Preaching Calendar of Puritans

GospelHeart

GospelHeart

Puritan Board Freshman
Do we have any examples of the preaching calendar of Puritan Pastors? (i.e the sermons they preached in a church over 10 years?)

Did they mostly preach on one off verses, or did they ever work through the Bible chapter by chapter, book by book?
 
I won't generalize but a lot of them preached on books, for a long time. I reconstructed a schedule for James Durham's 7 years or so preaching in Glasgow from finding a few manuscript dates for his various series. He general went a verse or few verses at a time when preaching. You can find the schedule in the appendix to volume 3 of the three volume RHB/NP edition of Durham's Lectures on Revelation.
 
NaphtaliPress said:
I won't generalize but a lot of them preached on books, for a long time. I reconstructed a schedule for James Durham's 7 years or so preaching in Glasgow from finding a few manuscript dates for his various series. He general went a verse or few verses at a time when preaching. You can find the schedule in the appendix to volume 3 of the three volume RHB/NP edition of Durham's Lectures on Revelation.
Click to expand...
Thanks for putting that together. I was just looking over it. Can you explain what a "lecture" was in a 17th century ecclesiastical context, and how it differs from a sermon?
 
G. D. Henderson suggests it came in when Scotland got rid of readers who were not ordained. He says the practice came that instead of a reader reading Scripture and no more, that ministers would read the text, explain it, read the next verses, explain it, etc. This was daily in the big cities (or some system; Durham took a turn in the weekly lectures at the Glasgow cathedral but there was some daily lecture in the city which ministers took turns taking a full week; never have found this was; it was "in the city" opposed to at the cathedral). Henderson describes Edinburgh; at Glasgow it was apparently the practice also to lecture prior to the sermon on Lord's days (unclear to me if all within the formal call to worship; possibly?). Others may opine; my guess is how different from a sermon varied with the person; but the puritan sermon generaly explained the text, developed doctrines and gave applications or uses (observations). Durham's lectures on the Book of Job explain the text and close with observations (points of application). His lectures on Song of Solomon have them throughout but in neither does develop doctrines to expound as in preaching. His lectures on the ten commandments are devoid of formal observations, the whole being extended explaining and applying of each commandment. I'm not sure there was a set form of a lecture, at least in Durham's case. Again, I'm only speaking to the case of Durham. The lectureship died out (actually Charles II had it outlawed) by the late 17th century.
TylerRay said:
Thanks for putting that together. I was just looking over it. Can you explain what a "lecture" was in a 17th century ecclesiastical context, and how it differs from a sermon?
Click to expand...
 
It's not a calendar per se, but we know from Dr. Bates that Thomas Manton's sermons on Psalm 119 were preached at the rate of 3 per week. He had a regular Wednesday lecture.
(The Works of Thomas Manton, V.1 [Birmingham: Solid Ground Christian Books reprint, 2008], xxviii & xxxi)
 
Might lecture have been used to distinguish between divine worship and another occasion such as the Wednesday mid-week gathering?
 
jwithnell said:
Might lecture have been used to distinguish between divine worship and another occasion such as the Wednesday mid-week gathering?
Click to expand...
They lectured during the week but also in the Lord's Day service (both AM and often or regularly, not recalling, in PM). So I don't think that is the distinction; and my guess is on the Lord's Day being prior to the sermon, it was within the formal worship service.
 
NaphtaliPress said:
G. D. Henderson suggests it came in when Scotland got rid of readers who were not ordained. He says the practice came that instead of a reader reading Scripture and no more, that ministers would read the text, explain it, read the next verses, explain it, etc. This was daily in the big cities (or some system; Durham took a turn in the weekly lectures at the Glasgow cathedral but there was some daily lecture in the city which ministers took turns taking a full week; never have found this was; it was "in the city" opposed to at the cathedral). Henderson describes Edinburgh; at Glasgow it was apparently the practice also to lecture prior to the sermon on Lord's days (unclear to me if all within the formal call to worship; possibly?). Others may opine; my guess is how different from a sermon varied with the person; but the puritan sermon generaly explained the text, developed doctrines and gave applications or uses (observations). Durham's lectures on the Book of Job explain the text and close with observations (points of application). His lectures on Song of Solomon have them throughout but in neither does develop doctrines to expound as in preaching. His lectures on the ten commandments are devoid of formal observations, the whole being extended explaining and applying of each commandment. I'm not sure there was a set form of a lecture, at least in Durham's case. Again, I'm only speaking to the case of Durham. The lectureship died out (actually Charles II had it outlawed) by the late 17th century.
Click to expand...
I wonder if any of Horton Davies' books deal with the lecture.

If anyone has a copy of his Worship of the English Puritans that they are willing to part with for a reasonable price, btw, I'm interested.
 
Dr. Beeke, if I remember correctly, from his lecture in the Puritans Conference (Puritan Literature) says something along the lines that even though many Puritan preachers were barred from ordination in the Church of England, due to non-conformity, that "the people" desired to have Puritan preachers, as they were most popular at the time. So then, these churches would have the properly and officially ordained Pastors from the state Churches, but hire the Puritans on as "lecturers" in a non-shepherding capacity. And that it worked as kind of a duel positive, in that the official preachers of each church only had to worry about the Sunday morning sermon, while the Puritan lecturers did the Sunday night, and mid-week sermon/lectures; and the Puritan preachers did not have to worry about the other shepherding aspects outside giving those lectures, and could focus on writing books (due to being ineligible for normal pastoral duties due to their non-conformity.)


From the 12:00-15:00 minute mark.
 
Last edited:
davejonescue said:
Dr. Beeke, if I remember correctly, from his lecture in the Puritans Conference (Puritan Literature) says something along the lines that even though many Puritan preachers were barred from ordination in the Church of England, due to non-conformity, that "the people" desired to have Puritan preachers, as they were most popular at the time. So then, these churches would have the properly and officially ordained Pastors from the state Churches, but hire the Puritans on as "lecturers" in a non-shepherding capacity. And that it worked as kind of a duel positive, in that the official preachers of each church only had to worry about the Sunday morning sermon, while the Puritan lecturers did the Sunday night, and mid-week sermon/lectures; and the Puritan preachers did not have to worry about the other shepherding aspects outside giving those lectures, and could focus on writing books (due to being ineligible for normal pastoral duties due to their non-conformity.)


From the 12:00-15:00 minute mark.
Click to expand...
I think you are along the right lines. However, even those in the CoE were hired as lecturers. I did a biographical message on Sibbes and read Dever's little book about him. Sibbes was a lecturer for much of his ministry. Sibbes lectured on Sunday afternoons at Gray's Inn, an association or club of professional men. I think basically the difference between lecturer & vicar/pastor would be the shepherding duties and ability to administer sacraments.
 
davejonescue said:
Dr. Beeke, if I remember correctly, from his lecture in the Puritans Conference (Puritan Literature) says something along the lines that even though many Puritan preachers were barred from ordination in the Church of England, due to non-conformity, that "the people" desired to have Puritan preachers, as they were most popular at the time. So then, these churches would have the properly and officially ordained Pastors from the state Churches, but hire the Puritans on as "lecturers" in a non-shepherding capacity. And that it worked as kind of a duel positive, in that the official preachers of each church only had to worry about the Sunday morning sermon, while the Puritan lecturers did the Sunday night, and mid-week sermon/lectures; and the Puritan preachers did not have to worry about the other shepherding aspects outside giving those lectures, and could focus on writing books (due to being ineligible for normal pastoral duties due to their non-conformity.)


From the 12:00-15:00 minute mark.
Click to expand...
I definitely acknolwedge what you're saying, but it doesn't account for the lecture in Scotland. I think it was also a feature of nonconformist worship after the Glorious Revolution. It, or the remnants of it, remained at least until the 1800s in some places. Ichabod Spencer (1798-1854), who ministered in Congregationalist and Presbyterian churches in the Northern US, mentions it: 'In the time of a revival of religion, a clergymen, not much known to me, called upon me and by invitation preached for me at my regular weekly lecture in the evening' (A Pastor's Sketches, p.123).
 
Alexander Suarez said:
Good day brother,

In case you didn't already know, it is available online here: https://archive.org/details/worshipofenglish00davi/mode/2up

Kind regards,
Click to expand...
Thanks, brother!

Looks like he mentions the lectures, but doesn't discuss them.

'This is not to assert that Sunday services comprised all of the public religious services of the Puritans. On the contrary, they held Lectures and Prayers on week-days and frequently met for special Fasts and Prayers on days of national emergencies.'

He gives an interesting quote from Edmund Calamy:
'Their stated publick worship on the Lord's days (which they conscientiously devote wholly to religious purposes) is thus managed. The Minister in each Christian Society, offers up to Almighty God the common Requests of the whole Society, in the aptest and most Scriptural expressions he is able. He publishes the Will of God both as to Truth and Duty in two distinct Discourses, the one in the Forenoon, and the other in the Afternoon. Each sermon is about an hour's length and begun and closed with Prayer. The Psalms are sung in Metre by the whole Assembly. In some Congregations there are Evening Lectures, besides the forementioned Forenoon and Afternoon Sermons. In some, the Youth are catechised on the Afternoons of the Lord's Days, in others on the Evenings, and in others on some Week Day. Some ministers use the Lord's Prayer constantly, others frequently, others seldom or never, as reckoning it rather given for a Directory, than to be used as a Form. Some ministers, besides their stated Preaching, do ordinarily expound a chapter, or some lesser portion of Scripture, at the beginning of the Morning Service, while others only read two or three chapters, or a Psalm and a chapter.''
 
Thanks all for your responses! :)
@NaphtaliPress @py3ak & others

Seems like anecdotally a preaching practice of lectio continua at a slow pace (one to a few verse units). But of course hard to generalise to all Puritans at all times! :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top