1. Sandeen's, Ernest R. influential study, The Roots of Fundamentalism: British and American Millenarianism, 1800–1930 (Chicago, 1970; Grand Rapids, 1978)Google Scholar is an example of this interpretation of fundamentalism; see also Marty, Martin E., Modern American Religion, vol. 1, The Irony of It All, 1893–1919 (Chicago, 1986), pp. 208–247Google Scholar, and Marsden, George M., Fundamentalism and American Culture: The Shaping of Twentieth-Century Evangelicalism, 1870–1925 (New York, 1980), pp. 54–71.Google Scholar

2. See, for example, Ahlstrom, Sydney, A Religious History of the American People (New Haven, 1972), p. 811;Google ScholarSandeen, , Roots of Fundamentalism, p. 106.Google Scholar

3. Sandeen, , Roots of Fundamentalism, p. 163.Google Scholar

4. Between the census of 1861 and 1871 Methodism became the largest Protestant denomination in Canada. According to the 1871 census, over 80 percent of Canadian Methodists lived in Ontario, where with a following of 28.5 percent of the population they were the largest denomination in the province. The Plymouth Brethren, by comparison, were no numerical threat as a denomination; it was their influence within other Protestant denominations that made them a force to be reckoned with.

5. Smith, Timothy L., Revivalism and Social Reform: American Protestantism on the Eve of the Civil War (Nashville, 1957; Gloucester, 1976), p. 92;Google ScholarMcLoughiin, William G., Revivals, Awakenings, and Reform (Chicago, 1978), pp. 113–140.Google Scholar

6. For a discussion of Darby's activities in both Canada and the United States, see Sandeen, Roots of Fundamentalism, chapter 3. On Europe, with particular reference to encounters with Methodism, see McDonald's, W. introduction to Steele, Daniel, Antinomianism Revived; or, The Theology of the So-Called Plymouth Brethren Examined and Refuted (Boston, 1887), pp. 5–14.Google Scholar

7. Sandeen, , Roots of Fundamentalism, p. 75.Google Scholar

8. Marsden, , Fundamentalism and American Culture, p. 46.Google Scholar

9. Sandeen, Ernest R., “Towards a Historical Interpretation of the Origins of Fundamentalism,” Church History 36 (1967): 68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

10. See Brauer, Jerald C., “Conversion: From Puritanism to Revivalism,” Journal of Religion 58 (1978): 227–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar Brauer's approach, with its emphasis on understanding revivalism as a way of becoming, being, and remaining religious, has been seminal in the research presented here.

11. Dewart, E. H., Broken Reeds; or, The Heresies of the Plymouth Brethren Shown to Be Contrary to Scripture and Reason (Toronto, 1869).Google Scholar See also pamphlet, Dewart'sMisleading Lights: A Review of Current Antinomian Theories of the Atonement and Justification (Toronto, [ca. 1881–1884]).Google Scholar Dewart was by no means alone in objecting to the Plymouth Brethren on these theological grounds. For a similar response to the Brethren, see Strachan, R., Wandering Lights: A Stricture on the Doctrines and Methods of Brethrenism (Toronto, [1883–1885]).Google Scholar

12. Dewart, , Broken Reeds, p. 4.Google Scholar His identification of these “evangelists” as Brethren, despite their denials, is likely accurate; on F. W. Grant, see Sandeen, , Roots of Fundamentalism, pp. 80, 238.Google Scholar Dewart refers to others by last name only; “Needham” may be George C. Needham, a leading exponent of Darby's ideas.

13. Dewart, , Broken Reeds, pp. 4, 6, 9–11.Google Scholar

14. Ibid., pp. 20, 12.

15. Ibid., pp. 24–25.

16. Ibid., pp. 26. The attraction of the biblical inerrancy of Princeton Theology for those who proposed this approach to conversion is not surprising. Sandeen notes that Charles Hodge substituted the doctrine of verbal inspiration of Scripture for the witness of the Spirit referred to in the Westminster Confession; see Roots of Fundamentalism, pp. 118–119.Google Scholar

17. Dewart, , Broken Reeds, p. 31.Google Scholar

18. For examples of his editorials on the subject, see “Unjust Condemnation,” Christian Guardian (hereafter cited as CG), 18 02. 1885, p. 104;Google Scholar“Prevalent Plymouth Errors,” CG, 8 04. 1885, p. 216Google Scholar“Questionable Theology,” CG, 17 02. 1886, p. 104;Google Scholar“What Must I Do to Be Saved?” CG, 3 03. 1886, p. 136;Google Scholar and “What Must I Do to Be Saved?” CG, 3 02. 1892, p. 72.Google Scholar

19. Letter to the editor, signed “Watchman,” “The Wiles of Plymouthism,” CG, 2 05 1888, p. 276.Google Scholar

20. “Pride and Presumptions of Antinomians,” CG, 1 09. 1880, p. 279.Google Scholar

21. Burwash, Nathanael, The History of Victoria College (Toronto, 1927), p. 466–467.Google Scholar

22. Burwash, Nathanael, Wesley's Doctrinal Standards: The Sermons, with Introductions, Analysis, and Notes (Toronto, 1881)Google Scholar, introductory notes to Wesley's sermon XVI, “The Means of Grace,” p. 150; see also p. xvii.

23. Burwash's introduction to the Canadian edition of Antinomianism Revived, pp. 3–4.Google Scholar Steele's book is also concerned primarily with the difficulties with Plymouthism's views of salvation. The last chapter connects dispensationalism to erroneous thinking about personal regeneration.

24. The Sarnia Observer's coverage of local church reaction has been collected in Lindsay Reynold, “The Great ‘Plymouth Brethren’ Controversy in South-Western Ontario, 1872–73,” United Church of Canada Archives, Toronto, Ontario.

25. See, for example, letters to the editor, Sarnia Observer, 7 02. 1873, p. 2.Google Scholar

26. The series was published between March and May 1873. Duncan's explication of doctrinal errors echoes Methodist concerns and gives an interesting preview of the later divisions within and across evangelical denominations during the fundamentalist controversy. There are interesting references in the final article to Plymouthism's disdain for ordered ministry and theological training. These evangelists also encouraged the laity to administer the Lord's Supper and baptize in the name of the Lord Jesus rather than in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost; see Sarnia Observer, 9 05 1873, p. 2.Google Scholar

27. Editorial, “Objections to Methodist Evangelistic Methods,” CG, 15 02. 1888, p. 104.Google Scholar Restrictions on the participation of women is a feature of Plymouthism that deserves closer examination because of its continuing influence in some fundamentalist teaching. Janette Hassey has examined changes in fundamentalism's attitudes towards women in public ministry in No Time for Silence: Evangelical Women in Public Ministry around the Turn of the Century (Grand Rapids, 1986).Google Scholar

28. Editorial, , “Antinomianism Revived,” CG, 1 02. 1888, p. 72.Google Scholar

29. Letter to the editor, Aylesworth, R., “Plymouthism,” CG, 15 02. 1888, p. 99.Google Scholar

30. Editorial, “The Office and Work of Ministry,” CG, 26 03. 1884, p. 100.Google Scholar During the 1880s it attracted some promising young Methodist clergymen such as Salem Bland, who for a few years corresponded with Lord Cecil, a peer from a prominent British family who devoted his life to Brethren evangelism. See Allen, Richard, “Salem Bland: The Young Preacher,” The Bulletin (Committee on Archives of The United Church of Canada) 26 (1977): 86.Google Scholar

31. Dewart and Burwash were strong proponents of the doctrine of Christian perfection in Canada, as was Daniel Steele in the United States.

32. Sandeen, , Roots of Fundamentalism, pp. 77–78, 101, esp. 177–181.Google Scholar

33. Steele, , Antinomianism Revived, pp. 22–88, 148–161.Google Scholar

34. On the interest in holiness, see Wacker, Grant, “The Holy Spirit and the Spirit of the Age in American Protestantism, 1880–1910,” Journal of American History 72 (1985): 45–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar, and Bebbington, D. W., Evangelicalism in Modern Britain: A History from the 1730s to the 1980s (London, 1989), pp. 151–180.Google Scholar The connection between the Brethren and the Keswick movement merits exploration given their influence on Hannah Whitall Smith; see her autobiography The Unselfishness of God and How I Discovered It (New York, 1903), esp. pp. 179–180, 190–195, 220, 234–237.Google Scholar Fundamentalism found in Keswick teaching an appealing approach to holiness; on the “Victorious Life,” see Marsden, , Fundamentalism and American Culture, pp. 72–80.Google Scholar Canadian Methodist reaction was more mixed. For positive assessments of Keswick, see the editorial “Visit of the Keswick Brethren,” CG 19 04. 1893, p. 244,Google Scholar and Sherlock, B., “The Keswick Brethren,” CG, 24 05 1893, p. 323.Google Scholar For reservations, see the editorials, “Keswick Teaching on Holiness,” CG, 24 01. 1894, p. 5,Google Scholar and “Christian Perfection—The Keswick Dispute,” CG, 19 Feb. 1896, p. 118.

35. Editorial, “The Christian Conscience,” CG, 27 02. 1889, p. 136.Google Scholar

36. Editorial, “The Niagara Bible Conference,” CG, 9 08. 1893, p. 504.Google Scholar Dewart was an outspoken critic of George Workman's teaching of higher criticism. Workman resigned in 1892 after his opponents succeeded in prohibiting him from teaching theological subjects at Victoria.

37. Editorial, “A Complex Theological Question,” CG, 29 03. 1893, p. 200.Google Scholar

38. Editorial, “The New Version and Our Theology,” CG, 29 06 1881, p. 204;Google Scholar see also Die, Marguerite Van, An Evangelical Mind: Nathanael Burwash and the Methodist Tradition in Canada, 1839–1918 (Kingston, 1989), p. 101.Google Scholar Steele also noted that particular wordings of some texts used by the Brethren to support their doctrines had been shown by the RSV to be spurious; see Antinomianism Revived, p. 72.Google Scholar

39. Editorials, “Is the World Getting Worse?” CG, 11 02. 1880, p. 44;Google Scholar“Pre-millennial Views,” CG, 28 10. 1885, p. 680;Google Scholar“Pre-millennialism,” CG, 28 03. 1888, p. 194;Google ScholarLaing, John, “The Premillenarian Theory,” Canadian Methodist Magazine 23, 3 (03. 1886): 274–277;Google ScholarCleveland, G. A., “The Millennium,” Canadian Methodist Magazine 26, 4 (10. 1887): 363–373.Google Scholar The latter is an abridgment of an article by William Rainey Harper.

40. Some Methodists wondered if dispensationalists were more interested in getting the believer properly instructed about the millennium than in converting the unbeliever; see the editorial, “Is It True?” CG, 30 09. 1896, p. 625.Google Scholar A. C. Courtice, Dewart's successor as Christian Guardian editor, feared the loss of confidence in the adequacy of existing agencies to evangelize the world to which Moody's new educational ventures contributed; see “The Second Coming of Christ,” CG 23 02. 1898, p. 120.Google Scholar The paper also urged that the work of evangelism not fall into the hands of those “whose doctrinal teaching is gloomy, who do not count this a genuine, glorious and successful dispensation of the Holy Spirit, but an interim period between the first and second advents which will not see the salvation of the world” see “Strong Evangelism,” CG, 13 02. 1901, p. 97.Google Scholar

41. For Moody's “conversion” to dispensationalism, see Sandeen, , Roots of Fundamentalism, pp. 75–76.Google Scholar Steele also made this point and noted the impact of the Brethren on his approach to the Bible; see Antinomianism Revived, pp. 55–56.Google Scholar

42. See CG, 16 06 1886, p. 369,Google Scholar for General Superintendent Albert Carman's attack on the “namby-pamby style of conversion” in the same address where he recounts the importance of his own conversion, which had taken place in a revival service.

43. Unsigned column, “News from Manitoba,” CG, 17 09. 1924, p. 12.Google Scholar

44. Those seeking the “old paths” may have had a greater affinity with the worldview of the progressives, whose message of social transformation offered possibilities for progress denied by the fundamentalists. For an interesting discussion of premillennialism which notes the congruity between approaches to conversion and proposals for social transformation, see the six-part series of pamphlets, The Christian Hope, published by the Methodist Department of Evangelism and Social Service in 1922–1923, especially “Redemption by Revolution.”