home  |  book  |  blogs  |   RSS  |  contact  |
  An American Manifesto
Friday April 18, 2014 
by Christopher Chantrill Follow chrischantrill on Twitter

TOP NAV

Home

Blogs

Opeds

Articles

Bio

Contact

BOOK

Manifesto

Sample

Faith

Education

Mutual aid

Law

Books

ROAD TO THE

MIDDLE CLASS

Contents

Chapter 1

Chapter 2

Chapter 3

Chapter 4

Chapter 5

Chapter 6

Chapter 7

Chapter 8

Chapter 9

Chapter 10

Chapter 11

Chapter 12

Chapter 13

Chapter 14

Chapter 15

Bibliography

Chapter 3:
Awakenings of Monotheism

| (1) | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next>> |print view

Awakenings have been the shaping power of American culture from its inception. —William G. McLoughlin

THE SUPRISE OF REDNECKS debouching from the Appalachians into the Atlantic plain and the explosion of Pentecostalism in the inner cities has unnerved those who had convinced themselves that religion was a thing of the past, now that God was dead. 

The idea of a spontaneous, widespread religious revival is today considered rather shameful, overdetermined with images of Elmer Gantry and the sawdust trail.  Our modern elites in the media and the academy sneer at the simple pieties of the revivalist.  They regard the manipulation of crowd emotion by the charismatic preacher as fraudulent, and delight in the hypocrisy of the man of God who succumbs to the sins of the flesh as proof that his message is a lie.  Yet these same people swoon without irony over the spontaneous religious movement we call “The Sixties,” celebrate the “consciousness raising” of progressive political movements, and, in the 1990s, notoriously overlooked the flaws of that charismatic man of the people, Bill Clinton.  Popular movements, their leaders and their followers, whether welcome or unwelcome, progressive or religious, are a fact of human history.  Perhaps they are trying to tell us something.  For religious awakenings are not new, or even exceptional.  The most important Awakening in the United States was the one that gave it birth.

In the middle of the 18th century a powerful outburst of Protestant enthusiasm erupted in both England and colonial North America.  In Britain, John Wesley and his brother Charles preached a revival of Protestant religion using a simplified doctrine called Methodism.  It “contained nothing new in doctrine.  Its emphasis was on the practical side of life.” (Johnson 1979 p62)  It was Christianity reduced to the bare essentials, adapted to the needs of the simple mechanics who were changing the world out on the margins of England, developing water-driven cotton weaving, steam-driven mine pumps, and iron bridges.  

The upper crust was offended by Wesley’s revival.  It was concerned that his preaching would foment revolution.  But Wesley would have none of it.  The people that converted to Methodism, he wrote, the upper echelons of the working classes and others anxious to improve their status, almost all became frugal and industrious in their new-found faith, and they achieved a modest competence.  As their wealth increased, their interest in religion began to fade—and also their interest in overturning the established order.

Wesley was excoriated for reducing religion to the capabilities of the lowest people and allowing untutored and barely literate mechanics to preach.  True, Methodism had little to say to the tip-top swells of London, but it spoke volumes to the struggling mechanics in Carbondale and Ironbridge.  In the crucible of Methodism these rough countrymen transformed themselves into the respectable chapel-going English lower middle class.  Work all you can, save all you can, give all you can.  This was the simple doctrine that Wesley taught.  It inspired mechanics to the ministry in the eighteenth century, and, as we shall see, continued to do so in the late twentieth century.

At the same time that the Wesley brothers were inspiring the mechanics of England, preachers Jonathan Edwards and George Whitefield were preaching revival in New England, and from the scattered farms ordinary people came in their thousands to participate in a Great Awakening that convulsed the social order and led directly to the American Revolution.

George Whitefield was only twenty-three when he broke into the American colonies with his itinerant preaching and brought a dramatic new style to the pulpit.  He had gone to Oxford with the Wesley brothers and had belonged to the Holy Club they had formed at the university.  Then he came to America, and launched the first great modern revival, the Great Awakening.  To Americans used to moralizing and doctrinal sermonizing from the pulpit, his charismatic style:

startled and enthralled his audiences.  Whitefield... would sing hymns, wave his arms, tell stories in colloquial language, employ vivid imagery, weep profusely over his own melodramatic appeals, and pray extemporaneously and directly to God, as though he were talking to him.  On provincial Americans who had never seen anything like it, the effect was electric. (McLoughlin 1978 p61)

Benjamin Franklin knew Whitefield, admired his eloquence, and grew a substantial business printing many of his sermons.  Once, when Whitefield was preaching outside in the city of Philadelphia, the practical Franklin walked around in the crowd to estimate how far his voice could carry, and thus how many people could hear his voice.  Franklin also helped a preacher threatened with excommunication by the Presbyterians on account of his heterodox views.

Whitefield’s theatrical revivalist production was no amateur hour.  He was a gifted publicist, and planned his itinerant ministry like a commercial product introduction.  People were amazed that he could create crowds out of thin air—his farewell address on Boston Common was said to have been attended by 30,000 at a time when the population of Boston was 20,000—but Whitefield was not.  “He believed that he had been charged by God to cause a spiritual awakening.”  He and his assistants were skilled advance men who knew how to attract crowds, and spent time and money to make crowds happen.

Whitefield was a master of advance publicity who sent out a constant stream of press releases, extolling the success of his revivals elsewhere, to cities he intended to visit. These advance campaigns often began two years ahead of time. (Finke, Stark 1992 p88) 

Of course, the skills of a great entrepreneur and publicist are worth nothing if his product and his message fail to resonate with the market.  Timing is everything.  According to William G. McLoughlin, the critical factor that drove the Great Awakening to success was a breakdown in the traditional patriarchal family structure.  In the seventeenth century fathers, by deeding land to heirs in their wills, maintained control over their sons until they reached middle age.  Young people were kept in subordination to their elders, and accepted this subjugation as the price of acquiring title to land—the chief form of wealth—eventually.  Their egos were subordinated to community.  This social order began to break down around 1700 as young men moved further west, acquiring inexpensive land and establishing an independence from father and the rigid Puritan community.

Freedom throws off the yoke of subservience, but it rips away the veneer of security that protects a life lived in subordination to a strong master.  The security of subordination is replaced by the terrors of responsibility.  But man cannot live alone face to face with reality.  Life is not a smooth progressive growth curve.  It is a terrifying battle with reality, and mankind cannot survive face to face with the reality of nature red in tooth and claw.  The smooth surface of Apollo is a necessary to hide the frightful reality of Dionysian frenzy.  Culture is the veneer of hope we construct to block out the absolute terror of reality.


| (1) | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next>> |print view

 

Click for Chapter 4: The Nineteenth Century From the Top Down

 

Buy the ebook: Road to the Middle Class: only $0.99.

 

Your comments are welcome. Please e-mail to Christopher Chantrill at mailto:chrischantrill@gmail.com, and take the RMC test here.

 TAGS


Responsible Self

[The Axial Age] highlights the conception of a responsible self... [that] promise[s] man for the first time that he can understand the fundamental structure of reality and through salvation participate actively in it.
Robert N Bellah, "Religious Evolution", American Sociological Review, Vol. 29, No. 3.


Taking Responsibility

[To make] of each individual member of the army a soldier who, in character, capability, and knowledge, is self-reliant, self-confident, dedicated, and joyful in taking responsibility [verantwortungsfreudig] as a man and a soldier. — Gen. Hans von Seeckt
MacGregor Knox, Williamson Murray, ed., The dynamics of military revolution, 1300-2050


Civil Society

“Civil Society”—a complex welter of intermediate institutions, including businesses, voluntary associations, educational institutions, clubs, unions, media, charities, and churches—builds, in turn, on the family, the primary instrument by which people are socialized into their culture and given the skills that allow them to live in broader society and through which the values and knowledge of that society are transmitted across the generations.
Francis Fukuyama, Trust


What Liberals Think About Conservatives

[W]hen I asked a liberal longtime editor I know with a mainstream [publishing] house for a candid, shorthand version of the assumptions she and her colleagues make about conservatives, she didn't hesitate. “Racist, sexist, homophobic, anti-choice fascists,” she offered, smiling but meaning it.
Harry Stein, I Can't Believe I'm Sitting Next to a Republican


Liberal Coercion

[T]he Liberal, and still more the subspecies Radical... more than any other in these latter days seems under the impression that so long as he has a good end in view he is warranted in exercising over men all the coercion he is able[.]
Herbert Spencer, The Man Versus the State


Moral Imperatives of Modern Culture

These emerge out of long-standing moral notions of freedom, benevolence, and the affirmation of ordinary life... I have been sketching a schematic map... [of] the moral sources [of these notions]... the original theistic grounding for these standards... a naturalism of disengaged reason, which in our day takes scientistic forms, and a third family of views which finds its sources in Romantic expressivism, or in one of the modernist successor visions.
Charles Taylor, Sources of the Self


US Life in 1842

Families helped each other putting up homes and barns. Together, they built churches, schools, and common civic buildings. They collaborated to build roads and bridges. They took pride in being free persons, independent, and self-reliant; but the texture of their lives was cooperative and fraternal.
Michael Novak, The Spirit of Democratic Capitalism


Society and State

For [the left] there is only the state and the individual, nothing in between. No family to rely on, no friend to depend on, no community to call on. No neighbourhood to grow in, no faith to share in, no charities to work in. No-one but the Minister, nowhere but Whitehall, no such thing as society - just them, and their laws, and their rules, and their arrogance.
David Cameron, Conference Speech 2008


Faith and Politics

As far as the Catholic Church is concerned, the principal focus of her interventions in the public arena is the protection and promotion of the dignity of the person, and she is thereby consciously drawing particular attention to principles which are not negotiable... [1.] protection of life in all its stages, from the first moment of conception until natural death; [2.] recognition and promotion of the natural structure of the family... [3.] the protection of the right of parents to educate their children.
Pope Benedict XVI, Speech to European Peoples Party, 2006


Never Trust Experts

No lesson seems to be so deeply inculcated by the experience of life as that you should never trust experts. If you believe doctors, nothing is wholesome: if you believe the theologians, nothing is innocent: if you believe the soldiers, nothing is safe. They all require their strong wine diluted by a very large admixture of insipid common sense.
Lord Salisbury, “Letter to Lord Lytton”


 

©2007 Christopher Chantrill