Lay Empowerment and the Development of Puritanism

Francis Bremer

• Publisher: Palgrave Macmillan
• Year: 2016
• ISBN:
  9781137352897
• Topic: History
• Subtopic: North American History
• Index: History

A study of the rise and decline of puritanism in England and New England that focuses on the role of godly men and women. It explores the role of family devotions, lay conferences, prophesying and other means by which the laity influenced puritan belief and practice, and the efforts of the clergy to reduce lay power in the seventeenth century.

1

The Experience and Meaning of God’s Caress

A constant theme in the history of Christianity has been the struggle between those who rely on divine inspiration to define the faith and those who argue that truth should be established by the institutional church. The chapter of the broader story that this book explores features the tension that shaped the faith and practices of sixteenth- and seventeenth-century puritanism between scripturally aware laymen and laywomen, who believed themselves to be inspired by the Spirit, and university-trained clergy. There was a long prelude to this story. In the earliest days of faith, groups such as the gnostics, who asserted the value of personal, intuitive means to discern truth, were gradually forced to the margins, and their writings excluded from the “canon” of acceptable beliefs.¹ By the start of the third century there was a mainstream Catholic church in the west that asserted itself as the single authority able to “choose sacred texts for canonical status or compare the local creeds in Churches for a uniform direction in teaching.”² The Nicene Creed was a major step in the process of defining orthodoxy, produced at the general council that the emperor Constantine called to meet in the city of Nicaea in 325, and modified at the First Council of Constantinople (381).

Over the following centuries the institutional Christian church in the west, headed by the papacy, exerted ever-stronger authority in distinguishing acceptable from heretical beliefs and suppressing views deemed heretical. Some of the heresies were rooted in individual divine revelation that produced a different understanding of doctrine. The church asserted that its beliefs were grounded in the canonical scriptures, asserted to be the revealed word of God to men. The interpretation of those scriptures was the responsibility of the institutional church. The fact that until the first Guttenberg Bible was printed in the mid-1540s those sacred books were only available in laboriously copied manuscripts accessible primarily by clergy made it easier to maintain church authority over the meaning of the scriptures. A further safeguard was the fact that the biblical manuscripts were in Hebrew, Latin, and Greek—not in the vernacular tongues of early modern Europe.

As early as the Waldensian movement in the twelfth century and progressing with the Lollard and Hussite movements in the fourteenth and fifteen centuries, some Christians had asserted the equality of all believers.³ But it took the invention of printing to see such movements achieve significance. The Reformation of the sixteenth century was a critique of Catholic practices and teachings that was rooted in a different reading of the scriptures, but a reading that an ever-increasing number of Christians could test for themselves as a result of the printing revolution that made the texts more accessible. Printing also made available to a wider audience (albeit those who could read Latin) biblical commentaries and theological works by church fathers such as Augustine.⁴

Protestant reformers challenged the need for church authorities to explain what was in the word of God and demanded the publication of the Bible in the vernacular languages of Europe. Leaders such as Luther, Calvin, and Zwingli challenged the authority of the pope with the authority of scripture, but the meaning of scripture was not always clear, leading to variant forms of Protestantism. Luther’s doctrine of the priesthood of all believers placed the heart of the believer above the teachings and traditions of the church.⁵ Though his assertion of that doctrine was more nuanced than it has often been presented, it was embraced and even enhanced by many who would place the heart of the believer above the teachings and traditions of the institutional church.

As the scriptures became more accessible, believers struggled over how to interpret them. New attention was devoted to the texts themselves. Humanists emphasized the importance of textual accuracy and employed new skills in attempts to perfect the translation of the scriptures, going beyond the standard fourth-century Latin translation of St. Jerome. A key figure was Erasmus, who produced critical editions of a range of Christian texts, including a Greek New Testament.⁶

The humanist approach, adopted by many reformers, emphasized the application of the tools of reason to discern the true meaning of scripture, and thus elevated the role of those who had studied to learn those tools of interpretation. But others, while not denying the value of such learning, believed that human reason itself was corrupted by original sin and that true understanding was achievable only through the grace of God. The inspiration of the Holy Spirit enabled only those chosen by God to make sense of the scriptures. Over time, as we shall see, this emphasis on the inspiration of the Spirit could lead some to go so far as to see such an inner light as making the scriptures unnecessary. But most of the reformers we are dealing with saw the scriptures as God’s revealed word and accepted the value of both learning and inspiration as means to understand them, though at times disagreeing on the relative importance of each.

England’s puritans did not totally reject the use of reason in the search for truth in the Bible, and valued the scholarship of the church Fathers and other commentators on the scripture, but they placed a greater emphasis on the importance of the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. The Dorchester clergyman John White wrote that “a man when he is regenerate, hath no more faculties in his soul then he had before he was regenerate,” but “in the work of regeneration those abilities which the man had before are improved, and receive a farther strength to comprehend and work spiritually.”⁷ Such an emphasis was not limited to puritans, but it is their views that I wish to discuss briefly here and trace over time in the following chapters.

Puritans believed that those who were saved were transformed by the grace of God in ways that included the ability to read the scriptures with greater understanding than was possible for those who were not of the elect.⁸ As expressed by Richard Sibbes, “God, joining with the soul and spirit of a man whom he intends to convert … causeth him to see a divine majesty shining forth in the Scriptures.”⁹ And Thomas Goodwin wrote that

If we read the Scriptures, and to get the meaning of them, observe the connection of one thing with another by reason, yet there comes often a light of the Spirit beyond the height of reason, which, by that observation of the connection, seals this up to be the Holy Ghost’s meaning.¹⁰

Like Goodwin, John Davenport believed that while anyone could profit from reading the scriptures, only those whose understanding was illumined by the Spirit could truly understand it.¹¹ The light received from the “sanctifying spirit of God” was the “new light whereby we are enabled to see other things, or the same truths in a more spiritual and effectual manner.”¹²

Scripture was where God’s truth was revealed, and the inspiration of the Spirit was necessary for a clear understanding of that truth, and particularly how it applied to the individual believer. If the meaning of the scriptures was revealed by grace provided by the Spirit, and the Spirit bestowed grace on all who were God’s elect, then arguably the ordinary believer was as capable of discerning God’s truths as the best-educated minister. This was the belief that led to the empowerment of the laity. But, pushed too far, this emphasis on the Spirit could lead to problems.

Puritans believed that the purpose of the Spirit’s grace was to enable people to understand the true meaning of scripture. Most rejected the notion that the Spirit might offer insights that contradicted or superseded the message of the scripture. But a critical issue was whether such inspiration was limited to understanding the scriptures, or could reveal truths beyond the scriptures. The claim that she received immediate revelations would ultimately be the key justification for banishing Anne Hutchinson from Massachusetts. The Quaker belief in the breadth of the Spirit’s inspiration would lead to the separation of this sect from its puritan roots.

Even limiting the scope of the Spirit’s guidance to scriptural interpretation had its problems. Christians did not always agree on what it was that the Spirit revealed. This failure was seen as the result of the remnants of sin, which even those who were elect labored under. The desire to help individuals discern the true nature of their inspiration led many to emphasize the importance of communal discussion as a means of avoiding anarchy and achieving consensus where possible. One of the things that makes puritanism so difficult to define precisely is that many of those who helped shape the movement believed in an evolving understanding of truth, accepting that whatever they believed might be modified by further light. Those who recognized their imperfections were open to the idea that further light might lead to a better understanding of disputed points. John Robinson, the leader of the Leiden Pilgrims who came to the New World in 1620, advised his flock, “The Lord has more truth and light yet to break forth out of his holy word.”¹³ This was also accepted by John Winthrop who, in his lay sermon on “Christian Charity,” offered the hope that if they faithfully sought God, the New England colonists might “see much more of his wisdom, power, goodness and truth than formerly we have been associated with.”¹⁴ This openness was viewed less favorably by the Scottish Presbyterian Robert Baillie, who would criticize his Congregational opponents in the 1640s for what he called a “principle of mutability, whereby they profess their readiness to change any of their present tenets.”¹⁵

Empowered by the Spirit, the laity played a large role in seeking that further light and striving for unity if not uniformity. The puritans whom I will focus on urged individuals to read their Bibles, listen to sermons, and discuss the messages they received with friends and family in conferences. Conferences were viewed as a means of counteracting the anarchic tendencies, and reflected the value puritans placed on “sweet consent” and the communion of saints.¹⁶ In many congregations lay members (generally limited to males) were allowed and even encouraged to ask questions and even to present their own views by way of “prophesying.” Individuals sought verification of the testimony they received by corroboration from others. The views of educated clergy who were also visibly saints were important, but so too were the lay members of a gathered community of fellow saints.¹⁷ And in cases where a clergyman could not be found to minister to a group of Christians, lay preachers led the congregation in prayer and discussion of the faith.

For puritans the Spirit’s guidance in understanding the scriptures and thus God’s will was offered only to those who had been saved. The inspiration of the Spirit was not produced by a clergyman’s ordination or a layman’s education. While puritans believed strongly in the value of education, no amount of education could make one regenerate. God alone bestowed upon an individual the grace to see more clearly and understand more profoundly. The act of regeneration was an act of God whereby a new understanding and a new will was instilled in the elect. It was “wrought irresistibly, not issuing from the liberty of our choice.”¹⁸

The major part of the story that will be followed in this work is the ways in which the belief in the Spirit’s guidance of individuals led to various ways in which laymen, and even laywomen, were encouraged not only to take responsibility for their own faith, but to reach out in various ways to edify other members of the fellowship of saints. Another part of the story is the attempts to curb the democratic and individualistic elements of these beliefs. For some this would mean emphasizing the leadership role of the clergy within the congregation. Others would seek to curtail lay authority by requiring congregations to defer to the authority or advice of synods or assemblies.¹⁹

It is a mistake to read too much of later denominational forms into the evolution of puritanism in the sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries, though for the most part those who sought greater lay empowerment favored congregational forms. Numerous individuals, some lay and some clerical, were searching for a better understanding of God’s way. Inspired by the Spirit and shaped by circumstances, they struggled to reform England. The communities they created were expressions of their sense of being elect and their experience of communion. What follows is their story.

2

Thinking of the Laity in the English Reformation

The English Reformation was begun by a layman who happened to be king.¹ Henry VIII, of course, saw himself as a special layman, divinely anointed as king. But the fact remains that the impetus against the right of the papacy to define doctrine and practice in the Catholic Church came from a layman who placed his own interpretation of a key text in Leviticus above that of the pope and then sought learned opinion to support his position. Equally important in our story is that when the split with Rome became inevitable, it was the English Parliament, comprised mostly of laymen (abetted by churchmen in the House of Lords) that invested the king with the title of Supreme Head of the Church in England. Some would later claim that since the monarch’s authority derived from Parliament, that body actually had the right to determine the affairs of the church, a position strongly rejected by future monarchs, but supported by those who saw Parliament as means of pushing for further reform. And while Archbishop Thomas Cranmer arguably played the critical role in shaping the Protestant Church of England, an important role was also played by the layman Thomas Cromwell, whom Henry VIII appointed vicar general and vice-regent of the king in “Spirituals.”²

There was, of course, a long history of clashes between powerful laymen and the Catholic Church. One thinks of the Investiture Controversy of the eleventh century, with Pope Gregory VII excommunicating the future Emperor Henry IV over the latter’s claim to present bishops with symbols of sacred authority. In England one of the most famous clashes was between King Henry II and the Archbishop of Canterbury, Thomas Beckett, which led to the Archbishop’s murder in his own cathedral in 1170.³ These and similar controversies centered on issues of power and wealth debated between secular and religious princes.

There were also clashes resulting from the efforts of ordinary believers to shape religious understanding and practice. Looking at Europe as a whole these would include the Waldensian movement started by the wealthy Lyon merchant Peter Valdes, or Waldo, around 1170, and the fifteenth-century preaching by the German shepherd and street entertainer Hans Bohm, or Behem.⁴ Focusing on England, the Lollards of the fourteenth century relied more on “the secret motions in private men” than they did on priests for defining the faith, with laymen engaged in reading and discussing scripture as well as preaching.⁵ Lollards met together in groups that ranged from a handful to over a hundred, where, according to one scholar, “they read and discussed the scriptures, heard sermons, and distributed books. These sessions, often called ‘conventicles and schools,’ could on occasion last through the night.”⁶ John Skilly, a miller in Norfolk, was but one of many who, when confronted by the authorities, expressed views that challenged the authority of priests and asserted lay authority.⁷ An Oxford scholar who was a Lollard claimed that “every man, holy and predestined to etern...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Title Page
• Copyright
• Contents
• Acknowledgments
• Introduction
• 1. The Experience and Meaning of God’s Caress
• 2. Thinking of the Laity in the English Reformation
• 3. Lay Puritans in Stuart England
• 4. Gatherings of the Saints in England and the Netherlands
• 5. Shaping the New England Way
• 6. The Free Grace Controversy and Redefining the Role of Lay Believers
• 7. The Role of the Laity in England’s Puritan Revolution
• 8. Varieties of Lay Enthusiasm in New England and England
• 9. Responding to the Challenges of Diversity, 1640–60
• 10. Clergy and Laity in the Later Seventeenth Century
• Epilogue: Looking Backwards, and Ahead
• Notes
• Bibliography
• Index