Seventeenth-Century Eschatology

Goodwin, below, makes Jack van Impe look like Greg Beale … okay, not that bad, but ….

Goodwin’s view of ‘Popery’ is perhaps best understood in his Exposition of Revelation.

Like all of his writings, Goodwin interacted with a number of writers from various ecclesiastical backgrounds. Two especially stand out, however, in his Exposition of Revelation: Thomas Brightman (1562-1607) and Joseph Mede (1586-1638). Because of influence of Brightman and Mede, Goodwin approached the book of Revelation with specific – what modern-day theologians would call ‘historicist’ – hermeneutical presuppositions. Consequently, by adopting Mede’s method of synchronisms, Goodwin saw the book of Revelation as a prediction of the major events in Christian history. Those who adopt such a view of Revelation have typically viewed their own age as decisive in terms of the unfolding of the events prophesied. Not surprisingly, then, given Goodwin’s ecclesiastical and political context, the role of the Catholic Church figures prominently in his exposition. The value in Goodwin’s exposition lies not in his exegesis of Revelation 11 – it would prove to be somewhat of an embarrassment to him later on in life – but in identifying the nature of the ever-increasing gulf between Protestants and Catholics in the seventeenth century. Though Goodwin would ultimately disagree with Mede’s ecclesiology, there is some truth in Jeffrey Jue’s contention that ‘Mede’s anti-Catholic position was admired by most puritans who easily adapted and redirected his criticism toward Archbishop Laud and the English Church.’ However, not only did Goodwin adapt and redirect Mede’s anti-Catholic position toward the carnal Protestants in the Church of England, he also directed his criticism towards the Catholic Church.

According to Goodwin’s exegesis of Revelation, the millennium was still regarded as a future glorious event, a time on Earth when all Nations will come to know Jesus Christ. This age was ‘yet to come’, an age in which the church would ‘continue for a Thousand years, during which time the Jews shall have it, and the Gentiles together with them.’ In Goodwin’s mind, writing in the seventeenth century, the church had been for the most part under the influence of Antichrist, ‘namely, the Pope.’ These ages he identified in Revelation under two divisions; the seal prophecy (Revelation 6-11) and the book prophecy (Revelation 12-22). Therefore, he saw chapter twelve of Revelation as having reference to the ‘primitive times’, the state of the church during its first four hundred years of existence after Christ’s ascension. Chapters thirteen and fourteen, then, were said to highlight the state of the church during the reign of popery (Antichrist). Goodwin described the pope in Revelation thirteen as the ‘Beast with ten horns’, possessing both a temporal and ecclesiastical power whereby he, along with his clergy, would ‘mould the Christian Religion … and the Worship thereof, into a true likeness and conformity to the Heathenish Religion.’ Goodwin believed, however, that he was living in an age on the verge of millennial glory. The fall of popery, and thus the expiration of Antichrist’s kingdom, was thought to be imminent. Goodwin, instead of following Mede’s date of 1736 as the end of the Beast’s reign, based his date-setting upon Daniel 12:11-12, in which two numbers, 1290 and 1335, representing prophetic years, were given to Daniel. These dates were ‘to be counted from the ceasing of the daily Sacrifice; that is, … from Julian’s Time’ (360-365 A.D). Goodwin, by adding 1290 and 1335 to Julian’s time, obtained two dates, 1650-56 and 1690-1700. He thought of these two periods as ‘set as posts’; that is, between 1650 and 1700 would mark the end of Popery with 1700 consummating all and thus ushering in ‘the glorious Kingdom of Christ.’ Goodwin felt that the final defeat of Antichrist would result not only because of the various reformations over the latter course of church history, but especially because of the ‘third’ reformation that Goodwin himself was part of.

For Goodwin, opposition to Popery would not be limited to the years 1650-1700. Chapter fourteen of Revelation has reference to the various reformations. The first Reformation, of which there are three degrees, represented by three different angels, was carried out by believers in opposition to the ‘False Church.’ Petrus Waldus (d. 1218) and his followers were the first to separate from ‘Popish Doctrine and Worship.’ They were conspicuous by the fact that they preached the gospel and called men to turn from idolatrous worship. John Wycliffe (d. 1384), John Huss (1372–1415), Jerome of Prague (1379-1416), and their followers, furthered the cause of Reformation in the church, much in the same way that the Waldensians had through their preaching and translation of the Scriptures. ‘But then follows’, says Goodwin,

a Third Angel, more vehement than the rest, and that was Luther and his Followers …. [Luther] showing that her Worship and Doctrine … was a damned Doctrine … laying open the Falsehood and Errors of it manifestly, that now under so clear a Light of the Gospel as this age held forth, it could never stand with Salvation to live therein.

Calvin and others were, however, chiefly responsible for the above ‘Reformation’, both in terms of doctrine and worship. This reformation was a time of ‘glorious Peace and Sunshine of the Gospel.’ For Goodwin, these reformations marked the process by which popery would be overthrown; indeed, he was convinced that ‘the Light which hath broken forth in many of our Reformed Churches, since Calvin’s Time, and which still increaseth, and shall, until Antichrist be consumed, is both in Matter of Doctrine, Interpretation of Scriptures, Worship, Church-Government, &c. much purer … than what shines in the Story and Writings of those three latter Primitive Ages.’ Despite the advances made by Calvin and others, Goodwin was convinced that the Church was in need of ‘a New Reformation,’ or ‘a second Reformation.’ Based upon his dating system, and detailed exegetical analysis of Revelation 11, Goodwin believed that he was living in an age that would include heightened persecution of Reformed ministers. The problem of popery was, of course, not limited to the Catholic Church. Goodwin felt that popish worship, ceremonies, and doctrine had infiltrated the Church of England, especially with the growing influence of Archbishop Laud. Lawrence is correct to note that ‘[w]ithout doubt, Goodwin thought Laud and his fellow–travellers, men such as White, Cosin, and Montagu, were the Pope’s last champions. These men and their policies would in time either literally or figuratively slaughter the godly ministers and magistrates of England. That time had not yet come.’ These events would, of course, serve as the precursor to ‘the glorious Kingdom of Christ’, the millennial age where ‘both East and West, Jew and Gentile, and the fullness of both, do come in, and become one Fold under one Shepherd for a thousand years …. And so that Prophecy of this his Kingdom, in Isa. 59.19, is fulfilled; where, after the final destruction of all Christ’s Enemies … They shall fear his Name … and the Redeemer shall come unto Sion …’

Goodwin had clearly identified popery as the great enemy of the Christian faith; both its doctrine and worship were constantly criticized by Goodwin as he sought to make plain the soteric and ecclesiological differences that separated Catholics and Protestants. His opposition to popery was, however, heightened by his eschatology; that is, his conviction that he was living in an age of reformation, where the threat of popery was still very real, meant that the content of his writings were no doubt shaped by the context in which he lived.

Goodwin’s exposition of Revelation, particularly chapter eleven, has received a good deal of treatment. See

See Works, II, Revelation, 90, 130, 144, 146, 187, 188.

See Works, II, Revelation, 34, 35, 75, 99, 100, 103, 126, 128, 130, 165, 171, 174, 188. The best studies on British apocalypytic thoughts are Jue, Heaven Upon Earth; Crawford G. Gribben, The Puritan Millennium Literature & Theology, 1550-1682 (Dublin: Four Courts Press, 2000); Richard Bauckham, Tudor Apocalypse: Sixteenth Century Apocalypticism, Millennarianism, and the English Reformation, from John Bale to John Foxe and Thomas Brightman (Oxford: Sutton Courtenay Press, 1978).

A number of scholars have given attention to Goodwin’s eschatology, especially his exegesis of Revelation 11. See Rodney L. Petersen, Preaching in the last days: the theme of ‘Two Witnesses’ in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1993), 212-16; Jue, Heaven Upon Earth, 177-80; Gribben, Puritan millennium, 45-9; Chang, ‘Christian Life’, 48-86; Fienberg, ‘Puritan Pastor and Independent Divine’, 168-234; Lawrence, ‘Transmission and Transformation’, 116-30.

Works, II, Revelation, 165.

Jue, Heaven Upon Earth, 177.

Works, I, Ephesians, Pt. 1, 455-56.

Works, II, Revelation, 61.

Works, II, Revelation, 64

See Jue, Heaven Upon Earth, 179.

Works, II, Revelation 184.

Works, II, Revelation, 185.

Works, II, Revelation, 84.

Works, II, Revelation, 85.

Works, II, Revelation, 85.

Works, II, Revelation, 86.

Works, II, Revelation, 129.

Works, II, Revelation, 78-9.

Lawrence, ‘Transmission and transformation’, 124-25.

Works, II, Revelation, 28.