Past is Prologue

 The insanity of the English Civil Wars (1642-51, although I’d fold the Bishops’s Wars, starting 1639, into the mix) among the “visible saints,” as they conceived of themselves, is notable for merging the present of the 17^th century with the biblical past, both Old Testamentary and New Testamentary.  John Saltmarsh, one of the leading preachers to the New Model Army, which had been formed by Parliament in 1645, asserted that the “Kingdom of Christ” was, concretely and in the present,

 

“a company of godly gathered by his owne Spirit, having their Lord and Saviour in the midst, confederated by an holy and sacramental paction, ruled by the law of his Will and Spirit; obeying his commands, whether in silent inspirations, or louder exhortations”

 

Within their gatherings, each believer was in effect the fulfillment of the Old Testament prophecies that pointed to Christ.

 

The language that Saltmarsh and others like him use is about typology.  Old Testament figures are understood to be types of Christ, who is the antitype, or fulfillment.  In practice almost every “good guy” in the Hebrew Scriptures is understood to be a type of Christ in the Christian Scriptures.  So Adam was a type of Christ (Christ was often called “second Adam”), as was Noah, and Moses, and David, and . . . .

 

But the New Testament itself points to a further spiritual development, indicated by the second coming at the end times.  That further spirituality is what Saltmarsh means by the “Kingdom of Christ.”  For Saltmarsh the gathered communities of believers existed in a localized post-second-coming world, as if the New Jerusalem had already arrived—not globally, but within the gathered community.  They were quite literally “visible saints,” already living in the pure spirituality of the New Jerusalem.

 

This is the way that another preacher, Samuel Mather, puts it:

 

“Look whatever Glory was in any of these Persons [i. e. Old Testament types of Christ] by way of Prefiguration of Jesus Christ:  it is and should be found in every Believer by way of Participation from Christ and Imitation of him.”

 

Living in such spiritual bliss, the visible saint could do no wrong.  Every action, every statement, every thought, was holy, inspired directly by God.  Indeed, oftentimes the distinction between the individual and God tended to disappear, so it wasn’t necessarily divine inspiration that moved the “saints,” but rather they acted as if they were gods themselves.  Although the relatively less extreme folks would balk at such an assertion, the radicals would not find the statement problematic at all.  Equivocating on the issue, as seems to be his usual mode (so discovered Anne Hutchinson, much to her cost), that New England worthy, John Cotton, asserts that “the Holy Ghost was united with the person of a believer so that one who was so blessed was more than a man.”  He doesn’t specify what the “more” amounts to, of course.

 

Almost needless to say:  England became ungovernable under the notions of those “saints.”  Ultimately Cromwell was obliged to control them forcibly.

 

And here’s why I’m thinking of those “visible saints.”

 

It’s not an exact parallel, but some of the current insanity, attributing a biblical identity to dearleader, for instance (apparently he’s David—no doubt because like David, he lusted for the alien woman), reminds me of those “visible saints.”  There may not be a whole lot of those nuts, but the “visible saints,” also a minority, indicate the danger they pose.  I’d urge the Republican leaders to become a bit more conversant with the history of the English Civil Wars, which underlies their revulsion at mixing church and state.  But by this point it seems to me pointless to try to bring our own “visible saints” under the control of any authority.  They are, and will make the nation as a whole, ungovernable.