CHAPTER XIII.
THE DEACONESS CAUSE IN AMERICA.
It was no part of the plan of this book, when first projected, to treat of the deaconess cause as it is developing within the United States of America, but gradually, through the kindness of many friends belonging to different denominations, a number of facts have been obtained which bear directly upon the question of how the example of European deaconess houses has influenced and is influencing the Protestant Churches of America; and it seems unwise to omit them from the consideration of the subject.
Naturally the German Lutherans, who were well acquainted with the deaconess work in their native land, were the first to try to introduce it among their churches. In the yearly report sent out from Kaiserswerth, January 1, 1847, Fliedner mentions that an urgent appeal had been made to him to send deaconesses to an important city in the United States, there to have the oversight of a hospital, and to found a mother-house for the training209/205 of deaconesses. In the report for the following year Fliedner again refers to the call from America, and states his intention to extend his travels to the New World, and to take with him sisters who shall aid in founding a mother-house. In the summer of 1849 he was enabled to carry out his intention, and July 14, 1849, accompanied by four deaconesses, he reached Pittsburg, Pa., where Rev. Dr. W. A. Passavant, who had written so many urgent appeals for his aid, was awaiting him. The building had already been secured for a hospital and deaconess home, and, July 17, was solemnly dedicated at a service where Fliedner delivered the principal address, and a large audience testified to their interest.
Before his return to Europe Fliedner visited the New York Synod, and, in an English discourse, described the character and aims of Kaiserswerth, and commended the newly founded institution at Pittsburg to the sympathy and aid of the German Lutheran Church in America. No further results were reached, as the synod contented itself with resolving that “this Ministerium awaits with deep interest the result of the work made in behalf of the institution of Protestant deaconesses at Pittsburg.”[1]
The institution is occasionally heard of afterward210/206 in the proceedings of the Pittsburg Synod, and in the paper, The Missionary, published under the auspices of the same Church. Urgent appeals were also sent out for devoted Christian women to come to the aid of the sisters and to join their numbers; but although the hospital, commended by their skillful and able ministrations as nurses, had the full approval of the public, there were few, if any, who came to join them, and they were unduly burdened by a task too great for their small number.
In 1854 Dr. Passavant resigned his pastoral charge, and devoted his entire time to the furtherance of the cause, but, up to the present, it has not attained the complete organization and wide extension that its friends in the German Lutheran Church have desired.
The institutions which owe their existence to Dr. Passavant’s efforts are the infirmary at Pittsburg; the hospital and deaconess home in Milwaukee; the hospital in Jacksonville, Ill.; the orphanages for girls in Rochester and Mount Vernon, N. Y., and one for boys in Pennsylvania.
There is, at the present time, only one of the original Kaiserswerth sisters left, and that is Sister Elizabeth, the head deaconess at Rochester. Dr. Passavant still continues to labor at forming a complete organization on the basis of the Kaiserswerth211/207 system, and, to quote the words of Dr. A. Spaeth, “As he succeeded forty years ago in bringing the first sisters over from Kaiserswerth to Pittsburg, I have no doubt that now, when the Church is at last awakening to the importance of this work, he will succeed in the completion of his undertaking.”
A more recent development of the deaconess work in the German Lutheran Church has arisen in connection with the German hospital in Philadelphia. The hospital was well equipped for its work, but there was much dissatisfaction with the nursing, which was inefficient and unskillful. In the fall of 1882 the hospital authorities turned for advice and co-operation to Dr. W. J. Mann, Dr. A. Spaeth, and other clergymen of the denomination in Philadelphia. It was determined to secure German deaconesses as nurses. Several attempts were made to induce Kaiserswerth, or some other large mother-house in Germany, to give up a few sisters to the hospital, but on all sides the applications were refused. The deaconesses were too greatly needed in the Old World to be spared for work in the New. At length, through the unremitting efforts of Consul Meyer, and of John D. Lankenau, president of the board of managers, a small independent community of sisters under the direction of Marie Krueger,212/208 who had herself been trained in Kaiserswerth, acceded to the proposal, and the head-deaconess, with six sisters, arrived in Philadelphia June 19, 1884. They left the field of their self-denying work in the hospital and poor-house at Iserlohn, in Westphalia, sadly to the regret of the authorities and citizens of the place, but to the hospital at Philadelphia they gave invaluable aid. From the first their good services met with appreciation. The efficiency of the hospital service was greatly increased; and from physicians and hospital authorities there was only one testimony, and that a most favorable one, to the value of deaconesses as trained nurses. Mr. Lankenau, who has ever been the wise and munificent patron of the institution, determined to insure a succession of these admirable nurses for the service of the hospital, and, at an expense of over five hundred thousand dollars, he built an edifice of palace-like proportions, and made over this munificent gift to the hospital corporation. It was accepted by them January 10, 1887. The western wing of the building is used as a home for aged men and women; the eastern wing is a residence and training-school for the deaconesses, the chapel uniting the two, and the whole being known as the Mary J. Drexel Home and Philadelphia Mother-house of Deaconesses.
A visit to the Home convinced me that the regulations of the house, the work of the sisters, and the devotion to duty that characterize the mother-houses in Germany rule also in this home in the New World. The imposing entrance hall with the great stair-way, the floor and stairs of white marble, the wide halls and spacious reception-rooms and offices seemed at first almost incongruous surroundings for the modest active deaconesses, some of whom were busy in the hospital wards, others hanging clothes on the line, and others occupied in duties within the building. But place and environments are only incidental matters; the spirit within is the determining quality; and a conversation with the Oberin (head deaconess) and the rector left me with the persuasion that the spirit of earnest devotion to God and humanity is the main-spring of duty in this house.
The arrangement of the rooms for the sisters is similar to that at Kaiserswerth; each consecrated sister has a small apartment simply furnished for her own use. The older probationers are divided two and three in a room. Those who have recently entered are placed in two large rooms, but here every one has her own four walls—even if they are only made by linen curtains. When Elizabeth Fry first visited Kaiserswerth, among the arrangements214/210 that she at once recognized and commended was that by which each deaconess was given the privacy of her own apartment. In the deaconess houses that are so rapidly springing up in different parts of the United States this provision ought to be guarded with care, for a life that is so constantly drawn out in ministrations to others should have some moments of absolute privacy upon which no one can intrude.
There are at present thirty-two deaconesses at the Philadelphia Mother-house, twenty of whom are probationers. The house was admitted to the Kaiserswerth Association, and will henceforth be represented at the Conferences. The direction is vested in a rector and head deaconess, neither of whom can be removed except on just cause of complaint. The distinctive dress is black, with blue or white aprons, white caps and collars. There is one addition to their garb which Fliedner would have looked upon with disfavor, and that is a cross—worn by the sisters from the time they are fully accepted as deaconesses.
The first consecration took place in the beautiful chapel of the Home, January 13, 1889, when three deaconesses were accepted as members of the order.
For those who desire to form a good conception of the deaconess institutions as they are conducted215/211 in Germany, a visit to the Philadelphia Mother-house of Deaconesses will be fruitful of valuable suggestions.[2]
In July, 1887, a Swedish Lutheran pastor in Omaha sent a probationer to Philadelphia to be trained as a sister for a deaconess house to be established in that central city of the United States. In 1888 four others joined her, and the building of a hospital and deaconess home is now progressing by the generous support of all classes of philanthropists in Omaha. A deaconess home has also recently been founded by Norwegian Lutherans in South Brooklyn, L. I.
In the German Reformed Church a layman endeavored in 1866 to arouse interest in the deaconess office. The Hon. J. Dixon Roman, of Hagerstown, Md., at Christmas gave five thousand dollars to the congregation, and with it sent a proposition to the consistory that three ladies of the congregation should be chosen and ordained to the order of deaconesses, with absolute control of the income of said fund for the purposes and duties as practiced in the early days of the Church.[3]216/212 This, and the action of the Lebanon Classis in 1867, requesting the synod “to take into consideration the propriety of restoring the apostolic society of deaconesses,” seem to have been the only steps taken by those connected with this denomination.
In the Protestant Episcopal Church of America the bishop of Maryland first instituted an order of deaconesses in connection with St. Andrew’s Parish, Baltimore, Md. Two ladies gave themselves to ministering to the poor, and, with the sanction and approval of the bishop, a house was obtained and given the name of St. Andrew’s Infirmary. In 1873 there were four resident deaconesses and four associates.[4] An early report of the infirmary says: “The deaconesses look to no organization of persons to furnish the pecuniary aid required by the demands of their position. Their first efforts have been for the destitute and sick. At the home they minister daily to the suffering and destitute sick wherever found; some requiring only temporary medical aid and nursing; others, whom God has chastened with more continuous suffering, requiring, in their penury, constant care and continual ministration.” There is also under217/213 their charge a church school for vagrant children, and one also for the children of those comfortably situated in life.
The “Forms for Setting Apart Deaconesses,” the “Rules for Self-Examination,” and the “Rules of Discipline” in the order of deaconesses in Maryland are largely patterned after the Kaiserswerth rules. In truth, the general questions for self-examination in regard to external duties, spiritual duties to the sick, the conduct of the deaconesses or sisters to those whom they meet, and the means for improving in the duties of the office are in many cases selected, and but slightly altered, from the series prepared by Pastor Fliedner.[5] The influence of the devout German pastor is indelibly stamped upon the deaconess cause in whatever denomination it has developed during the nineteenth century.
In 1864 the deaconesses of the Diocese of Alabama were organized by Bishop Wilmer. Under the supervision of the bishop the three deaconesses with whom the order originated were associated in taking charge of an orphanage and boarding-school for girls. In 1873 there were five deaconesses, one probationer, and two resident associates.[6]
In the Church Home all of the work is done by218/214 the inmates. As in the foreign Homes, the deaconesses are provided with food and raiment, and during sickness or old age they are cared for at the expense of the order. They are forbidden to receive fee or compensation for their services. Any remuneration that is made is paid to the order. In one feature, however, the deaconesses of Alabama differ from either their German or English sisters, and that is in the care of their individual means. The “Constitution and Rules” says: “The private funds of deaconesses shall not be expended without the approval of the chief deaconess or the bishop.”[7] This usage prevails in sisterhoods, but, outside of this instance, so far as the author has been able to learn is not known in deaconess institutions.
The rules for the associates in connection with the order are given somewhat at length, from which the following are taken. After defining an associate as a Christian woman desiring to aid the work of the deaconesses, and admonishing her that, although not bound by the rules of the Community, yet she must be careful to lead such a life as is becoming one associated in a work of religion and charity, she is requested “to state what kind of work she will undertake, under the direction of219/215 the chief deaconess, and to report the result to her at such intervals as may be agreed upon.” The following modes of assistance are suggested as most useful; namely, “to provide and make clothing for the poor; to collect alms; to procure work, or promote its sale; to teach in the school; to assist in music or other classes; to relieve the destitute; to minister to the sick; to visit and instruct the ignorant; to attend the funeral arrangements for the poor; and to take charge of or assist in the decoration of the church.”
The feature of the union of the associates with the deaconesses is one whose importance can scarcely be exaggerated. There are many who would be able to serve for a short time in this relation whose valuable aid would be entirely lost if none but deaconesses who give all their time and strength could work in the order.
In the Diocese of Long Island Bishop Littlejohn instituted an association of deaconesses by publicly admitting six women to the office of deaconess in St. Mary’s Church, Brooklyn, February 11, 1872. The association has not continued in the form in which it originated, but has now changed into the Sisterhood of St. John the Evangelist. Still this sisterhood retains many of the distinctive deaconess features. A sister may, for instance, withdraw220/216 from the sisterhood for proper cause. She labors without remuneration, and the sisters live together in a home, or singly, as they may please, in any place where their work is located.
In the Diocese of Western New York there are five deaconesses, with their associates and helpers, under the direction of the bishop of the diocese.
In America, however, as in England, within the Episcopal Church sisterhoods are more influential and more rapid in their growth than are deaconess institutions. In a list of the sisterhoods of the Episcopal Church in America, given in the monthly magazine devoted to women’s work in the Church,[8] fourteen sisterhoods are named, one religious order of widows, and two orders of deaconesses, one of which is that which is now changed into the Sisterhood of St. John the Evangelist.
In 1871 the Board of Missions of the Protestant Episcopal Church discussed at some length the relation of women’s work to the Church, and there resulted increased interest in the subject of sisterhoods and deaconess institutions. An effort has been made to obtain for the order of deaconesses a wider recognition than it now enjoys, as it simply has the support of the bishop within whose diocese the deaconesses are at work. To this end, in the221/217 General Convention of 1880, a canon was presented to the House of Bishops, and accepted by a large vote. But it reached the Lower House too late for consideration, and no further action has been taken since that time.
In the Presbyterian Church of America the question of the revival of the office of deaconess has already claimed some attention. The late Dr. A. T. McGill for many successive years earnestly recommended the revival of the office to the members of his classes in the theological seminary at Princeton; and his views, matured by years of reflection, were given for publication in an article published in the Presbyterian Review, 1880.
In the Minutes of the General Assembly for 1884, page 114, and of 1888, page 640, we find an overture asking if the education of deaconesses is consistent with Presbyterian polity, and, if so, should they be ordained, answered in the negative in the following words: “The Form of Government declares that in all cases the persons elected [deacons] must be male members. (Chap. 13. 2.) In all ages of the Church godly women have been appointed to aid the officers of the Church in their labors, especially for the relief of the poor and the infirm. They rendered important service in the Apostolic Church, but they do not appear to have occupied a222/218 separate office, to have been elected by the people, to have been ordained or installed. There is nothing in our constitution, in the practice of our Church, or in any present emergency, to justify the creation of a new office.” The next year an explanation of this action, which so obviously contradicts the facts of history, was asked, but the committee declined to say any thing more.
The Southern Presbyterian Church has proceeded further, and in the direction of the female diaconate, as it is characterized in its main features wherever it has existed, when it declares in its Book of Church Order, adopted in 1879, that “where it shall appear needful, the church session may select and appoint godly women for the care of the sick, of prisoners, of poor widows and orphans, and, in general, in the relief of the sick.”[9]
In isolated Presbyterian congregations deaconesses have already obtained recognition. At the Pan-Presbyterian Council, held in Philadelphia in 1880, Fritz Fliedner, the son of Dr. Theodor Fliedner, was present as a member, and through the influence of his words the Corinthian Avenue Presbyterian Church set apart five deaconesses, whose223/219 duty it should be to care for the poor and sick belonging to the congregation.
“More recently the Third Presbyterian Church of Los Angeles, Cal., empowered its three deacons to choose three women from the congregation to co-operate with them in their work, granting them seats and votes in the board’s monthly meeting.”[10]
The very interesting article from which the quotation has just been made seems to think the term “deaconess” a misnomer for the Kaiserswerth deaconess, as she belongs to a community, whereas the deaconess of the early Church was attached to a congregation and belonged to a single church as an officer; but it may well be questioned whether the class of duties assigned to the deaconess of the early Church and of modern times alike, that is, the nursing of the sick, the care of the infirm in body and mind, the succoring of the unfortunate, and the education of children, are not the main characteristics of the office of a deaconess, while the fact of her connection with a number of like-minded women in community life is merely an external feature of the office as it has developed in the nineteenth century. Whatever form the question224/220 may assume, with the Presbyterian churches of Scotland and England so far committed to the adoption of the office of the deaconess as an effective part of the organization of the Church, it seems inevitable that the Presbyterian Church of America will have to meet this question in the near future.
The Methodist Episcopal Church of America, although occupying itself with the question of the diaconate of women later than any of the denominations previously mentioned, by its acceptance of the office and by making it an inherent part of its ecclesiastical organization has taken a higher ground than any Protestant body, with the exception of the Church of Scotland. The Methodist Episcopal Church has ever offered a freer scope for the activities of its women members than any other body of Christians save the Quakers, who are still the leaders in this respect; but it may be questioned if any furnishes a larger number who are actively engaged in promoting philanthropic and religious measures.
The honor of practically beginning the deaconess work in connection with the Methodist Episcopal Church in the United States belongs to Mrs. Lucy Rider Meyer, of the Chicago Training-school, who, during the summer months of 1887, aided by eight earnest Christian women, worked among the poor,225/221 the sick, and the needy of that great city without any reward of man’s giving. In the autumn the Home opened in a few hired rooms, and Miss Thoburn came to be its first superintendent. The story of the growth of the work, the securing of a permanent home, and the enlargement of its resources is a most interesting one.[11]
The Rock River Conference, within whose boundaries the Chicago Home is situated, had from the beginning an earnest sympathy and confidence in the work as it was developing in its midst. A memorial was prepared, and was presented to the General Conference in May, 1888, by the Rock River Conference, through its Conference delegates, asking for Church legislation with reference to deaconesses. At the same time the Bengal Annual Conference, through Dr. J. M. Thoburn, also presented a memorial asking for the institution of an order of deaconesses who should have authority to administer the sacrament to the women of India. Our missionaries in India have long felt the need of some way of ministering to the converted women who are closely secluded in zenana life, and who, though sick and dying, are precluded by the customs226/222 of the country from any religious service of comfort or consolation that male missionaries can render. If it had been possible for our women missionaries to administer the sacrament many Indian women could have been received into the Church. All of the papers and memorials on this subject were put into the hands of a committee, of which Dr. J. M. Thoburn (afterward made missionary bishop to India and Malaysia) was chairman; and the report of the committee was as follows:
“THE NEW OFFICE OF DEACONESSES IN THE METHODIST EPISCOPAL CHURCH.
“For some years past our people in Germany have employed this class of workers with the most blessed results, and we rejoice to learn that a successful beginning has recently been made in the same direction in this country. A home for deaconesses has been established in Chicago, and others of a similar character are proposed in other cities. There are also a goodly number of similar workers in various places; women who are deaconesses in all but name, and whose number might be largely increased if a systematic effort were made to accomplish this result. Your committee believes that God is in this movement, and that the Church227/223 should recognize the fact and provide some simple plan for formally connecting the work of these excellent women with the Church and directing their labors to the best possible results. They therefore recommend the insertion of the following paragraphs in the Discipline, immediately after ¶ 198, relating to exhorters:
“DEACONESSES.
“1. The duties of the deaconesses are to minister to the poor, visit the sick, pray with the dying, care for the orphan, seek the wandering, comfort the sorrowing, save the sinning, and, relinquishing wholly all other pursuits, devote themselves in a general way to such forms of Christian labor as may be suited to their abilities.
“2. No vow shall be exacted from any deaconess, and any one of their number shall be at liberty to relinquish her position as a deaconess at any time.
“3. In every Annual Conference within which deaconesses may be employed, a Conference board of nine members, at least three of whom shall be women, shall be appointed by the Conference to exercise a general control of the interests of this form of work.
“4. This board shall be empowered to issue certificates to duly qualified persons, authorizing them228/224 to perform the duties of deaconesses in connection with the Church, provided that no person shall receive such certificate until she shall have served a probation of two years of continuous service, and shall be over twenty-five years of age.
“5. No person shall be licensed by the board of deaconesses except on the recommendation of a Quarterly Conference, and said board of deaconesses shall be appointed by the Annual Conference for such term of service as the Annual Conference shall decide, and said board shall report both the names and work of such deaconesses annually, and the approval of the Annual Conference shall be necessary for the continuance of any deaconess in her work.
“6. When working singly each deaconess shall be under the direction of the pastor of the church with which she is connected. When associated together in a home all the members of the home shall be subordinate to and directed by the superintendent placed in charge.“J. M. Thoburn, Chairman.
“A. B. Leonard, Secretary.”
The adoption of this report made its contents a portion of the organic law of the Church.
It is doubtful if there was any measure taken at the General Conference of 1888 that will be more229/225 far-reaching in its results than that which instituted the office of deaconess. The full and complete recognition accorded by the highest authority of the Church commended it to the people, who showed a remarkable readiness to accept the provisions. Nearly simultaneously, at important points distinct from each other, steps were taken to establish deaconess homes, and to provide lectures and practical training to educate deaconesses for their work.
The terms of the law in which the Conference action was expressed were not closely defined. It was felt that in establishing a new office for a great Church there must be room for a wide interpretation, to meet the various exigencies that will arise. It is true, also, that there can be no final interpretation until there shall be a basis of experience wide enough and varied enough to furnish facts that will justify us in forming conclusions from them. Still it was thought by those who were practically engaged in the work that there should be a common agreement on certain practical points: What was to be the training that the deaconesses were to receive during the two years of “continuous service?” What was to be their distinctive garb? What was to be the relation of the deaconess homes, that were arising, to the230/226 Conference board appointed by the Annual Conference? To discuss these and other questions a Conference was held in Chicago, December 20 and 21, 1888, of those who were actively engaged in the work. The outcome of the deliberations was the “Plan for Securing Uniformity in the Deaconess Movement.” Regulations were suggested concerning homes and their connection with the Conference boards, conditions of admission were agreed upon, and a Course of Study and Plan for Training recommended.[12] Of course the recommendations set forth in the “Plan” are not obligatory, but there has been remarkable unanimity so far in accepting them.
In addition to the Chicago Deaconess Home, and the branch in New Orleans, there is the Elizabeth Gamble House in Cincinnati, of which Miss Thoburn is superintendent; the Home in New York city, instituted by the Board of the Church Extension and Missionary Society, under the superintendence of Miss Layton; the home in Detroit, under the auspices of the Home Missionary Society; and homes under way or projected in Philadelphia, St. Louis, and Minneapolis; while individually deaconesses are employed in Kansas City,231/227 Jersey City, Troy, and Albany. It is also well to add that since his return to India, Bishop Thoburn has opened a deaconess house in Calcutta, with four American ladies as deaconesses, while at Muttra a second home has been opened, of which Miss Sparkes, so long connected with our mission work in India, is superintendent.
Pastor Fliedner thought it strange that in the New World where there is such ceaseless activity in good works, the deaconess cause should make such slow progress; but the season of sowing had to precede that of reaping, and it seems now as though the fullness of time had arrived for the incorporation into the agencies of the churches of America of the priceless activities of Christian deaconesses.
[1] Phöbe die Diakonissen, Dr. A. Spaeth, p. 31.
[2] For facts concerning the Philadelphia Mother-house of Deaconesses, and other important assistance rendered me, I desire to express acknowledgements to Dr. W. J. Mann, Dr. A. Spaeth, and Rev. A. Cordes, the rector of the house.
[3] McClintock and Strong’s Cyclopedia, vol. ii, art. “Deaconesses.”
[4] Sisterhoods and Deaconesses, Rev. H. C. Potter, D.D.. 1873, p. 118.
[5] Sisterhoods and Deaconesses, p. 105.
[6] Ibid., p. 181.
[7] Constitution and Rules for the Order of Deaconesses of Alabama, Art. vi.
[8] Church Work, May, 1888.
[9] For this and other suggestions regarding the deaconess question in the Presbyterian Church, I am greatly indebted to the kindness of Dr. Hastings, President of the Union Theological Seminary.
[10] Presbyterian Review, April, 1889, art. “Presbyterian Deaconesses.”
[11] Mrs. Meyer’s book on Deaconesses, containing also the story of the Chicago Training-school and Deaconess Home, gives the best description to be obtained of the rise of the work in Chicago.
[12] A more extended and elaborate course of study has been prepared by the Rev. Alfred A. Wright, D.D., Cambridge, Mass.