Dr. Joel R. Beeke

Before man had any other calling, he was called to be a husband…. First man must choose his love, and then he must love his choice…. The man and wife are partners, like two oars in a boat.¹ — Henry Smith

There may be no better example of Calvinism in action than the lives of the Puritans at home. Their views on marriage and broader family life were biblical, positive, and lavish. Their writings² reveal this outlook, and many scholars have confirmed it through the years.³ Therefore, in order to gain a better understanding of the Calvinistic idea of domestic life, I will focus on the Puritan view of marriage in two articles and on the Puritan view of the family in the following two issues.

The Puritans had an astonishingly healthy view of marriage. Here is a description of marriage by Richard Baxter: “It is a mercy to have a faithful friend that loveth you entirely… to whom you may open your mind and communicate your affairs…. And it is a mercy to have so near a friend to be a helper to your soul and…to stir up in you the grace of God.”⁴ John Dod and Robert Cleaver put it this way: “Thy wife is ordained for man: like a little Zoar, a city of refuge to fly to in all his troubles: and there is no peace comparable unto her but the peace of conscience.⁵ John Downame says that “God the Institutor of marriage, gave the wife unto the husband, to be, not his servant, but his helper, counsellor, and comforter.”⁶ And John Cotton writes, “Women are Creatures without which there is no comfortable Living for man: it is true of them what is wont to be said of Governments, That bad ones are better than none.” Though some call them “a necessary Evil,” Cotton went on to say, they are really “a necessary Good.”⁷

The Puritans built on Reformation teaching for their positive attitude toward marriage. In sermons and lengthy treatises, they set forth scriptural purposes, procedures, principles, and practices covering every point of marriage.

Purposes of Marriage

The Puritans agreed with the Reformers that Scripture sanctions three purposes for marriage, all of which aim for the higher good of the glory of God and the furthering of God’s kingdom on earth. According to the Book of Common Prayer, the purposes of marriage are: (1) the procreation of children, (2) the restraint and remedy of sin, and (3) mutual society, help, and comfort. Some early Puritan works on marriage maintained this order, but the Puritans gradually moved the third purpose to first place, as was codified in the 1640s by the Westminster divines in the Confession of Faith (24.2): “Marriage was ordained [1] for the mutual help of husband and wife [Gen. 2:18]; [2] for the increase of mankind with a legitimate issue, and of the Church with an holy seed [Mal. 2:15]; and [3] for the preventing of uncleanness [1 Cor. 7:2, 9].”⁸ Later Puritans focused more on the Genesis 2:18 mandate for marriage (“It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him”) than on the Genesis 1:28 command to be fruitful and multiply.

The first purpose for marriage, then, is to provide companionship and mutual assistance. Henry Smith says this is God’s way “to avoid the inconvenience of solitariness signified in these words, ‘It is not good for man to be alone’; as though he said, This life would be miserable and irksome, and unpleasant to man, if the Lord had not given him a wife to company his troubles.”⁹ William Gouge, whose hefty Of Domestical Duties became a classic among the Puritans as well as a common wedding gift, focuses more on the mutual assistance in marriage that flows out of companionship. This includes the tasks of childbearing, child-rearing, and family government, both in times of prosperity and adversity, and health and sickness.¹⁰ Through such companionship, William Perkins says, “the parties married may thereby perform the duties of their callings in a better and more comfortable manner (Prov. 31:11–13).”¹¹ All of this is to serve “for the benefit of man’s natural and spiritual life,” John Robinson writes.¹²

The second purpose of marriage is procreation and the building up of the church through godly child-rearing. The Puritans believed that having children is not simply a private matter to be decided between a husband and wife. Rather, from their perspective, children are a gift of God through which believers are to serve the family, the church, and the state. Gouge notes that Christians should have children so “that the world might be increased: and not simply increased, but with a legitimate brood, and distinct families, which are the seminaries of cities and the Commonwealths. Yea also that in the world the Church by an holy seed might be preserved, and propagated (Mal. 2:15).”¹³

The third purpose of marriage, as Gouge says, is for men and women to “possess their vessels in holiness and honour” and to avoid fornication (1 Cor. 7:2, 9). Gouge goes on to say, “Marriage is as an haven to such as are in jeopardy of their salvation through the gusts of temptations to lust.”¹⁴ Marriage is the best and most sanctified solution to the temptation of fornication.

In their emphasis on the physical purposes of marriage, the Puritans did not devalue its spiritual purpose. They stressed that marital love should remain subordinate to a loving God. John Winthrop, in a letter written to his wife shortly after their marriage, calls her “the chiefest of all comforts under the hope of salvation.”¹⁵ Cotton warns against “the error of aiming at no higher end” than marriage itself and encourages people to look upon their spouses “not for their own ends, but to be better fitted for God’s service and bring them nearer to God.”¹⁶

Procedures for Getting Married

The Puritan procedure for getting married consisted of six steps. First was the period of getting to know, like, and love each other. This could be initiated by the couple themselves, by parents, or by friends. But wise young people would ask counsel both of parents and of friends concerning possible marital partners. Whatever the case, love is foundational in the Puritan view, for it encourages bonding. As Gouge says, “Mutual love and good liking of each other is as glue.” This glue will sustain a couple through marriage, for “love will not easily be loosened by any trials.”¹⁷

Second, there was a contract of espousals, which was a commitment to marry. This contract was more binding than our modern form of engagement. Gouge describes it this way: “This rightly made is a contract, which is the beginning of a marriage.” While holding hands in front of witnesses, each party vowed: “I do faithfully promise to marry thee in time meet and convenient.”¹⁸ Biblical support for such a contract included the examples of Lot’s daughters, who were “contracted to husbands [while] they are said to have known no man” (Gen. 19:8, 14), and Mary, who is described as “a virgin espoused” (Luke 1:27).¹⁹

Third, the contract was formally announced to the congregation on three successive Sundays. Those announcements provided an opportunity for any church member who had lawful objections against the marriage to voice them through proper church channels. If there were no objections, the church was assumed to have provided a “silent approbation” upon the marriage.

Fourth, the marriage was publicly solemnized in a religious ceremony, which consisted of the pastor administering the marriage vows and preaching a short sermon, followed by a civil celebration. Gouge describes the civil celebration as “all those lawful customs that are used for the setting forth of the outward solemnity [of the wedding], as meeting of friends, accompanying the Bridegroom and Bride both to and from the Church, putting on best apparel, seating, with other tokens of rejoicing: for which we have express warrant out of God’s word.”²⁰

Fifth, after the service, there was feasting at the groom’s home, where “witty questions and doubtful riddles may be propounded.”²¹ The questions and riddles that were entertained were wholesome and intellectually stimulating; nothing ribald was tolerated, in contrast with the often-suggestive comments and rituals that occur at many modern weddings. Sixth and finally, the marriage was consummated through sexual intercourse.²²

Principles for Marriage

The Puritans grounded marriage on two major scriptural principles: the Christ-church principle and the covenantal principle. These principles are perhaps the primary factors behind the orderliness, stability, and happiness of Puritan marriages.

The Christ-church principle. Gouge’s Of Domestical Duties is based on Ephesians 5:21–6:9, which describes the duties of husbands, wives, parents, children, masters, and servants. Prior to detailing these duties, however, Gouge gives an opening chapter of 133 pages that explains this scriptural passage phrase by phrase. He sets forth the major principle of marriage—that the husband is to love his wife as Christ loves the church, while the wife is to show reverence and submission to her husband as the church does to Christ.

The husband’s headship over his wife parallels Christ’s headship over His church (Eph. 5:23). As Christ loves His church, the husband must love his wife absolutely (v. 25), purposely (v. 26), realistically (v. 27), and sacrificially (vv. 28 – 29).²³ He must exercise a “true, free, pure, exceeding, constant love” to his wife, nourishing and cherishing her as Christ does His gathered people (v. 29).²⁴ Since Christ’s love for His church is all-encompassing, a husband cannot love his wife adequately because, being a sinner, he will always fall short of Christ’s perfect love (v. 25). But Christ’s love to His bride must be the husband’s pattern and goal.²⁵ Such love will serve “as sugar to sweeten the duties of authority which appertain to an husband,” so that his loving wife may more easily submit to him.²⁶

Given the modern caricatures of Puritanism, it is vital to note that Puritan husbands were rarely male chauvinists and tyrants. Modelling the husband’s headship on Christ’s headship of the church, Puritans understood that male authority was more a charge to responsibility than a ticket to privilege. Headship was leadership based on love (1 Peter 3:7).

Since the church humbly and unconditionally submits to Christ, the wife’s submission to her husband means, according to Isaac Ambrose, that she should show reverence and “yield subjection” to her husband in all things, except when her husband acts contrary to God and His commandments (vv. 22 – 24). This principle holds true even if her husband is “a son of Belial” (1 Sam. 2:12)—i.e., of a difficult temperament. Ambrose writes, “A wife must be meek, mild, gentle, obedient, though she be matched with a crooked, perverse, and wicked husband.”²⁷

For the Puritans, submission was not so much a matter of hierarchy as of function. God assigns the role and duty of leadership to the husband not because he is superior to his wife, but simply because God delegates this authority to him and not to her. Robinson explained headship this way: “God created man and woman spiritually equal, and when both fell into sin she did not become more degenerated than he from the primitive goodness. Yet in marriage one of the two must have final authority, since differences will arise, and so the one must give way and apply unto the other; this, God and nature layeth upon the man.”²⁸

The Puritans believed that the wife must yield voluntary submission. If a husband compels submission, the battle is already lost. Submission is to be rendered by the wife as part of her obedience to Christ. Thus, it is her honor and freedom to acknowledge her husband as her head.

Both husband and wife should focus on their own duties, the Puritans said. If husbands show little love to their wives, they should not expect much submission and reverence from them; likewise, if wives show little reverence and submission to their husbands, they should not expect much love from them.²⁹

The covenantal principle. Flowing out of this principle of love and submission, the Puritans made much of the principle of marriage as a covenant (Mal. 2:14). Edmund Morgan summarizes their view:

Every proper marriage since the first was founded on a covenant to which the free and voluntary consent of both parties was necessary…. Since time began no man and woman had ever been allowed to fix the terms upon which they would agree to be husband and wife. God had established the rules of marriage when he solemnized the first one, and he had made no changes in them since then. The covenant of marriage was a promise to obey those rules without conditions and without reservations.³⁰

Morgan goes on to quote Samuel Willard: “Many other Covenants are bounded by the makers, but all the duties of this covenant [are] appointed by God. [Therefore] when husband and wife neglect their duties they not only wrong each other, but they provoke God by breaking his law.”³¹

Notes:

1. Quoted in John Blanchard, The Complete Gathered Gold (Darlington, England: Evangelical Press, 2006), 405.
2. Richard Adams, “What are the Duties of Parents and Children; and how are they to be Managed According to Scripture?” Puritan Sermons 1659 –1689 (Wheaton, Ill: Richard Owen Roberts, 1981), 2:303 –358; Isaac Ambrose, Works of Isaac Ambrose (London: Thomas Tegg & Son, 1872); Richard Baxter, “The Poor Man’s Family Book,” in The Practical Works of Richard Baxter (Morgan, Pa.: Soli Deo Gloria, 1996), 4:165 – 289; Paul Bayne, An Entire Commentary upon the Whole Epistle of St. Paul to the Ephesians (Edinburgh: James Nichol, 1866), 491–563; Robert Bolton, General Directions for a Comfortable Walking with God (Morgan, Pa.: Soli Deo Gloria, 1995), 262– 281; Thomas Boston, “Duties of Husband and Wife; Sermon XXIII,” in The Works of Thomas Boston, ed. Samuel M’Millan (Wheaton, Ill: Richard Owen Roberts, 1980), 4:209 –218; John Bunyan, “Family Duty,” Free Grace Broadcaster, 170 (1999): 15 –28; John Cotton, A Meet Help: Or, a Wedding Sermon (Boston: B. Green & J. Allen, 1699); John Dod and Robert Cleaver, A Godly Form of Household Government (London: Thomas Man, 1598); Thomas Doolittle, “How May the Duty of Daily Family Prayer be Best Managed for the Spiritual Benefit of Every One in the Family?” in Puritan Sermons, 1659 – 1689, 2:194 –272; Thomas Gataker, “A Good Wife God’s Gift,” “A Wife in Deed,” and “Marriage Duties,” in Certain Sermons (London: John Haviland, 1637); Thomas Gataker, A Marriage Prayer (London: John Haviland, 1624), 134 –208; William Gouge, Of Domestical Duties (Pensacola: Puritan Reprints, 2006); Matthew Griffith, Bethel: or, a Form for Families (London: Richard Badger, 1633); George Hamond, The Case for Family Worship (Orlando: Soli Deo Gloria, 2005); Matthew Henry, “A Church in the House,” in Complete Works of Matthew Henry (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1978), 1:248 –267; William Perkins, “Christian Oeconomy,” in The Work of William Perkins, ed. Ian Breward (Appleford, England: Sutton Courtenay Press, 1970), 416 – 439; John Robinson, The Works of John Robinson, vol. 3 (Boston: Doctrinal Tract and Book Society, 1851); Daniel Rogers, Matrimonial Honour. (London: Th. Harper, 1642); Henry Scudder, The Godly Man’s Choice (London: Matthew Simmons for Henry Overton, 1644); Henry Smith, “A Preparative to Marriage,” in The Works of Henry Smith (Stoke-on-Trent, England: Tentmaker Publications, 2002), 1:5– 40; William Whately, A Bride-Bush or A Wedding Sermon (Norwood, N.J.: Walter J. Johnson, 1975); and William Whately, A Care-Cloth or the Cumbers and Troubles of Marriage (Norwood, N.J.: Walter J. Johnson, 1975).
3. J. Philip Arthur, “The Puritan Family,” The Answer of a Good Conscience, Westminster Conference, 1997(London: n.p., 1998), 75 – 94; Lawrence J. Bilkes, “The Scriptural Puritan Marriage” (unpublished paper for Puritan theology class at Puritan Reformed Theological Seminary, Grand Rapids, Mich., 2002); E. Braund, “Daily Life Among the Puritans,” The Puritan Papers: Volume One, ed. J. I. Packer (Phillipsburg, N.J.: P&R, 2000), 155–166; Francis J. Bremer, The Puritan Experiment: New England Society from Bradford to Edwards (New York: St. Martin’s Press, n.d.), 176–180; Catherine A. Brekus, “Children of Wrath, Children of Grace: Jonathan Edwards and the Puritan Culture of Child Rearing,” in The Child in Christian Thought, ed. Marcia J. Bunge (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2001), 300 –328; Ezra Hoyt Byington, The Puritan in England and New England (Boston: Roberts Brothers, 1897), 221–277; J. T. Cliffe, The Puritan Gentry: The Great Puritan Families of Early Stuart England (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1984), 63–82; W. Gary Crampton, What the Puritans Taught (Morgan, Pa.: Soli Deo Gloria, 2003), 62–72; Gaius Davies, “The Puritan Teaching on Marriage and the Family,” The Evangelical Quarterly, 27, no. 1 (Jan. 1955): 19–30; John Demos, A Little Commonwealth: Family Life in Plymouth Colony (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1970), 82–106, 181–190; Daniel Doriani, “The Godly Household in Puritan Theology, 1560–1640” (Ph.D. dissertation, Westminster Theological Seminary, 1985); Christopher Durston, The Family in the English Revolution (New York: Basil Blackwell, 1989); Alice Morse Earle, Customs and Fashions in Old New England (Detroit: Omnigraphics, 1990); “Form for the Confirmation of Marriage Before the Church,” in Doctrinal Standards, Liturgy, and Church Order, ed. Joel R. Beeke (Grand Rapids: Reformation Heritage Books, 1999), 156–158; Philip J. Greven, “Family Structure in Andover,” Puritanism in Early America, ed. George M. Waller (Lexington, Mass.: D. C. Heath and Co., 1973); William and Malleville Haller, “The Puritan Art of Love,” Huntington Library Quarterly, 5 (1942): 235–272; Charles E. Hambrick-Stowe, “Ordering Their Private World: What the Puritans did to grow spiritually,” Christian History, 13, no. 1 (1994): 16 –19; Graham Harrison, “Marriage and Divorce in Puritan Thinking,” The Fire Divine, Westminster Conference, 1996 (London: n.p., 1997), 27–51; Erroll Hulse, Who are the Puritans: And What do they Teach? (Darlington, England: Evangelical Press, 2000), 139 –142; James Turner Johnson, A Society Ordained by God: English Puritan Marriage Doctrine in the First Half of the Seventeenth Century (Nashville: Abingdon, 1970); M.M. Knappen, Tudor Puritanism: A Chapter in the History of Idealism (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1965), 451–466; Edmund Morgan, The Puritan Family: Religion and Domestic Relations in Seventeenth-Century New England (New York: Harper & Row, 1966); Steven Ozment, When Fathers Ruled: Family Life in Reformation Europe (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1983); J. I. Packer, A Quest for Godliness: The Puritan Vision of the Christian Life (Wheaton, Ill.: Crossway, 1994), 259–273, 355–356; Neil Pronk, “Puritan Christianity: The Puritans at Home,” The Messenger (Sept. 1997): 3– 6; Helen Ratner, “The Puritan Family,” Child & Family, 9, no. 1 (1970): 54 – 60; Darrett B. Rutman, Winthrop’s Boston: A Portrait of a Puritan Town, 1630–1649 (New York: W. W. Norton Co., 1972); Leland Ryken, Worldly Saints: The Puritans As They Really Were (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1986), 39–54, 73–88; Levin Ludwig Schucking, The Puritan Family: A Social Study from the Literary Sources (New York: Schocken Books, 1970); Lawrence Stone, The Family, Sex and Marriage in England 1500–1800 (New York: Harper & Row, 1977); and Margo Todd, “Humanists, Puritans and the Spiritualized Household,” Church History, 49, no. 1 (1980): 18–34.
4. Quoted in Ryken, Worldly Saints, 42.
5. Dod and Cleaver, A Godly Form of Household Government, 125.
6. John Downame, The Plea of the Poor (London: Edward Griffin, 1616), 119.
7. Cotton, A Meet Help, 14.
8. Westminster Confession of Faith (Glasgow: Free Presbyterian Publications, 1994), 103. The Dutch Reformed liturgy of the late sixteenth century had already adopted the same order, though more descriptively: “The first reason is that each faithfully assist the other in all things that belong to this life and a better. Secondly, that they bring up the children which the Lord shall give them, in the true knowledge and fear of God, to His glory, and their salvation. Third, that each of them avoiding all uncleanness and evil lusts, may live with a good and quiet conscience.” (Doctrinal Standards, Liturgy, and Church Order, 156). Cf. Ryken, Worldly Saints, 48.
9. Smith, “A Preparative to Marriage,” in The Works of Henry Smith, 1:5.
10. Gouge, Of Domestical Duties, 152.
11. Perkins, “Christian Oeconomy,” in The Works of William Perkins, 420.
12. Quoted from the Works of John Robinson, in Charles H. and Katherine George, The Protestant Mind of the English Reformation, 1570–1640 (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1961), 268. 13. Gouge, Of Domestical Duties, 152.
14. Ibid.
15. John Winthrop, Life and Letters of John Winthrop, 2nd ed., ed. Robert C. Winthrop (Boston: Little, Brown & Co., 1869), 1:159.
16. Cotton, A Meet Help, 12.
17. Gouge, Of Domestical Duties, 143.
18. Ibid, 144.
19. Ibid., 147. For a sample of a contract that includes a commitment to basic Christian doctrines and an exposition of the Ten Commandments in the context of marital duties, see Kenneth L. Parker and Eric J. Carlson, “A Treatise of a Contract Before Marriage,” in ‘Practical Divinity’: The Works and Life of Revd Richard Greenham (Aldershot, England: Ashgate, 1998), 339–348.
20. Gouge, Of Domestical Duties, 148–149.
21. Ibid., 152
22. Morgan, The Puritan Family, 30–31; Arthur, “The Puritan Family,” 79.
23. Ambrose, Works of Isaac Ambrose, 130.
24. Gouge, Of Domestical Duties, 31.
25. Ibid.
26.Ibid., 94.
27. Ambrose, Works of Isaac Ambrose, 133.
28. Quoted in Ryken, Worldly Saints, 76.
29. Gouge, Of Domestical Duties, 96–97.
30. Morgan, The Puritan Family, 30.
31. Quoted in Morgan, The Puritan Family, 30.

Published by The Banner of Sovereign Grace Truth, used with permission.