The problem which confronts us at the outset, is the problem which has been facing historians for the past three hundred years: What were the causes of the English Civil War? What matters were responsible for the decisive split between Crown & Parliament into two distinct parties, and which ultimately led to civil war? Many theories and interpretations have been given. In this chapter, we will find that there are three major interpretations. The first is that it was a religious struggle - and so the Civil War became known as the 'Puritan Revolution'. The second is that it was a purely political conflict between the Crown and its Ministers, on the one hand, and the House of Commons, which had by then become the 'mirror' of the Puritan element in the country, on the other. And the third is that it was a class, or economic, war. Contemporary historians tended to regard it as a twofold struggle - a conflict over religion on the one hand, and the constitution on the other. It was they who coined the phrase 'Puritan Revolution'. This interpretation, however, has subsequently been challenged, in the light of the detailed research which has been conducted - especially in the field of economic history. And so the Civil War has been interpreted in terms of a social and economic conflict - it is said to be a class war. The social and economic factors have tended to become emphasized while the religious have been pushed into the background - often excluded altogether. It is my intention in this thesis, therefore, to assert once again the very real part played by religious matters in the origins of the English Civil War. Intro., p. 1.

Throughout his Preparatory Meditations, Edward Taylor used many images to deprecate himself. These images reflected his Puritan religious beliefs rather than an extremely low self-image. The themes of his poetry were taken from the Bible, but they reflected the many duties which befell him in conjunction with his ministry at Westfield. By using images which were most familiar to him and the rhetorical devices of the seventeenth century, Taylor sought to seek God's forgiveness by doing His will--confessing personal guilt, asking for forgiveness, and praising God's mercy. Because the meditations were directed only to God, Taylor never sought to publish them. Like the child he so desperately wanted to be looked upon as, he sought only his father's favor.

Cette thèse examine le discours puritain ainsi que les différentes manifestations de la présence indienne et de la voix indienne (Indian agency) dans la littérature Puritaine des XVIIème et XVIIIème siècles en général et dans les récits de captivité indienne en particulier. Les récits de captivité manquent évidemment d’objectivité en ceci qu’ils présentent une version unique des faits (celle des auteurs puritains des récits). Le problème de la subjectivité se pose d’autant plus lorsque l’on examine les paroles censées avoir été prononcées par les Indiens (les paroles que leur attribuent leurs anciens captifs). Ce constat nous a amené à poser la question suivante : par-delà la définition du récit de captivité au sens concret du terme (otages puritains entre les mains des Indiens dans le contexte précis de l’Amérique du Nord coloniale), n’y aurait-il pas lieu de postuler l’existence, au sein de ces récits (« en filigrane ») d’autres formes, plus abstraites, de captivité, comme celle que constituerait l’« l’emprisonnement » de la « voix » indienne dans des récits écrits par des blancs ? Cette voix indienne, comment se manifeste-t-elle dans les récits du corpus? Quels discours les auteurs attribuent-ils à leurs anciens ravisseurs ? / This study is dedicated to the analysis of seventeenth-and early eighteenth-century Puritan discourse and the way in which the agency of Indian appears in writings penned by the Puritans, a prominent subsection of which falls under the genre known as Indian Captivity Narrative. My main intention was to go beyond the initial characterization of captivity narratives and claim that these texts are not only about the actual physical and moral experience of the white Christian captives among the Indians, but also deal with more abstract and less often addressed forms of captivity. One such (less immediately obvious) form of captivity is, metaphorically speaking, that of the Indian “voice” in white narratives. This study therefore addresses the following questions: How does the Indian voice come across in such prose? What kinds of discourse do Mary Rowlandson, Hannah Swarton, and other former captives attribute to their former abductors? How do these former captives render and reconstruct dialogues that purportedly occurred between them and their Indian captors? This presentation of the Indian voice is not only conditioned by the former captive’s attitude (i.e., by the author’s voice), but it is also altered by the specific bias of those in charge of controlling the contents of the narrative, i.e., the editors and the publishers, such as Cotton and Increase Mather, who were the most influential representatives of the political and religious establishment of the time.

Philip Doddridge (1702-51) was pastor of the Independent congregation meeting at Castle Hill, Northampton, and tutor of the Northampton academy from 1729 to his death in 1751. He is regarded as a leader of moderate Dissent during that period and the heir, theologically and pastorally, of Richard Baxter. He has been seen as forming a bridge between the more rational Dissenters, on the one hand, and the more conservative and orthodox wing of Dissent on the other. His thought has not, however, been the subject of a detailed analysis in the context of his time. This thesis sets out to conduct such an analysis in order to examine more closely his position within early eighteenth-century Dissent. Doddridge’s philosophical and theological views are considered in chapters two to five. Chapter two assesses the extent of his indebtedness to the philosophy of John Locke, examining also the views of Isaac Watts and showing how Doddridge and Watts modified Locke’s thought in some areas in order to accommodate Christian beliefs. In chapter three, Doddridge’s views on natural theology, natural law and reason are considered and the influence on him of Samuel Clarke, in particular, is examined. Turning to theology, chapter four looks at the use in early eighteenth-century Dissent of terms such as ‘Baxterian’ and ‘moderate Calvinist’ and then considers Doddridge’s doctrinal positions on a range of subjects which are generally considered to represent Baxterian theology. Chapter five examines Doddridge’s views on the key interconnected areas of confessional subscription, scripture and the doctrine of the Trinity. Practical subjects are then considered in chapters six to eight. Doddridge’s views on Christian piety are examined in chapter six. Chapter seven considers ways in which Doddridge sought to communicate, examining the audiences whom he aimed to reach, the ways in which he attempted to reach them and the content of what he wanted to say. The eighth chapter looks at the subject of identity and argues that Doddridge is to be viewed, not so much as a bridge between different wings of Dissent, but as a leader amongst moderate Calvinists. In conclusion, this thesis argues that Philip Doddridge sought to expound a Calvinist theology in the context of the philosophical and theological debates of his day and to promote an ordered Dissent focused on central evangelical truths and united around the language of scripture.

No description available.

No description available.

Exploring Puritanical cultural habits in the 21st century American military, the following study focuses on U.S. Army courts-martial in the Global War on Terrorism. The study uses Emile Durkheim's original sociological interpretation of crime and deviance. That interpretation is linked with responsibility as described by Durkheim's follower Paul Fauconnet in Responsibility: A Study in Sociology ([1928] 1978) and with a new cultural reading of Max Weber's The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism ([1905] 1976). The study is an inductive, descriptive examination of the Puritanical aspects of American military culture based on its treatment of acts labeled as deviant and criminal in the Global War on Terrorism. Four sets of war crimes are included in the study: Abu Ghraib (which occurred in Iraq in 2004), Operation Iron Triangle (which occurred in Iraq in 2006), the Baghdad canal killings (which occurred in Iraq in 2007), and the Maywand District killings (which occurred in Afghanistan in 2010). My data include primary data collected through participation and observation as a consultant for courts-martial related to all the cases except Abu Ghraib. Records of trial, investigation reports, charge sheets, sworn statements, and other documentation are also included in the study as secondary data sources. The study illuminates how unconscious, Puritan cultural habits color and shape both military actions and their perceptions. I explore Puritanism and its influence on military law, responsibility, revenge, "magic" (in its sociological sense), and narcissism. The study concludes with observations and recommendations for changes in U.S. military law.

This thesis examines the descriptions of Royalist and Parliamentarian masculinity in English Civil War memoirs by women through a close reading of three biographical memoirs written by Margaret Cavendish, duchess of Newcastle; Lady Ann Fanshawe; and Lucy Hutchinson. Descriptions of masculinity are evaluated through the lens of Raewyn Connell's theory of hegemonic masculinity to understand the impact two competing models of masculinity had on the social and political culture of the period. The prevailing Parliamentarian hegemonic masculinity in English Civil War memoirs is traced to its origins before the English Civil War to demonstrate how hegemonic masculinity changes over time. The thesis argues that these memoirs provide evidence of two competing models of Royalist and Parliamentarian masculinities during the Civil War that date back to changes in the Puritan meaning of the phrase “man of merit”, which influenced the development of a Parliamentarian model of masculinity.

Text in German with summaries in German and English / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 350-377) / Die Doktorarbeit hat die Absicht herauszufinden, was Jonathan Edwards unter dem Begriff „Sündenerkenntnis“ verstanden hat und dabei die Frage nach der Bedeutung dieses Verständnisses für die Erweckungsbewegung zu beantworten. Während Jonathan Edwardsʼ Theologie und Philosophie im Allgemeinen gut erforscht ist, wurde dieser Aspekt noch nicht genauer untersucht. Zunächst wird auf der Grundlage einer chronologischen Einordnung seiner Werke Jonathan Edwardsʼ Verständnis von Sündenerkenntnis aus seinen wichtigsten Schriften erarbeitet, wobei eine Entwicklung in seinem Gedankengut deutlich wird (Qualitative Inhaltsanalyse). In einem zweiten Teil wird Jonathan Edwardsʼ Verständnis von Sündenerkenntnis mit der Theologie seiner Vorläufer, Zeitgenossen sowie Nachfolger und Gegner verglichen, wobei sich die Untersuchung auf die Bewegung des Puritanismus, die Epochen des „Great Awakening“ und des „Second Great Awakening“ beschränkt (Diachronischer Vergleich). In einem dritten Teil wird Jonathan Edwardsʼ Verständnis von Sündenerkenntnis systematischtheologisch und theologiegeschichtlich eingeordnet. Mit dieser Studie soll ein weiterer deutscher Beitrag zur internationalen Jonathan Edwards-Forschung geleistet werden. Der Ansatz dieser Forschung ist dabei historisch ausgerichtet, da er den systematisch-theologischen Begriff „Sündenerkenntnis“ auf der Grundlage der Biografie Edwardsʼ und einer chronologischen Einordnung seiner Werke zu ermitteln sucht, um ihn dann in einem diachronischen Vergleich mit Verständnissen aus verschiedenen zeitlichen Epochen zu vergleichen und so den Begriff „Sündenerkenntnis“ in einem theologiegeschichtlichen Kontext einordnet und versteht. / The thesis tries to answer the question, how Jonathan Edwards understood the term “conviction of sin”. The intention is to find out the significance of his understanding of this term for the revivalmovement of his time. While numerous studies have been done on his theology and philosophy, this aspect has not been thoroughly examined yet. Based on a chronological assessment of his works Jonathan Edwardsʼ understanding of conviction of sin is established from his major works (qualitative content analysis). This reveals a development in his thought-system. In a second part Jonathan Edwardsʼ understanding of conviction of sin is compared with the theology of his predecessors, contemporaries and opponents. This examination is limited to the time of the Puritans, the “Great Awakening” and the “Second Great Awakening” (diachronic comparative analysis). In a third part Jonathan Edwardsʼ understanding of conviction of sin is assessed in a systematictheological way and classified historically. The author intends to make another German contribution to international Jonathan Edwards Studies. This research is historically focused, because of the fact, that the term “conviction of sin” is analysed by means of the biography of Edwards and a chronological classification of his works to compare it with meanings of different historical epoches and classify it in its theological historical context by that approach. / Christian Spirituality, Church History and Missiology / D. Th. (Church history)

This thesis examines the life and works of the English Calvinist clergyman Daniel Featley (1582-1645) through the lens of various printed and manuscript sources, especially his manuscript notebooks in Oxford. It links his story and thought to the broader themes of early Stuart religious, political, and intellectual history. Chapter one analyses the first thirty- five years of Featley’s life, exploring how many of the features that underpin the major themes of Featley’s career—and which reemerged throughout his life—were formed and nurtured during Featley’s early years in Oxford, Paris, and Cornwall. There he emerges as an ambitious young divine in pursuit of preferment; a shrewd minister, who attempted to position himself within the ecclesiastical spectrum; and a budding polemicist, whose polemical exchanges were motivated by a pastoral desire to protect the English Church. Chapter two examines Featley’s role as an ecclesiastical licenser and chaplain to Archbishop George Abbot in the 1610s and 1620s. It offers a reinterpretation of the view that Featley was a benign censor, explores how pastoral sensitivities influenced his censorship, and analyses the parallels between Featley’s licensing and his broader ecclesiastical aims. Moreover, by exploring how our historiographical understandings of licensing and censorship have been clouded by Featley’s attempts to conceal that an increasingly influential anti- Calvinist movement was seizing control of the licensing system and marginalizing Calvinist licensers in the 1620s, this chapter (along with chapter 7) addresses the broader methodological issues of how to weigh and evaluate various vantage points. Chapters three and four analyse the publications resulting from Featley’s debates with prominent Catholic and anti-Calvinist leaders. These chapters examine Featley’s use of patristic tradition in these disputes, the pastoral motivations that underpinned his polemical exchanges, and how Featley strategically issued these polemical publications to counter Catholicism and anti-Calvinism and to promulgate his own alternative version of orthodoxy at several crucial political moments during the 1620s and 1630s. Chapter five focuses on how, in the 1620s and 1630s, the themes of prayer and preaching in his devotional work, Ancilla Pietatis, and collection of seventy sermons, Clavis Mystica, were complementary rather than contradictory. It also builds on several of the major themes of the thesis by examining how pastoral and polemical motivations were at the heart of these works, how Featley continued to be an active opponent—rather than a passive bystander and victim—of Laudianism, and how he positioned himself politically to avoid being reprimanded by an increasingly hostile Laudian regime. Chapter six explores the theme of ‘moderation’ in the events of the 1640s surrounding Featley’s participation at the Westminster Assembly and his debates with separatists. It focuses on how Featley’s pursuit of the middle way was both: a self-protective ‘chameleon- like’ survival instinct—a rudder he used to navigate his way through the shifting political and ecclesiastical terrain of this period—and the very means by which he moderated and manipulated two polarized groups (decidedly convictional Parliamentarians and royalists) in order to reoccupy the middle ground, even while it was eroding away. Finally, chapter seven examines Featley’s ‘afterlife’ by analysing the reception of Featley through the lens of his post-1660 biographers and how these authors, particularly Featley’s nephew, John Featley, depicted him retrospectively in their biographical accounts in the service of their own post-restoration agendas. By analysing how Featley’s own ‘chameleon-like’ tendencies contributed to his later biographers’ distorted perception of him, this final chapter returns to the major methodological issues this thesis seeks to address. In short, by exploring the various roles he played in the early Stuart English Church and seeking to build on and contribute to recent historiographical research, this study sheds light on the links between a minister’s pastoral sensitivities and polemical engagements, and how ministers pursued preferment and ecclesiastically positioned themselves, their opponents, and their biographical subjects through print.