Hollitz Great Awakening
Out With the Old, In With the New
There were multiple factors that influenced the Great Awakening in the early seventeen hundreds. From 1730 to 1740, rebellion spread throughout the colonies causing a major religious warfare between churches. In Contending Voice, Hollitz shows us the perspective of two famous preachers that gave the Great Awakening a stir of madness. The “wild,” “indecent,” and work of “mad men” revolutionized the way colonist viewed how religion could be so intense frequently causing “Mayhem in the church” (Hollitz 34) (qtd Hollitz 42). The two leaders were utterly different with their take upon how the colonist should react toward their faith in God.
Seen as the outspoken minister in the Great Awakening, James Davenport was in my opinion a hellraiser. Some may disagree about my decision, but there were distinct actions made by Davenport that couldn’t be passed up to not classify as clear …show more content…
Being as simplistic and conventional as Chauncy could, I labeled him as a trailblazer. As Hollitz points out, Chauncy was an uninspired preacher but was vaguely labeled as “Great Awakening’s most ferocious critic” (Hollitz 37). Chauncey’s perspective of religion was to never stray from the traditional zeal of god that has been around since the beginning. To Chauncey, Davenport’s actions caused a horrific flow of religion throughout the colonies. In Charles’ Enthusiasm Described and Caution’d Against (1742), he states “The cause of this enthusiasm is bad temperament of the blood and spirits; ‘tis properly a disease, a sort of madness” showing that he absolutely despised what his contender was doing to everyone and everything (Hollitz 46). It’s not that Chauncey wanted everything his way of preaching, he just wanted the colonists to know the unconditional truth about God, not the nonsense James portrayed for everyone to
There were multiple factors that influenced the Great Awakening in the early seventeen hundreds. From 1730 to 1740, rebellion spread throughout the colonies causing a major religious warfare between churches. In Contending Voice, Hollitz shows us the perspective of two famous preachers that gave the Great Awakening a stir of madness. The “wild,” “indecent,” and work of “mad men” revolutionized the way colonist viewed how religion could be so intense frequently causing “Mayhem in the church” (Hollitz 34) (qtd Hollitz 42). The two leaders were utterly different with their take upon how the colonist should react toward their faith in God.
Seen as the outspoken minister in the Great Awakening, James Davenport was in my opinion a hellraiser. Some may disagree about my decision, but there were distinct actions made by Davenport that couldn’t be passed up to not classify as clear …show more content…
Being as simplistic and conventional as Chauncy could, I labeled him as a trailblazer. As Hollitz points out, Chauncy was an uninspired preacher but was vaguely labeled as “Great Awakening’s most ferocious critic” (Hollitz 37). Chauncey’s perspective of religion was to never stray from the traditional zeal of god that has been around since the beginning. To Chauncey, Davenport’s actions caused a horrific flow of religion throughout the colonies. In Charles’ Enthusiasm Described and Caution’d Against (1742), he states “The cause of this enthusiasm is bad temperament of the blood and spirits; ‘tis properly a disease, a sort of madness” showing that he absolutely despised what his contender was doing to everyone and everything (Hollitz 46). It’s not that Chauncey wanted everything his way of preaching, he just wanted the colonists to know the unconditional truth about God, not the nonsense James portrayed for everyone to