Assignment | Lesson Two | Examining how several nineteenth-century crises tested the movement’s commitment to Christian unity

As I reflect on the lecture, videos, and readings from this week, I am struck by a common throughline – who decides what is essential to the movement and what is not? Dr. Brown’s lecture sketches this theme and its impacts across the issue of slavery, biblical interpretation, instruments in worship, and mission work. The readings from Rev. Jha’s book illustrate that this question of what, or perhaps who, is essential to the Disciples movement’s evolution and growth extended to the missionary emphasis (or lack thereof) related to indigenous, Mexican, Black, and Asian communities.

I’m challenged by the very real people who were collateral damage within these debates. Real harm was done, whether these were enslaved people not advocated for; native populations displaced, murdered, or ignored as the movement expanded into new geographic territories; or Black Disciples whose contributions seemed to be minimized and needs overlooked.

Preston Taylor’s work to advocate for the “body and souls of Black folk,” as Rev. Edward Robinson shared in his lecture is an inspiring account of leadership and advocacy. Taylor’s resolve to establish the National Christian Missionary Convention in 1917 and create a space for the education and advancement of Black Disciples did not occur outside of his criticism of the racism perpetuated by many white Disciples. I’m left wondering what Taylor thought about the Convention’s work and the interaction with white Disciples in the 14 years from the founding of the Convention until his death. Did he see meaningful progress in the full inclusion and nurture of Black Disciples within the movement?

The question posed by Dr. Brown at the end of his lecture is what I’m chewing on most this week: Across the movement, Christians reading scripture earnestly often came to very different positions on matters of justice, so how does Disciples history help us consider today’s history?

Part of my response to this question involves thinking about general vs. special revelation. If the rule for discerning what is essential as a matter of faith is scripture alone, then how limited are we in receiving the many other ways God reveals Godself to us?

Having served churches across four denominations and five states, I believe there’s something essential that’s revealed about God’s character and work in the world through every tradition and its practices (including non-Christian faith traditions). I also believe there’s something I can learn about God’s character through a hike in the mountains in my Colorado home or a conversation with my Muslim friend, as two other examples. In forming a movement, the early Disciples perhaps overlooked the myriad ways God reveals Godself to humanity far beyond scripture alone.

The same could be said of conservative denominational traditions today who tend to view scripture through a more literalistic lens. Doing so can serve as an avoidance tactic that allows people of faith to shy away from debate, doubt, wrestling, and the honest “I don’t know” that’s sometimes called for when developing a mature faith. In the U.S. right now, Christians are actively doing this as we debate the dignity and personhood of our immigrant neighbors, the inclusion and participation of LGBTQ+ people within the Church and society, the responsibilities of the wealthy, and a faithful response to the current administration’s actions. As the Disciples history is teaching me, silence on these issues doesn’t ultimately preserve unity; it actively harms.

I took particular interest in learning more about the ‘1906’ split between the Disciples of Christ and Churches of Christ this week. I am a product of both traditions as well! All four of my grandparents were members of the Church of Christ and my parents met as undergraduate students at Abilene Christian College (as it was named at the time). My dad ended up attending Vanderbilt Divinity School for his Mdiv. and while there became acquainted with the Disciples of Christ. Several years later he was serving his first DOC congregation and that became the tradition within which I was raised - eventually attending a Disciples school (TCU) and becoming an ordained pastor myself. However, I’ve worshiped many times in Church of Christ churches over the years and some extended family members still belong to that tradition.

It’s always been emphasized to me that the main difference was around instrumental music - and there are many excellent singers in my family, having grown up singing a cappella parts in worship! But I always noticed other differences - generally no women in church leadership, no ordained ministry, a more literal interpretation of the Bible, and typically more conservative on social issues than I was used to. I also experienced how caring and compassionate church members were as they took care of their congregants in difficult times. My grandparents worked to support a wide variety of missions and educational programs related to the church as well - international mission projects and Bible Colleges among them.

Diving into the layers of history surrounding the division is helpful in contextualizing some of these differences. It’s clear how adding organs to sanctuaries is seen as extra-biblical as they just didn’t exist in the churches of Acts. But it also seems like they were a symbol of prosperity or education or class in some way that may have led to more powerful opposition from those who couldn’t afford them. Additionally, I recognize from my own experience within the Churches of Christ how some of the other differences in the 19th century that Dr. Brown raised - like regional differences, slavery & race, biblical interpretation, approach to cooperation, worship practices - have led to some of the differences between Disciples and Churches of Christ today.

I also have a better understanding of how important it was for the Churches of Christ to remain independent from wider structure. Participating in ecumenical missionary societies or even those within ‘the movement’ was a step too far for churches that saw maintaining their autonomy as fundamentally important. And it was a further step in adding something that was not a part of the biblical pattern of being church.

A couple of questions raised in Dr. Brown’s video lecture are ‘who decides what is essential?’ and ‘is silence in scripture prohibitive or permissive?’. These are great questions for me to keep in mind. The differences in understanding over what is essential have led to breaks in communion in the past - and I could see that happening again in the future. It’s easy to see why so much of our present Disciples of Christ identity centers around the open table as the one necessary essential - we’re not as likely to disagree about that and it holds us together despite other differences.

After spending time this week listening to the lecture, watching the videos, and completing the readings, I realize how little I truly knew about the Disciples' history. I suppose I had assumed or hoped that the Disciples were different.

Hearing and reading about the early movement's attitudes toward people of color—specifically Black Americans, Chinese and Japanese immigrants, and Mexican Americans—it is difficult to reconcile where we are today as a denomination with a past rooted in ignorance and the marginalization of those who spoke a different language than our faith's forefathers.

I am reflecting today on how little has actually changed since the initial westward expansion. I still see remnants of the "white man's burden" in our ministries today. For example, in my work at a food bank, I have noticed a differing attitude toward Hispanic and Latino guests compared to white guests. It is as if we are conditioned to assume that those who speak a different language are less intelligent, even though we know this is not true. We must be careful not to repeat the mistakes of the past.

May we continue to strive for the ideals of unity in diversity, and the scriptural truth that we are all one in Christ. I believe this transformation can only happen when we truly listen to the stories of those who have been excluded yet still strive for that ideal. May we also remain honest about our own prejudices and privileges.

Growing up in an extreme evangelical fundamentalist organization was challenging for me. I was put into “therapy” with a “lay-therapist” to get me back on track and “straighten” me out after questioning some of the teachings and beliefs mostly around justice issues. My councilor, a white older woman, had spent most of her life as a missionary in Africa. She ensured me that Christianity was actually a freeing religion because new African believers allowed the wife to walk next to her husband instead of behind him. Through Christ, equality has been achieved, quoting Galatians 3:28. I didn’t agree.

The appeal of the Disciples denomination to me was the focus on justice. However, the readings this week jolted me sideways. In Room at the Table, Jha correlated the rise and shape of the Disciples movement with the values of the United States at that time. This idea was profound for me. The United States was expanding west, leaning into the idea of “it’s there for the taking” without much thought from whom or what was being taken. Overlaying the dividing issue of slavery (unfathomable by today’s viewpoint), the Disciples seemed anything but Christlike. My new found denomination has a flawed past! 

I have been wondering how much the Disciples are still being shaped by current American values, albeit a more liberal take in terms of equality and justice.

Galatians 3:28 (There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus) seems important after the readings this week. Preston Taylor commented that whites often denied assistance when needed, but did help to form separate churches. (Robinson and Jha) This laid the foundation of separateness which is still visible today. Interestingly though, black congregations embraced this “help” in light of Galatians 3:28. Ideologically, black congregations could see the hypocrisy of whites in society, and desired to live out the biblical truth with those likeminded. Today we are still racially separate in many congregations. 

I see, today, that some are still put in a position of walking behind. We still stratify others based on race, economics, gender, sexuality, ability, and religious understanding (the list is long). I think we would all agree that our cultures need to change. Maybe we can start in the church.

After last weeks response, Dr Brown asked me to consider if there is an alternative between "top-down orders" and "building consensus" on issues of equality. I believe some of this week's materials do show both a third way, but also exposes some problematic elements in our history. Preston Taylor was an African American preacher who believed strongly in the evangelization and equality of other African Americans, and did not wait for a "consensus" in order to plant churches, teach the Gospel, or even build a black business community in Nashville. He was openly critical of white Disciples, while also staying "on the inside" to work from within as he believed that the overall mission of the ministry was heading in the right direction, despite its flaws.

Similarly, Mattie Hart Youngkin did not wait, or ask for permission, in order to pull together a group of women who began the Benevolent Association of the Christian Church. She was instrumental in seeing a need for the poor and orphaned in Missouri, and helped launch a home for them and other benevolent and social justice work.

Both Taylor and Youngkin did this work without a social location of privilege. In fact, you might make the argument that Taylor had no other choice, the movement towards activism was almost forced upon him because the Disciples movement was already marginalizing him. As a woman, who also had first hand experience of what happens when a parent dies prematurely, Youngkin likely saw the needs of people as imperative and necessary to act.

Which leads me to this "third way": Acting for justice is a necessity for people already marginalized, but is sometimes optional for people with privilege. Justice doesn't wait for consent for those who bear the cost of injustice. At the same time, why is it that we often wait for a "Preston Taylor" or "Mattie Youngkin" of each generation to come forward and take up the work. This tension is revealed repeatedly throughout history. But what is possible if people who do have privilege, institutional standing, or who command positions of power, join in the fight? Where are the voices of those seeking justice today being either heard, or ignored, in order to present a sense of humility or unity? 

This week’s lessons brought out some painful truths about the Disciples that kind of hit me in the face as I read them. It’s hard to pick one thing that stands out more than the other. I think the way that we treated those who were not white by needing to civilize and Christianize them, and the manner in which we did it, stand out the most. While I didn’t read anything that seemed outwardly forceful (I’m still processing last month’s course that covered the Doctrine of Destiny), we were very selective in how we supported anyone who didn’t look like our white churches. The black churches grew alongside the white ones, but without much support. The Mexican and Latin American people were treated differently in the sense that we acted as missionaries to them. Sandhya’s book touches on the Chinese and Japanese immigrants a little, and I look forward to learning more about that further into the book. The indigenous people almost went unacknowledged during this time, which is another area I look forward to exploring.

What surprised me is that we seemed to embrace Puerto Rico a lot more when it became a part of this country. It’s interesting and appalling to me that we treated what we considered Americans better than anyone else. Christianity apparently had borders then and still does today for some people. While the Mexicans, Latin Americans, and Tejanos were thought of as non-citizens and then deemed of less importance, we just fully went into Puerto Rico because it was ours. I really struggled with how nationality was tied to faith in this lesson. This is a struggle of ideals vs practices for me. God created this world, these people, and loves us all equally, and there we were (and here we are still) drawing borders and doling out different levels of acceptance, support, and love.

I appreciated some of the historical context that was given to see how the different conventions started to form for some of these groups. Having attended National Convocation for the first time this year, I would like to learn more about Preston Taylor, as his work gave a connection to the black churches that was desperately needed. As I work within my ministries, I see that we are still disconnected in many ways, and I am always looking for ways to understand and connect people. I feel that while these conventions (National Convocation, NAPAD, Obra Hispana) are needed, we need to do better as a general church to work together. I can feel the division. I can feel the love but I can feel the division. What we want from this world, we are not yet achieving in our own denomination. 

One important thing I learned this week was how closely the development of women’s leadership in the Christian Church was connected to the post-Civil War and Reconstruction era. The Christian Woman’s Board of Missions emerged during a period when the nation and the church were trying to redefine themselves after slavery and emancipation. As stated in the Wiki page for CWBM, Carolyn Neville Pearre recognized that women represented an “untapped potential” for mission, and Thomas Munnell’s response (that this was “a flame of the Lord’s kindling and no man can extinguish it”) captures both the spiritual energy of the movement and the barriers women faced within the church. Since I read this quote last Monday from Munnell it has been echoing in my head and feels powerful to remember today how the women around me in ministry continue to carry on this flame without letting men snuff it out.

Sarah Lue Bostick’s story especially challenged and complicated my understanding of Disciples history. As the lecture explained, She was not simply helping from behind the scenes but preached in both Black and white churches, raised funds, organized missionary work, helped establish institutions of higher education, and was ordained. I appreciated that Dr. Gilmore pointed out how describing her as a “jack of all trades” could minimize what she was actually doing. Like the lecture says, she was re-signifying what it meant to be a woman, a Christian, and a leader in the postbellum church. Her ministry is even more meaningful to me because she was born in Kentucky, like me, and because I am also seeking ordination within the CC(DOC), hoping to preach and lead in many different contexts.

At the same time, Bostick’s story reveals tension between Disciples ideals and Disciples practice. The church proclaimed unity and mission while remaining shaped by pervasive racism and sexism. Women were invited to serve because their labor was useful but they still had to fight for a recognized place at the table. Black women faced even greater obstacles, yet they continued to build, preach, organize, and preserve their histories. Their voices are essential to remember because they reveal that Disciples history was not shaped only by well-known white male leaders whose names and photos are often more familiar to folks. It was also shaped by women who trusted the possibilities God showed them and persisted in creating space for themselves and others.

Erin Aylor

July 23rd, 2026

Week 2

What complicated my previous understanding of Disciples history?

Per the professor, “In the 10 years before the Civil War, Disciples of Christ church members owned more slaves than any other Protestant denomination…beat out only by non-Protestand Catholics.” 

What is something of this period that has significance for your congregation?

From Jha’s book on pg 38, “Black Disciples were pushed in the direction of forming the convention by a general attitude of many Whites that the Negro was a ward pet, or second class human being, not a full equal partner in the family of Disciples. The question of race was addressed in moving speeches at the General Convention occasionally, but little application was made to how Blacks were treated in terms of accommodations at the meetings, or even as they traveled in the interest of the church program.” Between our First Christian Church DOC (historically White) and Central Christian Church DOC (historically Black) sits the Latimore Tourist Home, which is on the National Register of Historic Places. [see links below].  It was in The Green Book and was the only stop for miles and miles for Black travelers that was safe to spend the night and get a good meal for many years.  How sad as a part of our country’s history is it that someone could not even travel safely or be welcomed at any hotel, restaurant, or gas station that he or she desired simply due to the color of their skin. 

Whose stories seem especially important to remember from this week’s lesson material?

For certain, Preston Taylor! I’m so glad the video link was available because he did SO much more than what was noted in Jha’s book! (I do realize a book without a specific focus on him cannot cover everything.)  He was not just someone who advanced the Black community in relation to the Disciples of Christ.  He was a soldier (drummer boy for 116th Black regiment), a wise business man who worked to advance the cause of Blacks with excellence…not retaliation or violence; I’m thinking of the railroad story here.  I do have be honest that I was quite disappointed to hear that he cheated on his wife and was potentially a ladies man marrying 4 different times. He was a pastor of 40 years for goodness sakes! That has no business in his life. 

Ching-Hsin (Steven) Han

“Hualien is far away, America is very close” is a famous quote from Roland Peter Brown, a physician at the Mennonite Christian Hospital. Hualien is located on the rural east coast of Taiwan. While most people/physicians seek overseas opportunities in the US, Dr. Brown urged people to stay with those in need on their native soil. That’s the lesson I took away when Jha pointed out the White Man’s burden toward missions in Mexico and Puerto Rico, rather than the Latinx people around them. It resonates with my current context.

Very often our honorable goals mask unseen, questionable, or problematic motivations or biases. It’s easier to love those you know little about than those who are closer and affect your daily life, even with the same blood, language, ethnicity, and nationality. Ethnic Chinese immigrant population is quite large in the greater LA area. Lots of ethnic Chinese immigrants are eager to pray or financially support ministry back in China or outside the US. However, it’s challenging to ask them to do the same locally. The reasons are complex. Almost every new immigrant experienced trauma caused by earlier, veteran immigrants. Who scammed you on the used car? Who tricked you on the better cell phone plan? Who promised a money-saving way for legal applications and documents? It’s the group of people who speak the same language as you, not unfamiliar Americans. Then a belief of “you better try to fight alone because no one is trustworthy and because that’s how I made it through” is deeply formed.

Social justice is still the hallmark of Disciples. When we count social justice or advocacy as a means of mission, it’s really challenging, at least in the ethnic Chinese immigrant community. When I urge people to love and try to advocate for our own community, the trauma and the belief stifle people's willingness. I believe unless we truly embrace the Gospel and let God’s sovereignty and bigger plan heal us, the tragedy of history will occur repeatedly.