What was the “Puritan’s dilemma” in 17th Century England and how their response to this dilemma allow them to remain true to their “Puritan Calling”.

instead of discussing or explaining. You need the “Whys” in your essays.
In the Final Exam try writing your essays like you are writing them for someone who knows absolutely nothing about American History! It will force you to include the much needed explanation.
(1.) What was the “Puritan’s dilemma” in 17th Century England and how their response to this dilemma allow them to remain true to their “Puritan Calling”. Also, discuss 4 motives behind the “Great Migration” to the Massachusetts Bay Colony in the 1630’s.
Background_to_Puritan_Theology

The Erosion Of John Winthrop’s Puritan Experiment
In 1630 John Winthrop along with 7 Massachusetts Bay Company members, led the first thousand Puritans to “New” England. This was the beginning of what ultimately would become the “Great Migration” of the 1630s. This was a migration in which 20,000 Englishmen and women preferred to live in the American wilderness rather than a civilized England—where King Charles ruled without Parliament. Actually, it was this tremendous influx of settlers that sustained the colony throughout its formative years. Massachusetts Bay didn’t have a staple crop like Virginia’s tobacco. Instead, they developed a barter economy between the old and new settlers that eventually brought them a great deal of prosperity. As far as the government of the “Colony” was concerned, the Massachusetts Bay Charter was completely silent. When it came to the government of the “Company,” however, the Charter of 1629 was much more specific. The Charter instructed a “Great and General Court” to meet 4 times a year in order to make laws for both the Company and the Colony. This “Great and General Court” consisted of a Governor and Deputy Governor–comparable to a company president and vice-president. It also included a “Council of 18 Assistants”–comparable to a Board of Directors. “Freemen” were also included in this “Great and General Court”–comparable to the stockholders of the Company. This “Great and General Court” met 4 times a year as a legislative assembly–very much like Virginia’s General Assembly. The main difference between these two legislative assemblies was that in order to be a “freeman,” “assistant” or “governor” in Massachusetts Bay, you had to be a member of the Massachusetts Bay Company. And since there were only 8 members of the Company in Massachusetts, it made it very difficult to fill out the ranks of the “Great and General Court.” Within a year of the Puritans’ arrival, “freemanship was extended to all adult male church members. With the drafting of the “Constitution of 1630”, Governor John Winthrop and the “Assistants” gave up their exclusive powers of government and shared this power with a large portion of the colony’s population. In other words, you no longer had to be a Company member to exercise political rights in the Colony. After the “Constitution of 1630,” you only had to be a church member— one of the “saved,” one of the “elect”, one of the “visible saints.” Don’t get the wrong idea here—John Winthrop was not trying to “democratize” the colony. Democracy in Massachusetts Bay would mean that everyone had an equal hand in governing the Colony. John Winthrop would have “shuddered” at the thought of democracy in his new Christian Utopia! In fact, even though he extended freemanship in the Constitution of 1630, he changed the “responsibilities of a freeman at the same time. You see, Governor Winthrop argued that the number of freemen had now become too large to sit down and work together as a legislative assembly—a lawmaking body. So, the same “Constitution of 1630” which extended freemanship also confined the political rights of the freemen solely to the election of the “Council of Assistants”–who, in turn continued to make the laws for the Colony. It’s important to understand that even though the “Constitution of 1630” did extend a voice to all church members in the selection of their rulers—there was never any question as to who were the rulers and who were to be ruled in Massachusetts Bay. The real legislative powers were still lodged in the Governor and his “Council of Assistants.” The power to make laws remained with the original Company members— not with the freemen and certainly not with the people. Governor Winthrop had a bad habit of trying to isolate the Bay Colony’s government from the bad judgment of the people. He honestly didn’t feel that the people-at-large were fit to govern this new “Christian Utopia”—not when there was so much at stake in Massachusetts Bay. They were, after all, in the process of building a “City Upon a Hill”–a Biblical Commonwealth for the entire Protestant World to emulate. Under these circumstances, John Winthrop believed that there should never be any blur in the distinction between the “rulers” and the “ruled.” In fact, John Winthrop believed that rulers, no matter how they were selected, received their authority from God and, therefore, were responsible only to God. According to Winthrop the duty and responsibility of the Bay Colony’s government was simply to enforce God’s will. Therefore, he argued, that as long as a ruler did his duty—by punishing sinners and enforcing God’s will—then his power remained absolute. Winthrop believed that it was the rest of the Colony’s Christian duty to submit to its rulers. Anything less, he argued, would be a challenge to God’s authority. Now, if this sounds vaguely familiar—it should! John Winthrop sounds an awful lot like King Charles and his belief in the divine right of rulers. Winthrop and his assistants, however, had one small problem wielding this kind of arbitrary power in Massachusetts—Puritans! Puritans simply did not have a very high tolerance for the concept of the divine right—not in England nor in Massachusetts Bay. They could not accept it even under a holy and benevolent ruler like John Winthrop. In fact, by 1634 the freemen in the Colony were becoming a little uncomfortable with the way John Winthrop wielded his power and authority. The Freemen eventually demanded to see the original Massachusetts Bay Charter that was issued by King Charles back in 1629. What they found, of course, was that Freemen (according to the original charter) were just as entitled to the Colony’s legislative power as the governor and assistants. So, in 1634, John Winthrop was forced to give the Freemen back the lawmaking powers assigned to them in the original “Charter of 1629”. And John Winthrop’s punishment… He was voted out of the Governor’s Chair for the next 3 years and reduced to the rank of an assistant. This little reprimand was to serve as fair warning from the good people of the Bay Colony that tyrannical rulers would not be tolerated in the Massachusetts Bay Colony—not even well-intentioned ones like John Winthrop! Just like John Winthrop had predicted, however, the number of Freemen really were too large to sit down and work together as a legislative assembly. The Freemen solved this problem, not by giving up their legislative powers, but by delegating their power to a “Body of Deputies.” This “Body of Deputies” worked very much like Virginia’s “House of Burgesses”–in the sense that a deputy was selected from each town to join the Great and General Court in making the laws for the Colony. So, from 1634 on the Great and General Court consisted of the Governor and Deputy Governor, the Council of 18 Assistants and instead of the Freemen, the Body of Deputies. These 3 groups sat four times a year to make the laws for the Colony and were joined once a year by the Freemen for annual elections. Unfortunately for John Winthrop this was not the end to his problems nor was it the end to the Deputies’ quest for more power and authority within the Colony. The Deputies, remember, are only meeting 4 times a year with the Great and General Court. This meant that a lot of business was being carried out or dismissed without the input of these deputies. And to make matters worse, John Winthrop and the Assistants really resented this sharing power with the Deputies. They were making life miserable for them whenever possible. You see, John Winthrop and the Assistants tended to be the wealthier sort—the better-born and better connected Englishmen in the Colony. Because of their success, they truly believed that they were “more fit” to govern than the less-successful Deputies and Freemen. God, in other words, had shown his pleasure with them by allowing them to be more successful in their businesses. To John Winthrop and the Assistants, this was another version of the Divine Right, and therefore, they expected the less well-to-do deputies to defer to their judgment. Again, John Winthrop and the Assistants had one small problem with this scheme of government—Puritans! These are, remember, the Puritans who left “old” England because King Charles chose to rule without Parliament. They are obviously going to be suspicious of any attempt to create another tyranny in the “New” England. It didn’t take very long for the inhabitants of the Bay Colony to get sick and tired of John Winthrop and his attempt to isolate their government from them. It didn’t take very long for them to fear that the tyranny they left behind in “old” England was about to be realized once again in “New” England. So, in 1641 the Freemen and the Deputies got together and drafted the “Body of Liberties.” This was essentially a code of laws–a bill of rights–designed to protect the people from their government. This was a rather novel concept, since in the past, they had tried to protect their governments from the bad judgment of the people. But the inhabitants of the Bay Colony had finally come to realize that rulers were just as human as the rest of the colonists, and, therefore, just as likely to succumb to the pressures of greed, corruption and tyranny—as King Charles himself. The “Body of Liberties” was an acknowledgment that “a government of laws offered more protection than a government of men.” This realization or “revelation” was truly an enormous step toward the evolution of representative government in America. It started to chip away at the “divine right of rulers.” It began to make governments accountable to the people—even if they were not yet ready to challenge the belief that governments were also accountable to God. Despite this “Body of Liberties,” the Deputies and the Council of Assistants continued to dispute matters of authority for the next few years. They continued to fight until finally a standoff occurred between these 2 groups. This was a standoff that began, believe it or not, over the ownership of Goody Sherman’s pig! Goody Sherman was a poor widow who lived in one of the smaller towns outside of Boston. Mr., Keene was an affluent Boston merchant. They both claimed to be the owner of a stray pig. They took their case to the Great and General Court where it erupted into a power play between the Deputies and the Assistants. All 22 Deputies were in favor of Goody Sherman and the Council of 18 Assistants favored Mr. Keene. The case was actually settled out of court in favor of Goody Sherman before a final vote was taken. But it certainly taught those cocky Assistants a very important lesson– the Deputies could always outvote them. The Council of 18 Assistants knew their numbers would always remain the same while the number of Deputies would continue to grow with the addition of new towns to the Colony. John Winthrop and the Assistants could not bear the thought that these lowly deputies shared the same power with them in the Great and General Court. In fact, John Winthrop was still convinced that if they were going to lead the Protestant World in establishing a new “Zion,” then it was still necessary to isolate their government from the bad judgment of the people. John Winthrop and the Assistants were determined to find a way to prevent the Deputies from making “grave errors of judgment” that might put their religious experiment at risk. In 1644 they solved this problem by formally dividing the Great and General Court into two separate houses—both of which now had a veto over the other house. The “House of Deputies” would be somewhat comparable to today’s House of Representatives, but it was modeled on Parliament’s House of Commons. The “House of Assistants” would be comparable to today’s Senate—although it too was modeled on Parliament’s House of Lords. These two Houses no longer met together as one Great and General Court, but rather, they met and worked separately to create their laws and then sought the consent of the other House for the General Court’s acceptance. This is the basic structure of the Bay Colony’s Government. This was a government, remember, that was constructed from a trading company charter and transformed into a self-governing commonwealth. They were so secure in their lack of English supervision that they created a fiercely independent Colony—with a colonial government of considerable power. But remember– their aim was never independence from England for its own sake—like the Plymouth Puritans had sought. Rather, they sought independence from England for the sake of a more Godly life. Religion in Massachusetts Bay You would think that in such a Godly community as Massachusetts Bay, the Puritan Church and minister would have a great deal of power. Not so! In fact, the Puritans believed that giving their clergy politically coercive powers was a dangerous step toward Catholicism. Yikes! So, the Puritan Church in Massachusetts Bay was strictly a spiritual association. The church’s minister may have been a highly influential person in the town but he still had very little authority within his own church. He taught and prayed with his congregation. He preached and he admonished them. But, he did not “rule” his church–the church members did that for him. It was the church members who excommunicated the members, issued the censures and the pardons and even decided a parishioner’s punishment. All of this was in sharp contrast to “old” England, where the Anglican Church had a great deal of power within the government. The Puritans in Massachusetts Bay, by contrast, wanted their clergy to serve them, rather than rule them. This was truly a distinctive feature of Puritan “New” England. Most of the Puritans in Massachusetts Bay were “Congregationalist” Puritans. This meant that they had abolished the Anglican Church’s hierarchy, but they did not replace it with a new hierarchy of their own. Instead, the Congregationalists chose to remain as a loose confederation of independent churches. There was, in other words, “no church larger than its congregation.” This is what the Puritans referred to as Congregational independence—a distinctive feature of Puritan New England. These Congregational Puritans also required “regenerate membership”—meaning only “God’s elect” were entitled to full church membership or admitted to the sacraments. John Winthrop, in particular, took this idea of “regenerate membership” very seriously. He believed that anything so ridiculous as “open membership” would be very dangerous to this holy experiment. In fact, he believed that such easy access to church membership would actually destroy people’s motivation for moral endeavor. People would not work hard enough to prepare for their conversion experience if church membership came too easy. Also, don’t forget that church membership brought Freemanship or political rights in the Bay Colony. Only Church members were given the right to vote in the Great and General Court. Therefore, if you removed this religious basis for political rights, it would mean that saints and sinners alike would have an equal voice in the government. Surely this would invite God’s wrath! Open church membership, according to John Winthrop was just too dangerous to the peace and well being of this “City Upon a Hill.” It was too dangerous when there was so much at stake—they still believed the eyes of the entire Protestant World were upon them. “Regenerate membership,” however, was a feature of Congregationalism that caused problems for John Winthrop, because it tended to breed “separatism” among the church’s parishioners. The entire process of becoming a full church member was undoubtedly frustrating and brutal on “sinners.” It did, however, have a profound effect upon the “saints” as well. Because after you passed their tests, and made it to a “visible saint” status, then you would be asked to pass judgment on your neighbors’ behavior– probably for the rest of your life. In other words, you -with your assumption of superior purity—would be called upon to interrogate conversion experiences or to investigate possible candidates for church membership. In doing this, you would be continually asserting your own superiority over your neighbors. This process, then, could not help but breed separatism in the community—the kind of separatism that bred people like Anne Hutchinson and Roger Williams. Separatism, was one of John Winthrop’s greatest challenges in the Bay Colony. He was very quick to discover is that it was a whole lot easier to punish sinners than to restrain the “saints”–the “holier-than-thou” type; the overly zealous Puritan reformers.

VIDEO: 1. The Puritan Experience I: Forsaking England Web Link/
/ 2.VIDEO: The Puritan Experience II: Making of a New World Web Link /
/3.The Witches of Salem: The Horror and the Hope

Last Completed Projects