Posted on 11/16/2006 11:30:51 AM PST by xzins
MEMORIAL TO JAMES ARMINIUS
Arminius, that servant of Christ, in order to approve himself before God, chose to endure the hatred and contradiction of all mankind, rather than to violate his conscience. He held out to the whole Christian world the ensign of peace and concord, and he wished a commencement to be made in the Reformed Churches. Being a man of prudence and mild in spirit, he perceived that those Churches were distracted and separated from each other in many ways, and that in these days neither measure nor end was observed in making secessions; that endeavours were therefore to be used to induce the contending parties to lay aside animosity, and to sing a funeral song over their unnecessary enmities and quarrels; that every exertion was then to be employed, to take an accurate account of such doctrines as are absolutely necessary, and each party to confine itself within those limits; that, with regard to all the rest, whatever was capable of being tolerated, or did not hinder salvation, should receive toleration; that the rule of Prudence and Charity alone is sufficient for this purpose; and that, without these, continual strife and hatred must be perpetuated, which would cause the tears of the Church afresh to flow. This was the design of Arminius; and he persisted in it to the close of his life, nothing being such a source of grief and sorrow to him, as the obstinate resistance of those who ought to have shewn themselves the most favourable to this design. Whether it was laudable or not, let those judge who are affected with commiseration at the sight of the whole of Christendom divided into most minute parties: I entertain no doubt myself of its being a pious purpose.
Arminius was too great an admirer and practiser of that Apostolic direction, Let your moderation be known to all men, ever to indulge in bitter or reviling expressions. He will never be detected in having traduced, much less in having rendered odious and infamous, or in having injured by a single word, those whom Capellus calls "the Reformers." Indeed, no one ever dissented from them with greater moderation. Let the writings of Arminius be inspected, and my assertion will be found correct. Such, in fact, was the modesty of this pious and learned man, that he thought all errors, especially those which he accounted to be injurious to piety, ought to be attacked with boldness and according to the meaning of their authors; but that the wanderers in error themselves ought to be treated with mildness and according to the mind of Christ Jesus. For he knew how easy it is to commit a mistake, how unjust to visit with reproaches him who is in error, how disgraceful to speak evil of a pious man, and how necessary it is for a Christian, and particularly for a Bishop, to be no striker, but patient (1 Tim. iii.3), gentle to all men, and in meekness instructing those that oppose themselves (2 Tim. ii.24). Such were his sentiments, such was his conduct--most opposite to those opprobrious arts which Capellus employs!
Arminius was as averse to a new Confession, as he was to a schism. Those things which he considered as desiderata in the Church, he wished to be corrected by the Church and within herself; and he thought those things could be amended there more efficaciously and with greater safety. From new Confessions he did not hope for a remedy, but feared more dangerous paroxysms. To adhere to the scriptures alone; or, where any Confession was established, to tolerate certain improper phrases, solely through a hatred of schism, and either to reconcile them with scripture by the benefit of a mild interpretation, or to correct them by the aid of a lawful revision was, in his opinion, a much better course than to expend labour upon new Confessions which might serve to foment schisms. For as a prudent man he perceived, in this age fruitful in strifes and quarrels, the usual consequence is, that wherever new Confessions are formed, there the minds of men are separated and distracted by their different opinion. At no period of his life did he assert, much less did he contend, that the article on Predestination in the Dutch Confessions was false or bore evident marks of falsehood, that it contained heresies or abounded with them, much less that it abounded with a multitude of them: As an unexceptionable proof of this it may be stated that he always endeavoured to establish his sentiments by many and strong arguments from the Dutch Confession itself; and he professed that he was prepared to retire from the ministry, if at any time, either in secret or in public, he had spoken or written any thing contrary to that formulary. He always denied that the sentiments which he opposed were those of the Confession: He said, they were those of some particular divines, from which he was perfectly at liberty to dissent.
Arminius never said that the whole human race was at the same time reconciled and healed by the satisfaction of Christ. He was a man of greater accuracy, than to speak in that manner. He has said that mankind were reconciled by the satisfaction of Christ: But who, except a dotard, would say that they were healed? Arminius only teaches that God for Christ's sake bestows on those who are reconciled to Him through Christ a new power [ability] when they are called by the Gospel, that they may be enabled to free themselves from that servitude, provided they use diligent endeavours, and be not wanting to themselves and to the grace of God. But he who teaches this, teaches a doctrine contrary to that which Capellus wishes. For such a man teaches that those who are reconciled are still under the servitude of sin; but that, by the aid of grace which is newly bestowed on them by God, it is possible for them to be gradually healed of that servitude. For it is one thing to impart an ability to any one, by which he may come out of his servitude: It is another thing, actually to come out of servitude, or to be healed of it.
Those persons who have lived with Arminius, and who, as the phrase is, have eaten a bushel of salt in his company, can bear testimony to his candour and integrity. France, your country, never produced a spirit possessed of greater integrity. Unless he had been studious of these virtues, he would neither have incurred the chance of so much hatred, nor have subjected himself to the peril of such obstinate contradiction. If he occasionally used prudence, out of a greater regard to his own conscience and to the public peace, he did nothing more than what was the duty of a good man and a Christian. He could do this, and he actually did it, without any design to deceive; nay, he did it with the design to approve himself the more to God, who alone inwardly inspects the heart, and to whom, he knew, a hypocrite is more hateful than a man that is openly wicked: For when a bad man wishes to appear a good one, he is then the worst of all.
What could any one desire that was more open, candid, and nervous, than the Declaration of Arminius before the states of Holland? I wish his adversaries had, with equal candour and ingenuousness, declared their sentiments on Reprobation, at the Hague Conference, and more recently at the Synod of Dort! But if ever any persons employed dissimulation, or declined to disclose their sentiments, they were certainly the members of those two assemblies. Indeed it is a thing common in its occurrence--for a man, when he perceives himself to be guilty of a crime, to use indecent haste in boldly charging it upon others, that he may seem to be at the greatest possible distance from it himself.
In conclusion therefore I say, that Arminius acted in all things with perfect good faith and candour; that he openly professed the doctrine which he held; that according to his own declaration, he always ingeniously believed this doctrine to be contained in the formularies of the Churches; that he never condemned those formularies; and that he never disclosed, except in the assembly of the States and at their command, the considerations which he had marked down according to the decree of the Supreme Magistrate and at the request of the Synod. Capellus therefore, without any just cause, laments the absence of candour in this most candid breast.--Examen Thesium I. Capelli
EPISCOPIUS, SIMON (Simon Biscop, Bischop or Bisschop) (1583-1643), Dutch theologian, the systematizer of Arminianism (q.v.), was born at Amsterdam on Jan. 1, 1583. In 1600 he entered the University of Leiden, where he studied theology under and came under the influence of Jacobus Arminius. In 1610, the year in which the Arminians presented the famous Remonstrance to the states of Holland, he became pastor at Bleyswick, near Rotterdam; in the following year he supported the Remonstrants conference. In 1612 he was made professor of theology at Leiden. Episcopius was spokesman of the 13 representatives of the Remonstrants before the synod of Dort in 1618, but he was refused a hearing, the Remonstrant doctrines were condemned and he and the other Arminian representatives were banished. After the death (1625) of Prince Maurice, the Arminian controversy abated and Episcopius was permitted in 1626 to return to his own country. He was appointed preacher at the Remonstrant college in Amsterdam, and died there on April 4, 1643. In theology, Episcopius protested against the tendency of Calvinists to stress abstract dogma, especially predestination and original sin, and argued that Christianity was practical rather than theoretical. He was author of the Arminian confession of faith (published 1622). His Opera Theologica, edited posthumously, was published in two volumes at Amsterdam (1650-65). Episcopius' biography was written by P. van Limborch (1701). See also F. Calder, Memoirs of Simon Episcopius (1835). --From Encyclopaedia Britannica.
As they used to say, "if only all that energy were applied to peaceful purposes..."
See #3. Were it redirected to peaceful purposes, cancer would have been conquered long ago, and people would be routinely living in full health and undiminished vigor to at least 250.
Thank you, J.
What's your background?
I prefer "Bondage of the Will" by Luther.
Most appropriate. :>)
Ex-atheist is good.....God likes it a lot :>)
Plantinga is too smart for me. I always feel like I've got a dwarf brain when folks at his level start a serious conversation.
I agree, that is why I generally prefer his popularizers like JP Moreland. 'Philosophical Foundations for a Christian Worldview' is a great book - it could almost be called 'Plantinga for Dummies' except that it is still a lot of hard work.
When I was in seminary, we had a wonderful old professor (Kuhn) who worked patiently with us slow learners and beamed every time it looked like a light bulb went on.
I was never a Christmas tree. :>)
Read post #2
I am a calvinist in the tradition of Arminius.
Have I hidden that?
Since when are you a free willer?
That would make you a.....let me see.....a heretic!?! ;-)
CTA = PTBA
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.