# Who are the modern Puritans?



## JM

Are there any modern Puritans in todays world or are we restricted to using the term "Puritan" to a period of time frozen in history?


----------



## crhoades

If the term can be used of anyone today, Joel Beeke gets my vote.


----------



## LadyFlynt

I actually use the terms Puritan and Covenanter to describe myself. You say "Presbyterian" and most ppl immediately think of the liberal end of PCUSA (in my experience...I know this isn't all). If someone can relate to one of those two groups then they understand when I say I'm a modern puritan/covenanter.


----------



## JM

Dr. Beeke was the first to come to my mind as well. Many may disagree, but John Piper ranks up there as well.

peace,

jm


----------



## PuritanCovenanter

The PB may not like me calling myself Reformed but even us Reformed Baptists can be known as descendants of the Puritans. Just look at Bunyan.


----------



## PresReformed

I believe that The Free Presbyterian Church of Scotland is about as Puritan as it gets nowadays.


----------



## Ivan

puritancovenanter said:


> The PB may not like me calling myself Reformed but even us Reformed Baptists can be known as descendants of the Puritans. Just look at Bunyan.



Amen! Then again, I'm a bit of a Rebel...the Lee and Jackson type.


----------



## Ivan

crhoades said:


> If the term can be used of anyone today, Joel Beeke gets my vote.



Frankly, he is the first person to come to my mind too.


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot

I think that the term "Puritan" is tied historically to a particular era (mid-1500's to early 1700's) and place (England, Scotland, Ireland, Holland and America) and that, generally speaking, Jonathan Edwards is considered the "last Puritan."


----------



## JM

The Valley of Vision is said to contain Puritan prayers, yet, it's also said it contains a prayer from CH Spurgeon...


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot

_Valley of Vision_ - Description: A selection of prayers and meditations *in the Puritan tradition*...

Many have followed in the footsteps of the Puritans and do so even today. But the term itself has a historical connection to a period in time that ended about 200 years ago.


----------



## Laura

VirginiaHuguenot said:


> I think that the term "Puritan" is tied historically to a particular era (mid-1500's to early 1700's) and place (England, Scotland, Ireland, Holland and America) and that, generally speaking, Jonathan Edwards is considered the "last Puritan."



*scoff* Word Pharisee. The spirit of the term counts most, not the letter.  Joel Beeke gets my vote, too.


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot

Laura said:


> *scoff* Word Pharisee. The spirit of the term counts most, not the letter.  Joel Beeke gets my vote, too.



 I've been called worse -- _Puritannical_, for instance! 

I'm blessed to sit under Puritan preaching every Lord's Day, and I'm a big fan of Joel Beeke. As an (amateur) historian, however, I reiterate that the Puritan Age is over.  As one who believes in Puritan postmillennialism, I am convinced their spirit will live on and, by God's grace, prosper. There have been different names throughout history for Biblical Christians, usually pejorative. Who knows what faithful Christians will be called in the 21st and 22nd centuries? As someone once said (not a Puritan), "The principle for which we contend is bound to reassert itself, though it may be at another time and in another form."


----------



## elnwood

As far as being the closest theological descendants of Puritanism (i.e. Savoy Declaration Congregationalism), The Conservative Congregational Christian Conference is the closest.


----------



## AV1611

I like to think of myself as a Puritan in that I am inside the Church of England trying to reform it to the word of God...just like Thomas Cartwright:

1. http://www.evangelical-times.org/articles/jan04/jan04a11.htm
2. http://www.evangelical-times.org/articles/feb04/feb04a13.htm


----------



## JM

VirginiaHuguenot said:


> _Valley of Vision_ - Description: A selection of prayers and meditations *in the Puritan tradition*...
> 
> Many have followed in the footsteps of the Puritans and do so even today. But the term itself has a historical connection to a period in time that ended about 200 years ago.



If a prayer is in the Puritan tradition, isn't it a Puritan prayer? Kind of like, "I'm a Christiani in the Baptist tradition so I'm a Baptist [reforming]."


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot

JM said:


> If a prayer is in the Puritan tradition, isn't it a Puritan prayer? Kind of like, "I'm a Christiani in the Baptist tradition so I'm a Baptist [reforming]."



A Puritan prayer is a Biblical prayer. If one collected a book of early church father prayers and included Thomas Aquinas, it wouldn't make Aquinas an early church father, though he might be following in their tradition, because that is a descriptive term that has an historical association to a particular era in time. Likewise, Spurgeon, who was Puritan-minded, was not part of the Puritan era, although John Bunyan, for instance, was.


----------



## bwana-asafiwe

Would you consider a person to be a modern day puritan who, being calvinistic, and a meticulous student of the puritans both historically and experimentally (very much like Beeke), is a non-reformed believer, a Baptist, even a _fundamentalist_ .


----------



## PuritanCovenanter

VirginiaHuguenot said:


> I think that the term "Puritan" is tied historically to a particular era (mid-1500's to early 1700's) and place (England, Scotland, Ireland, Holland and America) and that, generally speaking, Jonathan Edwards is considered the "last Puritan."



That is why I said descendants of.


----------



## Kevin

VirginiaHuguenot said:


> I think that the term "Puritan" is tied historically to a particular era (mid-1500's to early 1700's) and place (England, Scotland, Ireland, Holland and America) and that, generally speaking, Jonathan Edwards is considered the "last Puritan."



Andrew is correct. It is even more narrowly defined by some historians (Fischer,et.al.) as English spec. East Anglia and the new world immigrants from that region.

I think both (historical) usages are appropriate depending on context; Those who hold to "Puritain" ideas and those who are "Puritains".


----------



## bookslover

JM said:


> Are there any modern Puritans in todays world or are we restricted to using the term "Puritan" to a period of time frozen in history?



Who's the guy with the forked beard? I don't recognize him.
I'll probably feel like a dummy when you tell me.


----------



## bookslover

VirginiaHuguenot said:


> I've been called worse -- _Puritannical_, for instance!
> 
> I'm blessed to sit under Puritan preaching every Lord's Day, and I'm a big fan of Joel Beeke. As an (amateur) historian, however, I reiterate that the Puritan Age is over.  As one who believes in Puritan postmillennialism, I am convinced their spirit will live on and, by God's grace, prosper. There have been different names throughout history for Biblical Christians, usually pejorative. Who knows what faithful Christians will be called in the 21st and 22nd centuries? As someone once said (not a Puritan), "The principle for which we contend is bound to reassert itself, though it may be at another time and in another form."



I'm glad you're not amil, but you have not yet come all the way home, my son. Come back to the light of day, my son. Come all the way back...to the historic premil position, the only position the Scriptures teach (heh, heh).

Follow the light, follow the light...


----------



## JM

bookslover said:


> Who's the guy with the forked beard? I don't recognize him.
> I'll probably feel like a dummy when you tell me.




B. H. Carroll.


----------



## Staphlobob

puritancovenanter said:


> The PB may not like me calling myself Reformed but even us Reformed Baptists can be known as descendants of the Puritans. Just look at Bunyan.



The finest preacher I've ever heard (S. Hartland) is Reformed Baptist, and I think he's very much a Puritan in both theology and style. His sermons last about 1 hour, but you wouldn't know it because the time seems to fly by.


----------



## Staphlobob

AV1611 said:


> I like to think of myself as a Puritan in that I am inside the Church of England trying to reform it to the word of God...just like Thomas Cartwright:



This raises a question that, for me, is quite timely and significant. (Chances are those who know Puritanism much better than I have known the answer for quite a while, but I'm still learning.)

Is it possible to be liturgical and still be a Puritan? I understand that many of the Puritans were indeed of the Church of England and used the BCP. 

Or would you say that one must one hold to the regulative principle to qualify as a Puritan?

The reason I ask is that a number of us will be leaving our present denomination to form another church. Though we're not quite sure what it will be, many are asking that we remain liturgical. Though I lean towards the regulative principle I'm not loathe to use, say, the 1928 BCP. 

What say y'all?


----------



## Me Died Blue

Kevin,

Naturally, it depends on what we mean by "liturgical" - after all, in the strict sense, _every_ worship service has a liturgy. Even so, I know it typically conveys a more "high church" order of worship in people's minds, which I would say is certainly not contrary to the Regulative Principle or Puritan worship, given that the elements themselves remain the same.

Though I have not yet read it myself, Darryl Hart's book _Recovering Mother Kirk: The Case for Liturgy in the Reformed Tradition_ has been highly commended by many. You might want to check it out.


----------



## Staphlobob

Me Died Blue said:


> Kevin,
> Though I have not yet read it myself, Darryl Hart's book _Recovering Mother Kirk: The Case for Liturgy in the Reformed Tradition_ has been highly commended by many. You might want to check it out.



Thank you for the comments and the recommendation. I've just purchased Hart's book.


----------



## 3John2

Not sure but I would say John Piper as well. Also not to sound ignorant (I've only been Reformed about 2 1/2 yrs) but who is Joel Beeke? Any books from him?


----------



## bookslover

3John2 said:


> Not sure but I would say John Piper as well. Also not to sound ignorant (I've only been Reformed about 2 1/2 yrs) but who is Joel Beeke? Any books from him?



Beeke has authored or edited about 40 books, I think. He is a Dutch Reformed pastor, scholar, and author. He is president and professor of systematic theology and homiletics at Puritan Reformed Theological Seminary in Grand Rapids, Michigan. He is also pastor of the Heritage Netherlands Reformed Congregation in that same city. His latest book (with Randall J. Pederson) is Meet the Puritans: With a Guide to Modern Reprints.

His website: www.heritagebooks.org. He's one of the good ones!


----------



## 3John2

Thank you for that. I will now have to read one of his books.


----------



## Me Died Blue

Beeke has some excellent sermons as well.


----------



## Staphlobob

Me Died Blue said:


> Beeke has some excellent sermons as well.




I'll say! I downloaded many of them and transfered to my MP3. now when I walk in the mornings I often listen to one of Beeke's sermons.

He was at the 2006 Banner of Truth conference in Penn. I asked him why he always repeats his points at the beginning of his sermons. He said it was to help out those note-takers who write slow.


----------



## JM

Dr. Beeke has inflanced me beyond anyone else [when it comes to prayer and meditation]. He is a true Puritan and faithful brother.


----------



## Peter

I'd vote for Iain Murray too.


----------



## bookslover

Peter said:


> I'd vote for Iain Murray too.



Murray has written many excellent books, and has done yeoman work since the 1950s in promoting the Puritans.

The only stain on his career was his re-writing of Arthur W. Pink's _The Sovereignty of God_ to suit himself. Not a very ethical move, frankly.


----------



## PresReformed

His "Spurgeon vs. Hyper-Calvinism", "Wesley and the Men Who Followed" and his attack on psalmody have also been quite a stain on his career. I think he has lost a lot of credibility in his scholarship since he began trying to rewrite history to his own thinking.


----------



## Peter

bookslover said:


> Murray has written many excellent books, and has done yeoman work since the 1950s in promoting the Puritans.
> 
> The only stain on his career was his re-writing of Arthur W. Pink's _The Sovereignty of God_ to suit himself. Not a very ethical move, frankly.



what do you mean? I have the BT "Sovereignty of God", what did he change?


----------



## NaphtaliPress

As I've said before, I prefer the _old _Murray to the _new _Murray on the regulative principle of worship. 


PresReformed said:


> His "Spurgeon vs. Hyper-Calvinism", "Wesley and the Men Who Followed" and his attack on psalmody have also been quite a stain on his career. I think he has lost a lot of credibility in his scholarship since he began trying to rewrite history to his own thinking.


----------



## Peter

Murray's work on conversion and assurance outweigh his bad views on worship. The first two are a far more important part of puritan theology. Thanks for bringing them to my attention though. Otherwise I would've lumped him in with puritan giants like Beeke.


----------



## PresReformed

Peter said:


> what do you mean? I have the BT "Sovereignty of God", what did he change?



I believe he removed about 7 chapters from the book that he didn't agree with. The Baker edition is complete.


----------



## 3John2

Off the subject sort of...I clicked on that link that was provided for sermons by Joel Beeke. I tried to listen to one of them but was unable. Does one have to pay to listen to them?!


----------



## JM

I've downloaded a bunch without any problem, they just ask for my email once in a while, that's about it.

As for [a little less] modern Puritans, I'd add John L. Dagg.


----------



## bookslover

PresReformed said:


> I believe he removed about 7 chapters from the book that he didn't agree with. The Baker edition is complete.



Yes, Murray re-wrote portions of Pink's book, edited out a lot of material and, I think, added a chapter of his own at the end. (It's been awhile since I've compared the two versions.) I *always* recommend that people buy the Baker Books edition, which is Pink's original book, rather than the Banner of Truth edition, which is Murray's "invented" Pink book.

If someone disagrees with how an author has stated a theological position in a published book, his options are: (1) write a long review article stating his disagreements and his opinion as to why the author is wrong; or (2) write his own book in answer to the author he disagrees with.

What you most certainly do *not* do is re-write the author's book to suit yourself. 

Sometimes it makes me wonder what other books the Banner of Truth has tinkered with over the years - none, I hope.


----------



## PresReformed

bookslover said:


> Sometimes it makes me wonder what other books the Banner of Truth has tinkered with over the years - none, I hope.



I have wondered the same thing. I have been told that Thomas Watson's _Body of Divinity_, _The Lords Prayer,_ and _The Ten Commandments_ were originally a lot larger than the BoT editions.


----------



## 3John2

Well I finally downloaded one of Joel Beeke's sermons!!! That's one of the things I LOVE about forums & this one in particular. I get exposed to people I haven't heard about. I'm SO grateful to be able to download sermons on the net. I've been overdosing on Piper in his page & now this. Anyone else you all would recommend?


----------



## ZackF

*I would like to be one...*

...except I don't think I could find any of those leather/wooden boots they wore in a size 12/13 today. People use to be smaller. A godly people but smaller.


----------

