BRETHREN-L Archives

Archiver > BRETHREN > 2004-11 > 1100879499


From: "Dwayne Wrightsman" <>
Subject: Re: [BRE] COB and OGBB
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 10:51:39 -0500
References: <e8.6c2386b.2ecf66cb@aol.com>


Jim,

Thanks, now I am satisfied; my question has been answered. Indeed I was
confused. So the main branch was trying to "conserve" what was "new." The
OGBB wanted to "reestablish" what was "old." And it took time (a couple of
decades or more?) for all of this to reach the boiling point. But, just as
I originally expected, the labels (nouns formed out of adjectives) for the
two groups were to distinguish between the "Old-Orders" and the
"Neo-Conservatives." Too bad they didn't use that wonderful prefix "neo" to
clarify things for me.

Incidentally, if anyone wants to read about the effects of the divide on one
church and its member families, I highly recommend reading Lela M Shoup, "A
Brief History of the Donnels Creek Old German Baptist Church," 1976,
especially pages 12-20. It goes into detail about how individual members of
certain families had to struggle with which way to go, and how they tried to
get along as blood family while the church family was falling apart.

Dwayne


----- Original Message -----
From: <>
To: <>
Sent: Friday, November 19, 2004 10:10 AM
Subject: Re: [BRE] COB and OGBB


> Dwayne,
> Perhaps you are confused. Some of the issues that was the basis of the
> division such as Sunday school, protracted meetings, higher education,
> forming
> of Districts had already become part of the church. At the first separate
> Annual meeting held in 1882 by OGBB action was to strike out all decisions
> " That
> gave encourgament to changes and deviations from the old established order
> and
> practice of the church."
>
> The OGBB wanted to regress to their former practice.
>
> Article 5. of the 1882 OGBB annual meeting minutes reads "Inasmuch as we
> are
> much opposed, since the division, by some of the so-called "conservative"
> and
> "progressive" brethren, upon what conditions can we admit such into the
> church
> in case any should change their minds and wish to stand with us in the old
> faith and principles of the church?"
>
> I cannot explain why those terms were used except they appear in the
> offical
> minutes in 1882.
>
> Jim Denlinger
>
>
> ==== BRETHREN Mailing List ====
> 7 ------------------------
> Join The Fellowship Of Brethren Genealogists (FOBG)
> Our Sponsoring Agency
> For further information contact Ron McAdams
> mailto:
> ------------------------
>

This thread: