This document is part of the Festschrift in Honor of Charles Speel,
edited by Thomas J. Sienkewicz and James E. Betts and published by Monmouth College in
Monmouth, Illinois in 1997. The Table of Contents for this volume can be accessed here. If you have any questions, you may contact Tom Sienkewicz at email@example.com.
Monmouth College in a Multicultural America: An Essay
William T. Irelan MC'62
When Monmouth College was founded in 1853 in Monmouth, Illinois by the Associate Reformed Presbyterian Church, mainstream America was essentially a white, Anglo-Saxon, Protestant, and largely rural, society. The great waves of Roman Catholic immigration (from Ireland, Southern and Eastern Europe) associated with the rapid industrialization and urbanization of America in the late nineteenth century were yet to occur. African Americans were still in bondage, not even legally recognized as citizens of the United States.1 The small Jewish community was hardly noticeable on a national level, and Asians were limited to the Chinese who had come to California during the Gold Rush of 1849. Native Americans (American Indians) were still being subdued on the western frontier.2
In its early days Monmouth College was very much a product of the rural midwestern community it was designed to serve. Religiously and ethnically homogeneous, attracting small-town rural students of North European Protestant origin, the College community was also reflective of American society at large. Although the College, like the country, has evolved since the mid-nineteenth century, it still exists in large measure to serve rural students from the small, predominantly white communities of central western Illinois. Presently, i.e., in the fall of 1995, 91.0% of the student body hails from the state of Illinois.3 Foreign students from 16 countries comprise 4.3% of the student body while minority students constitute 4.7% of enrollment. Women students outnumber men 57.7% to 42.3% and Roman Catholics now predominate among religious denominations. Overall, more than 90% of students come from the white majority of the American population.
While the fundamental socio-cultural character of Monmouth College and the region it serves probably has changed only marginally since the founding of the College, the demographic as well as cultural profile of American society more generally has changed dramatically during this period. Consequent to the "Century of Immigration" from 1820-1920, mainstream America evolved from a society of primarily white, Anglo-Saxon Protestants (WASPs) to one of WASPs and Roman Catholics of Irish and Southern and Eastern European origin (Italians and Poles).4 In that century America became "multi-ethnic," if not entirely "multi-cultural"; there was diversity of national origin, but it was within a common European cultural heritage. European immigration patterns established during this period presaged the enactment of a Europe-centered national immigration policy under the Immigration Act of 1924. That Act established immigration quotas based on the national origins of the existing population, thereby favoring European immigration and the retention of the primarily European character of the society.
A Europe-centered immigration policy endured thereafter until 1965 when Congress, decrying the allegedly "discriminatory" orientation of the Immigration Act of 1924, decreed that all countries henceforth would be given the same quota. Although supporters of the 1965 legislation provided firm assurances the change in policy would not affect the established ethnic balance of the country, their expectations proved false. Since 1965 the country has experienced a huge surge in immigration of peoples from non-European countries, largely from Latin America and Asia, a trend expected to continue indefinitely.5 Concurrently European immigration has declined. As will be seen, these recent immigration patterns hold immensely important implications for the future of the country, not least for those states where these recent arrivals have congregated.6
Today America is a vastly different society from what it was when Monmouth College was established more than 140 years ago. Roman Catholics, although not as numerous as Protestants, now constitute the largest single Christian denomination in the country and comprise more than 36% of all religiously affiliated individuals.7 As evidenced by the election of John F. Kennedy, Roman Catholics, at least those of European origin, have become fully integrated into the Protestant America to which they emigrated. African Americans, liberated from the bonds of slavery, have made, despite many obstacles, an indelible mark on mainstream American society. A rapidly growing and ethnically diverse Hispanic population now calls out for acceptance and recognition.8 American Jews have contributed to and influenced American society and culture in a manner disproportionate to their numbers, and a Muslim community, of both Asian and Arab origin, has belatedly staked out a place in America for adherents of Islam. A small but long-established Asian society of Japanese, Chinese and Filipinos thrives, and Indians and Pakistanis from the Asian Sub-Continent, Koreans and Vietnamese each have recently established a substantial permanent presence in America. Native Americans, regrettably, remain a nearly invisible, if not forgotten, social entity, viewed by many Americans as simply a kind of historical relic.
Of particular interest within this broad ethnic mosaic are the numerous recent immigrants of non-European origin, in particular Hispanics and Asians, whose ethnic and cultural backgrounds differ substantially from those of the white majority. As these immigrant groups have increased in number, they have established ethnic enclaves across the American landscape replete with visible accoutrements of their native cultures. In so doing they are following the well-trodden path of the English, Germans, Scandinavians, Irish, Poles, Italians, and other immigrants who preceded them. Whereas these European immigrants ultimately assimilated to a larger American whole, it seems debatable whether the celebrated phenomenon of the American "melting pot" will fully apply to recent non-European immigrant groups. These newcomers may more likely follow in the footsteps of Native Americans, African Americans and Chinese Americans who, as non-Europeans in a white American society, have tended to retain their separate and distinct ethnic characters.
Undeniably, non-European peoples have found the path of assimilation into white, European America paved with a multitude of barriers and conflicting social interests. Asians in general have faced rejection and outright exclusion by the white majority; African Americans, although among the earliest non-native residents of the country, have long been alienated from their white American compatriots, first enslaved by white settlers and thereafter systematically discriminated against by the descendants of those early colonists; Native Americans have confronted the unique challenge of trying to maintain their very identity in the face of harassment, expulsion and dispersal by numerically superior European colonizers.9 It seems inevitable that recent immigrants of non-European stock also will confront ethnic, cultural and other obstacles and disincentives to assimilation.
Moreover, with access to modern telecommunication technology and transportation systems, new immigrant groups simply have less need to assimilate. Unlike earlier immigrants from Europe, they are not obliged by the circumstances of immigration to break off ties to the "Old Country." A typical Scotch-Irish, German or Italian immigrant in the 1900's left the homeland expecting never to return. Hispanic immigrants from Mexico and other parts of Central America, however, can easily maintain close links to their nearby home countries. For many recently arrived Hispanics, the very word "immigrant" seems inadequate to describe their actual social status in this country. Even immigrants from more distant Asia or Africa can not only maintain regular contact with their countries of origin, but can visit those countries periodically, and at least as frequently expect their families to come to visit them in America.
With the multiplicity and volume of non-European groups now settling in America the country appears, at least for the foreseeable future, destined to face a process of increasing social "Balkanization." Whether this process will lead to an ideal ethnic harmony that has largely escaped other multiracial and multicultural societies, or will result in the divisive ethnic strife seemingly endemic to those societies can only be subject to conjecture (Brimelow 1995:114-133).10 But one thing is certain, existing social and demographic trends ultimately will compel Americans to confront, as we have in the past, the question of what kind of America we want to be, and perhaps more important, the question of what kind of country we can be and still maintain the social cohesion, commonality of purpose and political unity a nation-state requires. Will the United States of America now consciously seek to become a mini-United Nations of the world, or will it conclude that it has reached its cultural carrying capacity? Such questions will inevitably lead the country to a reconsideration of current immigration law and policy.
Today America accepts almost as many immigrants as the rest of the world combined. Western Europe, already struggling to absorb its "guest-worker" population, is tightening its borders against expected refugees from Eastern Europe and the Balkans. Japan's gates have always been closed, and the same is true of China, India and many other Asian nations. Yet the motivation for population movement increases every day. The gap between rich and poor nations is growing rapidly, and the number of refugees from war and ethnic conflict has never been higher. There are now some 125 million people living outside their own homelands, many of whom must inevitably be absorbed elsewhere. Meanwhile the world's population continues to grow at an alarming rate, bringing further pressures for migration.11 Clearly the United States cannot alone relieve these pressures. To the extent it tries, it may create for itself many of the very problems that have caused migration from other countries in the first place.
Immigration policy will doubtless bend and change under these many pressures, but America will not likely abandon its deeply embedded immigrant tradition, a tradition that has enriched our society beyond measure.12 We will continue to welcome people to our shores, although the probable focus will be on those with existing family ties to America, those with needed skills, and those who seek asylum from political oppression. The total allowable volume of immigration per year, however, may well be reduced, and efforts to control illegal immigration increased. The simple fact is that, while immigrants are generally an economic as well as cultural plus to the country, America no longer needs labor in the same degree it did in the past. Immigration proponents may invoke romanticized references to the poet Emma Lazarus and her compelling concept of America as a refuge for the tired, poor, huddled masses of the world.13 But the truth is that post-colonial immigration policy in this country has largely been driven by hard economic reality: America needed labor to develop and expand. Our perceived "manifest destiny" to push the western frontier across the continent, coupled with the need for population to carry out the task, was the principal motivating factor behind the open immigration policy of the nineteenth century. No such compelling national interest in immigration exists today.
Regardless of the future course of immigration policy, recent patterns of immigration, both legal and illegal, are a fact in America and the consequences of that immigration history must now be squarely faced. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the U.S. population will reach 392 million by the year 2050, a 50% increase over our present size. Of that total 52.5% will be white, 22.5% Hispanic, 14.4% African American, 9.7% Asian, and 0.9% Native American. This projection compares with a population profile in 1990 of 75.7% white, 11.8% African American, 9.0% Hispanic, 2.8% Asian, and 0.7% Native American.14 When Monmouth College was founded, the country was approximately 90% white European. Thus from a country that generally saw itself, and was seen by others, as a prototypically white, European derivative culture, America is becoming something clearly quite different. This is not abstract speculation; this is demographic fact, of which there are already many visible indices, not the least of which is language.
In the 1990 census it was reported that 73% of Miamians, 50% of Los Angelenos, 41% of New Yorkers, and 30% of Chicagoans and Houstonians did not speak English at home.15Currently one in five children in American public schools is foreign born.16 With one million new legal immigrants each year, and 300-400,000 illegals, many American schools are being overwhelmed by the cost and pedagogical challenge of teaching large numbers of immigrant children the language of learning before they can participate effectively in the mainstream educational process. Because 85% of all current immigrants are non-Europeans, it is not only a simple question of bilingualism. In many parts of the country America is becoming a truly polyglot society at the educational level, with somewhat unpredictable implications.17
The new demography is not only an irreversible fact. It is also a powerful and influential new dynamic in American society, in particular with respect to its burgeoning Hispanic population. Concomitant with the growth in the Hispanic population U.S. interest in and influence over Latin America has expanded. After many decades of problematic relations with the Southern Hemisphere, which traditionally resented and feared its powerful neighbor to the north, the United States has entered a period of remarkable cordiality with the Latin countries of Central and Southern America. With the establishment of democratic regimes in all but Cuba, the political differences of the past have diminished and the economic systems of most of the countries of North and South America have finally converged toward a philosophical commonality. Undoubtedly the existence of a large Hispanic community in the United States has positively and significantly influenced the improvement of relations between the United States and its southern neighbors. We are, in a sense, no longer an "other" culture and country to our Latin neighbors. We are becoming increasingly one of them.
With these changes have come major U.S. investment and unprecedented economic growth in Latin America. As a result of the signing of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), trade barriers between the major countries of North and South America are being dismantled. Canada, the United States and Latin America now constitute an increasingly integrated regional economy of 772 million people. As the Latin countries become more technologically advanced, U.S. economic interest in them will become deeper and more widespread. Traditional markets in Europe and elsewhere will remain, but the Latin American share of U.S. commercial and economic interaction with the world will almost certainly grow both absolutely and in relative terms. Who can doubt the active role our Hispanic population will play in such a scenario as it enfolds?18
It is a truism that America is becoming an increasingly international society in an increasingly international world. But because this development has been more the result of circumstance than choice, it is a development many Americans do not understand and are not readily prepared to accept. Some may see our growing multicultural make-up as opportunity, a resource for staying competitive in a rapidly integrating world economy. Many others, however, worry about becoming foreigners in their own land. How traditionally isolationist America responds to this historic shift in its fundamental ethnic character is a question that must concern us all.
There are now and always have been strong nativist and isolationist tendencies in the white American population. In 1882 Congress passed the Chinese Exclusion Act targeted at a single nationality. In 1917 Congress legislated an Asian Barred Zone specifically designed to shut out all Orientals. Today we can no more give free rein to such "Know Nothing" tendencies than we can avoid buying Japanese cars. The yearning of certain politicians for the traditional America in which they grew up notwithstanding, the ever increasing demographic and political strength of the "new" Americans from Latin America and Asia will likely counteract inclinations of other Americans to pretend the country is something it no longer is. Frustrated white Americans may join militias, engage in animated posturing on the Internet, even commit terrorist acts. But they can not change the new demographic landscape of America.
Perhaps the single most significant feature of this new landscape will be the rapid decline of the white American as the dominant racial/ethnic type in American society. Sometime in the decade following the year 2050 the white majority will become simply the largest minority, which implies not only a new role for the traditional majority, but also the acceptance of that new role. For a group long accustomed to being the overwhelmingly dominant social entity, the group by which the very identity of the society has been measured and described, it will be an extraordinary challenge for many white Americans to adapt to the reality that they are, or at least are rapidly becoming, a minority in their "own" society, and that nothing can be done to change that fact.
In the coming years the white majority community must decide whether to use its relative strength and dominance to mediate the competing demands of the many other segments of American society, or whether to see itself as just another minority in competition with other ethnic groups. Already there are signs the white majority is tiring of the role of the paternalistic elder member of society to whom abused and disappointed minorities may bring their grievances for resolution. Already white communities throughout the country are segregating themselves in walled-in private neighborhoods ("Gated or Fortress Communities") behind monitored security gates.19 Is this the wave of the future or the last gasp of the past?
Monmouth College students of tomorrow will live in an America comprising living, breathing communities of nearly every race, culture and ethnic background known to man. The image of an American will no longer be that of a North European composite; it will be the image of all men, everywhere. Consequently a major challenge for Monmouth College, as well as for other similarly situated institutions of American higher education, will be how to prepare students, who, for the most part, come from socio-cultural backgrounds no longer representative of the country as a whole in the vastly different world in which they will likely live and work. One approach, currently being pursued by Columbia University, is simply to require all students to study in some depth a society outside the Western tradition. This approach, on its face a rather modest step, may be sufficient for the worldly students a Columbia can attract. A more radical approach has been undertaken by Occidental College in California. In 1987 Occidental, located in a region substantially populated by ethnic minorities, simply "went multicultural" by raising the proportion of minority students to 40% of its total student body and by placing greater emphasis on non-Western cultures in its curriculum.
Despite the geographical and institutional constraints in which it operates, Monmouth College possesses a progressive past history of minority enrollment and equal opportunity for women, a record which will serve as an excellent underpinning to the College's multicultural future. Unlike many other early colleges, Monmouth began on a coeducational basis, welcoming young women from the day it opened its doors. The first graduating class of the College, 1858, comprised three men and one woman. The next three classes produced equal numbers of men and women graduates. Moreover, it was home to the first female "fraternity" in America, Kappa Kappa Gamma, and admitted the first African American student to apply, a male, in the fall of 1868.
Monmouth College can also be proud of its past history of involvement in international education. In the early 1900's, largely as a consequence of Presbyterian missionary work abroad, a number of students came from Japan to study at Monmouth. Chinese and Ethiopian students began coming to the College in the 1920's. Over the years foreign students on campus, courses on world religions and offerings in world and European history all have provided interested students from isolated rural areas with important windows on the world. Through the Presbyterian Church and other avenues the College, beginning at least from the 1950's, also offered students opportunities for study abroad, from Europe to Asia, in programs which in those days were in the main limited to the prestigious private colleges of the East. For many students, including this writer, these Monmouth programs offered not only a cultural and educational experience of a lifetime but also opened career opportunities unprecedented in that day for students coming from small, modestly endowed and largely unknown midwestern colleges. More recently, the College has further enhanced the international dimension of its campus life and work with the addition of professors of foreign and minority origin. Indeed, the immediate past president of the College, Dr. Bruce Haywood, was an immigrant to America from Great Britain.
It is now the task of Monmouth College to seek its own counsel and find its own way in a new and rapidly changing social and educational environment. Neither the Columbia nor the Occidental paradigm is necessarily the most appropriate course for the College to follow. Monmouth's response to the "multicultural challenge" must inevitably reflect the realities of the social and demographic environment in which it is located. As long as western central Illinois remains demographically unchanged, the core composition of the student body at Monmouth College will likely remain equally unchanged. The College probably cannot, and therefore should not try to, forcibly mirror the rainbow image of the society at large. In this regard, it is well to note that Monmouth College is committed to retaining the integrity of its traditional mission and the academic standards for which it is known and respected. Within this context, however, the College must continue to exert its maximum effort to attract minority students within its institutional reach, the ultimate goal being a student body genuinely representative of the educational market the College serves. The College should also strive to enhance the socio-cultural sophistication of its faculty and general academic milieu, a goal which, inter alia, will require a continuing effort to increase measurably both foreign and minority representation on the faculty and the level of foreign as well as minority student enrollment.
Monmouth College must prepare students to take their places in a future America many may only vaguely perceive, but one in which Americans of many different races and ethnic backgrounds must learn not only to tolerate but to accept and respect each other's social and cultural differences. Whatever course the College may follow in pursuit of this task, e.g., larger numbers of minority students and faculty, foreign professors and students, or non-Western studies programs, it must take care never to lose perhaps its most valuable inherent resource--the pervasive existence within the College community of the fundamental values, beliefs and common human decencies of the small midwestern communities whence Monmouth College's students still largely spring. Graduates whose academic training is complemented by even a modicum of this deeply engrained character of the College will almost certainly be prepared to deal with the rapidly changing world that awaits them.
Certainly the egotistical "me-first" philosophy currently holding many Americans in thrall will provide little help or guidance in responding to the complex societal issues the coming multicultural era will present. To prosper in peace and harmony in such a social environment, Americans must all reach deep into their reservoir of "good will toward men" to a degree they may never previously have had to contemplate. Dr. Charles J. Speel II, Professor Emeritus of Religious Studies, commenting recently on the relationship between the College and the ethical foundations of its religious underpinnings, may have put the essence of this thought in its most felicitous form:
The cultivation of responsibility for upholding a free society in which service to others is more highly regarded than service to self remains an important ingredient of the mission of the Synod, the Presbytery and Monmouth College.20
If by the time of their graduation Monmouth College students have adopted as their
guiding credo this timeless, indeed elegant, ethical thought, the College will have
provided its students with the kind of personal compass they will need to successfully
meet the multicultural challenges of their futures.
Brimelow, Peter. 1995. Alien Nation. New York: Random House.
Daniels, Roger. 1990. Coming to America. New York: Harper Collins.
1. The Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, ratified in 1868, provided that "all persons born or naturalized in the United States. . . are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside." Although the Amendment applied to African Americans, it did not affect Native Americans who, despite being born in the United States, were excluded because their tribes and tribal lands were considered "domestic dependent nations," i.e., as something akin to a foreign country.
2. Native Americans were not given citizenship until 1924 by act of Congress. Daniels 1990:114.
3. Although some 30% of the student body is currently drawn from the Chicago metropolitan area, more than 50% of all students come from small schools with graduating classes of fewer than 100.
4. Roger Daniels 1990, Chapters 6-8.
5. Various estimates put the expected immigration level for the decade of the 1990's at between 10 and 15 million, which would make that decade the largest ever in the history of U.S. immigration (Brimelow 1995:5). Given recent trends, approximately 85% of that number will likely come from non-European countries.
6. The foreign-born population of the United States reached 22.6 million in 1994. The largest group came from Latin America, with more than 6.2 million from Mexico alone. The Philippines contributed over 1 million and China, Korea, Vietnam and India each accounted for approximately 500,000. These immigrant groups, both legal and illegal, have congregated principally in California, but also in Texas, New York and Florida. Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census-1995.
7. Andrews and McMeel, ed. The Universal Almanac (Kansas City, 1995), 237.
8. The word "Hispanic" is a term of convenience in the United States suggesting unfortunately a kind of monolithic ethnic grouping that does not in reality exist. Hispanics encompass a vast array of nationalities and ethnic groups, such as Mexicans, Cubans, Puerto Ricans and other natives of South and Central America, who share a common linguistic and cultural heritage with Spain and Portugal.
9. If there be any doubt of the continuing alienation of many African Americans, recent remarks by Toni Morrison, African American Nobel laureate in literature, ought certainly to dispel it. In a cautionary homily to a group of predominantly African Americans in Washington, D.C., Ms. Morrison recently painted a picture of an America where blacks might end up like Jews in Nazi Germany. Although the word picture was extreme, and clearly not fully representative of Ms. Morrison's views on the subject, the message was clear: many African Americans believe the dominant white community in America will always conspire to keep them down and out. Courtland Milloy, "Morrison's Prophecy and Paradise." The Washington Post, Sunday, March 5, 1995, B1. African American law professor Lani Guinier's proposals on cumulative voting are another expression of this same fear of being left out. Election laws may be colorblind in a democracy but voters are not.
The attitude of the country's two million Native Americans is linked to their experience with a white settler society that in large measure sought to exterminate them. Today Native Americans are the poorest and sickest of any minority group in the United States. But they do not ask for charity, they ask for the right to be "free, equal and different." Ronald Wright, Stolen Continents: the 'New World' Through Indian Eyes, quoted by Colman McCarthy in "Respect for the Tribes." The Washington Post, Saturday, May 7, 1994, A19. That Native Americans may wish to maintain their separate ethnic identity is not surprising. Cultural assimilation would be the death knell for the continued existence of the individual tribes as distinguishable social entities, the loss of the final battle in a more than 300-year effort to retain a distinctive native culture. For Native Americans, it is thus an immense pride in themselves and their history that motivates their quest for separate identification.
10. Former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger has expressed the concern that our commitment to ethnic self-determination, in Bosnia-Herzegovina, in particular, if pressed on a global basis, might "splinter the world into unmanageable confusion." And, he asks, "at the extremes, what might (the principle of self-determination) do to the cohesion of our own society?" Henry Kissinger, "Bosnia: Only Just Beginning. . . ." The Washington Post, Monday, September 11, 1995, A21.
11. See generally, Jessica Matthews, "Immigration and the Press of the Poor." The Washington Post, Monday, November 21, 1994, A25.
12. Nonetheless we may be obliged to reconsider the social practicality of continuing to apply to immigration law and policy the principle of non-discrimination that became enshrined in the 1965 revision of the immigration law. Our concern for and commitment to this fundamental ethical principle derived from experience with, and efforts to end, racial and ethnic discrimination in domestic American society. Although it was with obvious good intention that we extended the principle more broadly to immigration law and policy, we now see that left indefinitely in place such a policy, however laudable in principle, will lead to an increasingly more radical transformation of the traditional ethnic configuration of the country, with all of the social uncertainties such an event will entail. For the sake of future social cohesion and stability the country may well be forced to restrict in some fashion its current open-ended application of the principle of non-discrimination to immigration policy. Congress can and likely will sidestep a direct confrontation over this politically charged issue by simply lowering the overall level of permissible immigration.
13. Ms. Lazarus, it should be noted, was referring to Europeans, not to the entire global community.
14. Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census-1993
15. Nathan Glazer, "Cracks in the Melting Pot." The Washington Post, Education Review, Sunday, April 2, 1995, 1.
16. Pamela Constable, "Immigrants in the Classroom." The Washington Post, Education Review, Sunday, April 2, 1995, 1.
17. Today bilingual education has become a controversial topic, but certainly not for the first time in our history. German American communities in the 1800's lobbied for and were permitted to establish schools offering instruction exclusively in the German language and schools offering students the option of instruction in either German or English. Nativist attacks on the loyalty of the German immigrant communities and the pressures of anti-German hysteria during World War I led ultimately to the collapse of German language schools in America. Roger Daniels 1990:159-160. Politics aside, bilingual education doubtless can be a useful tool with which to help immigrant children adapt to their new American environment. However, bilingual educational programs aimed at perpetuating a specific ethnic orientation generally have not proved popular in the United States. The "Americanization" of immigrant populations is considered the purpose of their being here. Americans tolerate and even romanticize vestiges of Old World traditions only so long as they take a clear back seat to New World custom and practice.
18. Charles Trueheart, "Hemisphere Builds Bridges Across Once Deep North-South Divide." The Washington Post, Sunday, August 13, 1995, A1.
19. An estimated 3-4 million people live behind walls throughout the nation, nearly as many as are confined in prisons, and the number is growing. The inevitable effect, if not necessarily the motivation behind this development, is to segregate people by income, race and age, not exactly the pursuit of the American dream of a truly integrated society. Ann Mariano, "Enclosed Communities: Havens, or Worse?" The Washington Post, Saturday, April 9, 1994, E1. Roger K. Lewis, "'Gated' Areas: Start of New Middle Ages." The Washington Post, Saturday, September 9, 1995, E1.
20. Scots Newse, Summer 1995, the Rev. Charles J. Speel II, "The college/church relationship: an historical perspective." A4. Monmouth College Office of Public Relations.
Speel Festschrift Table of Contents
Return to Monmouth College Department of Classics Homepage