No description available.

No description available.

In recent years a controversy has arisen in the scholarship dealing with St. Anselm of Canterbury. Since R. W. Southern published his biography of Anselm, his views have been widely accepted. In his view, Anselm was a devout monk who spent his life contemplating, with clear insight, profound theological issues. Forced to accept the Archbishopric of Canterbury, Anselm was never content with his responsibilities and longed to return to the simple life of a monk. The result was that Anselm blundered his way through conflicts with the Kings of England, William Rufus and Henry I. Because of his inability to handle himself in political spheres, Anselm was forced into exile twice. Within the last decade, however, Sally N. Vaughn has challenged Southern's prevailing views with a re-examination of the sources. In her opinion, Anselm was an astute politician who determined, early on, that he was destined to be Archbishop of Canterbury. Vaughn tries to show that Anselm carefully orchestrated events so that he was in fact elected to the position. Sally Vaughn's Anselm is very different from the contemplative monk of Southern's book. The controversy now centres on whether or not a devout contemplative monk could also be an astute politician while still maintaining an other-wordly detachment. This is the view of Eadmer, Anselm's companion and first biographer. Southern and Vaughn's views, while defensible from the sources, both fail to recognise, unlike Eadmer, the compatibility of vocations as an archbishop and a monk. This thesis will re-examine the sources--Eadmer's biographies and Anselm's writings--to show that Eadmer's view is the correct one. Anselm clearly transferred his intellectual powers into his monastic vocation and from there used his principles as a guiding force of his episcopacy.

No description available.

This dissertation is an intellectual biography of John Charles Ryle, the first Bishop of Liverpool. Chapter 1 focuses on Ryle’s intellectual, theological, and spiritual formation. Special attention is given to his home, education at Eton and Oxford, conversion, religious opinions, and unexpected entrance into ministry. Chapter 2 discusses Ryle’s preaching, based primarily on the sermons he preached at Helmingham (1844-1861). It begins by tracing his homiletical development, which culminated in the development of a more simple and direct style of preaching that brought him national acclaim. This “crucified style” will then be analyzed in light of his classical rhetorical training as well as Victorian homiletical theory. The chapter will conclude with a rhetorical comparison of sermons preached by J. C. Ryle, John Henry Newman, and Charles Haddon Spurgeon on John 11. Chapter 3 examines Ryle’s pastoral theology by looking at a series of pastoral writings he began publishing at Helmingham. These include evangelical tracts, practical (devotional) commentaries on the four canonical gospels, and a series of less well-known hymn-books. Chapter 4 focuses on Ryle as a theological controversialist and champion of the Evangelical party. His writings against ritualism, neologianism, and Keswick spirituality are examined, and his role in these various debates are discussed. Chapter 5 discusses the role Ryle played as a nationally recognized leader of the Church of England. Attention is given to his attempts to unify the Evangelical party, his defense of the establishment, and his proposals for church reform. Chapter 6 examines Ryle’s episcopacy in Liverpool from 1880 to 1900. The chapter begins with a discussion of the state of the diocese before his appointment. This is followed by an analysis of his diocesan strategy to reach the “masses.” The chapter is concluded by considering Ryle’s major concerns for the Church of England in the closing decades of the nineteenth century.

No description available.