Futurist
Ad Honoris
- May 2014
- 21,692
- SoCal
The Puritans would have extremely strongly objected to things such as legalized same-sex marriage, though!
How did New England transition from being puritanical to being liberal?
- Thread starter Futurist
- Start date
London and East Anglia. Those were the main Puritan and before that Lollard areas. New England accents are heavily influenced by East Anglian accents. They also tended to be lower middle class shop keepers.
Futurist
Ad Honoris
- May 2014
- 21,692
- SoCal
So, Blue is wrong about the demographics of English immigrants to the Americas changing in the 18th century?
In the US the electoral college map constantly fools people. The consistency of blue and red equals the consistency of 50%+ not a homogeneous identity. I live in New England and aside from Vermont(which probably does meet modern stereotypes) it's identity as "liberal" is severely overstated when it comes to day to day life. In terms of 50% of the population consistently voting one way rather than the other that's another story.
Also that was a Massachusetts rather than a New England thing and people angry about Massachusetts Puritanism is largely what got the other states in the region started. The Green Mountain Boys for example were a far cry from that mold.
Also that was a Massachusetts rather than a New England thing and people angry about Massachusetts Puritanism is largely what got the other states in the region started. The Green Mountain Boys for example were a far cry from that mold.
- Jan 2012
- 426
- South Midlands in Britain
There are puritans and puritans.
The understanding of the word puritan has evolved. The name `puritan' was given to those in the Church of England, reformed by Elizabeth the First who didn't think the reforms went far enough. These tended to be people who held more to Scripture, prayer and sermons, whereas the mainstream was more ceremonial and seen by the puritans as `papist'. The modern perception of a puritan as a nasty old prurient busybody who likes stopping people having fun, derived from the more authoritarian expressions of the puritan faction.
The Elizabethan church produced heresies of its own, the most interesting being English Anabaptism. This is not to be confused with the more radical Dutch or German Anabaptism that produced some quite fascinating attitudes such as Shakers and the like. The English variety sat very well with the surviving elements of Lollardy and in due time fragmented into both General Baptism and Particular Baptism, each of which in turn evolved in different ways. However, these are the originators of the Baptist churches of today so have, generally speaking, developed a modern, tolerant style.
The New England colonies were the product of particular congregations which would only accept new colonists on the basis that the newcomer accepted their brand of belief. They were not generally tolerant and so tended to fragment over time. It is the fragmentation that produced division and hysterical accusations of heresy and witchcraft. The creation of Rhode Island is a useful illustration of the early process of fragmentation.
It is usual these days to see New England as the core of the incipient United States. In terms of individualism I agree. The can-do Yankee attitude of the pioneer has its roots in the puritan ideal of Scripture and prayer. Yet, the original colonies also included plantations that employed slave labour. Such estates could provide a much quicker return on investment than any settlement of peasant farmers, however much they cooperated with each other. I tend to view the slave plantation built on land stolen from Native Americans is a truer statement of how the United States began than peasant farmers in New England ploughing enclosures with the bible in hand and cooperating with their neighbour next door.
My own cultural origins are in puritanism. The English side were Anabaptists in the 17th century and the Scottish side were largely for the Covenant. My background covers both dour Calvinism and lively Quaker argument. I have to own up to both despite an Anglican upbringing. The puritans are difficult people to understand as to us conscience is everything.
The understanding of the word puritan has evolved. The name `puritan' was given to those in the Church of England, reformed by Elizabeth the First who didn't think the reforms went far enough. These tended to be people who held more to Scripture, prayer and sermons, whereas the mainstream was more ceremonial and seen by the puritans as `papist'. The modern perception of a puritan as a nasty old prurient busybody who likes stopping people having fun, derived from the more authoritarian expressions of the puritan faction.
The Elizabethan church produced heresies of its own, the most interesting being English Anabaptism. This is not to be confused with the more radical Dutch or German Anabaptism that produced some quite fascinating attitudes such as Shakers and the like. The English variety sat very well with the surviving elements of Lollardy and in due time fragmented into both General Baptism and Particular Baptism, each of which in turn evolved in different ways. However, these are the originators of the Baptist churches of today so have, generally speaking, developed a modern, tolerant style.
The New England colonies were the product of particular congregations which would only accept new colonists on the basis that the newcomer accepted their brand of belief. They were not generally tolerant and so tended to fragment over time. It is the fragmentation that produced division and hysterical accusations of heresy and witchcraft. The creation of Rhode Island is a useful illustration of the early process of fragmentation.
It is usual these days to see New England as the core of the incipient United States. In terms of individualism I agree. The can-do Yankee attitude of the pioneer has its roots in the puritan ideal of Scripture and prayer. Yet, the original colonies also included plantations that employed slave labour. Such estates could provide a much quicker return on investment than any settlement of peasant farmers, however much they cooperated with each other. I tend to view the slave plantation built on land stolen from Native Americans is a truer statement of how the United States began than peasant farmers in New England ploughing enclosures with the bible in hand and cooperating with their neighbour next door.
My own cultural origins are in puritanism. The English side were Anabaptists in the 17th century and the Scottish side were largely for the Covenant. My background covers both dour Calvinism and lively Quaker argument. I have to own up to both despite an Anglican upbringing. The puritans are difficult people to understand as to us conscience is everything.
- Jan 2014
- 1,094
- Rus
- Jan 2012
- 426
- South Midlands in Britain
As the Episcopalian church. The Anglican church is a Protestant church with bishops. It is organised into particular territories around the world.
It was allowed, but many of the Anglican churches closed. Many of the members were loyalists and left for Canada. This happened throughout the US. The Anglican / Episcopal Church was almost destroyed. It came back somewhat, but is small and tends to be elite.
Before independence, there were almost all Congregationalist churches in New England with a few Anglican ones. In the 19th century, many of the Congregationalist Churches became Unitarian and some Congregationalists became Baptist or Methodists. There was also foreign immigration of Catholics and other religions. So there were many religions in New England by that time in New England and the rest off the US.
I know in colonial times the only churches allowed in Virginia were Anglican. Not sure if this was true in any other state. The Anglican religion was established, funded by the government everywhere but New England and Pennsylvania. Congregationalism was established in New England in most states into the mid 19th century.
- Jan 2012
- 426
- South Midlands in Britain
Congregational churches are those managed by the congregation. They see no need of bishops. All puritan churches are so managed.
- Jan 2014
- 1,094
- Rus