English with Mrs. Lamp



Who were the Puritans?

The Puritans were a group of Protestant religious reformers that emerged in the mid 1500s. They sought to bring the Church to a state of “purity” that would match Christianity as it had been in the time of Christ. Their reforms involved getting rid of the church hierarchy, doing away with the doctrine of good works, and eliminating anything they saw as residual “popery.” They believed individuals could know God’s will and thus one did not need the church to act as an intermediary between oneself and God. They felt people were saved by God’s grace alone, not good works. And they wanted to get rid of elaborate ceremonies, the massive ornamentation of the church, and all rituals and beliefs that came from tradition rather than from the Bible.

Puritans believed it was important to be a diligent worker, often saying, “idle hands are the devil’s playground.” They also stressed temperance, which means restraint or moderation in yielding to one’s appetites or desires. They did not fear or hate dancing, drinking, or sex, but they did ban sexual dancing, drunkenness, adultery, and fornication. A good Puritan strove to be simple, humble, modest, and serious; he or she would try to focus on his or her spiritual life and the next life rather than being worldly or materialistic. Puritan reformers criticized English society for being too sinful, and the Church of England and the English government for being too lenient. They thought the government should strictly enforce public morality by prohibiting vices like drunkenness, gambling, ostentatious dress, swearing, and Sabbath-breaking.

At the time, the Church of England and the government of England were one in the same; thus, questioning the English Church was the same as questioning the government. For this reason, the Puritans were persecuted by the English monarchs. Queen Elizabeth (r. 1558-1603) felt the Puritans threatened her control, and she ordered that all Puritan meetings be suppressed. King James (r. 1603-1625) also rejected the Puritans, saying he would harry them out of the kingdom, if possible. These rulers employed harsh punishments to quell the Puritan dissent. For example, one Puritan published a pamphlet proposing drastic reforms in the Church of England. The authorities put him in jail, fined him, whipped him, cut off the tops of his ears, burned his forehead with a hot iron, and slit his nose in half.

In the hopes of establishing a colony based on Puritan values and ideals, somewhere they could worship freely, a group of 100 Puritans set out for America on the Mayflower in 1620. These people believed they were on a divine mission from God, calling themselves “Pilgrims” because a pilgrim is one who makes a journey to a holy place. In fact, John Winthrop, their first governor, famously said in one of his sermons, “We must consider that we shall be as a city upon a hill, the eyes of all people are upon us.” The new colony they were establishing was to set a shining example of true Christianity for the rest of the world.

Once they reached America, Puritans set up their churches as self-governing bodies; individual churches were not answerable to any higher authority. This was the beginning of the separation of church and state. Although the church and the law in each town were one in the same, they did not want a national church or national government. Even so, across the board, their churches were plain, simple—even austere, and their services were dominated by long, scholarly sermons in which their clergy described and explained passages from the Bible.

Although Puritans got rid of the structure and ritualism of Catholicism, emphasizing instead individual faith and study of the scripture, a woman named Anne Hutchinson and her ideas, called antinomianism, took this further, rejecting intellectualism and hierarchy all together and advocating for the abandonment of any structured church.

Now, Puritans believed “born-again men were illuminated with divine truth” and felt religion should take on a more “personal mode,” meaning individuals, through education and access to the Scripture, could know God’s will without going through church leaders like priests or Popes. Even so, they took for granted a society and state which relied upon a certain hierarchy. Thus, they were very threatened by anyone whose beliefs seemed to promote too much individualism.

Additionally, they thought the Bible was the only way God directly communicated with human beings. While they did study the natural world and interpret events in order to gain a sense of His will, they did not think God spoke directly to human beings by means of visitations, revelations, or divine inspirations of any sort.

Anne Hutchinson, on the other hand, maintained that every person had direct access to God through an “inner light,” thus there was no need for the structured church, scholarship, or the study of the Bible. These ideas were viewed as a “dangerous” form of individualism, a “fanatical anti-intellectualism” (Miller 14-15), and potentially destructive to the colony. Puritan leaders felt the antinomians took Puritan ideas further than they were meant to go. Thus, Hutchinson and her followers were banished.

One of the reasons the Puritan church was so powerful was the Puritan belief that the government had the right to prevent individuals from leaving or contradicting the church. They felt the foundation of all laws was the inflexible law of God. They could not just let everyone have a say because if they allowed a more egalitarian, democratic form of government, they might not be able to set that shining example of true Christianity for the rest of the world, and that had been the whole purpose of their coming to America. Thus, despite what some later commentators would say, Puritanism and Democracy were not necessarily co-productive ideas. In fact, despite the fact that they had to move to America to avoid intolerance in England, the Puritans were entirely intolerant of those who held beliefs different from their own; they frequently tortured, imprisoned, and banished dissenters.

Puritanism in America was only popular for about a century. As the founders died off, they were replaced by new generations far less fervent in their beliefs and far less likely to go to church. These younger people had never been persecuted or tortured for their beliefs! Nor did they have to endure the extreme hardships the original settlers suffered in carving out a home amid a hostile American wilderness and under threat from hostile native tribes. In tough times, membership in the group and a strong sense of religious belief and purpose had fortified the Puritans; they felt a strong need for strict organization and strict religious principles to survive. However, the strong work ethic of these forefathers, who believed economic success was an indicator of God’s favor, led to a strong economy and booming businesses. People began to enjoy times of comparatively easy living, with food and safety mostly secured. This great economic success seemed to replace the need for such a strict religion. Finally, the oppressive and demanding nature of the Puritan church (including the pressure to be perfect, their Draconian treatment of dissenters, and the disaster of the Salem Witch Trials of the 1690s) lead many colonists to lose their faith in the Puritan leaders, leave the church, and begin new colonies. The Puritans were simply unable to live under the pressure of their own religious zeal.

Today, we still see remnants of our Puritan past in the ever-present American quest for freedom, the value we place on hard work (what we still call “the Protestant work ethic”), the idea of our country as a shining example for others—the city on a hill, and our belief in the foundational importance of a good education for every American.

How was Puritanism different from Catholicism?

“Sola Scriptura”

The Roman Catholic view is that the Bible and tradition are coordinate sources of faith and practice, and we believe tradition is the only legitimate and infallible interpreter of the Bible. We do not believe people can simply interpret the Bible for themselves.

The Magisterium is the authority that lays down what is the authentic teaching of the Catholic Church. It is made up of the pope and the bishops who are in communion with him. We believe the Word of God has been entrusted to the Church. We have faith that when the pope speaks ex cathedra (when he defines a doctrine concerning faith or morals to be held by the whole Church), his teachings are infallible because it was God’s will that we would have the Church, and it was His will that the Church would have a pope—the “Vicar of Christ” who stands in the place of Jesus as the visible head of the Church. We believe God would not allow the pope to be wrong when he speaks ex cathedra.

In this discussion it is important to keep in mind what the Catholic Church means by tradition. Sacred or apostolic tradition consists of the teachings the apostles passed on orally through their preaching. They have been handed down and entrusted to the Church. It is necessary that Christians believe in and follow this tradition as well as the Bible (Luke 10:16). The truth of the faith has been given primarily to the leaders of the Church (Eph. 3:5), who, with Christ, form the foundation of the Church (Eph. 2:20). The Church has been guided by the Holy Spirit, who protects this teaching from corruption (John 14:25-26, 16:13).

Catholics also believe we need ordained teachers and ministers of the sacraments. Scripture speaks of bishops, priests, and deacons as being invested with spiritual powers not possessed by the community at large, and these are transmitted by an external sign (the imposition of hands), thus creating a separate order—a hierarchy. Scripture shows the Church starting with an ordained priesthood as its central element, and history shows this priesthood living on in unbroken succession to the present day.

The Puritans believed the scriptures were the only infallible source of faith and practice. They felt that not only was the Bible the Word of God being passed down through the writings of apostles and prophets, but also that people could privately interpret the Bible without priests, bishops, cardinals, or the pope. They refused to accept any religious authority beyond that of the “revealed word of God” (the Bible). This belief is called “sola scriptura” or “Scripture alone.”

Because of this belief, Puritans rejected priests, bishops, cardinals, and the pope. They also wanted a simplification of the church and worship, doing away with any doctrine or ceremony they felt had no clear warrant in the Bible, thus rejecting the necessity of good works, the veneration of the Virgin, praying to saints, the dogma of transubstantiation, confession out loud, the celibacy of the clergy, and all the sacraments besides Baptism and the Eucharist.

Puritans thought people had a right and duty to read and interpret the Bible themselves and to take part in the government and public affairs of the Church. This made them oppose the hierarchical system that placed the essence and authority of the Church in an exclusive priesthood and made ordained priests the necessary mediators between God and the people. Because they wanted everyone to know “God’s covenant” (the way He wanted people to think and act), it was important to the Puritans that the common people be well educated so the right ideas and understandings would be held and expressed and so the complex messages of their leaders would be received by a comprehending audience. For this reason, the Puritans established Harvard College in 1636, and the entire community supported it; even the poor farmers “contributed their pecks of wheat” for the continued promise of a “literate ministry” (Miller 14).

“Sola Fide”

Catholics do believe God’s grace alone makes it possible for us to be saved. However, Catholics believe it takes more than “faith alone” for an individual to actually be saved. If an individual is to be Redeemed, he must be "regenerated in God,” that is, he must be justified. (Justification is the transformation in the soul by which man is transferred from the state of original sin, in which, as a child of Adam, he was born, to the state of grace through Jesus Christ, our Redeemer.)

What do Catholics believe must be done to gain justification? The Council of Trent assigns the first and most important place to faith, which is styled "the beginning, foundation, and root of all justification.” According to Christ's teachings, the next step is (if one is not Baptized) a genuine sorrow for all sin with the resolution to begin a new life by receiving Holy Baptism and by observing the commandments of God. By the grace of the Sacrament of Baptism, the catechumen is freed from sin (original and personal) and its punishments, and is made a child of God. The same process of justification is repeated in those who have already been Baptized but whom, by mortal sin, have lost their baptismal innocence, with the modification, however, that the Sacrament of Penance replaces Baptism*. Finally, only such faith as is active in charity and good works can justify man. Catholics believe faith alone cannot justify man. We believe our relationship with God is based on perfect love of God or “charity” (cf. Gal., v, 6; I Cor., xiii; James, ii, 17 sqq.), so “dead faith” or faith devoid of charity (fides informis) cannot possess any justifying power.

*Of course, for those pagans and non-Catholics who without their fault do not know the Sacraments of Baptism and Penance, Catholic theologians unanimously hold that the desire to receive these sacraments is implicitly contained in the serious resolve to do all that God has commanded, even if His holy will should not become known in every detail.

The Puritans believed human beings were inherently sinful because they had inherited the original sin of Adam and Eve (Catholics believe we are inherently good, as we are made in God’s image). Puritans believed people had to constantly struggle to overcome their sinful nature, and they thought most of humanity was damned after the fall. However, they also thought God, in His infinite mercy, had sent His Son so that a small number of “elect” individuals could be saved from the fate of eternal hellfire that all men, because of their corrupt natures, justly deserved. In Puritan theology, Jesus died for the chosen only, not for everyone.

Okay, so how did one become one of the “elect?” Well, Puritans believed in “sola fide” or “faith alone.” This meant people were saved through their faith in Christ only. Good works, they believed, would happen because of one’s faith, and they were evidence of one’s salvation, but they were not sources of or conditions of salvation. Thus, one’s personal salvation depended solely on the grace of God, not on individual effort.

A huge part of this idea is called “predestination.” The Puritans believed that because God’s knowledge and power was not limited by space or time, God had decided who would be saved or damned before the beginning of history, so His decision would not be affected by how human beings behaved during their lives. This is why the emphasis that the Catholic Church places on “good works” did not exist in their religion. Basically, if a person was saved, he or she would be the kind of person who would do good, and if he or she was not saved, then he or she would be the kind of person who would not do good. A person could not simply choose to do good, earn “credit” for this goodness, and thus change whether or not he or she would be saved.

The only way an individual could know he or she was saved was by directly experiencing God’s grace through a “conversion experience.” This chosen group of “saints” would be blessed, at some point in their lives, by a profound sense of inner assurance that they possessed God’s “grace.” For them, the word “grace” describes a miracle through which God grants some people the ability to love Him and His creation fully and truly. These people would feel a huge change in themselves, and from then on, they would act like saints. They would have only good and pure feelings, and they would act only in good and pure ways. Unless the Devil tempted someone away from God, they did not believe the elect were capable of sin, as their sin would mean God had chosen wrong, which would be impossible.

Because of these beliefs, Puritans constantly asked themselves, Am I saved, or am I damned? How could they figure out the answer? Well, they had the key–the basis of spiritual understanding–the foundational text and all-encompassing code: the Bible. They believed that “after the fall of man, God voluntarily condescended […] to draw up a covenant or contract with His creatures in which He laid down the terms and conditions of salvation, and pledged Himself to abide by them” (Miller 58). Within the pages of the Bible, one could figure out how God wanted man to think and act. This was called “Covenant Theology.” The Bible wasn’t telling people what to do; rather, it was explaining why certain people were saved and others were not. It gave the conditions against which one might measure up one’s soul. One must study the Bible to know the terms of the contract. If a person examined his or her life and found that he or she always acted, thought, and felt in accordance with what the Bible said was right and good, then that person could be pretty sure he or she was one of the “elect.” If, on the other hand, one continually failed to be saint-like, those failures were evidence of one’s damnation.

Considering all this, why would anyone accept the doctrine of predestination? It seems pretty unfair, right? This God doesn’t seem to offer any incentive for upright moral behavior. He has already decided who will be saved, and no good actions on the part of men and women can change that divine decree. This theology denies human beings any free will! Why wouldn’t Puritans sink into despair or revel in the world’s pleasures and just enjoy the moment, since there was nothing they could do to affect their eternity in the afterlife? Well, the answer is this: they felt their very ability to master their evil inclinations provided evidence they were among the elect group of saints. In other words, the Puritans did not regard leading a godly, moral life as the CAUSE of a person’s salvation, but rather as an encouraging sign of the EFFECT of being chosen by God to enjoy eternal bliss in heaven. Of course, it was impossible to be entirely confident of one’s eternal fate, but that edge of uncertainty only made believers redouble their efforts to purify their own lives and society as a whole.

Anne Bradstreet

(1612-1672)

Born into a family of Puritans and educated by tutors in her native England, Bradstreet was immersed in the Bible. She also had access to the large library of the Earl of Lincoln, who employed her father. At sixteen, she married a well-educated and zealous young Puritan by the name of Simon Bradstreet.

Two years later, in 1630, she sailed with her husband and her father across the Atlantic to what would later become known as the Massachusetts Bay Colony. Eventually, her father and her husband would become governors of Massachusetts. For her part, Anne kept house and raised eight children. She found time to write poems, but she never sought an audience or publication. When her brother-in-law, John Woodbridge went to England in 1647, he published her poems without her knowledge. Her book of poetry was the first literary work to be written in America and read widely in the Old World.

In the 1600s, American poetry was almost exclusively devotional in nature. Bradstreet’s poetry was unique because it focused on personal subjects (like her husband, children, and her home), yet it was also very traditional in that she always viewed her life within a spiritual context. Every event, no matter how trivial, bore a divine message; every misfortune served to remind her of God’s will and the path to salvation. Her poetry gives readers an impression of Puritan beliefs and values.

If it seems striking that the author of The Tenth Muse was a woman, Anne Bradstreet was certainly conscious of the fact herself. Aware that she may be charged with being overbold or arrogant for aspiring to a place among the company of the established male poets, she wrote, “If what I do prove well/ it won’t advance; / They’ll say it’s stolen, or else it was by chance.” In another poem, she tackled the issue good-humoredly, if a bit apologetically. She clearly liked to write, yet she apparently felt it improper for a woman to appear in print. Here, as a proper Puritan wife should, she is quick to assert the superiority of men:

Let Greeks be Greeks, and Women what they are,

Men have precedency, and still excel,

It is but vain, unjustly to wage war,

Men can do best, and Women know it well.

Whether or not “men can do best,” men did not. The person who deserves to be called the first American poet was a woman.

Vocabulary:

“Meter” is the repetition of a regular rhythmic unit in a line of poetry. Each unit is known as a foot, and each foot is made up of stressed (/) or unstressed (u) syllables. In these poems, Bradstreet uses iambic couplets. An iamb is a foot that has an unstressed and then a stressed syllable. A couplet is two successive rhyming lines.

Some of the language in the poems is “archaic,” meaning that Anne Bradstreet uses words that were once common but are now considered old-fashioned, such as thee, ye, and thou.

Also, like most other early American poets, Bradstreet often uses “inverted syntax,” meaning that she reverses the expected order of words. For example, she writes, “when rest I took,” rather than, “when I took rest.”

“To My Dear and Loving Husband” is a loving tribute to Anne Bradstreet’s husband. Written many years into their marriage, it is one of the poems that Bradstreet did not want published because she did not consider it appropriate for public view.

If ever two were one, then surely we.

If ever man were loved by wife, then thee;

If ever wife was happy in a man,

Compare with me ye women if you can.

I prize thy love more than whole mines of gold,

Or all the riches that the East doth hold.

My love is such that rivers cannot quench,

Nor ought but love from thee give recompense.

Thy love is such I can no way repay;

The heavens reward thee manifold, I pray.

Then while we live, in love let’s so persever,

That when we live no more we may live ever.

Discussion Questions:

1. How does Bradstreet use hyperbole and metaphor to emphasize the intensity of her love for her husband?

2. How does Bradstreet make clear that their love is mutual?

3. What can we tell about Puritan values and beliefs from this poem?

4. Can you find any archaic language or inverted syntax in this poem?

5. What is the meter and rhythm of this poem?

|Accent pattern creates different types of feet… |Number of feet tells you whether it is… |

| | |

|Iamb (u/) destroy |Monometer |

|Trochee (/u) topsy |Dimeter |

|Anapest (uu/) intervene |Trimester |

|Dactyl (/uu) merrily |Tetrameter |

|Spondee (//) hum drum |Pentameter |

|Pyrrhic (uu) the sea(son of )wheat |Hexameter |

| |Heptameter |

| |Octameter |

“Upon the Burning of Our House” is Anne Bradstreet’s chronicle of a domestic tragedy.

In silent night when rest I took,

For sorrow near I did not look,

I wakened was with thund’ring noise

And piteous shrieks of dreadful voice.

That fearful sound of “Fire!” and “Fire!”

Let no man know is my Desire.

I, starting up, the light did spy,

And to my God my heart did cry

To straighten me in my Distress

And not to leave me succourless.

Then, coming out, behold a space

The flame consume my dwelling place.

And when I could no longer look,

I blest His name that gave and took,

That laid my goods now in the dust.

Yea, so it was, and so ‘twas just.

It was his own, it was not mine,

Far be it that I should repine;

He might of all justly bereft

But yet sufficient for us left.

When by the ruins oft I past

My sorrowing eyes aside did cast

And here and there the places spy

Where oft I sate and long did lie.

Here stood that trunk, and there that chest,

There lay that store I counted best.

My pleasant things in ashes lie

And them behold no more shall I.

Under thy roof no guest shall sit,

Nor at thy Table eat a bit.

No pleasant talk shall ‘ere be told

Nor things recounted done of old.

No Candle e'er shall shine in Thee,

Nor bridegroom‘s voice e'er heard shall be.

In silence ever shalt thou lie,

Adieu, Adieu, all’s vanity.

Then straight I ‘gin my heart to chide,

And did thy wealth on earth abide?

Didst fix thy hope on mould'ring dust?

The arm of flesh didst make thy trust?

Raise up thy thoughts above the sky

That dunghill mists away may fly.

Thou hast a house on high erect

Frameed by that mighty Architect,

With glory richly furnished,

Stands permanent though this be fled.

It‘s purchased and paid for too

By Him who hath enough to do.

A price so vast as is unknown,

Yet by His gift is made thine own;

There‘s wealth enough, I need no more,

Farewell, my pelf, farewell, my store.

The world no longer let me love,

My hope and treasure lies above

Discussion Questions:

1. Describe Bradstreet’s initial feelings (in stanzas 1-6) regarding the burning of her house.

2. How does Bradstreet’s emotional focus change in the seventh stanza?

3. Near the end of the poem, Bradstreet speaks of another “house” in an extended metaphor. What is this house?

4. Can you find any archaic language or inverted syntax in this poem?

5. What is the Puritan attitude toward wealth and material things?

6. What Puritan belief regarding the afterlife is revealed in this poem?

7. Some critics feel that Bradstreet reminds herself so often not to have too much affection for earthly things as to suggest that she does not really want to give them up. Does it seem that she truly is not a materialistic person, or is she trying to convince herself not to be materialistic?

8. What meter is this poem written in?

“For Deliverance from a Fever” is a poem exploring serious illness alongside Puritan themes

When sorrows had begirt me round,

And pains within and out,

When in my flesh no part was found,

Then didst Thou rid me out.

My burning flesh in sweat did boil,

My aching head did break,

From side to side for ease I toil,

So faint I could not speak.

Beclouded was my soul with fear

Of Thy displeasure sore,

Nor could I read my evidence

Which oft I read before.

"Hide not Thy face from me!" I cried,

"From burnings keep my soul.

Thou know'st my heart, and hast me tried;

I on Thy mercies roll."

"O heal my soul," Thou know'st I said,

"Though flesh consume to nought,

What though in dust it shall be laid,

To glory t' shall be brought."

Thou heard'st, Thy rod Thou didst remove

And spared my body frail

Thou show'st to me Thy tender love,

My heart no more might quail.

O, praises to my mighty God,

Praise to my Lord, I say,

Who hath redeemed my soul from pit,

Praises to Him for aye.

Discussion Questions:

1. Describe Bradstreet’s initial feelings (in lines 9-12) regarding her intense illness.

2. What is she asking God for in lines 13-20?

3. Near the end of the poem, Bradstreet speaks of her heart ceasing to quail—what was she afraid of?

4. Can you find any archaic language or inverted syntax in this poem?

5. How did the Puritans view illness?

6. What Puritan belief regarding God’s will is revealed in this poem?

7. Why might Anne Bradstreet be struggling with her fear of death? How does that fear go against Puritan teachings and ideas?

8. What meter is this poem written in?

“Before the Birth of One of Her Children” considers the possibility of death in childbirth. At the time, women were pregnant for most of their adult lives, bearing an average of 6-7 children. The likelihood of maternal death in childbirth, due to dehydration, blood loss, and infection, was between 1 and 2%, compared to .018% today. Anne bore eight children, making her chances 1 in 8.

All things within this fading world hath end,   

Adversity doth still our joyes attend; 

No ties so strong, no friends so dear and sweet,   

But with death’s parting blow is sure to meet.   

The sentence past is most irrevocable,   

A common thing, yet oh inevitable. 

How soon, my Dear, death may my steps attend,   

How soon’t may be thy Lot to lose thy friend,   

We are both ignorant, yet love bids me   

These farewell lines to recommend to thee,   

That when that knot’s untied that made us one,   

I may seem thine, who in effect am none.   

And if I see not half my dayes that’s due, 

What nature would, God grant to yours and you;   

The many faults that well you know I have   

Let be interr’d in my oblivious grave;   

If any worth or virtue were in me,   

Let that live freshly in thy memory   

And when thou feel’st no grief, as I no harms,   

Yet love thy dead, who long lay in thine arms. 

And when thy loss shall be repaid with gains   

Look to my little babes, my dear remains.   

And if thou love thyself, or loved’st me,

These o protect from step-dames’ injury. 

And if chance to thine eyes shall bring this verse,

With some sad sighs honour my absent Herse;   

And kiss this paper for thy loves dear sake, 

Who with salt tears this last Farewel did take.

Discussion Questions:

1. How can one tell Bradstreet is addressing this poem to her husband?

2. What does Bradstreet hope for in the event of her death? (search for three to four things)

3. What does she mean when she refers to her children as her “dear remains”?

4. How does Anne Bradstreet’s language suggest her deep love for her husband?

5. What is the meter of this poem?

6. Can you find an example of inverted syntax?

Edward Taylor

(1642-1729)

Although Edward Taylor wrote thousands of lines of poetry during his lifetime, he allowed only two stanzas of one poem to be published while he was alive, and he asked that his heirs not publish any more. Written in the late 1600s and early 1700s, Taylor’s poems were not printed until 1939.

Like most American Puritan writers, Edward Taylor was a minster. He was born in England to a Puritan family, and he came to Boston in 1668 after losing a teaching position in England because he refused to take an oath contrary to his religious beliefs. Once there, he trained for the ministry at Harvard College. In 1671, he accepted a post as minister in the tiny frontier town of Westfield, Massachusetts. He wrote that the hundred-mile journey proved difficult, “the snow being mid-leg deep, the way unbeaten, or the track filled up again, and over rocks and mountains.”

Difficulties persisted during the nearly sixty years Taylor faithfully tended to the spiritual needs of his flock in Westfield. The town was under constant threat of attack during King Philip’s War, the great Indian war of the 1670’s in which two-thirds of the villages of Massachusetts Bay were damaged or destroyed. Taylor’s first wife bore eight children, five of whom died as infants. A conservative and seemingly irritable man, he also quarreled with tenants on his property and with his own congregation and other ministers on religious matters. He tried to defend the original faith of the Puritans against newer, more liberal religious ideas. For example, he believed that only a person who had experienced grace (someone who had gone through a “conversion experience”) should be allowed to become a full member of the church, yet many other Puritans wanted to eliminate that requirement in hopes of keeping the churches filled.

Throughout his life, Taylor wrote a great deal. No one knows how much, for his poems are still being discovered. Some turned up not long ago stuffed into the bindings of books in his library. His poetic style was different from that of most Puritan poets, as it was often difficult and intricate, but his content was very much in keeping with the writing of his day, as almost all of his poetry concerned religion He wrote little directly about his life in the New World, yet his poems testify to the intensity of Puritan religious life in wilderness America, and their publication after two hundred years contributes to American literature a powerful and original imagination.

Vocabulary:

The Conceit

In poetry, a conceit is a startling metaphor or simile – a surprising connection made between two different things. This connection must be especially witty, strange, exaggerated, long, or elaborate. Conceits are designed to make us see connections between vastly different things.

| |from God's Determinations Touching His Elect |

| | | |

| |Infinity, when all things it beheld  | |

| |In Nothing, and of Nothing all did build,  | |

| |Upon what base was fixed the lath* wherein  |a machine that shapes wood |

| |He turned this globe and rigalled* it so trim?  |grooved |

|5 |Who blew the bellows* of His furnace vast?  |a device for blowing on a fire |

| |Or held the mold wherein the world was cast?  | |

| |Who laid its cornerstone? Or whose command?  | |

| |Where stand the pillars upon which it stands?  | |

| |Who laced and filleted* the earth so fine,  |bound |

|10 |With rivers like green ribbons smaragdine*?  |emerald |

| |Who made the seas its selvedge* and it locks  |finished edge of woven cloth |

| |Like a quilt ball* within a silver box?  |a pretty ball of quilt pieces |

| |Who spread its canopy? Or curtains spun?  | |

| |Who in this bowling alley bowled the sun?  | |

|15 |Who made it always when it rises set,  | |

| |To go at once both down, and up to get?  | |

| |Who the curtain rods made for this tapestry*?  |thick woven cloth with pictures or designs |

| |Who hung the twinkling lanterns in the sky?  | |

| |Who? Who did this? Or who is He? Why, know  | |

|20 |It's only Might Almighty this did do.  | |

| |His hand hath made this noble work which stands,  | |

| |His glorious handiwork not made by hands.  | |

| |Who spake all things from nothing; and with ease.  | |

| |Can speak all things to nothing, if He please.  | |

|25 |Whose little finger at His pleasure can  |to distribute by portion or measure |

| |Out mete* ten thousand worlds with half a span:  | |

| |Whose Might Almighty can by half a looks  | |

| |Root up the rocks and rock the hills by the roots.  |a switch |

| |Can take this mighty world up in His hand,  | |

|30 |And shake it like a squitchen* or a wand.  | |

| |Whose single frown will make the heavens shake  | |

| |Like as an aspen-leaf the wind makes quake.  | |

| |Oh, what a might is this Whose single frown  |fetched |

| |Doth shake the world as it would shake it down?  | |

|35 |Which All on Nothing fet*, from Nothing, All:  | |

| |Hath All on Nothing set, lets Nothing fall.  | |

| |Gave All to nothing-man indeed, whereby  | |

| |Through nothing-man all might him glorify.  | |

| |In Nothing then embossed the brightest gem  | |

|40 |More precious than all preciousness in them.  | |

| |But nothing-man did throw down all by sin:  | |

| |And darkened that lightsome gem in him.  | |

| |That now his brightest diamond is grown  | |

| |Darker by far than any coal-pit stone. | |

Discussion Questions:

from God's Determinations Touching His Elect

1. According to the first two lines, what was the whole world built from?

2. Where is this belief echoed in the Bible?

3. Taylor often conveys his spiritual meanings through the imagery of everyday life – specifically, life in a Puritan village. In this poem, he uses these images to talk about the act of creation, something that is nearly impossible for human beings to imagine. In lines 3-4, for instance, he makes a startling comparison: God is like a common woodworker. These types of startling comparisons are called conceits. To what other kinds of common workers does the poet compare God?

4. One reason Taylor uses everyday imagery is to express his meaning in vivid pictures, presenting his ideas not only to the mind, but also to the eye. Explain ONE of these images: how does the world really look as if it were created on a “lathe” (3), as if it were “laced and [bound]” with green ribbons like a shoe (9), as if it were a “quilt ball” (12), or as if it were a house with “twinkling lanterns” (18)?

5. In what lines does the poet convey to us God’s terrifying power, a power far greater than that of any human artisan?

6. According to lines 37-8, what is the purpose of human existence in God’s world?

7. What is the “gem” that God sets in “nothing-man” (39)?

8. In the last image of the poem, what has become of this gem?

9. What Biblical event is the poet referring to?

10. The first part of the poem is organized as a series of questions. Taylor answers all of these questions with one answer: God. What feelings about God is this series of questions designed to create?

11. Explain the pun (play on words) in line 28.

12. Explain the paradox (an expression that seems contradictory) in line 36.

Upon a Spider Catching a Fly

Thou sorrow, venom elf:

      Is this thy play,

To spin a web out of thyself

      To Catch a Fly?

            For Why?

I saw a pettish wasp

      Fall foul therein:

Whom yet thy Whorl pins did not clasp

      Lest he should fling

            His sting.

But as afraid, remote

      Didst stand hereat,

And with thy little fingers stroke

      And gently tap

            His back.

Thus gently him didst treat

      Lest he should pet,

And in a froppish, waspish heat

      Should greatly fret

            Thy net.

Whereas the silly fly,

      Caught by its leg

Thou by the throat tookst hastily

      And 'hind the head

            Bite dead.

This goes to pot, that not

      Nature doth call.

Strive not above what strength hath got,

      Lest in the brawl

            Thou fall.

This fray seems thus to us.

      Hell’s spider gets

His entrails spun to whipcords thus

      And wove to nets

            And sets

To tangle Adam’s race

      In's stratagems

To their Destructions, spoiled, made base

      By venom things,

            Damned Sins.

But mighty, gracious Lord

      Communicate

Thy grace to break the cord, afford

      Us glory’s gate

            And state.

We'll nightingale sing like

      When perched on high

In glory’s cage, thy glory, bright,

      And thankfully,

            For joy.

This poem creates an elaborate metaphor (called a conceit) in which the cobweb stands for the devil’s trap. Just as the spider spins a delicate web that is the scene of a natural conflict, so does the devil create a trap for humans. The poem itself shows how people can escape the trap.

In the sixth stanza, “This goes to pot” means it has lost vitality, it’s washed up, finished. If we put those lines into normal word order, Taylor is saying “This goes to pot, that Nature doth not call.” In Puritan theology, Nature, or “natural reason,” was the term for every man’s ability to perceive God’s truth by instinct, though not everyone heeded Nature’s call.

Just as the “silly fly” in this poem gets its head bitten off and “goes to pot,” those people who do not heed the call of natural reason will go to Hell. However, those who listen to natural reason will be given the grace to break Satan’s cords, to go through “glory’s gate,” and to rest “on high/In glory’s cage” forever.

Group Activity:

Rewrite “Upon a Spider Catching a Fly” as a prose paragraph. Put the speaker’s language into contemporary English. You will have to replace archaic words, and you will have to rewrite the inverted syntax so that your paragraph uses normal English word order. You may change the wording as little or as much as you think is necessary, but make sure it is easy to read and sounds like something you would write today.

Discussion Questions:

“Upon a Spider Catching a Fly”

The poem begins with a parable, a brief story drawn from everyday life that is used to teach a lesson. This parable has three characters: the spider, the wasp, and the fly.

1. What is “Hell’s spider” (32), and what does it do to “Adam’s race” (36)?

2. How does the spider treat the wasp that has fallen into its net differently from how it treats the fly?

3. Why does the spider treat its two victims differently?

4. What kind of person does the wasp symbolize, and what kind of person does the fly symbolize?

5. Who alone can break the cords spun by Hell’s spider?

6. What rhyme scheme does Taylor use in this poem?

7. Can you find any internal rhymes as well (check stanzas 5, 6, and 7)?

Huswifery (the work of a housewife)

Make me, O Lord, thy Spinning Wheel complete.

Thy Holy Word my Distaff make for me.

Make mine Affections thy Swift Flyers neat

And make my Soul thy holy Spool to be.

My Conversation make to be thy Reel

And Reel the yarn thereon spun of thy Wheel.

Make me thy Loom then, knit therein this Twine:

And make thy Holy Spirit, Lord, wind quills

Then weave the Web thyself. The yarn is fine.

Thine Ordinances make my Fulling Mills

Then dye the same in Heavenly Colors Choice,

All pinked with Varnished Flowers of Paradise.

Then clothe therewith mine Understanding, Will,

Affections, Judgment, Conscience, Memory,

My Words and Actions, that their shine may fill

My ways with glory and thee glorify.

Then mine apparel shall display before ye

That I am Clothed in Holy robes for glory.

Discussion Questions:

1. In religious poetry, a conceit often serves a deeper purpose than surprise. It can also emphasize the underlying unity among all things in God’s creation—high and low, familiar and strange. As a Puritan, Taylor believed the miracle of grace consisted in mighty God consenting to join with lowly humans. In this conceit, Taylor compares God granting His grace to what ordinary activity?

2. The conceit begins in the first stanza; the speaker compares himself to a spinning wheel. In line 2, what is Taylor saying one needs in order to receive grace?

3. The second stanza compares the speaker to a loom, on which the thread or yarn is turned into cloth. Who is the weaver weaving the threads into cloth (“the Web”)?

4. What does Taylor mean when he says “Thine Ordinances make my Fulling Mills”?

5. Explain what the speaker is asking for in the final stanza.

6. How does this conceit show how Puritans feel about mankind and grace?

7. How does this poem highlight a difference between how Catholics and Puritans feel about achieving salvation?

Jonathan Edwards

(1703-1758)

Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God (Orange Text 153-6)

Born in East Windsor, Connecticut, in 1703 (eighty years after the Puritans landed in New England), Jonathan Edwards’ intellectual abilities and religious fervor were recognized early, and he was groomed from an early age to succeed his influential grandfather as pastor of the Congregational Church in Northampton, Massachusetts. At the age of thirteen, he entered Yale College. In his early twenties, he began preaching alongside his grandfather in Northampton. He was only twenty-six when his grandfather died, and he succeeded him as the preacher of one of America’s leading churches.

He began his ministry at a time when enthusiasm for the old Puritan religion was declining. To offset major losses in their congregations, churches had been accepting increasing numbers of “unregenerate” Christians. These were people who accepted church doctrine and lived upright lives but who had not confessed a conversion experience – they had not been “born again” in God’s grace. Thus, they were not considered to be saved. Edwards refused to accept these people as full members of his church, and in his sermons, he strove to make these “sinners” understand the precariousness of their situation by helping them actually to feel the horror of their sinful state.

He was a strong-willed and charismatic pastor, and his formidable presence and brilliant sermons helped to bring about the religious revival known as the “Great Awakening.” This revival began in Northampton in the 1730’s and during the next fifteen years it spread throughout the American colonies. Suddenly, people all over America began denouncing their sins and dedicating themselves anew to God. These mass conversions were so intensely emotional as to amount, at times, to mass hysteria.

During this time, Edwards wrote and preached such sermons as “Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God,” which roused his listeners to frenzy. In it, he warned his congregation that being church members would not automatically save them from Hell. He tried to persuade them that they had to personally experience conversion, the transforming moment in which they felt God’s grace. [Although the Puritans believed in predestination, Edwards worried that even members of God’s elect had turned so far from God that they were in danger of missing His call to grace and thus being condemned to Hell.] He read the sermon in his usual straightforward, unemotional manner, but as he depicted the furnace of eternal torturous fire awaiting sinners, members of the congregation began calling out, “What shall I do to be saved? Oh, I am going to Hell! Oh, what shall I do for Christ?” One listener wrote that the “shrieks and cries were piercing and amazing” that the “great moaning and crying out” forced Edwards to stop several times to ask for quiet in the church.

Edward’s passionate conviction brought him fame but also antagonism. In his sermons, he didn’t hesitate to accuse prominent church members, by name, of relapsing into sin. He continued to be unbending in his refusal to accept the “unregenerate” into his church, and his extremism displeased so many people that in 1750, his congregation voted him out of his prestigious position as minister, and he was sent to the remote Mohican Indian community of Stockbridge, Massachusetts. After eight years of missionary work in this lonely exile, Edwards was “rescued” and named president of Princeton University, but he died three months later from the effects of a smallpox inoculation.

Discussion Questions:

1. What people are in danger?

2. What behavior does he say is useless to prevent these people’s everlasting destruction?

3. In this sermon, Edwards speaks mostly of an angry God, but where in the sermon does Edwards offer his congregation a vision of hope and a merciful God?

4. In the hopeful section, what actions does Edward want his audience to take?

5. There are two famous conceits in Edwards’ sermon: the archer with his bow and arrow, and the man dangling the spider above a fire.

a. What are the archer, the bow, and the arrow compared to?

b. What are the man, the spider, and the fire compared to?

6. Besides the images from the two conceits we considered above, can you think of two more ways Edwards uses metaphors to illustrate the imminent danger people are in?

7. What does Edwards say to help his listeners feel what eternity is?

8. What major Puritan spiritual belief is illustrated in this sermon?

9. What is the Puritan view of human beings?

10. What is their view of God?

11. What made this sermon so effective?

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download