Buy term paper on Pastoral Letter, the Congregational Ministers

. The Pastoral Letter had an unpleasant impression on Sarah Grimke, the ideas and thoughts of the ministers resembled her those of “witchcraft,” and she directly names them “superstition.” She explains the situation of those days from an historical perspective, the women appeared in miserable position due to the “traditions of men,” the dominance of males determined women to lack their inalienable rights and freedoms; they appeared to be confined within the fence of their household.
Grimke agrees that there is a danger, but in defining its source she offers a quite different elucidation – she apprehends “danger from those who, having long held the reins of usurped authority, are unwilling to permit us to fill that sphere which God created us to move in, and who have entered into league to crush the immortal mind of woman” (320). According to this statement, the “female character” and the natural rights of women were infringed by men, and the reform efforts move to actualization of the true inborn character of a female “in the sphere which her Creator has assigned her” (ibid.).
In this light the accusations of the congregational ministers become nothing more than a mere myth made out in order to suppress and enslave women and take them from the knowledge of female true nature and vocation as far as possible. There were designed such prescriptions as to satisfy the wishes and needs of the dominant male party. The task of Grimke is thus to “ascertain” the actual “duties” and “privileges” of those who have been oppresses for ages.
Her arguments and examples are sincere and persuasive as she refutes the allegation of the letter demonizing the reform movement. Sarah Grimke displays the motives and inclinations of the women to live a decent life, with the rights and duties equal to those which men enjoy, she does not claim for the rights and privileges only but also for the duties and responsibility.
4. Turning to the Bible, Grimke shares her suggestion that some of the passage were not adequately translated, because all he translators from Hebrew and Greek were males and could have perverted the sense so that it would satisfy the male party. “[W]hen we are admitted to the honor of studying Greek and Hebrew, we shall produce some various readings of the Bible a little different from those we now have,” predicts the speaker. Further on, there follows the exposition of how Grimke understands the scriptural commandments and prohibitions.
Pointing out at the Sermon on the Mount, she states that Jesus never differentiates the principles for men and women separately – “I […] find him giving the same directions to women as to men” (321). Thus, the equality between them is clear and evident, and the division of the roles appears to be “anti-christian” according to the author of the speech.
She does not find any postulate in the Holy Writ prescribing woman to be dependent of man, she calls it “monstrous” and “anti-christian,” then Grimke makes a complaint that gave all her rights to man and became content with the privileges that seemed to men fair to endow her with.
Later, she provides a quotation where man calls on to depend upon him, and God says that “HE will teach us of his ways” (321). The words of God and man are opposite, they require opposite deeds, actions and thinking, so Grimke makes her choice and decides to listen to God, not to man. She wants to believe God rather than man (321 – 322).buy term paper
The prevalent justification of women’s misery with the help of Bible, its dominance in the discourse of 1830s, is viewed by Sarah Grimke as a result of female illiteracy in biblical languages, the fact that it was translated by men and that the key positions in church and society are occupied by the male party.
5. The Declaration of Sentiments is imitating the Declaration of Independence, the reason for that might be manifold. The former proclaimed the freedom and independence of the white Americans from Great Britain, it gave them a chance to exercise their natural and God-given rights, to control their lives and fortunes by themselves. The Declaration of Independence set a sever confrontation between the oppressed and oppressors which resulted in a war. The Americans proved they were seasoned and strong people capable of managing their own affairs and defend themselves from any aggression or attack. It contributed to greater unity and enthusiasm within the American society that made it possible to build a powerful country respected on the international arena.
The authors of the Declaration of Sentiments earnestly wanted to “inherit” all that was produced by the first declaration, on the one hand; on the other hand, they were intending to demonstrate a strong link between their motive and those of the Founding Fathers and Revolutionary Patriots. Speaking about the king, the Declaration of Independence states that “he has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people” (“Declaration”), the Framers also emphasized that if a government becomes destructive for its people, the latter have full right, or even they have a duty, to alter, and, if necessary, abolish (“Declaration”).
The Declaration of Sentiments, in turn, is aimed at to “undo the heavy burden, to beak every yoke, and to let the oppressed go free,” in other words, to give the slaves the same that the independence gave to the white Americans. Thus, it is a completion or a final part, article, section of the Declaration of Independence. Such a form of appeal was apparently chosen by the abolitionists in order to find and confirm common language, common values, and common principles with their opponents who revered the Declaration of Independence.