Page images
PDF
EPUB
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

and awful considerations implicitly | death, when he lent an ear to the to follow the dictates of conscience deceiving words of the devil.' in the interpretation of God's Word, From this article I conclude,' says and yet he will claim for himself Arminius, some years after, that the protection of casuistry and the man did not sin on account of any liberty of non-natural interpretation necessity through a preceding in subscription to ecclesiastical decree of predestination; which informularies or orthodox articles of ference is diametrically opposed to faith. The position in which, as that doctrine of predestination minister of the Reformed church against which I now contend.' The at Amsterdam, Arminius was placed sixteenth article, which treats of by his change of opinion on the the eternal election of God, says: doctrine of divine predestination, 'God has showed himself merciful by was one of difficulty and peril. But delivering from damnation, and_by several circumstances were calcu- saving those persons whom, in His lated to mitigate the difficulty and eternal and immutable counsel, and lessen the peril. according to His gratuitous goodness, He chose in Christ Jesus our Lord without any regard to their works; and He has showed himself just in leaving others in that their fall and perdition into which they had precipitated themselves.' 'I do not clearly see,' says Arminius, how these words are consistent with this doctrine of predestination.'

In the first place, the formularies to which the clergy of the Dutch church were pledged were to a large extent couched in the language of Scripture, and either ignored or evaded this particular point at issue. These formularies were the Belgic Confession and the Heidelberg Catechism. The first had something of a Calvinistic tinge and hue. It was framed to serve as the basis of union for all the Reformed churches of the Netherlands. It was compiled by men who for the most part owed their Protestantism to the Calvinism of France, rather than to the less sharply-defined system of the sturdy Reformer of Germany. It was accepted by the churches of Flanders as well as by those of the Low Countries. But the Dutch element was represented in it, though not so largely as the Walloon and French. Professor Junius of Leyden had revised it, yet he had sent it afterwards to Geneva to receive the approbation of Beza and the ministers of that city. Still it did not expressly teach or fairly imply the peculiar tenets of predestination and election which Arminius had renounced. To the mild and qualified form of preterition which it prescribed, Arminius could give his honest and unequivocal assent. The fourteenth article of this Belgic Confession declares: Man knowingly and willingly subjected himself to sin, and consequently to the curse of

[ocr errors]

The Heidelberg Catechism, though much prized by the Dutch Calvinists for its bias towards their opinions, was scarcely less opposed to the tenets Arminius had abandoned. The twentieth question declares : Salvation through Christ is not given to all them who had perished in Adam, but to those only who are ingrafted into Christ by true faith, and who embrace His benefits.'

From this sentence I infer,' says Arminius, that God has not absolutely predestinated any men to salvation, but that He has in His decree considered them as believers.' In the fifty-fourth question of the same Catechism it is written: 'I believe that from the beginning to the end of the world, the Son of God out of the entire race of mankind doth by His Word and Spirit gather or collect unto himself a company chosen unto eternal life and agreeing together in the true faith.' Arminius gives us his own view of this passage also. He says: 'In this sentence "election to eternal life" and "agreement in the faith" stand in mutual apposition, and in such a manner that

The Candour and Modesty of Arminius.

the latter is not subordinate to the former, which, according to the scheme of predestination I reject ought to be the case. Were such a view expressed the language would have been: "The Son of God calls and gathers to Himself, by His Word and Spirit, a company chosen to eternal life that they may believe and agree together in the true faith."

[ocr errors]

From these extracts, with the comments of Arminius subjoined, it will be seen that there was nothing in the Confession or Catechism to make the position of Arminius in the Reformed church untenable, or in any way to render his altered views on the doctrine of predestination a violation of good faith. With perfect conscientiousness he could hold such views and continue his subscription to the common formularies.

Moreover, it is to be remembered, that there had been for centuries a difference of opinion in the church upon this question. The early Greek and Latin fathers make no mention of it, but from the time of Augustine downwards it had been debatable ground. No ancient synod or council had pronounced upon it. No decision of weight had ever been given establishing any particular view as orthodox, and condemning every other as heretical. The question itself was always treated rather as a subject of metaphysical speculation than a test of orthodoxy. In the churches of the Reformation also it was not a fixed and settled doctrine. Calvinism was by no means synonymous or co-extensive with Protestantism. Luther (in his latter days) and Melancthon of Germany; Cranmer, Latimer, Overall, Andrews, and Clayton of England; Hemming of Denmark; Erasmus, Isbrand, Snecanus, and Holman, of Holland, with many others of the Reformed churches prior to the time of Arminius, were opponents of the scheme of absolute predestination. If the widest, broadest, and most general views are to be taken as orthodox, then Calvinism itself with its hard lines

133

of exclusiveness and its ruthless innovations is the greatest heresy of modern times. In abandoning the Genevan theology, Arminius abandoned the opinions of a comparatively recent sect, went back to the older faith, and followed the guidance of the earlier church.

such

For

Still further, it is obvious enough that Arminius did not by this transition surrender any vital principle of religion or impair his efficiency as a minister of Christ. It is not necessary to piety to maintain that without regard to our belief in the gospel, or our practical godliness, God has from all eternity chosen us to salvation. It is scarcely essential to the work of evangelization to hold that though the good news of God's grace are to be preached to all, yet some of our hearers possibly may be from all eternity reprobate and doomed by irreversible decrees to unbelief and perdition. For four hundred years men lived and died in the faith of Christ, often sealing their profession with their blood, and no doctrines were maintained. four hundred years the gospel was preached and expounded by faithful lips, and no such rigid system of theology was developed. Nay, more, it is impossible for any one, whoever he may be, to take up the strain of the first apostles of the cross and command all men everywhere to repent, without, for the time at least, foregoing metaphysics, and forgetting all subtle theories of supralapsarian and sublapsarian divines. From a thousand pulpits in every Christian land the gospel is preached to-day, as it has been preached any day for eighteen hundred years, by plain earnest men, who are totally innocent of such logical refinements, and who take God's message in His Word to mean what, it says.

It is important to bear these considerations in mind in order to appreciate fully the candour of Arminius, and the modesty and wisdom of the course he resolved to pursue. The dogmas which he

had given up as not essential to Protestantism or to orthodoxy, and as unwarranted by the Word of God, were received with much favour by some of the Dutch clergy. To combat publicly these opinions would have been perfectly consistent with that liberty of prophesying formerly allowed by the Reformed church, but would possibly have provoked much needless strife and contention. To be silent about them would not detract from the fulness and power of an evangelical ministry, would not hamper freedom of discussion and exhortation upon more vital topics, and might prevent scandal if it did not disarm suspicion. Arminius determined to continue the latter course. He would still hold in abeyance public consideration of this question. He would apply himself still more deeply to study and yet further mature his views. In this way he felt he could serve God without rebuke, satisfy his conscience without casuistry, and might hope for peace without distrust. It was not long, however, before he found himself in this last expectation sadly disappointed. His abandonment of the task of refuting Coornhert and the Delft divines not unnaturally gave rise to suspicions as to his soundness in the faith. He had not openly impugned the opinions he had been called upon to defend, but that was a small matter. He had begun to doubt or dissent from them or he would have completed the work he took in hand. The champion of the Genevan school had himself forsaken the favourite tenets of his venerable tutor. The young preacher had probed the vexed question to the ⚫ bottom and dared to think for himself. He must take the consequences. The penalty of petty persecution was sure to follow from the zeal of envious or misguided men. Such persons are always on the alert seeking occasion of scandal and reproach in the church. There were such persons at Amsterdam at this period, and the occasion they sought was soon found.

The good old custom of consecutive expositions of Scripture was then rife. There were giants in those days in the pews as well as in the pulpit. Congregations assembled for instruction and worship. They could endure instruction, and had a taste for biblical criticism. Arminius was expounding chapter by chapter and verse by verse the Epistle to the Romans, and the people drank eagerly the word of truth from the fountain head. In the course of his expositions he came to the seventh chapter, and presently to its fourteenth verse: For ye know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin. This verse and the remaining part of the chapter Arminius interpreted as describing a sinner under legal conviction, just as Martin Bucer had explained it, and all the fathers of the church before the days of Augustine, and Augustine himself in his earlier works which he never entirely retracted, and nearly all modern commentators of every school. Arminius says, 'The apostle in this passage does not speak about himself nor about a man living under grace, but he has transferred to himself the person of a man placed under the law.' This he supports by arguments derived from the purpose of the previous chapter and its connection with this, from the words themselves, from the manner in which 'carnal' and 'spiritual' are opposed to each other in the Scriptures, from the meaning of the phrase sold under sin,' from the signification of 'sin dwelling or reigning within,' and from other considerations. The contrary opinion, the interpretation of the passage as descriptive of the internal conflicts of the regenerate, however possible and plausible, he considers invalidates the efficacy of the grace of God, and is injurious to the cultivation of genuine piety, for it leaves the regenerate man still 'carnal,' 'sold under sin,'

under the dominion of sin,' and unable to perform that which is ! good.' While such a view of the

Arminius continues his Lectures.

135

passage ascribes too little to the | in turn themselves accused of heresy. power of God's grace, his own view The civil authorites now interposed. does not, he thinks, ascribe too The ministers of religion were summuch to human nature, for it rep- moned in a body before the magresents the person whose state Paul nates of the city, lectured severely assumes as convinced of sin by the on their dissensions, and admonished law, as contrite, wretched, and to keep their theological squabbles helpless, in quest of a Saviour, and out of the pulpit. Should they fail though not regenerate yet in the in this duty, recourse would be had stage next to regeneration. to other remedies, lest by their unseemly contention harm should accrue to the church and the republic. The ministers bore the reproof with meekness. They explained, apologized, solicited a conference for the further settlement of their dif ferences. The authorities of the city decided that no further discussion should take place, but that the whole affair should be consigned to | oblivion. So for a time the matter was at rest.

sum

For this exposition of a disputed passage of Scripture a storm of scandal was raised about Arminius. He was beset by a noisy crowd of calumniators. Some called him a Pelagian, on the ground that he attributed too much goodness to human nature. Others branded him as a Socinian, because Socinus had expounded the passage as he had done. Others were content to designate him a heretic, a preacher of doctrines opposed to creed and catechism, and a traducer of the ancient fathers of the church, whose support he claimed. The matter was brought before the Presbytery. Arminius was moned to appear. One Peter Planc, a brother minister, was his chief accuser. Arminius warmly repudiated the charges brought against him. He was neither a Pelagian nor a Socinian, and he had not taught any doctrine contrary to the formularies of mutual consent. Moreover, he claimed for himself freedom in the interpretation of particular passages of Scripture. Peter Planc was not satisfied. The clergy of Amsterdam waxed hot in contention. It became the common talk that the ministers of the Reformed church were not agreed among themselves upon matters of faith. To remove this scandal, Uitenbogardt, a friend of Arminius, at the request of Professor Lydius of Franeker, came to the city. Having consulted with Taffin of the Walloon church, he drew up a plan for restoring harmony, obtained the assent of Arminius to its conditions, and presented it to the Presbytery. The plan was rejected by a large majority, and Uitenbogardt and Taffin were thanked for their pains by being

Relieved from turmoil and contention, Arminius continued his expositions of the epistle to the Romans. There was no diminution of popular interest in his ministry. The crowded church, with its mixed and attentive assembly of hearers, told how deeply he had laid hold upon the hearts of the people, and how widely his fame and influence extended. He was growing every day in usefulness and power. But his opponents were on the alert watching the opportunity to reopen the strife. As if determined to prove that the phrase 'I am carnal,' which Arminius objected to apply to spiritual men, did apply to them, they did their best to merit the apostolic rebuke, Whereas there is among you envying, and strife, and divisions (factions), are ye not carnal and walk as men? In the spirit of carnal contention, they frequented the church of Arminius and listened to his discourses. They desired fresh ground of accusation against him. He was coming, they thought among themselves, to the stronghold of orthodox predestination, the ninth chapter of the epistle they should soon make him an easy victim. Arminius, suspecting the intentions of some of his hearers, resolved to be doubly on his guard.

He would not do violence to his conscience by advocating doctrines of which he stood in doubt, but he would not gratify the wishes of the captious and ill-disposed by breaking through that reserve upon which he had determined. Nor as he examined and studied afresh the argument of the famous chapter, did he find it difficult to act upon this prudent and wise decision. The true rendering of the passage, he conceived, did not at all support the doctrine of absolute and unconditional predestination. The apostle was not discussing this subject, but vindicating the doctrine of justification by faith against the objections of the Jews. These objections and the refutation of them Arminius pointed out and enlarged upon in several discourses. This was not what his adversaries expected. But they would not be deprived of their triumph. Not being able to get up charges against the preacher on account of what he had said, it seems they got up charges against him on account of what he had not said. It was a clear proof of the grossest unsoundness in the faith that he did not deduce their favourite doctrine from this well-known predestinarian chapter. Besides Lutherans, and even Anabaptists, and other heretics, approved the exposition. What need of any further evidence? The cry of heresy was again raised. It waxed louder and louder, and came to the ears of the Presbytery. In the absence of Arminius from that august body, it was determined to warn him of his errors, and bind him over by a public pledge to the doctrines commonly received amongst them. When, at a subsequent sitting, the admonition was given, Arminius replied with some warmth, that he was branded with the names of heretic, latitudinarian, Pelagian, and yet no man attempted to prove his heresy; that both in public and in private he had frankly affirmed again and again his full and complete acceptance of the Confession and Catechism as formularies of faith; that he had always preached

in harmony with them; that, therefore, the admonition to him personally was unnecessary and irrelevant, and that if differences of opinion existed amongst the ministers of the church it was as much the duty of others to see that they agreed with him as it was his duty to see that he agreed with them. Upon this bold and spirited reply one of the Presbyters broke out into passionate declamation. He saw,' he said, 'the arts of the devil to disturb the peace of the church. Some of the magistrates themselves had this object in view. It was of no use for Arminius to appeal to the Confession and Catechism, since he had already explained two passages of Scripture against these standards. For his part, after hearing him interpret the seventh chapter of Romans he could never derive any benefit from his discourses.' Το this Arminius quietly replied that by the help of God he would never be the instigator and author of strife, and he hoped better things of the magistrates of the city. Other subjects of a personal nature were then introduced, the anger of the Presbytery expended itself, a better feeling arose, and the meeting was dismissed.

But there were some who would not on any consideration allow this matter to rest. By their officious zeal fresh strife was soon stirred up. The Presbytery again consulted together upon the subject. In the absence of Arminius, it was resolved to call upon him to declare distinctly and without circumlocution his opinion on all the articles of faith. Arminius asked for reasonable space for consideration. As he was sitting in this ecclesiastical court, a short time afterwards, he was reminded tauntingly of his fate. Starting to his feet he challenged with a loud voice all his opponents, whoever they were, to stand forth and state what he had spoken in his discourses worthy of censure. No one rose. But the insinuation was thrown out by some one that the testimony of

« PreviousContinue »