Kingdom Of Matthias Rhetorical Analysis

Paul Johnson and Sean Wilentz present an almost antithesis to the Second Great Awakening with The Kingdom of Matthias. The religious revival movement of the mid 1800’s emphasized a host of things previously unheard of by the zealots of the 18th century. Women were empowered in their roles of spirituality and salvation became a journey instead of a destination. I consider the mark of the Second Awakening to be an opportunity to define religion and what it means to you—within the parameters of the multiple evangelical and perfectionist movements. Johnson and Wilentz argument in the novel is that with “fanatics” like Thomas Finney, who was a leader in the growing evangelical movement, comes an abuse of the independent control of one’s relationship with god. The author’s emphasize the point by telling the dramatic tale of Prophet Matthias and the sermons that earned him a following. The blind devotion of his followers shows the lost ideologies of those who had previously thought they had it all figured out. They had come from strong, Christian backgrounds that satisfied and fulfilled what they perceived to be necessary out of religion. But as the supposed perspectives of God, Jesus and all Messiahs alike shifted, many people found themselves reaching for a sense of perfection and honesty in their religion. The most prominent character in this whirlwind novel like story is Prophet Matthias. Born Robert Matthews, he was raised strictly Catholic in a settlement in the countries of New York. His eccentric sensibilities didn’t truly show themselves until he was already married and had moved into a more industrial area with his family. When his good fortune ran out, he converted several times, too many different religions. This sort of freedom and lack of identity in his faith seemed to twist his understanding of salvation. What he was raised in, the strict idea of following a religion that saved you before you were even born, didn’t have the same strength as it did in his younger years. The definition of Religion was almost too vague in the midst of the Second Great Awakening, which I believe is exhibited by Johnson and Wilentz argument as well as Prophet Matthias’ story. Robert Matthews ceased to be a father and husband, and became a message from the lord, meant to combat the gentile and feminine Christianity that had reared its head. It was his responsibility to preach his understanding of what faith truly was. “In short, Matthias would damn the enemies of the Jews—Above all, the meek Christian devils and their disobedient women.” (Johnson, Wilentz, pg. 94) When Matthias got it in his head that he was a prophet of the Lord, he meant to spread his message. He began by meeting with Elijah Pierson and his accolades; Elijah, who had always been pious, had recently been driven mad by the death of his wife. In this weakness Matthias struck out at Pierson. The two would end up having one of the most tumultuous and controversial relationships among the players. Elijah came from an equally zealous and strict religious background, participating in missionary work through his Christian church. He and his wife worked hard to redeem the local prostitutes. Elijah subscribed to the very same form of Christianity and evangelicalism that was revolutionizing religion. When his wife passed, Elijah lost this part of him. Searching for something to fill this void, Elijah met Matthias. This is an excellent example of how Johnson and Wilentz backed up their argument; by …show more content…
While it contradicted many of the values set forth, times of transition will always lead to some extreme alternative groups. It was a complete shuffling of the power hierarchy, the values and even the goals of religion. The one aspect of the Second Great Awakening that was inherited by Matthias was the directive to convert. Previously, if you did not live within the community of religion your whole life, you were not welcome. With Finney and Robert Matthews, we see that conversion is very important—even if they are for drastically different reasons. But they also expressed a good argument as to the sentiment of the masses. When Matthias was caught, there was outrage punctuating the shifting emotions of th public away from Matthias’ perspective and towards religious