1920 Fire Centennial — “Immediate Aftermath” by David M. Fulk

This is the second in a series of blog articles discussing the destructive March 21, 1920, fire, and the five-year journey to a new building and brighter future.

Before the fire department put out the flames which destroyed the 1883 building and the 1902 addition, church members were talking about what needed to happen next. The deacons and finance committee agreed to meet two days later to decide what recommendations should be made to the church.

On March 29—seven days after the fire—several recommendations were adopted. In that single meeting, the church:

  • accepted the school board’s offer to hold Sunday services in the  Sandusky School auditorium and to hold Thursday prayer meetings at the Methodist Church;

  • consented to begin raising $75,000 for a new building;

  • agreed to have the building foundation in place by fall;

  • decided to buy the lot on the southwest corner of Kansas and Leonard for expansion;

  • appointed a salvage committee to save anything unscathed by the fire;

  • appointed an 11-member building committee; and

  • appointed a 54-member building fund committee. That’s right…54!

Two weeks after the fire, on the evening of April 6, 56 members gathered to launch the building fund campaign. Fifty-two people pledged $51,050. Less than a month later (on anniversary Sunday, May 2), the pastor announced the full $75,000 had been subscribed. That’s $961,447 in 2020 dollars. Truly remarkable!

During this period, one can’t help but notice a sense of optimism and determination. That feeling must have extended into the community, given that people were joining the church every week.

The positive spirit of the church can also be seen in its routine work as they:

  • celebrated former interim pastor and Jewell president John Priest Greene’s 50th anniversary in the ministry;

  • placed the $3,500 in insurance money for the Lucy Wornall Organ into a fund so that memorial would continue in the new building;

  • increased the insurance on the parsonage from $6,000 to $10,000 and approved to have the outdoor woodwork painted;

  • appointed a committee to ensure elderly and infirmed members could attend services at the temporary locations;

  • voted to send the pastor to the Southern Baptist Convention and elected delegates to the Northern Baptist Convention meeting;

  • approved a disbursement of funds to the Northern Baptist Mission Board;

  • began considering if it would alter membership in the North Liberty Baptist Association (the group 2BC was instrumental in founding in 1844);

  • voted to send the charred remains of items from the 1883 building cornerstone to the Missouri Baptist Historical Society (now the Partee Center) at William Jewell, as well as the remains of a stained glass window given by Jewell students for the 1902 building addition (and still on display in the Partee Center);

  • hosted Jewell’s baccalaureate service; and

  • baptized new members (where we don’t know).

A big meeting took place on Sunday, July 4. General plans for a new building were presented to accommodate a modern and growing congregation. An architect reported the proposed building (without furnishings) would cost $150,000—TWICE what they’d planned and already received in pledges.

Nonetheless, the recommendations and plans were unanimously adopted, and the J.H. Felt Company was hired as the architectural firm to draw plans and specifications.

So how do you raise another $75,000 to fund your building campaign?

Pastor Mangum had an idea. He reported at the July 15 business meeting (100 years ago this week!) that he presented a plan to the State Board of Missions proposing that Missouri Baptists and the Southern Baptist Convention “assist us in building our new church.”  The state board approved giving $10,000, pending the SBC Home Mission Board make a $15,000 commitment at its January 1921 meeting. The rationale was that Second played a vital role in the spiritual education of William Jewell students, particularly ministerial students. The church heartily endorsed the pastor’s plan!

Within four months of a tragedy, the church was moving forward with a new vision, as well as a plan and a resolve to achieve it. To their good fortune, the economy of the “Roaring ’20s” would help get them there.

My next installment will highlight a tense meeting when the church rejected the building committee’s recommendation on construction bids and will include the outcome of the Home Mission Board’s decision to support our building campaign.

Janet Hill