Controversy and Conscience: Abiezer Coppe's Return to Orthodoxy.

The infamous seventeenth-century radical Abiezer Coppe is too interesting to not be the subject of numerous scholarly treatments. There are today many Coppes: the libertine and practical antinomian, the working-class hero, and, of course, the liar. This article uses Coppe's 1651 petition for release from Newgate prison as a wedge into a broader Puritan worldview involving sanctification by successive bouts of divine annihilation. Drawing on the recent work of cultural historians and historians of emotion, I show that each step toward sanctification entailed, somewhat paradoxically, the recognition of total depravity, a "laying low" of the sinner's previously established identity. I argue that Coppe's 1651 petition was neither entirely honest nor dishonest—the continuum accepted by most modern commentators—but rather a further step in a surprisingly conventional narrative of Protestant atonement. That Coppe was able to capitalize on such a narrative and secure his release is a testament not to his chameleon nature but to the complexities and contradictions of the broader Puritan fabric rippling beneath the clash of radicalism and authoritative belief. The infamous seventeenth-century radical Abiezer Coppe is too interesting not to be the subject of numerous scholarly treatments. There are today many Coppes: the libertine and practical antinomian, the working-class hero, and, of course, the liar. This article uses Coppe's 1651 petition for release from Newgate prison as a wedge into a broader Puritan worldview involving sanctification by successive bouts of divine annihilation. Drawing on the recent work of cultural historians and historians of emotion, I show that each step toward sanctification entailed, somewhat paradoxically, the recognition of total depravity, a "laying low" of the sinner's previously established identity. In the process, I argue that Coppe's 1651 petition was neither entirely honest nor dishonest–the continuum accepted by most modern commentators–but rather a further step in a surprisingly conventional narrative of Protestant atonement. That Coppe was able to capitalize on such a narrative and secure his release is a testament not to his chameleon nature but to the complexities and contradictions of the broader Puritan fabric rippling beneath the clash of radicalism and authoritative belief. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]