Advertisement

Caveat Emptor: Pre- and Postmillennialism in the Late Reformation Period

  • R. Smolinski
Chapter
Part of the International Archives of the History of Ideas / Archives Internationales d’Histoire des Idées book series (ARCH, volume 175)

Abstract

The study of late Reformation eschatology is frequently bogged down in a quagmire of terminology which can be as puzzling to novices as it is to those who plumb its depth. All too often modern assumptions about, and definitions of, the terms “premillennialism” (whose adherents place Christ’s Second Coming at the beginning of the thousand years during which Satan is bound in the “abyss” according to Rev. 20:1–3) and “postmillennialism” (whose adherents place Christ’s reappearance at the end of the millennium) are rigidly superimposed upon the developing historical context in the early modern era. Modern interpreters frequently characterize sixteenth- and seventeenth-century postmillennialists as forward looking thinkers who welcome scientific innovation and engage in literally transforming the fallen world into a terrestrial paradise; on this view, postmillennial progressivists know that they already live in the golden age of “the world’s conversion under an increased potency of grace” prior to Christ’s visible reappearance at the Day of Judgment.1 Postmillennialist activism became the predominant eschatological ideology of the nineteenth century, historians have usually argued, because it appealed to the intellectuals among the apostles of progress who embraced science, democracy, and human perfectibility as God’s ultimate gift to mankind.2 An inverse rationale is generally applied to premillennialism which, so the story goes, appealed to a more conservative contingent whose voluntaristic fundamentalism demanded nothing less than supernatural intervention to offset the chaos of human affairs. The supposed gloom-and-doom of the premillennialists, these modern critics explain, was engendered by their trepidation as they passively awaited their wrathful King of Kings to return at the beginning of the millennium, a prospect which inspired in them, according to the “official” interpretation, little more than abject terror or a dour melancholy.

Keywords

Seventeenth Century Admission Test Church Membership Church Militant Roman Emperor 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. 1.
    See Le Roy Edwin Froom, The Prophetic Faith of our Fathers: The Historical Development of Prophetic Interpretation,3 Vols. (Washington, D.C.: Review and Herald, 1946–54). 2:649–55. The quotation is located on 649.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    See Ernest Lee Tuveson, Millennium and Utopia: A Study in the Background of the Idea of Progress (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1949); and Robert Nisbet, History of the Idea of Progress ( New York: Basic Books, 1980 ).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    C.C. Goen’s influential article “Jonathan Edwards: A New Departure in Eschatology,” Church History 28 (March 1959), 25–40, calls Edwards’ belief in a prosperous state of the church within history “a radical innovation which had decisive consequences for the future” (25). Goen refutes Perry Miller by identifying Daniel Whitby, Charles Daubuz (1637–1717), and Moses Lowman (1680–1752) as Edwards’ principal sources for his postmillennialism (35–38). In his Redeemer Nation: The Idea of America’s Millennial Role (Chicago. University of Chicago Press, 1968), Ernest Lee Tuveson adopts Goen’s argument with few qualifications (30–39) as does Alan Heimert (59–66) in Religion and the American Mind (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1966); Stephen J. Stein, in his Introduction to “Apocalyptic Writings,” The Works of Jonathan Edwards, Perry Miller, General Ed., 18 Vols. to date (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1957-), 5: 7–19 and 40–59; and Robert W. Jenson (133–34), in America’s Theologian: A Recommendation of Jonathan Edwards (New York: Oxford University Press, 1988). James West Davidson significantly revises this argument in The Logic of Millennial Thought (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1977), esp. 25–36, and John F. Wilson points to the nineteenth-century apostles of progress who adopt Edwards as their spiritual father to reify their own ideas, in “History, Redemption, and the Millennium,” in Jonathan Edwards and the American Experience, ed. Nathan O. Hatch and Harry S. Stout ( New York: Oxford University Press, 1988 ), 133–41.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Richard Baxter, The Glorious Kingdom of Christ, Described and Clearly Vindicated (London, 1691), 9–10.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    St. Augustine, The City of God, trans. Marcus Dods (New York: Modern Library, 1950), Book 20, Chap. 7, 720. Cited hereafter in the following format: City of God, 20. 7. 720.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ibid.,20.8.723.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ibid.,20.8.722–4.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ibid.,20.9.726Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ibid.,20.6.716–19; 9.727–28; 10.728–29. For the various positions outlined, see Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History VII.xxiv; Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Tryphon; Irenaeus, Against Heresies V.xxxv; Tertullian, Against Marcion III.xxiv; and Lactantius, Epitome,Chap. xi, and Divine Institutes V.xxxiv. Daniel Whitby reviews this debate in his Treatise of the True Millennium,Chap. 1, in Paraphrase and Commentary on the New Testament,2 vols. (Edinburgh, 1761), 2:2–9.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    St. Augustine, City of God,20.11.729; 13.730–32.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ibid.,20.16.735.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    See Norman Cohn, The Pursuit of the Millennium. Revolutionary Millenarians and Mystical Anarchists of the Middle Ages (New York: Rev. and expanded ed., Oxford University Press, 1970; first ed.1957), 80 and 235, and Heiko A. Oberman, Luther: Man Between God and the Devil,trans. Eileen Walliser-Schwarzbart (New York: Doubleday, 1992), 42–4, 60, and 71.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    See Heinrich Quistorp, Calvin’s Doctrine of the Last Things, trans. Harold Knight ( Richmond: John Knox Press, 1955 ).Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Quoted in T.F. Torrance, Kingdom and Church: A Study in the Theology of the Reformation (Fair Lawn, N.J.: Essential Books, 1956), 152–3. Calvin, Commentary on Matthew 6: 10.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    John Bale, Image of Both Churches, in Select Works of John Bale, D.D.,ed. Henry Christmas (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1849), 558, 559–60.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ibid.,561Google Scholar
  17. 17.
  18. 18.
    Brightman’s stages are summarized in his The Reverend Mr. Brightmans Iudgement or Prophecies (London, 1643), found in Thomas Brightman, The Revelation of Saint John (Amsterdam, 1644).Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ibid.,264.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
  21. 21.
    Ibid.,267.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ibid.,266.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Ibid.,263–70.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Ibid.,265, 267, 270.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Ibid.,268.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Ibid.,265.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Johann Heinrich Alsted, The Beloved City Or, The Saints Reign on Earth A Thousand Yeares,trans. William Burton (London, 1643), 36.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
  29. 29.
    Ibid.,17.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Ibid.,17–8.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Ibid.,17.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Ibid.,18.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Ibid.,78–79.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Ibid., 10,79–83.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Mede’s Clovis Apocalyptica was translated into English as The Key of the Revelation in 1647. My citations are from the second ed. (London, 1650), Part 1, 27.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
  37. 37.
    Mede, Remaines On some Passages in the Revelation (London, 1650), 25–8.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Ibid.,24–5.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Ibid.,25. For the same argument, see Mede’s The Key of the Revelation,A5—A6, and The Works of the Pious and Profoundly Learned Joseph Mede ed. John Worthington, 4th ed. (London, 1677), 603–5, 773–7.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    See John Cotton, Churches Resurrection, or the Opening of the Fift and Sixt verses of the 20th Chap. Of the Revelation (London, 1642), 5, Cotton, Exposition upon the Thirteenth Chapter of the Revelation (London, 1655), 120.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Ibid.,5–6Google Scholar
  42. 42.
  43. 43.
    Ibid.,7, 6.Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Ibid.,6, 7.Google Scholar
  45. 45.
  46. 46.
    Ibid.,6, 10.Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Ibid.,16–20.Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Ibid.,16.Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Ibid.,20.Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    For John Davenport, see his “Epistle,” in Increase Mather’s Mystery of Israel’s Salvation (London, 1669). For Drue Cressener, see his The Judgments of God upon the Roman-Catholick Church (London, 1689), esp. 290–6. For Praisegod Barbone (also Barbon), see his Good Things to Come, Or, A Setting forth of some of the Great Things that will Contemporize and take place; when our Lord Christ shall come gain (London, 1675), 5–6, 22–32, 39–50, 59–65. For Increase Mather, see A discourse Concerning the glorious state of the church on earth under the New Jerusalem“ (ca. 1692–95), a manucsript ed. Mason I. Lowance, Jr., and David Watters which is included in their long article, ”Increase Mather’s `New Jerusalem’: Millennialism in Late Seventeenth-Century New England,“ Proceedings of the American Antiquarian Society 87 (1977), 381–85, 388, 393–94, and, also, Increase Mather, A Dissertation Concerning the Future Conversion of the Jewish Nation (London, 1709), 15, 18–21, 25–8; Samuel Willard, The Checkered State of the Gospel Church (Boston, 1701), 20–1, 51, 57–9. William Torrey, A Brief Discourse Concerning Futurities or Things to come (Boston, 1757), 7, 8–9, 27–37, 50–1; Ezekiel Cheever, Scripture Prophecies Explained (Boston, 1757), 7–13, 16–7. The sermons by Torrey and Cheever were written in the late 1680s and early 1690s; neither were published until more than half a century later, when Thomas Prince offered them as alternatives to Edwardsian postmillennialism. For Thomas Goodwin and Cotton Mather see my discussion below.Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Thomas Goodwin, The World to Come, or, The Kingdome of Christ asserted (London, 1655), 33–4.Google Scholar
  52. 52.
  53. 53.
    Ibid.,28, 29–30.Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Ibid.,22, 23.Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Ibid.,22, 23.Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    “`Problema Theologicum’ [1703]: An Authoritative Edition,” ed. by Jeffrey Scott Mares, Proceedings of the American Antiquarian Society 104, Pt. 2 (1994), 423. See also Reiner Smolinski, The Threefold Paradise of Cotton Mather: An Edition of ‘Triparadisus’ (Athens and London: University of Georgia Press, 1995), 245.Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Mather, ’Problema Theologicum, esp. 384–8,420–4.Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Ibid.,407.Google Scholar
  59. 59.
  60. 60.
    Ibid.,406. See also 407–8.Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    Ibid.,423–4.Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Ibid.,423.Google Scholar
  63. 63.
    See Mede, The Key of the Revelation,A5–A6, and Works,773–8.Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    Smolinski, The Threefold Paradise of Cotton Mather,278. For Cheever’s own views, see his posthumously published Scripture Prophecies Explained (Boston, 1757).Google Scholar
  65. 65.
    Praisegod Barbone, Good Things to Come (London, 1675), 53.Google Scholar
  66. 66.
    Ibid.,59–65.Google Scholar
  67. 67.
    Smolinski, The Threefold Paradise of Cotton Mather,316.Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    Ibid.,Part III, Chaps. 2–7Google Scholar
  69. 69.
    See Mede, Works,775, and his revision of this issue in A Paraphrase and Exposition of Saint Peter,2nd ed. (London, 1649), 12–22; Increase Mather, Dissertation Concerning the Future Conversion of the Jewish Nation,31–2; Cressener, The Judgments of God upon the RomanCatholick Church,284–300; Cotton Mather, ’Problema Theologicum, 417–22; Smolinski, The Threefold Paradise of Cotton Mather,155–243.Google Scholar
  70. 70.
    See Mede, Works,593.Google Scholar
  71. 71.
    Smolinski, The Threefold Paradise of Cotton Mather,180–1.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  • R. Smolinski
    • 1
  1. 1.Georgia State UniversityUSA

Personalised recommendations