Uncategorized

The Jewish Reform Movement

Posted by

0

Although the Reform, Conservative, and Orthodox divisions of Judaism are currently used to describe Jews in Israel as well as in the U.S., the terms originated as a result of American reforms. Jewish reformers led by Rabbi Isaac Wise stressed worship over theology and rejected long-held traditions such as dietary laws. In contrast, Orthodox and Conservative Jews continued traditional practices, but Conservatives allowed some traditions to change after a while. American Jews like Isaac Wise wanted to stop the anti-Jewish sentiment in society and also to emphasize their similarities with Protestant and Enlightment ideas. Out of these efforts grew a reform movement with a special American identity.

Historically, Jews experienced discrimination in mainstream American society regardless of their contributions. In the novel Son of a Smaller Hero, storeowner Samuel Panofsky describes the past relationship between Jews and Anglos. “We [Jews] discovered cures and it didn’t help and we made for them philosophies and they chased us away and we invented so they’d take the invention and deport the inventor…” American Jewish reformers realized that Jews were making the difficulties they encountered in the dominant society worse by clinging to outdated traditions. The Jewish reform movement was partly an attempt to give Jewish people more acceptance into mainstream society. Reform Jewish worship services began to copy those of Protestants. English (rather than Hebrew) and music were introduced and sometimes services were held on Sunday instead of Saturday, the traditional Jewish Sabbath. By no longer insisting on some of the traditions that made their religion stand out from Protestantism, Jewish reformers hoped to lessen anti-Jewish feelings.

Protestants and Jews clearly shared more beliefs than, for example, Muslims and Protestants shared. Although Jews did not accept the New Testament as God’s word or Jesus as the son of God like Protestants did, the two religions had much in common. Both accepted the Old Testament as the word of the same God and sought to live by the Ten Commandments. The Jewish reform movement was based on the shared beliefs of both religions. Their relation with American Protestants helped Reform Jews to create a uniquely American movement.

In addition to sharing certain religious beliefs, Protestants and Jews also adopted nineteenth century Enlightenment ideas. Protestants valued reason and so did Jews. The equal rights promised by Enlightenment thinker Thomas Jefferson were especially significant for Jews who had a history of persecution. By using reason, reform Jews changed religious laws and rituals that were outdated. Thanks to Enlightenment concepts, Jewish reformers could assure themselves that even religion could be changed.

 

 

Protestantism in Early America

Posted by

0

After spending ten years in a Lutheran grade school, I graduated from the eighth grade with no knowledge of religions other than my own. Religion classes were required each year, but only Lutheranism was discussed. Similarly, eighteenth century Puritans virtually ignored all other religions. Tax-supported schools taught only Protestant doctrine; even textbooks like The New England Primer used Protestant beliefs to teach the letters of the alphabet. Despite the fact that the Puritans ignored any group that did not agree with their beliefs, religious diversity thrived through new Protestant denominations and the influences of the Enlightenment.

The British colonies in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries were predominantly Protestant. The Puritans who settled the Massachusetts Bay colony were Calvinists who stressed the idea of human helplessness. Their God knew everything and He alone could determine whether a person went to heaven or hell. The Puritans saw themselves as God’s chosen people who would create in Governor John Winthrop’s words “a city upon a hill”, or a model for other Christian civilizations in which church and state were united. Despite their religious goals, Puritans stole land from Native Americans and committed other injustices in the name of their Lord. For example, in 1637 Puritans were convinced that God agreed with their extermination of the entire Pequot tribe.

Although the American colonies were mainly Protestant, not all Protestants shared the same beliefs. A Puritan clergyman named Roger Williams protested against the crimes committed against Native Americans and said the church should not try to build a Christian society based on such actions. Like Williams, Anabaptists believed that the church should remain separate from the state. They also believed in separating themselves from society and forming their own communities of believers. Since Protestantism continues to be challenged and altered by different groups, it is clear that this religion will never become one-dimensional.

Just as Protestantism was divided in the colonies, non-Protestant religions provided religious diversity as well. In The Declaration of Independence, Thomas Jefferson wrote, “they [men] are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights”. By using the word Creator, Jefferson was not referring to the vengeful God of the Puritans who determined who went to heaven or hell. Instead, Jefferson and other revolutionaries during the Enlightenment era of the eighteenth century shared the ideas of deists in Europe. Deists believed that God created the universe and then did not interfere with anything in it. The deist God had the confidence in mankind to let people independently govern the world He created.   

 

What Life was like for American Immigrants in the Nineteenth Century

Posted by

0

Thousands of immigrants came to American cities like New York in the 1880s. The growth of industry created a need for labor; however, the laborers, including children, were rarely treated well. Jacob Riis published How the Other Half Lives to expose the living and working conditions in New York slums. The middle class was stunned into action to improve the city and reforms resulted from Riis’ writings.

In his book, Riis points out that immigrants who were established and had become successful in America were treating the new immigrants poorly. For example, an Italian family paid an Irish landlord more than twice what their three rooms were worth. The head of the family asked the landlord to lower the rent, but he threatened to throw the family out in the street if they did not pay what he asked. Riis wrote, “The once unwelcome Irishman has been followed in his turn by the Italian, the Russian Jew, and the Chinaman, and has himself taken a hand at opposition…against these latter hordes.” Since immigrants like the Irish who were in America longer were treated poorly when they arrived, they treated new immigrants badly as well.

Although today working from home is often considered a luxury, this was not true for immigrants in the late nineteenth century. Factories hired immigrants to work from home because there were no laws that governed how long an immigrant could work outside the factory. Inside the factory there were rules, like required lunch breaks, and children could not start working until they were in their teens. In the tenements, however, “the child works unchallenged from the day he is old enough to pull a thread. There is no such thing as a dinner hour…and the “day” is lengthened at both ends far into the night.”

Working and living conditions in the tenements became even more unbearable in the summer. Families were so crowded together that diseases spread easily and many people, especially children, did not live through August. Fire escapes and trucks became bedrooms so that people could by chance get some fresher air than the stifling heat from cooking and working indoors provided.

Sadly, there was little chance that a young immigrant could improve his condition. Riis wrote, “The old question, what to do with the boy, assumes a new and serious phase in the tenements…in nine cases out of ten he would make an excellent mechanic, if trained early to work at a trade, for he is neither dull nor slow, but the short-sighted despotism of the trades unions has practically closed that avenue to him.” Once a child was born into a poor immigrant family, other Americans, including former immigrants, refused to help him make a decent living. Without the chance to earn money honestly, many immigrant children took to the streets and became thieves.

W.E.B. Du Bois and Black Rights

Posted by

0

Like Booker T. Washington, W.E.B. Du Bois served as leader for the black community in the late nineteenth century. In contrast to Washington, however, Du Bois wanted equal rights for blacks immediately. He believed they had the same right to economic and social freedom that whites did. He stated that “they [African-Americans] still press on, they still nurse the dogged hope,–not a hope of nauseating patronage, not a hope of reception into charmed circles of stock-jobbers, pork-packers, and earl-hunters, but the hope of a higher synthesis of civilization and humanity.” In other words, blacks should have the same opportunities as whites.

In his article “Strivings of the Negro People,” he mentioned that black Americans have a “double-consciousness.” By using this phrase, Du Bois meant that because he was an African-American he had two selves—the person he perceived himself to be and the person whites perceived him to be. Instead of comparing themselves as individuals against other individuals, Du Bois and other African-Americans compared themselves to whites.

The way in which whites viewed African-Americans in the nineteenth century, however, was very different from the way African-Americans viewed themselves. African-Americans like Du Bois saw themselves as people capable of learning and working in challenging professions. Whites, however, saw them as ignorant people capable of only working in service jobs such as a maid. As Du Bois said, “the freedman has not yet found freedom in his promised land.” The only way African-Americans could truly be free is if whites were forced to recognize the talents of black people. As a professor of history and economics at Atlanta University, Du Bois was an example of what African-Americans could achieve if they were given a chance.

Columbus’ View of Native Americans

Posted by

0

In February of 1493, Christopher Columbus wrote a letter to the Treasurer of Aragon who supported his adventures. Columbus’ views of the Native Americans he encountered in the Western Hemisphere were made clear in the letter. Some of the natives knew how to sail, and Columbus gave them credit for their skill: “They are most ingenious men, and navigate these seas in a wonderful way.” Aside from this statement, however, Columbus’ descriptions of the natives portrayed them as inferior to Europeans.

Columbus made it clear that it was easy to take land from the Native Americans not only because they had inferior weapons, but because they were fearful. He wrote, “They [the natives] have no iron, nor steel, nor weapons, nor are they fit for them, because…they appear extraordinarily timid. The only arms they have are sticks of cane…with a sharpened stick at the end, and they are afraid to use these.” Columbus easily made friends with the local rulers and claimed their territories because they had no knowledge of European weapons.

In addition to their ignorance of weapons, Columbus stated that the natives were also clueless about what their possessions were worth. Whenever the sailors traded with the natives, the sailors could get much more in return than they gave to the natives. Columbus claimed to have stopped his men from taking advantage of the Native Americans, but he had his own selfish motives for doing so. He wrote that he “gave a thousand good and pretty things that I had to win their love, and induce them to…love and serve their Highnesses and the whole Castilian nation, and help to get for us things they have in abundance, which are necessary to us.” Although Columbus appeared to be protecting the natives, he only did it because the natives had materials which his men wanted.

Columbus also believed he had the right to make the natives into slaves. He captured some to provide him with knowledge about the land he discovered: “I took by force some of the natives, that we might gain some information of what there was in these parts.” In addition, he also promised the king and queen of Spain that “their Highnesses will see that I can give them…as many slaves as they choose to send for, all heathens.” The inferiority which Columbus perceived in the Native Americans (their timidity and lack of knowledge of Christianity) supposedly gave him the right to make them serve Europeans. Yet Columbus did not see that without the help of the natives to guide him, he and his men would not have learned much about the new territory.

Booker T. Washington and Racial Equality

Posted by

1

In the late 1800s, Booker T. Washington was the President of the Tuskegee Institute, a school in Alabama that taught African Americans practical skills like farming. He spoke to whites about African Americans at the Atlanta Exposition. The speech, which emphasized that good relations with whites would help blacks more than starting arguments, made Washington a recognized leader of African Americans.

Washington believed that in the late nineteenth century African Americans needed good relations with whites so they could make a living and get educated. In his opinion, African Americans could achieve good relationships with whites much easier by seeking jobs in factories or as maids than if they demanded a seat in Congress. He stated, “No race can prosper till it learns that there is as much dignity in tilling a field as in writing a poem. It is at the bottom of life we [African Americans] must begin, and not at the top.” By filling jobs that were useful to whites, African Americans had a better chance of earning a living. According to Washington, if African Americans had nothing to live on they would not be able to enjoy equal rights even if they had those rights were offered to them.

Although he believed in African Americans working simpler jobs at first, Washington wanted them to be accepted into white society eventually. He pointed out the benefits that whites would gain from helping blacks get education and jobs, “we [African Americans] shall constitute one-third and more of the ignorance and crime of the South, or one-third its intelligence and progress.” Washington believed that if whites saw how useful blacks were to the economy of the South, they would be more accepting of equal rights for blacks. He stated, “No race that has anything to contribute to the markets of the world is long in any degree ostracized.” Despite the fact that he encouraged blacks to work jobs that might seem demeaning, he hoped they would gradually gain the right to do whatever they wanted, including serving in Congress.

Catholicism and the Pueblo

Posted by

0

One of the motives the Spanish gave for settling in California was to convert the native Pueblo to Catholicism. The religious motive gave Spaniards an excuse to profit from their journey by acquiring gold, spices, and other items. As missionary Father de la Ascension stated, “If the Spaniard does not see any advantage he will not be moved to do good, and these souls [of the Pueblo] will perish without remedy.” Religion was also supposed to motivate the Spanish to treat the natives well.

The Europeans faced some obstacles in getting the Pueblo to convert to their customs. For example, Pueblos had a greater respect for nature while the Europeans believed that the earth and its resources could be used however mankind wanted. The Pueblo religion suggested that gods and the people came from the underworld below the earth. Since gods came from beneath the earth, nature and natural resources were considered sacred. Spaniards and the Pueblo also had different perceptions of community. In Spanish society, individuals were encouraged to distinguish themselves from others. Individuality had no place in Pueblo society, however. Distinction was discouraged in Pueblo society because the community’s prosperity was considered to be more important than individual achievements.

Despite their differences, Pueblo religion and Spanish Catholicism were similar in some ways. Both religions stressed the authority of a higher power. The universe was not controlled by human beings but by a god or gods. The god(s) decided the people’s fate and could send disasters if they were angry at their followers. Also, the reverence which saints received in the Catholic Church was similar to the Pueblo heroes who became revered spirits when they died. Some Pueblo adopted the Catholic faith because they wanted to please the Spaniards and receive gifts from them. Unfortunately, Native Americans did not realize that many of the gifts the Spanish gave them were worthless.   

How the Environment Influenced the Organization of Native American Societies

Posted by

0

The environment in which a child lives—her parents, friends, and neighborhood—greatly impacts who that child will become. In the same way, the environment in which a society is placed influences the development of that society. Native American societies varied according to the type of ecosystem, or environment, a tribe inhabited.

Native American economies were greatly affected by their ecosystems, and thus their ability to plant and grow food. The tribes migrated toward food and water during the different seasons. These changes in climate caused the people to find methods that helped them adjust to their environments.

Different ecosystems made different methods of survival necessary. In a fragile ecosystem like the one the Northern Algonquians inhabited, a hunter and gatherer technique was used. Societies would fish and gather food in the spring and summer while hunting during the winter. For these Native Americans, late winter and early spring became the time of hunger. This ecosystem was easy to alter due to the few animals and plants. As a result, the tribes needed to be small and very mobile. The Northern Algonquians’ small villages led to a less complex society compared to other tribes.

In contrast to the fragile ecosystem, sturdy ecosystems like the one in which the Iroquois lived had a greater variety of plants and animals. The Iroquois established an agricultural society. They planted in the spring, harvested in the fall, and hunted during winter. Their fertile ecosystem allowed them to grow a variety of foods and contributed to their ability to set up more permanent communities. 

The agricultural Iroquois were able to establish more complex social organizations than the hunter and gatherer societies. Within an Iroquois village were households which consisted of a number of families together in a long house. The Iroquois ecosystem provided more authority for women because women were responsible for the planting and harvest and most of the society’s nourishment came from the women’s work. In contrast, in the Northern Algonquian tribe the men were more valued because they hunted and hunting was their society’s main source of food. Within both of these ecosystems Native Americans shared land but individuals could own food they produced or gathered.

The political organization of the Iroquois also gave women power because of their harvesting skills. In the Iroquois League, women chose the male members of the councils which governed the tribes. The society remained in the control of men, however, so that no women became chiefs. Fragile ecosystems did not allow for as much female authority in their government. Each Native American society provided different methods of growing food, social and political organization depending on the environment in which the people lived.

 

How the French Colonists Treated the Native Americans

Posted by

0

Colonial France provides some contrast to the economic and religious practices of other nations toward the Native Americans. The economy in the French colonies was based almost entirely on trading animal furs. Samuel de Champlain established a trading post at Quebec in 1608 and entered into an alliance with the Algonquin, Montagnais, and Huron Indians. The coureurs de bois, or French traders, gave the Native Americans metal goods in exchange for beaver fur. This fur was in high demand in Europe. Trading posts were placed on vacant land and France’s economy was not dependant on cash crops like tobacco. In contrast to colonial England and Spain, the French colonists fully incorporated the natives into their economic system. The natives did not work for the French colonists or have their lands taken by whites.

The religious practices of colonial France were also unlike those of England and Spain. Champlain sent for missionaries to convert the natives. Catholic priests called Recollets and Jesuits who established Montreal came to the area. Since France’s economic system depended on the well-being of the natives, missionaries were more tolerant of the Native Americans than missionaries from other countries. Only colonial France was able to produce economic and religious practices that did not subject the natives to cruelty.

One reason for the tolerance of the French traders and missionaries of the natives may have been their small numbers. The population of New France never reached the level of New Spain or the English colonies. As a result, there was less pressure placed on the Indians and their lands. Luckily for the Native Americans in French colonies, the small white population may have stopped some of the forced labor requirements and land grabbing that went on in other colonies.