Moving in Every Object of Benevolence

“Moving in Every Object of Benevolence”: The Dissemination of Oberlin’s Abolitionist and Temperance Perspectives in Lorain County, Ohio. Joshua D. Fahler Senior, Kent State University jfahler@kent.edu 20831 Hawley Road Wellington, Ohio, 44090 (440) 759-6209 (Mobile) 2 “Moving in Every Object of Benevolence”:1 The Dissemination of Oberlin’s Abolitionist and Temperance Perspectives in Lorain County, Ohio. In 1839, Rev. Jonathan Blanchard delivered a speech in Oberlin, Ohio entitled “A Perfect State of Society.” Blanchard’s objective for the speech was essentially twofold: first to explain what a “perfect state of society” is, and secondly to understand the means to this perfect state. Stating that “Society is perfect where what is right in theory exists in fact: where practice coincides with principle and the law of God is the law of the land,” Blanchard declared that the respective campaigns against intemperance and slavery “…are the means…the agencies by which the Millennium is to be ushered in.”2 Some time after Blanchard’s address, Jerusha Reed and Lydia Boies prepared to attack local saloons “with axe and hammer” in nearby Wellington. Although one saloon owner’s guns and dogs caused them to reconsider, they continued working by more peaceful means to rid Wellington of the “ardent spirits” they accused of causing so much sin and vice in the world. They were supported in this by the Wellington Maternal Association, a women's prayer group which provided women a forum of religious expression in the small but growing town. Whether or not they consciously thought of This essay is based upon research for my Kent State University Honors College Senior Thesis, which is scheduled for completion in December, 2007. I would like to thank my advisors, Drs. David W. Odell-Scott and Guy E. Wells, for their encouragement and assistance in this endeavor. Further thanks goes to Jay Eastman as well as Drs. Odell-Scott and Wells for commenting on this essay. Jane Coven of First Congregational, United Church of Christ, Elyria; Roland Baumann and the staff of Oberlin College Archives; and Judy Wurtz of Wellington First Congregational United Church of Christ have allowed me access to the documents this essay is based upon. I am thankful to all of these individuals and countless others for their time and efforts in assisting me in this undertaking. 2 John Blanchard, “A Perfect State of Society, Address Before the ‘Society of Inquiry,’ in Oberlin Collegiate Institute Delivered at Oberlin Lorain Co. Ohio, at the Annual Commencement, Sept. 3, 1839, by Rev. J. Blanchard, Pastor of the Sixth Presbyterian Church, Cincinnati” (Oberlin, OH: Printed by James Steele, 1839). 1 3 themselves as agents in Blanchard’s New Millennium, their actions clearly shared his vision of a perfected society.3 Twenty years after Blanchard’s address, an Oberlin African American man awaited the gallows. Sentenced to die for his part in John Brown’s raid on Harper’s Ferry, John Copeland had previously taken part in the famous 1858 Oberlin-Wellington Slave Rescue, a successful attempt to rescue a fugitive slave in Wellington.4 In a letter to his family, Copeland begged his family not to mourn as he underlined the reasons for his current state and discussed his future expectations of glory in Heaven: I fully believe that not only myself but also all three of my poor comrades who are to ascend the same scaffold- (a scaffold already made sacred to the cause of freedom, by the death of that great champion of human freedom, Capt. JOHN BROWN) are prepared to meet our God.5 A notable trend in antebellum intellectual history ties these events together. While it differs from the better-known narratives from the world of Henry David Thoreau, Ralph Waldo Emerson, and Margaret Fuller, it presents the beginnings of an evangelical current which would identify with American culture in spite of the fact that this American culture was the very object of its labors;6 while at the same time Lydia M. Boies to Marian Hamlin Laundon, unknown date, circa 1885, in the custody of Guy Wells. I am indebted to Dr. Wells for assisting in making available much of the Wellington-oriented source material considered in this essay. Without his tireless work to assist Wellington First United Congregational Church of Christ in preserving their primary source material, this essay could not have been possible. 4 Research pertaining to the 1858 Oberlin-Wellington Rescue includes Nat Brandt, The Town That Started the Civil War (New York: Dell Publishing, 1990), William Cheek and Aimee Lee Cheek, John Mercer Langston and the Fight for Black Freedom, 1829-65 (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1989), and Roland M. Baumann, The 1858 Oberlin-Wellington Rescue: A Reappraisal (Oberlin: Oberlin College, 2003). 5 John A. Copeland to his family, 16 December 1859, Electronic Oberlin Group, Available on-line at . For an account of Copeland’s role in the Harper’s Ferry Raid, see Brandt 242-5. For Brandt’s account regarding Copeland’s involvement in the Oberlin-Wellington Rescue, see 79, 94, 103-4. Also see Robert S. Fletcher, A History of Oberlin College From Its Foundation Through the Civil War (Oberlin: Oberlin College, 1943), 414-5. 6 George M. Marsden, The Evangelical Mind and the New School Presbyterian Experience (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1970), 230-1. Note how Marsden identifies the effects and causes of American evangelicalism as “reciprocal” to the culture. 3 4 continuing what many saw as an attempt to secure the new nation in God’s plan for humanity.7 Whether considering the temperance and antislavery questions of antebellum America or the contemporary evangelical Christian’s political interpretations of the “moral” issues at stake in the 2004 Presidential Election, American Christians have long interested themselves in bringing the Kingdom of God into their earthly republic throughout history.8 Oberlin College and the so-called “Oberlin theology” played a major role in these antebellum reform movements. Propelling this theology would be a missionary impulse reaching into the Deep Southern United States and later into the Far East, with missionary efforts most notably existing in China.9 In spite of this, the surrounding communities of Lorain County have received limited attention in this discussion, For an understanding of the historiography of antebellum reform and the emerging religious perspective in understanding reform, see Glenn M. Harden, “Men and Women of Their Own Kind: Historians and Antebellum Reform.” (M.A. Thesis, George Mason University, 2000). Insight as to Oberlin’s place in the milieu of antebellum reform is adapted heavily from Leo P. Hirrel, Children of Wrath: New School Calvinism and Antebellum Reform (Lexington: The University Press of Kentucky, 1998) and Robert H. Abzug, Cosmos Crumbling: American Reform and the Religious Imagination (New York: Oxford University Press, 1994). Fletcher, 230-5 also ties this perfectionism into the reform activities of Oberlin. 8 For a theological consideration of the Kingdom of God intervening in human affairs, see Paul Tillich, “The Decline and the Validity of the Idea of Progress,” in Jerald C. Brauer, ed., The Future of Religions (New York: Harper & Row, 1966). Drawing upon observations cited by David Brion Davis in Slavery and Human Progress (New York: Oxford University Press, 1984) Robert Abzug notes that Tillich’s kairos is applicable to American religion, especially in the area of antebellum reform. See Abzug, 5, 232 n.4. For a consideration of antebellum reform as it relates to contemporary evangelical political activism, see James B. Stewart, “Reconsidering the Abolitionists in an Age of Fundamentalist Politics,” in Journal of the Early Republic, 26 (Spring 2006): 1-23. It should be noted that while I consider this relationship notable, I believe that decades of cultural and theological change make creating a direct lineage difficult to fully explain in this essay. I am more concerned with a general approach to the discussion, with the role of Christian religion in a secular world. 9 For Oberlin’s missionary work before the Civil War through the American Missionary Association, see Fletcher, 257-65. For postbellum missionary work and its overseas focus through the early twentieth century, see John Barnard, From Evangelicalism to Progressivism at Oberlin College, 1866-1917 (Columbus: The Ohio State University Press, 1969), 30. 7 5 regardless of the fact that Oberlin’s theology traveled throughout the county as a result of Oberlin’s missionary efforts and furnishing ministers to churches in need. 10 This essay examines the currents of ecclesiastical order and theological belief and how reform-minded social activism, pervasive in the Oberlin Colony itself, diffused throughout the remainder of Lorain County. These trends will be examined in the development of the 1843 Schism of First Congregational Church of Wellington, Ohio and more specifically in Oberlin’s involvement in the ideological and theological factors leading up to that Schism. Likewise, the 1852 Schism, also in Wellington, will be examined in terms of its fruits: a “Free Congregational Church,” promoting temperance, abolitionist, and feminist sentiment in a community not predisposed to intellectual or theological quarreling. In short, while the origins of the respective communities differ, Oberlin’s drive for reform traveled south to influence Wellington as a result of either conscious or subconscious actions leading to drastic results. The Plan of Union In the midst of the migration westward following the War of 1812, American Christians felt the pressing need to secure salvation for the frontier. Visiting clergy observed a “blatant godlessness” running rampant, and as a result numerous organizations formed to address the problem by making an organized effort to Christianize the West. The 1801 adoption of the Plan of Union by the Congregational General Association of Connecticut and the Presbyterian General Assembly would be the 10 See Benjamin B. Warfield, Perfectionism, (New York: Oxford University Press, 1931), 2 vols., 209 for an observation that “the Western Reserve of Ohio… became so far infected that scattered groups of ‘Oberlin Perfectionists’ appeared here and there through it.” Also see History of Lorain County, Ohio, With Illustrations & Biographical Sketches of Some of its Prominent Men and Pioneers (Philadelphia: Williams Bros., 1879) for discussions of various churches receiving Oberlin supplies including North Amherst (333) and Ridgeville (164), both of which had controversies relating to Oberlin Perfectionism and beliefs of church polity. An understanding of Oberlin’s complete missionary activities as they relate to Lorain County requires an investigation and explanation this essay unfortunately cannot undertake. 6 most important organized effort by which Eastern Presbyterian and Congregationalist bodies would do their part in this Christianization.11 Termed “presbygational” by historians, the Plan sought to create a system respecting both the hierarchy of Presbyterianism as well as the autonomy of Congregationalism.12 This system would see itself working out in Lorain County as churches were planned, organized, and planted according to the auspices of the Plan. Eventually, these churches found themselves responsible to the Synod of the Western Reserve and to various local Presbyteries, with the Presbyterian aspects of the plan taking the majority of the power in inter-church relations.13 In Lorain County, Elyria Presbyterian Church would hold a prominent role in county relations in terms of the Lorain Presbytery, and later, the Elyria Presbytery, giving Elyria a position as a stronghold of Presbyterianism in the county.14 The New Haven Theology and Oberlin Perfectionism Christian theology plays an integral role in the story of the Oberlin-Wellington relationship, as it stimulates many ideologies and causes for political reform. The major theological current in which the bulk of Lorain County religious influence is rooted is known as the “New Haven theology,” attributed to Prof. Nathaniel William Taylor of 11 Charles L. Zorbaugh, “The Plan of Union in Ohio,” Church History, 6 (June, 1937): 145-164. See especially 146-7. Also see John Corrigan and Wintrop S. Hudson, Religion in America: An Historical Account of the Development of American Religious Life (New York: Prentice Hall, 2003), 138-40 and Sydney E. Ahlstrom, A Religious History of the American People (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1972), 456-8 for concise summaries. See William Warren Sweet, Religion on the American Frontier 17831850 Vol. II The Presbyterians (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1939) for a thorough description of the role which the Plan of Union played on the frontier. 12 Ahlstrom, 456-8; Marsden, 11-2. 13 Sweet, The Presbyterians, 41-2; Hirrel, 57-60; Ahlstrom, 457. 14 The Lorain Presbytery, organized and formed in 1836, consisted of Lorain County and was administered from Elyria. In 1842, the presbytery was reorganized and renamed the Elyria Presbytery. See William S. Kennedy, The Plan of Union; Or, a History of the Presbyterian and Congregational Churches of the Western Reserve, With the Biographical Sketches of the Early Missionaries (Hudson, Ohio: Pentagon Stream Press, 1856). 7 Yale College.15 Taylor considered human reason an integral part of the Christian religious experience, developing a response which attempted to answer the Unitarian and Deistic currents of the day while still remaining Calvinist, a compromise which many clergy considered heretical and “Pelagian.”16 These accusations came about as a result of Taylor’s indication of the increased role of human reason in salvation – and his modified perspectives on Calvinism including strict predestination and the total depravity of man which sought to give humanity increased agency in the process of salvation. This “heresy” of New Haven theology would soon make important inroads in the Western Reserve via Western Reserve College,17 holding an important place in the formation and role of the benevolent societies in the east and on the frontier.18 In 1837, the theology would be responsible for a split in the Presbyterian Church, with its proponents becoming known as “New School” Presbyterians.19 Asa Mahan and Charles Finney of Oberlin would shift the theological makeup of Lorain County religion even further.20 Developing a theological system known widely as “sanctification,” the two would be instrumental in an official adoption of the theology following a revival in the autumn of 1836.21 With Mahan and Finney’s belief that human agency is so important as to render the possibility of perfection plausible, they undeniably alienated their Calvinist counterparts. Resentment and cries of heresy were directed from Old Calvinist as well as New School sources as a result of what many considered a turn 15 For a thorough discussion of the Presbyterian theological discourse predating Taylor’s New Haven theology, see Marsden, 31-45. 16 Ibid., 39-40, 46, 58. 17 Modeled after Yale in architecture and academics, Western Reserve College provided a sort of “base” for the Plan of Union to be carried out on the Reserve. See Fletcher, 227 for a description of the gap between Oberlin and Western Reserve. 18 Marsden, 20. 19 Ibid., 67. 20 Fletcher, 74, 220. 21 Ibid., 223-224. 8 away from orthodoxy.22 This resentment may be observed in an 1839 letter regarding a member of Fredericktown Presbyterian Church requesting a letter of dismissal:23 Resd [Resolved] That we cannot consciencously [sic] recognize the so called church of Oberlin as a part of the visible church of Christ, on account of the exceedingly corrupt doctrines which we believe are taught there…24 Even Finney’s own Memoirs mention that New School Presbyterian Lyman Beecher “regarded Oberlin doctrines and influence as worse than those of Roman Catholicism,” referring to a fear that Oberlin’s focus upon good works acted against the Protestant doctrine of Justification by Faith Alone.25 When considering the fact that Beecher himself went on trial in front of the General Assembly for his New School theological views, Beecher’s comments become even more interesting, elaborating a profound division between Oberlin and the thus far dominant role of Calvinism in American religious thought.26 The result for the rift this belief caused is rooted in an assortment of factors. Oberlin theology alarmed both New and Old School Presbyterians, as mentioned earlier. Likewise, as Marsden notes, Finney’s consideration of the Presbyterian General Assembly’s annual meetings resulting in a “jubilee in hell” only shows the gap Mahan and Finney fashioned from the status quo through their theology, a factor we will 22 23 Hirrel, 45. By “letter of dismissal,” I refer to a common Presbyterian and Congregational practice of requiring assent of a church body to allow a member to move between congregations, usually in the form of a letter providing permission for this to occur which affirms the member’s baptism, membership, and stature of good standing. As Dr. Wells pointed out to me, these functioned as a sort of ecclesiastical “passport” as people migrated to new communities, introducing previously unknown potential members. 24 Fredericktown Presbyterian Church to Oberlin First Congregational Church, 10 March 1839, First Church General Correspondence, Box 1, Oberlin College Archives. Note that the letter does not contain the location of this church. Oberlin College Archives hereafter referred to as “O.C.A.” 25 Charles G. Finney, Memoirs of Rev. Charles G. Finney Written by Himself (New York: A.S. Barnes & Company, 1876), 344-5. 26 Marsden, 56-7. 9 consider as notable when reflecting upon the 1843 Schism.27 Further, Oberlin’s theology only intensified fears of disarray during what many considered a critical period for Christendom.28 Oberlin Colony and Collegiate Institute Formed as a planned community, Oberlin played the role of an ideological giant from its very inception. Founded in 1833 by John J. Shipherd and Philo P. Stewart in the interest of creating a Christian society and institution of higher learning, Oberlin’s beginnings remind one of the Utopian leanings of 19th century religion which prompted Ralph Waldo Emerson to remark in 1840 that “Not a reading man but has a draft of a new community in his waistcoat pocket.”29 Shipherd’s involvement in Oberlin comes after laboring as the settled pastor of Elyria from 1831-1832.30 After noting in a letter to his parents that “my sphere of 27 Ibid., 59. It should be noted that it is debated whether Mahan and Finney developed a new theology at all. While Allen Guelzo questions Oberlin’s rebellion against the status quo by questioning the development of a new theology, it should be kept in the reader’s mind that Mahan and Finney pronounced concepts which certainly stirred the establishment. As such, I am more concerned with what happened as a result of the theology more than the theology itself. See Allen C. Guelzo, “An Heir or a Rebel? Charles Grandison Finney and the New England Theology,” in Journal of the Early Republic,” 17 (Spring, 1997): 61-94. 28 Finney’s reputation as “a self-defined, self-made Christian itinerant whose church credentials were marginal” turned theologian likely alarmed much of the established clergy as Abzug notes that Finney, as a religious virtuoso “could at crucial moments reformulate the sacred even in the most tradition-bound of sects…[deeply affecting] the religious life of the West, reform, and ultimately American religion in general.” See Abzug, 59-60. 29 Ralph W. Emerson to Thomas Carlyle, 30 October 1840, The Correspondence of Thomas Carlyle and Ralph Waldo Emerson, 1834-1872, ed. Charles E. Norton (Boston: J.R. Osgood and Company, 1883), 308. This mention of new communities by Emerson (in this case Brook Farm) is also noted in Corrigan and Hudson, 200. Amy DeRogatis, Moral Geography: Maps, Missionaries, and the American Frontier (New York: Columbia University Press, 2003), 157-79. DeRogatis is primarily concerned with Oberlin as it “tapped into the nostalgic desire to reconstruct a lost biblical or Puritan home,” 159. For accounts of American utopian attempts, see John Humphrey Noyes, The History of American Socialisms (New York: Dover, 1966; original edition 1870) for an account of a participant observer and Charles Nordhoff, The Communistic Societies of the United States (New York: Schoken Books, 1965; original edition 1875). 30 By “settled pastor,” I refer to a permanent pastor in charge of a single church, rather than an itinerant preacher or “stated supply.” 10 usefulness [at Elyria] is now much circumscribed,” 31 Shipherd moved to become involved in the foundation of Oberlin Colony and Collegiate Institute.32 The community Shipherd created required autonomy to function as a purely Christian society.33 This need led to Oberlin’s withdrawal from the Presbytery of Cleveland in 1836 and association with the General Association in the Western Reserve, an organization which it had a major role in forming.34 First Congregational Church of Wellington In April of 1824, the First Congregational Church of Wellington formed, with “the congregational mode of dicipline [sic]” under the Plan of Union.35 Wellington received stated supplies from varying missionary societies under the sponsorship of the Plan until 1828, when a permanent minister, Joel Talcott, was sent by the American Home Missionary Society.36 By 1833, Talcott’s position allowed Oberlin to create its first ties to the Wellington church, and institutional connections would follow with 31 John Jay Shipherd to his mother, 3 September 1832, qtd. in Amy DeRogatis, Moral Geography, 158. For Shipherd’s dismal missionary experience in the context of the foundation of Oberlin, see DeRogatis, 157-9. See Fletcher, 76-84. 32 Records of the Presbyterian Church in Elyria organized November 25th AD 1824 and of the Sessions of said Church, October 29, 1832. Hereafter referred to as “Elyria Presbyterian Records, 1824-1837.” 33 Robert S. Fletcher, “The Government of the Oberlin Colony,” The Mississippi Valley Historical Review, 20 (1933): 179-90. 34 For a New School Presbyterian perspective, see Kennedy, 196-200. Perhaps the feeling of Presbyterians such as Kennedy regarding the Plan can be summed up in Kennedy’s consideration of the Plan of Union as a blessing to the Western Reserve which the Congregational “ecclesiasticalism” tore apart. See 196. Also see Fletcher, A History of Oberlin College, 220. Note that the “General Association” as described by Fletcher is also known as the “Congregational Association” in the Oberlin records. See “Oberlin Church Records Sept. 1834,” September 12, 1836 (Hereafter referred to as “Oberlin Records”). Also see the Records of the General Association of the Western Reserve, 1836 – 1850, Oberlin College Special Collections. 35 Records of the First Congregational Church of Wellington, Ohio 1824-1846, Wellington First Congregational Church, Wellington, Ohio, ed. Guy Wells, 2006. See entry for April 20, 1824. Hereafter referred to as “Wellington Records 1824-1846.” 36 Ibid., October 29, 1828. See Fletcher, 73. Note Fletcher’s mention of Daniel W. Lathrop of Elyria, a future permanent minister at Wellington. By “stated supplies,” I refer to itinerant ministers who traveled as agents of varying missionary societies to minister to numerous congregations. See n. 30. 11 Talcott’s membership on Oberlin’s Board of Trustees.37 While records from Wellington are limited to minutes of the Wellington church government, we know that Talcott left in 1837, and that the church grew to a strong level of regular membership during his tenure.38 Talcott’s training at Yale College and Auburn Seminary provided early influence of the New Haven theology,39 and attention to moral reform is manifest in several significant resolutions of the Wellington church. “The drunkenness of Noah and the curse of Ham”40 During Talcott’s ministry, the most notable resolutions pertained to temperance, anti-Masonry (both in 1833), and antislavery (1836). Because Oberlin’s foundation involved temperance as a condition for its very existence41 and because of Finney’s personal anti-Masonry attitudes42 combined with the early dates of the temperance and anti-Masonic resolutions (being in the year of the foundation of Oberlin), these resolutions in and of themselves do not seem as significant as the anti-slavery resolution in terms of early Oberlin-Wellington communication regarding moral issues. However, when considering the temperance issue in the context of the entire set of church records, 37 “The First Annual Report of the Oberlin Collegiate Institute.” (Elyria, OH: Atlas Office, 1834). Also see Fletcher, 665. 38 Ruth Arndt, Gordon Black, and Ralph Miller, “A History of First Congregational United Church of Christ of Wellington, Ohio 1824-1974.” (Unpublished church history, 1974). See 9-10, where first title page is page “1.” The growth of membership in Talcott’s term is seen in the Wellington records judging by the amount of members joining between 1828 and 1837. 39 Fletcher, 73. 40 Paraphrased from Genesis 9:18-29. As noted by David M. Goldenberg, the curse placed upon Ham as a result of the sin committed by him during a stage of Noah’s drunkenness has historically been seen as an explanation regarding the existence of dark skinned humans – and in America as a reason for AfricanAmerican slavery and racism. See David M. Goldenberg, The Curse of Ham: Race and Slavery in Early Judaism, Christianity, and Islam (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2003). I would like to thank Dr. Wells for providing me with this insight and pointing me to Goldenberg’s work. 41 “Oberlin Covenant,” Oberlin Society Records, 1834-1914, First and Second Congregational Churches of Oberlin Records, 1834-1994, Oberlin Society, Box 1, O.C.A. Oberlin’s foundation as a covenanted community presents an intriguing array of questions for any scholar of religious history. 42 Finney, a former Freemason, held a position as a key opponent of the organization. See Paul E. Johnson’s mention of Masonic and anti-Masonic controversies as they related to Finney in A Shopkeeper’s Millennium: Society and Revivals in Rochester, New York, 1815-1837 (New York: Hill and Wang, 1978). 12 some interesting patterns occur. As mentioned, on April 24, 1833 with Talcott as Moderator, Wellington passed a resolution requiring “a pledge of entire abstinance [sic] in the use & traffic of this article [distilled spirits]… of all members which are received in [the] future.”43 This resolution comes four years after a mention of expenses paid which includes wine for sacrament.44 In June of 1842, while Talcott appears to still have had some influence in spite of his resignation,45 Wellington voted to “procure the pure juice of Grape for Communion Seasons,” signifying a purist outlook regarding alcohol; with this, Wellington moved past the “distilled spirits” of the 1833 resolution to a position which also excluded even communion wine.46 While this does not signify any specific Oberlin connection, the extent to which temperance was carried out is certainly notable. Oberlin had made a statement regarding wine much earlier, but the gap in time existing between the Oberlin and Wellington resolutions places doubt upon the idea of an identified push to remove wine from Wellington’s communion on Oberlin’s behalf.47 In 1835, Oberlin’s antislavery sentiment was inscribed into the Records of the First Church of Oberlin, stating that “slavery is a sin” and that “no person shall be invited to preach or minister to this church, or any Br[other] be invited to commune who is a slave holder.”48 One year later, Wellington made its own pair of anti-slavery resolutions, 43 Wellington Records, 1824-1846, April 20, 1833. Note that the entry is not dated, however is noted as “April 24, 1833” on page 293. 44 Wellington Records, 1824-1846, May 14, 1827. 45 See Ibid., “Lords day May 1842,” p. 160. Talcott is recorded as giving a baptism in the entry. 46 Wellington Records, 1824-1846. June 27, 1842. As Hirrel notes, New School temperance activists commonly referred to a “two-wine theory” to justify the banning of fermented wine from communion services. With the New England birth of this movement, it should be admitted that Oberlin’s influence is not specifically even necessary. See Hirrel, 128-133 for specific mention and description of this theory. 47 Oberlin Records, September 1, 1835. 48 Ibid. 13 likely with Talcott as Moderator.49 With the first and second resolutions stating that “slavery as it exists in the United States is a henious [sic] sin against God and ought immediately to be abolished” (first resolution) and that the church must eradicate slavery (second resolution), the church stopped short of passing a third resolution barring communion with slaveholders. When a motion was made to “postpone the last [third resolution] indeffinitely [sic],” 14 “Yeas” outnumbered the 11 “Nays.” The list of members voting in the negative – who were interested in considering the exclusion of slaveholders from communion with the church – includes known participants in the Underground Railroad such as David Webster and Matthew DeWolf. While less is known of Webster, DeWolf is recognized as a Rescuer in the 1858 Oberlin-Wellington Slave Rescue, among other future members of the First Congregational Church in Wellington as well as the Wellington Free Congregational Church.50 The Wellington antislavery resolution of 1836 remains significant in not that it occurred, but that it occurred one year after the resolution of Oberlin during the ministry of a member of Oberlin’s Board of Trustees. Elyria, the center of the Lorain County Presbyterian milieu, would have its own antislavery resolution, but not until 1847 under the ministry of abolitionist David A. Grosvenor.51 While forces of immediatism existed in Elyria just as in Oberlin and Wellington around the time of their resolutions under the 49 While no Moderator is listed for this meeting, the entry of November 11, 1835 notes that the current minister is to act as Moderator at meetings of church government. See Wellington Records, November 11, 1835, p. 64, Article 4. 50 Wellington Records, December 15, 1836; Brandt, 124-125. For Webster’s involvement in the Underground Railroad, see “Underground Railroad Collections”, located at as an OhioLINK Ohio Memory exhibit, Retrieved December 4, 2006. 51 See David A. Grosvenor, “The Laws of Ohio Respecting Colored People, Shown to Be Unjust,” (Hudson: “Printed at the Office of the Ohio Observer,” 1845). Grosvenor’s influence is also seen in Elyria’s June 11, 1847 resolution pertaining to war as being “the standing scurge [sic] of the human race,” a pattern seen with Oberlin’s own peace movement, especially during the height of the Mexican-American War. See “Records of the Presbyterian Church Elyria June 9, 1837,” June 11, 1847. Hereafter referred to as “Elyria Records, 1837-1865.” 14 influence of John Monteith, Rev. Daniel W. Lathrop questioned the influence of immediatism and its interference with more traditional church-related activities, a common pattern among American Presbyterians.52 Henry Cowles, Oberlin’s Influence, and Wellington’s Schism After Talcott’s departure, Wellington’s pulpit was filled by Oberlin faculty, providing the ultimate chance for Oberlin to infuse its controversial platforms into Wellington. Unfortunately, church records only tell us about some of the supplies, and do not delve into much detail about them. However we do know that Oberlin Professor Henry Cowles acted as a stated supply for the first time in June of 1838.53 While Cowles’ influence may not be tracked specifically through the records, Cowles’ background presents important questions for this story. Cowles, a Yale graduate, was a post-millennial perfectionist who felt quite at home at Oberlin as an editor of the The Oberlin Evangelist, a publication seeking to disseminate Oberlin’s theological and moral views.54 Cowles’ influence at Wellington is probably seen with the August 1841 request made by Hadlock Marcy and his wife, Laury. The couple had “requested a letter of dismission + recommendation to the church in Oberlin [,] which was refused.”55 This is notable as Marcy is listed as a “Yea” in the December, 1836 antislavery resolution – stating that he does not agree with barring 52 53 Fletcher, 146. Ibid., June 30, 1838. Note that only “Rev Mr. Cowles” is present. Based on the entry of July 1, 1839, it can be inferred that this relates to a relationship between the church and Henry Cowles, as opposed to his brother, John. Also see April 6, 1839 and April 7, 1839. See Fletcher, 72. Also see Henry Cowles Papers, Personal Correspondence, O.C.A. for several letters from Wellington church members. It should also be noted that John Cowles was on the delegation from Oberlin in the formation of the General Association of the Western Reserve, and Henry served as a delegate to the Association on numerable occasions. See Fletcher, 220. 54 Fletcher, 223-4 and 418-22. As Fletcher notes on 418, the Evangelist stated in its first issue a list of subjects to be discussed: “Christian Education, Slavery and Abolition, Revivals of Religion, and any other subject that may be seen to be of the highest importance.” 55 Wellington Records 1824-1846, August 20, 1841. 15 slaveholders from communion.56 While we do not know if Cowles influenced Marcy specifically, Marcy’s intention to attend a radically abolitionist church which had always distanced itself from slaveholders is certainly notable. Marcy had not gone to Oberlin, but is on the list of excommunicated members who, later left to form, the Independent Congregational Church.57 As we will see, Oberlin’s influence led to disaster for Wellington’s reputation in the eyes of the Presbytery. In 1842, the seeds of the 1843 Schism at Wellington were planted when John S. Reed, clerk of the church, took issue with the removal of an addendum he had proposed affirming that “[distilled] spirits might be used as medicine.” While the records do not indicate Reed’s reason for the use of spirits as a medicine, it may be inferred that there was economic interest on Reed’s part, as owner of a general store in Wellington.58 Whatever the reason, Reed became angry enough that on February 25, 1842 he stated his intention to protest the fact that part of a church resolution which had been previously voted in by members of the body had been “expunged.” That March, he delivered this protest and resigned from his position as church clerk, stating that “the church has no right to obliterate or expunge a record of its proceedings” and citing that that “my rights as an individual in this case were rudely + unjustly wrested from me…”59 56 57 Ibid., January 1, 1836, December 15, 1836. Ibid., December 2, 1844. 58 Ernst L. Henes. Historic Wellington Then and Now (Wellington, OH: The Southern Lorain County Historical Society, 1984), 9. Also see John S. Reed to Henry Cowles, 14 January 1843, Henry Cowles Papers, Personal Correspondence, Box 2, O.C.A. and John S. Reed to Henry Cowles, 28 July 1850, Henry Cowles Papers, Personal Correspondence, Box 3, O.C.A. Reed’s actions are muddled by the fact that in a 6 October 1853 letter to Cowles, Reed touts his efforts “for the suppression of the sale of spirits in this town…” Based on the information we have from Reed’s proposal, it might be considered that Reed considered the sale of spirits sinful only if they would lead to sin. See John S. Reed to Henry Cowles, 6 October 1850, Henry Cowles Papers, Personal Correspondence, Box 3, O.C.A. 59 Wellington Church Records, 1824-1846, April 12, 1842, p. 165. 16 Reed’s beliefs pertaining to reform may be understood through an undated letter written by Lydia M. Boies, wife of Dr. Eli Boies, an Oberlin-Wellington Rescuer who arrived in Wellington sometime after the 1843 Schism.60 Discussing the issue of reform throughout a ten page letter titled “Reminicences” [sic], Boies frequently mentions Reed’s wife, Jerusha,61 who emerges as a guiding spirit in the earlier mentioned Wellington Maternal Association; a sort of support group embracing and maintained by Wellington women from multiple churches, with an interest in moral and spiritual development and dialogue. Both Boies and Reed considered moral reform to be the perfect way for them, as women, to engage themselves in the purification of the world around them. Through the Maternal Association, Wellington women actively considered the issues of the day; whether by considering physical attacks on local saloons or sewing clothing to donate to fugitive slaves in Canada. Their husbands seemed to believe the same, with or without the organization of Wellington First Congregational Church behind them.62 Whatever Reed’s intentions were, the issue rippled through the congregation. Questions pertaining to the political structure of the church ensued. These discussions would shift from the temperance resolution to heavier issues of Christian theology and polity to tear apart the church. On August 30, 1842, a controversial resolution occurred relating to the church’s Articles of Faith. While the full text of the Articles has been lost, an 1879 history of Lorain County explains their contents. When considering these articles along the lines of Oberlin theology, interesting parallels occur. The 4th Article maintained a “doctrinal belief in God’s sovereignty,” the 7th Article focused on 60 61 Brandt, 124-125. Also see L. M. Boies to M.H. Laundon. Jerusha’s first name can be located in Wellington Records 1824-1846, December 4, 1844. 62 L.M. Boies to M.H. Laundon, ca. 1885. 17 predestination, and the 13th wrestled with the doctrine of infant baptism.63 What exists here is a response to Old Calvinist and even perhaps New School Calvinist thought, highlighted in the 4th and 7th articles. To further the gap between church and Presbytery, church member Philo Herrick presented a resolution to “ask leave of [the Elyria] Presbytery to withdraw and unite with Lorain Association,” a branch of the General Association established by Oberlin.64 In response to the attempt to withdraw, a minority backed by the Presbytery soon fought back with a protest against the resolution relating to the Articles of Faith, noting that the “vote of the Church was called for in an irregular manner without proper Notice” and that the meeting was “not duly notified.”65 In January 1843, the Presbytery declared the church’s actions as invalid, approving the records but with “exceptions.”66 Apparently, the Presbytery decided it was time to step in to the affairs of the church, and Rev. Daniel W. Lathrop, former pastor of Elyria and earlier opponent to immediatism in Elyria, submitted a pastoral letter expressing “deep regret” of the situation at hand.67 Throughout the letter, Lathrop laments that the church, which he says began as a group of faithful Christians who “in the Wilderness... were indeed a light amid the surrounding darkness,” was now deciding to break from the Presbytery as a result of “the evils which have come upon you [the church].”68 Most importantly, Lathrop mentions that the church had brought it upon themselves – that “it [the problem at hand] has almost necessarily resulted from the general course you [the church] have pursued for some 63 64 History of Lorain County, Ohio, 355. Wellington Records 1824-1846, August 30, 1842, December 14, 1842. Also see Fletcher, 220-221. 65 Wellington Records 1824-1846, 181-183. 66 Ibid., Undated, 185-186. 67 Ibid., January 8, 1843, 192. 68 Ibid., 194. 18 years past[.]” Lathrop states the first problem being the “disregard” of what the Confession of Faith stated, mentioning that the church members apparently wanted a larger membership so much that they were willing to lower their theological standards. The ties Lathrop makes to Oberlin are apparent when he denounces the “employment of leaders who were not sound in the Faith and which was very fruitful in the evil already mentioned of.” This “evil” refers to Oberlin perfectionism – reflected in the church’s recent vote to expunge articles 4 and 7. Lathrop moves on, stating that “we would not be understood here at all to say that all the stated supplies you had from time to time were of this character [of unorthodoxy] [.]”69 Overall, Lathrop’s letter gives us the biggest indication of Oberlin’s influence upon Wellington and the fear this generated on the level of the Presbytery. Lathrop is obviously interested in the strength of the Presbytery, as he calls the church on to repentance. Likewise, the Presbytery’s interest in keeping Wellington in its orbit is also seen, along with the fear of the Oberlin supplies, as Wellington received Lathrop as a settled minister through 1845.70 Wellington First Congregational Church split as a result of a majority group rather than a minority faction.71 Why the majority was forced out of the church is unclear, but based on the above evidence of the control the Presbytery actually had, it may be inferred that the Presbytery played a major role in this. The church had institutionally separated by March of 1843. By December 1844, a list was provided of the names of male and female members who had gone to the new Independent Congregational Church “as 69 70 Ibid., January 8, 1843, p. 197. Arndt, et al., 16. 71 Wellington Records, 1824-1846, January 3, 1843 – January 28, 1843. 19 Seceeders [sic] from this Church…”72 Now excommunicated, these members would have the independence to carry out their plans to perfect society. Reform Activities of Post-Schism First Congregational Church In spite of the relative lack of activism of Wellington’s “Presbyterian” church,73 members of Wellington First Congregational felt the need to be active in what Lathrop had described as “…moving in every object of Benevolence.”74 Perhaps the still-existing antislavery impulse is best seen through the story of one John Mason, an escaped fugitive slave who became a member of the church in April 1847 after arriving the previous month. Mason was granted full status as a regular member after being baptized following a profession of faith. The following August, Mason’s education was discussed, suggesting a sense of racial equality not found in many abolitionist churches. What occurred as a result of this resolution is not known however, and the church records state that Mason was “murdered” while assisting others in escaping from Kentucky in 1850.75 Financial notes for the church mention very little in the way of financial support going toward specific reform movements before the 1843 Schism, but, a notable change can be observed afterward. In annual financial reports to the Elyria Presbytery, specific moral reform organizations, general causes, and basic church function may all be identified. The antislavery impulse can be directly identified with the mention of $50.00 72 73 Wellington Records 1824-1846, December 4, 1844. Lydia Boies, a member of Independent Congregational Church and later Free Congregational, refers to a “strict Presbyterian” in the Wellington Maternal Association. This is likely a result of Boies’ own Congregational leniencies. By “relative lack of activism,” I refer especially in relation to Wellington Free Congregational Church, which will be covered later in this essay. See L.M. Boies to M.H. Laundon, ca. 1885. 74 Wellington Records, January 8, 1843, p. 200. 75 Wellington First Congregational Church Records, 1846-1863. Wellington First Congregational Church, Wellington, Ohio. March 19, 1847, April 4, 1847, and August 27, 1847. Also see membership records near end of book on pp. 32 and 33. Hereafter referred to as “Wellington Records, 1846-1863.” The Mason entry is especially mysterious as it presents the only known evidence of Mason we have. The original author took the time to depart from the systematized process of filling in the set table to tell of Mason’s story. 20 procured for “Fugative [sic] Stores in Canada” in the Annual Statistical Summary of April 1, 1851, a reference to the communities of fugitive slaves who had escaped north.76 This summary comes as the first major financing of the antislavery cause on Wellington’s part, and comes at the time of the merger between First Congregational and Independent Congregational, as the report mentions receiving 19 members from Independent Congregational Church. The author wonders what influence this core group of members had in deciding to send this money, and if their absence relates to a rough correlation to funding organizations like the American Colonization Society. These annual financial reports begin at a time when antebellum abolitionism is only becoming more rampant, with the national scene beginning to see sparks turn to flame in terms of the antislavery issue. The April 3, 1852 summary mentions $19.00 contributed to the American and Foreign Antislavery Society, and $90.54 to the Oberlin-controlled American Missionary Association.77 This “financing of reform” continues throughout the decade with $18.00 for “Lower Canada” in 1853,78 and the influence of Oberlin versus the Presbytery upon Wellington is noted in the 1854 report, which contains a mention of $58.00 for the American Colonization Society.79 This support of the A.C.S. likely comes from the Presbyterian influence, a consequence of the still-strong connections to the Elyria Presbytery which Wellington had and fostered. During this period, the church’s support 76 Records of the First Congregational Church of Wellington, 1846-1873, April 1, 1851, ed. Guy Wells, 2006. Hereafter referred to as “Wellington Records, 1846-1873.” 77 Ibid., April 3, 1852. Also see Fletcher, 257-63. 78 Wellington Records, 1846-1873, April 5, 1853. 79 Ibid., April 4, 1854. Also see April 3, 1855 for a $54.00 donation to the A.C.S and April 1, 1856 for a $20.00 donation. See Fletcher, 142-149 for an explanation of Oberlin’s relationship to the A.C.S. 21 of Western Reserve College, a stronghold of New School Presbyterianism, is observed in the 1856 annual report.80 Unfortunately, records for the Independent Congregational Church are lost, and what remains is correspondence to and from the First Congregational Church found in the latter group’s records.81 While both of these resources would provide more constructive insight to the situation, the limits of space and time prohibit a complete analysis of the church in this article. Further inquiry is required to make complete sense of the remaining records and would be valuable in identifying the impulse of reform in Wellington. Free Congregational Church, 1852-1861 The very existence of Free Church revolves around the earlier controversies surrounding the church’s relationship with the Presbytery which ultimately led to the 1843 Schism. With the union of the Independent and First Congregational Churches being initiated in February of 185182 and continuing through the following November,83 the major condition of union was the withdrawal of First Congregational Church from the Presbytery. Ultimately, this action was questioned by enough members at the First Congregational Church to call for debate, and another split in January of 1852 led to the creation of Free Congregational Church.84 80 81 Wellington Records, 1846-1873, April 1, 1856. Much of the process of the first unification can be found in the Records of the First Congregational Church of Wellington, 1846-1863 Records, including copies of letters to and from each respective church as well as lists of members requesting dismissal to and from Independent Congregational. 82 Wellington Records, 1846-1863, February 12, 1851. 83 Ibid., November 1851. 84 Ibid., November 14, 1851 and January 23, 1852. 22 Free Church’s Oberlin influence is seen on the very first page of records, with the Rev. James A. Thome of Oberlin acting as stated supply for the church’s founding.85 The church’s Constitution includes an antislavery statement barring communion with slaveholders which evidently passed without resistance,86 and on October 24 and 25, 1854, the church hosted a “Christian Anti-Slavery meeting,” of which John Reed was a delegate. Fletcher’s history of Oberlin notes this meeting – an action of the Church AntiSlavery Society, an organization heavily influenced by Oberlin which had had two previous meetings in Cincinnati and in Ravenna, Ohio – to be “pretty much of an Oberlin affair.”87 Further, the church financed the “Kansas Sufferers,” a likely reference to the events of Bleeding Kansas and the formation of the Kansas Emigrant Aid Association of Northern Ohio, an Oberlin creation.88 Wellington Free Church provided an outlet for radical reformers to be active in other areas of reform likely inspired by Oberlin. In 1855, the church voted to further include women, when the church passed a resolution stating that “sisters” could vote in church business. While this does not seem to be occurring frequently, Lydia Boies is noted in a July 29, 1860 church vote and no evidence exists to suggest a controversy or long discussion regarding this issue.89 With the existence of the Maternal Association in Wellington, and the prominence of Jerusha Reed and Lydia Boies, questions arise as to Oberlin’s influence regarding feminism in Wellington, or at least female roles in the church. It should also be mentioned that in her “Reminicences,” [sic] Boies refers to 85 86 “Records of the Free Church 1852-1861,” hereafter referred to “Fee Church Records”, p. 2. Ibid., “Articles of Faith.” 87 Ibid., October 5, 1854. Also see Fletcher, 264-265. For an account of the meeting, see “The Christian Anti-Slavery Convention at Wellington,” The Oberlin Evangelist, November 22, 1854. 88 Fletcher, 391-395. Also see Free Church Records, “Contributions for the year 1856.” 89 See Free Church Records, February 15, 1855 and July 29, 1860. 23 work with the Women’s Christian Temperance Union in Michigan. The springboard created for Boies’ movement into public life at Wellington is certainly notable.90 Underlying the antislavery and feminist stances of Free Church as well as the separations which led to the very existence of Free Church are indications of the primary importance placed upon church and individual purity. In an 1853 letter to Henry Cowles, John Reed contemplates his separation from the main church body as a godly act of purity – a method which occurred as a result of an impure body in the form of Wellington First Congregational Church. In the contemplation of this separation, Reed indicates a need for the church body to act in unison – which he laments Free Congregational is not doing. In this sense, Reed’s letter gives us some of the best reasoning for the action of each schism. Interestingly, it corresponds very well with the Oberlin theology and can be viewed as an ultimate indication of Oberlin’s influence.91 Oberlin, Wellington, and Antebellum Reform While our subjects were certainly not isolated in their thoughts, they required a substantial amount of orthodox instruction in how to understand the merger of their religion with their actions. What occurs is a line of ideological ferment traceable through multiple venues which changes as it moves through these venues. In Lorain County, Ohio, we see Oberlin creating ideological waves in its sister communities, a testament to the controversial and undeniably important role of Oberlin College in the antebellum period, as well as a fresh perspective to the role of Wellington in antebellum reform issues which is more than deserving of further inquiry. This essay is interested in how this experiment would be carried out, and what propelled it. Whether it is in the actions 90 91 L.M. Boies to M.H. Laundon, ca. 1885. John S. Reed to Henry Cowles, 12 May 1853, Henry Cowles Papers, Personal Correspondence, Box 3, O.C.A. 24 of a Lydia Boies, a Jerusha Reed, or a John Copeland, the ideological incentive came from the Johnathan Blanchards of the day and perhaps more importantly the theological ferment Blanchard and others like him promoted. While they remain notable, these ideological waves are only ripples in the greater ocean of the development of American Christianity. American religion certainly is a difficult sea to examine, with currents of both Traditional and Non-traditional Christianity, Enlightenment thought, and countless intellectual responses all engrained with an infinite variety of perspectives and conclusions. While considering American religion, what struck Alexis de Tocqueville was a pervasive “Religious insanity,” where Americans’ souls “…soar impetuously towards heaven.”92 The antebellum reformers embodied a breed of this insanity as they understood the establishment of God’s Kingdom by purifying America – the New Jerusalem. Men and women like John Copeland and Jerusha Reed wielded guns and axes to proclaim and externalize their beliefs. But, just as Paul charged the Ephesians, so too did the antebellum reformers internalize Paul’s admonitions and directions, remembering to “wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places”93 in their many efforts to cleanse humanity for Christ. 92 Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America 2 vols. (New York: Bantam, 2004; originally printed in 1835 and 1840), 656. 93 Ephesians 6:12, King James Version. 25 Bibliography Primary Sources Church Records Oberlin Church Records Sept. 1834. [1834-1839] Oberlin First Congregational Church, Oberlin Ohio, First and Second Congregational Churches of Oberlin Records, 1834-1994, Membership, Box 1, Oberlin College Archives. Records of the Presbyterian Church in Elyria organized November 25th AD 1824 and of the Sessions of said Church. [1824-1837] Elyria Congregational Church, Elyria, Ohio. Records of the Presbyterian Church Elyria June 9, 1837. [1837-1865] Elyria Congregational Church, Elyria, Ohio. Records of the First Congregational Church of Wellington Ohio, 1824-1846. Wellington Congregational Church, Wellington, Ohio, ed. Guy E. Wells, 2006. Records of the First Congregational Church of Wellington, Ohio 1846-1863. Wellington Congregational Church, Wellington, Ohio, 2006. Records of the First Congregational Church of Wellington, Ohio 1846-1873. Wellington Congregational Church, Wellington, Ohio, ed. Guy E. Wells, 2006. Records of the Free Church, 1852-1861. Wellington Congregational Church, Wellington, Ohio. Other Records “Oberlin Covenant.” Oberlin Society Records, 1834-1914. First and Second Congregational Churches of Oberlin Records, 1834-1994, Oberlin Society, Box 1, Oberlin College Archives. Records of the General Association of the Western Reserve. Special Collections, Oberlin College Library. Letters Fredericktown Presbyterian Church to Oberlin First Congregational Church, 10 March 1839, First Church Correspondence, Oberlin College Archives. 26 John A. Copeland to his family, 16 December 1859, Electronic Oberlin Group, Available on-line at . John Jay Shipherd to his mother, 3 September 1832, qtd. in Amy DeRogatis, Moral Geography, 158. John S. Reed to Henry Cowles, 14 January 1843, Henry Cowles Papers, Personal Correspondence, Box 2, O.C.A. John S. Reed to Henry Cowles, 28 July 1850, Henry Cowles Papers, Personal Correspondence, Box 3, O.C.A. John S. Reed to Henry Cowles, 6 October 1850, Henry Cowles Papers, Personal Correspondence, Box 3, O.C.A. John S. Reed to Henry Cowles, 12 May 1853, Henry Cowles Papers, Personal Correspondence, Box 3, Oberlin College Archives. Lydia M. Boies to Marian Hamlin Laundon, Unknown date, circa 1885, Private collection of Guy E. Wells. Books Finney, Charles G. Memoirs of Rev. Charles G. Finney Written by Himself. New York: A.S. Barnes & Company, 1876. Nordhoff, Charles. The Communistic Societies of the United States. New York: Schoken Books, 1965; original edition 1875. Norton, Charles E, ed. The Correspondence of Thomas Carlyle and Ralph Waldo Emerson, 1834-1872. Boston: J. R. Osgood and Company, 1883. Noyes, John H. The History of American Socialisms. New York: Dover, 1966; original edition 1870. Tocqueville, Alexis de. Democracy in America. New York: Bantam, 2004. Pamphlets Blanchard, John. “A Perfect State of Society, Address Before the ‘Society of Inquiry,’ in Oberlin Collegiate Institute Delivered at Oberlin, Lorain Co. Ohio, at the Annual Commencement, Sept. 3, 1839, by Rev. J. Blanchard, Pastor of the Sixth Presbyterian Church, Cincinnati.” 27 Oberlin, OH: Printed by James Steele, 1839. Grosvenor, David A. “The Laws of Ohio Respecting Colored People, Shown to Be Unjust.” Hudson: “Printed at the Office of the Ohio Observer,” 1845. “The First Annual Report of the Oberlin Collegiate Institute.” Elyria, OH: Atlas Office, 1834. Newspapers “The Christian Anti-Slavery Convention at Wellington.” The Oberlin Evangelist. November 22, 1854. Secondary Sources Articles Fletcher, Robert S. “The Government of the Oberlin Colony.” Mississippi Valley Historical Review, Vol. 20, No. 2. (1933), pp. 179-190. Guelzo, Allen C. “An Heir or a Rebel? Charles Grandison Finney and the New England Theology.” Journal of the Early Republic, Vol. 17, No. 1 (Spring, 1997), pp. 6194. Stewart, James B. “Reconsidering the Abolitionists in an Age of Fundamentalist Politics,” in Journal of the Early Republic, 26 (Spring, 2006), pp. 1-23. Zorbaugh, Charles L. “The Plan of Union in Ohio.” Church History. Vol. 6, No. 2. (June, 1937), pp. 145-164. Books Abzug, Robert H. Cosmos Crumbling: American Reform and the Religious Imagination. New York: Oxford University Press, 1994. Ahlstrom, Sydney. A Religious History of the American People. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1972. Barnard, John. From Evangelicalism to Progressivism at Oberlin College, 1866-1917. Columbus: The Ohio State University Press, 1969. Baumann, Roland M. The 1858 Oberlin-Wellington Rescue: A Reappraisal. Oberlin: Oberlin College, 2003. 28 Brandt, Nat. The Town that Started the Civil War. New York: Dell Publishing, 1990. Brion-Davis, David. Slavery and Human Progress. New York: Oxford University Press, 1984. Cheek, William and Aimee Lee Cheek. John Mercer Langston and the Fight for Black Freedom 1829-65. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1989. Corrigan, John and Winthrop S. Hudson. Religion in America: An Historical Account of the Development of American Religious Life. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 2003. DeRogatis, Amy. Moral Geography: Maps, Missionaries, and the American Frontier. New York: Columbia University Press, 2003. Fletcher, Robert S. A History of Oberlin College: From Its Foundation Through the Civil War, vol. 1-2. Oberlin: Oberlin College, 1943. Goldenberg, David M. The Curse of Ham: Race and Slavery in Early Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2003. Harden, Glenn M. (2000) “Men and Women of Their Own Kind: Historians and Antebellum Reform.” M.A. Thesis, George Mason University. Dissertation.com, 2003. Henes, Ernst L. Historic Wellington Then and Now. Wellington, OH: The Southern Lorain County Historical Society, 1984. History of Lorain County, Ohio, With Illustrations & Biographical Sketches of Some of its Prominent Men and Pioneers. Philadelphia: Williams Brothers, 1879. Hirrel, Leo P. Children of Wrath: New School Calvinism and Antebellum Reform. Lexington: The University Press of Kentucky, 1998. Johnson, Paul E. A Shopkeeper’s Millennium: Society and Revivals in Rochester, New York, 1815-1837. New York: Hill and Wang, 1978. Kennedy, William S. The Plan of Union; Or, a History of the Presbyterian and Congregational Churches of the Western Reserve, With the Biographical Sketches of the Early Missionaries. 29 Hudson: Pentagon Stream Press, 1856. Marsden, George M. The Evangelical Mind and the New School Presbyterian Experience. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1970. Sweet, William W. Religion on the American Frontier 1783-1850 Vol. II The Presbyterians. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1939. Warfield, Benjamin B. Perfectionism, vol. 2. New York: Oxford University Press, 1931. Book Chapters Tillich, Paul. “The Decline and the Validity of the Idea of Progress,” in Jerald C. Brauer, ed., The Future of Religions (New York: Harper & Row, 1966). Unpublished Material Arndt, Ruth, Gordon Black, and Ralph Miller. “A History of First Congregational United Church of Christ of Wellington, Ohio 1824-1874.” Unpublished: 1974. “Underground Railroad Collections”, located at < http://worlddmc.ohiolink.edu/OMP/YourScrapbook?user=UGRR> as an OhioLINK Ohio Memory exhibit, Retrieved December 4, 2006.