“My purpose is not to dispute, but to persuade; not to confute anyone but to instruct those that need; not to make a noise but to excite devotion.”
– Jeremy Taylor, ‘The Worthy Communicant’

Introduction: The Catholic Century?

The Anglican tradition has always had an identity problem.^[1] The most significant division in historic Anglicanism has been between the “high church/catholic” party and the “low church/evangelical” party. Both parties have been guilty of crafting spurious histories in order to justify their own interpretation of Anglicanism.^[2] Seventeenth century writers, often called the Caroline Divines, are an especially targeted group for this sort of history-crafting. Since the Victorian era, both evangelical Anglicans and Anglo-Catholics have viewed the seventeenth century as a turn away from the Reformation. As a result, evangelicals who embrace Reformational practice and piety have tended to avoid the Caroline Divines. Likewise, Anglo-Catholics looking to downplay the Reformation have tended to embrace them. In this essay, I argue that both these approaches are wrong. The seventeenth century of Anglicanism is not, as some have characterized it, a move back toward Roman Catholicism, but is rather an expression of Protestant pietistic devotionalism mirroring similar developments within Lutheranism. Though not without significant doctrinal missteps, the seventeenth century is full of spiritual treasure that belongs to all evangelical Christians. The seventeenth century was a piestic century, not a Romanizing one. In this essay, I will focus on three major parallels between seventeenth century Anglicanism^[3] and early German Lutheran Pietism: 1) both groups made similar theological moves under similar political climates in roughly the same century, 2) both groups have been interpreted similarly in later centuries, and 3) both groups remain highly influential on modern-day Protestantism through the figure of John Wesley.

The Inward and Irenic Turn of the 17th century

Both Anglican Devotionalism and German Pietism were seventeenth century movements which occurred under similar national circumstances. As a result, both movements are characterized by a turn away from polemical writing in favor of a devotional and practical approach to Christianity.

The Caroline Divines certainly had their share of polemical writings. However, after the Formularies of Anglicanism were settled and well-defended by apologists like Richard Hooker and John Jewel, Anglicans transitioned from defending the institution of the Church of England to promoting piety within it. Anglican Devotionalism began in 1626 with the founding of Little Gidding, an intentional community rooted in the spirituality of the Book of Common Prayer. A series of financial woes caused the Ferrar family to create this community as a spiritual refuge in a property which they had purchased a year prior.^[4] The family’s effort was a unique attempt to sanctify quotidian English life in a distinctly Anglican mode by catechizing the nearby community and praying constantly.^[5] While Little Gidding produced some writings, its influence doesn’t lay in its literary output. Instead, Little Gidding served as an inspirational hub for Anglican Devotionalists. It attracted attention from figures like George Herbert, whose devotional poetry was published with the help of Nicholas Ferrar, as well as other leaders like Bishop John Williams and King Charles I.^[6]

The literary aspect of Anglican Devotionalism blossomed later in the seventeenth century with the publication of Lancelot Andrewes’s Private Devotions in 1646^[7] and Jeremy Taylor’s Exercises for Holy Living and Holy Dying in 1650 and 1651.^[8] These works promoted deep self-examination and a thirst for holiness. Classic devotional poets like the aforementioned Herbert, John Donne, and Thomas Traherne, all of whom wrote in a similar introspective style, also became popular during this time. The Prayer Book’s finalization in 1662 solidified the devotional core of this era. In seventeenth century England, doctrine and confessions blossomed into prayers and poetry.

Much like German Pietism, this turn toward devotional writing in England occurred during a time of political turmoil. It is no coincidence that Ferrar, Andrewes, and Taylor all had strong ties to royalty. Charles I visited Little Gidding twice the same year he was imprisoned by Parliament.^[9] Taylor, an exiled bishop, wrote all of his most famous works to a divided Church with the hope of Restoration heavy on his heart.^[10] Andrewes was beloved by King James I and was asked to preach in his court as well as oversee the King James Bible translation. Though Andrewes is the earliest figure here, his popularity as a devotional writer came when his posthumous devotions were published the very same year that King Charles I was imprisoned. The Caroline Divines, most of whom were staunch loyalists, had a front seat to the collapse of the English monarchy. Like the German Pietists, they sought to increase the virtue of common people through self-examination and piety while their rulers were enmeshed in violence and chaos.^[11]

As they proliferated their devotional writings, both Anglican Devotionalists and German Pietists tended to see doctrinal debates as distractions from the Christian life. This resulted in a certain charity to fellow Christians within other traditions. Pietists like Spener, Francke, and Zinzendorf promoted an “ecumenical, irenic Christianity” which turned away from “dead orthodoxy” and toward a more lively, active form of Christianity.^[12] They were not afraid to look to Puritans and medieval mystics for wisdom. Likewise, Caroline Divines like Andrewes and Thomas Ken, saw themselves as steering the Church of England away from various scholastic and divisive “systems.”^[13] Andrewes and others took special influence from the Greek Church Fathers as well as non-Anglican Protestants. Anglicans of this century set out to promote primitive, patristic Christianity which all Christians in all times and places could embrace along with them. Pietists and Anglican Devotionalists responded to the bloodshed of their time with softer doctrinal commitments and a call for deeper personal transformation.

The Bad Guys of Church History

Though the inward and irenic turn of the seventeenth century makes sense given its political and theological context, both Lutheran Pietism and Anglican Devotionalism have been received by later theologians and historians in a similarly negative way. Anglican and Lutheran evangelical theologians tend to see the seventeenth century as a departure from the settled orthodoxies of the Reformation.

In general, many modern day Christians in confessional traditions tend to see pietism as a rival to strong, intellectually sound Christianity.^[14] This is especially true for Lutherans.^[15] Pietism is associated with an experiential faith that ignores the intellect. To be fair, this is not a universal opinion. Many have called for a reconsideration of Lutheran Pietism.^[16] Still, the criticism is widespread. For example, the popular Lutheran novel The Hammer of God written by Swedish Lutheran bishop Bo Giertz allegorizes the various parties within Lutheranism and illustrates three different pastors navigating their way through various doctrinal and pastoral challenges rooted in modernism, liberalism, extreme pietism, and dead orthodoxy.^[17] Yet, Giertz is sometimes defended by other Lutherans as not being a Pietist, despite his generally positive attitude toward healthy Pietism.^[18] For many Lutherans, Bo Giertz being a Pietist would mean he was not trustably orthodox. Lutherans want to be sure that the confessional heritage of Lutheranism as contained in the Book of Concord is never obscured by subjectivity or works-righteousness.

A similar pattern emerges for modern Anglicans, though much more pronounced. The seventeenth century is often a line in the sand between evangelical Anglicans and Anglo-Catholics. In The Rise of Moralism, evangelical Anglican bishop C. F. Allison argues that Jeremy Taylor’s writings represent a “a serious departure from classical, orthodox Anglicanism and the beginning of a pastorally cruel, theologically corrupt interpretation of the gospel.”^[19] J.I. Packer, a quintessential Reformed Anglican, categorizes the Caroline Divines of the seventeenth century as “anti-Puritan, anti-Roman, and anti-Protestant.”^[20] Packer sees this era of Anglican theology in general as a break from the settled English Reformation that came before it. The Caroline Divines went for the Greek Fathers where the Reformers went for Augustine, they preferred florid homilies to simple preaching, and they put the sacraments and church order over heart religion and conversion.^[21]

This appraisal of the seventeenth century has deep roots originating in the Victorian era. The nineteenth century Oxford Movement turned to the seventeenth century high-churchmen when trying to justify their patristic and catholic renewal efforts.^[22] This can be seen in projects like The Library of Anglo-Catholic Theology, a rival project created to compete with the Parker Society’s compilation of early English Reformers. Rather than view Anglican Devotionalism’s strong commitment to disciplined prayer, sacramentalism, and the emphasis on the visible church as a valid expression of Protestantism, evangelicals and Anglo-Catholics from the nineteenth century onward began viewing these divines as a win for the Anglo-Catholics. Where evangelicals might be able to cite Cranmer and Ridley to prove the Church of England’s Reformed character, the Oxford Movement had Andrewes and Taylor to prove its catholic roots.

I believe this assessment of the seventeenth century creates a false polarity. While certain Caroline Divines, especially Andrewes and Taylor, had some questionable interpretations of Protestant doctrine, it is unnecessary for evangelicals to completely avoid Anglican Devotionalism. One can easily criticize their doctrine where it falls short of Scripture and historic Protestant teaching while still benefiting greatly from their devotional expertise. To reject the vast majority of seventeenth century Anglican divines on the basis of their less-than-Reformed doctrine is to entirely miss an important contrasting force within their writings.

In the spirit of transparency, the doctrinal deficiencies of seventeenth century Anglicanism ought to be discussed fully before further commendation of their spiritual acumen. The Caroline Divines had misgivings about the rising scholastic Calvinism of their day for a wide range of reasons. First and foremost, these concerns were political. Calvinism was strongly associated with a divisive force in English politics known for resisting the monarchy. As Packer argues, the Caroline Divines were nothing if not “loyalists.”^[23] Their high church theology was an ecclesial embodiment of their commitment to the English royalty. Their inward and irenic turn was a response to this divisive form of Calvinism. Further, many Carolines, especially Taylor, held to experimental interpretations of classic Protestant doctrines, especially justification, predestination, and free-will.^[24] It is important to note here that all seventeenth century Anglican writers, even the experimental ones, saw their views in line with the Thirty-Nine Articles of Religion which were finalized in 1571 before many important developments in the mainstream Reformed tradition. To be reformed then is not what it means to be Reformed today. Few of them were staunch Calvinists like the Westminster Divines, but none of them were secret Roman Catholics. Nevertheless, I echo Allison’s warnings about their departures from classical Protestantism. Allison’s theological dissection in The Rise of Moralism is poignant and precise. Still, these outlying, experimental views ought not to disqualify the Caroline Divines from Protestantism. Even the Reformers had disagreements on justification.^[25] The Carolines always maintained a staunch commitment to the Word of God as their final authority.^[26]As Owen Chadwick argues, in the seventeenth century “we may find some of the best of Reformed theology, whether pastoral or dogmatic. There is no question of repudiating the Reformation.”^[27]

The exclusion of the Caroline Divines from modern evangelical conversations leaves out an important voice.^[28] This era gave Anglicanism a more pastoral and pietistic nature than other Protestant traditions. Even for those who would rather avoid anything remotely Arminian from this era, the seventeenth century saw some of the most underappreciated Reformed Anglican divines like John Davenant, who was present at the Synod of Dort^[29], James Ussher, a strong friend of the Puritans^[30], and Joseph Hall, all of whom are overlooked because of their proximity to the high-church villains of the seventeenth century. It would be a great shame for evangelicals to continue to ignore this century.

John Wesley, the High Church Evangelical

One important figure in the eighteenth century further binds together German Pietism and Anglican Devotionalism: John Wesley. Though Methodism eventually left the Church of England, Wesley never intended this schism. Wesley was an Anglican through and through. Albert Outler has insisted that Wesley is “the most important Anglican theologian in his century.”^[31] Wesley’s own conception of Methodism and the way he influenced later Protestant doctrinal development further demonstrates the essentially Protestant nature of seventeenth century Anglican Devotionalism.

Wesley was deeply formed in his early years by seventeenth century High Church Anglicanism, especially Jeremy Taylor’s Holy Living and Holy Dying.^[32] His evangelical conversion, however, came during a near-death experience he had on a ship with a group of German Moravians.^[33] The bravery of these Pietists onboard with him caused him to greatly reconsider the seriousness of his own faith. Later on, his famous Aldersgate experience happened as Wesley listened to Martin Luther’s Preface to Romans, an important text for both German Pietists and seventeenth century Anglicans alike which emphasizes both the believer’s need for faith alone and the need for that faith to be living and active.^[34] Wesley takes in both Pietism and Anglican Devotionalism as major influences for his open-air preaching about the New Birth and holiness.

Both movements’ influence can be seen in Wesley’s Christian Library, a thirty volume library compiled to teach practical divinity to eager Methodists. Fred Sanders points out the breadth of Wesley’s Library which included Arndt’s True Christianity, works of Church Fathers, and collections of Anglican sermons.^[35] The most surprising inclusion, however, is John Wesley’s extensive use of the Puritans. Wesley spent years of his ministry critiquing Calvinism, yet the fact that nearly half of this Library was Puritan writers provides an important counterweight to this narrative. Wesley clearly honored the Calvinist tradition deeply.

The Christian Library along with his Standard Sermons^[36] present Wesley’s intentions and influences for Methodism. Wesley never once saw what he was doing as a departure from evangelical Protestantism. His efforts were aimed at renewing the Protestant Church of England with resources from her Formularies, especially the Book of Common Prayer, as well as the best that Protestant divinity had to offer at the time whether Lutheran, Anglican, or Puritan. Nothing in his Sermons or his Christian Library hinted at Wesley being a secret Roman Catholic or a proto-Anglo-Catholic. Wesley’s views on justification and free-will were classically Protestant and nowhere near as experimental as figures like Taylor or Andrewes.^[37] Wesley was an Arminian evangelical, whose doctrine, in his own words, strayed from Calvin “a hair’s breadth.”^[38] For Wesley, healthy Anglicanism meant meditating on Scripture and learning from the best seventeenth century Anglicans like Taylor and Thomas Ken alongside Reformed divines like Owen, Rutherford, and Sibbes, and proto-Pietists like Arndt. Wesley put Puritanism, Lutheranism, and Anglican Devotionalism together as one stream of evangelical holiness. Wesley was a high churchman in some ways, especially his liturgical and devotional preferences.^[39] Yet even as his movement outgrew the Church of England,^[40] Wesley’s core teaching was evangelical, focused first and foremost on God’s “holy love” for humanity.^[41] Methodism changed the landscape of evangelicalism forever. All of this from the heart of a well-educated Anglican clergyman in the immediate aftermath of the seventeenth century.

A glance at today’s Pentecostal movement confirms that Wesley’s yearning for holiness is still alive. Pentecostalism, which accounts for 655 million Christians globally^[42], traces its roots back to the Wesleyan movements of the nineteenth century.^[43] Wesley’s teaching on “Christian perfection” which blossomed into modern renewal movements is originally rooted in classical Anglicanism. His band meetings, like Taylor’s devotional classics, were centered around examining one’s conscience. Danker has even suggested that the word “perfect” that Wesley uses to describe Entire Sanctification comes from Thomas Cranmer’s Collect for Purity.^[44] The Prayer Book together with the devotional masters of the seventeenth century presented to Wesley and his followers a thorough-going system for Spirit-led self-mastery. Today, 655 million believers have faith in Jesus Christ because of Wesley’s commitment to that system.

Conclusion: Reformed Catholicity

In their book, Reformed Catholicity, Scott Swain and Mike Allen offer an enticing vision for the Reformed tradition. The Caroline Divines are good candidates for the sort of retrieval laid out in that volume. They were well-educated not just in original languages and Patristics but in “the school of Christ” where all Christians are ultimately called.^[45] They were churchly Protestants who valued tradition and visible unity. They eschewed the sectarianism that Phillip Schaff warned about and which still permeates Protestant theology today.^[46] Their tireless mortification of sin is a powerful antidote against the Moral Therapeutic Deism that J. Todd Billings counsels against in the afterword to Swain and Allen’s book.^[47] Their holiness resonates even today through millions of believers whose lineage goes back to their work. Embracing these divines would also mean breaking a false polarity within the Anglican tradition and applying a more generous approach to this era, as Billings calls for later in his essay.^[48]

Many will be rightly concerned at their doctrinal missteps. However, these errors ought to be put aside because retrieval is not about repristinating a by-gone era. As Kevin Vanhoozer says, retrieval means going backward for the sake of going forward.^[49] If the Reformation was about restoring Scripture and the priesthood of all believers, then the Anglican Devotionalists belong to the Reformation. We Anglicans who rightly insist on the centrality of the English Reformation should be embracing this era as well. As the Global Anglican movement “resets” Anglicanism, we have a chance to offer something uniquely useful in these divines to the church catholic. Piety should not be a party issue. All Christians can safely benefit from the council of the Carolines and the Pietists: pray constantly, examine oneself deeply, and promote charity among all Christians.

Joseph Whitenton is the Director of Youth and Music at Redemption Anglican Church in the Colony, Texas. He is co-founder of the Redemption Institute, a catechetical program for Anglican youth. Currently, he is a postulant Holy Orders in the ACNA and is pursuing an MDiv at Reformed Theology Seminary in Dallas, Texas. He is married to Misty, his beautiful wife, and is father to Thomas, his very silly toddler.

1. For a recent treatment of various competing Anglican perspectives see The Future of Orthodox Anglicanism (Wheaton: Crossway, 2020) edited by Gerald McDermott ↑

2. Mark Chapman, Anglican Theology (London: T&T Clark, 2012), 1-10 ↑

3. For this essay, I am using the terms “Caroline Divines,” “Anglican Devotionalism,” and “17th century Anglicanism” more or less interchangeably ↑

4. Alan Lawson Maycock, Nicholas Ferrar of Little Gidding (Grand Rapids: W.B. Eerdmans, 1938), 107-118 ↑

5. Stephen Neil, Anglicanism (Mowbray: London, 1958), 148 ↑

6. Maycock, Nicholas Ferrar of Little Gidding, 234-235 ↑

7. Jean H. Faurot, “Private Devotions,” chap. Christian Spirituality: The Essential Guide To The Most Influential Spiritual Writings of the Christian Tradition, eds. Frank N. Magill and Ian Philip McGreal (San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1988), 297 ↑

8. Jean H. Faurot, “The Rules and Exercises of Holy Living and Holy Dying,” chap. Christian Spirituality: The Essential Guide To The Most Influential Spiritual Writings of the Christian Tradition, eds. Frank N. Magill and Ian Philip McGreal (San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1988), 309 ↑

9. W. M, Noble, Huntingdonshire (Cambridge University Press, 2012), 72–73 ↑

10. Charles James Stranks, Anglican Devotion: Studies in the Spiritual Life of the Church of England Between the Reformation and the Oxford Movement (London: SCM Press, 1961), 69-71 ↑

11. Roger Olson and Christian Collins Winn, Reclaiming Pietism (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2015), 31-33 ↑

12. Olson and Winn, Reclaiming Pietism, 104 ↑

13. J. R. H. Moorman, The History of the Church In England (Harrisburg: Morehouse, 1963), 234 ↑

14. See for instance Francis Schaffer, Christian Manifesto (Wheaton: Crossway 1981), 18-19 and Mark R. Talbot, “What Wrong With Pietism?” Modern Reformation Vol. 11, No. 4, (July/August 2002) ↑

15. See for instance Steven Paulson, Lutheran Theology, (London: Bloomsbury, 2011), 22. Other Confessional Lutherans like C. F. W. Walther and Dr. Gene Veith have a similar tone toward Pietism in their writings. ↑

16. Jeffrey D. Brown, “Reconsidering German Lutheran Pietism,” The Covenant Quarterly, 60:2 (May 2002), p 24-34 ↑

17. Leland Ryken, “The Best Christian Novel You’ve Never Heard of,” The Gospel Coalition, (Dec. 14, 2015), https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/reviews/hammer-best-christian-novel/ ↑

18. Eric R. Andrae, “Was Bo Giertz A Pietist?” Logia, 9 no 4 Reformation 2000, p 43-48 ↑

19. Anonymous. Review of The Rise of Moralism: The Proclamation of the Gospel from Hooker to Baxter by C. F. Allison in Church History 37, no. 3 (September 1968): 345. ↑

20. J. I. Packer, The Heritage of Anglican Theology (Wheaton: Crossway, 2021), 171. ↑

21. Packer, Heritage of Anglican Theology, 165-181 ↑

22. Chapman, Anglican Theology, 131-132 ↑

23. Packer, 171 ↑

24. Mark Chapman, “The Beauty of Holiness: Practical Divinity,” chapter in The Vocation of Anglican Theology, (SCM Press, 2014), 196-243 ↑

25. See for instance the striking similarities between Peter Martyr Vergmli’s view of justification and John Henry Newman’s view in Chris Castaldo’s Justified in Christ: The Doctrines of Peter Martyr Vermigli and John Henry Newman and Their Ecumenical Implications ↑

26. See for instance Jeremy Taylor’s view of Scripture in Anglicanism edited by Paul Elmer More and Frank Leslie, pg. 92. Taylor is perhaps the most un-Reformed divine when it comes to justification, yet he arrives at such a view through Protestant principles. See also how many of the devotional poets of this era write about the beauty of the Bible. ↑

27. Owen Chadwick, Mind of the Oxford Movement (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1960), 18. ↑

28. Also noted here is the reverse sin. Many Anglo-Catholics leave out the brilliant devotional writings of Ryle, Hall, and Packer. See for instance the total exclusion of these writers from the recent Love’s Redeeming Work edited by Rowell, Stevenson, and Williams. ↑

29. See Michael J. Lynch’s brilliant treatment of Davenant in John Davenant’s Hypothetical Universalism: A Defense of Catholic and Reformed Orthodoxy ↑

30. See for instance Crawford Gribben’s The Irish Puritans: James Ussher and the Reformation of the Church ↑

31. Albert C. Outler, Theology in the Wesleyan Spirit (Nashville: Discipleship Resources, 1975), 1. ↑

32. Kenneth J. Collins, John Wesley: A Theological Journey (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2003), 29-36 ↑

33. Jonathan Dean, A Heart Strangely Warmed Dean, (London: Canterbury Press, 2014), 5. ↑

34. Collins, John Wesley: A Theological Journey, 89-90 ↑

35. Fred Sanders, “So Many Good Books: Wesley’s Christian Library,” New Scriptorum Daily (Sept. 4, 2007), https://scriptoriumdaily.com/so-many-good-books-wesleys-christian-library/ ↑

36. A collection of published sermons in the tradition of Cranmer’s Book of Homilies, demonstrating yet another Reformational impulse from Wesley ↑

37. See for instance John Wesley on the Christian Life by Fred Sanders, especially chapters 4 and 6 ↑

38. Letter, John Wesley to “a friend”, May 14, 1765, in Telford, Letters of John Wesley, 4:298 ↑

39. Ryan Danker, “Wesley and Tradition” Firebrand Magazine (June 8 2020), https://firebrandmag.com/articles/wesley-and-tradition?rq=anglican ↑

40. James Mahoney, “The Methodist’s Duty: Wesley’s “Constant Communion” and the 21st Century Methodist” Firebrand Magazine (July 9, 2024), https://firebrandmag.com/articles/the-methodists-duty-wesleys-constant-communion-and-the-21st-century-methodist?rq=book%20of%20common%20prayer ↑

41. Kenneth J. Collins, The Theology of John Wesley: Holy Love and the Shape of Grace (Nashville: Abingdon, 2007), Introduction ↑

42. G. A. Zurlo, T. M. Johnson, and P. F. Crossing “World Christianity and Mission 2021: Questions about the Future” International Bulletin of Mission Research 45:1 (December 2020), 15-25 ↑

43. Allan Heaton Anderson, An Introduction to Pentecostalism, (Cambridge University Press, 2013), 25. ↑

44. Ryan Danker, “What is Christian Perfection?” talk given for Seedbed Ministries, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BQ1KMocOCoo ↑

45. Michael Allen and Scott Swain, Reformed Catholicity (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2015), 25 ↑

46. Philip Schaff, The Principle of Protestantism: As Related to the Present State of the Church, trans. J. W. Nevin (Chambersburg, PA: German Reformed Church, 1845). ↑

47. J. Todd Billings, Reformed Catholicity, 143-161 ↑

48. Billings, 158-159 ↑

49. Kevin J. Vanhoozer, Biblical Authority After Babel (Grand Rapids: Brazos Press, 2016), 22-23 ↑