# Church Planting among Immigrants in the Gilded Age >[!note] Note >The following is an extended research outline for my presentation to the Evangelical Missiological Society regional meeting at North Greenville University on April 5, 2025. It is not a completed article, but it includes my research and numerous quotations from the sources upon which this presentation relies. > >Portions of this presentation are excerpts from: Cook, Charles Keelan. “Christianize and Americanize: Tracing the Link Between Theological and Sociological Presuppositions and Protestant Home Missionary Practices Toward Immigrants From 1880–1920.” Ph.D., Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary, 2024. https://www.proquest.com/docview/3141415398/abstract/615910608724DA3PQ/1. ## Introduction: - **Thesis:** Protestant Missionaries of the Gilded Age divided on the role of foreign language churches in home missionary efforts toward immigrants, with some favoring the use of language churches to reach and disciple immigrants while others claimed they inhibited the imperative of Americanization. - **Advanced Organizer:** This paper will demonstrate the significance of this division by first describing the missionary context of immigration to the United States during the Gilded Age. Second, the paper will survey various positions held concerning the role and function of language churches in immigrant missions during the era. Finally, the paper will outline some implications of these positions as they relate to culture and worldview. ## The Missionary Context - "In 1880 the foreign population amounted to 6,679,943 in a total population of 50,155,783."^[Sherman H Doyle, *Presbyterian Home Missions: An Account of the Home Missions of the Presbyterian Church in the U.S.A* (Philadelphia: Presbyterian board of publication and Sabbath-school work, 1902), 236.] "In 1900 our foreign population had increased to 10,460,085 in a total population of 76,303,387."^[Doyle, *Presbyterian Home Missions*, 237.] By the early 1900s, the United States was averaging over 2,000 new immigrant arrivals every day.^[*Home Missionary*, 82. ] ### The Rise of Ethnic Enclaves - Mass immigration resulted in the formation of ethnic enclaves in major cities across the United States. In his missions manual, Howard Grose wrote, - >New York is a city in America but is hardly an American city. Nor is any other of our great cities, except perhaps Philadelphia. Boston is an Irish city, Chicago is a German-Scandinavian-Polish city, Saint Louis is a German city, and New York is a Hebrew-German-Irish-Italian-Bohemian-Hungarian city—a cosmopolitan race conglomeration. Eighteen languages are spoken in a single block.^[Howard Benjamin Grose, Aliens Or Americans? (New York: Young People’s Missionary Movement of The United States and Canada, 1909), 198.] - He continued, - >In Philadelphia, the most American of all our large cities, it is possible, in one section of the city, to walk ten squares and to hear nine different languages. Nor do these immense numbers simply settle in one large city, but they segregate, entirely occupying separate sections. The result is that most of our large cities have their " Little Germany," " Little Italy," " Little Scandinavia," and " Chinatown." The shop signs in such districts are written in foreign tongues, newspapers are printed in foreign languages, and the American language is spoken only by the children who attend the public schools.^[ Grose, *Aliens Or Americans?*, 227.] ### For the first time, the majority were not Protestant - Not only was immigration growing like nothing they had seen before, another very important shift occurred: for the first time in American history, the majority coming were not Protestants. In 1900, 52% of immigrants were Roman Catholic, with another large portion being Jews.^[Grose, *Aliens or Americans?*, 250-251.] The significant number of immigrants were not Protestant. - Harlan Paul Douglass, author of another prominent missions manual, claimed, - >Previous to about 1882 most of our immigrant population had come from Northern and Western Europe, from lands which were racially allied to ours and which had experienced parallel developments in modern democracy and civilization. Suddenly since that time their great bulk has come largely from Southern and Eastern Europe. Now scarcely one fifth come from the Protestant and fully modernized lands whose civilization is likest ours, while over two thirds come from countries which border on Asia or the Mediterranean Sea.^[Harlan Paul Douglass, *The New Home Missions: An Account of Their Social Redirection* (New York: Missionary Education Movement of the United States and Canada, 1914), 112.] - The shift was primarily to Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, and Jewish peoples. Grose shared the breakdown, - > In 1869 not one per cent. of the total immigration came from Austria-Hungary, Italy, Poland, and Russia, while in 1902 the percentage was over seventy. In 1869 nearly three quarters of the total immigration came from the United Kingdom, France, Germany, and Scandinavia; in 1902 only one fifth was from those countries^[Grose, *Aliens Or Americans?*, 128-129.] ### Responses to this change in religious background were varied. - Some saw this as an opportunity and others as a threat. It is interesting to break down the various missionary manuals of the era into these two categories: opportunity and threat. I don't have time for us to parse all of that out, but it stands to reason that protestants would divide on their perspective of this change in national circumstances. #### Opportunity for Gospel Ministry - Those who saw it as an opportunity, saw it as an opportunity to reach people who were already the object of international missions efforts. - I've already quoted him, but one good example of the opportunity posture is the work of Howard Grose. A Baptist minister and professor, Grose served as the editorial secretary for the American Baptist Home Missionary Society from 1904-1910 and authored two provocatively-titled manuals addressing missions to immigrants: *Incoming Millions* and *Aliens or Americans?* - You'd think from his titles, he's writing from a threat paradigm, but that was precisely his point. He was aiming his works at people who lived in the threat camp and attempting to persuade them toward a more optimistic understanding of the mission in front of them. - He wrote, "Immigration may be regarded as a peril or a providence, an ogre or an obligation... The author is a Christian optimist who believes God has a unique mission for Christian America, and that it will ultimately be fulfilled.''^[Grose, *Aliens Or Americans?*, 10.] #### Threat to Christian Civilization - Those who saw it as a threat, did so, because they feared this new influx of non-Protestant religious commitment would tear apart the fabric of the Christian civilization they were building in the United States. They were usually explicit about this. - Perhaps the best example of the threat view was also one of the most popular missions manuals written during the Gilded Age. In fact, it was one of the most popular books of any kind written during that time... selling hundreds of thousands of copies. - The book was called *Our Country* and it was written by Josiah Strong, a national home missions leader in the Congregational church and prominent early proponent of the Social Gospel. - Strong's book used threat language to frame the entire theme of his manual, organizing his argument around seven perils to the Christian mission in the U.S. His first peril was immigration. Strong wrote, - >"So immense a foreign element must have a profound influence on our national life and character. Immigration brings unquestioned benefits, but these do not concern our argument. It complicates almost every home missionary problem and furnishes the soil which feeds the life of several of the most noxious growths of our civilization.''^[Josiah Strong, *Our Country: Its Possible Future and Its Present Crisis* (New York: The Baker and Taylor Co., 1885), 40] ### Correlation between Social Gospelers and Threat Language - While we don't have time to camp out here, I will note one real correlation I discovered analyzing these manuals. Those who viewed immigration as a threat tended to be proponents of a social gospel, or social salvation as they usually called it. In fact, the more their manuals were about social solutions, the more likely they were to list immigration as a threat to their project. - Those who took a more optimistic tone often focused on individual salvation or a priority on evangelism. They noted the individual potential of every person once saved. So they spoke of the opportunity to Christianize these who were coming and the good that it might do in transforming them. - That was not hard and fast, and you had that kind of rhetoric in both camps. Furthermore, this was before that social gospel controversy erupted, so it is hard to tell where people land. But, you do see leanings on this point. ## Survey Missions Methods Employed - Before we discuss the specifics of language church planting, it is beneficial to provide a brief survey of home missions methods employed toward immigrants during the era. As you can imagine, there was an array of methods. Though, I do feel the surprise is not how different they were but how similar they are to many of the things we consider doing today. - Protestants used a bunch of different methods, but you begin to see categories emerge and even span across different denominations and groups. The tactics employed also begin to reveal differences in Protestant understanding of Christian mission generally. I categorized them into six different buckets. The list starts (roughly) with those methods aimed at individuals and ends with methods aimed at social activism. This leads up to the discussion of the final missions method, and the one I want us to focus on, planting churches among these immigrants. - **The list is as follows:** - Welcoming Immigrant Arrivals - Distributing Literature - Evangelizing and Preaching - Meeting Physical Needs - Campaigning for Social Activism - Starting Immigrant Churches ### Welcoming Immigrant Arrivals - Meeting new arrivals at the port of entry was a very common strategy employed across the Protestant spectrum. Some groups had dedicated missionaries whose assignment was to be at the port every day welcoming new arrivals and getting them connected elsewhere. - My own denomination, the Southern Baptist Home Mission Board, had a lady named Marie Buhlmaier stationed in Baltimore as a missionary to the immigrants. Much of her worked centered on this task, and she details it in depth in her memoir *Along the Highway of Service*.^[Marie Buhlmaier, *Along the Highway of Service* (Atlanta: Home Mission Board of the Southern Baptist Convention, 1924).] - Howard Grose, whom I mentioned earlier, makes explicit in his manuals that missions toward immigrants begins at the port of entry, and he claimed 30 different missionaries were stationed daily on Ellis Island by various denominations and agencies.^[Grose, *Aliens Or Americans?*, 274.] - Douglass asserted, "To meet the immigrant in his first shock of dislocation and bewilderment, home missions send a representative to Ellis Island to soften the gruffness of officialism, and become responsible for the newcomer whose friends or relatives fail to meet him, or who is without sufficient money to reach his proper destination.''^[Douglass, *The New Home Missions*, 119.] - As you can imagine, the initial experience at a port of entry was bewildering to people who often didn't speak English. In an age where they were issued through various checks for diseases, mental disorders, or other problems and then pushed out the door into the street of a major, US city. Missionaries could provide assistance and immediate contact. ### Distributing Literature - Literature distribution was also very common. This was true for all of home missions at the time, so it stood to reason that it would mark immigrant missions. The American Baptist Home Mission Society (ABHMS) report of 1883 claimed, "This work of Bible and tract distribution is still expected of all missionaries, of every nationality, in every field of labor. Thus millions of pages of the Scriptures and of general religious literature, have been scattered abroad wisely by the Society."^[American Baptist Home Mission Society, *Baptist Home Missions in North America: Including a Full Report of the Proceedings and Addresses of the Jubilee Meeting, and a Historical Sketch of the American Baptist Home Mission Society, Historical Tables, Etc., 1832-1882* (New York: Baptist Home Mission Rooms, 1883), 531.] - Agencies often had people dedicated to this work as well, called colporteurs. This work would happen both at the port of entry, but also in ethnic enclaves and immigrant ghettoes. Buhlmaier and Grose both spoke about the importance of passing out Bibles in as many languages as possible at the ports.^[Buhlmaier, *Along the Highway of Service*, 20; Grose, *Aliens or Americans?*, 275.] Sherman Doyle, who wrote about Presbyterian efforts in the early 1900s, claimed, - >Three Slavonic [colporteurs] are engaged in the work. In their first month's work in January, they visited six hundred and thirty-five families, including with boarders, three thousand nine hundred and twenty-one men, six hundred and seventy-two women, eleven hundred and twenty-nine children. Their sales were one hundred and six dollars and sixteen cents, of which fourteen dollars were of Polish and Bohemian tracts, the rest being , *Presbyterian Home Missions*, 234.] ### Evangelizing and Preaching - Evangelism is where you start seeing some cracks in a unified Protestant understanding of the missionary task, yes to immigrants, but also in missions generally. - Most spoke of the importance of evangelism. In fact, many pointed out that it must be the priority of Christian mission toward immigrants. The 1883 missions report for American Baptists declared, - >The evangelization of these people, many of whom indeed are birth right members of churches, but who know no more than the ancient Jewish formalists of regeneration by the Spirit through personal faith in and loving surrender to Christ, is a matter that ought most deeply to concern us, not merely on the ground of patriotism, but for their own soul's sake.^[American Baptist Home Mission Society, *Baptist Home Missions in North America*, 32--33.] - Grose also spoke of evangelism as the primary component of the missionary task in port ministry.^[Grose, *Aliens or Americans?*, 275.] - However, the view was not universally held. Harlan Douglass, whom I have previously cited, in his manual *The New Home Missions*, pushes back against the idea that evangelism is need for Catholics or Jews, because their faiths will eventually evolve into true Christianity. Douglass wrote, "Speaking for himself, the author largely excepts the Jew from this responsibility. He believes that the Hebrew faith in America is destined to evolve into essential Christianity and that, in its progressive wing, it already shows strong tendencies to quick, democratic adaptation to modern conditions."^[Douglass, *The New Home Missions*, 122--123.] Again, this was not the majority view of the time, but as the era moves toward the fundamentalist and modernist controversy that began in the 1920s, you begin to see more of this. - One thing to note is that most discussion on evangelism centered around corporate evangelism in a preaching context. There was discussion of personal evangelism, but most centered on evangelistic preaching. The American Baptist Home Mission Society reported that gospel preaching was occurring to nine different nationalities in 1882.^[American Baptist Home Mission Society, *Baptist Home Missions in North America*, 470.] Another example is the work of Antonio Mangano, himself an immigrant, who served as the head of the Italian Department at Colgate Seminary. Concerning missions to Italian immigrants, Mangano wrote of the imperative of "preaching and teaching of the gospel of Jesus as the way of salvation, by means of religious services, Sunday-schools, prayer-meetings, and a modern evangelism."^[Antonio Mangano, *Sons of Italy: A Social and Religious Study of the Italians in America* (New York: Missionary Education Movement of the United States and Canada, 1917), 150.] This presentation will discuss this point more as we start talking about opinions on church planting. ### Meeting Physical Needs - Home mission manuals regularly addressed the importance of meeting physical needs in the immigrant context. Referring to Buhlmaier, Fannie Heck wrote, - >The long line of new citizens pass one by one through the entrance gates, and the rigid examination. The moment of their release from this trying ordeal she is with them. There is a cheery greeting; the child is lifted from the weary arms of the mother; the telegram is sent to the relatives out in Kansas or Nebraska; the long German loaf for the hungry children is purchased; the fresh milk for the little one bought; help with the troublesome baggage is given.^[Fannie E. S. Heck, *In Royal Service: The Mission Work of Southern Baptist Women* (Richmond, VA: Educational Department, Foreign Mission Board, Southern Baptist Convention, 1913), 331.] - Douglass noted the importance of guarding unprotected girls and women upon arrival.^[Douglass, *The New Home Missions*, 119.] Grose spoke of the importance of meeting the varying needs of immigrants at their initial port of entry in order to secure them a fair start in the new land.^[Grose, *Aliens Or Americans?*, 274--275.] He wrote, "Once put the touch of human kindness upon the immigrant and he is not likely to forget it. The hour of homesickness, of strangeness in a strange land, of perplexity and trouble, is the hour of hours when sympathy and help come most gratefully.''^[Grose, *Aliens Or Americans?*, 275.] - Two different means of discussing mercy ministries developed in the manuals. Some wrote of the importance of mercy ministry accompanying evangelism and preaching, while others wrote of meeting physical needs as evangelism or as more important than evangelism. - Mangano's work serves as an example of methods which prioritized the role of evangelism in immigrant missions; however, he speaks of the need to marry them to mercy ministry. Mangano wrote, - >The ideal method of work is a union of a social settlement ministering to the physical side of life through athletics, health talks, and visiting nurses; to the mental, through clubs and English classes, music, drawing, and handcraft; to the need of fun, through entertainments and social gatherings; and to crown all and give purpose to life, a spiritual ministry, the preaching and teaching of the gospel of Jesus as the way of salvation, by means of religious services, Sunday-schools, prayer-meetings, and a modern evangelism.^[Mangano, *Sons of Italy*, 149--150.] - On the other hand, the work of Washington Gladden, a prominent father of the Social Gospel movement, and Douglass deemphasized evangelism in favor of meeting physical needs and activism on behalf of the immigrant. Gladden redefined evangelism in his work to mean Christian lives brought into contact with immigrants. He claimed this was a more potent form of the gospel than sharing the gospel message.^[Washington Gladden, *Applied Christianity: Moral Aspects of Social Questions* (Boston: Houghton, Mifflin, 1886), 239--240] According to Douglass, the importance of assimilation and meeting social and physical needs eclipsed the need of evangelism for immigrants, whose religion he claimed would eventually evolve into essential Christianity.^[ Douglass, *The New Home Missions*, 122-123.] ### Campaigning for Social Activism - Those who deemphasized evangelism most often recast the mission through the lens of social activism. Ironically, this turned the focus in their writing away from directly ministering to the immigrant directly and toward some form of social or civil engagement. Douglass titled his home missions manual, *The New Home Missions: An Account of Their Social Redirection*, noting in the subtitle the central challenge of his work: that Christian mission must be directed toward social engineering.^[Douglass, *The New Home Missions*, xi-xv.] - The redirection of the Christian mission toward practices of social and civil activism played prominently in other widely read manuals and home missions treatises of the day.^[Some of the most significant works on Christian mission written during the Gilded Age and Progressive Era advocated for a "social salvation" that required the work of Christians in bolstering civil society in order to foster the developing kingdom of God through civilization. See Strong, *Our Country*; Washington Gladden, *Social Salvation* (Boston: Houghton, Mifflin and Co., 1902); Washington Gladden, *Applied Christianity: Moral Aspects of Social Questions* (Boston: Houghton, Mifflin, 1886); Walter Rauschenbusch, *Christianizing the Social Order* (New York: Macmillan, 1913).] - Protestants who adopted a primarily social salvation model of Christian mission believed that Christianity must attack the root system issues within society to leaven the whole of civilization and usher in a Christianized population.^[ Several treatises on home missions focused on the importance of root social issues as the target of Christian mission, noting the importance of environmental factors on marginalized populations such as the poor and immigrants. See Rauschenbusch, *Christianizing the Social Order*; Washington Gladden, *The Christian Pastor and the Working Church* (New York: C. Scribner’s Sons, 1902); Gladden, *Social Salvation*. ] The object of mission became the elimination of social perils such as gambling and drunkenness instead of particular people in need of salvation.^[ Gladden, *Social Salvation*, 135.] As noted above, Strong organized his entire missions manual around the elimination of a list of social perils that threatened American and Christian progress in the Gilded Age.^[ Strong, *Our Country*.] ## Survey of Positions on Language Church Planting - Alongside calls for evangelism of immigrants came discussions about church starting among those immigrants. Protestants disagreed about the impact of starting immigrant churches as a missions practice. Some advocated for it, others saw it as a temporary necessity, while still others discouraged the practice.^[A range of opinions existed among American Protestants concerning the importance of starting foreign language churches for immigrant communities. For an example of support for immigrant churches, see Mangano, *Sons of Italy*. For opposition to starting immigrant churches, see Douglass, *The New Home Missions*.] Creating clean lines for categorization into different camps is impossible. The various perspectives and arguments overlap, but it is possible to discuss them in three major veins: opponents, sceptics, and proponents. ### Opponents to Language Church Planting - I'll begin by noting the term opponents is likely too strong to describe those who explicity dissuaded other from the practice of planting churches in other languages. While outright rejection of starting language churches was rare, some deemphasized the practices or wrote more about the problems they created than the benefits as a missions method among immigrants. Some home missions manuals from the era dissuade the continued practice of starting foreign language churches. - Douglass' work serves as one such example. In his writing, Douglass approved of immigrant churches only as a sometimes necessary and temporary means to assimilation. Douglass claimed, - > On the other hand it should be remembered that the gospel in one’s native tongue is not the same as the gospel preached effectively under city conditions. Many of these churches simply bring the rural traditions of Europe, which are no more suitable to the modern city than the rural traditions of America. The children rapidly Americanize and the charm of the gospel in the native tongue wears away. The foreign-speaking church peculiarly needs social redirection.^[Douglass, *The New Home Missions*, 105–106. ] - He demonstrates a disdain for practice in subtle shifts in terminology as well. Douglass referred to immigrant churches as “foreign-speaking churches,” unlike other proponents of the practice, and he discussed at length the difficulties they presented to true Americanization of the immigrant. Douglass noted the tendency for immigrant churches to be “veneered with American progress rather than fundamentally changed.”^[Douglass, *The New Home Missions*, 120–121.] - Furthermore, a correlation seems to exist between those who conceived of immigrant missions more as social engineering and activism and those who deemphasized both evangelism and church planting in other languages. - These sources shifted the focus away from evangelistic efforts toward assimilation of the immigrant as their highest need. Again, Douglass provides the example. Douglass wrote, “Less spectacular than peculiar and separate institutions for foreign-speaking peoples, but sounder and more happy is the persistent assimilating process which takes the foreigner right into the American community and church.”^[Douglass, *The New Home Missions*, 124.] - Of course, I'm not suggesting a causative link between these ideas, as there's no way to demonstrate that with the available data. In addition, almost every vein of immigrant missionary methods called for assimilation of the immigrant at some degree. Across the spectrum, both proponents of language church planting and those who dissuaded the practice claimed cultural assimilation was a critical need for immigrants. ### Sceptics of Language Church Planting - Another vein of immigrant church planting philosophy agreed that starting churches in immigrant languages was an important, but temporary, step in immigrant missions. This group wrote of the value of these churches for initial evangelization and discipleship, but proposed that a plan to incorporate these immigrants into American (that's their words) churches was crucial for their assimilation. - Joel S. Ives, Secretary of the Missionary Society of Connecticut, noted that subsequent generations of immigrants were less likely to need a foreign language church.^[ Ives, Joel S., “Swedish Connecticut,” The Home Missionary, September 1906, 130.] Ives wrote, - > But it is only reasonable that these strangers can best worship God in their mother tongue. Twenty years have proved it a wise expedient. The children all plan to be Americans and it is with increasing difficulty that they are held to the dialect of the old people.^[Ives, “Swedish Connecticut,” 131.] - You'll note the assumption built into Ives's statement concerning the desire of immigrant children to completely assimilate into English-speaking churches. This was also present in Douglass's statement above. Douglass wrote, "The children rapidly Americanize and the charm of the gospel in the native tongue wears away."^[ Douglass, *The New Home Missions*, 106.] It's hard to know whether or not this assumption was true of the majority of immigrants. It would be anachronistic to assume a contemporary desire by immigrants to maintain their culture was true back then in a very different social setting. At the same time, I'm unconvinced this assumption by American Protestants held for the overwhelming majority because of the writings of our last vein of methods: those who advocated for language planting on its own merit. ### Proponents of Language Church Planting - Despite the veins of opinion which either rejected language church planting among immigrants outright or expressed reticence to the practice, another vein of opinion explicitly promoted the missionary method. As noted previously, Protestants were united in the importance they placed on making Americanization part of Christian missionary practices toward immigrants. That was true even of this next group; however, their calls for Americanization of the immigrant allowed for the development of Christian communities and practices maintained in the mother language of these various immigrant groups. In fact, as we will see, proponents of language church planting often claimed it actually aided in the process of cultural assimilation. - Proponents of language church planting often grounded their argument on the importance of preaching in the native language of the immigrants. Multiple manuals discuss the significance of preaching in the native language of the immigrants.^[Heck, *In Royal Service*, 331; American Baptist Home Mission Society, *Baptist Home Missions in North America*, 471; Mangano, *Sons of Italy*, 167.] The ABHMS report asserted, - > Having welcomed people of other nationalities to our shores, as Christians we must make the most of our opportunities for their evangelization; without pausing for heated discussion whether the bread of life be conveyed to them in German-silver or American-silver dishes. It is important, above all things, that they be Christianized in the quickest way possible. The method of the Holy Spirit on the day of Pentecost is the safe and wise one still to follow—to give the Gospel to every man in his own tongue wherein he was born.^[American Baptist Home Mission Society, *Baptist Home Missions in North America*, 471.] - Reverend J.N. Williams, an American Baptist missionary to the French in New England claimed, - > They have appointed missionaries to labor among this class of people; and as they speak French, a foreign tongue, we cannot fulfill the great commission towards them by preaching ever so much in English. … And I argue from that, that our five sermons in French are worth ten thousand sermons in English—at least for the French.^[American Baptist Home Mission Society, *Baptist Home Missions in North America*, 120--121.] - For this reason, Grose encouraged the further training of converts from immigrant groups as missionaries to their own people, since they knew the language and customs.^[Grose1909, 280--281.] In fact, many missionaries to immigrants were converted immigrants initially reached through Protestant efforts.^[Examples mentioned in this presentation include Marie Buhlmaier and Antonio Mangano.] - This focus on the importance of gospel proclamation and discipleship in a person's mother tongue, led to a reliance on church planting as an important method for home missions toward immigrants. Mangano strongly advocated for the importance of immigrant churches. In his manual, Mangano discussed the development of branch churches. He claimed, - > The branch or independent church, with a separate building used only for the Italian work, has been found to accomplish the best results.... The converts are all members of the mother church, but the branch has its own officers and deacons, administers the ordinances, and has absolute freedom in conducting its own work.^[Mangano, *Sons of Italy*, 168.] - Branch churches eventually achieve complete independence and autonomy. In his description, Mangano utilized the terminology of the Nevius Method, or three-self formula, for starting indigenous churches.^[Mangano demonstrates familiarity with the contemporary development in international missionary practices by relying on the terminology from the Nevius Method. In 1899, John Nevius systematized the previous work of Henry Venn and Rufus Anderson on the need for self-governing, self-propagating churches. See John L. Nevius, *The Planting and Development of Missionary Churches* (New York: Foreign Mission Library, 1899). For Mangano's reliance on Nevius, see Mangano, *Sons of Italy*, 167–169.] For Mangano, the aim of immigrant church starting was self-governing churches. - Still, others who supported starting foreign language churches questioned their long-term viability. The 1883 home missions report of American Baptists noted, - > It should be borne in mind, however, that there is a steady drain from these non-English speaking churches to American churches; hence, that all results are not visible in churches distinctively of foreign populations. American churches have been greatly enriched by accessions of those who were first brought under the influence of the truth in German and Scandinavian churches in this country.^[American Baptist Home Mission Society, *Baptist Home Missions in North America*, 470.] - In his writings, Latourette records the start of a Romanian Baptist church planting work with several hundred Baptists and a small number of churches, which began in 1913.^[283 Latourette1941.] He also claims immigrant churches formed in different languages were ultimately "foredoomed," and that the natural assimilation of immigrants into the broader culture made them an inherently temporary necessity.^[ Latourette1941, 292] This assertion places Latourette squarely in the sceptic camp above. - Despite Latourette's assumption, the Romanian Baptist Association he mentioned in his work still exists today and has grown, planting more Romanian churches among immigrants in the United States and Canada.^[Romanian-Baptist.] To his point though, many immigrants, did eventually assimilate into larger denominations. ## Implications of Positions - A survey of available historical information reveals that Protestants in the Gilded Age were divided over their approach to home missions among immigrants. At the highest level, Protestants either saw immigrants as a God-given opportunity for gospel ministry or a threat to their program of building the Kingdom of God. At a more granular level, Protestants propose, and engaged in, an array of missionary methods to tackle the "immigrant problem." Among these methods was a debate concerning the importance of church planting amng immigrants, especially in languages other than English. Analysis of this debate provides several enlighting implications for reflection today. - **First, it must be noted that our current conversation over missions toward immigrants in the United States is not new.** In fact, evangelicals have been at this moment before in many ways. Gilded Age immigration still stands as the highwater mark in United States history, with the present era being the first which threatens to pass it. However, it would be easy for contemporary Christians and ministers to think we are in a completely new moment in church history and overlook the history of tradition that surrounds this issue. There are differences, for sure, and we must not fall into the trap of assuming what worked in the Gilded Age will solve today's problems. Nevertheless, history can be our tutor here. - In the Gilded Age, Protestants were not of one mind concerning missions toward immigrants or the methods employed. It is no surprise that these issues today find evangelicals spread across an array of responses. Furthermore, the questions we are asking today are not even new. Many of the same questions posed today in order to discern the church's best reponse to our moment were also asked during the Gilded Age. Hindsight provides a fresh perspective, and perhaps further study of this era would enrich our own conversation today. - **Second, the propensity for Christians to view their present moment as an opportunity or a threat appears a constant in history.** Reading the varied perspectives of Gilded Age Protestants creates an eery echo to today's conversation concerning our temperament about this missionary occassion. Is it a threat to the church's endeavor, or is it an opportunity for gospel ministry? Regardless of the policy conversation, Christians are at their best whenever they see their circumstances, no matter what they may be, as the providential orchestration of the Lord for the fulfillment of the Great Comission. Gilded Age church planting among immigrants serves as an important encouragement to view this present moment with the optimism that only the gospel and a biblical eschatology may provide. - **Finally, the diversity in positions concerning language church planting may have been a boon to the work.** As noted above, Protestants divided on their approach to planting churches in the various languages of the immigrant arrivals. While it's clear from history that planting language churches was an important aspect of the work (I would add, very likely an important aspect of our work today), the various convictions of Protestant actually led to a multivalent approach to church planting that likely made for a stronger overall response. Some focused intently on the need for language church planting from the start. Others busied themselves with the task of integration and assimilation into English-speaking churches. Surely, there was a need for both given the diversity that existed across the immigrant groups. - Today, the same rings true. Missiological solutions are too narrow if they don't account for the extreme diversity that today's immigration presents for church planting. Much work needs to done to strengthen efforts at church planting in now hundreds of languages across the United States. At the same time, the rise of truly multi-ethnic churches is occurring across the country in response to increased diversity. A diversity of opinion exists concerning the "right" way to address church planting in our presently diverse environment. However, a proper response might be to realize the benefit of an array of approaches, some focused on language groups, and others focusing on multi-ethnic groups united by a common language. Truth be told, there are even positions between those. - Since Latourette's offhanded claim that foreign language churches would all disappear, we see firsthand how wrong he was. A healthy and vibrant network of gospel centered churches exists in dozens of languages across the United States today, including the Romanian Baptist network about which Latourette was speaking. However, the need for multi-ethnic congregations has perhaps never been higher than our present moment. A posture of openness and cooperation should mark our well-intentioned efforts, even when we choose to adopt varied methods of engaging in the work. ## Works Cited: