The Puritan threat
Who Were the Puritans?
Puritans were not a single organised movement but a broad tendency within English Protestantism. They believed that the Reformation had not gone far enough — that the Church of England still retained too much Catholic ceremony, too many bishops with too much power, and insufficient emphasis on the Bible and preaching. The word “Puritan” was originally a term of abuse used by their opponents; they generally called themselves “the godly” or “the professors.” By the 1570s and 1580s, however, they had become a significant force in both Parliament and the Privy Council, making them a genuine political challenge to Elizabeth’s religious settlement.
The Puritan Challenge to the Settlement
Puritans wanted several reforms that Elizabeth refused to grant. They wanted to remove the remaining Catholic elements from worship — vestments, crucifixes, kneeling at Communion, the sign of the cross at baptism. They also wanted a reformed presbyterian church structure, replacing bishops with elected councils of elders (presbyters) as in Calvin’s Geneva. This was not merely a theological dispute: eliminating bishops would have removed the Queen’s control over the Church, since bishops were appointed by the Crown and enforced royal religious policy.
The leading intellectual voice for Presbyterianism in Elizabethan England was Thomas Cartwright, a Cambridge theologian who argued in the early 1570s that bishops had no basis in scripture and that the Church should be governed by elected elders. His views were too radical for Elizabeth’s government: Cartwright was eventually deprived of his Cambridge fellowship and spent years in exile and prison. Nevertheless, his ideas had wide influence among educated Protestants, including several members of the Privy Council.
Presbyterianism was a political as well as a religious threat. Bishops were appointed by the Crown and enforced royal religious policy. Replacing them with elected elders would have removed the Queen’s control over the Church — effectively creating an independent religious authority that could defy royal commands.
Puritan Opposition in Parliament
Puritan MPs attempted to push further reform through Parliament during the 1570s and 1580s. In 1571, Walter Strickland introduced a bill in the Commons to reform the prayer book along Puritan lines. Elizabeth had it withdrawn and banned Strickland from the Commons temporarily. In the Parliament of 1587, Anthony Cope introduced what became known as “Cope’s Bill and Book” — a proposal to replace the entire Book of Common Prayer with a Genevan (Calvinist) alternative and abolish episcopal church government. Elizabeth had the bill confiscated and imprisoned Cope and several other Puritan MPs in the Tower of London.
Puritans were not only in Parliament — several of Elizabeth’s most powerful councillors were sympathetic to their cause. Robert Dudley, Earl of Leicester, Francis Walsingham and (to some extent) William Cecil were all inclined towards stricter Protestantism. This gave Puritanism real influence within the government. However, these councillors supported Puritanism as a Protestant movement against Catholic threats rather than as a programme for dismantling the royal supremacy over the Church. When Puritan demands moved towards full presbyterianism, even sympathetic councillors tended to draw back.
The Marprelate Tracts, 1588–1589
The most provocative expression of Puritan opposition was the Marprelate Tracts, a series of anonymous satirical pamphlets published using a secret printing press in 1588 and 1589. Written under the pseudonym “Martin Marprelate,” these pamphlets attacked the bishops of the Church of England in savage, scurrilous terms — mocking them as corrupt, ignorant and unscriptural. The tracts were entertaining and widely read, but they shocked even some who were sympathetic to reform. The government tracked down the printing press; several men connected with the tracts were arrested and executed. The Marprelate affair hardened the government’s stance: Elizabeth became less willing to tolerate even moderate Puritan demands after this episode.
Government Response: Archbishop Whitgift
Elizabeth’s most effective weapon against the Puritan challenge was her appointment of Archbishop John Whitgift as Archbishop of Canterbury in 1583. Whitgift was a committed anti-Puritan who believed in firm episcopal discipline. He issued “Three Articles” requiring all clergy to subscribe to the royal supremacy, the prayer book and the Thirty-Nine Articles — the doctrinal foundation of the Church of England. Any clergy who refused were suspended. Whitgift used the Court of High Commission to discipline non-conforming clergy. His policies were controversial even within the government: William Cecil complained that his tactics were too harsh and compared them to the Spanish Inquisition. Nevertheless, they were broadly effective: the presbyterian movement within the Church was contained, and Puritanism was pushed towards the edges of the establishment.
Archbishop Whitgift (appointed 1583) required all clergy to subscribe to: the royal supremacy, the Book of Common Prayer, and the Thirty-Nine Articles. Clergy who refused were suspended. He used the Court of High Commission to enforce these requirements.
Historians debate how serious the Puritan threat really was. The traditional view presents Puritanism as a serious danger to the settlement. A revisionist view, associated with historians such as Peter Lake, argues that most Puritans were ‘church Puritans’ — loyal to Elizabeth and working within the Church, not against it — and that only a small minority were genuine separatists who rejected the Church entirely. On this reading, Elizabeth’s firm response was overkill that created more tension than it resolved. What is clear is that Puritanism was not suppressed permanently: it re-emerged as a much more powerful force in the seventeenth century, eventually contributing to the Civil War and the execution of Charles I in 1649.