No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 02 February 2009
What is the ultimate seat of authority to which Christian theology makes its appeal?' Dr Whale in posing this question says that answers fall into three great and distinctive types. ‘The first type emphasises the authority of the Church’ while ‘the second type emphasises the sole authority of the Bible’ and ‘the third type may be loosely described as mystical—its constitutive principle is the “Inner Light”'.1
page 183 note 1 Whale, J. S., Christian Doctrine, 8th impression 1956, pp. 14ff.Google Scholar
page 184 note 1 Hooker, Eccles. Polity, V, LXV, 2.
page 185 note 1 Quoted Temple, W., Readings in St. John, 1950 reprint, p. 119.Google Scholar
page 185 note 2 Temple, W., Mature, Man and God, 1935 reprint, pp. 329 and 240f.Google Scholar
page 186 note 1 Rich, E. C., Spiritual Authority in the Church of England, 1953, pp. 98 and 112.Google Scholar
page 186 note 2 Acts 15.28.
page 186 note 3 Wood, G. E., The Regal Power of the Church, 1886, pp. 30, 32.Google Scholar
page 186 note 4 Palmer, W., On the Church, 1842, vol. II, pp. 291ff.Google Scholar
page 187 note 1 Authority Ecclesiastical and Biblical, 1908, p. 2f.
page 188 note 1 op. cit., pp. 93 and 95.
page 188 note 2 Art. XX of the XXXIX Articles.
page 188 note 3 ‘De sancto Spiritu’, chap. 77.
page 188 note 4 Fison, J. E., The Blessing of the Spirit, 1950, p. 171.Google Scholar
page 188 note 5 e.g. the Bull of 1302, ‘Unam Sanctam’.
page 189 note 1 Fison, op. cit., p. 153.
page 189 note 2 See Woodhouse, H. F., ‘What is meant by Succession?’, in Theology, October 1952.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
page 189 note 3 Fison, op. cit., p. 157.
page 189 note 4 op. cit., p. 160.
page 189 note 5 1 John 5.21.
page 190 note 1 Quoted Whale, op. cit., p. 17.
page 191 note 1 Chadwick, O., From Bossuet to Newman, C.U.P., 1957, p. 164.Google Scholar
page 191 note 2 Newman, J. H., An Essay on the Development of Doctrine, 1878 ed., p. 8.Google Scholar
page 191 note 3 op. cit., pp. 66 and 73f.
page 191 note 4 John 16.13 and 14.26.
page 192 note 1 Theological Investigations, vol. I, trans. Ernst, L., 1961, pp. 43 and 47.Google Scholar
page 192 note 2 Mozley, J. B., The Theory of Development, 1878 reprint, pp. 144ff.Google Scholar
page 192 note 3 op. cit., ch. 1, sect. I passim.
page 193 note 1 Mozley, op. cit., p. 41f.
page 194 note 1 Rahner, cf. p. 41.
page 194 note 2 op. cit., pp. 42 and 44.
page 194 note 3 op. cit., p. 56.
page 194 note 4 Matt. 13.52.
page 194 note 5 Homilies, 1843 ed., p. 497.
page 195 note 1 op. cit., pp. 5–18 passim, 33, 36.