Thomas Chubb | |
|---|---|
 Portrait of Thomas Chubb, byThomas Gainsborough | |
| Born | (1679-09-29)29 September 1679 nearSalisbury |
| Died | 8 February 1747(1747-02-08) (aged 67) |
| Genre | Theology |
| Literary movement | Deism |
Thomas Chubb (29 September 1679 – 8 February 1747) was alay EnglishDeist writer born nearSalisbury. He saw Christ as a divine teacher, but held reason to be sovereign over religion. He questioned the morality of religions, while defending Christianity on rational grounds. Despite little schooling, Chubb was well up on the religious controversies.[1] HisThe True Gospel of Jesus Christ, Asserted sets out to distinguish the teaching of Jesus from that of theEvangelists.[2] Chubb's views on free will and determinism, expressed inA Collection of Tracts on Various Subjects (1730), were extensively criticised byJonathan Edwards inFreedom of the Will (1754).[3]
Chubb, the son of amaltster, was born atEast Harnham, nearSalisbury. The death of his father in 1688 cut short his education, and in 1694 he was apprenticed to aglover in Salisbury, but subsequently entered the employment of atallow-chandler. He picked up a fair knowledge of mathematics and geography, but theology was his favourite study. His habit of committing his thoughts to writing gave him a clear and fluent style.[4]
Chubb spent some years living and working inLondon at the house ofJoseph Jekyll,Master of the Rolls. However, he was drawn back to Salisbury, where by the kindness of friends he was enabled to devote the rest of his days to his studies.[4]
Chubb made his first appearance as an author in theArian controversy. A dispute having arisen aboutWilliam Whiston's argument in favour of the supremacy of the one God and Father, he wrote an essay,The Supremacy of the Father Asserted, which Whiston pronounced worthy of publication, and it was printed in 1715.[4] Another of his published tracts,The Previous Question with Regard to Religion, went through four editions, three in 1725. His tracts were collected in a quarto volume in 1730 and attracted wide notice. (A second, two-volume edition in 1754 included 35 tracts.) Chubb was encouraged to write further tracts. A disciple ofSamuel Clarke, he gradually moved fromArianism into a modified Deism.[5]
In 1731 he published aDiscourse concerning Reason ... [showing that] reason is, or else that it ought to be, a sufficient guide in matters of Religion. Some "reflections" upon "moral and positive duty" were added, as suggested by Clarke'sExposition of the Catechism. In 1732The Sufficiency of Reason further considered... was appended to an "enquiry" against a recent sermon bySamuel Croxall arguing that to celebrate Charles I's martyrdom was inconsistent with celebrating William III's arrival.[5]
In 1734 came four tracts of his attacking the common theory ofinspiration, arguing that the resurrection of Christ was no proof of his divine mission and criticising the story of Abraham's sacrifice of Isaac. The whole argument showed increasing scepticism, and the assertion about Abraham led to some controversy. He returned to the question in 1735, in some "Observations" onThomas Rundle's nomination to theDiocese of Gloucester, Rundle having been accused of disbelieving the story. Three tracts were added that continued the former discussion.[5]
In 1738 Chubb publishedThe True Gospel of Jesus Christ asserted, which provoked various attacks, including one fromEbenezer Hewlett.[6] It was followed byThe True Gospel of Jesus vindicated, andAn Enquiry into the Ground and Foundation of Religion, wherein it is shown that Religion is founded on Nature. He persisted in stating that true Christianity consisted of a belief that morality alone could make men acceptable to God, that repentance for sin would secure God's mercy, and that there would be future retribution. HisEnquiry into the Ground and Foundation of Religion (1740) includes a controversy withHenry Stebbing. Chubb argues against interpreting literally the command to give all to the poor, noting that Stebbing himself was apluralist with two livings, a preachership and an archdeaconry, and due to be chancellor of theDiocese of Salisbury, so that he could hardly interpret the command literally to himself.[5]
Chubb's 1741Discourse on Miracles states that they could at most afford a "probable proof" of arevelation. In 1743 hisEnquiry concerning Redemption is a defence of himself against some sneers byWilliam Warburton. "The Ground and Foundation of Morality considered" (1745) is an attack onThomas Rutherforth's theory of self-love. The last work that Chubb published himself wasFour Dissertations (1746), attacking some Old Testament passages with a freedom that gave wide offence.[5]
| Deism |
|---|
 |
False equivalencies |
Opposition |
Joseph Waligore states in a 2012 article, "The Piety of the English Deists", that Chubb discussed prayer more than any other deist.[7] Chubb's longest writing on the subject was a 30-page pamphlet, "An Enquiry Concerning Prayer", where he began by insisting that prayer was a duty God required for achieving a closer relationship with him. The purpose of prayer was to render someone
"a suitable and proper object of God's special care and love. For as prayer is an address or application of a dependent being to his supreme governour, and original benefactor.... It naturally draws forth our souls in filial fear, in hope and trust, in love, delight, and joy in God; and creates in us a just concern to please him, and to approve ourselves in his sight; and consequently to put on that purity and piety, humility and charity which is the spirit and practice of true Christianity."[8]
Chubb said we should pray often and "it is when we forget God, when God is not in all our thoughts, that we do amiss; then our minds and lives are corrupted and defiled."
He also discussed whom we should pray to. First he said we should not pray to dead human souls, as we have no reason to think they hear our prayers or have any power to help us. Then he discussed whether we should pray to angels. Unlike Morgan – who thought we should pray to both God and angels – Chubb thought we probably should not pray to angels. He said even though they were "ministering spirits", we could not be sure they heard our prayers, and they might not be at liberty to help us without God's direct guidance. He spent a final ten pages wondering whether we should pray to Jesus or just to God the Father, concluding we should pray to God the Father "in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ".[8]
Chubb was sure that God heard all our petitions, but he did not think God answered them all in the way we wished. God answered only if they were for lawful things and people prayed earnestly "with a modest resignation to God's will".[vi] Chubb thought that God sometimes gave us harmful things we had prayed for, but then God acted "in displeasure".[8] In another tract, he was more pessimistic about God's positive response rate to our prayers. He cited evidence that God did not often answer our prayers: over the previous 200 years, millions of sincere, fervent prayers had petitioned God for the defeat of theAntichrist, but the Roman Catholic hierarchy or other interests ostensibly bent on defeating God's kingdom still existed.[9]
{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: archived copy as title (link)
One or more of the preceding sentences incorporates text from a publication now in thepublic domain: Chisholm, Hugh, ed. (1911). "Chubb, Thomas".Encyclopædia Britannica. Vol. 6 (11th ed.). Cambridge University Press. p. 322.
This article incorporates text from a publication now in thepublic domain: Stephen, Leslie (1887). "Chubb, Thomas". InStephen, Leslie (ed.).Dictionary of National Biography. Vol. 10. London: Smith, Elder & Co. pp. 297–298. This article incorporates text from a publication now in thepublic domain: Wood, James, ed. (1907). "Chubb, Thomas".The Nuttall Encyclopædia. London and New York: Frederick Warne.
