Puritan Conflicts in Early 17th Century England
Individual free will allows for a variety of different beliefs to be cultivated. Unfortunately, people do not always accept a variety of ideas. One area in the human experience that has long been disputed is religion. Religion is such a controversial topic that it has been the cause of many wars such as the Crusades and the Thirty Years’ War. The people involved in these wars felt a responsibility to uphold and preserve their faith. In England, the Anglican Church and the Puritans in the first half of the 17th century are another example of peoples with religious problems. Although religion did not directly lead to a physical war, religious conflicts caused a good deal of frustration. Under James I, Charles I, and the Anglican Church, Puritans did not have complete religious autonomy because their beliefs often conflicted with those of the Anglican Church. Consequently, the Puritans felt a responsibility to uphold their practices.
The Anglican Church and the English government were closely related to each other; the king not only ruled the country, but was the head of the church as well. Therefore, disobeying the church meant that people also acted against the king[i]. Like governmental organization, the Church of England was based on a hierarchal structure. It favored powerful bishops, ornate services and liturgies, and allowed people to personally observe the religion. During King Charles I’s reign, royal and elite citizens of England largely composed the Church of England[ii]. These close connections between the church and the state allowed for much corruption to take place[iii].
The Puritans’ goals, as in the Ref...
... middle of paper ...
...arvard
University Press, 1986), 69-71)
[vi] Jim Sharpe, “Scandalous and Malignant Priests in Essex: The Impact of Grassroots
Puritanism,” in Politics and People in Revolutionary England, eds Colin Jones,
Malyn Newitt, and Stephen Roberts (New York: Basil Blackwell, 1986), 258
[vii] Ashley, Maurice. “England in the Seventeenth Century.”
http://www.uq.net.au/~zzrawill/books/english/pelican/bep_ash.htm
[viii] “The Proclamation for the Authorizing and Uniformity of the Book of Common
Prayer.” http://justus.anglican.org/resources/bcp/JamesI_Procl_Uniformity.htm
[ix] Kistler
[x] “William Laud.” http://www.manotick.org/stjames/Archival%20pages/william_laud.htm
[xi] Hirst, 70
[xii] “Our English Heritage”
[xiii] “William Laud”
[xiv] Kistler
[xv] “Our English Heritage”
[xvi] Kistler
B. Unconditional Election God has chosen some for salvation and some to be condemned. Whether or not one is predestinated for salvation can not be affectet by oneself. Its not because of what one has done or not done, there is no reason for the predestination and no possibility to change the own status.
One of the consequences of the Act was that the first allegiance of the clergy was changed from the papacy to Henry VIII. As well as this, traditional privileges the Church was entitled such as the benefit of the Clergy and sanctuary were abolished .This implies that the Act of Supremacy 1534 played a greater role in changing the relationship between the Church and State because it undermined the authority of the church within England as the controlling of the church’s finances, administration and development was shifted Henry. All of these changes suggest that the previous close relationship between the Church and state had weakened as they contributed to the paving for the growth of Protestantism. In addition, despite the fact both the Acts of Supremacy reinforced royal control, Henry being confirmed as ‘Supreme Head of Church’ would have had a greater impact on the relationship between the Church and State in the 16th century than Elizabeth becoming ‘Supreme Governor’ because Elizabeth’s title still applied that the pope was supreme head whilst Henry’s highlighted the fact that Henry was the only head of church - further undermining the influence of the
These two opposing religions had their differences be known be the other side and would fight for their ideas to be the ones all to follow. Conrad Russel states in his book The Causes of the English Civil War, that England “was a society with several religions, while still remaining a society with a code of values and a political system which were only designed to be workable with one”. Inside the Church of England was essentially two churches, Protestant and Catholic. Both sides were determined that their religion was going to be the one in the church and not the one outside looking in. Both sides wanted to control the authoritative powerhouse of England and would do anything to have the Church of England become the church of their religion. However, religious differences did not just occur between the citizens, it also occurred between King Charles I and Parliament. First off let’s look at King Charles himself. Charles was a very religious monarch who liked his worship to be High Anglican. He also believed the hierarchy of priests and bishops was very important, which alarmed Parliament because they believed that King Charles was leaning towards the idea of Catholicism in England. King Charles’ form of worship was seen by the Puritan faith as a form of popery. This upset them because they wanted a pure worship without icons or bishops. To clarify, popery is the doctrines, practices, and ceremonies associated with the pope or the papal system; Roman Catholicism. Charles also wanted to support William Laud who was the leader of the High Church Anglican Party because they had recently became prominent. Parliament strongly disagreed with the King’s decision because they feared that Laud would promote Roman Catholicism ideas and
Throughout the history of mankind, numerous events such as the Crusades, have occurred in the name of religion and religious freedom. Sadly, motivation for the early settlers coming to America wasn’t strictly about finding religious freedom. It was actually deeply rooted in the desire for economic growth and new trade opportunities. The New world presented itself as an opportunity for many to gain higher social economic status and growth in their business ventures. A number of known historical facts, including: hunger for new trade, poverty of many English inhabitants, and the rivalry between Spain and England, contributed and fostered the foundation and settling of the American Colonies.
During the 17th century, many Puritans set sail for New England in order to escape religious persecution and re-create an English society that was accepting of the Puritan faith. John Winthrop, an educated lawyer from England who later became governor of the Massachusetts Bay Colony, was one of the first in North America to advocate Puritan ideals and lifestyle. Winthrop delivered his sermon A Model of Christian Charity, in hopes of encouraging his shipmates to establish a truly spiritual community abroad. Almost fifty years later, a Puritan named Mary Rowlandson, daughter of a wealthy landowner and wife of a minister, wrote A Narrative of the Captivity and Restoration of Mrs. Mary Rowlandson, describing her 11-week captivity by native Indians after an attack on Lancaster. Rowlandson recounts her story with heroism and appreciation for God. Although John Winthrop and Mary Rowlandson were in entirely different situations when composing their literary works, both writings reflect many of the same ideals that characterize the Puritan mind, such as the belief in God's mercy, the acceptance of one's condition in life, and the importance of a strong community.
While I'm sitting here at my computer, in my air conditioned home, with the radio blaring and the t.v. on downstairs, I try to imagine how life was as a young Puritan. To be honest, I don't think I could live a week the way they do. I could try but it would be excruciatingly difficult.
The frequency of popular protest and rebellion in Early Modern England offers an insight into the nature of the social relations people maintained. P. Clark refers to the repetition of rebellion and popular protest as being ‘a recurrent phenomenon’ which spread throughout Europe in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth century. This implies that people thought there was a necessary cause to act in such a way, believing that change was possible to address their grievances. Additionally, Andy Wood further emphasises the ideology of the repetitive nature of popular protest and rebellion through the existence of a ‘shared tradition of popular protest’. This implies that there was a continuation in the motivations of those who chose to rebel. Many of the
of slur; it was a label to abuse those who were into the repression of
Puritan life is probably one of the biggest paradoxes known to man theoretically. In practice is doesn’t seem like such an absurd notion. There are certain things that may lead someone into confusion over the way that Puritan life was conducted. One of these things is the object of holiness. This means that only certain members are allowed into the Puritan life after proving themselves holy. Another object that may cause confusion is the idea of enjoying oneself in Puritan life. Recreation did occur in Puritan life, but the definition of Puritan recreation is differently defined. One more object of confusion in Puritan life is the type of Puritan in which you are stereotyped into depending of your actions regarding your religion. Although this might sound complicated it is not as intricate as it is written. For Puritan’s this was a way of life. This tells us that, in practice, all of these social theories are probably more plausible than they sound. Winthrop did encounter all of these problems in his journey from England to Massachusetts, and them encountered some of these while he was in control of the society there.
The English Civil war was partially a religious conflict, which brought Church and State against Parliament. Under the reign of James I, England saw the rise in Protestants dissenters. Groups like Barrowists, Puritans, Fifth Monarchists, Quakers, and many more demanded for more religious reform. They felt that the Church of England’s liturgy was too Catholic for a Protestant church. James VI and I accepted the more moderated Puritans and other dissenters, and he was able to keep his kingdom in peace. However, his son Charles I did not believe that kings were answerable to Parliament, but to God. In fact, he ruled without Parliament for many years. He trusted the running of the Church of England to William Laud, who believed that the Church had already gone through too many reforms. Laud went wrong when he tried to make church services more about doctrine and sacraments, and sought to make freewill the official doctrine of the Church. He did not stop there. He ordered that alters should be re-sited from the central places in churches to the east end of churches across the country. This essay will discuss Laud’s Arminian doctrines and his misjudgement of England’s religious mood, which led to his downfall and to the civil war.
King Henry II said “Who shall rid me of this troublesome priest?” (1964 Becket). After four knights over herd King Henry II say this and went to the church to kill Becket because they thought he said to kill Becket . Then King Henry II would get the power of the church. Subsequently King Henry II would be able to do more things scene Becket is not have the power of the church.
There have been many wars fought throughout history, due to different religious beliefs. One of these wars would be, the Thirty Years War, which took place from about 1618-1648. This war happened to be one of the most disastrous ones ever in history, though it was spread all through Europe. It was initially between the Protestants and Catholics, that were involved in the Holy Roman Empire. It started off as a religious conflict, where the Lutherans were being converted back to Catholicism, and the two religions formed alliances in the empire. The violence had first started when Ferdinand II, the Holy Roman Emperor inflicted upon promoting one state religion to all other religious beliefs. The Protestants were furious by that violation of their own rights that was permitted
Unlike today, the church had a close relationship with the State. There was practically no division between secular and state affairs. The secular law that existed during the Middle Ages in Europe stated that all crimes that were committed we...
Henry VIII and Queen Elizabeth I may have been the English Reformation’s greatest benefactors, all because of self interest. Henry VIII was not originally Protestant, but after the pope denied him of his divorce, Henry VIII took things into his own hands. Due to the power kings had in the Middle Ages, Henry VIII was able to control Parliament and force it to do whatever he wanted. So in 1534, Henry VIII forced Parliament to pass a law he made known as the Act of Supremacy. The Act of Supremacy stated that the king ought to be the head of the Church of England. This law gave the king complete power over the Church of England, instead of the pope. However, the type of church and state relationship did not change. Rather all the Act of Supremacy did was take power from the pope and give it to the king. Surprisingly, the Catholics did not retaliate against this strong change. The pope had always been the head of the church, but now the king had taken his position. This serves as an example of nationalism. The Catholics did not think about how removing the pope could harm their religion in any way. However, instead the people blindly followed Henry VIII because he was the leader of the nation and they assumed he was right. Also, by imposing other laws that punished Protestants, Henry VIII did not give the people much of a choice. Fortunately, for Henry VII, nationalis...
the aftermath of the Protestant reformation. In England, after the establishment of the separate Anglican church of England there were many protestant groups left in England still in conflict. These groups all tried to push and pull parliament in their favor -- which ultimately made it so that nothing could be done. These conflicts even came to the point of bloody civil wars and suffering on both sides of the fighting. Parliament ultimately decided to stop these wars by creating religious Act of Toleration (1689) for the non-conformist protestants.