policy and “does not affect the present practice of segregation in the Presbyterian Church in the U.S.”

45 Third Annual Report of the Board of Church Extension of the Presbyterian Church in the U.S., 1952, pp. 35–36; and Cook, Norman, “Snedecor Gets A New Regional Director,” The Presbyterian Survey, LXIII (May, 1953), 26–27.Google Scholar

46 Minutes of the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in the U.S., 1952, pp. 168–69. See also Barry, Sara, “The Role of the Presbyterian Church in the United States in a Segregated Society” (unpublished M.R.E. thesis: Bibical Seminary in New York, 1955), pp. 67–68.Google Scholar

47 Minutes of the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in the U.S.A., 1953, pp. 101–102; and ibid., 1955, p. 107.

48 ibid., 1954, p. 192.

49 ibid., 1946, pp. 211–12.

50 Christian Observer, CXL (July 9, 1952), 2. The southern Presbyterian representatives also dissented when the Federal Council of Churches decided to file an amicus curiae brief in the Sweatt Case involving segregation of the Texas University Law School. Presbyterian Outlook, CXXXI (Oct. 24, 1949), 3.

51 ibid., CXXXVII (June 20, 1955), 6–7; ibid., CXXXVI (Nov. 22, 1954), 3; ibid., CXXXVI July 12, 1954), 4; ibid., CXXXVI (Sept. 27, 1954), 10; ibid., CXXXVI (June 28, 1954), 3; and Southern Presbyterian Journal, XIII (Dec. 8. 1954), 14–15.

52 Presbyterian Outlook, CXXXVII (June 20, 1955), 6–7.

53 Barber, Jesse, Climbing Jacob's Ladder (New York: Board of National Missions, 1952), pp. 73–74, 85–86, and 93–94.Google Scholar

54 Presbyterian Outlook, CXXXII (June 26, 1950), 10–11.

55 The General Assembly of 1950 refused to take a position on segregation at future meetings. Minutes of the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in the U.S., 1950, pp. 32 and 70.

56 Southern Presbyterian Journal, IX (June 15, 1950), 2–3; ibid., IX (July 15, 1950), 5; and ibid., XIII (Sept. 15, 1954), 3. A stand on desegregated facilities for national meetings in a united church could have precluded such meetings in the Deep South or forced a change in Montreat's policy.

57 For the extent of racial inclusiveness among northern Presbyterian churches see H. B. Sissel, “Are We Segregated on Sunday?” Presbyterian Life, XI (June 1, 1958), 13–16.

58 For criticism of the Federal Council's position on the race issue and the Ku Klux Klan see Presbyterian of the South, LCIII (Nov. 12, 1919), 1; and ibid., LCVI (Nov. 8, 1922), 1.

59 Minutes of the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in the U.S., 1947, pp. 38–39; ibid., 1949, p. 35; Gage, Daniel, “The Federal Council,” Christian Observer, CXXXVI (Feb. 4, 1948)Google Scholar, 10; Dickinson, Charles C., “Political Activities of the Federal Council of Churches,” Southern Presbyterian Journal, I (Dec., 1942)Google Scholar, 12; and ibid., IV (July, 1945), 7–8. In 1945 the Christian Observer noted that it had become a General Assembly “custom” to debate the matter of continuing membership in the Federal Council. Christian Observer, CXXXIII (June 13, 1945, 2.

60 Southern Presbyterian Journal, VI (Sept. 1, 1947), 3.

61 Minutes of the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in the U.S., 1955, pp. 36–40 and 166.

62 Southern Presbyterian Journal VI (Sept. 15, 1945), 11–12; and ibid., XII (Jan. 20, 1954), 6–7.

63 ibid., XI (Sept. 24, 1952), 3. See also ibid., X (Aug. 8, 1951), 4–5; and ibid., X (Nov. 7, 1951), 4.

64 ibid., IV (Dec. 15, 1945), 5–6.

65 The group was reported to have had a budget of $98,000 to finance a well-organized campaign against union. Although voting on unification was not to begin until January 1, 1955, presbyteries, particularly the anti-union ones, began to ballot before that date. Christian Century, LXX (Sept. 23, 1953), 1069.

66 Southern Presbyterian Journal, XIII (Sept. 1, 1954), 5.

67 Christian Observer, CXLII (June 16, 1954), 3; and Presbyterian Outlook, CXXXVI (June 7, 1954), 5.

68 Dornbusch and Irle, op. cit.

69 Presbyterian Outlook, CXXXVI (Nov. 29, 1954), 3. For a list of how the presbyteries voted see the Atlanta Constitution, May 1, 1955. The prounification forces rallied around the Presbyterian Outlook, which also supported desegregation.

70 Union needed approval from three-quarters of the presbyteries. Forty-three presbyteries voted against union; forty-two, for. In one presbytery there was a tie.