Chief among them were the alienation of labor due to industrialization, the isolation and persecution of immigrants to the US, the crisis in agricultural production of the time and the movement to protect the interests of rural farm families ["Populism"], urbanization, new political ideologies infiltrating the American 'body politic' - particularly the writings of Karl Marx and the early "Communists," and perhaps most surprisingly, religious revivalism that resulted in moralistic crusades against slavery, alcoholic beverages (the temperance movement), and a host of other "moral ills" and ethical challenges of the time.
Those that bought into the "Progressive Movement" were often former violent revolutionaries who decided that it was more expedient -- and safer -- to seek "reform" via the ballot box and the "transformation" of the system from within than by revolution by violent means, such as force-or-arms.
The paper below concentrates most on the origins of American Progressivism, and the role the particular eschatological (view of the future) known as "Postmilliennialism" plays in it's formation. A simple definition of post-millennialism is the believe that the Church, redeemed humanity, will positively change the circumstances on earth, and eventually bring in the kingdom of God through Evangelism and Political advancement, so that the Church one day will rule over the earth for a Utopian era, euphemistically referred to as "the Kingdom Age," or "the Millennium." It is only at the END of this time that Christ Returns to receive His kingdom. This view is very optimistic about the ability of humans to achieve success and triumph over evil via human institutions, including the Church, the State, and even corporations and unions. Postmillennialism was the "majority" view of most of Christianity, particularly those influenced by Calvinists/Puritans in New England, the Mid-Atlantic, and the Mid-West, and spreading to the Southward in the later 1800's.
______________________
No political movement has impacted
the United States over the past century more than Progressivism. The principles, policies and values of
Progressive ideology are integrated into the fabric of the American nation at
every level of governance and society, and its views and beliefs are ingrained
in the hearts and minds of many in every class across every region of the
country. At one time, however,
Progressivism was not natural or accepted ideology, but a new and foreign
concept that was rejected by many Americans, or at least unknown and vaguely
defined. The question that confronts the
historian is, how did the philosophy of Progressivism, which would give rise to
so much of the modern and postmodern socio-political landscape, become the most
effective, impacting and powerful American political movement of the last 100
years?
There were, of course, many
contributing factors to the formation of the movement that would become known
as “Progressivism.” The nexus of these
influences are complex and widely varied – beginning with the early monarchical
machinations of Founding Father Alexander Hamilton who desired an all-powerful
centralized government,[1] and
the Alien and Sedition Acts passed in 1798 by the Federalist Congress in part
to restrict criticism of President John Adams’ policies and silence his
political oppositions “free speech.” [2] Some would also label as a “progressive”
trait the rather heavy-handed style of leadership characteristic of the presidency
of Andrew Jackson who “defended his own authority with resolute determination,
[but] he did not manifest a general respect for the authority of the law when
it got in the way of the policies he chose to pursue.”[3]
The Progressive Movement certainly
doesn’t owe its whole existence to American sources and personalities. With the emergence of the socio-economic political
theories of Karl Marx, “socialism” or “communism” became quite popular after
the publication of The Communist
Manifesto in 1848, and the philosophical premises of Marx’ ideology were to
some extent adopted by those in American Government and politics, which
contributed greatly to the continuing hunger of many for the centralization of
power in a Federal State, a centerpiece of the Progressive Movement.
Many members of the early Marxist movement from Germany and France immigrated to the United States after the failed Marxist French Revolution of 1848, and became leading proponents of the Union Cause in the American Civil War, supporting Lincoln, the strengthening of the Federal Government, and centralized political power. Karl Marx himself, as well as Friedrich Engels saw the victory of the Union as a triumph for Socialism, and Marx even penned a letter of support to Lincoln during the course of the war.[4] These early infusions of foreign “socialist” intellectual encouragement in addition to the many thousands of Europeans that immigrated, bringing their dialectical materialist worldview with them certainly had an impact in creating the foundations of the Progressive Movement.
Furthermore, Progressivism came from a long line of American protest movements particular to the American Mid-west, beginning with the Grangers and moving to the rural Populists, and then naturally migrating into major population centers to form what became Progressivism. While Historian Russell B. Nye noted that Progressives were generally urban,
Many members of the early Marxist movement from Germany and France immigrated to the United States after the failed Marxist French Revolution of 1848, and became leading proponents of the Union Cause in the American Civil War, supporting Lincoln, the strengthening of the Federal Government, and centralized political power. Karl Marx himself, as well as Friedrich Engels saw the victory of the Union as a triumph for Socialism, and Marx even penned a letter of support to Lincoln during the course of the war.[4] These early infusions of foreign “socialist” intellectual encouragement in addition to the many thousands of Europeans that immigrated, bringing their dialectical materialist worldview with them certainly had an impact in creating the foundations of the Progressive Movement.
Furthermore, Progressivism came from a long line of American protest movements particular to the American Mid-west, beginning with the Grangers and moving to the rural Populists, and then naturally migrating into major population centers to form what became Progressivism. While Historian Russell B. Nye noted that Progressives were generally urban,
and not of the same “class” as their predecessors in
protest, the Populists, he contended they came from the same general line of
ideological remonstrance against the system.[5] While Populist rural farm and ranch laborers
protested against the Cattle Barons and Railroads, Progressivist urban
industrial laborers took up the cause against so-called “Robber Barons” or
Captains of Industry.
Socio-Economic and Political forces
did not exhaust the attitudes and convictions that were driving formation of
Progressivism, either. The United States
was a nation given to religion, and particularly to a predominantly Protestant
brand of Christianity that had its roots sunk deep into the traditional faiths
of their European forefathers, particularly as they emerged from the Reformation
era of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries.
While many Americans came from spiritual backgrounds steeped in one of
the English Church traditions or its “spin-off’s,” the Anglicans, Episcopals,
Baptists, Methodists, Congregationalist Puritans, and so forth, many others
followed similar Protestant Church traditions, though with their own national
and cultural flavors, such as the German Lutherans, Dutch Reformed, Scottish
Presbyterian, French Huguenot, Moravians, Waldensians, and so on. Regardless of the particular strain of
Christianity, however, Historian Nathan O. Hatch observed two very important
“central components” that were common to most Christians of the Early Republic,
and that by their nature would come to mesh well with a Progressive agenda and
political ideology, at least on the surface.
First, Hatch noted that Christianity in America, unlike its European
counterparts, had largely jettisoned the antiquated idea of the strict
distinction between clergy and laity, and had instead adopted as the “central
force” of the American faith “its democracy or populist orientation.”[6] Hatch went on to explain that this “empowered
ordinary people by taking their deepest spiritual influences at face value”
rather than subjecting them to “the frowns of respectable clergy,” and actually
freed the lay people to act on their faith, their belief system, and to become
involved.[7] These two elements of personal empowerment
and populist orientation were big influences on the psyche of common Christians
in the first half of the nineteenth century, which explains why a growing
number of them became involved, not only in spiritual matters such as the
“Second Great Awakening,” but also in social issues of the day like abolition
of slavery, temperance and the fight against alcoholic beverages, women’s suffrage,
the labor movement, and many more.
But, what motivated the involvement
of these Christians? What internal
conviction, what doctrinal affirmation compelled them to labor toward the ends
of establishing positive social change? Of
particular interest in addressing this question, particularly during this
period of American History, is the way Christians saw the future. Eschatology is “a branch of theology concerned with the final
events in the history of the world or of humankind; a belief concerning death,
the end of the world, or the ultimate destiny of humankind; specifically : any of various Christian doctrines
concerning the Second Coming, the resurrection of the dead, or the Last
Judgment.”[8] Most American Christians have always
considered their understanding of how the future will unfold from both a
Biblical and a social perspective to be an essential facet of their religious
faith.
From the earliest days of the nation, and in fact, back to the beginning of the Colonial period, many of the prominent Protestant ministers and theologians, heavily influenced by the Reformation tradition and Puritan experiences in the New World, took a very optimistic view of the future, believing that redeemed humans, as embodied in the Christian Church, would eventually evangelize and win the world to Christ, leading not only to a spiritual but also to a social transformation of the entire globe; a Kingdom of God come on earth.
From the earliest days of the nation, and in fact, back to the beginning of the Colonial period, many of the prominent Protestant ministers and theologians, heavily influenced by the Reformation tradition and Puritan experiences in the New World, took a very optimistic view of the future, believing that redeemed humans, as embodied in the Christian Church, would eventually evangelize and win the world to Christ, leading not only to a spiritual but also to a social transformation of the entire globe; a Kingdom of God come on earth.
One such Protestant leader was
Puritan John Winthrop, who led the early English settlers of the Massachusetts
Bay Colony. It was Winthrop’s fervent
hope that he and his colony would serve as an example of redemption and reform
that would transform, not only the “New World,” which they called “New England,”
but also the “Old World” of Europe, and eventually the entire world. Despite the hardships of the early years,
Winthrop’s famous words echo through history and set the optimistic, but
demanding tone so characteristic of Puritan eschatology of the time: “We must
consider that we shall be as a city set on a hill; the eyes of all people are
upon us.”[9]
America’s most famous native scholar of Scripture, Johnathan Edwards,
also affirmed this optimistic and theologically progressive view of eschatology
in his works during the first half of the 1700’s. Edwards, a Newport, Rhode Island
Congregational Minister, is most renowned historically for his leadership in
the spiritual revival known as “The First Great Awakening” of the 1730’s and
1740’s, and the classic sermon “Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God,” which he preached hundreds of times in
Churches throughout New England and beyond.
He was, however, also a prolific writer and theologian who contributed a
great deal to a uniquely American Protestant theological vision, and his most
important conclusion with regard to how the Kingdom of God would be achieved on
earth is revealed in his The Works of Johnathan Edwards, A.M., in a
commentary entitled, “To the Fall of the Antichrist.” Edwards, regarding the coming of the
Millennium, or Kingdom of God on earth, summarizes, “This is a work that will
be accomplished by means, by preaching of the gospel, and the use of the
ordinary means of grace, and so shall be gradually brought to pass.”[10]
During the Colonial and Early American era, this concept of Christian Eschatology formally became known as “Postmillennialism.” The formal theological definition of Postmillennialism is “The Christian doctrine that Jesus Christ’ Second Coming will follow the millennium, a kingdom or utopian age (that may not necessarily be viewed as a literal 1,000 years). In this view, the Church progressively “conquers the world" so to speak. During this present age, Postmillennialists believe that sin will not cease, but it will be minimized because of the influence of the church. Christ will not physically reign but rather he will spiritually reign through the church because of its vast influence over all facets of life. At the culmination of time, Jesus will return to judge the world, sending the wicked to Hell and the righteous to their reward.”[11] In very simple terms, Postmillennialism understands the future “millennium” or “kingdom age” as “the climax and goal of human progress, with human effort contributing to the realization of God’s providential design…. This is called postmillennialism [because] the Second Coming of Christ occurs at the end of the millennium.”[12]
During the Colonial and Early American era, this concept of Christian Eschatology formally became known as “Postmillennialism.” The formal theological definition of Postmillennialism is “The Christian doctrine that Jesus Christ’ Second Coming will follow the millennium, a kingdom or utopian age (that may not necessarily be viewed as a literal 1,000 years). In this view, the Church progressively “conquers the world" so to speak. During this present age, Postmillennialists believe that sin will not cease, but it will be minimized because of the influence of the church. Christ will not physically reign but rather he will spiritually reign through the church because of its vast influence over all facets of life. At the culmination of time, Jesus will return to judge the world, sending the wicked to Hell and the righteous to their reward.”[11] In very simple terms, Postmillennialism understands the future “millennium” or “kingdom age” as “the climax and goal of human progress, with human effort contributing to the realization of God’s providential design…. This is called postmillennialism [because] the Second Coming of Christ occurs at the end of the millennium.”[12]
The question, then, is how this
popular, fervent and optimistic brand of Christian Eschatology became an
influential, perhaps even formative element in the development of the political
movement called Progressivism in the late nineteenth century United States.
One suggestion might be that Postmillennialism combined the perfectionist ideals of the Second Great Awakening with the kingdom-building optimism of “Yankee pietism.”[13] Yankee Pietism emerged as a movement among the:
New Testament oriented, anti-ritualist, congregational in governance, active
One suggestion might be that Postmillennialism combined the perfectionist ideals of the Second Great Awakening with the kingdom-building optimism of “Yankee pietism.”[13] Yankee Pietism emerged as a movement among the:
New Testament oriented, anti-ritualist, congregational in governance, active
in
para-church organizations, and committed to individual conversion and
societal
reform in order to usher in the millennial reign of Jesus Christ.
Pietists
did not compartmentalize religion and civil government. Right
belief
and right behavior are two sides of the same spiritual coin.[14]
Mark Noll and Luke Harlow additionally observed that, though
most of the “Yankee Pietists” were from the “anti-liturgical” traditions (such
as “Baptists, Methodists, Disciples, Congregationists, Quakers”),[15]
in the political and social movements, the term was “too vague,” and
“confessionalists can be pietists and devotionalists too.”[16] The social and political implications of
“Yankee Pietism” transcended the sectarian Christian doctrinal
differences. This ecumenism naturally
lent itself to “other than Christian” motivations for accomplishing goals for
the greater good, and later perhaps motivations with no religious foundation at
all.
Numerous historians have addressed the effect of the Christian eschatological belief system of Postmillennialism and how it influenced the development of the United States politically, particularly during the nineteenth and early twentieth century.
Daniel Walker Howe noted that “Postmillennialism provided the capstone to an intellectual structure integrating political liberalism and economic development with Protestant Christianity.”[17] This was certainly not the universal view of all Protestant Christians of the time, but with the champions of Second Great Awakening like Lyman Beecher,[18] Richard T. Ely[19] and Charles Grandison Finney,[20] it became the prevailing view by mid-century, and certainly after the Civil War.
Numerous historians have addressed the effect of the Christian eschatological belief system of Postmillennialism and how it influenced the development of the United States politically, particularly during the nineteenth and early twentieth century.
Daniel Walker Howe noted that “Postmillennialism provided the capstone to an intellectual structure integrating political liberalism and economic development with Protestant Christianity.”[17] This was certainly not the universal view of all Protestant Christians of the time, but with the champions of Second Great Awakening like Lyman Beecher,[18] Richard T. Ely[19] and Charles Grandison Finney,[20] it became the prevailing view by mid-century, and certainly after the Civil War.
Part and parcel of postmillennial
eschatology was the encouragement of activism.[21]
It was this brand of Christian eschatology that drove the “continuing moral and
social improvement” movements such as abolition, temperance and women’s
suffrage,[22]
and also “provided the rationale and motivation to sustain the imperial vision”
along the way, leading to such events as the Monroe Doctrine, Manifest Destiny,
the Spanish-American War and ultimately World War I.[23]
According
to Mark Noll and Luke Harlow, there is no doubt that as Postmillennial “Yankee
Pietism” grew in numbers and social clout, beginning early in the nineteenth
century when they “launched a crusade to Christianize America.”[24] This agenda was deliberate and divided into
two phases.
First,
they created the “benevolent empire” in the 1810’s to spread
the
Gospel and teach the Bible. Then, in the
1820’s, they established
reform
societies to eradicate slavery, saloons, Sabbath desecration,
and
other social ills. Finally, in the
1830’s, they entered the political
mainstream
by joining the new Whig Party against the Jacksonian
Democrats. By the end of the 1840’s….they added nativist
legislation
To
their agenda, especially by extending the naturalization period
from
four to fourteen years.[25]
Somewhere
along the way, however, Postmillennialism lost its “spirituality” but retained
its optimism, its utopian ideals, and its concept of human progress. Historian James H. Moorhead refers to this as
an “erosion to the more open-ended eschatology of the kingdom,”[26] which
is also seen in the emergence of theological liberalism and Biblical “higher
criticism” regarding heretofore traditionally accepted orthodox doctrines of
the faith. William R. Hutchison quotes
Charles S. Briggs, a late nineteenth century proponent of “Modernism” and
Biblical higher criticism as saying “We have undermined the breastworks of
traditionalism; let us blow them to atoms.
We have forced them from the face of the earth that no man hereafter may
be kept from the Bible.”[27]
In the
absence of a strong reliance on Christian traditions and staunchly held
cardinal doctrines, those who maintained a generally “postmillennial”
eschatology began to gravitate to a philosophy that placed their reliance in
another means of “establishing the kingdom.”
"God,”
Richard T. Ely declared, "works through the State in carrying out His
purposes more universally than through any other institution."[28] This was the perfect soil into which was sewn
the seed of collectivism, Darwinian Evolution, a drive by Radical Republicans
during and following the Civil War toward centralization of power in the
Federal Government, and a Marxian Dialectical Materialistic philosophy that
conspired to produce Progressive political pioneers like Robert M. La Follette,[29]
and Presidents Theodore Roosevelt[30]
and Woodrow Wilson.[31]
The
emergence of politicians like Wisconsin Governor and later Senator Robert M
“Fighting Bob” La Follette in the last half of the nineteenth century tracked
with the merging of the social practices and political ideas of the more
liberalized Postmillennial Pietists and their more secular and materialist
counterparts in public life. La Follette,
born in 1855, rose to prominence as a Congressman first elected in 1884 and
serving three terms as a champion of the populist interests of common laborers
and farmers, and an outspoken foe of the industrial giants and corporate
interests like railroads and the lumber industry, very prominent in Wisconsin.[32]
La Follette
himself had been raised by a Baptist mother who had come west with Yankee
Pietist ideals already formulated, however his father Josiah La Follette, who
had died when Robert was young, was an agnostic. When his Mother remarried John Z. Saxton, a
very conservative, strict and dedicated Baptist, Robert grew to dislike the formal
religion and doctrinal absolutes of his Step-father.
“I got fed up with that sort of thing as a boy. My stepfather insisted on entertaining the Baptist Minister every Sunday,” La Follette once quipped when asked about his disposition to churches and religion. According to biographer Nancy Unger, his disdain went further than merely disliking the institution, but the harsh discipline his religious Stepfather often inflicted upon he and his siblings for “poor manners, impoliteness, and discourtesy” and other unacceptable behaviors in children of the day.[33] Yet La Follette never abandoned the ideals of “Yankee Pietism” he was taught as a child, and he wove them into his social philosophy and political ideology, forming a microcosm and prototype of the exemplary “Progressive” in the late nineteenth century, having moved away from the overt religious faith, but kept the social involvement and activism, and gravitated toward a much more statist and collectivist theory of governance. In this sense, Robert La Follette serves as the nearly perfect reflection of what happened to the population of Postmillennial Yankee Pietists in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries.
“I got fed up with that sort of thing as a boy. My stepfather insisted on entertaining the Baptist Minister every Sunday,” La Follette once quipped when asked about his disposition to churches and religion. According to biographer Nancy Unger, his disdain went further than merely disliking the institution, but the harsh discipline his religious Stepfather often inflicted upon he and his siblings for “poor manners, impoliteness, and discourtesy” and other unacceptable behaviors in children of the day.[33] Yet La Follette never abandoned the ideals of “Yankee Pietism” he was taught as a child, and he wove them into his social philosophy and political ideology, forming a microcosm and prototype of the exemplary “Progressive” in the late nineteenth century, having moved away from the overt religious faith, but kept the social involvement and activism, and gravitated toward a much more statist and collectivist theory of governance. In this sense, Robert La Follette serves as the nearly perfect reflection of what happened to the population of Postmillennial Yankee Pietists in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries.
By the time
Theodore “Teddy” Roosevelt assumed the presidency in 1901 after the
assassination of William McKinley, the “Progressive Era” was well
underway. During Roosevelt’s Presidency,
the “Social Gospel” movement was at its height, and theologically liberal
leaders such as Baptist Walter Rauschenbusch, Episcopal Richard T. Ely, and
Congregationalist Washington Gladden were championing many diverse social
causes. Common during this time were
temperance and the push for prohibition of alcohol, support of labor unions and
“worker’s rights,” women’s suffrage, working against poverty, and just the
beginnings of racial desegregation and “civil rights.”[34]
Teddy
Roosevelt was no political slouch.
Unlike McKinley, Roosevelt was a Republican in the more “progressive”
vein of the Party. While he was
certainly no Robert La Follette, Roosevelt more than once spoke of his
appreciation for the Progressive firebrand, so the direction Roosevelt took in
governing the nation was not surprising.
Roosevelt demonstrated his “progressive faith in scientific management
and committed to enlarging presidential power,” also “sponsoring legislation
that expanded the administrative power of the federal government.”[35] Theodore Roosevelt rightly earned the title
of the first “Progressive” President, because the Federal Government had not
taken a leap in regulatory power or legal control over the people or the States
since the end of “Reconstruction.”
President
Roosevelt knew how to make his view of an “energetic national government”
palatable to the American people, however.
As an example, this was demonstrated when he chose to run for
re-election in 1912 after a term out of office. The Republican Party failed to
nominate him, instead re-nominating incumbent President William Howard
Taft. Taft was from the Conservative
wing of the Party, and Roosevelt bolted, running on the “Bull-Moose” ticket –
another name for the Progressive Party. At
the conclusion of the Progressive Party convention that year, Roosevelt is
reported to have proclaimed, “Our cause is based on the eternal principles of
righteousness; We stand at Armageddon, we battle for the Lord.” As a response to his speech, Roosevelt had
the Convention delegation wave their Bibles and march out of the auditorium as they
sang the Christian hymn Onward, Christian
Soldiers.[36]
Woodrow Wilson was, by far, the most successful President of the classic Progressive Era. Wilson managed to integrate the formerly separate Progressive Party into his Democrat Party, and persuade his party to adopt many of their ideas. Among his greatest triumphs were the creation of the Federal Reserve Bank, the passage of the Sixteenth Amendment approving the “graduated” or “Progressive” Income Tax, the Seventeenth Amendment authorizing the direct election of Senators by democratic vote rather than by vote of the State Legislatures, the creation of the Federal Trade Commission and the passage of the Clayton Anti-Trust Act regulating commerce and limiting monopolies as well as aiding organized labor, the Keating-Owen Act outlawing child labor, the Federal Highway Act, and the Eighteenth Amendment prohibiting the transport and sale of intoxicating liquors.[37]
Woodrow Wilson was, by far, the most successful President of the classic Progressive Era. Wilson managed to integrate the formerly separate Progressive Party into his Democrat Party, and persuade his party to adopt many of their ideas. Among his greatest triumphs were the creation of the Federal Reserve Bank, the passage of the Sixteenth Amendment approving the “graduated” or “Progressive” Income Tax, the Seventeenth Amendment authorizing the direct election of Senators by democratic vote rather than by vote of the State Legislatures, the creation of the Federal Trade Commission and the passage of the Clayton Anti-Trust Act regulating commerce and limiting monopolies as well as aiding organized labor, the Keating-Owen Act outlawing child labor, the Federal Highway Act, and the Eighteenth Amendment prohibiting the transport and sale of intoxicating liquors.[37]
Raised the
son of a Presbyterian Pastor and Theologian, he drank deeply from the well of
Calvinist theology, believing in the tenets common to the Reformed tradition:
Predestination, the omnipotence and sovereignty of God, and a personal life of
devotion to his faith which included daily Bible reading, morning and evening
prayers, and church attendance, including at mid-week prayer services.[38] If Robert La Follette was the prototype of
Progressivism’s beginning, it’s flirtation with Christian themes but adoption
of secular and materialistic methods and goals, then President Woodrow Wilson was
the personification of the Postmillennial Progressive Christian. His religious convictions and ideas of God
formed the framework of his entire worldview.
His assurance in the truth of God’s sovereignty and predestination gave
him a confidence in God’s guidance, both for himself as a leader, and for the
nation he led. He held an optimistic and
idealistic view that the United States, as a Christian nation, was to exemplify
that devotion to the elements of righteousness which are derived from the
revelations of Holy Scripture.”[39] Wilson was firmly postmillennial, viewed his
role as a messenger of God, and considered his support for democracy, the “War
to End All Wars” (World War I) and establish a “League of Nations” as “divinely
inspired paths” to achieving the prophesied “Kingdom of God” spoken of by the
prophets in Scripture.[40]
The eschatological view of Postmillennialism found its greatest
acceptance among Protestant Christians in the United States, Europe and around
the industrialized world as Christian missionaries continued to reach new lands
with the Gospel, revivalism and awakenings continued to flourish, and Christian
nations enjoyed general prosperity and comfort.
Is it any coincidence that during this period of time, the political
movement known as Progressivism developed, and enjoyed its greatest popularity
during the Industrial Revolution in America and England when people saw their
world improving, their faith growing, and their causes advancing?
Of course, it couldn’t last forever. Woodrow Wilson’s second term ended after he’d won “The Great War,” but the American People balked at his “League of Nations,” fearful of the international entanglements it could bring. Wilson was struck down by a stroke, and the US economy suffered a brief but sharp recession as he left office, returning a Conservative, Calvin Coolidge to the Presidency. So, too, the days of Postmillennialism’s popularity were numbered. After 1921, the United States suffered two more major blows that caused many Christians to entirely abandon the optimistic eschatological prognostications once held by so many in the prior century. The Great Depression, which began in 1929 with the crash of the Stock Market, followed by a second and even more devastating World War less than three decades after the first simply crush whatever optimism many had left for a better world.[41]
Of course, it couldn’t last forever. Woodrow Wilson’s second term ended after he’d won “The Great War,” but the American People balked at his “League of Nations,” fearful of the international entanglements it could bring. Wilson was struck down by a stroke, and the US economy suffered a brief but sharp recession as he left office, returning a Conservative, Calvin Coolidge to the Presidency. So, too, the days of Postmillennialism’s popularity were numbered. After 1921, the United States suffered two more major blows that caused many Christians to entirely abandon the optimistic eschatological prognostications once held by so many in the prior century. The Great Depression, which began in 1929 with the crash of the Stock Market, followed by a second and even more devastating World War less than three decades after the first simply crush whatever optimism many had left for a better world.[41]
Progressivism,
however, has remained one of the most pervasive and longest lasting political
movements in American history. The
proponents of Progressivism and its reforms may find it politically expedient
to change the labels they are wearing at a given time in the life of the
national body politic, like “Liberal,” for instance, or they might retreat on
certain policy issues when the political tone and atmosphere turns against
them. A great example of that might be
the Clinton triangulation on the issue of “Workfare” rather than “welfare,”
which President Clinton initially resisted, but once a Republican Congress was
elected, he not only embraced, but claimed credit for. This kind of tactical retreat and
incrementalism has allowed the survival of Progressivism as political movement
far longer than most others, and for that reason, its impact cannot be
overestimated.
Often, however, one of its most important sources is glossed over or completely missed by some historians and modern commentators. Much of the basis for the optimism, collectivism, and the positive belief in building a better world “progressively” may be attributed to the ascendancy of the nineteenth century Protestant eschatological view known as postmillennialism. Affirming a great optimism in the abilities of “redeemed humanity,” they believed the Church could bring about the Kingdom of God on earth through reform, economic and social improvement, and the use of Government to implement these changes, both in the United States and eventually, abroad. Though the initial dedication of early Protestant adherence to traditional doctrines gave way to higher criticism and their rejection, these more liberalized Christians retained their optimism, collectivism, concepts of Statist centralization and high opinion of human abilities to achieve a “utopian” ideal, and the result by the beginning of the twentieth century was a full and complete political philosophy known as “Progressivism.” This movement gave birth to modern Liberalism, and indeed, remains a major player in politics today as expressed in the ideology and policies of President Barack Obama, the Democrat Party, major Unions, Occupation Wall Street and the like. While it may seem unlikely in some cases, one of the pillars of Progressivism was a Christian Eschatological view with a positive view of the future, and of human’s abilities to bring it to pass. That vision endures in most Progressives of today.
Often, however, one of its most important sources is glossed over or completely missed by some historians and modern commentators. Much of the basis for the optimism, collectivism, and the positive belief in building a better world “progressively” may be attributed to the ascendancy of the nineteenth century Protestant eschatological view known as postmillennialism. Affirming a great optimism in the abilities of “redeemed humanity,” they believed the Church could bring about the Kingdom of God on earth through reform, economic and social improvement, and the use of Government to implement these changes, both in the United States and eventually, abroad. Though the initial dedication of early Protestant adherence to traditional doctrines gave way to higher criticism and their rejection, these more liberalized Christians retained their optimism, collectivism, concepts of Statist centralization and high opinion of human abilities to achieve a “utopian” ideal, and the result by the beginning of the twentieth century was a full and complete political philosophy known as “Progressivism.” This movement gave birth to modern Liberalism, and indeed, remains a major player in politics today as expressed in the ideology and policies of President Barack Obama, the Democrat Party, major Unions, Occupation Wall Street and the like. While it may seem unlikely in some cases, one of the pillars of Progressivism was a Christian Eschatological view with a positive view of the future, and of human’s abilities to bring it to pass. That vision endures in most Progressives of today.
Bibliography
Bendle,
Ph.D., Melvin F. . "The Apocalyptic Imagination and Popular Culture." Journal of Religion and Popular Culture 11 (2005),
(accessed August17, 2012).
DiLorenzo, Thomas.
Hamilton’s Curse. New York:
Crown Forum Publishing Group, 2008.
Edwards, Johnathan, Henry Rogers, Sereno Edwards
Dwight. The Works of Johnathan Edwards A.M.
Vol. 2 London: Childs & Sons, 1839.
Evans, Christopher H. The
Social Gospel Today. Louisville, Kentucky: Westminster John Knox Press, 2001.
Fine, Sidney. Laissez
Faire Thought and the General-Welfare State: A Study of Conflict in American Thought, 1865-1901. Ann
Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1956.
Gillon, Steven M. & Cathy D. Matson. The American Experiment: A History of the
United States. Boston:
Houghton-Mifflin, 2006.
Handy,
Robert T. A Christian America: Protestant
Hopes and Historical Realities.2nd ed. New York: Oxford University Press USA, 1971,
1984.
Hatch, Nathan O.
The Democratization of American
Christianity. Boston: Yale University Press, 1989.
Howe,
Daniel Walker. What Hath God Wrought: The
Transformation of America, 1815-1848. New
York: Oxford University Press, 2007.
Hutchison,
William R. The Modernist Impulse in
American Protestantism. Durham, North Carolina:
Duke University Press, 1992.
Kleppner, Paul. The
Third Electoral System, 1835-1892: Parties, Voters, and Political Cultures. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina
Press, 1979.
Link, Arthur S. ed. The Papers of Woodrow Wilson, Volume 23. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1977.
Magee, Malcolm D.
What the World Should Be: Woodrow
Wilson and the Crafting of a Faith- Based
Foreign Policy. Waco, Texas: Baylor
University Press, 2008.
Merriam-Webster
Dictionary. (Encyclopedia Brittanica Co., 2012):
http://www.merriam-webster.com/ (accessed August 19, 2012)
Moorhead,
James H. "The Erosion of Postmillennialism in American Religious Thought,
1865 — 1925," Church History 53 (March 1984): 61 — 77.
Moorhead, James H. World Without End: Mainstream American Protestant Visions of the Last Things 1880-1925. Bloomington,
Indiana: Indiana University Press, 2006.
Noll, Mark A., Luke E. Harlow. Religion
and American Politics: From the Colonial Period to the Present. New York: Oxford University Press USA, 2007.
Nye, Russell B. Midwestern
Progressive Politics: A History of its Origins and Development 1870-1950. East Lansing, Michigan:
Michigan State College Press, 1951.
Online
Bible Dictionary. (Spreading the Light Ministries,
1999-2009): http://www.spreadinglight.com/theology/dictionary/definitions/postmillennialism.html
(accessed August 19, 2012)
Pestritto, Ronald J. & William J. Atto, eds. American Progressivism: A Reader. Lanham,
Maryland: Lexington Books, 2008.
Quandt,
Jean B., "Religion and Social Thought: The Secularizing of Postmillennialism," American Quarterly 25 (October 1973): 390 — 409.
Schweikart, Larry & Michael Allen. A Patriot’s History of the United States. New
York: Penguin Group, 2004.
Unger, Nancy.
Fighting Bob La Follette: The
Righteous Reformer. Chapel Hill: University Of North Carolina Press, 2000.
Wilson, Clyde. “Lincoln’s Marxists: a Review.” Chronicles Magazine, April 2012. p. 27
[1]
DiLorenzo, Thomas. Hamilton’s Curse. (New
York: Crown Forum Publishing Group, 2008), pp. 16-17.
[2]
Schweikart, Larry & Michael Allen. A
Patriot’s History of the United States. (New York: Penguin Group, 2004): p.
152
[3]
Howe, Daniel Walker. What Hath God
Wrought: The Transformation of America 1815-1848. (New York: Oxford University Press,
2007): p. 411
[4]
Wilson, Clyde. “Lincoln’s Marxists: A Review,” Chronicles Magazine (April, 2012): p. 27
[5]
Nye, Russell B. Midwestern Progressive
Politics: A History of its Origins and Development 1870-1950 (East Lansing,
Michigan: Michigan State College Press,1951): 4, 13, 21-22
[6]
Hatch, Nathan O. The Democratization of
American Christianity. (Boston: Yale University Press, 1989): pp. 9-10, 213
[7]
Hatch, p. 10
[8]Merriam-Webster Dictionary. (Encyclopedia
Brittanica Co., 2012): http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/eschatology
[9]
Schweikart, Allen. p. 29
[10]
Edwards, Johnathan, Henry Rogers, Sereno Edwards Dwight. The Works of Johnathan Edwards A.M. 2 Vols. (London: Childs & Son, 1839): Vol. 2, p. 605
[11]
Online Bible Dictionary. (Spreading
the Light Ministries, 1999-2009): http://www.spreadinglight.com/theology/dictionary/definitions/postmillennialism.html
[12]
Howe, p. 286
[13]
Paul Kleppner. The Third Electoral
System, 1835-1892: Parties, Voters, and Political Cultures. (Chapel Hill:
University of North Carolina Press, 1979), p. 190; Howe, p. 619
[14]
Noll, Mark A., Luke E. Harlow. Religion
and American Politics: From the Colonial Period to the Present. (New York:
Oxford University Press, USA, 2007): p. 150
[15]
Noll, Harlow, ibid.
[16]
Noll, p. 142.
[17]
Howe, p. 287
[18]
Howe, pp. 287, 580
[19]
Jean B. Quandt. “Religion and Social Thought: The Secularizing of
Postmillennialism.” American Quarterly 25
(October 1973): p. 403
[20]
Howe, pp. 174, 287
[21]Moorhead,
James H. World Without End: Mainstream
American Protestant Visions of the Last Things 1880-1925. (Bloomingtom,
Indiana: Indiana University Press, 1999): p. xv
[22]
Moorhead, p. 47
[23]
Moorhead, p. 6
[24]
Noll, Harlow, p. 150
[25]
Noll, Harlow, pp. 150, 151
[26]
Moorhead, p. 173
[27]
William R. Hutchison. The Modernist
Impulse in American Protestantism. (Durham, NC: Duke University Press,
1992): p. 94
[28]
Sidney Fine. Laissez Faire Thought and
the General-Welfare State: A Study of Conflict in American Thought, 1865-1901. (Ann
Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1956): p. 180
[29]
Steven M. Gillon & Cathy D. Matson. The
American Experiment: A History of the United States. (Boston:
Houghton-Mifflin, 2006): p. 816
[30]
Gillon & Matson, p. 828
[31]
Gillon & Matson, p. 836
[32]
Gillon & Matson, pp. 816, 817
[33]
Unger, Nancy C. Fighting Bob La Follette:
The Righteous Reformer. (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press,
2000 ): p. 22
[34]
Evans, Christopher H. The Social Gospel
Today. (Louisville, Kentucky: Westminster John Knox Press, 2001): p. 149
[35]
Gillon, Matson, p. 829
[36]
Pestritto, Ronald J. & William J. Atto, Ed. American Progressivism: A Reader. (Lanham, Maryland: Lexington
Books, 2008): p. 10
[37]
Gillon, Matson, p. 837
[38]
Link, Arthur S. ed. The Papers of Woodrow
Wilson (Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1977): Vol. 23,
p. 20. “The Bible and Progress,” a
speech delivered May 7, 1911, in Denver, Colorado.
[39]
Link, ibid.
[40]
Magee, Malcolm D. What the World Should
Be: Woodrow Wilson and the Crafting of a Faith-Based Foreign Policy. (Waco,
Texas: Baylor University Press, 2008 ): p. 34
[41]
Online Bible Dictionary. (Spreading
the Light Ministries, 1999-2009): http://www.spreadinglight.com/theology/dictionary/definitions/postmillennialism.html
