God’s promise to his plantation can also be closely related to “calling” but instead for an entire group. Like a “calling” moving to new land is directed by God. Therefore, the Puritans do it with great passion. Many times these moving processes are done successfully through purchase or some sort of agreement. However, we all know that it doesn’t always go down like that. In cases, when Puritans don’t receive the land they believe is God directing them towards, there may be violence. As bible literalists, this may be considered “just” violence or lawful war. As we look back now it seems so wrong and is wrong. But the Puritans saw it as God’s Sovereignty.
We can compare this act of the Puritans to things we often see today and other parts of history. The United States is guilty of this act which is most likely directly influenced by the Puritans. The “trail of tears” or manifest destiny can be related to God’s promise to his plantation. The United States passionately believed they needed the land and they had the right to it because of their organization and power. The Puritans also passionately believed they had right to the land no matter what through God’s order.
Today the U.S. is constantly getting involved in controversial foreign affairs. Our government is obviously very passionate about something whether it is power, God, money, land. These motives motivate our government to do these controversial things the same way the Puritans motive of God influenced their actions.
The Puritans acts can easily be looked back on and criticized because of the harm they may have caused; however, at this point criticism holds no importance. As we learn I think it is more important to know and understand their motives in order to respect their passionate beliefs and keep some sort of peace with in debates and disagreements.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
When I read Winthrop's "God's Promise," I couldn't help but think that our country has continued, or I guess reimagining, certain elements of Winthrop's. For the present day especially, his notion of driving out the "heathens" from the land made me think of this country's war against terrorists, and his "vacant place" mentality ("where there is a vacant place, there is liberty for the Son of Adam or Noah to come and inhabit") I saw as a precursor to manifest destiny (as Colin mentioned above). Winthrop, on page 5, does seem to give "pre-criticism" to US's disrespect to the Indian nations during the trail of tears: but though his initial statement is strong, "no Nation is to drive out another," he muddies it around with all of his sub-rules and disclaimers ("...unless the Nations do unjustly wrong them,") that are vague and can be applied and fit to many different situations. In class we talked about why it is importatnt to study Puritan writings, and in Winthrop's "Promise" I think we get a good answer; we can see the history of this country and our justification for the unjust, and try to prevent these things from recurring.
ReplyDeleteYou said that the writings give us justification for the unjust but I question where does it actually give justification to such things as the trail of tears? Winthrop says, as you quoted, "no Nation is to drive out another" so where is the justification? He says "...unless the Nations do unjustly wrong to them" but the Native Americans did very little wrong to the current Americans.
ReplyDeleteAs far as the terrorist comment goes, I can sort of see the comparison but I wouldn't so much call terrorist "heathens" because that connotates godlessness and we all know that terrorists are anything but. And also, we aren't really driving them from our land but pushing them back.
I do really like your thoughts on the "vacant place" mentality, I felt that works really well as a comparison to manifest destiny. While, I don't and you probably don't either, think that manifest destiny was necessarily just, I think that this type of thinking was probably pretty accurate for Americans during the James Polk era.
I said I was quoting Winthrop in my comments but I was actually quoting John Cotton's sermon. Got a little mixed up there.
ReplyDeleteI also saw the parallel between, "God's Promise" and gods, "Calling." As one is called into a certain life path, one is also given land righteously by God. But how does one know if they are rightful in claiming a piece of land? If the land is sold to a person or is not already taken, then it is lawful by god. Were the Puritans disobeying this law by taking land that belonged or was inhabited by the Indians. From, "Gods promise to his plantation," it seems as if the puritans weren't following Gods laws of proper ownership of land.
ReplyDeleteI wonder how closely our county is still acting based on the Puritan way, by thinking it is our God given right to lead the world. Was the war in Iraq based on the idea of protecting America or was it for power,money, and/or land? With our new President in office seeking much change, how much will our country change from the Puritan foundation that we were built on? While many voted for change, our country still wants our new President to gain the respect of the world, so that we can once again lead. Again, our mission is always to lead the world.
ReplyDeleteI feel that we would really have to be there in their times to fully understand their reasons for what they did. By no means do I agree with them but I feel that we would be more...enlightened in our discussions if we did know first hand. As far as the "Calling" that went on in the Puritans I do not feel that this is in the best interest of the people. I realize that some people just know that they were meant for something specific like a lifestyle or just...I get that. What I dont get is would about the people who do not really know. Last class we talked about how most of them became farmers. I feel this is not really given them a chance to know their potential. One of those farmers could do something great but would never know because he/she was not given the opportunity.
ReplyDelete