Basically, I'm just looking for some explanations. In John Winthrop's A Model Of Christian Charity, he says that "the care of the public must oversway all private respects". What does this quote mean? Also, what I'm even more confused on- what is the "care of the public" in this context? Like what is he exactly talking about when he says the "care of the public"? This is part of an AP Lang assignment and one of the questions is asking about this quote- but I just can't seem to understand it. Any help is appreciated!
See this excerpt from the Taibbi-Chomsky conversation:
>Chomsky: We were a “City on a hill.”
>Taibbi: Exactly.
>Chomsky: Did you ever go into the origin of city on a hill?
>Taibbi: No, I didn’t.
>Chomsky: It’s an interesting case. The term had never really been, barely been used before Reagan. But Reagan picked it up, and did the “Shining city upon a hill” speech.
>But if you go back and you read John Winthrop’s sermon, he says almost the opposite. When he says we’re a city on a hill, what he means is everyone is looking at us, and if we don’t live up to the ideals that we profess, we’re going to be punished.*** Of course, in his case, by the Lord. Not by society.
>So it’s really saying we’re exposed, we have to try to live up to these ideals. He didn’t say we were doing it, by any means. In fact, he knew we weren’t. That was the point.
>Taibbi: Instead, they turn it into a catch phrase for exceptionalism.
>Chomsky: Yeah. So wonderful, isn’t it?
>Taibbi: Hilarious.
This is the footnote, too:
>*** From Winthrop’s sermon: “For we must consider that we shall be as a city upon a hill. The eyes of all people are upon us. So that if we shall deal falsely with our God in this work we have undertaken, and so cause Him to withdraw His present help from us, we shall be made a story and a by-word through the world. We shall open the mouths of enemies to speak evil of the ways of God, and all professors for God’s sake. We shall shame the faces of many of God’s worthy servants, and cause their prayers to be turned into curses upon us till we be consumed out of the good land whither we are going.”
I'm skeptical as to whether Chomsky is correct about this, but it's really hard for me to interpret the text. I mean, what Chomsky says doesn't seem to be a correct interpretation to me, but I'm in no position to judge because I have zero historical expertise as to the historical context. Plus, I find it hard to even understand such an old-fashioned text. I did find this discussion, though, which lays out some ideas abou
... keep reading on reddit ➡
For example, would Winthrop have cited Ezekiel 16:17 in his original sermon, or was the notation probably just added after?
In the Hillsdale College pdf of the speech, they write, "Therefore God still reserves the property of these gifts to Himself as in Ezekiel 16:17. He there calls wealth His gold and His silver. "
In the UTexas pdf of the speech, they write, "Therefore God still reserves the propperty of these gifts to himself as Ezek. 16. 17. he there calls wealthe, his gold and his silver."
In the Winthrop Society page of the speech, they write, "Therefore God still reserves the property of these gifts to Himself as Ezek. 16:17, He there calls wealth, His gold and His silver"
