Jansenism and England: Moral Rigorism across the Confessions. By Thomas Palmer
`Jansenism and England' is a huge programme. In his introduction Thomas Palmer clearly explains the scope and purpose of his monograph (a revised version of a 2015 Oxford DPhil). He means to study the echoes of the Jansenist controversy, primarily in its moral dimension (the so-called ‘moral Ja...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Electronic Review |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Interlibrary Loan: | Interlibrary Loan for the Fachinformationsdienste (Specialized Information Services in Germany) |
| Published: |
2020
|
| In: |
The journal of theological studies
Year: 2020, Volume: 71, Issue: 2, Pages: 951-954 |
| Further subjects: | B
Book review
|
| Online Access: |
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
| Summary: | `Jansenism and England' is a huge programme. In his introduction Thomas Palmer clearly explains the scope and purpose of his monograph (a revised version of a 2015 Oxford DPhil). He means to study the echoes of the Jansenist controversy, primarily in its moral dimension (the so-called ‘moral Jansenism’ or ‘rigorism’), among English episcopalian divines of the mid-seventeenth century, in order to shed light on the distinctive ‘theological sensibility’ (p. 4) of this group, members of which he labels ‘Anglican divines’ or, more specifically, ‘the “holy living” theologians’. In view of the book’s English focus, it would be inappropriate to spend too much time on the inaugural chapter on Jansenism. Palmer has an excellent grasp of both French and Latin sources, he is well informed of recent French literature, and he provides a generally adequate overview. Although, or because, his approach is more theological than historical, he neglects some subtle distinctions of seventeenth-century theology. Pope Innocent XI did not censure ‘the proposition that it is probable that one can make a decision “even according to a less probable opinion”’ (p. 11): this would have amounted to a full-blown condemnation of probabilism, a step that the papacy consistently refused to take. The proposition in question (Denz.-Schön. 2102) only concerned the very specific case of a judge delivering a verdict, and was a novel development of ‘Baroque’ casuistry. On the origins of probabilism, Palmer rightly refrains from citing the once influential studies of Martin W. F. Stone, which were exposed as serial plagiarism a decade ago: but his account would have benefited from using Stone’s main source and victim, Ilkka Kantola, Probability and Moral Uncertainty in Late Medieval and Early Modern Times (Helsinki: Luther-Agricola-Society, 1994). |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1477-4607 |
| Contains: | Enthalten in: The journal of theological studies
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1093/jts/flaa120 |