By the Same Author. A STUDY OF THE CONSTITUTION OF-THE METHODIST EPISCOPAL CHURCH, . . $0 60 EVOLUTION OF CHRISTIAN DOCTRINES, . . i 00 MANUAL OF METHODIST EPISCOPAL CHURCH HISTORY i 75 INTERROGATORY STUDIES IN BIBLE HIS- TORY, 75 ArMINIANISM in HISTORY; OR, The Revolt from Predestinationism. GEO. L. CURTISS, M. D., D. D., Professor of Historical Theology in the School of Theology of DePauw University. ^ CINCINNATI: CRANSTON & CURTS. NEW YORK : HUNT & EATON. 1894. COPYRIGHT BY CRANSTON cS: CURTS. PREFACE. — ♦ — When it became necessary to give a class in Historical Theology a careful view of Arrainian- ism in its historical as well as doctrinal charac- ter, I found material for such a study, but it was undigested, ill-arranged, and very unsatis- factory. After a careful search I failed to find a book on the subject that could be recommended to students. A copy of Brandt's " Life of James Arminius" could not be found, though a large dealer advertised at times for a year for it. Only recently I ran across it in an old French second-hand bookstore in New Orleans. Driven to gather and arrange such material as could be obtained, there resulted these chapters in the form of lectures, which were delivered to the class, discussed, revised, and delivered a sec- ond time. After this they were re-written and put in the present form, and a third time deliv- ered to thoughtful men. At the request of those who heard them, they are now offered to the public in this form. They 4 PREFA CE. do not profess to be an exhaustive treatment of the history of Arminianism, but to make such a fair and clear presentation as shall lead young Methodists to a knowledge of what Arminian- ism is, what it has had to contend with in the struggle for existence, why Methodism is Ar- minian and not Calviuiau, a part of the reason why Methodism has had such remarkable moral and spiritual victories, and what triumphs there are in store for Arminian Methodism as "Chris- tianity in earnest" in the years to corQe? GEO. L. CURTISS. DePauw University, 1894. CONTENTS. CHAPTER I. Page. What is Arminianism, 7 CHAPTER II. Akminius as Professor at Ley den, 32 CHAPTER III. Arminian Leaders, 51 CHAPTER IV. Arminian Writers, 7S CHAPTER V. Doctrinal Controversies, 93- CHAPTER VI. Pre-Wesleyan Arminianism in Europe, 118 CHAPTER VII. The Political Home of Arminianism, 13^ CHAPTER VIIL Arminianism in its Wesleyan Growth, 15& CHAPTER IX. Scholars op Arminianism, 179 5 6 INDEX. CHAPTER X. Page. Arminianism and the Friends, 200 CHAPTER XL Arminianism and Revivals, 209 Appendix, 221 Index, 227 ARMINIANISM IN HISTORY. Chapter I. WHAT IS ARMINIANISM? Epochs in History — Discussions of Doctrines and Polity — Spread of Predestinationism — Calvinism, Aiminianism, and Uuiversalism — A Particular Statement of Armin- ianism — Original Sin as taught by Arminius — Armin- ianism not a New Doctrine as taught by Arminius — Augustine and Predestination to Eternal Life — Gott- ■ schalk and Foreordination to Damnation — James Armin- ius— Birth— Death of his Father — Adopted by ^milius — At School at Utrecht — Death of iEmilius— Adopted by Suellius — At Marburg - Murder of his Mother, »Sisters, and Brother at Oudewater — At Rotterdam — Sent to Ley- den — A Brilliant Student— Adopted by the Burgomeis- ters of Amsterdam — Sent to Geneva — Forms the Ac- •quaintance of Uytenbogaert — Went to Basle and studied for a Time — Went to Padua — Heard Zarabella Visited Rome— Called to Amsterdam— Examined bj^ the Classis — -Commenced Preaching — How Arminius came to adopt the Doctrine called by his Name — Koornhert to be re- futed — Arminius chosen for the Task — The Examination led to his Repudiation of Predestination — Married — Pul)lic Exposition of Romans— Criticism and Slander — His Traducers — His Defense— The Senators decide in his Favor. The distinct and vigorous promulgation of im- portant doctrines of Christianity, and their working iike leaven among the people, produce epochs in 7 8 A RMINIA NISM /JV HIS TOR Y. history. This is especially true if the doctriue- chance to antagonize some old and favorite doc- trine of the Church, or some bi'anch, and runs counter to the preconceived notions of any con- siderable number of men. The most remarkable discussions that the world has ever heard, and which have produced the most marked effects upon events in history, both in individuals and in na- tions, are those about Christian doctrine and Church government. The best talent, the greatest learn- ing, the highest degree of enthusiasm, and, at the same time, the most wonderful endurance have been brought into the discussions of doctrines and polity in whatever age. If there has been mingled in the discussions of Christian doctrine any political ques- tion, the results have entirely changed the face of history. When Arminianism was promulgated in Hol- land at the Synod of Dort, Calvinism was the dom- inant doctrine regarding original sin, freedom of the will, and God's decrees concerning human sal- vation. For a full thousand years it held sway over the masses of the people under the name of Augustinism, and when some enlightened ecclesias- tics presumed to controvert and deny the truth of the dogma, and proceeded to demonstrate its fallacy from Scripture and logic, then arose agitations in the Reformed Church world of so persistent a char- acter as to affect schools, agitate Churches, and, sometimes, to involve nations. Such a hold had WHA T IS A RMINIA NISM ? » this doctriue of the eternal decrees taken upou men that they came to question the right of any one to doubt the truth of the dogmas of Calvinism. It had taken hold upon the State, and stamped it- self upon the Government of Geneva, dictated its constitution, and enacted its laws. Having achieved this brilliant success, it reached out to other Swiss States or cantons, to do for them as at Geneva. It crossed the sea, and took a firm hoM upon Scot- land, and so fastened itself upon her sturdy minds that it held them with the grasp of a giant, from which thralldom the Scottish mind has not yet been freed. In England, Calvinism asserted itself, and •demanded the highest place, priding itself upon be- ing recognized as the established doctrine regarding human salvation. Intrenched in this fortified fast- ness for many years, it was impossible to advance any other claims. From England Calvinism crossed the Atlantic, and intrenched itself in the sterile soil and among the rugged rocks of New England, and refused to admit the preaching of, and belief in, the doctrine of Arminianism, until that unique pioneer of New England Methodism preached a sal- vation free to the world of men in Boston Common, while standing upon a borrowed table. Look the facts over, and see if it is not true that Episcopacy, Independency, Congregationalism, and Presbyte- rian ism were all the professors of and in the posses- sion of the hard dogmas of Calvinism. East and West, in the Old World and in the New, there was 10 ARMINIANISM IN HISTORY. only a slight foothold for the warmer, richer, and more soul-encouraging doctrines of Arminianism, In the world are three great doctrinal systems regarding human salvation, known by distinctive titles ; namely, Calvinism, Arminianism, and Uni- versalism. The kernel of each may be stated in a few words. Calvinism, among other things, says that God in Jesus Christ made provision for the salvation of those in the human race who were predestinated and foreordained from all eternity to be saved in heaven, and the remainder are predestinated and foreordained from all eternity to eternal damnation for the glory of God. Arminianism teaches that God in Jesus Christ made provision fully for the salvation of all those who, by repentance towards God and faith in our Lord Jesus Christ, accept the terms, and all who do thus accept are eternally saved. All who rebel against God, and refuse to accept of Jesus on the terms of proffered mercy, sink under Divine wrath, and are eternally lost. Universalism teaches that God in Christ Jesus has made such an abundant and merciful provision for human salvation that everybody, irrespective of individual moral character, and without repentance and faith in a Savior, shall be saved in heaven. In this doctrine there is no provision for the pun- ishment of sin hereafter. All punishment of sin is in this life. Universalism has been driven to such WHA T IS A R MINI A NISM ? 11 straits as strangely to equivocate in her statements as to how much punishment may be given or re- quired in this life, and how much may be given in a possible state of post-mortem purgation. There seems to be no uniform solid ground upon which all believers in the doctrines of Universalism may stand. According to Calvinism, there is in man a ne- cessitated will, which can act only in certain ways. The will must act, but it is necessitated to act in a certain way. Out of that groove it can not move. According to Arminianisn, there is a perfect freedom of will regarding man's moral condition and powers. Man must make his own choice of salvation, or choose to reject. He may will freely to use the means provided for his salvation, or he may as freely reject. In either case he must abide by the results of his free choice. According to Universalism, there is no will in salvation. Man is in a condition of salvation with- out his choice. He is in the stream, and can not do otherwise than go with it into heaven. A More Particular Statement of Arminianism. What is Arminianism ? In the fewest words, it is the doctrine that God, by the sacrificial oflfering of his only-begotten Son, Jesus Christ, has made an abundant provision for the salvation of all hu- man souls who come unto him in the prescribed manner. This provision is universal. Not a soul 12 A RMINIA NISM IN HIS TO R Y. is left out of the promise. Every soul that wills to enter life eterual, by using the means designated may enter into life eternal, and not die. All souls who go down to hell, go, not because God has fore- ordained them to go down to l)lackuess and despair, but because they have willed to reject the offers of mercy. As to original sin, Arminianism teaches that man, descending from Adam, has become corrupted by Adam's sin, but is not guilty. Adam was both guilty and corrupted. No one will be lost in per dition because of Adam's transgression, but all are in the bondage of corruption because of the sin of the federal head. From the crown of the head 'to the sole of the foot there is corruption. This involves man's triple nature — body, mind, and spirit. This corruption has so affected the race that no one can return to God by natural means. His virtue is prostrated, his power largely paralyzed, his appetite for purity sadly vitiated, his bent to sin and folly established. But he may will to reach out to proffei-ed redemption by the blood of Jesus Christ, and receive such gracious aid from the Holy Spirit, by the exercise of faith, as to be restored to favor with God and sealed for the kingdom of heaven. The system of theology that teaches clearly this doctrine is called Arminianism, because that James Arrainius advocated it strongly against the Calvin- istic doctrine in Holland, while his followers advo- cated it in the Synod of Dort. WMA T IS A RMINIA NISM? 1 3 Was this a New Doctrine with Arminius? No. " Before the time of Augustine [fourth century] the unanimous doctrine of the Church Fathers, so far as scientifically developed at all, was that the Divine decrees ae to the fate of the indi- vidual man were conditioned upon their faith and obedience, as foreseen in the Divine Mind. Augus- tine, in his controversy with Pelagius, with a view to enhance the glory of grace, was the first to teach unequivocally that the salvation of the elect de- pends upon the bare will of God, and that his de- cree to save those whom he chooses to save was un- conditional." It was left for Gottschalk, in the ninth century, to supply the second part of the doctrine ; namely, that those who are not saved unconditionally are foreordained to be damned, or reprobated to be lost. Thus stood the doctrine about 1535, when John Calvin, either at Geneva or at Strasburg, united the foreordination unto eternal life unconditionally of Augustine, and the foreordination of the repro- bate to hell unconditionally of Gottschalk, and sent them out as the center of his system of Sys- tematic Theology in the Christian Institutes. The doctrine has since that time received the name of Calvinism. There have been some erroneous statements concerning Arminianism, which must have arisen from either a willful perversion of the truth or an 2 14 ARMINIANISM IN HISTORY. ignorance of it. Dr. Archibald A. Hodge, in Johnson's Encyclopedia, says: "Between these [that is, between Pelagianisni and Calvinism] comes the manifold and elastic system of a compromise known as Semi-Pelagianism, and in modern times as Arminianism." There never was a time when Semi-Pelagianism and Arminianism were synony- mous terms. They are now, and always have been, quite distinct in their definitions and teaching. To attempt to bring Arminianism into contempt by linking it with Arianism, Socinianism, or with any other kindred notion that is recognized in the Chris- tian world as erroneous, is base in the extreme. It is true that some of these sects have advocated one or two doctrines as held by Arminius ; but that does not make them, by any means, Arminians, any more than because a few men are criminals, thei'e- fore all men are criminals. Arminianism is a sys- tem of its own, wholly distinct from Pelagianism, Semi-Pelagianism, Arianism, Socinianism, and all other isms, and especially from Calvinism. When James Arminius taught the system now called by his name he was only restoring to the world the doctrine as found in the primitive Church. Calvinism was not the primitive apostolical doctrine or faith. The primitive doctrine universally taught that whosoever willed to come to the Father by the Son could do so, by the way of Jesus Christ, and be eternally saved. Man was made with a will, and was free to act in approach to God, or free to WITA T IS ARMINIANISMf 15 refuse and go away into despair and darkness and eternal death. James Arminius was the rightful restorer of the doctrine as it flowed from the lips of the impetuous Peter, the beloved John, the sweet-spirited James, the polished Paul, and all the apostles and early Fathers of the Church. James Arminius. Who was James Arminius, and how did he come to advocate this doctrine ? With this ques- tion arises another of some importance : How did the primitive doctrine come to be so long obscured, and such antagonistic notions prevail? Jacob Hermannson, or, as sometimes called, simply Hermann, was born in the year 1560 A. D. , at a town in South Holland called Oude water. After he began to be a scholar, his name was Lat- inized into Jacobus Arminius, and in the English the Jacobus became James. His father's name was Hermann Jacobs, and his mother, Angelica, a woman of Dort. His father's occupation was that of a cutler, holding a respectable position in the town. While James w'as yet an infant his father died, leaving a wife and three children. Jacobus was taken under the care of a former Romish priest by the name of Theodorus ^miliiis. At an early age he was sent to school at Utrecht, to which place JEmilius had removed. The character of -^railius was good, being now a Reformed clergy- man, and quite learned, and from him Arminius 10 A RMIXIAXISM IK HISTORY. received careful traiuino;. Theodorus ^Eiiiilius was "a man of" singular eruditiou, who stood high auioug his fellow-towusineu for the gravity of his manners and the purity of his life." When the youth was fifteen years of age his foster-father died. At once a friend, Rudolph Snellius, a "profound linguist and most expert mathematician," took him in charge, and in 1575 removed to Marburg for the advan- tages of that school. This was the year when the Spaniards attacked and sacked Arminius's native town of Oudewater, and cruelly murdered hun- dreds of*innocent people without regard to sex, put its garrison to the sword, and hanged its ministers of religion. Hearing of this sad event, and fearing the worst, Arminius hurried back to find that his mother, l)rother, and sisters had perished by the hands of the wicked soldiers, and with them several relatives. Overlooking the blackened ruins of his once beautiful home, and saddened by the hard con- ditions, and feeling that all ties that bound him to this spot had been broken, Arminius walked back to Marburg. Few can realize the sadness of that hour to this youth, — fatherless, motherless, brother- less, sisterless, and homeless, all because of the wicked persecutions of the Church of Rome, The outlook was anything but bright. Only a myste- rious, overruling Providence can now provide. For some unexplained reason he went to Rotter- dam, possibly because a few remnants of his Oude- water friends had escaped there, and waited for WHAT IS ARMINIANISM? 17 something favorable to occur in their native State. Peter Bertius was the pastor of a Reformed Church at that place. He was a large-hearted and philan- thropic man, and as a man of God opened his home and received young Arminius into his family. Peter Bertius sent young Arminius, with his son Peter, to the University of Leydeu, Avhich had just been founded by William, Prince of Orange. Ar- minius was fortunate in his teachers at Leyden. Beside Peter Bertius, Sen., was John TafRn, Wal- loon minister and counselor of the Prince of Orange, Lambert Danaius, a master of varied erudition, " versed at once in philosophical and theological studies," and John Dousa, a poet of no mean character. "Arminius," says Brandt, "soon made such proficiency that he far outstripped his fellow-students. . . . There was scarcely a field of study or department of the arts which he did not bound over with eager and joyous impulse." Here he remained six years. The brilliancy and attain- ments of the youth attracted the attention of the "Directors of the Merchants of the City of Amster- dam," a body of wealthy and noble-hearted men of strong faith, and concerned in the government of the city. It was agreed that they should furnish all the money necessary to defray his expenses while being educated for the ministry, on conditions which he accepted. On accepting this generous offer, Ar- minius agreed that "after he had been ordained he would not serve in the Church of any other city 18 - ARMIKIANISM IN HISTORY. without the permission of the burgomeisters of Amsterdam," Having accepted the agreement for material aid, in lo82 Armiuius went to Geneva to study theology, and fully })repare himself for the work of the Church. Geneva was at that time the center of the Reformed Church. The school stood at the head, and was justly celebrated all over the Chris- tian w^orld. The doctrines clustering around un- conditional predestination as taught by John Cal- vin, were taught and enforced with the iutensest rigor, aTul their form was unchanged by Theodore Beza, who, if possible, was a stronger predestina- tionist than C'alvin. Armiuius had a profound ad- miration for Beza. " With the utmost gravity of manners, this theologian excelled his compeers in persuasiveness of address and in })romptitude and perspicuity of utterance, while his learning and attainments in sacred literature were profound and extraordinary. With ears intent Arminius drank in his words ; with eager assiduity he hung upon his lips; and with intense admiration he listened to his exposition of the ninth chapter of Paul's Epistle to the Romans." (Brandt, p. 44.) The progress made by Armiuius was great. His mind moved and worked strongly and rapidly. He stood among the first students at Geneva. While at Geneva, he met with a student from Holland, and of the university of XUrecht, who never Latinized his extravagantly long and hard WHA T IS A EMI NT A NISM? 19 uarue, Uytenbogaert, a man of no mean ability and culture. Their friendship was life-long, and when the time was ripe for it, Uytenbogaert became one of the stauchest advocates of the doctrines promul- gated by Arminius. While at Geneva, Arminius began to lecture as well as study. He sharply at- tacked the philosophy of Aristotle, giving offense to some of the professors by defending Ramus and his system of dialectics in opposition to that of the old Greek philosopher. Great opposition was raised to his remaining at Geneva, and soon he visited Basle, and entered the university and began his studies. So proficient was Arminius in his lectur- ing and studies, that the faculty of theology offered to confer on him the Doctor's degree gratis. Strange to say, this rising young star among theologians de- clined the honor, alleging as a reason that he was too young a man to receive such a grave degree. In 1588, Arminius returned to Geneva, where the storm raised against him had measurably blown over, and he remained three years longer in the study of theology. His mind was permeated with the doctrines of John Calvin, and he did not to the public seem to have any doubts regarding their truth. Yet we have no means of knowing that he at any time strongly advocated them. In 1586, Arminius was attracted to Padua, Italy, to hear the celebrated professor of philos- ophy, Zarabella. His mind was not greatly im- pressed with this master, and he tarried with him 20 ARMINIANISM IN HISTORY. but a short time, and then visited Rome and other places in Italy. lu a few months lie returned to Geneva to continue his studies. The l)urgomeisters of Amsterdam, hearing of this journey to Rome, which he undertook without their consent or knowledge, ordered his immediate return to Am- sterdam. This they claimed the right to do, be- cause they were furnishing the money for his education, and he was practically their servant, bound to them in body and mind for a lifetime. He was accused by some enemies of having " kissed the Pope's slipper," which meant that he had l)e- come a Roman Catholic. He promptly denied this charge, and proved it a false accusation by a travel- ing companion, and that he was as genuine a re- former as any who remained at Geneva or Amster- dam. On leaving Geneva in the autumn of 1587, he received and bore away a high testimonial from his teachers. * In it occurred this sentence: "His mind was in the highest degree qualified for the discharge of duty, should it please God at any time to use his ministry for the promotion of his own work in the Church." (Brandt, p. 53.) This matter having been settled, he was or- dained in the Reformed Church in 1588. His ex- amination took place before the Amsterdam Classis, and by the request of the authorities of the Church, he began his ministry in that city in officiating each week at the " evening services." He delivered a discourse and conducted the prayers. This com- WHAT IS ARMINIANISMf 21 menced ou the 4th of February. He soon attracted such attention by his "style of speaking," which was " marked by a certain sweet and native grace, tempered with gravity," that by the action of the Consistory he was jDhiced in charge of the Church in Amsterdam. His church was soon crowded with earnest worshipers. His great soul was on fire for the saving and reformation of Amsterdam. The spirit of a real religious reformation burned within his breast, and he preached righteousness and true holiness with an unusual unction. Arminius was now in the twenty-eighth year of his age. "His discourses," says Brandt, "were masculine and erudite ; everything he uttered breathed the the- ologian — not raw and commonplace, but superior, acute, cultivated, and replete with solid acquisitions both in human and in sacred literature. This made him such a favorite both with high and low, that in a short time he attracted towards himself the ears and the hearts of all classes alike. In the gen- eral admiration of his talents, some styled him ' a file of truth;' others, 'a whetstone of intellect;' others, 'a pruning knife for rank growdng errors;' and, indeed, on the subject of religion and sacred study, it seemed as if scarcely anything was known Avhich Arminius did not know." (Brandt, p. 57.) Of his visit to Rome Arminius often said that it was of great benefit to him, for he " saw at Rome a mystery of iniquity more foul than he had ever mentioned." He saw some of the things that had 22 ARMINIANISM IN HISTORY. stirred the heart of Luther, and led to a revolt from the thralldom of the Seven-hilled City- How DID ArMINIUS come TO ADOPT THE ThEORY OPPOSED TO THE LoNG-ESTABLISHED DOC- TRINES OF Calvinism ? Melanchthon in Germany held very mild opin- ions in regard to predestination. He would not accept or teach the strong doctrine as taught by Augustine or Gottschalk, but taught it in a manner that took away almost the whole of the really ob- jectionable. These notions were known in Ger- many, and spread through Holland even earlier than the doctrines of Calvin, and found genuine advocates and followers. At Amsterdam, in 1589, a citizen, Richard Koornhert, "published several works in which he attacked the doctrine of pre- destination which was taught by Beza and the Genevan school." Koornhert's arguments were so fully fortified, and so sharply put, that the Hol- land theologians were not able to put them aside or show their falsity. The Dutch mind, ordinarily slow to act, now moved quite swiftly, and the doctrines of Koornhert were likely to become universal. To counteract these teachings, and at the same time help to remove some of the more objectionable things in Calvinism, a change or modification of the doctrines of Calvin as taught by Beza, was proposed by certain ministers about Amsterdam. Some of the ministers of Delft considered this WHAT IS ARMINIANISM? 23 teaching of Kooruhert iucendiary and deptruc- tive, while others became convinced that Beza was possibly in error to some extent in his pres- entation of the doctrine of predestination. The Dutch mind was confused as to its theology as most of them received it. While ' ' they agreed, with Beza, that Divine predestination was the antecedent un- conditional and immutable decree of God concern- ing salvation and damnation of each individual," yet they could not agree with Beza that man, con- sidered before he was created, was made the object of unconditional salvation or reprobation. The Delft ministers were not all of them advocates of supralapsarian predestination and reprobation, but held to sublapsarian election ; and this blast of Koornhert did not allay the excitement. The objection of Koornhert to Calvinism was that the "doctrine of absolute decrees represented God as the author of sin, as such decrees made sin necessary and inevitable no less than damnation." The view he published in a book called " Responsio ad Argumenta Bezie et Calvimv," etc. The book was reckoned heterodoxical and dangerous by the theologians of Delft. It savored too much of free thought and liberal interpretation of God's plans. It seemed to bring man into too familiar and easy intercourse with God. The book must be answered or refuted. Koornhert was Secretary of State of Holland — a man of learning, who looked into philosophy and 24 A RMIXIA NISM JX JUS TOR Y. religiou with the eyes of a hiymau. He attacked Romanists, Lutherans, and Calviuists alike, and brwight forward an array of autagouisius not easily answered. ' ' He maintained that every religious com- munion needed reformation, but he said that no one had a right to engage in it without a mission sup- ported by miracles." The Calviuists of Holland, more than Romanists or I^utherans, took umbrage at his treatment of jn-edesti nation, and demanded its answer. The task of formulating a proper and convincing answer was assigned toLydius, a profes- sor at Franeker. He besought Arminius to make the answer, to which the Amsterdam, scholar and minister consented. When Arminius commenced the task of exam- ining the book of Kooruhert, he went about it like a thoroughly conscientious man, honest in purpose and devoid of desire to deceive or be deceived. Arminius began at the foundation and traversed the entire theme of Koornhert, patiently going over the arguments and counter-arguments, the illustra- tions and Scriptures, weighing them as to their value and force, until his own mind was filled with doubt as to the truth of Calvinism. How long before he adopted the primitive doctrine and forsook Calvin- ism can not be determined. His sermons at Am- sterdam very soon began to have the flavor of the freedom of the will in matters of salvation, in op- position to the dogma of a necessitated will, and that whoever wills to come to God by Jesus ('hrist WHA T IS A RMINIA NISMf 25 may come and be made free. For about two years this clear, forcible, primitive preaching continued. It called forth many questions and frequent discus- sions between himself and the Calvinists. In 1593 his lectures on Romans ix were published. He, in these, quite sharply disputed the teachings of the Genevan school. A party was formed against him ; disputes and contentions ran high. Staid old Am- sterdam and her burghers were for once theolog- ically stirred from center to circumference. It was soon discovered that Arminius was a disputant not easily handled. His steel was sharp, his arguments pointed, and his wit keen. It was agreed that be- tween all parties for the time there should be a truce. It was not rigidly maintained. The mental and spiritual exercises of Arminius in coming out from the mysticism and bondage of doubt under the doctrine of predestination and a necessitated will into the clear light and mental freedom of the doctrine as taught by the early Fathers of the Church, is a story of interest, for it is one of victory. About this time he took for a Avife Elizabeth Real, "a woman of elegant manners and a great mind." She was the daughter of one of Amsterdam's greatest judges and senators, and one who had most actively defended his city and country against the unmitigated tyranny and cruelty of the Spaniards. She proved to be "en- dowed and adorned with hereditary virtues, most exemplary manners, and the love of unaffected 26 ARMINIANISM IN BISTORT. piety" — just such a life as encouraged and stimu- lated the mind and heart of Arminius to study and teach what his conscience told him was the mind of God. Finding so much antagonism arising against his teaching of salvation provided for all men and the possibility of all men accepting by faith and re- ceiving pardon of sin, Arminius set a watch over his lips, and continued his studies carefully and persistently. He saw the carnal bondage of many of his Church, and how they needed enlightenment regarding the nature and bondage of sin, together with a freeing of their minds from "-vicious and distorted interpretations" of "several passages of Holy Writ on which, not infrequently, as an axi- omatic basis, were reared carnal views at variance with genuine Christianity." Not long after, he made a public exposition of the Epistle to the Romans. When he came to the words, " For we know that the law is spiritual, but I am carnal, sold under sin," he clearly set forth his views. "His opinion was," says Brandt, "that to interpret this passage as many do, of the man as truly and thoroughly born again through gospel grace, was to do the utmost to invalidate the efficacy of Christian regeneration and the cultivation of genuine piety; inasmuch as the entire exercise of Divine worship, all evangelical obedience, and that new creation which the inspired writers so often and so earnestly inculcate, were thereby shrunk within WHA T IS A RMINIA NISM ? 27 such narrow limits as to consist, not in the effect, but simply in the wish. Wherefore, after accurately weighing in his own mind the train of thought in that chapter, and calling to his aid the commenta- ries of Bucer and others upon it, he publicly taught and maintained that St. Paul in this place does not speak of himself as what he then was, nor yet of a man living under the influence of gospel grace, but personates a man lying under the law, on whom the Mosaic law had performed its functions, and who, in consequence, being by the aid of the Spirit con- trite on account of sin, and convinced of the impo- tence of the law as a means of obviating salvation, was in quest of a deliverer, and was not regener- ated indeed, but in the stage next to regeneration." (Brandt, pp. 66, 67.) It was not many days after this discourse before the tongue of criticism and slander wagged against Arminius. He was charged with being a Pelagian ; for "he ascribed too much goodness to an unregen- erate man." Others said he was an heretical teacher, a Socinian ; he taught directly opposed to the Bel- gic Confession ; he held contrary to the Palatine Catechism ; and he had perverted the Fathers, for he appealed to their teachings to confirm his. The public mind of Amsterdam was soon again seething and boiling at a furious stage. It seemed as if nothing would satisfy some minds but the destruc- tion of Arminius. The calmness of this true re- former was most admirable. The Classical Court 28 A RMINIANISM IN HISTORY. ordered him before them to give "satisfactory ex- phioation of his opinion." Arminius consented to appear, provided it was in the presence of the rul- ers of the city, or their delegates, or before his brethren in the ministry, the elders being absent. It was arranged that he should appear before the ministers. After much and earnest prayer, he ap- peared, and Peter Plaucius became the advocate against him. Many things charged against him, Arminius proved he had never uttered from the pulpit; and others had been entirely perverted to an opposite meaning from what he meant. When they charged him with Pelagianism,- he denied it, and " contended that by no legitimate process could they be elicited from his exposition in question, but, on the contrary, were manifestly repugnant to it." Arminius showed that he had correctly quoted from and interpreted the writings of the ancient divines, or Fathers, and that Bucer and Erasmus, of modern times, agreed with his interpretations of the Epistle to the Romans. Regarding the charge that he taught contrary to the Catechism and Confession, he took ample time to show that he "had taught nothing whatever contrary to these formularies of mutual consent, and that his doctrine on the point in question could be easily reconciled with them." (Brandt, pp. 69-70.) Rising to a consciousness that he had certain mental and spiritual rights, he declared that " he was in no respect bound to every private interpretation of the Reformed, but was WJfA T IS A RMINIA NISM. 29 plainly free, and entitled to expound the heavenly oi-acles and particular passages of the sacred vol- ume according to the dictates of conscience ; and that, in so doing, he would ever be on his guard against advancing aught which tends to tear up the foundation of the Christian faith." (IbuL, p. 70.) While by the majority Armiuius was cleared of all guilt under these charges, still there were in- dividuals who clamored for his arrest and deposi- tion, and sought by every means to detract from his greatness, his innocence, and his usefulness. Chief among these traducers was this same Peter Plaucius. He was not satisfied with traducing the character of the minister in Amsterdam, but at The Hague and elsewhere. M. Lydius and XTytenbogaert went to Amsterdam in the fond hope of settling matters, and restoring harmony, but all to no purpose. At last the matter was brought before the new sena- tors, who invited the retiring senators to sit with them, and they determined to hear the charges of Plaucius and others, and Arminius's answer. The senators, the 11th of February, heard the case. After the charges liad been presented and advo- cated fully, Arminius was permitted to speak in his own behalf. This he did in his own masterly manner. He took up the charges item by item, and showed clearly that what he taught was not against the Catechism or Belgic Confession, but in harmony with them in his interpretation of Romans vii. What seemed to be at variance was 3 30 ARMINIANISM IN niSTORY. not with the authorized standards, but the inter- pretations of some divines. He entered a strong plea for freedom of conscience in Scripture inter- pretation. He said "he had not entertained a doubt that it wouhl be free to him, in the exercise of that liberty, to discuss sacred subjects which be- long to all Christians and Christian teachers what- soever, to expound this or that passage of Scripture according to the dictates of conscience. Further, since the hinge of the existing difference turned mainly on this point, that some thought his opinion of that passage opposed to the received ecclesiastical formularies, and that this was a charge of which he could be easily convicted, he, for his part, held him- self in readiness, for the vindication of his name, to enter into a conference with his compeers; but he earnestly entreated that such conference should take place in the presence of the senators them- selves, or their delegates; for he anticipated that the issue of this case would be more satisfactory were these influential men to be present, not as witnesses merely, but as moderators and righteous arbiters in respect to all thaf might be advanced on either side." (Brandt, pp. 83-84. ) As soon as his assailants could get the floor, they demanded that the conference or discussion be held in the presence of the Classis, and not before the senators. But the honorable senators took occasion to order all the ministers to retire, after which they deliberated as to the merits of the charges against WIT A T IS ARMINIANISM. 31 Arminius, the manner in which they were advo- cated, and the gentle, learned, and logical reply of Arminiu8. The unanimous decision of the senators was presented by their president: — "That it was the opinion and decree of the honorable senators that the Church Court should allow this whole mat- ter to rest, and permit whatever discussions had arisen out of it up to this time to be consigned to oblivion. A fresh conference upon it did not appear to them to be suitable, or likely to do good. They (the ministers) must henceforth be on their guard, lest any of them should give vent to new doctrines from the pulpit. Should any of them have opinions in which they differed from other divines, and on which they boasted a profounder knowledge, it would be incumbent on them to reserve these to themselves, and to talk them over in a friendly manner with their compeers. Meanwhile, those who think differently, and who can not be con- vinced of error, must be calmly foreborne with until the points in dispute be decided by the authority of some council." Having rendered this decision, two of the sen- ators added a "very grave and serious admoni- tion, ... to cultivate that fraternal harmony and peace by which they were wont to be dis- tinguished." (Brandt, p. 85.) Thus this great thinker, eminent scholar, and devout Christian, Armiuius, was again vindicated. Chapter II. ARMINIUS AS PROFEvSSOR AT LKYDEN. Pestilence in Holland — Death of Jnnins, a I'lolessor of Di- vinity at Leyden — James Arminins proposed for tj[u' Vacancy — The Opposition of (ioniarns — His Address to tlie Curators — They determined to have Arminins— Not inclined to accept — The Objections at Amsterdam over- come — Keleased — Elected— Examined for the Doctor- ate — Success — His Oration on the Occasion — His Ora- tions on taking his Chair — Effect upon the Students— Enemies- Said that J'redestination made (!od the Au- thor of Sin — Made Rector Magnific—Hominius— Follow- ers of Arminins accused of his Crimes — Excitement spread to Other Ecclesiastical Bodies — Address on hMght- eousness and Divine Providence— Two Significant Facts ; 1st. People misquoted and perverted his Meaning; '2d. He never fViiled to meet any Disputant on the Ques- tions of Doctrine — Question of a National Synod — Ar- minius's Oration — Why a National Synod had not been convened — A Synod ordered by the States (ien- eral— Controversy as to Revision — A Synod of South Holland at Oorcum — Call made upon the I^eyden I'ro- I'essors as to the Belgic Confession and Palatinate Cate- chism — Opportunity for Arminins to speak of the Con- fession — Petition for a Preliminary Synod at The Hague— Arminius's Letter to Hypi)()litus — Apology - Declaration of Sentiments at The Hague — The Misfor- tune of his Death — His Motto — Crotius's Kemark con* cerning Arminins. A PESTILENCE raged in Holland, and tlic chair of Divinity in the University of Leyden was made vacant by the death of Francis Junins in 1002. 32 ABMIXIUS AS PHOFESSOE AT LEYDEN. 33 The curators of the uuiversity were favorably im- pressed with James Arininius, from what they had learued of his ability, aud selected him as their candidate for the successor. AVheu the chair was tendered to Arminius he felt himself under obliga- tions to the Church at Amsterdam, because of their having furnished the money for his education, and reported the case to them. The burghers of Am- sterdam were unwilling to release him from his pulpit ; but Uytenbogaert, who at this time was minister at The Hague and chaplain to Maurice, Prince of Orange, succeeded in obtaining his re- lease from his contract with the men of Amsterdam. There were many of the Calvinistic ministers who were opposed to Arminius becoming professor of Divinity at Leyden, because of his well-known anti-Calvinistic notions. Among these was Profes- sor Gomarus, one of the Divinity professors at Leyden, who to the end of his life continued to antagonize Arminius. Gomarus was a man of cul- ture and influence, but was the embodiment of strong prejudices. He had been appointed by the curators of the Leyden Academy to deliver the funeral oration in honor of Junius. When the curators were in session, Gomarus went into their presence to report his discharge of the duty im- posed upon him and present them with a copy of his oration. He took occasion to speak against James Arminius, who he had heard was their can- didate for a successor of Junius. He gave them to 34 ARMINIAXISM IN HISTORY, understand that to himself Arminius was very of- fensive ; that Junius, while living, "had no favoi*- able opinion of Artuinius." In Amsterdam " he had it in his power to infect one Church only, but here he could infect many, not only in this but in other lands." He accused Arminius of self-seeking, "but no faith was to be attached to his woi'ds." The effect of this speech was rather to lead some to sympathy with Arminius ; for when Gomarus was asked if he knew Arminius, he was compelled to say "he only saluted him once, as he descried him at a little distance." When questioned as to how he knew about the peculiar teachings -of Arminius, he said he had it "from ministers most worthy of credit. " When pressed for the names of those min- isters he could only name Plaucius. These curators put but little confidence in the address of Gomarus, or reference to Plaucius, but set about finding out for themselves as to their ac- cusations. They called into their council John Van Olden Barueveldt, who advised them to consult ITytenbogaert. After a careful and searching ex- amination, they found James Arminius an innocent man, and all they could desire as the successor of Junius. When the proposition of the curators was pre- sented to Arminius, he promptly dissented from their choice. He questioned his own ability, the willingness of the senators of Amsterdaili to release him, and the consent of his enemies to allow him ARMINIUS AS PEOFESSOR AT LEYDEN. 35 to take the honorable chair. Some great names were arrayed against Arminius, while as equally famous men stood for his election. There were sharp discussions on both sides. Gomarus led the party against Arminius, while Uytenbogaert led the party for him. The sermons, addresses, letters, and conversations of Arminius were read, criticised, dis- cussed, condemned, and praised. The curators pa- tiently heard all that was said. Not once was Arminius before them. He was informed of all the proceedings ; he was not flustered, angered, or discouraged, but left all in the hands of Providence, knowing that he had not done or said anything worthy of such condemnation. Calmly he waited the issue. His dear friend, Uytenbogaert, wrote him these consoling words : "I would have you be of good cheer. . . . The Lord God will pro- vide, and grant that success which he knows will be most conducive to his own glory and the edifi- cation of the Church, yea, more, and to the salva- tion of me and mine. On him I cast all my care. He will bring forth my righteousness as the light, and my judgment as the noonday." (Brandt, l(i2. ) Every step of the way to the professorship at Leyden, Arminius was stopped by objections, ques- tions of doctrine, suspicions, attacks of enemies, — led mostly by Gomarus. At last all seemed cleared away. The curators said "that the suspicions stirred against Arminius had not been svibstan- tiated, nor was there just cause why any one should 36 ABMIXTANISM IX HISTORY. judge unfavorably rct>pecting him ; for iu the ex- ercise of liberty granted him of proi)he.syiug [of discussing sacred things] in the Church, he had taught nothing that was inimical to the Christian religion." (Brandt, i)[). 171), 180.J Having been called and elected to the profes- sorship, the next step was to be made a doctor, and invested with the office. On the 19th of June, he was examined by Goniarus before Grotius and Merula. All expressed themselves as fully satis- fied with the examination. On the lOth of July, Armiuius held a disputation on the subject "Con- cerning the Nature of God." His opponents were Peter Bertjus, Hominius, Crucius, and Greviuchov- ius. He held his place against them in a manner to gain " universal applause." The next day, Go- marus invested Arminius with the honor of the well- earned Doctor's degree, with the usual formalities. At the same time Arminius delivered his great ora- tion " Concerning the Priestly Office of Christ." The teritimonial, or diploma, given by the academy to Arminius, is full of flattery of its kind. It is recorded that Arminius was the first to receive the Doctor's degree at Ley den. On taking his chair, he found that the stu- dents of the university of Leyden had been giving more attention to the intricate controversies and knotty questions of the schoolmen than to the studies of the Scripture and theology. The sjurit in which he entered upon his work is expressed by ABMIXIUS AS I'BOFESSOJi AT LEYDEN. -tt himself iu a letter of Heptember 22, 16()o. " I will, therefore, with the help of the good God, address myself to this province, and look for success by his al)uudaut blessing. He kuow's from what motive I have undertaken this office, what is my aim, what object I have in view in discharging the duties of it. He discerns and a})proves, I know. It is not the empty honor of this world — mere smoke and bubble — nor the desire of amassing wealth (which indeed were in vain, let me strive to the utmost), that has impelled me hither ; but my one wish is to do public service in the gospel of Christ, and to exhibit that gospel as powerfully and plainly as possible before those who are destined, in their time, to propagate it to others." (Brandt, pp. 187-1.S8.) Such a spirit led him to give three "elegant and polished oratioils " on these topics, "Of the Object of tSacred Theology," " Of the Author and End of Theology," and "Certitude." 'j By this method," writes Brandt, "he strove to instill into the minds of the students a love for that divine and most dignified of all the sciences ; and at his very entrance into his office he judged with Soc- rates, the wisest of the Gentiles, that the prin- cipal part of his res})onsibility stood fulfilled could he only succeed iu inflaming his disciples with an ardent desire of learning." His first effort was to change the condition of things he found at Leyden, and he began by lee- 38 A BMINIA NISM IN HIS TOR F. tures on the Bible as " the foundatiou of all truth." During this time he brought out in his lectures to the students his full and free method of Scripture interpretation, which charmed his hearers, and made the curators rejoice in this acquisition of so great and noble a te.acher in place of Junius, who had been removed by the hand of death. In the meantime, the enemies of Arminius were suspicious, and watching for an opportunity to as- sail his character and destroy his reputation. An occasion presented itself in a little time. Two stu- dents of theology invited him to "honor Avith his presence their theses, or positions, which they had drawn up to be subjected to public examination." One was on Jtistificatioii, the other on Original Si)i. Arminius knew that other professors had been pres- ent under such circumstances, when the doctrine of the theses was not according to their mind. Now, since there were some things in these he did not in- dorse, his enemies made it an occasion of great fault- finding. While no open rupture followed, Gomarus sought, by mutterings, to poison the minds of stu- dents, curators, and the public, and set them against him. The next year Arminius began a course of lectures on the Old Testament, with an occasional "exposition of certain portions of the New." This so greatly displeased Gomarus that, meeting Arminius, he broke out in "a burst of passion," saying : "You have invaded my profes- sorship !" To this, Arminius made the defense that ARMINIUS AS FEOFESSOE AT LEYDEN. 39 the curators had given him a certificate "to select themes for prelection at any time, not only from the Old Testament, but also from the New, pro- vided he did not encroach upon the particular sub- ject in which Gomarus might be engaged." AVhile he had not in fact trenched upon the rights of Go- marus, the charge was made, and served as an oc- casion for other charges and complaints. There were many injurious reports circulated by his enemies, which had a tendency to injure his reputation with the Government and among the Churches. During the years 1605-1608 there was a constant besieging of Arminius on the question of predestination. At first he was led to answer in moderate terms, though holding the views that later were more fully and sharply advocated. He did not desire to stir up unnecessary antagonism to him- self, or lead men to the advocacy of what he be- lieved to be wrong. Gomarus, as the leader, and Helmichius, John Kuchlinas his uncle, Lansber- gius, and others, were constantly throwing out hints as to Arminius's heterodoxy, and made charges against his integrity as a Christian man, and in many ways sought to annoy him, and lead to a statement of his doctrines, so that, as ardent be- lievers in unconditional predestination, they might have somewhat against him as a believer in the feeed-om of the will, and that Jesus Christ died to make salvation possible for all men. They often said, Arminius is to be ranked with the Pelagians, 40 AliMINIAyiSM IX HISTORY. thougli the assisortion was as often refuted. It is prob- able that he rasped their feeliugs when he said of the })redestiuatiouisni of Calvin, Beza, and Gomarus, that it "made God the aiiflior of !