Is ‘Three Sunnes’ Everard’s take on the Tregony parhelic event of Dec. 1621?

The particular interpretation is broadly outlined in both John Eaton’s ‘Honeycombe’ and the ‘Dead Faith’ as well as being revealed by the Puritan, Giles Firmin, about his stay with his obviously Eatonist relative in Ipswich whilst attending grammar school there – see G. Firmin – ‘A Brief Review of Mr Davis’s Vindication: Giving no Satisfaction’ (1693) and Como.In 1631 Henry Firmin and his fellow Ipswich laymen went before the High Commission (a case which seems to have commenced that November). Both Firmin and one Henry Mudd were still being forced to appear before the High Commission some three years later. They recanted fully but the evidence from Giles Firmin’s visit to the family shortly afterwards suggests that not only was this recantation not genuine but that their ‘antinomianism’ had become markedly radicalised and come to include aspects not known to have been amongst Eaton’s own teachings. These included both God being the author of sin and outright mortalism. Como assumes that Mudd must have been directly responsible for the injection of such ideas into Firmin’s theology but he fails to provide substantive evidence in ‘Blown by the Spirit’.

Source: Is ‘Three Sunnes’ Everard’s take on the Tregony parhelic event of Dec. 1621?

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s