PDF hosted at the Radboud Repository of the Radboud University Nijmegen The following full text is a publisher's version. For additional information about this publication click this link. http://hdl.handle.net/2066/148702 Please be advised that this information was generated on 2021-09-27 and may be subject to change. AL DIVINITY WITH A TINCTURE OF CHRIST? An interpretation of the theology of Benjamin Whichcote, founder of Cambridge Platonism Paul Miles Davenport MORAL DIVINITY WITH A TINCTURE OF CHRIST? AN INTERPRETATION OF THE THEOLOGY OF BENJAMIN WHICHCOTE, FOUNDER OF CAMBRIDGE PLATONISM * PROMOTORî: PROF». MAG. DR. EDWARD SCHILLEBEECKX MORAL DIVINITY WITH A TINCTURE OF CHRIST? AN INTERPRETATION OF THE THEOLOGY OF BENJAMIN WHICHCOTE, FOUNDER OF CAMBRIDGE PLATONISM PROEFSCHRIFT ter verkrijging van de graad van doctor in de godgeleerdheid aan de Katholieke Universiteit te Nijmegen, op gezag van de Rector Magnificus Dr. G. Brenninkmeijer, hoogleraar in de faculteit der sociale wetenschappen, volgens besluit van de Senaat in het openbaar te verdedigen op donderdag, 1 juni 1972, des namiddags te twee uur precies door PAUL MILES DAVENPORT geboren te HOULTON, MAINE (U.S.A.) NIJMEGEN 1972 uitvoeringen druk' H.Th.Peeters, R.Th.E.Tissen Writing a thesis is much like running a marathon race, an impossible feat unless the "loneliness of the long di s teine e runner" is made bearable by the support of others· Like every thesis writer, I have a host of supporters to thank and fear that many will be left out in this necessarily brief expres­ sion of gratitude. The important first impulse for this race was partly provided by the "werkgroep Lessing'· under the direction of Drs. Nico Schreurs, a group whose earnest yet light-hearted approach to their subject is for the author a fond memory and an unforgettable .lesson in how theology should be done· I would like to thank Prof. Gordon Rupp of Cambridge University who gave freely of his valuable time and know­ ledge in the difficult first stages of the race. Then, during the long middle stretch it was particularly John Caven- augh, a Thomas More specialist, who earned my gratitude by his generous willingness to lend an ear and some advice con­ cerning the practical side of writing a thesis· Among the numerous others to whom the author owes a debt of gratitude the following must at least be mentioned: My parents, for their constant encouragement; Dr. Donald Campbell for his unfailing personal support above and beyond the call of duty; Charles MacDonald, also a runner, for his leadership and encouragement; and Karel Steenbrink who first made a foreigner feel at home and whose welcome has never worn out. Nor should I forget the staff and administration of the Dr. Williams Library of London whose friendly and prompt assistance brightened many a dreary winter day. Finally, a warm thank you is due to my wife, Ursula, who has been there at every point along the way and often kept a weary runner on course. TABLE OF CONTENTS page INTHODUCTION 9 CHAPTER 1 THE DENIGRATION AND REHABILITATION OF NATURE 17 1. NATURE UNDER FIRE The opening attack: Luther vs. Eraamus 17 The war escalated: Calvin 23 An ineffectual counter-attack: Trent 30 II. NATURE ON THE REBOUND: THE OPPOSITION OVERREACHES ITSELF 3^ A Chaplain is persecuted 3** A country is persecuted 39 III. NATURE CHAMPIONED: CAMBRIDGE PLATONISM 51 Foreshadowings of a new mentality: Wm. Perkins 51 Benjamin Whichcote: "The defender of Good Nature" 5¿f CHAPTER 2 NATURE IN DEFENSE OF RELIGION 71 I. PLATONISTS« CONCEPT OF NATURE NOT IN TUNE WITH THE TIMES? Unscientific view of Nature? 71 Impractical approach to Nature? Sk II. TUCKNET'S CRITIQUE: WHICHCOTE'S CONCEPT OF NATURE IN CONFLICT WITH ORTHODOX VIEW OF GRACE 86 The rational framework of Whichcote*s theology 86 The Whichcote-Tuckney debate: Nature vs. Grace? <i 91 Tuckney's mistrust of Reason 92 Whichcote defends his position 95 III. THE PRO-GRACE CHARACTER OF WHICHCOTE'S CONCEPT OF NATURE 102 Nature as Image of God 102 The natural foundation of the "life of religion": Realizing one's "image" 10^ Summing up: Nature's kinship with divine truth 108 Nature as Natural Revelation 'iU9 7 The content of Whichcote'e natural revelation 110 Innatism? 113 IV. THE PASTORAL AND APOLOGETIC CONTEXT OF WHICH- COTE'S CONCEPT OF NATURE, NATURAL RELIQION The context 116 The Apologetic Syllogism 117 Major premise: God is rational 117 Minor premise: Man is the image of God 121 Conclusion: As God is rational so should man be rationalt 122 CHAPTER 5 WITH A TINCTURE OF CHRIST? 133 I. THE SETTING: REFORMATION CHRISTOLOGY A certain extrinsicism 133 Whichcote'e strategy: Salvation as reconciliation 138 II. THE RECONCILING CHRIST A modest mediator 1^2 Before God? Before man 1^9 III. CHRIST IN THE FALL AND RESTORATION Foreshadowed in the Fall 152 Christ in the restoration 157 CHAPTER THE PLATONISTS» PATRIMONT 167 SELECT BIBLIOGRAPHY І83 9 INTRODUCTION I have long had a predilection for the thought of the Cambridge Platonists. It was several years ago as a lectur­ er in English Literature that I first made their acquain­ tance mainly through the writings of the Cambridge Profes­ sor of English and self-confessed "inveterate tresspasser" -i in other fields, Basil Willey. Therefore it was no coinci­ dence that I chose to do a study of Whichcote's theology for my doctorate. Moreover, having noted that the subject of my "doctoraal" paper, Gotthold Lessing, showed a good deal of spiritual kinship with the founder of Cambridge Platonism, it was quite consciously that upon completion of the Lessing project I journeyed to England to pursue the Enlightenment in its English roots. It is difficult to know exactly why one finds a par­ ticular theology attractive but I must say something by way of justification of a rather esoteric topic. I recall lis­ tening to a Salvation Army speaker on the streets of London and what he said affords perhaps a clue to my choice of topic. He said that he had not come to talk about a God who would dramatically change a man's life, who would suddenly replace fear and loneliness with security and joy but rather of a- God who—if allowed to enter into ones life—would make ones sorrows a little less sorrowful and ones joys a little more joyful. Sorrow would not be banished nor would joy be unting- ed with sadness but the whole spectrum of human experience would be raised a few tones to a new pitch of intensity and awareness. This unexpectedly modest claim struck a respon­ sive chord not only in myself but, judging from the still­ ness- with which they listened, in телу among that street- corner audience. Some perhaps found that such a sermon glossed over sin and diminished God in an effort to make religion attractive to sceptical audiences. Others, includ­ ing myself, would rather think that to bring God thus close 10 to human life is to locate Him where He ie and wille to be. Whichcote, who realized that an exaggerated claim for the God of salvation only detracts from the goodness of the God of creation, might well have preached that sermon. Certainly there is such a reality as sin but a magni­ fied consciousness of ones failings cannot constitute a solid foundation for the love of God. In personal relationship in­ sight into failure and inadequacy comes only in the measure on the experience of love. I can only begin to grasp the magnitude of my sinfulness in and through my knowledge of the perfectly selfless way in which God loves me· A theology which numbers sin among its first principles therefore is building on a basis which cannot support the weight of the interpersonal character of the divine-human relationship of the Christian revelation. Furthermore, a theology which places sin very near the center of its speculations is a theology which tends to cast a shadow of suspicion over human nature· In such systems, the purely religious nature of sin is easily forgotten and sin mingled with the ontological structure of man· "Spiri­ tual progress" thus comes to have the connotation of somehow rising above that tainted human nature by aspiring to an anatural supernaturality· But Catholicism has undergone an incredible metamor­ phosis in the past decade and such recollections are as dated as an "ex cathedra" pronouncement from Rome. Tet while a new mentality has dawned theology's task of theoretically grounding and clarifying the emergent outlook is far from complete. Much remains to be done before a properly posi­ tive evaluation of human desires and deeds will have been accorded and the reality of sin will have been fitted into its proper perspective. It is in the cause of a theology that would bring to the fore the long obscured doctrine of creation in an attempt to clarify the goodness that belongs to man and the universe in virtue of their created being, 11 that this study is enlisted· But before proceeding any further it is time to intro­ duce Benjamin Whiohcote and his followers since it is by no means to be taken for granted that these obscure Cambridge theologians of the seventeenth century are well known to the reader. Very little is known of Benjamin Whichcote, born in 1609 of an "ancient and honorable family" until he entered Emmanuel College, the "seminary of Puritans", at the age of seventeen in 1626· The young student made a good impression on at least one of his teachers, viz., his tutor Anthony Tuckney, who disclosed to Whichcote later in their famous exchange of letters that "from your first coming to Cambridge I loved you: as finding you studious and pious, and very lov­ ing and observant of me." He completed his studies in due course, receiving his В .A.