What do you think?
Rate this book
Justification and Sanctification
Book by Toon, Peter
- GenresTheology
162 pages, Paperback
First published December 31, 1983
6 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 of 1 review
January 12, 2019
Peter Toon’s Justification and Sanctification helpfully etches out the various soteriological positions of Western Christianity. After concisely surveying the pertinent biblical data, he equitably describes the trajectory of thought on the topics of justification and sanctification by extrapolating on the views of major Christian figures, movements, and councils including Augustine and Aquinas, Lutheranism, the Council of Trent, Reformed theology, Anglicanism, and Wesleyanism. Overall, Toon’s book accentuates the parallels and dramatic differences between the various Christian traditions and is an accommodating appraisal of the pertinent biblical data; however, it could be improved by expanding his treatment of Anglicanism. Further, his work catalyzes further discussion by raising the question of what constitutes legitimate doctrinal development.
One often overlooked facet of the interdenominational discussion of justification and sanctification is what differing traditions share in common. Toon draws attention to the christocentricity of the various schools of thought within Christianity. The pre-Reformation Church emphasized the Incarnation as the means whereby “Salvation is wrought by Christ for us and is achieved in us when his Spirit dwells in our hearts.” While Luther’s doctrine of imputation may have been novel, it was nevertheless focused on the righteousness of Christ, “Luther talked of the imputed alien (external) righteousness of Christ; concerning this Augustine had nothing to say, for his emphasis was on the internal righteousness caused by the Spirit.” Even in the Roman reaction to Protestantism, the Council of Trent affirms the communication of the merit of Christ’s Passion as the locus of justification. Despite the “unhappy divisions” in Christ’s Church, there is, still a central emphasis on Christ, his Incarnation, Crucifixion, and Resurrection.
Toon’s treatment of Scripture traces the theme of righteousness across the Old and New Testaments. The cardinal Hebrew word for righteousness in the Old Testament is sdq; a right understanding of this word highlights the importance of relationships; God’s relationship to humanity is consistently based on his covenantal faithfulness in spite of humanity’s many failures. His discussion of righteousness in the New Testament is more expansive but similarly illuminating. He introduces the theme in Paul’s work, harmonizes supposed contradictions between the Pauline corpus and the Epistle of James, and distinguishes between justification and sanctification. Toon’s analysis is a beneficial work to reference because he adequately summarizes the biblical materials in an easily accessible manner.
One deficiency in Toon’s book is his overly narrow definition of Anglicanism which ultimately limits what should have been a broader investigation. While engaging important Anglican sources like Cranmer, Hooker, and the Thirty-Nine Articles, he treats the Caroline Divines and, by extension, the Tractarians, as aberrant and illegitimate informers of Anglican identity. This view reflects a quaint understanding of Anglican identity endemic to the intraparty disputes of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. Mary I.M. Bell rightly calls for acknowledgment of the influence of the Tractarians while allowing for legitimate criticisms of their work, “For what the Oxford Movement did in 1833 the whole Church of England must in honour give thanks. For what it has led to in 1933 we are not all bound to agree in the measure of our praise.” A thinker like E.B. Pusey would have been helpful to compare and contrast with Cranmer and Hooker. His view moderated Reformed and catholic understandings because he effectively believed righteousness to be both imputed and imparted. Toon’s exploration of Anglican teaching precludes more thorough investigation on the topic because he a priori dismisses the Oxford Movement and their predecessors, the Caroline Divines.
Finally, Toon’s book raises the question, “What constitutes legitimate doctrinal development?” As he explores Luther’s hypothesis of imputation, he admits, “[Luther’s] doctrine represented a major innovation and development in terms of the history of the doctrine of justification in the Western Church.” The phenomenon of doctrinal development is inevitable. By admitting a lack of catholic support for Luther’s position, the natural concern is what apparatus(es) should be used to determine their legitimacy. This question is outside the scope of Toon’s immediate concern but should be considered by theologians conversing on this topic.
Toon’s book Justification and Sanctification is a worthy edition to a theological library; its value lies in its accessibility, concision, and overview of biblical data. An expanded understanding of Anglicanism would allow a more thorough discussion of justification and sanctification within the Church of England’s tradition. Finally, Toon forces readers to consider how doctrine develops, albeit indirectly. If a reader seeks to be more informed concerning the topics of justification and sanctification, Toon’s book is a fantastic introduction.
One often overlooked facet of the interdenominational discussion of justification and sanctification is what differing traditions share in common. Toon draws attention to the christocentricity of the various schools of thought within Christianity. The pre-Reformation Church emphasized the Incarnation as the means whereby “Salvation is wrought by Christ for us and is achieved in us when his Spirit dwells in our hearts.” While Luther’s doctrine of imputation may have been novel, it was nevertheless focused on the righteousness of Christ, “Luther talked of the imputed alien (external) righteousness of Christ; concerning this Augustine had nothing to say, for his emphasis was on the internal righteousness caused by the Spirit.” Even in the Roman reaction to Protestantism, the Council of Trent affirms the communication of the merit of Christ’s Passion as the locus of justification. Despite the “unhappy divisions” in Christ’s Church, there is, still a central emphasis on Christ, his Incarnation, Crucifixion, and Resurrection.
Toon’s treatment of Scripture traces the theme of righteousness across the Old and New Testaments. The cardinal Hebrew word for righteousness in the Old Testament is sdq; a right understanding of this word highlights the importance of relationships; God’s relationship to humanity is consistently based on his covenantal faithfulness in spite of humanity’s many failures. His discussion of righteousness in the New Testament is more expansive but similarly illuminating. He introduces the theme in Paul’s work, harmonizes supposed contradictions between the Pauline corpus and the Epistle of James, and distinguishes between justification and sanctification. Toon’s analysis is a beneficial work to reference because he adequately summarizes the biblical materials in an easily accessible manner.
One deficiency in Toon’s book is his overly narrow definition of Anglicanism which ultimately limits what should have been a broader investigation. While engaging important Anglican sources like Cranmer, Hooker, and the Thirty-Nine Articles, he treats the Caroline Divines and, by extension, the Tractarians, as aberrant and illegitimate informers of Anglican identity. This view reflects a quaint understanding of Anglican identity endemic to the intraparty disputes of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. Mary I.M. Bell rightly calls for acknowledgment of the influence of the Tractarians while allowing for legitimate criticisms of their work, “For what the Oxford Movement did in 1833 the whole Church of England must in honour give thanks. For what it has led to in 1933 we are not all bound to agree in the measure of our praise.” A thinker like E.B. Pusey would have been helpful to compare and contrast with Cranmer and Hooker. His view moderated Reformed and catholic understandings because he effectively believed righteousness to be both imputed and imparted. Toon’s exploration of Anglican teaching precludes more thorough investigation on the topic because he a priori dismisses the Oxford Movement and their predecessors, the Caroline Divines.
Finally, Toon’s book raises the question, “What constitutes legitimate doctrinal development?” As he explores Luther’s hypothesis of imputation, he admits, “[Luther’s] doctrine represented a major innovation and development in terms of the history of the doctrine of justification in the Western Church.” The phenomenon of doctrinal development is inevitable. By admitting a lack of catholic support for Luther’s position, the natural concern is what apparatus(es) should be used to determine their legitimacy. This question is outside the scope of Toon’s immediate concern but should be considered by theologians conversing on this topic.
Toon’s book Justification and Sanctification is a worthy edition to a theological library; its value lies in its accessibility, concision, and overview of biblical data. An expanded understanding of Anglicanism would allow a more thorough discussion of justification and sanctification within the Church of England’s tradition. Finally, Toon forces readers to consider how doctrine develops, albeit indirectly. If a reader seeks to be more informed concerning the topics of justification and sanctification, Toon’s book is a fantastic introduction.
Displaying 1 of 1 review