| |
| META TOPICPARENT | name="WebPreferences" |
|---|
-- DonnaAckermann - 30 Oct 2009 | | | In order to understand how colonial Massachusetts viewed incest, it is first necessary to understand colonial Massachusetts. Puritanism was a driving force in the establishment of the colony. According to John Winthrop, the first governor of the Massachusetts Bay Colony, the ultimate goal in establishing the colony was to “build ‘a Citty [sic] upon a Hill’ where it would be possible not only to worship and live as Christians but to set the world an example of godliness.” The colony was thus united in its purpose to serve God through its practice of Puritanism and relied on a theory of social covenant to demand that everyone “live righteously and according to God’s word.”
Notes
:
:
:
| |
<
< | Because Puritanism played such a large role in Massachusetts, the church itself was of the utmost importance in the daily functioning of the colony and served as the primary source of public and private morality. The church served as a strong form of social control precisely because it had so much power to regulate an individual’s actions. An even stronger form of social control in Massachusetts was the family. The colonists believed so adamantly in the family unit as a method of social control that the General Court in 1632 ordered all unmarried people to join families as servants or otherwise. Marriage was the core of the family unit and was therefore a particularly important familial relationship.
Notes
:
:
:
:
| >
> | Because Puritanism played such a large role in Massachusetts, the church itself was of the utmost importance in the daily functioning of the colony and served as the primary source of public and private morality. The church served as a strong form of social control precisely because it had so much power to regulate an individual’s actions. An additional form of social control in Massachusetts was the family. The colonists believed so adamantly in the family unit as a method of social control that the General Court in 1632 ordered all unmarried people to join families as servants or otherwise. Marriage was the core of the family unit and was therefore a particularly important familial relationship in a society organized around the church. | | | | |
<
< | A Puritan marriage required living together harmoniously, having sex, and the man financially providing for the wife. And while the couple had a duty to love each other, their highest love should be reserved for God. Puritanism required that a person’s thoughts and outward deeds serve God. Marriage was a form of outward conduct, and as marriage was a covenanted relationship, marriage itself was a way to serve God. Because marriage was such an important institution and itself served as a way to serve God, regulating who could marry whom was a topic Massachusetts took very seriously. A proper marriage therefore could result only from choosing a suitable person. Because family played such an important role in Puritan society, “any threat to the sanctity and integrity of the family unit deserved the most serious punishment of which God’s law approved.”
Notes
:
:
:
:
:
:
| >
> | A Puritan marriage required living together harmoniously, having sex, and the man financially providing for the wife. And while the couple had a duty to love each other, their highest love was reserved for God. Puritanism required that a person’s thoughts and outward deeds serve God. Marriage was a form of outward conduct, and as marriage was a covenanted relationship, marriage itself was a way to serve God. Because marriage was such an important institution and itself served as a way to serve God, regulating who could marry whom was a topic Massachusetts took very seriously. A proper marriage therefore could result only from choosing a suitable person. Because family played such an important role in Puritan society, “any threat to the sanctity and integrity of the family unit deserved the most serious punishment of which God’s law approved.” | | | | |
<
< | The issue then became whether it was the church or the colonial government that should determine who qualified as a suitable person for marriage and what the appropriate punishment should be. While the church and state were separate institutions, they worked together. The church relied on civil law to regulate personal conduct and to fill in the gaps where the church was unable to enforce the laws of God. The civil government was therefore superior to the church, and it was the civil government that had jurisdiction to perform marriages, grant divorces, and punish religious crimes, including idolatry, blasphemy, heresy, and incest. Incestuous marriages were therefore considered a crime, not a sin, to be regulated by the colonial government.
Notes
:
:
:
| >
> | The issue then became whether it was the church or the colonial government that should determine who qualified as a suitable person for marriage and what the appropriate punishment should be for those who marry an unsuitable person. While the church and state were separate institutions, they worked together. The church relied on civil law to regulate personal conduct and to fill in the gaps where the church was unable to enforce the laws of God. The civil government was therefore superior to the church, and it was the civil government that had jurisdiction to perform marriages, grant divorces, and punish religious crimes, including idolatry, blasphemy, heresy, and incest. Incestuous marriages were therefore considered a crime, not a sin, to be regulated by the colonial government. | | |
II. The Colonial Government’s Treatment of Incest | |
<
< | Before discussing how the colonial government actually addressed incest, one must first establish that the colonial government had the power to do so, given that Massachusetts was an English colony. In both the Massachusetts Bay Colony Charters (of 1628 and 1691), the English monarchy gave Massachusetts the power to make the laws necessary to protect the public’s welfare, as long as they were not in conflict with English law. Although the charters explicitly provided that the colonists could establish necessary laws, the colonists consciously rejected the charter in its modification, repudiation, and additions of practices, procedures, and laws which conflicted with English law. For example, the colonists departed from English law by having the civil government assume jurisdiction over marriage and divorce. Indeed, the King cited the colony’s regulation of religious laws as being in conflict with English law as a reason to revoke the original colonial charter. Thus, although the charter allowed the Massachusetts colony limited power to enact laws, Massachusetts believed it had its own independent power to do as it saw fit.
Notes
:
:
:
:
| >
> | Before discussing how the colonial government actually addressed incest, one must first establish that the colonial government had the power to do so, given that Massachusetts was an English colony. In both the Massachusetts Bay Colony Charters (of 1628 and 1691), the English monarchy gave Massachusetts the power to make the laws necessary to protect the public’s welfare, as long as those laws were not in conflict with English law. Although the charters explicitly provided that the colonists could establish necessary laws, the colonists consciously rejected the charter in its modification, repudiation, and additions of practices, procedures, and laws which conflicted with English law. For example, the colonists departed from English law by having the civil government assume jurisdiction over marriage and divorce. Indeed, the King cited the colony’s regulation of religious laws as being in conflict with English law as a reason to revoke the original colonial charter. Thus, although the charter allowed the Massachusetts colony limited power to enact laws, Massachusetts believed it had its own independent power to do as it saw fit. | | | The governor of Massachusetts made the colony’s view very clear when he informed Mr. Edward Randolph, a representative of the monarchy, that Massachusetts was not required to follow the laws of England and that the colony, and only the colony, had its own legislative power (derived from the charter) to make laws. Massachusetts believed it had the first, only, and final say on its laws. As a result of that attitude, the colonists established idealistic and practical laws, based on English law and God’s law, that reflected the colony’s holy purpose of serving God.
Notes
:
:
:
|
|