Confessing Our Unity in Christ

Confessing Our Unity in Christ

Historical and Theological Background

to

“The Ground of the Unity”

Prepared by

C. Daniel Crews Archivist of the Moravian Church,

Southern Province

For presentation to the Moravian Clergy Association

January 6, 1994

Fourth edition, August 2013

Published at the request of the Provincial Elders Conference, Southern Province


Historical and Theological Background

to


Prepared by

C. Daniel Crews Archivist of the Moravian Church,

Southern Province

For presentation to the Moravian Clergy Association

January 6, 1994

Fourth edition, August 2013

Published at the request of the Provincial Elders Conference, Southern Province

Editions and Their Changes First edition: January 1994 Second edition: January 2000: Update “The Ground of the

Unity” following the 1995 Unity Synod Third edition, June 2011: digital copy of the second edition Fourth edition, August 2013: repaginated digital edition;

further updating “The Ground of the Unity” to the 1995 Unity Synod

Documents at the Moravian Archives web site on the Internet, (http://moravianarchives.org/publications/e-books/): Unity Statutes of 1464 Ancient Unity’s Confession of 1535 Ratio Disciplinae of the Ancient Unity Unum Necessarium, John Amos Comenius Essentials of the Christian Faith, Augustus Schultze Spirit of the Moravian Church, Bishop C. H. Shawe

Preface to the second edition The purpose of this second edition is twofold, one practical, one theological. First, the first edition of 1994 has effectively sold out. It is hard — and gratifying — to realize, that this little survey of doctrinal statements of a small Protestant Church is a best seller. May it remain so, and more important, may we take to heart all that speaks to us of our Savior’s grace through the guidance of the Holy Spirit. The second reason for this new edition is that barely a year after the first edition was published it was out of date. The Unity Synod of 1995 made a small but significant alteration to “The Ground of the Unity,” the current doctrinal statement of the Moravian Church. Synod saw the need to emphasize that it is the Triune God, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, as revealed in the Holy Scripture, who is the only source of our life and salvation, not just the humanly transcribed Scripture itself. In addition, 2,000 years of Christian tradition and wisdom are now set forth as a guide for our better understanding in proclaiming the Gospel of Christ. This edition of “Confessing Our Unity in Christ” includes “Essential Features of the Unity,” which has accompanied “The Ground of the Unity” ever since the latter’s formulation in 1957, but which sadly was omitted in the first edition of this booklet. Whereas “The Ground of the Unity” can be considered the Moravian Church’s charter of existence, amended and yet to be amended through the gracious leading of the Holy Spirit,

“Essential Features of the Unity” represents the bylaws under our charter, outlining our everyday mode of practice and cus-tom as a Church that receives its existence from its Savior. “The Ground of the Unity” stands today as a doctrinal state-ment of the worldwide Unitas Fratrum or Moravian Church, open to further understanding and expression as the Holy Spirit guides the Church. The accompanying “Essential Fea-tures of the Unity” outlines congregational life, by the members as individual parts of the congregation and by the congregation itself as a part of the worldwide Unity.

C. Daniel Crews, Archivist Moravian Church, Southern Province

January 2000


Historical and Theological Background to


Introduction

When the president of the Provincial Elders Conference of the Moravian Church, Southern Province, asked me to prepare this study, I was well aware of the importance of the task, for this has to do with the most basic matters of the faith which we as Christians, and particularly as Moravian Christians, profess. It should also provide a helpful resource as we in our day seek to explore more deeply the beliefs which unite us as Moravians. As I began this work, however, I was not aware of the magnitude of the task, for while we would assume that “The Ground of the Unity” did not simply appear out of the blue at the General Synod of 1957, I did not fully appreciate how intrinsically it is part of a long line of doctrinal statements which extend back throughout the more than 500 years of our church’s ongoing life and development. That being so, this study can only begin to scratch the surface of the valuable and fascinating wealth of material which relates to our church’s confession of its faith. Months, even years, of study could be devoted to this topic to treat it in a fully comprehensive way. I pray, however, that we may benefit from what has been un-

2 CONFESSING OUR UNITY IN CHRIST covered so far. In the name of Jesus Christ, our Savior, let us begin.

The Old Unity

In the old Unitas Fratrum of the fifteenth to the seven-teenth centuries primary attention was devoted to living a life of faith and carrying out its practical implications. Certainly they were also concerned with verbally expressing the faith they held, but as Amédeo Molnár says in his study of their theology:

The Unity of Brethren never asserted the immutability of dogmatic expression. It was convinced that continuity was given to its theology primarily by its close association with the essential matters of Christian faith, as the Holy Scriptures bear witness to these within the confessing Christian community. It is true that ecclesiastical and theological expression among the Bre thren leaned on the apostolic confession of faith and on the dogmatic tradition of Western Christianity, but it did not assert for itself the claim of being the fixed and unchangeable rule. Likewise, the social and spiritual setting in which the Unity arose and lived affected substantially the form of its theological thinking and ex-perience.1

For this reason, as they progressed to clearer understanding from study of Scripture, from the experience of their own Christian lives, and from interaction with other Christians in other communions, particularly during the Reformation, the Unity often modified and at times repudiated the particular expressions and emphases of former years. For example, they benefited from the tutelage of Luther for a greater appreciation of salvation by faith as opposed to works-righteousness; they gave up the idea of seven sacraments; and they abandoned the practice of rebaptizing those who came to them from other denominations.

1 In Rudolf Říčan, The History of the Unity of Brethren, trans. C.

Daniel Crews (Bethlehem, Pa., and Winston-Salem, N.C.: The Moravian Church in America, 1992), p. 390.

CONFESSING OUR UNITY IN CHRIST 3 Certainly in their confessions of faith the old Unity did not assert “immutability of dogmatic expression.” Bishop Edmund Schweinitz in his History of the Unitas Fratrum2 lists no fewer than eleven separate confessions spanning the years 1468-1573. Moreover, the same confession sometimes appeared in Latin, Czech, Polish, or German versions, sometimes with rather significant variations among them. As Bishop Schweinitz observes in the introduction to his list of confes-sions, “The subject is therefore exceedingly complicated.”3 This is hardly surprising, for many of these documents are in the form of letters or statements to various authorities outside the church who demanded to know who and what the Unity was, and opinions may vary as to which of them have the status of formal confessions of faith. They do serve, however, to show that in the course of its history the old Unitas Fratrum pro-duced a great number of different official accounts of its belief and practice. A general word about these various documents may be in order here. The Unity did not see itself as a confessional church in the sense that some others (the Lutherans for example) did, and it usually produced formal statements of faith only in response to outside challenge, often tailoring them according to circum-stances. In these statements the Unity tried to hold to the most basic Christian truths without getting too much into theological niceties. This stemmed directly from the horror with which it saw the churches of the Reformation splitting

2 2nd edition, (Bethlehem, Pa.: The Moravian Publication Concern,

1901), pp. 648-653. 3 Schweinitz, p. 648. Different authors count differently, and even

the same author may reach a different total in different works. Thus, Anton Gindely, who counted each edition as a separate confession, in one book counts 36 confessions but in another comes up with 34. In Volume 1 of his careful history of the old church, Geschichte der Böhmischen Brüder (Herrnhut: Verlag der Missionsbuchhandlung, 1922), pp. 523-534, Dr. Joseph Th. Müller, the Unity Archivist, has a list of the early confessions which differs somewhat from that of Bishop Schweinitz.

4 CONFESSING OUR UNITY IN CHRIST into opposing camps over what the Unity saw as minor theo-logical distinctions. It did not want to provide more ammuni-tion for attacks of Christians upon other Christians, and it certainly found much with which it could agree in both the Lutheran and Reformed camps. But though it sought friendly relations with other com-munions, the Unity resisted pressure to abandon its own insights and be absorbed by other larger churches of the Reformation. For instance, the Unity was more concerned about disciplined, dedicated Christian living than it was about differing interpretations of the nature of Christ’s presence in the Holy Communion, though it consistently affirmed tha “sacramental” presence. Of course, Lukás of Prague and others did make forceful statements to other Reformers, and such a fiery leader as Jan Augusta did at times engage in sharp polemics.4 Still, this was perhaps inevitable in an age of such theological contention when the Unity itself was often under harsh attack. For the most part, though, members of the Unity held to their earliest principle, enunciated when people of differing theological persuasions had gathered to form the Unity, of taking the Scripture for their norm rather than depending on constructions of human theology.5 To be sure, however, they and others outside the Unity did not always agree on what the norm of Scripture was. Opinions within the Unity — then, as today — were not always unanimous on this either. The Confession of 1535 deserves special mention. In a time when further persecution loomed over them, and inspired by the example of the Lutherans at Augsburg in 1530, the Unity compiled a new Confession of Faith to be presented to the king by its members who were of the nobility. As Říčan says:

The influence of the Augustana [the Augsburg Confession] is clear. This is not a verbal dependence, however, and neither in its contents do the Brethren bind themselves to the Augustana in

4 Říčan, p. 118f, 139, 154, 164. 5 Müller, I, 76.

CONFESSING OUR UNITY IN CHRIST 5

all respects. Especially lacking here is a condemnation of other teachings.6

The first article of the Unity’s 1535 Confession speaks of the Holy Scriptures as their guide. This was true also of their very first confession of faith in 1468,7 and it has generally been Moravian practice to begin doctrinal statements with an avowal of Scripture as the foundation of faith. This is in dis-tinction from the confessional practice of other communions. For instance, the Augsburg Confession does not have an article on Scripture per se, though it cites it as authority for various articles and says at the end of the first 21 articles that all that is said in it is grounded on Scripture. Likewise, the Anglican Thirty-Nine Articles have separate sections on Scripture, but not at the first of the document. In content, the Unity’s Confession of 1535 then goes on to speak of God and salvation in Christ, and it affirms the true “spiritual” presence of Christ in the Holy Communion without trying to define it further in metaphysical terms. It is in full agreement with Luther on the cardinal doctrine of salvation through faith, and, characteristically, in the next article it stresses very strongly that good works are the necessary fruit of saving faith. It also maintains some older viewpoints of the Unity which might not find favor with Moravians of today, particularly the article which favors celibacy for the clergy. This Confession of 1535 did not attain its goal of winning royal approval for the Unity, but it did mark our church’s emergence from more or less seclusion to a more public pos-ture, and it remained through the years as the Unity’s great public avowal of its belief. It formed the basis for their later confessions8 and was reprinted by Bishop Comenius (Komen–

6 Říčan, p. 142f. 7 Schweinitz, p. 158: “The Bible is their norm of faith and rule of

practice.” 8 The Unity’s final independent confession of 1573 is basically the

same as that of 1535, but was rewritten in the more refined Latin of the time. See Říčan, p. 253f.

6 CONFESSING OUR UNITY IN CHRIST sky) in 1662 as part of his attempt to preserve the legacy of the Unity for those who would renew it in the future.9 One final aspect of the old Unity’s doctrinal stance needs to be noted before moving on to developments in the Renewed Unity. This is their concept of the essential, the ministrative, and the incidental things. This was extremely important to them, and indeed is a valuable contribution to theological thought. This concept was reflected in their hymns and devo-tional writings. It did not, however, receive the expression in their formal confessions which might have been expected. This is because the confessions were generally prepared for “out-siders” who were used to other modes of expression and would not have looked upon such expressions with favor even if they understood them. In short,10 the essentials were more the objective work of God for our salvation, and our living relationship with God and each other, than they were a list of doctrines to subscribe to. On the part of God the essentials for salvation were: The gracious good will of God the Father for our salvation; the meritorious saving work of Christ; and the gifts of the Holy Spirit. On the human side the essentials were: faith, love, and hope. The ministrative things were those which “ministered” or helped one to the essentials. These included the church, the sacraments, and the Scriptures. The incidentals were such things as the specifics of church order, particular liturgical forms, or the mode of baptism and the sort of bread used at Holy Communion. The Unity was perhaps right in anticipating some mis-understanding, and a word of caution is necessary here. It should not be thought that the ministrative things were down-played in this system or could be considered as unimportant. They were, in fact, the means appointed by God to enable mortals to come to the essentials. It might not go too far to say 9 Říčan, p. 388.

10 By far the best and most comprehensive study of this aspect of the Unity’s theology is Amédeo Molnár’s “The Brethren’s Theology” in Říčan, pp. 390-420.

CONFESSING OUR UNITY IN CHRIST 7 that the ministerials — the Scriptures, the sacraments, the church — were the indispensable means for our coming to the eternal essentials. As such they were crucial for the Christian life; they were by no means an end in themselves, but the means to our ultimate goal: redemption in our Lord and Savior

Zinzendorf and Moravian Theology

Comenius’ prayer that the Unity might someday be reborn was fulfilled among the little group of Czech exiles who found refuge on the estate of Count Nicholas von Zinzendorf in Saxony in 1722. There the faith whose record the old bishop had tried to preserve in printing its confession of faith and church order (Ratio disciplinae) continued, though in a new situation and different forms of expression. In the early Renewed Unity we do not find much in the way of a formal confession of faith, and this is because of several reasons. For legal considerations, and also because of Zinzen-dorf’s preference to keep it an ecclesiola in ecclesia (a little church within the church), the Renewed Unity for a good while technically adhered to the Augsburg Confession of the Lu-theran state church. They therefore had no need, nor indeed any legal authority, to formulate a separate confession of their own. Furthermore, having nearly come to disaster at the very beginning because of factious quarrels over doctrinal differ-ences, and having been delivered from this only by the unify-ing experience of the Savior’s grace and love on August 13, 1727,11 the Moravians, as we may now call them, were naturally wary of attempting to forge binding theological sys-tems. Then too, there was Zinzendorf himself, the Moravians’ patron and landlord, whose unique personality so influenced Moravians of the time that the Bishops Hamilton can say: “the

11 A detailed account of these controversies and their resolution is

given by Gerhard Reichel in The Story of the Thirteenth of August, 1727, trans. Douglas L. Rights (Winston-Salem, N.C., 1946).

8 CONFESSING OUR UNITY IN CHRIST theology of the Moravian Church in his day was to an unusual degree identical with the theology of Zinzendorf.”12 About the theology of Zinzendorf, reams could and have been written, though far more in German than in English. For the purposes of this study, the convenient summary in the Bishops Hamilton’s History provides the crucial points.13 One should, indeed, recall that Zinzendorf’s voluminous writings varied in content and emphasis over the years, and we may feel that some of his more eccentric opinions are happily long forgotten by the church at large. The solid core of his theology, however, has given Moravian theological expression a definite character which has served the church well and inspired its devotion over the years. This solid core, of course, was em-phatically “Christ and him crucified”: the humble yet joyful appreciation of the redeeming death of Christ, truly divine and truly human, on the cross for our salvation. In spite of our sinfulness, by grace we can love the Savior and accept in faith the forgiveness of our sin in the “all-availing merits of the life, sufferings, and death of Christ.” The Holy Spirit brings us into this saving and life-giving relation with Christ, and this in turn prompts the living of a life which seeks to follow Christ in all things.14 It was this sort of faith and the vital personal experi-ence of the Savior’s “near presence” which not only inspired and informed the eighteenth century Moravians’ close commu-nity life in their settlements, but also sent them to the far cor-ners of the earth to share the Good News of the Savior’s love. Zinzendorf did not evolve a full-blown systematic theology, and the church, as mentioned above, was required to be in legal conformity with the Augsburg Confession. In a Synod at Marienborn in 1740 (known as the Doctrinal Synod) the Mora-

12 J. Taylor Hamilton and Kenneth G. Hamilton, History of the Mora-

vian Church (Bethlehem, Pa., and Winston-Salem, N.C.: Inter-provincial Board of Christian Education, Moravian Church in America, 1967), p. 154.

13 pp. 154-159. 14 It will be noted that this last point is quite in harmony with the old

Unity’s insistence on good works as the inevitable fruit of faith.

CONFESSING OUR UNITY IN CHRIST 9 vians did give formal expression to their basic beliefs. They said, however:

Every church and every dispensation has insights of its own. If one puts them in writing they become a confession of faith, like the one we presented to the King of Sweden in 1735. We, however, make no symbol of them as [did] the Lutherans (1577), which may not later be altered. We want to retain freedom, so that our Saviour may enlighten our doctrine from time to time.15

Here again the link with the doctrinal stance of the old Unity is quite evident. As the Bishops Hamilton say:

By refraining from authoritative definitions of doctrine, they sought to avoid making issues out of matters of secondary importance. More, they endeavored to come to the Scriptures with minds unaffected by dogmatic prejudice, so as to apprehend both the word and the spirit of the Bible.16

Just as the Savior brings people to Himself in different ways and at different stages of life, so the living witness of a life clearly devoted to and in communion with Christ, and evi-dencing the fruits of the Spirit, is a better test of true Chris-tianity than is the intellectual confession of a series or system of doctrines. It may be that the best summary of Zinzendorf’s theology and of the faith on which the Renewed Unity was built is indeed found in the hymn “Christi Blut und Gerechtigkeit,” whose basic concepts are represented in the English translation:

The Savior’s blood and righteousness My beauty is, my glorious dress; Thus well arrayed, I need not fear, When in His presence I appear. The holy, spotless Lamb of God, Who freely gave His life and blood For all my numerous sins to atone, I for my Lord and Savior own.

15 Hamilton, History, p.157, citing quotation in Johannes Plitt, Denk-

würdigkeiten aus der Geschichte der Brüder-Unität, ¶ 199. 16 History, p. 157.

10 CONFESSING OUR UNITY IN CHRIST Later Eighteenth and Nineteenth Century Developments

Following the death of Zinzendorf in 1760, the General Synods of 1764 and 1769 were too busy fashioning a system of government for the church and meeting the huge financial debt which had accrued to do much in the way of doctrinal formulations. Likewise, the General Synod of 1775 dealt with constitutional matters, unfortunately increasing the centrali-zation of church government in the Unity Elders Conference in Germany at just the wrong time for expansion in America, where the winds of independence were gaining popular sup-port. However, this General Synod of 1775 also dealt with mat-ters of doctrine and formulated statements in its official Results (Verlaß) which provided the basic substance for Mora-vian doctrinal statements for the better part of the next 200 years. The 1775 Synod devoted many pages to an exposition of doctrine, but said that our “chief axiom” is (to quote the Eng-lish translation of the General Synod three-quarters of a cen-tury later): “That whoe’er believeth in Christ’s redemption/May find free grace, and a complete exemption/From serving sin.”17 How Zinzendorfian, how Moravian to express our “chief axiom” of faith in a hymn verse. Following that “chief axiom,” the 1775 Synod then goes on to say that, without departing from any other articles of Christian doctrine, it wishes to hold essen-tially, or particularly (Grundsätzlich), to the following four points:18

17 1775: I. A, 2. (Translation is from the 1857 General Synod; see note

31 below.) 18 1775: I.A, 2, a-d. Note that J. Taylor Hamilton in his History (1900),

p. 220f., and Kenneth Hamilton in his revision of that work (1967), p. 170, list five points and arrange them in the order adopted by later Synods. It is noted, however, in the 1967 work, p. 180, that the point concerning the fruits of a godly life as the result of the work of the Holy Spirit was added by the General Synod of 1818. (Except in this footnote, all citations of the History are from the 1967 edition.)


a. The doctrine of the atoning sacrifice and satisfaction of Jesus for us. He was delivered for our sins. To this also pertains the truth that we receive all sanctification from the merit of Jesus and must receive all power for living and godly conduct from the Savior.

b. The doctrine of the universal depravity of humanity; that body and soul are wounded unto death, and there is no health in us; that no powers remain in the fallen person through which one can resist the depravity of body and soul or help or better oneself.

c. The doctrine of the divinity of Jesus; that God, the Creator of all things, was manifest in the flesh and has reconciled the world to Himself; that all things were created through Him and to Him; and that He is before all things, and everything consists in Him.

d. The doctrine of the Holy Spirit and His operations of grace. These basic concepts gave direction to the Synod’s additional formulations in the chapter on doctrine in the Results, and future Synods repeated, refined, and expanded them in a variety of ways. It is obvious that the Renewed, like the old, Unity does not assert the “immutability of dogmatic expres-sion,” though the central core of faith remains the same. Two other publications of these years also deserve mention (as the Bishops Hamilton note). While they were not actions of General Synod, they were official expressions of Moravian the-ology to the wider world. The first of these was Bishop August Gottlieb Spangenberg’s Idea Fidei Fratrum: An Exposition of Christian Doctrine, written at the request of the Unity Elders Conference in 1777 and published in 1779. It is described as

intended to place before ministers and members of the Moravian Church a scheme of Christian doctrine expressed in biblical language and to present to friends of the Unity a vindication of its orthodox and catholic character. The twenty-four sections set forth the essentials of Protestant theology with the love of God in Christ as their central theme.19

The second publication was the hymnbook of 1778 prepared by Christian Gregor. Simply by its being in use for about 100 years, this hymnal continued the Moravian Church’s practice

19 Hamilton, History, p. 172.

12 CONFESSING OUR UNITY IN CHRIST of giving expression to its theology in its hymns more than in formal dogmatic productions. The General Synod of 1782 professed continued adherence to the Augsburg Confession, as Saxon law stipulated, and noted that the Confession was “in conformity to the Holy Scripture.”20 This was a time of increased pressure from the rationalism of the so-called Enlightenment, and it is in re-sponse to this that in repeating the four main doctrinal points from 1775 there is added to the section on the divinity of Christ a passage stressing that Jesus was more than simply an eminent messenger from God as many people thought in those days.21 It is in this light that the Bishops Hamilton say, “The Brethren determined to adhere more faithfully in their teaching to the language of Scripture.”22 In the Results of this General Synod of 1782, before the “chief axiom” and “four points,” in the manner of the old Unity there now stands as the first chapter of the Results a state-ment that “The Holy Scripture is the ground [Grund] of our doctrine, and the only rule [Richtschnur] of our faith and life.”23 This was repeated in the Results of the General Synods of 1789 and 1801.24 The addition to the section on Christ’s divinity made in 1782 is not repeated in 1801. Times were different, and the point had been made. However, members of the church were urged to acquaint themselves with the Scrip-tures so as to guard themselves against the “erroneous teach-ing which is prevalent in our time.”25

20 1782: I, A, 7. 21 1782: I, C, 9, c. 22 History, p. 172. 23 1782: I, A, 1. 24 The report on the 1789 Synod in the Southern Archives is appar-

ently not a complete one, but Bishop Hamilton’s History, p. 173f., 177, does not mention any changes in 1789 and says that the Synod of 1801 followed 1789 and “made no material changes in the statement on Moravian doctrine.” The reference in 1801 is I, A: 1, 10-11.

25 1801: I, A, 3.

CONFESSING OUR UNITY IN CHRIST 13 The Synod of 1818 in its sections on doctrine largely re-peats the words of 1801 (with a few modifications), but it does rearrange the “four points” of earlier years, perhaps to put them in what the delegates considered a more “logical” or systematic progression. They now stand as

a. universal depravity b. the divinity and incarnation of Christ c. the atoning sacrifice of Jesus d. the Holy Spirit and the operation of grace.

To these is now added a fifth point: e. the doctrine of the fruits of faith: that this must evidence itself

by willing obedience to the commandments of God because of our love and gratitude to Him.26

This addition would doubtless have been gratifying to Lukás of Prague, Jan Augusta, and other adherents of the old Unity. Little was done over the next three Synods of 1825, 1836, and 1848 to alter these five points, though they were now expressed in paragraph form. The 1825 Synod did say that the Moravian Church does not want to expand on the “truths” of God revealed for salvation and that “we feel bound as Brethren to all who agree with us in the experience of the heart.”27 The 1836 General Synod refined the statement on Scripture so that it now reads:

The Holy Scripture of the Old and New Testament is and remains the only rule of our faith and life [practice]. We revere it as God’s word, which He spoke to humanity in former times through the prophets, and in these last days through the Son and His apostles, to instruct people in the way of salvation through faith in Jesus Christ. We are convinced that all truths which are necessary for a person who desires to be saved to know and believe are fully contained therein.28

The 1848 General Synod reiterated that statement.

26 1818: II, 7. (A chapter on “Unitäts-Statuten” here precedes the

doctrinal chapter.) 27 1825: I, 4. 28 1836: II, 4. Note that the words “ground of our doctrine” do not

appear here. Note also the new addition of the last sentence, in which it says that everything needed for salvation is revealed in Scripture.

14 CONFESSING OUR UNITY IN CHRIST This brings us to the contributions of the General Synod held in 1857, the 400th anniversary of the Unitas Fratrum. In regard to doctrine, the 1857 Synod repeats the statement on Scripture as “the only rule of our faith and practice.” Synod then follows this with a section entitled Mysteries of Scrip-ture.29 This states that while we keep in view the “mark” [tar-get] set before the church by the apostle Paul (Eph. 4:13, 14) of coming into perfection in Christ, no longer “tossed to and fro” by “every wind of doctrine,” nevertheless we “never forget, that every human system of divine truth must remain im-perfect, as the same apostle says, (I Cor., xiii. 9,) ‘we know in part.’” This caution on human doctrinal systems is a clear echo of the ancient Unity’s refusing to assert “immutability of dogmatic expression.” This caution also speaks clearly to us today, that we must always bear in mind that all of our human doctrinal systems “must remain imperfect” and ever must be tested to “apprehend both the word and the spirit”30 of the Scripture. Following its caution on the “Mysteries of the Scripture,” the 1857 Synod places the section entitled Summary of Doc-trine. As did the 1775 Synod, the 1857 Synod prefaces its points of doctrine with the hymn verse expressing the church’s “chief doctrine”: “That whoe’er believeth in Christ’s redemp-tion,/May find free grace, and a complete exemption/From serving sin.”31 Then after an absence from the Results of three General Synods, the list of “five points” from the 1818 Synod reappears, except this time there are six of them, the doctrines of:

a. the total depravity of human nature b. the love of God the Father [this is the added point, and it

hearkens back to the “essentials” of the old Unity] c. the real Godhead and real humanity of Jesus Christ

29 1857: II, 5. 30 See the Bishops Hamilton’s comment on the 1740 Marienborn

Synod, notes 15 and 16 above. 31 1857: II, 6.


d. the atonement and satisfaction of Jesus Christ for us e. the Holy Ghost and his gracious operations f. the fruits of faith.

The Synod Results then go on to speak of the “Centre of Doc-trine,” which says in part: “The word of the cross, i.e. the testimony of his voluntary offering of himself to suffer and to die, and of the treasures of grace purchased thereby, is the beginning, middle, and end of our ministry, and to proclaim the Lord’s death we regard as the main calling of the Breth-ren’s Church.”32 They then speak of “The Way of Salvation,” where it is said that “both Scripture and experience” show that different people are led by God to salvation in Christ in differ-ent ways, but that growth in grace is necessary.33 Then follows a section on “The Christian Life,”34 which reinforces the call to moral living. All of this was seen as relating directly to the doctrine of the church. The 1869 General Synod left the doctrinal statements of the 1857 Synod virtually unchanged, and the 1879 Synod re-iterates them, except that now two more have been added:

g. the fellowship of believers with one another h. the Second Coming of the Lord in glory, and of the Resurrection

of the dead, unto life or unto judgment.

Also, since the 1879 General Synod stated that these doctrines were clearly attested to in Scripture, a series of Scripture refer-ences was now added to the end of each to indicate clearly the Scriptures on which it is based. The 1879 Synod added a sentence to the section on leading doctrines: “Our view of the leading doctrines is set forth more especially in the confession of faith which has been annually declared by the whole Church on Easter morning for more than a hundred years.”35 First listed as only four “points” by the 1775 Synod, then five in 1818 and six in 1857, these eight “truths” of the 1879 Synod — unofficially labeled eight “essentials” in the 1950’s by

32 1857: II, 7. 33 1857: II, 8. See above, p. 8, after note 16. 34 1857: II, 9. 35 1879: II, 7.

16 CONFESSING OUR UNITY IN CHRIST John Groenfeldt36 — these eight basic truths stood through the next five General Synods until 1957. This does not mean that all doctrinal issues were settled once and for all, however; and developments just before and just after 1900 sound very similar to concerns today. We therefore need to examine them in some detail.

The Crisis of 1909

The latter part of the nineteenth century was a time of theological ferment when what they called the “New Theology” (which we often refer to as nineteenth century liberalism) challenged traditional religious thinking. This likewise had an effect on the Moravian Church, particularly when elements of the “New Theology” began to be discussed at the German Province’s theological seminary. This seminary had been moved from Niesky to Gnadenfeld in 1818. “There,” say the Bishops Hamilton, “in a quiet settlement congregation and in the seclusion of rural life, it was thought the students would acquire a theological training with the least distraction.”37 In the second half of the nineteenth century, however, the new theological currents found their way even into the serene environs of Gnadenfeld, and among these currents was par-ticularly the thought of Albrecht Ritschl, which sought to “frame a new apologetic synthesis between Christian faith and the new knowledge contributed by scientific and historical scholarship.”38 Before long, many in the church felt that this “New Theol-ogy” was having too much influence at the seminary, to the detriment of sacred truths long held, and questions were

36 John S. Groenfeldt, Becoming a Member of the Moravian Church: A

Maunal for Church Members, (Bethlehem, Pa., and Winston-Salem, N.C.: Interprovincial Board of Christian Education, Moravian Church in America, 1954), pp. 21-22.

37 Hamilton, History, p. 181. 38 Williston Walker, History of the Christian Church, rev. ed. (New York:

Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1959), p. 493.

CONFESSING OUR UNITY IN CHRIST 17 raised at the German Province Synod of 1897.39 Some were so upset that they desired replacement of professors and a change in teaching methods. Voices were even raised de-manding that the institution be closed. The Bishops Hamilton’s account of this 1897 German Synod is instructive:

The situation was an anxious one. But once again the power of prayer became manifest. The Synod did not degenerate into a contest between two irrecon-cilably hostile parties. Searching inquiries were made and met in a fraternal way with the result that general confidence in Gnadenfeld was restored. It became more and more evident that the solution of the difficulty lay in giving new emphasis to the Christo-centric position of the theology of the Brethren’s Unity and to the doctrine of the atonement. The president of the seminary made a complete statement on these points in the name of his colleagues, and by a vote of forty-three to four Synod gave its support to him.40

The issue was not really resolved, however; the “New Theol-ogy” continued to be discussed in the Gnadenfeld seminary; and the debate arose again at the German Synod of 1908, this time with a vengeance.41 The immediate spark that rekindled the controversy in the German Province was the publication by President Paul Kölbing of the Gnadenfeld seminary of a book entitled Die Einwirkung der Person Jesu auf Paulus (The influence of the Person of Jesus upon Paul). This work, with its innocuous sounding title, was examined in a non-Moravian publication called Beröa in 1907, and this magazine, finding the book full of “New Theology,” printed an open question to the leaders of the Moravian Church asking why such teaching was tolerated at the seminary.42 Some Moravians wrote to express their own opinions directly to Beröa, a fact frowned on by the German Unity Directory, who felt that any opinions on this issue

39 Hamilton, History, p. 354. 40 History, p. 354. 41 A helpful source for following the issues and events of this Synod is

Herrnhut. Events were reported as they happened, and then a general summary was given in the 26 June 1908 issue.

42 Herrnhut, 26 June 1908, p. 212.

18 CONFESSING OUR UNITY IN CHRIST should have been directed through regular channels within the church. In any event, the issue was now a public one, and a group at Diedelsheim who had contributed regularly to Moravian missions in the past threatened to cut off contri-butions if the Moravians had truly “departed from the proper ground of belief.”43 This was a real threat to Moravian missions, since many of the funds to support them came from groups outside the church, and if such a trend spread, the already financially strapped missions could face immediate disaster. In the months before the German Synod of 1908, many letters appeared in Herrnhut, the weekly newspaper of the German Province at the time, with opinions ranging from laments that people had lost faith in the Moravian Church because justification and sanctification were no longer preached (24 April) to a denunciation of “ossified intolerant orthodoxy” (which appeared in the 22 May issue after Synod had begun). Another writer in the same issue said he did not like the “New Theology,” but could live with it. So it was that when Synod came to consider the seminary’s report, the chair asked Christ the Head of the church that all might be said “in the spirit of our Lord Jesus Christ, which is the spirit of holy love and divine truth.”44 Synod moved quickly through the routine reports on faculty retirements, student enrollment, etc., but then the more controversial issues arose. Debate, “conducted openly and with Brotherly love,” began on Monday afternoon with “long and earnest speeches.” By the close of the Wednesday night session, so many delegates were still waiting to speak that one could form no clear idea of the position of Synod as a whole.45 As summarized in the 26 June 1908 issue of Herrnhut,46 the delegates made an effort to “seek to understand, not oppose one another.” However, the lay

43 Herrnhut, 29 May 1908, p. 178. 44 Herrnhut, 29 May 1908, p. 177. 45 Herrnhut, 29 May 1908, pp. 177-179. 46 pp. 212-214.

CONFESSING OUR UNITY IN CHRIST 19 people, particularly, feared that the “New Theology” meant that the Savior and Scripture were no longer of value. Some stated that they were missing the core of the Gospel in sermons of the younger ministers, that some ministers understood Scripture differently from “plain layfolk,” and that they therefore had lost confidence in them to care for their souls, and they feared that great ill was coming to the church. The newspaper Herrnhut summarized:

What the lay people want and expect is a clear confession of Jesus Christ, the eternal Son of God, of his cross, and his bodily resurrection; in short, of the full and entire contents of the Holy Scriptures and the faith of our fathers as it has found expression in our hymnal from the time of Zinzendorf even to now. Finally, it was stressed that the church is not there for the theologians, but rather that the theologians are there for the church.47

The theologians acknowledged this, and some stressed the differences between their personal living faith and the methods of scientific theology. After almost a whole week of deliberations, the Synod had to come to a vote on specific resolutions to close or sharply restrict the seminary.48 The motion to close it was withdrawn, but discussion on restrictions continued. This bogged down, and a suggestion was made to require theological students to spend at least a semester at some other institution “to become acquainted with other theological directions and other living Christian circles outside the Brüdergemeine.” This seemed to be a resolution most of the delegates could live with, so the motion to place restrictions on the seminary was voted down 41-5, and the motion for “broadening experience” was adopted 45-0. Here the matter was left. This, of course, did not settle anything, and letters on these matters continued to be printed in the newspaper Herrn-hut.49 Disputes both within and without the church continued,

47 Herrnhut, 26 June 1908, p. 212. 48 Herrnhut, 5 June 1908, p. 184. 49 E.g. in the 3 July 1908 issue, p. 223. This ongoing controversy in

Herrnhut was specifically mentioned in a letter from J. Taylor Hamilton to Edward Rondthaler, February 24, 1909. Filed with

20 CONFESSING OUR UNITY IN CHRIST and one congregation at least, Christiansfeld in Denmark, filed a formal protest against the “Gnadenfeld theology.” In reporting this in a letter of January 4, 1909, to Bishop Edward Rondthaler, Bishop J. Taylor Hamilton, American represen-tative on the Mission Board in Herrnhut, wrote: “This will be one of the burning issues at the General Synod.”50 Just three weeks later Hamilton told Rondthaler:

It [the “New Theology”] contains within it grave dangers for the Unity, as the situation has shaped itself here. We need to be careful of the interests of the Unity; and to pray that these may be preserved amid the wide differences of opinion and viewpoint; but at the same time, whilst avoiding narrow shibboleths, adherence to Revealed Truth of God must come first.51

In addition to the theological issues per se, the German Synod of 1908 called for printing an abridged version of the Results of General Synods.52 This did not specifically mean that doctrinal statements were to be abridged or watered down, and in fact Taylor Hamilton was assured by German colleagues that this was not the case.53 Given the theological situation at the time, however, such an assumption would be easy to make. One such proposal, indeed, came not from Germany, but from the English Br. Libbey, which would have replaced the first eight chapters of the Results, including the doctrinal sections, with a mere 21 sentences. This obviously caused great concern.54

1909 General Synod materials in the Moravian Archives, Winston-Salem, North Carolina.

50 Filed with 1909 General Synod materials in the Moravian Archives, Winston-Salem, North Carolina.

51 Letter of February 24, 1909. Filed with 1909 General Synod mate-rials in the Moravian Archives, Winston-Salem, North Carolina.

52 “Beilage” [Appendix] to Herrnhut, 5 June 1908, p. 192. 53 Letter from J. Taylor Hamilton to Edward Rondthaler, October 9,

1908. Filed with 1909 General Synod materials in the Moravian Archives, Winston-Salem, North Carolina.

54 Letter to Bishop Rondthaler from B. LaTrobe, British representative on the Mission Board, April 20, 1908. Filed with 1909 General Synod materials in the Moravian Archives, Winston-Salem, North Carolina. Also in these files is an undated, but presumably 1909,

CONFESSING OUR UNITY IN CHRIST 21 No wonder the Ämtliche Mitteilungen der Missions-Direktion (Official Communications of the Missions Directory), in speak-ing of the “storms which have broken over us” since the last German Synod, said that “a shaking of our foundations seems to threaten.”55 Thus it must have been with some trepidation that the delegates assembled for the General Synod in Herrnhut from May 18 to July 3, 1909. Missions as usual required much attention, but the doctrinal issue also loomed large. Bishop Kenneth Hamilton summarizes the outcome: “Doctrinal ques-tions did in fact provoke a long debate, which it seemed desir-able to continue in closed session. In the end Synod adopted a conservative statement, in harmony with the views long cur-rent in the Church.”56 Other publications of the time give more details. The British Province Moravian Missions publication of August, 1909, contains the observations of a British delegate:

There were misgivings on the part of many concerning our German Theological establishment. Was the old faith maintained there; were the old truths taught? The General Synod decided it would be wise to deal with the question plainly and candidly in a free discussion, and to encourage personal conversation between whiles. . . . The free discussion ended with cross examination. The personal conversations were persistent cross examinations. The present writer is conservative in his views. He holds to a definite historical revelation; he believes that if Christ be not risen our teaching is empty and our faith is vain. He found that the representatives of the theology in question believed the same. If they had spoken as plainly in public as they did in private, a great deal of trouble would have been spared. They had no “heresy” to conceal; it was just the other way. They conscientiously endeavored to conceal their orthodoxy. They were so anxious to be honest that they were positively misleading. It was also perfectly clear that the fundamental “Moravian” doctrine of personal experience was not for a moment in question.57

proposal in German, signed P. Dober, which reduces the doctrinal statement to one page.

55 No. 31 (1909). 56 History, p. 330. 57 p. 154. The author is not named. See above, p. 7, after note 14.

22 CONFESSING OUR UNITY IN CHRIST What the General Synod of 1909 actually did as a result of all this was to reaffirm verbatim the doctrinal statements of the General Synod of 1899 (and thus those of 1879 and 1889). The delegates were so anxious to affirm allegiance to tradi-tional beliefs that they resolved to avoid all changes in the doctrinal section of the Results of the previous General Synod, even changes which did not touch on the substance of faith (except the Unity Directory was empowered to make a few edi-torial changes in printing the Results if necessary).58 Certainly the radical abridgement proposed by some was emphatically rejected. On the other hand, Synod also declined all sugges-tions for expanding this section, not wishing to initiate a proc-ess of adding more and more requirements and restrictions on belief, a result it saw as not only “un-Moravian,” but also as “un-Protestant.”59 It noted that whenever Christians diligently study the Bible, differences of interpretation are inevitable. The value of a theologically trained clergy was affirmed, and teachers were to be allowed to use scientific methods of scholarship. Still, all were expected to make use of the leading of the Holy Spirit, and stress was laid on the fact that the foundation of doctrine is Jesus Christ, the only Savior. The feeling of many delegates was expressed by Bishop Edward Rondthaler in his parting remarks in the British missions magazine: “We are thankful that our evangelical Christian doctrine has been maintained in purity, and we can now all go home with courage for the future of our respective provinces.”60 The crisis of 1909 was over.

58 1909 Results, Part IV “Resolutions and Declarations,” 6-8 (pp. 114-

118). 59 See previous note, p. 115. 60 Moravian Missions, August, 1909, p. 152.


Two World Wars and the Great Depression

The next General Synod met in 1914.61 As usual, the mis-sions and how to pay for them occupied much of the agenda. Doctrinally, this Synod made no change in the Results of 1909. It was hoped to be able to have General Synods more frequently, and another was called for in six to ten years’ time. However, as Bishop Kenneth Hamilton says: “Then before ever the members of Synod could reach home, marching armies be-gan to reshape the face of Europe and the fate of the world.”62 Following the First World War, Unity Conferences were held in 1919 and 1922 to deal with pressing issues that demanded immediate settlement. It was not until May 28, 1931, that a full General Synod could be assembled, and even then the number of delegates was reduced.63 New political circumstances and other factors necessitated the division of the missions work among the various provinces, rather than having one board headquartered in Germany as before. It was decided that at future General Synods, the Southern Province was to be given equal representation with the other “Home Provinces,” because of its 94 percent communicant increase since 1914. Doctrinally, the British Province presented a proposal to shorten drastically the opening chapters of General Synod Results. In this proposal the sections on doctrine are reduced to eight paragraphs, making a single printed page.64 Careful analysis might indicate that what is not said in this is perhaps as significant as what is. In any event, Synod was too pre-occupied with questions of church government and finance to be able to deal with the British proposal. No action was taken on the proposal itself, and the British Province was asked to

61 Hamilton, History, pp. 331-333. 62 History, p. 333. 63 Hamilton, History, p. 337-339. 64 Printed copy in the Moravian Archives, Winston-Salem, North Caro-

lina.

24 CONFESSING OUR UNITY IN CHRIST “give further consideration to this matter,” and to submit any forthcoming proposals to the PECs of the other provinces. Each province was recommended to appoint a committee to examine the proposals to shorten the portions of the General Church Order dealing with doctrine and other basic matters.65 As Bishop Hamilton says: “Unquestionably Synod thus avoided what might well have developed into a heated debate.”66 Another World War intervened before the next General Synod could meet. Following that war, as in 1919 and 1922, Unity Conferences were held to deal with immediate needs in 1946, 1948, and 1953. A full General Synod was called to meet in the Quincentennial year of 1957, and for the first time it assembled in the western hemisphere, in Bethlehem, Penn-sylvania, to be exact.

The General Synod of 1957 and “The Ground of the Unity”

As the delegates to the General Synod gathered in Beth-lehem on August 13, 1957, many challenges lay before them. A General Synod had not met for more than a quarter century, and delegates came from countries that had been on opposing sides in another horrible World War. Would the lingering effects spill over onto the floor of Synod itself?67 Furthermore, this Synod faced the potentially difficult task of restructuring the governing system of the worldwide Unity to allow former mission fields to assume their rightful equal place alongside the old “Home Provinces.” It is evidence of the changing char-acter of the Unity that English, rather than German, was de-clared to be the official language of Synod. In addition, other potentially divisive issues, which some could consider Scrip-

65 General Church Order, 1931. Resolution 1, p. 49. 66 History, p. 339. 67 See J. Kenneth Pfohl, Memorabilia of Salem Congregation, 1931-1961

(Winston-Salem: Moravian Archives, 1993), p. 414.

CONFESSING OUR UNITY IN CHRIST 25 ture to have settled clearly, were slated to come before it. These were the ordination of women and the re-marriage of divorced persons. Besides all this, proposals for revising the official doctrinal statements of the church had to be dealt with.68 In fact, a spirit of harmony prevailed from the opening of Synod. The Czech Province was recognized as a full Unity Province, provision was made for several provinces in Africa and the Caribbean to attain that status before the next Unity Synod (as General Synods were to be called in the future), and a process was begun for still other Provinces to move closer to full equality in Unity Synods and in managing their own Pro-vincial affairs. On some issues, specifically the re-marriage of divorced persons, an absolute consensus could not be reached, and the matter was left for the individual Provinces to decide according to their own particular circumstances.69 The ordination of women was approved “in principle,” but here also the decision of whether to do so was left to the Provinces.70 Interestingly enough, much of the opposition to ordaining women came from the American delegates, and a prominent Northern Province leader was quoted in the Allentown, Pa., Morning Call as saying that women ministers “would not be accepted here.”71 It is, of course, with the formulation of a doctrinal state-ment at the 1957 Synod that we are most concerned. Bishop Hermann G. Steinberg of Zeist in the Netherlands provides a helpful summary of how the document to be known as “The Ground of the Unity” came to be laid before the Synod: The impetus for this

68 For a general description of this Synod’s proceedings and decisions,

see Hamilton, History, pp. 343-345. 69 Minutes of the 1957 General Synod, Resolutions 5 and 6, p. 84.

Mimeographed copy in the Moravian Archives, Winston-Salem, North Carolina.

70 1957 Minutes, Resolutions 7 and 8, pp. 84-85. See also failed mo-tion on p. 86.

71 Wednesday, September 4, 1957.

26 CONFESSING OUR UNITY IN CHRIST

. . .arose in a large measure from the storm, earthquake, and fire through which some of the Provinces of the Unity, particularly Germany, had passed since 1931. The ‘still small voice’ was speaking to those with ears to hear. Attempts were made to express in words what the Spirit was saying to the Church at the Provincial Synods at Bad Boll in 1949 and 1951. The nearer the Quincentenary and the General Synod grew and the more loudly the Unity of tomorrow knocked at our door, the more urgently we saw the necessity of preparing the ground of the future. During 1955 and 1956 a group of Brethren from the continental Province (Europe) gathered to prepare a draft of a doctrinal statement.72

Given the stand taken by the General Synod of 1909 on keeping the old doctrinal statements intact, and the General Synod of 1931’s declining to deal with a new form of doctrinal expression, Bishop Steinberg had reason to write that it seemed a “hazardous enterprise” to propose this new state-ment to the Synod of 1957, for as he observes, other provinces had not gone through the “shattering and almost overwhelm-ing” experiences of the Continental Moravians. Still, as Bishop Kenneth Hamilton notes in his “The Ground of the Unity (an Explanation),” the fact that no changes were made in the doc-trinal sections of the Results of several previous Synods was not because everyone in the church was satisfied with the current forms, but rather because no specific form proposed could be agreed upon by a majority of the delegates to those Synods.73 Bishop Steinberg attributes to the working of the

72 “The Ground of the Unity,” Moravian Messenger (British Province),

December, 1957, p. 3. In this light, a comparison of “The Ground of the Unity” with the “Declaration of Barmen” (1934), in which some German Protestants affirmed loyalty to God over loyalty to human government, as the Nazis demanded, would be valuable.

73 p. 1. Typescript (mimeographed) in the Moravian Archives, Winston-Salem, North Carolina. Bishop Hamilton in his History, p. 344, says surprisingly little about “The Ground of the Unity” and does not refer to it by name. Hamilton’s “Explanation” says the last major doctrinal change was in 1889. This must be a typographical error (repeated later), for in his History (p. 321), he says that 1889 left the doctrinal section “essentially unchanged,” but does note that changes were made in 1879 (p. 319). The version in the History is in accord with the 1889 Results, and in its Resolutions (p. 2) that Synod “confesses anew” the doctrinal chapter as it

CONFESSING OUR UNITY IN CHRIST 27 Holy Spirit the fact that in the new situation of 1957 the Gen-eral Synod did approve the new statement, and Bishop Hamil-ton agrees:

. . .the fact that in 1957 the representatives of our world-wide Unity were of one heart and mind in matters of the faith and adopted the new document without a single dissenting vote, may be recognized as the over-ruling of the Holy Spirit and as a gift of grace to our Church from its Chief Elder and Head.74

After the Synod’s doctrinal committee revised and edited the document as to language,75 the General Synod of 1957 in its sessions 26 and 27 on September 2nd and 3rd read and approved each section of the document separately.76 Hamilton says that the full Synod made only one change in the doctrinal committee’s revised draft. This apparently involved dropping a statement on the place of the episcopacy in the “Conclusion” and adding the reference to the Headship of Christ experienced on September 16th and November 13th, 1741.77 Here, as so often before, the Moravian Church exalts Christ, and all else, even that which is dearest to us, is put in second place. As Bishop Steinberg says:

And so it was that a Statement was adopted which attempts to say in the terms of our own day what the Lord’s will is for the Church Universal and for the Unitas Fratrum. Synod gave to this statement the title of ‘The Ground of the Unity’. This name indicates the twofold meaning of the document. First, it points to the one unchanging ground upon which, by God’s grace, our Unity has been founded. Second, it points to the living ground in which our Church is rooted and springs continually into fruit. It

stood. Note, however, in regard to the statement in History, p. 319, it was 1857 which actually added the “sixth point,” and 1879 added the “seventh” and “eighth.”

74 “Explanation,” p. 1. 75 The British Moravian Archives has kindly furnished a photocopy of

the working copy with changes written in by A. J. Lewis, secretary of the doctrinal committee.

76 1957 Minutes, pp. 61-67. 77 “Explanation,” pp. 1, 8. The 1957 minutes themselves (p. 67) note

only that after the adoption of its sections, the whole first partial report of the doctrinal committee “as amended” was adopted. The minutes give final results, not what the precise amendment was.


points to the very foundation and to the fertile ground-spring at one and the same time.78

Steinberg also goes on to note that Synod directed that “this Statement or Creed should be sent to all congregations of the world-wide Unity, to be read and considered in all the varied languages and in one spirit of adoration, of joy and dedica-tion.”79 Bishop Hamilton notes that the new statement is only about one third the length of the one it replaces in the Results (Unity Book of Order). He continues:

In the second place, the 1957 document represents what is in the main a doctrine of the Church. It contains no specific summaries, for example, of the doctrines of God, of universal depravity, of the two natures of Christ, of the function of the Holy Spirit, of good works as the fruit of the Spirit, of sanctification, or of the resurrection of the dead. Yet much of what was included under these specific doctrines is implied and preserved in the more general terms which the new statement employs.80

“The Ground of the Unity” indeed employs different terms to express itself than did the eight “truths” or doctrinal state-ments that preceded it. Now the section on Scripture comes not first (as in 1782, 1909, etc.), but later in the document, and in its entirety it reads:

The Holy Scriptures of both the Old and New Testaments are and abide the only source and rule of the faith, doctrine, and life of the Unitas Fratrum. The Unitas Fratrum realizes that the mystery of Jesus Christ to which the Bible bears witness cannot be fully comprehended in any human statement. Yet the Holy Spirit makes God’s purpose of salvation sufficiently plain in the Old and New Testaments. The Unitas Fratrum recognizes the Word of the Cross to be the center of the Holy Scriptures and of evangelical preaching. Its main

78 Moravian Messenger, December, 1957, p. 3. 79 These are his words. The 1957 minutes themselves, p. 67, are less

effusive: “. . .the Unity Synod recommends to the Provincial Boards that the document ‘The Ground of the Unity’ shall be communicated to all congregations, especially by the ministers concerned, that it might be carefully considered by every member of the Unity. Carried 28-3.”

80 “Explanation,” p. 1.


commission and its reason for existence is to witness unfailingly to these glad tidings. We pray our Lord for strength never to desist from doing so.81

Bishop Hamilton says of this whole section on “God’s Word and Doctrine”:

In formulating the doctrine of the Holy Scriptures, it seems to me that the Synod of 1957 held particularly closely to the thoughts contained in our former doctrinal statement. The essential ideas in this paragraph are two: an unequivocal dependence of the Church upon the Holy Scriptures as the source and touchstone82 of the faith we hold, and the realization that there are mysteries dealt with in the Bible which we can neither completely grasp nor satisfactorily formulate in our teaching. Moravians hold that God has spoken to man plainly enough for our needs, and that central in His Word stands the doctrine of the Saviour’s vicarious death.83

“The Ground of the Unity” speaks of eternal things, but it is also very much grounded in the world in which we live, and is a product of its time. As always, Bishop Hamilton’s observa-tions are instructive:

Finally, “The Ground of the Unity” stresses the central im-portance of that service which the Church is called to render to its Lord and to its fellow-man. You will search in vain for any comparable emphasis in the parallel document of 1889. No doubt this feature reflects the tragic experiences of our Church and of all Christendom in the first half of the 20th Century, together with the deep consciousness of the failure of the Church to fulfill its function as Christ’s body on earth. It seems to me quite possible, however, that future Synods may judge that there is an overstress at this point and that it would be desirable for the Unity to underline other phases also of the mission of our Unity as a part of the Universal Church.84

In fact, changes have been made to “The Ground of the Unity.” The Unity Synod of 1981 added a section on “Personal Belief” and rearranged the second paragraph of the section on

81 Church Order of the Unitas Fratrum, Bethlehem, Pa., 1957, Part I, ¶4, pp. 11-12.

82 This word “touchstone” seems to be a particularly apposite render-ing for the German “Richtschnur” used in earlier statements.

83 “Explanation,” p. 3. 84 “Explanation,” p. 1.

30 CONFESSING OUR UNITY IN CHRIST “God’s Word and Doctrine.”85 The most recent change came in 1995 when Unity Synod saw a need to state more precisely in the section on “God’s Word and Doctrine” what truly defines our life. Now it is not merely the “Holy Scriptures,” but “the Triune God as revealed in the Holy Scripture” who is “the only source of our life and salvation.” Having again proclaimed that the Word of the Cross is the center of Holy Scripture, the 1995 Synod added that “we look to two millennia of ecumenical Christian tradition and the wisdom of our Moravian forebears in the faith to guide us as we pray for fuller understanding and ever clearer proclamation of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.”

Conclusion Thus “The Ground of the Unity” is printed in the Unity Book of Order as our church’s official statement on doctrine. As such, it stands in a long line of Moravian doctrinal state-ments over the centuries. In these, the church in each period of its history has sought to give expression in its own time to God’s eternal truth revealed for our salvation. The form, wording, and emphases may have varied, though we trust that the central core has remained firm. In these doctrinal statements the same two themes appear, which Bishop Kenneth Hamilton found in “The Ground of the Unity.” First, the church has ever firmly fixed its doctrinal statements in Scripture as their starting point, whether it used the terms ground, rule, source, or “norm,” to quote Bishop Schweinitz on the first confession of the ancient Unity, or “touchstone,” as Kenneth Hamilton said of the last. Second, they do not claim to be the immutable expression of all of theology for all time, and they affirm that dedicated Christians may differ in their interpretation of specific Scriptural pas-sages. Yet these doctrinal statements do point people clearly, unequivocally, and unashamedly to Jesus Christ, our Savior

85 Church Order of the Unitas Fratrum, Herrnhut,1981, Part I, §4, pp.

11-12. See appendix for the full text.

CONFESSING OUR UNITY IN CHRIST 31 and only Redeemer for all, and they insist that true faith must manifest itself in lives of loving service and humble yet joyful hope. As always, it is in our liturgies and hymns that these truths receive their most usual and public expression. We in our generation, like all generations of Moravians, must wrestle with how to live out our life in the Christ revealed through Scripture by divine grace. Also, as Bishop Hamilton implies above, future Unity Synods may choose to revise or rewrite completely our doctrinal statement again to highlight other aspects that need stress in their own time. As we have seen, that would be a very “Moravian” thing to do. However this may be, I humbly trust and pray that the central focus of any future formulations will remain as ever before, firmly grounded in the conviction expressed also in “The Ground of the Unity”:

With the whole of Christendom we share faith in God the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. We believe and confess that God has revealed Himself once and for all in His Son Jesus Christ; that our Lord has redeemed us with the whole of humanity by His death and His resurrection; and that there is no salvation apart from Him. We believe that He is present with us in the Word and the Sacrament; that He directs and unites us through His Spirit and thus forms us into a Church. We hear Him summoning us to follow Him, and pray Him to use us in His service. He joins us together mutually, so that knowing ourselves to be members of His body we become willing to serve each other.86

Or, as is so simply yet powerfully stated in the traditional words of our Lenten Liturgy:

“Christ and Him crucified remain our confession of faith!”

86 Church Order of the Unitas Fratrum, Bethlehem, Pa.,1957, Part I, ¶2,

p. 11, and Church Order of the Unitas Fratrum, Herrnhut,1981, Part I, §2, p. 11. The passage quoted is from a later printing.


Appendix

The Ground of the Unity

A doctrinal statement adopted by

the Unity Synod of the Unitas Fratrum, or Moravian Church,

held at Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, August 13 to 25, 1995

The Lord Jesus Christ calls His Church into being so that it may serve Him on earth until He comes. The Unitas Fratrum is, therefore, aware of its being called in faith to serve human-ity by proclaiming the Gospel of Jesus Christ. It recognizes this call to be the source of its being and the inspiration of its service. As is the source, so is the aim and end of its being based upon the will of its Lord.

The Belief of the Church With the whole of Christendom we share faith in God the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. We believe and confess that God has revealed Himself once and for all in His Son Jesus Christ; that our Lord has redeemed us with the whole of humanity by His death and His resurrection; and that there is no salvation apart from Him. We believe that He is present with us in the Word and the Sacrament; that He directs and unites us through His Spirit and thus forms us into a Church. We hear Him summoning us to follow Him, and pray Him to use us in His service. He joins us together mutually, so that

CONFESSING OUR UNITY IN CHRIST 33 knowing ourselves to be members of His body we become willing to serve each other. In the light of divine grace, we recognize ourselves to be a Church of sinners. We require forgiveness daily, and live only through the mercy of God in Christ Jesus our Lord. He re-deems us from our isolation and unites us into a living Church of Jesus Christ.

Personal Belief The belief of the Church is effected and preserved through the testimony of Jesus Christ and through the work of the Holy Spirit. This testimony calls each individual personally, and leads him/her to the recognition of sin and to the accep-tance of the redemption achieved by Christ. In fellowship with Him the love of Christ becomes more and more the power of the new life, power which penetrates and shapes the entire person. As God’s Spirit so effects living belief in the hearts of individuals, He grants them the privilege to share in the fruits of Christ’s salvation and membership in His body.

God’s Word and Doctrine The Triune God as revealed in the Holy Scripture of the Old and New Testaments is the only source of our life and salva-tion; and this Scripture is the sole standard of the doctrine and faith of the Unitas Fratrum and therefore shapes our life. The Unitas Fratrum recognizes the Word of the Cross as the center of Holy Scripture and of all preaching of the Gospel, and it sees its primary mission, and its reason for being, to consist in bearing witness to this joyful message. We ask our Lord for power never to stray from this. The Unitas Fratrum takes part in the continual search for sound doctrine. In interpreting Scripture and in the commu-nication of doctrine in the Church, we look to two millennia of

34 CONFESSING OUR UNITY IN CHRIST ecumenical Christian tradition and the wisdom of our Mora-vian forebears in the faith to guide us as we pray for fuller understanding and ever clearer proclamation of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. But just as the Holy Scripture does not contain any doctrinal system, so the Unitas Fratrum also has not developed any of its own because it knows that the mystery of Jesus Christ, which is attested to in the Bible, cannot be com-prehended completely by any human mind or expressed com-pletely in any human statement. Also it is true that through the Holy Spirit the recognition of God’s will for salvation in the Bible is revealed completely and clearly.

Creeds and Confessions The Unitas Fratrum recognizes in the creeds of the Church the thankful acclaim of the Body of Christ. These creeds aid the Church in formulating a Scriptural confession, in marking the boundary of heresies, and in exhorting believers to an obedient and fearless testimony in every age. The Unitas Fratrum maintains that all creeds formulated by the Christian Church stand in need of constant testing in the light of the Holy Scripture. It acknowledges as such true professions of faith the early Christian witness: “Jesus Christ is Lord!” and also especially the ancient Christian creeds and the funda-mental creeds of the Reformation.*

* Note: In the various Provinces of the Renewed Unitas Fratrum the

following creeds in particular gained special importance, because in them the main doctrines of the Christian faith find clear and simple expression:

The Apostles’ Creed The Athanasian Creed The Nicene Creed The Confession of the Unity of the Bohemian Brethren of 1535 The Twenty-One Articles of the unaltered Augsburg Confession The Shorter Catechism of Martin Luther The Synod of Berne of 1532 The Thirty-Nine Articles of the Church of England The Theological Declaration of Barmen of 1934 The Heidelberg Catechism


The Unitas Fratrum as a Unity We believe in and confess the Unity of the Church given in the one Lord Jesus Christ as God and Savior. He died that He might unite the scattered children of God. As the living Lord and Shepherd, He is leading his flock toward such unity. The Unitas Fratrum espoused such unity when it took over the name of the Old Bohemian Brethren’s Church, “Unitas Fratrum” (Unity of Brethren). Nor can we ever forget the powerful unifying experience granted by the crucified and risen Lord to our forebears in Herrnhut on the occasion of the Holy Communion of August 13, 1727, in Berthelsdorf. It is the Lord’s will that Christendom should give evidence of and seek unity in Him with zeal and love. In our own midst we see how such unity has been promised us and laid upon us as a charge. We recognize that through the grace of Christ the different churches have received many gifts. It is our desire that we may learn from each other and rejoice together in the riches of the love of Christ and the manifold wisdom of God. We confess our share in the guilt which is manifest in the severed and divided state of Christendom. By means of such divisions we ourselves hinder the message and power of the Gospel. We recognize the danger of self-righteousness and judging others without love. Since we together with all Christendom are pilgrims on the way to meet our coming Lord, we welcome every step that brings us nearer the goal of unity in Him. He himself invites us to communion in His supper. Through it He leads the Church toward that union which He has promised. By means of His presence in the Holy Communion He makes our unity in Him evident and certain even today.

The Church as a Fellowship The Church of Jesus Christ, despite all the distinctions be-tween male and female, poor and rich, and people of different ethnic origin, is one in the Lord. The Unitas Fratrum recog-

36 CONFESSING OUR UNITY IN CHRIST nizes no distinction between those who are one in the Lord Jesus. We are called to testify that God in Jesus Christ brings His people out of every ethnic origin and language into one body, pardons sinners beneath the Cross and brings them together. We oppose any discrimination in our midst because of ethnic origin, sex, or social standing, and we regard it as a commandment of the Lord to bear public witness to this and to demonstrate by word and deed that we are brothers and sisters in Christ.

The Church as a Community of Service Jesus Christ came not to be served but to serve. From this, His Church receives its mission and its power for its service, to which each of its members is called. We believe that the Lord has called us particularly to mission service among the peoples of the world. In this, and in all other forms of service both at home and abroad, to which the Lord commits us, He expects us to confess Him and witness to His love in unselfish service.

Serving Our Neighbor Our Lord Jesus entered into this world’s misery to bear it and to overcome it. We seek to follow Him in serving His brothers and sisters. Like the love of Jesus, this service knows no bounds. Therefore we pray the Lord ever anew to point out to us the way to reach our neighbors, opening our hearts and hands to them in their need.

Serving the World Jesus Christ maintains in love and faithfulness His com-mitment to this fallen world. Therefore we must remain con-cerned for this world. We may not withdraw from it through indifference, pride or fear. Together with the universal Chris-tian Church, the Unitas Fratrum challenges humanity with the

CONFESSING OUR UNITY IN CHRIST 37 message of the love of God, striving to promote the peace of the world and seeking to attain what is best for all. For the sake of this world, the Unitas Fratrum hopes for and looks to the day when the victory of Christ will be manifest over sin and death and the new world will appear.

Conclusion Jesus Christ is the one Lord and Head of His body, the Church. Because of this, the Church owes no allegiance to any authority whatsoever which opposes His dominion. The Unitas Fratrum treasures in its history the vital experience of the Headship of Christ of September 16 and November 13, 1741. The Unitas Fratrum recognizes that is it called into being and has been sustained hitherto only by the incomprehensible grace of God. Thanksgiving and praise for this grace remains the keynote of its life and ministry. In this spirit it awaits the appearing of Jesus Christ, goes forward to meet its Lord with joy, and prays to be found ready when He comes.


Essential Features of the Unity

The Unitas Fratrum and Its Congregations The Unitas Fratrum was called into being by God as a Church which stresses fellowship. After its apparent destruc-tion in the land of its origin, it was renewed in Herrnhut, Germany. We recognize that it is the Lord’s will to confront and call to Himself each individual through His Spirit and that formal membership in a congregation is for no one a substitute for a personal encounter with the Savior, nor does it relieve any from making a personal decision to accept Him. We learn from the Scripture, however, that it has pleased God to make the Church the place where God’s fellowship with men and women becomes a reality. A living Church is the clearest witness for its Lord to the world. A Church is and remains a living one when it:

• is attentive to God’s Word, • confesses its sins and accepts forgiveness for them, • seeks and maintains fellowship with its Lord and

Redeemer by means of the sacraments, • places its whole life under His rule and daily leading, • ministers to its neighbor and seeks fellowship with all

who confess Christ, • proclaims to the world the tidings concerning the Savior, • awaits wholeheartedly the coming of its Lord as King.

Within each congregation the various groups may become aware of, and participate in, the special gifts and tasks which can be drawn from the pattern of Jesus’ life on earth. Such congregations are “living stones” out of which the Lord will build His Church on earth. Wherever such congregations exist in the various parts of the Unitas Fratrum they form a living Church — a member of the body of Christ on earth.

CONFESSING OUR UNITY IN CHRIST 39 Communicant members of the Unitas Fratrum are those who have been received in one of the following ways:

• baptized and received into communicant membership by confirmation,

• received by adult baptism, • received from other Christian churches by letter of

transfer and by the right hand of fellowship, • received by reaffirmation of faith.

The Vocation of the Unitas Fratrum and Its Congregations The Unitas Fratrum lives by the gifts which the Lord has given His Church on earth: His Word and the sacraments of Baptism and Holy Communion. Its vocation is to proclaim His Word to its congregations and to the world and to administer the sacraments aright. The Unitas Fratrum considers it to be its mission to emphasize especially the following truths from the fullness of the Word of God:

• the Word of the Cross as the testimony of the Lord who was crucified for us and who rose again (1 Cor. 1:18,30);

• the Word of reconciliation as God making peace with His whole creation (1 John 2:2);

• the Word of personal union with the Savior as the vitalizing and molding power of the believer’s life (John 15:5);

• the Word of love between one another as the fellowship of members brought about by Jesus Christ, the Head of His Church (Eph. 4:15,16).

Baptism into the death of Jesus is administered in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit in the presence of the congregation. Customarily in the Unitas Fra-trum children are baptized and later received by confirmation into the communicant membership. In the celebration of the Lord’s Supper, the congregations of the Unitas Fratrum have the assurance of being united with their Lord, enjoy the fruits of His sufferings and death for the forgiveness of sins, unite with each other anew as members of His body, and rejoice in the hope of His return in glory.

40 CONFESSING OUR UNITY IN CHRIST From its beginning the Unitas Fratrum has emphasized fellowship among its members. It recognizes its calling to pre-serve this gift both by united adoration, self humiliation and intercession, and by ordering its life and service:

• as a fellowship within the congregation and with the Unitas Fratrum,

• as a fellowship with the Universal Church of Christ on earth,

• as a fellowship with the Church Triumphant before the Throne.

As a fellowship of the redeemed it extols the Lamb with joy-ful song. As a fellowship looking into the future it proclaims to the world the victory of Him who is to come. In the liturgical form of its services the Unitas Fratrum gives expression to its union with the whole Church of Christ on earth, and as a living fellowship it will create ever new forms within the frame-work of its own tradition. In this fellowship the Unitas Fratrum has received a new and transformed congregation life,

• in which Jesus Christ is Lord of every phase of life, • in which we live no longer unto ourselves but unto Him

who died for us and rose again, • in which we rejoice in the hope of His glorious return, • in which the congregation and its members are willing to

share the sufferings of Christ. We recognize our responsibility to the civil authorities in so far as human law does not contradict the “government of the Savior.” The life in the congregations of the Unitas Fratrum is not the fruit of its own piety but of the love of Christ which con-strains those who are His to love one another. The new life of the congregation is nourished by the cure and care of souls and the exercise of congregational discipline. Though the cure and care of souls is the special task of the ministers and their fellow-laborers, every member who has ex-perienced the saving love of the Redeemer is called to under-take this service.

CONFESSING OUR UNITY IN CHRIST 41 In Church discipline the sins and errors of the individual are considered and borne as the burden of the whole congre-gation. The congregation stands beside the erring one under the judgment of the Cross, ever mindful of its own need of forgiveness, and brings the fault before the only One Who can redeem us from our guilt. Church discipline is exercised in the confident faith that it is not the Lord’s will that a single member should be lost, nor that the clear witness of the congregation should be hindered. This discipline is especially necessary when by word or deed the gospel is falsified and the Lord denied. Therefore, the main object of Church discipline is the prevention of offenses and not the punishment of the individual. In the exercise of corrective discipline the following aspects are recognized:

• brotherly admonition by the minister, either alone or in fellowship with other members (Church Council, Elders, etc.) in private, in a spirit of love;

• further admonition with temporary suspension from the fellowship of the congregation as it is visibly expressed in certain privileges;

• exclusion from the membership of the congregation; • persons who are excluded shall be welcomed back into

the membership of the congregation after a profession of repentance on their part.

The Unitas Fratrum recognizes the priesthood of all believ-ers but also has specially appointed ministers who receive commission and authority for their service from the hands of Jesus Christ, Whom the Church acknowledges as its Chief Elder. All members may gladly and confidently carry on their work in and for the congregation, and by their devotion and faithfulness all can render service to the whole Church. At the same time the Unitas Fratrum gratefully ac-knowledges the gift of the offices of the ministry which it has received from the Lord. It recognizes and confesses that in reality it is its Lord and Head, Jesus Christ, Who calls and ordains, whether in the case of the reception as an acolyte, or

42 CONFESSING OUR UNITY IN CHRIST the ordination to the office of deacon, or the consecration as a presbyter or bishop. The same is true for the brothers and sisters who are called or elected to service in any official capacity. They can render their service well only through the grace of their Chief Elder.

The Witness of the Unitas Fratrum

The Unitas Fratrum is committed to the unity of the chil-dren of God as a reality created by God in Jesus Christ. This unity has been granted and preserved within it as a Church formed out of various peoples, languages, and denominations. Its very life, therefore, is to be of service to the Church Uni-versal. The Unitas Fratrum is committed to the victory of the Lamb of God that was slain as the hope of the world. It accepts as its central commission the proclamation of this message in every place where the Lord Himself opens the door. The Unitas Fratrum acknowledges its vocation to service in the homelands:

• to bring the gospel to those who are far from God; • to serve the youth by means of schools, camps, and other

agencies; • to serve in caring for the sick, for the aged, and for those

in special homes; • and to serve by means of the printed word, especially the

Daily Texts of the Moravian Church. The Unitas Fratrum experiences in its missionary enter-prise active help from wide circles throughout all evangelical Christendom through prayer, gifts, and individuals ready to serve. In this way also the unity of the children of God be-comes visible. The Unitas Fratrum appreciates the inestimable value of each human being for whom Jesus Christ gave His Life and counts no sacrifice too great to “win souls for the Lamb.” The Unitas Fratrum recognizes that its members are united by the Lord in congregations and are called to be pilgrims and messengers to carry the Gospel to all people and

CONFESSING OUR UNITY IN CHRIST 43 into all human relationships. The “first fruits” of their witness are the pledge of the whole harvest. The Unitas Fratrum recognizes its duty to grant the young churches full freedom concerning the future. God’s Spirit must and will show them whether to remain a part of the Unitas Fratrum as a Province of the Unity, or to become a self-dependent church, or to unite with some other indigenous church or church group. The Unitas Fratrum looks beyond this earthly witness of the Church to the great consummation when the Lord will “draw all people unto Himself” and His Kingdom be fully estab-lished.

Moravian Archives 457 S. Church Street

Winston-Salem, North Carolina 27101 www.MoravianArchives.org

336-722-1742