Who Reads an American Book?

Dry Bones & Indian Sermons: Praying Indians in Colonial America

Kristina Bross' book explores the shift in Puritan thought considering the New England colonies. What, exactly, does this mean then? Basically this: Bross is arguing that the Puritan view as to why these settlers migrated to America changed in the midst of the English Civil War. When it seemed that God's wrath was not going to come crashing down on Archbishop Laud and the English government for their persecution against Puritans, many repatriated back to England where things finally seemed to be falling into place. However, those that stayed in America needed another reason to bein America. Here is where Bross' argument comes into play:

"The real reason for migration, they had now discovered, had not been to escape God’s wrath on Archbishop Laud’s persecution but to carry the knowledge of God’s redeeming love to a people held captive by Satan" (Bross 8).

But wait, back up -- what does that mean? That the Puritans "discovered," or perhaps invented, another reason for their migration to the Americas: Christian Indians.

When their original reasons for emigrating became suddenly ungrounded and the migration itself seemed premature, the Puritans saved themselves with a new "errand" that they had not foreseen, though God had. They weren't in America in order to escape being carried to Hell in a hand basket, but rather they were meant to bring Christianity and the Word of God to those that did not know: the Native Americans. I think that Bross' own words sum up my view of this revelation quite nicely:

". . . the sudden appearance of systematic Puritan evangelism in New England years after the initial migration is less surprising if it is understood as evangelical improvisation, a response to events that made the initial colonial self-understanding -- whether primitivist or simply confused -- inadequate" (Bross 11, emphasis mine).

I find it interesting that the Puritans discovered their "true" errand just after their initial reasons failed them. It is not surprising that Bross accuses them of "responding to English national -- not New English colonial -- events" (Bross 7)

Though the book explores many different angles of these happenings in colonial America -- such as the Praying Indians' point of view and the Puritan point of view through scripture, i.e. the Revelation of St. John -- they all contribute to the same argument: that the evangelism of Indians began when the migrants original reasons for inhabiting America failedand critics screamed a resounding, "What now?!"

 

"Dicipline and Disinfect," why England should adopt New England's Congregational Doctrine

The main argument in this chapter of the book, “Authorizing Experience,” is not a position on Antinomian controversy or spiritual theology debates that created it, but rather an argument that Winthrop and others believed that the English monarchy would be reinforced by submitting to the Congregational doctrines of New England.  To show that the Antinomians were an infection to English government the nation is described with the metaphor of a body.  The colony’s body is spiritually infected just as the English body is physically infected.  There are several components to this argument which are listed and discussed below.

 

-Plague and Spiritual Infection-

    The Antinomian controversy and the control of Anne Hutchinson are compared to the control of the bubonic plague that is sweeping England during this time.  It is argued that Winthrop, by ordaining that every man should be in charge of his household, and that each household should be closed off and governed by the Congregational doctrine, is in effect doing the same thing that the magistrates controlling the plague are doing by closing off and isolating people in their homes from infection.  Winthrop is isolating the colony from the, “infection,” of Anne Hutchinson. 

    Another point that is made by Winthrop is that women are spiritually infectious.  If a woman is the head of the body instead of a man then infection occurs.  The Antinomians were causing this infection by allowing a woman to be the head of the political and spiritual body.  He identifies the Antinomians as an infection that occurs during the birthing process (thereby leaving men out of the way of being tainted) and links that directly to the fact that women present at the birthing of Mary Dyer’s child were taken to being violently ill and their children were ill as well.  Because only women can spread and carry the infection it is necessary for them to be quarantined in their homes under the careful supervision of their husbands.  Also he calls for a male presence in the birth rooms to quell the belief that women had supernatural power, and further control the, “infection.”  

-The Antinomian Infection did not originate in New England-

    Winthrop assures his followers that Anne Hutchinson and her beliefs did not originate in New England.  They are beliefs that she gained while in England.  However, her beliefs are Un-English, and Winthrop argues this in order to unify the New England church with the English church as true Christians.  Egan also uses the Thomas Welde writing that shows the Native Americans submitting to English monarchy by following the congregational doctrine of New England.  Egan says Welde is effectively saying, “Those in England who fail to see the benefits of the New English way are less sensible than the Indians.”  

-God Votes against Antinomians-

    The main foundation of New England is that the church and the political body are the same.  You must be a member of the church to vote, and you must show testimony about your conversion to Christianity to be a member of the church.  Therefore only true Christians whose ideas are filtered by their respective preachers are allowed to make decisions for the colony.  This is how England should operate, is the argument that Winthrop and others of the time make.  A main reason for this is that God votes on the side of Winthrop, against the Antinomians.  Hutchinson and Mary Dyer of the Antinomian party have stillborn babies during this time.  Why?  Because God is sending signs that the Antinomians are deformed bodies just as the stillborn children are.  If God is in complete control, then why did he send Hutchinson and her beliefs in the first place?  God did this in order to test the colony so that they could find their spiritual strength.  God acts on behalf of the congregational doctrines, Winthrop, and his followers.  This is further motivation for England to submit to the congregational doctrines. 

 

 

    -Kelly Walker

"Such Monstrous Births" provides context for monsters & Antinomians

Probably a bit long, but here goes:

“Such Monstrous Births” is Anne Jacobson Schutte’s looks at how the Antinomain movement was affected by the birthed demons and monsters by Antinomians. It provides the context of

Winthrop

’s “Short Story” and how other’s responded to the misbirths. The Antinomians advocated a “covenant of grace” and were opposed by “legalists” who preached a “covenant of works” (87). To clarify, Antinomianism is the belief that one can receive salvation without following laws of ethics or morality, where as legalism requires you to follow the codes for salvation.

Schutte emphasized that Puritans and legalists revered God’s providence, because they were interested in his role on creation and they felt that the events created on earth were an effect of the human races moral actions on earth. God had “regular providence” and “special providence” which reflected normal and unusual occurrences, respectively (95). They used this in relation to the monstrous births, with claims that the Antinomians were acting against God, which is why they birthed such monsters.

The “monstrous births” were the births (or misbirths based on point of view) of children to the Dyer and Hutchinson family which produced seemingly supernatural, demented, deformed children. Schutte uses Weld’s response to the births and his response to

Winthrop

’s “Short Story.” Schutte describes Weld’s view (and I will include this large section because it addresses the frequent issues and questions of “Such Monstrous Births”) here:

For him the two monsters could not have been miracles, for the age of miracles was past. Neither were they prodigies or portents foreshadowing remarkable events to come. Instead they were visible signs of the two women’s heresies. They were God’s confirmation of deviations already fully recognized by the ‘saints’ in Massachusetts Bay but perhaps believed by English Puritans to be still attractive to some residents of the colony and therefore politically dangerous. Only secondarily and by implications did Weld suggest that the misbirths might be deserved punishment for sin. Never did he publicly state or even hint that adultery or witchcraft might be involved. (98)

Schutte evaluates how different people of the era understood these misbirths, and how they affected the development of the political and religious dynamics of the colonies. Schutte concludes that the Antinomian movement is not interesting because it seeks to suppress a subordinate group, but rather “the interplay between “erudite” [a scholarly understanding of the entire scope of an element, such as this period in history] and “popular” traditions and between personal inclinations and public exigencies in a particular time and place” (106, brackets mine).