Puritans, Protestants, Persecution

I think you need a better history book. In reality what is know now as reformed or Calvinist is what developed after the reformatoion. The Puritans were most definitely Calvinists and much of reformed thought comes from them. I will try to do a better job of answering later when I am not using mt fat finger on this small phone

The doctrines of Grace can be demonstrated from the Gospel of John alone.

For Reformation and Puritan history, I would check out THIS and go HERE, and Vol VII and VIII of Philip Schaff's HCC.

singlecandle said:

"The Puritans...were staunch Protestants,
they agreed wholeheartedly with the Anglican
Creed. They thought that the old ceremonies
and practices, however, were too much
like those of the Roman Catholic Church.
The Anglican Church, they said, must be
"purified" of such corruptions."
United States History for Christian Schools
T.Keesee and M. Sidwell

So, the Puritans were basically in agreement
with Anglican doctrine just not Anglican practice?
Puritans were not necessarily Calvinists?

Click to expand...

I'm not impressed with this book. First, Anglicanism isn't credal. There isn't really an Anglican Creed. The Anglican church started for political reasons, because the King wanted a divorce, which ordinarily the Pope would have granted, but for political reasons was unable to. However some people also wanted to become Protestant. But others didn't. To this day, the Anglican church has a mix of people who are nearly Catholic and those who are strongly Protestant, typically Reformed.

The Puritans were on the Protestant side of Anglicanism. The term is complex because it lasted over a period of time when what was happening in the Anglican church was changing. In general the term it used for those who wanted the most serious reformation of the Church. It includes both theology and practice. I would say that Puritans are by definition Calvinist.

See Puritan - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"The Reformation's rapid spread drew theological
as well as actual battle lines across Europe.
Catholic armies were fielded to crush the Protestants
into submission, engulfing the continent with
intermittent war from the 1520s until the middle of the
1600s."
United States History for Christian Schools
T. Keesee and M Sidwell

Click to expand...

Of course there were Protestant armies too. For a central part of the conflict, see Thirty Years' War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. The conflict wasn't just religious. There were political and economic issues as well. Nevertheless, I find it hard to avoid saying that Protestantism was stopped primarily by military force.

Mostly, the Protestants are depicted as being
hunted Roman Catholic Dissidents not staunch
Calvinists.
So, during this time of great persecution the reformers were not complete
adherents to the TULIP doctrine?

Click to expand...

There were a number of different kinds of Protestant. This includes Lutherans, Reformed (i.e. Calvinists), and the radical Reformation (sort of Baptists, though there are differences). Lutherans were at least as involved in the wars as Reformed. The radical Reformation was persecuted by everyone. Radical Reformation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"Martin Luther was the pioneer, but
other reformers quickly rose up: Ulrich
Zwingli in the Swiss canton of Zurich, John
Calvin in Geneva and France, John Knox in
Scotland, William Tyndale and Thomas Cranmer
in England, and Menno Simons in the Netherlands.
The geographic diversity of the Reformation
mirrored its theological diversity."
United States History for Christian Schools
T. Keesee and M. Sidwell

Click to expand...

Remember, Luther wasn't the first. There were people with similar ideas throughout the Middle Ages. Most recently Hus, and some English folks as well. But the people listed above are key Reformers in the 16th Cent. In general that paragraph is a fair description. But one of the advances in recent scholarship on the Reformation (by recent I mean 40 years or so) is understanding just how closely tied it was to things going on in the late medieval period. If you have serious interest in the Reformation, I strongly recommend a good Reformation history.

Sounds like to be Reformed or Puritan does
not necessarily mean that you embrace
Calvinism and I guess thinking that most
of the persecution that took place during that
time was towards Calvinists is bad history.

Click to expand...

There's a quirk of terminology. "Reformed" is used for one specific part of the Reformation. It refers to a movement associated with both Zwingli and Calvin. Today the term Reformed means pretty much the same as Calvinist. However the Reformation consisted of more than just Reformed. It included Lutheran and the Radical Reformation.

"The Reformers were unified in their belief in
the absolute authority of Scripture and the priesthood
of all believers(that believers can pray to God directly
and interpret the Scripture without the need for an
intermediary priest.)
However, agreement on these Biblical
fundamentals ensured that there would be
disagreement among the Protestant groups.
If Christians could now interpret the Bible for
themselves, they would not all reach the same
conclusions on all the issues."
United States History for Christian Schools
T. Keesee and M. Sidwell

Has Calvinism always been just a drop in the
sea of theology?!

Click to expand...

Sort of. First, Lutherans and Reformed agreed on many things. The magnitude of the disagreements tended to get exaggerated, for institutional reasons. Today the largest US Lutheran and Reformed denominations (ELCA and PCUSA, respectively) are in full communion with each other.

I don't have precise numbers, but in the 16th Cent my impression is that Lutheran, Reformed, and Catholic were of similar size, with the radical Reformation being much smaller. The situation today is complicated, because of the growth of various independent Protestant groups. At least in the US, the number of strict Calvinists is fairly small, maybe a few percent. But that wasn't the case in the 17th Cent. Currently the largest churches that go back to the original 16th Cent Reformed churches (the "mainline" Reformed churches) don't really hold TULIP. They are Reformed in the sense that they follow Scripture, but no longer are quite so sure that Scripture points to TULIP. But in the US most Protestants today seem to belong to groups that aren't strictly Lutheran, Reformed, or any other traditional theology.

The Pew Forum classifies the largest groups in the US as Evangelical, Catholic, and Mainline. They feel, and I agree with them, that conservative Lutheran and Calvinist churches now have enough in common with each other and conservative independent churches such as S Baptists that it makes sense to think of them all as evangelical. Mainline are the "liberal" churches, which include the largest churches going back to the original Reformation. That includes Lutheran, Reformed, and independent churches. But again, the mainline churches are now fairly similar to each other.

There's a new generation of strong Calvinists. They're highly visible, but in terms of statistics, people who are strongly committed to TULIP are pretty small. "drop in the bucket" maybe. That wasn't always true, however. In the 16th Cent it was one of the two major Protestant groups.

According to Wikipedia, a Pew report estimates that Reformed are now about 56 million worldwide, out of 2.2 billion Christians. But remember than many (maybe most) of those Reformed are mainline, who often don't believe in TULIP.

hedrick said:

The Anglican church started for political reasons, because the King wanted a divorce

Click to expand...

The Anglican church pre-dates the unhappy events surrounding Henry VIII

In depth history of the Church of England

singlecandle said:

"The Puritans...were staunch Protestants, they agreed wholeheartedly with the Anglican Creed. They thought that the old ceremonies and practices, however, were too much like those of the Roman Catholic Church. The Anglican Church, they said, must be "purified" of such corruptions." United States History for Christian Schools T.Keesee and M. Sidwell

So, the Puritans were basically in agreement
with Anglican doctrine just not Anglican practice?
Puritans were not necessarily Calvinists?

Click to expand...

Anglicans are diverse, some Anglicans have been and are Calvinists (James Ussher, J.C. Ryle, J.I. Packer for example). Here is an excerpt from a wikipedia article: "Puritans by definition felt that the English Reformation had not gone far enough, and that the Church of England was tolerant of practices which they associated with the Catholic Church. They formed into and identified with various religious groups advocating greater "purity" of worship and doctrine, as well as personal and group piety. Puritans adopted a Reformed theology and in that sense were Calvinists (as many of their earlier opponents were, too), but also took note of radical views critical of Zwingli in Zurich and Calvin in Geneva." Personally I have never read anything critical of Calvin written by a Puritan. The best way to understand the Puritans is to read and experience for oneself.

singlecandle said:

"The Reformation's rapid spread drew theological as well as actual battle lines across Europe. Catholic armies were fielded to crush the Protestants into submission, engulfing the continent with intermittent war from the 1520s until the middle of the 1600s." United States History for Christian Schools T. Keesee and M Sidwell

Mostly, the Protestants are depicted as being
hunted Roman Catholic Dissidents not staunch
Calvinists. So, during this time of great persecution the reformers were not complete adherents to the TULIP doctrine?

Click to expand...

Good question, and if I had the time, it would take a great deal of time to respond. The Canons of Dordt post-date the early Reformation years in the 1500's. However it is obvious from the decision at Dordt (1618-1619) that Calvinism was taught by a majority in the Netherlands at that time before the decision. The reason I make this point is because it is not completely fair to judge those before Dordt by Dordt. Does this make any sense? I mean neither John Calvin nor the Reformers "invented" Calvinism or TULIP, the Doctrines of Grace are expressed long before the Reformation in the Sacred Scriptures. Got to go real life calling me sorry...

I totally forgot to mention the French Confession, co-authored by John Calvin, and the Belgic Confession which passed through Geneva for review and approval. The only point of TULIP even debatable (and I personally do not consider it debatable) or contested concerning John Calvin, is the L, but that has been addressed and soundly by people greater than me. His doctrine of double Predestination alone, should leave little doubt about his view of the L. Anyway, I am not sure if this is helpful or not or relevant to your questions.

an interesting point of history about Puritans

one reason they were not popular in England is that many of them supported Oliver Cromwell, using modern terms we would call him a military dictator, who had the King Charles I beheaded
very interesting time in history

Rhamiel said:

an interesting point of history about Puritans

one reason they were not popular in England is that many of them supported Oliver Cromwell, using modern terms we would call him a military dictator, who had the King Charles I beheaded
very interesting time in history

Click to expand...

Indeed.

Thomas Cromwell, Oliver's relative during the first wave of Reformation in England, defended the divine right of Kings to rule and Oliver beheaded a King.

Rhamiel said:

one reason they were not popular in England is that many of them supported Oliver Cromwell, using modern terms we would call him a military dictator, who had the King Charles I beheaded
very interesting time in history

Click to expand...

twas. I actually just watch a movie called To Kill a King about Oliver Cromwell and Thomas Fairfax after the civil war ended. Decent flick. Worth checking out if you are interested in that era.

Just one thing:

Most of the early Puritans were, in fact, Anglican clergymen.

Rhamiel said:

an interesting point of history about Puritans

one reason they were not popular in England is that many of them supported Oliver Cromwell, using modern terms we would call him a military dictator, who had the King Charles I beheaded
very interesting time in history

Click to expand...

It depended on who you asked. The Separatist Puritans loved him. The Anglicans were a bit more careful and the Presbyterians, while sharing his doctrine and cautiously supporting him at first, later withdrew that support.

But, in point of fact, the majority of Englishmen supported Cromwell, those who did not were, for the most part Tories and High Churchmen.

You should read Dame Fraser's authoritative biography.

Anoetos said:

Just one thing:

Most of the early Puritans were, in fact, Anglican clergymen.

Click to expand...

Br. Anoetos,

Do you see a difference between Puritans and Nonconformists or were Nonconformists Puritans? Could you give some definitions for Dissenters, Separatists and Free Churchman?

Particular Baptists emerged from Puritan, Nonconformist roots so I never separated the two. I'm guessing Puritans held on to some Anglican practices and Nonconformists did not?

Thank you.

j

gordRedeemed said:

twas. I actually just watch a movie called To Kill a King about Oliver Cromwell and Thomas Fairfax after the civil war ended. Decent flick. Worth checking out if you are interested in that era.

Click to expand...

nice movie, it showed that King Charles was a weak leader and a poor administrator but also a man of conviction who thought he was doing the right thing and believed that he was serving the interest of the English people. I own the film on DVD
last year a friend of mine gave me a book that combined many primary sources from that time, court transcripts of the trial of King Charles, speeches made, even propaganda posters that both sides distributed

one thing that was interesting, the Scottish parliament wanted leniency shown to the King

Rhamiel said:

an interesting point of history about Puritans

one reason they were not popular in England is that many of them supported Oliver Cromwell, using modern terms we would call him a military dictator, who had the King Charles I beheaded
very interesting time in history

Click to expand...

If we want to argue guilt by association during that period of time, let's not forget Mary I of England.

"Mary I (18 February 1516 – 17 November 1558) was Queen of England and Ireland from July 1553 until her death. Her brutal persecution of Protestants caused her opponents to give her the sobriquet "Bloody Mary".

As the fourth crowned monarch of the Tudor dynasty, Mary is remembered for her restoration of Roman Catholicism after the short-lived Protestant reign of her half-brother. During her five-year reign, she had over 280 religious dissenters burned at the stake in the Marian persecutions. Her re-establishment of Roman Catholicism was reversed after her death in 1558 by her younger half-sister and successor, Elizabeth I.

Under the Heresy Acts, numerous Protestants were executed in the Marian persecutions. Many rich Protestants, including John Foxe, chose exile, and around 800 left the country. The first executions occurred over a period of five days in early February 1555: John Rogers on 4 February, Laurence Saunders on 8 February, and Rowland Taylor and John Hooper on 9 February. The imprisoned Archbishop of Canterbury Thomas Cranmer was forced to watch Bishops Ridley and Latimer being burned at the stake. Cranmer recanted, repudiated Protestant theology, and rejoined the Catholic faith. Under the normal process of the law, he should have been absolved as a repentant. Mary, however, refused to reprieve him. On the day of his burning, he dramatically withdrew his recantation. All told 283 were executed, most by burning. The burnings proved so unpopular, that even Alfonso de Castro, one of Philip's own ecclesiastical staff, condemned them, and Philip's adviser, Simon Renard, warned him that such "cruel enforcement" could "cause a revolt". Mary persevered with the policy, which continued until her death and exacerbated anti-Catholic and anti-Spanish feeling among the English people. The victims of the persecutions became lauded as martyrs." - Mary I of England - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Whatever support the Puritans provided Oliver Cromwell, obviously it was not enough to keep them in England, and if someone beheaded Mary I, perhaps 280 lives could have been spared a more painful death. Then again these events should not be forgotten, they should serve as reminders of the high price paid for religious freedom, they should serve as reminders that the Reformation did not occur for no good reasons, that with great conviction many of those Protestants would rather die than recant and go back to Rome, and so their blood helped pave the road to religious freedom and separation of Church and state. I understand most Catholics today would minimize the Reformation and have memory lapses concerning the Protestant martyrs (many accounts were recorded in John Foxe's infamous Book of Martyrs).

Btw, modern editions of John Foxe's "Book of Martyrs" are highly edited, originally part of a multi-volume set "Acts and Monuments": Internet Archive Search: creator:"Foxe, John, 1516-1587" AND (John Foxe)

History of the Reformation of the Sixteenth Century by J. H. Merle D'Aubigne