Puritan Reformed Theological Seminary?

[barnhart]

I find the Puritans interesting as a political movement but not so much as a religious movement. Their vision of the good society is quite compelling considering how far they were reaching from the conditions around them. Their new England seems harsh at times from our perspective until compared with the social structures of the Royal or charter colonies around them. For example in some of the early Virginia colonies the death penalty was an option for missing religious services three times in a row. There were also brandings, piercing and cropping of ears and tongues for misdemeanor level infractions. By contrast the Puritans did not accept punishment that mars the body as it is the image of God, created public education so all people could read the Bible, built quality public infrastructure like crowned roads to create economic opportunity for everyone to support themselves, and believed the experience of God and of beauty is a primary purpose for humanity. There is a lot there to like, but much I object to as well. Possibly the low point for me is the confluence of the kingdom of heaven with the worldly kingdom of power and coersion.

[Praxis+Theodicy]

...in some of the early Virginia colonies the death penalty was an option for missing religious services three times in a row. There were also brandings, piercing and cropping of ears and tongues for misdemeanor level infractions. By contrast the Puritans did not accept punishment that mars the body as it is the image of God...

This isn't true. The punishment for "being a Quaker" in a Puritan-led colony in North America was (1) cutting off an ear and being exiled for the first infraction, (2) cutting off the OTHER ear if you dared return to the colony (second infraction) and (3) drilling a hole through the tongue with a hot iron and other physical deforming punishments for further infractions.

Likely their thoughts on not doing punishments that "mar the body" were for their OWN people, i.e. Puritans who were caught in sin. But they had a very well-defined idea of "us" and "other," and if you were "other" (i.e. Catholic, Quaker, Baptist, Mennonite), you were punished severely with body deformities just for existing as that "other".

https://www.seacoastonline.com/story/ne ... 674190007/

[joshuabgood]

...in some of the early Virginia colonies the death penalty was an option for missing religious services three times in a row. There were also brandings, piercing and cropping of ears and tongues for misdemeanor level infractions. By contrast the Puritans did not accept punishment that mars the body as it is the image of God...

This isn't true. The punishment for "being a Quaker" in a Puritan-led colony in North America was (1) cutting off an ear and being exiled for the first infraction, (2) cutting off the OTHER ear if you dared return to the colony (second infraction) and (3) drilling a hole through the tongue with a hot iron and other physical deforming punishments for further infractions.

Likely their thoughts on not doing punishments that "mar the body" were for their OWN people, i.e. Puritans who were caught in sin. But they had a very well-defined idea of "us" and "other," and if you were "other" (i.e. Catholic, Quaker, Baptist, Mennonite), you were punished severely with body deformities just for existing as that "other".

https://www.seacoastonline.com/story/ne ... 674190007/

The Quakers famously waged a "lamb's war" against the Puritans...until they finally won and the Puritanical ideals relaxed a bit. But a ton of beaten Quakers, dead witches, and banished righteous people were left in the wake.

[barnhart]

...in some of the early Virginia colonies the death penalty was an option for missing religious services three times in a row. There were also brandings, piercing and cropping of ears and tongues for misdemeanor level infractions. By contrast the Puritans did not accept punishment that mars the body as it is the image of God...

This isn't true. The punishment for "being a Quaker" in a Puritan-led colony in North America was (1) cutting off an ear and being exiled for the first infraction, (2) cutting off the OTHER ear if you dared return to the colony (second infraction) and (3) drilling a hole through the tongue with a hot iron and other physical deforming punishments for further infractions.

Likely their thoughts on not doing punishments that "mar the body" were for their OWN people, i.e. Puritans who were caught in sin. But they had a very well-defined idea of "us" and "other," and if you were "other" (i.e. Catholic, Quaker, Baptist, Mennonite), you were punished severely with body deformities just for existing as that "other".

https://www.seacoastonline.com/story/ne ... 674190007/

Yes, you are right. Perhaps their high ideals didn't always translate to actual policy.

[MaxPC]

Is there a possibility that there may be a revival of Puritanism that is underway?

[Josh]

Is there a possibility that there may be a revival of Puritanism that is underway?

If it was ordained by God before the very foundations of the world were laid, then possibly.

[Praxis+Theodicy]

Is there a possibility that there may be a revival of Puritanism that is underway?

It's hard to say what, exactly, that would mean. Who were the Puritans? They have a set of doctrinal beliefs that are basically identical to Reformed or Presbyterians. Their truly distinguishing characteristic was their desire to have a "pure" church, which is kind of a goal that needs further defining. The early anabaptists were accused (arguably, the accusation was justified) of wanting that same goal.

If Puritans are just a theocratic arm of the Reformed church, yes, they are having a comeback. Stephen Wolfe and Doug Wilson have written books explicitly arguing in favor of Christian Nationalism.

[HondurasKeiser]

Is there a possibility that there may be a revival of Puritanism that is underway?

It's hard to say what, exactly, that would mean. Who were the Puritans? They have a set of doctrinal beliefs that are basically identical to Reformed or Presbyterians. Their truly distinguishing characteristic was their desire to have a "pure" church, which is kind of a goal that needs further defining. The early anabaptists were accused (arguably, the accusation was justified) of wanting that same goal.

If Puritans are just a theocratic arm of the Reformed church, yes, they are having a comeback. Stephen Wolfe and Doug Wilson have written books explicitly arguing in favor of Christian Nationalism.

In my rubbing of shoulders with Reformed folk, I've often gotten the impression that they have quite a bit of admiration for the Puritans and a desire to see a kind of revival of Puritan society. My brother-in-law sports a shirt that says "Get Married, Make Babies, Sing the Psalms, Take Dominion". He and my sister are very serious about all 4 of those points.

[justme]

Lamb's war?

[Ken]

Is there a possibility that there may be a revival of Puritanism that is underway?

It's hard to say what, exactly, that would mean. Who were the Puritans? They have a set of doctrinal beliefs that are basically identical to Reformed or Presbyterians. Their truly distinguishing characteristic was their desire to have a "pure" church, which is kind of a goal that needs further defining. The early anabaptists were accused (arguably, the accusation was justified) of wanting that same goal.

If Puritans are just a theocratic arm of the Reformed church, yes, they are having a comeback. Stephen Wolfe and Doug Wilson have written books explicitly arguing in favor of Christian Nationalism.

In what way is the Reformed Church experiencing a "comeback" as opposed to an accelerating decline?