"Bangorian" redirects here. For people from places named for the British diocese, see, see Bangor.
The Bangorian Controversy was a theological argument within the Church of England in the early 18th century, with strong political overtones. The origins of the controversy lay in the 1716 posthumous publication of George Hickes's Constitution of the Catholic Church, and the Nature and Consequences of Schism. In it, Hickes, as Bishop of Thetford, on behalf of the minority non-juror faction that had broken away from the Church of England after the Glorious Revolution, excommunicated all but the non-juror churchmen. Benjamin Hoadly, the Bishop of Bangor, wrote a reply, Preservative against the Principles and Practices of Non-Jurors; his own Erastian position was sincerely proposed as the only test of truth.
Benjamin Hoadly by Sarah Hoadly
The controversy itself began very visibly and vocally when Hoadly delivered a sermon on 31 March 1717[which calendar?] to George I of Great Britain on The Nature of the Kingdom of Christ. His text was John 18:36, "My kingdom is not of this world" and from that, Hoadly deduced, supposedly at the request of the king himself, that there is no Biblical justification for any church government of any sort. He identified the church with the Kingdom of Heaven. It was therefore not of this world, and Christ had not delegated His authority to any representatives.
Two competing visions of government were in play. On the one hand, there was a vision of God appointing the king and the bishops to be leaders, selecting them from all others and imbuing them with special characters, either through grace or in creation. That view held that the king, as the head of the Established Church, was not only a secular leader of a state but also a religious primate. Power and regulation flowed downward from God to the people. That was the aristocratic model that was favoured by the Tory party and had been used to propose the divine right of kings.
The other view was that power flowed up from the people to the leaders, that leaders were no more intrinsically better than those led, and God gives out revelation freely. That Whig view was also the view of the Puritans and the "Independents" (the various Congregational and Baptist churches, Quakers etc.).
George I favoured the Whigs in Parliament and favoured a latitudinarian ecclesiastical policy in general. That was probably not by any desire to give up royal prerogative but to break the power of the aristocracy and the House of Lords. A significant obstacle to all kings of England had been the presence of bishops in the Lords. While a king could create peers, it was much more difficult for him to move bishops into and out of the Lords.
Sermon and aftermath
The sermon was immediately published and instantly drew counterattacks. William Law (Three Letters to the Bishop of Bangor) and Thomas Sherlock (dean of Chichester), in particular, gave vigorous defences of church polity. Hoadly himself wrote A Reply to the Representations of Convocation to answer Sherlock, Andrew Snape, provost of Eton, and Francis Hare, then dean of Worcester. The three men, and another opponent, Robert Moss, dean of Ely, were deprived of their royal chaplaincies by the king. Hoadly did not, however, attempt to answer William Law. It has been claimed that in all, over 200 pamphlets linked to the controversy were published by 53 writers. Of those, 74 were published in July 1717.[1][2][3]
In May 1717, the Convocation appointed a committee to study the sermon. When the report was ready for synodal sanction against Hoadly, the king dismissed the convocation, which did not meet again for over 130 years.
A letter to the Reverend Dr. Edward Tenison, concerning some citations made from ... the Arch-Bishop of Canterbury's preliminary discourse to the Apostolical fathers, in a paper lately published, intituled, A letter to the Reverend the Prolocutor: being an answer to a paper, &c. By the author of that letter[11]
^"§5. Law's Controversial Writings against Hoadly, Mandeville and Tindal. XII. William Law and the Mystics. Vol. 9. From Steele and Addison to Pope and Swift. The Cambridge History of English and American Literature: An Encyclopedia in Eighteen Volumes. 190721". Bartleby.com. Retrieved 1 March 2013.
^Warner, Rebecca Louise. "Moss, Robert". Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (online ed.). Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/ref:odnb/19403. (Subscription or UK public library membership required.)
^A Letter to the Reverend Dr. Edward Tenison, Concerning Some Citations Made from .... the Arch-Bishop of Canterbury's Preliminary Discourse to the Apostolical Fathers, in a Paper Lately Published, Intituled, A Letter to the Reverend the Prolocutor: Being an Answer to a Paper, &c. By the Author of that Letter at Google Books
^Denis Larionov & Alexander Zhulin. "Read the ebook Catalogue of the printed books in the library of Merton College by Merton College. Library". Ebooksread.com. Retrieved 1 March 2013.
Further reading
Cross, F. A., ed. The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church. 1964. London: Oxford University Press.
Church of England and the Bangorian controversy, 1716–1721. Andrew Starkie: 2007: Boydell Press.
January 31, 2023
bangorian, controversy, bangorian, redirects, here, people, from, places, named, british, diocese, bangor, theological, argument, within, church, england, early, 18th, century, with, strong, political, overtones, origins, controversy, 1716, posthumous, publica. Bangorian redirects here For people from places named for the British diocese see see Bangor The Bangorian Controversy was a theological argument within the Church of England in the early 18th century with strong political overtones The origins of the controversy lay in the 1716 posthumous publication of George Hickes s Constitution of the Catholic Church and the Nature and Consequences of Schism In it Hickes as Bishop of Thetford on behalf of the minority non juror faction that had broken away from the Church of England after the Glorious Revolution excommunicated all but the non juror churchmen Benjamin Hoadly the Bishop of Bangor wrote a reply Preservative against the Principles and Practices of Non Jurors his own Erastian position was sincerely proposed as the only test of truth Benjamin Hoadly by Sarah Hoadly The controversy itself began very visibly and vocally when Hoadly delivered a sermon on 31 March 1717 which calendar to George I of Great Britain on The Nature of the Kingdom of Christ His text was John 18 36 My kingdom is not of this world and from that Hoadly deduced supposedly at the request of the king himself that there is no Biblical justification for any church government of any sort He identified the church with the Kingdom of Heaven It was therefore not of this world and Christ had not delegated His authority to any representatives Contents 1 Background 2 Sermon and aftermath 3 Timeline of publications 4 See also 5 References 6 Further readingBackground EditThis section does not cite any sources Please help improve this section by adding citations to reliable sources Unsourced material may be challenged and removed March 2013 Learn how and when to remove this template message Two competing visions of government were in play On the one hand there was a vision of God appointing the king and the bishops to be leaders selecting them from all others and imbuing them with special characters either through grace or in creation That view held that the king as the head of the Established Church was not only a secular leader of a state but also a religious primate Power and regulation flowed downward from God to the people That was the aristocratic model that was favoured by the Tory party and had been used to propose the divine right of kings The other view was that power flowed up from the people to the leaders that leaders were no more intrinsically better than those led and God gives out revelation freely That Whig view was also the view of the Puritans and the Independents the various Congregational and Baptist churches Quakers etc George I favoured the Whigs in Parliament and favoured a latitudinarian ecclesiastical policy in general That was probably not by any desire to give up royal prerogative but to break the power of the aristocracy and the House of Lords A significant obstacle to all kings of England had been the presence of bishops in the Lords While a king could create peers it was much more difficult for him to move bishops into and out of the Lords Sermon and aftermath EditThe sermon was immediately published and instantly drew counterattacks William Law Three Letters to the Bishop of Bangor and Thomas Sherlock dean of Chichester in particular gave vigorous defences of church polity Hoadly himself wrote A Reply to the Representations of Convocation to answer Sherlock Andrew Snape provost of Eton and Francis Hare then dean of Worcester The three men and another opponent Robert Moss dean of Ely were deprived of their royal chaplaincies by the king Hoadly did not however attempt to answer William Law It has been claimed that in all over 200 pamphlets linked to the controversy were published by 53 writers Of those 74 were published in July 1717 1 2 3 In May 1717 the Convocation appointed a committee to study the sermon When the report was ready for synodal sanction against Hoadly the king dismissed the convocation which did not meet again for over 130 years Timeline of publications EditYear Author Publication Position Replies1716 George Hickes died 1715 posthumously published by Thomas Deacon 4 The Constitution of the Catholick Church and the Nature and Consequences of Schism Non juror Benjamin Hoadly A Preservative against the Principles and Practices of the Nonjurors both in Church and State 1716 5 1717 Andrew Snape Letters to the Bishop of Bangor 6 High Church1717 Thomas Sherlock Remarks on the Bishop of Bangor s Treatment of the Clergy and Convocation and other works 7 High Church1717 William Law Three Letters to the Bishop of Bangor from 1717 8 Non juror of the Hanoverian succession 9 1718 Robert Moss The Report Vindicated from Misreports 10 High Church1718 Thomas Herne A letter to the Reverend Dr Edward Tenison concerning some citations made from the Arch Bishop of Canterbury s preliminary discourse to the Apostolical fathers in a paper lately published intituled A letter to the Reverend the Prolocutor being an answer to a paper amp c By the author of that letter 11 Supporter of Hoadley and Tenison1719 Francis Hare Church Authority Vindicated 12 High Church Hoadly An Answer to Dr Hare s Sermon intituled Church Authority vindicated 1720 5 13 See also Edit1716 in literature 1717 in literature 1718 in literatureReferences Edit Outlines of the History of the Theological Literature of the Church of England 1897 Anglicanhistory org Retrieved 1 March 2013 New Schaff Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge Vol V Goar Innocent Christian Classics Ethereal Library Ccel org Retrieved 1 March 2013 History of English thought in the eighteenth century Retrieved 1 March 2013 Hickes George Dictionary of National Biography London Smith Elder amp Co 1885 1900 a b Hoadly Benjamin 1676 1761 Dictionary of National Biography London Smith Elder amp Co 1885 1900 Snape Andrew Dictionary of National Biography London Smith Elder amp Co 1885 1900 Sherlock Thomas Dictionary of National Biography London Smith Elder amp Co 1885 1900 5 Law s Controversial Writings against Hoadly Mandeville and Tindal XII William Law and the Mystics Vol 9 From Steele and Addison to Pope and Swift The Cambridge History of English and American Literature An Encyclopedia in Eighteen Volumes 190721 Bartleby com Retrieved 1 March 2013 Law William 1686 1761 Dictionary of National Biography London Smith Elder amp Co 1885 1900 Warner Rebecca Louise Moss Robert Oxford Dictionary of National Biography online ed Oxford University Press doi 10 1093 ref odnb 19403 Subscription or UK public library membership required A Letter to the Reverend Dr Edward Tenison Concerning Some Citations Made from the Arch Bishop of Canterbury s Preliminary Discourse to the Apostolical Fathers in a Paper Lately Published Intituled A Letter to the Reverend the Prolocutor Being an Answer to a Paper amp c By the Author of that Letter at Google Books Hare Francis Dictionary of National Biography London Smith Elder amp Co 1885 1900 Denis Larionov amp Alexander Zhulin Read the ebook Catalogue of the printed books in the library of Merton College by Merton College Library Ebooksread com Retrieved 1 March 2013 Further reading EditCross F A ed The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church 1964 London Oxford University Press Chisholm Hugh ed 1911 Bangorian Controversy Encyclopaedia Britannica Vol 3 11th ed Cambridge University Press Church of England and the Bangorian controversy 1716 1721 Andrew Starkie 2007 Boydell Press Retrieved from https en wikipedia org w index php title Bangorian Controversy amp oldid 1012158087, wikipedia, wiki, book, books, library,
