underlying this word is that the Brethren minister to the “scattered” in other Churches without drawing them into the Moravian Church. In Germany, therefore, the importance of the Moravians must be measured, not by their numbers, but by their influence upon other Christian bodies. It was from the Moravians that Schleiermacher learnt his religion, and they even made a passing impression on Goethe; but both these men were repelled by their doctrine of the substitutionary sufferings of Christ.
In reply to the very natural question why the Moravians began their work in England, the answer given by history is that John Wesley, on his voyage to Georgia (1735) met some Moravian emigrants; that on his return he met Peter Boehler, who was on his way to North Carolina; that through Boehler’s influence both John and Charles Wesley were “converted” (1738). For a few years they took an active share in the Evangelical Revival (1738–1755); but Zinzendorf’s “ecclesiola” policy prevented their growth, and not till 1853 did the English Moravians resolve to aim at “the extension of the Brethren’s Church.” In foreign missions the distinctive feature about the Moravians is, not that they were so early in the field (1732), but that they were the first Protestants to declare that the evangelization of the heathen was the duty of the Church as such. Hitherto it had been a part of colonial policy. It was this that made their missions so influential.
Present Condition.—I. Enterprises: (1) Foreign missions in Labrador, Alaska, Canada, California, West Indies, Nicaragua, Demerara, Surinam, Cape Colony, Kaffraria, German East Africa, North Queensland, West Himalaya. (2) Leper Home near Jerusalem (1867). (3) Diaspora in Germany, Switzerland, France, Denmark, Norway, Russia, Poland. (4) Church extension in Germany, Great Britain, North America. (5) Boarding Schools: German province, 14; British, 7; American, 5. (6) Church Revival in Bohemia and Moravia, begun in 1869, and sanctioned by the Austrian government (1880).
II. Orders and Constitution.—The orders of the ministry are bishops, presbyters, deacons. But the bishops have no dioceses. Their chief function is to ordain, and to act as “intercessors.” The supreme legislative board is the General Synod. It consists of delegates elected by each province, certain ex officio members, and representatives from the mission field. At present the Moravian Church is divided into four provinces, German, British, American North and American South (North Carolina). In provincial matters each province is independent, holds its own synods, makes its own laws, and elects its own governing board; but the General Synod meets, on the average, every ten years at Herrnhut, and its regulations are binding in all the provinces. The foreign missions are managed by a mission board, elected by the General Synod. There is also a standing court of appeal, known as Unity’s Elders' Conference, and consisting of the Mission Board and four provincial boards. It is the Church’s representative in the eyes of the law. In Germany the official title of the Church is Evangelische Brüder-Unität; in Austria, Evangelische Brüder-Kirche; in England and America, Moravian Church.
III. Doctrine.—At the last General Synod (1909) they repeated their old fundamental principle that “the Holy Scriptures are our only rule of faith and practice”; but at the same time they declared that their interpretation of Scripture agreed substantially with the Nicene Creed, the Westminster and Augsburg Confessions, and the Thirty-nine Articles. Since 1879 their leading doctrines have been formulated as follows: (1) the total depravity of man; (2) the real Godhead and real humanity of Christ; (3) justification and redemption through the sacrifice of Christ; (4) work of the Holy Spirit; (5) good works as fruits of the Spirit; (6) fellowship of believers; (7) second coming of Christ; (8) resurrection of the dead to life or judgment.
IV. Ceremonies.—At morning worship the service consists of a litany, scripture lessons, sermon, singing, extempore prayer. At the evening service a litany is rarely used. The Communion is celebrated once a month. Infant Baptism is practised. There are three modes of admission to membership: in the case of the unbaptized, adult baptism (not immersion); in other cases confirmation or reception. Members from other Churches are generally admitted by reception.
V. Church Policy.—It is now held by some Moravians that their Church offers a via media between Anglicanism and Dissent. At the last meeting of the Lambeth Conference (1907) some overtures, on certain conditions, were made for (a) joint consecration of bishops, (b) joint ordination of ministers, (c) interchange of pulpits. In response the Moravians, at the General Synod (1909), welcomed the offer, but also declared their wish (a) to preserve their independence as a “Protestant Episcopal Church”; (b) to co-operate freely as heretofore with other Evangelical Churches. On this question negotiations are still in progress.
| VI. Statistics 1909. | ||
| Province. | Congregations. | Communicants. |
| German | 23 | 6,213 |
| British | 42 | 3,782 |
| American (N.) | 96 | 13,932 |
| American (S.) | 26 | 4,019 |
| Bohemia | 12 | 684 |
| Foreign Field | 245 | 33,466 |
| Total | 444 | 62,096 |
Literature.—Gindely, Geschichte der Böhmischen-Brüder (1858); Goll, Quellen u. Untersuchungen zur Gesch. d. Böhm.-Brüder (1882); Müller, Das Bischofstum der Brüder-Kirche (1888); Zinzendorf als Erneuerer der alten Brüder-Kirche (1900); Die deutschen Katechismen d. Böhm.-Brüder (1887); Becker, Zinzendorf und sein Christentum im Verhältnis zum kirchlichen u. religiösen Leben seiner Zeit (1900); Schulze, Abrisz einer Geschichte der Brüder-Mission (1901); Seifferth, Church Constitution of the Bohemian and Moravian Brethren (1866); De Schweinitz, History of the Unitas Fratrum (1885); Wauer, Beginnings of the Brethren’s Church in England (1901); Hamilton, History of the Moravian Church in the 18th and 19th Centuries (1900); Hutton, History of the Moravian Church (1909); Moravian Church Book (1902); Moravian Almanac (annual). For other sources see articles “Böhmische-Brüder” and “Zinzendorf” in Hauck’s Realencyklopaedie; and for latest results of historical research, Zeitschrift für Brüdergeschichte (half-yearly). (J. E. H.)
MORAY,[1] THOMAS RANDOLPH, 1st Earl of (d. 1332), Scottish warrior and statesman, was the only son of Thomas Randolph of Nithsdale, who had been chamberlain of Scotland, and through his mother Lady Isabel Bruce he was nephew to King Robert the Bruce. Randolph joined Bruce after the murder of the Red Comyn, and was present at his coronation in 1306. In June of that year he was captured by Aymer de Valence in a fight at Methven, and saved his life by becoming Edward’s man. He joined in the hunt for Bruce, but in 1308 he was captured by Sir James Douglas and imprisoned. He began by defying his uncle, but presently made his submission, becoming the friendly rival of the exploits of Sir James Douglas and the confidant of Bruce’s plans. In 1312 or 1314 the Scottish king made him earl of Moray and lord of Man and Annandale, while the estates held from Edward I. were confiscated. By a brilliant feat of arms he captured and destroyed Edinburgh Castle early in 1314, scaling the rock by a path pointed out by a certain William Francois who had made use of it in a love intrigue. On the eve of Bannockburn Randolph was posted in a wood in charge of the van with orders to prevent the English from throwing cavalry into Stirling. On the approach of a body of three hundred English horse under Sir Robert Clifford, Sir Henry de Beaumont and Sir Thomas Gray, Randolph came out of cover, and his spearmen, drawn up in a square, were vainly attacked on all sides by the English, who were driven to retreat on the appearance of Sir James Douglas with reinforcements; these, however, took no share in the action, the site of which is still known as Randolph’s Field. The next day found Randolph in command of the centre of the Scottish battle. He shared in Edward Bruce’s expedition to Ireland in 1315, and returned to Scotland in 1317 with Robert Bruce. With Sir James Douglas Randolph was closely allied and the two were associated in a series of brilliant exploits. In 1318 they seized the town of Berwick by escalade; being aided by the treachery of one of the burgesses, Simon of Spalding, and reinforced by Bruce they became masters of the castle some months later. In the next spring they made a raid on the northern English counties, laying waste the country as far as York, where they hoped to seize the English queen. They routed the militia hastily raised by William de Melton, archbishop of York, in a fight known as the “Chapter of Myton” because of the number of clerics who fell in the battle. Edward II., who was laying siege to Berwick, sought in vain to intercept them on their return journey. Later in the year the two Scottish nobles again raided England, and at length Edward II. signed a truce for two years. In 1322 Moray shared in Douglas’s exploit at Byland Abbey. In the next year he was one of the Scottish ambassadors charged to conclude a truce with England, and was further sent to Avignon to persuade the pope to acknowledge
