S3-eu-west-2.amazonaws.com



Week 10: The Church in a New World 1688-c180010.1 Introduction 10.2 The Political climateThe role of the stateAnglicanism and Non-Conformity1711-19 Occasional Conformity Act – bar for attending dissenting chapelRoman Catholics – 15 Jacobite plots between 1689 and 1759, main one the rising of 1715 – strong culture of anti-RomanismDissenters 5% of population in 1715, 4% in 1773But massive growth then – Methodists, Congregationalists and Baptists c25% population by mid C19High Churchmen10.2 Intellectual Climate – EnlightenmentOrigins of the EnlightenmentRationalismRene Descartes, Discourse on Method (1637)EmpiricismJohn Locke (1634-1702)David Hulme (1711-1776)Latitudinarianism = 10.3 Social climate – industrial revolution1700 20% of GB in non-agrarian work1800 50% of GB in non-agrarian work1750 <5% population in towns 5000+1801 c33% populationChurches – few new churches 1740-1831, but population grew 5.5m to 13.2m – and in different places10.4. Theological ClimateLiberal Biblical CriticismThomas Hobbes – Leviathan (1651)Baruch Spinoza (1632-77) H. S. Reimarus (1694-1768) G. E. Lessing (1729-81)DeismLord Herbert of Cherbury (1583-1648) John Toland (1670-1722) - book 1696; Matthew Tindal (1655-1733) - book 1730 - Thomas Paine (1737-1809) - 1794 William Paley - Natural Theology (1802) ??The Legacy of Deism – AtheismPietismNikolaus Ludwig von Zinszendorf (1700-1760) ?10.5 Revivals and MethodismGeorge Whitefield (1715-1770)John Wesley (1703-1791)Wesleyian ArminianismArminius:Humans are naturally unable to make any effort towards salvationSalvation is possible by grace alone Works of human effort cannot cause or contribute to salvation God's election is conditional on faith in Jesus Jesus' atonement was for all people God allows his grace to be resisted by those unwilling to believeSalvation can be lost, as continued salvation is conditional upon continued faith Wesley:Salvation can be lost – but people can be restored againChristian perfection possible in this lifeMethodism1744 college of lay preachers – origins of Methodist circuitBy 1791 death of John Wesley – 294 lay preachers, 70,000+ Methodists in UKBy 1851 4.4% of population MethodistCountess of Huntingdon’s ConnectionSelina, Countess of Huntingdon 1707-1791Conversion in 1739 - influence of earl's sister Lady Margaret. 1741 in touch with Wesleys, but 1744 began attending Whitefield's tabernacle 1748 Whitefield appointed chaplain. Many aristocrats heard him - mixed reaction. Note mix of concern for social order / unwillingness to recognise sin.1750's financial support for Whitefield - chapels. Chapels had chaplains - and therefore regular public services - all attached to homes owned by Selina.1753 Bristol and Moorfields tabernacles. 1761 chapel in Brighton. 1764-5 Bath, Bretby Hall, Lewes, Tunbridge Wells. Supplying pulpits - College at Trevecca 1768But 1779-1780 lost case over Spa Fields chapel as private chapel > forced to register chapels as dissenting houses.A few left C of E - Thomas Wills, William Taylor - 1783 first ordinations. five new chapels 1785 - but dependent on countess, who died 1791. Cheshunt college replaced Trevecca (to Cambridge 1906). ?10.6 Jonathan EdwardsLife and WorkBackgroundNorthhamptonPreaching Revival – Dismissal – Mission to the Indians 1751-1758PrincetonDeathSmallpox innoculation"Give my kindest love to my dear wife, and tell her that the uncommon union which has so long subsisted between us has been of such a nature as I trust is spiritual and therefore will continue forever."WritingsHis most famous writings include A Narrative of Surprising Conversions (reflection on the revival), Religious Affections, The life of David Brainerd, Freedom of the Will, and Original Sin. He also wrote Resolutions and MiscellaniesSome Miscellanies on Heaven5. HEAVEN. There is no more reason why it should be a damp to the happiness of some in heaven that others are happier, than that their happiness should be damped by barely a possibility of greater happiness, supposing them to be all equal. For if they were all equal, and all full of happiness, yet everyone would know that greater happiness is possible absolutely, and possible for them if God had but enlarged their capacity; and why should not they, who are acted by pure reason, desire it as much as if it were actually enjoyed by some beings? For barely that, that it is enjoyed by other beings, cannot possibly cause those that are acted by pure reason, and whose desires in every respect are agreeable to reason, to desire it any more than if it was only possible to be enjoyed, and were not actually enjoyed by any.? But instead of the superiority of some above others in happiness its being a damp to the happiness of those that are inferior, there is undoubted reason why it should be an addition to their happiness, and why it would rather be a detraction from their happiness if it were otherwise. For most certainly there is a pure, ardent, even inconceivably vehement mutual love between the glorified saints; and this love is in proportion to the perfection and amiableness of the object loved. Therefore, seeing their love to them is proportionable to the amiableness, it must necessarily cause delight when they see their happiness proportionable to their amiableness and so to their [own] love to them. It will [not] damp any to see them loved more than themselves, for they shall have as much love as they desire and as great manifestations of love as they can bear; and they themselves will love those that are superior in holiness as much as [do] others, and will delight to see others love them as much as [they] themselves [do].? We are very apt to conceive that those that are thus, that are more holy and more happy than others in heaven, will be elated and lifted up above them; whereas, their being superior in holiness implies their being superior in humility, or having the greatest humility; for humility is a part of holiness that is capable of degrees in the perfect state of heaven, as well as other graces. Not that the holiest shall think more meanly of themselves than the less holy, for they shall all be perfectly humble and perfectly free from pride, and none shall think more highly of themselves than they ought to think; but yet as they see further into the divine perfections than others, so they shall penetrate further into the vast and infinite distance that is between them and God, and their delight of annihilating themselves, that God may be all, shall be greater.?And besides, those that are highest in holiness, and so necessarily highest in happiness (for holiness and happiness are all one in heaven), instead of anything like despising those that are less holy and happy, will love those that are inferior to them more than they would do if they [themselves] had not so much holiness and happiness, more than if they were but equal with them, and more than [do] those that are equal with them. This is certain, for the foundation of the saints' love to each other will be their love to the image of God which they see in them. Now most certainly, the holier a man is the more he loves the same degree of the image; so that the holiest in heaven will love that image of God they see in the less holy, more than [do] those that are equally less holy. And that which makes it beyond any doubt that their superior happiness will be no damp to them, is this, that their superior happiness consists in their greater humility and in their greater love to them, and to God and Christ, whom the saints look upon as themselves.? These things may be said of this, besides what may be said about everyone being completely satisfied and full of happiness, having as much as he is capable of enjoying or desiring, like a vessel thrown into the sea of happiness; and also [besides] what may be said about their entire resignation, for God's will is become so much their own that the fulfilling of his will, let it be what it will, fills them with inconceivable satisfaction.?105. HEAVEN. That the glorified spirits shall grow in holiness and happiness to eternity, I argue from this foundation, that their number of ideas shall increase to eternity. How great a number of ideas soever when they are first glorified, it is but finite. And 'tis evident the time will come wherein they shall have lived in glory so long, that the parts of duration (each equal a million million ages) that they have lived will be more in number [than] their ideas were at first. Now we cannot suppose, that they will ever entirely forget everything that has passed in heaven and in the universe, for a whole million million of ages.'Tis undoubted, that they never will have forgot what passed in their life upon earth: the sins they have been saved from, their regeneration, the circumstances which did heighten their mercies, their good works which follow them, their death, etc. They must without doubt retain innumerable multitudes of ideas, of what passed in the first seventy years. So also, they shall retain to eternity their ideas of what was done in the ages of the world with relation to the church of God, and God's wondrous providences with respect to the world of men. And can we then think, that a whole million million ages of those great and most glorious things that pass in heaven, shall ever be erased out of their minds? But if they retain but one idea for one such vast space, their ideas shall be millions of times more in number than when they first entered into heaven; as is evident because, by supposition, the number of such ages will be millions of times more in number.? Therefore, their knowledge will increase to eternity; and if their knowledge, doubtless their holiness. For as they increase in the knowledge of God, and of the works of God, the more they will see of his excellency; and the more they see of his excellency, caeteris paribus, the more will they love him; and the more they love God, the more delight and happiness, caeteris paribus , will they have in him. See note on Psalms 89:1-2, in Harmony of the Old and New Testaments. ? It will be objected, that at this rate we might prove that the damned increase in perfection. I answer, no, for though it is true that they shall increase in knowledge, [they shall] increase in odiousness in the same proportion. For the more knowing good is, caeteris paribus , the more good; so the more knowing evil is,caeteris paribus , the more evil; the more ignorant, capable of less wickedness; the more knowing, caeteris paribus , capable of more. All in hell shall be as full of wickedness as they can hold, but the more knowing (in their kind of knowledge), the larger is the vessel; as in heaven the more knowing the blessed are, caeteris paribus , they are capable of greater holiness and happiness.?639. HEAVEN, whether the saints, when they go to heaven, have any special comfort in there meeting with those that were their godly friends on earth. I think that it is evident that they will, by 1 Thessalonians 4:13-14 and following verses……Hence it follows, that the special affection that the saints have in this world to other saints that are their friends, will in some respects remain in another world. I don't see why we should not suppose that saints that have dwelt together in this world, and have done and received kindness to each others' souls, have been assistant to each others true happiness, should not love one another with a love of gratitude for it in another world, and that the joy in meeting these and seeing their happiness is part of that joy that is spoken of, 2 Corinthians 1:14, "As also ye have acknowledged us in part, that we are your rejoicing, even as ye also are ours in the day of the Lord Jesus"; and 1 Thessalonians 2:19-20, "For what is our hope, or joy, or crown of rejoicing? Are not even ye in the presence of the Lord Jesus Christ at his coming? For ye are our glory and joy"; or why those that have loved one another with a virtuous love, and from such a love have shown kindness one to another, should not love one another the better for it in another world? God and Christ will reward them and favor them the more for such love, and all the fruits of it, to all eternity; and I don't see why they should not love one another the more for it. Neither do I see how it argues infirmity for a saint in glory to have a special respect to another, because God made use of him as an instrument to bring him into being, and so is the remote occasion of his eternal blessedness; or because he himself was the occasion of bringing the other into being; or that the same agreeableness of tempers that is the foundation of special friendship here, may be so also in another world; or even that a former acquaintance with persons and their virtues, may occasion a particular respect in another world. They may go to heaven with a desire to see them upon that account. The idea that they have of them by their acquaintance here, may be what they carry to heaven with them; and the idea we have of a proper object of our love, may be an occasion of the exercises of love, especially towards that object, and more than towards another of which we have not the idea.? This should move us to lay religion and virtue in the foundation of all our friendships, and to strive that the love we have to our friends be a virtuous love, duly subordinated to divine love. For so far as it is so, it will last forever; death don't put an end to such friendship, nor can it put an end to such friends enjoyment of each other. ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download