I read Puritanism: A Very Short Introduction with a sense of recognition. Here were my people, all down in black and white. Strict Baptists – the sect I was brought up in – must be the rump, the tiny remainder, of Puritanism; or at least part of the modern-day rump, along with Quakers and other sectarians.
Francis J. Bremer is Professor of History at Millersville University in Pennsylvania; he’s a leading authority on puritanism, and has condensed his knowledge into an exhilarating gallop through its history.
He starts the book by quoting the social critic H. L. Mencken, whose wry definition of puritanism – “the fear that someone, somewhere may be happy” – has become common currency. Bremer goes on to say that “the word ‘puritan’ is likely to be associated with ‘prudish’, ‘sexually repressed’, ‘prohibitionist’…The image of puritans as theocrats, regicides, witch-burners, Indian killers and bigoted heresy hunters has long been entrenched in popular culture”. One aim of Bremer’s book is to rescue puritanism from distortion and stereotype, and to clarify its part in the history of Protestantism.
“At the simplest level, puritans were those who sought to reform themselves and their society by purifying their churches of the remnants of Roman Catholic teachings and practice…They believed that England as a political nation must be committed to opposing the forces of Rome throughout Christendom.” Puritans were the most fervent, the most radical, in pursuing these goals: they were the vanguard.
"The Vision of the Four Chariots", Gustave Doré
“Puritanism did not begin as a distinct faith but as a reform movement within the Protestant Church of England in the sixteenth century,” Bremer explains. Puritans pushed a reluctant Henry VIII, and then a more malleable boy king Edward VI, towards the extremes of Protestantism being developed on the Continent. During the brief reign of the Catholic Mary I, many had to flee abroad – where their extremism was further stoked. Returning under the long reign of Elizabeth I, puritans were disappointed by the moderacy of that regime, and continued to push for greater reform. Bremer stresses two strong emphases which marked puritans out from other Protestants: their belief in the inerrancy of the Scriptures, and the ferocity of their anti-Catholicism. “For the puritans, more than many of their fellow English Protestants, the papacy was the source of all doctrinal and ceremonial errors which had taken the church off the course initially set by Christ and his early disciples.”
What I don’t know, as yet, is how the Huguenots in France felt about the English Puritans. Clearly they were both anti-Catholic. But how their doctrinal development compared, I have yet to find out. Bremer conveys a sense of massive religious ferment and excitement criss-crossing the Channel between England and the Netherlands. In contrast, France’s monarchy remained a bastion of Catholicism, its face set against Protestantism. What news did my Huguenot ancestors, still living in France in the sixteenth and early seventeenth century, hear about the march of English puritanism? What did they make of it? When did they start to despair of their own country, and think about flight to England?
It was in a funny little book I found at my mother’s flat. I should have brought it away.
Goodness…I have just looked in my notebook( thank you Richard Holmes!) and found i had noted it down…’A Holiday History of Britain’ by (ex Winchester teacher)Ronald Hamilton. Pub 1964 and I found a copy on Amazon for 33p!! https://www.amazon.co.uk/Now-Remember-Holiday-History-Britain/dp/B001AA2NXQ
It was written as a rapid overview/reminder of history…an early traveller’s guide so when you are visiting churches and monuments you could remember ‘key facts’ about dynasties etc. Patently obvious it was written before the women’s movement hit the scene in some of its comments.
Rather sweetly I found a hand painted bookmark inside the book-buttercups. Dated May 19th 1951 for my grandmother. It was painted by her sister probably for her birthday.
Very much enjoyed hearing more about the strands of Protestantism and the impact of them on politics and vice versa.
I note in the early seventeenth century, King James apparently ordered his bible translators to limit the influence of the Puritans.
I look forward to reading more about the Huguenots’ attitudes towards the English Protestants of this time.
There’s plenty more of all this to come! I’m very interested in King James I and his role in Protestantism – do you have any more info on his order to limit the influence of Puritans? A source I could read, perhaps? Thanks in advance!
It is interesting the way in which the word ‘puritanical’ is used now in a pejorative sense but how we don’t really connect it with its origins. Much the same, I guess, with many words. Your blog has made me think about all the other dimensions the Puritans had, how passionately they fought their corner feeling that their definitions of Christianity were the correct ones. Fascinating reading, Huguenotjo!
Yes, I feel that all the republican forces active in the Civil War generally have a bad press and are grossly misunderstood – not just the Puritans. The explosion of ideas at that time is fascinating, and well worth exploring. It’s all too easy to write the factions off as deluded extremists.
Fascinating synopsis of the history of puritanism. Thanks. I was left wondering what came first: protest against an existing state of affairs or the need to create a new religion. I guess the two went together, but I’m very interested in the way that protest and paranoia are at the heart of puritan subjectivity, along with a fervent desire to establish a new ( national) order.
There had long been demands to return to the kind of church run by the Apostles, where goods were held in common, where there was no hierarchy, and where all Christians were considered equal. See, for example, the Peasants’ Revolt of 1381. Such “heresy” was rumbling along for a couple of centuries before the time was right for Protestantism to become an unstoppable force. This coincided with the rise of nationalism, which clashed with recognition of the Pope and subjection to papal control of trade. The use of vernacular/national languages instead of Latin was a big part of the Protestant push.
The paranoia of Puritans is rooted in the idea that the Devil is real and is actively engaged in a bitter day-to-day struggle for mastery of the world. No corner of the world is safe from the Devil, and so everything and everyone must be viewed with suspicion: hypervigilance is essential. This mindset is very finely portrayed in Robert Eggers’ film “The Witch”, and the fine line between faith and hallucination beautifully drawn.
What a clear and interesting summary of the early Puritan movements! I wonder how much nationalism and politics infected the anti-Catholicism in England, and specifically the antagonism towards the Pope. In Northern Ireland the link between nationalism and anti-Catholism (‘Kick the Pope) is centuries old. Voltaire wrote a play called ‘Muhammad’ which was staged in England with a prologue which compared Islam (and its supposed tyranny) to Catholicism, but in Dublin the prologue compared Islam to Protestantism.
Thank you! Protestantism and nationalism were indeed closely linked, and antagonism towards the Pope was linked to burgeoning trade – nation-states did not want their imports and exports to be controlled by the Papacy. I want to blog more about this in future – see also my reply to Jon Cook’s comment.
Thanks, those are very interesting and pertinent points. Protestantism was indeed closely linked with nationalism, and antagonism towards the Pope was linked to trade. Nation states did not want the Papacy to have control over their imports and exports when huge markets were opening up worldwide.
I’ll definitely be covering all these issues in future blogs, but for the time being, please see also my reply to Jon Cook’s comment. The role of Huguenots in Ireland is a whole other story, which I’m looking forward to dealing with in depth.