Van Tell "Freedom of Conscience" - Tolerance and Conscience in Elizabethan England: William Perkins: The Theology of Conscience
Liberty of Conscience
From the Puritan to the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution - The history of a puritan idea
By John van Tell
Translated by Zhang Dajun
Guizhou University Press; 2011-12。
---
The text is about 6300 words; Annotated in bold type
Catalog: Yang Yuanping
---
summary
Perkins' emphasis on theology can be seen as the basis for a new theology known as the "theology of conscience." （p17）
Perkins' definition of conscience includes two important ideological presuppositions: the authority of biblical texts and the fact that they are based on functional psychology, which is why he uniquely defines conscience.
Following Paul's understanding, Perkins argues that the Christian conscience is always bound by the norms of the Bible—and especially the New Testament.
The authority of the Bible is above the power of the state. （p18）
Christians form their consciences by studying the Bible, especially the moral law. （p20）
The mistake of the Roman Church was to advocate absolute obedience to secular power, just as they advocated obedience to the Church without biblical basis. （p22）
The basic institutions of the family, the church, the state, and the enterprise all exist side by side under God's sovereign sovereignty... Institutions are set up to serve humanity... People's obedience to the laws of the nation coincides with the fact that they obeyed God in the first place. （p23）
If the state oversteps its authority on fundamental issues such as religion, believers in Perkins' eyes must take a stand of civil disobedience:
If human law ends up containing evil content, and it is forbidden by God, then there is no binding force on conscience at all; Conversely, people have an obligation not to obey their conscience (p24)
Two apparently distinct attitudes towards conscience have developed.
An attitude born out of the minds of government officials and others who support the traditional British model of thought, sees conscience as an activity within the jurisdiction of the government. （p25）
Another view of conscience emerged among the Puritans, the main spokesperson of which was William Perkins. It affirms that the conscience as a human being is above any other form of authority. Conscience is above the authority of man and institution because it belongs directly to God. （p26）
---
Chapter I: Tolerance and Freedom of Conscience in Elizabethan England
William Perkins: The Theology of Conscience
P17
William Perkins came to Cambridge University in 1557 and found that there was already a warm atmosphere aimed at improving the quality of the spiritual quality of life in the Church of England and society. Like many of his contemporaries, Perkins underwent a dramatic process of confession before turning to a passionate pursuit of godly living. Perkins was a gifted priest and writer who made a name for himself early in his career. Although he died in 1602 at the age of 44, he left behind three volumes of theological treatises. In terms of the number of writings alone, Perkins wrote more than any Puritan in Elizabethan times.
One important difference between Perkins' work and that of his contemporaries is that his work shows Perkins' great passion for conscience, which other Puritans do not have. In fact, Perkins' emphasis on theology can be seen as the basis for a new theology known as the "theology of conscience." To say that Perkins pioneered a new theology does not mean that the doctrinal standards of Puritan theology were thrown aside. The main teachings of Puritan theology, such as the sovereignty of God, justification by faith, and other teachings of the Protestant tradition, were preserved by Perkins.
Perkins' theology of conscience is based on the assumption that conscience plays a key role in determining the state of the soul. In fact, Christians have always been interested and concerned about the state of the soul. Perkins, however, sees conscience as a means and instrument that enables Christians to determine the state of their soul with a high degree of accuracy. His emphasis on conscience forced him to define it and describe how it works. As a result, he wrote extensively on the question of conscience, as well as a number of books on how conscience works. Perkins' foundational work on conscience, titled The Discourse, together with his Cases on Conscience, defined conscience and outlined the basic types of conscience problems. For Perkins, conscience encompasses all theological topics, as can be seen in the fact that Perkins described the question of salvation as "a question of conscience, and conscience is the greatest thing ever known."
P18
Although more needs to be learned about Perkins' role in the creation of a theology of conscience, this book will limit itself to examining his definition of conscience and the Elizabethan interest in freedom of conscience that it sparked.
Perkins' definition of conscience includes two important ideological presuppositions: the authority of biblical texts and the psychology of functional psychology (Editor's note: Functional psychology is a naturalistic psychology based on Aristotle, which arose in the Middle Ages). This psychology combines Aristotle's doctrine with late Roman and Islamic medicine. Aristotle proposed three faculties: general feeling, imagination, and memory. Later, some scholars mentioned three faculties, and some scholars mentioned five faculties. is why he made a unique definition of conscience. An exaggeration of any of these factors is a distortion of Perkins' definition of conscience.
Presuppositions about the authority of biblical texts influenced Perkins' view of conscience in the following ways. First, Perkins found a clear basis for the doctrine of conscience in the New Testament. St. Paul was the main interpreter of the concept of conscience, and he often referred to the freedom and liberation that Christians attain through conscience. Perkins' theology of conscience is an elaboration of Paul's principles. Following Paul's understanding, Perkins argues that the Christian conscience is always bound by the norms of the Bible—and especially the New Testament. In describing the duty and freedom of conscience, he always relied on the teachings of the Bible. Judging by the Elizabethan controversy over the source of power, Perkins' theological stance reinforces the Puritan claim that biblical authority prevails over state power.
The second important feature of Perkins' theology of conscience is the description of conscience from the perspective of functional psychology. Of course, the use of functional psychology was not the first of Perkins, but was only a deliberate imitation of Roman Catholic scholars. According to functional psychology, conscience is part of knowledge, which in turn is one of the two components of the soul, the other being the will. Conscience is related to knowledge, because the activity of conscience is inseparable from reason; Reason is an indispensable element of understanding. (p19) Perkins uses the well-known example of the "coachman and carriage" to illustrate the idea that conscience is part of knowledge. Just as the coachman can guide the carriage, so does the reason and conscience of cognition. In contrast, the will has only the ability to choose or reject certain actions, it is not instructive.
P19
Perkins made a further distinction by dividing cognition into theoretical and practical. Theoretical cognition judges truth and falsity, but stops at rational contemplation; On the other hand, practical cognition judges specific behaviors and determines whether they are good or bad. Perkins argues that conscience is part of practical knowledge, and its role is to judge specific behavior.
According to Perkins, a further distinction should be made, because conscience is more than cognition. Perkins says that conscience can be destroyed if it were merely cognition, but it is impossible. Conscience is an innate ability, that is, conscience performs the function of cognition, and is not merely a product of cognition like mere cognition. Perkins' assertion that conscience is an innate ability is based on his own experience: he cannot escape conscience anyway. This view is also supported by St. Paul's letter to the Romans, in which Paul taught that conscience may fall, but has always existed as a witness to God's law.
Perkins' definition of conscience using functional psychology is not so easy to understand, but his discussion of the purpose of conscience helps us build a bridge between functional psychology and modern thought. He pointed out that conscience can judge the actions of those who reside in it, and give it approval or condemnation. The function of conscience is only related to the behavior of the self, and conscience is a part of the self, and therefore cannot judge the actions of others. In Perkins' view, judgments about the right and wrong of other people's actions are, at best, cognition.
Perkins argues that a fundamental feature of conscience is its witness role. Perkins' reference to the role of witness refers to the ability of the conscience to dialogue with the rest of the self; That is, what others call the "voice of conscience". Conscience is not only a witness of self, but also a witness of God. The existence of conscience as a witness to the self and to God is Perkins' fundamental view. He said that conscience is placed in the human heart by God to give man a means of knowing whether his actions are in accordance with God's moral commandments. In Perkins' words:
P20
Conscience has a divine nature and is placed by God between him and mankind as an arbiter and declares to God whether it is for or against humanity.
Perkins acknowledges that the conscience has a certain transcendental sense of right and wrong, but this is not the source of the Christian conscience, which is formed by studying the Bible, especially the moral law. For Perkins, however, the moral law includes not only the Ten Commandments of Moses in the Old Testament, but also the moral law spoken of in the New Testament. The question of how a person obeys the moral law is articulated in his practice theology and his views on questions of conscience.
Two general features of practicing theology help keep it in the right direction and also help clarify its meaning to modern people. For Perkins, the moral law taught in the Old Testament is often diluted by Christian freedom in Christ. In fact, one might question the Puritans' emphasis on conscience by valuing the New Testament over the Old Testament. It turned out later that some Puritans placed so much emphasis on the Old Testament that they saw no particular value in the definition of conscience. The second characteristic of practical theology, embodied in Perkins and later the Puritans, was the tendency to rank questions of conscience according to Christ's summary of the moral law. Thus, the question of conscience is actually one of three basic types of problems: the question of the relationship between the self and God, the question of the relationship between the self and others, and the question of the self alone. Each of these three types contains a wide variety of questions imaginable, which Perkins lists to show his admirable logic.
The universal inclusiveness of this general overview makes it possible, and indeed challenging, for commentators of practical theology to discuss a variety of human relationships, including church, state, and personal relations. Perkins also showed a special interest in this kind of problem, at least he dealt with it at length and with effort and determination. In the introduction to the commentary on church and state, Perkins explains this question thoroughly, namely his conviction that the Holy See has long distorted the role of conscience in human affairs. He wrote:
P21
I will examine and refute here the view that the foundations of the Holy See still exist today; In other words, secular and ecclesiastical powers still have control over conscience, and the laws made accordingly remain true and considered appropriate constraints on mortal and venialsin, as if they were God's law.
Perkins' concern with Catholic custom stems from the fact that, in his view, the practices of the Catholic Church have done great harm to the divinely granted freedom of conscience to Christians. It is worth mentioning that he pointed to two places where he believed that the actions of the Roman side had become harmful: the church and the state.
As far as the Church is concerned, Perkins argues that all the unbiblical rules of the Roman Church tradition are unnecessary and unjustified violations of the freedom of conscience taught in the New Testament. In a typical Puritan way, Perkins lists 14 errors and refutes them one by one by expounding his own views. Here's an example to illustrate the point. A section of Galatians chapter 5 says, "Christ set us free from our freedom, so stand firm and not be held hostage by the yoke of slaves." Perkins knew exactly what this sentence meant:
God has given freedom to conscience in the New Testament, and on this basis it is not bound by God's other laws unless they are necessary for salvation.
Perkins quotes an unnamed Roman author who argues that this passage in Galatians refers only to the release of man from the bondage of sin and from the curse of the law, not from the law of all those above. Perkins countered:
P22
I reiterate that the idea is utterly absurd: to think that God has given us the freedom of conscience, free from the constraints of God's law, but still requires us to subject our conscience to the law of the sinful.
Perkins' comment not only underscores his view that the New Testament gospels have given freedom to mankind, but importantly, it also shows that man is not subject to any law made by others. Of course, he was not preaching anarchism; Rather, it emphasizes the fact that all laws come from God. This argument can also be found in his other writings. It stands in sharp opposition to the aforementioned Elizabethan government officials' assertion that the state is inherently powerful and prestigious. According to Perkins, Christians obey the state because the New Testament requires them to obey, not because the nation itself has God-given authority. As for how man obeys the state, Perkins outlines it while discussing the errors of the Roman Church.
The mistake of the Roman Church was to advocate absolute obedience to secular power, just as they advocated obedience to the Church without biblical basis. Perkins then elaborated on the way individuals should relate to their state. Certain secular positive laws must be obeyed because they simply repeat God's moral laws, such as those against murder. Another category of positive law comes from the power given by God to local officials to maintain peace and the public interest. This type of law is what Perkins calls "wholesome laws," but he stressed that it in no way implies unlimited carte blanche for local officials. These laws also contain "neutrality," that is, matters not explicitly required by God and that have nothing to do with freedom of conscience, such as the payment of taxes.
Perkins also mentions a third rather interesting category of laws when talking about secular affairs, which he calls "punitive laws." By this he means laws regulating things like business conduct, or laws with vague motives, or laws that are not explicitly required. Perkins believes that in these situations, a person is free to do what he wants, as long as he is ready to accept the punishment that comes with it. Clearly, Perkins was not the kind of person to take the view that law is law and therefore that people have to obey it in all circumstances.
P23
Perkins' description of how individuals deal with their relations with the state is not only groundbreaking but also revolutionary compared to the prevailing view in Elizabethan times. It can be argued that, in real life, Perkins' Christian obeys most of the laws that others obey, and he cannot kill or steal. The key and fundamental differences between Perkins and others are concentrated in a small context, but this does not diminish the importance of the fact that Perkins' theory is based on a different understanding of power and authority.
The word that best describes Perkins' theory is sphere sovereignty, which is often used to describe Calvin's idea of institutions. The term assumes that the power of all institutions derives from God's creative command. Each institution was created for a purpose and was therefore endowed with specific powers and jurisdictions. The answer to what these definitions are can be found by examining the order implicit in creation, or from the written revelation of the Bible. The basic institutions of the family, the church, the state, and the enterprise all exist side by side under God's sovereign sovereignty. If there were no human beings, then these institutions would not exist either; This gave rise to the idea that institutions are set up to serve humanity. Humans have a direct and first relationship with God. This is what Perkins had in mind when he objected to the Roman Church's view that secular and ecclesiastical jurisdiction included control over conscience, and that the laws established by these institutions had the same effect as God's law itself. Both the sovereign domain view and Perkins' view hold that people's obedience to the state or church is due to the fact that when the state or church has jurisdiction, there is a divine command in their hearts that leads them to obey its administration. Therefore, people's obedience to the laws of the country coincides with the fact that they obey God in the first place.
Only by recognizing that Perkins's view of power is very different from the prevailing view can one understand what Perkins meant by personal opposition to the laws of the state. For Perkins , mismanagement by sub-level government officials (p24) was not a significant problem : it could be presumably corrected by appealing to a higher chief executive. If the state oversteps its authority on fundamental issues such as religion, believers in Perkins' eyes must take a stand of civil disobedience:
P24
If human law ends up containing evil content, and it is forbidden by God, then there is no binding force on conscience at all; Conversely, people have an obligation of conscience not to obey.
The idea that people must reject government demands in certain circumstances was not a whim of Perkins, and Calvin shared the same view. Calvin's rhetoric was even tougher, arguing that Christians should be more likely to "spit on the face of the ruler" than to obey laws that are contrary to God's moral law. The points are consistent because both teach people to first obey God.
Perkins' contribution to deepening his understanding of freedom of conscience is significant, although his contribution is not yet fully recognized. Perhaps his most significant achievement was his systematic elaboration of what conscience is from the perspective of Christianity and the Reformation. His view of conscience—that it is a reliable and reasonable conduit for providing an authoritative witness to humanity and God—continued throughout the Reformation for the next two centuries. Equally important is his systematic description of how conscience acts on specific issues such as the relationship between church and state.
Freedom of conscience is the underpinning point of Perkins' holistic conception of conscience, and it is used in many ways. Perkins' declaration that "God has given freedom of faith in the New Testament" reflects his general view of freedom of conscience. Such a statement does not imply a concession or anarchism, nor does it imply that man is completely free and self-governing. Christians must obey the biblical prohibitions that are outlined in Perkins' practical theology. As far as faith is concerned, Christians must follow the basic doctrine of salvation. In Perkins' view, the Apostles' Creed listed enough, although the doctrine of what is necessary ultimately depends on the Bible.
P25
Perkins' description of how Christians should deal with their relationship with the state suggests another side of his view of freedom of conscience. As in religion, if a certain order is to be maintained, there are certain basic obligations, but Perkins will not recognize all laws in the name of order. For example, the law regulating commerce does not restrict conscience, so that in this case man has the freedom of conscience to pursue his own goals.
More serious, however, are the legal issues that conflict with God's moral law. In this case, the freedom of conscience of Christians is not restricted by the government. This can be well understood through the concept of domain sovereignty. Churches, governments, and individuals have their own responsibilities and spheres of power, but the power of any one does not come from any one of the others; in fact, their power comes first and foremost from God. This view of freedom of conscience holds that man is completely free in relation to any other sphere and will obey them only out of biblical commands. Perkins, therefore, postulates that the human conscience is completely free and free from the rule of the state, except for those things that the Bible requires to obey.
In short, for a variety of reasons, William Perkins played a very important role in the development of the concept of freedom of conscience. His systematic exposition of conscience based on the Bible and functional psychology has become the standard for generations to come. Moreover, his definition of conscience in this framework gives an appropriate definition of what freedom means below, i.e., "God has given freedom to conscience in the New Testament." There is no doubt that Perkins' vision of Christians has many responsibilities to the church, government, and others; But from the outset he believed that Christians in the New Testament enjoyed freedom of conscience, and as a result, his views were very different from those of Queen Elizabeth and her government.
By the end of Queen Elizabeth's reign, it was clear that two very different attitudes toward conscience had developed. An attitude born out of the minds of government officials and others who support the traditional British model of thought, sees conscience as an activity within the jurisdiction of the government. According to the territorial sovereignty doctrine, this means that the government considers all matters of conscience to be within its jurisdiction. (p26) Although the government considers itself to have complete sovereignty over the conscience of the individual, there is always the question of its conscience to the object of its rule. These issues, which it has chosen to make concessions, constitute a policy of tolerance. Another view of conscience emerged among the Puritans, the main spokesperson of which was William Perkins. It affirms that the conscience as a human being is above any other form of authority. Conscience is above the authority of man and institution because it belongs directly to God. Although the conscience is bound in certain circumstances, it is bound only in those situations clearly indicated in the Word of God. According to the theory of territorial sovereignty, conscience is outside the jurisdiction of the state and the Church. In other words, the individual's conscience is completely free, and it is a field in itself.
P26
At the dawn of the 17th century, both views—tolerance of conscience and freedom of conscience—continued in Old England. In the first 40 years, they became more of a factor in political and religious affairs.
---
directory
Introduction... 1
Chapter I: Tolerance and Conscience in Elizabethan England... 3
Chapter II: Tolerance and Freedom of Conscience in Old England, 1600-1640... 31
Chapter III: Conscience and the Builders of the Gulf Colonies: 1630-1640... 61
Chapter IV Freedom of Conscience in Old England 1640-1660 95
Chapter V: England in the Restoration: The Decline of Freedom of Conscience... 123
America's Acceptance of Freedom of Conscience: 1630-1770... 145
Chapter VII: Freedom of Conscience in the American Revolution... 179
Chapter 8 Conclusion ... 209
Bibliography... 214
===
The above is for reference only, thank you!
===
Christ set us free from us. So stand firm and stop being held hostage by the yoke of slaves. (Galatians 5:1 ESV)
It is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm, then, and do not let yourselves be burdened again by a yoke of slavery. (Galatians 5:1 NIV)
Brethren, you are called to be free, but do not use your freedom as an opportunity to indulge your lusts, but always serve one another with love. (Galatians 5:13 ESV)
You, my brothers and sisters, were called to be free. But do not use your freedom to indulge the flesh; rather, serve one another humbly in love. (Galatians 5:13 NIV)
IN CHRIST