The life and times of the Rev. Samuel Wesley: Rector of Epworth and father of the Revs. John and Charles Wesley, the founders of the MethodistsTyerman, L. (Luke)
History
The life and times of the Rev. Samuel Wesley: Rector of Epworth and father of the Revs. John and Charles Wesley, the founders of the Methodists
Tyerman, L. (Luke)
Church of England -- Clergy -- Biography; Wesley, Samuel, 1662-1735
On March 22d, another book was discussed in the Upper House, entitled,
“Essays on the Balance of Power,” in which it was asserted that persons
had been promoted in the Church who were remarkable for nothing but
enmity to the divinity of Christ.[154] The bishops, therefore, agreed
that a paper should be affixed to the doors of Westminster Abbey,
calling upon the author to make good his assertion, in order that the
parties might be proceeded against, otherwise the passage in question
would be voted a public scandal.
-----
Footnote 154:
Three years previous to this, Thomas Firmin, a famous citizen of
London, had died; a man held in high esteem for his charities of all
sorts, private and public. Firmin, in early life, sat under the
ministry of John Goodwin, but was afterwards converted to Socinianism
by John Biddle, already mentioned in this history. Firmin was a man of
great wealth, and promoted the printing of books against the Trinity,
and distributed them freely over the nation, to all who would accept
of them. The result was, the greatest mysteries in religion became the
common topic of discourse, and were treated as the contrivances of
priests to bring the world into blind submission to their authority.
This raised a great outcry against Socinianism; and, as Tillotson and
some of the bishops had lived in great friendship with Mr Firmin,
(because of his charitable temper, which they thought it became them
to encourage,) books like “Essays on the Balance of Power,” began to
be put in circulation—(See Burnet’s _History of His Own Time_. 1st
Edit., vol. ii. p. 212.)
-----
The next fortnight was spent in a quarrel between the two houses
respecting the right of the Lower House to prorogue itself, and they
then adjourned from the 8th of April to the 8th of May.
On the latter day the houses again assembled. The archbishop warmly
rebuked the Lower House for their unwarrantable assumption in daring to
prorogue themselves, and for claiming a distinct recess; and declared
that such behaviour had “given the greatest blow to the Church that it
received since the Presbyterian assembly that sat at Westminster in the
late times of confusion.” This rebuke made bad things worse, and the
Lower House became more rebellious than ever. The bishops appointed a
committee of five to meet a similar number of the Lower House, for the
purpose of examining the acts of the present synod, and to report upon
them. To this proposal, the Lower House replied that they should not
nominate any committee; but some of its members sent an address to the
archbishop stating their disapproval of its proceedings. Burnet
says:—“Many of the most eminent and learned of its members protested
against its proceedings;” but the actual protest shows that the
opposition, in point of numbers, was a very insignificant minority,
consisting, at the most, of only fifteen persons.
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