Ecclesiastical History of England, Volume 4—The Church of the Restoration [part 2]Stoughton, John
History
Ecclesiastical History of England, Volume 4—The Church of the Restoration [part 2]
Stoughton, John
Great Britain -- Church history
The publication of the _Harmonia Apostolica_ occasioned much
controversy. Answers appeared, written by Charles Gataker, son of
Thomas Gataker, one of the Westminster Divines; by Joseph Truman,--who,
though refusing to conform as a clergyman to the Established Church,
remained in it as a lay communicant; by Dr. Thomas Tully, Principal
of St. Edmund’s Hall, Oxford, a man of high reputation for learning
and ability; and by John Tombes, the Anti-pædobaptist,--who, like
Truman, declined ministerial conformity, but at least occasionally
practised communion. Truman differed from Bull less than did the other
combatants. Not to be wearisome, I would merely state, that his part
in the dispute mainly turned upon the question, What is grace? Bull,
in Truman’s estimation, regarding it as a bestowment of spiritual
power, to be improved or misimproved, according to the will of the
recipient; Truman, who in this respect anticipated the opinions of
modern Calvinists, representing grace as a Divine influence securing
the obedience of the will to the Gospel of Christ. He highly commended
that sober sentiment of the great Bishop Sanderson, who, confessing
his own disability to reconcile the consistency of grace and free-will
in conversion, and being sensible that they must both be maintained,
tells us, he ever held it “the more pious and safe way, to place
the grace of God in the throne, where we think it should stand, and
so to leave the will of man to shift for the maintenance of its own
freedom, as well as it can, than to establish the power and liberty
of free-will at its height, and then to be at a loss how to maintain
the power and efficacy of God’s grace.”[396] Gataker, Tully, and Tombes
were, what might be termed, High Calvinists. The first maintained, in
opposition to the Author of the _Harmonia_, as it appears from his
reply,--that remission of sins is entirely extraneous to justification,
that there are conditions in the Gospel covenant which are not
conditions of Gospel justification, that repentance is a condition of
the Gospel joined by Christ with faith, but it is not a condition of
justification, and that we are justified by the imputed righteousness
of Christ.[397] Tully treated Bull as an innovator; and after alluding
to Socinians and Papists, insinuated that he belonged to those, “who
perfidiously serving the interests of one or other of these parties,
shamelessly take to themselves the title of sons of the Church of
England.”[398] Tully contended for justification by faith alone; and,
injudiciously adding to the Scriptural argument the authority of the
Fathers, which he maintained to be in his favour, laid himself open to
the attacks of his opponent, who criticised his citations, and turned
against him testimonies from Irenæus, Origen, Cyprian, Hilary, Basil,
and Ambrose. The judgment of the Church of England, and of the Reformed
Churches on the Continent, also came under debate in this department
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account