Editing Puritans (section)

== Beliefs ==
=== Calvinism ===
{{Calvinism}}
{{Main|Calvinism}}
''Puritanism'' broadly refers to a diverse religious reform movement in Britain committed to the [[Continental Reformed]] tradition.{{sfn|Ahlstrom|2004|p=125}} While Puritans did not agree on all doctrinal points, most shared similar views on the nature of [[God in Christianity|God]], human [[sin]]fulness, and the relationship between God and mankind. They believed that all of their beliefs should be based on the [[Bible]], which they considered to be [[Biblical inspiration|divinely inspired]].{{sfn|Bremer|2009|p=35}}

The concept of covenant was extremely important to Puritans, and [[covenant theology]] was central to their beliefs. With roots in the writings of Reformed theologians [[John Calvin]] and [[Heinrich Bullinger]], covenant theology was further developed by Puritan theologians [[Dudley Fenner]], [[William Perkins (theologian)|William Perkins]], [[John Preston (priest)|John Preston]], [[Richard Sibbes]], [[William Ames]] and, most fully by Ames's Dutch student, [[Johannes Cocceius]].{{sfn|Ahlstrom|2004|pp=130–131}} Covenant theology asserts that when God created [[Adam and Eve]] he promised them [[Eternal life (Christianity)|eternal life]] in return for perfect obedience; this promise was termed the covenant of [[Good works|works]]. After the [[fall of man]], human nature was corrupted by [[original sin]] and unable to fulfill the covenant of works, since each person inevitably violated God's law as expressed in the [[Ten Commandments]]. As sinners, every person deserved [[damnation]].{{sfn|Bremer|2009|pp=37–38}}

Puritans shared with other Calvinists a belief in [[Predestination in Calvinism|double predestination]], that some people (the [[Election (Christianity)|elect]]) were destined by God to receive [[Grace in Christianity|grace]] and [[Salvation in Christianity|salvation]] while others were destined for [[Hell in Christianity|Hell]].{{Sfn|Bremer|2009|p=40}} No one, however, could [[Merit (Christianity)|merit]] salvation. According to covenant theology, [[Crucifixion of Jesus|Christ's sacrifice on the cross]] made possible the covenant of grace, by which those selected by God could be saved. Puritans believed in [[unconditional election]] and [[irresistible grace]]—God's grace was given freely without condition to the elect and could not be refused.{{sfn|Bremer|2009|p=42}}

=== Conversion ===
Covenant theology made individual salvation deeply personal. It held that God's predestination was not "impersonal and mechanical" but was a "covenant of grace" that one entered into by [[Faith in Christianity|faith]]. Therefore, being a Christian could never be reduced to simple "intellectual acknowledgment" of the truth of Christianity. Puritans agreed "that the [[Effectual calling|effectual call]] of each elect [[Saint#Other Protestantism|saint]] of God would always come as an individuated personal encounter with God's promises".{{sfn|Ahlstrom|2004|p=131}}

The process by which the elect are brought from [[Spiritual death in Christianity|spiritual death]] to spiritual life ([[Regeneration (theology)|regeneration]]) was described as [[Conversion to Christianity|conversion]].{{sfn|Bremer|2009|p=42}} Early on, Puritans did not consider a specific conversion experience normative or necessary, but many gained [[Assurance (theology)|assurance of salvation]] from such experiences. Over time, however, Puritan theologians developed a framework for authentic religious experience based on their own experiences as well as those of their parishioners. Eventually, Puritans came to regard a specific conversion experience as an essential mark of one's election.{{sfn|Ahlstrom|2004|p=132}}

The Puritan conversion experience was commonly described as occurring in discrete phases. It began with a preparatory phase designed to produce contrition for sin through introspection, [[Bible study (Christian)|Bible study]] and listening to [[preaching]]. This was followed by humiliation, when the sinner realized that he or she was helpless to break free from sin and that their good works could never earn forgiveness.{{sfn|Bremer|2009|p=42}} It was after reaching this point—the realization that salvation was possible only because of divine [[mercy]]—that the person would experience [[Sola fide|justification]], when the righteousness of Christ is [[Imputed righteousness|imputed]] to the elect and their minds and hearts are regenerated. For some Puritans, this was a dramatic experience and they referred to it as being [[born again]].{{sfn|Bremer|2009|p=43}}

Confirming that such a conversion had actually happened often required prolonged and continual introspection. Historian [[Perry Miller]] wrote that the Puritans "liberated men from the treadmill of [[indulgence]]s and [[penance]]s, but cast them on the iron couch of introspection".{{Sfn|Ahlstrom|2004|p=128}} It was expected that conversion would be followed by [[sanctification in Christianity|sanctification]]—"the progressive growth in the saint's ability to better perceive and seek God's will, and thus to lead a holy life".{{sfn|Bremer|2009|p=43}} Some Puritans attempted to find assurance of their faith by keeping detailed records of their behavior and looking for the evidence of salvation in their lives. Puritan clergy wrote many spiritual guides to help their parishioners pursue personal [[piety]] and sanctification. These included [[Arthur Dent (Puritan)|Arthur Dent's]] ''The Plain Man's Pathway to Heaven'' (1601), [[Richard Rogers (theologian)|Richard Rogers's]] ''Seven Treatises'' (1603), [[Henry Scudder (priest)|Henry Scudder's]] ''Christian's Daily Walk'' (1627) and Richard Sibbes's ''The Bruised Reed and Smoking Flax'' (1630).{{sfn|Bremer|2009|p=44}}

Too much emphasis on one's good works could be criticized for being too close to [[Arminianism]], and too much emphasis on subjective religious experience could be criticized as [[Antinomianism]]. Many Puritans relied on both personal religious experience and self-examination to assess their spiritual condition.{{sfn|Bremer|2009|p=44}}

Puritanism's experiential piety would be inherited by the [[Evangelicalism|evangelical Protestants]] of the 18th century.{{sfn|Ahlstrom|2004|p=128}} While evangelical views on conversion were heavily influenced by Puritan theology, the Puritans believed that assurance of one's salvation was "rare, late and the fruit of struggle in the experience of believers", whereas evangelicals believed that assurance was normative for all the truly converted.{{sfn|Bebbington|1993|p=43}}

=== Worship and sacraments ===
{{Further|Reformed baptismal theology}}

While most Puritans were members of the Church of England, they were critical of its worship practices. In the 17th century, Sunday worship in the established church took the form of the [[Morning Prayer (Anglican)|Morning Prayer]] service in the ''Book of Common Prayer''. This may include a sermon, but Holy Communion or the Lord's Supper was only occasionally observed. Officially, lay people were only required to receive communion three times a year, but most people only received communion once a year at Easter. Puritans were concerned about biblical errors and Catholic remnants within the prayer book. Puritans objected to bowing at the name of Jesus, the requirement that priests wear the [[surplice]], and the use of written, set prayers in place of improvised prayers.{{Sfn|Spurr|1998|pp=29–30}}

The sermon was central to Puritan piety.{{sfn|Spurr|1998|p=37}} It was not only a means of religious education; Puritans believed it was the most common way that God prepared a sinner's heart for conversion.{{sfn|Bremer|2009|p=59}} On Sundays, Puritan ministers often shortened the liturgy to allow more time for preaching.{{sfn|Craig|2008|p=37}} Puritan churchgoers attended two sermons on Sundays and as many weekday sermons and lectures they could find, often traveling for miles.{{sfn|Spurr|1998|p=38}} Puritans were distinct for their adherence to [[Puritan Sabbatarianism|Sabbatarianism]].{{sfn|Coffey|Lim|2008|p=4}}

Puritans taught that there were two [[sacrament]]s: baptism and the Lord's Supper. Puritans agreed with the church's practice of [[infant baptism]]. However, the effect of baptism was disputed. Puritans objected to the prayer book's assertion of [[baptismal regeneration]].{{sfn|Spurr|1998|pp=31–32}} In Puritan theology, infant baptism was understood in terms of covenant theology—baptism replaced [[Religious male circumcision|circumcision]] as a sign of the covenant and marked a child's admission into the [[visible church]]. It could not be assumed that baptism produces regeneration. The Westminster Confession states that the grace of baptism is only effective for those who are among the elect, and its effects lie dormant until one experiences conversion later in life.{{sfn|Beeke|Jones|2012|loc= "Regeneration and Baptism", [[Amazon Kindle]] location 18043–18056}} Puritans wanted to do away with [[godparents]], who made [[baptismal vows]] on behalf of infants, and give that responsibility to the child's father. Puritans also objected to priests making the [[sign of the cross]] in baptism. Private baptisms were opposed because Puritans believed that preaching should always accompany sacraments. Some Puritan clergy even refused to baptise dying infants because that implied the sacrament contributed to salvation.{{sfn|Spurr|1998|p=32}}

Puritans rejected both Roman Catholic ([[transubstantiation]]) and Lutheran ([[sacramental union]]) teachings that Christ is physically present in the [[Sacramental bread|bread]] and [[Sacramental wine|wine]] of the Lord's Supper. Instead, Puritans embraced the Reformed doctrine of [[Lord's Supper in Reformed theology|real spiritual presence]], believing that in the Lord's Supper the faithful receive Christ spiritually. In agreement with [[Thomas Cranmer]], the Puritans stressed "that Christ comes down to us in the sacrament by His Word and Spirit, offering Himself as our spiritual food and drink".{{sfn|Beeke|Jones|2012|loc="The True Meaning of the Lord's Supper", [[Amazon Kindle]] location 28097–28107}} They criticised the prayer book service for being too similar to the Catholic mass. For example, the requirement that people kneel to receive communion implied [[Eucharistic adoration|adoration of the Eucharist]], a practice linked to transubstantiation. Puritans also criticised the Church of England for allowing unrepentant sinners to receive communion. Puritans wanted better spiritual preparation (such as clergy home visits and testing people on their knowledge of the catechism) for communion and better [[church discipline]] to ensure that the unworthy were kept from the sacrament.{{sfn|Spurr|1998|p=32}}

Puritans did not believe [[confirmation]] was necessary and thought candidates were poorly prepared since bishops did not have the time to examine them properly.{{sfn|White|1999|p=49}}{{sfn|Spurr|1998|p=33}} The marriage service was criticised for using a wedding ring (which implied that marriage was a sacrament) and having the groom vow to his bride "with my body I thee worship", which Puritans considered [[blasphemous]]. In the funeral service, the priest committed the body to the ground "in sure and certain hope of resurrection to eternal life, through our Lord Jesus Christ." Puritans objected to this phrase because they did not believe it was true for everyone. They suggested it be rewritten as "we commit his body [etc.] believing a resurrection of the just and unjust, some to joy, and some to punishment."{{sfn|Spurr|1998|p=33}}

Puritans eliminated choral music and [[Musical instruments in church services|musical instruments in their religious services]] because these were associated with Roman Catholicism; however, singing the [[Psalms]] was considered appropriate (see [[Exclusive psalmody]]).{{sfn|Bremer|2009|p=65}} Church organs were commonly damaged or destroyed in the Civil War period, such as when an axe was taken to the organ of [[Worcester Cathedral]] in 1642.<ref>{{Cite web |url=http://www.worcestercathedral.co.uk/index.php?pr=The_Civil_War |title=Worcester Cathedral welcomes you to their Website |publisher=Worcestercathedral.co.uk |date=20 February 2010 |access-date=21 August 2010 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100823022433/http://www.worcestercathedral.co.uk/index.php?pr=The_Civil_War |archive-date=23 August 2010 |df=dmy-all}}</ref>

=== Ecclesiology ===
[[File:Catalogue of Sects.GIF|thumb|Polemical [[popular print]] with a ''Catalogue of Sects'', 1647]]
While the Puritans were united in their goal of furthering the English Reformation, they were always divided over issues of [[ecclesiology]] and church polity, specifically questions relating to the manner of organizing congregations, how individual congregations should relate with one another and whether [[Christian state|established national churches]] were scriptural.{{sfn|Ahlstrom|2004|p=132}} On these questions, Puritans divided between supporters of [[episcopal polity]], [[presbyterian polity]] and [[congregational polity]].

The episcopalians (known as the [[Prelate|prelatical]] party) were conservatives who supported retaining bishops if those leaders supported reform and agreed to share power with local churches.{{sfn|Bremer|2009|p=69}} They also supported the idea of having a [[Book of Common Prayer]], but they were against demanding strict conformity or having too much ceremony. In addition, these Puritans called for a renewal of preaching, [[pastoral care]] and Christian [[Church discipline|discipline]] within the Church of England.{{sfn|Ahlstrom|2004|p=132}}

Like the episcopalians, the presbyterians agreed that there should be a national church but one structured on the model of the [[Church of Scotland]].{{sfn|Bremer|2009|p=69}} They wanted to replace bishops with a system of elective and representative governing bodies of clergy and [[laity]] (local [[Session (Presbyterianism)|sessions]], [[Consistory (Protestantism)#Reformed usage|presbyteries]], [[synod]]s, and ultimately a national [[General Assembly (presbyterian church)|general assembly]]).{{sfn|Ahlstrom|2004|p=132}} During the [[Interregnum (England)|Interregnum]], the presbyterians had limited success at reorganizing the Church of England. The [[Westminster Assembly]] proposed the creation of a presbyterian system, but the [[Long Parliament]] left implementation to local authorities. As a result, the Church of England never developed a complete presbyterian hierarchy.{{sfn|Bremer|2009|p=72}}

[[Congregational church|Congregationalists]] or [[Independent (religion)|Independents]] believed in the autonomy of the local church, which ideally would be a congregation of "visible saints" (meaning those who had experienced conversion).{{sfn|Ahlstrom|2004|pp=132–133}} Members would be required to abide by a [[church covenant]], in which they "pledged to join in the proper worship of God and to nourish each other in the search for further religious truth".{{sfn|Bremer|2009|p=69}} Such churches were regarded as complete within themselves, with full authority to determine their own membership, administer their own discipline and ordain their own ministers. Furthermore, the sacraments would only be administered to those in the church covenant.{{sfn|Ahlstrom|2004|p=133}}

Most congregational Puritans remained within the Church of England, hoping to reform it according to their own views. The [[Congregationalism in the United States|New England Congregationalists]] were also adamant that they were not separating from the Church of England. However, some Puritans equated the Church of England with the Roman Catholic Church, and therefore considered it no Christian church at all. These groups, such as the [[Brownist]]s, would split from the established church and become known as Separatists. Other Separatists embraced more radical positions on [[separation of church and state]] and [[believer's baptism]], becoming early [[Baptists]].{{sfn|Ahlstrom|2004|p=133}}

=== Family life ===
[[File:The Snake in the Grass or Satan Transform'd to an Angel of Light.jpg|thumb|right|upright=1.1|''The Snake in the Grass or Satan Transform'd to an Angel of Light'', title page engraved by [[Richard Gaywood]], {{Circa|1660}}]]
Based on Biblical portrayals of [[Adam and Eve]], Puritans believed that marriage was rooted in procreation, love, and, most importantly, salvation.{{sfn|Porterfield|1992|p=82}} Husbands were the spiritual heads of the household, while women were to demonstrate religious piety and obedience under male authority.{{sfn|Norton|2011|p=91}} Furthermore, marriage represented not only the relationship between husband and wife, but also the relationship between spouses and God. Puritan husbands commanded authority through family direction and prayer. The female relationship to her husband and to God was marked by submissiveness and humility.{{sfn|Porterfield|1992|p=81}}

[[Thomas Gataker]] describes Puritan marriage as:

{{blockquote|... together for a time as copartners in grace here, [that] they may reigne together forever as coheires in glory hereafter.{{sfn|Johnson|1970|p=93}}}}

The paradox created by female inferiority in the public sphere and the spiritual equality of men and women in marriage, then, gave way to the informal authority of women concerning matters of the home and childrearing.{{sfn|Ulrich|1976|p=37}} With the consent of their husbands, wives made important decisions concerning the labour of their children, property, and the management of inns and taverns owned by their husbands.{{sfn|Demos|1970}} Pious Puritan mothers laboured for their children's righteousness and salvation, connecting women directly to matters of religion and morality.{{sfn|Saxton|2003|p=82}} In her poem titled "In Reference to her Children", poet [[Anne Bradstreet]] reflects on her role as a mother:

{{blockquote|I had eight birds hatched in one nest; Four cocks there were, and hens the rest. I nursed them up with pain and care, Nor cost nor labour I did spare.}}

Bradstreet alludes to the [[temporality]] of motherhood by comparing her children to a flock of birds on the precipice of leaving home. While Puritans praised the obedience of young children, they also believed that, by separating children from their mothers at adolescence, children could better sustain a superior relationship with God.{{sfn|Ulrich|1976|p=35}} A child could only be redeemed through religious education and obedience. Girls carried the additional burden of Eve's corruption and were [[Catechesis|catechised]] separately from boys at adolescence. Boys' education prepared them for vocations and leadership roles, while girls were educated for domestic and religious purposes. The pinnacle of achievement for children in Puritan society, however, occurred with the conversion process.{{sfn|Saxton|2003|p=82}}

Puritans viewed the relationship between master and servant similarly to that of parent and child. Just as parents were expected to uphold Puritan religious values in the home, masters assumed the parental responsibility of housing and educating young servants. Older servants also dwelt with masters and were cared for in the event of illness or injury. African-American and Indian servants were likely excluded from such benefits.{{sfn|Demos|1970|pp=107–117}}

=== Gender and punishment ===
Many Puritan communities operated under strict values that determined gender roles and generally “pure” behavior. Many of these values were shaped from their interpretation of the [[Bible]]. If anyone in the community was found to have disobeyed or strayed from these values, they would be reported and put through the [[censure]] process. This involved a public confession from the accused of their wrongdoings. People would be censured for things that ranged from immodesty and cursing to domestic abuse and fornication.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Fitzgerald |first=Monica D. |date=2011 |title=Drunkards, Fornicators, and a Great Hen Squabble: Censure Practices and the Gendering of Puritanism |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/41240523 |journal=Church History |volume=80 |issue=1 |pages=46 |issn=0009-6407}}</ref> Religious leaders would often make an example of the censured individual by turning their experience into a lesson for the [[Church (congregation)|congregation]]. In some cases, [[Minister (Christianity)|ministers]] or [[Elder (Christianity)|elders]] would meet with an individual to counsel them for a “private sin,” such as [[impiety]] or struggles with faith, before taking public action. In 1648, Puritan minister [[Thomas Hooker]] explained the necessity of church discipline: “[God] hath appointed Church-censures as good Physick, to purge out what is evill, as well as Word and Sacraments, which, like good diet, are sufficient to nourish the soul to eternal life.” They saw these practices as necessary for the community to keep each other in check and in line with their “godly paths.”<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Fitzgerald |first=Monica D. |date=2011 |title=Drunkards, Fornicators, and a Great Hen Squabble: Censure Practices and the Gendering of Puritanism |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/41240523 |journal=Church History |volume=80 |issue=1 |pages=42 |issn=0009-6407}}</ref>

While Puritan doctrine viewed men and women spiritually equal, [[laymen]] reinterpreted [[spirituality]] to reflect their ideas of [[masculinity]]. Men displayed their spirituality through their public actions and behaviors, such as being a good neighbor to the community and father to their families. Women were expected to reflect their inner spirituality with their entire being. The human soul was often described using feminine language, but men were allowed to separate their mind and body from their souls in order to maintain an image of masculinity on the outside.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Fitzgerald |first=Monica D. |date=2011 |title=Drunkards, Fornicators, and a Great Hen Squabble: Censure Practices and the Gendering of Puritanism |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/41240523 |journal=Church History |volume=80 |issue=1 |pages=48 |issn=0009-6407}}</ref> The husband was the [[Patriarchy|patriarch]] with ultimate authority, and the wife would be his assistant. If any of the other members of the family misbehaved, such as the children or even their mother, their actions reflected the capability of the father to be the head of the household.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Godbeer |first=Richard |date=2017 |title=“Your Wife Will Be Your Biggest Accuser”: Reinforcing Codes of Manhood at New England Witch Trials |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/90011101 |journal=Early American Studies |volume=15 |issue=3 |pages=502 |issn=1543-4273}}</ref> Thus, men were often called out for not fulfilling their role as a good father, husband, and/or neighbor.

As a result of this reinterpretation of the Puritan doctrine to reflect certain gendered beliefs, the things men and women were censured for differed. For example, women were often associated with “[[Eve]],” a temptress and sinful seductress. This led to women being censured for [[fornication]] far more often than men.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Fitzgerald |first=Monica D. |date=2011 |title=Drunkards, Fornicators, and a Great Hen Squabble: Censure Practices and the Gendering of Puritanism |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/41240523 |journal=Church History |volume=80 |issue=1 |pages=67 |issn=0009-6407}}</ref> Men, on the other hand, had more of a focus on civil duty, being censured for filing false lawsuits, arguing over property lines, charging inflated prices, tearing down a neighbor’s mill, land fraud, or poor military conduct. In the economic sphere, women lacked formal power. Thus, men were censured more often for poor business practices.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Fitzgerald |first=Monica D. |date=2011 |title=Drunkards, Fornicators, and a Great Hen Squabble: Censure Practices and the Gendering of Puritanism |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/41240523 |journal=Church History |volume=80 |issue=1 |pages=45 |issn=0009-6407}}</ref>

The audience played a large role in censures, listening for certain words that demonstrated the accused was truly remorseful for their actions. Similar to the distinction between female and male spirituality, the language women and men used in their confessions differed. The feminized language expected from women included words such as “shame,” “wounded,” “great sin,” “nature,” “pity,” “evil,” “poor,” and “grief.” On the other hand, men used more objective phrases such as “rules,” breach,” offense,” desire,” forgiveness,” actions,” and “brethren.”<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Fitzgerald |first=Monica D. |date=2011 |title=Drunkards, Fornicators, and a Great Hen Squabble: Censure Practices and the Gendering of Puritanism |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/41240523 |journal=Church History |volume=80 |issue=1 |pages=58-59 |issn=0009-6407}}</ref>

The difference in treatment for men and women was reflected even in the specific sins they were accused of committing. As stated earlier, women were rarely censured for economic disputes as they lacked influence in that regard. Thus, if a commercial dispute involving a woman were to arise, the congregation treated her differently than a man. Such was the case for a woman named Chaplain: “In 1696, Dorchester’s Sister Chaplain borrowed money from John Green to buy a shipment of wine. When Green died and his estate tried to collect the debt from Chaplain, she refused. The congregation did not cite her for breaking a contract, but censured her for lying.”<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Fitzgerald |first=Monica D. |date=2011 |title=Drunkards, Fornicators, and a Great Hen Squabble: Censure Practices and the Gendering of Puritanism |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/41240523 |journal=Church History |volume=80 |issue=1 |pages=45 |issn=0009-6407}}</ref> Women would also at times face harsher punishments than men for the same sin. “Boston's Second Church censured John Farnum for making bad comments about another church and its pastor, and they noted he was "breaking the rule of truth." However, that same congregation recorded much harsher words about Sarah Stevens, whom they admonished for "many evill carriages and sundry filthy speeches, not fit to be named." And when they censured her, they said she "grew more vile and hard hearted." The court also took up her case and sentenced her to jail and two whippings.”<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Fitzgerald |first=Monica D. |date=2011 |title=Drunkards, Fornicators, and a Great Hen Squabble: Censure Practices and the Gendering of Puritanism |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/41240523 |journal=Church History |volume=80 |issue=1 |pages=60-61 |issn=0009-6407}}</ref>

=== Demonology and witch hunts ===
{{Further|Christian demonology}}
Like most Christians in the [[early modern period]], Puritans believed in the active existence of the [[Devil in Christianity|devil]] and [[demon]]s as evil forces that could possess and cause harm to men and women. There was also widespread belief in [[European witchcraft|witchcraft]] and witches—persons in league with the devil. "Unexplained phenomena such as the death of livestock, human disease, and hideous fits suffered by young and old" may all be blamed on the agency of the devil or a witch.{{sfn|Bremer|2009|p=30}}

Puritan pastors undertook [[Exorcism in Christianity|exorcisms]] for [[demonic possession]] in some high-profile cases. Exorcist [[John Darrell]] was supported by [[Arthur Hildersham]] in the case of Thomas Darling.{{Sfn|Bremer|Webster|2006|p=584}} [[Samuel Harsnett]], a sceptic on witchcraft and possession, attacked Darrell. However, Harsnett was in the minority, and many clergy, not only Puritans, believed in witchcraft and possession.<ref>{{Cite DNB|wstitle=Scott, Reginald|display=Scott, Reginald}}</ref>

In the 16th and 17th centuries, thousands of people throughout Europe were accused of being witches and executed. In England and Colonial America, Puritans engaged in [[witch hunt]]s as well. In the 1640s, [[Matthew Hopkins]], the self-proclaimed "Witchfinder General", whose career flourished during Puritan rule, was responsible for accusing over two hundred people of witchcraft, mainly in [[East Anglia]].<ref>{{cite book |last=Robbins |first=Rossell Hope |chapter=Hopkins, Matthew|title=The Encyclopedia of Witchcraft and Demonology |location=New York |publisher=Crown Publishers |year=1959 |ref=ASIN:B0006AW066}}</ref> Between 1644 and 1647, Hopkins and his colleague [[John Stearne (witch-hunter)|John Stearne]] sent more accused people to the [[gallows]] than all the other witch-hunters in England of the previous 160 years.<ref>{{cite book |last=Notestein |first=Wallace |title=A History of Witchcraft In England from 1558 to 1718 |year=1911 |ref=Witchcraft |author-link=Wallace Notestein |publisher=American Historical Association 1911 (reissued 1965) New York [[Russell & Russell]] |page=195}}</ref> In New England, few people were accused and convicted of witchcraft before 1692; there were at most sixteen convictions.{{sfn|Bremer|2009|pp=31–32}}

The [[Salem witch trials]] of 1692 had a lasting impact on the historical reputation of New England Puritans. Though this witch hunt occurred after Puritans lost political control of the [[Province of Massachusetts Bay|Massachusetts colony]], Puritans instigated the judicial proceedings against the accused and comprised the members of the court that convicted and sentenced the accused. By the time Governor [[William Phips]] ended the trials, fourteen women and five men had been hanged as witches.{{Sfn|Bremer|2009|pp=30–32}}

=== Millennialism ===
{{See|Christian eschatology}}
Puritan [[millennialism]] has been placed in the broader context of European Reformed beliefs about the millennium and interpretation of [[biblical prophecy]], for which representative figures of the period were [[Johannes Piscator]], [[Thomas Brightman]], [[Joseph Mede]], [[Johannes Heinrich Alsted]], and [[John Amos Comenius]].{{sfn|Hotson|2000|p=173}} Like most English Protestants of the time, Puritans based their eschatological views on an [[Historicism (Christianity)|historicist]] interpretation of the [[Book of Revelation]] and the [[Book of Daniel]]. Protestant theologians identified the sequential phases the world must pass through before the [[Last Judgment]] could occur and tended to place their own time period near the end. It was expected that tribulation and persecution would increase but eventually the church's enemies—the [[Antichrist]] (identified with the Roman Catholic Church) and the [[Ottoman Empire]]—would be defeated.{{sfn|Maclear|1975|pp=225–226}} Based on [[Revelation 20]], it was believed that a thousand-year period (the millennium) would occur, during which the saints would rule with Christ on earth.{{sfn|Bremer|2009|p=76}}

In contrast to other Protestants who tended to view eschatology as an explanation for "God's remote plans for the world and man", Puritans understood it to describe "the cosmic environment in which the regenerate soldier of Christ was now to do battle against the power of sin".{{sfn|Maclear|1975|p=226}} On a personal level, eschatology was related to sanctification, assurance of salvation, and the conversion experience. On a larger level, eschatology was the lens through which events such as the English Civil War and the [[Thirty Years' War]] were interpreted. There was also an optimistic aspect to Puritan millennianism: Puritans anticipated a future worldwide religious revival before the [[Second Coming]] of Christ.{{sfn|Maclear|1975|p=227}}{{sfn|Bremer|2009|p=76}} Another departure from other Protestants was the widespread belief among Puritans that the [[Conversion of the Jews (future event)|conversion of the Jews]] to Christianity was an important sign of the [[Apocalypticism|apocalypse]].{{sfn|Maclear|1975|p=229}}