INTRODUCTION
This second portion of the biography is entitled “Rev. F. H. W. Kuckherman, 1852-1890 – as Ordained Minister and Pastor”. This tells of the conclusions and deductions about God and Creation that Rev. Kuckherman formulated from his study of the Bible. The reader of this portion of the biography needs to keep in mind that Rev. Kuckherman, as a young self-educated man, did not have the benefit of Seminary professors, theologians and Bible Study supplements. He made his own interpretations, drew his own conclusions and made the decision not to teach and preach from the Old Testament.
THE MINISTRY OF REV. F.H.W. KUCKHERMAN ORDAINED MINISTER AND PASTOR
(1852 – 1890)
The religious beliefs of Reverend Kuckherman, particularly during his later years, would probably make him unacceptable by any denomination. His talents for analysis and reasoning made him search continuously for the Truth and that which he could not accept – he would reject. In his wisdom, however, he would not express controversial subjects in his sermons.
It must be remembered that young Kuckherman came from Germany to Cincinnati, Ohio, in 1840 with what would be considered a third-grade education. His insatiable desire to advance in the field of learning made him an apt and observing scholar, however – principally through self-teaching. When he arrived at New Knoxville the following year, he was enthusiastically accepted as school teacher and then was sought after to lead religious services in the church previously established but which was now without a preacher. Thus he did not seek the ministry, but the ministry sought him and in it he served for almost half a century.
At first he would read from several books of sermons which he had at his command, but these seemed dull and often disagreeable. It was in 1847, after being licensed as a minister, that he began to prepare and deliver his own sermons based on personal study of the Bible and what he observed from the phenomena about him.
Young Kuckherman was not “prepared” for the ministry. He had no high school, college or seminary training. He had only the Bible from which to study and this he interpreted on the basis that his own ability at reasoning would permit. He soon regarded the printed sermon from his sermon books as incompatible with his concept of God and His Kingdom. He was a realist and refused to accept the fire and brimstone teachings of his day.
As a scholar, but also as a careful observer of the natural life that existed about him in his wilderness frontier, he gathered overwhelming evidence that his God had to be a God of love and harmony – not a God of jealousy and vengeance.
Through his observations he soon determined that throughout the entire natural kingdom of plants, flowers, shrubs, trees, fowl, fishes and all life of every form and description there existed a pattern of grandiose beauty, perfection of form for optimum performance, intelligence beyond description, and an effortless sense of being.
Did not this observation agree with the parable of Jesus of Nazareth when he said (Matthew 6: 26-29): “Behold the fowls of the air; for they sow not, neither do they reap, nor gather into barns; yet your heavenly Father feedeth them. And why take ye thought of raiment? Consider the lilies of the field how they grow; they toil not, neither do they spin. And yet I say unto you, that even Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of them.”
Thus in this new but primeval land he noticed the abundance of life, always expressing itself in harmonious order and performance. He noticed how this virgin soil – without tilling, seeding or cultivation – would bring forth the grass, flowers, shrubs and trees in magnificent color, order and performance. He noted the beauty and perfection of each flower when compared to the flowers of its kind. He noted the characteristic coloring of the plumage of birds. He noted how each animal species was especially arrayed in characteristic fur coats that were never dingy or disarranged. He noted that this wildlife possessed efficiency that was always sufficient unto itself. It needed no doctors, barbers, beauticians, dentists, teachers, morticians or any other services demanded by man.
Furthermore, wildlife had no need of a delivery room in a hospital to bring forth its young. Mysteriously all forms of wildlife are subject to the instinct of the mating season that, in turn, governs its young to be born at the most advantageous season for their best growth and development. Nor is any form of wildlife capable of adultery. Only man has perverted nature’s most vital life force of procreation to his own selfish pleasure and abuse.
Nor does any form of wildlife require schooling. Their lives are constantly regulated by an unerring instinct that is always sufficient for their needs. There are no retarded children in Nature’s domain. Nor, he observed, did the phenomena of advancing age mar the beauty or performance of any of Nature’s creation. Instead they developed in majestic fashion until they reached their maturity when, by instinct, they would foreknow their death by their waning competency.
Most interesting of all of his observations, however, concerned the phenomena of death on the part of all of Nature’s creations. He observed the uniformity and beauty demonstrated in the ripening of a field of wheat. Was this death or a simple process of the life span of wheat? He observed how all forms of wildlife (aside from accident) would provide their own burial in burrow, cave or thicket when instinct informed them of their time of passing. As a man after a day of heavy toil will crave sleep, just so will wildlife search its secluded spot and painlessly pass on into eternal sleep. Wildlife does not fear death when instinct calls.
Such were the observations made by young Kuckherman in his adopted pioneer life among virgin lands, streams and forest. The evidence of bountiful life was freely expressed to him on every hand, and his reasoning powers led him to the following concept of life as he saw it:
- The principle of life does not die – only its manifestations.
- The activity we recognize as life in plants, animals and humans is merely the active, temporary, material manifestations of the invisible life principle that operates as an immutable law of the universe.
- The principle of life, whether plant or animal, is an eternal force of perfect, self-expressing, self-creating, self-supporting energy. Each form of life is limited to its own peculiar life cycle – involving germination or conception, growth, reproduction and maturity. The principle requisite to life is vibrant health that in Nature’s domain is never sick until its life cycle has been performed.
Such were young Kuckherman’s conclusions as a naturalist. But would these conclusions satisfy the spiritual interpretations for a would-be preacher? He studied the Bible for a practical definition of God and he found the answer in Exodus 3: 13-14. “And Moses said unto God, behold, when I come unto the children of Israel and shall say unto them, The God of your fathers hath sent me unto you; and they shall say unto me, What is his name? What shall I say unto them?” And God said unto Moses, “I AM THAT I AM;” and He said, “Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you”.
That was it. The two-letter word AM described for him a force in the universe that was timeless and eternal, represented only as the ever-present NOW. The AM also meant for him an all-powerful FORCE that is everywhere present and always operative in full accordance with an all-knowing MIND that directs all activity in the universe. This AM was God, for God himself said so.
It is to be noted that this statement referred to the real universal God and not to the Lord or Jehovah God of the Israelites as portrayed through out the Old Testament, commencing with the 4th verse of the 2nd chapter of Genesis. The real God was a God of Love, Peace, and absolute Harmony. The personal God of the Israelites was a jealous, awesome being that would punish and destroy at will.
Thus it became his practice to reject all references to the Lord or Jehovah God made in the Old Testament—including the ten commandments. The accounts of the many tribulations and the almost constant warfare among the Biblical people did not interest him. Nor did the accounts of David’s adultery and the bastardy of Solomon and his thousand wives.
His differentiation between the two separately described Gods began with the study of the Creation Story. In the first chapter of Genesis all creation was credited to the only true God. The reference to days as to the evening and the morning did not allow for a literal translation of day and was it not quoted many times that a day unto God was as a thousand years unto man?
From this he reasoned that the process of creation was timeless and ever renewable. Because no two forms of life were ever alike, he allowed for variety and change. This was the concept he formed and when the theory of evolution was exploded upon a fundamentalist world, he was prepared to accept it fully.
In his deliberations on this subject he noted that the creation by the true God was accepted by the LORD God as sort of a mental creation, such as would be performed by an architect in preparing a blue print for a building to be constructed. This transition may be noted in Verses 3 through 7 of the second chapter of Genesis, as follows:
Verse 3. “And GOD blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it; because that in it he had rested from all His work which GOD created and made.
Verse 4. These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens.
Verse 5. And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew; for the LORD God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground.
Verse 6. But there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the face of the ground.
It was thus that he conceived the identity of two separate Gods – the universal God, the I AM, and the LORD God as the personally conceived God of the Israelites. In his study of the Old Testament, therefore, any reference to the only God – he considered as the I AM; all references to the LORD or JEHOVAH God he regarded as irrelevant.
What then, you may ask – did he preach about?
He found his real challenge in the New Testament concerning the life and teachings of Jesus the Christ and it – and it ONLY – became the subject of his preaching. However, in his personal study of the New Testament he found himself at variance with several of the dominant beliefs and preachings of his time. He could find no solid verification concerning the virgin birth of Christ and he could not accept the description of Christ as the meek lamb of God brought to slaughter as painters and theologians portrayed Him.
Concerning the virgin birth of Christ, he pondered whether Jesus was the son of man, even as himself, or was Jesus the Son of God – an entity to which man could never attain. Naturally, he wanted Him to be the son of man, a human being.
It was from the Gospel of St. Luke that the virgin birth of Christ received doubtful credence; doubtful because the opening verse of the Gospel acknowledges the Gospel as based on hearsay. “For as much as many have taken to set forth in order a declaration of those things which are most surely believed among us”.
(St. Luke 1: 1).
And again in Chapter 3: 23 which reads as follows: “And Jesus himself began to be thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph which was the son of Heli”.
St. Matthew in his Gospel proved that Jesus’ mother was not of the lineage of David and Abraham and devoted the entire first chapter of his Gospel to tracing this lineage to Joseph.
In after life it was said of Jesus (St. Matthew 13: 55-57) and (St. Mark 6: 3) – “Is not this the carpenter’s son? Is not his mother called Mary? And his brethren James and Joses, and Simon and Judas? And his sisters, are they not all with us?”
And concerning himself did not Jesus say, (St. Matthew 11: 19), “The Son of man came eating and drinking, and they say, Behold a man gluttonous, and wine bibber, a friend of publicans and sinners”.
While young Kuckherman thus pondered this basic question, he found complete satisfaction in the opening verses of the Gospel according to St. John, which reads as follows: “In the beginning was the Mind, and the Mind was with God, and the Mind was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by Him; and without Him was not anything made that was made. In Him was life; and the life was the light of men”. (Author’s Note: It is unfortunate that the King James Version of the Bible translates the Greek word ‘logos’ as ‘Word’ instead of ‘Mind’ as he found it in the Bible).
Herein he found the revelation that the universal God as the I AM of the Old Testament was also the universal MIND of the New Testament. This universal Mind, he concluded, was that part of the I AM that gave unerring directional force to the creation and functioning of all that which was represented by the all-inclusive I AM, both past and present and in time to come.
Thus he reasoned that the humanity of the earth-born Jesus was endowed with the Universal Mind of God as it existed in the beginning before the fall of man occasioned by the treachery of Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden.
When Adam and Eve ate of the forbidden fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil, they were not only cast out from the natural kingdom of the Garden, but they were cursed by virtue of the double minds established in them. Whereas previously man was directly governed by the Mind of God – Good – even as all life on earth except man is governed by the mind of unerring instinct to this day, man became possessed of the mind of Evil – Devil.
Thus the mind of God – Good – and the counterfeit mind – the mind of Evil – forced man to make a decision on every subject that affected his life. It was the purpose of the advent of Jesus the Christ (Jesus the man with God Mind) to show the way of life to a truly confused world. “Jesus sayeth unto him, I am the way, the truth and the life.” (St. John 14: 6).
This then was the unalterable image he formed of Jesus the Christ from his personal study of the Scriptures, which meant the mind of the living God implanted in earth-born man. It was this mind that the Apostle Paul referred to in his Epistle to the Philippians 2: 5 – “Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus”.
It was this mind in Jesus that permitted Him to say, “I and the Father are one” (St. John 10: 30), or again in St. John 14: 11 – “Believe me that I am in the Father and the Father in me”. The proof that this mind in Jesus represented not only the Lord God of the Israelites, but the one and only great Universal God was found in St. John 8: 57-58 – “Then said the Jews unto Him, Thou are not yet fifty years old, and hast thou seen Abraham?” Jesus said unto them, “Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am”.
Then the thought struck him – would any God entrust his gift of mind in the body of a weakling, as Jesus was portrayed in the paintings, sculptures and teachings of His day? His study of the New Testament gave no supporting evidence on this view but, on the contrary, the evidence did indicate that Jesus was indeed a man among men. Being a carpenter during his youth and early manhood required of him strength and agility to perform the different tasks of this occupation. Later, during his ministry, He lived the strenuous life of an outdoorsman. He must certainly have been a man of extraordinary physique, pleasing personality, kindly disposition, with a bearing of absolute self-assurance.
It was with this self-assurance that He trod the many miles from village to village during his three-year ministry; it was with this self-assurance that He performed His many miracles; it was with this self-assurance that He taught the multitudes that followed Him; it was with this self-assurance that He faced the money changers in the temple; and it was with this self-assurance that He faced Pilate in the Judgement Hall and who, in beholding Him, could only say in admiration, “Behold the Man”.
Along with His self-assurance, He was also human. When the wine had given out at the wedding feast He made more; He was never a killjoy. He consorted with the publicans and sinners to the dismay of the Pharisees and Saducees, and upon one occasion it is reported “Jesus wept”. Nowhere in the New Testament was there any evidence that the person Jesus appeared to any man as other than a man among men.
It was the mind in Jesus that was different. Through his universal Mind of Good – God – He knew not and could not speak from the Mind of Evil which was not in Him. Thus speaking to a double-minded people, his words were not easily understood so that it was necessary for Him to speak in parables. “All these things spake Jesus unto the multitudes in parables; and without a parable spake he not unto them”.
(St. Matthew 13: 34).
While Jesus thus spoke to the multitudes in parables of the common-place things that they would understand, He was also critically confronted by the learned Scribes and Pharisees. Their questions concerned matters relating to the Mosaic laws and were principally pointed to Him with the purpose of trapping Him by his answers. Here, too, He was the complete master at every occasion by his immediate and forthright replies that put them to shame until, as it is recorded, “they durst question Him no more”.
Such was the self-created image that young Kuckherman formed of Jesus the Christ from his personal study of the Scriptures. He recognized Him as a virile, strong and physically perfect man, bearing the single mind of the great Universal God.
However, it was in the message that Jesus brought that young Kuckherman found his deepest and most complete satisfaction. It was all summed up in the all-embracing commandment which reads, “These things I command you, that ye love one another,” (St. John 15: 17). It replaced the ‘Thou shalt nots’ of the ten commandments with the positive ‘do’ of the New Testament.
In these five words: “that ye love one another” – He brought understandable meaning to all of the ten commandments. If man is governed by love, he cannot help but honor his father and mother, he will worship his God, he will not bear false witness, he will keep the Sabbath and he cannot kill, steal, covet or commit adultery. Concerning this Paul wrote in Romans 13: 10: “Love worketh no ill to his neighbor; therefore love is the fulfilling of the law”.
While love was therefore the fulfillment of the law of Israel, it was more importantly the fulfillment of the entire law of the universe. Frictionless love alone can assure the peace and harmony required for every universal manifestation whether it be plant, animal or any of the celestial planets that move in their orbits in the heavens about us.
Only man, with his dual mind, is capable of promoting strife and dis-harmony through his traits of greed, pride, jealousy, covetousness, false witnessing and murder which come from the mind of evil and are the counterfeit of the true force of Love from the universal Mind of Good – God.
Love, love, love! Love is indeed the force that gives the directional urge to all cosmic manifestations. Love is indeed the motivating principle that operates in, through and around every existent being and only man seems capable of diverting it. Because man, through his duality of mind, had fallen into sinfulness, it was the mission of Jesus to lead man back to the central fact of life by showing the way, the truth and the life.
Thus thinking and believing, Kuckherman gained from the scriptures in utter simplicity the singularity of Christ’s teachings, Love thy fellow man”. It was all so simple – so majestic. Here in one small word was the governing force and power of the entire universe. Why could not man understand it, and follow all of its dictates?
So Kuckherman embraced LOVE as the governing influence of his personal life. He literally followed it in his every word, act and deed. It gave him a deep personal satisfaction and a peace of mind that passeth understanding. He could heartily agree with St. Paul in his Epistle to the Romans: 8: 38-39: “For I am persuaded that neither death nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come, nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord”.
With such self-assurance and peace at heart, Kuckherman preached only of Jesus the Christ and his message of love. More that 2,000 sermons did he preach on this inexhaustible subject without repeating a single sermon.
In such manner did Rev. Kuckherman preach to his ever-growing congregation. For thirty years he conducted services as he saw fit, because he was beloved by everyone. But then certain members of his congregation received the urge to affiliate the congregation with some well-known denomination. These members felt like “belonging”. It did not matter whether it be Lutheran, Presbyterian, Baptist or any other denomination.
Realizing that this urge to affiliate represented an irresistible trend among the members of his congregation, he quietly and peaceably led them to join the Reformed Church of the United States. Since this was also the denomination of the Mother Church of their native land in Germany, it would avoid strife and contention in their selection of any denomination. So it was that in 1874 his congregation received denominational status.
After the affiliation of his congregation with the Reformed Church denomination was completed, Rev. Kuckherman’s problems became multiplied and very vexing. This was because of the large amount of mail he received from the new headquarters. Much of this mail was to inform him of the rites and rituals which his congregation would henceforth be required to observe.
Upon carefully reading this material, he found much variance with the self-determined philosophy he had formed of the Scriptures. Even the suggested sermon topics which were drawn from the Old Testament as much as from the New Testament were disagreeable to him. What was he to do?
After prayerful consideration, he decided that he could not serve two masters at the same time. He would not permit his self-conceived philosophy of Jesus the Christ and his message of love to become adulterated with the many orders and demands of the Reformed Church denomination. Plainly, in his mind, it had become a battle between pure Christianity vs. secular Churchianity.
Thus while his congregation had become truly denominational, he himself remained adamantly aloof from all denominational dictates and decrees. He refused to attend any and all classis sessions and he never attended the Synodical meetings. Instead he would send a delegate elder from the congregation, and each year a different one, to fulfill the requirements of the denomination. He was elected as a trustee of Heidelberg College, the denominational college, but refused to attend a meeting.
In such manner he was obliged to carry on for an additional sixteen years. His duplicity of service was weighing heavily upon him and he earnestly sought relief from his charge; but his congregation would not release him. The message of true love which he exemplified through his personal being, by his every act, word and deed had radiated outward to touch all with whom he communicated, and this same love was returned a hundredfold. It is said that never was an unkind word spoken of him.
It was in the year 1890 that Rev. Kuckherman was at least temporarily stricken with a severe and painful gall bladder disorder. With the loss of much of his former vitality and good health, he pleaded with the congregation to relieve him and to find a replacement for him. To this plea the congregation gave its reluctant but respectful assent. On July 2, 1890 the Rev. Abraham Schneck of Louisville, Kentucky preached a trial sermon and was accepted to commence his duties as their new minister on September 1st of the same year.
Thus did Rev. Kuckherman find release from his self-imposed position of duplicity, but it was to be short-lived. Almost from the start the new Rev. Schneck urged the congregation to adopt the full denominational rituals of the Reformed Church which Rev. Kuckherman had completely neglected.
This sudden change in the order of the services in the congregation found immediate resentment on the part of the majority of its members. Possibly Rev. Schneck was too insistent in demanding full compliance to his request, but there was – at the same time – a great difference in the sermons preached. The resentment grew until, after a period of about three months, utter confusion reigned in the congregation.
After about six months, the feeling of resentment and discord in the congregation reached the boiling point with the result that Rev. Schneck abdicated his position and, taking about one third of the members of the congregation who were favorable to his request, he set about to organize an independent congregation to be called the Emmanuels Church. With quick dispatch this new congregation built a sizable brick structure designed to lure other members from the old denomination because its pulpit was unoccupied by a regular minister for almost two full years.
This turn of events caused Rev. Kuckherman deep regret and great dismay. What could he do to restore harmony in the community? Then came an idea. The congregation needed a challenge – a big challenge – in which every member could participate – possibly in the building of a new temple.
Consequently, Rev. Kuckherman and his wife journeyed to Cincinnati, Ohio for the purpose of engaging a noted painter to prepare for him an awe-inspiring masterpiece of a magnificent church structure. After about three weeks the painting was completed and, upon appropriate framing, he placed it in the most conspicuous position in the combined study and living room of his home.
As he had supposed, the visitation by members of the congregation was very great – for they wanted his advice on what to do about the split in the congregation. During their visits, these members were either consciously or unconsciously attracted to the magnificent painting on the wall. Many members returned for another look at the masterpiece and soon it became the topic of conversation throughout the community.
Finally, at a congregational meeting held on March 8, 1892 the members had made up their minds. They would build a church exactly like the one portrayed in the painting which Rev. Kuckherman had so subtly prepared. Because the construction of the church proceeded at a rapid pace, it was officially dedicated on August 26, 1894.
When the congregation besought Rev. Kuckherman to deliver the dedication sermon in the new church, he steadfastly refused. He maintained that this honor should be given to Rev. Noll – the man whom he had personally sought and recommended two years previously to fill the pulpit of his erstwhile congregation. Through personal advice and coaching, Rev. Noll had been able to establish himself on a highly satisfactory basis in the denomination, thus re-establishing peace and harmony among its members.
Instead he chose – and was welcomed – to deliver the last sermon in the old church where he had labored so long. With this sermon he closed his ministry and promptly entered another ministry – the ministry of the SOIL. While it is written that man cannot live by bread alone, it is also true that without bread man cannot live at all.
In such manner did Rev. Kuckherman manifest the force of love as the prevailing influence in all that is essential and worthwhile. How – even in his last encounter – he was able to re-establish peace and harmony out of tempered strife and deepest chaos! All of this he did without demand or coercion – and he did it by simple suggestion. Even the members who formed the Emmanuel Church promptly forsook it to reunite with the new church.
To many the life and works of Rev. Kuckherman have faded into dim memory, but this is deceiving – for his influence lives on. Through his manifestation of love by his every act, word and deed, he has woven a moral fabric into the community life that is strong and lasting. Throughout his ministry and even until now, there have been few divorces or civil suits in the community. The local community jail has not been used except by an occasional vagrant who might seek shelter for a night’s sleep.
Because Kuckherman was himself fastidious, he demanded cleanliness of person and property as the first law of living. He made it a point to be clean shaven until the day of is death, thereby setting an example for other men. This trait of cleanliness and orderliness remains as the outstanding trait of the entire New Knoxville community, whether it be a farm or a village dwelling.
The church he founded has gained local and national fame. In a special article published in the Christian Century Magazine, the church was proclaimed to be one of the outstanding rural churches in America. It received special acclaim in Life Magazine, and both the church and Rev. Kuckherman received special attention in the book “Ohio Builds a Nation”, which is the historical account of the early pioneer life in Ohio, by Samuel Harden Stille.
While the church is indeed a stately edifice, most important, however, is its record of providing 51 ministers, 6 foreign missionaries and more than 100 nurses to the Christian Service.
In completing this chapter, it is fitting and proper that it be ended with his favorite and most often quoted verse of Scripture: “Finally brethren, whatsoever things are true; whatsoever things are honest; whatsoever things are just; whatsoever things are pure; whatsoever things are lovely; whatsoever things are of good report; if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise, think on these things” (Philippians 4: 8).
NOTE: The article that was published in the Christian Century Magazine can be found on our website at this link -> Evangelical and Reformed Church. The article mentioned in Life Magazine was published in the January1, 1951 issue, and it was a summary of the study of twelve churches that was done by the Christian Century Magazine one year earlier.