However, this section on "Puritan Conservatism" is what I'll admit is pretty boring stuff. The author, Daniel Boorstin, is one of America's great historians. He earned a law degree (hence the detail he goes into in this section) from Yale, and has a Ph.D. in history from the University of Chicago. After a prolific career as a writer, he became the Librarian of the Library of Congress (is this redundant?). As I said, it's a little heavy reading, but I'm reading it along with you this summer. So please be frank, let it rip in the comment section! Tell me what you like, and what you don't (as I just did). Even if you "get" 10% of what Boorstin discusses, you'll be way ahead of the game.
For further guidance, go to the post entitled, "Directions."
Therefore, let us cut to the chase. Skim this section looking for a couple of main ideas that I'd like you to share in the comments section (each of this "posts" will contain their own comment section). Before commenting, you'll have to register as a member of this blog. Scroll down to the very bottom of the comment section, and you should see a link to click on to register.
I only ask that you pay attention to Lechford's complaints against the Puritan church membership.
He also thought the church too democratic, why?
Also, what was the "Half-way Covenant" and what was it's purpose?
38 comments:
Main Points:
-Struggle for law and transition from England to New England laws and in finding laws that would suit both the Massachussets Bay colony and their English rule.Separating and adapting those laws to fit the Puritan lifestyle.
-New England’s dependency on England and separating while determining laws. England focused on administration and law while the Puritans focused on their relationship with God and the Church.
-Complaints against the church and membership of the church(Lechford.) Churches were too hard to get into and they needed more unity and needed to be more easily accessed.
Lechford thought the church too democratic because their memberships were too strict. “The applicants for church members had to satisfy the elders and then the whole congregation of ‘the work of grace upon their souls or how God hath been dealing with them about their conversion…that they are true believers…” (pg 25) and etc. This made getting accepted into the church difficult. Lechford thought this an unnecessary evil because not everyone was accepted. Because only someone that went to the church was a free man, and only a free man could vote or hold office, Lechford thought the church too democratic. Also, because there were no bishops in the church, the government and the church were too democratic. "How could a church be well ordered where in effect every church-member was a bishop?" (pg 25) This way, it was the entire church population making the decisions, with "power to the keys," rather than a few educated decision makers, he believed poor decisions would be made.
The “Half way convenant” was a new class of church-membership as a solution to the entire “converting experience” and Lechford’s dispute. If you were descended from those who fit all the required criteria, but did not meet the standards yourself, you would still be allowed to join and become a member, but you were in a different “class of church.”
Main issues:
-not sure of ruler(s): the purtians were unsure wether to follow the local government of the colonies or to follow England
-needed a new system of laws: the puritans needed laws that would apply effectivly to New England. The laws of England needn't always nescesarily apply to life in New England.
Lechford viewed the church's selectivity as very poor. The Chruch admitted very few into the congregation. To be admitted, one must not only declare puritanism as their religion, one must virtually sell their soul to the church.
Lechford aslo frowned upon the Church's democratic policy. AS there was no clerical heirarchy in the New England puritan church, the congregation decided which path the church should follow. Making the wrong deceision might not onnly halt the progression towards God, but might also result in a step back. Without the clerial heirarchy (who supposedly were able to make accurate deceisions) the congregation was put to the job.
The "Half-way Covenant" was the rebutle to Lechford's comments on the Church's "entry fee." It wasestablished by the Church to bring more people to mass, and, hopefully, convert some of the population to full-fledged member of the congregation. The "Half-way Convenant" was made to buff the pews with common folk and to make the Church appear more community friendly.
All:
With Linnea "in the house" we are all in deep do-doo.
Forget about Jon raising the bar...
Thank you Linnea for your comments.
And Andrea, Elena, Bayley, and Jordan... I appreciate your comments as well... and will comment soon (maybe).
• The church formed a ‘legislature,’ and formed something similar to the Magna Charta. However, all laws were supposed to make lives easier and if it didn’t one didn’t need to follow them. The magistrates who were helping form the laws often proclaimed that there could easily be mistakes, as there weren’t ‘able body lawyers’ amongst them. They were full of self-doubt and didn’t stand by what they wrote.
• Lechford was one of the few people in Massachusetts Bay who had legal training from England even the judges of the courts had little to no legal practice prior to the position. Lechford complained that the membership requirements of churches were too strict. He also complained that the government of New England was too democratic because no one was a bishop, so there was not a higher authority. Also, legal processes were carried out orally rather than with the exchange of documents like those that took place in England. He felt that this method made things arbitrary and hard to form precedents.
• The ‘Half-way Covenant’ was a doctrine proposed in 1662. It separated the church into two; those who went through the ‘converting experience’ and those who did not. It was proposed to purify the church, but still keep ‘the benches filled.’
Boorstin’s main points on Puritan Conservatism encompass the Puritan adherence to English Law, their incorporation of Scripture into their regulations, as well as their lack of trained lawyers within the settlement. All three subjects derive from “their colonial situation” which encouraged these three traits. As a colony of England, the leaders of Massachusetts Bay Colony strove to create laws which coincided with their strict faith in God, as well as pleased their English colonizers. Luckily, they found English Law to meld quite easily with their beliefs, and thus based the overwhelming majority on “the Lawes of this our Realme of England.” There were, however a few instances where “the laws of Scripture were allowed to override the laws of England,” such as the addition of the capital crime of committing adultery with a married woman. Boorstin also points out the Puritan’s significant deficiency of skilled lawyers. This resulted in feeble attempts to use English legal language and an inability to produce complex legal documents.
Thomas Lechford was one of the few men in Massachusetts Bay that had English legal training and also found many areas in which to disagree with the proceedings of the colony. One of his main complaints was in gaining membership to the Puritan church. Lechford claimed the requirements to become a member too strict, and even goes as far as to call them “evil” and “inhuman.” It is hard to disagree, with conditions such as having “beene wounded in their hearts for their originall sinne” and to “know competently the summe of Christian faith.” Additionally, no one was able to hold office or vote, unless he was considered to be a “freeman.” And guess what the prerequisite was for being “a freeman?” Being a member of the church.
Lechford also felt that the church in Puritan New England was too democratic. He found the fact that there were no bishops to be a major flaw. Lechford argued that, in theory, everyone in the church was essentially a bishop, and therefore the church could not be run in an efficient and “well-ordered” manner.
The Half-Way Covenant, which was proposed in 1662, was responsible for creating a new membership class for the Puritan church. It allowed descendents of church-goers that had experienced the intense process of converting, to become partial members of the church despite the fact that they themselves were not fully converted. As Boorstin aptly states, it “kept the church benches filled.” Boorstin claims the Half-Way Covenant to be an “ingenious doctrine.” In my eyes it could indeed be an “ingenious doctrine”, but merely one of self-preservation, as it was merely created to keep up attendance to the church which would have otherwise failed due to its extreme regulations.
Main Points
-New England affected all American political thought and helped shape the "traditionalist character of our institutions."
-The Puritans modeled their common law after the English common law but adapted it to their new conditions.
-New England laws became the basis for later colonies.
-Lechford complained about the church, He said it was too strict and that the church was too democratic
-New England laws were almost identical to their English counterparts even though the Puritans had little law training and few law books.
Democracy of the Church
Lechford's complaints about the democracy of the Church were primarily targeted at the lack of bishops. Lechford could not understand how the Church could work with out bishops being in charge. He thought it strange that the congregation chose the ministers. He argued, "If the whole Church, or even the congregation, as our good men think, have the power to the keyes, how many Bishops then shall we have?"
Main points:
*King Charles gave the first Massachusetts Bay colonizers permission to make laws...as long as they didn't go against the Laws of England, starting some disagreements over what laws what people should follow.
*English laws vs. New English laws, where the Puritans were focused on church/God and the English were focused on laws
*the Massachusetts Fundamentalls were inexperienced at law
*The Puritans went for the "Laws of God" not the "Laws of Englishmen" but those two often coincided.
He complained against the membership because it was too hard to get into, and the fact that not everyone in a family got in sometimes split up families.
The church was too democratic because everyone worked together (from being out in the wilderness and needing to). The problem with this was that there were no bishops to lead, and then everyone would be a bishop, at least a litte in a sense.
The "Half-way Covenant" was a way to counter the criticism about church being too hard to get into. If someone wasn't 100% Eligible, but they descended from someone who was, they could still get into the church.
~Chris Sogge~ :)
Puritain Conservatism
This section emphasizes the following points:
• The Puritans attempted to balance the amount of power given to legislatures
• Settlements were to be developed with a focus on Puritan cultural values and not on the base of forming laws
• Much of the laws written in New England were written as a direct translation of laws in England (English laws written on left, New England on right)
• The court system in New England lacked professional experience, and created an incorrect replication of some portions of the English court system
• For a long while, written court cases did not exist in New England, as well as paid attorneys
Lechford thought that the process of the church admitting new members was quite flawed if not evil, because of the long list of requirements lay down by The Elders. All those admitted had to prove to a board of Elders that they had an “intense converting experience”. This sometimes caused masters to be separated from servants, or even parents to be separated from their children. Lechford went as far to call this inhumane
Lechford also called the church too democratic because of its lack of higher authority such as bishops. The theory of the Puritan church was that every member was a bishop. Lechford sarcastically criticizes this by saying, “If the whole Church, or every congregation, as our good men think, have the power to the keyes, how many Bishops then shall we have?”
Finally, the “Half-Way Covenant” was basically the Puritan response to the Lechford complaints concerning membership admittance. The Covenant allowed not only those with an “intense converting experience” into the church, but those descended from the latter.
1.)Main Points:
-Attempting to establish colonial law, Puritans disagree with English laws and wish to sever bonds by establishing new law. Eventually a compromise is reached, partially Puritan theology law, partially English administrative law. Also, complaints begin concerning the church (Lechford).
2.)Lechford's complaints:
Lechford's major complaint towards church membership was that it was far too exclusive and difficult to get in. Instead of just sasaying you are a Puritan and agree with church doctrine, you had to do much more to become a member, even going as far as saying they had to have "beene wounded in their hearts for their originall sinne". Lechford's second comlaint was that the church was too democratic because of lack of bishops, and that if there were no bishops then everyone was a bishop.
3.)The "Half-way Covenant"
The "Halfway Covenant was the answer to Lechford's complaints about the church being too exclusive. The covenant said that even if you did not meet all of the requirements to get into the church, you were allowed a slightly different memberhip as long as you were descended of a church member. The intention of the covenant was to "keep the church benches filled".
The Puritans attempted to set up a magna carta based system that was dependent on neither the church or old English laws, but simply a law adapted to their conditions
People desiring a more English style government protest, finally resulting in the 1648 publication of The Book of the General Laws and Libertyes, which many colonies based their own law books on.
There was a lack of legal lawyers, legal documents, and essentially most legalities in New England, which gradually changed, marked by a 1648 law that made it legal to employ attorneys.
American lawyers, when compared to modern standards, were far ahead of English ones.
The New England laws had many more death crimes, crimes punishable by death, most of which have biblical influences.
Lechford believed that the Puritan Church was to democratic, to me it seemed like he only said that because he was from another type of system. A true democracy like the one then, would have been statistically impossible where Lechford was from, simply because of the number of people. Also he was probably bitter the majority of the people voting to unbar him.
The Halfway Covenant is a document created by a group of ministers that essentially loosened the requirements needed to join the church (not saying it wasn’t still hard.) this suggests that there was a decline in attendance of the church.
The main points were that they were unsure about what laws to make. They wanted them to not only be consistent with the Bible but also with the laws of England. They, for the most part, followed English laws and had "insistent allegiance" to them. This may have been because the law makers were new to law making and found it simpler to stay with what they already knew, with a few exceptions.
Lechford's complaints: Lechford believed that it was far too difficult to get into the church, but to be a "freeman," one had to be a member. He thought the church was too democratic because it didn't have a hierarchy and with no bishops, everyone was one the same level making it too disorderly.
The half-way covenant was a half-way mark in church membership. Because of the difficulties of becoming a full member, the church made the covenant to allow people into the church (with descent from a member) without losing its purified ideals.
- Lechford's main complaints about the puritan church membership was how apparently arbitrary it was, to an outsider, as to who was accepted in and who was not. Some of the examples he mentions are that servants are some times accepted and not masters and even some times wife's and not husbands are accepted. it appeared to him that the faith testing made the puritans in to a very cliquey community that only the "special" people could belong to.
-Lechford's belief that the church was too democratic came from the basis that the puritans had not true hierarchal system. every one in his words "was a bishop, then how could a church be well ordered..." , the only position that was seemingly more important was the minister who preformed sermons for the populace of the towns.
- The "half way covenant" was designed to allow descendants of "spiritually enlightened" members to continue to be a part of the congregation, but not as full members. This new procedure kept church membership up and allowed for larger communities to be a apart of the puritan church.
- Colin Sobek
Main Points:
-Puritans recognized that the laws of England could be either integrated into the New England laws, or they could be "refined" to make for a better law system
-there was discontent and debate amongst people regarding which English laws were suitable and which were not
-trying to find a way to differentiate the New England law system from the original law system in the hopes of making New England more "righteous" in terms of religion and following God's laws
-trying to draw the line between God's own law and His rule amongst the people, and were the government should step in
2) Lechford saw the church as too democratic in that everyone in the parish had the right to vote for the minister. He believed that the people could more easily make a mistake this way than if a ruling of bishops appointed the minister. He believed that not eeryone was suited to be a part of this decision making.
3) The Half-way Covenant way a less strict "church-compatible" evaluation of people. If a certain person did not fulfill all of their spiritual obligations necessary to enter the Puritan church, they could enter based on a claim of ancestry or relation to someone who had.
1. Lechford’s main complaints about the Puritan church consisted of membership problems and the experience of the members in the institutions. As far as membership went Lechford believed that the requirements were too strict, “evil,” and inhuman” since a wife could be admitted and her husband could not. With this system you could only be a “freeman” of the colony if you had been accepted into the church. Another complaint that Lechford had was the way legality was carried out. The proceedings of a case were carried out without any paper work, there was no system of pay for attorneys and lawyers, and the legal training was little to none. As well he thought the church was to democratic because there were no bishops to maintain order.
2. The “Half way Convent” was proposed in 1622 by the churches of New England which created a way for people who were not able to go through more intense converting to become members of the church, just so long as they were related to someone who had converted in the normal system. This new proposal compromised and helped the church keep more members.
Meg
the church was too democratic in that it had no clerical members and one or two priests that really listened only to what the church members said, and agreed even if they were poor decisions.
The main ideas in this chapter are that laws in new england were meant to differ from the british laws due to a new country, but remained similar as the british laws were accepted as close to the laws of god.
Lechford thought that without bishops, every member of the clergy was elected by the people, making it too democratic for a religious entity.
The "Half-Way Covenant" was the church's response to Lechford's claims that the church's requirements were too strict. Before the covenant, if a person wanted a church position, then they had to be free of all sins, but now, the covenenat stated that if a person was descended from a good missionary, then they could be accepted.
1. Lechford’s main complaints about the Puritan church consisted of membership problems and the experience of the members in the institutions. As far as membership went Lechford believed that the requirements were too strict, “evil,” and inhuman” since a wife could be admitted and her husband could not. With this system you could only be a “freeman” of the colony if you had been accepted into the church. Another complaint that Lechford had was the way legality was carried out. The proceedings of a case were carried out without any paper work, there was no system of pay for attorneys and lawyers, and the legal training was little to none. As well he thought the church was to democratic because there were no bishops to maintain order.
2. The “Half way Convent” was proposed in 1622 by the churches of New England which created a way for people who were not able to go through more intense converting to become members of the church, just so long as they were related to someone who had converted in the normal system. This new proposal compromised and helped the church keep more members.
The 'Main ideas' of this section:
-The laws being codified in New England drew heavily from two sources- Biblical law and English law, more notably from the latter.
-Lack of real knowledge of the law in New England caused stress and hardships, such as it being prohibited to pay for legal counsel, things which were disliked by the Legal minds of England, such as Lechford.
-The puritans wanted the codified laws to be more heavily "Laws of God" than "Laws of men" but when finding the two to be similar, were appeased.
1) Lechford believed the Church to be 'Too democratic' for two main reasons.
a) Because the Church had no Bishops, all of the Clergy were elected more by populous vote and support than by the Church as an entity, making it more democratic than the historically autocratic Church.
b) Because the Church was at that time "inhumanely" difficult to get into. The process of gaining membership to the Church was oft-described as an “intense converting experience." This made it so that families, friends, co-workers and the like could not always be assured entrance or acceptance into the Church. Furthermore, the fact that only a Church-Goer was called a "freeman" and as only freemen could vote, it gave the church power of the voters.
2) The "Half-Way Covenant" was a method which somewhat appeased the complaints of Lechford on the latter account. It allowed the descendants of people admitted to the Church to be admitted without the difficult process otherwise required. This however, it seems, would not alleviate all of the issues, as if a family for generations was unable to gain entrance to the Church, they would continue that way until such time as one member was granted entrance. In this way, it still kept some power reserved to the Church in matters of entrance, but was a good move in that it attempted to release some of the stranglehold.
Main Ideas:
1. The Puritans incorporated Scripture into all their laws and regulations, but mostly adhered to English common law with a few changes to their own unique situation, and an emphasis on religion
2. The Puritan colony was formed around their own religious and cultural values and less around laws and government
3. The Puritan colony set an example for later colonies
4. The Massachussetts Bay area had few trained lawyers and thus a flawed early court system
Lechford complained that Church membership was too strict because to get in, you had to satisfy the leaders of the Chuch and all in it. Puritan orthodoxy and its part in the colony made it so that a Church member had to be a conformity in the Church. An issue with the difficulty of being accepted into the Church was that only someone in the Church was a free man and only free men could hold an office or vote, making it difficult for anyone with even a slightly different view from the Puritan Church able to hold power. He also thought the Church was too democratic because there were no bishops or higher authorities involved, and the descision-making was dispersed to a body of many people of all walks of life, not just those who were educated and informed, allowing for some very poor descisions to be made. The Halfway Covenant was Lechford's solution to the strict membership requrements of the Puritan Church. It was a branch of the Church for those who descended from Church members that fit all the criteria, but themselves did not. Thus, they would still be members of the Church and considered free men and able to be in office and vote, but they would be separated from the 'purer' strain of Church members and understood to be slightly unorthodox by the community.
Puritan Conservatism
Main Ideas:
This chapter discussed issues pertaining to the Puritans struggle with law in New England. Questions of old England and its coincidence with Puritan religion arose along with new criticism of the democracy and strictness of the church.
Lechford complains that the Puritan church is too strict about membership and complains that the only people who can get in are elders or people who know everything about the religion.
He also thought it was too democratic because there were no appointed bishops and everyone served as this position. He argued that there were too many people with a say and it would be difficult to make good decisions with so many opinions.
The Half-Way covenant was established in 1662 as a new form of half-membership that allowed people who didn’t fulfill the complete membership requirements but was descended from a Puritan to take part in the church practices. This kept the separation evident but allowed more people to come to church.
Taylor Oster 2009
Main Ideas:
-American Puritan government largely tried to imitate already establish English institutions, and were very conscious of being a colony of England, not trying to start anything radically new
-Colonist lawyers strove to copy English law wherever possible, although actual practices were not the same as in English courts, and there was confusion over technical language and application of English law in American situations
-The Colonists thought that Scriptural and English law were very similar, if not the same, and ideally could coexist
Lechford thought that Massachusetts churches’ membership requirements were too strict, in that members had to have experienced sin and transgression and fully undergone conversion. Lechford thought that this could leave for instances of one family member being accepted, and not others, or a master and not a servant, etc. Also, one had to be a member of the church in order to be a freeman, vote, and hold office.
Lechford found the churches too democratic in that there were no declared bishops, but rather everyone was a bishop, and Lechford found this to be confusing.
The Half-Way Covenant was established by Massachusetts ministers in 1662, and allowed for people related to church members to also be accepted into the church. This was partly in response to Lechford’s criticisms of the selectivity of membership, but also made it possible for more people to attend church.
Main Ideas of this chapter:
Puritans have problems with the English Law and their law that had religion incorporated into it. The strictness of being a Member of the Massachusetts Bay was also brought up.
Lechford's Complaints:
Lechford's main complaint is about how it is almost impossible to become a member of the Puritan Churches. He also says that, the only people that become members know everything about the belief or they are elders.
Lechford aslo though the church was to democratic. He claims this because their were no bishops and because since everyone in the church served at this role it was hard to make any decision. He also thought that this made the church not very organized.
The Half-way covenant created a new class of membership inside the puritan church. Its purpose was to grant membership to those who had not gone through the "intense converting experience", as long as they had desended from a member of the church. It was also made to keep the churches filled.
Main ideas- One main idea was that the common wealth was still bound to England’s institutions. They even made their own version Magna Carta. Due to this colonists wanted to take out some laws and instate others that worked better for how and where they lived. In other words codify their own laws. This was a problem because of the lack of legal knowledge in the colonies. Another main idea was how people fought against the strictness of the puritans, and how strict the puritans actually were.
1. Lechford’s complaints against membership were that they were too strict. A person had to be seen as worthy and good enough to enter the church. With this only parts of families were accepted to the church. One could also only be a “freeman” if they were accepted into the church and only “freemen” were allowed to vote and hold office.
2. Lechford thought that the church was too democratic because there were no bishops.
In his mind for a church to be well ordered there needed to be one bishop. Not a whole congregation of them.
3. The “Half-way Covenant” was a new class in the church for people who did not have the converting experience, which made them saint like, but were descendants of people who had. Its purpose was mainly to keep people going to church while still holding that they were a purified people. Only “visible saints” were allowed full membership.
~Rebecca Harkness
- Puritans were at first inexperienced and not the best with dealing with the law.
-deviated very little from English law
-they seemed almost "trigger happy" when it came to punishing lawbreakers with death
Puritan Chuch Membership: Were very strict rules to become a member, some of which included proving to the elders and whole congregation of how God been talking to them about becoming a member and how they are true believers.
Church Democratic: He believed this because there were no Bishops and therefore everyone was a bishop.
Half-Way Covenant: Was a ""new class of church membership for those who had not had the intesne "converting experience" but were descended from those who had had the experience."" Simply put they created a new type of church member who was not a full puritan and had gone through the converting process but yet were the kids of those who had therefore were raised by pure puritans.
Main points:
Colony was formed on religious values
Laws drew from both religious and English sources.
Colonists hoped religious and English laws could coexist
Area had a bad legal system
He also thought the church too democratic, why?
The was confused by the fact that “everyone was a bishop” instead of the appointed one bishop/church system in England.
Also, what was the "Half-way Covenant" and what was its purpose?
The Half-way covenant allowed family members of clergy to also join the church, thus increasing the numbers of attendees.
From what i can try to understand, the colony was found on religious values and ideas, and that laws were found on English Laws and English religious ideas. they wanted their own Laws and ideas but they had to form them but stealing ideas from the magna carta and other England and European Charters and Documents.
Lechford's complaints against the Puritans:
What Lechford found to be below par in New England was that the Puritan society had 'bent' or completely disregarded given English laws. The Puritan excuse to this was that English laws did not pertain to laws written down in the Bible, their primary book of law. Lechford also found that Puritans did not pertain to English law because the world of Massachusetts Bay was a far cry from the world of the English motherland. Although this was a liable excuse, many Englishmen still found the degradation of English law an outrage in the far off colonies. Likewise, Lechford discovered, and complained, that membership in the church nearly cost people their limbs. People were required to have spotless records, good family, high social standing, and more - providing for a distressed many, including Lechford.
To democratic in the church:
While Lechford complained that the church was far to strict in it's acceptance of membership, he also discovered that the congregation did not maintain a bishop. This was also a far cry from England - which docked more points for Massachusetts Bay seeing as they were not becoming a 'mini-England' in the least. Since there were no bishops, Lechford noted that the congregation 'voted' for a minister and leader in the church, promoting men of lower standard than a bishop, and leaving the Puritan church without a connection to the English church.
Half-way Covenant:
In reply to Lechford's colorful complaints that riddled all aspects of life in the colony, the Puritans constructed a half-way covenant that made the law of church membership less strict, instead letting people in who were familiarly related to another church goer. Those born into a church-going family were given a free-pass, allowing more people to enter the church, without having to pass law-upon-law and hurtle-upon-hurtle in order to step through the cathedral doors.
1. Lechford thought the church had developed into a religious democracy through varying points of evidence. The church of the colonies distance themselves from the church of England by strict membership opportunities as well as the fact that there was no assigned bishop placed by religious knowledge and preaching prowess, but through the votes of the audience listening to his sermons.
2. The matter of the half-way covenant allowed membership of the church to slacken, allowing the audience to consist of not only those that earned their way in, but those related to those that did so. It let blood relation into the church as well as the fact that if one was born into a church-attending family, they were thus issued an allowance into the pews and did not have to work their way into the church community.
1.Lechford’s main complaints regarding the Puritans were directed at their church. Lechford said that the membership requirements for the church were too stricts, saying people had to satisfy elders and entire congregations that they were actual believers of the Puritan Church and Lechford found this “evil” or “inhuman.” This effected the colony in greater ways because in order to be a freeholder, a person had to be a member of the Puritan church, and since being a freeholder allowed people the right to vote and hold office, church membership was very important.
2.He also thought the church too democratic, why?
Lechford complained that the church was too democratic because it had no bishops, like the Church in England. Lechford says, “how could a church be well-ordered where in effect every church-member was a bishop?” (pp. 25). Lechford thought the church could not operate correctly and effectively without the presence of designated bishops.
3.Also, what was the "Half-way Covenant" and what was it's purpose?
The “Half-Way Covenant was a way for the Puritan church to ease some of its problems with strict membership, creating a class of church membership in which people who had not experienced a distinct and “intense” conversion, could still be members if one of their descendants had experienced such a conversion.
Main ideas:
1. Being colonists had a significant effect on the Puritans' religion. This was because one, they were in a new, unexplored area depending on ther faith to guide them, and two, they were beginning to make thier own laws out of religion, which gave them new, more legal view on their religion.
2. On the other hand, the new laws that the Puritans were making, based off of their religion, were very similar to English law.
Lechford's complaints:
Lechford complained that church membership was too hard to attain, and people who were not members of the church were not considered free men and could not vote or hold office.
He also thought the church was too democratic. Why?
Lechford believed that the church was too democratic because it lacked bishops. He believed that a church needed bishops in order to be well run.
What was the "Half-way Covenant" and what was its purpose?
The "Half-way Covenant" was a class of membership of the church that allowed people descended from others who had had the "converting experience" to be members of the church as well. It served the purpose of allowing more people to become members of the church, while still having a "purified" church.
The last comment was from Mira Schlosberg. Sorry I forgot to sign my name.
~The main point was that laws in the colonies were supposed to differ from laws in England but there was dispute over the new laws, and the British laws were better accepted and recognized and the laws of God.
~Without bishops the electing of clergymen was too democratic for a religious unit and it seemed anyone could be chosen without them.
~This was a doctrine that separated into two groups, one of which went through a converting and the others which did not as a way of cleansing the church.
Bethany Kolody
THE AMERICANS: THE COLONIAL EXPERIENCE
PART ONE
A CITY UPON A HILL: THE PURITANS OF MASSACHUSETTS BAY
First Post on Readings -- Boorstin, "Colonial"
Please respond to five of the eight in the "comment" section of this post found at the bottom of these questions (and please sign you name!).
1. What is meant by the referenced, "City upon a hill?"
Boorstin’s name for the first part of his book is taken from his quote of John Winthrop, the leader of a new American colony in Massachusetts Bay. Winthrop predicted that the colony would be “A citty upon a hill,” which he means figuratively as an experiment of a new colony, “on a hill” because it is high enough to be in the sight of all who look. If they do wrong and “deale falsely” with their god, the world will be watching, and they will be made a story of.
2. According to Boorstin's interpretation of Winthrop's speech, what was America's destiny?
America’s destiny was to be a community formed like no other had been previously. People who came to America had before them infinite possibilities—they were no longer in the confines of their previous societies and could live as their new one sought fit. In this way they made an example of their form of life—a form of life so new that as Boorstin says, it forced the question “What of it?” and broadened the global idea of what a society could be.
3. In what way(s) were Puritans theologians (in society and not necessarily in terms of government)?
Puritans were not theologians in the sense of pondering previous great thinkers to form their own ideas as much as the type of theologians that accepted what they found to be right, and put all their effort into applying it to the new society they had before them. In their minds, they were perfecting it to apply to the truth that they had already dug up from past theories. In this way their society was not the creators of their theology, but a test of it’s use as a basis for life.
4. In what way(s) did Puritans lack open dialogue into theological questions?
As Boorstin says on page 6, “There was not a single important dispute which was primarily theological.” The Puritans did argue about fixed decisions such as who should rule, the number of representatives, and such institutional drama, but on the whole, Puritan ideas were so widely accepted that no theological arguments were necessary. It wasn’t the ideology itself that contradicted speculative outlooks, as we can see from Puritans from England who openly debated it. But while English Puritans pondered the small philosophical points of their ideas, the Massachusetts Colony Puritans sat back and conformed. “For Massachusetts Bay possessed an orthodoxy. During the classic age of the first generation, at least, it was a community of self-selected conformists… The Puritans in New England were surprisingly successful for some years at keeping their community orthodox. In doing so, they also made it sterile of speculative thought.”-pgs 7-8
8. Perhaps (according to Boorstin) the most distinctive of the sermon was what?
Perhaps the most distinctive quality of Puritan sermons was their frequency and versatility. They preached on Thursdays, twice on Saturdays, on Fast Days, on Thanksgiving Days, and even before executions. Boorstin’s pick is the election-day sermon, which he calls “most distinctive, perhaps” because they had an influence in the voter’s choices, using orthodox theology to characterize the duties of the rulers and the voters.
Lechford, an Englishman who spent from 1638 to 1641 in the Massachusetts Bay colony, was critical enough of its orthodoxy to publish a book on the differences between Puritan doctrine and original English law. Despite Puritan claims that following England’s example was even more important to them than following the Bible itself, Lechford was able to find a few flaws in the newly drawn up Puritan society.
First of all, Lechford was put off by the way that the Puritans ran their church. On one hand, they were too specific about admitting members. All members had to apply, first to the Elders, then to the entire congregation, and convince them both that they were not only true believers, but had a competent knowledge of the whole Christian faith. This academic requirement ripped apart relationships—sometimes children would be admitted but not parents, sometimes servants but not masters, sometimes vice versa. Moreover, it was crucial to become a church member, because only church members were considered “freemen” and only freemen could hold powerful positions or even vote.
Lechford’s second criticism came from quite the opposite end of the spectrum. He maintained that the churches of New England were “too democratical,” straying from the strict hierarchy of England’s church. Everyone in the New England church held more or less the same power. It seemed blasphemy that every member hold the sway of a Bishop. How could a church function without confusion if everyone was a bishop, or there were none at all?
The churches of New England responded to this criticism by structuring itself in a new way; the “Half-Way Covenant” was created in 1662. This started a sort of second class membership for the people who didn’t quite pass the test to be true believers, but were at least descendents of those who did. It was a compromise that let them keep their high Puritan ideals while filling half empty churches where only saints were allowed in.
-Bethany Kolody
Post a Comment