herbswanson.com
A Resource for the Study of the Thai church

Home Links Search Blog
herbswanson.com

This Heathen People: The Cognitive Sources of American Missionary

Westernizing Activities in Northern Siam, 1867-1889

Herbert R. Swanson

Thesis submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School of the University of Maryland
in partial fulfillmentof the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts

1987

CHAPTER TWO [PDF]


Abstract 2006 Intro 1987 Intro Chapter 1 Chapter 2 Chapter 3 Chapter 4 Chapter 5 Chapter 6 Chapter 7 Conclusion Bibliography

Two facts stand out from the history of the Laos Mission: first of all, the mission invested significant amounts of time, finances, and personnel in the activities it imported from the West; and, second, the mission assumed that those activities would aid them in the Christianization of northern Siam. Taken together, these two facts suggest a partial answer to the puzzle of why the Laos Mission seemed to set goals which its activities seemed not pursue.

Activities that grow out of generally accepted assumptions and appear in retrospect to contradict stated goals suggest that the missionaries were not acting idiosyncratically or blindly. Something was happening on a deeper level. This chapter opens the exploration of the source of missionary activities in northern Siam.

I

In seeking to understand why the Laos Mission acted in particular ways, the historian faces certain difficulties. The task of explanation, in this case, requires one to look behind the events of missionary westernization and determine the motivations from which the events arose. The records currently available, however, frustrate any direct examination of motivations because they concentrate almost entirely upon the daily business and routine of the mission. The members of the Laos Mission seldom reflected upon the meaning of their work or the reasons they felt called to do it. On those occasions, furthermore, when the missionaries did reflect upon their work they displayed a set of rigid, dogmatic prejudices that seemed almost thoughtless. Their beliefs obscured rather than revealed their motivations. The nature of the historical record and the minds of the missionaries themselves walls off the historian from a direct examination of missionary motivations.

Recognizing that historians often face the difficulties just mentioned, Robert Berkhofer provides some guidance. He argues that describing the actual motivations of particular actors requires the historian know the "inside" of those actors in ways not usually available to them. Historians, therefore, should proceed with caution. They should not use pop-psychology to guess at motivation and should draw, instead, upon the social sciences to study larger patterns of activity. Such patterns reveal sociocultural explanations for the causes of historical events; and sociocultural explanations take the historian close to the heart of individual and group motivation.[1]

The work of sociologist Peter Berger provides one particularly useful social scientific system. His extensive writings contain a cogent, unified, mainstream interpretation of human action which integrates the thought of several key sociological schools into one theoretical system.[2] He, furthermore, believes that sociology has an almost "symbiotic" relationship with history, and throughout his work he shows sensitivity to the problems of studying societies in the context of their pasts.[3] Finally, Berger seeks to account for those human beliefs, such as the Laos Mission's assumption that evangelism required westernization, which the believer holds as fundamental and inarguable.

Berger begins with the seemingly simple premise that, "Reality is socially constructed." He argues that knowledge and the meanings individuals attach to knowledge are all socially derived. The consciousness of individual members of a society, therefore, grows out of their social experience.[4] He concludes that, "the organism and, even more, the self cannot be adequately understood apart from the particular social context in which they are shaped."[5] Society and its individual members, in fact, have a "dialectical" relationship with each other. Individuals experience society as a potent, objective, and external reality that shapes their consciousness and plays a powerful role in the formation of individual character, social roles, and social identity. Yet, individuals also influence society and add to and change what other people know and believe. Berger concludes that the self is not a solid, given, enduring entity but, rather, a "process" constantly in dialogue with its social environment.[6]

Berger summarizes the social dialectic in three brief statements: "Society is a human product. Society is an objective reality. Man is a social product."[7] People, he contends, build their social world around them in regular, patterned ways so that they do not have to rethink every situation in which they find themselves. They, in a sense, mutually accept a set of rules by which to live together.[8] Those rules and patterns, in turn, provide a social environment of institutions, roles, and identities that people then experience as an objective reality beyond themselves. Language fixes that social reality in the individual consciousness. People, thus, see themselves as living in a meaningful, cohesive universe. Berger argues that society's power to force reluctant individuals to behave in certain ways shows that humans do experience society as an objective reality.[9] The social environment, in fact, seems so much like the natural environment that people normally accept their society's culture without question, thus allowing culture to shape their individual personality.[10]

Significantly, in terms of this thesis, Berger observes that religions have a particularly potent dialectical relationship with their adherents. Religion extends the social environment to encompass the entire universe causing adherents to believe that their religion's institutions, roles, and activities represent ultimate truth and are of ultimate significance. They reject the notion that their religion is a product of human activity, and thus they are all the more closely shaped by their socioreligious environment because they ascribe to it a divine origin and an immutable nature.[11]

Berger's sociological theory, in sum, shows that individuals and their actions cannot be adequately understood apart from the society into which they were born. The intricate, self-reinforcing process of the social dialectic causes individuals to internalize their sociocultural environment as a set of attitudes, motivations, and beliefs which govern their social relations and ways of acting.[12] The very fact that almost all people are unaware of this dialectical process means they are all the more bound to it.

In terms of the Laos Mission, Berger's theoretical framework suggests that the mission's assumption concerning westernization and evangelization originated in the social experience of its members. Missionary westernization in northern Siam, in other words, grew out of nineteenth-century American evangelicalism, the primary social habitat of the members of the Laos Mission. The source of the Laos Mission's activities, if Berger is correct, lies in the socially produced consciousness of the missionaries.

II

The activities of nineteenth-century American Protestant missionaries in other areas of the world lends credence to the argument that missionary westernizing activities in northern Siam originated in the missionaries' home culture. A brief survey of those activities reveals that American Protestant missionaries around the world engaged in activities identical to those the Laos Mission carried out. Stephen Neill describes a worldwide pattern of nineteenth-century Protestant missionary activity which included engaging in western-style educational, medical, and technological activities as well as linguistic studies, the translation of the Bible, and changing the status of women.[13] An extensive historiographical literature substantiates Neill's generalizations, particularly for American Protestant missions.

American Protestant work in Hawaii provides one of the earliest examples of the pattern of missionary activities. From the time of their arrival in Hawaii in 1820, American Protestant missionaries served as the primary agents of westernization in the islands. They introduced writing and a Romanized alphabet, printing and a printed literature, western schools, and western medicine. They helped codify Hawaiian law and played a major role in introducing American-style political institutions. They brought new architectural styles and building methods to Hawaii. The imported machinery, including spinning and weaving machines. They sought, within limits, to change the status of women and to improve the quality of infant and child care. They taught the Hawaiians new trades. For some fifty years, the Protestant missionaries shaped the ways in which westernization changed Hawaii.[14]

In the Middle East American Protestant missionaries the substantial social impact of the missionaries, particularly among minorities, played a key role in the diffusion of western learning through education and printing. Missionary work led to a revival in Arab literature and contributed to the birth of Arab nationalism. Missionaries also educated the first generation of women intellectuals in the Ottoman Empire. They introduced new industries and skills through industrial education.[15]

This same world-wide pattern extended to the work of American Protestant missionaries in Persia and China. In both places they established the first western-style schools and hospitals, set up a printing press, and especially tried to change the lives of minority groups. The missionaries had a particular impact on the social status of women. They provided educational opportunities, taught hygiene and homemaking, and, in the person of women missionaries, provided role models for relative social freedom. The list of American Protestant missionary activities in nineteenth-century Persia and China, in fact, virtually duplicates those for Hawaii and the Middle East.[16]

Presbyterians in other parts of the world also conducted their work in the same manner as the Laos Mission. In northern India, for example, the Presbyterians tried to convert the "natives" through schools, literacy instruction, other educational programs, hospitals, dispensaries, and leper asylums. They worked to change the social position of women by opening girls' schools and girls' orphanages.[17]

In Korea and the Philippines as well Protestant missionaries, including the Presbyterians, carried on these same sets of activities.[18] Joseph Grabill concludes that the nineteenth-century Protestant missionaries were the "...main private interculturalists in American society." They substantially contributed to the westernization of non-western cultures, especially in Asia, Africa, and the Pacific.[19]

In every case, however, the stated goals of the missionaries did not include the westernization of foreign cultures. Missionaries went overseas for one single purpose: to convert the "heathen" to Christianity. And, with a few notable exceptions, they failed to convert more than a small minority of people to their religion. In short, American Protestant missionaries around the world carried out the same set of activities as did those in northern Siam and achieved the same low rate of conversions. They shared the Laos Mission's contradiction between stated goals and ineffective means.

The fact that nineteenth-century American Protestant missionaries persisted in carrying out similar activities throughout the world with the same unsatisfying results recalls Berger's description of social and individual formation. Some factor prevented the missionaries from taking into account local mores and conditions and from wondering whether or not their methods, ideas, and institutions were appropriate to their particular situation. They acted globally on the assumption that only westernizing activities could successfully spread Christianity in non-western settings. The one factor that all of these missionaries shared was their American Protestant sociocultural heritage, and Berger would have the historian look precisely at that factor in the search to understand why the missionaries acted as they did.

Black American Protestant activities in Africa lend weight to the supposition that social and cultural background determined global missionary activities. Given the different social circumstances and experience of American blacks, one would expect that black missionaries might have acted differently than white missionaries. They did not. Irrespective of denominational affiliation, black American missionaries displayed the same attitudes, sought the same goals, and carried out exactly the same sets of activities as white missionaries in Africa and around the world. They shared the same sociocultural assumptions about the meaning and conduct of their missionary labors.[20]

III

On the two counts of sociological theory and world-wide patterns of Protestant missionary activity, then, sociocultural factors appear to offer the best means for understanding why the Laos Mission acted as it did. The biographies of the twenty-four individuals appointed to the Laos Mission between 1867 and 1889 shows that they did share a common sociocultural heritage, which consisted of citizenship in the American nation, evangelical Protestantism, and Old School Presbyterianism. The life experiences of the thirteen men and women who took leadership in mission activities in that period particularly exemplified the pervasive presence of that heritage in the lives of all the missionaries.[21]

Daniel McGilvary, more than any other individual, embodied and symbolized the Laos Mission. He founded the mission, recruited several of its members, set its tone and style, and initiated many of its activities. [22] And no one in the mission better demonstrated attachment to American evangelical culture and Old School Presbyterianism. Born in North Carolina in 1828, McGilvary lived in a home dominated by the stern Old School Presbyterian piety of his Scottish father. He went to school first in a church-related subscription school and then at the Bingham School, a school noted for its Christian character that had produced a number of Presbyterian preachers.[23] As a youngster, McGilvary also attended for a time a Methodist Church and Sunday school where he came in close contact with Methodist revivalism and camp meetings. But McGilvary clearly indicated later in life that his conversion was a quiet, private, studied event more typical of Old School Presbyterianism.[24]

After finishing school, McGilvary taught at the Pittsboro Academy in Pittsboro, North Carolina, a school that, like the Bingham School, had a firm evangelical reputation and emphasized Protestant "moral instruction." [25] The Pittsboro Presbyterian Church elected McGilvary a ruling elder, and therefore a member of the ruling body of the church, the Session. Presbyterians elected their elders for life and considered such election as a great honor, especially for one as young as McGilvary. As an elder, he attended meetings of Orange Presbytery, a level of involvement that gave McGilvary a still deeper understanding of and attachment to his denomination.[26]

In 1853, McGilvary carried his involvement one step further when he entered Princeton Theological Seminary in New Jersey, the seminary that dominated the thinking and the leadership of conservative Presbyterians for most of the nineteenth-century. McGilvary, furthermore, studied under the most influential conservative Presbyterian theologian of the day, Dr. Charles Hodge, and he accepted as Hodge's highly orthodox standards for doctrinal purity as his own. [27] The Princeton Seminary faculty, particularly Hodge, also planted in McGilvary their own deep commitment to foreign missions and, thereby, strongly influenced his decision to become a missionary.[28]

Princeton Seminary left an indelible mark on Daniel McGilvary's thinking. At the time of his death in 1911, one of his eulogizers described McGilvary as a man of thoroughly orthodox Princeton views. He commended McGilvary for believing that science proved the truth of religion and for rejecting the "iconoclastic speculations" of biblical higher criticism. Such views typified the conservative "Princeton Theology."[29]

During his seminary years, McGilvary had his first missionary experience. In the summer of 1855 he worked in Texas as an agent of the American Sunday School Union (A.S.S.U.). Texas taught him some of the realities and difficulties of missionary work and working for the A.S.S.U. exposed him to yet another important evangelical organization. During that summer McGilvary itinerated extensively, started ten new Sunday schools, and distributed A.S.S.U. literature in many places.[30] He later carried out these very same activities in northern Siam.

After graduating from seminary, McGilvary returned to North Carolina for eighteen months to serve as the pastor of the Union and Carthage Presbyterian churches. Both churches shared McGilvary's Scottish heritage, and McGilvary made a lasting impression upon his parishioners in spite of his brief term of service. During this period he conducted at least one revival, which resulted in the addition of over fifty new members to the Union Church.[31]

Right up to the time that he departed for Siam in 1858, Daniel McGilvary lived a life thoroughly immersed in evangelical culture. He grew up in a pious home. He went to and taught in properly evangelical schools. He went to the most conservative of evangelical seminaries and found summer employment in a classic evangelical institution. He pastored two Presbyterian churches. At no time, in fact, did McGilvary study or work outside of the institutional environment of evangelicalism. It was his culture.

Historical records have left much less direct information about the lives of most of the other members of the Laos Mission. In the case of Sophia McGilvary, the record only hints at the role she played in the mission and tells even less about her life before she went to Chiang Mai. Much can be inferred, however, from the life of her parents. The Rev. Dan Beach Bradley, already described above as the premier missionary in nineteenth-century Siam, embodied a strain of evangelical culture quite different from that of his son-in-law, McGilvary. He came from the "burned-over district" of western New York where the revivalism of Charles Grandison Finney had deeply impressed him and led him to the mission field. Bradley accepted the "Oberlin Theology" and its doctrine of perfectionism, which taught that those who completely committed themselves to Christ could attain sinless perfection. He had both Congregational and New School Presbyterian ties. Sophia's mother, Emelie Royce Bradley, grew up in the same pietistic, evangelical environment of western New York and shared with her husband a deep commitment to evangelical Protestantism.[32]

Thus, Sophia McGilvary came from an intensely evangelical, revivalistic home, and she herself spent some time going to a grade school in Oberlin, Ohio, a center of "Finneyism." She demonstrated her own attachment to her family's religious faith by returning to Siam to work as a missionary with her father, and in later life Bradley wrote of her and all his children that he took pride in their devotion to the Christian religion.[33] If nothing else, her willingness to take her children to distant, lonely Chiang Mai in 1867 and the long years of service she put in there suggest a deep level of commitment to evangelicalism.

Only one other missionary played a part in the history of the Laos Mission comparable to that of the McGilvarys. And like them, the Rev. Jonathan Wilson grew up in and never lived outside of the institutions of evangelical culture. Wilson was born in western Pennsylvania, a hot bed of Presbyterianism, in 1830, and in later years he recalled how his home church played a formative part in his early life to such an extent that he even named a northern Thai church after it. [34] After spending some time studying in the homes of two Presbyterian ministers, he attended a church-related academy and then entered Jefferson College in Canonsburg, Pennsylvania. After graduating from Jefferson College in 1851, Wilson taught at Blair's Hall, Fagg Manor, Pennsylvania, for two years.

Jefferson College and Blair's Hall were both strong evangelical institutions. The Rev. John McMillan, the "father of the Presbyterian Church in western Pennsylvania" and a graduate of William Tennent's famous "Log College,” founded the small private school which eventually evolved into Jefferson College. In 1802 the Presbyterian Synod of Virginia officially established Jefferson with the specific mission of training young men for ordained ministry. Jefferson made a significant contribution to the Presbyterian drive to "civilize" the Pennsylvania frontier. The Presbyterian Church looked to Jefferson College and other such colleges to provide ordained leadership for its home missionary movement.[35] Yet another eighteenth-century pioneer of western Pennsylvania Presbyterianism and student of William Tennent founded the highly evangelical Blair's Hall. By the 1850s the school had a long, distinguished history with many of its graduates going into teaching or the ordained ministry.[36]

Wilson entered Princeton Seminary in 1853, the same year as McGilvary, and he came under the same set of influences as did his future colleague. But the two men did not become friends until their last year in seminary when Dr. Samuel R. House of the Siam Mission visited Princeton in search of recruits. His compelling presentation brought both Wilson and McGilvary forward and precipitated their friendship. [37] After graduation, Wilson spent a year as a Presbyterian missionary to the Choctaw Indians of Oklahoma and taught at the Spencer Academy, a mission school.[38]

Wilson's life, in sum, paralleled that of McGilvary in several important respects. Both received a traditional, orthodox evangelical education. Both attended the most influential educational institution in the Old School Presbyterian Church. Both taught in church-related schools and had frontier missionary experience before they went to Siam. And between them Wilson and McGilvary dominated the Laos Mission during the period under study.

The scant biographical information available for Kate Wilson indicates that she shared her husband's attachment to evangelical institutions. Although nothing is known about her early life, when Kate Wilson left the field permanently in 1876 because of illness she moved to Oxford, Ohio, and maintained a close association with Western Female Seminary. At those times when she was too ill to care for herself, she stayed at the seminary, and her children went to school there in what she called a "Christian environment."[39]

Kate Wilson's presence in Oxford seems to have either initiated or, at least, encouraged a relation between the seminary and the Laos Mission. Founded in 1853, Western Female Seminary grew out of a movement in women's education that went back at least into the 1820s and endeavored to promote better Christian home life through the training of Christian girls in an environment of Christian piety. The movement had its origins in millennialism, and believed that if it could inspire women to raise up their children in Christian faith it could hasten the coming of the Millennial Age of Christ's rule over the world.[40]

Western Female Seminary consciously modeled itself on the work of Mary Lyon at Mt. Holyoke Seminary in Massachusetts, one of the most influential members of the female seminary movement. The founding and long-time principal of the Oxford school, Helen Peabody, studied under and then taught with Lyon. The "Holyoke System" that Peabody instituted at Western Seminary emphasized domestic training, academic study, and Christian piety; and it required students perform domestic chores to help maintain the school and gain practical experience in housekeeping. Students, as a rule, boarded at the school. Western Female Seminary was a thoroughly evangelical Protestant institution, which prided itself on the fact that between 1853 and 1880 forty-one of its graduates went to the home or foreign mission fields. That number included one graduate who went to the Siam Mission in Bangkok and two who joined the Laos Mission.[41]

Edna S. Cole and Mary M. Campbell graduated from Western Female Seminary in 1878 and arrived in Chiang Mai the next year. Cole came from St. Louis and belonged to the Second Presbyterian Church there, while Campbell lived in Lexington, Kentucky, where her father was a Presbyterian minister. Both went to northern Siam with a deep commitment to evangelicalism nurtured by their years at the seminary. In their last year, they participated in an intense period of revival which swept the school and led directly to their decision to go into foreign missionary work.[42] McGilvary himself visited the school in 1880 to meet yet another student, Lizzie Westervelt, preparing for service with the Laos Mission. He noted with pleasure that the school was "pervaded by a deep religious righteousness."[43]

McGilvary hand picked Dr. Marion S. Cheek, a fellow North Carolinian, to be the mission's physician. Like McGilvary, Cheek studied at the Bingham School, and when he arrived in Chiang Mai in 1875 the local people and princes soon flocked to him for medical treatment.[44] Two pieces of evidence indicate Cheek's attachment to evangelical culture. Soon after Cheek's arrival, McGilvary praised him for his love of the Bible and of Hodge's Systematic Theology, the crowning jewel of nineteenth-century Presbyterian orthodoxy. The fact that Dr. Cheek also married one of Bradley's daughters and Sophia McGilvary's half-sister, Sarah, collaborates McGilvary's testimony concerning Cheek's orthodoxy,[45] It hardly seems like that a man of suspect piety or theology could have found his way into the good graces of a daughter of Bradley.

The Rev. Chalmers Martin began his work in Chiang Mai in 1884, but ill health forced him to leave the mission only two years later. Even within such a brief span, however, Martin made a significant contribution to the work of the mission and won great praise from the its other members for his zeal and competence. He too graduated from Princeton Seminary. He also acquired a master's degree from Princeton College (University), then still widely regarded as an evangelical institution. He too had home missionary experience before he went to northern Siam. He spent the summer of 1881 as a Presbyterian home missionary in Dakota Territory. And after he left the Laos Mission, Martin pursued a distinguished academic career: he taught Old Testament at Princeton Seminary and Princeton College; he served the Pennsylvania College for Women as President; and he then went to Wooster College where he taught Old Testament for twenty-six years.[46] In 1895 Martin presented the "Students' Lectures on Missions" at Princeton Seminary. Published in 1898 under the title Apostolic and Modern Missions, those lectures presented a thoroughly orthodox Presbyterian view of the missionary's calling and methods which McGilvary and Wilson could have endorsed without qualification. Those lectures confirmed that Martin also lived and worked entirely within evangelical culture.[47]

The biographies of the McGilvarys, the Wilsons, the Cheeks, Chalmers Martin, Edna Cole, and Mary Campbell collectively show an abiding commitment to evangelical, Presbyterian institutions. Of the remaining members of the Laos Mission, much less is known about their lives before they went to or after they left northern Siam. Only one of those members might, however, contradict the pattern the mainstays of the mission set. Dr. Charles W. Vrooman, the first physician to serve the mission, stayed in Chiang Mai for only two years, 1871-73, and his correspondence reveals only a man of the expected and typical missionary piety. Yet, in spite of his apparent orthodoxy, he left the mission under a cloud because McGilvary, at least, suspected him of theological looseness. Vrooman, evidently, did not adhere fully to Hodge and the Princeton Theology.[48] Since Vrooman came from western New York, a center of the New School faction, and arrived in Chiang Mai only a year after the New School and Old School denominations reunited, one might speculate that McGilvary's disillusionment with Vrooman reflected old theological tensions between the two schools. In any event, Vrooman's quick departure demonstrates that the Laos Mission tended to weed out those who did not display "proper" enthusiasm for its particular brand of evangelical piety and ideology.

The members of the Laos Mission shared a common heritage. They grew up in pious, evangelical homes, attended avowedly evangelical schools, belonged to evangelical Presbyterian churches, and dedicated themselves to one of the highest callings possible to the devout evangelical Christian, the foreign mission field. Some of them had direct or indirect contact with revivalism, a central component of nineteenth-century evangelicalism. Thus the lives of the members of the mission, as far as we know them, display an almost startling uniformity dominated by evangelical institutions and beliefs. And the following chapters will substantiate the correctness of Peter Berger's dictum that "reality is socially constructed."

Conclusion

Sociological theory and a world-wide pattern of American Protestant missionary activity indicate that the members of the Laos Mission most likely engaged in westernizing activities because they carried with them a set of beliefs that set the parameters of their work. Those beliefs grew out of their sociocultural heritage. The remainder of this thesis will devote itself to the task of describing that set of beliefs and its impact on Presbyterian missionary activities in northern Siam.

Notes

[1] Robert F. Berkhofer, A Behavioral Approach to Historical Analysis (New York: Free Press, 1969), see esp. 54-63.

[2] Robert Wuthnow et al., Cultural Analysis: The Work of Peter Berger, Mary Douglas, Michel Foucault, and Jurgen Habermas (Boston: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1984), 21-54; Nicholas C. Mullins, Theories and Theory Groups in Contemporary American Sociology (New York: Harper and Row, 1973), 184-86; and Philip E. Hammond, "Peter Berger's Sociology of Religion: An Appraisal," Soundings 52 (Winter 1969): 415-24.

[3] Peter Berger, Invitation to Sociology: A Humanistic Perspective (Garden City: Anchor Books, 1963), 20, 168-69; and Peter Berger and Thomas Luckmann, The Social Construction of Reality: A Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge (Harmondsworth, England: Penguin Books, 1966), 72ff.

[4] Berger, Invitation to Sociology, 118, 121; Berger and Luckmann, Social Construction, 13, 17, 134; Peter Berger and Thomas Luckmann, "Sociology of Religion and Sociology of Knowledge," in Sociology of Religion: Selected Readings, ed. Roland Robertson (Baltimore: Penguin Books, 1969), 66, 69; and Peter Berger, The Sacred Canopy: Elements of a Sociological Theory of Religion (New York, Anchor Books, 1967), 15.

[5] Berger and Luckmann, Social Construction, 68.

[6] Peter Berger, "Reification and the Sociological Critique of Consciousness," History and Theory 4 (1965): 202; Peter Berger and Hansfried Kellner, Sociology Reinterpreted: An Essay on Method and Vocation (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1981), 91-2; Berger and Luckmann, Social Construction, 66-7,145-46; Berger, Invitation to Sociology, 87-90; and Berger, Sacred Canopy, 6-7, 14.

[7] Berger and Luckmann, Social Construction, 79; cf. Berger, Sacred Canopy, 18.

[8] Berger and Luckmann, Social Construction, 70-7; and Berger, Sacred Canopy, 6-7, 27.

[9] Berger, Sacred Canopy, 8-14, 90; and Berger, Invitation to Sociology, 87, 98, 106.

[10] Berger and Luckmann, Social Construction, 106-108; Berger, Sacred Canopy, 89; and Berger, "Reification," 200-01, 203-07.

[11] Peter Berger, Brigitte Berger, and Hansfried Kellner, The Homeless Mind: Modernization and Consciousness (Harmondsworth, England: Penguin Books, 1973), 75; Berger, Invitation to Sociology, 115-17; Berger, Sacred Canopy, 27-8, 46-9; and Peter Berger, "The Sociological Study of Sectarianism," Social Research 21 (Winter 1954): 479-80.

[12] Berger and Luckmann, Social Construction, 17, 68.

[13] Stephen Neill, A History of Christian Missions, 2nd ed. (Harmondsworth, England: Penguin Books, 1986), 215-18.

[14] Merze Tate, The United States and the Hawaiian Kingdom: A Political History (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1965): 4-13; and Joseph L. Grabill, "The 'Invisible' Missionary: A Study in American Foreign Relations," Church and State 14 (Winter 1972): 93-105.

[15] See Robert L. Daniel, American Philanthropy in the Near East 1820-1960 (Athens: Ohio University Press, 1970); James A. Field, America and the Mediterranean World 1776-1882 (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1969); and Frank Andrews Stone, Academies for Anatolia: A Study of the Rationale, Program and Impact of the Educational Institutions Sponsored by the American Board in Turkey: 1830-1980 (Lanham, Maryland: University Press of America, 1984).

[16] For Persia see see Ahmad Mansoori, "American Missionaries in Iran 1834-1934" (Ph. D. diss., Ball State University, 1986); and Frederick J. Heuser, Jr., "Women's Work for Women: Belle Sherwood Hawkes and the East Persia Presbyterian Mission," 65 (Spring 1987): 7-18. For China see Kenneth Scott Latourette, A History of Christian Missions in China (New York: Russell and Russell, 1929); Paul Varg, Missionaries, Chinese, and Diplomats: The American Protestant Missionary Movement in China, 1890-1952 (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1958); Jane Hunter, The Gospel of Gentility: American Women Missionaries in Turn-of-the-Century China (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1984); and James C. Thompson, Jr., Peter W. Stanley, and John Curtis Perry, Sentimental Imperialists: The American Experience in East Asia (New York: Harper and Row, Harper Torchbooks, 1981), 50-1, 56-60.

[17] John Crosby Brown Webster, "The Christian Community and Change in North India: A History of the Punjab and North India Missions of the Presbyterian Church in the U.S.A., 1834-1914" (Ph.D. diss., University of Pennsylvania, 1971).

[18] George L. Paik, The History of Protestant Missions in Korea 1832-1910 (1927; reprint, Seoul: Yonsei University Press, 1980); and Kenton J. Clymer, Protestant Missionaries in the Philippines, 1898-1916: An Inquiry into the American Colonial Mentality (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1986), 17-20.

[19] Grabill, "'Invisible' Missionary," 104.

[20] See Sylvia M. Jacobs, ed., Black Americans and the Missionary Movement in Africa (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1982), esp. 16-17, 64-73, 155ff, 185-86.

[21] The remaining eleven missionaries were either individuals who stayed on the field only for a brief period before leaving, usually because of health, or individuals appointed at the very end of the period under study.

[22] Wells, History of Protestant Work, 85.

[23] McGilvary, A Half Century, 20-1; and John K. Roberts, History of Union Presbyterian Church (Carthage, NC: Kelly Printing Co., 1910).

[24] McGilvary, A Half Century, 24-8.

[25] Charles L. Coon, North Carolina Schools and Academies 1790-1840 (Raleigh: Edwards and Braughton, 1915), passim.

[26] McGilvary, A Half Century, 32-3.

[27] McGilvary to Lowrie, 8 November 1875, vol. 3, BFM Records.

[28] McGilvary, A Half Century, 37.

[29] S.C. Peoples, "Rev. Daniel McGilvary, D.D. An Appreciation," Laos News 8 (October 1911): 116-20.

[30] McGilvary to Dear Sirs, 27 March 1855, 30 April 1855, 31 May 1855, ca. September 1855, and 7 November 1855, Records of the American Sunday School Union, Presbyterian Historical Society, Philadelphia.

[31] Roberts, Union Presbyterian Church, 16-17; and Minutes of the Session, First Presbyterian Church of Carthage 1850-1906, 15-16, at the First Presbyterian Church, Carthage, NC.

[32] Lord, Mo Bradley, passim.

[33] Lord, Mo Bradley, 205.

[34] Wilson to Lowrie, 12 May 1880 and 23 July 1880, vol. 4, BFM Records.

[35] "Jonathan Wilson," Necrological Report [Princeton Seminary Bulletin] (1912): 143-44; J.P. Wickersham, A History of Education in Pennsylvania (1886; reprint, New York: Arno Press, 1969), 111, 400-03; Howard Miller, The Revolutionary College: American Presbyterian Higher Education 1707-1837 (New York: New York University Press, 1976), 126-28, 187-88, 250; and Colin Brummitt Goodykoontz, Home Missions on the American Frontier (1939; reprint, New York: Octagon Books, 1971), 377-78.

[36] Necrological Report, 143; Wickersham, Education in Pennsylvania, 110-11.

[37] Daniel McGilvary, "Rev. Jonathan Wilson, D.D., An Appreciation," Laos News 8 (July 1911): 78-81.

[38] Necrological Report, 144; Curtis, The Laos, 252-53.

[39] K.M. Wilson to Lowrie, 24 August 1880, vol. 4, BFM Records; J.C.H., "Chieng Mai, Northern Siam," Woman's Work for Woman 9 (April 1879): 136-38; and Daniel McGilvary, "Rev. Jonathan Wilson, D.D., An Appreciation," Laos News 8 (July 1911): 78-81.

[40] "Annual Report of the Principal of the Western Female Seminary," 1871 (Oxford, OH: W.A. Powell, 1871); and Olive Flower, The History of Oxford College for Women 1830-1928 (Oxford, OH: Miami University Alumni Association, 1949), 51. See also Leonard I. Sweet, "The Female Seminary Movement and Woman's Mission in Antebellum America," Church History 54 (March 1985): 41-55.

[41] Memorial: Twenty-fifth Anniversary of the Western Female Seminary (Indianapolis: Carlon & Hollenbeck, 1881), 3-11, 222-23.

[42] Helen Peabody, Mary Margaretta Campbell: A Brief Record of a Youthful Life (Cincinnati: Silvius and Smith, 1881).

[43] Daniel McGilvary, Letter, 29 April 1879, Foreign Missionary 38 (September 1879): 187; "Movements of Missionaries," Foreign Missionary 37 (November 1878): 185; and McGilvary A Half Century, 238.

[44] Alma Cheek Redden, A Chronicle of Two Pioneer Families: The Bentons and the Taylors of the North Carolina Back Country (Greensboro, NC: Acme Printing and Typesetting Co., 1969), 24; Curtis, The Laos, 289; Cheek to Irving, September 1882, vol. 4, BFM Records; and Wilson to Irving, 2 May 1883, vol. 4, BFM Records.

[45] McGilvary to Lowrie, 8 November 1875, vol. 3, BFM Records. The citation for Hodge is: Charles Hodge, Systematic Theology, 2 vols. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1872-73.

[46] Curtis, The Laos, 288-89; McGilvary to Mitchell, 18 August 1885, vol. 5, BFM Records; Chalmers Martin, "Journal of my Summer in Dakota, May-Sep. 1881," Presbyterian Historical Society, Philadelphia.

[47] See Martin, Apostolic and Modern Missions, New York: Revell, 1898.

[48] C.W. Vrooman to Irving, 20 February 1870, vol. 3, BFM Records; Vrooman, letter, 6 February 1872, Foreign Missionary 31 (July 1872): 51-2; Vrooman, report, Foreign Missionary 32 (July 1873): 53-6; and McGilvary to Lowrie, 8 November 1875, vol. 3, BFM Records;


herbswanson.com