tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6923848597324199238.post3934626854768005273..comments2023-05-16T17:13:33.039+01:00Comments on theAV4ever: Thomas Ravis - a scourge of the Puritans.Clivehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17381181402866048722noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6923848597324199238.post-65184704545542183832011-05-12T12:56:34.053+01:002011-05-12T12:56:34.053+01:00If you read my blog on George Abbot, you will (if ...If you read my blog on George Abbot, you will (if you accept the analysis) see there is an Anglican via media which ‘plays both ends against the middle.’ - the Romish ceremonialists at one end, the radical separatists at the other. Abbot may be one of the best examples of the via media at this time, because he was seen as Puritan in doctrine (accepting Calvin’s teaching on Election &c) yet Romish in enforcing ceremonies on the clergy. He accepted episcopacy (and apostolic succession). Separatists complained he persecuted them. Roman Catholics complained he disenfranchised them. So, puritanism is a tricky label in the English context. See also my blog on John Rainolds. Rainolds’ motives (as arguably “the most learned man in England”) for proposing a new translation were more than political. Like James himself (who was no mean scholar), he also believed the Text could be improved in style and substance. In that they united; the rest is history!Clive Goviernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6923848597324199238.post-75975250852381493682011-04-29T01:50:53.246+01:002011-04-29T01:50:53.246+01:00HI,
Ravis was apparently fully on board with King ...HI,<br />Ravis was apparently fully on board with King James' agenda of total conformity (I shall have one doctrine and one practice or else....), as well as, total arrest of any and all reform. The so-called Puritans involved in the translation revision of the Church of England's Authorised Version (1st: Great Bible, 2nd Bishop's Bible, and 3rd: King James' Version) must have exchanged any Puritan identity for conformist identity to remain in the Church and be promoted within it rather than continue to fight for continued reform. The conference was supposed to entertain the Millenarian complaints but was rather used to sweep aside complaints and shame and silence Puritans to get them to conform. For King James to allow the revision was a ploy to make it look like he was giving the Puritans something if not resolving a single complaint listed in the petition. The revision was then another attempt to supplant the ever popular Puritan's Geneva Bible which finally succeeded 30 years later.<br />Ross PurdyAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com