Swiss Mennonite Cultural and Historical Association
|Home Origin History Monthly Feature Activities Board Anniversaries Store|
Andrew D. Schrag as a Bethel College student, ca. 1899
Andrew D. Schrag was born in 1876 on the Kansas Mennonite frontier in southern McPherson County. In his youth he showed great promise for leadership in church and school among his people. He left is Mennonite heritage and decided to make is contribution in the arena of higher education. In his home community, Andrew became a symbol of the perils of advanced education. The evidence in hand points to his being challenged by the optimistic vision of an increasingly improved American way of life.
Three years after arriving in Kansas, the Mennonites from Russia organized themselves as the Kansas Conference of Mennonites. High on their agenda was a school to train teachers and preachers to further the Mennonite faith. Bethel College was the lasting fruit of that progressive effort. In 1892 the Kansas Conference of Mennonites became the Western District of the General Conference Mennonite Church. General Conference Mennonites were among the most progressive of Mennonites in North America.1
Beyond the Mennonite world was an American society which looked forward to a future full of promise. From the beginning of the American nation, the spirit of optimism pervaded the American mind as it envisioned the potential destiny of social perfectibility. Great strides were made in the nineteenth century (transportation, industrialization, communications, reform movements) so that b the end of the century, in the formative years of Andrew’s life, there was great confidence that the keys to human existence had been discovered and humanity could look forward to a great future. The new future was the American dream.2
Andrew Schrag was born two years after is family and community settled in Kansas. In 1891, at age fifteen, he was baptized and became a member of Hopfield (Hoffungsfeld) Mennonite Church.3 His father hoped that Andrew, or at least one of the sons of the family, would become a minister. For three school years, 1892-95, Andrew studied at the Mennonite Preparatory School in Halstead and the newly established Bethel College near Newton.
Bethel College campus in 1901
A basic aim of Bethel college was to prepare teachers, fluent in both German and English, who could teach in Mennonite communities both in the English public elementary schools (running four to six months) and the German (Mennonite) schools (one to three months). C. H. Wedel, Bethel’s first president, wrote that the ideal graduate would be able to "teach German school, teach English district school, and also be active in Sunday School."4 The end was the fostering of the Mennonite community by bringing together the merits of their German culture and the merits of their new American culture.5
From 1895 to 1897 Andrew Schrag taught the English public school and the German school in his home community, fulfilling the goals projected by Bethel College. He was the first Mennonite to teach in his home public school.6 Among his pupils were future leaders of the community, including Edmund G. Kaufman, who became a missionary to China (1917 – 25) and president of Bethel College (1932 – 52).7
Schrag’s leadership apparently also impressed his fellow church members in the Hopefield congregation. Then congregation, Amish in background, chose its ministers by a process of nominations by members and selection by lot. In 1895 congregation members gave Andrew Schrag the most votes in the nomination process. The lot, however, did not fall upon him. His life course would have been much different had he been chosen minister at that time.8
Following the two years of teaching, Schrag returned to Bethel for two more years (1897 – 98). He graduated from the Academy in the spring of 1899. The literary societies were a very important aspect of student life, not only because students took a very active role, but also because they were the only extra-curricular activity (apart from music) approved by the faculty and in the good graces of the constituency. In the literaries students learned American ways of speaking, thinking, and "group management" (elections, parliamentary procedure, constitutions, etc.) Schrag was in the midst of such activities especially so in his last year.9
Further Americanization was manifested in one topic Schrag debated, "Resolved that Negroes should be restricted in their political rights." In another talk he wrestled with the problem as to which was more important in shaping people, the inner commitment or the outer events one encountered. In another message, he examined in what ways the New Testament church at Antioch was a mission church. He not only mentioned the church. He not only mentioned the church being energized by the Holy Spirit, but also that the body had a discerning enthusiasm, and gifted people properly educated in the culture of the day. 10 Andrew was involved in a number of additional debates and delivered orations at different occasions. In all these activities implicitly or explicity, Schrag dealt with the challenge to integrate the Christian revelation with discovered human knowedge.11
It apparently was at Bethel that Schrag met and became engaged to Margaret Richert, of the influential Mennonite Richert family. The engagement was broken, a serious breach in the Mennonite world. Apparently the separation took place after Schrag’s years at Bethel.
Significant in Schrag’s years at Bethel was the world view of the school. Bethel’s first president, Cornelius H. Wedel (1860 – 1910), had a comprehensive would view which embraced all of reality. Wedel believed that significant truth was and is revealed and subsequently discovered by man in creation, re-creation, and history. Such a posture entailed a positive attitude toward all aspects of human culture: art, science, government, music and other works of human creativity. The liberal arts disciplines were seen as a pat of the effort to discern and apply truth. With such a perspective, Wedel, as summarized by historian Dr. James Juhnke, saw Bethel College as a "place for vigorous engagement with culture and an eager embrace of issues posed by modern learning."12
Secondly, Wedel saw the church as an intentional community of believers modeled after the life and work of Jesus Christ and the New Testament Church. It represented God’s intention for humanity and the corporate reality where God’s truth was most fully revealed and expressed. Wedel’s congregational Christendom (a society ordered over against state church Christendom) was to use the best in the arts and sciences (literature, science, music, art, etc.) to enrich its inner life and to aid in the spreading of the Gospel.
In Wedel’s understanding, the Christian movement must be studied in the light of the whole of the whole of history. As for the Anabaptist-Mennonite tradition, it was not to be viewed in some isolated and truncated manner but rather in a reading of church history that sees Anabaptism as part of a faithful or alternative Christian community that reached back to Christ. Throughout church history there have been faithful witnesses. In short, Mennonites were not to sharply separate themselves from the history of Christianity and not perceive themselves as a totally unique sect.
President Wedel believed that God’s people were a distinctive community over against the sinful world Aware of the tensions between Christ and culture, and seeing the true church as a counter-culture or alternative society, he at the same time was critical of the rigidness and resultant withdrawal from the larger society of some Mennonites. The counter-community is to be aware of what is transpiring in the whole of society and to make discerning evaluations based on the Bible (centrally the New Testament) as to the merits and demerits of human knowledge. If there is beneficial and life enhancing truth to be uncovered via the liberal arts and if Anabaptism is to be meaningfully related to the Christian movement, it follows that the very sharp divide between the church (Mennonites) and the world is to modified. In this point of view regarding the larger society, Wedel emphasized the imperative of missionary work and the need of Christians to work for social reform.13
We do not know in any detail how Andrew Schrag responded to Bethel’s progressive Mennonitism, but at the very least, his move to attend Haverford indicates he was not more conservative than Wedel, but rather moving in the same general direction. It appears Schrag left Bethel as a progressive Mennonite.
During the next three years (1899-1902) Schrag was a student at a Quaker school, Haverford College (in suburban Philadelphia). He graduated in the spring of 1902 with a Bachelor of Arts degree. His reasons for choosing Haverford are not clear. There was a historic kinship between Friends and Mennonites given their common commitment to simple living, discipleship, and pacifism. Some Quakers were living in the Halstead, Kansas, area. Probably the most important element was H. J. Webster, a Haverford graduate teaching mathematics and natural science at Bethel from 1897 to 1900. Schrag received a Haverford scholarship, perhaps with the help of Webster’s influence.14
Homer J. Webster, mathematics teacher at Bethel College 1897-1900
Schrag stated that Haverford opened up to him a new world. True indeed. Geographically considered, in the class of 1900 – 1901 consisting of 121 students, only ten came from states west of Pennsylvania, and only three west of the Mississippi River. More important was the change in sociological context. Schrag moved from his rural German, Mennonite, fixed world view, and farm setting into a society that was very English, elitist, suburban, change-oriented, and Quakerishly sophisticated.15
Most significant was the beginnings of the liberalization of the Quaker work view among some Friends. Rufus Jones (1863 – 1948), very able and influential Quaker philosopher and Haverford faculty member (as of 1893) spearheaded the movement. Reacting against some conservative Quakers, Jones believed their posture was too static, worship services too fixed, and patterns of dress and speech overly rigid. The problem, Jones thought, was their making the furthering of a "peculiar people" an end itself when they should be concentrating on the universal principles of religion which are common to all sects and communions.16
More far reaching was his reaction to revivalistic evangelicalism and Wesley holiness, movements that influenced many Friends. Jones dismantled the dualistic world view that divided reality into two spheres, the supernatural with its very transcendent, supernatural and judgmental God on the one hand, and the natural consisting of a sinful world populated by sinful people on the other. The chasm between the two was unbridgeable, proclaimed by the revivalists, but God miraculously bridged it in Christ in a one-for-all and finished special revelation. In that system, Jones continued critically, sinful humans have no light within but were given the "light" as a gift.17
In his view of God, Jones and other liberals emphasized God’s love and immanence. That is, God was quietly working within the natural processes of life—the law of nature—moving humanity toward a harmonious future.18
Very central to Quakers, including Jones, was the light within—that of Christ (God) within every person. It is basic to the mystical experience in which the human spirit and the divine Spirit meet, find one another, and "are in mutual and reciprocal correspondence as spirit with Spirit."20 That is to say, a first-hand fellowship and experience with God that issues in a sense of mission. Toward that end, Quakers practiced meditation, prayer, Bible/devotional reading, obeying the light, and interacting with others in the same quest. In experiencing God, one became aware of "a radiance from the central Light of the spiritual universe, penetrating the depths of every soul, which if… obeyed and accepted as a guiding star would lead into all truth and all kinds of truth."21 The mission, as directed by the living Spirit would issue in a life lived in accordance with the example and teachings of Jesus Christ. That of Christ within points to world-wide possibilities and creates a favorable attitude toward possible truth in other religions. Emphasis was placed on latent potential of humans, over against the stressing of human sinfulness as seen in john Calvin’s views of salvation. One of the ways to develop the latent possibilities was the right kind of education.22
Another tenet of Jones and liberal Quakerism was a critical approach to the Bible. The disciplines of philology, archaeology, and history have shown that the material in the Bible came from a variety of sources: Canaanite, Persian, and Greek ideas found their way into Scripture; human evolutionary progress meant that truth was gradually discerned; some biblical books are composite, and much editing was done in the gradual bringing together of the Bible.
Quakerism from its conception was dedicated to high moral living and social responsibility; honesty, simple living, integrity, feed the hungry, clothe the naked, heal the sick. The Christ within will call his disciples to follow the Master in doing good. Both conservative and liberal Quakers were opposed to specific evils; slavery, child labor, mistreatment of Indians, drinking, etc. What as new with liberal Quakers was seeing the larger picture of societal structures and the end of bringing in the Kingdom of God in history. Jones declared (1895) that "the Spirit of God is in this world, shaping history … putting down evil, making righteousness, silently guiding the forces in the great battle of Armageddon."24
Schrag’s forte at Haverford was academics. He was noted by his fellow students as one who spent his time studying. Although his entrance examination scores were not high, at his graduation he received "general honors," and was elected into the Phi Beta Kappa Society.26
We do not know in any detail how Schrag responded to the liberal orientation of Jones and others. The views of Rufus Jones had some continuities with the thought of Bethel’s President Wedel. Given his intellectual abilities, Schrag surely would have seen such similarities. Worthy of note is that with liberal Quakerism one could be both deeply committed to the faith and be relevant to the optimistic coloration of modern life. He may have reasoned that a Quaker commitment would mean getting away from the traditional, uneducated ministry, historically frozen, and socially irrelevant Mennonitism of his home community. In addition, a controversy in his home community between the Hopefield and Eden congregations involved the kind of sectarianism that Jones believed was a gross distortion of true Christianity. Then, there was the selecting of minister by lot when the correct criteria were inner conviction and the needed education. Perhaps the communities’ harsh and unforgiving attitude when Schrag broke his engagement with Richert alienated the young student. From another angle, Schrag’s academic achievements and his adjusting to an English society told him that he could be an important player in the larger contemporary society. He had the "right stuff." Some of the "humble" Mennonites at home could have said, "Pride comes before the fall." Unfortunately we do not know if he reasoned as depicted above but we do know he went to Johns Hopkins University to earn a doctorate and was a successful professor at the University of Nebraska.
Johns Hopkins University
(1902 – 1906)
In 1906 Schrag received a Ph. D. degree from Johns Hopkins University. The road between Haverford and Johns Hopkins was well traveled. During the years Andrew was at Haverford, three Haverford professors became professors at Johns Hopkins. A few of the Haverford faculty had earned their doctorates at Johns Hopkins, and the head of the Johns Hopkins German department was Henry Wood, a Haverford graduate. 27
Johns Hopkins University (begun in 1876) was a pioneering and innovative institution. It was modeled after the German concept of a research university in which professors gave major attention to researching (as compared to teaching) at the cutting edge of their disciplines and guiding graduate students into new areas of study and research. It has been called the first university in America. It partook of the optimism that infused the American spirit at the turn of the century. 28
Johns Hopkins University was not brought into being by any church body, had no churchpersons on the board of trustees, and had no academic program for the discipline of religion in the curriculum. The initial idea of creating a University was formed in the mind of John Hopkins a wealthy (from grocery store clerk to millionaire) Baltimore merchant who was a Quaker. Six of the first twelve trustees also were Quakers. Of the remaining six four were Episcopalians, one was a Presbyterian, and one was a Swedenborgian. None of the dozen were professional educators but rather men of affairs, lawyers, bankers, and business men. 29
Given that the University had no religion department, the school was somewhat at a loss as to how to deal with religion. The trustees and school staff were not irreligious and anted a religious dimension in the school, but they wanted to stay away from sectarianism, ecclesiasticism, and dogmatism. In the first years the president, Dr. Daniel Gilman, conducted a short devotional period each morning with attendance voluntary; students brought into being a YMCA chapter and it and the school invited outstanding churchpersons and scholars in religion to lecture and speak, at times in special lectureships. One of their guidelines was that religion has nothing to fear from science and science has nothing to fear from religion. As the truth of that is conditioned by the definitions, the University had a public relations problem regarding evolution. 30
Schrag’s field of specialization was the German language. He also had tow minor areas, one was philosophy and the other history. The ore of Schrag’s academic work at Johns Hopkins was a course entitled "German Seminary." The course, taken all four years (probably required) of his stay, had a seminar format with students, and at times faculty members, reading papers followed by discussion and interaction involving both faculty members and students. Working with German literature and writings, attention was given to literary criticism, societal relationships and structures, history of ideas, and psychological perceptions. 31
Graduate student Schrag read papers on the writings of three of the four men covered in his dissertation. The title of his work was "Situation und Charaktere in der Dorfgeschichte bei Immermann, Auerbach, Rank and Gotthelf.) Schrag received his doctorate Jun4 12, 1906, as well as his second Phi Beta Society key. It has been reported that his response was, "I already have such a key." 32
As was true in evaluating the impact of Bethel and Haverford on Andrew Schrag, we do not have the needed primary sources to know his understanding of reality upon completing his studies at Johns Hopkins. The Schrag family (his wife and children) did not actively participate in organized religion. Possibly Johns Hopkins University influenced Schrag toward the view that religion is a private matter and is not essential in furthering the American dream. He may have concluded that organized church life really has no relevance in modern America. Earning a doctorate was one of the things to do in helping move society forward toward a better way of living.
In the next school year (1906 – 1907), Dr. Schrag filled in for a professor on leave as an Instructor in German at Adelbert College of Western Reserve University in Cleveland, Ohio. 33 In 1907 – 1908 Schrag was a student at the University of Berlin, where his dissertation was published. 34
The dissertation dealt with the village story genre of German literature as that genre developed in the eighteenth century into the nineteenth century. Schrag chose four representative authors writing village stories (Immermann, Auerbach, Rank, and Gotthelf) at the time the writing of village stories reached its highest point. The objective was to describe, compare, and analyze the village stories of the four men in terms of situations in which the stories were set and to note the basic characteristics of the stories. Schrag gave scant attention to the religious aspect of village life but rather focused attention on the psychological dimensions of life. 35
University of Nebraska
The high point I Dr Schrag’s professional life was the ten years he taught German at the University of Nebraska, 1908 – 1918. At Lincoln several facets of his life came together – his intelligence, teaching ability, and command in the classroom. He steadily moved up in rank from instructor to assistant professor to associate professor. From 1909 to 1913, he made summer trips to Germany giving him opportunities to learn more about German and Germany. 36 Schrag was living the American dream.
During his time at the University of Nebraska, Dr. Schrag and a colleague in the German department, Dr. Joseph E. A. Alexis, put together an introduction to German textbook, entitled First Course in German (R. G. Badger, Boston, 1920). 37 It was well received and widely used.
O July 9, 1914, Schrag married Harriet Graves of Lincoln, Nebraska The two met as Andrew was boarding at the home of Harriet’s sister, Mrs. Elizabeth Shattuck. The bride was a graduate of the University of Nebraska, earned a master’s degree, and taught school for two years before the two married. She came from a prosperous Nebraska farm family, English in heritage. Two children were born to the couple, Gretchen and Harold. 38
Schrag’s teaching at the University of Nebraska came to an abrupt end because of the strong ant-German spirit generated by World War I. Following President Woodrow Wilson’s commitment to neutrality when the war broke out in 1914, the university of Nebraska declared its neutrality. Gradually, however, anti-German sentiment increased. When the United Sates entered the war, emotions of patriotism and hostility against Germany and Germans became rampant. One professor declared that the war did not really begin in 1914 but in 1774 to Lexington and Concord. A new event in track meets was throwing the hand grenade. Schrag, having received his inheritance at the time, bought a new car only to learn that some anti-Germans saw the money as proof he was a German spy. 39
In April 1915, before emotions had become so inflamed, Schrag had published an article entitled "German Versus English Aggression," in the University of Nebraska scholarly journal The Mid-West Quarterly. In the article, he sought to refute the perception that Germany was the aggressor nation. He said the England, in securing its vast empire, was much more aggressive than Germany. He detailed the German takeover of Alsace-Lorraine, arguing that the people in that territory were largely of German blood. The article, written early in the European war, reflected Professor Schrag’s pro-German posture. At that time the faculty was divided on the matter of American participation in the war. 40
The United States declared war against Germany on April 6, 1917. Newton D. Baker, the Secretary of Defense, directed every state to establish its own council of defense. The Nebraska Defense Council was especially vigilant; it "discerned" less than full support for the war on the part of some Lutheran Church leaders, some German-Americans, including Mennonites, and some professors at the University. 41
The Nebraska Council began to gather data on those professors they thought were opposed to the war. The council pressured the Regents of the University to hold hearings to expose the "hotbed of sedition" at the University. The Regents of the University decided to hold public hearings declaring that anyone who interfered with the prosecution of the war would be "summarily … dismissed." At the same time the Regents asked the Council to give them a list of persons the Council felt were guilty of improper behavior as well as the evidence that indicated their disloyalty. 42
On May 28, 1918, the Council released to the public the names of the twelve faculty members against whom charges would be brought. Last on the list was Andrew D. Schrag. The variety of charges against the twelve included defending the I.W.W. (Industrial Workers of the World), believing in "internationalism," wrong attitudes toward Liberty Bonds, being a pacifist, justifying the sinking of the Lusitania, etc. 43 The case against Schrag read:
Prof. Andrew D. Schrag, teacher of German, before we entered the war, published articles and made addresses espousing Germanys side of the war. Since we entered the war, has expressed contempt for what America could do in coping with Germany. He has extolled German prowess and German science in his classes and in conversations with men of the faculty. Always has a hidden sneer for everything American. He leaves the impression with his students and others that he is still pro-German. Has never taken a virile stand for America. Has spent many summers in Germany. 44
It is not known if the charges were read at the hearing or whether they were made public.
The hearings lasted for nine days, May 28 to June 11, 1918. The faculty members were examined one by one with opportunity for anyone to present evidence; the accused were free to express themselves. During Schrag’s examination, no word was spoken against him.
The Regents concluded they found no overt evidence indicating any of the charged were guilty of disloyalty. Two faculty members were rebuked, three were asked to resign, two for being "indiscreet" in their "public criticism," and the other for being a pacifist. Six of the professors including A. D. Schrag were "declared to be as good as though no accusations have been brought." They were "fully exonerated and held as blameless." Schrag was declared a man in good standing. 45
Although he had been fully cleared, Schrag resigned his position with the university. No doubt the basic reason was that the German Department was abolished and German was not taught during the war. Schrag’s grandson, John C. Wiltse, presently Associate General Counsel at the university of Nebraska, has written, in an unpublished article on the trial of Schrag, that his grandfather "had been insulted by the students and victimized by adverse publicity." At the same time, according to oral tradition, the University offered him a job teaching philosophy, one of his minors at Johns Hopkins. After the war Andrew Schrag attempted to return to the University of Nebraska but was not rehired. 46
Soon after resigning from his teaching post, Schrag became the owner and manager of the Farmer’ State Bank in Davenport, Nebraska, located approximately seventy-five miles southwest of Lincoln.
During the decade spent in Davenport, banker Schrag was one of the leading citizens of the Davenport community. Within a year he was placed on the advisory board of the Victory Liberty Loan campaign and shortly thereafter he was serving on the Davenport Village Board. His community service also included being a member of the local school board; in that capacity he spoke at parent-teacher meetings regarding civic responsibilities and the importance of physical education.
In 1927 Schrag passed the Nebraska state bar examination, doing so without attending law school or taking correspondence courses. Although he did not practice law, his law knowledge helped in discharging his banking responsibilities. The manner in which he passed the law examination is further evidence of his mental capacities.
In the closing of the bank, necessitated by the Depression, Schrag did not file for bankruptcy but rather assumed personal responsibility for the outstanding deposits. The act reflected strong commitment to integrity, even though it placed the family in dire economic conditions for a number of years. 47
After selling the bank, the Schrags returned to Lincoln were they spent the rest of their days. Schrag entered into a number of jobs. For a time he sold life insurance (Pacific Mutual) and did well in the undertaking. During the height of the Depression, he was an administrator in the W.P.A. (Work Projects Administration) program. Since many of the people he worked with were of Hispanic background, he learned the Spanish language. Another undertaking was being the Nebraska State Inspector of Beehives. Something of his moral commitment was manifested when he, in response to the spread of a bee disease, rapidly moved against the blight by destroying infected beehives. That obviously was the required move but some of the bee-keepers saw to it that Schrag lost his job. For a time he was instructor in the defense industry, located in Lincoln, during World War II. 48
Schrag remained interested in politics. In at least one election, he voted for Franklin D. Roosevelt. At first he thought Hitler was good for Germany, but upon seeing the error of his evaluation, he was puzzled that he had not seen through Hitler sooner. On the lighter side Andrew Schrag was fond of certain radio programs, as listening to Jimmy Durante and Amos and Andy. Via the radio, Schrag never missed Nebraska football games.
Andrew Schrag’s decision to leave the larger Mennonite community was a common one. In 1889 C. H. Wedel, the first president of Bethel College, when deciding whether to return from his graduate studies to teach among the Kansas Mennonites, had commented that nearly all Mennonites, upon earning advanced degrees, left the Mennonite fold. 49 The gap between the traditional Mennonite attitude toward higher education and the philosophical world view of advanced education was very wide. It appears that another factor in the void between Schrag and the Kansas Mennonites from Russia was the breaking of his engagement with Margaret Richert. When Edmund G. Kaufman was a senior at Bethel he convinced his fellow seniors that the class should request that Dr. Andrew Schrag be the commencement speaker. The faculty rejected the request, apparently in large part because of the broken engagement. Mennonite leaders and Andrew Schrag had little if any contacts with one another in the decades that followed. 49
The pivotal point in Schrag’s life was the crisis generated by the Great War. Up to that point, we see a very able young man moving upward on the educational ladder, making the needed cultural adjustments to earn a doctorate and establish himself in an American university. The American dream became a reality.
The Great War shattered the dream. German language and German culture played a large role in Schrag’s life: family, community, church, Bethel College, doctorate, University of Berlin, summers spent in Germany, and University of Nebraska. The sequence implies identification by Schrag to the German world view. As mentioned above Schrag wrote an article in 1915 reflecting a pro-German point of view. The article confirms Schrag’s positive attitude to Germany.
Not only did the United States have a dream, so did Germany. Many German leaders, kings, and philosophers believed that Germany had a unique leadership genius to lead the world toward utopia.
During the war, Andrew Schrag was in an intense emotional crunch, given the highly charged and unrepressed rampant pro-American nationalism on the one hand and his pro-German sympathies which may have been colored by German ideals. Schrag’s resigning his professorship, even though he was cleared in the hearings and offered an opportunity to teach philosophy, appear to reflect the emotional climate of the time.
In summary, we see that Andrew Schrag was caught in an international crisis not of his making, but which had a negative impact on his inner being. Those of us in a society that has experienced tow World Wars, the Depression, the cold War, and Vietnam find it difficult to enter into the confidence that reigned in the formative years of Andrew Schrag, but we do understand persons being caught in a web of irrational evil forces. 50
Andrew Schrag died July 19, 1956, two months short of his eightieth birthday. John Wiltse, his grandson, saw it as ironic that his grandfather, whose greatest faculty was his mind, should die of brain cancer.
1Peter J. Wedel, The Story of Bethel College, ed. Edmund G. Kaufman (North Newton, KS.: Bethel College, 1954), pp. 14-20, 50-78.
2James C. Juhnke, "Foreword: Mennonites in a World of Progress and War," in Gerlof Homan, American Mennonites and the Great War, 1914-1918 (Scottdale, Pa.: Herald Press, 1994), pp. 13-16. Arthur S. Link and Richard L. McCormick, Progressivism(Arlington Heights, Ill.: Harlan Davidson, 1983), pp. 1-3, 11, 12.
3"Church Records of Hoffnungsfeld Mennonite Church, Moundridge, Kansas; Complete Family Records of Church. 1869. Kotosufka, Volhynia, Russia," 1920. Located in Mennonite Library and Archives, Bethel College, North Newton, Kansas. P. 531.
4Jances C. Juhnke, Vision, Doctrine, War: Mennonite Identity and Organization in America 1890-1930Scottdale, Pa.: Herald Press, 1989), p. 169.
6Second Catalogue, Bethel College, Newton, Kansas, 1894-1895; Third Catalogue, Bethel College, Newton, Kansas, 1895-1896; J. O. Schrag, "Pioneer" (Unpublished paper),pp. 1-7; J. O. Schrag, "The Black College" (Unpublished paper), pp. 1-2; J. O Schrag, "Teachers as Pioneer" (Unpublished sheet).
7Mennonite Encyclopedia, vol. 5 (1990), s.v. "Kaufman, Edmund G.," by James C. Juhnke. To be cited hereafter as ME.
8Interview, J. O. Schrag, October 20, 1994.
9Juhnke, Vision, Doctrine, War, p. 170. Wedel, Story of Bethel, pp. 129-130.
10"Local Notes," College Journal, p. 83. "Program," College Journal, December 1898, p. 96. "A Mission Church," College Journal, April 1899, pp. 6. "The Influence of Events upon Individual and National Life," College JournalNovember 1899. P. 82.
11"Belles Lettres Society," School and College Journal, November 1897, p. 88 "The Belles Lettres Society Entertainment at Bethel College," College Journal, March 1898, p. 27. "Bethel Notizen," College Journal, October 1898, p. 77 "Local Notes," October 1898, p. 75.
12James C. Juhnke, Dialogue with a heritage: Cornelius H. Wedel and the Beginnings of Bethel College (North Newton, Ks.: Bethel College 1987), p. 81.
13Ibid., pp. 9-98.
14ME, vol. 4 (1959), s.v. "Society of Friends," by Harold S. Bender. Wedel, Story of Bethel, p. 109. Interview, Robert Kreider.
15Catalogue of Haverford College. 1901-1902 (Philadelphia: Press of Leads and Biddle, 1901), pp. 12-15. Isaac Sharpless, The Story of a Small College(Philadelphia: Winston C. Winston Co., 1918), p. 145.
16Rufus M. Jones, Quakerism: A Spiritual Movement(Philadelphia Yearly Meeting of Friends, reprinted 1963), pp. 172-173.
17Thomas D. Hamm, The Transformation of American Quakerism(Bloomington, Ind.: Indiana University Press, 1988), pp. 153, 155. Elbert Russell, History of Quakerism(New York: Macmillan, 1942). pp 499-505.
18Hamm, Transformation, p. 150. Harry Emerson Fosdick, ed., Rufus Jones Speaks to Our Time: An Anthology(New York: Macmillan, 1951), pp. 7-17.
19Walter Rauschenbusch, quoted in Sydney E. Ahlstrom, A Religious History of the American People(New Haven, Ct.: Yale University Press, 1972), pp. 785-786.
20Fosdick, p. 12.
21Jones, Quakerism. P. 16. David Hinshaw, Rufus Jones, Master Quaker(New York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 1951), pp. 210-231.
22Fosdick, p. 12.
23Hamm, Transformation, p. 149. Hugh Barbour and J. William Frost. The Quakers(New York: Greenwood Press, 1988). PP 222-223.
24Hamm, Transformation, pp. 157-159.
25Barbour and Frost, p. 225.
26Haverfordian, October 1902, p. 89. "Class Notes," Haverfordian, February 1903, p. 28.
27Hugh Hawkins, Pioneer: A History of the Johns Hopkins University, 1874-1889(Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1960), pp. 3-6, 120-123, 145-146, 154, 162. Personal letter Diana F. Peterson to author, December 11 1991. Personal letter Brian Harrington to author, December 27, 1991.
28Ibid. Richard Mackey, A Brief Academic History of the Johns Hopkins University(N.p., n.d., 24 page pamphlet gained from Johns Hopkins University).
29John C. French, A History of the University Founded by John’s Hopkins(Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press, 1946), pp. 22, 324-332.
30Ibid. Hawkins, pp. 68-72.
31"Minutes of the German Seminary," 1902-1906, pp. 68-132. The Ferdinand Hamburg, Jr., Archives, Johns Hopkins University.
32Copy in the Milton S. Eisenhower Library, Johns Hopkins University.
33Personal letter, Bob Psuik to author, January23, 1989. Western Reserve University Catalogue, 1906-1907, pp. 60-61.
34Matriculate Catalog, Haverford College, 1833-1922. Situation und Charaktere in der Dorfgeschichte bei Immermann, Auerback, Rank und Gotthelf.
35Andrew D. Schrag, The Situation and Characteristics of the Village Story Written by Immermann, Auerbach, Rank, and Gotthelf, trans. Hilda Voth (Berlin: Martin and Johske, 1908), pp. 5-12, 93-95. I am very much indebted to Richard D. Schrag for reading and summarizing the content of the dissertation. "Summary statement," pp. 1-14.
36The University of Nebraska Complete Calendar; July 1, 1908-July 1, 1909 (Lincoln, NE: University Press, 1908, p. 38. Bulletin of University of Nebraska, Fortieth Annual General Catalog 1910-1911(Lincoln: University Press, 1910), p. 26. Bulletin of University of Nebraska, Forty-third Annual General Catalog 1913-1914(Lincoln: University Press, 1913), p. 28. Interview, Gretchen Hawk. Interview, Steven Wiltse, October 30, 1991.
37Copy of book in Milton S. Eisenhower Library, Johns Hopkins University.
38Interview, Gretchen Hawk, Lincoln Daily Star, July 16, 1914, p. 9.
39"American has a Score to Settle with Germany," Daily Nebraskian, March 13, 1918. "Grenade Throwing New Track Event," Daily Nebraskian, April 4, 1918. Personal interview, Gretchen Hawk.
41Robert N. Manley, "The Nebraska State Council of Defense: Loyalty Programs and Policies during World War I" (Master’s thesis, University of Nebraska, 1959). P. 5, 12-14, 176-179.
42John C. Witse, "The Loyalty Trial of Andrew Dante Schrag" (Unpublished article, 1987), pp. 1-10.
43John Wiltse, pp. 6-7. Manley, pp. 207-208.
44Nebraska State Historical Society, State Council of Defense Records, box 16, folder 41.
45John Wiltse, p. 8. Board of Regents of the University of Nebraska, Minutes, pp. 18-19, June 18, 1918.
46John Wiltse, p. 9.
47"The Victory Liberty Loan," Journal, April 11, 1919. "Village Board Proceedings," Journal, June 8, 1923. Interview, Gretchen Hawk. "News Item," Journal,January 20, 1925. "Banks Consolidate," Journal, April 6, 1928.
48Interview, Gretchen Hawk. Interview, Steven Wiltse, October 30, 1991.
49Juhnke, Vision, Doctrine, War,p. 115.
49"E. G. Kaufman Interview by Fred Zerger," ed. by John D. Thiesen and Barbara Thiesen (North Newton, Ks.: Mennonite Library and Archives, 1986), pp. 6-7.
50Junke, "Forward," p. 13-14.
|Home Origin History Monthly Feature Activities Board Anniversaries Store|