Friday, February 11, 2011

Reasonable Christian: D. Broughton Knox: Justification by Faith Alone: A Legal Fiction?


In my re-reading of the biographical sketch of D. Broughton Knox in the Selected Works: Volume I, I came across the contention by Marcus Loane that D. Broughton Knox advocated that the doctrine of justification by faith alone was a legal fiction. Now since this is often a term of derision by the Anglo-Papists I wondered if this was how Sloan intended the term? So I look up Sanday and Headlam's view of justification by faith as a legal fiction in Google Search. The search results were intriguing to say the least. I got a hit in Google Books which pointed me to The Expository Times, 1899. Apparently The Expository Times was published by Harvard Divinity School as part of their theological education. At any rate, D. Broughton Knox was an Evangelical, although not exactly an orthodox Reformed thinker. Knox advocated Amyraldianism, which is a departure from classical Reformed and Protestant theology. The following quote by Marcus Loane shows that Sloan has an inadequate understanding of both Knox and the doctrine of justification by an "imputed" righteousness. As we will see below, Loane has an inadequate understanding of Sanday and Headlam's view and therefore misunderstands Broughton Knox's view as well:

Broughton's teaching was all rooted in his understanding of the integrity and authority of Holy Scripture as God's Supreme written revelation of truth. He was never a blind adherent of Calvin, or Cranmer, or any other Reformation Divine; he carved out his own very independent line of approach. He admired Calvin rather than Calvin's more extreme disciples, and he followed Amyraldus rather than the latter in his view of predestination. He was not at ease with the doctrine of imputed righteousness, but followed Sanday and Headlam in treating it as a legal fiction. This led him to prefer the concept of reconciliation rather than of justification as the criterion for a standing or falling church. Marcus Loane, "David Broughton Knox." D. Broughton Knox: Selected Works: Volume I: The Doctrine of God. Ed. Tony Payne. (Kingsford: Matthias Media, 2000). P. 17.

To read the full article, click here.

Hat tip to Charle Ray at Reasonable Christian for drawing my attention to this article.

Justification by faith only was a major point of departure for the Protestant Reformers from the Church of Rome. It was the linchpin of the Protestant Reformation. The Thirty-Nine Articles, while permitting a broad latitude of opinions on secondary and tertiary matters, demands uniformity on the "most wholesome doctrine" of justification by faith alone. Only by faith which rests on the merits of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ are we accounted righteous before God.

2 comments:

Reformation said...

This article will rise above the "theological IQ" of the hordes within the ACNA. It "just will." The ACNA is not interested in these issues.

OTOH, assuredly, it will not be above the "IQ" level of the current REC Bishops...although they will "hide" it in the interests of "Anglican unity at any costs." Laud Leo knows what these issues are...precisely.

I know. I heard Leo Riches (REC) lecture in the early 80's on this subject.

Regrettably, Leo lectured while his mentor, Dr. Rudolph REC, noted the declension. The 80's were a period of decline. I was there.

Regrettably, Leo in the 90's sought union with the APA.

Regrettably, Leo, REC, was willing to abandon Reformed and Reformational Christianity.

Charlie, what u offer here is beyond the ken and imagination of the ACNA and AMiA. These two groups can't even imagine these issues.

Reformation said...

Robin and Charlie:

Are there no REC correspondents, plaintiffs, or rebuttalists here? I suspect any REC-ers fear a backwash from Laud Leo Riches, but whatever. I don't fear Laud Leo.

Forget the ACNA or AMiA, since this, unlike old REC-ers, is beyond their paygrade. Duncan is a General Sem grad in the 70's, a dimwit, by comparison to Riches. Riches is really beyond Bob in terms of theological attainments...quite far beyond him. (It shows when one listens to Bob.)

Charlie, to talk of DB Knox to "American Anglicans" is like talking ga-ga with children. They don't understand the sophisticated language. They "just don't."

While we've studied these issues, we cannot assume that "American Anglican Bishops" (other than the compromisers like Laud Leo Riches) have. That is beyond their ken, capacities and bibliographies.

Charlie, we are dealing with "Bishops" still sorting out sodomy (and liberalism) as a moral issue. Will bet you that these ACNA Bishops have never dealt with Machen's "Christianity or Liberalism" as a premier text in seminary. In short, we have leaders "thinking within their small boxes."

Regards,
PV