that joined the Ephrata Baptists. He was born in the Palatinate, and is
said to have been educated at Heidelberg. He came to this country when
about twenty years old. He is mentioned, it seems, in an interesting
letter of the Rev. Jedediah Andrews, under date of Philadelphia, 1730,
which letter may be found in Hazard’s Register. He says that there are
“in this province a vast number of Palatines. Those that have come
of late years are mostly Presbyterian, or, as they call themselves,
Reformed, the Palatines being about three-fifths of that sort of people.”
Mr. Andrews says, in substance, “There is lately come over a Palatine
candidate for the ministry, who applied to us at the Synod for
ordination. He is an extraordinary person for sense and learning. His
name is John Peter Miller,[56] and he speaks Latin as readily as we do
our vernacular tongue.”[57]
Peter Miller, in one of his letters, speaks of his baptism (or
rebaptism) in the year 1735. He says at that time the solitary brethren
and sisters lived dispersed “in the wilderness of Canestogues, each
for himself, as hermits, and I following that same way did set up my
hermitage in Dulpehakin [Tulpehocken], at the foot of a mountain, on a
limpid spring; the house is still extant [1790], with an old orchard.
There did I lay the foundation of solitary life.[58]
“However,” he continues, “I had not lived there half a year, when a great
change happened; for a camp was laid out for all solitary persons, at
the very spot where now Ephrata stands, and where at that same time the
president [Beissel] lived with some hermits. And now, when all hermits
were called in, I also quitted my solitude, and changed the same for a
monastic life; which was judged to be more inservient to sanctification
than the life of a hermit, where many under a pretence of holiness did
nothing but nourish their own selfishness.... We were now, by necessity,
compelled to learn obedience.... At that time, works of charity hath been
our chief occupation.[59]
“Canestogues was then a great wilderness, and began to be settled by poor
Germans, which desired our assistance in building houses for them; which
not only kept us employed several summers in hard carpenter’s work, but
also increased our poverty so much that we wanted even things necessary
for life.”
He also says, “When we settled here, our number was forty brethren, and
about so many sisters, all in the vigor and prime of their ages, never
before wearied of social life, but were compelled, ... with reluctance of
our nature, to select this life.”[60]
It was, it seems, about the same time that Miller was baptized that the
midnight meetings were held at the camp, “for the purpose of awaiting the
coming of judgment.”
Not long after the building of the meeting-house called Kedar (says
Endress), a widower, Sigmund Lambert, having joined the camp, built out
of his own means an addition to the meeting-house and a dwelling for
Beissel. Another gave all his property to the society, and now Kedar was
transformed into a sister-convent, and a new meeting-house was erected.
Soon after 1738 a large house for the brethren was built, called Zion,
and the whole camp was named Ephrata.[61] The solitary life was changed
into the conventual one; Zion was called a kloster, or convent, and put
under monastic rules. Onesimus (Eckerlin) was appointed prior, and Conrad
Beissel named father. (His general title appears to be _vorsteher_,
superintendent or principal.)
It was probably about this time, or earlier, that the constable entered
the camp, according to Miller, and demanded the single man’s tax. Some
paid, but some refused. Miller says that some claimed personal immunity
on the ground that they were not inferior to the monks and hermits in
the Eastern country, who supplied the prisons in Alexandria with bread,
and who were declared free of taxes by Theodosius the Great and other
emperors. But these Ephrata brethren were not to be thus exempted. Six
lay in prison at Lancaster ten days, when they were released on bail of a
“venerable old justice of peace.” When the brethren appeared before the
board of assessment, the gentlemen who were their judges saw six men who
in the prime of their ages had been reduced to skeletons by penitential
works. The gentlemen granted them their freedom on condition that they
should be taxed as one family for their real estate, “which is still
in force (1790), although these things happened fifty years ago.” (See
Miller’s letters in Hazard’s Register.)
A monastic dress was adopted by the brethren and sisters, resembling that
of the Capuchins.[62]
The Chronicle, published in 1786, speaks of the sisters as having
carefully maintained the dress of the order for nearly fifty years. About
the same date we read of Miller in his cowl.
It appears from the Chronicle that the other members of the society
at one time adopted a similar dress, but that the celibates (_die
Einsamen_) appeared at worship in white dresses, and the other members
(_die Hausstände_) in gray ones. The secular members, however, “saddled
themselves again” and conformed to the world in clothing and in other
things.
In an article upon Ephrata in Hazard’s Register, vol. v., 1830, will be
found the statement that, thirty or forty years before, the Dunkers were
occasionally noticed in Philadelphia (when they came down with produce),
with long beards and Capuchin habiliments; but this statement does not
seem to agree in date with that of the Chronicle, if these were secular
brethren.
Among the austerities practised at Ephrata formerly, was sleeping upon a
bench with a block of wood for a pillow.[63]
The late Dr. William Fahnestock tells us that these and other austerities
were not intended for penance, but were undertaken from economy. Their
circumstances were very restricted, and their undertaking was great. They
studied the strictest simplicity and economy. For the Communion they used
wooden flagons, goblets, and trays. The plates from which they ate were
thin octagonal pieces of poplar board, their forks and candlesticks were
of wood, and every article that could be made of that substance was used
by the whole community.
Rupp says that the chimneys, which remain in use to this day (1844), are
of wood; and the attention of the present writer was called in 1872 to
wooden door-hinges.
Rupp says also that they all observed great abstemiousness in their diet;
they were vegetarians, and submitted to many privations and to a rigid
discipline exerted over them by a somewhat austere spiritual father.
Peter Miller himself says that he stood under Beissel’s direction for
thirty years, and that it was as severe as any related in the Romish
Church (but this sounds exaggerated).
In the brother- and sister-houses, it has been stated that six
dormitories surrounded a common room in which the members of each
subdivision pursued their respective employments. “Each dormitory was
hardly large enough to contain a cot, a closet, and an hour-glass.”[64]
Of the industries established at Ephrata, one of Peter Miller’s letters
gives us a good idea. He complains, as before mentioned, of Eckerlin’s
obliging them to interfere so far in worldly things, and that money was
put out at interest. He adds that they erected a grist-mill, with three
pairs of stones; a saw-mill, paper-mill, oil-mill, and fulling-mill; had
besides three wagons with proper teams, a printing-office, and sundry
other trades.
He adds, “Our president [by whom he means Beissel] never meddled with
temporal things.”
Mr. Rupp (who cites the Life of Rittenhouse) says that the women were
employed in spinning, knitting, sewing, making paper lanterns and
other toys. A room was set apart for ornamental writing, called “Das
Schreibzimmer,” and “several sisters,” it has been said, devoted their
whole attention to this labor, as well as to transcribing the writings
of the founder of the society; thus multiplying copies before they had a
press. But the press appears to have been early established, and it was
the second German one in our State. It has been stated that Miller was at
one time the printer.[65]
Among the books published at Ephrata were some of Beissel’s, who had
adopted the name of Peaceful (_Friedsam_). One of their publications was
a collection of hymns, and was entitled “The Song of the Solitary and
Abandoned Turtle Dove, namely, the Christian Church, ... by a Peaceful
Pilgrim travelling towards Quiet Eternity.” Ephrata, from the press of
the Fraternity, 1747. 500 pages, quarto.[66]
Beissel also wrote a dissertation on man’s fall, of which Miller says
(1790), “When, in the late war, a marquis from Milan, in Italy, lodged
a night in our convent, I presented to him the said dissertation, and
desired him to publish it at home, and dedicate it to his Holiness.”
In 1748, a stupendous book was published by the society at Ephrata. It
is the Martyr’s Mirror, in folio, of which copies may be seen at the
libraries of the Pennsylvania Historical Society, and of the German
Society, in Philadelphia.
The Chronicon Ephratense, or Ephrata Chronicle, so often alluded to in
this article, was also from their press, but was published thirty-eight
years later. It contains the life of Beissel, under the title of the
venerable “Father in Christ, Peaceful Godright (_Friedsam Gottrecht_),
late founder and _vorsteher_ of the Spiritual Order of the Solitary
(_Einsamen_) in Ephrata, collected by Brothers Lamech and Agrippa.” I
have heard of several copies being still extant,—one in Lancaster County,
one in Montgomery, and one in the library of the Historical Society at
Philadelphia. The last I have been allowed to consult.
In speaking of the occupations practised at Ephrata, it may be permitted
to include music. Beissel is said to have been an excellent musician
and composer. “There was another transcribing-room,” says Fahnestock,
“appropriated to copying music. Hundreds of volumes, each containing
five or six hundred pieces, were transferred from book to book, with as
much accuracy, and almost as much neatness, as if done with the graver.”
In composing music, Beissel is said to have taken his style from nature.
“The singing is the Æolian harp harmonized.... Their music is set in
four, six, and eight parts.”
Morgan Edwards[67] (as cited in Day’s Historical Collections) says,
“Their singing is charming,—partly owing to the pleasantness of their
voices, the variety of parts they carry on together, and the devout
manner of performance.” This style of singing is said by Rupp (1844) to
be entirely lost at Ephrata, but to be preserved in a measure at Snow
Hill, in Franklin County. Fahnestock, who was himself a Seventh-Day
Baptist (or _Siebtaeger_), gives a very enthusiastic account of the
singing at Snow Hill. It may be found in Day’s Historical Collections,
article “Franklin County.”[68]
In addition to the various industries which claimed the attention of the
community, there must not be forgotten the care of their landed estate.
It has been said that they bought about two hundred and fifty acres of
land.[69]
A very large tract was once offered to them by one of the Penns, but they
refused it. I was told at Ephrata that they were “afraid they would get
too vain.”
Count Zinzendorf, the celebrated Moravian bishop, came to Pennsylvania
in 1741. At one time he visited Ephrata, and was entertained in the
convent, where his friendly behavior was very agreeable to the brothers.
(We may suppose that Miller, and Eckerlin, who was not yet deposed, were
men fit to entertain him.) He also expressed a wish to see Beissel. This
was made known to the latter, who answered, after a little reflection,
that Zinzendorf was no wonder to him, but if he himself were a wonder to
Zinzendorf, he must come to him (or as it seems, to Beissel’s own house).
Zinzendorf was now in doubt what to do, but he turned away and left
without seeing the father (_vorsteher_). The Chronicle adds that thus did
two great lights of the church meet as on the threshold, and yet neither
ever saw the other in his life.
The Moravians also erected brother- and sister-houses, but they were not
monastic institutions.[70]
Dissension arose at one time between some of the brethren of the Ephrata
Society and Count Zinzendorf, at a conference held by the latter at Oley,
now in Berks County. Zinzendorf seems to have desired to unite some of
the sects with which Pennsylvania was so abundantly supplied. But the
solitary brethren (of Ephrata) were so suspicious of the thing that they
would no longer unite with it. They had prepared a writing upon marriage,
how far it is from God, and that it was only a praiseworthy ordinance of
nature. This they presented, whereupon there arose a violent conflict in
words.
The ordinarius (Zinzendorf) said that he was by no means pleased with
this paper; his marriage had not such a beginning; his marriage stood
higher than the solitary life in Ephrata. The Ephrata delegates strove to
make all right again, and spoke of families in their society who had many
children.[71]
But Zinzendorf left his seat as chairman, ... and at last the conference
came to an end, all present being displeased.[72]
About this date (or about 1740) took place the formation of the
Sabbath-school, by Ludwig Hoecker, called Brother Obed.[73] He was a
teacher in the secular school at Ephrata,—a school which seems to have
enjoyed considerable reputation. The Sabbath-school (held on Saturday
afternoon) is said to have been kept up over thirty years. This was begun
long before the present Sunday-school system was introduced by Robert
Raikes. (American Cyclopædia, article _Dunkers_.)
Not long after the visit of Zinzendorf, or about 1745, occurred the
deposition of Eckerlin, the prior Onesimus. In one of his letters, Miller
says (1790), “Remember, we have lost our first prior and the sisters
their first mother ... because they stood in self-elevation, and did
govern despotically;” and adds, “the desire to govern is the last thing
which dies within a man.” (It seems probable that Eckerlin has not
received sufficient credit, however, for the pecuniary success of the
infant community.)
Some ten years after his deposition (or in 1755), began the old French
and Indian war. Fahnestock tells us that the doors of the cloister,
including the chapels, etc., were opened as a refuge for the inhabitants
of Tulpehocken and Paxton[74] settlements, which were then the frontiers,
to protect the people from the incursions of the hostile Indians. He adds
that all these refugees were received and kept by the society during the
period of alarm and danger. Upon hearing of which, a company of infantry
was despatched by the royal government from Philadelphia to protect
Ephrata.[75]
But why, we might ask, did these people seek refuge in a communion of
non-combatants? The question bears on the controversy, as to whether the
men of peace or the men of war were nearer right in their dealings with
the savages.[76]
Beissel died in the year 1768, or about thirty years after the
establishment of the cloister. Upon his tombstone was placed, in German,
this inscription:
“Here rests a Birth of the love of God, Peaceful, a Solitary, but who
afterward became a Superintendent of the Solitary Community of Christ in
and around Ephrata: born in Oberbach in the Palatinate, and named Conrad
Beissel.”
“He fell asleep the 6th of July, A.D. 1768: of his spiritual life 52, but
of his natural one, 77 years and 4 months.”
Endress says, “He appears to me to have been a man possessed of a
considerable degree of the spirit of rule; his mind bent from the
beginning upon the acquirement of authority, power, and ascendency.” For
ourselves, we have just seen how he received Count Zinzendorf, who had
crossed the ocean, and come, as it were, to his threshold.
Mr. Endress further says, “Beissel, good or bad, lived and died the
master-spirit of the brotherhood. With him it sank into decay.”
The British officer who wrote in 1786 (?), eighteen years after Beissel’s
death, gives the number of the celibates as seven men and five women.
I do not consider him good authority; but if the numbers were so much
reduced from those of 1740, it seems probable that they had begun to
decline before the decease of Beissel.[77]
Eighteen years after Beissel’s death, was published at Ephrata the
Chronicle of which I have so often spoken, giving an account of his life.
He was succeeded by Peter Miller. Miller was sixty-five years old when
our Revolutionary war broke out, and had been the leader at Ephrata seven
years.
Fahnestock says that after the battle of Brandywine “the whole
establishment was opened to receive the wounded Americans, great numbers
of whom (Rupp says four or five hundred) were brought here in wagons a
distance of more than forty miles, and one hundred and fifty of whom died
and are buried on Mount Zion.”[78]
It is also narrated that before the battle of Germantown a quantity of
unbound books were seized at Ephrata by some of our soldiers, in order to
make cartridges. “An embargo,” says Miller, “was laid on all our printed
paper, so that for a time we could not sell any printed book.”
A story has appeared in print, and not always in the same manner, about
Miller’s going to General Washington and receiving from him a pardon for
his old enemy Widman, who was condemned to die.
This story Mr. Rupp thinks is based upon tradition; one version has been
told in a glowing manner, and is attributed to Dr. Fahnestock. It runs
thus: On the breaking out of the Revolution, committees of safety were
formed in different districts to support our cause. At the head of the
Lancaster County Committee was Michael Widman, who kept a public house,
and who had been a vestryman in the Reformed Church. This church Miller
had left when he joined the Baptists. He persecuted Miller to a shameful
extent, even spitting in his face when he met him.
Widman was at first bold and active in the cause of independence,
but he became discouraged, and resolved to go to Philadelphia and
conciliate General Howe, the British commander, who then held that
city. Howe, however, declined his services,[79] but gave orders to see
him safely beyond the British outposts. His treasonable intentions
having become known to the Americans, he was arrested and taken to the
nearest block-house, at the Turk’s Head, now West Chester; was tried by
court-martial, and sentenced to be hung. Peter Miller, hearing of his
arrest, went to General Washington and pleaded for mercy towards him.
The general answered that the state of public affairs was such as to
make it necessary that renegades should suffer, “otherwise I should most
cheerfully release your friend.”
“Friend!” exclaimed Miller: “he is my worst enemy,—my incessant
reviler.”[80]
Said the general, “My dear friend, I thank you for this example of
Christian charity!” and he granted Miller’s petition.
It is not necessary for me to go further, and describe the scene of
Miller’s arriving upon the ground with the pardon just as Widman was
to be hung, nor the subsequent proceedings there, for I am quite sure
that they did not take place. Evidence to this effect is found in the
Pennsylvania Archives, vol. ix., where Peter Miller writes to Secretary
Matlack, interceding (apparently) for a man named Rein. Miller says, “I
have thought his case was similar to Michael Wittman’s, who received
pardon without a previous trial.”
The secretary replies (1781), “Witman did not receive a pardon previous
to a surrender.”
Thus it seems that the story of Widman’s trial by court-martial is
also wrong. That his property was confiscated, as I was lately told
at Ephrata, I have no reason to doubt, as the Colonial Records, vol.
xii., show that in council, in 1779, it was resolved that the agents
for forfeited estates should sell that of Michael Wittman, subject to a
certain claim.[81]
At Ephrata, during the past winter, I stood in the loft of the
brother-house beside a great chimney of wood and clay, and was told that
here Widman had been hidden. Whether he actually concealed himself in the
brother-house, as has been narrated, I do not find that history declares.
At a subsequent date, 1783, we find in the Pennsylvania Archives, vol.
ix., that Miller intercedes for certain Mennonites who had been fined for
not apprehending British deserters; the Mennonites not being permitted
by their principles to do so. Does this mean deserters from ourselves to
the British,—who were, as deserters, liable to the punishment of death? a
punishment which the Mennonites, as non-resistants, could not inflict.
Certain letters of Peter Miller, published in Hazard’s Register, and
of which I have made considerable use, were written at an advanced
age,—eighty or thereabout. He says in one of them (December, 1790), “Age,
infirmity, and defect in sight are causes that the letter wants more
perspicuity, for which I beg pardon.”
He died about six years after, having lived some sixty years a member of
the community at Ephrata. Upon his tombstone was placed this inscription
in German:
“Here lies buried Peter Miller, born in Oberampt Lautern, in the
Palatinate (Chur-Pfalz); came as a Reformed preacher to America in the
year 1730; was baptized by the Community at Ephrata in the year 1735,
and named Brother Jaebez; also he was afterward a preacher (_Lehrer_)
until his end. He fell asleep the 25th of September, 1796, at the age of
eighty-six years and nine months.”
In the plain upon the banks of the Cocalico still stand the brother- and
sister-houses (although not the buildings first erected). But the society
is feeble in numbers, and the buildings are going to decay. They are
still, however, occupied, or partly so. I found several women living here
in 1872. Some of these were never married, but the majority are widows;
and not all of them members of the Baptist congregation. Nor are the
voices of children wanting.
The last celibate brother died some forty years ago. One, indeed, has
been here since, but, as I was told, “he did not like it,” and went to
the more flourishing community of Snow Hill, in Franklin County.
The little Ephrata association (which still owns a farm), instead of
supporting its unmarried members, now furnishes to them only house-rent,
fuel, and flour. The printing-press long since ceased from its labors,
and many of the other industrial pursuits have declined.
No longer do the unmarried or celibate members own all the property, but
it is now vested in all who belong to the meeting, single and married,
and is in the hands of trustees. The income is, I presume, but small.
The unmarried members wear our usual dress, and none are strictly recluse.
Formerly a large room or chapel was connected with the brother-house. It
was furnished with galleries, where sat the sisters, while the brethren
occupied the floor below. (This building, I am told, is not standing.)
In the smaller room or chapel (_saal_) connected with the sister-house,
about twenty people now meet on the Seventh day for public worship.
But among all these changes the German language still remains! All the
services that I heard, while attending here in February of 1872, were in
that tongue, except two hymns at the close. We must not suppose that this
language is employed because the members are natives of Germany. One or
two may be, but the preacher’s father or grandfather came to this country
when a boy.
Around the meeting-room are hung charts or sheets of grayish paper,
containing German verses in ornamental writing, the ancient labors of the
celibates, or perhaps of the sisters alone. One small chart here is said
to represent the three heavens, and to contain three hundred figures in
Capuchin dress, with harps in their hands, and two hundred archangels.
Perhaps this and their celibate doctrine are drawn, at least in part,
from the opening of chapter xiv. of the book called the Revelation of
John.