Richard Snoddy. The Soteriology of James Ussher: The Act and Object of Saving Faith. Oxford University Press, 2014. See here to purchase the book.
James Ussher was a seventeenth Irish Reformed thinker, who had an
influence on England. Richard Snoddy has a doctorate from Middlesex
University and has been a teacher and a fellow at London School of
Theology.
Snoddy is addressing certain scholarly trends. For one, there is a
view that Ussher eventually repudiated his Reformed beliefs. A lot of
this book addresses Ussher’s ideas on soteriology—-the atonement,
justification, sanctification, and personal assurance of
salvation—-highlighting where Ussher changed his positions. Ussher did
come to accept that Christ died for all people, not only the elect, yet,
in accordance with Reformed thought, he still maintained that the Holy
Spirit enabled those whom God elected to salvation to believe. Others
held this position, too, but Ussher was significant because he had an
influence on English Reformed thought.
Another position that Snoddy addresses is that of R.T. Kendall. (By
the way, this is the second scholarly book on the Puritans that I have
read recently, and both books assert that Kendall’s conclusions are
inaccurate!) Kendall maintains that Calvinists after Calvin became
highly introspective because they were departing from what Calvin
believed. According to Kendall, Calvin thought that Christ died for all
people, not only the elect, so Christians could find assurance of
salvation on the basis of Christ having died for them. Calvinists after
Calvin, by contrast, supposed that Christ only died for the elect.
Consequently, people wondered if they were saved and if Christ actually
died for them, and they sought assurance of salvation from internal
signs of grace. Snoddy does not thoroughly dismiss Kendall’s model, but
he believes that Ussher provides a counter-example to it. Ussher, when
he believed in limited atonement, had a more objective emphasis on
assurance: believers could look at what Christ did for them and draw
assurance from that. When Ussher moved towards believing in unlimited
atonement, however, he stressed believers trying to make their calling
and election sure, seeking to move them away from easy-believism.
Others have probably written a better quality review than this one,
but my goal here is to give my impressions of the book, and to leave a
record of what I got out of it.
Those with a bare-bones understanding of Reformed theology will
understand this book. Those bare bones include predestination, penal
substitutionary atonement, imputed righteousness, and Christ sanctifying
whom he justifies. At the same time, the book goes much deeper than
that, as it highlights the diversity of thought about soteriology among
Reformed thinkers, Catholic thinkers, and even within Ussher himself.
Among the questions that are touched on in this book: Why did Christ
have to die to save people, if God had already chosen people unto
salvation? Are believers’ good works meritorious on account of Christ’s
merit, or is there something meritorious in the works themselves, since
they are inherently righteous? Does justification precede or come
after regeneration? Is justification for past sins only, meaning one
has to confess and repent to receive forgiveness of future sins, or is
it for future sins, too? Does God impute Christ’s active righteousness (obedience to the law) to believers? How does one reconcile Paul and James? Is
James talking about believers’ justification before human beings rather
than God, or is there a sense in which believers become internally and
practically righteous, before God as well? What exactly provides people
with assurance of salvation? Is it their faith, the object of their
faith, the work of the Spirit on their heart, their remembrance of
specific Christian propositions, or something that they gain as they
proceed in their Christian walk, trying to make their calling and
election sure?
Keeping track of who said what and where Ussher landed was a daunting
aspect of this book. Still, Snoddy did well to provide lucid
conclusions to the chapters, a conclusion to the book itself, and a
personal touch, as he shared biographical information about Ussher. The
book was highly nuanced, though, and not just in tracing Ussher’s
soteriological positions. The conclusion to the book highlights
ambiguity in Ussher’s view on baptism, asking if Ussher treated baptism
as a seal of faith, or as an institution that actually imparts grace.
There was also the question of whether Ussher wrote some of the things
that are attributed to him.
On some things, I am scratching my head. I can understand the
anti-Calvinist argument that Calvinism makes us unsure about whom Christ
died for, so how can we preach the Gospel to people when we do not even
know if Christ died for them? I am a little puzzled over the concern
that Calvinism obviates the importance of Christ’s death in salvation,
treating it more as a display of God’s justice and mercy than as an
absolutely necessary means to atonement. Could not God predestine to
save certain sinners, and then effect that salvation by sending Christ
to die for their sins? On page 157, Snoddy states: “In 1546, the
Council of Trent anathematised all who asserted that in baptism ‘all
which pertains to the true essence of sin is not removed’. The
Tridentine fathers insisted that sin did not remain after baptism.”
What remains is concupiscence, which in itself is not sinful. If
Catholics believe this, however, why do they have a confessional? Why
do they insist that mortal and venial sins are challenges with which
Catholics contend? While Snoddy is writing for a scholarly audience, I
wish he had defined what syllogism means, within the context of
assurance of salvation. I am also slightly unclear about what benefits
Christ’s death brought to the non-elect, according to Ussher, and what
the difference is between internal cleansing in sanctification and
“habitual inherent righteousness,” which Ussher taught.
I am still glad that I read this book, however, as it exposed me more to the diversity of Reformed thought.
I checked out this book from the library. My review is honest!