I noticed that you "recently completed a PhD on seventeenth-century theology and literature". Presumably that would have included the Caroline Divines and Restoration Churchmen. I have come to appreciate Caroline Divinity, including Andrewes and stretching back to Hooker.
One of the areas I'm interested in learning more is soteriology. I have read two books, one entitled the Caroline Captivity of the Church, by a friend (PhD), Rev. Julian Davies who's also a parish priest. It's a sympathetic reading towards Laud, as distinguished from "Carolinism" personified by King Charles I. The other recommended by Dr. Dan Dunlap: Predestination, Polemics and Policy by Peter White, another excellent book debunking the myth of an absolute bi-polarity in the theological spectrum of Jacobean and Caroline Church. And there is another scholar, Stuart something who's written on King James I who takes a similar view.
Can you please brief us about current scholarship on the issue, any new books published etc.? What are your thoughts?
Hi Jason -- it's great to hear from you. Your research interests sound very interesting. My own doctoral work centred mainly on soteriology, but unfortunately I didn't spend much time on the Laudians.
Peter White's work is definitely first-rate. Probably the most important books on the Laudians is Nicholas Tyacke, Anti-Calvinists: The Rise of English Arminianism, c.1590–1640 (Oxford: Clarendon, 1987). This relates the Laudians to the broader movement of anti-Calvinist theology in England; it's a profound and compelling book. A more recent study is Iain M. MacKenzie, God’s Order and Natural Law: The Works of the Laudian Divines (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2002). While Tyacke's study is a work of massive historical scholarship, MacKenzie offers a more conceptual, theological account of Laudian thought -- it's not as good as Tyacke's work, but it's still valuable in its own way, and it does make a unique contribution to the field.
Anyway, I hope this is helpful. Thanks again for stopping by.
Glad to have discovered your blog. It looks to be a great resource! Thanks for the reference to mine.
ReplyDeleteDan Dunlap
"Catholic in the Third Millennium"
Benjamin,
ReplyDeleteI noticed that you "recently completed a PhD on seventeenth-century theology and literature". Presumably that would have included the Caroline Divines and Restoration Churchmen. I have come to appreciate Caroline Divinity, including Andrewes and stretching back to Hooker.
One of the areas I'm interested in learning more is soteriology. I have read two books, one entitled the Caroline Captivity of the Church, by a friend (PhD), Rev. Julian Davies who's also a parish priest. It's a sympathetic reading towards Laud, as distinguished from "Carolinism" personified by King Charles I. The other recommended by Dr. Dan Dunlap: Predestination, Polemics and Policy by Peter White, another excellent book debunking the myth of an absolute bi-polarity in the theological spectrum of Jacobean and Caroline Church. And there is another scholar, Stuart something who's written on King James I who takes a similar view.
Can you please brief us about current scholarship on the issue, any new books published etc.? What are your thoughts?
Thanks.
Jason Loh
Penang, Malaysia
Hi Jason -- it's great to hear from you. Your research interests sound very interesting. My own doctoral work centred mainly on soteriology, but unfortunately I didn't spend much time on the Laudians.
ReplyDeletePeter White's work is definitely first-rate. Probably the most important books on the Laudians is Nicholas Tyacke, Anti-Calvinists: The Rise of English Arminianism, c.1590–1640 (Oxford: Clarendon, 1987). This relates the Laudians to the broader movement of anti-Calvinist theology in England; it's a profound and compelling book. A more recent study is Iain M. MacKenzie, God’s Order and Natural Law: The Works of the Laudian Divines (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2002). While Tyacke's study is a work of massive historical scholarship, MacKenzie offers a more conceptual, theological account of Laudian thought -- it's not as good as Tyacke's work, but it's still valuable in its own way, and it does make a unique contribution to the field.
Anyway, I hope this is helpful. Thanks again for stopping by.