reflection - 7

how patrick Henry's speech exemplifies the Rationalism writing style

The Speech to the Second Virginia Parliament by Patrick Henry is quite a fired up speech and I can feel the power in Mr. Henry's thoughts as I read this. This writing most definitely reflects the writing of the Rationalism period. It is incredible to see the immense difference between the writing style of the Puritans and the writing style of the Rationalism era. There is a huge difference between the two and they take place so close in time to each other! In the Puritan era, the people fully believed in God and believed that he had a plan for everyone, his hand was completely interfering with the way people lived, they all thought obeying him and his commands and having faith in him was the sure way to salvation. They also never questioned God's authority, or any authority above them, for that matter. They believed that God was with them through everything and that his providence would help them through life if they had faith in Him and were living for Him.

As the reader begins reading this speech by Mr. Patrick Henry, you see him set the stage for his speech by setting a tone of what his speech will be like and basically prepares the men for what is to come in his speech by indicating that they will be offended but they should listen to his standpoint because he believes he is raising many good points. In his opening two sentences he states "And in proportion to the magnitude of the subject ought to be the freedom of the debate. It is only in this way that we can hope to arrive at truth, and fulfill the great responsibility which we hold to God and our country" (Henry 112). This statement was certainly a lofty one, at that! The Puritans believed that God was the one who held the truth and He was the truth. For Henry to suggest that debate is the key to finding truth, is an immensely bold move, and frankly a risky statement. For him to boldly make this case is a sudden indication of the difference in the Puritan era and the rationalism era. Henry knows that people will disagree with his claim of debate, so he then says "Should I keep back my opinions at such a time, through fear of giving offense, I should consider myself as guilty of treason toward my country, and as an act of disloyalty toward the Majesty of Heaven, which I revere above all earthly things" (Henry 112). The Puritans would commonly keep back their opinions, for they believed it was not their opinions that mattered, but God's. However, Henry is saying that for him to keep back his opinions would be committing treason to his country! This I'm sure is used to get the attention of the people listening to his speech and to get them thinking about it. And then on top of that, he says that it would be disloyal to God for him to keep his opinion to himself. This now makes things interesting, because he is combining reason and religion. The people are not used to this, for Puritans only followed religion, not reason. Henry's speech puts the people in an interesting position. The people had thought always that religion was correct, but Henry's case was so logical and rational that they could not discard what he said, even if they wanted to.

As another act of persuasion Henry at one point, asks, " Are we disposed to be of the number of those who, having eyes, see not, and having ears, hear not, the things which so nearly concern their temporal salvation?" (Henry 112). This is a very good persuasion technique, because he basically is asking the people if they should live like dumb people and not question and dig deeper to see what the truth is. He uses rhetorical questions many times throughout his speech. This is another way to show that this is a writing of the Rational era, because he is raising such a point and questioning his authorities, which people never before would have done.

Henry, Patrick. "Speech to the Second Virginia Convention." Comp. Wilhelm, Jeffrey D. Glencoe Literature. AmericanLiterature ed. Columbus: McGraw-Hill Companies, 2009. 112-113 Print.