Reuben A Torrey American Fundamenatlist 1856-1928

INFORMATION TO USERS

A primary purpose of this dissertation is to reconstruct the life of the prominent American religious fundamentalist Reuben Archer Torrey (1856-1928), a task made difficult because Torrey's family destroyed his letters and diaries after his death. Therefore, this paper relies heavily upon letters preserved by the recipients and upon other primary source materials now located in the archives of the Moody Bible Institute of Chicago and the Bible Institute' of Los Angeles, in addition to Torrey's many published works.
Focusing attention on Torrey's life leads to clearer insights about the fundamentalist movement that may go unnoticed when viewing the movement in a macroscopic fashion. It is the fusion of Torrey's family background, his personal religious experience, and his grounding in

Torrey's secular education in Baconian science and Scottish Common Sense philosophy at Yale College reflected and reenforced the thinking of nineteenth-century Americans that there were immutable, fixed principles in the world-that man could know absolute truth. Accepting this nineteenth-century view, Torrey discovered absolute truth in an inerrant Bible that he understood to be God's message to all people. Torrey's high regard for the Bible led him to become associated with the Moody Bible Institute and the Bible Institute of Los Angeles, two schools where the Bible served as the foundation for the educational system. Not willing to be confined to an academic setting, Torrey carried the message of the Bible to the world as a successful evangelist. From 1902 to 1905, Torrey sailed around the world promoting the spirit of world-wide revival and in the process won 100,000 converts to Christianity.
While winning people to Christ was the passion of Torrey's life that consumed most of his energies, at times he applied biblical standards to world events. When the "war to end all wars" began in 1914, Torrey and the magazine that he edited, The King's Business, vehemently opposed United States involvement in the war while concomitantly

At the end of World War I, the fundamentalist controversies of the 1920s, one concerning the Reverend Harry Emerson Fosdick and the other concerning the teaching of evolution in Tennessee schools, gained the attention of the national media. These sensationalized events, however, made little impression on the aging Torrey: he continued single-mindedly to conduct revival meetings and to ferret out heresy within fundamentalist ranks until his death in 1928.

The prominent church historien Kenneth Scott Latourette has described the period from 1815 to 1914 as the greatest century for the expansion of Christianity into Asia, the Americas, the Pacific, and Africa. 1 A similar observation can be made about the expansion of Christianity on a lesser scale in the United States during the same period of time when pioneers built churches, established missionary societies, and founded Christian colleges on the fr9ntier. An important reason for this two-track development of Christianity was the missionary zeal of American Protestant evangelicals who wanted to share the biblical truths of their Christianity with the "heathen" overseas as well as with their unconverted neighbors at home.
Protestant evangelicalism centered on the idea of saving individual souls through a sudden, and usually emotional, conversion experience that reduced the
lKenneth Scott Latourette, A History of the Expansion of Christianity, vol. 5: The Great Century in the Americas, Australasia, and Africa, A.D. 1800-A.D. 1914 (New York: Harper & Row, Publishers, 1943; reprint ed., Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Publishing House, 1971), p. 470.

The significance of revivalism in American society cannot be understood by simply looking at the phenomenon itself; it is essential also to comprehend the intellectual support and legitimacy given evangelicalism by the intellectual milieu of the time. During the first half of the nineteenth century a friendly alliance existed between Protestant evangelicalism, Baconian science, and Scottish Common Sense philosophy, because of a common adherence to empiricism. The Scottish philosophy affirmed the trustworthiness of a person's senses to perceive the world; Baconian science stressed observation for determining facts; and evangelicalism looked for a changed life in a converted individual. Empiricism's focus on observation gave it an anti-theoretical bent that helped Protestant evangelicalism defend the validity of the conversion
2perry Miller, The Life of the Mind in America from the Revolution to the Civil War (New York: Harcourt, Brace & World, Inc., 1965; A Harvest Book), p. 7.

This orderly and comprehensi~le world view began to disintegrate when the philosophy of Immanuel Kant gained influence in the United States around 1850. 3 Unlike Common Sense philosophy, Kantian philosophy emphasized man's inability to grasp the truths of the world; Kant's belief that each individual projected mental constructs upon his environment destroyed the notion of a fixed, static world. Furthering this Kantian idea of a world in continuous flux were Charles Darwin and his book The Origin of the Species, published in 1859. What Kant had done in philosophy Darwin accomplished in the 8cientific world by promoting developmental or evolutionary theory as opposed to an acceptance of Baconian science's absolute truths. Darwinian develop-mentalism also pervaded the religious realm: the Congregational minister Horace Bushnell and numerous German biblical critics questioned respectively evangelical truths
3Herbert Hovenkamp, Science and Religion in America, 1800-1860 (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1978), p. 45.

In the midst of this intellectual upheaval moving away from an acceptance of absolutes, there were many people who defied the new trend in American thinking. One individual who lived during this change and resisted it was the evangelist and educator, the Reverend Reuben A. Torrey (1856-1928). Educated in Baconian science and Scottish Common Sense philosophy at Yale, Torrey, throughout his life, unwaveringly held to these beliefs4--in addition to affirming the value of evangelical revivalism. Because he held these religious, scientific, and philosophical beliefs of the nineteenth century, Torrey, in a sense, can be
4George M. Marsden in Fundamentalism and American Culture; The Shaping of Twentieth Century Evangelicalism: 1870-1925 (New York: Oxford University Press, 1980), pp. 14-17, 56, & 225, makes clear that Baconian science and Scottish Common Sense philosophy, that Torrey accepted as an individual, were important ingredients of the larger twentieth-century fundamentalist movement in which Torrey was to become an important leader.

Torrey's devotion to beliefs that posited absolute truth appealed to many Americans who were caught up in the frenzy of economic and social change that began after the Civil War and continued into the twentieth century. Spurred on by the Civil War, the United States began the agonizing experience of transforming itself from an agrarian society of individualistic farmers to an industrial society in which workers conformed to the time-clock and the whims of the market place.
In pre-industrial America, farmers had lived in relative isolation from the'world at large, a condition fostering the spirit of individualism and self reliance. A primary element of this belief system was the notion that people were responsible for their actions; farmers, for example, within the limits of weather, were responsible for their own successes and failures. This stress on individual accountability began to change in the years following the Civil War because the farming community began to suffer economically from low prices due to over production, falling income, and indebtedness. S Instead of assuming primary responsibility for their plight, many farmers blamed the banks and the railroads. This shifting
SRoss M. Robertson, History of the American Economy, 2nd ed. (New York: Harcourt, Brace, & World, Inc., 1964), pp. 261-262.

As farm people arrived in the cities from the countryside they experienced culture shock in confronting the impersonality of the large cities, cities which were continually increasing in size. From 1870 to 1900, New York City grew from 1.4 million people to 3.4 million. Similar gains in population also occurred in Minneapolis, which increased from 18,080 to 202,718, in Chicago (from 298,000 to 1.7 million), and in Los Angeles. (from 5,700 to 102,000). This rapid population growth created enormous problems in the areas of sanitation and housing. By the 1870s few of the largest American cities had underground sewers; most city dwellers relied upon privies and cesspools. Housing for the burgeoning population ranged from small, cramped tenements to large, comfortable apartments; there was, however, always a lack of privacy. Beyond the environmental problems of urban life, there were the many new aspects of life in the city that directly challenged the

One new way of life was that of the wage earner who sold his labor at fixed prices~ In 1870 relatively few Americans worked for wages, but by 1900 two-thirds of all American workers did so.6 In the cities many of these wage earners were employed in factories, working ten or more hours a day performing monotonous tasks that usually did not ~equire special skills. Factory regimentation contributed to a loss of individualism and self reliance as workers became wholly dependent upon others for their jobs. Apologists for the new order pointed with pride to how far America had moved toward becoming an industrialized country after the Civil War. By 1890, manufacturing in dollar value was greater than agricultural output; by 1900 the annual value of manufacturers was more than double that of agricultural products. The United States was the leading industrial power of the world.' To achieve this ranking required economic sacrifice from factory workers who had to endure reduced wages and unemployment as recessions and depressions racked the economy.
6David Burner, Eugene D. Genovese, and Forrest McDonald, The American People (St. James, New York: Revisionary Press, 1980), p. 358; cf., Henry F. May, Protestant Churches and Industrial America (New York: Harper & Brothers Publishers, 1949).
'Robertson, History of the American Economy,

Between 1870 and 1900, 12 million immigrants arrived in the United States searching for a new beginning, many of them settling in the industrial centers of New England, the middle Atlantic states, Ohio, Michigan, and Illinois•. Success came to many of these new arrivals; 1890 figures reveal that while immigrants were 14.5% of the population, they made up 26% of the working force. To many Americans this accomplishment was brought about at the expense of keeping wages down (to the delight of businessmen) and depriving native-born Americans of jobs. 9 Ideas such as these fostered resentment against the newcomers. After 1885 the character of immigration shifted away from the traditional areas of Northern and Western Europe to Central-Eastern and Southern Europe. The new breed of immigrants, much different from that of earlier years, came from non-English speaking, Catholic countries and
8Edward Chase Kirkland, Dream and Thought in the Business Community, 1860-1900 (Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press, 1956; reprint ed., Chicago: Quadrangle Books, 1964; Quadrangle Paperbacks), p. 7.
9Robertson, History of the American Economy, p. 393.

The new values and cultures of the immigrants collided head-on with American values that were in a state of flux because the country was moving away from an agrarian society of small farms to an industrialized society of big cities and big factories. In the midst of this economic and social upheaval, many Americans experienced problems of value clarification. One remedy for this disorientation was a conservative evangelicalism, promising absolute answers and accompanied by a heightened sense of doctrine. Helping to provide these answers was Reuben A. Torrey, who served as a spokesman and authority figure (as a Yale-educated minister) for the propagation of conservative evangelical ideas during the last decade of the nineteenth cent?ry and the first quarter of the twentieth century, ideas that were to become an important ingredient of a mix that became the fundamentalist ideology of the 1920s. Through his writings, his teaching, and his evangelistic work, Torrey convincingly appealed to the concerns and anxieties of many Americans who wanted fixed, absolute principles in the midst of intellectual and social change. The nature of Torrey's appeal was intellectual rather than emotional, so that Torrey, in steadfastly affirming the beliefs of a conservative evangelicalism, was in fact, and unintentionally, responding to a particular

Torrey's life-time achievements earned him recognition from a later-day historian, George Marsden (the premier historian of fundamentalism and author of Fundamentalism and American Culture; Twentieth Century Evangelicalism: 1870-1925), as being one of the principal architects of twentieth-century fundamentalism. 10 This dissertation, in agreeing with Marsden, takes seriously Torrey's religious claims and the religious claims of fundamentalism, while at the same time placing{~orrey and the movement within the main stream of American history and

12Ray Ginger, Six Days or Forever? Tennessee v. John Thomas Scopes (Boston: Beacon Press, 1958; reprint ed., New York: Oxford University Press, 1977), p. 129.

On December 28, 1901 , Reuben A. Torrey paced up and down a San Francisco dock as he patiently waited to board a passenger ship with his wife, to begin a momentous journey around the globe that would make him a worldfamous religious personality and earn him the reputation of being the Magellan of evangelical Christianity--the first evangelist to travel around the world spreading the message of Christianity. For the forty-five-year-old Torrey, there were no doubts or uncertainties about undertaking this strenuous trip: he immodestly believed the trip had been ordained by God.
In a sense, Torrey's trip can be viewed as a natural extension of Finney and Dwight L. Moody's nineteenth-century revival work in the United States and Great Britain projected onto the world scene at large, a world Americans were increasingly aware of after the U.S. victory in the Spanish-American War brought with it overseas possessions. Torrey's method of promoting world-wide revival, however, differed sharply from the techniques of his predecessors; Torrey, deliberately moving away from the traditional formula of appealing to the people's

While the rational, intellectual side of Torrey's personality dominated his evangelistic work and his normal relations with people, those individuals within Torrey's inner circle were aware of a different man who was an intensely private person capable of displaying an air of informality among those closest to him--Torrey's wife often
1William G. McLoughlin, Modern Revivalism: Charles Grandson Finney to Billy Graham (New York: The Ronald Press Company, 1959), p. 371.
2Ibid., p. 373.
3Helen C. A. Dixon, A. C. Dixon: A Romance of Preaching (New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1931), p. 210.

Reuben Archer Torrey was born into an upper middleclass family in Hoboken, New Jersey (part of metropolitan New York City), on January 28, 1856, the third of five children; his parents were Reuben Slayton Torrey and Elizabeth A. (Swift) Torrey. At the time Torrey's father was a successful New York banker benefiting from the unparalleled economic expansion of the United States during the 1850s. One year after Torrey's birth, economic disaster struck the United States with the Panic of 1857; Torrey's father lost all of his wealth,4 and, in 1859, the family moved from Hoboken to Brooklyn, New York. Within a short time Torrey's father established a new business manufacturing boxes. This enterprise became highly successful primarily because of the outbreak of the Civil War and its demands for vast quantities of supplies and equipment to support the armies in the field.
Despite the economic benefits of war, Torrey's father did not support politically Lincoln's goals. As a
4George T. B. Davis, Torrey and Alexander, The Story of a World-Wide Revival: A Record and Study of the Work and Personality of the Evangelists R. A. Torrey, D.D., and Charles M. Alexander, 2nd ed. (New York: Fleming

While Democratic politics dominated the family, in the religious realm there was a mixing of both iiberal and conservative Protestant. ideas. The elder Torrey tended to reflect the cosmopolitan ideas of cities and of liberal Congregationalism by accepting the universalist idea that no human being would ever receive eternal damnation. Reuben A. Torrey's mother, Elizabeth, in contrast to her husband's broad-minded views on eternal punishment, reflected the attitude of small-town America by living a pious Christian life as if everlasting hell was a reality in the hereafter. A demonstration of this piety occurred shortly after the birth of her son in 1856. She dedicated him to the service of the Lord6 (and she obviously told
5Ibid., p. 18.
6Edith C. Torrey to Mr. Perry, November 14, 1958, Moodyanna Collection, Moody Bible Institute, Chicago, Illinois.

A year after the surrender of General Lee, Torrey's father decided to retire from business and the fast pace of city life, and use some of the fortune he had accumulated during the war to buy a 200-acre estate at Geneva, New York, in the Genesee valley.9 On the beautiful lands of the Torrey estate overlooking Lake Seneca, young Torrey played in and roamed through the country-side as a boy from the age of ten until fifteen. At times he helped his father
7R. A. Torrey, Autobiographical Notes, sheet "I,"

8Davis, Torrey and Alexander, p. 20; Roger Martin,

9Davis, Torrey and Alexander, p. 19.

While Torrey's childhood can be described as normal, in one important way he differed sharply from other young people of his age--he had an insatiable desire to read. One day at the age of thirteen, while reading a religious· pamphlet, he seriously contemplated whether he should become a Christian. After reflecting on this question, he decided against it because he believed he would have to become a minister; this belief conflicted with his plans to become a lawyer. 10 Despite his decision, he could not entirely escape a commitment to become a minister. Torrey's awareness of his mother's early and ardent dedication of him to the Lord's service was influential, however. In later years Torrey wrote:

Torrey's shyness and bookish nature, however, did not i.nterfere with his academic success at school. He excelled in his studies, and in 1870, at the age of fourteen, he was graduated from Walnut Hill, an exclusive school in Geneva, affiliated with the Episcopal Church. Torrey had ambitious plans for attending Yale College in the fall, but these plans did not materialize. Yale refused to accept Torrey until he reached the age of fifteen, at which time he matriculated at Yale as the second youngest student in his class. 13 In later years, as Torrey gained a reputation for being able to speak and write for the masses of people, he declared inaccurately but with modesty, that his ability to concentrate and not his intelligence had enabled him to enter college at such a young age, yet become a successful student.
When Torrey entered Yale in 1871, the college viewed itself as a Christian institute of higher learning
12R. A. Torrey, The Holy Spirit: Who He Is and What He Does and How to Know Him in All the Fulness of His Gracious and Glorious Ministry (New York: Fleming H. Revell Company, 1927), pp. 36-37.

18 concerned primarily with the teaching of the liberal arts. Embodying this college ideal was its president, the Reverend Noah Porter, who began his tenure as president the same year Torrey began his studies at Yale. Porter's views of Christianity, like those of the college in general, were broadly evangelical, with a wide tolerance being extended to those individuals who held different ideas. 14 President Porter's moderate religious views and his toleration can be attributed in part to his academic training in philosophy and the influence of his famous father-in-law, Nathaniel W. Taylor, who had suffered persecution from staunch New England Calvinists opposing his New Haven theology that justified Finney revivalism.
While the religious dimension set the tone for education at Yale, the heart of the educational process at the college was the liberal arts program. President Porter typified the views of many educators of the time in his opinion that a college education had a higher purpose than merely preparing a student for a job in the world. 15 The essence of higher education as embodied in a liberal arts
14George S. Merriam, Noah Porter: A Memorial by Friends (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1893), p. 86; Roland H. Bainton, Yale and the Ministry: A History of Education for the Christian Ministry at Yale from the Founding in 1701 (New York: Harper & Brothers Publishers, 1957), p. 168.
15George Wilson Pierson, Yale College: An Education History, 2 vols. (New Haven, Connecticut: Yale University Press, 1952), 1:59.

The liberal arts program during Porter's administration has been described by one present-day historian as a program wherein "a medieval schoolman would at once have known where he was.,,19 The first two years of education at Yale emphasized the classical authors. As a freshman, Torrey studied Horner, Herodotus, Livy, Horace, algebra, geometry, and beginning trigonometry. Also, during his first and second years Torrey took courses in Greek, Latin, and mathemat~;cs.20 Th'e 0 f'~nst " . ur~ng.
pr~mary meth d 0 rue '~on d the first two years included daily textbook assignments and
16Ibid., p. 72.

compete against each other in a stiff, fair race. This strict method of education which forced an openness on the part of the student with the tutor apparently had no effect on Torrey's shy personality: he still refused to say

After two years of a gruelling schedule in the classics, the last two years of Torrey's education at Yale began to expand into other fields that included modern developments in the natural sciences, philosophy, and social studies. 23 By Torrey's senior year the broadening process had reached such a point that no less than eighteen subjects were required, with the majority of courses being given by professors who lectured to the students. 24 Required senior courses included astronomy or German, chemistry, geology, anatomy, physiology, linguistics, American constitutional law, history, political and social sciences, and courses in

almost half the whole faculty.27 This overly bleak view of Yale education by an author evaluating a system from the perspective of the twentieth century accurately describes an educational process that emphasized the conservative notion of accepting knowledge rather than striking out and seeking new ideas. Porter himself epitomized this conservative view of education when he declared that " ••• 'no kind of intellectual athletics was more useful •.. than the reflective analysis of classic sentences. ,,,28
The "classic sentence" symbolized the kind of education Torrey received at Yale, but in the world outside of Yale the forces of intellectual change were concerned with the recent developments in science, specifically with Darwin's publication of the Origins of the Species in 1859 and The Descent of Man in 1871. These books of Darwin brought about a revolution in mankind's thinking about the universe in which he lived. Instead of looking at the world in the traditional way as a static entity, Darwinian science postulated a dynamic view, a world in an unremitting state of change and development. Darwin's insights as a scientist were not the exclusive preserve of science, but "spilled over" into other academic disciplines. For example, philosophers and theologians began to raise

Ibid., p. 73. 28Ibid., p. 58.

The Darwinian push for a new inquiry into truth and knowledge had a limited impact on Yale because of President Porter's distrust of science and his insistence on a traditional education in the classics which automatically excluded Darwinian thought. Porter on one occasion wrote:

One Yale scientist, James Dwight Dana, understood the significance of evolutionary theory. A favorite teacher
29Noah Porter, Books and Reading; or, What Books Shall I Read and How Shall I Read Them?, 4th ed. (New York: Scribner, Armstrong & Co., 1873), p. 305.
30 bOd 314

31William F. Sanford, Jr., "Dana and Darwinism," Journal of the History of Ideas 26 (October-December 1965) :540.

Beyond the specific disagreement between Dana and Darwin over the creation of species, a more fundamental difference existed between the two men over the methodology of science. For Darwin, scientific methodology relied heavily upon theory, hypotheses, and the deductive method of reasoning. In contrast to this theoretical approach to science was the empirical science of Francis Bacon that influenced Dana and most college science programs in America during the nineteenth century. Francis Bacon in his seventeenth-century writings stressed observation as opposed to hypotheses, imagination, and even reason itself. This strong empirical basis of Baconian science is 'evident in "the first aphorism of Bacon's Novum Organon: 'man, as the servant and interpreter of nature, is limited in act and understanding by his observation of the order of nature; and neither his knowledge nor his power extends further. ,"34 Very simply, Baconian science stressed the gathering of facts and the classifying of information through the inductive method. Bacon's severe limitation on scientific methodology can be explained in part by his reaction against medieval scholasticism which by emphasizing the deductive method had produced many questionahle theories and little scientific observation. With Baconian induction, facts gained an absolute dominion at the expense of man's

As a student of Dana's, Torrey absorbed the Baconian" view of science and held it throughout his life, despite the eventua.L triumph of Darwinian science as symbolized by the 1925 Scopes Trial in Dayton, Tennessee. Helping to sustain Torrey's lifelong commitment to Baconian science was his acceptance of Scottish Common Sense philosophy as taught by President Porter in his classes of Yale seniors. Common Sense philosophy justified Baconian empiricism by providing philosophical argumentation demonstrating that the senses
35Theodore Dwight Bozeman, Protestants in an Age of Science: The Baconian Ideal and Antebellum American Religious Thought (Chapel Hill, North Carolina: The University of North Carolina Press, 1977), p. 20.
36Hovenkamp, Science and Religion in America, p. 144.

Common Sense philosophy originated in Scotland during the eighteenth century as a reaction to the skepticism of David Hume. 38 Hume's skepticism originated in his acceptance of John Locke's theoretical framework of knowledge and its three components of object, ideas, and mind. Locke had postulated that sense information about objects was formed into ideas that were known by the mind. Humean doubt questioned whether the ideas serving in an intermediary role accurately represented the object(s) to the mind. Could the mind know the true world?
The first assault on Hume's skepticism carne from the Anglican bishop George Berkeley who accepted Locke's theory of knowledge in a modif{ed form. Berkeley stated that in a philosophical sense all knowledge consisted of ideas, an affirmation that centered on minds and ideas to the exclusion of an external world of objects. While Berkeley's philosophy effectively dealt with Hume's skepticism by denying an outside world, for people who continued to believe in the real existence of birds, trees, and "horses outside of their own minds, his principles of human knowledge left much to be desired. 39
38G. A. Johnston, ed., Selections from the Scottish Philosophy of Corr~on Sense (Chicago: The Open Court Publishing Company, 1915), p. 1; cf., S. A. Grave, The Scottish Philosophy of Common Sense (Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood Press, 1973).
39

As a young man, Reid had taken refuge from Humean skepticism in Berkeley's philosophy, but with the passage of time he had become disenchanted with Berkeley's thought, without, however, lessening his concern over the influence of Hume's ideas. 40 From the perspective of a Christian philosopher, Reid believed that skepticism destroyed the science of the philosopher and undermined the Christian faith. 41 Reid recognized that to counter Hume's arguments effectively he would have to discredit part of Locke's
40Jack B. Rogers and Donald K. McKim, The Authority and Interpretation of the Bible: An Historical Approach (San Francisco: Harper & Row, Publishers, 1979), pp. 238

The denial of ideas could have led to greater skepticism by denying that the mind could accurately perceive the worldi 44 however, Reid was not about to move in the direction of skepticism. He declared that the mind could accurately perceive objects through a process of intuitive belief or judgment. While logic did not demonstrate intuitive belief, the powerful feeling associated with it was believed to be as convincing as a logical demonstration. 45
By supporting the validity of sense perception, Reid demonstrated the empirical temperament of his Common Sense philosophy which harmonized well with Baconian science and its method of obtaining objective facts by observation. With empiricism as a common touchstone, many people who followed the Baconian method became strong supporters of Common Sense philosophy, and vice-versa. Reid's acceptance

Rogers and McKim, The Authority and Interpretation of the Bible, p. 239.
45Hovenkamp, Science and Religion in America, p. 8.

The joint venture of Common Sense philosophy and Baconian science in discovering the truths of the world was not limited to the physical world but extended into the realm of morality. Reid declared:
liByan original power of the mind, when we come to years of understanding and reflection, we not only have the notions of right and wrong in conduct, but perceive certain things to be right and others wrong •••• There must, therefore, be in morals, as in all other sciences, first or self-evident principles, on which all moral reasoning is grounded, and on which it ultimately rests." 47

Such a focus on absolute truths in morality and science, developed a tendency among the disciples of Common

47Rogers and McKim, The Authority and Interpretation of the Bible, pp. 241-242.

In the United States, Thomas Reid's philosophy with its blend of Baconian science was well received by a historically young America that contained a people strongly committed to absolute truths as found in Christianity. John Witherspoon, a Presbyterian minister from Scotland, served as missionary and prophet for Common Sense philosophy in America. In 1768, Witherspoon assumed the presidency of the College of New Jersey (Princeton) and transformed it into a stronghold for Common Sense philosoohy by promptly purging those tutors at the college who did not subscribe to the Scottish philosophy. This drastic action
48Jack Rogers, "Francis Schaeffer: The Promise and the Problem," The Reformed Journal 22 (May 1977):15. Marsden, in Fundamentalism and American Culture (p. 111), emphasizes that the Common Sense view of truth being the same for all people is crucial to an understanding of fundamentalism.

From the College of New Jersey, Scottish Corr~on Sense philosophy gradually spread across the United States after the American Revolution as graduates of the college established schools throughout the South and West. In New England, the students of Yale College felt the impact of the Sccttish philosophy through the influence of Presidents Timothy Dwight and Noah Porter, and of Professor Nathaniel W. Taylor. 50 The impact of this philosophy reached such proportions in America that from about 1800 to 1875 Common Sense philosophy dominated higher education. 51 Why a philosophy from across the Atlantic Ocean appealed to nationalistic Americans can best be understood by viewing Common Sense philosophy as an apologetic tool of orthodox Christianity. From its inception, the Scottish philosophy had been used to protect Christianity by combating skepticism in its secular form, Humean skepticism, or in its religious
49Rogers and McKim, The Authority and Interpretation of the Bible, p. 245.
50Hovenkamp, Science and Religion in America, p. 20.
51Harvey Gates Townsend, Philosophical Ideas in the United States (New York: American Book Company, 1934), p.

Beyond defending Christianity from skepticism, Common Sense philosophy served as a common ground to bring American Christianity into an alliance with the philosophy's underpinnings in Baconian science. During the first half of the nineteenth century this alliance of religion and science worked to the advantage of Christianity because of the self-imposed limitations of Baconian science. The methodology of Baconian science, with its anti-hypothetical, inductive approach, placed rigorous controls on the use of reason, imagination, and theory while forcing scientists to a strict adherence to facts. A rigid conformance to facts made it difficult, if not impossible, for scientists to criticize the propositions of Christianity.
While the inductive method severely limited science, in the hands of Christian apologists such as Leonard Woods of Andover Seminary, it seemed inclusive enough to incorporate biblical data into scientific explanation. 53 One
52Donald G. Tewksbury, The Founding of American Colleges and Universities before the Civil War, with Particular Reference to the Religious Influences Bearing upon the College Movement (New York: Teachers College, Columbia University, 1932), passim.
53Bozeman, Protestants in an Age of Science, p. 145.

The fascination with science that gripped the minds of religious people during the early nineteenth century extended beyond equating biblical material with facts to the broader area of theology that became like a natural science based upon verifiable facts. 57 This blending of science with Christian theology produced a natural theology with an abiding interest in "evidence." "'Evidences' always implied facts relevant to the existence of God, or
54 bOd 131

The formidable alliance of religion and science that existed in pre-Civil War America began to break up around 1859 with the publication of Darwin's The Origin of the Species. Darwinism began to replace Baconian methodology as the scientific approach to the natural world in the United States. The groundwork for the disintegration of the union of Common Sense and Baconian empiricism had been prepared during the decade of the 1850s when Kantian philosophy attacked the Common Sense ideas of man's homogeneity of thought and that truth could be known. The philosophy of Kant emphasized active minds projecting categories on sense data in order to understand the world. 60 With each individual actively interpreting the world with his own categories, Kant discounted the possibility of men
58Hovenkamp, Science and Religion in America, p. 41.

Protestant liberals such as Horace Bushnell, "the father of American religious liberalism,"61 responded positively to these revolutionary developments in philosophy and science. Liberal seminaries became less concerned with absolute truth in theology as interest shifted to· the historical and cultural approach to theology and new s~minary courses were introduced dealing with the psychology and sociology of religious belief.
Not even Yale escaped exposure to these new liberal ideas, as evident by Horace Bushnell's speaking engagement at the college chapel during the same year that Torrey began his studies at the school. Bushnell, an alumnus of the college, had previously spoken at Yale, but on this particular occasion a chorus of conservative opposition arose, determined to stop his appearance. Warnings were delivered to the college administration that Bushnell's presence on campus would be contrary to the best interests of Yale. Not intimidated by these veiled threats, President Porter took a .tough stance and declared " .•.'If it be a question between the welfare of the College and the performance of duty, let the duty be done, and let the College suffer. ,"62 Duty was done, and the students and
61
Sydney E. Ahlstrom, A Religious History of the American People, 2 vols. (New Haven, Connecticut: Yale University Press, 1972; reprint ed., Garden City, New York: Doubleday & Company, Inc., 1975; Image Books), 2:51.
62Bainton, Yale and the Ministry, p. 168.

Bushnell had come to Yale during the twilight years of a brilliant and controversial career as a theologian-five years after his chapel talk he died at the age of 74. The liberal theology of relativity that Bushnell championed contrasted sharply with the Baconian science and Common Sense philosophy taught at Yale that offered a world of certainty. Bushnell discounted the possibility that language could provide precise meaning, a proposition that challenged the authority of the Bible for many conservative evangelicals who believed that the words of the Bible had fixed, eternal meanings. Beyond this devastating critique of the Bible, Bushnell also stressed a developmental conversion to Christianity through education over an extended period of time, in opposition to the traditional evangelical view of a spontaneous and sudden conversion. G3
Whether or not Torrey attended Bushnell's chapel presentation (and he no doubt did, because chapel attendance was required for all students), most likely he would not have agreed with Bushnell's theology. For Torrey, who was beginning his studies" in Baconian science and Common Sense philosophy, Bushnell's liberal theology would have been completely antithetical. But "there was also another
63William R. Hutchinson, The Modernist Impulse in American Protestantism (Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1976), p. 47.

While Torrey's mother rejoiced over her son's decision to become a minister as an indication of her prayers being answered, one of Torrey's sisters expressed skepticism that her brother would actually give up his plans to become a lawyer. 65 His Yale classmates also found it difficult to accept his decision, particularly because Torrey's life continued as usual: as a fraternity man, he indulged in what he would later declare to be the
64Davis, Torrey and Alexander, pp. 22-23.

During his senior year, Torrey, having undergone a conversion experience, decided to profess publicly his allegiance to Christ and become a member of the college church pastored by President Porter. One day Torrey approached the President as they were going to Porter's class in moral philosophy and ethics, and inquired about joining the college church. Without asking doctrinal questions, Porter responded by asking Torrey whether he was certain about his decision to join the church. 66 Torrey responded affirmatively, and within a short time he publicly professed his belief in Christ and became a member of the church.
In the spring of 1875, Torrey was graduated from Yale with a B.A. degree, along with sixty-eight fellow classmates. 67 After a summer break, he returned to New Haven and enrolled at Yale seminary, having met the following requirements:

67Directory of the Living Graduates of Yale University (New Haven, Connecticut: The Tuttle, Morehouse & Taylor Company, 1904), pp. 36-37.
qualifications, are admitted. 68 Torrey's selection of the Yale seminary was a natural choice because of his general familiarity with Yale and because of the seminary's Congregational heritage corresponding with his own Congregational background.
The general theological drift of the seminary when Torrey began his theological studies was in the direction of orthodoxy. In classes on the Bible, students were taught that the authorship of the gospel of John had beer settled in favor of the traditional view and that attacks upon the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch were unwarranted negativism from hostile critics. At Yale, Timothy Dwight, grandson of President Timothy Dwight and Professor of New Testament Criticism and Interpretation, did not engage in the speculation over biblical authorship; he concentrated his. energies on achieving a correct biblical text by examining the meaning of the Bible's words in the original languages. 69 This type of microscopic analysis known as "lower criticism" greatly stimulated the study of the Greek and Hebrew languages at Yale, and had significant influence on Torrey, who read the Bible on a daily basis in these ancient languages.
68catalogue of the Officers and Students in Yale College with a Statement of the Course of Instruction in the Various Departments, 1875-76 (New Haven, Connecticut: Tuttle, Morehouse & Taylor, Printers, 1875), p. 75.

The orthodox flavor of the seminary also extended into the area of systematic theology. Professor Samuel Harris defended Christianity and its miracles by advocating a natural theology of "evidences." One aspect of his natural theology dealt with the validity of the conversion experience by asserting in Common Sense fashion that God was "among the data of experience" that an individual could encounter. 70 Since God was part of experience, then according to Harris, physical and religious knowledge were the same in kind, and only different in their objects. 71
During Torrey's three years of study at the seminary he took courses which included Hebrew, exegetical study of the Greek New Testament, General Church History, Biblical Theology, American Church History, Sacred Rhetoric and Homiletics, Christian Doctrine, and Church polity.72 Besides the formal coursework, all students had to attend prayer each morning in the seminary chapel and were encouraged to practice their Christianity in a City Mission, a Sunday School, or in other benevolent endeavors. 73
One of the most important stages in the career of a Yale seminarian occurred at the end of the second year of
70Ibid., p. 1 7 1 •
71 Ibid., pp. 171-172.
72Catalogue of the Officers and Students in Yale College, pp. 75-76.
73I b'd

During the summer of 1877, Torrey traveled from New England to the Midwest to practice his preaching skills in the small rural churches of Ohio, and in the process he discovered the state to be a hotbed of prohibitionist activity--perhaps the result of the first two national conventions of the Prohibition Party that had been held at Columbus and Cleveland respectively in 1872 and 1876. 76 In the small village of Mesopotamia, Ohio, Torrey discovered a kind of preaching he had never heard in the
74Mart·~n, Torrey, p. 40 •
75Torrey, The Holy Spirit, p. 37.
76Roger C. Storms, Partisan Prophets: A History of the Prohibition Party, 1854-1972 (Denver: National Prohibition Foundation, Inc., 1972), p. 7.

While Torrey gained experience preaching in the Ohio churches, the tragedy of his mother's death on July 15, 1877, forced him to confront death as the greatest challenge of being a minister. Compounding the anguish surrounding his mother's death was his father's death two weeks later, on August 3rd. The death of his parents left Torrey completely on his own at the age of twenty-one, with one year of seminary to complete. 78
The total inheritance that Torrey received from his father's estate consisted of a pair of cuff links and a leather mRtch box. 79 The meager inheritance can be blamed on the Panic of 1873 that resulted in the loss of his father's second fortune, a loss he had not been able to
770avis, Torrey and Alexander, pp. 31-32. The young lady who signed the temperance pledge was Clara Smith, Torrey's future wife.
78Martin, Tor~~, p. 41.

Torrey's last year in seminary proved to be his most rewarding as he became heavily involved in revival activities on the Yale campus and in the New Haven community sparked by the preaching of the evangelist Dwight L. Moody. Initially, Torrey and a group of fellow seminarians attended Moody's revival meetings to analyze why people were attracted to the evangelist, a former businessman, who had no theological training. Instead of remaining objective, Torrey and his friends were captivated by Moody and his message that Christian faith could do anything, a message particularly meaningful to Torrey who still lived with the recent memory of his parents' deaths. With Christian faith came Moody's injunction to "'get to work for the Lord! ,,,81 a precept Torrey followed seriously. After receiving Scriptural verses and advice on how to bring people to Christ, Torrey immediately went ,out and claimed as his first convert a young lady. Other converts followed, and
80Catalogue of the Officers and Students in Yale College, p. 78.

Shortly after the conclusion of the New Haven/Yale revival meetings, Torrey concluded his theological studies at Yale and was graduated from the seminary in 1878 with the

After graduating from seminary Torrey received an invitation to accept the pastorate of a small Congregational church in the isolated farm community of Garrettsville, Ohio. Torrey agreed to serve the church only after assurances that the call was unanimous. When he arrived in Garrettsville in the fall of 1878, he discovered to his surprise that he had accepted the pastorate of a church

The confidence expressed in Torrey by his fellow Congregational ministers through the ceremony of ordination did not help the naturally shy Torrey confront his divided congregation every Sunday. He literally struggled to deliver memorized sermons to his parishoners, who were often distracted by his nervous habit of twisting a coat button. This agony of preaching a sermon was compounded several

The theological content of these early Torrey sermons emphasized old-fashioned revival. After reading the biography of Charles G. Finney and Finney's book Revival Addresses, Torrey concluded that revival was not limited to evangelist3 like Moody or Finney, but was a normal state of the church. 3 His conception of church and revival as normative did not gain the acceptance of many church members who preferred the usual way of doing things. For two months he tried without success to promote a church revival. When a young woman and an elderly lady experienced conversion and the revival was underway, Torrey set about preaching six nights a week. 4 This heavy preaching schedule reflected the revival's impact upon Torrey in breaking down forever his inhibitions and insecurities about preaching.
Torrey had obviously begun to recognize the area of his real strength and, eager to share the spirit of revival with the 1,000 townspeople of Garrettsville, he suggested unity meetings with the rival Methodist and Baptist
2Ibid., pp. 50-51.

The unity meetings lasted for nine weeks as the people of Garrettsville succumbed to the spirit of revival. At the conclusion of the unity meetings, revivalism continued in the Garrettsville Congregational Church as long as Torrey remained the pastor. The tangible results of these revivals are sketchy. On March 7, 1880, a total of 21 people were received into the Congregational church. For the year 1881,33 individuals were received into membership, 23 on professions of faith and 10 by transfer
5Ibid., p. 28.

While Torrey's reputation in Garrettsville rested on promoting revival meetings, this spirit of revivalism was also channeled into social r.eform. One Saturday while preparing a sermon, Torrey believed God wanted him to go and speak at a local saloon. Reluctantly, he went to the tavern, fell down on his knees (to the great surprise of the patrons),' and began to pray for those present and for the cause of prohibition. At the conclusion of tpis exercise, he calmly left the establishment and went back to his study. This action, unprecedented for Torrey, created a stir in the small community where news traveled rapidly. ~. Torrey did not fit the role of a sedate Congregational minister.
Attracting the attention of this earnest young minister was the youthful Clara Belle Smith, who attended Torrey's first sermon in Garrettsville. Clara Smith was an attractive woman who had experienced a childhood of loneliness due to the early death of her mother; her father, a ship captain on the Great Lakes and part-owner of a shipping company, was often away from home. After graduating from
8Daniel Carl Ankerberg, "Reuben Archer Torrey-Evangelist" (M.Th. thesis, Northern Baptist Theological Seminary, 1956), p. 17.
9Martin, Torrey, p. 55.

Torrey's courtship of Clara Smith lasted for less than a year. Convinced that God wanted him to have Clara for a wife, he lost no time in convincing Clara, and, on October 22, 1879, Clara Smith and Reuben Torrey were married; Torrey was 23, and Clara was 20. 11 As might be expected, Torrey had a highly idealistic view of marriage as being "'but a symbol, a prophecy and a complete revelation, as far as in human beings we can realise the Divine, of the love that Jesus Christ has for us.,,,12 Marriage enabled men and women to better comprehend "'the infinite love of God that led God in Christ to give Himself for us.,,,13 Torrey's working out of these ideas of marriage on a practical level is recorded by his son in the following statement:
"Although a young and deeply devoted husband, he frankly counted the cost he must pay if he were to make of himself all. that God would have him to be. Together he and his young bride agreed that he must put his work and study first; domestic demands ll....LSt be made secondary; the enjoyment of the social side

those early years. Established early in the marriage, the priority of service to God over family continued, often creating months of loneliness for Clara while Torrey was away happily conducting revivals. Despite frequent absences from his wife, Torrey in later years affirmed that their love for each other had not diminished, but had increased. 15
From the marriage of Reuben Torrey and Clara Smith five children were born: Edith Clare, on November 8, 1880; Blanche, April 8, 1884; Reuben, Jr., September 16, 1887; Elizabeth Swift, March 5, 1889; and Margaret, February 16, 1893. The oldest child, Edith, was born in Garrettsville, the next three children were born in Minneapolis, and the youngest child was born in Chicago. Clara Torrey fulfilled her husband's ideal of a mother by raising the children in a Christian environment conducive to bringing

15Helen C. Alexander and J. Kennedy Maclean, Charles M. Alexander: A Romance of Song and Soul-Winning (London: Marshall Brothers, Ltd., 1920), p. 83.
16Torrey's views of motherhood can be found in J. Kennedy Maclean, Triumphant Evangelism: The Three Years' Missions of Dr. Torrey and Mr. Alexander in Great Britain and Ireland (London: Marshall Brothers, n.d.), pp. 204-206.
After four years in the intellectually debilitating climate of Garrettsville, Torrey decided to leave the small farm community and, surprisingly, to postpone his fervent efforts at revivalism for the rewards of an academic life at German universities as an advanced student in theology. On an annual salary of $650 a year, Torrey was only able to carry out this course of action by obtaining a generous loan from a friend and fellow classmate at Yale, Howard Bell. 17 Du'ring the fall of 1882, Torrey, his wife, a,nd infant daughter Edith, left Garrettsville and sailed to Europe for the rarefied atmosphere of German universities.
During the latter part of the nineteenth century, Germany was in the forefront of the study of Christian theology from a critical perspective. Symbolizing this German critical spirit was the German theologian David Strauss (1808-1874). Strauss' reputation rested on his two-volume work entitled Life of Jesus, Critically Examined. In these volumes Strauss stressed meaning as the foundation of Christian faith as opposed to a reliance upon the facts and history of the Bible. 18 While allowing for a basic historical framework to the life of Jesus, Strauss speculated that his life had been rewritten to include miracles and the fulfilling of Old Testament prophecies. This Straussian view of the New Testament as myth instead of

Mart~n, Torrey, p. 58. 18
Hovenkamp, Science and Religion in America, p. 72.

When Torrey journeyed to Germ~ny, he had no expectation of becoming a Straussian disciple; instead, he sought apologetic arguments affirming the validity of the Bible for faith and practice. This view was reflected in the two Lutheran schools that Torrey attended--Leipzig and Erlangen. 20 The theological tenor of these two sch~ols within the context of German biblical criticism can be described as moderately critical with a strong element of apologetics always present. Their faculties worked diligently to synthesize the criticism of the Bible with Protestant orthodoxy to produce a new system of thought called the Erlangen theology.
Before arriving in Germany, Torrey had familiarized himself with the Erlangen theology by reading Franz H. R. von Frank's (1827-1894) System of the Christian Certainty. Christian certainty in Frank's theological model focused on the experience of regeneration which also brought with it the necessary religious concepts of sin, righteousness,

At Leipzig, Torrey studied under three Lutheran scholars, Franz J. Delitzsch (1813-1890), Cristoph Ernst Luthardt (1823-1902), and K. F. A. Kahnis. 23 Delitzsch, of Jewish descent, used his classes in Old Testament and Hebrew to analyze the numerous critical theories concerning the development of the Old Testament. 24 Luthardt, a professor of systematic theology, attacked the Straussian skepticism regarding the New Testament. 25 Because of his interest in

21 The New International Dictionary of the Christian Church, 1979 ed., s.v. "Frank, Franz Hermann Reinhold Von," by Richard Pierard.

Little information is available on ~he immediate circumstances surrounding Torrey's momentous decision to accept the inerrancy of the Bible. One day after returning from classes in a state of bewilderment, pe came to the realization that there were many religious concepts, including the nature of the Bible, that he could never know or understand through reason. While in this state of intellectual humility Torrey suddenly took an existential "leap of faith" by affirming the inerrancy of the Bible, an inerrancy which validated the absoluteness of the Bible

Torrey's equating the Bible with God's revelation to man was at odds with the teachings of his German professors who simply did not accept biblical inerrancy. The Erlangen theology stood at a midway point between an inerrant Bible above culture and history and a Straussian Bible subordinated to culture and history. The middle ground of the Erlangen school found revelation in God's acts in history as recorded in the Bible, with a full understanding that this was only possible through an understanding of the Bible within the context of history and culture.
The moderate position of the Erlangen school on the nature of the Bible did not discourage the scholarly-minded Torrey from wanting to stay in Germany beyond his initial one year commitment. His hopes for a second year of study, however, proved impractical because of financial considerations and Clara's second pregnancy. During the fall of
27Martin, Torrey, p. 61.

Upon arriving in the United States, Torrey had a choice of urban pastorates. In choosing between a wealthy, sophisticated church in Brooklyn, New York, and a newly formed church in the frontier town of Minneapolis, he selected the Minneapolis church. The reason for a person of Torrey's education and pastoral experience to choose a new church in an undeveloped community like Minneapolis in the 1880s may have been based on an expectation of molding the newly organized congregation in the image of his conservative religious beliefs. The established Brooklyn congregation would have had difficulty accepting his insistent emphasis on revivalism and on his fundamentalist conviction regarding the inerrancy of the Bible.
When Torrey reached Minneapolis he discovered to his great dismay that the church he was to pastor did not 28

During the 1880s Torrey's message at the Open Door church appealed to many people in Minneapolis who, like other Americans, were living in the midst of rapid soci~l change. In 1860 the population of Minneapolis was 5,882. Seven years later the city incorporated, to begin a period of unprecedented growth. During the 1870s railroad expansion and general development in the West contributed to the growth of a population from 18,080 in 1870 to 46,887 in 1880. However, the most spectacular growth of population in Minneapolis occurred during the decade of the 1880s when a sudden influx of Scandinavian immigrants helped to bring about a 250% increase in population so that by 1890 the population of Minneapolis was 164,738. 31 The great Scandinavian immigration brought not only people looking for employment (causing greater competition for jobs) but also brought a variety of cultures and languages into a city already reeling from dramatic growth and change.
29Reverend Marion Daniel Shutter, ed., History of Minneapolis, Gateway to the Northwest 3 vols. (ChicagoMinneapolis: The S. J. Clarke Publishing Company, 1923),

In the decade of the eighties, Minneapolis began to alter its appearance as a quaint New England town located near the rapids of a fast-moving river, and began to take on the image of a large, urban city. Building construction moved quickly in the city as landmark homes were removed and replaced with massive buildings for the use of big business and big government. At the heart of the Minneapolis economy were the Falls of St. Anthony (discovered 200 years earlier by Father Louis Hennepin) on the Mississippi River where lumbermen and millers competed with each other for the use of the water power. As the decade moved forward, the lumbermen gradually left the falls area to the millers, a situation that enabled them to triple flour production from 2,051,840 barrels at the beginning of the decade to 6,088,865 barrels in 1889; this increased flour production made Minneapolis the flour capital of the country, outdistancing St. Louis, New York City, and Milwaukee. 32
Helping Minneapolis to achieve this ranking were the vast wheat fields of Minnesota and the Dakotas, in addition to the new technology and business practices of the day. George H. Christian, a young southerner, invented a machine for processing the spring wheat of the upper plains region so that it could be milled into a high quality
32Lucile M. Kane, The Waterfall that Built a City: The Falls of St. Anthony in Minneapolis (St. Paul, Minnesota: Minnesota Historical Society, 1966), pp. 114-115.

60 flour. 33 By placing the machine in a large building like the Pillsbury A, a massive six-story structure of blue limestone constructed in 1881 34 (reputedly the second largest mill in the world), 7,000 barrels of flour could be efficiently produced every day by a regimented factory force. A further contribution to efficiency, and conforming to the accepted standards of the time, was a movement toward consolidating milling operations. By 1889, three companies, including the Pillsbury family, controlled 60% of the total production capacity in Minneapolis, while twelve operators

This sudden transformation of Minneapolis in the 1880s to the status of being a prominent American ~ity (a delight for any chamber of commerce) also brought with it negative consequences. In the midst of this rapid change and consolidation, many people experienced doubt and confusion; the different belief systems of the foreign immigrants and the modern practices of big business challenged traditional standards of morality. Helping to provide an element of stability in a community of change was Torrey's conservative religious message, which served as a rock of absolute religious principles, and offered hope and security.
33Shutter, History of Minneapolis, 1:354.

The sole reason why Torrey rejected universalism was that he could not find justification for such a position in his inerrant Bible. Writing in later years, Torrey declared:
"If anyone could produce me one single passage in the Bible that, fairly constructed, according to its context and the usage of the words and grammatical construction that clearly taught that the punishment of the wicked would not be absolutely endless and that somewhere, somehow all would repent and be saved, it would be the happiest day of my life. But no such passage can be found. I have searched for it from the first chapter of Genesis to the last chapter of the Revelation but cannot find it, it is not there. I am thoroughly familiar with the passages that men urge. I have formerly used them myself, but they will not bear the construction that is placed upon them if we deal honestly with them."36

In the tradition of Finney and Moody revivalism, Torrey strongly emphasized the American democratic idea of equality, that all people were sinners equal before God. For Torrey, this ideal of equality often moved in the direction of a Jacksonian glorification of the "common man" who was portrayed as being smarter than generally recognized. During one meeting for men, Torrey declared: "'I think that the average speaker along religious lines underestimates the thinking power of the average man, and especially the average working man. • • . The average man has got more brains than you give him credit for. , ,,37 In his writings Torrey frequently referred to the lowly washerwoman who could know her Bible {a Bible that Marsden characterizes as being the great equalizer)38 just as well as and perhaps even better than a learned professor of theology. 39
After three successful years of promoting the spirit of revivalism and egalitariansim at the Open Door church,
37Maclean, Triumphant Evangelism, p. 162.

39Charles Edwin Harrington, "The Fundamentalist Movement in America, 1870-1920" (Ph.D. dissertation, University of California, 1959), p. 195.

During the early years of Torrey's ministry in Minneapolis he had become active in a number of organizations dealing with social concerns, organizations that included the Associated Charities, Newsboy's Home, and various voluntary organizations supported by his Congregational denomination. The time devoted to these groups became so great that it interfered with his primary job as

, 't 42

While Torrey separated himself from groups exclusively concerned with social issues, he did participate in one organization that blended social concern with evangelism--the International Association of Christian Workers. The first meeting of this organization was held in Chicago, June 16-23, 1886. 44 At the early age of thirty, Torrey became president of the Association, a position he held until the demise of the organization. During the years of its existence, the organization responded to the emerging post-Civil War industrial order by sponsoring various social service activities; one historian describes it as one of the most important Protestant social service organizations of its time. 45 Reflecting the spirit of its president, the Association never wavered from its ultimate
42Dav~s,'Torrey and Alexander, pp. 35-36 ; Mart'~n, Torrey, pp. 64-65.
43M ' 65

44B '
ess~e Louise Pierce, A History of Chicago, vol. 3: The Rise of a Modern City, 1871-1893 (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1957), pp. 450-451.

On one occasion Torrey responded to the problem of unemployment by declaring: "!Give them a job if you can, and if you can't, give them money to help them get a job. The religion of Christ is a religion of love, which forgets self and works itself to the death to try and save others., .. 46 While evidencing a real concern for social issues, Torrey could never be described as a follower of the social gospel as presented by contemporary theologians like Washington Gladden or Walter Rauschenbusch, who respectively supported the principles of unionism and Christian socialism to improve the lot of people. From Torrey's perspective and from a fundamentalist perspective, these liberal theologians focused too much on the social aspect of the gospel--to the detriment of the infinitely more important principle of salvation through Christ.
Torrey's obsession with bringing people to Christ did not strait-jacket his mind from delving into the larger area of theology and adopting a number of doctrines that he adhered to for the rest of his life. For example, during his years in Minneapolis, he confronted the theological doctrine of millennialism, a belief that humanity will experience a thousand years of earthly peace and justice. Always prominent in Christian thought, this belief is based

During the first half of the nineteenth century, postmillennialism reigned supreme among American evangelicals (e.g., Charles Finney) as the method of revivalism appeared to be on the threshold of transforming the United States into the millennial kingdom of righteousness. After the massive and wanton destruction of the Civil War years, postmillennial optimism proved to be out of step with the times; the despair of premillennialism, an important tenet of fundamentalism, seemed to be more appropriate in the post-war years.
Before arriving in Minneapolis, Torrey had not taken a stand on millennialism. His ambivalence toward the subject changed after he heard a debate between Dr. Robert

After hearing the debate, Torrey left with the firm conviction that Sample had won the debate and that his premillennial position was correct. Eventually, Torrey, just as the fundamentalists were to do, accepted the premillennial idea largely on the basis of his belief in man's evil nature as manifest in the reality of a world moving away from traditional biblical truths to a relativism implicit in critical biblical studies and Darwinian evolutionary thought. While Torrey's premillennialism resulted from a pessimistic view of man and the world, the doctrine at the same time provided him with a sense of hope and liberation from his environment. Torrey declared:

it premillennialism broke the power of the world and its ambition over me and filled my lire with the most
47Louis T. Talbot, D.D., ed., Traits and Tracts of Torrey, A Fresh Appreciation of a Great Man and Teacher (Los Angeles: The Bible Institute of Los Angeles, n.d.), p. 23. In this reference Talbot incorrectly spells Shutter's name as ItShudder.1t Timothy P. Weber in Living in the Shadow of the Second Corning: American Premillennialism, 1875-1925, (New York: Oxford University Press, 1979) succinctly explains that It ... premillennialism generally broke the spirit of social concern which had played such a prominent role in earlier evangelicalismlt (p. 183). Torrey's own personal belief in the supreme importance of the conversion experience, however, was more responsible for Torrey's lack of interest in social reform than was the typical premillennialist persuasion.

While in Minneapolis, Torrey began to seek additional power from God in the form of a baptism of the Holy Spirit, or in effect, an embuing of power from the Holy Spirit, after personal doubts had arisen concerning his ministry. At one point he issued an ultimatum to God that he would not continue to preach from the pulpit unless he received the baptism of the Holy Spirit or some other clear indication from God that he should continue to preach. After several days of intense praying Torrey received a feeling of peace and assurance which he interpreted as

the ~sm 0 h p~r~t.

48M . 69-7.0

Torrey now wanted all Christians to receive the fullness of the baptism of the Holy Spirit. In later years he published a number of books delineating his views on this special baptism. He stressed that all Christians had the privilege of receiving the baptism to empower their witness and service to God. There was a reluctance on the part of many conservative Christians to accept Torrey's ideas, because of a concern that the baptism of the Holy Spirit could be easily associated with the spectacle of speaking in foreign tongues as described in the book of Acts. This worry seemed to be borne out at the turn of the twentieth century when the American pentecostal movement emerged from the Azusa Street revival in Los Angeles in 1906, with its distinctive doctrine of the Holy Spirit baptizing people with the power to speak in foreign tongues. As pentecostalism grew during the years after 1906, Torrey deliberately distanced himself from the movement and even from those pentecostals who agreed with his Holy Spirit teaching, declaring that pentecostalism "was 'emphatically

Not limiting the power of God to strengthening a person spiritually and psychologically through the baptism of the Holy Spirit, Torrey also extended God's power into the realm of performing physical healings on broken bodies. During his ministry in Garrettsville, Torrey had witnessed what he considered to be a miraculous healing of a church member who had been terminally ill with typhoid;52 however, it was not until Minneapolis that Torrey seriously accepted divine healing of the sick. On one occasion, a Methodist minister from Dakota territory and his wife brought their two-year-old daughter to Minneapolis in a desperate attempt to find a cure for their daughter's backbone deformity that doctors had predicted would cause her death within three years. Eventually the parents brought the deformed child to Torrey, who offered a prayer for divine healing. Immediately, the child seemed to have found relief from the pain of her condition. Torrey, claimed and unquestionably
51vinson Synan, The Holiness-Pentecostal Movement in the United States (Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1972), p. 144.
52R• A. Torrey, Divine Healing: Does God Perform Miracles To-day? (New York: Fleming H. Revell Company, 1924), pp. 27-28.

On the surface, Torrey's acceptance of divine healing seemed to plac~ him in the camp of Mary Baker Eddy's Christian Science movement that had been established in New England during the 1870s and expanded nationally during the decade of the 1880s. Torrey along with other conservative evangelicals, however, vigorously opposed this new movement because of a conviction that Eddy's teachings had transformed divine healing into a psychological process wherein the mental processes of the individual became a substitute for God's healing of the body.54 Torrey also noted an increase in the number of evangelists who gave up what for him was the more legitimate calling of saving souls, in order to emphasize divine healing for the illegitimate purpose of attracting larger crowds and receiving more money. This focus on fame and money led Torrey to declare that "some very sad tragedies, insanity, death and shipwreck of faith resulted from this pitiable business."55 For Torrey, Christian Science epitomized this "pitiable
53 Ibid., pp. 24-25; Martin, Torrey, p. 72.

It certainly does not honour God to refuse all remedies and get steadily worse and at the same time to say you are trusting God for healing. And many die doing it and bring great reproach upon God and upon Christianity and upon the great truth of Divine Healing. 58

Downplaying the importance of faith healing led Torrey to downplay the importance of material things. During his stay in Minneapolis, Torrey and his family imitated the life style of the early Christians mentioned in the book of Acts who totally relied upon God for their material needs. Inspiration for following this extreme course of action came from a book Torrey read by George Muller entitled The Life of Trust. Muller was a German-born evangelist and philanthropist who lived in England and devoted his life to trusting in the power of God to provide for all creature comforts. 60 This literally meant that Muller refused to accept a salary or to make any requests for financial support for himself or his various philanthropic projects. He relied solely upon the power of prayer for his physical sustenance.
After reading The Life of Trust during the fall of 1888, Torrey made a momentous decision to follow the e}~ample of Muller's life. In later years Torrey described the impact of the book on his life in the following words:
"Perhaps the most decisive turning point in my life since I have been in the ministry came through reading 'The Life of Trust' by George Muller. I have been a different man ever since I read that
60Roger Steer, George Muller: Delighted in God! (Wheaton, Illinois: Harold Shaw Publishers, 1979), passim.

Not all of the prayer requests were granted, however. The reason given for this situation was not a shortcoming on God's part, but the result of what Torrey perceived as sin in his own life that prevented all prayers from being answered. For example, one night befo; ~ re iring, Torrey prayed for money to support his minist In the middle of

Torrey's experience in Minneapolis of" working out his theology did not bring him into conflict with the stated beliefs of his denomination, except in the area of baptism. After comparing the Congregational policy of baptism by sprinkling with the biblical account, Torrey concluded that baptism by immersion was the proper form. 63 In order to bring his life into conformity with the teachings of the Bible, he and his wife were rebaptized by
62R• A. Torrey, The Power of Prayer and the Prayer of Power (New York: Fleming H. Revell Company, 1924; reprint ed., Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Publishing House, 1955), pp. 201-202.
63 "

immersion while in Minneapolis, a baptism that symbolized
the incipient fundamentalist direction of Torrey's theology.
Torrey's concern for orthodoxy reflected the views of many within the Congregational Church. Of particular note was the position of the most famous Congregationalist of all, Dwight L. Moody, who established the Bible Institute of Chicago in 1889 to teach students the authority of t~e Bible. Supporting Moody's school were a number of Congregational ministers, including the influential E. M. Williams of Northfield, Minnesota. Upon learning of Moody's need for a superintendent to oversee his new Bible Institute, Williams immediately nominated Torrey, based upon his knowledge of Torrey's successful evangelistic work in nearby Minneapolis. Supporting the Williams' nomination was Fleming H. Revell, Moody's brother-in-law and a prominent publisher of evangelical books. Revell had observed Torrey's leadership of the International Christian Workers Convention and had come away favorably impressed, his opinion confirmed by the Reverend John Collins, who served as the secretary of the convention and had been Torrey's college and seminary classmate at Yale. 64
In September of 1889, the thirty-three-year-old Torrey met with Moody in Chicago to discuss the possibility of Torrey's becoming the first superintendent of Moody's new Bible Institute. When Moody offered him the post,

When he left Minneapolis in 1889, the doctrinal core of his Christian faith had already been formulated. The years in Minneapolis in addition to the years in Germany and Garrettsville had been an important time in Torrey's life for synthesizing the Baconian science and Common Sense philosophy of Yale College with the tenets of traditional Christianity. Torrey wrote of these formative years as being a time of four important epochs in his religious life: (1) accepting Christ as personal Saviour,

65R• A. Torrey, The Return of the" Lord Jesus (Los Angeles: Bible Institute of Los Angeles, 1913; reprint ed., Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House, 1966), pp. 20-21.
66Marsden, Fundamentalism and American Culture, pp. 49 & 56. On page 49 of his book, Marsden makes a perceptive comment that the postmillennial beliefs of preCivil War evangelicals provided the framework for "the process of secularizing mid-nineteenth-century American society. Materialism, capitalism, and nationalism were blessed with Christian symbolism.

When Torrey returned to Minneapolis in 1924 for three months to temporarily oversee the ministry of the famous fundamentalist William Bell Riley, who was recovering from injuries suffered in an automobile accident, Torrey continued to preach many of the same theological beliefs that he had held when he left Minneapolis thirty-five years earlier. The passage of time had not significantly affected the foundation of Torrey's religious convictions. The English minister F. B. Meyer, a friend of Moody's and Torrey's, has vividly described Torrey's single-minded commitment to Christian dogma:

Through the influence of a Sunday school teacher, Moody experienced a conversion to the Christian faith at 1

1R• A. Torrey, Real Salvation and Whole-Hearted Service (New York: Fleming H. Revell Company, 1905), p. 234.

After the trauma of the Civil War, Moody sailed to Great Britain in 1873 with his singing companion, Ira D. Sankey, to begin an evangelistic tour that transformed two unknown Americans into religious celebrities. During a four-month stay in London, two and one-half million Londoners attended the Moody/Sankey meetings to hear the Americans extol conservative Christian values and the need of a conversion experience to achieve salvation. Capitalizing on their fame in England, Moody and Sankey returned to the United States to conduct evangelistic campaigns in Chicago, Boston, Baltimore, St. Louis, Cleveland, and San Francisco. Schools to institutionalize Moody's conservative religious message were established in Massachusetts-Northfield Seminary for girls (1879) and Mount Hermon School for boys (1881). In 1886, Moody helped to establish the Chicago Evangelization Society which was to be the forerunner of the Bible Institute of Chicago.
As an achiever, Moody expected his Bible Institute to be successful under Torrey's guidance, but he retained ultimate authority. A demanding taskmaster, Moody would layout new programs which he expected Torrey to carry

81 3

As an educated Congregational minister, Torrey did not resent the leadership of an uneducated Congregational layman. Torrey had unlimited confidence in the innate abilities of common people. It followed that the uneducated Moody, who had accomplished more for Christianity than all the presidents of the theological seminaries of the time, was more than qualified to oversee and direct the activities of the Bible Institute of Chicago.
Also helping to transcend any social barriers between Torrey and Moody was a shared goal for the Bible Institute of training lay people for evangelism, a goal that mirrored Torrey's faith in common people. The first issue of The Institute Tie, the school's official publication, elaborated on the Torrey/Moody goal of evangelism by declaring that the Institute was "to send out men and women of deep spirituality, well-balanced character and with a burning love for souls, a good knowledge of the Word of God
3MoOdy to Torrey, December 10, 1894, Moodyanna Collection, Moody Bible Institute, Chicago, Illinois.
4R• A. Torrey, Why God Used D. L. Moody (Chicago: The Bible Institute Colportage Ass'n., 1923), p. 24.

Involvement of lay people in ministry as championed by Torrey and Moody reflected the major thrust of the Bible Institute movement in the United States since its beginning in 1872. In that year the first American Bible institute, appropriately named the Lay College, opened its doors under the auspices of the Reverend T. DeWitt Talmage's Presbyterian Tabernacle in Brooklyn. Eleven years later, in 1883, a second Bible institute, known as the Missionary Training College, was established in New York City by Dr.

The 253 lay men and women who attended the Bible Institute of Chicago during its first year of operation were not accepted on the basis of open admission, but by a process of careful selection. Before their application would be considered, all applicants to the school were obliged to affirm an evangelical belief that they had received the gift of salvation from God. Other required characteristics of an applicant were "Christian character, consecration, love for souls, good common sense, willingness to do hard work, and to be taught~ criticised and guided. "9 Denominational preference of the applicant had little importance in the selection process because creeds and denominational views were not given prominence at the Institute where there was no creed but the Bible.
Figures for the year 1896 clearly reveal the ecumenical flavor of the school: the student population represented twenty-seven denominations, the bulk of students coming from mainline denominations--Presbyterian, 89;
9Annual Catalogue, The Bible Institute for Home and Foreign Missions of the Chicago Evangelization Society (1895), p. 12.

1 eren s a es an S1X een ore1gn na 10na 1 1es.
The physical facilities available to these first students on the opening day of school were marginal. Three houses located in the vicinity of the Chicago Avenue Church on Chicago's near northside constituted the buildings of the Institute. The three houses plus a vacant lot had been purchased four months earlier for the grand sum of $50,000. By the first day of classes, construction of a large three-story brick building had begun on the vacant lot. The structure, known as the 153 Building, was to be the center of Institute activities, housing a large lecture hall, a library, offices, a dining room, a kitchen and a boiler room, and men's dormitory rooms. On January 16, 1890, dedication ceremonies for the 153 Building took place. In 1892, an additional two stories were added to the building. 12 Supporting this ambitious building project of the Institute was the strong board of trustees Moody had recruited. These
10
Catalogue of the Bible Institute for Home and Foreign Missions of the Chicago Evangelization Society (1897), p. 22.
llIbid.
12Gene A. Getz, MBI: The Story of Moody Bible Institute (Chicago: Moody Press, 1969), pp. 86-87.

To support financially the programs of the Institute during its first year of operation, it was estimated that $30,000 would be required and that most of this money would come from private donations. Little of the financial burden fell upon the students, who were not charged tuition; students paid a nominal $3.50 per week for board, with total

Primary responsibility for generating new revenue for the Institute fell upon the shoulders of Moody, who proposed raising the money in the same manner as he had done
13Ibid., p. 382.
14Record of Christian Work 8 (October 1899): 1.
15Moody to Mrs. Emily R. Jones, February 16, 1891, Moodyanna Collection, Moody Bible Institute, Chicago, Illinois.

As Moody grappled with money problems, Torrey concentrated his energies on dev, loping a curriculum for the Bible Institute radically different from his Yale liberal arts education. At Yale, Torrey had been taught to prize the liberal arts' emphasis on critical thinking as a way for discovering truth, but at the Institute critical thinking and learning were suspect. The Institute Tie declared: "Althoug~ we have all respect for learning yet when it degenerates into intellectual pride and presumption we are bound by loyalty to God and His word and our own salvation to refuse to follow men whose conclusions so belittle God and exalt men."17 Students at the Bible Institute were not to search for truth as Torrey had done, but were to accept what would become the fundamentalist premise that all necessary truth had been revealed and written down in the pages of the Bible. With a body of
16Moody to A. F. Gaylord, May 23, 1899, Moodyanna Collection, Moody Bible Institute, Chicago, Illinois.
17The Institute Tie 2 (January 16, 1893): 35.

19R• A. Torrey, Getting the Gold Out of the Word of God or How to Study the Bible (New York: Fleming H. Revell Company, 1925), p. 32.
20R• A. Torrey, What the Bible Teaches: A Thorough and Comprehensive Study of What the Bible has to Say Concerning the Great Doctrines of which it Treats (New York: Fleming H. Revell Company, 1898), p. 1. Torrey regarded this book as the most valuable book he had ever written.
88 An example of the inductive method of extracting doctrine from the Bible is the following excerpt from What the Bible Teaches:

is infinite."21

In associating science with his biblical exegesis, Torrey did not mean the accepted science of Charles Darwin, but the science of Francis Bacon. Torrey, in the tradition of such early nineteenth-century Christian apologists as Leonard Wood, treated biblical verses like the raw materials of science where truth could be discovered through inductive reasoning.
While Torrey's students spent much of their time tediously sifting through the individual verses of the Bible in search of truth, the overriding truthfulness and importance of the entire Bible were ever present. The following Torrey quotations from the classroom, published in The Institute Tie, for example, demonstrate its overreaching influence.
21 Ibid., p. 32.
Theories corne and theories go like the summer mists, but the Word of God endureth forever. 22
The belief that every verse in the Bible must be made to harmonize with all the others, and with our pre-conceived opinions, proceeds upon the hypothesis that man is infinite, and nothing can be true unless he can understand and explain it. 23
A knowledge of all the facts will reconcile all seeming contradictions in the Bible. 24 The simple q~estion is not what aQpears reasonable but what does the Word of God teach. 25 A good many of the passages which you can't understand are the ones which conflict with your notions. 26
Friends, you and I have no business to reason out the probability or improbability of a Bible doctrine; if the Bible teaches it, it is our business to believe it. 27

The doctrinal basis undergirding Torrey's absolute commitment to the Bible as the source of Christian truth can be attributed to his faith in the Bible as the inerrant Word of God--the faith he had gained during his stay in Germany. During the years following his visit to Germany, he developed and refined his ideas on biblical inerrancy. He taught his students that inerrancy entailed the concept that " ••. God Himself is the real Author of all the books: He was always guiding what ·every one wrote, whether it was Moses or John or Paul.,,28 God guided the writing of the Bible through the third member of the Trinity, the Holy Spirit, who chose the words and the smallest letter or portion of a letter to express the ideas of the Bible. 29 Because divine intervention provided the ideas, words, and letters of the biblical text, it followed logically that the Bible would reflect God's characteristics of being absolutely perfect and absolutely truthful.
In reality, however, a perfect Bible did not exist for Torrey and his students, because the loss of the
28R• A. Torrey, The God of the Bible: The God of the Bible as Distinguished from the God of "Christian Science," the God of "New Thought," the God of Spiritualism, the God of "Theosophy," the God of Unitarianism, the God of "The New Theology," the God of Modern Philosophv, and the God of Modernism in General (New York: George H. Doran Company, 1923), p. 41.
29R. A. Torrey, The Fundamental Doctrines of the Christian Faith (New York: George H. Doran Company, 1918),

Accompanying Torrey's belief in inerrancy was the idea that an infinite God in His wisdom had provided finite man with a biblical account that ordinary people could comprehend. Torrey told his classes that 99% of the Scripture had a surface meaning that was never understated or overstated. 33 Because most of the Bible did not fit the category of being an obscure, mysterious book, the same rules of interpretation and grammatical construction that students applied to the study of Shakespeare's King Lear also applied to the Bible. 34
To deal with the 1% of the Bible that baffled many Institute students and lay Christians, Torrey published Difficulties and Alleged Errors and Contradictions in the Bible (1905) that dealt with a potpourri of specific problems ranging from the sun standing still for Joshua
32R• A. Torrey, The Bible and Its Christ; Being Noonday Talks with Business Men on Faith and Unbelief (New York: Fleming H. Revell Company, 1904-1906), p. 102.
33Torrey, The Power of Prayer, p. 134.

A classic example of Torrey's orthodox defense of the Bible dealt with the 110th Psalm for which Torrey accepted the traditional view of the Psalm as being written by David and dealing with the subject of the corning Messiah --Jesus Christ. Strongly supporting this position were twenty-three verses from the New Testament, verses that included statements by Jesus linking himself with the 110th Psalm. Challenging this orthodox position was the liberalminded George Adam Smith (1856-1942), a professor of Old Testament at the Free Church College in Glasgow, Scotland, who totally disagreed with the commonly accepted authorship and meaning of the 110th Psalm. In 1899, Smith and Torrey met and debated the issue of the 110th Psalm. The debate did not take place within the confines of the Bible Institute where intellectual controversy was not prized, but at Moody's Northfield Bible Conference. In the following Smith-Torrey exchange, the issues of the debate are revealed in addition to Torrey's fundamentalist-like logic that inevitably leads to an orthodox conclusion.
35R. A. Torrey, Difficulties and Alleged Errors and Contradictions in the Bible (Chicago: The Bible Institute Colportage Association, 1907), passim.
"Professor Smith, you teach that the 110th Psalm is not Messianic, and that it was not written by David; that it refers to a brother of Jonathan Maccabeus, and is not by David at all, but by some unknown man of that period. If that be true, one of two things must also be true--it is certain, either that Jesus Christ knew it was not by David, and did not refer to Himself, in which case, in building an argument for His Divinity upon it, He deliberately pulled the wool over the eyes of those to whom He spoke, or else He did not know it, in which case He built an argument for His Divinity upon a mistake. In either case what are you going to do with ~he Divinity of Christ?"
Smith replied, "I do not build my faith in His Divinity on the 110th Psalm."
"Neither do I," answered Torrey, "but having found out that He is Divine, I must maintain that He knows what He is talking about when He built an argument for His Divinity on the 110th Psalm."36

Experience (New York: Fleming H. Revell Company, 1910),

Bible writers nowhere teach error. 8 This distinction between "mistaken hopes" and "biblical teachingsII would find expression and amplification in his subsequent writings. For instance, Torrey wrote that the Holy Spirit had kept Paul free from all errors in his teaching. 39 Once the Holy Spirit had descended upon a prophet such as Paul, the prophet instantaneously became an infallible mouthpiece for God. 40 How one determined whether a particular prophet spoke with the power of tpe Holy Spirit or from a position of IImistaken hopes,1I Torrey never provided adequate criteria to distinguish.
By accepting the Bible as a mixture of the human and the divine, Torrey demonstrated a greater sophistication in biblical interpretation than would most fundamentalists, but at the same time this sophistication challenged his own inerrancy doctrine that all the ideas, words, letters, and even portions of letters within the Bible were inspired by God. Torrey did not repudiate or

Beyond the formal teaching of Bible doctrine to the Institute students, Torrey established a program of practical Christianity in which the students went out into the world and applied what they had learned in the classroom. Everyday, except Monday, Institute students traveled to the slums of Chicago and its environs to present the gospel of Jesus Christ. During the program's first year of operation, the 253 men and women students established an incredible record of making 22,766 personal visits and conduct~ng 3,380 meetings of various kinds. For all of this hard work there were 2,729 conversions, which averaged out to around ten conversions for every student. 41 While the harvest of converts may have been small in relation to the effort, Torrey calculated that if 2,000 people would each convert one person to Christ in a year and the converts each led one person to Christ in the next year, etc., then everybody on earth would have hea'rd the gospel in thirty-five
42

' f' t 43

To help Institute students deal with the large number of Catholics and non-believers in Chicago, Torrey published his first book, How to Bring Men to Christ (1893). Encouraged by Moody to write the book, Torrey expressed the hope "that from a careful study of these pages any earnest Christian can learn how to do efficient work in bringing others to the Saviour."45 To achieve this task, Torrey developed nine general categories of people hostile to Christianity and suggested scripture verses
43p' A H' f Ch' 3 : 21 22 •

44Ibid., p. 543.
45R. A. Torrey, How to Bring Men to Christ (Old Tappan, New Jersey: Fleming H. Revell Company, 1893), p. 5.

The most dramatic application of practical Christianity for Torrey and the Instit-te students took place in

Extensive planning for the World's Fair campaign, however, did not take into account the severe economic downturn in the country's economy that began May 5, 1893, four days after President Grover Cleveland had officially opened the World's Fair. The recession, which became known as the Panic of 1893, brought about a sharp reduction in the value of stocks, a dramatic decline in the government's gold reserves, and lower attendance at the fair. Despite a lower attendance, the 27 million fairgoers 48 brought enough money into the Chicago economy to limit the city's economic suffering and keep the Bible Institute solvent.
For the six-month duration of the World's Fair, the Bible Institute served as a nerve center for the evangelistic
48Ray Ginger, Altgeld's America: The Lincoln Ideal versus Changing Realities (New York: Funk & Wagnalls Cnmpany, 1958: reprint ed., New York: New Viewpoints, 1973), pp. 21-22.
100 crusade, with prominent churches such as the First Congregational Church and Immanuel Baptist Church serving as meeting places. 49 In addition to church buildings, Moody rented large theaters, public halls, and tents to accommodate more people. 50 These facilities located in the loop area of Chicago, several miles from the fairgrounds on the southside of Chicago, caused Torrey-and others-concern: would people attending the fair want to go out of their way to attend revival meetings? Implicit within this question was the belief that The World's Fair Evangelization Campaign could be a gigantic failure.
In order to attract people to the various meetings, Moody enlisted the help of prominent evangelicals such as

Any evaluation of the success of The World's Fair
49Dennis Erwin Graff, "Dwight L. Moody and the 1893 Chicago World's Fair Campaign" (M.A. thesis, Wheaton College, 1965), pp. 35-36.
50Ibid., p. 37.
51Martin, Torrey, p. 98.
52Graff, "D\,light L. Moody and the 189:; Chicago World's Fair Campaign," p. 50.

While Torrey remained extremely busy during 1893
53Estimates which appear to be greatly inflated are suggested in: Reverend H. B. Hartzler, Moody in Chicago or the World's Fair Gospel Campaign: an Account of Six Months' Evangelistic Work in the City of Chicago and Vicinity During the Time of the World's Columbian Exposition, Conducted by Dwight L. Moody and His Associates

54Martin, Torrey, p. 99.
55Graff, "Dwight L. Moody and the 1893 Chicago World's Fair Campaign," p. 74.
56James F. Findlay, Jr., Dwight L. Moody: American Evangelist, 1837-1899 (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1969), p. 401.

Located adjacent to the Bible Institute, the Chicago Avenue Church, like the Bible Institute, was a product of Moody's Chicago ministry. After the Chicago fire of 1871 had destroyed Moody's Illinois Street Church, the evangelist decided to build an even larger church at a new location on the corner of Chicago Avenue and LaSalle Street. In 1872, construction began on the Chicago Avenue Church, which was to have a seating capacity of 2,000 people. Four years later the stone and brick Gothic structure was completed and free of debt. 58
57Record of Christian Work 13 (April 1894): 116.
58Richard Ellsworth Day, Bush Aglow: The Life Story of Dwight Lyman Moody, Commoner of Northfield (Philadelphia: The Judson Press, 1937), pp. 147-148.

Before Torrey accepted the pastorate of the Chicago Avenue Church, the sanctuary was normally half full on Sundays; once he began his preaching on a permanent basis, almost immediately the church became overcrowded with people. Attendance at Sunday evening services grew until the church.had a difficult time seating the worshippers, sometimes numbering 2,700 and mostly men,59 who were eager

Torrey's enormous success at the Chicago Avenue Church can be attributed to the appeal of his message and to the unsettling effects of the Panic of 1893 that drove many people to religion. By early 1894 the worst depression to strike the United States in the nineteenth century had caused the closing of 600 banks, the failure of 15,000 businesses, and 74 railroads to be placed in receivership. Unemployment totaled an astounding 2.5 million, or about 20% of the labor force. It would not be until 1901 or 1902

In Chicago during the winter of 1893-1894, 100,000 people were jobless; many of the unemployed were also the homeless who had to use the fl00rs and stairways of City Hall as sleeping space and rely upon Chicago saloonkeepers for free lunches. One famous·city personality, Michael "Hinky Dink" Kenna, First Ward alderman, fed 8,000 destitute people in a single week from his saloon. 63 While this haphazard relief effort provided temporary help, many people sought permanent solutions to their problems by turning to a religion of certainty as preached by Torrey or by taking dramatic action against the institutions of society.
One extreme action by an individual striking out was the assassination of the mayor of Chicago, Carter Harrison, on October 28, 1893. After delivering a speech at the World's Fair extolling the greatness of Chicago, the sixty-eight-year-old mayor returned to his home where he encountered a visitor. The visitor promptly fired three bullets into Harrison, and the mayor died within fifteen minutes. Prendergast, the assassin, proved to be a disappointed office seeker who had failed to obtain a job as
62Norman K. Risjord, America: A History of the United States (Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1985), p. 563; Harold U. Faulkner, Politics, Reform and Expansion, 1890-1900 (New York: Harper & Row Publishers, 1959), p. 143.

In the months following the Harrison killing, the economic consequences of the depression increased in severity. Businesses resorted to wage cuts and layoffs to stay in operation, and frustrated workers responded with strikes in order to force business concessions. During 1894 alone, there were more than 1,300 strike. nationwide, with the most famous and most violent strike, the Pullman strike, taking place in Chicago. This strike seemed to confirm Chicago's unsavory reputation of being a center for labor agitation and violence, a reputation that it had earned in 1886 with the bloody Haymarket Riot in which nine policemen had been fatally wounded.
At the Pullman Palace Car Company, located just south of Chicago in the company town of Pullman (now a part of Chicago), company management responded to the depression by summarily laying off 40% of the work force and reducing wages by 25%. While wages were reduced, the rents paid by workers in this company town were not decreased, thereby causing a severe economic crunch for the workers. 65 A
64stephen Longstreet, Chicago, 1860-1919 (New York: David McKay Company, Inc., 1973), pp. 288-289.
65Ginger, Altgeld's America, p. 150.

hell."66
In June 1894, Eugene V. Debs, the head of the American Railway Union, joined the Pullman strikers by giving them money and ordering his 150,000 union members not to handle trains with Pullman cars. Railroad owners responded by firing all workers who complied with Debs' order; Debs responded by calling a general railroad strike that haulted all rail service between Chicago and the west coast. In the midst of this chaos and on the pretext that the strike interfered with the U.S. mails, the Cleveland administration obtained an injunction against Debs and the American Railway Union, an injunction that, when backed by the 2,000 troops that President Cleveland ordered to Chicago, effectively ended the strike. However, before the strike ended, strike-related violence had taken the lives of four people in Chicago and thirty-four other human

The physical and emotional scars associated with the Pullman strike, the assassination of the mayor, and the never-ending depression left many Chicagoans bewildered and uncertain as to what the fut~re held for them. In their attempt to make sense of an unsettled, chaotic world, some people found that re~igion provided the answers. During the trying years of 1893-1901, Torrey preached an enticing Christian message from the pulpit of the Chicago Avenue Church, a message that claimed to offer the right answer for people seeking absolute answers.
In bringing his message to an audience, Torrey used a compelling and powerful preaching style infused with a deep sense )f conviction. In a way, Torrey fulfilled his youthful ambition to be a lawyer; he played the role, trying to overwhelm the congregation-the jury-with what he conceived

THERE are two events in the future which are absolutely

Jesus Christ is coming again to receive His people
67Richard Hofstader and Michael Wallace, eds., American Violence: A Documentary History (New York: Random House, 1970; Vintage Books), p. 152.
68MCLoughlin, Modern Revivalism, p. 371.
108 unto himself, and to reward them according to their works; and in the second place, it is absolutely certain that Jesus Christ is corning again to judge
the world. 69 Having caught the attention of the audience, Torrey painted a graphic picture of an omniscient God who would judge people on the basis of the innermost secrets of their hearts:

Capitalizing on the strong emotionalism generated by the subject of judgment, Torrey presented a plan of salvation to the audience, an orthodox plan of salvation that Torrey always included in his sermons. The blueprint for salvation included two mutually supporting principles, an acceptance of the Bible as God's direct revelation to man and a recognition that Jesus Christ arose from the dead.
69R• A. Torrey, Revival Addresses (Greenwood, South Carolina: The Attic Press, Inc., 1974), p. 51.

Relying upon the biblical account of Christ's resurrection, Torrey, in typical Common Sense fashion, declared that the resurrection of Jesus "is not a theological fiction; it is not a poet's dream: it is an established fact of history."71 Torrey continued to preach in a similar vein:

71 Ibid., p. 53.

Sermons like "The Judgment Day" helped to spark and sustain a spirit of revival within the Chicago Avenue Church that energiz~d the church and created overflow crowds, a condition similar to what had happened in Torrey's Minneapolis and Garrettsville churches. In Chicago, however, there were a number of people from the Bible Institute who worked closely with Torrey at the church. These individuals included Dr. D. B. Towner of the Institute's music department, who conducted the church choir; Charles M. Alexander, a student, who led the children's choir; and Ayme·r F. Gaylord, who served as the Institute's business manager and the church's Sunday school superintendent. Torrey's confidant and assistant at the church was William S. Jacoby, an Inst ~tute stu ent n~ne years orrey s sen~or. 74

74Martin, Torrey, pp. 113-114.

At the Bible Institute Torrey took a special interest in Jacoby and encouraged him in his studies. When Torrey eventually selected him to be his assistant at the church, the teacher-student relationship ended and a close
75Torrey, The Holy Spirit, p. 82.
76Ibid; George T. B. Davis, Twice Around the World with Alexander, Prince of Gospel Singers (New York: The Christian Herald, 1907), p. 95.
77Mart'1D, Torrey, p. 113 .

The foundation of this unique relationship between the Yale-educated Torrey and Jacoby, with his notorious background, rested on mutually accepted religious beliefs. Torrey wrote about this special friendship in the following words:

Jacoby's invaluable assistance to Torrey at the Chicago Avenue Church still left Torrey with a demanding work schedule. On one occasion Moody wrote to Torrey saying, "Fitt Moody's son-in-law thinks you are tired and overworked. I hope not and if you feel worn why
79Torrey, The Holy Spirit, p. 82.

We must push on to new fields in 1895. 83 While Moody demanded a lot from his superintendent, Torrey himself expected to achieve much through Bible study and prayer, hard work, and a strictly disciplined life of eighteen-hour days.
Insight into Torrey's life of work and discipline has been provided by a granddaughter who has left a description of his later years during "retirement." At six o'clock, he would arise and have a quiet time until
81Moody to Torrey, October 8, 1894, Moodyanna Collection, Moody Bible Institute, Chicago, Illinois.

Moody to Torrey, December 10, 1894, Moodyanna Collection, Chicago, Illinois.

A pleasant respite from the demanding work schedules at the Bible Institute and church came every summer when Torrey and his family traveled eastward to Northfield, Massachusetts, to Moody's Northfield Bible Conference. Established in 1879, by the 1890s, the Northfield Bible Conference had earned a reputation as being a center where outstanding Christian leaders from both sides of the Atlantic Ocean came to speak on subjects such as Bible study and how to successfully conduct home and foreign missionaryendeavors. 8S An excellent reputation brought the Conference a steady rise in the number of participants during the decade of the nineties with attendance ranging from 380 people in 1890 to 584 people in 1899. To Torrey's great delight, a significant proportion of these participants were from Yale; percentages ranged from a low of
84Taped interview with Jill Torrey Renich by Robert Schuster, Niles Michigan, May 16, 1980. Tape is stored at the Billy Graham Center, Wheaton, Illinois.
85Martin, Torrey, pp. 116-117.

At Northfield, the Torrey family enjoyed the long, lazy days of summer in their summer home which overlooked the conference grounds and the beautiful Connecticut River Valley. In these pleasant surroundings, Torrey's hectic pace of living slowed down, thereby allowing him to spend more time with his wife and five child~en. On occasion, Torrey would be asked to address the conference participants on one of Moody's favorite topics, the power
·· ld b . f b' b th HIS . . 87

With the summer of 1898, however, the idyllic s~l~~ers always associated with Northfield suddenly changed to one of grieving. Torrey's beloved daughter, Elizabeth, died in the spring of 1898. Her death proved to be the greatest tragedy that Torrey ever confronted, a tragedy that shook his very being.
The tragic sequence of events leading to Elizabeth's death began one March Saturday in 1898 when she became sick after an outing with Jacoby at Lincoln Park in Chicago. On Sunday and Monday she remained at home instead of going to church and school, while Torrey and his wife believed that she was suffering from a bilious attack. On Tuesday the doctor arrived at the home and incorrectly diagnosed her
86James B. Reynolds, Samuel H. Fisher, and Henry B. Wright, eds., Two Centuries of Christian Activity at Yale (New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1901), app., D.
87Torrey, Why God Used D. L. Moody, pp. 55-59.

On Thursday, March 19th, Elizabeth's condition appeared to be so improved that Torrey wrote hopeful letters to Moody and other close friends telling them how the crisis had passed. On the same day, however, the spirit of hopefulness suddenly changed to despair when the nurse attending the child shouted for Torrey and his wife to come to their daughter's bedside. In later years Torrey described the pathetic scene when he reached his daughter's side:
Elizabeth's eyes were closed. She was breathing

taken its flight from the mortal body. It was so
sudden, so unexpected, it was almost crushing. 89 Torrey, who had prayed for the healing of others, now had to try and cope with the death of his young daughter.
Adding to his acute distress was a health department order that the body had to be buried at once so as to prevent the spread of diptheria. No one except the Torreys and Jacoby was allowed to attend the funeral. The Torrey children had to remain across the street from the cemetery
88Torrey, The Holy Spirit, p. 93.

117 while their sister's casket was lowered into the grave in the midst of a downpour of rain. During this time of overwhelming grief, Torrey's wife could only say: "'Archie, I am so glad that Elizabeth is not in that box! ,,,90 That night, the Torrey family had to stay in the unfamiliar surroundings of a hotel so that their home could be fumigated.
The next morning, as Torrey walked from the hotel to the Institute to conduct classes, the full impact of the events during the previous days finally overwhelmed him. Within a few feet of the Institute, Torrey cried out Elizabeth's name in sorrow. In this moment of existential despair he experienced a sense of joy that he had never known in his entire life,91 a joy he attributed to the power of the Holy Spirit. In later years, he described this feeling of joy in the following words:
It is an unspeakably glorious thing to have your

and sixty-five days in every year, springing up
under all circumstances into everlasting life.92 Despite the mention of 365 days of joy, in the days immediately following Elizabeth's death, Torrey continued to suffer from moments of depression and despair. In
90Ibid., p. 95.

Like Torrey, the country as a whole found the Spanish-American War to be a convenient diversion from a more pressing worry--the economic depression that continued to plague the country. Before the outbreak of war the American public had readily accepted the sensationalized accounts of Spanish violence in Cuba· as reported in the newspapers, particularly those papers owned by Hearst and Pulitzer. Many newspapers affiliated with Protestant churches openly called for United States intervention in Cuba as a crusade to save tne Cuban people from their Spanish colonial masters. Merged with this crusading spirit was a feeling of nationalism that burst forth in the country after the sinking of the U.S.S. Maine in Havanna harbor on February 15, 1898. Under these circumstances, it was not surprising that a declaration of war brought forth many volunteers to swell the ranks of the army from its peace-time level of 30,100 men to 274,000
93

93Richard B. Morris and Jeffrey B. Morris, eds., Encyclopedia of American History, Bicentennial ed. (New York: Harper & Row, Publishers, 1976), pp. 343 & 345.

While the American public's zeal for the war effort did not waver, Torrey's initial enthusiasm for the war turned to disillusionment when he arrived at the American army camps and witnessed the raw camp life involving prostitutes and liquor. 95 After serving a brief tour of duty as chaplain, Torrey, memories of his beloved Elizabeth always with him, returned to Chicago and engaged in a heavy.work schedule at the Bible Institute and the Chicago Avenue Church.
A year and a half after Elizabeth's death, Torrey had to deal with the death of another person very close to him--Dwight L. Moody. Moody's final days began on November 15, 1899, when he became 7isibly ill at a revival campaign in Kansas City, Missouri. 96 Eventually, Moody became so ill that he could no longer continue, and he decided to return to Northfield after summoning Torrey to complete the campaign.

liThe death of Mr. Moody is a call to go forward-a call to his children, to his associates, to ministers of the Word everywhere, to the whole church. 'Our leader has fallen; let us give up the work,' some would say. Not for a minute! Listen to what God says, 'Your leader is fallen; move forward. IIMoses my servant is dead; therefore arise, go in, and possess the land. Be strong and of a good courage, be not afraid. 1I As I was with Moody, so I will be with thee. I will not fail thee nor forsake thee!' ••• His death, with the triumphal scenes that surround it, are part of God's way of answering the prayers that have been going on for so long in our land for a revival. 1I99
Shortly after Moody's funeral the Bible Institute's Board of Trustees voted to carryon the memory of their departed leader by changing the name of the Institute to

Not everybody conferred upon Torrey the mantle of the great Moody, particularly A. P. Pitt, Moody's son-inlaw. A week after Moody's funeral, Pitt wrote Gaylord, the Institute's business manager, to express concern over several of Torrey's religious views, including the notion of faith healing. Pitt questioned whether the holding of such views should be allowed of a person who was on the Institute's board of trustees. 102 Pitt chose not to, but he could also have questioned Torrey's membership on the boards of trustees of the Mount Hermon and Northfield schools. 103 His anxiety over Torrey's religious views may be understood as a response to a feeling of insecurity in his administrative position at the Institute. Torrey was the recognized head of the school, even though Moody
100Ibid•
101 paul White, The Moody Church Story (n.p., n.d.), p. 7.
102A. P. Pitt to A. P. Gaylord, January 3, 1900, Moodyanna Collection, Moody Bible Institute, Chicago, Illinois.
103p~n ' dlay, D' h L. dy, 399

One example of Torrey's tenacious emphasis on evangelism was the weekly prayer meetings for world-wide revival that were started at the Bible Institute. Every Saturday night, after Torrey's Bible class, from nine o'clock to ten o'clock, 300 to 400 people would gather to

During January 1901, a Dr. Warren and a Mr. Barber from Australia stopped in Chicago on their way horne, to
104

While preparations were underway, Torrey began to have second thoughts about going as he reviewed his many obligations to the Bible Institute, the church, and his family.ll0 These responsibilities weighed heavily upon his mind, while the memory of his deceased daughter encouraged him to leave Chicago and travel thousands of miles
106showers of Blessing, n.v. (June 27, 1901): 3.
107Davis, Torrey and Alexander, p. 13.
108Dr • W. Warren, God at Work, 2nd ed. (London: "Christian Herald" Co., Ltd., n.d.), p. 4.
109Ibid.

111
R. A. Torrey, The Gospel for To-day; New Evangelistic Sermons for a New Day (New York: Fleming H. Revell Company, 1922), pp. 32-33.
112Showers of Blessing, n.v. (June 27, 1903): 3.

Looking to his future responsibilities as leader of the Melbourne campaign, Torrey believed that any success resulting from the crusade would corne directly from God. Hoping to begin a victorious evangelistic crusade, he sent five thousand personally signed letters to committed Christians, asking them to pray daily for success in Melbourne. 114 The Missionary Study and Prayer Union, which had been established in the summer of 1901 with Torrey as its president, helped to promote this prayer endeavor.
After the extensive trip preparations had been completed and on the eve of their departure to Australia, Torrey and his wife had to endure a final public farewell at the Moody Church. The Reverend E. M. Williams, who had supported Torrey for the superintendency twelve years earlier and now served as the secretary of the Executive Committee of the Chicago Theological Seminary, praised him for his work and extended to him the best wishes of the Congregational Ministerial Union of Chicago in his new

After the public adulations of the farewell meeting, Torrey and Clara boarded a train for San Francisco, and, on December 28, 1901, they sailed from San Francisco to Australia by way of Hawaii, Japan, and China. Two years after Moody's death, Torrey had clearly assumed the mantle of his mentor as an evangelist winning others to Christ in the spirit of nineteenth-century American revivalism.

When the Torreys left San Francisco on December 28, 1901, they confronted a grueling schedule that had expanded considerably from the initial plan of only spending a month in Australia conducting an evangelistic campaign. Before arriving in Australia, Torrey and his wife were to stop in Honolulu, Japan, and China to lead revival meetings. After completing their work in Australia, the Torreys were scheduled to return to America by completing an around-theworld trip with stops in India and Great Britain. 1
After traveling on a ship for more than a week out of San Francisco, the Torreys finally arrived at Honolulu, where they stayed for less than twenty-four hours. Despite the brief layover, Torrey conducted a religious meeting for Americans and Englishmen and a separate meeting for the island natives. At the conclusion of the latter meeting, thirty Hawaiians accepted Christ, becoming the first con

1Institute Tie 2 (January 1902): 155.

3The Southern Cross Special Mission Number, n.v. (September 10, 1902): 61.

The thing that interested us was that so many of

Christian meeting they had ever been in, and the
first Christian sermon they had ever heard. 5 This impression confirmed in Torrey's mind the power of the Christian message and the validity of his Cornmon Sense view that people from all nations and cultures essentially thought alike, a condition that enabled all people to grasp the truth when presented to them.
From Japan the Torreys sailed to China where they spent thirty-one exhaustive days conducting evangelistic meetings three or four times a day. Cities visited in China included Shanghai, Hangchow, Soochow, Foochow, and Canton. 6 Conversions were difficult to obtain in China because of the dominance of Confucianism and the presence of an anti-foreign spirit as the result of the Boxer Rebellion. In the spring of 1900 a group of dedicated

Under these difficult circumstances, Torrey still had some limited success in gaining Christian converts. Important converts included a daughter of one of the richest men in China and two members from the household of a man close to the Emperor. 7 The difficulty of gaining converts did not lessen Torrey's enthusiasm for China as a mission field, as evidenced by his later involvement in the establishment of a Bible institute in China. At the conclusion of the Chinese crusade, Torrey and his wife began the last leg of their journey to the nominally Christian

When the Torreys reached Australia in April of 1902, they were met by a former student, who had directed the children's choir at the Chicago Avenue Church, Charles Alexander. Alexander had arrived earlier to make the necessary arrangements for the musical portion of the campaign. His presence in Australia as the crusade's song leader had corne about as an afterthought. Some time after Torrey had
7Showers of Blessing, n.v. (June 27, 1903): 5.

Alexander's social background, like that of Moody's and Jacoby's, contrasted sharply with Torrey's middle-class upbringing, but the two men's conservative religious ideas compared favorably •. Alexander was born in a Tennessee log cabin after the Civil War to a family of humble means. Encouraged by his father, an elder in the Presbyterian church, Alexander as a young boy displayed an interest in religious music. After receiving a public school education, Alexander matriculated at Maryville University where he studied music and eventually became the school's director of music. During his years at the college he began to move in the direction of a conservative religion after reading Charles Finney's autobiography three times and experiencing the trauma of his father's death. On the night of his father's ~sath, Alexander had to walk across town to find an undertaker for the body, an experience that led him to ponder the fate of his father's soul.
8D . Torrey an A exan er, p. 13 •

Before the Americans had arrived in the Australian capital of Melbourne for their first crusade, extensive preparations had been underway for several months by an ad hoc committee consisting of prominent Melbourne ministers and laymen. Every house in Melbourne (metropolitan population of 500,000) had been visited twice, and 2,000 prayer
10Ibid., p. 30.

During the first night of the crusade, Torrey carefully set the tone of the campaign by announcing that he did not depend on tbe organizational methods of man for the crusade's success; he looked to God, who would not only bring a triumphant revival to Australia, but to the world. No doubt Torrey was impressive--a good-looking man of commanding presence despite his medium height, with a balding head and a well-groomed gray beard and moustache of nineteenth-century style. Torrey fervently declared:

are to see one of the mightiest movements in the
history of the Church of Jesus Christ on earth."13 While Torrey provided the audience with a sense of being part of a larger movement that extended beyond the boundaries of Melbourne, Alexander catered to the emotional needs of the people through his songs, the most popular song being the "Glory Song." After the first meeting, the

12Showers of Blessing, n.v. (June 27, 1903); 5; Warren, God at Work, p. 4.

The Melbourne crusade, or Simultaneous Mission, as it was also known, lasted for one month. In many ways,· this campaign imitated the famous 1893 World's Fair Evangelistic Campaign in Chicago by providing for simultaneous meetings in fifty different centers throughout the city during the first two weeks of the crusade. 15 The latter weeks of the campaign centered on the Melbourne Exhibition Hall where crowds of seven or eight thousand people congregated to hear Torrey and Alexander. 16
During the last two weeks of the campaign, Alexander conducted a large choir of 1,250 voices through a series of songs at the beginning of the meetings, to help warm the audience to Torrey's message. First, the choir would sing a hymn through under the direction of Alexander. Alexander would then turn and face the thousands of people on the main floor and, his commanding presence enhanced by his tall stature, he would successfully lead them in the melody; then he would direct the people in the galleries in song, and finally the assembled ministers and dignitaries on the platform were required to sing by themselves. Conducting the voices of thousands of people required a magnetic
14Ibid., pp. 77-79.

audience as fire would melt wax."17 At th.e concl.usion of the singing portion of the meeting, the audience would then be in a receptive mood to hear Torrey's sermon.
In sharp contrast to the emotionalism generated by Alexander's singing was Torrey's calm, deliberative method of delivering the sermon. Like the members of the Moody Church, Australians were attracted to Torrey's unorthodox method of preaching revival that stressed reason rather than emotion. At the conclusion of a sermon, Torrey always provided his listeners with the opportunity to make a rational decision for salvation by accepting Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior. When Torrey issued an appeal for a decision, Alexander would direct the choir in the singing of a hymn emphasizing the seriousness of the moment and heightening the emotions of the people. One hymn used frequently, "Tell Mother I'll be There," contained the following chorus:
Tell moth-er I'll be there,

At the conclusion of the Melbourne campaign on May 10, 1902, Torrey and Alexander immediately set off to conduct similar revival meetings in other towns of southeastern Australia-Ballarat, Geelong, Warnambool, Mary-borough, Terand, Bendigo, and Sydney-in addition to the towns of Hobart and Launceston on the island of Tasmania. The successful revival in Melbourne furnished a momentum that caused people in these towns to turn out in large numbers to hear Torrey and Alexander; the result was an
18Ibid., p. 165.

One important convert for Torrey and Alexander during their travels through southeastern Australia was Robert Harkness of Bendigo, a tall, slender young man with a boyish look. During the June 14-18th Bendigo campaign Harkness played the piano at the revival meetings. 20 At the conclusion of the first meeting in Bendigo, Torrey approached the young man and unabashedly asked him if he was a Christian; Harkness replied in the negative. 21 Harkness continued to play the piano for the duration of the Bendigo campaign without accepting Christ. Alexander asked Harkness to accompany them to the next town, and shortly afterwards Harkness (while riding a bicycle) made a decision to accept Christ. 22 Ultimately, Harkness became the permanent pianist for Torrey and Alexander during their world-wide evangelistic crusade. In later years Harkness served as a close associate of Torrey's while earning an international reputation as a composer of Gospel hymns. 23
While Harkness eventually accepted the implications of Torrey's preaching, not everybody agreed with Torrey and his message. For example, in the town of Ballarat opposition developed to Torrey's prohibition of dancing. A more
20Alexander and Maclean, Charles M. Alexander, p. 55.

138 serious dispute occurred in Sydney when Torrey boldly declared that Jesus Christ had been killed by the Unitarians of the time, specifically Jews, but in a more general sense by believers in God who were not willing to accept the Trinitarian position that Christ was Divine. This remark of a combative nature, foreshadowing a fundamentalist mood, created instant controversy and led to an invitation for a Unitarian pastor to respond to Torrey's charge at a revival meeting. On the night when the Unitarian minister appeared at the revival meeting, Torrey repeated his charge that Unitarians were Christ-killers and then began to attack the integrity of the Unitarian minister present at the meeting. Rhetorically he asked if the Unitarian pastor on the platform was the same minister who had left America after abandoning his wife, sailed to New Zealand with another man's wife, traveled to Tasmania where he was driven out by a mob, and then journeyed to Sydney where he became a Unitarian pastor. After this scathing attack, which proved to be true, Torrey announced that he would not allow a person with this kind of reputation to speak before the audience, thereby effectively prohibiting a Unitarian

24Robert Harkness, Reuben Archer Torrey: The Man, His Message (Chicago: The Bible Institute Colportage Association, 1929), pp. 37-39.

If it has, how come all the great universities were founded by Christians? Where is there a great university founded by infidels?

Prayer is itself one of the most potent of causes. God knows from eternity what prayers will be offered to Him, and in the arrangement of His plans takes these prayers into account.

At the conclusion of the Sydney crusade the evangelistic campaign in Australia came to an end after five months of intense activity and the claiming of 20,000 converts. From Australia Torrey and Alexander sailed across the stormy Sea of Tasman to the island country of New Zealand to begin a revival campaign that has been described as more successful than the Australian campaign. 26
On August 27th the evangelistic team arrived in Wellington, New Zealand, to conduct a crusade at the personal invitation of the city's mayor. After less than two

In the British colony of India, Torrey and Alexander spent six exhaustive weeks conducting evangelistic crusades in a culture hostile to Christianity. Cities on their itinerary included Madras, Calcutta, Bombay, and the Hindu holy city of Benares. Welcoming the evangelists to Madras was the local secretary of the YMCA and former student of the Moody Bible Institute, Mary Hill. During a week in

On arrival in England, the Torreys received an official welcome at Exeter Hall in London. The informal welcoming committee of prominent English evangelicals that greeted the Torreys on January 9, 1903 included the Reverend Prebendary Webb-Peploe, the Reverend F. B. Meyer,

"I am here to-nigHt • • • to try and repay a debt of gratitude, to repay in a small way what I owe to Dr. Torrey, and our beloved and dear brother Moody. In 1895, I was at Northfield, U.S.A., and experienced great kindness. A little later, I was privileged to go to Chicago, and stay at the beautiful Institute for one week, when I saw what Dr. Torrey had been permitted to do there. That is my justification for standing here now to welcome Dr. Torrey and Mr. Alexander•..."33

After these many kind words were spoken, Torrey rose and spoke with authority about the sources of power for Christians--the power of prayer, the power of the blood of Christ (atonement), the power of the Word of God, and the

"I believe • • • you and I are to see one of the great revivals of all time--one of the greatest revivals in all the world's history. A revival in earlier days meant something more or less circumscribed. A revival in this age of post, telegraph,' newspapers, and all the ease of modern communication, a revival in Australia means a revival all round the globe, and you and I are, as I say, across the threshold of one of the greatest epochs in the history of the Church of Christ on earth."36

Following in the footsteps of Moody and Sa.nkey who had visited Edinburgh thirty years earlier, Torrey and Alexander accepted the invitation and arrived in the city for a February 2nd public welcome from Dr. James C. Russell, Moderator of the Church of Scotland, and the Reverend Robert Rainy, Principal of New College in Edinburgh. 38 This official sanction of the crusade by two

Jesus. 39 Torrey's unexpected success in Edinburgh, particularly with university students, may be attributed to his appeal to the intellect rather than to the emotions, an appeal informed by Scottish Common Sense philosophy, whose center was Edinburgh.
From the "cap and gown" town of Edinburgh the Torrey-Alexander mission journeyed to the Scottish industrial city of Glasgow, at the invitation of the United Evangelistic Association, an organization of evangelical ministers and laymen that had come into existence during the 1874 Moody crusade in the city.40 The Reverend Dr. Howie, Moderator of the United Free Church, formally welcorned the evangelists to Glasgow with remarks that noted a developing opposition to Torrey's revival method of having people stand and confess Christ in public; Dr. Howie sided

From Glasgow the Torrey party traveled to Aberdeen, Scotland, and spent the month of April in that city, before returning to the United States by way of Belfast, Ireland. 43 In Belfast, a Protestant enclave on an island dominated by Roman Catholics, Torrey and Alexander were enormously successful. Supported by local Methodists, Presbyterians, and Plymouth Brethern, thousands of people flocked to the meetings, which were initially held in two large halls. The large number of people forced Torrey to ask the well-to-do citizenry to stay home so working-class people could attend. When this plea went unheeded, a suggestion was made to use a building in the market section of the city that could accomodate 7,000 people. After a test to determine if Torrey's voice could carry throughout the vast structure, meetings were scheduled in the new building. Despite these new accomodations, the first meeting had an overflow crowd

In June 1903, Torrey and Alexander finally arrived back in Chicago, six months behind their original schedule, to receive a tumultuous welcome at an evening gathering of the faithful in the Chicago Auditorium. Before the 8 P.M. meeting a crowd estimated at 10,000 gathered outside the Auditorium for admittance to a building that could only hold 6,000 people. 45 On the platform to greet the now world-famous evangelists were conservative evangelical leaders that included Dr. C. I. Scofield, Dr. James M. Gray, and Dr. J. Wilbur Chapman. Delivering a welcome address was Luther Laflin Mills, a prominent Chicago lawyer, who portrayed Torrey as a conquering hero for God.

ity of men in their spiritual weaknesses and needs. 47 After this stirring introduction, Torrey stood during prolonged applause and then proceeded to speak for one hour about his experiences as a world-wide evangelist. At the conclusion of his remarks he triumphantly declared that the world revival many people had prayed for was now underway.
During the summer months of 1903, Torrey and Alexander were kept busy speaking at Bible conference meetings and planning for an early departure to Great Britain. Included in the plans for overseas travel were Torrey's wife and four children. Arrangements were finally completed in August, and the Torrey entourage left the United States during the latter part of the month.

The new year brought with it the opening of the Birmingham, England crusade on January 17, 1904, in Bingley 51

At the opposite end of the social scale, Torrey's ministry in Birmingham also appealed to a number of wealthy, Christian families wh'.:> viewed Torrey as an effective instrument for spreading the gospel message. One of these prominent families was the· Cadbury family of cocoa rnanufacturing fame. Within the family, one member, Helen Cadbury, worked particularly hard during the Birmingham
52Maclean, Triumphant Evangelism, p. 48.

"I am sure you can do better work married, but I

have. "54
After an engagement of less than six months, the couple celebrated a Quaker marriage on July 14, 1904, at the Friend's Meeting House in Birmingham. In the tradition of-Helen Cadbury's Quaker faith there were long periods of silence during the wedding until the Holy Spirit moved a person to speak. 55 One individual stirred to speak was Torrey, who spoke eloquently about the interrelatedness of marriage and one's Christian faith. On the second day following the marriage ceremony the newlyweds sailed to the United States for a six-week honeymoon trip.56
Rest and relaxation during the honeymoon were important for the couple, particularly for Alexander, who had maintained a full schedule of activities between the time of his engagement and marriage. Shortly after
54

Following the Dublin crusade the evangelistic team returned to English soil and journeyed to George Muller's hometown of Bristol, where they received-an official welcome from the superintendent of the George Muller Orphan Homes. Torrey responded to the welcome in a gracious manner, acknowledging his intellectual debt to Muller's writings. During the following four weeks, Torrey and Alexander conducted meetings in the town that were well attended, partly because of the publicity generated by the Unitarian protests to Torrey's orthodox doctrines that were published in

57Maclean, Triumphant Evangelism, pp. 64-66.

Alexander's wedding resulted in the temporary breakup of the Torrey-Alexander team. Alexander traveled westward to the United States for his honeymoon, and Torrey journeyed eastward with his family to continental Europe to gratify his aesthetic temperament by visiting the museums, art galleries, and historic sites of France, Germany, and Switzerland. 61 Six weeks later the Torrey-Alexander team was reunited to begin a major September revival campaign in Bolton, England.
During October, the Torrey-Aiexander mission was in Cardiff, Wales, operating out of a large, corrugated iron building that could seat 7,000 people. This enormous building had been transported from London after serving as the building for the International Congress of the Salva
, h d' 62

59Ibid., p. 71.

64The New International Dictionary, s.v. "Roberts, Evan John," by R. Tudur Jones.

The initial success of filling the building did not continue for the duration of the mission. Six weeks after the opening of the campaign, meetings were being held twice daily in the Tournament Hall, except Friday, with the
65Davis, Twice Around, p. 108; Maclean, Triumphant Evangelism, p. 91.

One spectacular attempt to increase the number of people at the Tournament Hall, particularly poor people, took place on January 7, 1905, when a so-called wedding feast was held in the facility to celebrate the wedding of Mr. and Mrs. Alexander that had taken place six months earlier. The poor and hungry of Liverpool were invited as guests and the wedding banquet consisted of food in paper

156 the mission choir of approximately 2,500 voices sang hymns. 71 At the conclusion of the meal, Alexander ascended the dias amidst cheering from the guests and expressed thanks for the unique wedding gift and in the spirit of the occasion offered advice on selecting a mate. Following these comments, Mrs. Alexander rose and spoke about the hope of the mission staff for all of the assembled guests to know and love Jesus Christ as their savior. 72 After Mrs. Alexander's remarks, Torrey delivered the major address of the evening. He emphasized the love of God being strong enough to save all sinful men, whether rich or poor,73 and when he offered an invitation for those gathered to come forward and publicly acknowledge Christ as their Savior, 217 people responded. 74 The success of the wedding feast prompted another feast (this time for 2,300 people) that resulted in a similar number of conversions. 75
While the poor people of Liverpool were enticed to attend revival meetings, the same could not be said about businessmen; Torrey had to go to the business community. To accomplish this task, an important series of meetings
71D . T' d 111

who conduct, as it were, the commerce of the world."77

From Liverpool the evangelists traveled to the most populous city in the world at that time, London, to conduct their largest and most impor.tant revival campaign ever, a campaign that lasted for five months and realized nearly

. . 80

Thorough planning and good publicity by the London Evangelistic Council resulted in a throng of people wanting to attend the February 4, 1905 opening night session of the crusade. When it was announced that admission to the Royal Albert Hall would be by ticket only, 40,000 people applied for approximately 10,000 tickets. 81 Seated on the platform for the opening night meeting were the privileged lords and ladies of the realm, members of Parliament, and prominent Christian leaders that included Torrey acquaintances-
79Ibid•

For the next seven and one-half weeks Torrey held regularly scheduled meetings in the 11,OOO-seat Royal Albert Hall and in the process conducted what had become a routine revival campaign--regularly scheduled meetings and special meetings for the poor, children, businessmen, and mothers. At the close of the Royal Albert Hall mission, Torrey and Alexander began a new crusade in the southern part of London known as Brixton, in a 5,500-seat building newly constructed

At the farewell meeting for the evangelists held in the Royal Albert Hall on July 3, 1905, an atmosphere of thanksgiving prevailed for what God had accomplished in London through the work of Torrey and Alexander. Many speeches were given lauding the results of the five-month campaign, speeches that seemed deliberately aimed at countering press reports that portrayed the London campaign as a failure. One speaker asked the following questions:

84Davis, Torrey and Alexander, p. 173.

While the various figures for the crusade are impressive standing by themselves, the bottom line for any evangelist is the number of converts. Figures for the number of converts from the London crusade vary from 14,000 to 15,000. Using the latter figure and calculating it as a percentage of those in attendance at the revival meetings, only 1.3% became converts. Despite the small percentage of converts, a leader of the London Evangelistic Council had earlier declared that the results of the campaign were greater than expected. 87
When Torrey gave his farewell address, he did not dwell on percentages, but focused on the personal satisfaction he had received from the five-month campaign. He spoke of rejoicing in three kinds of blessings that God had provided: (1) the blessing that went to the unconverted,

At the end of the London farewell meeting, Torrey and Alexander departed Great Britain in opposite directions. Torrey proceeded to Germany for a summer vacation and four days of evangelistic meetings in Berlin: Alexander sailed home to the United States to lead the music at the Northfield Conference. 89
Two months later Torrey and Alexande! rendezvoused in England to begin the last three missions of the English crusade that were held in the cities of Sheffield, Plymouth, and Oxford. On September 2, 1905, the Sheffield campaign began among the industrial workers of the town and lasted for one month. The outcome was 3,500 converts. From Sheffield, Torrey and Alexander traveled to the English seaport of Plymouth for a month-long campaign, and then on to Oxford for two weeks of meetings. In Plymouth, Torrey revealed his democratic feelings when he made an eloquent appeal for Christians to help the many underdogs of society, to seek out the poor and destitute of the population.

"The road of pride .•. has two sides; the genteel side and the vicious side, but it is the same road and it leads to the same place. A great many of you people want to be saved in the literary and aesthetic way. You want to be saved by going to church and listening to pulpit orations and have the light stealing in through beautiful stained-glass windows, to the exquisite beauty of a matchless organ wonderfully played so that the music thrills you and steals through your whole heart, and where "there is incense and everything that is delightful to the senses, where you get to feel very aesthetic and very much soothed and very delightful, and you think this is art religion. It won't save you. A lady said to me once, 'I do so like to go to the theatre and the opera. I feel just the same in the theatre as I do in the church.' Of course. You feel aesthetic; you feel soothed; you feel delightfully peaceful. There is just one door into the Kingdom and everybody has to stoop to enter it. Every one has to enter that door as a sinner. You may be a respectable sinner, or you may be an outcast, but you are a sinner. Christ Jesus carne into the world to save sinners, and it is only sinners He is looking for, and if you are not a sinner there is no place for you in Christ. But you are a sinner, and if you don't acknowledge it, you lose the joy of being a saved sinner. "91

On November 28, 1905, a final farewell meeting was held in the Liverpool Tournament Hall for the evangelists before their departure from British soil. 92 In the Hall, which had been the scene of many stirring revivals, there were now many speeches praising the evangelistic team for their accomplishments, accomplishments which oftentimes surpassed Moody's achievements in England. In twelve cities, Torrey had the following number of converts: London (2 campaigns), 17,000; Edinburgh, 2,700; Glasgow, 3,000; Aberdeen, 2,000; Belfast, 4,000; Liverpool (2 campaigns), 11,600; Birmingham, 7,700; Dublin, 3,000; Cardiff, 3,750; Sheffield, 3,500; Plymouth, 3,700; and Oxford, 800. The total figure for the British Isles was 80,000 converts, while in the Australian-Asian area Torrey and Alexander had obtained an additional 20,000 converts--a grand total of 100,000 Christian converts for the world-wide evangelistic crusade that had lasted for almost four years.93
Torrey's success as the first world-wide evangelist can be understood by his ability to portr~y Christianity as the only true religion with answers for those people unable
92

av~s, w~ce Aroun , p. ; Dav~s, Torrey an Alexander, p. 91.

While Torrey proved capable of producing large numbers of converts, contemporaries frequently raised one major question: what was the permanent value of Torrey's revival work? During Torrey and Alexander's second visit to Liverpool a newspaper survey had been taken of ministers

94

Theological opposition to Torrey's evangelistic work in Great Britain was not limited to English critics, but also included a fellow-American Congregational minister, the liberal Dr. Samuel Parkes Cadman of Brooklyn. Cadman and Torrey had previously been at loggerheads over theological issues during one summer session at the Northfield Conference. During Torrey's British crusade Cadman had traveled to Great Britain with a group of Congregational ministers to observe the Torrey-Alexander Mission. Upon returning to the United States, Cadman published a liberal
94Maclean, Triumphant Evangelism, pp. 274-279.

"I am in active sympathy with all genuine evangelical work, but I am opposed to its being used for the advancing of-any peculiar theological views which create division in the church and excite just opposition among thinking men everywhere. We are not going to win the great fight which is upon us by clinging to obsolete traditions which have been discarded by the sane, reverent and constructive scholarship of Christianity~ and when these traditions, which are matters of private opinion, are insisted upon as dogmas necessary to salvation, I for one refuse to be allied with any such human perversion of the Divine truth."96

When Torrey ended his world-wide evangelistic tour and returned to the United States in December of 1905, he encountered an America much different from the country he had left only four years earlier. In 1901 Torrey had left a country confident and optimistic about itself despite the recent assassination of President McKinley. The country still remembered the stunning American victory in the Spanish-American War and the subsequent liberation of the Cuban people. In the domestic realm, McKinley's presidency had represented the traditional American belief in a limited national government anchored in the principles of the Constitution. Symbolizing this stance was the Currency Act of 1900 which provided for a gold standard to limit the federal government's ability to destabilize the currency by inflation.
During Torrey's absence from the country, McKinley's successor as president, Theodore Roosevelt, moved away from the customary view of a limited government to champion a larger and more active national

Roosevelt's actions were not the actions of a lone individual but were within the context of a larger movement known as progressivism, a movement that dominated American thought from 1897 to 1917. The President's sympathy for progressivism gave it added respectability while concomitantly making him the titular head of the movement. Progressivism prided itself on being realistic about the world, a realism that often led progressives to be critical about certain aspects of American life. For example, while America gloried in the aftermath of its victory in the Spanish-American War, many progressives looked with dismay upon the Philippines colony acquired as a result of the war. 70,000 American troops were required to put down a revolt of a native population opposed to American sovereignty over the islands. In the economic realm, Americans prided themselves on their newly won position as the premier economic power of the world. Progressives, however, focused on the negative aspects of American society; behind the economic

This critical attitude toward American society, and particularly toward the economic system, did not originate with the prog~essive.movement but had been noted in the works of earlier academic writers such as Lester F. Ward. In 1883, Ward published Dynamic Sociology (500 copies sold), which contended that a so-called just society could only come about through greater government intervention into the free market system. Following the interventionist path of Ward were economists such as Richard T. Ely, John R. Commons, Edward Bemis, and Thorstein Veblen. Veblen's most famous book, Theory of the Leisure Class, attacked the pretensions of the wealthy in order to support his thesis that there should be greater government intrusion into the economy to provide for the social betterment of all. In his later writings Veblen gave up the free enterprise system to advocate a system in which production and distribution would be controlled by technocrats.
The general public's exposure to the ills of America did not come through the books of these academicians but through the writings of a group of sensationalist journalists and authors who viewed themselves as the conscience of America. Writing passionately for the

The writings of the muckrakers greatly aided the progressive movement in gaining important support among disillusioned farmers who were angry at the railroads, among industrial workers who felt that they should have a larger slice of the corporate pie, among intellectuals who considered reform fashionable, among liberal ministers who were losing influence over their congregations,
1
John Alexander Carroll and Odie B. Faulk, Home of the Brave (New Rochelle, New York: Arlington House Publishers, 1976), pp. 278-279.

This outbreak of progressive reform that Torrey encountered when he returned to the United States failed to capture his attention much like social issues in general that were not of primary importance to later fundamentalists. (Marsden notes that the "precursors of fundamentalism" were generally "not oriented toward politics.")3 Torrey stubbornly devoted all of his energies toward his goal of setting America on fire with the spirit of revival. Though Torrey of course did not become a convert to progressivism, he did share in the general spirit o~ reform that permeated the country, but he shared in it from the perspective of an evangelist. He conceived of true reform as being religious in nature, coming about when an individual experienced salvation
2Ibid., pp. 279 & 282.

While Torrey's experiences and doctrinaire theology prevented his wholehearted acceptance of progressive ideas, the same could not be said about the followers of liberal Christianity who eagerly took up the banner of progressivism. Ever since the publication of Horace Bushnell's Christian Nurture in 1847, there had been a steady movement of liberal Christians away from the traditional belief in individual salvation to an emphasis on the importance of environmental factors in the development of Christian

The views of Munger eventually became part of a larger campaign known as the Social Gospel movement; the movement received "its name because it rejectedindividual salvation as the beginning and end of Christ's message. "5 The recognized father of the Social Gospel was the Reverend Washington Gladden, pastor of the First Congregational Church in Columbus, Ohio. Following an approach similar to that of Munger's, Gladden stressed environmental factors while defining religion as relations among God's people. Gladden's view of a relational-type Christianity is evident in the following statement:

4Samuel P. Hays, The Response to Industrialism: 1885-1914 (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1973),

5William G. McLoughlin, Revivals, Awakenings, and Reform: An Essay on Religion and Social Change in America, 1607-1977 (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1978),

The limited impact of the Social Gospel may have been the result of the movement's becoming identified exclusively with the theological position of liberals, or "modernists. ,,8 Liberals, believing in the higher criticism of the Bible, were skeptical about traditional Christian doctrines, a stance not popular with middle America. Munger, who may be considered an early proponent of the Social Gospel, rejected the orthodox doctrine of eternal damnation, to the consternation of many within his denomination. Washington Gladden directly attacked the Bible in his 1891 Who Wrote the Bible?, and answered his own question by saying it was defi~itely not God.
6Ibid., p. 173; cf., Hutchinson, Th~ Modernist Impulse.
7MCLoughlin, Revivals, Awakenings, and Reform,

8MCLoughlin, Revivals, Awakenings, and Reform, p. 176.

On the other hand, the Social Gospel movement profitted greatly from its association with progressivism. Because Social Gospelers identified with the progressive movement's goals of improving society and the environment, when progressivism gained national prominence during the presidency of Theodore Roosevelt, the Social Gospel movement also benefitted by having its ideas legitimized. The improved status of the Social Gospel movement and its alliance with the progressive movement occurred at a fortuitous time for liberal clergy to reassert their influence in American society, an influence that had been gradually slipping into the hands of businessmen since the end of the Civil War. The new standing f9r ministers became evident in the progressive movement
9Frank Hugh Foster, The Modern Movement in American Theology: Sketches in the History of American Protestant Thought from the Civil War to the World War (New York: Fleming H. Revell Company, 1939), p. 155.
10Ibid., p. 156.

Liberal support for the ideas of the Social Gospel soon made itself felt in the ruling councils of the mainline denominations. In 1901 the Episcopal and Congregational churches established commissions to deal with labor problems from a Christian perspective. Several years later the Methodist Church (North) created an official agency for social action and at the same time adopted a liberal social creed. A quantum leap forward for the Social Gospel movement came in 1908 when thirty-three Protestant denominations established the Federal Council of Churches of Christ in America. Light on doctrine but heavy on social action, the Council at its first meeting investigated the Bethlehem Steel strike and issued a report condemning the twelve-hour day and the seven-day week. 12
Domination of the Federal Council by Social Gospel advocates prevented the organization from being truly representative of American Protestantism. Most American Protestants at the time were conservative evangelicals13 more in tune with the religious teachings of Torrey than
1 1
Robert H. Wiebe, The Search for Order, 1877-1920 (New York: Hill and Wang, 1967), p. 208.

Proponents of the Social Gospel, however, persevered. The foremost champion of the movement was Walter Rauschenbusch, born in Rochester, New York, and the son of a German Baptist seminary professor. Following in the footsteps of his father, Rauschenbusch joined the Baptist ministry and for eleven years served a Baptist congregation in a slum area of New York City known as Hell's Kitchen. One of the few proponents of the Social Gospel to actually minister to destitute people, Rauschenbusch became an immediate convert to the Social Gospel. He campaigned for Henry George in the 1886 mayoral race in New York City, worked for playgrounds and better housing, and, through a loose fellowship of ministers known as the Brotherhood of the Kingdom, he clarified his ideas on the Social Gospel. From 1897 to 1917 he served as a professor at Rochester Seminary where he promoted the Social Gospel through teaching and writing, his most famous book being A Theology
14MCLoughlin, Modern Revivalism, p. 398.

Cen'tral to Rauschenbusch' s thought was the concept of the Kingdom of God, which he considered the key to understanding the teachings and work of Jesus. The blame for the failure to teach this most basic idea of Christianity from American pulpits was placed squarely on the shoulders of conservative evangelicalism with its emphasis on revival and soul-winning. Rauschenbusch declared:

Rauschenbusch's faith in a Kingdom of God on earth did not allow for a free enterprise economic system. Going beyond the moderate progressive idea that American businesses should be regulated for the good of society, Rauschenbusch proclaimed the capitalist system to be inherently evil and anti-Christian, a system that had to be done away with. According to this view, capitalism openly went against Jesus' teachings about cooperation and brotherhood by encouraging selfish and greedy competition. To rid America of capitalist competition and transform the country into a true Christian commonwealth, Rauschenbusch advocated
15Ahlstrom, Religious History, 2:268-269.

181 twentieth-century socialism. He declared socialism to be "'the most thorough and consistent economic elaboration of the Christian ideal",,17 and even went so far as to say that "'God had to raise up Socialism because the organized church was too blind or too slow to realize God's end.,~18 For many Americans, Rauschenbusch's dream of having a socialist America sounded more like the goal of a political ideologue rather than the goal of a theologian, despite the fact that the socialist alternative was presented in religious terms as being part of God's divine plan. Few people, including followers of the Social Gospel, were willing to go as far as Rauschenbusch and equate socialism with the Kingdom of God.
From Torrey's perspective, a more serious problem with Rauschenbusch's ideas, and with the Social Gospel in general, was focusing on the Kingdom of God concept in an exclusive way so as to make it the primary and complete aim of Christianity. 19 This view of Christianity was diametrically opposed to Torrey's life work as an evangelist urging people as individuals to make a personal decision for Christ and receive eternal salvation. Not only in this specific sense, but in a more general sense Torrey
1 7 Ibid., p. 176.

The country's flirtation with the Social Gospel did not steer Torrey away from his primary work as an evangelist; in fact, it may have strengthened his determination to carryon revival work as a way to counter the liberal Social Gospel. However, this dedication to revivalism ultimately conflicted with his perhaps less glamorous obligations to the Moody Church and the Moody Bible Institute. Realizing this dilemma, before leaving Great Britain he had submitted his resignation from the pastorate of the Moody Church and had contemplated resigning from the superintendency of the Bible Institute. 20
Even before Torrey had thought about giving up his position at the school, a movement had been afoot at the Institute to ease Torrey from power and re9lace him with a person who would permanently stay at the Institute. A prominent individual in this movement for change was Henry
20Torrey to James Gray, September 20, 1905, Moodyanna Collection, Moody Bible Institute, Chicago, Illinois.

During May 1904, while Torrey was still in England conducting revivals, Crowell invited Dr. James Gray of
21Richard Ellsworth Day, Breakfast Table Autocrat: The Life Story of Henry Parsons Crowell (Chicago: Moody Press, 1946), p. 166.
22Annual Catalogue, The Bible Institute for Horne and Foreign Missions of the Chicago Evangelization Society (1895), p. 22; Sixth Annual Statement for the Year Ending Dec. 31, 1895 of the Bible Institute for Horne and Foreign Missions; Catalogue of the Bible Institute for Home and Foreign Missions of the Chicago Evangelization Society (1897), p. 22; Catalogue of the Bible Institute for Horne and Foreign Missions of the Chicago Evangelization Society (1898), p. 22; The Moody Bible Institute of Chicago Secretary's Report (January 1901), p. 6; The Moody Bible Institute of Chicago (Incorporated) for Home and Foreign Missions Annual Report, 1902, n. pag. po 3.

Gray's new role at the Bible Institute was deliberately vague so as not to have Torrey suspicious of any inhouse political maneuvering against him. Crowell advised a cautious approach in dealing with the world-renowned Torrey.

23Henry Crowell to James Gray, May 10, 1904, Moodyanna Collection, Moody Bible Institute, Chicago, Illinois.
24Torrey to James Gray, August 14, 1892, Moodyanna Collection, Moody Bible Institute, Chicago, Illinois.
25Dwight Moody to James Gray, May 28, 1898, Moodyanna Collection, Chicago, Illinois.
26John David Hannah, "James Martin Gray, 1851-1935: His Life and Work" (Th.D. dissertation, Dallas Theological Seminary, 1974), p. 107.

A year after Gray received his permanent appointment to the Institute, and, shortly before Torrey returned to the United States, Crowell introduced a school reorganization plan that eliminated Torrey's position as superintendent while making Torrey and Gray coordinate deans with equal authority. 28 Torrey resented this division of authority and suggested to A. P. Fitt, Moody's son-in-law and still a power at the Institute, that Gray should be removed from his new job: "I think he has proven that He sic is a splendid teacher but he is in a position now that neither nature or grace have fitted him for. u29 This effort to remove Gray from his position of influence was to fail in part because of Torrey's frequent absences from the Bible Institute directing American revival crusades during a three-year period, 1906-1908. These numerous absences seemed to justify Gray's remaining in power, to oversee effectively the operations of the Institute.
27
Henry Crowell to James Gray, July 28, 1904, Moodyanna Collection, Moody Bible Institute, Chicago, Illinois.
28James Gray to Committee on Pastorate, November 10, 1905, Moodyanna Collection, Moody Bible Institute, Chicago, Illinois.
29Torrey to A. P. Fitt, July 4, 1906, Moodyanna Collection, Moody Bible Institute, Chicago, Illinois.

In the midst of Torrey's heavy revival schedule (that included the prominent cities of Toronto, Canada; Philadelphia; Atlanta; Ottawa,. Canada; Nashville; Omaha; Cleveland; and Chicago), an important change took place in the evangelist's relationship with Alexander. At the close of the Ottawa campaign in June 1906, the two men parted company.30 Alexander hurried to Birmingham, England, to be with his gravely ill wife, and Torrey returned to the United States for the Nashville meetings. As a replacement for Alexander, Torrey selected two people--D. B. Towner of the Moody Bible Institute as his song leader and Charles Butler as his soloist. The temporary absence of Alexander from the evangelistic team because of his wife's health eventually became permanent; the two partners in evangelism drifted apart, Alexander in later years, becoming a soloist for the evangelist J. W. Chapman. In the long run, Alexander's departure proved advantageous to Torrey in preventing him from being tainted with the controversy surrounding Alexander's publication of a hymnal in 1908, a hymnal which Torrey described as containing songs that were "'practically pirated' ,,31 from other writers.
During the same year that Alexander severed his ties with Torrey, Torrey increased his separation from the Bible Institute by changing his place of residence from Chicago

In spite of the fact that his family now lived in Philadelphia, not Chicago, and in spite of a heavy work schedule of evangelism, Torrey continued to involve himself in the minor and major issues of the Moody Bible Institute-issues which also brought to the surface a mutual antagonism between Torrey and Gray. For example, the innocent and seemingly mundane task of choosing a new name for the school's magazine, the Institute Tie, brought Torrey and Gray into conflict~ Torrey suggested the title "Study, Prayer and Work" while Gray supported the name "Christian Tie." Torrey vehemently disagreed with Gray's title, as evident in a letter to Fitt, a letter that also provides insight into Torrey's thinking as a man in his early fifties who has definite ideas.

33Torrey to A. P. Fitt, May 15, 1907, Moodyanna Collection, Moody Bible Institute, Chicago, Illinois.
34James Gray to A. P. Fitt, May 26, 1907, Moodyanna Collection, Moody Bible Institute, Chicago, Illinois.

Politically, this divisive relationship between Torrey and Gray undermined Torrey:s influence at the Bible Institute, influence that continued to diminish each day he stayed away from the school conducting revival campaigns, which he considered to be his most important work. By 1908, Torrey's lack of influence became obvious concerning the question as to when the Moody Bible Institute had been established. Based on his authority as first superintendent of the Institute and close confidant of Moody's, Torrey stated that the founding date of the school was October 1, 1889, when the doors of tlie Institute were opened for the first time to students. Other people at the Institute disagreed and promoted January 22, 1886, the birth date for the Chicago Evangelization Association which eventually brought into existence the Bible Institute. 36 Not until the school diplomas for the graduates of 1908 were printed did Torrey learn that Moody had founded the Institute in 1886. He indignantly declared: "I protest against what to
35Torrey to A. P. Fitt, April 10, 1908, Moodyanna Collection, Moody Bible Institute, Chicago, Illinois.
36Torrey to A. P. Fitt, March 18, 1908, Moodyanna Collection, Moody Bible Institute, Chicago, Illinois.

This setback for Torrey served as a prelude to a more significant defeat three months later over the appointment of a new superintendent of women. Torrey objected to the prime candidate under consideration, a Miss Cary, because from his point of view she was not in the evangelical camp. Torrey asserted:

Before the lady assumed her office, Torrey resigned all of his positions at the Institute, commenting that Gray would now be ' • ]'ob. 40 reasons

37Torrey to A. P. Fitt, April 23, 1908, Moodyanna Collection, Moody Bible Institute, Chicago, Illinois.
38Torrey to A. P. Fitt, April 10, 1908.
39A• P. Fitt to Torrey, July 16, 1908, Moodyanna Collection, Moody Bible Institute, Chicago, Illinois.
40Torrey to A. P. Fitt, August 5, 1908, Moodyanna Collection, Moody Bible Institute, Chicago, Illinois.

Torrey's long overdue resignation from the Moody Bible Institute proved to be beneficial in the sense of freeing up additional time for him to spend on a special evangelistic project that he had been working on for a year, the establishment of a conservative Bible conference as a bulwark against liberalism and the Social Gospel. The immediate motivation for a new Bible conference stemmed from his sense of not being needed or wanted at the

When Torrey's idea of organizing a new Bible conference came to the attention of the Reverend John M. Mac-Innis, a former Moody Bible Institute student and pastor of the Montrose Presbyterian Church, MacInnis decided to recommend his small northeastern Pennsylvania village as the site for the conference. 43 He suggested to Torrey that the Montrose scenery and location would attract people from the Middle Atlantic states. A skeptical Torrey agreed to visit Montrose during the early part of October 1907 on his way to a crusade in Chicago. When Torrey and his wife arrived in the town by train, MacInnis met them and
42Frank H. Hagerty to A. P. Fitt, May 24, 1907, Moodyanna Collection, Moody Bible Institute, Chicago , Illinois.
43Institute Tie 9 (October 1908): 114.

As the summer of 1908 approached, Torrey began to take more time away from his revival campaigns to plan with MacInnis the first summer session, scheduled for August 21August 30. Prior to the opening day of the Conference, the Torrey family moved their household goods from Philadel'phia to their new horne in Montrose near the conference grounds. 46 The Montrose horne, which became known as the "Torrey Lodge," was a beautiful red-brick structure that Torrey had purchased from one of MacInnis' parishioners for $15,000,47 an expensive house, but within the means of a world-famous evangelist who by this time had published ten books.
When the first summer session of the Montrose Bible

45"Montrose Bible Conference Association Treasurer's Cash Statement," August 21, 1909, Montrose Bible Conference Archives, Montrose, Pennsylvania.
46Martin, Torrey, p. 213.
47Mr . Beech's daughter to Mrs. Kinne, December 4, 1935, Montrose Bible Conference Archives, Montrose, Pennsylvania.

Attendance at the meetings varied. The morning sessions attracted.1,000 and 2,000 people, while the afternoon meetings drew around 1,500 participants. The best attendance occurred during the evening and Sunday meetings

While he championed religious conservatism at Montrose, he protested the liberalism of his Congregational denomination by taking the ultimate step of severing his thirty-year affiliation as an ordained pastor with the
49Ibid., p. 151.

51 Ibid., p. 151.
52Walter Vail Watson, IIA Dream that Refused to Fade, Being a Kindly History of the Montrose Bible ConferenceII (Unpublished manuscript located in the Montrose Bible Conference Archives, Montrose, Pennsylvania, 1976), p. 39.
196 Congregational Church and joining the Presbyterian Church. Since the 1880s (with Munger and Gladden in the vanguard) the Congregational Church in America had become increasingly liberal in its theological outlook and more critical of conservatives like Torrey. Much of the liberal criticism directed at Torrey regarding his evangelistic crusades came from fellow Congregational ministers such as Dr. Samuel Parkes Cadman, Charles S. MacFarland, Reun Thomas, and H.

By uniting with the Presbyterian Church, Torrey identified himself with a denomination moving in an opposite direction to that of the Congregational Church. During the 1890s, liberal personages within the Presbyterian Church had been purged, and, in 1910, the church's General Assembly went on record to affirm five doctrines as essential for the Christian faith--doctrines that were to become fundamentalist staple: (1) inerrancy of the Bible, (2) the Virgin Birth, (3) the doctrine of Christ's substitutionary atonement, (4) Christ's bodily resurrection, and (5) the belief in miracles. 54 Because of this denominational conservatism, Torrey remained within the Presbyterian Church for the remainder of his life, although he was outside the sphere of church politics.
53MCLoughlin, Modern Revivalism, p. 370.
54Lefferts A. Loetscher, The Broadening Church, A Study of Theological Issues in the Presbyterian Church since 1869 (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1964), p. 98.
Torrey's loose affiliation with the Presbyterian Church enabled him to concentrate his energies en what he always considered to be his primary calling in life, being an evangelist and winning souls to Christ. From 1908 to 1911, Torrey single-mindedly carried out this role by using the Montrose Bible Conference as a base of operations to conduct numerous revival crusades in major American cities and one English campaign at Cambridge University, with the famous British missionary C. T. Studd. 55 However, by the summer of 1911 the fifty-five-year-old Torrey became weary in his commitment as a full-time itinerant evangelist. Af ter a deca e 0 f preac 1ng to more t an 15
d h' h m1'11'10n peop1e 56 and living out of a suitcase-a decade that had begun with his trip to Australia-Torrey decided to settle down. He accepted the permanent position of dean and part-time evangelist at the three-year-old Bible Institute of Los Angeles.
55John Wesley White, liThe Influence of North American Evangelism in Great Britain between 1830 and 1914 on the Origin and Development of the Ecumenical Movement" (Ph.D. dissertation, Mansfield College, Oxford, 1965), chapter 3, pp. 36-38.
56A Souvenir of Reuben Archer Torrey Day at the Billy Graham Center, Wheaton College (n.p., n.d.), p. 2.

The Bible Institute of Los Angeles (BIOLA) which Torrey agreed to serve was not unfamiliar to him. Previous to the opening of the school on February 25, 1908, the Reverend Thomas Corwin Horton, a Presbyterian and one of the Institute's founders, had met with Torrey on two occasions to obtain important advice on the establishment of BIOLA in the image of the Moody Bible Institute. 1 The meetings between Horton and Torrey also served as a time for reunion between the two men who had first become acquainted with each other during the 1880s when both served churches in Minneapolis. As a result of these meetings, Torrey agreed to help his old acquaintance by conducting an evangelistic crusade to promote the school in Los Angeles early in 1908. The Los Angeles campaign, however, failed to materialize because of the inability to secure adequate facilities for the crusade. Despite this setback, the school opened in February, with Horton serving as the school's superintendent and W. E. Blackstone, a Methodist layman and author of the enormously successful premillennial book Jesus is
1James O. Henry, "Black Oil and Souls to Win," The King's Business 49 (February 1958): 23.

199 Coming, serving as the dean. Financially, the young school appeared to be on a sound basis: the millionaire founder of the Union Oil Company of California, Lyman Stewart, a cofounder of the school, served as the Institute's President. 2
The physical locat~on of the new Institute was on Main Street in downtown Los Angeles, on the second floor of a large building that contained a pool hall. 3 After three years the four rooms on the second floor proved to be inadequate, and plans were developed to enlarge the Institute's facilities by purchasing two parcels of land, to construct new school buildings in the center of the city.
As plans for the new physical plant moved forward, a search began for a new dean of the Institute. Not surprisingly, at the top of the list as an ideal candidate was Torrey, who combined a world-wide reputation as an evangelist with many years of practical experience as an educator at the Moody Bible Institute. 4 To determine whether Torrey would want to cast his lot with a young, fledgling Bible institute, Horton traveled to Denver in July of 1911 to meet with Torrey, who was conducting a Bible conference.
During his meeting with Horton, Torrey agreed to accept the deanship if a number of l' ~~itions were fulfilled. Of prime importance for Torrey was control over the course
2Ibid., p. 24.

Two other important stipulations for employment Torrey demanded were three months off every year to do evangelistic work and the completion by October 1912 of a larger school auditorium where worship services could be conducted. 6 BIOLA's eagerness to obtain Torrey's services led Horton to an immediate acceptance of Torrey's conditions. After completing the November 1911 evangelistic crusade at Cambridge University with C. T. Studd, Torrey would assume his new duties at BIOLA, beginning January 1912. For him, BIOLA was a welcome challenge.
5Lyman Stewart to Thomas Horton, July 1, 1911, Stewart Letters, Bible Institute of Los Angeles, La Mirada, California.
6Lyman Stewart to Milton Stewart, July 29, 1911, Stewart Letters, Bible Institute of Los Angeles, La Mirada, California.
Torrey's acceptance of the deanship necessitated a transcontinental move for the Torrey family from Montrose to southern California. Easing the psychological stress of moving was the knowledge that they could return every summer to their Montrose home, which now became the Torrey summer residence. The new home in California was located in the middle-class suburb of South Pasadena, several miles from the Institute, in downtown Los Angeles. Every business day Torrey would commute to work by means of an electric trolley car system (Torrey never learned to drive a car) that crisscrossed the Los Angeles basin.
Torrey, like most of the 750,000 people living in southern California (319,198) in Los Angeles), was an immigrant to an area that was already a melting pot of people from different states. Also living in southern California was a significant number of foreign nationals who had come from Mexico, the Philippines, Japan, Russia, and Yugoslavia. People were attracted to the region because of the ideal weather; Los Angeles received only 15 inches of rainfall a year and zero inches of snow. Also attractive was the growth anticipated for the area when the Panama Canal, then under construction, was opened to traffic. Even before the opening of the canal, prosperity had been a way of life in Los Angeles, because of the large shift of investments from San Francisco to southern California after the 1906 San

A year before Torrey arrived in Los Angeles the city's image of having a favorable business climate had been severely tarnished because of the senseless bombing by union men of the Los Angeles Times building (October 1, 1910) ·that resulted in the deaths of twenty people. The staunchly Republican paper headed by General Harrison Gray Otis had become the symbol of anti-union, anti-progressive forces in the city. For seventeen months prior to the bombing, substantial union strength in the city had been evident in strikes by brewery and metal workers and marches through the city streets by as many as ten and twenty thousand workers shouting socialist slogans. After the bombing, ~nion support suffered a severe reversal--aggravated by pleas of guilty by union men involved in the crime. These

When Torrey arrived in Los Angeles, labor unrest continued to be the major preoccupation of the community; however, since Torrey lacked a progressive viewpoint this was a minor problem to him. A far greater worry was the
7Carey McWilliams, Southern California Country: An Island on the Land (New York: Duell, Sloan & Pierce, 1946), p. 130.

These cults ana others directly challenged traditional Christianity with their teachings, but, more importantly, their ability to flourish in southern California demonstrated the general population's indifference toward Christianity. On one occasion Lyman Stewart remarked with deep regret that the pagan element was liable to dominate" the western coast of the United states,10 a ramark that provided ~ll the needed justification for having a Bible Institute of Los Angeles.
By the time Torrey had begun his duties at the Institute, the Samis controversy of a few months earlier had been resolved. Samis was allowed to stay on at the school after he and all the other faculty members had signed a statement of belief affirming the traditional Christian doctrines. With doctrinal peace reigning at the school, the new dean could focus his energies on bringing BIOLA's curriculum into harmony with the course of instruction at the Moody Bible Institute.
Under Torrey's leadership, the two years of instruction at BIOLA emphasized a thorough knowledge of the Bible and the practical application of personal evangelism to win others to Christ. Not confined to his administrative role, Torrey taught the class on Bible doctrine, using his book What the Bible Teaches, and encouraging students to apply
10
Lyman Stewart to E. O. Emerson, April 8, 1912, Stewart Letters, Bible Institute of Los Angeles, La Mirada, California.
205 what they had learned in the classroom to the larger Los Angeles community, i.e., conducting personal evangelism. 11 Not all students, however, shared Torrey's sense of urgency for conducting personal evangelism or saw a need for obeying the regulations of the Institute. On one occasion, several students who had repeatedly violated the rules of the school had their names read before a student assembly, Torrey publicly announcing, " ••• 'Go to your rooms, pack your bags as quickly as you can, leave the school and do not come back.,"12 This example of Torrey's no-nonsense approach in running the school earned him a reputation among students as being too stern, a reputation he lamented. 13
Lyman Stewart as president of the school applauded Torrey's strict handling of students. Sixteen years Torrey's senior, Stewart had been reared in a strict Presbyterian home where rewards and punishment were a part of life. A native of Titusville, Pennsylvania, Stewart as a young man served four years in the 16th Pennsylvania Cavalry during the Civil War. After the war, he returned horne to make his fortune in the booming oil business that had begun in Titusville in 1859 with the successful drilling of the first oil well in the United States. Fron~ 1866 to 1872 Stewart

Oscar E. Sanden, "Reuben Archer Torrey: A Biographical Memoir" (Unpublished manuscript located in the Moody Bible Institute library, n.d.), p. 109.
206 accumulated close to $300,000, a fortune he lost during the Panic of 1873 when he attempted to establish a company to manufacture and sell farm machinery. Stewart's luck began to change when he moved to southern California during the winter of 1882-1883 to drill for oil in the Los Angeles area. Oil was finally discovered at the Star #1 drilling site, after the drilling of seven dry wells. Accompanying this success was the creation of a number of oil companies that culminated in the establishment of the Union Oil Company of California on October 7, 1890. 14
As the head of the Union Oil Company, Stewart gave much of his time and money to undertakings that promoted conservative Protestantism--BIOLA, the YMCA, the Los Angeles Gospel Union Mission, an earlier Los Angeles Bible Institute

During his first year at the Institute and before the school's auditorium had been completed, Torrey conducted Sunday afternoon meetings at the Temple Auditorium in Los Angeles--to disappointingly small audiences rather
14Henry, "Black Oil and Souls to Win," pp. 12-16.

207 than the large crowds that Stewart had anticipated. 16 Another letdown for Stewart was Torrey's treatise "on the pearl of great price" that appeared in the Gist of the Sunday School Lessons series. Stewart (ever ready to criticize) labeled the piece a sloppy exposition, suggesting that Torrey may not have had the time to edit it properly, bepause he was in a hurry to publish another book. Stewart did not directly communicate these misgivings to Torrey, but asked a mutual friend to talk with Torrey about the matter. Later, Stewart wrote this friend:

apparently careless exposition. 17
Stewart's obsession with precise exposition is understandable. He had selected Torrey as editor of the official publication of the Bible Institute, The King's Business, during a period of time when the school faced developing opposition within a number of mainline churches that perceived the Institute as being antagonistic to the established churches. Stewart recognized that this kind of opposition could seriously affect the number of students attending the Institute from the Methodist, Lutheran, United
16Lyman Stewart to May, May 24, 1912, Stewart Letters, Bible Institute of Los Angeles, La Mirada, California.
17Lyman Stewart to A. C. Gaebelein, October 7, 1912, Stewart Letters, Bible Institute of Los Angeles, La Mirada, California.
208 Presbyterian, Episcopal, and Congregational denominations. 18 To prevent criticism from the churches, he instructed Horton to inform the faculty and students that the established churches were not to be criticized either in a direct or indirect fashion. 19 Maintaining good relations with the local churches would also be important for keeping the door open to the solicitation of money from church members to support the Institute's operating budget and the ambitious building project.
On May 31, 1913, the cornerstone for BIOLA's permanent building on Hope Street in downtown Los Angeles was finally laid. The inscription on the cornerstone dedicated the building to Christ: "Unto Him that loved us and washed us from our sins in His own blood." Inside the cornerstone was a copper box containing a number of items, including copies of The King's Business, a copy of Torrey's What the Bible Teaches, and a Scofield Bible. 20 On this joyous day Lyman Stewart gave the dedication address. He compared the large scale of the buildings to be constructed with the enormous work of the Institute in teaching and disseminating the truths of Christianity. To accomplish this end, Stewart declared that the doors of the school were to be open every
18The King's Business 4 (March 1913): 150.
19Lyman Stewart to Thomas Horton, October 21, 1912, Stewart Letters, Bible Institute of Los Angeles, La Mirada, California.
20Henry, "Black Oil and Souls to Win," p. 29.

Beneath the surface joy of the occasion was the stark financial reality that BIOLA lacked sufficient money resources to build the Hope Street building. Approximately $125,000 of the school's money remained tied up in unneeded land that had initially been purchased as the site for the Institute's facilities. 22 The problem of cash flow also plagued Lyman Stewart, who, because of a dramatic reduction in the value of his stock portfolio could not contribute enough money to guarantee the Institute's building program. Two months after the building ceremony, the value of Stewart's Union Oil stock had dropped to 50% of what it had been three years earlier. To provide sound financing for the building program, Stewart supported the establishment of the Bible Institute Building Co.npany to sell $500,000 worth of gold bonds at 6% interest. 23 Until the company could be established Stewart suggested to Torrey that he raise money from department store magnate John Wanamaker and several wealthy widows such as Margaret Olivia Sage,
21 Ibid•
22Lyman Stewart to Torrey, June 19, 1913, Stewart Letters, Bible Institute of Los Angeles, La Mirada, California.
23Lyman Stewart to Torrey, July 25, 1913, Stewart Letters, , Bible Institute of Los Angeles, La Mirada, California.

Despite Stewart's prodding to raise money, Torrey seemed to lean in an·opposite direction. For example, at a meeting held in the Temple Auditorium, he forthrightly declared that he did not want to receive money from people who were not saved. When this remark came to Stewart's attention, he waxed theological, pointing out that many people would disagree with Torrey's view; people could only know whether they were saved after they died. Stewart suggested that Torrey, instead of being exclusionary in his request for money, should make an appeal for money from those who loved the Lord. At the same time, Stewart suggested modifying another frequent Torrey statement--"'If you are not able to give, we don't want you to give anything. ,"25

26

Lyman Stewart to Torrey, June 19, 1913. 25
Lyman Stewart to Torrey, March 27, 1915, Stewart Letters, Bible Institute of Los Angeles, La Mirada, California.
26Ibid.

While the solicitation of money for the building fund continued to be a struggle, the construction process
27Lyman Stewart to Torrey, April 1, 1914, Stewart Letters, Bible Institute of Los Angeles, La Mirada, California.
28Lyman Stewart to Torrey, April 25, 1914, Stewart Letters, Bible Institute of Los Angeles, La Mirada, California.

By September 1914 the dormitories were ready for occupancy, and, on Easter Sunday, 1915, the new auditorium (Torrey had been promised it would be completed by the Fall of 1912) was finally opened and dedicated. Accompanying the dedication of the new auditorium was a series of victorious meetings that resulted in many conversions and a growing concern as to how the new converts would be properly cared for. The leader of the evangelistic meetings, Dr. L. W. Munhall, recommended that an independent, interdenominational church should be established having a BIOLA affiliation and using the school's facilities. 29 Two years earlier, Lyman Stewart had presented a similar suggestion, but now that the Bible Institute had a completed auditorium
29T. C. Horton, To the Members of the Church of the Open Door (n.p., 1924), pp. 3-4.

Outside of the BIOLA community, reaction to the establishment of a new church was negative among many Los Angeles downtown churches. 30 Many church leaders expressed a fear that a new church would draw members away from established congregations and declared that Torrey had given assurances to a local minister that an Institute church would never be established. 31 Torrey denied having given such a promise. To lessen ou~side opposition, Stewart and Horton met with a committee of Baptist preachers to assure them that students at the school would not be required to attend the Institute's church. The Baptist ministers came away from the meeting satisfied with the school's explanation. A similar result occurred when BIOLA officials explained their position to the Los Angeles Presbytery, which formally approved the establishment of a new church. 32
A constitution and by-laws for the new church, based
30Ibid., p. 4.
31Lyman Stewart to Torrey, May 26, 1915, Stewart Letters, Bible Institute of Los Angeles, La Mirada, California.
32Horton, To the Members, p. 4.

During the fall of 1915 the church opened its doors for the first time. Serving as the senior pastor was Torrey, and his immediate superior at BIOLA, Horton, took

33Lyman Stewart to Torrey, June 21, 1915, Stewart Letters, Bible Institute of Los Angeles, La Mirada, California.
34Ibid•
35Lyman Stewart to Torrey, July 10, 1915, Stewart Letters, Bible Institute of Los Angeles, La Mirada, California.

Lyman Stewart to May, October 18, 1915, Stewart Letters, Bible Institute of Los Angeles, La Mirada, California.
215 crowds38 because of the enormous size of the auditorium with its seating capacity for 3,000 people. To remedy this situation, Stewart paid for twenty additional part-time staff to go out into the community and attract people to the

38Lyman Stewart to May, October 28, 1915, Stewart Letters, Bible ~nstitute of Los Angeles, La Mirada, California.
39Lyman Stewart to Torrey, October 25, 1915, Stewart Letters, Bible Institute of Los Angeles, La Mirada, California.
40Lyman Stewart to Miss Helen Blackman, January 16, 1918, Stewart Letters, Bible Institute of Los Angeles, La Mirada, California.

1ng ffer1ng. 42
While Stewart's business mind emphasized attendance figures, Torrey and Horton focused on a quality church membership of dynamic Christians committed to winning people to God. In later years Horton wrote:
No other church in the United States, to the best of my knowledge, has ever achieved the results in definite, soul-saving work which have been achieved by the Church of the Open Door and the various departments of its Sunday School, .•.
Had we sought to build up the church membership on the same basis as that upon which most other churches operate, we could easily have had 5000 members . • • , but our aim and purpose from the beginning have been unselfish and have commanded the approval and blessing of God. 43

41Lyman Stewart to Torrey, October 2, 1918, Stewart Letters, Bible Institute of Los Angeles, La Mirada, California.

During his tenure at the Open Door church (which was to be his last church), Torrey preached a revivalist message similar to the message he had preached over thirty-five years earlier at his first church in Garrettsville, Ohio. However, during his y~ars at the Los Angeles church Torrey's orthodox preaching took on greater significance as a protest against the expansion of religious liberalism and its attempt to capture the soul of Protestant Christianity.
Torrey's protest against liberalism and its Social Gospel message went beyond the pulpit homilies at the Church of the Open Door to editorial involvement in the publication of The Fundamentals, perhaps the most significant publica-· tion of conservative religious thought from the Civil War to World War I. Published from 1910 to 1915, the twelve volumes of The Fundamentals reflected Torrey's view of countering liberal thought by presenting the basic beliefs of conservative evangelical Christianity in a restrained and scholarly manner that was, for the most part, devoid of rancor.
The Fundamentals was the brainchild of Lyman Stewart, who had gone away from an 1894 meeting of the Niagara Bible Conference convinced that the principles of conservative Christianity should be widely disseminated to counteract
44Lyman Stewart to Miss Helen Blackman, January 16,

church literature, which in many cases, is prejudiced."45 Initially, because of his lack of financial resources to undertake such a large campaign, nothing came of Stewart's dream of spreading the principles of orthodoxy. After fifteen years of remaining dormant, the idea took on a new life after Stewart heard Amzi C. Dixon, the pastor of the Moody Church, speak at the Baptist Temple Auditorium in Los Angeles during August of 1909. Stewart talked with the out-of-town minister about sending a true Christian publication to all the ministers of the country.46 Dixon agreed. 47
Encouraged by Stewart, Dixon hurriedly established a committee consisting of Torrey (who at the time was not affiliated with BIOLA), Henry P. Crowell, and four other ind.·~viduals to create Stewart I s "true Christian publication." When the committee met for the first time in Chicago on November 5, 1909, money for the project was no problem: Lyman Stewart and his brother, Milton, were to contribute a total of $300,000 to publish The Fundamentals, although only

46Ernest R. Sandeen, The Roots of Fundamentalism: British and American Millenarianism, 1800-1930 (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1970), pp. 188-189.

The Stewarts' financial support of the publication did not bring editorial control. A special committee that included Torrey determined the content of The Fundamentals, and any proposed article was read and critiqued by each member of the committee before a vote in committee to decide whether to accept or reject an article (a majority vote was necessary for acceptance). By this process of selection, sixty-four American and English authors were represented in the publication. Of the English authors, James Orr, a professor of theology at the United Free Church College in Glasgow, had the greatest academic reputation. Other Englishmen included in the publication were individuals Torrey had previously met on his tour of England--H. C. G. Moule, H. W. Webb-Peploe, G. Campbell Morgan, W. H. Griffith Thomas. 50 Prominent among the American authors was Torrey, who had three articles published: "The Certainty and
48sandeen, Roots of Fundamentalism, p. 198.

· t S· 51

A primary goal of The Fundamentals was to defend the integrity of the Bible and the truthfulness of traditional Christian doctrines. In article after article the various authors justified orthodox Christianity, using arguments from the nineteenth century based upon the principles of Common Sense philosophy and Baconian science. For example, Torrey's article on the Resurrection of Christ contains a brief discussion on the nature of true science (Baconian science) as not starting "with an a priori hypothesis that certain things are impossible i.e., miracles, but simply examining the evidence to find out what has actually occurred. ,,52 Supplementing these apologetic arguments were articles dealing with personal testimonies, the need for evangelism, and attacks upon beliefs not in harmony with
51 Ibid•
52The Fundamentals: A Testimony to the Truth, 12 vols. (Chicago: Testimony Publishing Company, n.d.),

Liberal criticism of The Fundamentals had a greater impact upon Torrey than on most people because of his position on the editorial committee and his later role as editor of the last two volumes of the publication. Dixon served as editor for the first five volumes of The Fundamentals until in 1911 he received a call to the pastorate of the prestigious Metropolitan Tabernacle in London, England. Assuming the duties of editor was Dr. Louis MeYer, a Christian convert from Judaism who served as editor for the next five volumes until his sudden and unexpected death. After Meyer's death, Torrey completed tn~ editorial work, bringing out volumes eleven and twelve to complete the twelve-volume work in 1915. 55
Torrey's participation in The Fundamentals project was not his only effort to hold back the tide of liberalism. Before the publication of the final volume of The Fundamentals Torrey had been calling upon Christians to attend so-called prophetic conferences to reaffirm their traditional faith. As early as December 1, 1913, an invitation with Torrey's signature was sent to conservative Christians asking them to attend a Prophetic Conference at the Moody Bible Institute from February 24-27, 1914. Other prominent signers of the call were James Gray, William Bell Riley of Minneapolis, the President of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, the Principal of the Anglican Wycliffe

The Prophetic Conference began its meetings as scheduled, with large crowds attending each of the daily s~ssions. Present at the Conference were people from across the United States and Canada representing nearly every major Protestant denomination. Speakers came from the Congregational, Methodist, Baptist, Presbyterian, Protestant Episcopal Church, and Plymouth Brethern denominations. 57 As a principal speaker at the ecumenical gathering, Torrey gave the closing address, entitled "Our Lord's Second Corning, a Motive for Personal Holiness." In this speech Torrey spoke about the seven characteristics that should be evident in the social and spiritual lives of Christians:

After the Chicago Conference other prophetic, premillennial meetings were held in Minneapolis-St. Paul, St. Louis, and Los Angeles to rally conservative Christians. The 1914 Los Angeles conference was held March 22-25 in Stewart's Immanuel Presbyterian Church, with most of the leading speakers at the Chicago meeting giving the addresses. 59 While many Christians in southern California welcomed this mini-Prophetic Conference, other Californians, especially the Methodists, criticized the meeting. The liberal Methodist publication, The California Christian Advocate, characterized the meeting at Immanuel Presbyterian as promoting premillennial beliefs and the accompanying "'fearful and revolting doctrines that almost of necessity go with that teaching. ,,,60 According to the Methodist journal, an accurate description of the "prophetic conference" would be to label it a "pathetic conference."

1The King's Business 5 (November 1914): 593. Marsden, in Fundamentalism and American Culture (pp. 143145), also stresses the pacifist nature of The King's Business and other conservative publications like Our Hope and The Christian Herald.
2The King's Business 5 (November 1914): 593; Ibid., 7 (October 1916): 869.

While the power of the devil might seem overwhelming in the war, the war at the same time demonstrated the pervasiveness of evil in the world and man's thin veneer of civilization. The King's Business noted that Germany, with its unparalleled culture and science, had prosecuted the war in a most diabolical and damnable way.3 German science enabled airplanes and ~eppe1ins "to direct their engines of destruction in the night above the homes of sleeping women and children and non-combatants and drop bombs upon them and maim and kill them."4 This kind of warfare was described as being cowardly murder of innocent civilians for which the airmen responsible went horne to receive praise from their leaders instead of being placed

While special criticism was directed at the German aerial bombardment, England did not escape criticism in the pages of the magazine despite the effectiveness of British propaganda in the United States during the war. Unlike most Americans, Torrey received letters from German Christians that presented a different picture of the war from that generally portrayed in the American press. Also, as president of the American Council of the African Inland Mission, Torrey was privy to information about the war effort in
3Ibid., 5 (November 1914): 596.

The general skepticism that Torrey expressed in The King's Business, questioning the legitimacy of England's cause and Germany's cause, extended into the area of whether American newspapers were reporting the war realistically. One specific criticism dealt with newspaper accounts of trench warfare; The King's Business characterized such accounts as fictitious because of their tendency to downplay the brutality of war. To correct this misconception, The King's Business published a letter from a Christian serving in the trenches and experiencing first-hand the horrors of
7

For all Americans, the horror of World War I became a reality with the sinking of the British passenger liner, the Lusitania, by the German submarine U-29 on May 7, 1915; included on the casualty list of 1,198 were 128 Americans. Former president Theodore Roosevelt called the sinking an act of murder and piracy as he advocated United States preparedness for a possible war against Germany. Editorially, The King's Business declared that the deaths of 150 babies and hundreds of women contributed toward making this act of inhumanity absolutely without precedent in the history of modern nations. Germany had sunk "to the level of the savage American Indian in his worst days.,,8 How Germany could act in such a barbaric way was simplified for the readers of The King's Business, who were told that God and Christianity had been left out of the civilizing and
., . d G 9

But, unlike the belligerent rhetoric Theodore Roosevelt directed toward Germany, The King's Business advocated a policy of moderation toward the German nation. An editorial in the magazine noted that it was part of human nature to want to take vengeance over the sinking of the Lusitania; however, for a Christian, vengeance could not be a part of life. This Christian spirit of not taking revenge corresponded with the rhetoric of President Woodrow
8Ibid., 6 (July 1915): 559.

to hatred and bitterness. 12
For Torrey, the life of love was also a life of pacifism, but with this belief, which would in idyllic circumstances have had an appeal, for the first time Torrey, whose message had previously mirrored society's need for re-affirmation of conservative beliefs, was failing to achieve the customary rapport. In one issue of The King's Business, Torrey recommended Blood Against Blood, a book by the English Quaker Arthur Sydney Booth-Clibborn. 13 This strange title referred to Christ's own blood shed on the cross being a pacifist statement that His followers should never take a human life. To temper any possible negative reactions to this anti-war book and Torrey's personally positive recommendation, Torrey slipped from his authoritarian stance and cautioned his readers that while a person might not agree with all of the book's arguments, the b00k was st ~ ·11 worth read'~ng. 14
Practical application of pacifism became evident in the same issue of The King's Business in which Torrey promoted Booth-Clibborn's book. In response to public advocacy during the early months of 1916 that military training
12Ibid., 6 (December 1915): 1040.
13Arthur Sydney Booth-Clibborn, Blood Against Blood, 3rd ed. (New York: Charles C. Cook, n.d.).
14The King's Business 7 (March 1916): 220.

conduct toward other nations. 15 This specific criticism of military training in the schools evolved into a general attack on the arguments of the military preparedness novement to militarize America, i.e., to provide military training in the schools, to expand the military forces, and to make provisions for industrial preparedness. According to an editorial in The King's Business, there was no time in the history of the United States when a large army and navy was less needed than the

The editorial position of the magazine argued that the best way for countries to stay out of war was to act reasonably and in a Christian manner.

To the specific question of why the American populace could not act as Christians and stop the politicians from getting the United States involved in war, no immediate answer was provided. Other issues of The King's Business, however, gave a clear and unambiguous answer, deploring that the first loyalty of most Americans centered on their country and not on the teachings of Christianity. As early as 1914 the magazine had condemned the loyalty of patriots who rationalized their country's actions on the principle of "my country right or wrong" as engaging in "a thoroughly vicious sentiment. It justifies the most

An earlier edition of the magazine had posited a Christian alternative to this American chauvinism--the law of love. The law of love avoided placing the worst construction on the actions of other nations while automatically denying the righteousness of the American cause. Realistically, The King's Business noted that the United States, like all the other countries of the world, frequently denied the law of love by following the principle of self-interest and selfishness in the conduct of foreign affairs. 25 America was not a Christian nation,26 nor had there ever been or would there ever be a Christian nation until the second corning of Christ.
One example of selfishness was the American attitude

236 toward Mexico. The October 1916 issue of The King's Busi~expressed grave concern over an impending war between the United States and Mexico because of the machinations of
, b' d l't" 27

As Pershing conducted his sensitive military operation in Mexico, American newspapers focused their reporting on the 1916 presidential election campaign and the main campaign issue of the possibility of United States involvement in the European conflict. The Democratic party's nominee was the incumbent president, Woodrow Wilson, and the party's attractive slogan was: "He kept us out of war." On the Republican ticket was Charles Evans Hughes, a former associate justice of the United States Supreme Court. Without
27Ibid., 7 (November 1916): 964.

237 taking a stand, The King's Business found both candidates to be acceptable: Wilson and Hughes were sons of ministers and were pronounced Christians. No matter who won the election, a true Christian would be in the White House for the next four years and would surely keep the United States
29

Immediately after the 1916 election, The King's Business continued strongly to advocate a policy of peace-while at the same time indulging in a brief spree of antiCatholic and anti-militarist rhetoric. The readers of The King's Business now learned that the great war in Europe "had its origin largely through Roman Catholic intrigues regarding Servia Serbia."30 According to the magazine, Catholic intrigue continued unabated as the Church sought influence in the American and German governments, a state of affairs that could drag the United States into war. Adding to the problem were the many congressmen who were actively
29Ibid., 7 (September 1916): 771.

Such a rapid turn-about in editorial policy for the magazine (and for much of the country) can be attributed to a decision by the German government to resume unrestricted submarine warfare against ships of all nations, commencing on February 1, 1917. Two days later President Wilson announced the severance of diplomatic relations with
31 Ibid., 8 (March 1917): 196.

Participating in the upsurge of anti-German feeling in the country was The King's Business, that now portrayed the leaders of Germany as mad men in charge of a country that might have to be crushed. The magazine did not explicitly advocate the destruction of Germany, because of the humiliation and suffering that would descend upon German Christians and the civilian population as a whole, who were innocent of the sins of their leaders. 34
Using the language of war that permeated America at the time, The King's Business declared that Christians should go war, not against Germany, but against the devil, sin, unb_~ief, and all kinds of error.
Oh, that we might be as merciless in dealing with sin

the devil and sin and unbelief, and I do not believe
in compromise or arbitration in this war.35 In this highe'r war against the forces of the devil, Christians were to avoid all business and social relationships
34Ibid., 8 (April 1917): 293.

While the analogy between a soldier and a Christian was being worked out, the United States entered the war to end all wars on April 6, 1917. The question naturally arose as to whether a Christian could be a soldier in the true sense of the word. !he King's Business, choosing not to answer the question, ignored it. With a sense of resignation, the magazine characterized the United States as being "sucked into the awful maelstrom of war"37 and offered the assurance that everything would work for the best for all people who truly loved God. 38 A year earlier, the magazine would have strongly condemned U.S. involvement in the European conflict; now, the only ,anti-war rhetoric coming from the magazine dealt with the hatred that war generates between nationalities. To counter this war hatred, American Christians (like English and German Chr;stians) were to love their country and their country's ene~ies.39

Has a Christian any right for which he should take up arms and fight for?
No. But other people have rights that a Christian ought to contend for, his wife and children have rights, and the poor and oppressed and wronged have rights. No Christian should take up arms and fight for his own personal rights, but a Christian is sometimes under obligation to defend others, even though he has to do it by force. 41

The King's Business reluctantly justified u.s. involvement in the war, but the magazine res~sted the burst of fervent patriotism generated by the war and by George Creel's Committee on Public Information. For example, during the summer of 1917 it noted that a number of zealous patriots had a southern minister arrested and jailed without a trial because of the preacher's suspected disloyalty to the President. 42 Also, the same issue of the magazine approvingly quoted a New York Evening Post editorial that spoke out against the hatred being directed toward Germans while insisting that the rights of aliens and the fundarnental freedoms of conscience, press and speech had to be preserved. 43 Of greater concern to The King's Business was the mixing of patriotism with religious doctrine that resulted in the idea that sacrificing one's life in the war guaranteed eternity in heaven. The magazine described this belief as a "soul-destroying lie."44

God who died on the cross of Calvary for them. 45
According to The King's Business, a truly patriotic American, first and foremost, ·had a proper relationship'· with God.

In conjunction with the advice to call upon God for help, readers of The King's Business were encouraged to help the war effort by joining the prohibition movement and
45Ibid., 8 (July 1917): 581.

49Ibid., p. 580.
50Norman H. Clark, Deliver Us from Evil, An Interpretation of American Prohibition (New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 1976), p. 124.

later when the congress, on December 18, 1917, adopted an . amendment to the Constitution prohibiting the manufacture,

the head of this poisonous snake beneath tg~ iron heel
of a thoroughly arroused public sentiment? The answer to Torrey's question came less than four montns

While the war effort helped to bring about prohibition by raising America's consciousness of the detrimental effects of alcoholic beverages, the war also helped. to bring about a greater awareness of the harmful effects of cigarettes. To attack the tobacco interest, The King's Business relied upon an argument similar to that used against strong drink: land producing tobacco reduced the amount of food being produced for the war effort. The magazine believed that the American government was "apparently working hand in hand with the American Tobacco Trust to perpetuate, not merely this appalling waste, but unquestionable injury to our man power. "56 The specific injury from cigarette
55Ibid., 9 (October 1918): 836-837.

248 smoking was not specified, but the magazine quoted a source as saying that more American soldiers wduld be harmed by cigarettes than by German bullets. 57 Because of this viewpoint, an editorial in the magazine expressed shock over the discovery that leaders of the Y.M.C.A. were engaged in the promotion of cigarettes as an important way to help relieve the tensions of the war. The only beneficiaries from this type of promotion were the tobacco manufacturers. 58
This attack on cigarette smoking, like the assault on alcoholic beverages, reflected an overall strategy of The King's Business--to use the.war in Europe as a way to fight against certain wrongs in American society; the battlefields for Americans were not only in France, but in their own communities and neighborhoods. By combating strong drink and cigarettes or tobacco, a person demonstrated a true spirit of patriotism, wanting to get America right with God.
In sharp contrast to the patriotism of The King's Business was the patriotism of some Americans who "discovered" groups of people less than enthusiastic about the war. The liberal Shirley Jackson Case, a postmillennialist from the University of Chicago Di"inity School, in The Millennial Hope: A Phase of War Time Thinking, took seriously the slogan that the war was one to end all wars and
57Ibid., p. 457.

"Two thousand dollars a week is being spent to spread the doctrine (i.e., the doctrine of premillennialism). Where the money comes from is unknown, but there is a strong suspicion that it emanates from German sources. In my belief the fund would be a profitable field for government investigation. My object in writing the book was to enlighten the American people, for if the belief spreads' many would not be able to see the need of fighting for democracy. That the doctrine of the premillenarians has many supporters is certain, as the divinity school gets many communications each week from pastors allover the country asking how to combat, the idea."59

59Ibid., 9 (April 1918): 276; cf., Weber, Living in the Shadow, p. 120.

Several months before the readers of The King's Business were made aware of Professor Case's unfounded charges that the premillennial movement may have received money from German sources, the magazine unwittingly refuted these charges by giving Torrey over three pages of its editorial section for a condemnation of German thought as represented by its scientists and theologians. Torrey quoted prominent German scholars to demonstrate how German nationalism influenced these professors to such an extent as to make them biased and incapable of fair reasoning. 62 He quoted the famous German zoologist Ernst Haeckel:
60Ray H. Abrams, Preachers Present Arms: The Role of the American Churches and Clergy in World Wars I and II, with Some Observations on the War in Vietnam (Scottdale, Pennsylvania: Herald Press, 1969), p. 133.
61Marsden, Fundamentalism and American Culture,

. "At all events we must, at the conclusion of peace, demand substantial expansion of the German Empire. In this our motive will not be the greed and covetousness of world-ruling England, nor the national vanity of gloire-seeking France, nor the childish megalomania of Rome-mad Italy, nor the insatiable craving for expansion of semi-barbarous Russia."64

."The International Lie-Press has given us a fourth Great Power against Germany, and deluges the world with lies against our magnificent and strongly moral army, and slanders everything that is German. I propose that in the treaty of peace we should claim a special Milliard as indemnity for lies."bb
Torrey criticized Harnack and Haeckel for their

ances.
Two months after Torrey's attack on German professors and their scholarship, The King's Business dealt specifically with Case's charges that premillenarians were in the pay of Germany. The magazine noted a similarity
67Ibid., pp. 99-100.

"We think only of war. We execute God Almighty's will, and the edicts of his j~stice we will fulfil in vengeance upon the ungodly. God calls us to murderous battles, even if worlds should thereby fall to ruin. Like gardens of roses, our wounds blossom at the gates of heaven.,,71
70Ibid., 9 (April 1918): 277.

• "Thou who dwellest in thy Heaven above, cherubim, seraphim, and Zeppelins; thou art enthroned as a God of thunder in the midst of lightning from the clouds and lightning from sword and cannon, send thunder, lightning, hail, and tempest hurtling upon our enemy and hurl him down to dark burial-pits. "72

The King's Business' criticism of Germans invoking the name of God to justify the violence of "murderous battles" and hurling the enemy "down to dark burial pits" created a mindset: the editors of the magazine could not accept the fact that a militarist, i.e., Germany, would be willing to accept a just and fair peace by negotiations. When press reports of May 11, 1918 indicated that Germany was sympathetic to a possible plan of mediation of the war by Pope Benedict XV, The King's Business concluded that the German government would never accept peace negotiations

As for Pope Benedict XV, on two previous occasions (July 30, 1915, and August 1, 1917) he had appealed to the belligerents in the war to make peace, but on both 0ccasions he had been rebuffed. Because of these efforts, he earned the reputation of being pro-German. 74 An editorial in the magazine took up the theme of the Pope's pro-Germanism:
To propose Pope Benedict as a mediator in the present

have indicated in another editorial, it is plain as
day that his sympathies are all with the Kaiser. 75 According to The King's Business, evidence of the Pope favoring the Kaiser could be found in various acts of omission and commission. In the category of omission, the Pope refused to take any action against Irish priests and clergy from Quebec who resisted the military draft. 76 On the active side, the Pope took immediate action to sanction a disciplinary inquiry against the Archbishop of Carniola, who had assumed the leadership of a revolutionary movement against the government of Austria-Hungary, which was aligned with Germany. The common thread in these various actions
74William L. Langer, compo & ed., An Encyclopedia of World History: Ancient, Medieval, and Modern Chronologically Arranged, 4th ed. (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1968), p. 714.
75The King's Business 9 (July 1918): 548.

By strongly condemning the papacy, The King's Business displayed a remarkably short memory; during the early years of the war the magazine had displayed an evenhandedness toward Germany while denouncing the efforts of the American preparedness movement to institute a draft of young men. (Torrey had even recommended a pacifist book to the magazine's readership.) The King's Business' condemnation of the Pope for what the magazine had previously advocated can be interpreted as the result of the changed position of the United States in regard to the war, and the anti-Catholic bias of the magazine. As a conservative Protestant magazine, The King's Business looked to God-not to a Catholic Pope--for world peace.
When it appeared that the war would continue indefinitely, the magazine's position of looking to God for peace eventually found expression at the highest level of the United States government. On May 11, 1918, President Wilson issued a proclamation declaring May 30th, to be a day of prayer, fasting, and public humiliation before God by the American people. Wilson righteously declared that God

As for the future of the world now that the fighting in Europe had ended, Torrey entertained no illusions that enduring peace and security would be forthcoming. Already there was the danger of anarchy in the world (a probable

"It is God's plan that the Holy Father of Rome should be the spiritual and temporal head of His kingdom on earth. It is the same today as in the time of the first pope. The best way to accomplish this is through political power, .•."81

Torrey viewed the President's innocuous meeting with the Pope as unnecessary, as a colossal political blunder, and as a surrender to the Roman Catholic Church: " President Wilson's surrender to Roman Catholicism ought to arouse all who have any conception of the iniquities and subtleties of the Roman Catholic machine to nation-wide and effective action.,,82 As a Protestant nation, Americans would "not tolerate the bowing of our Chief Magistrate to that strange and pernicious mixture of politics and religion that is headed up at Rome. ,,83 The United States had defeated the German Kaiser and should not become subservient to the will' of the papacy.
Torrey's fear of the papacy in American politics did not continue as a regular theme in The King's Business, because of the lack of evidence to support such a position and because Torrey stepped down as the editor-in-chief of the publication. The last edition of the magazine under Torrey's guidance was the December 1918 issue; a short paragraph in this issue explained that Torrey decided to retire because of the lack of available time to fulfill the duties of the position adequately. The readers were assured

The war years had been a difficult period of time for Torrey to serve as editor-in-chief of The King's Busi~, trying as he did to keep the religious magazine from merely reflecti.ng the .attitudes and beliefs of a world at war and the easy thinking that the end justifies the means. From the beginning of the war in 1914, the publication had unabashedly challenged the various nationalisms of the time by stressing Christian love above patriotism, a position which became increasingly untenable as the United States drifted into war. Once the United States became involved in the war, the editorial position of the magazine reluctantly accepted American participation while using the war as a vehicle for an attack on American social evils such as strong drink. At the conclusion of the two wars-the war to end all wars and the war to end all alcoholic beverages-Torrey once again began to concern himself with the contest between liberals and conservatives over the direction of Protestant Christianity in a post-war America. Torrey, and the country, now had to make the difficult transition from a "war-for-democracy" frame of mind (in which right and wrong seemed more apparent) to the uncertainties and ambiguities of a nation at peace. But Torrey's

In the months following the World War I armistice there was an optimism among the American people (an optimism significantly and emphatically not s~ared by the realistic and premillennial-minded Torrey) that a lasting world peace could be achieved on the basis of Wilson's Fourteen Points as presented to the world on January 14, 1918. The Fourteen Points were based upon the American ideals of free trade, free navigation, reduction in armaments, and national self determination--principles that were to be guaranteed by a general association of nation states. Once the tough negotiations with the allied countries began at Versailles, it became all too apparent that Wilsonian idealism would have to compromise with European realism. Wilson willingly accepted a compromise peace settlement with the Europeans~ however, when Republicans in the United States Senate objected to Article X of the League of Nations Covenant, Wilson refused to compromise with them. Article X provided a League guarantee of national boundaries, a guarantee that opponents believed would insure American involvement in future

Adding to the general disillusionment concerning prospects for world peace were the extreme rhetoric' and actions of the new Russian government under the control of Nikolai Lenin. At the end of World War I Lenin spoke about the need for revolutionary violence to bring down the capitalist governments of the world. To translate this rhetoric into action was the goal of the Third Communist International established in March 1919. Initially, the Third International proved to be successful with a communist takeover in Hungary, uprisings in Germany, and communist intrigue in China.
Not even the United States escaped the surge of revolutionary violence. After a number of bombings in the United States, Torrey and many Americans were genuinely concerned about the atheistic regime in Russia which they

1According to Marsden, Fundamentalism and American Culture (p. 208), adding plausibility to the fears about Russia were earlier premillennial predictions about the" threatening role of Russia in the end times.

~sJor , Amer~ca, p. ; Burner, T e Amer~can People, p. 494.

Despite the practical, nonideological orientation of American workers, it served the interests of businessmen to attribute great influence to communist revclutionaries in order to discredit the strikes. During the 1919 steel strike, Judge Elbert H. Gary, chairman of the board of United States Steel, warned about the advancement of Bolshevism, particularly in the form of William Z. Foster, a closet communist, who was a union organizer in U.S. Steel's Chicago-Gary, Indiana plants. Discrediting strikers made it easier for United States Steel to overcome racial prejudices and import southern blacks into the Chicago area to keep the steel mills operating. 4 By January 1920, the strike was over, and, for many Americans,
4R' 'd, ' 686.

In the midst of the turmoil and fear of the postwar years, there were many liberal Christians of a Social-Gospel bent who continued to reaffirm their pre-war idealism that humanity could indeed establish God's Kingdom on earth in which world peace and unity would reign. As part of this process, the Interchurch World Movement was created on December 18, 1918, as an organization designed to unite all Protestant missionary and benevolent agencies under one umbrella in "a single campaign for money, men, and spiritual revival."S Using the newly discovered organizational techniques that had been developed during the war, the leadership of the Interchurch World Movement decided to carry out their plans on a grandiose scale by first raising one billion dollars. In an April, 1920 bulletin they declared:

SAhlstrom, A Religious History, 2:383.

Torrey rejected the post-war liberal optimism about world peace and unity that inspired the formation of the League of Nations and the Interchurch World Movement. For Torrey, true peace and unity could only be achieved on the basis of common religious doctrine rather than on the basis of noble ideals and a campaign for a billion dollars:

During the summer of 1918, Torrey hosted a meeting of prominent conservatives at his Montrose summer home, to lay the groundwork for the establishment of a worldwide organization for Bible-believing Christians. 9 Attending the Montrose meeting were William Bell Riley, John Campbell, William Evans, W. H. Griffith Thomas,
8The King's Business 10 (January 1919): 7.
9The meeting at Torrey's home seems to confirm Marsden's view, Fundamentalism and American Culture (po 141), that the broad evangelical coalition that had dominated America for more than a century was breaking up during the years between 1917 and 1920.

At Montrose, plans for the international organization of orthodox Christians were developed and presented the following year to a gathering of conservative Christians in Philadelphia. The Philadelphia meeting, which lasted from May 25 to June 1, 1919, had 6,000 people from across the country in attendance (including Torrey) to hear sermons on traditional Christian topics--"the doctrines of God, Christ, Satan, sin, atonement, sanctification, grace, redemption, Church, second advent, prophecy, resurrection, and future punishment. "12 In the midst of all this preaching, a decision was made by those assembled to establish formally the World's Christian Fundamentals Association (WCFA), with a nine-point creed that included statements dealing with the inerrancy of the Bible and the premillennial return

11
Stewart to Torrey, August 24, 1918, Stewart Letters, Bible Institute of Los Angeles, La Mirada, California.

As a founder of the World's Christian Fundamentals Association, Torrey had gr~at hopes that the organization would be a force in the world for the spread of conservative Christian ideas. Despite the world vision implied by its name, the WCFA had little impact on the world, primarily because of a small membership centered exclusively in the United States and Canada. Even within the United States, the organization had only a minor impact on the emerging fundamentalist movement.
One year after the establishment of the World's Christian Fundamentals Association a suggestion appeared in a 1920 edition of The Watchman Examiner, a prominent Northern Baptist paper, that the term "fundamentalist" should be applied to all Christians who were willing to "battle" for the fundamentals of the Christian faith. 15 Curtis Lee Laws, a conservative and the edito·r of the paper, believed that the new name would more accurately
13Ibid., p. 245.
14Ibid.
15LeRoy Moore, Jr., "Another Look at Fundamentalism: A Response to Ernest R. Sandeen," Church History 37 (June 1968): 196.

On May 21, 1922, the Reverend Harry Emerson Fosdick (a Baptist serving outside his denomination) ascended his pulpit at the First Presbyterian Church in New York City and delivered one of the most provocative sermons in American history--"Shall the Fundamentalists Win?" Reflecting back on the sermon forty years later, Fosdick declared in a self-serving fashion: "It was a plea for good will, but what came of it was an explosion
16These two battles were within the framework of what Marsden, Fundamentalism and American Culture (p. 164), calls the two fronts of fundamentalism--the major denominations and the teaching of evolution in the public schools.

A difference more essential than differences over specific doctrines between the fundamentalists and the liberal Fosdick was the dissimilarity in world view. Fosdick, in his sermon had declared: "We must be able to think our modern life clear through in Christian terms and
17Harry Emerson Fosdick, The Living of Those Days: An Autobiography (New York: Harper & Brothers, 1956),

18Ernest J. Wrage and Barnet Baskerville, eds., Contemporary Forum: American Speeches on TwentiethCentury Issues (New York: Harper & Brothers, 1962), p. 104.
19Ibid., p. 100.

Conservatives within Torrey's Presbyterian denomination were outraged when they learned of the content of Fosdick's "Shall the Fundamentalists Win?" sermon. Fosdick's antagonism to the specific doctrines of an errorless Bible and Mary's virginity appeared to contradict Presbyterian doctrine that had been affirmed in 1910 and reaffirmed in 1916 by the General Assembly of the church. One fundamentalist went so far as to label

After almost three years of patient maneuvering, the conservative elements within the Presbyterian Church were able to force a showdown with Fosdick. He had the choice of becoming a regular Presbyterian minister or leaving the pulpit of the First Presbyterian Church. Rather than join a denomination that subscribed to a number of doctrines he could not accept, Fosdick resigned his position. In his last sermon at the church where he had served for seven years, Fosdick stood his ground, relating the following comments to a sympathetic audience: II 'They call me a heretic,' he said. 'Well, I am a heretic if conventional orthodoxy is the standard. I 3hould be ashamed to live in this generation and not be a heretic. ,,,23
21Fosdick, The Living of Those Days, p. 153.
22C. Allyn Russell, Voices of American Fundamentalism: Seven Biographical Studies (Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1976), p. 206.
23Fosdick, The Living of Those Days, p. 176.

A few weeks after Fosdick delivered his dramatic farewell ser~on at the First Church, the battleground for fundamentalists shifted to the state of Tennessee and the passage of a state law prohibting the teaching of evolution in the public schools. This head-on attack against modern science (Darwinian science) by fundamentalists who accepted the truth. claims of Baconian science came at a time when modern science had gained a large following in America. 25 The American public marveled at the stories about Albert Einstein's theory of relativity and the new labor-saving devices that came from the scientific laboratories. People were gullible enough to believe that science could accomplish almost anything. 26 Modern science even intruded into the religious realm, an impact that Fosdick wrote about:
24George W. Dollar, A History of Fundamentalism in America (Greenville, South Carolina: Bob Jones University Press, 1973), p. 97.
25Marsden, Fundamentalism and American Culture (pp. 214-215), supports this view by citing Thomas Kuhn (author of The Structure of Scientific Revolutions) to point out that fundamentalists were operating with a different paradigm of science than that of their opponents.
26Frederick Lewis Allen, Only Yesterday: An Informal History of the Nineteen-Twenties (New York: Harper & Row, Publishers, 1964; Perennial Library), p. 164.
"The men of faith might claim for their positions ancient tradition, practical usefulness, and spiritual desirability, but one query could prick all such bubbles:. Is it scientific? That question has searched religion for contraband goods, stripped it of old superstitions, forced it to change its categories of thought and methods of work, and in general has so cowed and scared religion that many modern-minded believers • • • instinctively throw up their hands at the mere whisper of it. • • • When a prominent scientist comes out strongly for religion, all the churches thank Heaven and take courage as though it were the highest possible compliment to God to have Eddington believe in Him. Science has become the arbiter of this generation's thought, until to call even a prophet and a seer scientific is to cap the climax of praise."27

276 viewed as scoundrels. 2S From July 10-21, 1925, the attention of many Americans was riveted on the Scopes trial in the small rural town of Dayton, in the heartland of H. L. Mencken's Bible Belt. The trial had become an instant media event when more than one hundred American reporters (and two British reporters) descended upon the town. As' ,-this were not enough, WGN radio from Chicago received the distinction of being the first radio station to broadcast a trial. over the radio. How much of the trial Chicagoans could understand by listening to their radios is questionable. The presiding judge, a pious fundamentalist, characterized himself,_ in a southern drawl, as "'Jist , 29

All the elements for a good newspaper story were present at the trial. For the defense was the famous trial lawyer and supporter of many liberal reform movements, Clarence Darrow from Chicago. Of greater fame and on the side of the prosecution was the three-time presidential candidate and progressive reformer, William Jennings Bryan from Nebraska. That two self-righteous men who could not be described as being politically conservative should oppose each other in the Scopes trial
28Marsden, Fundamentalism and American Culture (pp. 184-185), writes about one outcome of the trial being a decline in fundamentalist power at the centers of national life.

Darrow's famous cross-examination during the last days of the trial was not directed at humiliating Bryan, but to show that the fundamentalist Bryan did not accept everything in the Bible in a literal sense, an important point because the Tennessee anti-evolution law was based
30Ibid.
31Ferenc M. Szasz, "Three Fundamentalist Leaders: The Roles of William Bell Riley, John Roach Straton, and William Jennings Bryan in the Fundamentalist-Modernist Controversy" (Ph.D. dissertation, The University of Rochester, 1969), p. 248.

Bryan's testimony alienated many, including some of his fundamentalist allies; though he did not believe in a literal six-day creation, at the same time he antagonized Christians of a liberal persuasion because of his literal acceptance of the Jonah and the fish story and the story of God stopping the sun for Joshua. Bryan's shifting back and forth between a strict and loose interpretation of the Bible led Darrow arrogantly to characterize this and Bryan's fundamentalist beliefs in general as being foolish views "that no intelligent Christian on earth believes."34
While inconsistent in biblical interpretation, Bryan must be given credit for being consistent in his
32Clarence Darrow, The Famous Examination of Bryan at the Scopes Evolution Trial, Edited by E. HaldemanJulius (Girard, Kansas: Haldeman-Julius Publication. n.d.),

James Gray to Torrey, October 14, 1925, Moodyanna Collection, Moody Bible Institute, Chicago, Illinois.

As an anticlimax to the Scopes trial, the jury eventually had the last word when it declared Scopes guilty of teaching evolution in the classroom in violation of Tennessee state law. An appeal to the Tennessee Supreme Court upheld the jury decision. Many fundamentalists throughout the country were encouraged by the jury's verdict and began to agitate for anti-evolution laws in their own states. By 1928, nine states had

While the Scopes trial and the Fosdick controversy were to be the two most spectacular events of the 1920s through which the fundamentalist movement came to the attention of the American public as a whole, Torrey had stood aside from them. In a less spectacular way, Torrey sought to further his view of Christianity by publishing books dealing with the fundamentals of the faith, by conducting evangelistic campaigns, and by trying to improve the reputation of the Bible Institute of Los Angeles.
In the ten years following the conclusion of World War I until his death in 1928, Torrey published an average of 1.5 books each year. This remarkable
36Marsden, Fundamentalism and American Culture,

Unhappily for Torrey, his post-~ar success as an author did not produce large crowds at his evangelistic crusades; in fact, after the war Torrey never had the successful campaigns he had enjoyed in the pre-war years. The first evangelistic crusade after the war teamed Torrey and Charlie Alexander after many years of traveling their separate ways; this was to be the last Torrey-Alexander campaign (Alexander died in the fall of 1920). Meetings were held at BIOLA and in nearby Redondo Beach,
37According to Marsden, Fundamentalism and American Culture (pp. 47-48), 75% of fundamentalist talk and writing was devoted to popular piety, Bible study, and saving souls.

A primary explanation for Torrey's lackluster performance as an evangelist can be attributed to his inability to modify his message to meet the ethical and moral challenges to Christianity from a growing movement of materialism and consumerism, a movement that increasingly became the new "religion" for many Americans during the 1920s. From 1921 to 1929 industrial production in America doubled and real per capita income increased
38Lyman Stewart to Dr. Frank A. Keller, February 13, 1919, Stewart Letters, Bible Institute of Los Angeles, La Mirada, California.
39Lyman Stewart to Dorothy, March 21, 1919, Stewart Letters, Bible Institute of Los Angeles, La Mirada, California.
40Lyman Stewart to Dr. Frank A. Keller, April 10, 1919, Stewart Letters, Bible Institute of Los Angeles, La Mirada, California.

Probably the greatest diversion for many Americans during the twenties centered around radios and automobiles. During the summer of 1920, WWJ in Detroit became the first radio station to begin regular commercial broadcasting. Within four short years there were some 1,400 radio stations in the country, broadcasting a variety of programs that included concerts, sports activities, election returns, church services (Torrey preached over the airwaves), and programs of current interest such as those dealing with the Scopes trial. This phenomenal growth in the number of radio stations and in the diversity of programming complemented radio sales that grew from $69,000,000 in 1922 to $842,548,000 in 1929, an incredibly large

If Americans became tired of listening to their radios, then they had the freedom to get into their cars and drive anywhere they desired. During the decade of the 1920s car ownership in America tripled from 9,000,000 automobiles at the beginning of the decade to over 30,000,000 in 1930. The enormous increase in the numbe~ of vehicles reflected the increasing wealth of the American public and the techniques of mass production, e.g., the assembly line, that brought about a lower cost per car unit. The mass production of cars also stimulated the growth of countless other businesses--rubber, steel, road construction, motels, petroleum, etc.
Torrey and many other fundamentalist Christians responded less to this tide of mass consumerism and materialism than to the accompanying revolution in morals that took place during the decade. Contributing to this change in morals was the automobile that enabled couples to escape the watchful eyes of elders. At the beginning
42Allen, Only Yesterday, p. 137.

The postwar expectations of Torrey and many progressive reformers had been that the passage of the 18th Amendment outlawing intoxicating beverages would have a calming influence on the country. Problems associated with drunkenness (such as child and wife abuse, absenteeism from work, a high crime rate, and costly welfare programs) would be eliminated or greatly reduced, and the country would prosper. Because of these
43Ibid., p. 83.

The Volstead Act defined intoxicating liquor as any beverage that contained as little as ~ of 1% of alcohol. The unenviable task of enforcing this act fell upon the 1,500 agents assigned to the Bureau of Internal Revenue. Grossly undermanned, this government agency tried to keep America dry from a tidal wave of home brew and imported liquor from Canada. In 1924 alone, it was estimated that $40,000,000 of liquor was smuggled into the country. Accurate figures for domestically produced alcohol are nonexistent; however, between 1919 and 1929, U.S. production of corn sugar, which could be used to make corn whisky, increased 600%.45 This production of bootleg liquor catered to the needs of many Americans who now considered drinking to be romantic and exciting because it was illegal; it was an inalienable right that no government could take away.
The high consumer demand for bootleg liquor and the promise of large profits attracted the attention of professional criminals. The most famous of these gangsters were Dutch Schultz of New York and Alphonse Capone of Chicago. Capone had a business card that portrayed him

The enormous profits available from prohibitionrelated crime and the 75,000 annual arrests for liquor violations shocked the sensibilities of Torrey and other reformers who had viewed prohibition as a panacea for the ills of American society. The lack of self-restraint and general disregard for the law reflected a mood toward greater personal freedom and self-indulgence already noted in the changing sexual mores and growing materialism. This was hardly a time for traditional Christianity to flourish, but Torrey doggedly continued his old-fashioned evangelistic campaigns--to audiences that got progressively smaller and smaller. Other evangelists changed with the times by adapting the Christian message to the new circumstances. Prominent in this group was Aimee Semple McPherson, who established Angelus Temple across town from the Bible Institute of Los Angeles.
Aimee Semple McPherson, like Torrey, had spent much of her career as in itinerant evangelist before settling down in southern California in 1921. The

Visitors attending Angelus Temple for the first time oftentimes found it difficult to believe they were attending a church rather than a nearby Hollywood theater. Lavish pageants were staged before the congregation, and, on one occasion, Sister, as she was often called, managed to produce a military battle between the forces of Good and Evil, complete with artillery and small arms fire. In the midst of the battle a blimp carrying the devil appeared and was promptly shot down at the exact moment that a spotlight directed its beam on an unfurled American flag. When not staging these extravaganzas, McPherson might hold a fourteen-hour Holy Spirit rally of continuous preaching from a team of ministers. During one of these

While Torrey, because his methods of revival were out of tune with the times, did not have the evangelistic success of an Aimee Semple McPherson during the 1920s, his vision for the Bible Institute of Los Angeles was futuristic. He wanted the school to strike out in new directions. Helping to make Torrey's dream a reality was the excellent financial condition of the Institute. In October 1919, Lyman Stewart announced to the Institute's Board of Directors that the indebtedness of $430,000 incurred in the construction of the school's building had been liquidated. 49 To help insure extra income for BIOLA in the years ahead, Stewart turned over 4,000 shares of Union Oil Company Stock in addition to a major interest in the Western Machinery company.50
48carey McWilliams, "Aimee Semple McPherson: 'Sunlight in My Soul,'" in The Aspirin Age, 1919-1941, ed. Isabel Leighton (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1949; A Touchstone Book), pp. 59-60.
49

Because of BIOLA's favorable monetary condition, the school directed much of its resources toward supporting a sister Bible institute in China-the Hunan Bible Institute. Dr. Frank Keller, a former missionary of the China Inland Mission and a founder of the Chinese school, believed the school would be an invaluable instrument in the spread of Christianity among the Chinese in the post. war era. Before the war ended, 5 1/4 acres of choice land had been purchased for $15,000 in gold, and a fund of $46,000 for the construction of institute buildings had been established at BIOLA. 51 Within a few months of the termination of world hostilities, Torrey and his wife made their second trip to China (the first trip had been in 1902), to observe and speak at the Hunan Bible Insti
52

A third voyage of the Torreys to China took place during the summer of 1921, in the midst of economic and political turmoil. 53 From 1920 to 1926, civil war plagued China as local war lords attempted to maintain and expand
51Lyman Stewart to Torrey, November 9, 1918, Stewart Letters, Bible Institue of Los Angeles, La Mirada, California.
52Lyman Stewart to Dr. Frank A. Keller, April 17, 1919, Stewart Letters, Bible Institute of Los Angeles, La Mirada, California.
53Lyman Stewart to Dr. Frank A. Keller, June 17, 1921, Stewart Letters, Bible Institute of Los Angeles, La Mirada, California.

While BIOLA continued to support the Chinese Bible Institute during the difficult years of civil war, on the home-front BIOLA, with the establishment of KJS in 1921, began to divert a portion of its funds into the magic area of radio broadcasting. 55 Initially skeptical of this new medium, Torrey eventually became an enthusiastic supporter of the invention which made it possible for thousands of people located hundreds of miles away to hear his preaching of the gospel message. On March 10, 1922, KJS was on the air as the first radio station in the United States devoted exclusively to religious
54Lyman Stewart to Dr. Frank A. Keller, January 12, 1922, Stewart Letters, Bible Institute of Los Angeles, La Mirada, California.
55Daniel P. Fuller, Give the Winds a Mighty Voice: The Story of Charles E. Fuller (Waco, Texas: Word Books, Publisher, 1972), p. 75.

Despite the new directions that BIOLA took in the post-war years in missionary work and in radio broadcasting, the Institute remained steadfastly devoted to its original purpose of educating young people who would proclaim the good news of Jesus Christ in accordance with the teachings of the Bible. Torrey remained directly involved in this mission by teaching the class on the Bible, always using as a text his archaic book What the Bible Teaches. During the 1920s Torrey encountered in one of his Bible classes a student in his thirties whom Torrey came to know and for whom Torrey believed God planned a great work in the future. The student was Charles E. Fuller,57 a 1910 graduate of Pomona College, who later reflected Torrey's ideas in his role as a prominent radio evangelist and co-founder of Fuller Theological Seminary.
While the post-war years brought success to BIOLA in the form of 350-400 students each year filling the classrooms and a good financial picture, behind this rosy image were sharp differences in personality between the leaders of the school--Torrey and Lyman Stewart. During the many years of the Torrey-Stewart relationship, Lyman Stewart had never hesitated to criticize Torrey's work at

58
Lyman Stewart to Torrey, August 7, 1920, Stewart Letters, Bible Institute of Los Angeles, La Mirada, California.
59Lyman Stewart to Torrey, September 30, 1920, Stewart Letters, Bible Institute of Los Angeles, La Mirada, California.
60Ibid.
This conflict o.:f };:-. :sonalities led Torrey to consider seriously resigning from BIOLA .and seeking employment elsewhere. He eventually met with an individual from the Moody Bible Institute, probably James Gray, and inquired about the possibility of teaching part-time and serving as Moody's official representative at Bible conferences and evangelistic meetings. If a satis

When Stewart learned of Torrey's plans to leave BIOLA, he immediately wrote him and stated that he would regard his departure as a great personal loss. Stewart assured Torrey that his preaching had helped him more than anyone else and that he had personally defended Torrey from criticism. 62
Whether Stewart's sentiments influenced Torrey to remain at BIOLA is unclea~, but Torrey did not resign. The Torrey-Stewart relationship, however, did not change fundamentally. Stewart, in a seesaw fashion, criticized and praised Torrey. In a letter to Frank Keller in China, Stewart wrote: "Dr. Torrey is a great Bible teacher
61Unsigned Memorandum, October 4, 1920, Moodyanna Collection, Moody Bible Institute, Chicago, Illinois.
62Lyman Stewart to Torrey, October 19, 1920, Stewart Letters, Bible Institute of Los Angeles, La Mirada, California.

I have not felt at any time, however, that your salary was too large, for it is the amount we agreed upon at the very beginning of your service; and I have always felt, and still feel, that your name has been, and is, a tower of strength, both to the Institute and to the Church; and your teaching and preaching, though probably not so popular as that of some others, have been upbuilding, and have established our people in the truth as few churches have been established. 65
Stewart's death did not bring an immediate end to personality conflict at BIOLA, as evident by an incident that occurred at a gathering of the class of 1923 and the alumni association. Near the end of the meeting, Torrey suggested that a missionary couple in attendance who had attended BIOLA should be offered membership in the alumni
63Lyman Stewart to Dr. Frank A. Keller, June 17, 1921.
64Lyman Stewart to Dr. A. C. Gaebelein, January 12, 1922, Stewart Letters, Bible Institute of Los Angeles, La Mirada, California.
65Lyman Stewart to Torrey, August 18, 1923, Stewart Letters, Bible Institute of Los Angeles, La Mirada, California.

'1 67

This embarrassing incident exposed a deteriorating relationship between Torrey and Horton that had the practical consequence of diminishing Torrey's influence at the Institute. In 1924, BIOLA stopped sponsoring an annual summer ministerial institute (which had been held at Montrose).68 To gain a sponsor, Torrey successfully appealed to Gray for support from the Moody Bible Insti
69

66sanden, "Reuben Archer Torrey," p. 124.
67Ibid•
68Torrey to James Gray, March 18, 1924, Moodyanna Collection, Moody Bible Institute, Chicago, Illinois.
69Torrey to James Gray, April 7, 1924, Moodyanna Collection, Moody Bible Institute, Chicago, Illinois.

While the untenable situation at BIOLA moved Torrey in the direction of resignation, his renewed success as an evangelist also pulled him away from the Institute and the church. His decision to resign took place within the context of a successful crusade in Winnepeg, Canada, where 5,000 people crowded into a skating rink to hear the aging evangelist preach the fundamental doctrines and values of Christianity.71 He set the date for his resignation to take effect after July 1, 1924. Torrey would devote the rest of his life to evangelism and Bible conferences.
When the date arrived for Torrey to leave BIOLA and the Church of the Open Door, a spirit of magnanimity reigned. Horton praised him for being an excellent teacher and preacher. 72 A few skeptics, however, viewed his departure as being forced by Horton. Torrey
70Ibid .

a-lways begin with you. 1173 Torrey never forgot BIOLA, and he continued to be interested in the various happenings at the Institute for the rest of his life.
In the immediate weeks after leaving the Institute and church, Torrey busied himself with the numerous conferences which had become a part of the Montrose scene-Missions Conference, July 6-13: Ministerial Institute, July 14-24: General Conference, July 25-August 3: and Prophetic Conference, August 4_10. 74 Before the end of the summer he received an urgent request from Minneapolis to assume temporarily the pastorate of the famous William Bell Riley's First Baptist Church and the leadership of his Northwestern Schools while Riley recovered from head injuries incurred in an automobile accident. Torrey agreed to serve as pastor from September through November 1924.

After the brief stay in Minneapolis, Torrey and his wife prepared for an eventful 1925 as they experienced the ordeal of moving their household goods from South Pasadena across the continent ~.o their new home in Asheville, North Carolina. Establishing a home in Asheville enabled Torrey and his wife to be closer to Montrose and to their children living on the east coast, while having the benefit of mild southern winters.
Despite living thousands of miles away from his former place of employment, Torrey continued to be aware of events at BIOLA, an awareness that eventually became a preoccupation. After Torrey's resignation from BIOLA, John MacInnis was appointed in his place as Dean of the Institute. The MacInnis appointment could hardly have troubled Torrey, because he had personally invited his friend and former pastor of the Montrose Presbyterian Church to teach at BIOLA. By 1927, however, Torrey had expressed strong reservations about MacInnis and the new superintendent of the Institute, Charles Hurlburt,

By the end of 1927, Torrey's fears for BIOLA seemed to have been realized when the Institute published John MacInnis' book entitled Peter the Fisherman Philosopher: A Study in Higher Fundamentalism. Torrey wrote Gray a candid letter about the book's auth~r:
Dr. MacInnis is acting like an insane man in his

ship and orthodoxy than he is for the glory of the
Lord Jesus •••• It has nearly put me in bed. 77 Other fundamentalist Christians, including Charles Trumbull of the influential Sunday School Times, attacked the MacInnis book. Trumbull's primary objection focused on MacInnis' characterization of Peter's gaining insight into Christ's mission on earth by his own efforts. For Trumbull, Torrey, and other fundamentalists, Peter gained insight into Christ and faith only through the divine intervention of the Holy Spirit, and not through his own efforts. 78
The chorus of fundamentalist objections to the
76James Gray to Torrey, May 23, 1927, Moodyanna Collection, Moody Bible Institute, Chicago, Illinois.
77Torrey to James Gray, March 14, 1928, Moodyanna Collection, Moody Bible Institute, Chicago, Illinois.
78Fuller, Give the Winds a Mighty Voice, pp. 69-70.

In the midst of the MacInnis controversy, Torrey suffered a breakdown in health from which he never recovered. While traveling on trains from Asheville to Duluth, Minnesota, where he was scheduled to conduct evangelistic meetings, Torrey became ill with acute bronchitis. At Cincinnati, Torrey decided to return home, a decision which necessitated remaining in the Cincinnati railroad station from 11:30 in the morning to 7:45 in the evening. On the return trip Torrey suffered continuously with chills during the night until he arrived back in Asheville at 9:40 A.M. the next day. He immediately went to a doctor, who reassured him about his health--reassurances Torrey apparently did not accept because he developed his own schedule of recuperation. During the months of
79I b'd~., p••69

Meanwhile, the MacInnis controversy was corning to a head when other issues became involved in the conflict. One edition of The King's Business implied that Torrey himself had endorsed the ideas of the MacInnis book as far back as the spring of 1922, when MacInnis had delivered the substance of his book in lectures at BIOLA and was subsequently hired by Torrey to be a member of the school's faculty.81 Torrey disputed the implication that he had hired MacInnis after hearing the lectures by declaring that he had not attended the lectures and that he had already invited MacInnis to become a member of the faculty before the lectures were given at BIOLA. 82 While this disagreement remained away from the public, another issue of the MacInnis controversy invoked the spectre of a public law suit.
In the May 1928 issue of The King's Business there was an attack by MacInnis on Torrey's administration at
80Torrey to James Gray, April 13, 1928, Moodyanna Collection, Moody Bible Institute, Chicago, Illinois.
81Torrey to John MacInnis, May 8, 1928, Moodyanna Collection, Moody Bible Institute, Chicago, Illinois.
82Torrey to Keith Brooks, May 22, 1928, Moodyanna Collection, Moody Bible Institute, Chicago, Illinois; Torrey to James Gray, Telegram, May 29, 1928, Moodyanna Collection, Moody Bible Institute, Chicago, Illinois.

since 1921."83 Furthermore, the article pointed out that in 1926 there were 362 students and.in 1927 there were 368. The numbers-game attempted to soften the criticism of MacInnis by demonstrating that during his tenure in office the number of students at BIOLA had increased from the low during Torrey's last year in office. Torrey, in a letter to MacInnis, immediately questioned the veracity of the article:

I furthermore demand that you issue no more copies of this May number of The King's Business that contains this misrepresentation and that you destroy all that you have in your possession. And I also demand that, if you reproduce this article or any portion of it in any tract or other publication, that you do not send it out but destroy every copy, and if you have sent it out that you send word to everyone to whom it was sent that your statement is false and inform them of the real facts in the case. The law also empowers me to make this demand. 8S

During the fall of 1928, great pressure was placed upon MacInnis to submit a second resignation, which he did. In a December 1928 meeting of the board of directors, the board, by a vote of six to four, reversed its earlier decision and accepted MacInnis' resignation. After the vo·te, the chairm~n of the board and the three board members who had supported MacInnis resigned. 88 Charles E. Fuller, who as a board member had voted to accept MacInnis' resignation, became the new chairman of the board of directors. Undoubtedly, Torrey would have been pleased with the selection of his former student as chairman of the board and the ending of the MacInnis controversy; however, before these events occurred Torrey had died.
In the days and hours before Torrey's death there were no indications that his life was in jeopardy. On October 22, 1928, Torrey and Clara celebrated their
87Torrey to John MacInnis, June 18, 1928, Moodyanna Collection, Moody Bible Institute, Chicago, Illinois.
88Fuller, Give the Winds a Mighty Voice, pp. 71-72.

Torrey's funeral was held during the afternoon of October 30th in Montrose, with internment on a small knoll overlooking the tabernacle building of his beloved Montrose Bible Conference. 90 Conducting the funeral service was his longtime friend of the Atlanta Baptist Tabernacle, the Reverend Will Houghton, whose remarks were based lion II Samuel ~:38, 'A prince and a great man

89Mart1n, Torrey, p. 5.
90R. A. Torrey, Jr. to James Gray, Telegram, October 27, 1928, Moodyanna Collection, Moody Bible Institute, Chicago, Illinois.

In the years following Torrey's death, the fundamentalist movement continued the precipitous decline in power and influence among opinion makers' that had begun after the Scopes trial, a decline that accelerated during the uncertain times of the Great Depres~ion. By '935 the arch foe of the fundamentalist?, Harry Emerson Fosdick, announced without regret that the movement had been thoroughly defeated. 2 While defeated t fundamentalism had not been destroyed.
Beginning in the 1940s, many children of the fundamentalists began to move away from their fathers' heated doctrinal disputes and, in a conciliatory fashion, advocated two absolute principles of faith--the conversion experience and the authority of the Bible. Harking back to the terminology of the previous century, they consciously
1John D. Woodbridge, Mark A. Noll, and Nathan O. Hatch, The Gospel in America: Themes in the Story of America's Evangelicals (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Publishing House, 1979), p. 78.
2Harry Emerson Fosdick, "Beyond Modernism," The Christian Century 52 (December 4, 1935): 1552.

By the early 1960s, the power of evangelical ideas in America as represented by the large number of conservative and fundamentalist clergy became apparent from scientific polling. In a 1961 poll of Protestant pastors, conducted by the Opinion Research Corporation of Princeton, New Jersey, it was discovered that 39%
3Richard Quebedeaux, The Young Evangelicals: Revolution in Orthodoxy (New York: Harper & Row, Publishers, 1974), p. 13.
4Erling Jorstad, Evangelicals in the White House: The Cultural Maturation of Born Aqain Christianity, 19601981, Studies in American Religion, Vol. 4 (New York: The Edwin Mellen Press, 1981), p. 16.

After the tumultuous sixties, Americans wanted a peaceful and stable world based upon fixed principles. In this kind of social environment many people were attracted to evangelicalism, with its truth structure based on biblical authority and its stress on the importance of the conversion experience. In 1972 nearly 80,000 young people met in Dallas, Texas, for an evangelistic meeting called Explo 72. 6 The Honorary Chairman of the gathering, Billy Graham, called upon the participants to go out into the world and witness for Christ.
5"American Delegates at New Delhi," Christianity Today 6 (November 10, 1961): 115.
6Donald Bloesch, The Evangelical Renaissance (Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1973), p. 13.

h ' 1 1n evangeI' By 1976, polling revealed that 34% of all American adults had experienced a conversion experience--48% among Protestants and 18% for Catholics. 9 This growing impact of the evangelical movement on American society could no longer be ignored. Newsweek magazine declared 1976 to be the year

Serving the growing evangelical movement and seeking to expand its influence were an array of writers and television evangelists. Important evangelical writers were Hal Lindsay and Harold Lindsell. Lindsay's multimillion seller The Late Great Planet Earth presented a premillennial view of the last days on earth before the
7Jorstad, Evangelicals in the White House, p. 37.
8Bloesch, The Evangelical Renaissance, p. 14.
9Richard Quebedeaux, The Worldly Evangelicals (San Francisco: Harper & Row, Publishers, 1978), p. 3.
10Jorstad, Evangelicals in the White House, p. 46.

The American political establishment finally took notice of the evangelical movement with the January 20, 1977 inauguration of James Earl Carter as the 39th President of the United States. During the rough-and-tumble months of the 1976 election Carter had not tried to hide his evangelical beliefs, continuing to teach Bible studies on Sunday mornings and to make statements concerning a

Quebedeaux, The Young Evangelicals, p. 27. 12
Jorstad, Evangelicals in the White House, p. 130.

How long this young, twentieth-century evangelical movement will continue to grow and expand remains unclear. It is doubtful, however, that the movement will ever achieve the dominance in American society that was the case with nineteenth-century evangelicalism-unless a new science and a new philosophy were, inconceivably, to come forth to provide the necessary intellectual support in the same way that Baconian science and Scottish Common Sense philosophy upheld nineteenth-
13"The Religious Personality of the Populace," Christianity Today 23 (December 21, 1979): 1671.

Revell Company, 1927.

Twice Around the ·World with Alexander, Prince of Gospel Singers. New York: The Christian Herald, 1007.

The Living of Those Days: An Autobiography. New York: Harper & Brothers, 1956.

Triumphant Evangelism: The Three Years' Missions of Dr. Torrey and Mr. Alexander in Great Britain and Ireland. London: Marshall Brothers,

F~fteen Years in the Chapel of Yale College, 1871-1886. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1888.

"The Scottish Philosophy and American Theology." Church History 24 (September 1955): 257-272.

Bush Aglow: The Life Story of Dwight Lyman Moody, Commoner of Northfield. Philadelphia: The Judson Press, 1937.

Six Days or Forever? Tennessee v. John Thomas Scopes. Boston: Beacon Press, 1958; reprint ed., New York: Oxford University Press, 1977.

Southern California Country: ·An Island on the Land. New York: Duell, Sloan & Pierce, 1946.

liThe Theology of R. A. Torrey." Ph.D. dissertation, Bob Jones University, 1975.

The Young Evangelicals: Revolution in Orthodoxy. New York: Harper & Row, Publishers, 1974.

10"77.