Friday, December 26, 2008

Chapter 7 Part 2

The Life of James Arminius
Chapter 7, 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.
--------------------

Perceiving, however, but too plainly, while yet in the very threshold of the office on which he had entered, that the young intellects under his care were entangling themselves in the intricacies of many profitless questions, and, to the neglect of the standard of celestial truth, prosecuting a variety of thorny theorems and problems, he took counsel with his colleagues, and gave it as his opinion that this growing evil should be resisted, and the youth recalled to the earlier and more masculine method of study. With this view, he reckoned nothing more important than to foreclose, as far as he could, crabbed questions, and the cumbrous mass of scholastic assertions, and to inculcate on his disciples that divine wisdom which was drawn from the superlatively pure fountains of the Sacred Word, and was provided for the express purpose of guiding us to a life of virtue and happiness. From his first introduction into the Academy it was his endeavour to aim at this mark, and give a corresponding direction to his studies both public and private. But truly this laudable attempt was in no small degree thwarted, partly by the jealousy which some had conceived against him, and partly also by a certain inveterate prejudice as to his heterodoxy, with which many ministers of religion had long been imbued, and under the impulse of which they stirred up his colleagues against him.

The first germs, indeed, of this budding jealousy betrayed themselves in the following year (1604); For when Arminius, who had undertaken the task of interpreting the Old Testament in particular, proceeded also now and then to give a public exposition of certain portions of the New Testament, Gomarus took this amiss, and began to allege that the right of expounding the New Testament belonged solely to him, as Primarius Professor of Sacred Theology — for this title had been conceded to him by the Senatus Academicus, a short time prior to the arrival of Arminius. Nay, more; happening to meet Arminius, he felt unable to contain himself, and in a burst of passion broke out in these words — 'You have invaded my professorship.' Arminius replied that he did not mean to detract anything whatever from the primacy of his colleague, and from the academic titles and privileges conferred upon him; and that he had not done him the slightest injury, having obtained license from the honourable curators to select themes of prelection at any time, not only from the Old Testament, but also from the New, provided he did not encroach on the particular subject in which Gomarus might be engaged.

But this dispute, which arose out of a matter of no moment, and was easily allayed, was from henceforth succeeded by others which opened the way to dissensions of greater magnitude, and of more disastrous issue to the Reformed Church. For Arminius, under the conviction that it was his duty to do nothing against the dictate of an undefiled conscience, and the proper liberty of teaching, in matters of religion, conceded to himself as well as to other doctors of divinity, judged it to be in no respect unbecoming or unlawful for him — especially as he had not concealed from the honourable curators of the Academy that on the subject of divine predestination he differed from the doctors of the Genevan school — to give forth, in a temperate manner, a public declaration of his opinion on that point. Accordingly, after the professors of theology had entered into a mutual arrangement as to the order and succession in which the disputations were to be held, and the lot had fallen to Arminius to dispute on the subject of predestination, he drew up, on the 7th February, certain theses on that point, and exposed them for public discussion. Their purport was this: 'that divine predestination is the decree of God's good pleasure in Christ, by which, with himself, from eternity, he resolved to justify and adopt believers, on whom he decreed to bestow faith, and to give eternal life to them, to the praise of his glorious grace; that reprobation, on the other hand, is the decree of wrath, or the severe will of God, by which, from eternity, he resolved to condemn to eternal death, unbelievers who, by their own fault, and by the just judgment of God, will not believe, as persons who are not in a state of union with Christ—and this for the declaration of his wrath and power.' [Vid. Uitenb. Hist. Eccl.]. But although this position of his did not perfectly correspond to those which Calvin and Beza had given forth on this subject, still he by no means looked upon it as a novelty, but as entirely coinciding with the opinion which George Sohnius, and other divines before him of the Reformed religion, had taught both by tongue and pen. Besides, that he might not, in defending these positions, incur the just offence of any one, he was particularly on his guard, in the course of this disputation, against saying anything in disparagement of the reputation of Calvin and Beza, sparing' their names, and manifesting severity towards no one of a different opinion. Not long after, (on the 29th May, and sometime in July,) with the same freedom of discussion, and in the same temperate tone, he further subjected to public examination, his theses On the Church, and On the Sin of our First Parents; and in the course of this last disputation, Gomarus and Trelcatius being present, he took occasion, by a series of very solid arguments, to confute the necessity, and establish the contingency of that sin. [Vid. Epist Eccles. p. 134.]. But although he was convinced that the opinion of his adversaries on this point involved numerous absurdities, and that everything that was wont to be adduced, in palliation of this dogma, of the absolute necessity of things, deserved to be discarded, he nevertheless, in this as well as in other controversies, conducted his own cause with much moderation, and, directing his address to his hearers, begged this only at their hands, that they would diligently sift whatever arguments he advanced; adding — what on all occasions, public and private, he was wont to declare — that he was ready to yield to those who taught what might be more in accordance with truth. Not a few, however, murmured against the disputation thus held, and took it amiss that among other things he had maintained, 'that there is no absolute necessity in things, besides God; yea, that not even does fire burn necessarily; but that every necessity which exists in things, or events, is nothing else than the relation of cause to effect.' [Ex Epist. Arm. 17 Aug. 1604, script. Vid. Epist. Eccles. p. 138.].

On the same point, too, shortly after, a discussion was started and kept up at considerable length with him, by the very learned Helmichius, who happened at that time to have taken a journey to Leyden [Videsis de hac materia Armin. disserentem in Epist. ad Uitenb. 17 Aug. et 3 Kal. Sept. script. 1604.]. Helmichius asserted, that many things were, in different respects, both contingent and necessary. This Arminius denied of things absolutely necessary. Helmichius appealed to passages plainly testifying that the word of God stands; that the word of God cannot be broken; that Gods counsel is fulfilled, &c.; and thence inferred that what God had decreed must come to pass necessarily. Arminius denied this consequence, on the ground that God's decree might rightly and correctly be said to stand, if that which he had decreed came to pass, although it should not come to pass necessarily. Helmichius acknowledged that the opinion which Arminius defended, did not subvert the foundations of the faith, neither could it be called heretical. Arminius on the other hand maintained, that so far was this opinion from deserving to be branded with so black a name, that nothing, he felt persuaded, would tend more to illustrate the glory of God, than if all Christians whatsoever were to maintain that there is nothing necessary besides God; and that he not only foreknows things contingent, but also that his decrees are accomplished through contingent events and free causes. At length, however, after much had passed on both sides, and Arminius had offered to hold a conference with him respecting all the articles of the Christian religion, and the entire system of theological doctrine, Helmichius bade him a friendly farewell.

No comments: