tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1797680548627342748.post5356991920919159756..comments2023-10-22T06:20:26.048-05:00Comments on The Heritage Anglican Network: A Clear Flowing StreamUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1797680548627342748.post-71201829954614537592015-12-01T19:18:27.176-06:002015-12-01T19:18:27.176-06:00Sorry! A few mistakes in former entry. Meant to ...Sorry! A few mistakes in former entry. Meant to say charismatic not systematic and meant to say article not artichoke. <br /> peterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17364878500752958892noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1797680548627342748.post-33544559059637751982015-12-01T19:14:03.310-06:002015-12-01T19:14:03.310-06:00While I agree with you I your assessment thAt the ...While I agree with you I your assessment thAt the charismatic movement's main tenets are not compatible with historic anglicanism, you some how infer that arminianism is not either. First, there are arminians that are not charismatic and conversely there are some Calvinists that are systematic. Also the Anglican liturgy affirms Christ death for all and artichoke# 16 affirms that one Can fall from grace. This is arminian not Calvinist. Even article#17 is broad enough for both Arminians & calninists. Arminianism <br />did not begin with arminius, he only formalized what the early church believed. You suggest that Anglicanism may have been a middleway between Geneva & Zurich. I would contend that it was more a hodgepodge of Calvinism, Lutheranism, and English catholic (non Roman) views. A tapestry is the best description.<br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br />peterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17364878500752958892noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1797680548627342748.post-15831830350009441222011-02-24T09:41:54.675-06:002011-02-24T09:41:54.675-06:00Charlie,
The Nowell to whom Gatiss refers in The ...Charlie,<br /><br />The Nowell to whom Gatiss refers in <i>The True Profession of the Gospel</i> is the Rev. Dr. Nowell, the public orator of Oxford in 1769. Nowell's assertion that the Church of England's doctrine was Arminian prompted Toplady's first major controversial work, <i>The Church of England Vindicated from the Charge of Arminianism</i>. Alexander Nowell, the author of <i>A Catechism</i> died in 1602. He was thoroughly Reformed in his opinions, to which Toplady attests in his own writings.Heritage Anglicanshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13536133779405456898noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1797680548627342748.post-47602988822517425742011-02-22T20:35:08.373-06:002011-02-22T20:35:08.373-06:00Charlie,
Where in his book does Lee Gatiss make t...Charlie,<br /><br />Where in his book does Lee Gatiss make this argument. I have just received the copy you sent me and I have not yet begun reading it.<br /><br />From what I know of Alexander Nowell's background, he was Prebendary of Westminister who was forced to flee to Strasbourg and Frangfort during Mary's reign. On the Continent he acquired "Puritan and almost Presbyterian views." In 1563 at the request of Convocation he wrote his <i>Catechism</i>. In 1571 Convocation sanctioned the <i>Catechism</i> for general use. He was Dean of St. Paul's Cathedral, London, for something like 41 years. He preached before Elizabeth I on a number of occasions and his sermons created quite a stir. <br /><br />In <i>Theology of the English Reformers</i> Philip Edgcombe Hughes notes the Reformed position on sacerdotalism was well stated in the <i>Catechism</i>. <br /><br />With the two Books of Homilies, the 1571 Proposed Canons, and the 1604 Canons, Nowell's <i>Catechism</i> is considered one of the subsidiary historic Anglican formularies. <br /><br />I assume that Gatiss is referring to Toplady's response to Heylyn's claim that Nowell was sympathetic to Arminianism even though Arminius had "not been born or but newly born" when Nowell wrote his catechism, and had been "dead a some years before the name of an Arminian had been heard in England." Toplady also wrote, "But, that Calvinistical doctrines suffered no injury nor amputation by passing through the hands of that learned editor, and of the convocation of 1562, I am fully satisfied." Toplady then goes on to explain why "those doctrines continued with full force to predominate in Nowell's improved edition." See <i>The Works of Augustus Toplady</i>, Volume 2, London, 1794, pp. 136-138. See also Toplady's footnote, pp. 138-139Heritage Anglicanshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13536133779405456898noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1797680548627342748.post-35123585217744582742011-02-22T14:43:26.923-06:002011-02-22T14:43:26.923-06:00Lee Gatiss argues in his book, The True Profession...Lee Gatiss argues in his book, The True Profession of the Gospel, that Nowell was an Arminian and sought to undermine the English Reformation along the lines of Heylyn. Not sure since I have not read Nowell's catechism.Charlie J. Rayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18185331029930925967noreply@blogger.com