American History

A Comparative Study

Perceptions of Puritanism
In comparing and contrasting the Alan Simpsons The Puritan Tradition with Roland H. Baintons Jonathan Edwards The Great Awakening, there are many similarities between the two works. Both articles bear many differences as well. In the following paper, the two authors and their perceptions of Puritanism will be extracted and analyzed.

In The Puritan Tradition, Alan Simpson delineates the influences of Puritanism from the seventeenth to the nineteenth centuries. He argues there is a secular component to the puritan thought of England and America and casts doubt upon the lasting effects on all socioeconomic and political factions of modern society. His arguments pose a direct opposition to Baintons view of the everlasting puritan mindset.
While Simpson argues the length of Puritan Consciousness has already run its course, Bainton asserts the influence is still lingering in todays society, specifically through the voice of Jonathan Edwards. Bainton provides evidence for the modernist approach Jonathan Edwards had in shaping his postulates and the affects of his ideals in postmodernist thought. Simpson argues the influence of Puritanism lasted till a hazy period in the nineteenth century before its cessation with the concurrent end to Victorianism.

In Jonathan Edwards The Great Awakening, Roland H Bainton discusses the puritan philosophy of the colonial era. At this time, colonies experienced a period of  revivalism, which involved great ambiguity in the minds of colonists as to what truth was and who was responsible for it. People were questioning their faiths, and  scientific discoveries began to muddle the certainty of the Churchs teachings.  When Jonathan Edwards set out to define the revivalist movement, he placed a special focus on the individualized aspect of religiosity.

Simpsons article however criticizes the supposed links scholars find between Puritanism and the philosophical atmosphere of postmodernism. A web of traced lineages can be derived for all social constructs to arrive at the desired point. The links, however, are fickle and stretched to broadened concepts which muddle the definition of Puritanism itself. Simpson criticizes scholars who espouse the belief that Puritanism is alive and running the thought processes of the worlds most affluent nations.

To demonstrate this, Simpson offers several examples, naming the statue of Oliver Cromwell and explaining the ideals he had in the seventeenth century would not exist in the modern-day society.  Another example Simpson gives involves Thomas Carlyle.  He was a Calvinist that struggled with his faith, converted but allowed pagans into his group of believers  something his Puritan  ancestors would have definitely frowned upon.

From the pulpit Edwards preached of the inevitability of sin in the lives of men, who were merely the victims of an innate tendency toward vice. Though, the colonial periods puritans is often considered close-minded and reactionary, Edwards clearly proved he was ahead of his time in terms of his modernistic views.  The existence of strict moral guidelines still exist today but are seriously compromised by the progressive movement. While condemnation and deep faith is cast aside for tolerance and science, the moralistic values of Puritanism have a definite role in todays society.

The evidence laid forth by Bainton begins by giving a brief history of the influences that crafted Edwards ideas. Beginning with an education at Yale, Edwards got a glimpse into moral depravity which he deemed monstrous impieties. There was such a terrible social unrest that he postulated the world would never be any different. He felt weary as he view a world that was beyond repair as far as sinfulness.

After Yale, Edwards adopted a more positive outlook as he joined his grandfather at the pulpit. He set out on a mission to correct the wrongs he saw in New England. Unavoidably he seemed to have the same problems as his ancestors, following in their footsteps. But he never let the powerless concept of pre-determinism stand in his way. No souls were pre-determined to turn away from conversion, and in consequence, be subject to Hell. Edwards believed Gods will allowed for men to turn away from their sinful lives, despite mans unconscious affinity for sin.

At this new turn in his thoughts, Edwards found himself inspired that New England colonists could be saved. He was governed by the laws set forth by God, and rested assured of his piety as he ardently observed all of the rules God put forth in the scriptures. Mans life should be driven by self-reflection, observance of the Sabbath and in-depth knowledge of the Scriptures. The job of the preacher was to spread the word, give a blunt sermon to spread humility in the men and women of his congregation, and stress the omnipotence of God.

The unprecedented outlook of Edwards came in the message and content of his sermons. He warned of sinfulness and condemned moral ambiguity, bring mans predilection for sin to light for many of the congregations members. He thrived in his piety, and shed light on the evils of the colonies. One major point in Edwards sermons was the callousness of men. He preached about the coldness and egoism hed seen in his years at the university.

Both sides of the debate on puritanical influence have valid, cohesive points. However, the article by Bainton is more convincing. The moral values of someone living in the seventeenth century being vastly different than the moral values espoused centuries later is dependent on a wide range of factors. New laws that govern society put pressure on individuals to act according to the laws set standard of guidelines. That doesnt necessarily mean the moralistic thought and predilections dont exist in man anymore. It simply means there are laws that enforce certain behaviors. Therefore Simpsons argument of the Puritanical influence being finished is based on the development of more laws and tougher enforcement. There are innumerable factors that change how Thomas Carlyle might have differed from his predecessors. When Simpson merely attributes the difference as a death to a set of puritan ideals fostered for more than three centuries, his outlook seems oversimplified. When a set of morals guides the fabric of socioeconomic and political interests, that set doesnt simply die off and cease to maintain some influence in those factions forever. Society is so intricate and the thoughts that influence one another are so numerous that simply declaring a movement has ended is impossible as well as appallingly simplistic.