Revs. Stoever and Muhlenberg: Thoughts on Record-Keeping

The following notes were contributed by: Linda McDaniel.

There is much interesting reading regarding Pastors Stoever and Muhlenberg. We are indeed indebted to Pastor Stoever for his record keeping and also, perhaps, for being available to legitimize so many of our ancestors relationships in a time when records were difficult to find.

Since in many instances these men and others like them provided dates and recorded ceremonies found nowhere else, I think that the question of how these two men are viewed by historians has to pivot upon whether the person doing the critique is a family historian or a church historian.

I have been actively interested in the history of the Lutheran Church in "the Pennsylvania Field" for most of my adult life, and those who know me also know that I am no fan of Henry Melchoir Muhlenberg who, at least in my mind, comes across (from his own writings) as a pompous, self-serving boor. However, I believe that his contribution to the establishment of a formal structure for the fledgling Lutheran Church in the Colonies was invaluable.

On the other hand, recording keeping, for those of us interested in the lives of our ancestors is a much more important topic. Sadly, the common practice for the church, (and this may be the case even to the present day) was that the record of pastoral acts of a particular pastor belonged to that pastor, who may or may not have made a duplicate entry in a church register. My husband, who served several Lutheran parishes, found that in each one, the records of the previous (20th century) pastors were in disarray. In one case, it was sadly found that for a period of more than 20 years, no marriages were entered into the register owned by the congregation. Thankfully, this was from the 1920's to 1940's and most of the record could be reconstructed by visiting the York County Courthouse and going through the marriage licenses one by one!

For most congregations, gratefully, this neglect of records is no longer the case as most pastors are required to keep such records accurately as a part of their pastoral duties or it is a duty of a clerk to see that they are kept. But we would do well to keep this situation in mind in our own churches and try to see that accurate records are maintained by the congregation. So, my points are two:

1. The record of a baptism/marriage/death may be held at the Church where your ancestor attended. Or it may have only been entered into the personal register of the pastor performing the act. You then may need to look for it at the last parish where the pastor served, or another church in the multi-church charge which he served, or in a library/historicalsociety/seminary archives, etc--indeed, almost anywhere. The record of pastoral acts of Rev. J. C. McCarney, a pastor of Quickel E. L. Church in York County for, I believe about 24 years, was apparently kept by his family after his death, and to my knowledge is not available.
2. Please encourage those responsible in your congregation, whatever denomination it might be, to keep accurate registers of pastoral acts. Don't assume the pastor is as good at record keeping as she/he is at being a pastor. You may need to be sure that she/he has assistance in this area. And please don't be critical of him/her for this. A pastor has many responsibilities and TOO little time.

The following notes were contributed by: Michael Reck.

This is a response to me from a friend that had some unusual information on Rev. Johann Casper STOEVER, but thought others in the group might be interested in. JCS was a long term Lutheran Pastor in SW Pa, and traveled extensively, baptizing and burying many.

In trying to find the material on JCS, my friend, John Swank, came across a book he have had for 20 years or so, The Notebook of a Colonial Clergyman, by Henry Muhlenberg. It is a diary. Muhlenberg arrived in Philadelphia from Halle, Germany in 1742, and this was part of his early notes as he became acquainted with the Lutherans in Pennsylvania.

1742- Dec 1

I learned that Mr. Kraft had traveled through the whole province of Pennsylvania, appointed deacons and elders here and there, and established a general presbytery in the whole country and a special presbytery, as he called it, in Philadelphia. And beside all this, he had organized a consistory of which he was the president and Mr. John Casper Stoever, the assessor. The assessor, Stoever, is a bookbinder whom the scoundrelly collector, Frederick Schultze, appointed a so-called Lutheran preacher here in a barn and thus conferred the dignity of ordination upon his disreputable behavior. The purpose of the presbytery was to make it possible for Valentine Kraft and his assessor to travel around the country and carry on their trade with the holy sacraments. The consistory served the purpose of letting him ordain a few more lazy and drunken schoolmasters and place them as preachers in vacant places. He enjoys great respect because our poor, ignorant Lutherans are pushed into the corner by the Moravians on one hand, and on the other are duped by his windy boasting.

P.10-11

Needless to say, Muhlenberg had no great love for Kraft or JCS. The whole book is typical of that age of great sense of superiority of his position above others. It is also an interesting look at the French and Indian War and American Revolution.

The historians have sided with Muhlenberg as being the first significant Lutheran Pastor in America.

Part of Muhlenberg's complaint was that the traveling ministers collected $ for performing baptisms and weddings...rather than being supported by offerings generally. He saw them as opportunists. On the otherhand, coming from Germany where the church was state supported, he may have seen this a strange and unusual.

Thanks to John Swank for this bit of information.

More notes from:

Mary Jo MacCracken.

Regarding the Rev. Johann Casper STOEVER and the assertion by Lutheran historians that Muhlenberg was the first significant Lutheran minister in America, I would ask several questions.

Do you think the historians making that judgment cared about service to the people? Did they find books listing hundreds of baptisms and marriages that Muhlenberg performed? Such records may not have been high on the list of criteria for the label. It would seem to me that respect and veneration were and continue to be due Rev. Stoever.

Opportunist indeed! Did you pay your minister when you married? My husband and I did! How would you like to ride a horse through muddy pathways in cold, wet or stormy weather in middle age in order to serve your people not for a day or week but for years? Where is it written that a good minister must NOT be practical... cannot be a good businessman OR woman?

Johann Casper STOEVER was called to the ministry ... he kept meticulous records which continue to help people to this very day. I wish I could find records kept as well by other ministers... that includes records by Johann Casper STOEVER's own great-grandson Rev. Elias STOEVER a traveling minister for the Evangelical Reformed Church in the 1830s and 1840s in one of the Ohio-PA circuits. Settling in Greensburg, Stark County, Ohio, Elias descended from JCS (son John Frederick/Anna Margretha Daenschaertz -- grandson John Jacob "Jake"/Maria Schott -- great grandson Elias).

I will admit JCS did not complete the traditional schooling expected of clergy of that day... he was not a man of letters, but a man who could empathize with the people. Yes, I suppose he may have been difficult and defensive when reminded of the comparison with Muhlenberg, but I submit to you that the Rev. John Casper STOEVER was popular with the people then and now because "he got it". JCS understood what was needed to serve God and gave of himself. Appreciated in the 1700s because he was there when someone wanted to marry or bury or baptize a loved one, Rev. Stoever is appreciated today by those of us searching for information about our family.