Chapter 2 Part 2

The Life of James Arminius
Chapter 2, Part 2 of 3.

This biography of James Arminius was written in Latin by Caspar Brandt, published by Gerard Brandt in 1724, and translated to English by John Guthrie in 1854.
--------------------

But although he put himself most wisely and rigidly on his guard against openly impugning the generally received tenets concerning Divine Predestination, and kept to himself, for the sake of peace, many truths on which the rest differed from him in opinion, he by no means held himself so bound to the prevailing opinions of others as to preclude him, when engaged in the exposition of this or that passage, from occasionally and modestly expressing his dissent. Above all, he made it his endeavour to eradicate from the minds of his hearers certain popular errors in the highest degree hostile to Christian piety; and to vindicate, against the vicious and distorted interpretations of some, several passages of Holy Writ on which, not unfrequently, as on an axiomatic basis, were reared carnal views at variance with genuine Christianity. For this purpose a fit opportunity, as it appeared to him, presented itself in the year 1591, when, after having been sometime engaged in the public exposition of Paul's Epistle to the Romans, he reached the 14th verse of the seventh chapter — 'For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin.' His opinion was, 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 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 commentaries 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 contrite on account of sin, and convinced of the impotence of the law as a means of obtaining salvation, was in quest of a deliverer, and was, not regenerated indeed, but in the stage next to regeneration.'

This exposition of the passage — which was simply submitted, without discussing the contrary opinion — procured him much ill will, and but little favour with the most of his ministerial brethren. Some took occasion from it to fasten on him the crime of Pelagianism, on the ground that he ascribed too much goodness to an unregenerate man. Others daubed his opinion with the mark of heresy, for no other reason than that Faustus Socinus, under the name of Prosper Dysidseus, had expounded this chapter of Paul in much the same way. With most the cry was, that he had uttered many things from the pulpit opposed to the Confession of the Belgic churches and the Palatine Catechism; and, further, that he had appealed without just warrant, in defence of his opinion, to the divines of the ancient Church, and even to some of a more recent age.

Shortly after, the matter was brought before the Classical Court, who decreed to summon Arminius to their bar, and hold an interview with him, with the view of convincing him of his error, and of his perverse doctrine, or of making him give a more satisfactory explanation of his opinion. On being apprised of this decision, Arminius signified that he would enter most cheerfully into such a conference, but on this condition, that it take place in the presence of the rulers of the city, or their delegates; or, if tin's should not be deemed advisable, that he be allowed to meet only with his brethren in the ministry, the elders of the church being absent. The latter alternative being adopted, after previous prayer to God, a discussion was held between him and Peter Plancius. Plancius urged many things against Arminius, which Arminius proved either that he had never uttered from the pulpit, or that he had done so with a clearly different aim, and in a different sense [Ex schedulia MS. Arminii.]. To the charge of Pelagianism, he replied, with some warmth, that he utterly repudiated those errors which were commonly ascribed to Pelagians; 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. With respect to the authorities he had cited in the pulpit, he owned he had said that very many of the ancient divines, both of the Greek and Latin Church, had adopted his exposition, which he could establish by proofs not a few; as for the rest, he was not aware that he had adduced in support of his opinion any of the recent divines of the Church except Bucer, although he did not use the same phraseology; but that Desiderius Erasmus was inclined to the same opinion — a name by no means to be despised by any of the Reformed. Here Plancius began to detract greatly from the authority, and to weaken the credit, of the ancient fathers of the Church. This Arminius resented, and declared that neither Plancius himself, nor any divine of the modern Church, had a right to think or speak so disparagingly of men whose names were held sacred, and who so acted in their day as to entitle themselves to be held in honour by the entire Christian community. The Confession and Catechism being next referred to, he showed at much length that he had taught nothing whatever contrary to these formularies of mutual consent, and that his doctrine on the point in question could be most easily reconciled with them. He added that he was in no respect bound to every private interpretation of the Reformed, but was plainly free and entitled to expound the heavenly oracles, and particular passages of the sacred volume, according to the dictates of conscience; and that in so doing, he would ever be on his guard against advancing aught which went to tear up the foundation of the Christian faith. In the course of the discussion, the subject of predestination was mentioned once and again; but he refused to touch on that doctrine, on the ground that in his exposition of this seventh chapter he had advanced nothing whatever which had the remotest bearing on that controversy. Being further asked what opinion be held as to the perfection of man in this life, he replied that he considered a question of this description as altogether superfluous, having brought out his mind on this point more than a hundred times in the course of expounding the sixth and seventh chapters of that apostolic epistle. Other and more copious replies of Arminius to many allegations of this kind, will be found in his very accurate 'Dissertation on the True and Genuine Sense of the Seventh Chapter of the Epistle to the Romans,' which, in consequence of these commotions, he afterwards wrote during his leisure hours,- and brought to a close about the commencement of the year 1600 [Ex Epist. Arm. ad Uitenb. 26th Jan., 1600.].

Notwithstanding these ways in which he strove to clear himself of the crimes laid to his charge, individuals were to be found who gave him daily trouble — the leader of this clamouring choir being Peter Plancius. Indeed, so hot grew the strife at the beginning of the following year, that the very learned M. Lydius already mentioned, on being informed of the ecclesiastical controversies which had sprung up at Amsterdam, set out for the Hague, and entreated the help of Uitenbogaert to lull them to rest. He plied him with persuasive words, and instigated by the ardent love he bore to that flourishing church, the care of which had been committed to him some years before, he implored this minister of the Hague that, with the view of getting the matter settled, he would write to Arminius (whom, he owned, the classis had handled rather sharply) — or, better still, set out for Amsterdam, and try to persuade him, for the sake of preserving peace, to meet the views of his brethren and co-presbyters as far as in him lay, and the inviolability of a good conscience would permit [Vid. Hist. Uitenbog. Ecclesiast.]. Nor did Lydius doubt but that Arminius would willingly comply with the advice of Uitenbogaert, partly from the great influence this man wielded in almost all the churches, and partly from the intimacy with him which Arminius had long since contracted and cherished.

Swayed by these entreaties, Uitenbogaert repaired to Amsterdam, and deemed it of the utmost importance to call upon the Rev. John Taffin, minister of the Walloon Church. This was the first call he made. He explained to him the object of his journey; and having elicited from him the state of the entire controversy, he strenuously besought him that he would not refuse to lend his endeavours towards healing this dissension. To this request Taffin readily yielded, and undertook, with the utmost cordiality, the same province with Uitenbogaert; for he was a man most desirous — if ever man was — of Christian piety and peace. These two men, accordingly, after having consulted together, and combining their strength, waited, in the first instance, upon the classis, and then upon Arminius, and proffered to both their very best services, with the view of restoring a good understanding. This offer both parties accepted with thanks; and signified that nothing would gratify them more than that the means should be considered which might be most likely to reach that desirable end. A conference was forthwith appointed to be held in the house of Taffin, and the charge of acting in the affair, and pleading their cause, was delegated by the classis to certain of their own number. On that occasion, both the accusing and the accused party, after each had been heard, returned home without settling the affair. But Taffin and Uitenbogaert, judging it right not to rest in these preliminary steps, shortly after presented to the Church Court at an extraordinary meeting, a certain formula, on the basis of which harmony might be restored. It was couched in the following terms [Ex aetis Presbyt. Amst. citatis a Triglandio in Hist. Eccles. p. 281.]: — 'James Arminius declares that — although he is not conscious that he holds, or has taught, anything different from what is set forth in the Confession and Catechism, or has given just cause to any for entertaining such a suspicion concerning him — nevertheless, for the sake of testifying his desire for the peace of the Church, and to disabuse the minds of some of all sinister opinions, he is willing cordially to pledge his faith, by signing this document, that henceforth he will not only deliver to the Church nothing different from, but will also deliver to the Church the very thing contained in, the writings of the apostles and prophets, as these are explained in the Catechism and Confession, and everywhere taught in the Reformed Churches. Further, that he will so conduct his discourses and exhortations (as he at the same time believes he has hitherto done) that no just ground shall ever be furnished to any for suspecting that he holds anything different concerning doctrine and ecclesiastical discipline, from what is comprehended in the Confession and Catechism, and in the articles of the last General Synod. If, moreover, any difficulty should arise in his mind concerning any articles of doctrine, he engages that he will take care not to make the same public, either from the pulpit, or anywhere else. Further, that, instead of this, it shall be open for him, in such a case, to confer with his brethren in the ministry. But should he feel that their arguments are not at all satisfactory to him, and that the difficulties in question still burden his mind, in these circumstances he engages voluntarily to impose silence upon himself until a General Council of the churches shall be called, by whose advice and judgment he will cheerfully abide. On the other hand, and finally, in order that mutual peace and harmony among the ministers of religion may be preserved the more inviolate, the colleagues of Arminius promise and engage (although, so far as concerns themselves, they deem this superfluous — never having given any one even the smallest occasion to question their fidelity and duty) that they will take care, not only in their public discourses, but also in their private conversations, never to furnish any with just grounds for suspecting that they are not at peace amongst themselves; on this condition, however, that they shall not be held to have violated their engagement when, in defence of the true faith, they refute the arguments of adversaries, according to the formula of the Reformed doctrine received in the Low Countries. Which stipulation being made and heard, the Ecclesiastical Court, for important reasons, and chiefly with the view of promoting the peace of the Church, has judged it proper to suspend their own judgment upon the protestation of Arminius made in the commencement of this document, and forthwith consign to silence this whole affair; earnestly praying the ever-blessed God to conduct this attempt to a happy and prosperous result, for the glory of his name, and the edification of the Church.' [Ex schedulis MS. J Armin. vernacule script.].

This scheme for restoring harmony 'having been drawn up and handed in, no doubt remained among reasonable men but that, on these terms and engagements, both parties would at once agree to it.' But their hope proved fallacious. Arminius, indeed, cordially accepted these terms; but the classis, by a large majority, rejected them. Nay more, Taffin and Uitenbogaert, after all the pains they had taken to promote the peace of the Church, received such slender thanks at the hand of some, that very injurious reports concerning them were circulated through the whole city, to the effect that they were abettors of erroneous opinions [Uitenb. Hist. Eccles.]. Wherefore, although they saw that their labour had been lost, and that no hope of restoring peace smiled upon them, so far as those ecclesiastics were concerned, still they felt it to be due to their own reputation to call the Church Court once more together. This being done, they vindicated their own innocence on a variety of grounds, and referred, with, great boldness, to the injury done them by those who had so foully misrepresented this their mediation. They further begged and demanded of the assembled brethren, that they would take in good part the object at which, in true candour of spirit, they had aimed; adding, that their determination was to take no further steps in the matter, but commit it to Divine Providence.

Before, however, we narrate the progress and issue of this affair, we must not omit to mention that this same Uitenbogaert, whose earnest endeavour to promote the peace of the church in Amsterdam has just been noticed, was found fault with at the very time, by some of the pastors of that church, even for the close intimacy which he cultivated with Arminius; and that this circumstance probably had to do with the reasons why his counsel was not listened to. This is corroborated by the following account, drawn up by the hand of Arminius himself, now in glory, which, as it has not been mentioned by any writer, so far as I know, I reckon not unworthy of being introduced in this connexion.