SOURCE: Filetti, Jean S. “Wigglesworth's The Day of Doom.” Explicator 58, no. 3 (spring 2000): 127-30.

[In this essay, Filetti interprets the poem The Day of Doom by attempting to infer Wigglesworth's methods of teaching his readers, focusing on Wigglesworth's use and arrangement of biblical parables.]

Michael Wigglesworth acknowledged that he was willing to “play the fool this once for Christ” if that ornamentation—poetry—helped instruct and bring others to the path of righteousness (qtd. Nye 38). With the goal to instruct, why does Wigglesworth, a pastor-poet knowledgeable about the entire range of biblical stories, use Gospel parables exclusively in his poem The Day of Doom (1662)? What do the parables he selects and his decoding of them tell us about his teaching method?

The parables Wigglesworth selects teach the lesson that depending on one's choice, there is reward or punishment. Wigglesworth's listeners, who must have found likenesses of themselves in the groups of sinners who plead their cases on Judgment Day, are offered instruction in decision-making so that they might secure their own salvation. He also selects only those parables found in Matthew and Luke, making no reference to those in Mark or John. This rejection of the other Gospels is, no doubt, purposeful because the parables in Matthew and Luke are more intelligible and are considered “genuine instruments for teaching the church” (Johnson 183). Wigglesworth's selection process shows an instructional method that is unified and understandable.

Furthermore, Wigglesworth's decoding of the parables indicates his desire to reach souls that are savable, “readers with yet another chance to knock at the door of redemption” (Hammond 62). In addition to crafting an understandable, focused content, his instructional method also carefully moves from the less-difficult parables to those that are more complex and carry multiple messages. For example, in stanza 2 Wigglesworth juxtaposes the more complex and rich parable of the ten virgins with the more easily understood parable of the rich fool, from Luke 12 referenced in the first stanza. Because it is Wigglesworth's purpose to instruct his readers, he places first the parable that is the easier to understand—the parable of the rich fool. The Puritans, who denounced placing stock in the things of this world, would have condemned the rich fool who declares: “Soul, you have ample goods laid up for many years; take your ease, eat, drink, be merry” (Luke 12.19 RSV). The Puritans clearly understood that “a man's life does not consist in the abundance of his possessions” (Luke 12.15).

In stanza 2, however, Wigglesworth is quick to point out that a life of austerity and self-denial is not enough. Those who would be sheep on the Judgment Day are those whose lives are spent not just in denouncing the treasures of this world but in pursuing spiritual nourishment. Wigglesworth employs the more complex lesson in the parable of the ten virgins to remind his readers of the need for spiritual preparedness. This parable, which pictures ten maidens, all with lamps, waiting for the Lord, suggests what one's spiritual attitude should be cultivated during one's earthly years. Not only must the lamp—the body—be kept in a state of worthiness, but the oil or light—the spirit—within the lamp must be present and ready to receive the “bridegroom”—Christ. The parable concludes by emphasizing that the “bridegroom” will not wait for those who are not spiritually prepared. When the five virgins who went searching for oil knock on the already closed door to the marriage feast, the bridegroom replies: “‘Truly, I say to you, I do not know you.’ Watch therefore, for you know neither the day nor the hour” (Matthew 25.12-13). Wigglesworth, in interpreting this parable, writes:

Wallowing in all kind of sin,
          vile wretches lay secure:
The best of men had scarcely then
          their Lamps kept in good ure.
Virgins unwise, who through disguise
          amongst the best were number'd
Had clos'd their eyes; yea, and the wise
          through sloth and frailty slumber'd.

(stanza 2)

Wigglesworth compares the biblical five virgins who did not have enough oil or light to the men who do not keep their lamps in good condition. He attributes their moral deficiency to laziness and frailty. This moral deficiency is much less obvious than the rich man's love of worldly goods, but in both parables the dramatic detail is intended to emphasize the folly of unpreparedness. With this foundation, Wigglesworth instructs his readers on the proper state of being spiritually awakened and prepared.

In using Gospel parables to instruct his readers, besides allowing the easier parables to be springboards into the more difficult ones, Wigglesworth also breaks down and analyzes the more difficult parables for his readers. He probably learned this analytic procedure during his schooling at Harvard. In his biography of Michael Wigglesworth, Richard Crowder notes: “In constructing their sermons, the students followed the procedure set down in the preceding century by Petrus Ramus. Having started with a text from the Bible, they separated it into ‘arguments,’ which in turn were rearranged to present the ‘doctrines’ the sermon proposed to teach” (37-38).¹

Wigglesworth, drawing on this training, takes the parable of the marriage feast from Matthew 22.1-14 and weaves it through the judge's response to the second group of hypocrites. He elaborates on various messages in the parable and through this elaboration teaches several lessons.

The main argument of these hypocrites is that they have partaken of communion, have received saving grace from it, and, therefore, should be among the sheep. The biblical parable, however, notes that “both bad and good” are invited to the table (Matthew 22.10). The hypocrites, therefore, cannot assume that the partaking of Communion ensures salvation. The receiver is called on to be transformed. Wigglesworth compares the hypocrites to those who come to the feast without wedding garments and, as a result, are bound hand and foot and cast into complete darkness:

You say y'have been my Presence in:
          but friends, how came you there
With Rainment vile that did defile
          and quite disgrace my Cheer?

(stanza 76)

This reply is placed in the first stanza of the Lord's reply, and the next four stanzas elaborate on what constitutes improper attire. Wigglesworth proposes that the garment is not one of outward attire but rather an inward attire or attitude. In stanzas 77-80, the judge first chastises the hypocrites for taking Communion and not being moved or frightened by it, and then he condemns them for taking Communion because they wanted to go to heaven and not because they loved the Lord. It is this attitude that has caused them to be dressed in a “sordid hew” and “cloaked [in] Wickedness.”

Wigglesworth also uses the parable to teach a lesson on what earthly marriage should be. The Lord reminds the hypocrites that marriage should not be based on “Lust” and that lasting happiness depends on a “spiritual” union, one in which the “Creator” is loved more than the “Creature” (stanza 79).

Grounding his instruction, as Christ does, in the parable, Wigglesworth indicates his profound belief that his listeners, like Christ's disciples, are capable of making right choices if they receive understandable instruction.

Note

1. For a fuller discussion of the influence of Petrus Ramus on Wigglesworth, see John C. Adams.

Works Cited

Adams, John C. “Alexander Richardson and the Ramist Poetics of Michael Wigglesworth.” Early American Literature 25 (1990): 271-88.

Crowder, Richard. No Featherbed to Heaven: A Biography of Michael Wigglesworth 1631-1705. East Lansing: Michigan State UP, 1962.

Hammond, Jeffrey A. “‘Ladders of Your Own’: The Day of Doom and the Repudiation of ‘Carnal Reason.’” Early American Literature 19 (1984): 42-67.

Johnson, Luke T. The Writings of the New Testament: An Interpretation. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1986.

Nye, Russel B. American Literary History: 1607-1830. New York: Knopf, 1970.

Wigglesworth, Michael. The Day of Doom. Seventeenth-Century American Poetry. Ed. Harrison T. Meserole. New York: Norton, 1968. 54-113.