Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T18:42:33.901Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Ecclesiology, Piety, and Presbyterian and Independent Polemics During the Early Years of the English Revolution

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 May 2015

Youngkwon Chung
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Religious controversy swept across England during the revolutionary decades of the 1640s and 1650s. Historians have studied the attendant ecclesiological debates meticulously. The piety as practiced by the puritans has also been carefully examined. Yet generally, these two subjects of ecclesiology and piety have been kept as separate compartments of analysis. The plethora of tracts that rolled off the press during the initial years of the 1640s, nevertheless, shows that many contemporary polemicists were keen to tie the two themes together. The Presbyterian and Independent polemicists were no exception. As this article seeks to demonstrate, a common feature of their publications was the belief that their preferred ecclesiastical polity best served the purpose of promoting individual piety and creating a godly society. Thus the Presbyterian and Independent conflict waged not only over issues of ecclesiology proper such as categories of church offices and of governing councils or composition of church membership to which historians have directed their attention hitherto, but also over questions of how ecclesiology affected piety. Such conflict was a reflection of the commitment of Presbyterians and Independents to their respective vision of reformation for the country. More broadly, this article shows a facet of religious controversy that ultimately led to the disintegration of the godly community and weakened the base of support for the Commonwealth and the Protectorate.

Type
Articles
Information
Church History , Volume 84 , Issue 2 , June 2015 , pp. 345 - 368
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of Church History 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Edwards, Thomas, Reasons against the Independant Government of particular Congregations (London, 1641)Google Scholar, epistle dedicatory.

2 Drysdale, A. H., History of the Presbyterians in England: Their Rise, Decline, and Revival (London: Publication Committee of the Presbyterian Church of England, 1889), 264–331Google Scholar. For a background to the pamphlet controversy, see Woolrych, Austin, Britain in Revolution 1625–1660 (New York: Oxford University, 2002), 155–233CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Holmes, Clive, Why Was Charles I Executed? (London: Hambledon Continuum, 2006), 1–69Google Scholar; Braddick, Michael, God's Fury, England's Fire: A New History of the English Civil Wars (London: Allen Lane, 2009), 113–238Google Scholar.

3 Edwards, Reasons against Independant Government, epistle dedicatory.

4 Henderson, Alexander, The Government and Order of the Church of Scotland (Edinburgh, 1643)Google Scholar, sig. A2. Also see L. Charles Jackson, “For Kirk and Kingdom: The Public Career of Alexander Henderson 1637–1646” (PhD diss., University of Leicester, 2012), ch. 4.

5 Goodwin, Thomas, Nye, Philip, Simpson, Sidrach, Burroughes, Jeremiah, and Bridge, William, An Apologeticall Narration, Humbly Submitted to the Honourable Houses of Parliament (London, 1643)Google Scholar, 4. This highly controversial pamphlet was most likely written in late 1643. The London bookseller, George Thomason dated his copy, “January 3d” of 1644.

6 Goodwin et al., Apologeticall Narration, 9.

7 Anon., Syons Prerogative Royal (London, 1641)Google Scholar, 6, 7. This tract affirmed the typical Congregational view that civil magistrates retained jurisdictional authority over individual churches.

8 Drysdale, History of the Presbyterians, 264–331.

9 Burton, Henry, Christ on His Throne (London, 1640)Google Scholar; Burton, Henry, The Protestation Protested (London, 1641)Google Scholar. Marshall, Stephen et al. , An Answer to a Book Entituled An Humble Remonstrance (London, 1641)Google Scholar; Marshall, Stephen et al. , A Vindication of the Answer (London, 1641)Google Scholar.

10 See Tolmie, Murray, The Triumph of the Saints: the Separate Churches of London, 1616–1649 (New York: Cambridge University, 1977), 48Google Scholar; Como, David, “Secret Printing, the Crisis of 1640, and the Origins of Civil War Radicalism,” Past and Present 196 (2007): 81CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Such tracts included Anon., The Presbyteriall Government Examined, Wherein the weaknesse of their grounds are unfolded (London, 1641)Google Scholar; Cotton, John, The Doctrine of the Church, to Which is Committed the Keyes of the Kingdom of Heaven (London, 1642)Google Scholar; Anon., The Orders for Ecclesiastical Discipline . . . in His Maiesties Dominions by the Auncient Ministers, Elders, and Deacons of the Iles of Gurnsey, Gersey, Spark, and Alderny (London, 1642)Google Scholar; Paget, John, A Defence of Church Government Exercised in Presbyteriall, Classicall, & Synodall Assemblies (London, 1641)Google Scholar. Some publications were by those who had been deceased prior to 1640.

11 Haller, William, Liberty and Reformation in the Puritan Revolution (New York: Columbia University, 1967), 112–128Google Scholar; Yule, George, Puritans in Politics: The Religious Legislation of the Long Parliament 1640–1647 (Abingdon: Sutton Courtenay, 1981), 106–207Google Scholar; Bradley, Rosemary, “The Failure of Accommodation: Religious Conflict between the Presbyterians and Independents in the Westminster Assembly 1643–1646,” Journal of Religious History 12, no. 1 (June 1982)CrossRefGoogle Scholar. The more general works on the English Civil War echo this sentiment. Woolrych, Britain in Revolution, 270, 297–300; Braddick, God's Fury, England's Fire, 309–312, 337–347.

12 Goodwin et al., Apologeticall Narration, 3.

13 Ha, Polly, English Presbyterianism, 1590–1640 (Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University, 2011)Google Scholar, 144, 155.

14 Vernon, Elliot, “A Ministry of the Gospel: the Presbyterians during the English Revolution,” in Religion in Revolutionary England, eds. Durston, Christopher and Maltby, Judith (Manchester: Manchester University, 2006), 116Google Scholar. Also see Elliot Vernon, “Sion College Conclave and London Presbyterianism during the English Revolution” (PhD diss., Cambridge University, 1999); Ann Hughes, “‘The Public Profession of These Nations:’ the National Church in Interregnum England,” in Religion in Revolutionary England, 94, 109. Also see Hughes, Ann, “The Frustrations of the Godly,” in Revolution and Restoration: England in the 1650s, ed. Morrill, John (London: Collins and Brown, 1992), 70–90Google Scholar.

15 Nuttall, Geoffrey, Visible Saints: The Congregational Way 1640–1660, 2nd ed. (Weston Rhyn: Quinta, 2001), xGoogle Scholar.

16 Lim, Paul, “Puritans and the Church of England: Historiography and Ecclesiology,” in The Cambridge Companion to Puritanism, eds. Coffey, John and Lim, Paul (New York: Cambridge University, 2008), 236Google Scholar.

17 For instance, Shaw's discussion of such texts as the Directory for Public Worship, Confession of Faith, and Larger and Shorter Catechisms was concerned more with the process of its formulation and conflict among interested parties rather than the nature of piety it outlined. Shaw, William, A History of the English Church during the Civil Wars and under the Interregnum 1640–1660, 2 vols. (London: Longmans, Green Co., 1900) iiGoogle Scholar, 338–384. Also see Drysdale, History of the Presbyterians, 264–331.

18 For example, see Spurr, John, English Puritanism 1603–1689 (Basingstoke: Macmillan, 1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

19 A good example of this sort of an argumentation is Rutherford, Samuel's A Peaceable and Temperate Plea for Pauls Presbyterie in Scotland (London, 1642)Google Scholar.

20 Milton, John, The Reason of Church Government Urged against Prelaty (London, 1641), 6Google Scholar.

21 Anon., Orders for Ecclesiasticall Discipline, 19.

22 Anon., Complaints concerning Corruptions and Grievances in Church Government (n.p., 1641)Google Scholar, 6, 7.

23 Anon., The Forme of Prayers and Administration of the Sacraments, etc. Used in the English Congregation at Geneva (London, 1643), 9Google Scholar.

24 Paget, Defence of Church Government, 29.

25 Anon., Complaints concerning Corruptions, 6, 7.

26 Anon., The Beauty of Godly Government in a Church Reformed (n.p., 1641), 7Google Scholar, 8.

27 Anon., An Appeale to Every Impartiall, Judicious, and Godly Reader Whether the Presbyterie or Prelacie Be Better Church Government (London, 1641), 4Google Scholar, 5. This tract was reissued in London three years later under the title, The Cleere Antithesis or Diametricall Opposition between Presbytery and Prelacy. George Thompson identified Downing as the author of this tract. Donagan, Barbara, “Downing, Calybute” in Oxford Dictionary of National Biography online [hereafter ODNB], eds. Matthew, Collin and Harrison, Brian (New York: Oxford University, 2004)Google Scholar.

28 Anon., Beauty of Godly Government, 7, 8.

29 Anon., An Appeale to Every Impartiall, Judicious, and Godly Reader, 9.

30 Gillespie, George, An Assertion of the Government of the Church of Scotland (Edinburgh, 1641), 8–17Google Scholar.

31 Anon., Englands Glory in Her Royall King and Honourable Assembly in High Court of Parliament, above Her former Usurped Lordly Bishops Synod (n.p., 1641)Google Scholar.

32 Baillie, Robert, Prelacie is Miserie: or the Suppressing of Prelaticall Government and Establishing of Provintiall, and Nationall Sinods (London, 1641), 7Google Scholar, 8.

33 Henderson, Government and Order of the Church, 31.

34 Anon., The Ecclesiasticall Discipline of the Reformed Churches in France (London, 1642), 27Google Scholar.

35 Anon., Appeale to Every Impartiall, Judicious, and Godly Reader, 10. The presence of the monarch or a royal commissioner was also a feature of the national synod. See anon., Beauty of Godly Government, 10.

36 Deacons attended the meetings of a consistory, but this was only to make factual report of their activity rather than to voice their opinion.

37 Anon., Ecclesiasticall Discipline of Reformed Churches, 30; Anon., Beauty of Godly Government, 10, 11.

38 Henderson, Government and Order of the Church, 59.

39 Gillespie, Government of the Church of Scotland, 8–17.

40 Anon., Syons Prerogative Royal, 13.

41 Davenport, John, The Profession of the Faith (London, 1642), 7Google Scholar, 8.

42 Anon., Syons Prerogative Royal, 8, 9; Goodwin et al., Apologeticall Narration, 12–19.

43 Goodwin et al. Apologeticall Narration, 9.

44 Anon., Presbyteriall Government Examined, 10

45 Anon., Syons Prerogative Royal, 24.

46 Anon., Presbyteriall Government Examined, 10, 11. Also see Syons Prerogative Royal, 23.

47 Anon., Presbyteriall Government Examined, 5.

48 Anon., Syons Prerogative Royal, 7, 8.

49 Paul, Robert S., The Assembly of the Lord: Politics and Religion in the Westminster Assembly and the “Grand Debate” (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1985), 146–154Google Scholar.

50 Anon., Presbyteriall Government Examined, 12–15.

51 Anon., Orders for Ecclesiasticall Discipline, 30.

52 Ibid.

53 Milton, John, Of Reformation touching Church Discipline in England (n.p., 1641), 73Google Scholar.

54 Anon., Forme of Prayers, 7.

55 Henderson, Government and Order of the Church, 7–9.

56 Marshall et al., An Answer, 33.

57 Cotton, John, The True Constitution of a particular Visible Church, Proved by Scripture (London, 1642), 10Google Scholar.

58 Anon., Syons Prerogative Royal, 29, 30.

59 Henderson, Government and Order of the Church, 7, 9.

60 Edwards, Reasons against Independant Government, 13, 14.

61 Paget, Defence of Church Government, 29.

62 Burton, Protestation Protested, sig. C2.

63 Cotton, True Constitution, 10.

64 Ibid., 13.

65 Goodwin et al., Apologeticall Narration, 6, 7, 11.

66 Geree, John, Vindiciae Voti (London, 1641)Google Scholar, sig. E2; Kenneth Gibson, “John Geree” ODNB online.

67 Goodwin et al. Apologeticall Narration, 4.

68 Anon., Presbyteriall Government Examined, 6, 7.

69 Burton, Protestation Protested, sig. B3.

70 Ibid., sig. C.

71 Goodwin et al., Apologeticall Narration, 8.

72 Haller, Liberty and Reformation, 113, 114; Woolrych, Britain in Revolution, 297.

73 Henderson, Government and Order of the Church, 18.

74 Anon., Ecclesiastical Discipline of Reformed Churches, 4.

75 Marshall et al. An Answer, 24, 91.

76 John 21:15–17 and I Peter 5:1–4, English Standard Version.

77 Henderson, Government and Order of the Church, 17. Also see Milton, Of Reformation, 51.

78 Anon., Orders for Ecclesiastical Discipline, 24, 25.

79 Anon., Ecclesiastical Discipline of the Reformed Churches, 6.

80 Paul, Assembly of the Lord, 158–163.

81 Anon., Orders for Ecclesiasticall Discipline, 6.

82 Henderson, Government and Order of the Church, 28–30.

83 Ibid.

84 Ibid.

85 Anon., Orders for Ecclesiasticall Discipline, 6.

86 Cotton, John, The Doctrine of the Church, to Which Is Committed the Keyes of the Kingdome of Heaven (London, 1642), 2Google Scholar.

87 Cotton, Doctrine of the Church, 2.

88 Anon., Syons Prerogative Royal, 28.

89 Quoted in Paul, Assembly of the Lord, 160.

90 Cotton, Doctrine of the Church, 2.

91 Abbott, William, “Ruling Eldership in Civil War England, the Scottish Kirk, and Early New England: A Comparative Study of Secular and Spiritual Aspects,” Church History 75, no. 1 (March 2006): 38CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

92 Henderson, Government and Order of the Church, sig. A2.

93 Ibid., 30.

94 Ibid.

95 Gillespie, Government of Church of Scotland, 16.

96 Henderson, Government and Order of the Church, 30.

97 Paget, Defence of Church Government, epistle dedicatory.

98 Anon., Ecclesiastical Discipline of Reformed Churches, 14.

99 Anon., Forme of Prayers, 8.

100 Also see Abbott, “Ruling Eldership.”

101 Goodwin et al., Apologeticall Narration, 8. Also see Paul, Assembly of the Lord, 142.

102 Anon., Presbyteriall Government Examined, 1.

103 Cotton, Doctrine of the Church, 3.

104 Anon., Presbyteriall Government Examined, 1, 4.

105 Cotton, Doctrine of the Church, 4; Paul, Assembly of the Lord, 172, 173, 201. Also see Van Dixhoorn, Chad, The Minutes and Papers of the Westminster Assembly 1643–1652, 5 vols. (New York: Oxford University, 2012) iiGoogle Scholar, 12.

106 Anon., Orders for Ecclesiasticall Discipline, 8, 9.

107 I Timothy 3:1–13, ESV; Cotton, Doctrine of the Church, 3.

108 Milton, Of Reformation, 29.

109 Acts 6:1–7, ESV.

110 For a merging of religious and constitutional aspects of conflict in Civil War England, see Orr, D. Alan, “Sovereignty, Supremacy and the Origins of the English Civil War,” History 87, no. 2 (October 2002): 474–490CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Also see Braddick, Michael J., “History, Liberty, Reformation and the Cause: Parliamentarian Military and Ideological Escalation in 1643,” in The Experience of the Revolution in Stuart Britain and Ireland, eds. Braddick, Michael J. and Smith, David L. (New York: Cambridge University, 2011), 117–134CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

111 Also see An Vindication of the Presbyteriall Government and Ministry: Together with an Exhortation to All the Ministers, Elders, and People (London, 1649)Google Scholar. The Presbyterian church government as constructed on paper by the Assembly of Divines and sent to the Houses in 1645 would subsequently acquire the trappings of Erastianism with supreme authority vested in parliament. See Yule, Puritans in Politics, 52; Shaw, History of the English Church, 195–201.

112 Durston, Christopher and Eales, Jacqueline eds., The Culture of English Puritanism 1560–1700 (Basingstoke: Macmillan, 1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Spurr, English Puritanism, 153–201; Davies, Horton, The Worship of the English Puritans (Morgan, Penn.: Soli Deo Gloria, 1997)Google Scholar; Coffey and Lim, Cambridge Companion to Puritanism, chs. 11 and 16.