The writer of the Letter to the Hebrews reminds Christians that they are surrounded by a great "cloud of witnesses." (NRSV) That "cloud" has continued to grow in size since then. In this monthly column we will be thinking about some of the people and events, over the past 2000 years, that have helped make up this "cloud." People and events that have helped build the community of the Christian church as it exists today.
The start of a deep story: a "city on a hill"?
The famous Mayflower settlers at Plymouth Colony, in 1620, were the first of a series of waves of what we now often simply call 'Puritan' settlers who colonised New England. Most of the 'godly' emigrants to North America travelled there between 1630 and 1640. This has become known as "the Great Migration."
Among these waves of Puritan colonists perhaps the most important migration occurred in 1630, when John Winthrop led the so-called Winthrop Fleet, with 700 colonists travelling on eleven ships. This great movement led to the founding of Boston and Massachusetts colony.
The fundamental nature of this new colony was made clear by Winthrop's manifesto, A Model of Christian Charity. It declared,
"We are a Company professing ourselves fellow members of Christ, in which respect
only, though we were absent from each other many miles, and had our employments
as far distant, yet we ought to account ourselves knit together by this bond of love,
and live in the exercise of it...We must be knit together in this work as one man."
It is abundantly clear, from Winthrop's words, that this was not going to be just another commercial venture. It was going to be spiritually distinct and an example to the world. For, as Winthrop explained to his companions on the sea voyage to North America, their colony should be a "City upon a hill" (quoting Jesus in Matthew 5:14–16). That phrase would run and run in the North American context.
The settlers at Massachusetts Bay thought that they were founding a beacon of godliness, Bible commonwealths in which all life would be lived in line with the Christian scriptures. It is not hard to see how this has fed over the centuries into a belief in "American exceptionalism".
In addition, other attitudes also began to coalesce around a sense of divinely sanctioned purpose. And some of these had – and have – characteristics far-removed from the graciousness of that borrowed gospel phrase.
Where the story went next
A sense of being in line with God's providence inspired a supreme sense of confidence as the early settlers stamped their ownership on the land. Some spoke of the colonies as constituting an "American Israel," a new expression within God's providential plan.
This spiritual self-confidence also revealed itself in an increasingly negative attitude towards those who (in their opinion) did not form part of the 'godly' enterprise. This also connected to the belief in being conquerors of an "American Canaan," in a way that combined New Testament spiritual designations (the "city on a hill") with Old Testament strategies (conquest). This combination would have long-lasting consequences.
As the settlers in Massachusetts Bay expanded inland, conflicts grew with local Native American tribes. And when they did, they assumed an almost exterminatory character which was rooted in their selective use of the Bible (almost always the Old Testament).
This attitude first revealed itself in their view of the Native American mortality in the face of European diseases. In parts of New England this had resulted in mortality rates of 90 per cent. This was interpreted as a sign of God's providence. John Winthrop expressed this view in a letter he wrote in 1634, "God hath hereby cleared our title to this place."
John White, who supported the settlements but never made it to America, referred to providential "defoliation," which had left the eastern coastlands "void." The image was that of 'weeds' cleared to make room for a 'better growth.' Two worlds were on a collision course. It was accelerated by a settler attitude which rapidly assumed prior rights to any land they desired. The New England Puritan writer, Increase Mather, wrote in 1676 of "the Heathen People amongst whom we live, and whose Land the Lord God of our Fathers has given to us for a rightful possession."
Well before he wrote this, violence had already occurred. In 1636, war broke out between the New England settlers and the Pequot tribe. In 1637, a Pequot settlement on the Mystic River was destroyed in an action which saw no mercy extended to non-combatants. The Native American allies of the English were shocked; this was a new kind of war. They would soon experience much more of it.
In 1675 resentment at English behaviour and loss of land led several tribes to join together in what became known as King Philip's War. It raged from 1675 to 1678, and saw about twelve frontier towns destroyed, and large numbers of homesteads burnt. The war rapidly spread across what is now Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, and as far north as Maine. Only Connecticut survived without devastation comparable with other areas, due to its alliance with local tribes holding firm. Large numbers of settlers were killed across New England, but these numbers were dwarfed by the massacres of Native Americans and the enslavement of survivors. It was an exterminatory policy.
It was an indication of things to come as the colonies later expanded westward. And this was accompanied by a sense of cultural and, indeed, spiritual superiority. This was not inevitable. In Pennsylvania, Quakers (themselves persecuted in New England) had a much better relationship with Native Americans. Extermination was not the only option on the table. But it would become the option of choice as the years unfolded.
This fear of 'the other' and intolerance of 'difference' became a feature of the semi-theocracy established at Massachusetts Bay, in which church ministers enjoyed huge political influence. This idea of a separate Church and state – but one in which the churches expect a place at the table when it comes to political decision-making – continues to be a marked characteristic of the US.
The godly experiment in semi-theocratic government was brought to heel by the British crown. In 1684 the Massachusetts Bay charter was annulled by royal decisions in London. Then, from 1686, the various colonies of New England were unified as the Dominion of New England. In 1689, power was briefly wrested back to the colonies but, in 1691, King William III issued another charter which unequivocally unified the colonies under royal authority. This area was styled the Province of Massachusetts Bay. More fundamental for Puritan politics than a name and boundary change was the decision imposed on the province which extended voting rights to non-Puritans. This was a game-changer. The move effectively put an end to the godly semi-theocracy. But it would not erase it from the cultural and mythological national memory of the US.
The idea of godly American exceptionalism would help flavour the eventual rebellion against British rule and the US Constitution which accompanied it. It would also influence the idea of "Manifest Destiny," as the US expanded westward in the 19th century, at the expense of Native Americans.
The afterlife of a founding myth
The idea of godly exceptionalism, as declared by Winthrop in 1630, continues to echo in US politics. Ronald Reagan famously referred to "a shining 'city on a hill'," when articulating his vision for the US in 1980. In 1989, he referred again to "the shining city," in his farewell speech to the nation. John F. Kennedy had done this earlier, in 1961, stating that "we shall be as a city upon a hill — the eyes of all people are upon us." These politicians appeared to connect to the aims of the 17th-century Puritans. Perhaps a New Jerusalem really might be raised in the context of the New World? It was a powerful contribution to the concept of American exceptionalism, and it continues to resonate today.
Since 1960, Winthrop's text of 1630 has been referenced by presidents John F. Kennedy, Lyndon B. Johnson, Richard Nixon, Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan, George H. W. Bush, Bill Clinton, and Barack Obama. The modern prominence of the words of Winthrop owes a great deal to the writing of Perry Miller (1905–1963), a mid-century Harvard scholar of history and literature who argued that US self-understanding started with the Puritans; and who found this best represented in Winthrop's sermon of 1630. Before Miller, the text had slipped out of the spotlight.
In his Inauguration Address, in January 2017, Donald Trump declared: "We do not seek to impose our way of life on anyone, but rather to let it shine as an example. We will shine for everyone to follow." The reference evoked the same tradition that can be traced back to Winthrop's sermon in 1630.
However, in the bitter politics of contemporary America, it is telling that Joe Biden – reflecting on an election campaign, in 2016, which he described as having been ugly, divisive and coarse – remarked: "So much for the shining city on the hill."
So, where does that phrase and concept sit today in the deeply divided US? Arguably, the enduring concept of the "city on a hill" assumes that there is a peculiarly Christian nature to the nation. But history is rather more complex.
A 'battle for the soul of America'?
As far back as 1802, Thomas Jefferson spoke of "a wall of separation between Church and State." This clear principle is contained in the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, of 1791. Article Six of the US Constitution also specifies that "no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States."
The Treaty of Tripoli, between the US and Tripolitania, which took effect in 1797, states (in a way that would shock many modern US Christians):
"As the government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded
on the Christian Religion... and as the said States never have entered into any war or
act of hostility against any Mehomitan [ie Islamic] nation, it is declared by the parties
that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption
of the harmony existing between the two countries."
Nevertheless, an outlook developed during the 19th century that there is something peculiarly Christian about the US, despite there being no state Church or theocratic foundation, and in spite of freedom of thought and expression being enshrined in the US Constitution and its First Amendment.
The US was, it seems clear from the evidence, founded as a secular republic and yet Christianity has had a huge impact on political conversations and decision-making. It continues to do so. As a result, today few nations 'do God' so openly as the US. The contribution of New England and the "city on a hill" motif to the political and cultural DNA of the US lives on - as does the debate over what this means.
In 2017, former Governor of Arkansas Mike Huckabee asserted that: "I believe Trump's historic battle for the White House in 2016 metaphorically reminds us that America too is in a historic battle not only for its political future but also for its very soul."
That particular view continues to attract many adherents. But there are deep questions. Do Trump and the MAGA movement represent such a mission? Most US evangelicals believe so. Others would strongly disagree. More generally, how should Christian principles influence a nation? Does the New Testament support a model of 'dominionism' and semi-theocracy, if Christians are close to the centre of power, or one of humble service, example, and persuasion? Is there any role for law and coercion in support of Christian ideology? And can any one section of society impose its faith outlook on a diverse and multi-cultural modern community? Readers will, no doubt, differ in their answers to these pressing questions. What is undeniable is that, in 2024, a battle is going on for 'the soul of the USA' and this includes the question of whether a "city on a hill" can/should be asserted through political power? And if so, how?
Much will be decided during this conflicted and turbulent autumn in the US. As well as debates about the economy, immigration, and the southern border, at the core is a heated conversation concerning what kind of nation the US is and should become. Is it still a "city on a hill" and what does that mean in the complex nation of the 21st century? How does Christian faith speak into this US debate? And which form of Christian faith (for believers are as polarised as their nation)? Whatever the result in November, the words of 1630 continue to echo in the US of 2024.
Martyn Whittock is a historian and a Licensed Lay Minister in the Church of England. The author, or co-author, of fifty-six books, his work covers a wide range of historical and theological themes. In addition, as a commentator and columnist, he has written for several print and online news platforms and been interviewed on TV and radio news and discussion programmes exploring the interaction of faith and politics. These have included being interviewed on news platforms concerning the religious dimension to current US politics, Christianity and the Crown in the UK, and the war in Ukraine. His most recent books include: The Secret History of Soviet Russia's Police State (2020), Daughters of Eve (2021), Jesus the Unauthorized Biography (2021), The End Times, Again? (2021), The Story of the Cross (2021), Apocalyptic Politics (2022), and American Vikings (2023). His interest in the 17th-century Puritans and their continuing impact on the modern world, especially in the USA, is explored in: When God was King: Rebels & Radicals of the Civil War & Mayflower Generation (2018), Mayflower Lives (2019) and Trump and the Puritans (2020).
