Westminster Assembly

The Westminster Assembly of Divines was a council of divines (theologians) and members of the English Parliament appointed from 1643 to 1653 to restructure the Church of England. Several Scots also attended, and the Assembly's work was adopted by the Church of Scotland. As many as 121 ministers were called to the Assembly, with nineteen others added later to replace those who did not attend or could no longer attend. It produced a new Form of Church Government, a Confession of Faith or statement of belief, two catechisms or manuals for religious instruction (Shorter and Larger), and a liturgical manual, the Directory for Public Worship, for the Churches of England and Scotland. The Confession and catechisms were adopted as doctrinal standards in the Church of Scotland and other Presbyterian churches, where they remain normative. Amended versions of the Confession were also adopted in Congregational and Baptist churches in England and New England in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. The Confession became influential throughout the English-speaking world, but especially in American Protestant theology.

The Assembly was called by the Long Parliament before and during the beginning of the First English Civil War. The Long Parliament was influenced by Puritanism, a religious movement which sought to further reform the church. They were opposed to the religious policies of King Charles I and William Laud, Archbishop of Canterbury. As part of a military alliance with Scotland, Parliament agreed that the outcome of the Assembly would bring the English Church into closer conformity with the Church of Scotland. The Scottish Church was governed by a system of elected assemblies of elders called presbyterianism, rather than rule by bishops, called episcopalianism, which was used in the English church. Scottish commissioners attended and advised the Assembly as part of the agreement. Disagreements over church government caused open division in the Assembly, despite attempts to maintain unity. The party of divines who favoured presbyterianism was in the majority, but the congregationalist party, which held greater influence in the military, favoured autonomy for individual congregations rather than the subjection of congregations to regional and national assemblies entailed in presbyterianism. Parliament eventually adopted a presbyterian form of government but lacked the power to implement it. During the Restoration of the monarchy in 1660, all of the documents of the Assembly were repudiated and episcopal church government was reinstated in England.

The Assembly worked in the Reformed Protestant theological tradition, also known as Calvinism. It took the Bible as the authoritative word of God, from which all theological reflection must be based. The divines were committed to the Reformed doctrine of predestination — that God chooses certain men to be saved and enjoy eternal life rather than eternal punishment. There was some disagreement at the Assembly over the doctrine of particular redemption — that Christ died only for those chosen for salvation. The Assembly also held to Reformed covenant theology, a framework for interpreting the Bible. The Assembly's Confession is the first of the Reformed confessions to teach a doctrine called the covenant of works, which teaches that before the fall of man, God promised eternal life to Adam on condition that he perfectly obeyed God.

## Background

Parliament called the Westminster Assembly during a time of increasing hostility between Charles I, monarch of England and Scotland, and the Puritans. Puritans could be distinguished by their insistence that worship practices be supported implicitly or explicitly by the Bible, while their opponents gave greater authority to traditional customs. They believed the Church of England, which had separated itself from the Roman Catholic Church during the English Reformation, was still too heavily influenced by Catholicism. They sought to rid the church and nation of any of these remaining influences. This included the Church's episcopal polity, or rule by a hierarchy of bishops. Puritans, unlike separatists, did not leave the established church. Under Charles, the Puritans' opponents were placed in high positions of authority, most notably William Laud who was made Archbishop of Canterbury in 1633, even though these "high churchmen" were in the minority. Puritans were forced to keep their views private or face fines and imprisonment. Laud promoted advocates of Arminianism, a theological perspective opposed to the Reformed theology of the Puritans. Worship practices such as kneeling at communion, bowing at the name of Christ, and the placement of communion tables at the East end of churches were also reinstated. To the Puritans, these seemed to be a step in the direction of Catholicism.

There were also conflicts between the king and the Scots, whose church was ruled by a system known as presbyterianism, which features elected assemblies. James, Charles's predecessor as King of Scotland, made it clear that he intended to impose elements of episcopal church government and the Book of Common Prayer on the Scots beginning in 1604. The Scots considered this a reversion to Roman Catholicism. Charles furthered English impositions on the Church of Scotland in 1636 and 1637. This led to the First Bishops' War between Charles and the Scots in 1639. Charles called what came to be known as the Short Parliament to raise funds for the war, but he soon dissolved it when it began voicing opposition to his policies. Following the Second Bishops' War with the Scots in 1640, Charles was forced to call another parliament to raise additional funds.

What came to be known as the Long Parliament also began to voice vague grievances against Charles, many of which were religious in nature. Parliament had many Puritans and Puritan-sympathizing members, who generally opposed the existing episcopal system, but there was little agreement over what shape the church should take. Later in 1640, the Root and Branch petition was presented to the House of Commons, the lower house of Parliament. It was signed by about 15,000 Londoners and called for total elimination of the episcopal system. Committees were organized in the House of Commons to enact religious reforms, leading to the imprisonment of Archbishop Laud and his supporters in the Tower of London as retaliation for their repression of Puritans. The Court of High Commission and the Star Chamber, courts which had inflicted severe punishments on Puritan dissenters, were also abolished.

## Calling the assembly

The idea of a national assembly of theologians to advise Parliament on further church reforms was first presented to the House of Commons in 1641. Such a proposal was also included in the Grand Remonstrance, a list of grievances which Parliament presented to Charles on 1 December that year. Charles responded on 23 December that the church required no reforms. Undeterred, Parliament passed three bills in 1642 appointing an assembly and stipulating that its members would be chosen by Parliament. Charles, whose royal assent was required for the bills to become law, was only willing to consider such an assembly if the members were chosen by the clergy. This was the practice for selection of members of Convocation, the assembly of clergy of the Church of England.

Defying the king, between 12 February and 20 April 1642, each county delegation of England in the Commons chose two divines, in addition to two for each county of Wales, four for London, and two for each University (Oxford and Cambridge). County delegations often chose divines from their own county, but not always. Commons chose the members in this way to ensure that their local constituencies were represented in the decision. The House of Lords, Parliament's upper house, added another fourteen names on 14 May, to which the Commons agreed. Meanwhile, relations continued to deteriorate between the king and Parliament. Charles raised the royal standard at Nottingham on 22 August, marking the beginning of the First English Civil War. The start of the war lent support to the cause of the Assembly in Parliament, because holding it would convince the Scots that Parliament was serious about reforming the church and induce the Scots to come to their aid. On the other hand, the war added strain to the already busy Parliament.

Parliament finally passed an ordinance to hold the assembly on its own authority without Charles's assent on 12 June 1643. It named as many as 121 ministers and thirty non-voting parliamentary observers: twenty from the Commons, and ten from the House of Lords. The Assembly was almost entirely English; Parliament appointed Englishmen for the counties of Wales, but the French stranger churches (churches of Protestant refugees from Catholic France) sent two ministers in place of any from the Channel Islands. Many of the divines were internationally recognized scholars of the Bible, ancient languages, patristics, and scholastic theology. Many were also famous preachers. Most of these theologians had retained their positions in the Church during the tenure of William Laud. Some had been ejected from their churches or cited by ecclesiastical courts for their views. Some had fled to the Continent, and one to the American colonies. Nonetheless, they all considered themselves members of the Church of England and had received episcopal ordination. Most were conformists, meaning they agreed to follow the Act of Uniformity 1558 and the Book of Common Prayer.

The Assembly was strictly under the control of Parliament, and was only to debate topics which Parliament directed. Assembly members were not permitted to state their disagreements with majority opinions or share any information about the proceedings, except in writing to Parliament. Parliament chose William Twisse, an internationally respected theologian, to be the Assembly's prolocutor or chairman. Due to Twisse's ill health, Cornelius Burges, whom Parliament appointed as one of several assessors, served as prolocutor pro tempore for most of the Assembly. Twenty-two appointed members of the Assembly died before 1649, and they along with those who did not attend for other reasons were replaced by another nineteen members. Three non-voting scribes were also added in 1643.

## Revising the Thirty-Nine Articles

The Assembly's first meeting began with a sermon by William Twisse in the nave of Westminster Abbey on 1 July 1643. The nave was so full that the House of Commons had to send members ahead to secure seats. Following the sermon, the divines processed to the Henry VII Chapel, which would be their place of meeting until 2 October when they moved to the warmer and more private Jerusalem Chamber. After their initial meeting they adjourned for about a week, as Parliament had not yet given specific instructions.

On 6 July, they received a set of rules from Parliament and were ordered to examine the first ten of the Thirty-Nine Articles, the current doctrinal standard of the Church of England, and "to free and vindicate the Doctrine of them from all Aspersions of false Interpretations". After a day of fasting, the Assembly took a vow, as directed by Parliament, to "not maintain any thing in Matters of Doctrine, but what I think, in my conscience, to be truth". The divines organized themselves into three standing committees, though each committee was open to any member of the Assembly. The committees would be assigned topics and prepare propositions for debate in the full Assembly following each morning of committee meetings. In addition, over 200 ad hoc committees were appointed for tasks such as examination of candidate preachers, college fellows, and suspected heretics.

The Assembly resolved, after some debate, that all the doctrines of the Thirty-Nine articles would need to be proven from the Bible. Assembly members were prone to long speeches and they made slow progress, frustrating the leadership. The eighth of the Thirty-Nine Articles recommended the Apostles' Creed, Nicene Creed, and Athanasian Creed, considered to be basic statements of orthodoxy, to be received and believed. The Assembly was unable to resolve conflicts between those who would not be bound by creeds and those who wished to retain the existing language that the creeds be "thoroughly received and believed". The "excepters", who took the former position, argued that the articles only require the "matter" of the creeds be believed. On 25 August the article was put off until the rest of the articles could be dealt with. This early disagreement on fundamental issues revealed deep rifts between different factions of the assembly.

## Debating church government

From the beginning of the First Civil War, the Long Parliament recognized that they would need assistance from the Scots. In return for a military alliance, the Scottish Parliament required the English to sign the Solemn League and Covenant in 1643, which stipulated that the English would bring their church into greater conformity with the Church of Scotland. The Scottish Parliament sent commissioners to London to represent Scotland's interests to the English Parliament. Eleven of these, four theologians and seven members of Parliament, were also invited to the Assembly. The commissioners were given the opportunity to become full voting members of the Assembly but declined, preferring to maintain their independence as commissioners of their own nation and church. Samuel Rutherford, George Gillespie, and Alexander Henderson were the most outspoken of the commissioners.

On 12 October 1643, Parliament ordered the Assembly to cease work on the Thirty-Nine Articles and to begin to frame a common form of church government for the two nations. The Assembly would spend a quarter of its full sessions on the subject of church government. The majority of the Assembly members supported presbyterian polity, or church government by elected assemblies of lay and clerical representatives, though many were not dogmatically committed to it. Several members of this group, numbering about twenty and including William Twisse, favoured a "primitive" episcopacy, which would include elements of presbyterianism and a reduced role for bishops.

There were also several congregationalists, who favoured autonomy for individual local churches. Their most influential divines were Thomas Goodwin, Philip Nye, Sidrach Simpson, Jeremiah Burroughs, and William Bridge. They were often called the "dissenting brethren" in the Assembly. They have sometimes been labelled "Independents", but they rejected this term. The Assembly members for the most part reserved the label "Independent" for separatists who left the established church. The congregationalist divines cannot be equated with separatists and Brownists, as they had accepted episcopal ordination and remained in the Church of England. Their influence was assisted by the success of Oliver Cromwell and his New Model Army in the ongoing civil war. Cromwell and many others in the army supported congregationalism.

A third group of divines were known as Erastians, a term for those who believed that the state should have significant power over the church. The entire Assembly was Erastian in the sense that the body had been called by Parliament and was completely under state control. Those labelled "Erastian" at the Assembly believed the civil authority, rather than church officers, should hold the power of church discipline. This included the power to withhold communion from unrepentant sinners. They did not see any particular form of church government as divinely mandated, and because of this the dissenting brethren allied with them when it became clear that a presbyterian establishment would be much less tolerant of congregationalism than Parliament. There were only two divines at the Assembly who held the Erastian view, John Lightfoot and Thomas Coleman, but the presence of members of Parliament, especially John Selden, as well as the fact of parliamentary oversight of the Assembly, gave Erastian views disproportional influence.

Several episcopalians, supporters of the existing system of bishops, were also included in the summoning ordinance, but Parliament may have nominated them to lend greater legitimacy to the Assembly and not have expected them to attend because Charles had not approved of the Assembly. Only one, Daniel Featley, participated, and he only until his arrest for treason in October 1643.

Debate on church officers began on 19 October. The Assembly began with the issue of ordination, as many of the divines were concerned about the rise of various sectarian movements and the lack of any mechanism for ordination of ministers of the established church. While some members did not seem to think ordination necessary for preachers (though they should not administer the sacraments without it), a majority of the divines thought any regular preaching without ordination unacceptable and wished to erect a provisional presbytery for purposes of ordination. There was also debate at this early stage over the nature of the visible church. The congregationalists considered a church to be a single local congregation, while the majority considered the national church to be a unity and were alarmed at the prospect of a disintegrated English church. Despite these debates, up until the end of 1643 there was hope that a common church government could be framed that would be satisfactory to all parties involved.

On 3 or 4 January 1644, the five leading dissenting brethren signalled a break with the rest of the Assembly when they published An Apologeticall Narration, a polemical pamphlet appealing to Parliament. It argued that the congregational system was more amenable to state control of religious matters than that of the presbyterians because they did not desire the church to retain any real power except to withdraw fellowship from aberrant congregations. By 17 January, the majority of the Assembly had become convinced that the best way forward was a presbyterian system similar to that of the Scots, but the dissenting brethren were allowed to continue to state their case in hope that they could eventually be reconciled. It was hoped that by avoiding asserting that presbyterianism was established by divine right, the congregationalists could be accommodated.

Despite these efforts, on 21 February it became clear just how fundamentally opposed the groups were. Philip Nye, one of the dissenting brethren, asserted in a speech that a presbytery set over local congregations would become as powerful as the state and was dangerous to the commonwealth, provoking vigorous opposition from presbyterians. The next day, the Assembly finally began to establish a prescription for presbyterian government. Owing to a strong belief in the unity of the church, the Assembly continued to try to find ways to reconcile the dissenting brethren with the majority throughout 1644, including the establishment of a special committee for that purpose in March. However, on 15 November, the dissenting brethren presented their reasons for disagreement with the rest of the Assembly to Parliament, and on 11 December the majority submitted a draft of a presbyterian form of government.

## Conflicts with Parliament

Relations between the Assembly and Parliament were already deteriorating in 1644, when Parliament ignored the Assembly's request that "grossly ignorant and notoriously profane" individuals be barred from communion. While members of Parliament agreed that the sacrament should be kept pure, many of them disagreed with the presbyterian majority in the Assembly over who had the final power of excommunication, taking the Erastian view that it was the state. Also, by 1646, Oliver Cromwell's New Model Army had won the war on behalf of Parliament. Cromwell, along with a majority of the army, was strongly in favour of religious toleration for all sorts of Christians even if the national church was to be presbyterian. His rise to power as a result of his military victories made the idea of a strictly presbyterian settlement without freedom of worship for others very unlikely. Parliament at least wanted to know which sins in particular were grave enough to trigger excommunication by the church; the Assembly was reticent to provide such information, as the majority considered the power of the church in this area to be absolute.

In May 1645, Parliament passed an ordinance allowing excommunicants to appeal the church's sentences to Parliament. Another ordinance on 20 October contained a list of sins to which the church would be limited in its power to excommunicate. To the majority of the divines' dismay, an even more Erastian ordinance was proposed in March 1646. The Assembly published a protest, provoking the Commons to charge it with breach of privilege and to submit nine questions to the divines on the matter. Votes were to be included with the answers, an attempt to force the divines associated with the protest petition to reveal themselves.

The Nine Queries, as they came to be called, focused on the divine right (jure divino) of church government. While the presbyterian divines were capable of defending their vision for church government as established by divine right in the Bible, they were unwilling to answer the queries because doing so would further expose the disunity of the Assembly and weaken their case in Parliament. In July 1647, the New Model Army invaded London and conservative members of Parliament were forced out. Parliament passed an ordinance establishing religious tolerance and ensuring that the Assembly's vision of a national, compulsory presbyterian church would never come to fruition. In London, where support for presbyterianism was greatest, presbyteries were established in only sixty-four of 108 city parishes, and regional presbyterian classes were only formed in fourteen of England's forty counties. A planned national general assembly never met. Many presbyterians did, however, establish voluntary presbyteries in what was a de facto free church situation until the Restoration in 1660, when a compulsory episcopal system was reinstated.

The new Form of Government was much more acceptable to the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland. They passed it on 10 February 1645, contingent on some particularities of presbyterian government which were expected to be worked out in a forthcoming Directory for Church Government. At the same time they announced their desire to formally unite the two churches. Following the rise of Cromwell and the secret Engagement of some Scots with Charles this hope was abandoned, and the documents were never formally adopted. The General Assembly ceased to function under Cromwell and the kings who succeeded him from 1649 to 1690.

## Confession, catechisms, and the Directory for Public Worship

During and after the debates over church government, the Assembly framed other documents which did not cause open rifts. The Directory for Public Worship, which was to replace the Book of Common Prayer, was swiftly written in 1644 and passed by Parliament on 3 January 1645. The Directory, accepted by the Scots as well, took a middle course between the presbyterians and congregationalists. The presbyterians for the most part preferred a fixed liturgy while congregationalists favoured extemporaneous prayer. The Directory consisted of an order for services with sample prayers. The Assembly also recommended a psalter, translated by Francis Rous for use in worship.

A Confession of Faith to replace the Thirty-Nine Articles was begun in August 1646. While there is little record of the actions of the Assembly during the writing of the Confession, it is clear that there were significant debates in the Assembly over almost every doctrine found in it. The Confession was printed and sent to Parliament in December. The House of Commons requested scripture citations be added to the Confession, which were provided in April 1648. Parliament approved the Confession with revisions to the chapters on church censures, synods and councils, and marriage on 20 June 1648. The General Assembly of the Church of Scotland had already adopted the Confession without revision in 1647. The restoration of Charles II in 1660 effectively made this legislation a nullity.

The Assembly had already done significant work on a catechism between December 1643 and January 1647 containing fifty-five questions, before it decided to create two catechisms rather than one. The Larger Catechism was intended to assist ministers in teaching the Reformed faith to their congregations. The Shorter Catechism was based on the Larger Catechism but intended for use in teaching the faith to children. Parliament demanded scripture proofs for the catechisms as well. The Scots General Assembly approved both catechisms in 1648.

The Assembly understood its mandate under the Solemn League and Covenant to have been fulfilled on 14 April 1648 when it delivered the scripture citations to Parliament, and the Scottish Commissioners had already left by the end of 1647. The Assembly continued to meet primarily for the purpose of examination of ministers for ordination. Most of the divines were unhappy with the republican Commonwealth that emerged after Colonel Pride's Purge of the Long Parliament in 1648. As a result, a majority stopped attending rather than agree to the oath of Engagement to the Commonwealth that was imposed in 1649. Newspapers continued to report on the meetings of the Assembly as late as March 1653. The Assembly must have stopped meeting sometime between then and Cromwell's dissolution of the Rump Parliament on 20 April 1653.

## Theology

The Assembly was a product of the British Reformed tradition, taking as a major source the Thirty-Nine Articles as well as the theology of James Ussher and his Irish Articles of 1615. The divines also considered themselves to be within the broader European Reformed tradition. They were in frequent correspondence with continental Reformed theologians, and sought their approval. They also drew upon the pre-Reformation British theological tradition, which emphasized biblical knowledge and was influenced by the Augustinian theological tradition exemplified by Anselm, Thomas Bradwardine, and John Wycliffe. The recorded debates of the Assembly are full of citations of church fathers and medieval scholastic theologians.

The Confession starts with the doctrine of revelation, or how people can know about God. The divines believed knowledge of God was available to people through nature as well as the Bible, but they also believed that the Bible, or Scripture, is the only way in which people attain saving knowledge of God. The doctrine of Scripture was also a particularly important area of debate at the time. Scholars had begun to argue that the Hebrew vowel points, marks added to the text to aid in pronunciation, of the Old Testament were probably not part of the original. This caused significant debate between Reformed polemicists and Roman Catholics. Catholics argued that such a discovery demonstrated the need for an authoritative magisterium to interpret the Bible as opposed to the Protestant doctrine of perspicuity, that the essential teachings of the Bible could be interpreted by anyone. English Reformed writers in particular took up the work of defending the Reformed doctrine. The divines had a strong view of the inspiration of the Bible, and believed that God revealed himself in the propositions found in Scripture. While the issue of biblical inerrancy, the belief that there are no errors in the Bible, did not arise until the eighteenth century, the divines clearly did not believe the Bible to contain any errors. Many of the divines held a rather mechanical view of biblical inspiration, believing that not only the words and ideas but also the letters and vowel points of the Hebrew text were inspired by God. On the other hand, they acknowledged that the text was written by humans in their own styles. They did not make any distinction between essential and incidental matters with respect to biblical inspiration.

Puritans believed that God is sovereign over all of history and nature and that none of what were called his decrees would be frustrated. There was significant debate in the Assembly over the relationship of God's decree of predestination to the redemption purchased by Christ's death. Many of the Reformed during this period taught that Christ died with the purpose only to save those who were eternally chosen to be saved, a doctrine called particular redemption. A vocal minority of the divines of the Assembly argued for a position known as hypothetical universalism. Edmund Calamy held such a view, and he argued that Christ's death, as well as saving those who had been chosen, offered salvation to all people on condition that they believe. The Assembly's Confession did not teach such a view, and its language is much more amenable to a particular redemption interpretation, but there is a general agreement among scholars that the Confession's language allows an hypothetical universalist interpretation.

Covenant theology is an interpretive framework used by Reformed theologians which was significantly developed during the seventeenth century. Under this scheme, as articulated by the Assembly, God's dealings with men are described in terms of two covenants: the covenant of works and covenant of grace. The Westminster Confession was the first major Reformed symbol to explicitly mention the covenant of works (sometimes called the covenant of life), in which God offered Adam eternal life on condition of perfect obedience. In the fall of man, Adam broke the covenant of works by eating of the tree of knowledge of good and evil. To remedy this, God offered salvation apart from human initiative in what was called the covenant of grace. This covenant allowed man to enjoy eternal life despite his inability to obey God's law perfectly. The idea of the covenant of grace was a much more common feature of orthodox Reformed theology. The Westminster divines set these two covenants against each other as the two major ways in which God deals with people.

The divines associated William Laud and his followers with Catholicism, which they were even more strongly opposed to. Before the civil war, the divines saw these two groups as the greatest threat to the church. With the rise of radical sectarian movements during the war, the divines became much more concerned with these groups than polemics against Catholicism. The divines were particularly concerned with those they labeled antinomians. This was a loose term for those who saw the moral law as no longer relevant for Christians. The divines saw these groups as more immediately threatening than Catholicism.

## Legacy

The work of the Westminster Assembly was repudiated by the Church of England during the Restoration in 1660. The Act of Uniformity 1662, a law requiring even greater adherence to the Book of Common Prayer and support for episcopalianism than had previously been required, forced Puritan ministers to leave the Church. Though some presbyterians continued to desire to be readmitted to the established church, restrictions on worship for non-conformists led to presbyterians putting aside differences with congregationalists and adopting congregational church orders.

The Civil War brought with it the end of the consensus among English Protestants that there should be a single church imposed by the state, though there was still not complete freedom of religion. The ideals of the dissenting brethren of the Assembly were significant in the rise of denominationalism, the doctrine that the church is found in several institutions rather than a single one in a given location. Though Protestants already commonly recognized the validity of churches in different territories, the outcome of the Assembly's debates marks the wider acceptance of the idea that several true churches may be found in the same territory.

The Confession produced by the Assembly was adopted with amendments by Congregationalists in England in the form of the 1658 Savoy Declaration, as well as by Particular Baptists in the form of the 1689 Baptist Confession. When the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland was reestablished in 1690 following the Glorious Revolution, it ratified the Westminster Confession, but not any other document produced at Westminster. The Confession remains, according to the 1929 Declaratory Articles, the Church of Scotland's "principal subordinate standard", subordinate to the Bible. Memorization of the Shorter Catechism has been made a requirement for children in many Presbyterian churches.

The migrations and missionary efforts of each of these groups lead to the widespread significance of the Westminster Assembly throughout the English-speaking world. The Assembly's Confession was particularly influential in American Protestant theology. It was included with congregationalist changes as part of the 1648 Cambridge Platform, a statement produced by ministers of colonial Massachusetts and the surrounding region, and again in colonial Connecticut as part of the 1708 Saybrook Platform. The Confession was modified for American Baptists in the 1707 Philadelphia Confession. The Adopting Act of 1729 required American Presbyterians to agree to the theology of the Assembly's Confession, and the Confession remains a part of the Presbyterian Church (USA)'s Book of Confessions. The Confession has been called "by far the most influential doctrinal symbol in American Protestant history" by the historian of religion Sydney E. Ahlstrom.

1643–1653 English church reform council


The Tale of the Pie and the Patty-Pan

The Tale of the Pie and the Patty-Pan (originally, The Pie and the Patty-Pan) is a children's book written and illustrated by Beatrix Potter, and published by Frederick Warne & Co. in October 1905. It tells of a cat called Ribby and a tea party she holds for a dog called Duchess. Complications arise when Duchess tries to replace Ribby's mouse pie with her own veal and ham pie, and then believes she has swallowed a small tin pastry form called a patty-pan. Its themes are etiquette and social relations in a small town.

A version of the tale was composed by Potter in 1903, but set aside to develop other projects. In 1904, she failed to complete a book of nursery rhymes for Warnes, and the 1903 tale was accepted in its stead. Potter elaborated its setting and storyline, and developed the tale more fully before publication. The illustrations depict the cottages and gardens of Sawrey, a village in the Lake District near Potter's Hill Top farm, and have been described as some of the most exquisite Potter ever produced. Ribby was modelled on a cat living in Sawrey, Duchess on two Pomeranians belonging to Potter's neighbour Mrs Rogerson, Tabitha Twitchit on Potter's cat at Hill Top, and Dr Maggoty on the magpies in the London Zoological Gardens.

The tale was originally published in a larger size than Potter's previous books, but was reduced in the 1930s to bring it into line with the other books in the Peter Rabbit series. It was given its present title at that time. Potter declared the tale her next favourite to The Tailor of Gloucester. Beswick Pottery released porcelain figurines of the tale's characters through the latter half of the 20th century, and Schmid & Co. released a music box in the 1980s.

## Development and publication

The Potter family summered occasionally at Lakefield, a country house in the village of Sawrey. "They came with their servants, their carriage and pair, and Miss Potter with her pony and phaeton," a village resident recalled. "Miss Potter was about the village sketching everywhere and often came to our house."

Close to Lakefield and off the road in their own enclosure were three dwellings known as Lakefield Cottages. Mr. Rogerson, a gardener and caretaker at Lakefield, lived in one of the cottages, and eventually his wife's two pedigree Pomeranians – Darkie and Duchess – would become the models for Potter's fictional Duchess. Darkie had a fine black mane, but Duchess was more intelligent and could sit up with a lump of sugar balanced on her nose.

In the summer of 1902, Potter sketched the interior of the third Lakefield Cottage belonging to a Mrs. Lord. These drawings included a watercolour and pen-and-ink sketches of the living-room, pen-and-ink sketches of the pots of geraniums on the living-room window sill, the entrance passage, the pantry, the stairs, some of the upstairs rooms, and details of the carved oak furniture. In some of the sketches Potter roughly outlined a cat. She also sketched the village including the sloping path down to the Lakefield Cottages and the post office door. These became the backgrounds for The Pie and The Patty-Pan.

During a rainy holiday in Hastings at the end of November 1903, Potter outlined a tale about a cat, a dog, and a tea party she called Something very very NICE. She discussed the Lakefield sketches as backgrounds for the tale with Warne. He proposed a large format volume similar to L. Leslie Brooke's Johnny Crow's Garden to do justice to the detail of the illustrations, but the entire project was set aside when The Tale of Benjamin Bunny and The Tale of Two Bad Mice were chosen for development and publication in 1904.

Potter had long wanted to develop a book of nursery rhymes, but such a project left Warne cold. Rhymes were already well represented in the firm's catalogue, and Warne felt Potter's unbridled enthusiasm for the genre would make the project a headache for him. In the past, he had tried to discourage Potter's interest in rhymes, believing her own stories superior, but she persisted. He reluctantly agreed to a book of rhymes for 1905, but Potter did not have it ready at the end of 1904, so he accepted the tea party tale instead. Early in 1905, it was decided the book would be published at the end of the year.

By March 1905, Potter was anxious to begin work on the tale. She thought the 1903 version too thin and rewrote the entire story, retaining Ribby the cat and Duchess the dog as the central characters while elaborating the setting and developing a stronger plot line. It was decided the tale would be published in a format slightly larger than her previous productions with ten full-colour illustrations and other illustrations in pen and sepia ink.

Like the tale's companion piece set in the Newlands Valley, The Tale of Mrs. Tiggy-Winkle, the cat and dog story is set in a real place, Near Sawrey, and is the only Potter tale to refer to Sawrey by name. Tabitha Twitchit disdainfully comments on her cousin's choice of party guest: "A little dog, indeed! Just as if there were no CATS in Sawrey!" The characters in the tale were modelled on real world individuals. Ribby's counterpart lived in Sawrey, and Tabitha Twitchit's counterpart lived at Hill Top, though her fictional shop is located in nearby Hawkshead. Dr. Maggotty was drawn from magpies in the London Zoological Gardens. Potter made notes in her sketchbook about the bird's anatomical structure and the colour of its feathers: "Brown black eye, nose a little hookier than jackdaw, less feathered." The bird's tail was over half its total length she noted, and its feathers were "very blue" and parts were green.

The illustrations depict the village's gardens, cottages, and, in the background of the frontispiece, Hill Top. Although the real Duchess lived at Lakefield Cottages, in the tale her home became Buckle Yeat, a picturesque cottage in the village, and Duchess is shown in its garden reading Ribby's invitation. In the illustration of Duchess leaving home with her veal and ham pie in a basket, Potter took some artistic licence and combined the doorway of the village post office with the Buckle Yeat garden. Completely faithful to life in the village, Potter even included the pattens Mrs. Rogerson wore to the pump in the illustration depicting Duchess standing in the Lakefield Cottage porch holding a bouquet. The illustration of Duchess standing on a red sofa cushion was painted at Melford Hall and Potter's young cousin Stephanie Hyde Parker was permitted to put some red paint on the cushion. She later wondered if Potter removed it.

Towards the end of May 1905, Potter sent the illustrations to Warne for his review, writing, "I think it promises to make a pretty book." He criticised a picture of the cat and Potter wrote him, "If you still feel doubtful about the little cat—will you post it back to me at once ... I don't feel perfectly satisfied with the eyes of the large head, but I think I can get it right, by taking out the lights carefully, if you will ask Hentschel not to do it before we have proofs. The drawing is getting much too rubbed."

On 25 May, Warne asked Potter to send him one of the two dummy books she had in her possession in order to check the size of the plates before continuing with the printer's blocks. He thought there was "too much bend" about the dog's nose and the division between its legs was unclear. He kept the two plates back for Potter's inspection before sending them off to make the blocks. On 26 May, he received two more originals and the circular portrait of the cat for the cover. He thought the background of the colour illustration of Ribby and Duchess sitting at the table too light, but liked the pen-and-ink sketches. Potter struggled with the dog illustrations, and sent Warne a photograph of her canine model to prove the dog's ruff was as large as she had depicted it.

Potter's own three-door oven, her hearthrug, her indoor plants, her coronation teapot, and her water pump are minutely detailed with more color than in other productions. The large format of the original edition, the captions accompanying the full page color illustrations, and the occasional lack of coordination between picture and text all display Potter's delight in the pictures, sometimes at the expense of the text.

One of the illustrations did not coordinate properly with Potter's text. She altered the drawing and wrote Warne, "I have altered the oven as it will save a good many corrections. I did a good deal to the cat but she is still looking at the top one. I don't think it signifies as she talks about both ovens ... I don't think I have ever seriously considered the state of the pie but the book runs some risk of being over cooked if it goes on much longer! I am sorry about the little dog's nose. I saw it was too sharp. I think I have got it right. I was intending to explain the ovens by saying the middle handle is very stiff so that Duchess concludes it is a sham;–like the lowest. I think only two pages want changing; I think it will come right."

The drawings were finished and in early June 1905 Warne approved. Potter wrote she was glad he liked the drawings, and "if the book prints well, it will be my next favourite to Tailor. She was energized with the completion of the book and wrote Warne she wanted to settle on future work before leaving for a holiday in Wales. In Merioneth she received his letter of proposal on 25 July and accepted, but he died suddenly and unexpectedly on 25 August 1905 before a marriage took place. Potter became deeply depressed and was ill for many weeks. However, she rallied to complete the last two tales she had discussed with him: The Pie and the Patty-Pan and The Tale of Mr. Jeremy Fisher.

The Pie and the Patty-Pan was published in October 1905 in a large format, priced at one shilling, and dedicated to Joan, the sixth child of Potter's former governess Annie Carter Moore, and to Beatrix, Mrs. Moore's newborn and Potter's god-daughter: "For Joan, to read to Baby". The Pie was the first of Potter's books to be published in a format larger (177 mm by 138 mm) than the standard size (139 mm by 104 mm) of the Peter Rabbit books; and the first of her books to integrate pen-and-ink and colour illustrations between its boards.

The book's endpapers had been overlooked. Potter wrote to the firm: "I conclude there is no time to get an end-paper design done—unless Mr. Stokoe has already designed one—I do not mind one way or another; I had begun to scribble something but it looks a bit stiff." Mr. Stokoe apparently did not design one because the endpapers were either plain white or mottled lavender. Several years later, they were replaced with a design featuring a pie and a patty-pan and the cover illustration changed to Ribby sitting by the fire. In the 1930s, the book's size was reduced to bring it into line with the rest of the Peter Rabbit books. The title was changed at that time to The Tale of the Pie and the Patty-Pan.

Potter declared the tale her next favourite to The Tailor of Gloucester. The pictures are some of the most beautiful Potter ever created, especially the profusions of flowers in the doorways and garden plots. The colours in the illustrations are not the muted browns and greens the reader expects in a Potter illustration, nor are they the contrasting colours such as the muted reds and blues Potter uses occasionally to give her illustrations a splash of colour. Instead, the colours are bright oranges, violets, and yellows seldom seen in her other books. Even Ribby's lilac dress and Duchess's black mane illustrate Potter's concern for colour in this book.

## Plot

"Once upon a time", Ribby, a "Pussy-cat" invites her friend, a dog called Duchess to tea with plans to serve her "something so very very nice" baked in a pie dish with a Pink rim. Ribby promises Duchess she shall have the entrée entirely to herself, and Ribby will eat Muffins. Duchess accepts the invitation fondly but hopes she will not be served Mouse Pie. Duchess is disgusted by Mouse as a meal, and considers writing to Ribby to tell her this, however cannot bring herself to do it.

Duchess had been planning on inviting Ribby to tea, hoping to serve Ribby a Veal and Ham pie, also baked in a pie dish with a Pink rim (both pie dishes were bought at the shop of Tabitha Twitchet’s, Ribby’s cousin). Duchess reads the invitation again and realizes she will have the opportunity to switch the pies when Ribby leaves to buy Tea, sugar, and Marmalade. Duchess’s pie just needs to be cooked and it will be ready. Ribby has two ovens, one above the other, and she puts her mouse pie in the lower oven, fearing that the higher oven will overcook the pie. She tidies the house, sets the table, and leaves to buy Tea, Marmalade and Sugar. Duchess meantime has left home with her ham and veal pie in a basket, passes Ribby on the street, and hurries on to Ribby's house. She puts her pie into the higher oven, and searches quickly for the mouse pie (which she does not find because she neglects to look in the lower oven). Meanwhile, Ribby is buying her Groceries at her Cousin, Tabitha Twitchet’s, shop. After a pleasant gossip with her Cousin, Ribby informs Tabitha about her upcoming tea with Duchess. As Ribby leaves, Tabitha mutters under her breath about how she disapproves of Duchess the Dog. When Ribby returns home, Duchess sneaks out the back door. At the appointed hour, Duchess appears at Ribby's door and the tea begins. Distracted for a moment, Duchess does not see which oven Ribby opens to remove the pie. Duchess eats greedily, believing she is eating her ham and veal pie. She wonders what has happened to the patty-pan she put in her pie, and, not finding it under the crust, is convinced she has swallowed it. She sets up a howl; Ribby is perplexed and annoyed, however when Duchess is convinced she is dying. Ribby agrees to go and find Dr. Maggoty, a Magpie Doctor.

Duchess is left alone, sitting by the fireplace, and discovers her Veal and Ham Pie (overcooked) in the oven. Duchess realises she ate Mouse Pie. Knowing she cannot adequately explain her Veal and Ham Pie to Ribby, she puts it outside the back door intending to sneak back and carry it home after she leaves. Ribby and Dr. Maggoty arrive and, after much fuss, Duchess takes her leave, only to find that the magpie (who has left by the back door) and a couple of jackdaws have eaten her Veal and Ham Pie when she returns to collect it. Ribby later finds the remains of the smashed pie dish and the patty-pan outside the back door and declares, "Well I never did! ... Next time I want to give a party – I will invite Cousin Tabitha Twitchit!"

## Scholarly commentaries

M. Daphne Kutzer, Professor of English at the State University of New York at Plattsburgh at the time of her Beatrix Potter: Writing in Code (2003) believes The Pie and its two immediate predecessors (the tales of Two Bad Mice and Mrs. Tiggy-Winkle) are transitional works in Potter's life and literary career. All three books confront the meaning of domesticity, work, and social hierarchies while exhibiting an underlying discomfort with the unyielding strictures of Victorian domesticity, and a disengagement from the broad political and social concerns of her earlier books to the more narrow political and social concerns of working farmers and rural people.

Ruth K. MacDonald of New Mexico State University at the time of her Beatrix Potter (1986) argues that the theme of The Pie is the very proper social relations between neighbours in a small town. She points to the overly formal quality of the letters exchanged between the heroines as one example of the theme, and another, she indicates, is the manner in which the two pass each other on the street without a word to one another because "they were going to have a party". Though Duchess probably does not speak to Ribby for fear of revealing her plan to switch the two pies, Ribby probably does not speak to Duchess out of an exaggerated sense of politeness or because she is rushed. At the hour of the party, Duchess is anxious to arrive on time, yet not too early, and loiters outside Ribby's cottage before delivering her most "genteel little tap-tappity" and asking "Is Mrs. Ribston at home?" MacDonald notes that these instances not only underscore the elaborate codes of behaviour Potter's fictional animals observe but, by extension, the villagers of Sawrey. For Potter, the result of such elaborate etiquette was nonsensical, distorted behaviour. Nevertheless, the cat and dog remain friends at the end of the story, and, in carefully avoiding any offence, their social pretenses and codes of etiquette are maintained.

## Merchandise

Potter asserted her tales would one day be nursery classics, and part of the process in making them so was marketing strategy. She was the first to exploit the commercial possibilities of her characters and tales with spinoffs such as a Peter Rabbit doll, an unpublished Peter Rabbit board game, and a Peter Rabbit nursery wallpaper between 1903 and 1905. Similar "side-shows" (as she termed the spinoffs) were conducted over the following two decades.

In 1947, Frederick Warne & Co. gave Beswick Pottery of Longton, Staffordshire rights and licences to produce the Potter characters in porcelain. Ribby coming from the farm with butter and milk was released as a figurine in 1951; Duchess with a bouquet of flowers in 1955; Duchess holding the ham and veal pie in 1979; and Ribby and the broken pie dish in 1992. A limited edition tableau depicting Duchess and Ribby was produced only in 2000.

Schmid & Co. of Toronto and Randolph, Massachusetts was granted licensing rights to Beatrix Potter in 1977. A music box playing "Music Box Dancer" and topped with a porcelain figure of Duchess holding a bouquet was released in 1980.

## Reprints and translations

As of 2010, all of Potter's 23 small format books remain in print, and available as complete sets in presentation boxes, and as a 400-page omnibus. First edition copies and early reprints of The Pie are offered by antiquarian booksellers. The Pie was available as a hardcover volume but also in paperback, audiobook, and electronic formats.

The English language editions of the books still bore the Frederick Warne imprint in 2010 though the company was bought by Penguin Books in 1983. The printing plates for the Potter books were remade from new photographs of the original drawings in 1985, and all 23 volumes released in 1987 as The Original and Authorized Edition.

Potter's books have been translated into nearly thirty languages including Greek and Russian. In 1986, MacDonald observed that the Potter books had become a traditional part of childhood in both English-speaking lands and those in which the books had been translated.

Children's book by Beatrix Potter