Putting the Light on the Hill: Protestant Intellectualism as Elitism in the Denominational

Status Race of the Nineteenth Century

An Honors Thesis for the Department of American Studies

Allison Smith Harrington

Tufts University, 2014 INTRODUCTION

Last night, I presented a three minute description of my thesis to my peers and professors in American Studies. Perhaps not surprisingly, I experienced a tremendous amount of difficulty

figuring out how I would present a snapshot of my year-long work. A simple explanation proved difficult when most people have very little context for Christian Universalism in the 18th century.

The denomination has all but disappeared from public view, and is altogether invisible at Tufts, despite its close association with the school. In the modern era, many people conflate Christian

Universalism with Unitarianism, or assume their memberships were always linked. My paper relies on falsifying this claim. I was completely overwhelmed by the amount of history I felt I needed to provide to describe the major tensions I chose to explore regarding these two denominations. Why is it so difficult, I thought, to explain this whole thing...and why do I even bother? Well, I guess, because even as we actively try to obscure early American history’s close linkage with Protestantism in its many forms, its legacy is everywhere. When I chose to explore the early history of Tufts, and the role of Christian Universalism in its founding, I realized I was taking on years of American religious history. When we talk about the academy, and its liberal and enlightenment associations, we cannot separate it from its entrenchment in Protestant piety,

Protestant intellectualism, and perhaps most salient for this paper, Protestant classism.

The invisibility of Protestant thought in our collective conceptions of higher education just goes to show how normatively Protestant we are, particularly as educated Americans. The principles on which early American colleges were founded into the late eighteenth century, are

Protestant principles. The ways in which we understand democracy, political participation,

ii privacy, freedom, in reading and understanding the arguments for and against them, are

Protestant frameworks. Like most ideologies propagated by the elites, these strains of thought become normative, they become the backbone of structures that are difficult to dismantle, and they become indistinguishable from what is rational. In trying to parse out the politics of the founding of Tufts, I found that the arguments in support were familiar arguments about creating exceptional individuals who would contribute to the American republican spirit. They are the arguments we still make today for our extremely exclusively and cost prohibitive higher education system. I found that the arguments against the founding of private higher education are the voices that we obscure from this period of history: the ones who, despite strongly held humanist feelings about defending the dignity of man, were keenly aware of the intellectual hierarchy that exclusive education breeds. Rarely do we frame our own deeply held American beliefs in the context of a deeply Protestant founding, but even more rarely do we acknowledge that the voices who survived from this time were the elitist ones. Not only has Protestant normativity obscured our understanding of early arguments surrounding the spirit of America (a

Protestant nation), but elitism within Protestantism has obscured many of the more populist, and egalitarian, messages of the time.

I’d like to thank everyone who helped me with this work. To my readers, Professor Lisa

Lowe, and Professor Lemons, thank you for your helpful comments along this process. I wish I had utilized your help and support more. Thank you to Professor Tom Chen for supporting me and for being a very sympathetic companion and guide throughout this project. Thank you to

Professor Jean Wu, for her support during thesis class time, but, in particular, for the two

iii amazing classes I took with her where I learned so much about confronting the past with a critical eye, and moving forward with a compassionate one. Thank you to my advisor, Professor

Heather Curtis, who first sparked my interest in American homegrown religion, and who helped me to understand so much about our collective American history. Through American Studies I have learned how to understand American exceptionalism, not as a means for humanist social disciplining, but as a pure acknowledgment of our unique, communal, history of power and oppression. Thank you to my mother, to whom I complained a lot, I’m sure you are happy that this is over. To my sister, Rebecca, you are the smartest person I know, thank you for always listening to my ideas, and for being such a constructive force whenever we talk.

Through this paper, I proved to myself that I am able to put my thoughts on the page, even when they are clamoring to remain in abstraction. Through this paper I learned to be an empathetic reader of history, and I challenged myself to truly understand these stories that we, as

Americans, rarely disentangle, at least not in public life. Throughout the writing of this paper I challenged the romantic notions we have surrounding higher education. I argued that through its exclusivity, college has maintained the magical status of being “transformational,” of creating better men, while really it is a way of furnishing the elite with the rationale for their continuing rule. Ultimately, though, there is something fundamentally transformative about intellectual inquiry. I learned so much while writing this paper, and being able to construct a viewpoint around that knowledge was extremely meaningful to me. I hope that whoever reads this will learn also. While I still remain dubious about the value of highly exclusive liberal arts education,

I can say that through writing this paper, I feel as though I have been transformed through

iv learning, not by learning to think like a good normative Protestant, but by learning to think outside of being a good, normative Protestant.

v CONTENTS

Introduction and Acknowledgements………………………………………….ii

Methodology…………………………………………………………………..1

I. The Rational Divide………………………………………………………...4

II. The Great Awakening and Higher Education………………………………13

III. Were They But Trained and Balanced by Any Systematic Education…….23

IV. Conclusion: The Problem with Liberalism………………………………..44

vi Methodology

In this paper I examine how and why American Christian Universalists came to found

Tufts University in 1852 as their first, and primary, institution of higher education. Through historical analysis, I locate the establishment of Tufts within its broader context in American religion, higher education, and within the Christian Universalist movement. In doing this, I uncover some of the philosophical tensions at play in the founding of Tufts as a site for elite, non-sectarian, learning in 1852. I explore how the denominationalism of the late 18th and early

19th century led to higher education as a benchmark for elitism within the competitive religious market, how liberal thought, in particular, signified upper class Protestantism. I will examine how and why Christian Universalists were relatively late to the game in the creation of Tufts and how its founding impacted the future of the denomination. Ultimately this paper reveals the challenges that higher education presents to the separatism and populism that pervaded

Universalist thought from its inception.

Documents such as letters, sermons and treatises served as my first entrance into understanding Christian Universalism. These were most easily accessed through books like

Ernest Cassara’s Universalism in America: A Documentary History of a Liberal Faith and other documentary histories of Universalism. Though rarely presenting a united perspective on the defining arguments surrounding the Great Awakening, Universalists were active throughout the

18th century in developing their theology surrounding universal salvation. By the early 19th century, they were participating in the great ideological debates of the early 19th century, particularly as they related to issues of human rights such as slavery . Through engaging in these dialogues and through their largely informal meeting of minds, learned Christian Universalists produced prolific amounts of writing, sermons, and articles. The Universalist tradition, from its inception as a home-grown American strain of Christian thought, was amorphous in membership, and lacking in creed or doctrine. For this reason in particular, Universalist writings are key to identifying the spirit of American Christian Universalism at any given time in its history up to this point. By highlighting key language and dominant themes in Christian Universalist writing I further reveal the contradictions at play in the founding of an educational institution.

Along with its helpfulness in identifying the ethos of Universalism, reading and analyzing printed source materials was equally crucial in my understanding the establishment of

Tufts College. The decision to found Tufts, where it would be located, and how it would be funded, is recorded through the Universalist General Conventions, sermons, and correspondences between some of the most influential Universalists of the day. Russell Miller’s history of Tufts, A Light on the Hill, helped me to understand previous perspectives on Tufts founding and the intricacies of some of the major arguments. In addition to applying a critical lens to this decision making, I also profile Hosea Ballou, the man most influential in the founding of Tufts College.

Most important to my methodology was putting the founding of Tufts in its appropriate context. In order to understand what precipitated developments in mid-19th century

Universalism, it was important to frame the denomination in the American religious landscape, particularly within the New England religious hierarchy, its origins, revivalism, intellectualism, and the First Great Awakening. In the same way, it was important to locate the founding of Tufts

2 College in its own historical and geographical contexts, particularly the state of higher education at the time, which was quickly becoming one of the main means of promoting competition amongst Protestant sects.

Though largely historical, this paper ultimately grapples with a philosophical question.

Secondary source and historical analysis serve to illuminate some of the contradictions at the center of the founding of Tufts. This paper offers a deeper understanding of Christian

Universalism in higher education, however its ultimate concern is with the paradoxical nature of liberal, elite, education within the complicated Protestant milieu of the 19th century.

3 Chapter 1: The Rational Divide

“‘The World Moves.’ This is one of the confident sayings of those who believe in human progression. It is an ordination of Divine Providence from the beginning that man should realize mental and moral growth through the successive generations of his earthly life”- J.G. Adams

The Enlightenment Era ushered in an age of intellectuals. It was a cultural movement that emphasized reason and individualism over tradition. Starting in France with philosophers like

Rousseu and Voltaire, Enlightenment thinking spread across Western Europe, and to the shores of

America, where it was embraced by many of America’s homegrown intellectuals. Francophiles like Thomas Jefferson borrowed generously from the Enlightenment in the creation of an independent America. The Declaration of Independence, drafted in 1776, is an Enlightenment document, emphasizing human potential, self-governance, and individualism. For the intellectual elite, the Enlightenment meant a greater emphasis on rationalism, creating a space for intellectual inquiry outside purely theological contexts. It was a revisionist take of European history, skipping hundreds of years, and linking its civilization up with the democracy of Greece and the majesty of Rome. It represented a return to classical intellectualism in the form of literature,

European language, biblical study, and the classics like Greek and Roman. Enlightenment thinking had a bearing on the increasingly rational debates of the day, on human capability, rights, and duty, ultimately shaping the American Revolution. Humanism1 was at its core, and it was also the basis for the rejection of Calvinism amongst its traditionally learned adherents.

Calvinism, which had a stronghold in colonial New England, and across the Atlantic in

England, is a form of reformed Christianity that emphasizes the “total depravity” of humanity.

1 Humanism: A philosophical and ideological position that emphasizes human works and agency. In particular, it stresses man’s progress and ability. Humanism generally preferences critical thinking and rationalism over what it perceives as “traditional”

4 Calvinists believe that humans, by nature, are not inclined to love God, but rather to further their own earthly interests. God, in his unconditional mercy, has chosen only some people to ascend to heaven, while the rest are foreordained to damnation. This idea of predestination is independent of human action, those who are preordained to be saved are unable to resist the saving Grace of

God, while those who are not, are bound to live in toil and sin in the depths of hell. These guiding principles led to a type of piousness based on the outward manifestations of a saved soul.

Community life revolved around doing good works--laboring, close study of the bible, and meditation. The more successful one was at this practice, the more evidence there was that they were among the saved. One was required to prove that they were going to gain ultimate salvation in order to gain societal acceptance. This theology was at the center of early American Christian life. In the 17th century the Pilgrims of Plymouth and the Puritans of Massachusetts Bay, in particular, sought to live out pure Calvinist teaching in their new colonies, creating a “city on the hill”, an example for all of Europe which was still working out its complicated relationship with

Catholicism, which spoiled the possibility for pure Christian practice across the Atlantic.

Despite Calvinism’s popularity in the 17th century, it lost adherents as American life changed, and as the shape and definition of American pietism began shifting and changing. The tensions between the humanism of Enlightenment thinking, which dominated American public life and discourse, and the harshness of the Calvinist God proved difficult to reconcile. Christian

Universalists were among the first of this period to question how an all powerful, merciful, and sovereign God, would fail to save all of humanity, whose sins he died for. Anabaptists movements in Europe, which included Quakers, Methodists, and Lutherans, all of whom put

5 more stock in a “religion of the heart,” than Calvinism’s emphasis on a religion of mind and work equally questioned this doctrine. When preachers of universal salvation such as Dr. George

De Benneville, a Universalist Evangelist, and scholar of world religion, came to America in

1741, he had success spreading Universalism among Anabaptists in Pennsylvania and New

Jersey. These were mostly German immigrants, and Quakers. Universalism’s most organic ties have always been to these frontier, separatists movements. Another preacher, John Murray, is often credited as the other founder of American Universalism. Murray immigrated from England after being excommunicated from his Calvinist community. He was a follower of a Welsh minister, James Relly, who was preaching Universal salvation across England. The combination of these two influential thinkers shows how American Universalism has its roots in both German

Pietism and English Calvinism. Universalism sprouted from the decay of Calvinism, but it did not seek to overturn it, instead Universalism remained a highly Christocentric brand of

Calvinism which had shifted its scope to include all of humanity in salvation, and was content to have an amorphous membership with whom it shared general beliefs about human salvation.

The 1740s, when George De Benneville was first beginning to preach in America, coincides with The First Great Awakening. Many credit John Edwards, a preacher in Western

Massachusetts, with being the first major figure in The Great Awakening. He preached about the emotional connection between humans and their God, and emphasized the experience of Jesus’ love. The Great Awakening was organized around enthusiastic, itinerant, preachers, and stirred up many parts of social and civic life. It touched almost every class of people in the Colonial

America. At this point in history, with recent immigration to new territories, and the organization

6 of cities and ports, the American colonies had reached a level of complexity that threatened to disturb an older, quieter, way of life. This new dynamism spurred up questions of the meaning of existence, and revealed tensions in society surrounding religious ideals and pure religious practice2. The strongly worded itinerant preaching of persuasive speakers across the less urbane frontier and Southeast, and the righteousness of their mission, proved successful in ushering in a new type of American pietism based more on human experience and emotion. Religious adherents of the Revival, another term for The First Great Awakening, became more engaged in their religious practice, as opposed to passively listening to intellectual sermons. Preachers extolled an emotional connection to God judged only by the believer, directly in opposition with

Calvinist Christianity that relied on outside factors such as societal position or scriptural knowledge to determine the quality of one’s faith and ultimately their salvational status. It was less condemning than Calvinism toward lower classes of people. Another major figure in the

Great Awakening, George Whitefield, an English Anglican preacher drew massive, emotional, crowds to hear him speak. Open air sermons began to attract the illiterate and uneducated and a new sort of religious fervor, based on the intensity of religious experience, emerged. In deeply

Revivalist communities, humanism took a backseat to religious experience and conversion.

Revivalist Christianity relied on the charisma of the speaker, and the sense of religious community that the revivals fostered3.

Few opposed the intense revival that had swept through the colonies quite like Charles

Chauncy. Chauncy was a Congregational Minister in New England who felt that the

2 Ernest Cassara, Universalism in America: A Documentary History of a Liberal Faith, (Boston: Beacon, 1971)

3 Ann Lee Bressler, The Universalist Movement in America, 1770-1880, (Oxford, 2001)

7 emotionalism of The Great Awakening created more pride than piety in its adherents. He felt that the manner in which followers of George Whitefield praised and followed him was idolatrous,

“as though he had been an Angel of God; yea, a God come down in the Likeness of Man”4. His preferred form of Christian practice emphasized logic and reason within theology, with emphasis on self-control. It aligned itself more with the liberalism of the Enlightenment, that man’s infinite consciousness was the key to societal progress. He believed that reading and interpreting the bible called for critical and historical analysis, with ultimate concern for the quality and seriousness of one’s religious questioning. Chauncy said, “religion, of late, has been more a commotion of the passions than a change of the temper of the mind” 5. Chauncy believed that the locus for much human understanding was the brain--that theory, and study, were behind the acceptance of all human truths. A “religion of the heart” was utter “enthusiasm”, a pejorative term at the time for the Revival. “Enthusiasm” was meant to be the opposite of rationalism, meant to categorize the Awakening as disorganized extremism. Chauncy believed that when religion became solely about experiencing the grace of God through emotion, there was not a clear enough distinction for what could be considered a divine work, and what was just the emotional fanaticism of crowds of people rallying around an influential preacher. Chauncy said,

“people, in order to know, whether the influences they are under, are from the SPIRIT, don’t carefully examine them by the word of God, and view the change they produce in the moral state of their minds, and of their lives, but hastily conclude such and such internal motions to be

4 David Robinson, The Unitarians and the Universalists, (Westport: Greenwood Press, 1985) 9

5 Douglas Sloan, “The Great Awakneing and American Education, (New York: Teachers College Press, 1973)

8 divine impressions…” 6 In other words, it was difficult to understand what should be credited to divine intervention, and what should be considered the exceptional nature of man. Underlying

Chauncy’s resistance to The Great Awakening were certain social and political factors. Chauncy, and the other Congregational ministers who agreed with him, made up the New England ruling elite. They found the overall character of the Awakening frightfully anti-intellectual. They were the well-educated and serious scholars of the Bible who were entrenched in the legacy of

Puritanism, a deeply Biblical society. They believed in structured and organized intellectual inquiry, “reasonable beings are not to be guided by passion or affection...they need to be under the government of a well instructed judgement.” 7 Chauncy found the general disorderly and riotous nature of the Revivalist movement to be counter-productive to religious life, and to governmental order. The Revival, in Chauncy’s mind, was destabilizing and dangerous to

American life.

The good order is the strength and beauty of the world. The prosperity of both church and state depends very much upon it. And can there be order, where men transgress the limits of their station and intermeddle in the business of others?

Although Chauncy disagreed with the revival on a theological level, his concern was also with maintaining elitism among religious scholars, that “everyone do what is proper of him in his own place.” 8 To him, rational study, also led, in general, to an understanding of one’s placement in society. This put the great educational institutions of the day (Harvard and Yale), and the New

England ruling elite, directly at odds with the Revival.

6 Sloan. The Great Awakening and American Education. 248

7 Sloan. The Great Awakening and American Education. 245.

8 Sloan. The Great Awakening and American Education. 248

9 The criticism, however, was not one-sided, George Whitefield’s populism and antimaterialism in his sermons and in his identity, led to denunciations of the rulings classes on the side of The Revival, as well. Whitefield criticized Boston society, and in particular the serious theological study going on at Harvard as a place where “discipline is at a low ebb,” and that

“Bad books [that is, works of theology with liberal or Arminian tendencies] are becoming fashionable among the tutors and students.” 9 |10 As the Northeast became more urbane and genteel in comparison to the rest of the country, many of their concerns seemed elitist to the swaths of American farmers and frontiersmen. Whitefield found the emphasis on educational inquiry that Chauncy and others promoted pretentious. In general, Whitefield quipped that

Congregational ministers of the Boston establishment, “rest in a head-knowledge, are close to

Phrisees, and have only a name to live.” 11 The schism between Charles Chauncy, and his likeminded colleagues, and the preachers of the Great Awakening grew more pronounced during the 1750s. The resistance to the Great Awakening that was beginning to take hold amongst

Boston intellectuals stayed with them into the 19th century even as other aspects of their orthodoxy waned. The revised Congregational faith that people like Charles Chauncy helped to usher in, one that supported rational study above all other claims to faith and knowledge, came to be known as Unitarianism in the 19th century, and as a church and organizing body and installed

9 Arminianism: Based on the theological ideas of the Dutch reformer, Joseph Arminius of the 16th century. For our purposes, it is important to note that Arminianism is often contrasted with Calvinism because of its emphasis on free will, humanism, and universal salvation.

10 Robinson, The Unitarians and The Universalists. 11

11 Robinson, The Unitarians and The Universalists. 11

10 itself as the premier form of liberal12 Christian religion, with an emphasis on rational study as opposed to emotional enthusiasm. Unitarianism was the intellectual, rational, response to

Calvinism.

The humanism of Unitarianism, its emphasis on the capability of man, eventually led to the acceptance of universal salvation as a concept. Unitarians embraced all of the aspects of

Arminianism that Calvinism had rejected, in particular, its insistence on free will and universal salvation. Although this united Universalists and Unitarians in agreement on principal aspects of their theology, their aversion to the punitive nature of Calvinism, they had highly disparate perspectives. Charles Chauncy, for example, had a certain level of disdain for the teachings of

John Murray, a big name in Universalism, emphasized in his decision to delay his own treatise on universal salvation, out of fear of being associated with him. Partly it was differences in theological roots. Generally, Unitarianism embraced a “liberal” Christian model emphasizing arminianism, and humanism, where the Universalism of Murray stayed closely linked to

Calvinism, in its Christocentricism, and emphasis on God’s sovereignty. Additionally, Murray was moved by the emotionalism of the revival and this sensationalism had stayed with him in his preaching style and practice. Partly though, it was the sociological differences in their adherents.

Chauncy and his comrades remained the established clergy of New England, the ideological descendants of the Puritans who had created institutions like Harvard College for their intellectual pursuits. Serious intellectualism had long dominated New England theological

12 A political and social philosophy founded on ideas of liberty. Liberalism is closely tied to The Age of Enlightenment. It stresses individualism, humanism, and personal liberty. Many consider it the founding principles of the American nation.

11 practice. Universalism, on the other hand, was far more anti-establishment. It allied itself with

Quakers, Baptists, and other dissenting sects who called for an overhaul of existing religious establishment and a severing of church and state once and for all. Where Unitarianism was the establishment, Universalism was part of the dissenting groups inspired, in part, by the rebellion

The Great Awakening. This meant that as Revivalism continued to splinter and create fractions within Protestant sects across America, Universalists derived their legitimacy from a completely different part of society than the New England establishment.

12 Chapter 2: The Great Awakening and Higher Education

“The spirit of Love will be intensified to Godly proportions when reciprocal love exists between the entire human race and each of its individual members. That love must be based upon mutual respect for the differences in color, language and worship, even as we appreciate and accept with gratitude the differences that tend to unite the male and female of all species. We do not find those differences obstacles to love.”

-George de Benneville

Education is at the very heart of the conflicts of the Great Awakening, and their outcomes.

As Protestantism fractionalized along the lines of the revival, and America offered new religious strains to its shores, a religious marketplace formed. One of the ways that this competition played out was through the founding of institutions of higher education, for the training of clergy and for the advancement of each sect. Erudition had long gone hand and hand with proper

Protestant practice, particularly in America. In the first colonies, Calvinism revolved around reading and interpreting the Bible and so early American societies were literate and placed a high value on learning and education. This allowed its members to read the scripture, but also to be skilled in matters of record and communication, a must for a diligent Calvinist. In order for ministers to serve their educated communities, they had to be more learned than their congregation in order to fully explicate and give significance to the Bible. For the training of these religious intellectuals, the reputable New England colleges were established, Harvard and

Yale. Despite the harshness of Calvinist doctrine, which stressed man’s tendency toward sin, this emphasis on the human mind, and its ability to comprehend fantastic theological truths, is innately humanist. However, this humanism is made complicated by the fact that the Calvinist world also believed in an omnipotent, God, who controlled the fate of the human soul. Without

13 acknowledgement of man’s personal relationship with God, it is difficult to understand a world in which God’s omnipotence, and man’s endless rationality could co-exist. In granting man such consciousness, God’s intervention is obscured. It is a tenuous balance to strike, and it means often disregarding the spiritual connection between man and God that is at the heart of

Christianity. In particular, it shows how New England piousness’ rejection of emotionalism predated its dislike of the Revival. The rationalism, new science, and philosophy that came with the Enlightenment created an even greater imbalance between religious experience and rational arminianism in what came to be liberal Christianity, with rationality and humanism taking precedence over religious experience or spirituality. This created an ideological tension between rationalism and revivalism, making education a battle ground for Great Awakening arguments.

The charges of “anti-intellectualism” aimed at the Revivalist were met with charges of conceit and elitism towards sectarian higher education in New England by men like George

Whitefield. However other revivalists sects saw the value in having literary institutions to train their clergy and promote their own message particularly learned Congregationalists, Lutherans, and Wesleyans. In their mind being Revivalists did not relegate them outside the tradition of intellectualism within the Protestant faith. However, the New England clergy was largely inhospitable to Revivalists within their own literary institutions. In Connecticut, itinerant preaching was heavily policed by its mainly Congregational population. Congregationalism became more stringent about not tolerating Revivalists within its community, and so Revivalists were forced to convert to being Baptist in order to avoid paying taxes to the Congregational

Church whose leadership they did not agree with, and who sought to alienate them. Harvard and

14 Yale who had initially tolerated George Whitefield, and other revivalist leaders, turned against

The Great Awakening completely, alienating many Harvard and Yale graduates who were moved by Revivalism. The need for education among Revivalist factions who valued theological study and liberal education was strong. Moderate Revivalists viewed radicals of the Great Awakening as too fixated on emotional experience, as opposed to seeing it as just one important component of religious conversion. They were worried that these extremists were too willing to pass judgment on the state of other people’s souls, and since, ostensibly, their goal was to create a community of love and tolerance between the American churches, they saw radical Separatists as highly disruptive. Ultimately, this meant that moderates of the Great Awakening were tasked with creating an intellectual stance on revivalism, its benefits, but also a critique of the ways in which extremism had spoiled it. They would not be the enemies of learning. It was out of this new moderate identity, that many of the new institutions of the day were formed13.

In 1740 the colonies had three colleges--Harvard, Yale, and William and Mary. By 1776, the year of American independence, there were nine, and of the six new ones, four of them were founded under the auspices of moderate revivalism. The first full-fledged revivalist college was the College of New Jersey (Princeton University) in 1748. The college received wide spread support. It was clear that a college established in a young, active community would benefit everyone. Local clergy, New Jersey officials, and revivalist ministers, all helped to secure the charter for the college. Next came Dartmouth College, College of Rhode Island (Brown

University), and Queens College (Rutgers University). Revivalists, who had once been called

13 Sloan. The Great Awakening and American Education. 18

15 anti-intellectual, were highly successful in their task of creating new schools. Revivalism’s theology entailed a slightly different philosophy on education14. The liberal-thinking Unitarians at Harvard and Yale were likely to deny the importance of emotion in understanding. Topics or experiences that did not stand up to frank rationalism went ignored. The revivalists offered a a slightly less cerebral model for education. Within Revivalism’s theology is the potential of all men to experience conversion is a natural social-leveling. Revivalism had relied on popular support to establish its institutions, and thus their institutions were slightly more populist.

The new American nation entered the 19th century with a renewed faith in the organizing powers of Christianity, and in its abilities to move and engage populations of people. The

Revival had actively pushed for some sort of democratization of religious practice and study, and this created more access. Growing population, and the need for systematized education, and where that could possibly come from, all became dominating conversations for American

Christianity. The fate of an adult’s soul after death, which had once been the main concern of almost all Protestant sects (Calvinism, and Universalism included) took a back seat to the growing population of children inside of religious traditions that required education. Horace

Bushnell, a Congregationalist minister influenced American Christianity significantly with his publication of Christian Nature which encouraged Christians to be more concerned with “moral education and progress than about ultimate salvation.” 15

By the 1830s, Unitarians had effectively taken over Harvard College, once a puritan seminary, and made it a beacon for liberal intellectualism, much less orthodox than it had been

14 Sloan. The Great Awakening and American Education 20

15 Bressler. The Universalist Movement in America. 298

16 under strict Congregationalism, or even Charles Chauncy. Revivalist colleges enjoyed shakey success in New England, but boomed else where, like in New York and Pennsylvania. They sought to create modern and first-rate study because they were sensitive about charges of anti- intellectualism, but they were also genuinely enthusiastic about this new education and a renewed sense of intellectual excitement. The overall sense of a revitalized American community, one progressing towards great things, led them to embrace the new trends in science and utilitarianism of the time. They tended to open their attendance up to practitioners of all

Protestant denominations. This attracted the most students possible, but it also reflected a change where the goals of education were no longer just to furnish the social elite with knowledge in the liberal arts, but to create an educated American populace, and a new social order. These new colleges were non-sectarian in nature, meaning most did not have a theological school that supported one denomination, despite having been founded for the advancement of one particular sect. For the Revivalists, on the outside of the intellectual establishment due to their early clashing with New England Congregationalists, saw education as not only a means of asserting their own rationalism, which had been called into question, and often discredited the First Great

Awakening, but to continue to subvert New England exclusivity by creating colleges with a more populist purpose.

In contrast with the growing institutionalism of other Protestant sects, Universalism was

finding its footing during the First Great Awakening, after being the first to contribute to the argument on universal salvation. After this the denomination remained largely disorganized, where their base in the 1750s was amongst many men of faith who found universal salvation

17 compelling, by the 1820s, most revivalists, and the Unitarians came to these similar conclusions.

Throughout all of the debates concerning the duty of a church to create higher education for its own clergy, Universalism remained wholly opposed. The first generation of Universalists were separatists. They were calling for a whole restructuring of the church and state, a redistribution of power that in no way preferenced elitism, or legitimacy, over a purer home-grown spirituality.

The Universalists, had none of the establishment that other religions that were on the forefront of education, had. In fact, they were the type of separatists who moderate revivalists wished to distance themselves from, because they were extreme in their desire for an overhaul of religious power structures. Universalists preferred words like, “parish” or “society” to describe their adherents, and were extremely critical of sectarian education, even as a site for the training of

Universalist preachers. They believed that their preachers would be served just as well getting their education in the impressive public school system that Massachusetts established in the early

19th century, than in their own schools. One Universalist newspaper is quoted, “Of her public schools, above all her other admirable institutions, her people have just cause to be proud.” 16 To many Universalists, theological schools threatened the very nature of Christian Universalism.

Another Universalist expressed it, schools “are to educate children for time, not for eternity; children are sent to these useful Seminaries not to experience religion, but to fill their minds with the elements of the worldly sciences.” 17 While many Universalists valued education in the secular sense, they did not understand the need for Protestant denominations to found their own schools, as the public school system was expanding.

16 Russell E Miller. The Light on the Hill. (Boston: Beacon, 1996) 55.

17 Miller. The Light on the HIll. 12

18 Universalism took Revivalism’s populist-bent a step further. It did not take to defining its membership, nor did it ever require schooling in order to be a preacher. Contained in

Universalism is the notion of the “every man,” the mechanic, the seamen, the farmer. Where many of the Revivalist colleges did seek to educate a large population, contained in their mission was a desire to prove the intellectual rigor behind Great Awakening-thinking. Universalists did not hold this same pretension. It was never in the Universalists’ interest to prove their intellectualism. Old-timers, like “Father” Hosea Ballou, often cited as the founder of American

Christian Universalism, “were convinced that theological schools were the vehicles for the perpetuation of the corruptions of Christianity.” 18 For early Universalists, to put such an emphasis on formal education would make the Universalist preacher less like an apostle, coming in from the field, to bask in the glory of God, and make preaching a trade for the elite.

Contained in this primitivist standpoint is a large part of Universalist spirit. Universalism, due to its mistrust of institutions, and popularity among those with little education, had the image of being associated with the uncouth. In fact, this image is at the heart of Universalist lore. One of the main reasons for this is because of the biographies of some of Universalism’s first prominent leaders. Hosea Ballou 1D19 is often hailed as the Grandfather of Universalism, an educated, highly persuasive preacher, he grew the tradition throughout the late 18th century and early 19th century. The Universalism of Ballou and his contemporaries was scattered across the country, but with remarkable consistency, the first generation of Universalist thinkers believed

18 Cassara. Universalism in America. 35.

19 The “1D” exists to distinguish between the two Hosea Ballou’s who were both highly influential in the development of the Universalist tradition.

19 that they were simply modifying Calvinism, furthering its reach with the inclusion of unconditional election. This Universalism offered a means of reconciling popular rationalism with piety and devotion to God. Unitarianism, in its rejection of Calvinism had gone the other way, placing God and man on the same level. Ballou captured this distinction in his Treatise, and it became required reading for Universalists. Ballou’s biography is what lends Universalism some of its rustic flavor. Ballou was born in Richmond, New Hampshire, log cabin in 1771. He was the eleventh and last child of farmers. He grew up in the backwoods of a Massachusetts border town, his childhood the subject of much Universalist legend, given its Lincolnesque associations. Ballou had little formal education but through his own study was able to become a

Universalist minister, commonplace for most Universalist ministers. By the time he moved to

Boston in 1816, Ballou was the main Universalist of his day.

Universalists applauded the 19th century trend to defend human dignity in the face of reprobation and eternal sin, but generally, denominational thinkers thought that Unitarianism had been too reactionary in its rejection of Calvinism, and was filling the mind with “vain conceit.” 20

Universalists were not willing to concede all of life’s mysteries to man’s free-will. They also weren’t interested in the striving of moderate Revivalists to match Unitarianism in its institutionalism. Many Universalists believed that the success of Universalism was not by the number of its members, but by public acceptance of universal salvation as a concept. Because this was generally the case, Universalists believed that they had accurately captured the spirit of

Christianity at the time, in part by maintaining this anti-institutional stance. Conventions and

20 Bressler. The Universalist Movement in America 74.

20 meetings were informal and involved mostly discussion of theological or social issues. Despite formal organizations centered in the Northeast, like the Universalist General Convention, which became the main ecclesiastical body in 1833, for many of its traditional, independent, and cantankerous practitioners, Universalism remained in their eyes more a theological movement than an organized church.21 Universalism was at its core, a separatist movement, in form and spirit not unlike Quakerism. When other Christian sects began to create institutions for instruction in their views, Universalism was slower to react. Perhaps as a result of this, the mid- century saw losses in Universalist membership to Congregationalism and Unitarianism and this was of great concern to certain church leaders.

In the 1830s, the future of Universalism was beginning to seem unclear. It had gained prominence during a time of deep theological questioning, and now was no longer at the forefront of these discussions, which were occurring with far less frequency. Universalism’s population growth was completely stagnated by 1850. The theological debates that had driven

Universalism’s rise in the 1740s and 1750s no longer distinguished the Universalist church, as ideas about universal salvation took hold in many more liberal circles as well. Early on in its creation, the religion existed in sermons, letters, and treatises on universal salvation. Many

Congregational and Baptists preachers who were moved by universalists writings, began also to preach universal salvation in their sermons. For many, this was the basis of their connection to

Universalism, simply believing in universal salvation. It was in these theological musings, that

Universalism was most directly manifested. However, the Universalist church was never strict

21 Bressler. The Universalist Movement in America 272

21 about membership and for the most part, the movement gained popularity amongst the unlettered, and relied heavily on its relatively uneducated preachers to deliver its message to the masses.

22 Chapter 3: Were They But Trained and Balanced by Any Systematic Education

“Universalism was the evening star of the church as the night of the dark ages came on, and appeared as the morning star at the dawn of the Reformation.”-Thomas Whittemore D.D.

The person credited most with the organization and maintenance of Universalism throughout the 19th century is Hosea Ballou 2D, the nephew of Hosea Ballou 1D, the grandfather of Universalism. Often praised for being clear-headed, logical, and an untiring student, Ballou

2D, dedicated himself to the academic interests of Universalism on a grand scale throughout his life. He was born in Guilford, Vermont in 1796 to parents, Asahel Ballou and Martha Starr, his mother was a descendant of Comfort Starr, one of the original incorporators of Harvard College.

His parents were Baptists. Seeing the light, as it is often put, in his early adulthood, he converted to Universalism. History paints Ballou as an independent scholar, moved to study through pure intellectual curiosity, and a strong value for the theological principle behind Universalism. In

J.G. Adam’s Fifty Notable Years, a volume that expounds upon the accomplishments of

Universalism in the first half of the 19th century, published in 1887, Ballou is said to have expressed an interest in Green and Latin in his youth. His young adulthood was taken up with a fascination with the early ecclesiastical history of Universalism. Ballou served as a pastor in

Stafford, Connecticut, and in Roxbury and Medford, Massachusetts starting in 1821. He was the editor of “Universalist Magazine,” and the Universalist “Quarterly,” which he also established.

In 1842 he published “Ancient History of Universalism,” which was praised for illuminating

Universalism’s unique contributions to Christian theology22. His scholarly work to create a larger

22 J.G. Adams. 50 Notable Years (Boston: Universalist Publishing House, 1882).

23 sense of history for Universalism was praised within the denomination. It highlighted the unique and enduring theology of universal salvation, which has its roots in very early Christianity. This lent Universalism academic and historical legitimacy. History smiles fondly upon Ballou who is portrayed glowingly in many accounts. One colleague wrote:

His scholarship was not only general and varied, but exact in details, and frequently astonishing by its minute acquaintance with things and events out of the ordinary channels of information; and his knowledge was so unostentatious held, and kindly and moderately imparted, that it required special inquiry to elicit it, and seemed but natural to him. His gentle manners and readiness to impart information, and his mild and loving spirit, won for him the esteem of all who became acquainted with him, so that their admiration of the scholar and teacher were often lost in their affection for the friend 23

Beginning in 1827, Hosea Ballou 2D served on every committee that dealt with

Universalism’s denominational needs for education. Thomas Whittemore, a preacher who also greatly influenced Universalism of this period said, “Dr. Ballou took an active part in preparing the Universalists to get up a literary institution among themselves. He knew they were able to do it in a pecuniary point of view; and that they would do it when they saw their duty plainly.” 24

Ballou 2D set about creating a solid argument surrounding Universalism’s duty to educate its adherents, while also asking Universalism to engage in discussions about education which had long been marginalized within denominational discourse. In 1839 Ballou 2D wrote columns in

Expositor and Universalist Review, so eloquent that one reader said, “it should be graved on the heart of every Universalist.” In 1844, due to his large body of theological scholarship on universal salvation and early Christianity, Harvard College gave Ballou DD an honorary degree,

23 JG Adams. 50 Notable Years 18

24 JG Adams. 50 Notable Years 18

24 hence the DD after his name. In 1843, the year before, he had replaced Ellery Channing as a member of the Harvard Board of Overseers. In 1846, Ballou acted as the chairman of a committee that set out to collect $50,000 dollars. This money would turn Clinton Institute, a

fledgling Universalist school in Clinton, New York, into the first Universalist university, but this failed, due to lack of funds. He stayed in Medford, as opposed to going to Clinton to try to save the failing school. Ballou felt that the efforts that had been made thus far in Universalism to create educational institutions were insufficient in a big way. In the preamble to his plea in the

Expositor which had gained so much acclaim, Ballou DD wrote,

It is well known that the Academies and Colleges in our country are generally under the control of influence of sects opposed to the cause in which we are engaged; it is highly desirable that our denomination, now so rapidly growing, should be provided with institutions under its own care, for the instruction of our youth in the higher branches of literature and science. 25

Of particular note in this quote is the assertion that Universalists were somehow without friends or supporters in the realm of higher education. This feels overstated when Ballou had been so lavishly honored by Harvard College throughout his career. Ballou was highly focused on his goal to establish a Universalist college, and this argument seems purely strategic. It was, in fact, the belief of many Universalists in New England who opposed the founding of a Universalist college, that they “direct their patronage and exert their influence” on Harvard. One supporter of this said, “There is no way in which we could do half so much service to the cause of learning in our country as by contributing to render this institution still more adequate to its purpose, and inspiring into it a more liberal, republican and earnest spirit.” 26 Thus, it is interesting to see how

25 Russell Miller. Light on the Hill. 60

26 Russell Miller. Light on the Hill. 30

25 Ballou DD stresses the uniqueness of the Universalist denomination and its educational needs, while also benefitting continuously from his own associations with Harvard College.

Ballou DD, was first and foremost a scholar, drawn to Universalism through his family’s association with it, but also through its rich sense of theology and dedication to Biblical study.

However, Ballou DD did not represent the average Universalist. In 50 Notable Years, Adams says this to describe the generation of clergy who were most closely associated with

Universalism.

Although some of their ministers were very respectable scholars, giving good evidence of their literary attainments in their pulpit instructions, and now and then an uncommon genius would appear, making his talents specially available as writer or preacher, the larger number were more notable mainly for their plain good sense, their reasoning powers, their very intimate acquaintance with the Scriptures, and their aptness in the use of them in defense and advocacy of their faith, which often rendered it impossible for a theological opponent, however well trained as a scholar, to sustain himself in an attempted vindication of his opinion.27

Ballou DD is an exceptional figure, not just for his notable scholarship, but also for the more traditional form of Universalism, steeped in the history of early Christianity, he wished to promote. Not unlike other Universalist ministers, Ballou DD believed that Universalism’s largest contribution to Christianity was the work it did to further the argument for universal salvation over predestination, but he also focused more on the ancient history of Christian Universalism than its more recent history as an American-grown religious denomination that was less than a hundred years old. Ballou’s own desire to prove his intellectual prowess seems to go in the face of what Universalism had come to represent in the denominational status race of the 19th century.

Universalism was destitute in the educational forces which had strengthened and aided the churches whose membership was continuing to grow, but this was not just for lack of resources, it was integral to the culture and history of the denomination which was separatist in nature. It

27 JG Adams. 50 Notable Years. 293

26 did not seek to align itself with the establishment, but to problematize American religion and institutionalism, the closeness of church and state. As one Universalist who protested the establishment of a college said,

The proper sphere of a University lies in the department of general science and learning, and it should be the organ of no religious tenets, nor sectarian influences and prejudices. It ought never to be established or managed by any religious denomination as such, but rather by those who are interested in the cause of science and letters, of all denominations, for thus the influence of sectarian motives and feelings would be neutralized.28

For many Universalists the establishment of literary institutions, or colleges, directly linked up with denominations was deeply problematic. The splintering of American protestantism which occurred during the first Great Awakening created a competitive religious market, where first the competition had only been about theological discussions, it then became about who had the institutions to back these theological discussions. At first it was just the liberal Christians that had installed themselves at Harvard and Yale, but the importance of institutionalizing was not lost on other groups. In the increasingly organized and urban America, education became a sphere in which to exert dominance. The nature of Protestantism, with its emphasis on literary study, combined with the humanism and rationalism of the 18th century, combined with the growing belief that a liberal arts education was the means of creating a well-rounded American citizen, made higher education an integral part of creating a legacy to be proud of.

For Universalism, this meant a turning away from central eschatological concepts about

God’s sovereignty, omnipotence, and loving mercy (the source of universal salvation) and emphasizing, instead, the unlimited potential of the individual to be educated and rational. In thinking about what this means for Universalism, it deemphasizes the main parts of their theology that distinguish it from Unitarianism. In many ways, this expresses the biggest tension

28 Miller. The Light on the Hill. 33.

27 for Universalism at this time. Universalism shared much of liberal Christianity’s views regarding social justice, and Universalists were influential in these discussions, but ultimately what many

Universalists professed was different about Universalism was its faith, not in the individual, or in humanity, but in the divine mercy of God. This had long been what had kept Universalist theology outside of the frameworks of liberal Christian thought. Many Universalists did feel this way, however, with Hosea Ballou DD at the helm, the push for education went full speed ahead.

Despite the most earnest efforts of Hosea Ballou DD, and other men like Thomas

Whittemore DD, who worked alongside Ballou on all important Universalist publications, the denomination was very much at a standstill on the question of higher education. Schools which had been opened up for Universalist learning had often wilted after one or two years, due to lack of funding. The Clinton Institute, which was supposed to be the first attempt at a College failed quickly. Ballou said in a letter, “I have often had the hypochondria...when observing the practical indifference of our folks with respect to education, their contempt of systematic culture, their magnetic attraction to foolish hobby-horses. I have spent half my life thinking that I was a gone goose.” 29 In 1847, Thomas J Sawyer, a prominent and educated Universalist, called for an

Educational Convention to meet in New York, weeks before they were to have their General

Convention. It would be a circular30 that would address all the questions surrounding

Universalist higher education. Particularly, how to make sure the venture didn’t fail. It seemed not all efforts up to this point were in vain, because the largest group that had been assembled in the interest of education met in New York, and unanimously agreed to the need of a college.

They resolved that the college would be in the Hudson Valley, a locus for many Universalists,

29 Russell J Miller. The Light on the Hill. 35

30 Circular: The meeting was with the intention to create some sort of Universalist stance on higher education that would then be distributed to the members of the Universalist General Convention

28 and then assembled the Board of Trustees, keeping in mind their desperate need for funding.

Fifteen trustees were nominated by the men present at the convention. They were the richest and most influential men in the Universalist congregation, from diverse locations, representing eight states. The hope in assembling this group of trustees was to gain support from all different parts of the country for a Universalist college, that it not be a push just from New England. The

Convention also appointed a committee to get the funds to start the college. Hosea Ballou DD set the number at $100,000 knowing the bind of inadequate financing.

A couple weeks later, Hosea Ballou was the keynote speaker at The United States

Universalist Convention in New York City on May 18, 1847, making his most impassioned plea to the Universalist convention on the matter of education yet. Troubled that the denomination might be doing a poor job of serving its more educated and sophisticated adherents, he worried the more cultured members of their church would be drawn away, “We have suffered some of the consequences, too, in the well-known tendency among the more cultivated minds, who once belonged with us, or whose families belonged with us, to seek other forms of religious ministration.” 31 This quote expresses rather clearly Ballou’s paranoia that Universalism was not a sophisticated religion. That more, “cultivated” minds were not at home in the religion whose tendencies were towards a more populist model.

We have existed, now, as a body, more than 60 years. We have increased, as we boast, almost beyond precedent. We number 18 State Conventions, 80 Associations, about 700 preachers, more than 1000 societies; and probably 700,000 people nominally belong to our Connexion. We have made our presence felt and recognized by the world; we have drawn the public observation upon us. And the inquiry is now growing louder, on every hand, ‘What are the actual results of this numerous increasing community, in all the important interests that such a body naturally has in charge?

31 Ernest Cassara, 210. The entire speech is printed in this book

29 Ballou expressed what was, until then, simply a reality of Universalism, that Universalism had little power within the American religious landscape, despite having grown in influence. Ballou, once again, showed little concern for the intentionality of this move. Instead painting

Universalism as a church that was failing to serve its adherents.

We have already suffered some of the evils, in a form that may well alarm us: in the want of regular mental discipline among those who must be our future teachers; and in the consequent flightiness of those lively imaginations, that are among God’s choicest gifts, were they but trained and balanced by any systematic education.

Ballou worried about the undisciplined nature of Universalist education, citing “flightiness” as a regularly occurring characteristic in talented Universalist youth. Ballou was rather harsh in this regard, “We may declaim against the frivolousness of the motives, and sometimes, perhaps, with much justice; but I cannot help asking, Who is to blame, in the first place, for it? Why do we leave these powerful temptations to drive them away?” A general turning away from the church around this time was not unheard of. Generally speaking, Americans were less concerned with theology in the mid 19th century than at any other time in American history up to this point.

Discussions about universal salvation had been replaced with discussions over the morality of slavery, of temperance, and of the urban poor. However, it was not just a matter of historical circumstance, as Ballou’s rhetoric is not unlike that of Charles Chauncy in the 1740s, who worried about the youth who were being brought into the revival, Chauncy said,

As to the multitudes who are brought into such new, and (to them) unheard of circumstances [Large scale community participation in the revival], ‘tis true, they are illiterate, and young people; but that’s notwithstanding, if the newness of their circumstances is such as is proper to new creatures, they will, in their general behavior, discover the true spirit and genius of this sort of persons[itinerant preachers].

30 In other words, there is something threatening in an uneducated and enthusiastic youth. For

Chauncy, it was clear what this was--he opposed the Revival which had exploded across

America, wishing to maintain a more sedate lower class and to keep religious practice within the institutions that he was a part of.

Good order, said Chauncy, is the strength and beauty of the world. The prosperity of both church and state depends very much upon it. And can there be order, where men transgress the limits of their station and intermeddle in the business of others?

Chauncy’s classism is fairly obvious in this statement, Ballou’s less so. However, both men harbor a deep fear of a setting which does not have structures in place to organize the youth. For

Ballou, this is an interestingly conservative stance for him to take. Within Ballou’s argument is an implicit sympathy with an anti-Revivalist ideology. This aligns Ballou very firmly on the side of the establishment.

Ballou’s question “Who is to blame?” is an interesting one. Ballou surely does not think it is he, for her is well-educated, well spoken, and highly persuasive. It is those adherents who lack direction who are getting pulled away from the faith. However, the question one might ask is: are the same followers of Universalism who lack discipline and education the same ones who he envisions at a Universalist college? ;“happy shall we be, if we take warning from these first signs of impending danger, and apply ourselves to the work of removing the offense. Otherwise, we need not be told that the evils will multiply with increasing rapidity, till them end in ‘the abomination of desolation’.” The offense, as Ballou states, is the uneducated masses that made up Universalism. For him, this was an image of Universalism that could not keep being perpetuated. Having worked since the 1820s in order to guarantee some progress towards

31 Universalist education, Ballou was frustrated. He guaranteed to his audience that if they are to continue lacking in educational backing, they will lose all of the great minds in Universalism.

Let it once be discovered that when we can do, we will not; that we have no tendency in the direction of real, sober, intellectual progress; that we but suffer ourselves to be dragged on by others in the pursuit of general knowledge and in the cultivation of mind, -- let it be seen that such is the course we are permanently to hold; and can you wonder at, or severely blame, that part of the community which is attached to the cause of learning, if it gives up its hopes of us, and turns to some other quarter, where a more commendable spirit prevails.

Ballou’s fear lies in the loss of educated adherents, the ones that would serve to elevate

Universalism above the religion of anti-establishment North Easterners, or rugged frontiersmen.

In this plea for the future, Hosea Ballou 2d is appealing not to the youth, despite that they would be the ones benefitting from this education, but to the older generations of ministers who had fancied themselves the minds behind the movement. He discusses his membership in this group when he says,

I once indulged the confident expectation that I should live to see Universalists doing their duty, in this cause,--founding well-endowed Academies, and at least one College, placed on a permanent basis. I have so long solaced myself with the anticipation of sharing in the work, that it is hard, my brethren, it is hard to part with all hope. But the night is coming down, in which no man can work.-- The shadows of age are already on these eyes; and nothing is done.

Within this part of his speech is an acknowledgement of the generational divide in Universalism.

There is the older generation who is invested in the future of the religion which they built out of

The Great Awakening. These are the ones who are invested in the success of the denomination, and who understand the stakes. They had once been active in interdenominational conversation, and had been praised for their persuasiveness. Interestingly, the older generation also held onto more romantic ideas about the spirit of Universalism. In particular, its anti-institutionalism. In

32 fact, the first stone was not laid on Tufts College, the fruits of Ballou’s tireless labor, until the older Hosea Ballou 1D, died. For Ballou, within his speech, the threat is that Universalism will become the religion of the poor and under-educated. It is not simply the future of Universalism in the balance, but also its image as a religion based on the thoughts of great and talented men, a history that Ballou DD had served to extend through his scholarship on ancient universalism.

Ballou pleas urgently with his audience, to have the “more commendable spirit,”dedication to education. As Unitarianism continued its austere reign at Harvard College, full of imposing brick buildings, and elevated moral purpose, it was quite urgent in the eyes of Ballou 2d, and others, that Universalism partake in the founding of a college, even at the risk of alienating some of its less sophisticated adherents.

33 Chapter 3: The Light on the Hill

“Insignificant as the denomination of Universalists may now appear in the eyes of the world, it is not to be doubted that the time is coming when it will occupy in this country, and throughout all Christendom, a much more commanding position, and men will ask for the beginning of what they shall then see, and love to read the story of our present struggles and victories.” -Rev. T.J. Sawyer DD

The speech was mostly a rallying cry, as the decision to found the college had already been made. The Universalists needed the support of their denomination to follow through with the process of opening a college, which would, in truth, prove an arduous process. The College, now under the name of Tufts, because of a generous donation of land by Charles Tufts, would take a number of years before it opened. For one thing, there was much argument over where the school would be. At first it had been a popular idea to have the school be in upstate New York, near Clinton. Then, there was the romantic notion that any person who subscribed $10 to the founding of Tufts would have a vote on the matter. This sense of democracy was fleeting, and the location of the school became an arguing point solely for the Board of Trustees, who controlled much of the process. Many felt that the location was unimportant as long as the college built itself a reputation quickly, failure was a continuous worry. Western Massachusetts and upstate

New York were the two most popular choices. In his history of Tufts College, A Light on the Hill,

Russell Miller discusses at length the different arguments as to where the school should be.

Certain trustees held prejudices about the provinciality of the country side, and others worried about the lack of morality in the city. Ultimately, it seems, the allure of New England’s intellectual history was too great. A pivotal moment was when one newspaper editor expressed that the site for Harvard College was dissatisfactory, that it should have, instead, been placed

34 “among the West Cambridge Hills.” Immediately, this land on the Medford/Somerville line became a popular choice among the board. However, Ballou was extremely hesitant,

[There was] no need of another college on merely literary grounds..and it would be felt by the community at large as an attempt at a sort of rival institution to Harvard-and what a comparison, especially for the first years!-with our two or three professors, of name unknown in the literary or scientific world, with our library perhaps two or three thousand volumes at most, with but the embryo of a philosophical apparatus,-in contrast with the oldest, richest, best-appointed university on this side of the Atlantic.32

Ballou had a great respect for Harvard, and was deeply concerned that recruiting a respectable student body would be extremely difficult with Harvard so close by. Interestingly, this was not a concern for other Universalists. In fact, when the time came to vote on a location, Ballou was the lone vote against the Medford/Somerville location on Charles Tufts’ land. Famously (for Tufts students) Charles Tufts stated of his hill, “For if Tufts College is to be a source of illumination, as a beacon standing on a hill, where its light cannot be hidden, its influence will naturally work like all light; it will be diffusive.”Even more deeply impressive, and questionably true, when

Charles Dickens visited the site for Tufts College he said, “there was not, probably, more than one other hill-top in the world from which one could see such a combination of natural beauty in landscape, and at the same time, survey such an accumulation of wealth and culture.” 33 So it had been decided, by 1850, despite the fear of failure in the shadow of Harvard, to put Tufts on the

Medford/Somerville line, only one mile away from the beacon of liberal education for the

Western world.

Thomas Sawyer DD, who had fought long and hard beside Thomas Whittemore and

Hosea Ballou for the founding of a Universalist college, was elected by the Trustees in 1851 to serve as the first university president. However, he was not altogether happy with Tufts. He

32 Russell Miller. The Light on the Hill. 45

33 Russell Miller. The Light on the Hill. 45

35 resented that the school was in New England, after much talk that it would be in New York since its very beginnings, and he also did not understand the refusal by the trustees to include a theology school in the founding. However, it was strictly expressed by the trustees of Tufts that

Tufts was to be a literary institution only, open to all denominations, and without any divinity school. Ultimately, this expresses some consistency on the part of Tufts’ founders, as

Universalism had long rejected the idea of sectarian education altogether, even in its earliest moments. However, it does bring up the question, why open a school in the name of Christian

Universalism, if there is to be no discernible Universalist influence in the education received?

Thomas Whittemore, a supporter of Tufts, had said that, “one of the principal objects in establishing Tufts College was to give aspirants to the ministry an opportunity to obtain competent education,” even if they were not necessarily receiving sectarian training34. He did not want the funds badly needed for the literary institution at Tufts to be diverted to any sort of theology school, even though, at the time, there was a major shortage of educated ministers in the Universalist faith. There was a shortage of fifty clergymen in New York State alone, and the

Midwest was notably destitute of Universalist clergy. St. Lawrence College in upstate New York was established in the same decade to fill the need for a theology school.35 This further distanced

New England Universalists from their New York counterparts. Particularly as Tufts continued to insist that even without the theology school, it could support clergy and regular liberal arts students. Ballou, in his speech at the General Convention in 1848 expressed how many of the more educated adherents of Universalism were getting educated at other universities, while the rest of Universalists were largely uneducated. So, who did the university hope to serve? Those

34 Russell Miller. The Light on the Hill. 47

35 Russell Miller. The Light on the Hill. 47

36 Universalists who sought education solely to become clergy, would not find their training at

Tufts. The university was to be a site for the type of liberal learning done by the Unitarians at

Harvard. It would be a literary institution, privately run, that would serve those who sought top rate literary education in the Boston area. Sawyer was not pleased with this decision. Along with voicing these resentments about a theology school, Sawyer asked for an unreasonably high salary that the college would be unable to support. Hosea Ballou “reluctantly” took up the position of

President in 1852, as the school was struggling to lay its first cornerstone36.

In 1853, the main school building was still under construction and so Ballou, realizing he himself knew next to nothing about higher education (he had never been to college, despite his many honors at Harvard) requested a year’s leave. Of note, are Ballou’s efforts to ingratiate himself in the liberal arts. For someone as deeply theological and well-versed in the Bible as

Ballou, it is interesting to see how his priorities were on the elements of liberal study thought to be most humanist and secular. For inspiration, from September to December 1853 Ballou visited

“the principal Colleges of New England, in order that he might combine in the system of

Instruction and Government of Tufts College, as many of the excellencies of the different

Colleges, as possible.” This is in an excerpt from Russell Miller’s book on this time of Hosea

Ballou’s life:

Hosea 2d covered an amazing amount of academic ground in four months. He visited Harvard, Williams, Yale, and Brown. He attended classes in mathematics, history, English and declamation, foreign languages, and the sciences; he conferred with instructors on teaching techniques and problems, noted texts used and subjects discussed in the classroom. At Providence he spent considerable time with Brown's notable president, Francis Wayland. He attended President Walker's class in Evidences of Revealed Religion at Harvard. He inquired about grading systems, the handling of disciplinary cases. What, he asked Williams' president, Mark Hopkins, should the teacher do if he disagreed with the textbook? The answer: "Say so, & vindicate." He attended prayers at chapel at Williams at 6:30 A.M. and a few hours later was discussing instructional salaries. He

36 Rusell Miller. The Light on the Hill. 55-56

37 asked the president of Yale how often faculty meetings were held and was apparently relieved to discover that there was "not so much machinery in the Gov't. of Yale as in that of Harvard." He found out how examinations for admission and for courses were conducted. In short, Hosea 2d discovered as much as he could about administering a college. 37

Ballou returned and immediately began his role as Tufts’ president. At the official grand opening of the school, crowded with attendants, he explained the merits of a college as he saw them, “the College works out abroad from itself, beyond the circle of its graduates, sending its energies forth through all other institutions, and down through all classes, even the most unlettered.” 38 Ultimately, Ballou saw the opening of Tufts as a move towards a more progressive society. He believed that universities, with their emphasis on learning and human potential, had a trickling down of culture and good works throughout society, even those who were unable to attend. Ultimately, this is a highly revealing change in the policy that most Universalists had towards education in the earlier years of the century. Thomas Whittemore himself had said, earlier on in the debates about the needs for education, “we go for a universal education of the people- the poor and the rich-the farmer and the mechanic, and the seamen, as well as the lawyer, the physician, and the the clergyman . Let all the people be educated. The Universal diffusion of knowledge is the only safeguard of our republican institutions!” 39 However, there were no safeguards in place to prevent Tufts College from being as exclusionary as the looming institution it was competing with just a mile away. Despite, Universalism’s earlier conceptions, like this quote about Nichols Academy (a failed Universalist school in 1819) “whenever there shall arise a surplus in income, it would be expanded in the free education of young men, of indigent circumstances, but moral and pious habits designing to enter the gospel ministry” this is

37 Russell Miller. The Light on the Hill. 57

38 Russell Miller. The Light on the Hill. 57.

39 Russell Miller. The Light on the Hill. 55

38 not the school that the Universalists created40. Liberal knowledge, the key to maintaing American republicanism, would remain only for those who could afford it. Interestingly, because his case had been made for the betterment of Christian Universalists, Ballou did not mention the denomination directly once in his groundbreaking speech.

***

Tufts earned early recognition through its association with Hosea Ballou DD. The New

Hampshire Patriot reported on June 1, 1852.

The Post says that “among the clergymen who will have great influence in moulding the proposed institution are Rev. Hosea Ballou 2d, of Medford, and Rev. Thomas J Sawyer of Clinton, New York whose literary labors through scholarship and earnest efforts in the cause of education have been such as to have elicited compliment of D.D. From Harvard College.41

It was these commendation that lent Tufts legitimacy in its early years. The fact that it was

Christian Universalist came second after the fact that it was to be in style and keeping with the

New England tradition of higher education. The Barre Gazette said this in their write up on the founding of Tufts,

New Universalist College. We learn that arrangements are fully made for erecting a Universalist College on Winter Hill, Somerville and partly in Medford. This is a fine site, and commands a beautiful view of the harbor, Boston, Charlestown, Roxbury, Brookline, Malden, Lynn etc. Charles Tufts Esq of Somerville has given twenty acres of land for the college. The institution will have $ 100,000 when it is opened for students with the prospect of a larger sum in a few years. It has influential patrons in all New England….The design is to make this a College of the first order, ranking with the best New England Colleges, and at the same time, to furnish the agriculturists, the manufacturer, the mechanic and the merchant, with the education requisite to their

40 Miller.Light on the Hill 42.

41 New Hampshire Patriot. June 1, 1852.

39 pursuits…. We believe this will be the first college proper of the Universalists in this Country42

Of particular interest in this quote is the idea that Tufts College would be able to join the ranks of the elite New England colleges, which had for so long rejected populism, and also serve its own adherents of whom many were working class and uneducated. JT Sawyer, the man who was first offered the job of Tufts presidency said, “we are composed not of the wealthiest nor the poorest, but of the thrifty middle class who earn their bread by the sweat of the brow.” 43 Sawyer was also the man who had protested the placement of Tufts in New England, and the lack of theology school. Sawyer, in comparison to Ballou, was less interested in creating a college for liberal study, and more interested in a college to serve a Universalist population. He was more in touch with the financial capability of the Universalist community. In reality, despite its prime location, and prestigious faculty members, Tufts College struggled to acquire the funding to keep existing for the first ten to twenty years of its existence. Hosea Ballou DD died in 1861, nine years after the first cornerstone was laid at Tufts, but not long into its stability. Tufts College struggled to stay open and relied on money from the state to keep its doors open into the 1860s.

After Ballou’s death, Alonso Miner DD, also with an honorary degree from Harvard, took up the position as Tufts’ president. In 1863, Tufts was still short on money and attendees. There simply were not enough qualified Christian Universalists to fill up the graduating class of classical students. Under Miner, there was the introduction of a “Philosophical Course” and the creation of an Engineering Department, both which were supposed to meet the demand for a less rigorous academic experience, in order to better serve the Universalist community. In comparison to what was called a “classical” or “academic” curriculum, the Philosophy Course

42 “New Universalist College” Barre Gazette. March 12, 1852.

43 Miller. The Light on the Hill. 93

40 would grant the degree of a Bachelor of Philosophy (B.Ph) and was considered a “partial course of instruction.” The entrance examinations for this field of study were less intense. There was no ancient languages section. It was created for the increasing number of applicants who were not learned in Greek and Latin. It was considered by most to be an inferior degree. Two years after it was created, it was demoted to a “Special Course of Instruction.” The degree was given after two years of collegiate level work. Despite its intentions to meet the needs of the Christian

Universalist population, and increase attendance at Tufts, the program floundered, and had trouble finding its place within the academic setting. Its lack of prestige on the campus, especially in comparison to those students who were studying a full classical course load, led to a dismissal of the program as nothing more than a remedial school. For many years, the program did not even graduate one student.44

Another change that happened under AA Miner DD, that is distinctly interesting to the

Universalist’s forays into higher education, was the opening of the Tufts Divinity School. Once again, the Universalists faced the facts that the social class of its adherents was the biggest hurdle to creating an elite college with full attendance. The opening of a theology school is a shocking twist in the history of Tufts College, given that it was strictly expressed by those involved in its founding that it would be a place for solely sectarian learning. However, a Universalist theological school had been a provision in the will of a wealthy donor, and thus needed to be provided for, despite the general aversion to sectarianism. It ushered in a new image for

Universalism, a modern image, where ministerial work was a profession that required training.

For some, this was an exciting indication of what was to come for Universalism. Many had worried that the outmoded, revivalist-inspired preaching of Universalist ministers was stagnating

44 Miller. The Light on the Hill. 103-105

41 the sect and preventing it from being among the ranks of the great liberal Christian denominations. The Crane Theology School opened at Tufts in 1869. At its inception, students at the divinity school received free tuition. The Universalists knew well that the people who would be training to become Universalist ministers would have little to no expendable funds, and would most likely be poor. 45

There were very little requirements for entry, which was meant to reflect the Universalist ideal of preachers coming in from the field. However, the course load was quite heavy, especially for the under-prepared student body, and soon, like the philosophy program, the Divinity School lost its reputation within the university. Members of the Board of Trustees, and the Tufts student body itself, sought to distance the liberal arts college from the divinity school. No one wanted to spoil the prestige of liberal study. The classical students had a strong aversion to the divinity school. Divinity students were housed in different buildings on campus, and even had a different calendar. Many efforts were made to make sure the theology school would in no way create a sectarian environment on campus. It is interesting to see how the emphasis on non-sectarianism is often played out in terms of sophistication, with liberal study being more sophisticated, and more elevated, than denominational thought. This is a classed issue, clearly, particularly as the divinity school served a less learned population than the literary institution.

Ten years into the existence of the divinity school, the administration found the quality of the work being produced underwhelming. Degrees in divinity (BD) were being recommended to only fractions of the class. There was simply no way to expect college-level coursework from pupils with minimal education, even from the grade school level. In order to create a more selective admissions process, a rigorous examination was put in place, and a preference was

45 Miller. The Light on the Hill. 104

42 made for college graduates. By 1883, the Divinity School stopped being free, and half tuition was collected from divinity school members. Throughout the 19th century, the Divinity School was unable to support itself, and struggled to stay afloat. The Crane Theology School would never be a successful enterprise for Tufts College, throughout the 19th century it struggled to stay afloat, and in the 20th century fought even harder to stay relevant in a growingly secular environment.46

The troubles with the Crane Theology School and the Philosophy program reflect one incredibly salient point that this paper has been dancing around: liberal thought, with its emphasis on rationalism, learnedness, and personal responsibility, is steeped in a history of elitism. The precedent was set in the earliest forms of American higher education. Harvard and

Yale, the first institutions of their kind on American soil, were intended to train the New England elite. They reflected the upper crusts of the New England establishments, the church leaders, and the aristocracy. Arguably, the emphasis on literacy and erudition in New England could be chocked up to a Calvinist legacy, but it also reflects the wealth and power of these more established populations and their more elitist concerns.

46 Miller. The Light on the Hill. 108

43 Conclusion: The Problem with Liberalism

“Universalism is a living moment, organized out of the grandest ideas and spiritual facts of the universe; gathering into itself the richest and mightiest moral forces, and working towards the most positive practical ends; and a man is a Universalist, and is the better off for being a Universalist; only as some sense of what Universalism thus is, and of the force of its motives, and the reality of its work, flows down, a quickening power, into his being.” -E.G. Brooks, D.D.

The Great Awakening highlighted this discrepancy between elite religious thought, centered around the individual, structures and institutions, and populist religion, revolving around community and relatable doctrine. The criticism lodged at either side of the debates of the

Great Awakening revealed the underlying class tensions that structured these arguments.

Ultimately, it was up to those revivalist movements that did wish to interact in academic discourses, usually these were also the richer and more established of these religions, to open their own institutions of higher education. Baptists, Methodists, and Wesleyans all jumped at the chance to display their own intellectual might, and their own organizational power. These institutions displayed to the world that it was not simply those inheritors of Puritan pietism who valued the elite education of their sophisticated adherents. These Revivalists who took on this role were tasked with creating education that was at once more populist than Harvard and Yale, by opening their schools up to members of all denominations, but also reflected the

Enlightenment’s emphasis on human reason, which had long been most fully realized in the somber intellectualism of the New England elite.

The Universalists, in their later call to action, joined a slightly different Protestant higher educational milieu. The sectarian education of Harvard, which had long been a thorn in the side of Universalists, gave way to Unitarianism. Unitarianism included all the trapping of

Enlightenment, liberal, thinking, while also taking progressive views on many theological issues.

In other words, it was liberal, progressive, non-sectarian education, and it represented the

44 pinnacle of American higher education: the shaping of young and talented minds so that they could better engage in American republicanism. Universalists who valued the rigorous intellectualism of the Unitarians, like Hosea Ballou, viewed Harvard as the model for the best type of education. Unitarians were united with Universalists on most of their theology, they were both counted among the most liberal, and least doctrinal of Protestant sects. They both valued humanity, human action, and human theological interpretation. Universalists who sought to be better educated, and more erudite, were content to seek their schooling at Unitarian institutions.

Unitarians had what Universalists didn’t have, which was institutional backing, and the inheritance of the New England establishment.

Universalists who did not have such an affinity for liberal higher education were not a minority. In fact, in understanding the ways in which Tufts College failed in its first twenty years, its main challenge was its this failure to recognize that many Universalists did not have the means, nor the cultural capital, to desire rigorous, liberal, education. In establishing an institution for higher education that preferred liberal study to the training of ministers that could then serve their own communities, Universalists hindered the preservation of their own cultural priorities, which had long valued the general populace over, and above, exclusive academia. The central arguments of Universalist theology shied away from honoring those ministers and preachers who were exceptional because of their intellectual prowess. This was the business of the well-trained ministers of the New England tradition. This was the business of Harvard and Yale. Universalist ministers were never expected to be notable because of their rigorous training, they were supposed to gain recognition for their novel ways of interpreting the scripture which spoke to a different form of American life in the 18th century, one that was being freed from the chains of a ruling class legitimized through Calvinism. Universalists were supposed to be speaking to the

45 masses, assuring them that despite their social status, they would also be saved. In its inception, this was the noble purpose of Christian Universalism. However, it was also what stagnated their development into an established denomination. Ultimately, it was difficult for Universalists who did yearn to see a more intellectualized, and refined, community, to gain the status they desired within Universalism. In emphasizing the similarities between Unitarianism and Universalism,

Hosea Ballou DD and his comrades hoped to demonstrate that Universalism also had it within itself to churn out professional ministers, who would, once again, be able to engage in theological discourses that were now largely centered in institutions of higher education. Hosea

Ballou desired a place in the intellectual aristocracy. He believed that this was the best way to prove Universalism’s relevance and supremacy. However, in emphasizing the similarities between Unitarian and Universalist educational goals, he ignored many of their differences: both theological and social.

Students at Protestant-founded colleges were thought to value rationalism, above emotionalism or sensationalism. Rationalism was posed directly against emotionalism during the

Great Awakening. The way that Revivalists showed they were rational, was to establish colleges.

So what does this mean about claims to rationalism? Can a religious group be rational if it doesn’t have institutional backing? Rationalism is something that people can gain access to.

Frontiersmen being moved by the itinerant preaching of an uneducated preacher were not rational. Universalists who clung to its early history of separatism and emotionalist movements, were not rational either. Hosea Ballou DD, who had two honorary degrees conferred upon him by Harvard University, had the badge of rationalism. In this way, rationalism, at the heart of liberal education, is the currency of intellectualism, and a signifier for elitism. Generally, those people who find themselves accepted into American institutions, are thought to be rational. They

46 are transformed, through their indoctrination into higher education, into the preservers of

American republicanism. They are the gatekeepers of American ideology. In its attempts to found a college for liberal study, with little emphasis on emotional, or spiritual, theological work,

Universalism alienated its many adherents who had identified strongly with its spirit of separatism, of existing outside institutional frameworks.

Many social theorists, educational experts, and philosophers, have tried to understand the legacy of liberalism in American higher education. In particular, how it creates and maintains exclusivity amongst elites. In his book Ivy and Industry: Business and the Making of the

American University, Christopher Newfield dissects critiques of humanism. Humanism, as I’ve earlier expressed, is at the heart of many of the contradictions of early higher education.

Newfield says, “[humanism] seems to reject always pluralist and hybridized modern societies in the name of purified élites, its ideals requiring the backdrop of degraded others.” 47 In the case of the Great Awakening this is particularly true, with Charles Chauncy and the Congregational elites on one side of the debate, and the populist revivals on the other. It favors the “purification” of certain classes of people, over the needs of the unruly masses, who they view as spoiling society. Newfield goes on, “All humanisms have been, in some way, disciplinary humanism, constructing manageable subjects. All humanisms have been, in some way, supremacist humanisms, entangled in the user’s attempts to justify the superiority of a national status, an opposition to strangers, a way of life.” 48 In this particular case, it is the attempt to justify a ruling class, a class of better educated people, who then become elected officials. It justifies a democracy that is dominated by elites. In his plea for a more cultured Universalism, Ballou also

47 Christopher Newfield. Ivy and Industry:Business and the Making of the American University, 1880-1980 (Duke University Press: Durham, 2003) 44

48 Newfield. Industry and Ivy. 45

47 desires to discipline those in the Universalist denominations who he views as uneducated. Ballou desires cultural capital. In the push to place Tufts in New England, as opposed to upstate New

York, where many less cultured Universalists were centered, the founders of Tufts show their desire to no longer be separatists, but to instead contribute to the elitist regional identity of New

England. “Humanism came to express this middle class’s sense of its difference from--and superiority to--other classes: these university types were not labor, and they were not masters either, not those great capitalists and other sovereigns who followed their financial self-interest rather than science and truth.” 49 Humanism affects gentility, sensibility, and organization. It represents culture. In this way, humanism effectively does two things, it honors a way of life that is constantly being threatened, that of the cultural elite, while also expressing great faith in the future, if this way of life is to continue, “the old does not simply rule the new in a remaindered system of thinking, but continuously cedes ground to the new that the form of the old foretells, dwelling in the present an elaborate metaphor for what is to come.” 50

This sort of preservation of cultural signifiers and traditions is long entrenched in the

American class and labor system. “Originally, [‘liberal’ was] the distinct epithet of those ‘arts’ and ‘sciences’ that were considered ‘worthy of a freeman;’ as opposed to servile or mechanical.

A liberal art is the cause and the expression of human freedom.” 51 It is clear through this definition of liberal study, that studying the humanities, is conferred on a certain class ranking, someone who is free, the owning class, not the working class, and certainly not the slaves and serfs who were not free at all in order to preserve others freedoms. “When ‘liberal’ appeared in the term ‘liberal arts,’ it described the goal of ‘general intellectual enlargement and refinement’

49 Newfield. Industry and Ivy. 46

50 Newfield. Industry and Ivy. 48, 52.

51 Newfield. Industry and Ivy. 46

48 linked to a mechanism of repression.” 52 It also posits that through liberal study, a person can become more free. That we experience freedom through our own self-expression, that our own repression may be lifted through our own examination of our intellect.

If, through liberal education, man experiences freedom, then it would appear that all those who are unable to be educated in this way, remain trapped, stagnated, and underdeveloped.

A president of Amherst, a college founded for Congregational ministry, said “The end, or aim of education...is not primarily to produce greatness in partial directions, great mathematicians, great philologists, great philosophers, but in the best sense of the term, great men--men symmetrically powerfully developed...The whole man comes into our consideration. The design is, by discipline and culture, to make men.” 53 This quote expresses the goals of higher education as many saw it pre-Civil War. Higher education is the way to create the men who will run the world, of furnishing the highest social classes with men of infinite consciousness. Just as Hosea

Ballou gained privilege and power through his association with higher education, so too, did the men who were educated within it.

Those Universalists who were not from New England, who did not have the money or the time to gain first rate grade school education, and those who were women, had no way to gain the prestige which liberal education promised. For some, liberal education meant the opening up of a future, it meant progress. However, for most it kept them trapped in their oppressed state, the realities of which they had wished to mitigate through religious experience. Liberalism keeps these people in their place, grounded in the harsh realities of somber rationalism. Liberalism allows a select few to see a future for themselves, while it keeps organized the rest of society in

52 Newfield. Industry and Ivy. 48

53 This paper, perhaps by my own fault, ignores the broad based implications of exclusively white male higher education, however, it is, of course, just another way to maintain elitism and to only confer rationality on certain genders, races, and classes.

49 their distinct places. Liberalism relies almost exclusively on tradition. “The authority of traditional practices--linguistic, behavioral, moral, institutional, and so on--does not involve a sense of external imposition; rather it is experienced as part of the natural order of social life.

Traditionalism, like authoritarianism, involves the sense of being coerced by an outside source of power.” 54 Although people like Russell Miller, and JG Adams view Hosea Ballou as a man who had a vivid and decisive vision of the future. What he really had was an extremely clear understanding of traditional forms of power, from where they are derived, and how they could be accessed. Even in his scholarship on early Christian Universalism, Ballou knew that in creating an established past, he might be able to guarantee a future for Universalism.

But what kind of future is it? In Ballou’s speeches he expresses the hope that in creating a Christian Universalist college, there would be a trickling down effect, enlivening the community of Christian Universalists who would not have access to higher education. Though history reveals that this was not quite the case. The more humble Universalists who were inspired by this great new leap into higher education, were alienated by its rigor. In the end, the vision of Christian Universalism that is preserved through Tufts College is one that makes it nearly indistinguishable from Unitarianism, and perhaps, this was the goal. After all, Ballou did not once mention the Christian Universalist faith in his speech at the laying of the cornerstone of

Tufts. In 1961 The Unitarian Association and the Universalist Church of America merged, creating the Unitarian Universalist Association. One has to wonder if this was Ballou’s wish.

Universalism, despite its very late entrance into the world of higher education, guaranteed its place in history through the establishment of a college. What was to happen if Christian

Universalists had remained destitute in the field of education? They would have retained their

54 C.A.Bowers. Elements of a Post-Liberal Theory of Education. (Columbia University: New York, 1987) 65.

50 original character, but the denomination perhaps would not have survived the growing institutionalism, and competition amongst wealthier Protestant sects of the 19th century. In the process, Universalists became “the other liberal Christian sect.” Ultimately, in establishing Tufts,

Hosea Ballou and his likeminded comrades, linked Unitarianism and Universalism, securing the prestige of Universalism, as a slightly less uppity form of Unitarianism. Ultimately, this means that Universalism was able to retain a place in the American religious landscape into the 21th century but perhaps, only in its most normative, and least threatening form.

51 References

1.J.G. Adams. 50 Notable Years (Boston: Universalist Publishing House, 1882)

2.C.A.Bowers. Elements of a Post-Liberal Theory of Education. (Columbia University: New York, 1987)

3.Ann Lee Bressler, The Universalist Movement in America, 1770-1880, (Oxford, 2001)

4.Ernest Cassara, Universalism in America: A Documentary History of a Liberal Faith, (Boston: Beacon, 1971)

5.Russell E Miller. The Light on the Hill. (Boston: Beacon, 1996)

6.New Hampshire Patriot. June 1, 1852.

7.Christopher Newfield. Ivy and Industry:Business and the Making of the American University, 1880-1980 (Duke University Press: Durham, 2003)

8.“New Universalist College” Barre Gazette. March 12, 1852.

9.David Robinson, The Unitarians and the Universalists, (Westport: Greenwood Press, 1985)

10.Douglas Sloan, The Great Awakening and American Education, (New York: Teachers College ! Press, 1973)

52 53