Worshiping God With Our Minds: Theology As Doxology Among The Puritans

By Peter Beck

As Diarmaid MacCulloch argues, “Puritanism is in the eye of the beholder.” [1] Interpretations of the Puritan project vary. Some interpret the Puritans as the logical outcome of political upheaval within the English state. Others see the movement as a faith-based expression of sociological changes taking place during the transition between the medieval and early modern periods. [2] Though these efforts accurately describe the when, the context, and the what, they fall short of explaining the why.

Still other historians have recognized the shortcomings of explaining the seismic shift represented in Puritanism in purely secular terms. These scholars have sought to explain the Puritans according to their own standards, according to their theological concerns. Carden, for example, argues, “Their absolute belief in the Bible and the God of the Bible was the fundamental motivating force behind their worldview.” [3] Horton Davies, on the other hand, interprets the movement as a biblically driven reaction to the worship of the Roman Catholic Church and its close ecclesiastical relative, the Church of England. [4] Packer believes that communion with God is the “heart of Puritan theology and religion.” [5] These attempts to explain the center of Puritan thought, and others like them, are adequate insofar as they go. Yet, they too fall short of offering the holistic explanation that the Puritans themselves provided.

According to their own words, the Puritans sought a system of faith that was first and foremost about the worship of God. The worship that they desired, however, was more than liturgical expressions of faith on Sunday that differed only in form from their predecessors. Instead, they deduced from their studies of Scripture that theology and the life informed by such convictions were to be one harmonious act of worship.

A survey follows that examines the thoughts of four key Puritan thinkers. Separately, they represent three different eras in the movement’s development. Seen together, however, it becomes clear that each shared a common goal: a theology that leads to doxology.

William Ames (1576-1633)

Trained at Cambridge University, William Ames developed his theology under the influence of early Puritan William Perkins (1558-1602). Ames, however, quickly established himself as the leading spokesman for the Puritan movement. [6] According to Beeke and van Vliet, Ames’s contemporaries recognized him as the “father of the Puritan movement.” [7]

As influential as Ames may have been in England, his theology enjoyed even greater influence in New England. [8] “In early American theological and intellectual history,” notes John Eusden, “William Ames was without peer.” [9] Jonathan Edwards, for example, would have been able to quote Ames’s work verbatim and often referred to him in his own writings. [10] Thus, Sydney Ahlstrom can probably safely declare Ames to be “the chief theological mentor of the New England Puritans.” [11]

Ames’s systematic theology, The Marrow of Theology (1623), represents both his thought and his influence. Reader demand required the text to be reprinted seventeen times in three different languages in the first thirty-three years after its first publication. Taking the influence of The Marrow of Theology and Ames’s widespread appeal into account, it can be reasonably argued that Ames’s understanding of theology as doxology should be seen as representative of his era in the development of Puritan thought. As such, The Marrow of Divinity offers the reader an insight into commonly held Puritan beliefs concerning this matter.

“Theology is the doctrine or teaching of living to God.” Thus William Ames began his influential systematic treatment of theology. Living to God, he continued, is living in accord with God’s will, for God’s glory. The manner in which one accomplishes this profound task is through the study of Scripture, the contemplation of God’s person and work, and the work of the indwelling Holy Spirit. In theology, Ames explained, the Christian finds his or her purpose in life: knowing and loving God. This, he said, is “the spiritual work of the whole man.” So conceived, theology must not be merely philosophical but practical. For, Ames concluded in his introduction, “[Theology] is a guide and master plan for our highest end, sent in a special manner from God, treating of divine things, tending towards God, and leading man to God.” [12]

The unified way in which Ames viewed theology is further illustrated in the construction of his theology text. Reflecting his Ramist philosophical approach, theology, he said, consists of two parts: faith and observance. The first half of the work, Book One, is dedicated to the theological—to the nature, object, and purpose of faith. Here, too, Ames remained completely theocentric as faith is defined as “the resting of the heart on God.” [13] The second half of the text speaks to the practical, the outworking of one’s theology, what Ames called “observance.” Observance, he maintained in Book Two, “is the submissive performance of the will of God for the glory of God.” [14] In other words, a proper understanding of theology cannot help but produce a corresponding lifestyle reflective of one’s faith as defined in his theology. This public manifestation of one’s beliefs, Ames argued, is properly understood to be religion. [15] Moreover, “The proper act of religion,” he added, “is to bestow honor upon God and is called worship and adoration.” [16] Worship is but the external manifestation of internal convictions; it is the living faith of those living to God. Those who respond rightly are rightly called Christians and those who do not are not. [17]

John Owen (1616-1683)

In many ways, John Owen acted as a driving force within the Puritan movement and on its behalf. He served as friend, confidant, and chaplain to Oliver Cromwell during the English Civil War and in its political aftermath. [18] Owen stamped his imprint on English theology as dean of Christ Church College at Oxford and as defender of orthodoxy. He came to the defense of the gospel against Arminianism and Socinianism, and he argued with Richard Baxter over Baxter’s position on the extent of the atonement. Owen’s mind shaped and guided a generation of Puritans. As J. I. Packer remarks, “He is by common consent…the greatest among Puritan theologians.” [19]

While Packer contends that communion with God is the heartbeat of Puritan thought, Owen believed that a proper biblical theology was the key to that communion. To that end, he confessed that he devoted his life to gaining heavenly wisdom and divine truth through the application of his mind to the biblical text and the theological premises found there. [20]

Owen warned readers of his magisterial Biblical Theology (1661) that theological gain comes at great expense. Those who pursue it, he said, must forego pleasure and seek God’s love, as theological wisdom only comes through hard work arising out of a personal relationship with God. [21] The mind rightly focused seeks to glorify God in its exercise; [22] that exercise, he concluded, involves putting one’s faith to practice. Echoing the sentiments of Ames, Owen wrote, “If we are in pursuit of a holy and righteous system [of theology], we must have one capable of implanting its principles in our minds and our hearts so as to live to and for God himself.” [23] Any theology that fails to do so is not Christian, and any theologian who follows such a system is no theologian. [24]

“The subject matter of theology is largely God himself,” Owen stated early in the body of his text. [25] His definition of theology follows logically from his concern for the application of biblical wisdom. Theology is “the truths of Almighty God and the worship and obedience which is His due.” [26] “All theology indeed revolves around God, His due worship, and our obedience to Him,” Owen reiterated just two pages later. [27]

As the erstwhile theologian gains knowledge, that knowledge changes him. “This new light and wisdom necessarily brings with it new and spiritual emotions related to that truth.” These changes produce closer communion with God and active obedience to his will, making men “true and wise theologians.” Knowledge that does not produce fruit is wisdom in name only. The heartbeat of true wisdom, the “vital force of theology,” Owen noted, “is piety, it is worship, it is fear of God in all of which its essential activities consist.” Real knowledge, true theology, makes worshipers of men. [28]

In the end, while Owen acknowledged that communion with God is one end of “all true theology,” [29] “the ultimate end of true theology is the celebration of the praise of God, and His glory and grace in the eternal salvation of sinners.” [30] Biblical theology produces practical results and eternal praise.

Thomas Watson (c. 1620-1686)

A contemporary of Owen, Watson has played an important role in presenting Puritan thought to the present generation. When the Banner of Truth Trust began reprinting the classics of the Puritan era in 1958, the first author they chose to highlight was Thomas Watson. While Erroll Hulse accurately describes Watson’s writing style as “the most readable of the Puritans,” another reason explains their decision. [31] Watson’s works are, the publisher proclaims, “the most useful and influential of our publications.” [32] As Charles Spurgeon remarked in his memoir of Watson, “His writings are his best memorial.” [33]

Two of Watson’s many writings offer a clear portrayal of his understanding of the relationship between theology and worship. The Godly Man’s Picture (1666), written during Watson’s ministerial exile following the Great Ejection of 1662, provides an artful rendering of the Christian, “drawn with a Scripture pencil.” [34] In the preface to the reader, Watson prepared the canvas for the argument to follow. “Godliness,” he wrote, “consists in an exact harmony between holy principles and Christian living.” [35] What follows are twenty-four characteristics that Watson held to be true indicators as to the godliness of the saint.

“The first fundamental sign is that a godly man is a man of knowledge.” [36] God teaches this knowledge on the pages of Scripture as He reveals Himself. Such knowledge, Watson contended, serves a purpose for it is a practical knowledge. “True knowledge not only improves a Christian’s sight, but improves his pace.” Thus knowledge of God—theology—changes the way the Christian lives. Anything else is unacceptable. “It is a reproach to a Christian to live in a contradiction to his knowledge, to know he should be strict and holy, yet to live loosely.” [37]

Watson’s A Body of Divinity (1692) builds upon the sketches of The Godly Man. Comprised of 166 sermons, this work draws upon the Westminster Assembly’s Shorter Catechism to lay out for the reader a more thoroughgoing theological treatment of the key doctrines of the Christian faith. Prior to beginning his discourse on the Catechism, Watson illustrated the need for such training with his interpretation of Colossians 1:23. “It is the duty,” he wrote, “of Christians to be settled in the doctrine of faith” [38]—to be settled one must be well-grounded in key tenets of Christian thought39 and to possess a thorough knowledge of the “fundamentals.” [40] Without a theological foundation the Christian cannot serve God correctly or worship Him rightly. [41] “As the body cannot be strong that has sinews shrunk; so neither can that Christian be strong in religion who wants the grounds of knowledge, which are the sinews to strengthen and stablish him.” [42] Catechizing in theology provides the means for strengthening the Christian’s faith and service.

The first question of the Westminster Shorter Catechism asks, “What is the chief end of man?” As many know, the answer is that “man’s chief end is to glorify God, and to enjoy him forever.” The glory which God deserves, said Watson, is either the glory intrinsic to God’s nature, something man cannot alter or add to, or it is “the glory which is ascribed to God, or which his creatures labour to bring to him.” [43] Watson directed his attention to the latter.

Four things comprise the glory which the Christian can ascribe to God, according to Watson: appreciation, adoration, affection, and subjection. [44] Appreciation occurs when Christians are “God-admirers,” basking in His beauty. [45] Adoration takes place when they worship God in accordance with His revealed will. [46] Affection is “a love of delight,” the love of God stirred in the hearts of believers for who they perceive God to be, not for what God has done. [47] Finally, subjection refers to the willful obedience of God’s people to their Master. This fourth and last act of glorifying God brings theology and doxology together. “We glorify God when we are devoted to his service; our head studies for him, our tongue pleads for him, and our hands relieve his members.” [48] Note the position of matters of the mind in Watson’s prioritization of those things which bring glory to God: worshiping God with the mind comes first.

Watson listed seventeen ways in which the Christian can glorify God. Interesting in the midst of these are the words of William Ames: “We glorify God by living to God.” [49] Living to God, Watson explained, happens “when we live to his service, and lay ourselves out wholly for God.” Two entries later, Watson added, “We glorify God by standing up for his truths.” [50] The other fifteen ways mentioned by Watson include issues of Christian living: evangelism, worship, the use of spiritual gifts, and so forth. All are the practical outworking of internal beliefs or knowledge, for, as Watson concluded his exposition of the first question, God’s glory is a duty to be diligently and zealously sought. Watson more than believed these things; he lived them to his dying breath, a final breath spent in prayer.

Jonathan Edwards (1703-1758)

Historian Henry Tappan once said of Jonathan Edwards, “I believe there is a prevailing impression that Edwards must be fairly met in order to make any advance in an opposite argument.” [51] While interpretations of Edwards’s influence vary, no theologian since the days of the Reformers, save perhaps Schleiermacher and Barth, has so imposed his thoughts upon the minds of those who followed as has Edwards. Samuel Hopkins, a contemporary of Edwards, could barely contain his enthusiasm for his friend.

President Edwards, in the esteem of all the judicious, who were well acquainted with him, either personally, or by his writings, was one of the greatest—best—and most useful of men, that have lived in this age.

He discovered himself to be one of the greatest of divines, by his conversation, preaching and writings: One of remarkable strength of mind, clearness of thought, and depth of penetration, who well understood, and was able, above most others, to vindicate the great doctrines of Christianity. [52]

Two centuries later, Perry Miller, while loathing Edwards’s “peculiar doctrines,” still esteemed him as an “artist” and “child of genius.” [53] More recently, Philip Gura dubbed him “America’s evangelical,” [54] while Robert Jenson called him “America’s theologian.” [55] Thus, for a quarter of a millennium, Edwards has stood alone as America’s premier religious thinker.

Yet another reason to study Edwards remains. As Martyn Lloyd-Jones posited, “Edwards takes you out into the depths where you begin to see man face to face with his Maker.” [56] Or, as John Piper writes, “Edwards is strongest where we are weakest. He knows God. He sees and savors the supremacy of God in all things.” [57] For this reason, Edwards must be dealt with as the last in a long line of influential and valuable Puritan theologians.

“It is of exceeding importance that we should have right notions and conceptions of the nature, attributes, and perfections of God,” Edwards told his congregation. [58] Thus, he sought to build his theology on the right understanding of God. “Now it is impossible we should love, fear, and obey God as we ought, except we know what he is, and have right ideas of his perfections, that render him lovely and worthy to be feared and obeyed.” Moreover, he reasoned, “It would be greatly to the advantage of our souls, if we understood more of the excellency and gloriousness of God.” [59]

A proper understanding of God not only affords man the spiritual tools necessary for Christian living, but such knowledge ultimately equips him to fulfill the very end for which he was created: “to think and be astonished [at] his glorious perfections.” [60] As Edwards argued elsewhere, this acknowledgment of God’s greatness is the same as glorifying God or praising Him, holding Him in “high esteem” and expressing it “in words and actions.” [61] The point, then, of all theological speculation, the very reason for theological effort, is the public display of a changed life that results in the worship of God.

As Edwards had observed in his seminal Religious Affections (1746), “True religion, in great part, consists in holy affections.” [62] Affections, he added, are the “more vigorous and sensible exercises” of the soul. [63] Lest someone accuse Edwards of saying that feelings, not thought, experience, not theology, drive one’s actions, he warned,

For although to true religion, there must indeed be something else besides affection,…there must be light in the understanding, as well as an affected fervent heart, where there is heat without light, there can be nothing divine or heavenly in that heart. [64]

Affections, then, are constrained by one’s theology and prove themselves “in Christian practice.” [65] “Christian practice” is the best evidence one can give of his theology, “the best evidence of a saving belief of the truth,” things ascertained only in the exercise of theology. [66]

Conclusion

As Peter Lewis rightly summarizes, “For Puritanism was not merely a set of rules or a larger creed, but a life-force: a vision and a compulsion which saw the beauty of a holy life and moved towards it, marveling at the possibilities and thrilling to the satisfaction of a God-centered life.” [67] Packer, too, comes close to the very heart of the matter in his own inimitable way.

And their theology was no mere theoretical orthodoxy. They sought to “reduce to practice” all that God taught them. They yoked their consciences to his word, disciplining themselves to bring all activities under the scrutiny of Scripture, and to demand a theological, as distinct from a merely pragmatic, justification for everything that they did. They applied their understanding of the mind of God to every branch of life, seeing the church, the family, the state, the arts and sciences, the world of commerce and industry, no less than the devotions of the individual, as so many spheres in which God must be served and honored. They saw life whole, for they saw its Creator as Lord of each department of it, and their purpose was that “holiness to the Lord” might be written over it in its entirety. [68]

Thus all of life and the theology that informs it must be driven by God’s self-revelation and man’s responsibility to glorify God in all that he does. Orthodoxy leads to orthopraxy. Right thinking produces right living. A knowledge of God leads to the worship of Him. Just as Ames proposed and others repeated, theology is doxology.

Notes

1. Diarmaid MacCulloch, The Later Reformation in England, 1547-1603 (New York: Palgrave, 2001), 69.
2. See Reformation to Revolution, ed. Margo Todd (London: Routledge, 1995). To that end, Spurr has called Puritanism an “activist faith,” a response to and a corrective for the changes taking place in society (John Spurr, English Puritanism: 1603-1689 [New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1998], 5).
3. Allen Carden, Puritan Christianity in America: Religious Life in Seventeenth-Century Massachusetts (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1990), 33.
4. See Horton Davies’s various books on the worship of the American and English Puritans.
5. J. I. Packer, “The Puritan Idea of Communion with God,” in Puritan Papers, Volume 2, 1960-1962 (Phillipsburg, N.J.: Presbyterian & Reformed, 2001), 103.
6. Joel R. Beeke and Jan van Vliet, “The Marrow of Theology by William Ames (1576-1633),” in The Devoted Life, ed. by Kelly M. Kapic and Randall C. Gleason (Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 2004), 54.
7. Beeke and van Vliet, “The Marrow of Theology by William Ames,” 65.
8. New England Puritan Increase Mather (1639-1723) held Ames’s systematic theology, The Marrow of Theology, in high esteem, believing it to be the best summary of Calvinist thought ever written. According to Eusden, Mather cited Ames more than he did Calvin (“Editor’s Preface,” The Marrow of Theology, trans. John D. Eusden [Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1997], 65).
9. “Editor’s Preface,” The Marrow of Theology, 11.
10. Thus, by his own admission, Edwards’s thoughts concerning theology and doxology closely reflect that of Ames. In Religious Affections, Edwards cited Ames by name three times.
11. Sydney E. Ahlstrom, A Religious History of the American People (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1972), 131.
12. Ames, The Marrow of Theology, 77-78.
13. Ames, The Marrow of Theology, 80.
14. Ames, The Marrow of Theology, 219.
15. Ames, The Marrow of Theology, 238.
16. Ames, The Marrow of Theology, 239.
17. Ames, The Marrow of Theology, 240.
18. Alan Spence, “Owen, John (1616-83),” in The Dictionary of Historical Theology, ed. by Trevor Hart (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2000), 412.
19. J. I. Packer, A Quest for Holiness: The Puritan Vision of the Christian Life (Wheaton: Crossway, 1990), 81.
20. John Owen, Biblical Theology: The History of Theology from Adam to Christ (Morgan, Pa.: Soli Deo Gloria, 1994), xxii.
21. Owen, Biblical Theology, xxviii.
22. Owen, Biblical Theology, xl.
23. Owen, Biblical Theology, xlii.
24. Owen, Biblical Theology, xlvi.
25. Owen, Biblical Theology, 8.
26. Owen, Biblical Theology, 14.
27. Owen, Biblical Theology, 16.
28. Owen, Biblical Theology, 646.
29. Owen, Biblical Theology, 618.
30. Owen, Biblical Theology, 619.
31. Erroll Hulse, Who Are the Puritans…and What Do They Teach (Auburn, Mass.: Evangelical Press, 2000), 97.
32. Cover notes, A Body of Divinity (Edinburgh: Banner of Truth, 1958).
33. Charles Spurgeon, “Brief Memoir of Thomas Watson,” in A Body of Divinity, vii.
34. Thomas Watson, The Godly Man’s Picture: Drawn with a Scripture Pencil (Edinburgh: Banner of Truth, 1992).
35. Watson, The Godly Man’s Picture, 7.
36. Watson, The Godly Man’s Picture, 20.
37. Watson, The Godly Man’s Picture, 24.
38. Watson, A Body of Divinity, 1.
39. Watson, A Body of Divinity, 1.
40. Watson, A Body of Divinity, 4.
41. Watson, A Body of Divinity, 4.
42. Watson, A Body of Divinity, 5.
43. Watson, A Body of Divinity, 7.
44. Watson, A Body of Divinity, 7.
45. Watson, A Body of Divinity, 7.
46. Watson, A Body of Divinity, 7-8.
47. Watson, A Body of Divinity, 8.
48. Watson, A Body of Divinity, 8.
49. Watson, A Body of Divinity, 14.
50. Watson, A Body of Divinity, 15.
51. Henry P. Tappan, A Review of Edwards’s “Inquiry into the Freedom of the Will” (New York: J. S. Taylor, 1839), xi.
52. Samuel Hopkins, The Life and Character of the Late Reverend Mr. Jonathan Edwards (Northampton: S. & E. Butler, 1804; reprint of The Life and Character of the Late Reverend Mr. Jonathan Edwards [Boston: S. Keeneland, 1765]), iii.
53. Perry Miller, Jonathan Edwards (New York: William Sloane Associates, 1949), xii–xiii.
54. Philip F. Gura, Jonathan Edwards: America’s Evangelical (New York: Hill and Wang, 2005).
55. Robert W. Jenson, America’s Theologian: A Recommendation of Jonathan Edwards (New York: Oxford University Press, 1988).
56. D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones, The Puritans: Their Origins and Successors (Carlisle, Pa.: Banner of Truth, 1997), 361.
57. John Piper, God’s Passion for His Glory: Living the Vision of Jonathan Edwards (Wheaton: Crossway, 1998), 31.
58. Edwards, “God’s Excellencies,” in Sermons and Discourses, 1720-1723, vol. 10 of The Works of Jonathan Edwards, ed. Wilson H. Kimnach (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1992), 416.
59. Edwards, “God’s Excellencies,” in Sermons and Discourses, 417.
60. Edwards, “God’s Excellencies,” in Sermons and Discourses, 417.
61. Edwards, “The End for which God Created the World,” in God’s Passion for His Glory, 238.
62. Edwards, Religious Affections, in The Works of Jonathan Edwards (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1959) 2:95.
63. Edwards, Religious Affections, 96.
64. Edwards, Religious Affections, 120.
65. Edwards, Religious Affections, 383.
66. Edwards, Religious Affections, 449.
67. Peter Lewis, The Genius of Puritanism (Morgan, Pa.: Soli Deo Gloria, 1996), 12.
68. Packer, A Quest for Holiness, 29.