(My purpose in this series is to find the elements of the un-romanticized story of what we know of Pilgrims, and discover what they believed, thought, and felt and realize something of ourselves and the dangers we face in the twenty-first century in our interaction with this world. One of the great problems with history is the idea of writing truth. We are limited by our own views of what history ought to be and tend to read into the historical narrative our own views and make them fit a story which happened now more than 300 years ago. Hopefully, as a reader you will not be too antagonized by some realistic, unvarnished truth. As I have said many times, sadly, there is not much demand for truth today. MAS
As we approach the annual celebration known as Thanksgiving, a word should be said about these people we know as the Pilgrims. You see, as Americans we have a tendency to romanticize certain historical events and as Benjamin Franklin said, create a civic religion. Our forefathers are enshrined as the keeper of the divine idea that became America. Only in recent years has history moved away from the idea of a central narrative associated with nation building to consider the multitude of narratives that make up the story of America. America in not one storybut many stories, and varied. The Native American, the African slave, women, and a host of other marginalized groups, which have suffered omission from the historical narrative, have finally reached a point of at least some consideration. Consider some facts about Pilgrims that you may not realize is part of the real story.
Who were the Pilgrims?
The Pilgrims were a grassroots group of dissenters within the Anglican Church. They stayed in the Anglican Church and sought to reform it from within until conditions led them to become separatists. They rejected the elements of popery held over from the days when Roman Catholicism was the established religion of England. The break with Catholicism came when Henry VIII was denied a church divorce from his wife, resulting in the king establishing his own religion, with him as the head.
The Puritans' main concern was that the judgment of God would be brought on a country which did not enforce God's laws. The rule King James I (of King James Bible fame) concerned them because he half-heartedly sought to enforce existing laws, which they felt could dekay the pending judgment. Under James and his predecessor, Elizabeth I, parliament rose in power and the Puritans believed this was their greatest hope for change in a godly direction. The Puritan preacher, Reverend John Preston, defined Puritan belief in a message before the House of Commons in the summer of 1625 by reminding members that the Lord regards not so much what the particular sins of a Nation or Church are, as what the Action, the behavior, the carriage of the State towards them is. Doubtless the action of both the Houses of Parliament declaring with zeal both now and heretofore, hath been a great means of turning away the Lord's wrath, and will be more and more, if you do more and more.[1]
In 1625 Charles I occupied the throne, following the lackluster reign of James I, and feeling threatened by a Parliament which would not do his bidding, dismissed the assembly and ultimately imprisoned many leading Puritans. Charles I was married to a Catholic and embraced a new teaching which was sweeping England, that of Jacob Arminius[2]. Arminianism taught that men by their own wills could achieve faith and win salvation. This teaching, which was heresy to Puritans, was embraced by the king, and many of the pastorates within the Anglican Church were filled by preachers who believed the new doctrine. In return, these new pastors endorsed the royal prerogatives of Charles I. Spurred on by Puritans who wanted the Arminian heresy suppressed the Parliament passed laws contrary to Charles I, and subsequently, he moved to dissolve Parliament and go his own way. The end of Parliament was a fatal blow to the mindset of Puritans, who perceived it as the last bulwark against heresy and sin. Without it there was little hope, in the Puritan mind, of enforcing the will of God in England.
In the Puritan mindset, the day was darkened further by Protestant reverses on the Continent as well. In France, Germany, etc. armies moved against the purveyors of Reformation belief and won great victories. Papal armies appeared to be on the cusp of returning Europe of Catholic control. To the Puritans it looked like God had given Europe up to the powers of darkness. John Winthrop, a leading Puritan and famous leader of the Plymouth settlement in the new world, expressed the sentiment of coming judgment. In a letter to his wife he says, It is a great favor that we may enjoy so much comfort and peace in these so evil and declining times and when the increase of our sins gives us so great cause to look for some heavy scourge and judgment to be coming upon us: the Lord hath admonished, threatened, corrected, and astonished us, yet we grow worse and worse, so as his spirit will not always strive with us, he must needs give way to his fury at last; he hath smitten all the other Churches (in Europe) before our eyes, and hath made them to drink of the bitter cup of tribulation, even unto death; we saw this, and humbled ourselves, to turn from our evil ways, but have provoked him more than all the nations round about us; therefore he is turning the cup towards us also, and because we are the last, our portion must be, to drink the very dregs which remain: I am very persuaded, God will bring some heavy Affliction upon this land, and that speedily. CITATION Edm07 \l 1033 (Morgan 2007). This sense of impending judgment lay heavily upon Winthrop and other Puritan leaders as they decided their future course.
In 1625 the solutions to the problems were few, but each carried tremendous consequences. They could chose revolution and rebellion, but they realized the price of failure as the Huguenots had in France. As covenantal believers, the Puritans believed their relationship with government was a covenant ordained by God, and so were apprehensive about laying hands on their king. It would take the situation becoming much worse before resorting to the removal of Charles I and his beheading in 1649.
The other option was to launch a second Protestant Reformation, to give up England and the Church of England as beyond saving, and withdraw from them much as they had done from the Roman church a century before. This idea served dual purposes for Winthrop and his followers: it removed them from the evil of the world in which they lived, and it also absolved them from responsibility of the coming judgment on England.
The move from Puritan to Separatist was a major move, playing a tremendous role in the future between the separatist colony of Plymouth and the Massachusetts Colony at Boston. It goes to the paradox the Puritans struggles with and every serious Christian faces at some point in life. It is the dilemma faced of living in the world and not of it. That obligation is not a test of strength. It is not a trial imposed on a person. It is a recognition that all men are brothers in sin, that there is no escape in this life from the evils that the monks in one way and the separatists in another were trying to put behind them. The Separatist defied a wicked world, but in doing so they also deserted their brothers. They gave them up as somehow hopeless and unconvertible. Thus was the difference between what the Pilgrims became and what the Puritans were. The Puritans, who hated sin as much as any Separatist, refused to give up on their brethren, who were also following the same path they followed. Winthrop and his friends eventually chose to avoid the problem rather than solve it. It was this decision that led to their decision to abandon England in pursuit of a more holy existence.
In The Pilgrim Story, Part II Deserting a Wicked World we will consider the Pilgrims soujourn in Holland and its effects on their Christian life.
Works Cited
BIBLIOGRAPHY Morgan, Edmund G. The Puritan Dilemma: The Story of John Wintrop. New York: Pearson Educational, Inc., 2007.
[1] CITATION Edm07 \l 1033 (Morgan 2007)
[2] Jacob Arminius rejected the hyper-view of Calvinism and its fatalism, and believed that each man when presented with the truth of the Gospel, could choose to be saved. Men were not born elected to heaven or hell, but had free will and a choice.