A Resource for the Study of the Thai church

Home Links Search Blog

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



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

Evangelicals responded to their dualistic situation with a zeal to help God change the world. They felt God called them to act in ways that would defeat the kingdom of darkness and expand the kingdom of light. They concluded that they must, in fact, exert control over their society in order to root out evil in and insure the moral and doctrinal purity of the New Israel. The techniques of revivalism offered them one means of gaining that control, but evangelicals found that it could not rely on revivalism alone. Under the rubric of conservative "reform," American evangelicals created another set of organizations and strategies fit to purify their nation.

The Laos Mission, heirs to the evangelical world view, stood also as heirs of conservative reform. The missionaries, in fact, made no cognitive distinction between the institutions and strategies of reform and the world view out of which they arose. Worldview, strategies, programs, and institutions formed one common sense whole to them. They, therefore, took the strategies and the institutions of reform with them because conservative evangelical reform seemed the logical way to accomplish the Christianization of northern Siam. The evangelical reform movement described in this chapter led directly to the activities of the Laos Mission.


The evangelical reform movement took shape in the post-Revolutionary era, an era evangelicals experienced as a time of threatening social change when it appeared that religion was losing its influence over American society. The Revolutionary era itself distracted the nation from more pious concerns and encouraged interest in the new "infidelism" of militant deism and rational religion presented a serious threat to traditional piety. The further stress of creating a new nation and coping with social change also distracted it from religious concerns.[1] Although the actual situation may not have been as serious as Protestant leaders supposed, rightly or wrongly, Protestant leaders believed that religion was in decline and reacted accordingly.[2]

Evangelicals responded to the decline in piety partly by developing and emphasizing denominational structures and concerns and partly through the Second Great Awakening.[3] But they eventually realized that defense of their religion required them to join together across denominational lines. In order to achieve interdenominational cooperation, conservative evangelicals, led by the Congregationalists and Presbyterians, borrowed the model of reform cooperation from the British noncomformists and founded a whole set of American cooperative, voluntary associations.[4] These evangelical reform groups concretely embodied the revivalistic, millennialist, activist, aggressive, perfectionist, common sense, dualistic worldview of evangelicalism, even as they devoutly sought to conquer the nation and the world for their faith.[5]

The first "wave" of British-influenced voluntary reform associations in the United States were not reform societies in the strictest sense of the term but, rather, missionary societies. The first of those societies, the New York Missionary Society (founded 1796), modeled itself after the London Missionary Society. To a large extent, however, the missionary societies set the stage for the later reform societies, and the reform societies remained, essentially, missionary societies devoted to the conversion of some segment of society for the millennial good of all the world.[6]

The fact that American reform began as a missionary movement seeking to convert the world left an indelible imprint on it. All of the various nineteenth-century American reform movements, evangelical and otherwise, had their origins in revivalism, drawing from it the underlying ideas and the methods needed to achieve their aims. As reformers attacked intemperance, poverty, delinquency, or immorality, they utilized the intensity and the emotionalism of revivalism to carry themselves forward. Even non-evangelical American reformers incorporated millennial and perfectionist themes in their thinking, and revivalism provided them also with the techniques of persuasion reformers needed to gain converts to it.[7]

At the heart of that heritage stood a set of five organizations, sometimes called the "Evangelical United Front" by historians, created specifically to Christianize American society. The Big Five included the American Education Society (founded 1816), the American Bible Society (1816), the American Sunday School Union (1824), the American Tract Society (1825), and the American Home Missionary Society (1826). These five societies maintained extremely close working relations with each other and shared many of the same directors on their governing boards. They even met each year during the month of May at the same location.[8]

As befit their close working relationship, each society had a set of responsibilities complimenting those of the other four. The American Education Society (A.E.S.) prepared young men for the ordained ministry and home missionary work. The American Home Missionary Society (A.H.M.S.) took young men trained by the A.E.S. and sent them to the frontier to conduct missionary work. The American Sunday School Union (A.S.S.U.) organized and trained young people in the expectation that they would one day become leaders and members of local churches. The American Bible Society (A.B.S.) and the American Tract Society (A.T.S.), as well as the A.S.S.U., provided the propaganda literature and the tracts needed for evangelistic campaigns.[9]

Beyond the Big Five and their networks of regional, state, and local affiliates, existed a second set of evangelical reform societies aimed at the moral uplift of one social group or another. Although not overtly missionary and revivalistic in intent, these societies sought the same ends as the Big Five, namely, the conversion of the infidel and the protection of social morality. The evangelical moral reform societies were as millennial and revivalistic as the Big Five.

The single most important revivalist of the nineteenth-century, Charles Grandison Finney, also had a profound influence on the course of the evangelical moral reform movements. Finney's revivalism brought personal piety out of the homes and the churches into the public arena where he called upon the converted to confront the unconverted with the perils of eternal damnation and the joys of eternal salvation. Finney and his followers created an excited, emotional, fervent revivalistic movement that aimed to remake society through the conversion of individuals to revivalistic pietism. That movement called upon the vision of the millennium to inspire the converted in their task of remaking society into a purified, thoroughly Protestant society. While Finney himself remained attached to "pure" revivalism, many of his followers translated their enthusiasm to convert the world into parallel reform movements focused on particular issues. Finney revivalism stimulated the temperance movement and made it the centerpiece of antebellum reform. Disciples of Finney appropriated his fervor, goals, and techniques for militant abolitionism, the drive to purify society by ending slavery.[10]

Finney revivalism's doctrine of perfectionism proved to be one of its most important contributions to dualistic evangelical reform. Perfectionism held that those who lived according to their divinely given natures and acted benevolently towards others could achieve holy perfection in this life.[11] It rooted itself in a "romantic faith" that, in turn, grew out of the traditions of conservative Protestantism. It believed in progress and identified progress with the protection of America and Protestantism from the dangers of infidelity. Perfectionism desired the Christianization of American society. It emphasized morals and moral order. Thomas argues that this romantic perfectionism spread itself broadly across American Protestantism and planted even more deeply the demand that Protestants totally commit themselves to immediate efforts to convert society.[12]

Perfectionism placed a great premium on action and impelled its adherents to action. Perfectionist evangelical reformers could not remain neutral to evil. They had to fight against evil because they believed that the very future of their nation and the whole human race depended upon their ability to act for change. Social problems represented barriers to the millennium, and social action hastened the millennium.[13]

The perfectionist emphasis on action, on saving society, and on achieving the millennium reinforced one of the fundamental tendencies of the whole web of dualism: intolerance. In their haste to win the future and their certainty that they alone held the keys to the future, reformers warred even with each other. They split and split again into factions pursuing the same goals but resisted working together because each believed the other failed to move in the directions perfectionism dictated. Perfectionism radicalized leading elements in the temperance movement, the abolitionist movement, and the peace movement and made the dread of failure so great that compromise with other factions became impossible.[14]

The temperance movement stood out among the evangelical moral reform societies as the largest, the most typical, and the most typically perfectionist of all of them. Spearheaded by the American Temperance Society, the antebellum temperance movement identified alcoholism as the most important cause of social immorality including idleness, self-indulgence, waste, and poverty. The early nineteenth-century temperance societies promoted only the temperate use of alcohol, but, under the influence of revivalistic perfectionism, a radical wing emerged and called for total abstinence. Historians routinely note that the temperance movement had close links to evangelical revivalism and shared with revivalism the same dualistic mind set. Temperance reformers assumed that the consumption of alcohol and everything associated with it was totally evil, and temperance societies conducted what amounted to revivalistic campaigns to convert people from the use of alcohol to total abstinence.[15]

Historians have devoted attention to the antebellum temperance movement because those close ties to evangelicalism made it a centerpiece in the evangelical drive to gain control over society. Social historians note the role temperance played in introducing a new work ethic into the industrializing American economy. Evangelicals feared that the rise of an unrestrained working class would introduce new dangers to the purity and piety of society, and they allied themselves with the entrepreneurs in evangelizing workers with a set of ethics congenial to production and the social control of the workers. That ethic emphasized all of the values that became associated with the middle class, the social heartland of evangelicalism, including sobriety, frugality, respectability, promptness, and industry. Temperance reformers and their allies among factory owners and workers assumed that if the boisterous, rowdy workers could be sobered up they would improve morally and become better, more controlled workers and citizens.[16]

These same antebellum concerns carried over into the Midwest after the Civil War where an often aggressive evangelical prohibition movement waged war on drink. The evangelical drive to prohibit drinking amounted to a cultural battle between evangelicals and ethnic and Catholic immigrant groups which cherished alcohol consumption as part of their European heritage. The prohibitionist evangelicals emphasized conversion and rural values while fearing cities and Catholics. They identified themselves with the Protestant missionary movement to Christianize the world. Like their antebellum forbearers, they looked upon drink as the source of all social evil, the greatest threat to Christian values, and an instrument of Satan.[17]

The larger antebellum reform movement, indeed, exerted a potent influence on the evangelicals well after the Civil War ended. Postbellum evangelical reformers associated themselves with all of the ideas of nation, millennium, progress, perfectionism, and reform even when, at first glance, their goals seemed far removed from the web of dualism. Health reformers, for example, sought the millennium through healthful living. They reasoned that such living would necessarily include upright moral living and a strong Christian faith that would lead inexorably to the perfection of individuals and society.[18] In their search for labor reform, labor leaders also relied upon millennial thinking to give workers the vision, the framework, and the moral imperative they needed to protest against employers. Postmillennialism, Finney perfectionism, and antebellum evangelical revivalism were the predominant influence on the American labor movement from the Civil War to the end of the century. Labor leaders, like health leaders and reformers of other causes, sought the perfection of the world.[19]

The reform mentality, then, filtered through evangelicalism throughout the nineteenth century, and the temperance movement simply exhibited the attitudes and the methods of the other antebellum and postbellum reform movements. Abolitionism, the women's rights movement, the Indian Reform movement, and others shared the millennialism, revivalism, perfectionism, and dualism of the temperance movement. They grew out of the same evangelical soil and pursued the same millennial ends.[20]


The members of the Laos Mission experienced the conservative reform movement as a part of their own world view through their conservative Presbyterian heritage. Given their belief in the necessity of religion for society and their concern for the purity of society, the reform impulse came quite easily to Presbyterians. In the post-Revolutionary era they shared the fears of other evangelicals concerning the supposed decline of religion in the nation and joined the Congregationalists at the core of the evangelical reform movement.[21] Presbyterians dominated the movement in the South, and they played a strong role in the West, where others often associated reform societies with Presbyterianism.[22]

The Old School wing shared the Presbyterian interest in reform activities partly, at least, because evangelical reform itself was a conservative movement that drew on the ideas of the past in the search for a better future.[23] Old School Presbyterians, however, chose their reform causes and organizations with some care. They, for example, could not accept radical abolitionism because of its associations with the heresies of radical revivalism and because its demand for immediate change denied the Old School mentality.[24]

Old School Presbyterians took an active part in founding and leading a wide variety of reform societies, but even in the post-Revolutionary era conservative Presbyterians tended to participate in benevolent and moral reform societies entirely or largely comprised of Presbyterians. They constantly worried about maintaining the "purity" of Presbyterian orthodoxy.[25] Conservative Presbyterians felt uneasy about the way in which the Congregationalists and New School Presbyterians dominated many of the evangelical reform societies with their liberal, "heretical" tendencies. In 1816 conservative Presbyterians began a drive to create a set of denominational agencies to carry out missionary and reform functions entirely under the control of the General Assembly.[26]

The actions the Old School took, out of their fear of contamination, created a major turning point in Presbyterian history. When the Old School rejected as too dangerous the Congregationalist-New School drive to Christianize all of society through interdenominational efforts, it withdrew from that effort and retreated behind the walls of denominationalism in order to protect the purity of its faith and provide for the care of its members. It built a fortress to protect "true Christians" from the influence of the world.[27]

From within the walls of the Old School fortress, however, conservative Presbyterians continued to struggle for the Christian reform of society. The Presbyterian Church (Old School) after 1837 created its own apparatus of boards and agencies, modeled after the voluntary reform associations, to carry its religion into the world. In the process, the Old School denomination turned itself into a reform-like missionary society with the self-given charged of Christianizing the world.[28]

Old School Presbyterians, then, took a leading part in the nineteenth-century evangelical, perfectionist reform movement in their own particular way. They focused on the divergence between society as it should be and its reality, and, as a consequence, they emphasized the conversion and perfection of society instead of the individual. Conservative Presbyterians felt themselves called by God to accomplish those ends through reforming action.[29] Even though they overtly rejected Finney perfectionism as a dangerous theological innovation, conservative Presbyterians actually shared that perfectionism in a broader, more covert manner.[30]

In fact, while Presbyterians never lost their emphasis on collective perfectionism, they even gradually accepted the more widely held viewpoint that the reform of society must be achieved through the conversion of individuals, one by one. This combination of collectivist and individualistic perfectionism profoundly influenced the Presbyterian understanding of how reform took place. They retained their desire to "save" all of society, but they looked to the revivalistic mechanics of individual conversions to gain that social salvation.[31]

Presbyterians looked upon the individual members of threatening outside groups, such as the American Indians, Catholics, or "secular humanists," as embodiments of all of the qualities of infidelity and impurity of their group. In order to conquer the sinfulness of the group, evangelical individualism convinced the Presbyterians that they must conquer the individual sinfulness of each person within that group. In the case of groups with a distinct culture, conquering the sinfulness of individuals meant stripping them of their culture and replacing it with evangelical culture. The heathen and the infidel, according to this line, were the victims of their culture.[32] Their only hope for attaining individual and social perfection lay in "escaping" the evil influences of their original culture.

Old School Presbyterianism, in sum, acted out of a mode at once aggressive and defensive. As a conservative participant in the evangelical reform movement, it aimed for the kinds of social change, which impelled it into an aggressive, crusading posture. Yet, in true conservative Presbyterian fashion, it also remained fearful of the dangers of contamination from the outside world. Both the aggressive and the defensive modes fed upon and reinforced that fundamental evangelical dualism that warned against the world outside as a dangerous, evil place.

The Laos Mission's drive to establish a separate counter-culture made sense only in the context of this defensive-aggressive attitude. It conceived of the missionary counter-culture as a safe haven within which the mission could "decontaminate" its converts. Therefore, they had to make that counter-culture as perfect as possible, which meant as unlike northern Thai "heathenism" as possible. The mission, in short, felt it must act aggressively to change heathen culture into Christian culture. In its fundamental stance, the Laos Mission attacked to defend.


As American evangelical churches, interdenominational agencies, and benevolent and moral reform societies sought to reform their nation, they developed an elaborate set of techniques to that end. That set of techniques became a virtually set pattern to which evangelicals turned habitually each time they challenged the "forces of Satan" for the sake of their religion and society. Although the pattern grew up over a period of decades and out of various historical situations, three particular situations shaped it. These were the challenges posed by urbanization, westward expansion, and the American Indians. It was that same pattern which the Laos Mission utilized to create its own activities.

Of the three sources of evangelical reform activity, Protestant missionary activity among the American Indians, may well have been the most important one of all. Colonial mission efforts among the Indians provided inspiration and models for both the foreign missionary and the voluntary reform movements of the nineteenth century, both of which traced their institutional origins back to early Indian missions societies.[33] Many of the strategies and tactics the evangelical missionaries and reformers later used in the cities, on the frontier, and against special groups, such as slave holders, may be traced back to missionary work among the Indians.

Presbyterians, among the Cherokees in the early nineteenth century provides an excellent example of the development of Indian missions. In pursuit of the goal of converting the Cherokees, Protestant missionaries established schools, aided the Cherokees in learning farming, taught them English, produced a Christian literature in the Cherokee language, and otherwise consciously sought to facilitate the assimilation of the Indians into American culture.[34]

Protestant missionary work among the Indians, more generally, emphasized education including, common schools, Sunday schools, and a significant reliance on boarding schools. All of these schools taught English literacy, "academic" subjects such as geography, and heavy doses of religious and moral instruction. Missionaries to the Indians also itinerated extensively among them. They promoted the establishment of voluntary associations, especially Indian missionary societies, temperance societies, and benevolence associations. Missionary work among the Indians strongly encouraged women's education and undertook domestic training programs to improve the economic and moral conditions of Indian families. Protestant missionaries also introduced the Indians to western medicine and attempted to turn the "wild" Indians into farmers and tradesmen.[35]

Evangelicals carried this general set of activities over into and refined it in the crusade to reform the cities. Nineteenth-century evangelicals perceived urbanization as a threat because cities seemed so uncongenial to the traditional values of rural America. Cities, they felt, bred disorder, chaos, and immorality, and beginning in the post-Revolutionary period they responded to the moral challenge of the cities in a number of ways. They established urban missionary societies and conducted urban revivalistic campaigns. They organized Bible and tract societies that produced and distributed large amounts of literature including Bible portions and tracts. They set up Sunday schools and went out in the streets to round up children and adults for the Sunday schools. They used the Sunday schools to teach literacy as well as more religious subjects. Urban missionaries itinerated through their urban territories visiting homes and carrying out the distribution of literature and the organization of Sunday schools and churches.[36] Eventually, millennial enthusiasm waned among the evangelical urban missionary and reform movement, and more sophisticated, realistic, and professional organizations, such as the YMCA and charity groups not specifically related to churches, took over the work of evangelical urban reform. Yet, even in the Gilded Age evangelical urban workers continued to draw on the repertoire of responses created earlier in the century. They updated and republished a flood of older tracts. They pressed for increased numbers of revivalistic services. They tried to increase the number of Sunday schools.[37]

The western frontiers, as described earlier, seemed to pose a similar threat to social stability and moral order. Evangelicals responded to that threat with strategies and tactics like those, which they used among the Indians and in the cities. The "Mississippi Valley Campaign," which involved both denominational societies and the Evangelical United Front's Big Five societies, provides one of the most significant and clearest examples of that response. The campaign began when evangelical emissaries took a series of survey trips into the South and West in the decade before 1820. They reported that the frontier was a degraded, semi-barbaric, immoral, and heathen society desperately in need of salvation. Samuel J. Mills, in particular, returned to the East to sound the alarm and demand that the scattered agencies of the E.U.F. organize a vast national campaign to win the frontier for Christ.

The alarm Mills and others raised stimulated the evangelical reform movement to found its national societies, and the Big Five emerged as the focal point for the western campaign. In 1829 they launched a great campaign that sought to put a Bible in every home, place a school in every district, and locate a pastor for every one thousand people. The Big Five flooded the frontiers with tracts and Bibles. Sunday Schools began to appear. The American Education Society not only trained pastors in eastern seminaries but also established seminaries out on the frontier. By 1831 the American Home Missionary Society had 483 missionaries in the West and South while the American Sunday School Union had another 112 workers in those regions. A substantial number of denominational missionaries also engaged in frontier work.[38]

All three of the most influential domestic evangelical missionary and reform campaigns used the same general set of activities, with varying degrees of emphasis, to accomplish the Christianization of the objects of their work. Especially in the case of the missionary work with the Indians, these efforts went well back into the colonial era. Early urban missionary and reform efforts utilized the same general pattern of activities and contributed to the process, which made them so popular among Protestant missionaries. The great missionary and reform campaigns on the frontier solidified the types of activities engaged in and greatly expanded the scope of their use and the resources Eastern evangelicals expended on them.


In a landmark 1957 article, Clifford Griffin argued that the concept of "social control" should be applied to the reform activities of antebellum American evangelicals, particularly the Presbyterians and Congregationalists. He pointed out that an organized movement among antebellum Protestants, which he summarized under the heading of "religious benevolence," sought to use religion as a means for maintaining control over society by dictating to the public how they should behave. That movement identified particular groups, such as Catholic immigrants, as dangerous and carried out specific activities aimed at converting those groups. It did so because it believed that the safety of the nation depended upon Protestant control over the nation.[39]

Several historians have questioned the Griffin's arguments and particularly reacted against the implication that antebellum evangelicals exercised social control primarily out of economic, social, and political self-interest. The critics contend that a genuine concern for others, more than self-interest or fear, motivated those who led the crusade for social control . The evangelicals genuinely believed that people would live happier, more moral lives as Protestants, and they would gain eternal life. The concept of social control, the critics claim, obscures the humanitarian impulse that lay behind it.[40]

In reality antebellum evangelicals exhibited mixed motives. They did wish only the best for those they sought to control, but their dualism encouraged evangelicals to so closely associate the good of society with their own piety that they could not but conclude that what was good for them was good for the nation.[41]

Gerald Grob's study of nineteenth-century mental hospitals provides a way in which to understand what social control meant in the evangelical context. According to Grob, antebellum evangelicals considered mental illness a moral problem. Social deviants caused their own mental condition by departing from the values of rural, Protestant American culture. Evangelicalism dealt with this form of moral deviance by creating the mental hospital, a place that isolated social deviants in a controlled, therapeutic environment using "moral therapy" to cure deviance. Moral therapy included occupational therapy, religious exercises, games and amusements, and an emphasis on a safe, humane environment.[42]

Grob's concept of moral therapy describes the strategy evangelicals pursued in their larger drive to reform American society. Evangelicalism, especially in the antebellum era, tried to exert social control in the United States by giving the whole nation a healthy dose of moral therapy. Born of the Second Great Awakening, for example, the early nineteenth-century New York City missionary movement sought to exercise social control over the urban poor through a massive campaign of moral therapy which included the usual elements of evangelical reform tactics: educational programs, distributing Bibles and literature, home visitation programs, and revivalistic campaigns. That campaign paid especial attention to combating intemperance, prostitution, and Sabbath-breaking, which it believed to be the "real causes" of poverty. It tried, in short, to solve the "problem" of poverty by reforming the moral behavior of the poor.[43]

Moral therapy, moreover, provides an excellent description of the aggressive-defensive nature of Old School Presbyterian reform. As the 1820s crusade to save the Sabbath from Sunday mail delivery demonstrated, the Presbyterians shared in the evangelical reformist concern for social control and moral therapy. Considering such issues as Sabbath-breaking as moral issues, Presbyterians practiced an aggressive moral therapy that sought to change the other into a mirror image of oneself. And, just as moral therapy took place behind the safe walls of an institution, so the Old School resolved to give their therapy from within the confines of their own separate agencies and institutions. On the frontier Presbyterians emphasized the role of the church in maintaining public order, providing public education, disciplining church members, and exerting political influence. Non-Presbyterians accused them of trying to make the Presbyterian Church a de facto established church bent on curbing the religious and moral liberties of others.[44]

Even at the end of the nineteenth century, Presbyterians continued to assume that God was at work in their society expanding divine lordship and control over it. They still believed that God commanded them to exert control over society, particularly the intellectual life of the nation, which Presbyterians considered to be their special responsibility. They still demanded that political structures conform to their interpretations of biblical principles, and they still made those demands in the firm conviction that the survival of the nation depended upon living up to those principles.[45] Hood concludes that nineteenth-century Presbyterian thought was an "ideology of religious conquest" which sought to protect older social values and enhance the power of the clergy within society.[46] One could hardly find a branch of American evangelicalism more exemplary of the concepts of social control and moral therapy than the Presbyterians, particularly of the Old School persuasion.


The web of American evangelical and Old School Presbyterian thinking, the heritage of the Laos Mission, has now been expanded to cover yet another set of strands, including reform, perfectionism, social control, and moral therapy. These strands themselves created a variety of evangelical movements, institutions, and organizations that embodied the drive for reform and social control. In spite of the addition of these strands, however, dualism remained firmly in place at the heart of the evangelical web. The evangelical reform movement, social control, and moral therapy, like revivalism before them, did nothing more than express in concrete historical forms the dualistic desire to convert the threatening other into a non-threatening similar.

In origin and intent, the evangelical reform movement remained essentially an expression of evangelicalism's missionary impulse, particularly among the Old School Presbyterians. In terms of the Laos Mission, this association of missions and reform meant that the mission functioned as if it were an agent for the evangelical reform movement in northern Siam. The Laos Mission expressed the same impulse, shared the same cognitive heritage, sought the same ends, and acted in ways similar to the American evangelical reform movement.


[1] Foster, Errand of Mercy, 3-10; Mathews, "Second Great Awakening," 33-4; Handy, History, 153-54; and Marsden, Evangelical Mind, 8-9.

[2] Richard W. Pointer, "Seedbed of American Pluralism: The Impact of Religious Diversity in New York, 1750-1800" (Ph.D. diss., Johns Hopkins University, 1981), 275-79.

[3] Mathews, "Second Great Awakening."

[4]Marsden, Evangelical Mind, 3-4; James Luther Adams, "The Voluntary Principle in the Forming of American Religion," in The Religion of the Republic, ed. Elwyn A. Smith (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1971), 226-29; and Lewis, "The Reformer as Conservative," 93-4.

[5] Foster, Errand of Mercy, 208ff; Smith, Revivalism and Social Reform, 8-9, 43, 149; Donald M. Scott, "Abolition as a Scared Vocation," in Antislavery Reconsidered: New Perspectives on the Abolitionists, ed. Lewis Perry and Michael Fellman (Baton Rouge: Lousiana State University, 1979),52-3; Whorton, Crusaders for Fitness, passim; Bell, Crusade, 102; Thomas, "Romantic Reform"; and Elwyn A. Smith, "The Voluntary Establishment of Religion," in The Religion of the Republic, ed. Elwyn A. Smith (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1971), 177-78.

[6] Oliver Wendell Elsbree, The Rise of the Missionary Spirit in America (1928; reprint, Philadelphia: Porcupine Press, 1980), 51; Cole, Social Ideas, 102; Foster, Errand of Mercy, 65;ง and McLoughlin, "Introduction," 13.

[7] Cole, Social Ideas, 96, 102; and Ronald G. Walters, American Reformers, 1815-1860 (New York: Hill and Wang, 1978), 37.

[8] Hudson, American Protestantism, 85-7.

[9] Kuykendall, Southern Enterprize, 15-18.

[10] Paul E. Johnson, A Shopkeeper's Millennium: Society and Revivals in Rochester, New York 1815-1837 ( New York: Hill and Wang, 1978), 95-115; Weisberger, Great Revivalists, 89; and Lesick, Lane Rebels, 84-6.

[11] McLoughlin, Modern Revivalism, 101-04; and Sweet, "View of Man," 219-21.

[12] John L. Thomas, "Romantic Reform in America, 1815-1865," American Quarterly 17 (Winter 1965): 656-60. See also Smith, Revivalism and Social Reform, 109-13, 141-47; and McLoughlin, "Pietism."

[13] John Shanklin Gilkeson, "A City of Joiners: Voluntary Associations and the Formation of the Middle Cleass in Providence, 1830-1920" (Ph.D. diss., Brown University, 1981), 43-4; and Marsden, Evangelical Mind, 256-57.

[14] Thomas, "Romantic Reform," 660-62, 674.

[15] Joseph R. Gusfield, Symbolic Crusade: Status Politics and the American Temperance Movement (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1966), 5, 40, 44-5; Handy, History, 181-82; Handy, Christian America, 51-2, 90-2; and Gilkeson, "City of Joiners," 8, 11.

[16] Gilkeson, "City of Joiners," 9-23; Jill Siegel Dodd, "The Working Classes and the Temperance Movement in Ante-bellum Boston," Labor History 19 (Fall 1978): 510-31; Faler, "Cultural Aspects"; and Johnson, Shopkeeper's Millennium, esp. 79-83.

[17] Jensen, Winning of the Midwest. For a case study in Iowa see Jerry Harrington, "Bottled Conflict: Keokuk and the Prohibition Question, 1888-1889," Annals of Iowa 46 (Spring 1983): 593-617.

[18] Whorton, Crusaders for Fitness, 153-67.

[19] Gutman, "American Labor Movement," 90-2.

[20] See Smith, Revivalism and Social Reform.

[21] Hudson, American Protestantism, 60, 78-9; Miller, Revolutionary College, 194-96; and Foster, Errand of Mercy, 123.

[22] Kuykendall, Southern Enterprize, 80-8; and Rudolph, Hosier Zion, 203-10.

[23] Griffin, Ferment of Reform, 30-1.

[24] Murray, Presbyterians and the Negro, 75ff, 113-17.

[25] Miller, Revolutionary College, 193-94, 213-14, 228-29.

[26] Elwyn A. Smith, "The Forming of a Modern American Denomination," Church History 31 (March 1962): 74-99.

[27] Smith, "Modern American Denomination," 90-3, 95-6.

[28] Hood, Reformed America, 194-96; and Hood, "Evolution of the Denomination," 157-60.

[29] Hood, "Presbyterianism," 158; cf. Lois Banner, "Presbyterians and Voluntarism in the Early Republic," Journal of Presbyterian History 50 (Fall 1972): 194.

[30] McLoughlin, "Pietism," 163-70; and Marsden, Evangelical Mind, 79-81.

[31] Hood, Reformed America, 3, 64, 196-97.

[32] See Michael Coleman, "Christianization and Americanizing the Nez Perce: Sue L. McBeth and her Attitudes to the Indians," Journal of Presbyterian History 53 (Winter 1975): 356-57; and Prucha, Great Father, 204-05.

[33] R. Pierce Beaver, "Methods in American Missions to the Indians in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries: Calvinist Models for Protestant Foreign Missions," Journal of Presbyterian History 47(June 1969): 148; and Charles I. Foster, Errand of Mercy, 220.

[34] Lawrence A. Cremin, American Education: The National Experience 1783-1876 (New York: Harper & Row, 1980), 234-42.

[35] Berkhofer, Salvation and the Savage, 16-45, 63-6, 74-6, 115; and Coleman, "Presbyterian Missionaries," 33-9.

[36] Boyer, Urban Masses, viii, 9-12, 22-51, 70-5, 85, 122; and Mohl, "Urban Missionary Movement," 125. For an excellent study of evangelical activities in the cities see Carol Smith Rosenberg, Religion and the Rise of the American City: The New York City Mission Movement, 1812-1870 (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1971).

[37] Boyer, Urban Masse, 133-35; and Rosenberg, American City, 186.

[38] Hudson, American Protestantism, 85-91; Foster, Errand of Mercy, 189-203; and Goodykoontz, Home Missions, 215-69.

[39] Clifford S. Griffin, "Religious Benevolence."

[40] Lois W. Banner, "Religious Benevolence as Social Control: A Critique of an Interpretation," Journal of American History 60 (June 1973): 23-41; and John W. Kuykendall, Southern Enterprize: The Work of National Evangelical Societies in the Antebellum South (Westport, CT: Greenwood, 1982), 2-6. For similar comments in the field of 19th century institutional history see also Constance M. McGovern, "The Myths of Social Control and Custodial Oppression: Patterns of Psychiatric Medicine in Late Nineteenth-Century Institutions," Journal of Social History 20 (Fall 1986): 3-24; and David J. Rothman, "Social Control: the Uses and Abuses of the Concept in the History of Incarceration," Rice University Studies 67 (Winter 1981): 4.

[41] Goodykoontz, Home Missions, 16-17; and W. Daivd Lewis, "The Reformer as Conservative: Protestant Counter-subversion in the Early Republic, in The Development of an American Culture, ed. Stanley Coben and Lorman Ratner (New York: St. Martin's Press, 1983), 81-4.

Anonymous Americans: Explorations in Nineteenth-Century Social History, ed. Tamara K. Hareven (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1971), 250-79. For evidence that American used institutional moral therapy for dealing with indigency as well as mental illness, see Walter I. Tratner, From Poor Law to Welfare State: A History of Social Welfare in America, 3rd ed. (New York: Free Press, 1984), 56-61.

[43] Mohl, "Urban Missionary Movement." For similar views on the New York City urban missionary movement for the years up to 1850 see Rosenberg, Religion and the Rise of the American City, 2-9.

[44] See T. Scott Miyakawa, Protestants and Pioneers: Individualism and Conformity on the American Frontier (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1964), 21-31; Ted C. Hinckley, "The Presbyterian Leadership in Pioneer Alaska," Journal of American History 52 (March 1966): 742-56; and Ted C. Hinkley, "Sheldon Jackson: Gilded Age Apostle," Journal of the West 23 (January 1984): 16-25.

[45] Smith, Seeds of Secularization, 47-8, 54-6.

[46] Hood, Reformed America, 27, 81-2, 85, 112.