An Appeal to Heaven – Baptist Isaac Backus' Struggle for Religious Liberty in the Revolutionary Era

Converting to Christianity in 1741 as an effect of the Great Awakening, Isaac Backus became a separatist Baptist Congregationalist and head of the Warren Association of Baptists who championed religious freedom in America. Through the work of his piestic writings and petitions to Congress and State legislatures, the Massachusetts Baptist pastor vied for the separation of church and state in order to ensure and protect individual liberty of consciousness.

An Appeal to the Public for Religious Liberty (1773) poses as one of Backus’ most renowned works that details legal, Biblical, and Enlightenment rationale to support his position which stresses the importance of true liberty, the role of the government, and the differences between civil and ecclesial structures. Backus clearly defines the distinction between each government type, stating that "all acts of executive power in the civil state, are to be performed in the name of the king or state they belong to; while all our religious acts are to be done in the name of the Lord Jesus." He goes onto say that due to the nature of civically elected systems, “putting any men into civil office is of men, of the people of the world; so officers have truly no more authority than the people give them."[1] Justification for the Patriots’ separation from the mother-country fell along these lines, with Colonies abject to Britain’s refusal to acknowledge their rights as Englishmen or fairly represent the interests and concerns of citizens.

Similarly, having endured decades of religious persecution due to the arrangement of state-sponsored churches, Backus and other religious dissenters saw hypocrisy in how Revolutionaries decried civil subjugation while spiritually subjugating their fellow compatriots who theologically differed from the traditional Congregational and Anglican Church structure which dominated Colonial religious life.

Backus’ Appeal to the Public illustrates that “while his thoughts were similar to John Locke, he maintained a distinctly pietistic interpretation of man's natural obedience to God. [The two ordained systems of government held] purposes and natures [which] were distinctly different and should never be linked together.”[2] He relied upon Biblical narratives and the sovereign examples of David and Solomon to reveal that God erected covenants with nations and that the creation of laws ensured the protection of liberty. However, Backus appealed to notions of God’s ordained order, the distinctive nature of man’s depravity, and how though the Revolutionary Era’s mindset adhered to the idea that civil liberty ought not to be denied, he proposed that religious liberty shared the same fundamental importance.

Patriotic cries against a neglectful sovereign were validated however, when the “same cry was raised by Backus and the Baptists in protest against religious taxes imposed by civil government, it was perceived as an unnecessarily divisive ploy by fanatical rabble-rousers.”[3] Due to their association with other groups desiring religious freedom, such as pacifistic Quakers, Baptists were viewed as non-patriotic and their petitions, letters, and public addressment of religious concerns were largely ignored. However, Backus managed to utilize the “rhetorical strategies of the more elite New England revolutionaries in support of the minority opinion that their right of conscience, like the patriots' rights with Great Britain, had been unjustly denied.”[4] Through the War for Independence, Backus preached to the Continental Army, met with Congressional members, and traveled about the colonies sermonizing the importance of religious autonomy. He consistently readdressed the Baptist “position in relation to the colonial bid for freedom emphasizing that religious taxation without representation was just as unjust as civil taxation without representation.”[5]

Historian Thomas Kidd eloquently specifies how the “evangelical tradition supplied spiritual propulsion to the Patriot cause that was unsurpassed by any other element of Patriot ideology"[6] Though differing doctrinally, these “individuals of such varied theological strands [agreed] that religion had political implications.” Communal convictions and adherence to republicanism strengthened both the religious and irreligious alike as a core principle acknowledged was that the “disestablishment of state churches was the best means to promote religious tolerance and freedom of conscience. Following the war, evangelicals and rationalists often joined politically in agreement on the public role of religion and that the government had no business legislating religion.”[7] Dissenters amicably account that the “war in Virginia was not only a war against British rule but also a war against religious establishment. Religious liberty was not the result of republicanization, but republicanization was the result of the concerted efforts by dissenters to gain religious freedom from the establishment in exchange for mobilization against the British.”[8] Furthermore, the advance of religious liberty in America is revealed to be “not inevitable, nor was it the natural outcome of the American victory in the Revolution. It had to be won, not from Britain per se, but from the established church which was at war with the British. Thus, religious liberty was won through petitions and negotiations more than on the battlefields of the Revolution.”[9] Despite theological disputes, Backus supported the Revolution, and by relying on Biblical and civil arguments vindicating the rights of man, he became known as the “most forceful and effective writer America produced on behalf of the pietistic or evangelical theory of separation of church and state."[10]

Ultimately, political change ushered in a reconfiguration of state and church structure in America. As new state constitutions were designed and adopted, a more inclusive awareness emerged towards dissenters as sects, such as the Baptists, were gradually accepted into the fold of mainstream Protestantism. The voluntary service of dissenters during the Revolution additionally aided their plight, as the conscientious objectors to imposed theocracy had proven themselves loyal to the new republic through blood and Christian fervor. The hold of Anglican and Congregational churches slowly began to weaken, yet it was not until the mid-19^th century that the final ties between church and state were officially severed.[11]

---

[1] Isaac Backus, “An Appeal to the Public for Religious Liberty,” 1973.

[2] Sewell Jr. and Edward H. “Isaac Backus’ Plea for Religious Freedom, 1770-1776.” Today's Speech 23, no. 2 (1975): 39-47.

[3] Ibid., 45-6.

[4] Ibid,.

[5] Sewell Jr. and Edward H. “Isaac Backus’ Plea for Religious Freedom,” 44.

[6] Thomas S. Kidd, God of Liberty: A Religious History of the American Revolution (2010): 94.

[7] Matthew Hill, “God of Liberty: A Religious History of the American Revolution.” Fides Et Historia 43, no. 1 (2011): 93-4.

[8] John A. Ragosta, Wellspring of Liberty: How Virginia’s Religious Dissenters Helped Win the American Revolution and Secured Religious Liberty, 2010.

[9] John D. Wilsey, “Wellspring of Liberty: How Virginia’s Religious Dissenters Helped Win the American Revolution and Secured Religious Liberty.” Fides Et Historia 45, no. 1 (2013): 156-7.

[10] William G. McLoughlin, “Isaac Backus on Church, State, and Calvinism: Pamphlets, 1754-1789,” (1968): 1.

[11] Sewell Jr. and Edward H. “Isaac Backus’ Plea for Religious Freedom,” 45.

Image - Isaac Backus, Government and Liberty Described and Ecclesiastical Tyranny Exposed, 1788.

Puritan Piety through a Communal Work Ethic

Diligence - Frugality - Faith

Inspired by Charles Cohen’s, “The Saints Zealous in Love and Labor,” this analysis details contrasting scholarly perspectives regarding the Puritan psychology of work. Cohen cites Max Weber’s thesis and mentions how Weber links the practice of piety to the development of capitalism and Western Civilization. Weber suggests that Puritans were largely inspired to fulfill their earthly acts of labor due to a higher sense of moralistic reasoning and virtue. Overwhelmingly, from the writings of John Winthrop, one of the leading founders of the Massachusetts Bay Colony, and other Puritan authors, the majority of New England’s early settlers appeared to have desired to manifest their faith through good works and economic activity, whether as a show of their own piety or due to societal pressures to behave accordingly to the ideals of their religiously-based colony. From Charles perspective, Puritans assumed that if they were not being productive, they were not living up to the standards of Christ and that without labor, the Spirit of God was not being accessed, thus not reflecting a transformed state from sinner to a soul regenerated into active Christian life.

Reminiscent of John Smith’s famously attributed quote – “Those who do not work do not eat” –highly incentivized public activity from all members of Puritan society regardless of class or gender is indicative that new settlements along the Eastern coastline were no longer bound by old European ties to class hierarchy. Additionally, each individual, in order to survive the harsh elements of the New World, appeared compelled to participate and contribute, concepts that were exceptionally relevant to the Puritan way of life, as the common belief seemed to hold that the single action from one of their members could result in either God’s favor or displeasure, indicating that there existed subsequent consequences for either their action or inaction.

Historian Sharon Beder explores how a higher motivation is necessary for the efficiency of modern economics, that being portrayed in the success of capitalism. She states that "modern capitalism, more than mere trading for profit, requires a system of values that revolves around economic meanings and goals." She continues to highlight how the Protestant Reformation brought about "moral support and legitimacy" to settlers desiring to impact commerce and industry - one of the hallmarks of those crossing the Atlantic who were set on exploring and cultivating the relatively unclaimed American continent for their own personal or imperialistic gain.

Intriguingly, a critique of Max Weber's initial projection on how the economic motivations of Puritans stemmed from their Calvinistic theology emerges in the form of Anglican dissent. A contrary opinion posed by C. John Sommerville stands refreshingly aloof compared to the amount of research on early colonial piety during the 1600s. Sommerville argues that Anglicans were far more work-focused and efficient in their enterprises compared to their Puritan counterparts. In “The Anti-Puritan Work Ethic,” Sommerville disputes the validity of other scholars whom he sees as having relied too heavily on Weber's analysis and that consideration ought to be placed on other pieces of literary evidence to support the conjected link between Calvinist doctrine and the compulsive desire to work. He suggests, based on religious books penned by Anglican authors within the 17^th century, that Anglicans instead placed more emphasis upon worldly acts of labor “as a religious duty" in a way that was "integrated with the rest of their theology in a more logical manner than the Puritans." He sees the Puritan motive for work more as a symptom of psychology branching out from a sense of “religious anxiety” instead of acts conducted out of pure devotion.

Sommerville could be right, however, though more detailed and thought provoking due to how he contrasts the deeper theological differences between Christian denominations, it appears as though his argument misses the point – simply because Anglicans may have been more concentrated on work as a stated “religious duty,” this does not discredit the reasons as to why Puritans were motivated to actively act out the will of God. Cannot both sects be equally motivated by economic and religious factors? Even if Puritans were motivated in part by societal pressures they may have felt, especially in light of conformity, intrinsically the Puritan mindset is fundamentally yet enamored with the idea that each believer is responsible in expressing the Spirit of God and His transformational powers within and through their outward show of labor and good works. Through the tenets of the Protestant Reformation, with Luther’s insistence on Sola Gratia - through God's grace alone, the Puritans heartily believed that salvation can only be achieved through the sacrifice of Christ and not through any humanly effort, thus they were further inspired by Christian principles to dedicate their lives to hard work in service of God in addition to a dedicated display of their own personal piety and devotion in an outwardly visible way.

I do not see the conflict here as anyone can be simultaneously motivated by various influences yet still maintain a genuine and sincere conviction towards an original motivating factor, this being God in the instance through our analysis of motivational factors influencing the Puritans. In fact, Christianity revolves around each saint navigating through the diverse influences and responsibilities of life while always bearing in mind Who ought to have the greatest amount of influence in our lives.

Linking Protestant Work Ethic and Capitalism, Max Weber

Thankfully, historian Marilynn Robinson, points out a unique facet of Puritan thinking in her "Puritans and Prigs: An Anatomy of Zealotry" that acknowledges the Christian doctrine of the depravity of man, a notion emphasized quite emphatically by Calvinists from which Puritan methodology strains. She likens a portion of Puritanical society to that of the “National Socialism of Germany” or other fascist communities – “the idea that society can and should produce good people – people suited to life in that idealized society” who must consistently examine whether they and those around them are expressing and living up to that communal standard. However, she retracts that affiliation, suggesting that the Puritans cannot be considered “zealots or Stalinists”, but rather showcases how Puritans have a zealous nature about them only because the passion of these devotees originates from the deep desire to “feel secure in their reasonableness, worth, and goodness,” or rather, to solidly mirror their Christian identity, despite their understanding of flawed human nature. It is actually because of this understanding, Robinson claims, that they are “filled with a generous zeal to establish their virtues through the world of their society with the inspiring hope that this transformation can be accomplished.”

And this leads us back to the beginning of this discussion with the statement Cohen took from Max Weber, suggesting that Puritan motivation for earthly work was uniquely and intimately bound together with their desire to serve and worship God to the utmost of their abilities - a pious expression rooted at the very core of Christian hospitality and compassion which came to greatly influence and alter the course of Western Civilization due to both economic and religious motivating factors.

Link to Commentary Video - Puritan Piety through Work Ethic

Bibliography

Cohen, Charles L. "The Saints Zealous in Love and Labor: The Puritan Psychology of Work." The Harvard Theological Review 76, no. 4 (1983): 455-80. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1509547.

Fitzpatrick, Tara. "The Figure of Captivity: The Cultural Work of the Puritan Captivity Narrative."American Literary History 3, no. 1 (1991): 1-26. http://www.jstor.org/stable/489730.

Harper, Preston. "Puritan Works Salvation and the Quest for Community in "the Scarlet Letter"." Theology Today 57, no. 1 (Apr 01, 2000): 51, http://ezproxy.liberty.edu:2048/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1791712277?accountid=12085.

Hart, Ian. "The Teaching of the Puritans about Ordinary Work." 67, no. 3 (January 1, 1995): 195. http://www.biblicalstudies.org.uk/pdf/eq/1995-3_195.pdf.

Laird, Pamela. "Selling the Work Ethic: From Puritan Pulpit to Corporate PR."Enterprise & Society 2, no. 4 (12, 2001): 855-7, http://ezproxy.liberty.edu:2048/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/218624952?accountid=12085.

Robinson, Marilynne. "Puritans and Prigs: An Anatomy of Zealotry." Salmagundi, no. 101-102 (Winter, 1994): 36, http://ezproxy.liberty.edu:2048/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/221291588?accountid=12085.

Seaver, Paul. "The Puritan Work Ethic Revisited." Journal of British Studies 19, no. 2 (1980): 35-53. http://www.jstor.org/stable/175492.

Sommerville, C. John. "The Anti-Puritan Work Ethic." Journal of British Studies 20, no. 2 (1981): 70-81. http://www.jstor.org/stable/175637.

Winthrop, John. "John Winthrop: A Modell of Christian Charity." Hanover. Accessed September 09, 2016. https://history.hanover.edu/texts/winthmod.html.