Not Affirming Things Intended
Reason and Worship in More’s The Confutation of Tyndale’s Answer
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 20144158 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Richard F Hardin (corresponding author) |
| Year | 2002 |
| Volume | 39 (Number 149) |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 4-16 |
| Publication date | 2002-03-01 |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Moreana (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0047-8105 • E-ISSN: 2398-4961 |
| Publisher | Edinburgh University Press (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.3366/more.2002.39.1.3 |
| OpenAlex | W2476847597 |
| Language | EN |
More responds strongly to Tyndale’s insistence that ritual, like Scripture, must be interpreted plainly by the worshiper: the chief purpose of ritual is to bring us closer to God, not to enlighten the intellect. In The Apology he declares that we should meditate on the Bible and the forms of worship (which must be observed as forms) in order to stir the imagination, not to seek out the “things intended” by God, which are beyond our capacity to know. This controversy touches all the major points of English debate on the subject for over a century to come, and some historians now see that it is worth attention in itself
Aesthetics · Art · Epistemology · Intellect · Literature · Order (exchange) · Sociology · Subject (documents) · Subject matter · Theology · World Wide Web · Worship · Computer Science · Philosophy · Reformation and Early Modern Christianity
| Highly cited | No |
|---|