While Winthrop himself was a Puritan, he was not a Separatist along the lines of Bradford and other, more extreme, Puritans. That is, Winthrop believed that the rift within Puritanism that led to the "separation" and voyage to the new land could and should be healed. So Winthrop's message is one of reconciliation and unity.
As I mention above, "A Modell of Christian Charity" was originally delivered as a sermon by Winthrop to the passengers on the ship Alma, which was bringing more Puritan settlers to the new world. What's crucial to note here is Winthrop's motivation. In part he was simply reminding this "congregation" of their responsibilities as Christians. But Winthrop was also distressed at what he saw as the increasing self-centeredness of the settlers, and the growing gap between the values that the settlers professed and how they acted upon those values. So Winthrop's sermon is a pointed reminder to the settlers about how they were supposed to live their lives.
Puritanism itself was basically a modified form of Calvinism. So one of the key precepts of Puritanism--and one of the main reasons why we often tend to see Puritans as a dark and unhappy people--is a belief in the fundamental depravity and weakness of human beings. The more comtemporary notion that people are basically good would fly in the face of the Puritans. To a Puritan, we are all innately corrupted (by virtue of the original sins of Adam and Eve), and faith in Christ was the only path to salvation. However, what we tend to ignore (and what Winthrop was trying to remind his listeners about) is that for the Puritans faith alone was not sufficient, and that one had moral obligations towards one's fellow human beings. If, as a Christian, one was supposed to model one's life after the life of Christ (exemplum)--and one was--then compassion and good works were an essential part of one's life.
However, it nonetheless is true that in the strict Puritan/Calvinist doctrine, good works did nothing for one's possibility for salvation. You see, Puritans also believed in predestination. The Puritans believed that God was the author of history--past, present and future--and as such history was already written. So the "fact' was that God knew perfectly well who would be saved and who would be damned before humans even first crawled on this planet. And there wasn't a thing you could do about it. You could be the most giving and generous individual in creation, but if God had not elected you (the "elect" is the term the Puritans used to refer to those chosen by God to be saved), well, you were screwed. And free will? In your dreams.
Not surprisingly, then, this can lead us to wonder why anyone in his or her right mind would invest faith and energy in such a belief system. To understand that, you have to stop thinking like someone living in the early 21st century. The Puritans who came here left a continent that they believed was sinking into moral chaos, and came to a dangerous and deadly land, much populated by the minions of Satan. Predestination actually offered comfort, because if nothing else, predestination uncompromisingly asserts that God is in control, and that everything, no matter what or how bad, had a purpose. So in spite of what we might suspect, the Puritans were not given to despair--how could they, since they absolutely knew that God was in control.
To begin discussing Winthrop (and Bradford), go to the Discussion Blogs in our Blackboard component.
How is it that the Puritans believed "that for the Puritans faith alone was not sufficient, and that one had moral obligations towards one's fellow human beings" yet also believed in predestination. Do those two not contradict each other in a sense? If your fate is predestined by God why would they have moral obligations to their fellow man?
ReplyDeleteI feel that it's interesting that Winthrop's writing put so much emphasis on the existence of a poor class and a wealthy class and the ways that they can work together to achieve goals that can be beneficial for everyone. In the beginning, Winthrop explains that it does not matter what the situation may be, there has to be some people that are a part of a the poor class and some people a part of the rich class. I thought that with Winthrop explaining the reasons for the existence of the separate classes, he is in a way, foreshadowing what he is going to explain later one because he indeed does realize the importance of the two classes working together.
ReplyDeleteAn important reason as to why the poor would have to suffer is because there must be some conformity. I took that as Winthrop possibly stating that it's best to try and keep some balance amongst the two classes. I also took note of the obligations that the wealthy need to live up to in order to help the poor. I think that what Winthrop was referring to was that the wealthy would need to give back to the poor. One must sell or give everything they had to help the poor survive. It seemed that God wanted this to take place in order to help ensure that there was that equal balance and conformity. In a way, I thought of as even though there were the rich and poor, the reality was that no one was better than any other individual.
I felt that in the last paragraph on page 311, the reference to God's role was simple. I thought of it as the possibility of having the Puritans helping the poor and the poor helping the Puritans in return, and if this took place, the rewards that God would give them would be greater than gold or anything that would resemble wealth of any sort. Interestingly, I thought that the title seemed fitting. The charity that is described by Winthrop goes far beyond just a matter of helping each other, it's a matter of understanding that everyone is equal.