bald man blogging

Chapters 11 & 12 cover the decline of the Puritans. In the space of a few generations, their influence and prominence faded dramatically. Marshall attributes this to an abandonment of their principle virtues: humility and covenant community. Puritan humility was expressed thru a deep self-examination, confession and repentance. (This gravity toward sin is the quality often lampooned today.) Despite a few fire brand preachers, the comfort of life in an established colony (vs. a new, pioneering one) led to softness and a failure to self-examine. Further, as the colonists became less dependent on one another for survival, the commitments with which they bound themselves together grew loose. The communities spread out, and the deep love for one another dried up.

Is it just me, or does this sound familiar? The comforts of modern living are resulting in unexamined lives and nonexistent communities. And I’m not talking about society at large; I’m looking within the church. Do you see these same things? Are they as bad as they seem, and if so, how do we repent?

One “Sunburst of Light” (the title of Chapter 13) during this age of spiritual shadow was the revival now known as The Great Awakening. The central figure of this chapter is George Whitefield, an itinerant English preacher and contemporary of the Wesleys. When Whitefield came to the American Colonies, thousands up and down the coast came to hear him. In fact, at the time of the book’s printing (1977) some estimate that Whitefield had preached to more people than any other person in history. (I suspect another three decades of ministry by Billy Graham have bumped Whitefield into second.) While Whitefield’s ministry seemed to be a momentary blip of spiritual fervor, Marshall credits his Colony-wide renown as instrumental in the creation of a common identity; and this common identity was essential for the next major event in U.S. history.

The American Revolution

Technorati Tags: books, Puritans, The Great Awakening, The Light and the Glory, U.S. history

Continuing into the next section, Chapters 7-10, on the Puritans. These chapters cover about a century of history beginning with the early Puritan exodus from England to New England and ending rather quietly after the Salem witch trials and first concerted Indian uprising.

The Puritans and the Pilgrims were related, both being reform movements from within the Church of England. The major difference, however, was that the Puritans desired to remain within the Anglican church, while the Pilgrims separated from the church. (Thus the Pilgrims were also known as Separatists.) While the Puritans strongly disagreed with the separation of the Pilgrims, they did attempt to incorporate many of the Pilgrims ideas on how to form a strong community, notions that are at the root of American democracy.

What should be taken from the Puritans? Foremost is their sense of gravity toward sin. Clearly they understood how a little yeast could work its way through the whole community. If the Puritans were wrong in this area, I think it was in their focus not their intensity. The focus seemed to be on the individual and his or her personal, inward sin. This was to the exclusion of the body and its interpersonal sin. This same misdirected focus seems to prevail today.

The Gospel and the Kingdom are primarily communal. The Great Commandment, love others, is communal. The church, Christ’s body, is a community. Though a community is always comprised of individuals, a collection of individuals do not necessarily create a community. A communal focus held with Puritan intensity might be just the thing we need.

Again, I’d love to hear what you think. Do we take sin seriously enough? Are we in focus? Or is our sin-sight blurry?

Next up: The Great Awakening.

OK, the book is due back at the library. There is a pending request from another member, so I cannot renew it.

To whomever is waiting on me: I’m sorry, but I’m going to hang onto the book for a few extra days in order to finish it. I’ll probably be an extra week. (Not a bad way to spend 35¢.) Just so you know I haven’t been sitting on it without reading it….

Chapters 5 and 6 talk about the Pilgrims. It begins with their exile to the Netherlands, follows their tumultuous journey across the Atlantic, and concludes with the second Thanksgiving feast of 1623. After reading their story I cannot help but be impressed by this group of settlers. Physical hardships notwithstanding, the way they conducted business with the Adventurers who funded their expedition was inspiring. Their original seven year indenture took 20 years to satisfy due to the exorbitant interest and bogus additional fees charged to their account. They did not defend themselves in the courts, choosing instead to turned the other cheek.

Thought #1

I’ve long thought about this, and I’d like your opinion: Christians have no personal rights. We are not to defend ourselves, but rather we are to bear slander, abuse, dishonesty, etc. as part of our cross. Whatever rights we had have been purchased by our Redeemer. It is God who holds that authority in our lives. We are, as the Scriptures say, not our own; we have been bought for a high, high price. Whatever rights we had - or better said: whatever right we had to enforce personal rights now rests in the hands of our Redeemer. And it is God’s prerogative alone to defend us.

Rather, Christians are called to defend the rights of others. We are called to be God’s agents for the benefit of “the least:” the poor, the widow, the orphan, the hungry. We are to mediate not only between God and man, but among men on behalf of God. As ambassadors of the Kingdom that is over all others, we are God’s advocate for the least of Heaven’s citizens to the authorities of this world.

What do you think? Am I on target or off base? If I’m right, most would agree that Christians too often get caught up in defending themselves… or even God in their best intentions. What might be the result if Christians took the above to heart?

Thought #2

In order to get thru the second winter (1622-23), the Pilgrims had to ration food severely. The daily allowance was five kernels of corn per day. (Yikes!) In that second Thanksgiving (Harvest 1623) the feast began with a first course of five kernels of corn served on a bare plate, a reminder of hardships endured and overcome. The symbolic reenactment in remembrance is something we ought to do more of, stretching back into God’s ancient deeds among Israel and forward into the present. Further we ought to partake in both global remembrances (e.g. Easter and Eucharist) and local remembrances, those centered on God’s work among our local assembly and family.

Again, what do you think? How do you remember?

Next up

…the Puritans.

For future reference, a Next-Wave article by Scot McKnight entitled “What Is the Gospel?” The intro:

You would think the one thing we could all agree on is the gospel, but the fact is that I think defining the gospel is one of the pressing issues for the emerging movement that is giving shape to the Church for many Christians today. There is a growing conviction that the previous generation packaged the gospel for an easier sell-job and the package not only distorts the gospel, but it distorts the entire Church. Let’s think about these distortions. (link)

After taking a break to make Christmas cookies this weekend, I have made it thru a couple more chapters. The prose is a bit over the top; I’d classify the book as a work of propaganda. Nevertheless, like all good propaganda, there is truth to be found beyond the agenda.

Chapter 3 talks about the early Catholic missions to the Americas. Alongside the gold-hungry conquistadors came Franciscans, Dominicans and Jesuits. Men like Alonso de Benavides, Father Eusebio Kino, Fray Junípero Serra established missions throughout Mexico and the western US. Others, like Samuel de Champlain, Father Jacques Marquette, and Jean de Brébeuf worked in in Canada and the Great Lakes region.

My biggest complaint here is the characterization of native tribes. At the same time Marshall both lauds them for their kindness and generosity toward Europeans who don’t deserve it and demonizes them on the sole account that the name of Jesus is unfamiliar to them. I struggle with this. Some of the Indians were murderous and violent to be sure, but others exhibited what I can only describe as grace, a self-sacrificing love towards those who don’t deserve it. It’s an interesting question, I suppose. To what degree does ignorance prevent one from being saved? If I understand, worship, and serve God as best I can in my ignorance, will it be held against me if I can’t name my savior?

Chapter 4 introduced the English and Jamestown colony. Interesting bits here. In the Jamestown charter evangelism was listed as the colony’s primary purpose, yet only one minister was sent on the initial boat. It seems the call to God’s purpose was just a ruse to garner support back home. Treasure was the real thrust of the expedition. John Smith of Pocahontas fame isn’t portrayed well. This chapter seems to be a set of for the next, an examination of the Pilgrims.

[UPDATE] Seems relevant to mention that a film, The New World (imdb), is opening next month, and it is set in early Jamestown.  Here’s an early review by Sr Rose Pacatte. I highly recommend her movie review blog.

The first two chapters deal with Christopher Columbus. So far my sense of the authors purpose and foundational thoughts is accurate. A strong current of divine plan for the Americas (and specifically the United States) runs thru the text. A few other thoughts:

• Not as much original source material as I’d hoped for. For the most part the authors weave a historical narrative, retelling the past based on their research. Where the historical materials are silent, the authors must fill in the details; and it is here that their agenda comes thru. This isn’t necessarily a problem; it just isn’t what I was hoping for. The story is interesting even if I don’t buy the agenda that fills it out.

• Columbus is presented as a man whose noble desires were overcome by pride and greed. He seems to have felt a genuine sense of divine calling. Unfortunately, this calling was quickly drowned out by other noises: the allure of gold, the honor of royal attention, and international fame. I don’t pity him, but I can understand him.

• I don’t like the way the authors characterize the indigenous Caribbean people. For example, the following passage talks about how Columbus was losing sight of his divine mission:

“Gold - one can see the hand of the Devil here. Unable to overcome the faith of [Columbus] by sowing fear and dissension in the hearts of his men or by paralyzing him with despair, Satan had failed to keep the Light of Christ from establishing a beachhead in practically the only part of the world in which he [that is Satan] still reigned unchallenged.” (p. 42)

Really? The Americas were practically the only part of the world in which Satan still reigned unchallenged? Yet according to the authors own narrative it was the Europeans who raped, pillaged and enslaved the indigenous tribes, (The native population of Española plummeted from 300,000 to 20,000 in fourteen years!) and it was the tribes who demonstrated hospitality and kindness to the foreign visitors, resorting to violence only in retaliation. I’m not naive enough to paint a black and white picture, but it seems the only justification for saying Satan reigned in the Americas is the fact that Jesus’ name was not used.

Anyway, I’ll keep reading.

I know how much I enjoy seeing my name (or alias) on other people’s blogs, so I decided to add a blogroll.