In the great questions of national life presented by the crises of their day, the Puritans looked to Scripture for light on the duties, power, and rights of king, Parliament, and citizen-subjects. In regard to the individual, the Puritans focused on personal, comprehensive conversion. They believed with Christ that “except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of heaven” (John 3:3). So they excelled at preaching the gospel, probing the conscience, awakening the sinner, calling him to repentance and faith, leading him to Christ, and schooling him in the way of Christ.
Just what is meant by the term Puritan? Many people today use the term to describe a morose and legalistic brand of Christianity that borders on fanaticism. Much of this stereotype was the product of nineteenth-century anti-Puritan sentiments. While subsequent cultures have expressed various opinions of the Puritans, it is helpful to chronicle a brief history of the term and to assess the movement as objectively as possible.
The term Puritan was first used in the 1560s of those English Protestants who considered the reforms under Queen Elizabeth incomplete and called for further “purification” (from the Greek word katharos, “pure”). Its negative connotation derived from its being a translation of the Latin term catharus (Puritan) or cathari (Puritans; from katharos), a title given to medieval heretics (Gordon S. Wakefield, “The Puritans,” in The Study of Spirituality, ed. Cheslyn Jones, Geoffrey Wainwright, and Edward Yarnold, p. 438). For William Perkins (1558- 1602), often called “the father of Puritanism,” Puritan was a “vile term” that described people with perfectionist tendencies (The Works of Mr. William Perkins, 1:342, 3:15). Leonard J. Trinterud concludes, “Throughout the sixteenth century it was used more often as a scornful adjective than as a substantive noun, and was rejected as slanderous in whatever quarter it was applied” (Elizabethan Puritanism, pp. 3ff.).
The terms Puritan and Puritanism stuck, though what they mean has changed over the years. Twentieth-century scholars offer various opinions on what the terms actually intend to describe. William Haller sees the “central dogma of Puritan ism [as] an all-embracing determinism, theologically formulated doctrine of predestination” (The Rise of Puritanism, p. 83). Perry Miller finds the “marrow of Puritan divinity” in the idea of the covenant (Errand into the Wilderness, pp. 48–49); and Alan Simpson, in the concept of conversion (Puritanism in Old and New England, p. 2). Christopher Hill emphasized the social and political ideas in Puritanism (Society and Puritanism). John Coolidge linked the Puritan emphasis to a rejection of the Anglican doctrine of adiaphora, or things indifferent (The Pauline Renaissance in England: Puritanism and the Bible).