A Model of Christian Charity

by John Winthrop

The Reason What rule shall a man observe in giving in respect of the measure? What rule must we observe in lending? What rule must we observe in forgiving (a debt) ? What rule must we observe and walk by in cause of community of peril?

Genres: Classics, Nonfiction, History, American, Theology, Religion, Christian

Kindle Edition

First published January 1, 1838

About the author

Puritan (Calvinist) Governor of Massachusetts Bay Colony and co-founder of the settlement that became Boston.

Reviews

[Gregsamsa · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is the original source of the "like a shining city on a hill" meme that conservatives like to pose as a model for the United States, apparently unaware that the rest of the text is full of stuff they would denounce as socialism (e.g. "...the care of the public must oversway all private respects, by which, not only conscience, but mere civil policy, doth bind us.")

Oops.

I find it hard to rate texts like this which I think of in terms of important historical artifacts rather than literary ones to be evaluated aesthetically, so that's why the neutral 3 stars. For people who like to point out that the United States was "based" on Christianity, this sermon--as well as Winthrop's journals--could be very instructive regarding how the Christianity of that time was verrrrrrry different from today's flavors. In fact the very idea of Calvinist-style predestination now seems positively unAmerican!

[guilhereme silva · Rating 1 out of 5]

i thought the fondue fathers had invented melted cheese, not colonialism (no mentions of cheese, 0/10)

[Nya]

1. I know this isn’t a real book but I have a quota to fill !!!!

2ly. “if one member suffers, all suffer with it” is a lot like the black eye peas song when they sing “in this context, there's no disrespect. So when I bust my rhyme, you break ya neck”

3ly. I like the concept of putting the number and “ly” to represent thirdly, we should go back to that

4ly. “Noe body can be perfect”

5ly. the whole part about loving your neighbor, etc is good and could almost make up for the whole white-savior complex this entire document represents (but it doesn’t)

6ly. this is so long and boring

[andreea. · Rating 1 out of 5]

.

[Mya · Rating 2 out of 5]

I adored the passion I felt reading the scriptures, but the meanings convey exhaust the overall purpose of the story.

[Daniel Pojda ✨ · Rating 1 out of 5]

1/5 ⭐

[Lisa · Rating 3 out of 5]

Sarah's review:
John Winthrop spends lots of time developing his argument bit by bit in his “A Model of Christian Charity.” Though he starts out with a simple premise, that God has determined that some people will be rich while others will be poor, Winthrop finishes his piece with an exhortation to follow the rules of the colony he and other immigrants will establish soon.
After stating his first premise, Winthrop goes on to give reasons why God has given some people riches while allowing others to live in poverty: such divisions show God’s greatness, allow Him to work more often in people’s lives, and create a need for humans to help each other in times of need. From there, Winthrop discusses the difference between justice and mercy, concluding the segment by saying that God calls Christians to display compassion to their fellow man, even to their enemies. This may require a person to give all or most of what he or she has to help someone.
Since Winthrop anticipates that some people may have objections when it comes to his argument, he writes the next section of his sermon as a series of questions and answers. The questions point out a possible flaw in Winthrop’s argument, and then the answers address those points and reveal why they are not flaws. Using this method, Winthrop postulates that Christians should always be ready to give money when God calls them to do so; that they should lend generously to people with nothing; and that they should give everything they have, even their lives, to help their community if it is in peril.
This leads right into a discussion of the motivation for performing acts of mercy on a regular basis. Winthrop states that love impels Christians to help each other out. Just as one part of a human body will do work so that another body part will thrive, so members of the body of Christ will do the work necessary to help other members. Love binds Christ’s followers together into one group.
Now Winthrop turns to the main point of his discourse: how he wants the other members of his colonizing party to apply these principles of love and mercy. Since his company is made up of Christians, he expects that they will act in love as God commands them to do. The founding of a colony requires that settlers work together for mutual benefit and value the needs of others above their own, so Winthrop asks that they do so willingly. To make sure that his compatriots follow his ideas, he brings in examples from the Bible to remind them of how God punishes his chosen people when they do not follow his commands to the fullest. Winthrop also exhorts the colonists to strive to make their new settlement an example to other towns of a community based on love and self-sacrifice. He ends the piece by urging his fellow Christians to choose life, not death—a powerful note to end a cleverly crafted sermon.

[Haley · Rating 2 out of 5]

Throughout his sermon, John Winthrop encouraged the Puritans to stay strong. To truly understand the intensity of this point, we need to be reminded of the context of the Puritans’ situation. The audience on the Mayflower had just left basically everything and everyone that they knew. Their whole lives were changing dramatically and Winthrop was urging them to be strong in the Lord. He also constantly reminded them to “…be all knit more nearly together in the bond of brotherly affection.” (pg. 80) There are two key words in that quotation: knit and brotherly. Winthrop used the word “knit” to show unity and “brotherly” to show the church body as a family. Yet, the main concept that I found all throughout it was the command to love others. He was constantly reminding them that, “…the Gospel commands love to an enemy.” (pg. 81) Remembering the context of this sermon, we see the importance of this statement. The Puritans came to America because they were not allowed to practice their religion back in England and when they moved to Holland, their children began to leave the faith. According to Cheryl Bowman, (life123.com) the Puritans “found themselves hated by society” because of their beliefs. The were left with only one option: to leave Europe completely. The Puritans could have hated Europeans for all the hardships laid upon them as a result of the prejudice. Yet, Winthrop told them to love their enemies. To me, that is the strongest point that Winthrop made in his sermon.

[Paras2 · Rating 1 out of 5]

I HATED IT. LITERALLY EVERY SINGLE WORD OF IT.
It was a required text for American Literature course and I had to read it. it was like I was going through hell. :/
okay, yes, there were some points mentioned in class about how Winthrop wrote this sermon to kinda make rules for this new society by using scripture and it's well justified and all, but God it bothers me. this control through religion is the most nerve-wracking thing I have ever faced in any text. and just to say, again puritanism shines like a hot glowing pile of crap on fire. (ps. sry I can't control my rage.)
in all fairness, you might find Winthrop's rhetoric and persuasion interesting (tho I so did not)

[Marco · Rating 2 out of 5]

Read for college. It was interesting to read Winthrop's sermon to the puritans - delivered before, during the journey or after they arrived to America, it's not certain -, as they were going to the Massachusetts Bay Colony after they escaped from Europe, since it provides an insight into what was in their minds at the time. However, while it was a good way to know more about the puritanism ideology, theology texts are not my cup of tea and I can’t say I enjoyed reading it.

[laine · Rating 1 out of 5]

This wasn't going to be fun or interesting, but I had to read it for class and I don't want my efforts to be in vain, sooooo...I'm putting it on my Goodreads so it counts for my reading challenge

[Isabel Tolentino]

I have never thought I would read something like this, but I have to admit it's been an interesting experience. And although I'm not actually concerned about puritans or their sermons, I may read it again just from a rhetorical perspective.
In addition to that, I must say this has been really useful as an approach to puritans' way of thinking.

[AC · Rating 1 out of 5]

Ugghh… awful. What reactionary cant…

“Let us thank God for having giving us such [Puritan] ancestors; and let each successive generation thank Him, not less fervently, for being one step further from them in the march of ages.“ (Nathaniel Hawthorne, 1852)

[ViZz]

First of all, this was a pain to read.

Second of all, while I'm not religious myself, I can appreciate the importance of community, even if you're only helping because God told you to. Definitely portrays a "nicer" God than John Edwards.

[Dani Hayman]

Read for American Lit. to 1865 course

[liya]

i feel as if i didn’t read the same sermon/speech that half of the people who left a review on this did. it’s not that bad. it’s not supposed to exactly be entertaining….

[Rabbia Riaz · Rating 3 out of 5]

All I could get: Power of social love, world knitted like "one body", and love and sympathy as natural instinct. (Yes but with Biblical References 😄)

[Raghad · Rating 2 out of 5]

very bad. turgid legal and religious prose that aims to maintain the most rich in power.

[Tiffany · Rating 2 out of 5]

hmmm I think SOME of these rules COULD be alright but this stinks of superiority and a savior complex.

[Vitória · Rating 1 out of 5]

"charity" my a**

[liv (sparrow on twt)]

eat the rich, basically

[mafalda · Rating 1 out of 5]

americans ain’t nothing if not consistent <3
(yes i will write my sassy review for each and every old text they make me read)

[Courier · Rating 2 out of 5]

"So we shall keep the unity of the spirit in the bond of peace (...) we shall be as a city upon a hill."

He said #loveislove in 1630 so bonus points for that

I suppose American Exceptionalism took root right from the start of the US of A. As far as puritans go, though, Mr. Winthrop was not the worst, at least in this specific sermon. At least he preached that you should love your neighbor and acceptance of everyone (every white man at least, I guess), so it could have been much worse. Of course the idea of America being 'a city on a hill' vis a vis the exceptionalism, but as I said the sermon did have some alright ideas (or at least none that are completely unhinged).

[Gilraen Pendragon · Rating 3 out of 5]

I think John Winthrop was rather a pro, especially in his own time. Cutting aside as much of the flowery language that was in fashion at his time (and been used so for centuries), his language was very plain by the standards of his time. Of course, right now it makes a rather tedious read, because despite being not very flowery, he does tend to be long and winding, explaining and over-explaining the same matters. (So that even the most thick headed puritanist ought to get the point. I kept thinking people must have been more used to reading such texts back then, especially the calvinists, otherwise, if you hit someone, say, my mom, with this text atm, her head will explode, nevermind that she is pretty much the common woman of modern days). 

As to the pro, then it's not just the word style, but also the building of the text. Some parts are tediously long (to my modern eye), but the rest is in nice small chunks of questions, answers, arguments and conclusions. (Gotta love those conclusions, because say, one didn't get the point in the long chunk, the conclusion still explains what was being said and what conclusion reached). I do wonder if Winthrop had some sort of juridical background, because every now and then his style resembles smth being used in court, all with the "firstly, secondly, thirdly", statements etc. (Or perhaps it's because in court older language and style is still being used). 

His main style in this text tends to be question, answer (philosophical argument followed by Bible citations, a couple of examples from the Bible retold in simpler fashion than in the Book,  one or two examples from  the clerical history (saints, some famous priests etc) and definitely an example as to how to put the argument into use now and here. And  where such behaviour would lead and what would happen (and has happened) if the good folk fails. 

Shortly, the pattern goes like "word of god" - explanation - it has happened, has happened more recently, is happening, will happen, + hope + warning when failure. 

[Taylor · Rating 3 out of 5]

I found this hard to read, mostly because I'm not use to reading sermons or reading stuff with 1600's language. But once it was talked and explained in my English class, I did understand it a lot better and kind of liked it. I did have to reread it to make sense of some parts, so that also made me dislike it a bit more.

[Nadosia Grey · Rating 3 out of 5]

Interesting principles to live by although I am not religious by any means. The thesis is well structured and supported by arguments and subsequent objections that one may raise. The only thing I would wish for is better vocabulary. The repetitious openings of arguments really enables you to understand why high school teachers have a sacred grudge against those used in this work.

[J.M. Brister · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is a sermon from the 1600s that discusses how Christians should act, using Biblical justification. It is a challenging read, but there are things that a modern-day reader can at least somewhat enjoy.

[Heather · Rating 3 out of 5]

Read for an American Lit course. I think I'd give this sermon 3 1/2 stars. It has some really excellent principles and truths throughout it, but it's still kind of hard to grasp and understand fully due to the older English writing style.

[The Half-blood Reader · Rating 3 out of 5]

An important historical document for the study of USA's identity and its beginning with the puritans.
Wintrop's speech set out many concept bases for the future, even if most people are not really aware of then, even if they are not used in the exact same sense as back in the 17th century.

[Marie · Rating 1 out of 5]

A very dreary and sobering read. I liked the parts about love binding mankind together even though it was love for God and therefore an attempts at justifying the more violent actions of the Church against those who refused to join that big Christian lovefest.