Fun Size Bytes

  • Who I Follow
  • "Favorite Part" posts (starting at oldest)
  • Favorite Part (starting with most recent)
  • Contact Me
  • ask me anything
  • rss
  • archive
  • Confession: I’m a terrible study of history. I was never good at it, and I often found it boring.

But I love Sarah Vowell’s history books, and one of my favorites is
The Wordy Shipmates by Sarah Vowell.

I highly recommend the audiobook, unless you can’t stand her voice (there are samples on the web page) which I don’t understand because I think it’s adorable but I know some people don’t like it.

Anyway… here’s a section of the book I really liked (emphasis added):


  Here we arrive at the reason why this here tale of American Puritans is more concerned with the ones shipping off from Southampton for Massachusetts in the Arbella in 1630 than with the Pilgrims who sailed from Southampton toward Plymouth on the Mayflower in 1620: because the Plymouth colonists were Separatists and the Massachusetts Bay colonists were not.
  
  Before I explain that, I will say that the theological differences between the Puritans on the Mayflower and the Puritans on the Arbella are beyond small.
  
  Try negligible to the point of nitpicky.
  
  I will also say that readers who squirm at microscopic theological differences might be unsuited to read a book about seventeenth-century Christians. Or, for that matter, a newspaper.
  
  Secular readers who marvel every morning at the death toll in the Middle East ticking ever higher due to, say, the seemingly trifling Sunni-versus-Shia rift in Islam, might look deep into their own hearts and identify their own semantic lines in the sand. For instance, a devotion to The Godfather Part II and equally intense disdain for The Godfather Part III. Someday they might find themselves at a bar and realize they are friends with a woman who can’t tell any of the Godfather movies apart and asks if Part II was the one that had “that guy in the boat.” Them’s fightin’ words, right?
  
  Anyway, England, 1630.
  
  Question: Why is the aforementioned John Cotton standing in front of the aforementioned John Winthrop and his shipmates, watering the seeds of American exceptionalism that will, in the twenty-first century, blossom into preemptive war in the name of spreading democracy in the Middle East that temporarily unites even some factions of the aforementioned Sunni and Shia Mus lims, who hate each other’s guts but agree they hate the bully America more?
  
  Answer: Because Henry VIII had a crush on a woman who was not his wife.
  
  In order to divorce his wife, Catherine of Aragon, and marry Anne Boleyn, Henry had to divorce England from Rome.
  
  When the pope, for some reason, refused to annul the marriage vows Henry made to Catherine more than two decades earlier, Henry rebelled and established himself as the head of the Church of England in 1534.
  
  This was seventeen years after Martin Luther nailed Rome’s abuses by nailing his “95 theses” to a church door in Germany, thereby welcoming in the Protestant Reformation.


In case you didn’t know,
the Church of England was founded because Henry VIII wanted a divorce from his wife.

Which is, perhaps, not the best reason to start a new denomination.

But, hey, it helped lead to the founding of America.

The rest of the book is a great look at how Christians in the USA before the USA was the USA came to this country for religious freedom, and then promptly started persecuting other Christians who did not live up to their standards and follow their understanding of Christianity.

So when people want to say that this country was founded on “Christian principals” I want to say to them “Do you actually know anything about the early years of this country? Because even if you call all of the Founding Fathers ‘Christian’ then you should consider the fact that they decided very purposefully not to establish any version of Christianity as the official religion of the country.

Because they saw that even Christians who came to a new world seeking religious freedom were quick to deny that religious freedom to other Christians because they were a different ‘flavor’ of Christian.

That seems like a lesson that more modern-day Christians should pay attention to. Maybe.

    Confession: I’m a terrible study of history. I was never good at it, and I often found it boring.

    But I love Sarah Vowell’s history books, and one of my favorites is The Wordy Shipmates by Sarah Vowell.

    I highly recommend the audiobook, unless you can’t stand her voice (there are samples on the web page) which I don’t understand because I think it’s adorable but I know some people don’t like it.

    Anyway… here’s a section of the book I really liked (emphasis added):

    Here we arrive at the reason why this here tale of American Puritans is more concerned with the ones shipping off from Southampton for Massachusetts in the Arbella in 1630 than with the Pilgrims who sailed from Southampton toward Plymouth on the Mayflower in 1620: because the Plymouth colonists were Separatists and the Massachusetts Bay colonists were not.

    Before I explain that, I will say that the theological differences between the Puritans on the Mayflower and the Puritans on the Arbella are beyond small.

    Try negligible to the point of nitpicky.

    I will also say that readers who squirm at microscopic theological differences might be unsuited to read a book about seventeenth-century Christians. Or, for that matter, a newspaper.

    Secular readers who marvel every morning at the death toll in the Middle East ticking ever higher due to, say, the seemingly trifling Sunni-versus-Shia rift in Islam, might look deep into their own hearts and identify their own semantic lines in the sand. For instance, a devotion to The Godfather Part II and equally intense disdain for The Godfather Part III. Someday they might find themselves at a bar and realize they are friends with a woman who can’t tell any of the Godfather movies apart and asks if Part II was the one that had “that guy in the boat.” Them’s fightin’ words, right?

    Anyway, England, 1630.

    Question: Why is the aforementioned John Cotton standing in front of the aforementioned John Winthrop and his shipmates, watering the seeds of American exceptionalism that will, in the twenty-first century, blossom into preemptive war in the name of spreading democracy in the Middle East that temporarily unites even some factions of the aforementioned Sunni and Shia Mus lims, who hate each other’s guts but agree they hate the bully America more?

    Answer: Because Henry VIII had a crush on a woman who was not his wife.

    In order to divorce his wife, Catherine of Aragon, and marry Anne Boleyn, Henry had to divorce England from Rome.

    When the pope, for some reason, refused to annul the marriage vows Henry made to Catherine more than two decades earlier, Henry rebelled and established himself as the head of the Church of England in 1534.

    This was seventeen years after Martin Luther nailed Rome’s abuses by nailing his “95 theses” to a church door in Germany, thereby welcoming in the Protestant Reformation.

    In case you didn’t know, the Church of England was founded because Henry VIII wanted a divorce from his wife.

    Which is, perhaps, not the best reason to start a new denomination.

    But, hey, it helped lead to the founding of America.

    The rest of the book is a great look at how Christians in the USA before the USA was the USA came to this country for religious freedom, and then promptly started persecuting other Christians who did not live up to their standards and follow their understanding of Christianity.

    So when people want to say that this country was founded on “Christian principals” I want to say to them “Do you actually know anything about the early years of this country? Because even if you call all of the Founding Fathers ‘Christian’ then you should consider the fact that they decided very purposefully not to establish any version of Christianity as the official religion of the country.

    Because they saw that even Christians who came to a new world seeking religious freedom were quick to deny that religious freedom to other Christians because they were a different ‘flavor’ of Christian.

    That seems like a lesson that more modern-day Christians should pay attention to. Maybe.

    Source: audible.com
    • December 31, 2012 (11:08 am)
    • 36 notes
    • #books
    • #audiobooks
    Previous Post Home Next Post
    1. pocketcontents likes this
    2. jdhtwo likes this
    3. drusillabloeme likes this
    4. jxpx777 likes this
    5. wifeoftj likes this
    6. elizabethplaid likes this
    7. mattlowe likes this
    8. punkassjim likes this
    9. catty1 said: I am a big Vowell fan.
    10. catty1 likes this
    11. briliantlyfreakish reblogged this from sblaufuss and added:
      This looks like a history book I would enjoy.
    12. ughwhocares likes this
    13. citizenkerry likes this
    14. cpillsbury likes this
    15. steelopus likes this
    16. atsween likes this
    17. irregardlessly likes this
    18. robofrakkin likes this
    19. rartastic likes this
    20. lindstifa likes this
    21. littledarkone likes this
    22. funinthesunshine likes this
    23. linnefaulk likes this
    24. amassofhumanity likes this
    25. tracingben likes this
    26. sblaufuss reblogged this from tj and added:
      Also, in the 1796 Treaty of Tripoli, Article 11 states the following:...Aditionally, this...
    27. bourbonismycopilot likes this
    28. kalamazu reblogged this from tj and added:
      All of this, yes. I also love me some Sarah Vowell, who is a Midwestern girl who is moderately obsessed with the early...
    29. sblaufuss likes this
    30. alinalogic likes this
    31. dorkitude likes this
    32. summersumz likes this
    33. jamiek likes this
    34. chan-chan likes this
    35. iamsuperannoying likes this
    36. tj posted this
© 2008–2013 Fun Size Bytes