Regardless of their field, most Historians focus on the
external world of their subjects in the form of actions and ideologies. Action and ideology are evident through
examination of records, speeches, business accounts, and laws passed, providing
the evidence historians use to create an image of the past. The view of the past, and those who shaped
it, however, are left incomplete by the exclusion of the internal mental and
emotional structures of the people who lived in the past. This is the core of Philip Greven’s rationale
in The Protestant Temperament, which
examines Americans’ beliefs through the early 19th century. Greven argues that understanding American
Protestants’ religious experiences provides a more coherent and complete
picture of the influences shaping the United States from creation through the
present. Greven divides American
Protestants into three broad categories, Evangelicals, Moderates, and the
Genteel, based on their religious doctrine and general approach to life. Evidence of emotion and belief, which are
much more difficult to discern, describe, and document, is gleaned from
letters, speeches, sermons, and journals.
Greven defines Evangelicals as a Protestants who believe in
salvation through grace only, but who also experience a particular emotional
reaction to that religious doctrine. Greven’s Evangelicals also insist on the
complete subjugation of the will and the self to God. Evangelicals are further differentiated from
Calvinists in Greven’s system by their struggle to maintain a state of grace
rather than acceptance of the doctrine of predestination. Early American Evangelical belief that they
must submit their entire being to God shaped all of their activities from
discipline of children and family structure to the organization of churches,
and their interactions with other people.
In order to allow their children to more easily enter the
state of grace conferred by the complete subjection of the self to God,
Evangelical parents’ first mission was to break the will of their infant
children. Only by ensuring that children
were completely subject to the will of the parents were Evangelical parents
able to ensure that children would follow God’s dictates, but would more easily
subject themselves to God, earning salvation.
This was the core of Evangelical belief – that the individual will and
conception of self must be completely eradicated in favor of the Almighty. Greven describes the Evangelical approach to
childrearing as “Love and Fear”, meaning that children should both love their
parents and fear them, which also typified the Evangelical relationship with
God.
Evangelicals insisted on an ascetic lifestyle of strict
discipline, diet, and somber clothing, with none of the common sources of
entertainment allowed. Thus, dancing,
cards, romances, or theatre were all denied them. Greven argues that beyond denying these to
only themselves, Evangelicals wished to deny them to all other people in order
to remove the temptation of these sinful delights from themselves. The problem of temptation seems particularly
difficult for Greven’s Evangelicals to resolve, leading them to insist on what
they saw as doctrinally pure churches, excluding those not saved, or with
different theological ideas.
The need for purity and conformity, combined with what
Greven describes as suppressed anger and aggression resulting from the breaking
of their wills as children and again as part of the conversion experience,
drove Evangelicals to aggressively attack their opponents in the public
arena. Anger was acceptable for
Evangelicals only when directed against those they saw as the “enemies of God”,
taking on the role of religious warriors fighting against the infidel in all of
its guises. This role allowed
Evangelicals to develop a sense of self that they otherwise fought to suppress
in an effort to subject themselves fully to God’s will.
In contrast to Evangelicals, “Moderates” did not work to
deny, or suppress the self, but to discipline the self. Moderates’ different views of authority and
the nature of salvation allowed them a more nuanced approach to life. Moderates were still religious people, but
they believed that salvation could be achieved through a gradual process rather
than a sudden and cataclysmic event. This
stemmed from the view that God “established knowable rules and limits,” and
that mankind was given free will in order to come to a state of grace of their
own accord.
The stark difference in worldview from Evangelicals led
Moderates to radically different methods of childrearing, which did not include
crushing the wills of children.
Moderates emphasized duty rather than fear in their children, in an
effort to gain voluntary obedience. The
children of Moderates, thus retained their will, but learned to control
it. This meant that moderates were free
to engage in what Evangelicals would consider dangerous and sinful activities
such as playing cards or eating fine foods, but were under the onus of
restraining any tendencies toward gluttony or other vices.
\
At the most liberal end of the spectrum, Greven places the
“Genteel.” Genteel households were most
common among the wealthy, with the emphasis in relationships was on reverence
for those in authority. Genteel families indulged children in their desires
rather than teaching an ascetic lifestyle or one of discipline. Religious observances for Genteel families
were a matter of form over substance, with the expectation that people who
participated in the Sacraments, and were generally good would be saved.
Greven’s argument is an interesting one, despite the
challenges inherent in methodology and sources.
A major concern is the relative paucity of sources that discuss the
issues that he wishes to examine – Genteel individuals’ writings, like those of
William Byrd do not delve as much into the inner life of the writer, focusing
on external issues. This makes the issue
of divining emotional responses and motivations much more difficult. Trying to interpret these things without
sufficient evidence is fraught with peril, as the beliefs of the researcher may
loom larger in the analysis to fill the gaps.
This potential may be why the Evangelicals receive more attention, with
the Moderates and Genteel relegated to more supporting roles.
No comments:
Post a Comment