The Rise of Evangelicalism: The Experience of Sarah Osborn

Sarah Osborn was born into Calvinist Protestant Puritanism where she was well-trained to understand God as a wrathful authority who knew humans unable to be anything but sinful. However, throughout all Sarah’s hardships and personal struggles, her concept of this all-knowing God adapted to the environment of societal change that was happening around her. Her story is one of evolving Christian understanding from trembling before an inscrutable, unknowable God to one who interacts and embraces humans through personal experiences. As a result of the influence of the Enlightenment and Millennialist movements that fueled the First and Second Great Awakenings, evangelicalism grew from 1720 – 1790, in part, because it offered Christians assurance of salvation and individual authority that was lacking in Calvinist Puritanism.

Calvinist thought that made the journey with the Puritans settling the new world was very clear concerning the human condition. Puritan beliefs were grounded in the understanding of God, the human condition, and predestination; Sarah was taught early that God was an unknowable sovereign who determined who was saved and who was eternally damned, that “Christ’s death had not redeemed all of humanity but only a small group of the ‘elect.’”[1] All humans were corrupted by the original sin of Adam and Eve and that “it was crucial for even the youngest to be exposed to the concepts of original sin, heaven, and hell.”[2] Calvinist Christians were “completely dependent on a transcendent and uncontrollable God,”[3] where no one could save themselves, and further, they could have no assurance of salvation from the inscrutable and unknowable God. She boldly wrote about her contemplated suicide as a young adult, as she was completely convinced she was “monstrous, God-provoking, and hell-deserving.”[4] In the midst of her struggle, she concluded that God had “punished her for disobeying her parents” and that she had been afflicted due to her own behavior.[5] It is clear from her writing that she was experiencing a deep need for assurance of her own salvation, as she could not see how she, a wretched sinner, could possibly be affirmed before the God she knew.

The growth of evangelicalism out of this Calvinist Puritan belief structure cannot be considered without acknowledging the influence of the Enlightenment’s radical “assumption that individuals had the freedom to create a better world.”[6] Enlightened thinkers advocated individual freedom, and freedom from the past, by suggesting that the traditional Christian view of the human condition – and everything else, for that matter – needed to be tested and proved through rationality and empirical evidence. As this new way of thinking pervaded social thinking, Christians took on the new language of experience as a way to prove the existence of God and a justification of their beliefs. For Christians like Sarah who struggled with uncertainty of salvation, it spoke to a need – it addressed doubts of an unknowable God; spiritual experiences were valid and authoritative when couched in the language of the Enlightenment. Rationally proving God was active in the lives of Christians by describing and experiencing emotional reactions to preaching resulting in conversion filled the need to finally know their eternal fate in certainty. It was the Enlightenment’s push for rational, empirical proof through experience that Christianity co-opted in the form of evangelism, as Brekus explains: 

"Earlier Christians had defined conversion in multiple ways – it could mean changing one’s life by going to church regularly, taking communion, studying the Bible, or living according to the Ten Commandments – but for evangelicals it meant an immediate, heartfelt change. True religion, they claimed, was ‘experimental.’ Influenced by the Enlightenment emphasis on personal experience as the foundation of knowledge, evangelicals did not view conversion as an intellectual assent to the truths of the Bible or as a slow, imperceptible turning to God; for them it was a ‘new sense’ that was real as the physical senses of seeing, hearing, or tasting. Because people could actually feel and know whether they had been born again, they could be virtually sure of their salvation."[7]

The push of individualism, freedom of thought, and the need for assurance of salvation spawned revivals across the colonies. Starting with Charles Whitefield and Gilbert Tennent, and then followed by others, revival preachers called sinners to experience the emotional, individual experience of conversion. Not only was this emotional experience proof of God working in the life of an individual, but it provided the authority of a testimony that one could rely upon as rational and empirical. Sarah, and many others, were desirous of assurance of salvation that was previously elusive. She “envied them, and she seems to have embraced the evangelical movement as her own because she longed for their confidence.”[8] 

Sarah began attending revivals and embraced evangelical thought where “she could say – with assurance – that she knew what mattered. She knew that she had been born again.”[9] Even though she continued to hold to the traditional Calvinist views of God, and that suffering and affliction were signs of God showing care, she embraced the assurance of salvation. In her quest for assurance, she wrote to Gilbert Tennent, a revival preacher, looking for his affirmation of her salvation. In this letter to Tennent she describes her “religious experience,”[10] and based upon that, he gave affirmation of God’s grace toward her. She was relieved and even stated that she was “restored as if were from the grave”[11] of doubts.

Evangelicalism focused heavily on an emotional conversion experience, one that made the seeker feel that God indeed was participating in their lives. In addition to this important conversion experience, spreading the gospel gave Christians a purpose - sharing the ‘good news’ of salvation and the assurance they had experienced. The complete authority of the Bible was of utmost importance, however spiritual experience and personal testimony was of such a priority that special training (such as seminary) was not required or needed; anyone with a testimony and a desire to share was qualified. Within this context of evangelicalism arose another movement, Millennialism, which focused on the prophecy of the last book of the Bible (Revelation). Millennialists believed that Christ would make his second appearance in the world any day, and that human history was, indeed, in the last days. This created a sense of urgency and need to convert sinners, as well as purging Christians of sinful behavior, in preparation of the world for the Second-Coming. Sarah was like many others who agreed with the Millennialists; the imminent return of Christ and the reality of the American Revolution resulted in an urgency and purpose which made people feel that they were part of a bigger picture, God’s greater plan. Spreading the gospel to all was foremost, as Sarah wrote, “I know not what is before us […] no not for an Hour, but would fain Hope the Glory of the Latter days is beginning to dawn.”[12]

During the Second Great Awakening, religious authority to share and interpret the Bible according to personal spiritual revelation inspired many religious innovations that challenged traditional views of divine revelation, property ownership, and family structures. Moreover, evangelicalism gave voice to marginalized groups, such as women and African Americans (both slaves and freed), due to the spiritual equality afforded to all according to the Bible. Encouraged by the urgency of the ‘last days,’ and Sarah’s desire to share the gospel, she moved into this new-found religious authority and gained a reputation for her fervor to encourage and pray with those who came to her home. Crowds including African Americans, boys, and women filled her kitchen to listen to her read from the Bible, council, and pray. Like other evangelicals, Sarah made a “determined effort to convert the enslaved” and wrote that she “ha[d] thought it a duty to encourage them”[13] Interestingly, due to Sarah’s history of failing health and hardship, people were “drawn to her because of her steadfast faith in the midst of suffering.”[14] It was only through the spiritual equality encouraged in evangelicalism that enabled a woman to function as an evangelical leader, if only from her home. In this way, she was able to model the embrace of suffering as the will of God, while evangelizing and spreading the gospel to those eager to hear. She utilized her spiritual liberty within evangelicalism to speak with authority and confidence of the assurance she herself had gained.

Evangelicalism had become an important mode of Christianity partly due to Christians, like Sarah, who responded to the need for assurance of salvation from a hidden, inscrutable Puritan God. This enlightened thought was a completely “new way of thinking about human knowledge – that marked a break with Puritan tradition.”[15] The rise of evangelicalism, as traced through the First and Second Great Awakenings, enabled Christians to feel the desired acceptance of God and assurance of salvation, as well as exercise a new sense of liberty and authority gained through spiritual experience. This newfound freedom allowed them to boldly share the message of the gospel as well as engage in a bigger purpose of God’s plan and the imminent return of Christ in the environment of the American Revolution.

 

---

[1] Brekus, Catherine A. Sarah Osborn's World: The Rise of Evangelical Christianity in Early America. New Haven: Yale University Press, 37

[2] Ibid., 38

[3] Ibid., 37

[4] Brekus, Sarah Osborn’s World., 70

[5] Ibid., 70

[6] Ibid., 7

[7] Brekus, Sarah Osborn’s World, 94

[8] Ibid., 95

[9] Ibid., 95

[10] Ibid., 122

[11] Ibid., 123

[12] Brekus, Sarah Osborn’s World, 251

[13] Brekus, Sarah Osborn’s World, 250- 251

[14] Ibid., 254

[15] Ibid., 97

 

March 2016

Considering mindfulness in the classroom.

*I wrote this article at the beginning of my Independent Study of curricula and practices available to teachers and school administration. It would be fruitful to revisit this topic to see if any progress has been made in the almost 4 years since this was written. If anything, the 'hype' that surrounded classroom mindfulness practices has abated to a certain degree, allowing the concepts of mindfulness to be 'absorbed' into the more palatable and acceptable 'social-emotional learning', which is devoid of the perceptions of spirituality inherent in anything labeled 'mindfulness.'

From a certain point of view, to introduce mindfulness to students takes creativity and innovation, and that there is no right (or wrong) way (Rechtschaffen, 2014). He stated that “it functions best when the teacher is experimenting with using his or her own life as a laboratory for exploring and deepening the practice of mindfulness” (p. xxi). It goes without saying that to teach anything, the teacher needs to be not only well-acquainted with the subject-matter as well as personal experience interacting with that subject – especially such a personal topic as mindfulness or meditation. And mindfulness is so personal; it requires the teacher and student to engage with moment-to-moment personal experience (sensations, feelings, surroundings). To teach from a pre-made curriculum without personal experience (both with the activities and a personal practice), I suspect, might not be successful.  And it does take ‘creativity and innovation’ to consider the students themselves, their context(s), and needs when developing lessons or activities for their participation.

The research article by Margaret Buchmann (1989) is connected to this thought. While not speaking of mindfulness specifically, she stated that the concept of practice (of teaching, not a meditation practice) “goes beyond describing what a teacher does or what many teachers happen to do, appealing instead to a concept of teaching as a virtual activity that is a bearer of good” (p. 57). She asserted that the time a teacher spends in contemplation of instruction and the recipients is necessary for “the intrinsic good of learning” (p. 57). Careful consideration of the purpose, students, and context are necessary for a beneficial result (giving usable and edifying tools of mindfulness to the teachers and students) – I would call that skillful (or wise) effort, mindfulness, and concentration.

When we don’t listen to our students, we are in a perpetual battle against them. When we don’t honor the amount of physical movement kids need, we have to fight them or medicate them into sitting at a desk all day. When we don’t offer students a healthy way to express difficult emotions, we end up being perpetually frustrated by their behaviors. When we don’t tach them how to pay attention, we end up yelling at them when they are distracted. So many teachers have expressed grief to me because they feel as if they are in a war with the very kids they want to help. (Rechtschaffen, 2014, p. 14)

Considering indiscipline, the most common reported were distractibility, anxiety, worry, self-doubt, and the need for perfection (Harrison, 2012). In addition, teacher conceptions of indiscipline influences how they will react or respond to them. Research has shown that teachers attributed indiscipline to individual characteristics and family factors, and thus manage the situations of indiscipline principally with actions involving the students with their families. (Silva, 2016). It seems teachers perceive most behavior challenges as caused by influences outside of their control. The researchers concluded that it is “very important to develop actions of intervention addressed to teachers with goals to expand their vision on the situations that can generate indiscipline at school;” in other words, there may be some conditions within the teachers’ control that can be addressed such as instruction, materials used, and school rules.

The situation is clear: everyone involved is human and not perfect! And often behavioral challenges are motivated by situations and perceptions that are not clear. I have witnessed these teacher conceptions of indiscipline, and had conversations with teachers about challenges within their classrooms. I believe that mindfulness techniques have the potential to foster (teacher) compassion toward self and others that may be valuable in mediating some causes of indiscipline challenges. While classroom mindfulness practices may not provide lasting solutions to any of the long-standing issues of indiscipline in schools, it may help may reduce stress and provide tools (for teachers and students) to become more aware. 

Despite the benefits of mindfulness activities and a meditation practice there remains the matter of the hype surrounding the research. To put it bluntly, “misinformation and poor methodology associated with past studies of mindfulness may lead public consumers to be harmed, misled, and disappointed,” (Dam, 2017, p. 36). Interestingly, Goleman and Davidson state the same; Goleman was awarded his doctorate with what would be considered now somewhat faulty research methods (2017).

“As we’ve seen, our somewhat flawed research methods during our Harvard graduate school days reflected the general quality – or lack of it – during the first decades of meditation studies, the 1970s and 1980s. Today our initial research attempts would not meet our own standards to be included here. Indeed, a large proportion of meditation studies in one way or another fail to meet the gold standards for research methods that are essential for publication in the top, “A-level” scientific journals.” (Goleman, 2017, p. 77)

The Dam article calls out the problem of media and marketing influence and use of study results, sometimes glossing or hyping the results to get the big headlines or sell products: “published journal abstracts and media reports about obtained results often gloss over such crucial variations, leading to inappropriate comparisons between what might be fundamentally different states, experiences, skills, and practices” (2017, p. 40). The article was pretty pointed about nailing down certain aspects, most especially the definition of ‘mindfulness.’

Although some students take naturally to mindfulness, it is “not a magic bullet,” said Diana Winston, the director of mindfulness education at the U.C.L.A. center. She said the research thus far was “inconclusive” about how effective mindfulness was for children who suffered from trauma-related disorders, for example. It is “a slow process,” Ms. Winston added. “Just because kids sit and listen to the bell doesn’t necessarily mean they’ll be more kind.” (Brown, 2007)

For the record, mindfulness can be defined in simple terms both children and adults can understand and practice: mindfulness is paying attention, in the present moment, on purpose. Even if classroom mindfulness practices are not always an effective behavior management tool in the classroom, teaching and modeling simple daily mindfulness is a necessary and beneficial life skill for everyone involved, both inside and outside the classroom.

References

Brown, P. L. (2007). In the classroom, a new focus on quieting the mind. New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/16/us/16mindful.html

Dam, N. T., Vugt, M. K., Vago, D. R., Schmalzl, L., Saron, C. D., Olendzki, A., . . . Meyer, D. E. (2017). Mind the hype: A critical evaluation and prescriptive agenda for research on mindfulness and meditation. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 13(1). 

Goleman, D., and Davidson, R. (2017). Altered traits: Science reveals how meditation changes your mind, brain, and body. Avery Books.

Harrison, J. R., Vannest, K., Davis, J., & Reynolds, C. (2012). Common problem behaviors of children and adolescents in general education classrooms in the United States. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 20, 55-64.

Rechtschaffen, D. J. (2014). The way of mindful education: Cultivating well-being in teachers and students. W.W. Norton & Company.

Siegel, D. (2011). Mindsight: The new science of personal transformation. Bantam Books.

Silva, A. M., Negreiros, F., & Albano, R. M. (2016). Indiscipline in public school: Teacher conceptions and intervention. International Journal of Research in Education and Science, 3(1), 1-10.

Original article written September 2018, edited 2022.

When the True City Falls

 

When the True City Falls

Socrates states it right at the beginning – we are not so clever. I am assuming he included himself in that statement. In Book II of Plato’s Republic, he doesn’t truly believe that he can help his friends figure out the mystery of which is better – justice or injustice. However, to his credit, he states he cannot refuse his help, even after a failed first attempt, as it would seem impious of him to refuse. Therefore, his plan to “track down” justice and injustice [1] to fully understand the truth about their benefits was to find it, justice or injustice, in a larger object. Socrates’ logic says that if it can be found in the larger, then likewise we should be able to find it within a smaller one, namely the human soul. At the point it is found, it stands to reason that we will be able to see which is more beneficial. The method proposed is to build a hypothetical city, the larger object, from the ground up. From answering the question of why a city is formed, to how many people are required, Socrates, with help, decides why and how a city takes shape. The result is Socrates’ true city - the healthy city. In this paper, I will explore the model of a city as it goes from healthy to unhealthy, consider what is right or wrong considering the metaphor of health, and contemplate whether a city can be healthy and unhealthy simultaneously.

People have needs, both physically and socially. Using the presuppositions that people are different from other earthly creatures in that they are able create what they need rather than have it supplied through their environment, and that people cannot survive without each other, Socrates starts to build the city that will enable people to come together to supply and meet their human needs. The basic needs of people include food and fresh water, shelter, clothing or bodily protection from the elements, safety for rest, and intimacy with others. Socrates and the others determine those skilled crafters are to provide food, shelter, and clothing for the entire city, rather than having each individual attempt to be an expert in all the needed crafts. Further, this division of labor or specialization is key to this city, as it allows each contributor, or producer, the opportunity to best utilize their natural abilities while contributing to the needs of the whole. As the city expands to include more producers, all the physical needs of the people are met – food, shelter, and clothing – with producers being supported by secondary producers, merchants, and wage-earners who contribute the necessary tools and services needed for successful function of the city. Socrates summarizes by recounting that “they’ll produce bread, wine, clothes, and shoes…build houses…wear adequate clothing and shoes...” as well as cook, feast, and drink from their produce, have sweet-smelling beds on which to recline, give worship to their gods, and enjoy sexual intimacy without exceeding their means. [2] He even allows for pleasures such as salt and desserts to make life satisfying. This life that results from the imagined city, accordingly, would be one that is desirable and provides for everyone’s needs.

This city provides for all human needs and the participants are not expected or required to provide anything outside the bounds of their skill or expertise within their specialized craft. Nor are they expected to produce more than what is necessary for the city – there is no need for excess. Each will “live in peace and good health, and when they die at a ripe old age, they’ll bequeath a similar life to their children,” [3] and it is this city that Socrates deems the healthy city, the true city. All is right with this city; everyone is fulfilled and has purpose within the city, not only in their physical need, but in their social need, as well. They are able to feast and enjoy intimacy. They have children and can worship their deities (express gratitude) as they wish. They are able to pass down this good life to their descendants, ensuring they also will be content and satisfied in their life. Could there be anything wrong with this hypothetical city?

It would appear so, as the dialogue continues to reveal desires and expectations beyond these basic human needs. The character Glaucon suggests that there is something wrong with this city – that people desire finer things than the spices and desserts Socrates suggests earlier. [4] He states that people need fine furniture and delicacies in order to enjoy life to the full. Glaucon expresses an expectation of luxury within the city that Socrates is willing to entertain, for this is where the healthy city will become unhealthy – the progression that leads to the introduction of injustice. In addition to the expectation of fine furnishings and delicacies, Socrates adds perfumes and incense, prostitutes and pastries, and expensive decorations such as embroidery, gold, and ivory. [5] These expensive additions to the available products within a city would most certainly whet an appetite for more than basic needs; in fact, such expectations lead to war with neighboring communities over land possession. A sense of competition or coveting arises within the city when one desires the possessions or privilege of another. The produce of the city would then be classified according to value: basic, finer, or finest. The egalitarian sharing of products in the healthy city is now lost in a hierarchy of privilege and elitism – all feeling they deserve finery above what they basically need. This city has become infected and unhealthy in its desires, expectations, and ultimately, greed.

This metaphor equating the city to a body, either healthy or unhealthy (one with a fever [6]), is appropriate to describe the introduction of expectations and greed into the city. A body is healthy when all parts of the whole are working at optimum capacity, contributing what is needed when it is needed – like the healthy city where everyone contributes what is needed for a satisfying human life. Conversely, the unhealthy body is one where parts of the body are impeded or unwilling to contribute what is needed at the moment of need. The producers may still be producing what is needed for the basic needs of the city, but so much more is desired and expected. The whole city becomes out of balance when one crafter’s product is valued higher than others.  Competition results while the motivation for quality production can be overshadowed by a drive to garner higher demand.  Not only are the producers distracted by demand (or lack, thereof), they have an unnecessary expectation of luxury themselves. Perhaps they will no longer want to do what is necessary to produce the needed product for the city, instead yearning for status or authority over others. Thus greed, individually and socially, is the infection that causes a city to be ill and respond with a fever. When the body is exposed to disease or illness, the body responds by raising temperature to kill the intruding and harmful organism, and white cells are sent to a foreign object within the body to surround the object for the purpose of protection, evicting it from the body. Working together, the high temperature fever and white blood cells both immobilize the invader and eliminate it from the body. For Socrates, “those same desires that are most of all responsible for the bad things that happen to cities and the individuals in them” [7] is exactly the infection causing the fever in the unhealthy city. The expectation of deserved luxury, the lack of contentment, and desired status and authority over others causes the healthy city to become feverish and ill.

Cities are necessary because people cannot survive without each other. This presupposition finds truth in the idealistic healthy model of a city, but it is worthwhile to contemplate whether the healthy city and the unhealthy city can co-exist. More specifically, can both the healthy city and the unhealthy city be the same city at the same time? It could be said that both the healthy and unhealthy city provide the basic needs of the people, including food, shelter, and clothing. However, in the unhealthy city, people lower in a system of hierarchy (lower-class) may have more difficulty acquiring these basic needs due to social and economic restrictions. It also be argued that other needs such as safety for rest and intimacy with others could be seriously impeded with the introduction of unhealthy greed into the city. No one can feel completely safe when their livelihood has been consumed with thoughts of competition to be better than the next producer, striving to acquire more luxury, or manipulating situations or others to gain status or authority over others. Further, when a city is attacking their neighbors for needed land for additional production of luxury items, no one is safe from neighboring armies reacting in retaliation. When this situation exists within and around a city, no one can experience safety to rest in peace – there is no peace. And, when there is no peace, intimacy between people is most certainly strained. Who can you trust if everyone is striving for themselves and greedily coveting the possessions and status of others? Relationships are weakened, families are strained, and individualism is reinforced when everyone is focused upon themselves rather than the good of the city. I believe the answer is no – the healthy city and the unhealthy city are at odds with one another and certainly are unable to co-exist. As oil cannot mix with water, I don’t believe health and ill-health, or justice and injustice, can ultimately exist simultaneously. I think Socrates believed the same.

References

Plato, G. M. A. Grube, and Plato. "Book II." In Plato's Republic. Indianapolis: Hackett Pub., 1992.

[1] Plato’s Republic, Book II, Line 367d

[2] Book II, Line 372b

[3] Book II, Line 372d

[4] Book II, Line 372e

[5] Book II, Line 373b

[6] Book II, Line 373a

[7] Book II, Line 373e

 

March 2015