Puritans: The Lowest Point of Morality

Entitled separationists with little patience for anything outside of Christianity or their community norms is the perfect way to describe Puritans in the 1700s. This sentiment is shared by both Nathaniel Hawthorn in the novel The Scarlet Letter and Arthur Miller in The Crucible. In their writings, both of their depictions of Puritans held crude values which are expected of their time. All Christians trust in the court, no exceptions. Those who have different skin, hair, or eyes were not seen as Christian or human, as they were. Puritans had no empathy, understanding, or tolerance for anyone who did not abide by their strict code of law. This lack of understanding meant that the Puritan society was very crude, and less moral than ours today. Even if we are built from the puritan society that is synonymous with these terrible morals, our modern society has evolved and learned from our past mistakes. 

Being birthed into a society with Puritan roots, we Americans frequently have to look back and understand what we have done in the past to not repeat it. In the play, The Crucible by Arthur Miller, we read about a story depicting the Salem witch trials. During one of these trials, a man by the name of John Proctor tries to make a defense for himself, but in the process is cut off by a man claiming Proctor is attacking the Court. A reverend, Hale,  tries to seek the truth by asking, “Is every defense an attack upon the court? Can no one–?” (Miller 87). In this quote, Hale is cut off, which only served as a reminder to the reader that he has no voice in court. This is morally incorrect because a court hearing is much more than an argument. A court hearing decides the fate of someone’s future, a future with possible financial repercussions, jail time, and in the case of the Salem witch trials, death. In today’s world, we have the morality to understand that hearing people out, and understanding their words plays an important role in deciding their position in a legal disagreement. In our modern society, we have learned from these experiences. Never again will someone not be allowed to convey their argument, as it is immoral to condemn someone without hearing their retort. This type of predetermined outlook on someone’s character does not stop at puritans of the past and has been an observed action passed through puritan beliefs.

Protestants are people who live by the same set of codes and rules set by Puritans. Looking towards them to understand the Puritans who landed in America helps us understand the type of morality the Puritans had. Bias was evident in the Puritan court. In the essay “Still Puritan After All These Years” by Matthew Hutson, we learn that it didn’t end there. Hutson states “Studies since the ‘70s have also found that Americans who score high on a protestant Ethic Scale (emphasizing self-reliance and self-discipline) or similar metric show marked prejudice against racial minorities and the poor; hostility toward social welfare efforts; and. Among obese women, self-denigration.” (Hutson). The statement ‘hostility towards social welfare efforts’ shows the protestant community, and by extension, the Puritans did not care for those who needed assistance. The concept of helping thy neighbor, an idea that is typically valued by those of Christian faith, was not completely brought into fruition when it came to those of lesser status. This proves to be less moral outlook on others because protestants fail to recognize another person as human and deserving of life as a protestant identifying individual. Another key concept stated in the passage is that scoring higher also meant higher marked racial prejudice. Higher marked racial prejudice is important because historically, Puritans loved excluding people who didn’t fit their mold. Although many Americans love crediting themselves for currently having a morally just democracy, the American democracy when it was created by the Puritans, had many issues.

The American government we know today is vastly different from the one that Puritans created. Although we have similarities in documents, those encompassed by those documents, and more importantly who isn’t, is important. In “Peace, Love and Purism” by David D Hall, we learn “In 1648, Massachusetts became the first place in the Anglo-American world to Publish a code of laws – and make it accessible to everyone.” (Hall). The idea of a code of laws’ being ‘accessible to everyone may sound very inclusive at first, but with deeper inspection, it is clear that this ‘everyone’ David D Hall references may not be everyone you think. Historically, white land-owning men were the only ones who were encompassed by these laws. In the article, “Puritan Laws and Character” by Henry William Elson, we learn about how those not encompassed by the laws were treated. He states, “All colonies had negro slaves” all of whom certainly did not participate in the law-abiding society depicted previously. Even if one was fortunate enough in the Colonies to be encompassed by the Puritan laws, one was still bound by many irrational and immoral laws that restrict individual freedoms.

In New England being lucky to be a white, land-owning man meant they were blessed by Puritan laws that were restrictive and lacking in freedom. Puritan laws were based on religion and faith more than they were modeled for freedom and personal independence. Many laws restricted people’s ability to express their sense of self through clothing, physical appearance, or by showing affection to a  partner. To impose restrictions upon individual freedoms, Puritans declared “The length and width of a lady’s sleeve was solemnly decided by law” (Elson). Puritans used the power of law to control and hinder individual choice; however, as we aged as a country and a society we understood these to be immoral. To decide what another person wears by the code of law is completely ridiculous to current Americans because we have developed and learned what is necessary to keep society safe. In today’s world, even students can appear at school dressed in pajamas, and express affection to their significant other. However in Puritan society “A man was not permitted to kiss his wife in public” (Elson). Because of laws like this, we as an American society have learned to regulate things that affect others’ way of life. Simply, the length of a woman’s sleeve, or a man kissing his wife, do not harm anyone. Another example to call to mind is Hester Prynne in The Scarlet letter being forced to wear the letter A on her chest as prosecution for adultery. It was not enough to the puritans to have her publicly condemned in court, but they also had to make a permanent wardrobe change with the soul cause to shame her. To limit  simple freedoms like one choosing what to wear is immoral to the people it affects, and we as a society have moved on to larger issues. However, this want for control and regulation stems from the fact that Puritans were inherently intolerant people.

Puritans in The Scarlet Letter were depicted as judgmental people. They constantly butted into the life of Hester Prynne even after she was banished from society. In the novel, Hawthorn tried to take every chance he had to describe just how little he valued the Puritans. It was evident that although Hawthorne was writing from a place of hate towards the Puritans, they always glared back with a similar sense of distance for modernity. “All were characterized by the sternness and severity which old portraits so invariably put on; as if they were ghosts rather than pictures, of departed worthies, and were gazing with harsh and intolerant criticism at the pursuits and enjoyments of living men” (Hawthorne 67). Nothing aggravated Puritans more than knowing others are living a life of happiness that they couldn’t. Bound by unfair laws, and overly religious neighbors, Puritans critique people of the future for not living by their outdated and frankly incorrect moral standards. Puritans being described as ‘ghosts rather than pictures’ highlights their poignant hatred towards their lifestyle, only to force them to haunt others to ensure they don’t lead better lives. After death, the puritans still refused to let go of their intolerant morals so much that their hatred and fussy attitude can still be observed through historical record.

Puritans, although laying the groundwork for modern Americans, never truly understood morality. They constantly silenced others to diminish their voices and message, used laws to then restrict personal freedom, and looked down on those whose future was not yet written. Meanwhile, they created a false democracy where they gave the illusion of equality and passed it down to future generations only to reflect their sense of bigotry and intolerance. Although they are praised for their faith, Puritans truly lacked morality and empathy when it came to anyone who wasn’t a white-blooded land-owning Christian.