This article was downloaded by: [University of York]On: 15 October 2014, At: 23:03Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

NORA - Nordic Journal of Feministand Gender ResearchPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/swom20

Processes of gender democratizationin evangelical missions: The case ofthe Norwegian Missionary SocietyLine Nyhagen Predelli aa Norwegian Institute for Urban and Regional Research , P.O.Box 44, Blindern, Oslo, 0313Published online: 05 Nov 2010.

To cite this article: Line Nyhagen Predelli (2000) Processes of gender democratization inevangelical missions: The case of the Norwegian Missionary Society, NORA - Nordic Journal ofFeminist and Gender Research, 8:1, 33-46, DOI: 10.1080/080387400408044

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/080387400408044

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoeveras to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Anyopinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of theauthors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of theContent should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primarysources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions,claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilitieswhatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, inrelation to or arising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,

systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms& Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f Y

ork]

at 2

3:03

15

Oct

ober

201

4

Processes ofgenderdemocratization inevangelicalmissions: The caseof the NorwegianMissionary SocietyLine Nyhagen Predelli

Line Nyhagen Predelli, Ph.D. in sociology, M.A. inPolitical Science and M.A. in Sociology, is currentlyworking as researcher at the Norwegian Institute forUrban and Regional Research. Her 1998 dissertationwas entitled Contested Patriarchy and MissionaryFeminism: The Norwegian Missionary Society inNineteenth Century Norway and Madagascar. In hercurrent research project, she is continuing her work ongender and religion with a focus on Muslim womenand men in Oslo.Norwegian Institute for Urban and RegionalResearch, P.O. Box 44, Blindern, 0313 Oslo

#Taylor & FrancisISSN 0803-8740

ABSTRACT. In 1904 women were granted voting andrepresentational rights in the Norwegian MissionarySociety. A number of factors contributed to theintegration of women in the national missionorganization and the formal gender democratizationthat resulted from it. This article discusses some of thehistorical developments towards the gradual inclusionof women in mission management, with a viewtowards establishing the degree to which this processresulted from pressures from mission womenthemselves. The article invalidates the myth thatNorwegian missionary women in toto have beenconservative when it comes to the development ofwomen’s liberation in Norway, and shows that realitywas in fact more complex, as the missionary movementwas embraced by women and men with differing viewstowards women’s roles. The contradiction betweenwomen’s public humility and meekness on the onehand, and a more hidden “desire for power andauthority” on the other, was instrumental in the gradualintegration of women into mission management.

The impact of the Protestant missionarymovement of the 19th and early 20th centurieshas been profound, both in the European andNorth American home societies of missionorganizations, and abroad, where missionssought to evangelize and “civilize” peoples ofnon-Christian origin. Religious organizationssuch as missions are often understood to beconservative and changing only at a very slowpace. In particular, evangelical missions areoften taken to reproduce traditionalunderstandings about gender, because thereligious thinking they represent is notconsidered favourable to the generalemancipation of women in society. Reality is,however, more complicated. The historicalrecord of gender relations within missionorganizations is marked as much by contest andchange as by acceptance and accommodation interms of women’s participation. Thiscombination of contestation andaccommodation is especially visible in thehistory of the Norwegian Missionary Society(NMS).1

33

Gen

der

dem

ocra

tiza

tion

inev

ange

lica

lm

issi

ons

NO

RA

no.

120

00,

Vol

ume

8

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f Y

ork]

at 2

3:03

15

Oct

ober

201

4

Contested gender regimesProtestant missions of the 19th and early 20thcenturies were governed by principles of pietyand patriarchy, but even if the missionarymovement was male-dominated in terms oforganizational control, it is inaccurate todescribe it as a movement in which the labour ofmen was ever predominant, let alone suf� cient.Whatever their founders may have intended,mission organizations soon learned that theymust rely heavily on the energy and personalcommitments of women in all that they did.Hunter (1984, 14) writes of the “feminization ofthe mission force” which took place in theUnited States in the late 19th century, andBrouwer (1990, 5), looking at Canada, hasfound that “well before the turn of the century,single women missionaries and missionarywives outnumbered their male colleagues inmany overseas � elds”. In Great Britain, too, thewomen’s missionary movement was the largestsocial movement of women in the 19th century(Williams 1993; Thorne 1999). A paralleldevelopment took place in Norway, where thewomen’s missionary movement came to be themainstay of the Norwegian Missionary Society,whether measured by number of participants,co-ordination of local mission groups or money-raising for missionary projects (Tjelle 1990,105–108; Jørgensen 1992, 78–79).

Instead of being straightforward patriarchalregimes, evangelical missions have operated inways that reveal the often changing, paradoxicaland contested nature of the positions of womenand men in society. The notion of genderregime, a concept taken from Connell (1987), isuseful for describing the changing andparadoxical nature of the positions of womenand men in religious missions, as it allows aninvestigation of both liberating and oppressiveforces. Connell (ibid., 98–99) employs this termto delineate “a structural inventory of aparticular institution”. The concept recognizesvariations across different institutional contexts,and variations over time in each speci� cinstitutional context. What emerged over time inmissions were contested gender regimes, or

perhaps more realistically in 19th-centurycontexts, contested patriarchal gender regimes.Note that to emphasize contest and resistance isnot the same as saying that the missionarymovement was, as such, a feminist movement,or that women who took part in it were guidedby feminist concerns. In order to assess whetheror not the 19th-century women’s missionarymovement had links to feminist ideas, we mustuse a standard of evaluation proper to the timeand place of our inquiry. The straightforwardde� nition of feminism as “those activities whichchallenged … women’s con� nement to aseparate and essentially private social sphere”(Thorne 1993, 1) is a useful point of departure.

Hageman (1974, 174) has asserted that“Protestant women interested in missions in thelatter half of the 19th century did not allythemselves with those others of their timestruggling for the rights of women in the UnitedStates”. Hageman’s assessment has beensupported by Hunter (1984, xv; see also Hunter1989, 160; King 1989, 118) who has stated that“female missionary organizations were not self-consciously feminist and in fact were among themore conservative women’s organizations at theturn of the century”. Mitchison (1977, 72–73)has made the strong claim that the effects of themissionary movement were con� ned toreligious, as opposed to social reform, and seesno link between the women’s missionarymovement and the women’s movement. Welter(1980, 111) has argued that the fact that womenfound careers in the mission � eld was a result ofimpersonal societal causes, and “not a result ofwomen’s own efforts”.

A number of other scholars, however, make adirect link between the women’s missionarymovement and feminist concerns. Beaver (1980,11), for example, has not hesitated to call theWomen’s Foreign Mission Movement,consisting of American Protestant women, “the� rst feminist movement in North America”, andhas insisted that the missionary movement“stimulated the rise of various other streams inthe 19th-century struggle for women’s rightsand freedom”. Beaver’s views have beenchallenged (most directly by Hill 1985, 194),34

Gen

der

dem

ocra

tiza

tion

inev

ange

lica

lm

issi

ons

NO

RA

no.

120

00,

Vol

ume

8

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f Y

ork]

at 2

3:03

15

Oct

ober

201

4

but the possibility of feminist implications of thewomen’s missionary movement has also beenadvanced by Thorne (1999), who makes a casefor a direct link between the women’smissionary movement and the feministmovement in Britain, and by Grimshaw (1983,494), who stresses in this connection theconscious efforts of individual missionarywomen “to attain an education and anindependent livelihood”.

In Norway, there were clear links between the19th-century missionary and feministmovements (see Nyhagen Predelli 1998a).Below it is argued that missionary women inNorway, while gradually being emancipatedfrom the ideology of domesticity, contributedsigni� cantly to the liberation of Norwegianwomen from the private sphere of the home tothe public sphere of work. Women, as well asmen, have used missionary work in many ways,not only as an outlet for their speci� callyreligious zeal, energy and creativity, but also asthe means to ful� l themselves in much broaderways by putting their own abilities to work. Theimpact of missionary women’s work is notlimited to the local arena, as missionary womenworking as missionaries abroad oftenrepresented a “missionary feminism” with thegoals to educate women abroad in Christianmorals and raising their societal status.Although such a missionary feminism is acontroversial subject, much in the missionarydiscourse on women’s status can be seen asevidence for it (Nyhagen Predelli 1998b).

That women in missions, like those in secularsociety, have sought and found strategies forresisting entrenched gender relationships doesnot imply that they have had free rein to usetheir energy and creativity. On the contrary,missions, including the NMS, have typicallyplaced constraints on women’s activities thathave far exceeded those placed on men, and theyhave often con� ned women’s activities to arather limited sphere (see Grimshaw 1983;Hunter 1989; Brouwer 1990; Williams 1993).While it is true that women taking active part inthe missionary movement have sometimesde� ned their own terms of participation, more

often they have been limited by factors rooted incultural prescriptions and in the rules and modesof organization present at a particular time andplace.

Women’s missionaryassociations: an un� ttingactivity for women?The NMS was founded in Stavanger, a citylocated on the western coast of Norway knownfor its piety and industriousness, in 1842.Inspiration for its founding came fromDenmark, Germany, England and Switzerland,and in� uence from the Lutheran State Churchquickly came to predominate the mission.Initially, the NMS was designed as a maleenterprise, with an all-male membership and aneducational program reserved for malemissionaries. Women were, however, includedearly on as an important source of monetarysupport, and were urged to work for the missionby coming together in associations to produceneedlework for sale and secure an income forthe mission.

From the beginning, Norwegian women wereonly loosely af� liated with the NMS per se, asthey were not formally members of the missionorganization. In practice, this status meant thatwomen could not vote or participate in anydecision-making bodies within the NMS, even ifthey channelled most of their resources throughthat organization, and contributed decisively toits � nancial well-being and growth. Lack offormal in� uence, however, did not preventNorwegian women from surpassing the activityof men in the missionary movement. Butbecause the NMS made an early public appeal towomen in Norway to engage in work for themissionary cause by helping to clothe themissionaries themselves, as well as “theChristian Negro” and the “heathen Negrodisciples” (Nome 1943, 74), it was clear thatwomen were intended to take on a supportingrole, hidden from public view and prevented 35

Gen

der

dem

ocra

tiza

tion

inev

ange

lica

lm

issi

ons

NO

RA

no.

120

00,

Vol

ume

8

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f Y

ork]

at 2

3:03

15

Oct

ober

201

4

from taking on responsibility for � nancial andorganizational matters. The ideal of domesticitythat governed the lives of middle-class women(Cott 1977, 92; Prochaska 1980, 5; Vicinus1985, 2) and therefore also the lives of women inthe NMS, who mostly represented middle-classbackgrounds and values, could easily becombined with participation in religious,voluntary service. Taking on only a supportiverole for the mission con� rmed that a woman’sduty was � rst and foremost to take care of homeand children.

The second part of the 19th century was,however, a period of intense debate aboutwomen’s nature and role in society, both inNorway and internationally, and the Norwegianreligious sector, with its state church and manyvoluntary associations, was one of the arenaswhere different viewpoints were heard. TheNMS offers an organizational and aparticipatory perspective on these debates about“female emancipation” among theologians andlay people, and gives an example of how laypeople, with the support of a democratictradition, and in alliance with sympatheticmembers of the clergy, can challenge theestablishment of theologians and the statechurch in order to secure their own interests.The gradual integration of women into theNMS, which took place around the turn of thecentury, was a result of a growing, embarrassingdisparity between women’s contribution to theorganization and their lack of organizationalrights, and the realization that the NMSdepended on women’s contributions in afundamental way. The inclusion of women inorganizational leadership was secured throughthe long-lasting and persisting activity ofmissionary women, some of whom wereChristian feminists, and by the continuingpressures and in� uences of the “feminist spiritof the times”.

The NMS encouraged women early on toform supporting women’s missionaryassociations, but it was not a straightforwardmatter for women to do so. In addition to criticsfrom the state church establishment, piousmissionary women were themselves divided on

the issue. The problem was whether womenshould work for the mission in their own homes,or if they should join an association and thuswork for the mission outside the home. Twoimportant � gures in this debate were HenrietteGislesen (1809–1859) and Bolette Gjør (1834–1909).

Henriette Gluckstad (born Vibe), who later onmarried bishop Gislesen, was one of the � rstNorwegian women to establish a local women’sassociation in support of mission work. Born toa senior civil servant father in the city of Bergen,she became a born-again Christian after thedeath of her � rst husband (Nome 1943, 93). A“self-examining, pious, and introverted” (ibid.)personality, Henriette Gislesen, following theLutheran tradition, gave priority to a person’sreligious motivation and disposition rather thanto his or her good deeds. To do needlework insupport of the mission was important, but evenmore so was having the right “relationship toGod during our work, and the love with whichwe embrace our work” (Gislesen 1853, 20).

For Gislesen, meekness, humility andbashfulness were the primary womanly virtues.She held a deeply conservative view of therelationship between women and men, and sawit as a woman’s God-given duty to submitherself to and serve her husband within thecon� nes of the home. Gislesen’s view was verymuch in tune with Lutheran orthodoxy of thetime, which had a hegemonic position within theNorwegian religious establishment roughlyfrom 1600 to 1850 (Fæhn 1975; see alsoHammar 1998). Luther’s Catechism, the“Catechism songs” of Petter Dass, andPontoppidan’s Explanations were the in� uentialwritings that established a conservative gendertradition within the church, a tradition whichemphasized “a submissive, compliant, andobedient wife, who quietly surrendered to theauthority of her husband, the church, thegovernment, God and his word” (Fæhn 1975,590). Marriage, childbearing and housekeepingwere prescribed as God-ordained activities forwomen, and women’s dependence on maleauthority was put in the foreground. Writersfrom the theological establishment emphasized,36

Gen

der

dem

ocra

tiza

tion

inev

ange

lica

lm

issi

ons

NO

RA

no.

120

00,

Vol

ume

8

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f Y

ork]

at 2

3:03

15

Oct

ober

201

4

for example, that women could not exist oramount to anything without a man (Løhe 1865,30), or that education would cause both physicaland moral damage to women (Færden 1885, 93).The only permissible equality between thegenders was of a spiritual nature, as eachindividual, both male and female, could have adirect, personal relationship to God (see Skavlan1872, 25; Færden 1885, 2).

In accordance with this orthodoxLutheranism, Henriette Gislesen recommendedthat every woman set aside a particular time on aparticular day of the week to work for themission; a total of six hours of mission work permonth was deemed suitable (Gislesen 1853, 24).She further suggested that women do missionwork from 9:00 a.m. to noon on the � rst andthird Monday of every month (ibid., 27). If allwomen thus performed mission work in theirown homes on the same day and at the sametime, all women could join each other in a“society of the spirits”, and feel a closeness toeach other through membership in the holysociety (ibid., 22). This arrangement would alsoprevent the arousal of men’s indignation causedby a woman’s absence from her home (ibid.,35), and would increase the likelihood of ahusband’s support for the mission. The ideal“family association” would consist of a husbandreading aloud from the Bible and missionliterature, a wife (and possibly female servants)doing needlework to support the mission andchildren listening attentively to their lecturingfather (ibid., 53). Gislesen recommended theclosing of all existing women’s associations andthe establishment of such family associations astheir rightful alternative. She argued that “theconcept ‘association’ refers to something that isindependent, something that can exist in and foritself, (while) the concept ‘woman’ refersexactly to the contrary of independence, tosomething that as a rule, according to God’sholy order and will, neither can nor shall existfor itself” (ibid., 55).

Gislesen’s views were controversial from thestart. The NMS journal Norsk Missionstidende(MT) had a mixed review of her 1853 pamphleton women’s mission work (MT no. 5, 1853, 65–

75). Gislesen’s maxim that a woman’s calling isin her home was fully supported by the NMSreviewer, but he could not agree with the ideathat all women’s associations were super� uousand could readily be replaced with “family andhouse associations”. In the opinion of thereviewer, women’s associations would beneeded in a transitional phase to awaken themissionary interest among women. Without thesupervision and encouragement of a leader, anyinterest in mission work could quickly die off. Amore important criticism of Gislesen’s position,however, came from within the ranks ofmissionary women themselves, but in her favourshe actually also mustered signi� cant supportfrom the theological establishment.

Towards a growingconsciousness of women’spower in the missionQuite of another opinion than HenrietteGislesen, but from a similar social background,Bolette Gjør (born Nissen), daughter of astorekeeper in Trondheim, and stepdaughter of awealthy senior civil servant, was very critical ofHenriette Gislesen’s conservative views onwomen. Bolette Gjør became a mission womanwith liberal views on women’s role in society,and over the years she also developed direct tieswith the feminist movement in Norway(Nyhagen Predelli 1998a). From 1884, Gjørcould rely on support from the NMS leadershipwhen she, in her new role as editor of the journalfor women’s missionary associations,Missionslæsning for Kvindeforeninger (MLK),advised women to join each other inassociations and work to support the mission(MLK no. 3, 1884, 16).

Gjør was much younger than Gislesen, andthe 25 years of age difference between themwere important in terms of whether or not theychose to contest dominant societal views onwomen. In her position as editor of MLK, Gjørcould draw upon the growing feminist 37

Gen

der

dem

ocra

tiza

tion

inev

ange

lica

lm

issi

ons

NO

RA

no.

120

00,

Vol

ume

8

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f Y

ork]

at 2

3:03

15

Oct

ober

201

4

movement in Norway in terms of ideas andinspiration for her own agenda for missionwomen. Gjør could also draw upon theincreasing power and in� uence that missionarywomen themselves had gradually achievedwithin the missionary movement. By the early1880s, the NMS had become increasinglydependent on the � nancial means provided bythe loosely af� liated women’s associations, aswomen were then contributing more than half ofthe NMS’s total income (see Tjelle 1990).

Gjør demanded that women must not behindered by their household duties whenperforming their errands for the mission. Shewas quick to say that mission work could becombined with a woman’s work in the home,and emphasized that the duty to take care ofchildren and the sick had � rst priority. But Gjøralso insisted that women “for one time’s sakecan � nd another [person] to take care of thecreatures or make the food for them at home;that would not be irresponsible, to the contrary,it will do you good to sometimes tear yourselfaway from your daily toil …” (MLK no. 8,1887, 61–62). Moreover, Gjør recommendedthat meetings in women’s associations alwaysbe led by a woman (MLK no. 12, 1887, 96).

Although Gjør had the � nancial bene� t of themission as a whole and the spiritual needs ofmission women in mind when recommendingthat women run their own women’sassociations, it is also accurate to describe herwork for the mission as in� uenced by a feministagenda. Looking back on the history of thewomen’s missionary movement in 1909, Gjørdeclared that the women’s associationsestablished back in the 1840s had been “the � rsttender beginnings of a rising of women […].Wherever it reached, it had in� uence, [and] ithelped to lift women’s thoughts up above thedaily toil and struggle; helped many forward to alife in God, [and] became in many areas aliberation for women” (MLK no. 8, 1909, 57).Early on, missionary women were met withresistance from men, even to the point that theyhad stones thrown at them for going to missionmeetings (MLK no. 1, 1905, 3). But thewomen’s missionary movement, which was the

largest movement of women in 19th centuryNorway, grew to be a considerable force withinthe mission.

Missionary women experienced a growingconsciousness about their own importance in themission, and after their beginning in the 1820s,1830s and 1840s, the growth in independentlocal women’s associations was explosive. In1865, three hundred of these associations wereaf� liated with the NMS. By 1882, there were1,600–1,700 women’s associations, double thenumber of men’s associations. By the turn of thecentury, between 3,000 and 4,000 women’sassociations were established around thecountry, with an approximate total of 90,000members (Tjelle 1990, 108). These women’sassociations did not send their own missionariesabroad, and were not united in a nationalorganization. Their relationship was loose,based on solidarity to the mission cause andcommon af� liation with the NMS. Their workconsisted in the direct collection of money, andin needlework sold at bazaars and raf� es, theincome of which was mainly contributed to theNMS, but also to other mission organizations.

Not until 1884 did the women’s associationsachieve a closer relation with each other throughthe founding of MLK (“Missionary Readings forWomen’s Associations”), which was publishedby the NMS from 1884 until 1925 as asupplement to the NMS monthly journal NorskMissionstidende (MT). By the turn of thecentury, MLK had about 10,000 subscribers,while MT had about 17,000 (Tjelle 1990, 122),and both journals were read by a larger numberof people. At � rst, Bolette Gjør edited thejournal anonymously, referring to herself as “anolder [female] friend of the mission.” Only inJanuary 1893 did she begin to use her ownname, an indication of her own developmenttowards a feminist position (see Ebbel 1946,165). Gjør saw the women’s missionarymovement as a potential source of great powerfor women, and in 1905 she described missionwomen’s growing con� dence in these words:“Among the women themselves theconsciousness about them being a power in themission was growing, [a power] which could38

Gen

der

dem

ocra

tiza

tion

inev

ange

lica

lm

issi

ons

NO

RA

no.

120

00,

Vol

ume

8

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f Y

ork]

at 2

3:03

15

Oct

ober

201

4

make things happen when the women werejoined together” (MLK no. 2, 1905, 11).

New voting andrepresentational rights forwomenThe NMS became increasingly dependent on the� nancial means provided by the looselyaf� liated women’s associations. At the turn ofthe century, women were contributing fully two-thirds of the NMS’s total income (Tjelle 1990,81). This economic dependence, coupled withan external environment in which women wereslowly gaining more rights and in� uence,created the conditions for an increased scrutinyof the demarcation between women’s role assupporters of the mission and men’s role asdecision-makers in the NMS. Substantialchanges in the gender regime were the result.

As early as 1892, the NMS faced severeeconomic problems and unbalanced budgets,although the income from gifts steadilyincreased (ibid., 173). At the same time, theNMS was competing with other missionaryorganizations, both abroad and at home, for themoney collected by thrifty women. Theindependent status of the women’s associationssoon became a threat to the continuation of asecure income for the NMS. The prospect oflosing two-thirds of its annual income was a direone, and at the extreme there was even apossibility that the women could establish theirown independent missionary society with theirown missionaries to support. Such adevelopment had already taken place in theUnited States, Canada and England, and this waswell known to the NMS leadership (ibid., 178).If not literally its survival, at least the scope ofthe NMS’s organizational activities was clearlyat stake. Women themselves also started tobecome dissatis� ed with their lack of decision-making power within the NMS. As long as theywere contributing such a large fraction of theNMS income, some women felt it only seemed

fair to have a formal say in organizationalmatters.

All of these factors contributed to thechanging of the gender regime of the NMS bythe gradual integration of the women’sassociations into its organizational structure.The turning point in this long process was thegeneral assembly held in 1904, which grantedvoting and representational rights to individualwomen members. In doing so, the NMSassumed a pioneer role in Norwegian historybecause it was among the � rst institutions toextend its democratic principles to women. Asorganizational collectives, the women’smissionary associations became fully integratedinto the NMS structure in 1927. Women andmen fully enjoyed equal rights when, in 1939,women � nally became eligible for seats onnational and regional executive boards. The1904 decision, however, laid the groundworkfor further contestation of the patriarchal genderregime.

In 1902, the local NMS mission associationsin the two central eastern cities of Kristiania(Oslo) and Drammen suggested to the NMSleadership in Stavanger that all the regionalassemblies discuss the issue of women’s right tovote in the NMS (MT no. 9, 1903, 177). Onsome occasions, women had actually beenelected as representatives to NMS regionalassemblies, but they were usually rejectedbecause basic NMS principles dictated that onlymen could participate in the organizationaladministration (ibid., 176).2 In other places,women had exercised voting rights in regularmission associations although doing socon� icted with NMS basic principles. The lackof male participants at these meetings had madeit necessary to accept that women decided theissues at hand (MT no. 22, 1903: Referater, 47).The saying that “necessity knows no law” mightaccurately describe these “illegitimate”practices within the NMS, and the sameprinciple was invoked by the NMS on otheroccasions where a lack of male participation orstrength led to new opportunities for women(Nyhagen Predelli 1998b).

The proposal from Kristiania and Drammen 39

Gen

der

dem

ocra

tiza

tion

inev

ange

lica

lm

issi

ons

NO

RA

no.

120

00,

Vol

ume

8

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f Y

ork]

at 2

3:03

15

Oct

ober

201

4

had its background in the increased participationby women in the religious arena, and not least inthe increased contributions by and from womenin the missionary movement. The issues ofwomen’s emancipation and women’s rights,which were much discussed in Norwegiansociety at the time, also had an impact on theproposal. Norwegian women had by then madevarious advancements in the public sphere.From 1899, women were eligible to serve asschool board members; from 1900 they could beelected to poverty management boards, andwomen with a certain income or funds couldvote in municipal elections from 1901 (Agerholt1973). In 1903, women participated in electionsto the Lutheran State Church’s localcongregational boards. Early on, women whowere regular members of the temperancemovement of 1845 had been able to participatein organizational leadership (ibid., 124).

The NMS leadership in Stavanger took afavourable attitude towards the proposal, andencouraged all regional assemblies to discussthe issue of women’s voting rights (MT no. 9,1903, 176–183). Importantly, the NMSleadership acknowledged that some missionarywomen actually wanted the right to vote. Theleadership also suggested that by giving womennew organizational rights, women’s missionaryassociations would establish a closerrelationship to the NMS and thereby feel moreobliged to direct their money to the NMS.Moreover, women could offer valuablecontributions in discussions concerning familymatters, children, mission asylums, womenmissionaries, and so on. Foreseeing criticismfrom conservative mission friends, the NMSleadership suggested that the inclusion ofwomen in the decision-making process wouldnot mean that women were to rule over men, andthat it would not con� ict with the biblicaladmonition that women were not to speak inpublic (ibid., 179).

In 1903, nine regional NMS assembliesdiscussed proposals to give women rights tovote and to be elected as representatives. Thevoting rights issue proved to be much lesscontroversial than the eligibility issue, and an

overwhelming majority secured women votingrights.3 The voting rights issue was presented asa question of fairness: since women contributedmost to the NMS income, it would only be fairfor them to have a say in how to spend themoney. A closer association between the NMSand mission women would also make womenfeel obliged to send their money to the NMS,instead of establishing their own society orsending money to competing mission societies.Some felt that the measure should be accepted inorder to prevent hostility and misgivings amongmission women. It was emphasized that whilemen had both rights and duties within the NMS,women had only duties and no rights.

Looking at the social background of theparticipants in the various assembly debates, it isquite striking that a high number of those whospoke in favour of women’s rights weremembers of the clergy (i.e., ministers, vicars,chaplains and bishops) or other servants of thechurch, such as sextons and church singers.4

Not counting ministers or emissaries of themission society itself, at least 49 members of theclergy and other church servants spoke in favourof giving women at least the right to vote, if notthe right to be elected, while eight expresseddoubt about the issues at hand, and only threeopposed the measures to integrate women intothe NMS altogether. Of the other participants,most of whom are upper- or middle-classpeople, and who are identi� able by both nameand occupation, 41 voted for giving women newrights, seven were unsure or expressed doubts,and ten were against the new measures.Although it is dif� cult to draw conclusionsabout the size of each occupational categorypresent at the meetings, it is possible to deducethat the majority in favour of extending rights towomen was a result of collaboration betweenclergy and lay people in the mission.

This conclusion of co-operation betweenclergy and lay people runs contrary to previousscholarship on the religious establishment inNorway and its views on women. It is clear thatthe lay religious movement was not uni� ed inrejecting women’s emancipation from theprivate sphere. Because representatives from the40

Gen

der

dem

ocra

tiza

tion

inev

ange

lica

lm

issi

ons

NO

RA

no.

120

00,

Vol

ume

8

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f Y

ork]

at 2

3:03

15

Oct

ober

201

4

church also spoke warmly in favour of includingwomen in mission management, it is simply nottrue that “otherwise different factions in thechurch and among lay people all in all agreed intheir [conservative] views on woman and herposition” (Lein 1981, 22). Signi� cantly, bishopJohan Christian Heuch, who was known to beopposed to parliamentary systems anddemocratization in general, and to women’semancipation in particular (see Oftestad et al.1993, 229), argued that because women hadgained other rights in public life, they ought tobe given the right to vote and to be elected to allmanagement levels in the mission (MT no. 22,1903: Referater, 78). He could not � nd anyquote from the Bible putting up a hindrance tosuch a development, and declared that “ifanyone has the right to participate in missionissues, then it is women” (ibid.).

The regional assemblies found it much moredif� cult to support a measure giving women theright to be elected as members of executiveboards. The general mood expressed at theassembly meetings was that women could beeligible as representatives to local and regionalboards, and to local, regional and nationalassembly meetings. A majority of theassemblies declared reservation, if not outrighthostility, to the idea that women were to beeligible for national board positions (MT no. 22,1903). Many participants were ready to makethe concession of voting rights for women, butthey could not support a measure that in effectplaced women in leading or governing positions.Several members were concerned that women’sparticipation in management positions meantthat women would come to exercise completehegemony within the NMS, as women couldeasily gain a majority on the various executiveboards. Others generally feared a state in whichwomen would have the opportunity to exercisepower over men, a situation that would con� ictwith 1 Corinthians 14, 34–35 in the Bible, wherethe apostle Paul stated that women should keepquiet at church meetings and that they must notbe in charge. Such a new practice would also becontrary to the admonition of 1 Timothy 2, 12,where the apostle Paul commanded that “I do

not allow them [women] to teach or to haveauthority over men; they must keep quiet”. Formany of the male participants at the regionalassembly meetings, these biblical admonitionsmeant that women could not hold positions ofauthority and power within the NMS. To putwomen in such positions would also bedetrimental to their womanliness and naturalqualities of silence and humiliation. Somecharged that if the NMS conceded these rights towomen, other changes, such as women priestsand women preachers, would soon follow. Manymen also felt that there was an importantdifference between women voting for malerepresentatives and women themselvesparticipating on a continuous basis in missionleadership.

What about mission women themselves? Towhat extent did they contest the existingpatriarchal gender regime of the mission? Didwomen themselves want the right to vote and theright to be elected, and did they demand it? Itdoes not seem that directly articulated demandsfrom the women themselves constituted theprimary reason, certainly not the only one, fororganizational change. Although maleparticipants at the various regional assemblymeetings remarked that many individual womenand women’s associations expressed a desire forthe right to vote, it was also noted that thesewomen did not explicitly demand such a right.Indeed, at that time it was not considered properbehaviour for women to put forward suchdemands, and the NMS leadership stated bluntlythat the only decent thing to do would be for themen to give women their due in� uence, withoutthe demand being raised by the womenthemselves (Cirkulære til Bergen 1904, 16).Women’s alleged modesty and humble attitude,which held them back in public life, were thusreasons for men to put forward a “nobleproposal” on their behalf. That women did notpublicly demand democratic rights within theNMS, however, did not prevent them fromstating their wishes in private. At the Drammenregional assembly meeting, one representativeoffered the following analogy in favour ofextending rights to women: 41

Gen

der

dem

ocra

tiza

tion

inev

ange

lica

lm

issi

ons

NO

RA

no.

120

00,

Vol

ume

8

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f Y

ork]

at 2

3:03

15

Oct

ober

201

4

To offer women the right to vote without theright to be elected as representatives is the sameas putting a cup of coffee in front of a guestwithout offering him any sugar or cream. If onecould afford it, it would not have beenconsidered gentlemanly to offer people blackcoffee.

The next day it was reported by anotherrepresentative that

a prominent and highly esteemed missionarywoman from Drammen told me yesterday, aftershe had listened to the debates here, that “toonly give women the right to vote would noteven amount to a cup of black coffee … It is notthe right to vote that we women want. It is justthe same with the right to vote, when we cannotparticipate and express our opinion about themission …” Such things can be said by women,… and it should be said, Mr. Speaker, becauseit is true. (MT no. 22, 1903: Referater, 68 and71.)

Some participants at the regional meetingsstated that they had never heard any womanindicate that she wanted organizational rights,and a few declared women to have said outrightthat they did not want such rights. A goodnumber, however, maintained having heardwomen express a desire for equal rights. Womenwere also reported to have said that giving themrights would increase their feelings ofresponsibility towards the NMS.

A biblical interpretation insupport of women’sinclusionAfter the regional assembly debates, the NMSleadership repeated the fact that womenthemselves had not demanded a change in theNMS basic governing principles, but it was alsonoted that “women have until now not had sucha great opportunity to present such a need, evenif it should be present, because our missionwomen have neither been able to participate inthe discussion of mission matters nor have theyhad a magazine in which such a discussion couldtake place” (Cirkulære 1904, 16). Apparently

the NMS leadership overlooked the missionwomen’s own journal, MLK. Anyhow, theleadership pointed out that it was not useful tode� ne the issue as a matter of justice, asmissionary women themselves did not demandequal rights. Rather, the leadership presented thequestion � rst and foremost as a pragmatic one:would the extension of democratic rights towomen be useful for the mission? Theleadership answered their own question in thepositive, and recommended, among otherthings, that women be given the right to vote,and that women should be eligible for seats onregional and national assemblies and on localmission boards.

Central to the mission’s view of women wasthe biblical story of God’s creation of man andthe earth, and the subsequent fall of man. TheNMS leadership emphasized the universal truthof the notion that “man was � rst created andthen woman as his helper, and woman fell � rstin sin, and thereafter, led by her, the man [fell insin]” (Cirkulære 1904, 19). The creation ofwoman and her fall from grace were seen asdetermining woman’s nature and her societalposition (Lein 1981, 66). Because of her originalsin, the NMS declared, “just as much as awoman is not to appear as the teacher or advisorin a gathering, she is not to be a man’s head inmarriage. In both of these cases, the position ofauthority does not belong to woman, but toman” (Cirkulære 1904, 19–20). With such aconservative view of gender relations, howcould the NMS propose to give women the rightto vote and to be elected as representatives?

The NMS had to manoeuvre carefully in orderto avoid con� ict between its basic view ongender relations and its new proposal to includewomen in organizational leadership. The answerto this problem became a question of de� nitionor interpretation: “What does the apostle meanby talking at meetings?” (ibid., 20). In a cleveract, the NMS leadership produced a biblicalinterpretation sympathetic to women’sparticipation in decision-making to supportalterations in policy. This provides an intriguingillustration of the complex ways in whichgender relations were negotiated within the42

Gen

der

dem

ocra

tiza

tion

inev

ange

lica

lm

issi

ons

NO

RA

no.

120

00,

Vol

ume

8

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f Y

ork]

at 2

3:03

15

Oct

ober

201

4

mission, and it shows how organizationalexperience can have an effect on the use andinterpretation of scriptural beliefs.5 Recall thatone of the prevailing arguments againstwomen’s inclusion in the organizationalstructure had been taken from the Bible, wherethe apostle Paul counsels that women should notspeak at church meetings (1 Corinthians 14, 34–35). A straightforward reading of this passagewould imply exclusion of women asrepresentatives at the NMS general assembly.Once the NMS leadership became intent onsupporting women’s right to speak and vote,however, it decided to offer an alternativeinterpretation of Paul, which would allow for thechanged practice. What Paul had meant, theNMS leadership now reasoned, was that womenwere not to participate as preachers inecclesiastical services. Since Paul did notexplicitly forbid women to hold administrativepositions, however, the leadership concludedthat women could participate in organizationalmanagement (Cirkulære 1904, 20–21).

An argument could also be made that amission woman in an administrative positionwould be in a position of authority in relation tomen, as she would participate in “the making oflaws and rules that all servants of the missionsociety must obey” (Cirkulære 1904, 22).According to the NMS leadership, however, thebiblical order that women were not to be in aposition of authority also had to be re-examined,and the emphasis must be put on the meaning ofthe word “authority”, stemming from thesomewhat “obscure” word of “authentein”(ibid.). The NMS leadership interpreted thecommand of the biblical passage of 1 Timothy2, 12 to mean that women should not “actindependently and absolutely [autocratically]towards men”, and concluded that “this will notaffect women’s co-operation with men in a localor general assembly” (ibid.). Women castingtheir votes in the mission would thus not be aquestion of exercising illegitimate authority, buta question of co-operationbetween the gendersin organizational decision-making.

The NMS leadership made its decision togrant women the right to vote at the risk of

considerable cost. Facing internal disagreementand resistance from State Church theologians,the NMS leadership stood � rm in its decision tochange its policy toward women’sorganizational participation. Although the factthat women had the right to vote incongregational boards within the State Churchwas used by the NMS as an argument in favourof giving women new rights within the NMS,the limitation that women’s right to vote wascon� ned to local congregational boards withinthe State Church did not greatly challenge theideal of domesticity for women. In this area themission organization was clearly moreprogressive than its legitimating Churchinstitution, a fact at variance with the idea thatmissions generally represented the moreconservative trends in religious thinking.

Compared with so-called “high churchconservatives”, who generally resisted anydemocratic in� uences in the church and de� nedwomen’s emancipation as disbelief, and asimmoral and unnatural (Lein 1981, 2), the NMSdecision of 1904 is quite radical. The NMSbelonged to a low-church tradition, in whichdemocratic views and anti-hierarchical thinkingdominated, and the pro-democratic tradition ofthe lay people’s religious movement wasconducive to the inclusion of women in missiondecision-making. It is worth repeating that highchurch representatives such as State Churchministers and theologians also argued for givingwomen the right to vote and representationwithin the NMS. A co-operation between lowand high church representatives secured animportant advancement for Norwegian womenand produced a situation where religious forcesmobilized to change an existing gender regime.

The proposals that passed the generalassembly vote included giving women the rightto vote, and that women should be eligible forseats on the regional and national assembliesand on local boards. The � nal decisions weremade with an overwhelming majority, andprovided the women’s associations with asigni� cant new tool for shaping and in� uencingorganizational politics. These changes mighthave been prudent moves of co-optation 43

Gen

der

dem

ocra

tiza

tion

inev

ange

lica

lm

issi

ons

NO

RA

no.

120

00,

Vol

ume

8

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f Y

ork]

at 2

3:03

15

Oct

ober

201

4

(triggered by men’s awareness of theorganization’s dependence on the economicsupport of women) as much as they wereresponses to wishes among the womenthemselves. Whichever motive predominated,the decisions acknowledged the indispensabilityof women and gave them an active voice inorganizational matters. The change illustratesthat victory is seldom complete, as seats onnational and regional boards continued to bereserved for male representatives. Althoughwomen could now take on administrativepositions, they were always to occupy less thanhalf of the number of management positions atany level. The right for women to participate inone area expanded, but restrictions werereinforced and male hegemony was preserved inother areas.

ConclusionThe gradual integration of women in NMSdecision-making processes and the subsequentgender democratization of the NMS giveevidence that religious women in the missionarymovement have used strategies ofaccommodation and resistance in order tochange an existing gender regime. Missionwomen combined their public display of loyalty,humility and meekness with more privatelyexpressed desires for power and authority andresistance to the patriarchal principles of theNMS in order to assist and strengthen the NMSleadership’s efforts to change the establishedgender regime. Importantly, other missionwomen held more conservative views on theseissues, and did not seek to extend their own rolesin the mission. The integration of women wasalso a result of persistent � nancial problems inthe NMS, and an element of co-optation wastherefore at work. While missionary womengained some important democratic rights, theywere held back in other areas, most notably inhigh-level management. The notion thatwomen’s most important occupation was in thehome remained strong within mission circles, aschild-bearing and rearing were held against

women’s participation in the national board.Notwithstanding these considerations, thetension between women’s importance in themission and their lack of organizationalin� uence actually led to the contestation andchanging of the existing gender regime withinthe NMS.

The importance of the 19th and early 20th-century women’s missionary movement, bothfor the emancipation of women in general, andfor mission women in particular, has probablybeen underestimated. Recall that in Norway,there were between 3,000 and 4,000 women’sassociations by the turn of the century, with anapproximate total of 90,000 members. No otherorganization or movement in Norway has everhad that many women members. The women’smissionary movement also constituted thelargest social movement of women in countriessuch as Great Britain, Canada and the UnitedStates. By offering opportunities both at homeand abroad, the missionary movement hasaffected the general status of women in societyby playing an important part in changing bothwomen’s own assumptions and general culturalassumptions about what women can do andachieve. The missionary movement has beendecisive in bringing women out of their homesand into the public sphere, even as it has insistedon de� ning women’s work in missions asprivate, and on always maintaining some limitson what women can accomplish. Missionarywomen have participated in the making of theirown emancipation from the private sphere, andthey have contributed to the liberation of womenat large by providing alternative models ofgender relations through their work at home andabroad.

NOTES1. See Luthersk Kirketidende (no. 11, March 13,

1864: 161–168, no. 21–22, May 22, 1864:346–352, no. 5–6, August 7, 1864: 83–89 andno. 7, August 14, 1864: 97–108), for adiscussion between the theological candidatesHans Landstad and Anton Høyer.

2. In one case, women had actually been acceptedas representatives to an NMS regional44

Gen

der

dem

ocra

tiza

tion

inev

ange

lica

lm

issi

ons

NO

RA

no.

120

00,

Vol

ume

8

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f Y

ork]

at 2

3:03

15

Oct

ober

201

4

assembly meeting (see MT no. 22, 1903,Referater: 67). For other exceptions to missionrules, see ibid., 67.

3. The actual votes at the various regionalassembly meetings revealed regionaldifferences in attitudes towards these measures(see Nyhagen Predelli 1998b).

4. While clergy and other church servants wereoften referred to by both their last name andtitle in minutes from the meetings, otherparticipants were usually referred to by theirlast name only, and their social background isunknown. Many of those present neverparticipated in the discussions, and their namesand social backgrounds are not reported in theminutes of the meetings.

5. See Miller (1994, chapter 3) for a detailedexample of how scriptural beliefs can affectorganizational practices.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTSResearch for this project was funded by theNational Science Foundation, the HaynesFoundation and the Research Council ofNorway. The archival material is located at theNMS Archive, Stavanger, Norway. The authorthanks Jon Miller and an anonymous reviewer ofNORA for valuable comments.

REFERENCESAgerholt, Anna Caspari. 1980. Den norske

kvinnebevegelsens historie (The history of theNorwegian women’s movement). Oslo: GyldendalNorsk Forlag.

Beaver, R. Pierce. 1980. American Protestant womenin world mission: A history of the first feministmovement in North America. Revised edition.Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans.

Brouwer, Ruth Compton. 1990. New women for God:Canadian Presbyterian women and India missions,1876–1914. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

Cirkulære til Bergen 1904, NMS.Connell, R.W. 1987. Gender and power: Society, the

person, and sexual politics. Stanford: StanfordUniversity Press.

Cott, Nancy F. 1977. The bonds of womanhood:“Woman’s sphere” in New England, 1780–1835.New Haven: Yale University Press.

Ebbel, Clara Thue. 1946. Paa frammarsj. BoletteGjør, Misjonsvennen (Marching forward. BoletteGjør, the mission friend). Oslo: LutherstiftelsensForlag.

Fæhn, Helge. 1975. Kvinder selv stod op og strede:

Kvinnen i Den norske kirke etter reformasjonen.(Women in the Norwegian church after thereformation). Kirke og Kultur, 80, 587–600.

Færden, M.J. 1885. Kvindespørgsmaalet.Gjennemseet og forøget udgave avredaksjonsartikler fra “Luthersk Ugeskrift” (Thewoman question. Edited articles from “LutherskUgeskrift”). Kristiania: Th. SteensForlagsexpedition.

Gislesen, Henriette. 1853. Den kvindelige virksomhedfor misjonen. Et afskedsord til søstre (Women’swork for the mission. A parting word to sisters).Christiania [Oslo]: Abelsted.

Grimshaw, Patricia. 1983. Christian woman, piouswife, faithful mother, devoted missionary:Conflicts in roles of American missionary womenin nineteenth century Hawaii. Feminist Studies, 9,489–521.

Hageman, Alice. 1974. Women and missions: Thecost of liberation. In Hageman, Alice (ed.): Sexistreligion and women in the church. New York:Association Press.

Hammar, Inger. 1988. Den svaÊrerovradeoffentligheten. Kon och religion iemancipationsprocessen. (Gender and religion inthe emancipation process). Kvinnovetenskapligtidskrift, 19, 16–28.

Hill, Patricia R. 1985. The world their household: TheAmerican woman’s foreign mission movement andcultural transformation, 1870–1920. Ann Arbor:The University of Michigan Press.

Hunter, Jane. 1984. The gospel of gentility: Americanwomen missionaries in turn-of-the-century China.New Haven: Yale University Press.

Hunter, Jane. 1989. The home and the world: Themissionary message of U.S. domesticity. InFlemming, Leslie (ed.): Women’s work for women:Missionaries and social change in Asia. Boulder:Westview Press.

Jørgensen, Torstein. 1992. De første hundre aÊr (Thefirst hundred years). In Jørgensen, Torstein (ed.): ITro og Tjeneste: Det Norske Misjonsselskap 1842–1992 (In faith and service: The NorwegianMissionary Society 1842–1992). Stavanger:Misjonshøgskolen.

King, Marjorie. 1989. Exporting femininity, notfeminism: Nineteenth-century U.S. missionarywomen’s efforts to emancipate Chinese women. InFlemming, Leslie (ed.): Women’s work for women:Missionaries and social change in Asia. Boulder:Westview Press, 117–135.

Lein, Bente Nilsen. 1981. Kirken i felttog motkvinnefrigjøring (The church’s campaign againstwomen’s emancipation). Oslo:Universitetsforlaget.

Luthersk Kirketidende (The Lutheran ChurchNewspaper). 45

Gen

der

dem

ocra

tiza

tion

inev

ange

lica

lm

issi

ons

NO

RA

no.

120

00,

Vol

ume

8

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f Y

ork]

at 2

3:03

15

Oct

ober

201

4

Løhe, Wilhelm. 1865. Om den kvindelige eenfold.(On female simplicity). Translated by Welhaven.Stavanger: Lønnings Forlag.

Miller, Jon. 1994. The social control of religious zeal:A study of organizational contradictions. NewBrunswick: Rutgers University.

Missionslæsning for kvindeforeninger (Missionreadings for women’s associations). Stavanger: Detnorske misjonsselskap.

Mitchison, Wendy. 1977. Canadian women andchurch missionary societies in the nineteenthcentury: A step towards independence. Atlantis: AWomen’s Studies Journal, 2, 57–75.

Nome, John. 1943. Det Norske Misjonsselskapshistorie i norsk kirkeliv. Bind 1 (The history of theNorwegian Missionary Society in Norwegianchurch life. Vol. 1). Stavanger: Dreyers GrafiskeAnstalt.

Norsk Missionstidende (Norwegian MissionaryTidings). Stavanger: Det norske misjonsselskap.

Nyhagen Predelli, Line. 1998a. Emansipasjon avkvinner hjemme og ute: Misjonsfeminisme og densmottakelse blant misjonsbevegelse ogkvinnebevegelse. (Emancipation of women athome and abroad: Missionary feminism and itsreception by the missionary movement and thewomen’s movement). Kvinneforskning , 3–4, 37–51.

Nyhagen Predelli, Line. 1998b. Contested patriarchyand missionary feminism: The NorwegianMissionary Society in Nineteenth Century Norwayand Madagascar. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation,University of Southern California.

Oftestad, Bernt T., Rasmussen, Tarald andSchumacher, Jan. 1993. Norsk Kirkehistorie

(Norwegian church history). Oslo:Universitetsforlaget.

Prochaska, FK. 1980. Women and philanthropy innineteenth-century England. New York: OxfordUniversity Press.

Skavlan, Sigvald. 1872. Eva, den første kvinde (Eve,the first woman). Bergen: F. Beyers Forlag.

Thorne, Susan. 1993. Missionary-Imperial feminism.Paper presented at the meeting of the AmericanAnthropological Association, Washington, DC.

Thorne, Susan. 1999. Missionary-Imperial feminism.In Huber, Mary Taylor and Lutkehaus, Nancy(eds.): Gendered missions. University of MichiganPress.

Tjelle, Kristin Fjelde. 1990. Kvinder hjelper kvinder:Misjonskvinneforeningsbevegelsen i Norge 1860–1910 (Women help women: The movement ofWomen’s Missionary Associations in Norway1860–1910). Unpublished Master’s thesis,Department of History, University of Oslo.

Vicinus, Martha. 1985. Independent women: Workand community for single women 1850–1920.Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

Welter, Barbara. 1980. “She hath done what shecould”: Protestant women’s missionary careers innineteenth-century America. In Wilson James,Janet (ed.): Women in American religion.Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press,111–125.

Williams, Peter. 1993. The missing link: Therecruitment of women missionaries in someEnglish evangelical missionary societies in thenineteenth century. In Bowie, Fiona Ardener,Shirley and Kirkwood, Deborah (eds.): Women andmissions: Past and present. Oxford: Berg, 43–69.

46

Gen

der

dem

ocra

tiza

tion

inev

ange

lica

lm

issi

ons

NO

RA

no.

120

00,

Vol

ume

8

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f Y

ork]

at 2

3:03

15

Oct

ober

201

4