In another forum I saw a reference to Bishop John Davenant, calling him a 17th Century English Puritan. Maybe I am just operating in an Anglican bubble, but from what I have read of Bishop Davenant I do not consider him a puritan.
I responded by saying that it was true that Bishop Davenant was a delegate to the Synod of Dort. And Bishop Davenant aso signed the Canons of Dort. When he came back to England, he wrote in a way that leads me to conclude he believed in a kind of hypothetical universalism. Some have suggested that he was to Lutheran to be a good Anglican and way too Reformed to be a good Lutheran. In many ways Bishop Davenant was a proto-Amyrauldian. I also said that in some respects Davenant was a good scholar.
They responded by saying that there were some Arminians who were counted among the Puritans. John Goodwin is an example they offered.
A further response was that Amyraldianism has to do with the decrees. Davenant affirmed only a universal satisfaction with limited application the elect. This was common among the Reformed and was permitted by Dort, the very standard of what it means to be “Reformed.” They suggested that he was essentially a Reformed Anglican, and that Davenant’s views are fairly similar to Reformers like Bullinger, Ursinus, Zanchi, and even some at Westminster—none of whom held to Amyraldianism. They agreed that Davenant may be wrong at points, but suggested that is a different question as to whether Davenant's views are Reformed, and whether or not it is proper to characterize him as a puritan.
I have two questions.
1. Are the views expressed by Bishop Davenant on universal satisfaction Reformed?
2. How should 17th Century English Puritanism be defined? When I think of puritans and puritanism I think of English Protestants of the late 16th, and early 17th centuries who regarded the Reformation of the Church of England under Elizabeth as incomplete and sought to apply the regulative principle to worship, and purify the reformed doctrine taught in the Church.
I responded by saying that it was true that Bishop Davenant was a delegate to the Synod of Dort. And Bishop Davenant aso signed the Canons of Dort. When he came back to England, he wrote in a way that leads me to conclude he believed in a kind of hypothetical universalism. Some have suggested that he was to Lutheran to be a good Anglican and way too Reformed to be a good Lutheran. In many ways Bishop Davenant was a proto-Amyrauldian. I also said that in some respects Davenant was a good scholar.
They responded by saying that there were some Arminians who were counted among the Puritans. John Goodwin is an example they offered.
A further response was that Amyraldianism has to do with the decrees. Davenant affirmed only a universal satisfaction with limited application the elect. This was common among the Reformed and was permitted by Dort, the very standard of what it means to be “Reformed.” They suggested that he was essentially a Reformed Anglican, and that Davenant’s views are fairly similar to Reformers like Bullinger, Ursinus, Zanchi, and even some at Westminster—none of whom held to Amyraldianism. They agreed that Davenant may be wrong at points, but suggested that is a different question as to whether Davenant's views are Reformed, and whether or not it is proper to characterize him as a puritan.
I have two questions.
1. Are the views expressed by Bishop Davenant on universal satisfaction Reformed?
2. How should 17th Century English Puritanism be defined? When I think of puritans and puritanism I think of English Protestants of the late 16th, and early 17th centuries who regarded the Reformation of the Church of England under Elizabeth as incomplete and sought to apply the regulative principle to worship, and purify the reformed doctrine taught in the Church.
John Owen’s disagreements with John Davenant
Since, not only the complete finishing of this Treatise under my hand, which is now about 5 Months ago, but also the Printing of some Part of it, the Two Dissertations of Dr Davenant, of the Death …
reformedcovenanter.wordpress.com
John Davenant: A Jewel of the Reformed Churches or a Tarnished Stone?
Rev. Mark Shand* [Source: Protestant Reformed Theological Journal , April/November 1998] Introduction — “Introduction”...
commongracedebate.blogspot.com