论文部分内容阅读
【Abstract】In his sermon “A Model of Christian Charity” delivered in the spring of 1630， John Winthrop envisions a “purified” commonwealth in the new world by drawing a blueprint of “a city upon a hill” in New England， in which the community members should be knit together by this bond of love. However， behind the Puritan system of church governance is a strong element of hierarchical social order. Therefore， Winthrop’s religious ideology founded on Christian love in fact conceals the absence of true democracy and the non-existence of egalitarianism.
【Key words】John Winthrop； Christian charity； hierarchical ideology
【作者簡介】王丹（1980-），女，北京信息科技大学外国语学院讲师，文学博士，研究方向：美国小说与美国女性文学。
【基金项目】北京信息科技大学学校科研基金项目“《一位女士的画像》中的自由观研究”（1835010）。
Delivered in the spring of 1630， on their voyage to America and aboard the ship Arbella， John Winthrop’s “A Model of Christian Charity” is acclaimed to be the most famous text in the 17th-century American literature. In his sermon， Winthrop envisions a “purified” commonwealth in the new world by drawing a blueprint of “a city upon a hill” （27） in New England， in which the community members should be “knit together by this bond of love” （25）. “This hope of sympathy forms the heart of Winthrop’s Model---a vision of society in which reciprocal affections become fundamental to communal well-being” （Engen 533）. Such a view becomes an enduring testimony to the Puritan zeal and draws on a long tradition of Puritan sentiment， which has been exerting a profound influence in the long history on American ideology， culture and literature.
However， the Puritan theology is not merely a religious doctrine， it is also infused with some political concepts and corresponds in many points with the American democratic theory （Miller 58）. Behind the Puritan system of church governance is a strong element of hierarchical social order. Although in one sense all of those chosen for salvation are equal in the eyes of God， the Puritan doctrine is not based on equality of membership. In offering a divinely sanctioned social hierarchy， Winthrop’s Puritan ideal community is not a classless and egalitarian society， but rather a democratic society founded on social inequality. In fact， it is on the basis of hierarchical social order that Winthrop offers an early blueprint for American democracy， which is the embryonic form of Jefferson’s democratic principle stated in his Declaration of Independence： the so-called equality in his sentence that “all men are created equal” only applies to Anglo-Saxon white men， not including women and people of color. Therefore， Winthrop’s religious ideology founded on Christian love in fact conceals the absence of true democracy and the non-existence of egalitarianism. In his extrapolation of charity as the basis for a Christian commonwealth， Winthrop， on behalf of the Puritans， intends to enter into covenant with God for their cause in the new world. Originally referring to a legal contract， the term “covenant” is “a feudal arrangement implying a medieval sense of power relations between unequals and the imposition of formal responsibilities” （Michaelsen 87）. This word also draws on a long history in Old and New Testaments. Most dissenting theologians， including Williams Ames and William Perkins， who were favorites among the New England Puritans， also argued that “the mutuality of the covenant did not imply any equality between parties” （Gordis 388）. However， apart from implying a sense of unequal power relations between the two parties within the covenant， the biblical and feudal notions of “covenant” also indicates an unequal relationship among the chosen people of God who should unite together to form a covenant with God.
On closer inspection， we will find that this sermon is actually composed of two layers of narration： on the surface level， it is about the principles of brotherly affection in directing the Puritan members to create “a city upon a hill” in the new world wilderness， while on the deeper level， it can be perceived that the whole address is pervaded by a sense of feudal hierarchical ideology. Even in the opening paragraph of his discourse， Winthrop has already proposed or prescribed the unequal precondition of creating an ideal society in the name of divine providence： “God Almighty in his most holy and wise providence， hath so disposed of the condition of mankind， as in all times some must be rich， some poor， some high and eminent in power and dignity； others mean and in submission” （21）. Under the rich “are comprehended all such as are able to live comfortably by their own means duly improved” and the poor are “according to the former distribution” （22）. Here the distribution refers to that of God who has the right to reserve and distribute the wealth in the world， according to the Bible. The reason that the honorable and the wealthy can live comfortably is that they serve their Master better than others， while the poor cannot get the riches just because it’s God’s decision. In Winthrop’s opinion， the existence of social hierarchy is predetermined by the Almighty God.
Winthrop accounts for the variety and difference of the creatures as the glory of God’s wisdom as well as the preservation and common good of the whole. The establishment of an ideal Puritan community is closely linked to the moderation and restraining of the wicked， the purpose of which， whereas， is to maintain the rule of the rich and mighty over the poor and despised. According to Winthrop， the former are entitled to exploit and oppress the latter， only not to “eat up” them， while the latter are not supposed to “rise up against their superiors and shake off their yoke” （21）. In stressing the importance of exercising God’s graces， Winthrop explains that faith， patience and obedience should be preserved on the part of the poor and inferior sort. In his exposition of love as “the bond of perfection” （23）， Winthrop adopts the figure of “body” as a symbol for the community， the perfection or unity of which depends on the knitting of all its parts， that is， the members of the community. However， “each part of the body， like each member of the church， is different in gifts， administrations， and operations” （Schweitzer 449）. The mouth， here referring to the eminent in wealth and power， performs the function of receiving and mincing the food which “serves for the nourishment of all the other parts of the body” （24）， while the other “parts”， representing the poor， are expected to return wealth， duly transformed， to the mouth. Through the use of this metaphor， Winthrop posits the rich people on the position of leadership and beautifies their exploitation of the poor as serving the interests of those under their control and oppression. By employing the language of “Christian charity”， “knitting”， and “uniformity of consent”， Winthrop， one member of the ruling class， helps to “foster subjection to authority and to discourage dissention that must imperil the mission” （Morgan 145-146）.
Founding his famous sermon “A Model of Christian Charity” for “the city upon a hill” he envisions in New England on an understanding of Christian charity or love， Winthrop plays an active role in keeping the early Puritans firm in faith in God and preparing them for the hardships they have to face both aboard Arbella and in the New World. From this perspective， his sermon has a progressive significance in history. However， in some sense， we can feel that hidden behind the religious doctrine of “brotherhood” and social ideal is the hierarchical Puritan political system espoused by Winthrop， a grandson of a self-made member of the landed gentry and a political leader of the Puritan immigrants. In emphasizing the necessity for submission on the part of the poor and mean to the authority of the high and eminent in power and dignity， Winthrop’s Puritan community remains hierarchical in nature， despite his great religious zeal and successful rhetorical and strategic techniques. The “spiritual unity” envisioned in his ideal community is just a socially stratified society. In the meantime， it should be noted that the Bible language here is used successfully in justifying the subordination of the poor. In Winthrop’s viewpoint， it is only right and natural to preserve social hierarchy in the “city upon the hill” since it is by divine providence that the servants of God are born to be rich or poor， high or low in power and wealth. Therefore， it can be safely concluded that while uniting the Puritans together to fight against the hardships they are going to be confronted with， Winthrop also aims to render his religious sermon serving the political interests of the ruling class， and undoubtedly the hierarchical political system he blueprints at the original stage of the American nation paves the way for the later democratic power structure in the USA.
References：
[1]Engen，Abram Van.Puritanism and the Power of Sympathy[J].Early American Literature，2010，45.3：533-564.
[2]Gordis，Lisa.The Experience of Covenant Theology in George Herbert’s The Temple[J].Journal of Religion，1996，76，3：383-401.
[3]Michaelsen，Scott.John Winthrop’s“Model”Covenant and the Company Way[J].Early American Literature，1992，27.2：85-100.
[4]Miller，Joshua.Direct Democracy and the Puritan Theory of Membership[J].The Journal of Politics，1991，53，1：57-74.
[5]Morgan，Edmund S.John Winthrop’s“Model of Christian Charity”in a Wider Context[J].Huntington Library Quarterly， 1987，50，2：145-151.
[6]Schweitzer，Ivy.John Winthrop’s“Model”of American Affiliation[J].Early American Literature，2005，40，3：441-469.
[7]Winthrop，John.A Model of Christian Charity.Myths in American Culture[M].Ed. Jin Li.Beijing： Higher Education Press，2011：21-28.
【Key words】John Winthrop； Christian charity； hierarchical ideology
【作者簡介】王丹（1980-），女，北京信息科技大学外国语学院讲师，文学博士，研究方向：美国小说与美国女性文学。
【基金项目】北京信息科技大学学校科研基金项目“《一位女士的画像》中的自由观研究”（1835010）。
Delivered in the spring of 1630， on their voyage to America and aboard the ship Arbella， John Winthrop’s “A Model of Christian Charity” is acclaimed to be the most famous text in the 17th-century American literature. In his sermon， Winthrop envisions a “purified” commonwealth in the new world by drawing a blueprint of “a city upon a hill” （27） in New England， in which the community members should be “knit together by this bond of love” （25）. “This hope of sympathy forms the heart of Winthrop’s Model---a vision of society in which reciprocal affections become fundamental to communal well-being” （Engen 533）. Such a view becomes an enduring testimony to the Puritan zeal and draws on a long tradition of Puritan sentiment， which has been exerting a profound influence in the long history on American ideology， culture and literature.
However， the Puritan theology is not merely a religious doctrine， it is also infused with some political concepts and corresponds in many points with the American democratic theory （Miller 58）. Behind the Puritan system of church governance is a strong element of hierarchical social order. Although in one sense all of those chosen for salvation are equal in the eyes of God， the Puritan doctrine is not based on equality of membership. In offering a divinely sanctioned social hierarchy， Winthrop’s Puritan ideal community is not a classless and egalitarian society， but rather a democratic society founded on social inequality. In fact， it is on the basis of hierarchical social order that Winthrop offers an early blueprint for American democracy， which is the embryonic form of Jefferson’s democratic principle stated in his Declaration of Independence： the so-called equality in his sentence that “all men are created equal” only applies to Anglo-Saxon white men， not including women and people of color. Therefore， Winthrop’s religious ideology founded on Christian love in fact conceals the absence of true democracy and the non-existence of egalitarianism. In his extrapolation of charity as the basis for a Christian commonwealth， Winthrop， on behalf of the Puritans， intends to enter into covenant with God for their cause in the new world. Originally referring to a legal contract， the term “covenant” is “a feudal arrangement implying a medieval sense of power relations between unequals and the imposition of formal responsibilities” （Michaelsen 87）. This word also draws on a long history in Old and New Testaments. Most dissenting theologians， including Williams Ames and William Perkins， who were favorites among the New England Puritans， also argued that “the mutuality of the covenant did not imply any equality between parties” （Gordis 388）. However， apart from implying a sense of unequal power relations between the two parties within the covenant， the biblical and feudal notions of “covenant” also indicates an unequal relationship among the chosen people of God who should unite together to form a covenant with God.
On closer inspection， we will find that this sermon is actually composed of two layers of narration： on the surface level， it is about the principles of brotherly affection in directing the Puritan members to create “a city upon a hill” in the new world wilderness， while on the deeper level， it can be perceived that the whole address is pervaded by a sense of feudal hierarchical ideology. Even in the opening paragraph of his discourse， Winthrop has already proposed or prescribed the unequal precondition of creating an ideal society in the name of divine providence： “God Almighty in his most holy and wise providence， hath so disposed of the condition of mankind， as in all times some must be rich， some poor， some high and eminent in power and dignity； others mean and in submission” （21）. Under the rich “are comprehended all such as are able to live comfortably by their own means duly improved” and the poor are “according to the former distribution” （22）. Here the distribution refers to that of God who has the right to reserve and distribute the wealth in the world， according to the Bible. The reason that the honorable and the wealthy can live comfortably is that they serve their Master better than others， while the poor cannot get the riches just because it’s God’s decision. In Winthrop’s opinion， the existence of social hierarchy is predetermined by the Almighty God.
Winthrop accounts for the variety and difference of the creatures as the glory of God’s wisdom as well as the preservation and common good of the whole. The establishment of an ideal Puritan community is closely linked to the moderation and restraining of the wicked， the purpose of which， whereas， is to maintain the rule of the rich and mighty over the poor and despised. According to Winthrop， the former are entitled to exploit and oppress the latter， only not to “eat up” them， while the latter are not supposed to “rise up against their superiors and shake off their yoke” （21）. In stressing the importance of exercising God’s graces， Winthrop explains that faith， patience and obedience should be preserved on the part of the poor and inferior sort. In his exposition of love as “the bond of perfection” （23）， Winthrop adopts the figure of “body” as a symbol for the community， the perfection or unity of which depends on the knitting of all its parts， that is， the members of the community. However， “each part of the body， like each member of the church， is different in gifts， administrations， and operations” （Schweitzer 449）. The mouth， here referring to the eminent in wealth and power， performs the function of receiving and mincing the food which “serves for the nourishment of all the other parts of the body” （24）， while the other “parts”， representing the poor， are expected to return wealth， duly transformed， to the mouth. Through the use of this metaphor， Winthrop posits the rich people on the position of leadership and beautifies their exploitation of the poor as serving the interests of those under their control and oppression. By employing the language of “Christian charity”， “knitting”， and “uniformity of consent”， Winthrop， one member of the ruling class， helps to “foster subjection to authority and to discourage dissention that must imperil the mission” （Morgan 145-146）.
Founding his famous sermon “A Model of Christian Charity” for “the city upon a hill” he envisions in New England on an understanding of Christian charity or love， Winthrop plays an active role in keeping the early Puritans firm in faith in God and preparing them for the hardships they have to face both aboard Arbella and in the New World. From this perspective， his sermon has a progressive significance in history. However， in some sense， we can feel that hidden behind the religious doctrine of “brotherhood” and social ideal is the hierarchical Puritan political system espoused by Winthrop， a grandson of a self-made member of the landed gentry and a political leader of the Puritan immigrants. In emphasizing the necessity for submission on the part of the poor and mean to the authority of the high and eminent in power and dignity， Winthrop’s Puritan community remains hierarchical in nature， despite his great religious zeal and successful rhetorical and strategic techniques. The “spiritual unity” envisioned in his ideal community is just a socially stratified society. In the meantime， it should be noted that the Bible language here is used successfully in justifying the subordination of the poor. In Winthrop’s viewpoint， it is only right and natural to preserve social hierarchy in the “city upon the hill” since it is by divine providence that the servants of God are born to be rich or poor， high or low in power and wealth. Therefore， it can be safely concluded that while uniting the Puritans together to fight against the hardships they are going to be confronted with， Winthrop also aims to render his religious sermon serving the political interests of the ruling class， and undoubtedly the hierarchical political system he blueprints at the original stage of the American nation paves the way for the later democratic power structure in the USA.
References：
[1]Engen，Abram Van.Puritanism and the Power of Sympathy[J].Early American Literature，2010，45.3：533-564.
[2]Gordis，Lisa.The Experience of Covenant Theology in George Herbert’s The Temple[J].Journal of Religion，1996，76，3：383-401.
[3]Michaelsen，Scott.John Winthrop’s“Model”Covenant and the Company Way[J].Early American Literature，1992，27.2：85-100.
[4]Miller，Joshua.Direct Democracy and the Puritan Theory of Membership[J].The Journal of Politics，1991，53，1：57-74.
[5]Morgan，Edmund S.John Winthrop’s“Model of Christian Charity”in a Wider Context[J].Huntington Library Quarterly， 1987，50，2：145-151.
[6]Schweitzer，Ivy.John Winthrop’s“Model”of American Affiliation[J].Early American Literature，2005，40，3：441-469.
[7]Winthrop，John.A Model of Christian Charity.Myths in American Culture[M].Ed. Jin Li.Beijing： Higher Education Press，2011：21-28.