Early Stuart Polemical Hermeneutics

Darren M. Pollock examines the 1611 Romans hexapla commentary by the prolific Church of England preacher and controversialist Andrew Willet. While some have considered Willet's later biblical commentaries to have been a retreat from his earlier engagement in religious controversy, the author argues that his exegetical work maintained a significant element of anti-Catholic polemics, only expressed in a different genre. This polemical hermeneutic served as an organizing principle and as a means by which to clarify the presentation of traditional Reformed readings in relief against a body of Roman Catholic theology that Willet believed threatened the gospel of grace. Paulös letter provided ample opportunity for Willet to identify what is distinctive about Reformed theology – or rather, as Willet would have it, the particular ways in which »papist« dogma had diverged from the true line of Christian belief running from the Fathers through to the (truly »catholic«) Reformed church of the seventeenth century.Willet's exegesis highlights many of the polemical issues that had long been contended between Protestants and Catholics, including the authentic versions of the bible, Scripture's attributes, and principles of interpretation, as well as doctrines like justification, predestination, the assurance of salvation, and the place of good works. A close investigation into Willet's exegetical method also helps to see how an identifiable hermeneutical lens is consistent with a disciplined reading that is faithful to the text. His polemical focus does not corrupt his exegesis or force upon it meanings that are alien to the text itself; rather, his polemical hermeneutic serves to focus his attention and frame positive doctrinal statements against the sharp contrast of alternate readings.

Darren M. Pollock examines the 1611 Romans hexapla commentary by the prolific Church of England preacher and controversialist Andrew Willet. While some have considered Willet’s later biblical commentaries to have been a retreat from his earlier engagement in religious controversy, the author argues that his exegetical work maintained a significant element of anti-Catholic polemics, only expressed in a different genre. This polemical hermeneutic served as an organizing principle and as a means by which to clarify the presentation of traditional Reformed readings in relief against a body of Roman Catholic theology that Willet believed threatened the gospel of grace. Paul’s letter provided ample opportunity for Willet to identify what is distinctive about Reformed theology – or rather, as Willet would have it, the particular ways in which “papist” dogma had diverged from the true line of Christian belief running from the Fathers through to the (truly “catholic”) Reformed church of the seventeenth century.Willet’s exegesis highlights many of the polemical issues that had long been contended between Protestants and Catholics, including the authentic versions of the bible, Scripture’s attributes, and principles of interpretation, as well as doctrines like justification, predestination, the assurance of salvation, and the place of good works. A close investigation into Willet’s exegetical method also helps to see how an identifiable hermeneutical lens is consistent with a disciplined reading that is faithful to the text. His polemical focus does not corrupt his exegesis or force upon it meanings that are alien to the text itself; rather, his polemical hermeneutic serves to focus his attention and frame positive doctrinal statements against the sharp contrast of alternate readings.

Samuel Rutherford's (1600-1661) scholastic theology has been criticized as overly deterministic and even fatalistic, a charge common to Reformed Orthodox theologians of the era. This project applies the new scholarship on Reformed Orthodoxy to Rutherford's doctrine of divine providence. The doctrine of divine providence touches upon many of the disputed points in the older scholarship, including the relationship between divine sovereignty and creaturely freedom, necessity and contingency, predetermination, and the problem of evil. Through a close examination of Rutherford's Latin works of scholastic theology, as well as many of his English works, a portrait emerges of the absolutely free and independent Creator, who does not utilize his sovereignty to dominate his subordinate creatures, but rather to guarantee their freedom. This analysis challenges the older scholarship while making useful contributions to the lively conversation concerning Reformed thought on freedom.

Grace and Freedom addresses the issue of divine grace in relation to the freedom of the will in Reformed or "Calvinist" theology in the late sixteenth and early seventeenth century. It focuses on the work of the English Reformed theologian William Perkins, especially his role as an apologist of the Church of England, defending its theology against the Roman Catholic polemic, and specifically against the charge that Reformed theology denies human free choice. Perkins and his Reformed contemporaries affirm that salvation occurs by grace alone and that God is the ultimate cause of all things, but they also insist on the freedom of the human will and specifically the freedom of choice in a way that does not conform to modern notions of "libertarian freedom" or "compatibilism." In developing this position, Perkins drew on the thought of Reformers such as Peter Martyr Vermigli and Zacharias Ursinus, on the nuanced positions of medieval scholastics, and several contemporary Roman Catholic representatives of the so-called "second scholasticism." His work was a major contribution to early modern Reformed thought both in England and on the continent. His influence in England extended both to the Reformed heritage of the Church of England and to English Puritanism. On the continent, his work contributed to the main lines of Reformed orthodoxy and to the piety of the Dutch Second Reformation.

Amandus Polanus (1561–1610) has often been described as a highly significant theologian, but also a neglected one. Part of Polanus' significance comes from his inclusion of ethics and practical application in his discussion of theology and the way in which his theology mixes Ramist dichotomies and the scholastic distinctions common in Christian Aristotelianism. Stephen B. Tipton shows how Polanus' understanding of God's essence and attributes is built upon the ground of scripture, arranged with the aid of logical arguments and reasoning, and aimed at the worship and glory of the Triune God. Tipton defends this conclusion against previous research which suggests that Polanus' theology is grounded in rationalism and subordinates the Trinity beneath an Aristotelian notion of God's perfect unity. This research not only corrects these previous notions about Polanus, but it also provides greater insight into the early Reformed Orthodox period and the theology that arose from that time.

A substantially rewritten edition of a work that has already established itself as the leading authority in its field.

This collection affirms the shaping authority of early modern women in literature and culture, evident well beyond their own moment.

Drawing upon a myriad of literary and political texts, Literature and Political Intellection in Early Stuart England charts how some of the Stuart period's major challenges to governance--the equivocation of recusant Catholics, the parsing of one's civil and religious obligations, the composition and distribution of subversive texts, and the increasing assertiveness of Parliament--evoked much greater disputes about the mental processes by which monarchs and subjects alike imagined, understood, and effected political action. Rather than emphasizing particular forms of political thought such as republicanism or absolutism, Todd Butler here investigates the more foundational question of political intellection, or the various ways that early modern individuals thought through the often uncertain political and religious environment they occupied, and how attention to such thinking in oneself or others could itself constitute a political position. Focusing on this continuing immanence of cognitive processes in the literature of the Stuart era, Butler examines how writers such as Francis Bacon, John Donne, Philip Massinger, John Milton, and other less familiar figures of the seventeenth-century evidence a shared concern with the interrelationship between mental and political behavior. These analyses are combined with similarly close readings of religious and political affairs that similarly return our attention to how early Stuart writers of all sorts understood the relationship between mental states and the forms of political engagement such as speech, oaths, debate, and letter-writing that expressed them. What results is a revised framework for early modern political subjectivity, one in which claims to liberty and sovereignty are tied not simply to what one can do but how--or even if--one can freely think.