You're right. When you read his stuff yourself, you're hard pressed to not be impressed.
All very well said. There is always [i]much more[/i] to consider - First person accounts where they are available so you are not being [i]guided[/i] by a preposition of a 'third party' view. Too often, even subconsciously we can read into matters with our minds made up by however we have been persuaded before hand ...
Thought I would offer up a compelling alternative that I have been reading over the course of the last few months -
[i][b]John Newton and the English Evangelical Tradition: Between the Conversions of Wesley and Wilberforce -[/b][/i]
D. Bruce Hindmarsh
An older mention - Excerpts, etc.
[url=https://www.sermonindex.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=26483&forum=35&start=0&viewmode=flat&order=0]Letters of John Newton[/url]
Mr. Hindmarsh did an outstanding job in my opinion on a number of fronts. He uses an incredible amount of first hand accounts for one, but also manages to shelve his [i]opinion[/i] other than where there are breaks in continuity of accounts, things of that sort. He must have spent a great deal of time to put this together, a lot of research - It is excellent since it is not a scholarly style read, nor a theological treatise but does contain the theological tenets in place in that era - mid to late 1700's.
Didn't set out to write some type of review here but wanted to bridge some of the quotes above with why I find it important on some peripheral levels.
One of the things in the book that is striking revolves around the whole Cal\\Arm debate, ever present, aways ongoing, the constant feuding etc. etc. I am speaking of [i]now[/i] in emphasis more than ... then. What I found and almost expected was far more a camaraderie in a sense even amongst the varying viewpoints, frankly it was less hostile than it often is now. Part of that is in the way the subject matter is treated. Because it is something of a biography set in the surrounding times and locations it is less ... a dogmatic setting forth of viewpoints but more of a [i]looking into[/i] the matter over the course of several chapters - In other words, more like a sideways glance, an observance but again with first person accounts and so forth. Coming at it from a less decided angle, bias lets it stand on it's own merits, not punctuating one 'side' over the other.
Another older post touched on the letters exchanged between Wesley and Newton that had me full of wonder of what else might be available;
[url=https://www.sermonindex.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?viewmode=flat&order=0&topic_id=26785&forum=34&post_id=&refresh=Go]John Wesley's Letters[/url]
And it was interesting to stumble upon this book that contained so many of both bewtween them.
It's very difficult to summarize all this because it is a very long account of correspondence between the two ... and only a portion of overall scope of the book itself. But maybe the point I am trying to tie together is that things are just never so simple as to put these and other men into categorical constructs and tie them to their own stakes as it were. They are lot's of changes, there is a great deal of [i]silence[/i], there are [i]reasons[/i], situations, for instance just the inherent extremism within in their own corresponding 'ranks' that blur and confuse matters. Times were even Wesley's followers were taking his positions and key word here, (one of his own) - [i]Expressions[/i] out to seed and the various attempts to reel them back in.
On the flip-side was Newton's great difficulty in getting a pastorate (as things were conducted at that time) because of his mere associations with Wesley and others - Years it took to get through these very same things - Hard line stances in the "Established church" and his own wrangling over whether he should not just go the way of the Methodists and others despite his background, upbrining "Calvinism". It's tremendous in the sense that there was a lot more blurring of the lines than might be supposed. From the Moravian's to what was called Particular Baptist's there is a word that stands out and was often appealed to -
[i]Latitudinarianism[/i]
It may be the one 'ism' worth latching on to-
[b]Latitudinarianism
LATITUDINA'RIANISM, n.[/b]
1. Freedom or liberality of opinion, particularly in theology.
2. Indifference to religion.
Still, there were many disagreements, many often, heated controversy's - Even a seeming 'divide' in latter years, but there is that missing element again - Letter's from one side missing the response from the other. Added to that is changes in locations and travels and a drop in correspondence. Added to this is a change in perception and a change of mind on particulars.
For however many years now when it comes to SI there has been this tension and this seeming wish for a silver bullet to end all controversy. Have touted the 'both' of it all if it must be distilled down to the two fractional entities but it is never that simple and always that complicated.
Is it running down the 'middle' that fosters a compromise? Or is it putting oneself in-between the warring factions that get their teeth set on edge when their [i]point of view[/i] is the be all end all of any other consideration?
What makes this site differ in my opinion is the strange ability it has presented to force all to think and consider, that a great deal of the past, old, 'dead saints' are often extremely difficult to pigeon hole. Tozer, Ravenhill, Chambers or Wesley - Even the so called 'Mystics" - "Catholics" and on and on backward - The Anabaptists may be one of the greatest examples already mentioned here, [i]great extremes[/i] that need to be presented openly and honestly - The reformation itself and the outgoing tentacles.
Again it is difficult to put this all in Reader Digest styled language. There is a sense of [i]backing off[/i] and holding ones peace when things begin to get acrimonious, it is less to do with particulars then it is with a sense of ...
Php 2:3 [i]Let nothing be done through strife or vainglory; but in lowliness of mind let each esteem other better than themselves.[/i]
A portion from the book;
There was always the danger of Calvinist spirituality slipping into into quietism. At it's worst there was the temptation (to which Newton gave in not a little) to pour exaggerated abuse on oneself as a way of exalting the power of Christ to save. Romaine's rhetoric could be easily construed this way when he wrote, 'Depend upon it, man cannot be laid too low, nor Christ set too high. I would therefore, always aim, as good brother Grimshaw expresses it, to get the old gentleman down, and keep him down and then Christ reigns like himself, when he is ALL and man is nothing!' While the determination not to wink at sin and the desire to exalt Christ were admirable, the keeping oneself low could easily lead to low expectations of sanctifying grace altogether. Newton sought to temper such excesses in his Calvinist spirituality by gathering insights from Wesley's doctrine of perfection.
Indebted to Wesley for theological method and constructive criticisms of Calvinism, Newton was also influenced by Wesley's evangelical latitudinarianism. Wesley emphasized, despite their differences, the basis which they had in religious experience for shared Christian communion. He wrote that though they differed on some things, 'notwithstanding this, we tasted each other's spirits, and often took sweet counsel together'. Jean Orcibal comments on Wesley's efforts in this direction: 'Totally opposed to religious indifference, he was the exponent of a toleration which was mystical rather than doctrinal, such as he had seen John Byrom champion from the time of his youth. Newton sounded remarkably like this when he wrote to John Ryland about a disagreement in 1772, making appeal to their common experience of the thing they described differently. He said, 'If we hold the [i]head[/i] and love the Lord, we [i]agree[/i] in him, and I should think my time ill employed in disputing the point with you'. Or again, when writing to John Campbell, Newton said, 'I congratulate you and myself on the progress of what some may call latitudinarianism in Scotland. May we not say with the apostle, "Grace be with all that love the Lord Jesus Christ in sincerity?" I think that is a latitudinarianism prayer - I hope many agree in loving him, who sadly disagree about trifles.' Newton and Wesley could both ground latitude on common religious experience.
When it came to straightforward discursive theology the situation was more difficult. Initially Newton was able to treat his differences with Wesley simply as adiaphora. He was satisfied with Wesley's distinction between opinions and essential doctrines. But then the problem came, as always with this formula, when they could no longer agree over which principles were essential and which were non-essential. As noted above, by 1765 Newton's convictions about predestination had become more firm, and he refused to think of it as only an opinion. Still he was able to work out a revised formula of concord that would maintain evangelical solidarity, by saying, 'Though a man does not accord with my view of election, yet if he gives me good evidence, that [i]he[/i] is [i]effectually called of God[/i], he is my brother' (vi.199).41* Thus, he reverted to the shared experience of grace. He was not, however, able to work out such a formula for perfectionism.
*41 Likewise, Newton wrote to Hannah More about Calvinism on one occasion, and told her; 'I believe you are one yourself, though you are not aware of it.' [i]Memoirs of Hannah More[/i], ii. 410.
