Chapter 6 Part 2

The Life of James Arminius
Chapter 6, 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.
--------------------

On all these circumstances connected with the call of Arminius to the professorship we have judged it proper to enter more minutely into detail, both because of the great light thrown on our path by the manuscript journals of Uitenbogaert, who besides being present as an eye and ear witness, was himself a prime actor in the business; and also because some writers of the present age, in recounting this matter, have, partly in gross ignorance of the things transacted, and partly in bad faith, advanced much on the subject that transcends very far indeed the boundaries of truth. On this account particularly, James Triglandius, as compared with others, is in the highest degree blameworthy, and deserves to have branded on him a special mark of condemnation [Vid. Trigland. Hist. Ecclesiast. pag. 287.]. If his testimony be entitled to credit respecting the canvassing which Arminius is alleged to have systematically, and with downright servility, prosecuted among his colleagues in order to obtain his dismission, and indeed respecting the entire course of his life, to which he makes reference in the same place, then certainly Arminius has done many things which must be pronounced utterly unworthy of an honourable and dignified teacher of the Church. But, in truth, how sorrily the author named fulfils the duties, in this case, of an ingenuous historian, may be inferred from the fact, that the most of those things which tend in the highest degree to stir bad feeling against Arminius, and which, in giving an account of his call to the professorship, he pretends to have himself taken from the very acts of the Amsterdam presbytery, are in fact by no means to be found in those acts which this ecclesiastical court drew up in the course of that year; unless, perchance, we must regard as authentic acts a certain rough and garbled account of the transactions which, after a long interval of time (about the year 1617) [Vid. G. Brantii Parentis mei F. M. Apolog. pro Hist. Reform. contra J. Rulaeum Belgice conscript.], and amid the most fervent heat of the controversies respecting predestination, was drawn up in favour of that very bitter antagonist of the Remonstrants, Adrian Smout, for the most part by P. Plancius — the indefatigable calumniator of Arminius even after his death — who took care to get it inserted among the acts of the Amsterdam Presbytery. That Triglandius really trod in the footsteps of this slanderer, and drew those things which concern the life and call of Arminius from this document of Plancius, was disclosed by John Eulasus, a respectable minister at Amsterdam not so long ago, who, pressed by the native force of truth, was constrained to confess the fact in the same little work [Ex Lib. J. Rulaei cui titulus G. Brantii audax simulatio Belg. idiom. script.] in which he sets himself, with sufficient acerbity, to assail Arminius, and my father of happy memory, the defender of Arminius.

Of little avail, in like manner, to the prejudice of Arminius, are the testimonies cited by this same Triglandius, and appended to the narration drawn up by Plancius, of the following ministers, Hallius, Ursinus, and Lemaire, respecting the protestations of Arminius, and the pledge that he gave them, that 'he would advance nothing whatever in the Leyden Academy prejudicial to the peace of the Church; nay, that he would keep to himself his private opinions, and such as were repugnant to the consent of the Reformed Churches, until the meeting of the next National Synod.' For, besides that little weight is to be attached to these private declarations— which, moreover, were drawn up in behalf of the zealot whom we have named above (Smout), and that seven years and more after Arminius's death — Arminius constantly declared what is ascribed to him in these testimonies, and reserved a full explanation of his opinion on the subject of predestination to a general council of the churches; until at length, in consequence of the growing strifes 'stirred by many in relation to this question, he, by order of his superiors, and in the very assembly of the States, disclosed all the sentiments and all the scruples of his mind. Whether and how far by this deed he is to be held guilty of violated faith, and rightly and justly to be regarded as the leader and instigator in rending the peace of the Church, the following line of narrative will yet more clearly show.

The following words which he wrote to Uitenbogaert, shortly after he obtained his dismission, clearly indicate with what modesty of mind, and aversion from every appearance of canvassing, the subject of our memoir bore himself in this delicate conjuncture:— 'My beloved friend, there is one thing which vehemently distresses me. How shall I be able to satisfy such a great expectation? How shall I be able to prove myself to be in some measure worthy of having so mighty a movement set agoing on my account? But I console myself with this consideration alone, that I have not courted the professorship, and that the curators were warned of those things which have happened before they had determined anything on the subject of my call.' [Ex Arm. Epist. ad Uitenb. 26 Ap. 1603.].

Meanwhile, Arminius by no means dreaded the appointed conference with Gomarus, but awaited its issue with a perfectly tranquil mind. Nay, when his familiar friends had various consultations among themselves as to the plan of the conference about to be held, and some were desirous of having it arranged through the honourable curators that this conference should be held privately with Gomarus rather than in the presence of the deputies of the churches, so far was he from any inclination to lend an ear to this advice, and elude the condition stipulated by the brethren in Amsterdam, that he gave vent to his feelings in the following words:— 'And to what suspicions shall I then be exposed! For I shall be regarded as not merely suspected of heresy, but also, and thus far distrustful of my own cause, that I dare not to enter on the conference in the presence of the deputies of the Synod. I would rather confer with the entire Synod, and with the two Synods (of North and South Holland) than give occasion, even the least, for judging otherwise of me than that, cultivating a good conscience in all things, I do not dread the most prolix conference, yea not even the most rigid examination.'

The sixth day of May was accordingly announced for this conference to be held, in terms of the stipulated condition; and it took place at the Hague, in the house of the noble Lord of Norderwick, in the presence not only of Arnold Cornells, and Werner Helmichius, in name of the churches of North and South Holland, but also of these most influential and learned men, Nicolas Cromhout, Rumboldt Hogerbeets, and J. Uitenbogaert, whom the honourable curators of the Academy had earnestly invited to grace the occasion. First of all Gomarus marvelled, and took it amiss, that he saw no delegate present from the Church in Amsterdam, notwithstanding that the noble curators, in a most courteous letter delivered to the ecclesiastical court of that city, had besought that some one in their name should be present at the conference now to be held. For this divine thought it not quite proper that those should be absent on whose account principally he himself had come hither: affirming, moreover, that he was 'but little acquainted with the discourses and opinions of Arminius; that the greater part of the doubts respecting him had been stirred by the brethren in Amsterdam; and that it was their part, in consequence, to instruct and advise him in reference to the mode and 'subject matter of this conference.' At length, after a few preliminary explanations by the honourable curators, of the leading object of the meeting, the learned divine declared, that 'although he would rather that this province had not been committed to him, he yet reckoned it a debt which he owed to the cause of truth to undertake its defence, agreeably to the request of brethren, as far as circumstances might demand.'

Arminius, on the other hand, exprassed the utmost delight that he saw presented to him this most excellent and long-wished for opportunity of vindicating the innocence of his good name. An agreement was forthwith made as to the order and heads of the subjects to be considered; when Arminius, first of all, judged it right that the principle ought to be borne in mind, that 'not every difference concerning religion respected the essentials of faith, and that those who dissented in certain points which did not affect fundamentals, were entitled to forbearance.' In corroboration of this claim he instantly cited a certain celebrated saying of St Augustine; and was proceeding to adduce more opinions to the same effect, from ancient as well as recent divines, when Gomarus objected, declaring it to be superfluous, and that 'the one point to be settled was, whether those questions of which they were about to treat ought, or ought not, to be regarded as essentials.' [Ex Diario M.S. Uitenb.]. He maintained the affirmative; Arminius maintained the negative, and proceeded forthwith to establish the truth of his position.