Commentary Magazine


Cotton Mather

To the Editor:

In her review of Kenneth Silverman’s The Life and Times of Cotton Mather [Books in Review, August], Fernanda Eberstadt writes that Mather “prayed to God that he might not only be apprised in advance of the conversion of the Jews but might live to convert and baptize a Jew himself.” Neither Miss Eberstadt nor Silverman seems to know that later in life Mather changed his mind. As Mel Scult reports in his Millennial Expectations and Jewish Liberties (1978), Mather in his unpublished Triparadisus, written near the end of his life, declared that only those “that worship Christ” are the “true Israel of God” while “the circumcised infidels [i.e., the Jews] are no better than so many dogs.” Mather now believed that Jews would never be converted, for they had been superseded by the Gentiles, the new Israel. “Alas I was a very young man; I understood not the true Israel,” he wrote, explaining his earlier views, “and now I make my most public retraction.”

None of this, of course, challenges Miss Eberstadt’s broader interpretation of Mather. As she rightly understands, he was “no liberal and no ecumenicist.”

Jonathan D. Sarna
Hebrew Union College-Jewish Institute of Religion
Cincinnati, Ohio

_____________

 

To the Editor:

Fernanda Eberstadt’s otherwise excellent review contains a factual error which ought to be corrected. Specifically, Miss Eberstadt states that “in 1686 [Charles II] finally revoked the Massachusetts charter.” While the revocation may have been effective in 1686, Charles II assuredly did not issue it in that year, having died on February 15, 1685. . . .

Harris M. Abrams
Columbus, Ohio

_____________

 

Fernanda Eberstadt writes:

I am grateful to Jonathan D. Sarna for his information. Harris M. Abrams, of course, is right: Charles II died in 1685. But there is nevertheless some confusion over when the charter’s revocation actually came into effect. Although the High Court of Chancery’s decree of dissolution was handed down in October 1684, it was not served upon the colony until May 1686, along with a commission for a provisional government. In the intervening year and a half, Governor Simon Bradstreet ruled as if nothing had happened. The delay can be attributed to Charles’s death, to Monmouth’s rebellion (which Charles’s chosen governor of Massachusetts, a colonel returned from Tangier, helped put down), and to Whitehall’s stalling over proposals from the Lords of Trade that additional territories be annexed.

_____________

 

About the Author




Welcome to Commentary Magazine.
We hope you enjoy your visit.
As a visitor to our site, you are allowed 8 free articles this month.
This is your first of 8 free articles.

If you are already a digital subscriber, log in here »

Print subscriber? For free access to the website and iPad, register here »

To subscribe, click here to see our subscription offers »

Please note this is an advertisement skip this ad
Clearly, you have a passion for ideas.
Subscribe today for unlimited digital access to the publication that shapes the minds of the people who shape our world.
Get for just
YOU HAVE READ OF 8 FREE ARTICLES THIS MONTH.
FOR JUST
YOU HAVE READ OF 8 FREE ARTICLES THIS MONTH.
FOR JUST
Welcome to Commentary Magazine.
We hope you enjoy your visit.
As a visitor, you are allowed 8 free articles.
This is your first article.
You have read of 8 free articles this month.
YOU HAVE READ 8 OF 8
FREE ARTICLES THIS MONTH.
for full access to
CommentaryMagazine.com
INCLUDES FULL ACCESS TO:
Digital subscriber?
Print subscriber? Get free access »
Call to subscribe: 1-800-829-6270
You can also subscribe
on your computer at
CommentaryMagazine.com.
LOG IN WITH YOUR
COMMENTARY MAGAZINE ID
Don't have a CommentaryMagazine.com log in?
CREATE A COMMENTARY
LOG IN ID
Enter you email address and password below. A confirmation email will be sent to the email address that you provide.