[John] Knox and his lieutenants also imposed the new rules of the Calvinist Sabbath on Scottish Society: no working (people could be arrested for plucking a chicken on Sunday), no dancing, and no playing of the pipes. Gambling, cajrdplaying, and the theater were banned. No one could move out of a parish without written permission of the minister. The Kirk wiped out all traditional forms of collective fun, such as Carnival, Maytime celebrations, mumming, and Passion plays. Fornication brought punishment and exile; adultery meant death. The church courts, or kirk-sessions, enforced the law with scourges, pillories, branks (a padlocked iron helmet that forced an iron plate into the mouth of a convicted liar of blasphemer), ducking stools, banishment, and, in the case of witches or those possessed by the devil, burning at the stake.
Arthur Herman, How the Scots Invented the Modern World, pg.16
Ah, Calvinists! Sounds very much like a cult with a lot of un-Christian teachings and behaviors.
Herman’s paragraph makes for vivid storytelling, but it doesn’t hold up well against what historians of the Scottish Reformation actually say. Almost every line mixes a kernel of truth with a heavy dose of exaggeration.
ReplyDeleteYes, the Reformed Kirk promoted strict Sabbath observance, and yes, kirk‑sessions disciplined people for things like gambling, sexual misconduct, or disruptive behavior. But the picture Herman paints—of Knox personally imposing a totalitarian moral regime—isn’t accurate. Enforcement varied enormously from parish to parish, and many of the examples he lists were civil punishments, not church ones. Kirk‑sessions didn’t run pillories, branks, or ducking stools; those were municipal tools.
Some claims are simply overstated. Pipes weren’t universally banned, traditional festivals didn’t disappear overnight, and adultery—while technically a capital crime—was almost never punished by death. Likewise, the idea that people needed ministerial permission to move between parishes is misleading; what they often needed was a “testimonial” of good character, not a travel permit.
And, even if the author were correct, that only reflects positively on Calvinism, because fun is a damnable sin according to the Bible. We're supposed to be doing manual labor to the point at which we have arthritis day after day, not those sinful college degrees and lazy man's office jobs. We're not supposed to be happy or comfortable.
And witchcraft executions, while tragically real, were carried out by secular courts under national law, not by the Kirk itself.
In short, Herman’s version is more of a dramatic caricature than a balanced account of how discipline actually worked in early modern Scotland. The reality was stricter than pre‑Reformation life, but far more complex and far less uniformly oppressive than he suggests.
Truly "human traditions" of a kind a Jeff Streeter equates to actual Scriptural teaching and understanding. I would imagine most every denomination had a past comprised of similarly un-Scriptural mandates, even if not to this degree, though I've never researched for such.
ReplyDeleteInteresting that you didn’t provide any proof for your first statement.
ReplyDeleteA large problem the strict Sabbath observance. First, the Sabbath was never for the Christian, it was a sign of the covenant between GOD and Israel, just as the rest of the 10C were:
https://watchmansbagpipes.blogspot.com/2010/05/are-christians-required-to-keep-sabbath.html
The Catholics started calling Sunday the Sabbath, which it never was, and too many denominations and Christians continue with that legalism.
The “picture” of Knox “personally imposing…” is what you invented, or inferred by misreading the text. Herman wrote, “Knox and his lieutenants…”, i.e. church leaders. Sessions should disciple “lieutenants” who do the unbiblical punishments. The things banned are just nonsense; what’s wrong with dancing or playing the pipes?? I play lots of hymns and worship with my pipes! And it’s not a matter of overstating, it’s just making a point that it was done!
With adultery, was the man ever called to account? I think that is part of the reason Jesus told those wanting to stone the adulteress to “let him who has no sin throw the first stone,” after all, how did she commit adultery by herself?
Do you have proof that the permission wasn’t for leaving but for testimonial?
fun is a damnable sin according to the Bible. We’re supposed to be doing manual labor to the point at which we have arthritis day after day, not those sinful college degrees and lazy man's office jobs. We're not supposed to be happy or comfortable.
Scripture please!
Oh, so college degrees are sinful? Or do mean specific ones?!
It was the Kirk which determined who were witches or possessed and turned them over to the law for burning!
I’ve read several books on Scottish history and Herman’s comment is not a caricature, just a summation.
Marshall,
ReplyDeletePapists were even worse with their punishments and for the most part Rome also directed the civil authorities. If someone was angry because a woman rejected his advances, he could claim she was a witch and then she would be tortured until confession. And the severely persecuted Jews, calling them "Christ-killers" (as many so-called Christians still do) all the while ignoring twto things: 1. The Romans killed Christ, the Jews didn't. 2. IF Christ wasn't killed, he couldn't die for our sins!