Theology ~ Today

Vol. XXXII, No.4 JanuarY,1976

EDITORIAL
Pursuing the Puritan Ethic

I
N 1967 the historian Lynn White, Jr., published a famous article
suggesting that the historical roots of our ecological crisis lay in
the heart of the Christian tradition itself, specifically in the
biblical injunction granting human beings dominance over God's
creation (Gen. 1:28). Such a command, argued White, contributed to
the western attitude that nature had no intrinsic value except in terms
of its capacity for human use, and eventually, exploitation. l Although
White largely restricted his analysis to the medieval period, it was not
long before others linked the attitude of exploitation with the rise of
Protestantism, capitalism, and modern science,2 thus further
branding the already discredited "Puritan ethic" with still more op-
probrium.
Despite all the efforts of historians and theologians to redeem the
reputation of the Puritans, the term, "Puritan," still awakens many of
the attitudes of disdain and ridicule that were so common in the
1920's. H. L. Mencken's definition of a Puritan as a person who was
worried that someone, somewhere, someplace was having fun
continues to have an appreciative, if not an approving, audience.
Today the Puritan ethic has been roughly equated with everything
from the "Type A" behavior that leads to heart attacks, to manic
compulsive activity, to the supposed American preference for bad
food ("anything that tastes that good has to be bad").
I
There are, of course, legitimate reasons for criticizing the Puritan
ethic. First, it tended to be highly individualistic, emphasizing the
necessity of strenuous, solitary effort to tame the wilderness and
eventually one's competitors. Second, in its most pernicious forms, it

'Lynn White, Jr., "The Historical Roots of Our Ecologic Crisis," Science. Vol. 155
(March 10, 1967), pp. 1203-1207, reprinted in David and Eileen Spring, eds., Ecology
and Religion in History (New York, 1974), pp. 15-31.
2S ee Ecology and Religion in History, passim.

341

Downloaded from ttj.sagepub.com at UNIV OF GEORGIA on June 27, 2015

342 Theology Today
was static, coercive, and conservative. One was called to be a
housewife, carpenter, or laborer, and one had to be happy in com-
pletely fulfilling that pre-ordained role. The legacy of this attitude left
Protestant social ethics with little appreciation of the institutional
forms of oppression in an industrial and technological society. It fur-
ther contributed to the moral blindness to the divisions created and
perpetuated by racism and class. Third, the Puritan ethic encouraged
the identification of godliness with success, a devastating refor-
mulation of the deuteronomic formula that has largely seized the
imagination of Americans. As Sydney E. Ahlstrom has put it, there is
"a steady line of progression from the Puritan doctrine of vocation to
the Yankee gospel of work, and from that, in due course, to the Gilded
Age's gospel ofwealth."3
Ironically, it can be argued that while most Americans may ridicule
their pinch-faced Puritan ancestors, it is the tenacious adherence to a
secularized version of Puritan ethic that is at the root of so much of
our contemporary malaise. Implicit in the American attitude toward
work, which was shaped by the Puritan ethic, is the assumption that
diligent, disciplined activity would bring not only results but increasing
rewards. Minority groups experienced the frustration and denial of
this hope long before American society as a whole, but today we are
confronted with the bitter realization that the future is not open, but
closed. In nearly every area of society, the picture is one of limita-
tions, not promises or new opportunities. Part of the reason for this is
undoubtedly the ecological crisis with its attendant problems of
energy shortages, population explosions, and diminished raw ma-
terials. But for most Americans, the immediate cause has been the
rampant inflation of the past several years. For both young and old,
the purpose of work has ceased to be "getting ahead" but "staying
afloat."
II
Why, then, another look at the Puritan ethic? Surely the best course
of action is a decent burial of those values which have gotten us in so
much trouble. I would like to suggest that the prevalence of the Pu-
ritan ethic is itself a reason for giving it new and serious consideration.
People do not live constructively in a future that has no relationship to
the past, and it may be that a recovery and reinterpretation of our at-
titudes toward work might provide some resources for dealing with a
new and quite different age.
First, it should be emphasized that the Puritan ethic was above all
an ethic; that is, it was designed to place standards and boundaries
upon human activity. Whatever impulse it may have provided to a
kind of amoral capitalism or exploitation was ancillary and accidental

3Sydney E. Ahlstrom, "Thomas Hooker-Puritanism and Democratic Citizenship:

A Preliminary Inquiry into Some Relationships of Religion and American Civic
Responsibility," Church History, Vol. 32 (1963), p. 427.

Downloaded from ttj.sagepub.com at UNIV OF GEORGIA on June 27, 2015

 Pursuing the Puritan Ethic 343
to its primary intent to regulate and harmonize human life. Rather
than setting the individual free for unlimited and indiscriminate effort,
it sought to impose order, structure, and wholeness.
Second, the Puritan ethic was designed initially not for a society of
growth but of limitations. For the most part, it was hostile to many
capitalistic business practices, such as charging interest or
maximizing profits. The experience of prosperity in America may
have changed the emphasis, but Cotton Mather's classic formulation
of the Puritan ethic has a persuasive and all-too contemporary ring
today. "Suit your Expenses unto your Revenues: Take this Advice, 0
Christians," he declared. " 'Tis a Sin, I say 'Tis ordinarily a Sin, and it
will at length be a Shame, for a man to Spend more than he Gets, or
make his Layings out more than his Comings in."4
Third, the Puritan ethic placed honesty at the heart of a1l economic
activity. At a time when we are regularly bombarded with exposes of
how American corporations have bribed their way to wider markets
and have seen the pernicious influence of money in politics, this ideal
of moral integrity needs to be recaptured. "Truly, Justice, Justice,
must be Exactly fo1low'd in that Calling, by which we go to get our
Living," Mather exhorted. " ... Let a principle of Honesty in your Oc-
cupation cause you to speak the Truth, and nothing but the Truth, on
a1l Occasions.... Take no Advantage, either from the Necessity, or
from the Unskilfulness, of those with whom you are concerned: It is
Uncharitable, it is Disingenuous, it is Inhumane, for one man to prey
upon the weakness of another."5
Fourth, while it urged people to work "with INDUSTRY," the Puritan
ethic specifically refuted the idea that work was an end in itself.
Rather, work was always a means toward serving others and glori-
fying God. Mather rejected the compulsiveness which marks much of
our lives and insisted that people should "proportion" their work to
their ability. " 'Tis an Indiscreet thing," he said, "for a man to over-
charge himself in his Business: For a man to Distract his Mind, to
confound his Health, to Lanch [sic] out beyond his estate in his
Business, is a culpable Indiscretion."6
Fifth, Mather and the Puritans consistently made a distinction be-
tween work and worth, between one's job and the value of one's life.
This difference has been obscured and ignored with tragic conse-
quences. Elderly people wonder whether they are "worth" anything
since they are retired. Young people are asked what they will be,
meaning what they will do. The suffering and pain among the unem-
ployed, the unskilled, the incapacitated, and the elderly that has been
caused by this identification of work and meaning are deep and incal-
'Cotton Mather, A Christian at His Calling; Two Brief Discourses. one Directing a
Christian in his General Calling; Another Directing Him in his Personal (Boston, 1701),
excerpted and reprinted in Michael McGiffert, ed., Puritanism and the American
Experience (Reading, Mass., 1969), pp. 125-26.
'Ibid.. p. 126.
fi Ibid.. pp. 124-25.

Downloaded from ttj.sagepub.com at UNIV OF GEORGIA on June 27, 2015

344 Theology Today
cuiable. The Puritans, however, saw life in different terms. "There are
Two Callings to be minded by All Christians," said Mather. "Every
Christian hath a GENERAL CALLING; which is, to Serve the Lord
Jesus Christ. ... But then, every Christian hath also a PERSONAL
CALLING; or a certain Particular Employment."7 In less theological
language, what the Puritans insited upon was that all people had in-
trinsic worth before God which was different from whatever value
their "particular employment" may provide to the community.
Finally, at its best, the Puritan ethic was corporate in its concern
for the total welfare of society. It assumed that work was not for indi-
vidual fulfillment but a form of moral stewardship for everyone.
"There are two rules whereby wee are to walke one towards another,"
John Winthrop told the Massachusetts Puritans. "JUSTICE and
MERCY." Furthermore, "The ligamentes of this body which knitt
together are love," which "is a reall thing not Imaginarie" and
"absolutely necessary to the being of the body of Christ." In practical
terms, Winthrop's ideal of love refuted the attitude that the poor were
sinful and the rich were blessed. Instead, he declared, "when there is
noe other meanes whereby our Christian brother may be relieved in
this distresse, wee must help him beyond our ability, rather than
tempt God, in putting him upon help by miraculous or extraordinary
meanes."8
III
During this Bicentennial era, we should reexamine the values of our
past, not to readopt them uncritically but to learn from them and
reinterpret them for a new age. The Puritan ethic, despite all its de-
fects, can be one means of recovering our sense of direction and pur-
pose. At least, it involves a renewed commitment to the integrity and
morality that should prevail in economic, social, and political life. But
for the church, the Puritan ethic provides one resource for pro-
claiming again that we are saved not by what we do but by what God
has done for us in Jesus Christ. Our "two callings" should not be
confused. At a time when the future seems closed, the church has an
opportunity for reminding people that the future is not ours but
God's, that the meaning of our lives is not defined by our jobs but by
God's grace.
-John M. Mulder
lIbid., p. 122.
8John Winthrop, A Modell of Christian Charity, excerpted and reprinted in ibid.. pp.
28-30.

Downloaded from ttj.sagepub.com at UNIV OF GEORGIA on June 27, 2015