Auctoritas Patrum? The Reception of the Church Fathers in Puritanism. By Ann-Stephane Schäfer. Mainzer Studien zur Amerikanistik 58. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, 2012. 453 pp. $109.95 cloth.

Abstract

(ProQuest: ... denotes non-US-ASCII text omitted.)Auctoritas Patrum? The Reception of Church Fathers in Puritanism . By Ann-Stephane Schafer . Mainzer Studien zur Amerikanistik 58. Frankfurt am Main : Peter Lang , 2012. 453 pp. $109.95 cloth.Book Reviews and NotesAnn-Stephane Schafer's study joins a growing number of scholars drawing attention to use of patristic literature amongst early modern Protestants. Led by Irena Backus, image of a biblicist Protestantism has been qualified to reveal indebtedness to patristic thought. Schafer's book covers roughly same chronological ground as Jean-Louis Quantin's The Church of England and Christian Antiquity (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009), but, whereas Quantin focuses upon Anglicans, Schafer begins with William Perkins and ends with ecclesiastical debates of early eighteenth century in New England. Schafer correctly observes that use of church has received surprisingly little attention compared to Puritans' strict adherence to sola scriptura (20). Her study is poised to make a major contribution to our understanding of Puritanism.Schafer clearly states her theses. First, Puritan exegesis is far from taking a one-dimensional Biblicist perspective but that it is in fact to a large extent informed by interpretations of church fathers (22). Second, the traditional typological interpretation of (New England) Puritanism as embodiment of Old and New Testament types can be extended to apply to early church as well (23). Drawing upon Theodore Dwight Bozeman, she defines Puritans as dissenters from Church of England who were distinguished by three interlinked agendas--moralism, pietism, and biblical primitivism (24). This definition is problematic for a few reasons, largely because it is too broad and inconsistently applied. For instance, Schafer utilizes Perkins extensively as a kind of archetypal Puritan, but he can hardly be characterized as dissenting. This is not merely a trifling over a definition, but speaks directly to theme of Schafer's work.Chapter 2 is a close reading of prolegomenon of Perkins's Probleme of Forged Catholicisme . She outlines Perkins's strategy for purging patristic literature of spurious works and correctly reading remaining corpus in context to arrive at an orthodox reading that counteracts Roman Catholic claims. His advice is unoriginal and more could have been done to either show his dependence on earlier sources or underscore distinctive elements. Schafer nicely points out that Perkins's strategy equates Roman Catholicism with early church heresy and principle of sola scriptura is bolstered ironically by patristic testimony.Chapter 3 surveys context for patristic reception amongst Puritans. This includes a lengthy excursus on genesis of concept of auctoritas patrum , usage of patristic sources by earlier Protestants, and a consideration of place of church in training of ministers. The last two sections are most potentially interesting, but results are uneven. Schafer shows that although patristic literature was not part of official curriculum, students had ample access to fathers' writings in libraries. She surveys six commonplace books of colonial Congregationalist ministers, but only one contains a great deal of patristic material (129). …