Chapter 10 Part 3

The Life of James Arminius
Chapter 10, Part 3 of 3 (p. 231-242).

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.
--------------------

Still further material and occasion for these dissensions were famished by a little book published in the course of that year (1607) at Gouda, intended for the religious instruction of youth, and afterwards known under the name of the Gouda Catechism. This little work was composed by the pastors of the Church in Gouda for the purpose of testing whether it could be turned by the authorities to the use of the elementary schools, and substituted in the place of the Palatine Catechism, which, in their judgment, contained questions too difficult, and couched in ambiguous terms [Fusius de hoc libello Uitenb. in Hist. Eccles.].

No sooner had that composition seen the light than very diverse opinions began to be expressed in regard to it. Those who sided with Arminius praised the little work, partly because its authors, treading in the steps of the Palatine divines in respect to its general order, seemed to have advanced nothing whatever repugnant to the Christian doctrine; partly also, and on this account mainly, that the composition referred to, foreclosing all scope for the introduction of thorny and disputable points, and breathing the primeval simplicity of Christianity, embraced in few words, and these, too, deduced from the Sacred page, the things to be believed.

But immediately some arose from among the opposite ranks who publicly condemned and execrated the book, and declared that there scarcely ever was a monstrous opinion but what was veiled in terms as general as itself was horrid; that simplicity suited primitive times, when evils as yet unknown required no antidote, but that afterwards as errors increased forms of words had to be devised which might ferret out errorists from their lurking-places; that this little book either did away with, or omitted, the primary doctrines of the Christian faith; that a signal was thereby given to those desirous of innovation; and that Servetus himself would have cheerfully subscribed it [Grot. Annual, p. 555. in fol.—Vid. S. Lubberti Epist. ad Oldenbarneveld. inter Epist. Eccles. p. 215.].

Thus what the former called in harmony with heavenly truth, the latter called the lurking-place of heresies; what the former called liberty, the latter called disorder.

Nor was this all. Against this little book Reyner Donteklok took occasion to brandish his pen; and in a published treatise he not only addressed himself to the confutation of this small work of the Gouda divines, but also, at the instigation of certain malevolent parties, traduced with sufficient virulence those who had thought differently from others as to the mode of holding the Synod; and moreover, in no oblique terms, and all but pointing at him with his finger, he insinuated that Arminius had a hand in drawing up this catechism. But although to the publication of it Arminius had no great objection, and afterwards owned that the Gouda ministers had consulted him prior to issuing it, and that, after they had explained the reasons why they thought it should be published, he had expressed his concurrence; nevertheless, to that composition he never applied a hand, nor had any share in the drawing of it up. Nay more; so far as his choice, and that of some others, was concerned, this little book would have lain long enough unnoticed, had not the intemperate clamours of many magnified it into an importance greater than was due [Vid. Examen Catech. Goud. a R. Donteklok, Belgice conscript. 1607. pag. 3. 5. 8. 9.10—Arm. Epist. ad C. Vorst, Kal. April. 1609.].

Calumny, however, overstepping even these limits, and spurning all restraints of humanity, put in circulation, at this same time, a most foul report concerning Arminius and Uitenbogaert, namely — that the Roman Pontiff, in a most gracious letter which he wrote to them, and holding out the hope of a large emolument, had commended to them the advocacy of the Church of Rome [Ex Epist. Artopaei Uitenb. Histor. Eccles. inserta.]. How very far this was from even the semblance of truth, will yet more clearly appear from the subsequent thread of our narrative. But this magnificent lie was accompanied by another which was put in circulation about the same time, namely, that Arminius was in the habit of commending to his students, as of prime importance, the writings not only of Castellio and of Coornhert, but also of Suarez and other Jesuits, and of speaking in contemptuous terms of the works of Calvin, Beza, Martyr, Zanchius, Ursinus, and other eminent divines of the Reformed Church [Vid. praefat. Act. Synod. Dord.].

These, and many more calumnies of the same kind, which were scattered far and wide regarding him throughout Germany, France, England, and Savoy, Arminius received with no other emotion than that of pity for brethren who sinned so grievously against God and their neighbour. Nay, he thought as he himself testifies, that by this prodigious ado, and by the preposterous diligence of brethren, 'it would only turn out that he, a poor obscure man, who was not able by his own virtues to push himself into notice, and of whom otherwise scarcely any out of Holland would either know anything, or deign to speak, would day by day be rendered notable and renowned.' [Ex Epist. Arm. ad Drus.].

How inconsistent with truth that allegation was, as to his having recommended writers of questionable note (which was reported, as elsewhere, so in particular at Amsterdam,) I prefer to state in his own words rather than in mine. Mark these expressions of his which he penned to the chief magistrate of Amsterdam (Sebastian Egberts): 'The rumour about my advising the students to read the works of the Jesuits and of Coornhert, I can call by no other name than a lie; for never to any one, either by request or spontaneously, have I uttered a word on that subject. So far from this, after the reading of Scripture, which I strenuously inculcate, and more than any other (as the whole Academy, yea the conscience of my colleagues will testify,) I recommend that the Commentaries of Calvin be read, whom I extol in higher terms than Helmichius himself, as he owned to me, ever did. For I affirm that in the interpretation of the Scriptures Calvin is incomparable, and that his Commentaries are more to be valued than anything that is handed down to us in the Bibliotheca of the Fathers; so much so, that I concede to him a certain spirit of prophecy (interpretation) in which he stands distinguished above others, above most, yea above all. His Institutes, so far as respects Commonplaces, I give out to be read after the Catechism, as a more extended explanation. But here I add — with discrimination; as the writings of all men ought to be read. Of this my mode of advice I could produce innumerable witnesses: they cannot produce as much as one whom I advised to study Coornhert and the followers of Loyola. Let them produce one, and the lie will stand revealed. So that here from nothing springs a history, or rather a fiction. What other things are there done I know; aye, and what busy things have been done elsewhere I think you do not know. If you did know, you would be astonished at the perverse effrontery of men. As an antidote to all these I oppose integrity and patience, and sustain myself with the hope of a happy exit which the just Judge will grant unto me, who knows what I seek and what I do. I know that my earnest aims are pleasing to him, as being solely devoted to the establishment among Christians of truth, piety, and peace.' [Vid. Arm. Epist. ad Seb. Egb. inter Ep. Eccles. p. 185.].

With no less confidence of mind did he undertake, in the year following (1608) the vindication of his own cause in the presence of that most noble man, Hippolytus a Collibus, the ambassador to the States of the United Provinces of the illustrious Prince Palatine, Frederick the Fourth. Humours being already rife at Heidelberg that, on several articles of the Christian faith, Arminius dissented from the received opinion, this nobleman, thinking he ought not to rest in these, but hear the other side also, invited Arminius, in a very courteous manner, to visit him at the Hague. Admitted, accordingly, to an interview with him, Hippolytus, in a manner singularly courteous, stated the reasons for the sinister suspicions respecting him, and on what heads it was that Sybrandus Lubberti had impeached him by letter to the distinguished Paraeus; on all which Arminius candidly and ingenuously explained his own opinions, in particular, concerning the Divinity of the Son of God, concerning Providence and Divine Predestination, concerning Grace and Free Will, and also on the subject of Justification. So satisfactory to that nobleman was his explanation on these points, that he thought fit earnestly to solicit Arminius to give it to him in writing, in order that, on the one hand, after due consideration of these points, he might judge with more certainty and decisiveness respecting them, and on the other, be in a condition, in conferring with any on the subject, to confute the calumnies referred to, and to vindicate his innocence. Arminius accordingly drew up at the time, (on the 5th April 1608,) that most erudite and elaborate epistle to the ambassador of the Prince Palatine, which still exists among his published works, and comprises a succinct defence of his doctrine, as well as of his life. It is with pleasure we here subjoin the golden words with which he closes this epistle — words every way worthy of a noble-minded man:—

'Would to God,' he writes, 'that I could obtain this from my brethren by profession of the same religious fellowship with me in the Lord, that they would at least give me credit for some susceptibility of conscience towards God! — which, surely, the love of Christ ought readily to obtain from them, if indeed they would meditate on his spirit and mind. What profit can accrue to me from dissension undertaken from the mere lust of dissension, from stirring schism in the Church of Christ of which, by the grace of God and of Christ, I profess myself a member? If they imagine I am instigated to this by ambition or avarice, I declare sincerely in the Lord they do not know me. So free from avarice can I affirm myself to be, that it has never happened to allure me with its blandishments, although pretexts are not wanting by which I might palliate or excuse it. Ambition I have none, except the honourable ambition which impels me to this — to investigate divine truth from the sacred Scriptures with all my might — to hold it forth when found, calmly and without contention, so as not to dictate to any, or strive to extort assent, much less to seek to lord it over another's faith; and to hold it forth for this end, that I may gain more souls to Christ, and that I may be a good savour to him, and that mine may be an approved name in the church of the saints. This, after a long time's patience, I hope through grace to attain; although at present I am a reproach to my brethren; an offscouring and outcast to those who, in the same faith with me, worship and invoke the one God, the Father, the one Lord Jesus Christ, in the one Spirit, and who cherish the one hope with me, of obtaining the heavenly inheritance through the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ. The Lord will grant me, I hope, (and O! that the light of that holy and happy day may smile upon me!) that we may peacefully, in the name of the Lord, meet among ourselves, and institute a Christian conference on things pertaining to religion: in which I promise through the grace of God to exhibit that moderation of spirit, and love for the truth and peace, which may fairly be exacted and expected of the servant of Christ. Meanwhile, let my brethren be quiet and allow me to be quiet; — as quiet indeed I am, giving no trouble or molestation to them. If they think otherwise of me, let them institute proceedings; I will not shrink from the authority of any competent tribunal; I will not fail to appear. If they are of opinion that the minds of those who listen to me are artfully pre-occupied as from a distance, and the affair managed with such policy that they neither deem it advisable to face me in judgment, nor think it sufficiently safe that studious youth should be intrusted to me; and that therefore a black mark, as what I have deserved, ought to be daubed upon my name in order that these same youth may be scared away — otherwise certain risk would be incurred from the delay of the conference; lo, here I present myself, that along with them I may address, solicit, and supplicate those whose prerogative it is to call, or grant, conventions of this kind, that they would not suffer us any longer to be agitated by such vexation and disquietude of spirit, but either themselves apply a very speedy remedy, or permit it to be applied — but still, by their decree, and under their direction. I will not refuse to appear before any convention, whether of all the ministers of our United Netherlands or of some of them, to be summoned from the several provinces; or even of all the ministers of Holland and Westfriesland, (to which province our Leyden Academy belongs) or of some to be nominated from their number, provided the whole affair be transacted under the cognizance of our rightful rulers; nay further, I neither shrink from, nor dread the presence of learned men to be summoned from other places, provided they take part in the conference on equitable terms, and subject to the same rules to which I myself shall have to submit. Permit me to say, in one word, let a convention be held, be it of many or of few, if it only present some glimmering hope of success — such a hope as I shall not be able, on solid grounds, to prove deceptive — here I am, prepared and ready at this very day, at this very hour; for it teases and vexes me to be daubed every day with fresh calumnious aspersions, and to have the annoying necessity imposed upon me of wiping them away. In this respect, surely, I little resemble heretics, who either shrink from ecclesiastical conventions, or shape matters so, that they can trust to the number of their adherents, and calculate on certain victory.'

On the day following that on which Arminius drew up this epistle — or rather epistolary dissertation on religious affairs — to the Palatine ambassador, he gave forth the same indications of an intrepid and upright spirit in a letter to that man of consummate integrity, already knit to him for many years, at once by the bonds of close intimacy and of high esteem — John Drusius. After some preliminary reference to the very shameful acts of calumny of which he was the victim, and to the calmness of spirit by which he eluded them, he goes on to address that most attached friend in the following terms:— 'This very peace of conscience makes me judge that even the advices of my friends, by which they urge me to refute these calumnies, need not be acted on by me with precipitate haste. Nor do I apprehend that the minds either of the rulers, or of learned men, will be so far preoccupied with prejudice against me as not to be easily disabused even by the mere explanation of my sentiments and aims. Nay verily, such mighty and over-hasty plotting on the part of my brethren against me, is to me a most certain sign that they are distrustful of their own cause. For he that trusteth doth not make haste, confiding in Jehovah, in whom alone is all his help; and mine truly lies in his Word only, for the truth, perfection, and perspicuity of which alone I will not cease to contend against the traditions of all men, of what rank soever they be, as long as the benignant God thinks fit to lengthen out my life; nor will I ever suffer to be imposed on the Church of Christ, whether under the name of secondary, or under any other name, any authoritative rule whatsoever other than that one only Rule which is contained in the books of the Old and New Testament. And there is a necessity, I perceive, for a strenuous agitation of the subject, even among us who not go long ago were foremost to urge this first principle in opposition to Papists; but now, as if fleeing from court, we do not blush to prescribe to the churches and to their ministers, as traditions by the standard of which the Scriptures are to be explained, even Confessions and Catechisms, because, forsooth, they were drawn up by learned men, sanctioned by various decisions, confirmed by length of time (for they are beginning to plead a prescription of forty years), and sealed with the blood of martyrs!'

Chapter 10 Part 2

The Life of James Arminius
Chapter 10, Part 2 of 3 (p. 220-231).

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.
--------------------

Before taking leave of this ecclesiastical Convention, I must by no means here omit to state that a certain sinister rumour concerning Arminius, occasioned by the holding of this conference, spread out far and wide, to the effect that he had been entreated, with the utmost importunity, by the brethren then assembled, that he would not hesitate to unfold freely those things which he had meditated in the matter of the Christian faith, with the promise that they would do their endeavour to get him fully satisfied; but that this he had in a tone of sufficient boldness refused [Vid. praefat. Act. Synod. Dord—Baudart. monum. Hist]. As this story stirred against him a very bad feeling in the minds of many, who thought that he ought to have paid greater honour to that Conference, convened as it was from all the provinces at once, we think it well to trace from a point a little further back the character of this whole affair, and the transaction as it really happened, according to the account given by Arminius himself.

Sometime, then, before the subject of our memoir, agreeably to the summons of the States-General to attend the Conference, had presented himself at the Hague, he happened accidentally to lay his hand on five articles, viz: concerning Predestination, the Fall of Adam, Free Will, Original Sin, and the Eternal Salvation of Infants. These had been sent into other provinces also, but especially into Zealand and the district of Utrecht: yea and had been discussed at some ecclesiastical meetings, in terms which implied that, on those heads of doctrine, they contained the sentiments of Arminius himself. But scarcely had he perused them, when he immediately felt assured he had detected their author, — one, namely of the number of those whom the rulers had summoned to that same Conference with himself. Deeming it proper to deal with him on the subject at that very time, he freely signified to him on what grounds he suspected that those articles had been drawn up by him. This imputation the individual referred to did not deny, but declared that they were by no means sent as importing that they contained the opinions of Arminius himself, but simply as articles which furnished matter for disputation among the students at Leyden. Arminius rejoined that by this circumstance, notwithstanding, serious injury was done to him and to his reputation; nor could it otherwise than happen that articles of this kind, everywhere in circulation, would be attributed not so much to the students, as to himself; when the truth was, that they had neither emanated from him, nor did they accord with his sentiments on the points concerned, nor with the Sacred Scriptures.

After these things had passed between them (two only of the other brethren being present), Arminius further judged it proper, towards the close of this convention at the Hague, when all were present, to introduce the matter, especially as some were present at this convention who had not only read those articles, but who were under the impression that they were the production of Arminius himself. Accordingly, when the proceedings of this assembly had been already signed, — nay, after certain had been deputed to report their transactions to their Mightinesses the States, — he begged the brethren to do him the favour to remain for a little on his account, as there was a matter on which he wished to have some conversation with them. He straightway produced the above-named articles, and having read them, he proceeded in strong terms to complain of the injury done to him by their circulation — adding, that he protested solemnly, and as in the presence of the Supreme Majesty, that these articles were by no means his, nor did they express his opinions. This he repeated twice, and moreover entreated his brethren that they would not attach such immediate faith to rumours set afloat respecting him, and be so ready to admit things which were falsely laid to his charge. To this, a member of the conference on his own account replied, 'that for that end he would do well to signify to his brethren what in these articles he approved, and what he rejected, that thus they might to some extent be made aware of his opinions;' and some other one followed in the same strain. Arminius, however, replied that this did not appear to him to be advisable, nor was it obligatory upon him, seeing that this conference had been appointed for no such end; not to mention that time sufficient had been expended on this assembly, and that the States themselves were expecting their reply. On saying this, the conference was straightway brought to a close, no one seeking to follow up the conversation any further, nor all assembled simultaneously agreeing in that request, or using any persuasion with him, to understake such a task. Nay more, after the conference was over, some of the brethren declared in the presence of Arminius himself, that they had been charged by their churches not to enter on any discussion concerning doctrinal controversies, and should anything of the sort happen, to quit the conference as soon as possible [Ex Arm. Delcar. coram Ord.]

But further, after the holding of this convention, calumny heaped fresh charges on Arminius and on those who, sharing in his opinion, had freely spoken their minds as to the proper way in which the Synod should be held. They were represented as having sought, by these dissentient counsels, to interpose fresh delay in the way of the Synod's being held, and to pave the course directly for bringing about a revolution in doctrinal sentiment. Some made them out to be guilty of having got inserted in the public decree, the condition concerning the revisal of the Confession and Catechism. More roughly handled than all, were Arminius and Uitenbogaert, whose names, and whose very free expression of sentiment, according to the license granted to them by the States, were most acrimoniously animadverted on by the Synod of North Holland, which met shortly after at Amsterdam [Trigland. Hist Eccles.—Uitenb. Hist.] Nay, as if all this were not enough, Sybrandus, Lubberti, a professor in the Franeker University, despatched letters to Scotland, Germany, and France, asking advice of these foreigners, which contained a coloured and garbled account of what had been transacted at the previous Convention; — thereby exerting himself to preoccupy their minds with a violent prejudice against Arminius and Uitenbogaert [Vid literas S. Lubberti huic fini scriptas inter Epist. Eccles. p. 187.]. To this document the accused party felt constrained, in course of time, to oppose another, to vindicate among these foreigners the innoence of their good name against the detractions of adversaries [Vid. Epist. Arm. et Uitenb. Sybrandianae oppos. inter Ep. Eccles. p. 190.].

The Synod of South Holland, too, held at Delft in September following, embarked in the same business with sufficient animosity. Some of its proceedings, as far as the scope of the present narrative may require, I will here briefly and summarily recount. At this Synod, then, Uitenbogaert was called upon to explain to its assembled members the reasons why, in giving advice as to the mode of holding the National Synod, he, along with Arminius, had thought and counselled differently from the other pastors; in order that the Synod, after giving them due consideration, might be able to judge whether thereby, also, any prejudice had been done to the church. But Uitenbogaert immediately replied, 'that he, for his part, was ready to communicate to the Synod the opinions which had been delivered to the States; but to render reasons for them in this place, when those who had given expression to the same opinions with him were neither present, nor consulted, appeared to him altogether unadvisable. Moreover, he and his association in that Convention, were by no means bound by the mandate of any particular Synod, but had been summoned by the States of Holland themselves, to bring out their opinions freely and according to the dictate of conscience: to the States, therefore, with the best right, must the reasons of these opinions be rendered. It was to no purpose, accordingly, and quite out of place, for this assembly to take upon itself to judge in respect to that matter; rather ought the brethren to take care, and strive by all means, to prevent such very hasty judgments, — which also tended to the most serious prejudice of the Supreme Authority, — from compromising the interests of the churches; and to take care that such proceedings to not interpose fresh obstacles to obtaining the Synod, so long desired.' [Vid. praefat. Act. Synod. Dord.—Uitenb. Hist.]. Various discussions ensued concerning this affair; as also, on the same occasion, concerning the right of the magistrate in things pertaining to religion. At last the Synod thought that it would be sufficient in the circumstances, if the opinions presented to the States were merely read to it, and full judgment in regard to them deferred until the arguments for the dissentients' opinions, yet to be delivered to the States, should be more clearly made known to them.

The affair being thus disposed of, the assembly forthwith decided, in terms of the decree of the last Synod held at Gorcum, to press the inquiry, if some animadversions on the Confession and Catechism had not been presented to the classes. It was replied by some of the classical deputies, that most of the ministers in their respective classes had declared that they had no remarks to make in opposition to these writings; and that in their judgment they were sound throughout, and in harmony with the Sacred Volume — nay, even, 'that they were prepared to live and die with the Confession and Catechism.' On the other hand, Uitenbogaert and others, in name of their respective classes, intimated that there were amongst them those who were as yet seriously engaged in the examination demanded, and that they would deliver their animadversions at the proper time [Vid. Press declar. Contrarem. oppos. p. 32]. Immediately snatching occasion from this to get proceedings originated against Uitenbogaert, the president of the Synod asked him whether he, too, cherished any scruples against these books? on which, lest he should appear to call in question any main points of the Christian doctrine, yea, and of the Reformed Confession [This noble-minded man, as the elder Brandt informs us, gave the president distinctly to understand, that he answered his question ex gratia, and not at all as being under obligation to do so; and that he declared the question to be 'unseasonable, unprofitable, and a kind of inquisition.' See Ger. Brandt's Hist. Reform. in Low Countries, Vol ii. p. 43—TR], Uitenbogaert spontaneously and candidly declared 'that he approved of the Confession and Catechism as far as concerned the substance and basis of doctrine; he held that the fundamentals of salvation were sufficiently contained in them; and these formularies, as far as they agreed with the Harmony [See Confessionum Fidei Harmonia Orthod. et Ref. Eccl. &c. Genevae 1581.—TR.] of the other Protestant Churches, had his entire assent.' [Vid. Uitenb. Hist. Eccles.—Press. declare. Remonst. p. 32. Respons. ad Epist. Wallach. p. 17.].

Many joined in this sentiment, and expressed their concurrence in his statements, being desirous of nothing more than that ecclesiastical affairs should be conducted calmly and peaceably until the National Synod. To the suspicious minds of some, however, this declaration was by no means satisfactory; but they further asked 'if whatsoever things were contained in the Confession and Catechism were, as respects substance, words, phrases, and whatever else of that description, believed to be conformable to the Divine mind or not?' To this Uitenbogaert and the others replied 'that a declaration of that sort could not be made in a moment, and that to settle this matter aright a reasonable space of time was requisite;' on which the Synod at length decided by a plurality of votes to charge all the ministers, and even the professors of theology, that, laying aside all subterfuges, tergiversations, and delays, 'they would attentively examine every thing contained in the above-named writings, both as regards substance, and as regards words and phrases; and each deliver to his own classis, as speedily as possible, whatever remarks he might have to offer in opposition to the received doctrine.' [Act. Synod. Delf. Art. 3.].

Nor was this all. Proceeding yet further, the Synod, under the pretext that dissensions were growing daily and demanded an immediate remedy, at the same time decreed 'That their High Mightinesses the States of Holland and West Friesland, be requested to grant it permission to convoke from the two Synods of South and North Holland one Provincial Synod, by which the professors of theology who were to be cited, and such of the ministers of religion as it may seem necessary to the Church to summon, should, on the first opportunity, be brought together to a friendly conference on all those heads of doctrine in regard to which they cherished doubt; that in this way a judgment might be formed by the churches as to the nature and magnitude of the controversies, and as suitable a remedy as possible devised for allaying dissensions and preserving integrity of doctrine.' [Act. Synod. Delf. Art. 4.]. But this decision and decree, as it mightily pleased many, so it very highly offended others, and exposed its framers and authors to the suspicion of stepping, under the guise of holding this assembly and conference, into the place of a National Synod, and of exerting themselves to forestall its judgment and sentence. Nay, some thought that by this same decree the act of the States in regard to the lawful revision of the Confession and Catechism, and their right and authority to summon a National Synod in their own name, were very seriously infringed; and that this was done with the sole intent that those whom this ecclesiastical tribunal, after hearing their reasons, might have accused of heterodoxy, should henceforth be held disqualified to enjoy the right of voting in the National Synod. This undoubtedly entered into the grounds on which the deputies of both Synods, who petitioned the States for leave to carry their decisions into effect, were balked of their wish. For, on the 14th September, they received the reply 'that, considering the many difficulties with which this matter was beset, and the very grave political business which distracted the States at the time, it was impossible for them, in present circumstances, to comply with the request of the churches; but at their own tune, and when opportunity offered, they would take the matter into consideration: they further instructed the deputies of the churches to exert themselves meanwhile to the utmost for the promotion of ecclesiastical tranquillity; and they would besides, see to it that ministers of the opposite sentiment should be admonished of the same duty.' [Trigland. Hist. Eccles. p. 413.].

In the meantime, Arminius and Uitenbogaert were warned on all sides of the grievous extent to which, both in Holland and in the adjacent regions, they were everywhere maligned, — partly by clandestine whispers, partly by reports openly circulated among the people, — on account of the opinions they had expressed as to how the Synod should be held. They judged it by no means their duty to sit silent under all this; on the contrary, as a satisfaction due to their own character, they (on the 6th September) delivered to the Grand Pensionary of Holland, for presentation to the States, their reasons for their opinion, and for the advice they gave, drawn up in writing, and signed also by the two delegates from Utrecht. They moreover declared, that of nothing were they more desirous than that the rest of the brethren also should produce their reasons for the different opinions they advanced; and that thus, in regard to this matter, and the holding of the Synod, their High Mightinesses could give such a decision as would be most conducive to the good of the Church [Videsis integrum hoc Scriptum in Hist. Uitenbog.]. To the attainment of this wish, however, an obstacle was presented by the public deliberations respecting the armistice, the discussion of which so engaged the States as to leave them scarcely any leisure for these ecclesiastical affairs [The deliberations here referred to were of the very gravest character, and proved the source of that alienation between the ambitious Prince Maurice and the incorruptible Oldenbarneveldt, which caused the latter ere long to lose his head. Maurice was opposed to the truce. Oldenharneveldt, knowing his ulterior designs against the new-born liberties of Holland, promoted it in the face of storms that thickened around him from every side. His resolute patriotism at length triumphed in the famous truce of twelve years concluded with Spain in 1609, on terms deeply humiliating to the haughty Spaniard and advantageous to the Dutch—the fame of whose counsels and arms resounded throughout Europe. See Davies's Hist. Holland, vol. ii. p. 432.—TR.]. It was in allusion to this that the illustrious Philip Mornay declared at the time 'that he very much wished that an armistice could be concluded, in respect to the growing contentions in the Leyden Academy; for, as the times were, nothing could fall out more unseasonable than these.' [In Epist. ad F. Aerssenium, inter Epist. Eccles.].

Chapter 10 Part 1

The Life of James Arminius
Chapter 10, Part 1 of 3 (p. 212-220).

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.
--------------------

CHAPTER X.

CONVENTION AT THE HAGUE TO ARRANGE THE PRELIMINARIES OF A NATIONAL SYNOD; MISREPRESENTATION OF ARMINIUS AND HIS ADHERENTS FOR THE OPINIONS THEY THERE EXPRESSED; HIS LETTERS TO DRUSIUS AND HYPPOLITUS A COLLIBUS. A.D. 1607, 1608.

Having given these things some brief and incidental notice, let us now proceed to trace further the state of the agitated Church, and the progress of the hostile feeling of which Arminius was the object. Towards the close, then, of the month of February, the deputies of the Synods of South and North Holland had presented a petition to the States-General, in which they asked permission of them to hold an ecclesiastical convention for the purpose of paving the way to a National Synod. Leave was granted, and the 22nd day of May was appointed for this convention. Preintimation having been given by the States-General, to the States of the several provinces, these, each in their own name, summoned to the Hague certain pastors and doctors of more distinguished note, to obtain their opinions and advice as to the form and mode in which the Synod should be held.

Accordingly, on the day signified by the States General, the following presented themselves at the Hague. From Guelderland, John Leo and Fontanus; from Holland, Doctors Gomarus and Arminius, together with John Becius, Uitenbogaert, Helmichius and Hermann Gerhards; from Zealand, Hermann Faukelius and Henry Brandius; from the province of Utrecht, Everard Boot, and Henry Jansen the younger; from Friesland, Sybrandus Lubberti and John Bogermann, from Overyssel, Thomas Goswinus; and by and by, also, from the city of Groningen and from Amelandt, John Acronius and J. Nicasius. To these the illustrious States immediately submitted in writing eight questions relating to the proper order and mode in which the Synod should be held, with the request that after due consideration they would hand in their opinions, also in writing, and that too, if possible, with one consent; but that, failing this, each should draw out his own opinions apart. In the discussion and examination of these questions (which Uitenbogaert, in his Ecclesiastical History, has narrated at large) several days were consumed in the Presbytery Hall, at the Hague. After a variety of debates on one side and the other, it was at last unanimously agreed and declared, 'that, in regard to the time, it was necessary that the Synod should be convoked as nearly as possible at the beginning of the following summer, in the year 1608. With respect to the place, that the most convenient locality for holding the Synod would be the city of Utrecht. With respect to the mode, that the gravamina to be treated of in the Synod be reported by the several Provincial Synods to the National one; that for each particular Synod four pastors, with two elders, be deputed by vote; but that men distinguished for erudition, theological attainment, and piety, might be deputed in place of elders, although not invested with ecclesiastical office; that to this Synod there should be invited not only the churches in the United Provinces that speak the two languages, (Dutch and French,) but those also of the Dutch nation which are dispersed beyond the Dutch confines, or are congregated for themselves under the cross of persecution elsewhere; that their high mightinesses, the States-General, be humbly requested to send to the contemplated Synod delegates of their own, professing the Reformed religion, who might be willing, in their name, to take cognisance of its order; that professors of theology be also called to that Synod; and that in addition to those who are to be delegated by the churches, it be allowable for other ministers to be present at this Synod, in accordance with the usual practice in particular Synods.' [Via. praefat. Act. Dord. Synod—Uitenb. Hist. p. 349.].

But while on these and some other points there was unanimous consent, on certain other questions, on which the hinge of the matter turned, there was a conflict of opinion.

First, a debate was stirred respecting the judge of controversies on points of doctrine: that is to say, whether it should be the prerogative of the few ministers deputed by the churches to determine doctrinal controversies by a peremptory decision; or whether, prior to that decision by which all the ministers (if they wish to retain their office) should be bound to stand or fall, the deputing ministers also should not be informed, heard, and their votes, too, asked respecting the point in debate. For the former opinion, declared the greater part of the brethren; but for the latter, Arminius and Uitenbogaert, and with them the deputies from the province of Utrecht, — maintaining, as they did, that by the name Synod ought to be understood, not those delegated only, but also, and much more, the parties delegating [Via. Epist. Eccles. p. 193.].

A second point of difference concerned the rule according to which it was right that the determination should be made. This was occasioned by the sixth question, proposed by the States, viz., 'Whether it was not right that those to be delegated to the Synod should be bound to express their own opinion freely, and not be held to anything, save the Divine Word alone?' To this question, Arminius, and those who adhered to him, directly answered, it is right. But in this reply the other brethren by no means acquiesced. For although they did not venture to deny that the Divine Word was the test of doctrinal controversies, still, suspecting I know not what snake to lurk under that question of the States, before hazarding their own reply to it, they stirred a further question with Arminius and the others, namely, whether the arbiters of controversy should reckon themselves so bound to the Word of God as not to be at liberty to appeal, at the same time, to the Confession of the Belgic churches? To which, in name of his party, Arminius replied, 'that he, for his part, acknowledged and received the Confession as a formula of consent, but not as a rule of faith; so that if it, or any part or particle of it, should chance to come upon the anvil of discussion, no regard whatever ought to be had to it, while subjected to this trial, but the judgment respecting it, too, ought to be drawn from the Word of God alone. Nay more, judges of this description, that they may be able to pronounce sentence with the more freedom, ought to be released entirely, during that judicial process, from the subscription by which they had once bound themselves; — but with this express stipulation and caution, that meanwhile, throughout the course of such investigation and trial, it be allowable for no one in the Church or Academy to advance anything, in public or private, which may contravene the Confession.'

Thirdly, and finally, with reference to the question which the States had couched in these general terms, 'What further may it be expedient to do in regard to the convocation of a National Synod, that the most salutary results may thence accrue to the Church?' The most of the brethren were of opinion that the Belgic Confession and Catechism might be revised, indeed, in the Synod, if the Synod itself, for just reasons, deemed this necessary; but that the States be requested to strike out of their circular of citation, for the sake of the tranquillity of the churches, that clause concerning revision, which seemed to give offence to some, and a license of innovating to others; and that these, or some such words, be substituted in its place: That a Synod be convened for the confirmation, harmonious reception, and propagation of the pure and orthodox doctrine; for preserving and establishing the peace and good order of the Church; and, in fine, for promoting true piety among the inhabitants of these realms.

In defence of this opinion many reasons were advanced which, when others tried to repel, adducing several arguments to the contrary, on the ground of which it appeared to them that no alteration whatever ought to be made in the circular referred to, by and by the question began to be mooted and discussed concerning the necessity of revision itself; — Arminius, Uitenbogaert, and the two Utrecht ministers maintaining the affirmative, while the rest thought that this should be left for the Synod itself to determine. The greater part exclaimed, 'that the doctrine of the Reformed Church, sanctioned by the support of so many most weighty men, and sealed with the blood of so many thousands of martyrs, would, by an investigation of this sort, be called in doubt, and that this would give rise, not only to tumults, and stumblings, yea, and shipwreck of consciences, within the Church, but also to calumnies and reproaches beyond its pale.' To these reasons, moreover, they added certain offensive eulogiums of the books, the revision of which they were discussing, which came little short of a superseding of the Sacred Scripture. Gomarus declared 'that he received the Word of God, indeed, as the primary rule of faith, but the Confession and Catechism for the secondary rule.' In this statement, J. Bogermann, minister of the church at Leeuwarden, also expressed his concurrence, and did not hesitate, on the same occasion, repeatedly to declare 'that the Sacred Scriptures ought to be interpreted according to the Confession and Catechism.' [Vid. lib. cuititulus, Orig. et Progress. Ecclesiastic. Dissid. in Belg. Belgice script. p. 19.]. How completely these words (to be attributed to undue heat of debate, and not approved of by all his own party) tore up the basis of the entire Reformation, aud ran foul of the seventh article of the Belgic Confession itself, was enough, and more than enough, demonstrated by Arminius and his friends. They further strenuously contended for the revisal decided upon by the States; urging on a variety of grounds how accordant this was to reason, and how necessary, moreover, as matters then stood.

Arminius, in particular, maintained this position, and vigorously defended it against the objections of brethren. 'For as to what was advanced about the danger of doctrine being called into doubt, this,' he contended, 'was in the highest degree offensive; seeing that the thing to be discussed was not the Sacred text, but a human composition, which contained errors, and might therefore justly and properly be tried by the touch-stone of heavenly truth. It was to no purpose to obtrude the authority of divines and martyrs. For, besides that it was possible for even them also to have erred, a distinction must be maintained between the different things which the Confession of the Belgic churches contains. For some things are to be referred to the foundation of faith and of salvation, but other things are reared on that foundation, and therefore, of themselves, are not indispensably necessary to eternal life. The former, it is true, had been approved by the unanimous consent of all the Reformers, and confirmed by the martyrs' blood; but not by any means the latter: nay, in regard to these controversies, at present in agitation, no one of the martyrs probably was ever asked his opinion. The fear, too, that disturbances would perhaps arise from the revisal referred to, was one to which divines truly Reformed ought to attach no great importance. For, this reason admitted, it was then with the best right that the Papists formerly left no stone unturned with the view of preventing the doctrine received in the Church for so many centuries back, from being called into doubt, and subjected to fresh examination. Nay more, if Luther, Zwingle, and the other leaders of the Reformed Church, had attributed so much weight to considerations like these, they would never have addressed themselves to a work of such great difficulty, and so full of danger, as the Reformation, and to the serious investigation of the Popish doctrine.' [Vide sis has rationes fusius postea ab Arminio deductas in Declar. sua coram Ord.]

The matter having thus been fully argued on both sides, the great majority of the Convention persisted not the less in harping every now and then on that one string, namely, the offence which they declared there was reason to apprehend from the insertion of the fore-named clause in the letters of citation, till at last Arminius, and those who adhered to him, desirous of gratifying the rest, and more solicitous about the thing itself, than the formality, as they called it, gave their consent to the omission of the clause, only that this should be done without implying the omission of the revisal itself.

These deliberations being ended, and all results collected, a document was drawn up, and signed by the hands of all, embodying both the opinions in which they agreed, and the opinions in which they differed, which was presented on the first of June to the assembly of the States: appended was a declaration, on the part of all, that they were ready at the will and command of their High Mightinesses to explain more at large their opinions briefly exhibited in that document, and to fortify them with the reasons on which they respectively depended.

Chapter 9 Part 3

The Life of James Arminius
Chapter 9, Part 3 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.
--------------------

Meanwhile, and shortly before these things were (with very special reference to Arminius and his followers), determined upon by the Synod of Gorcum, the following circumstance furnished a handle for stirring fresh strife against him. It happened ill the course of a disputation held under his presidency, on the subject of the divinity of the Son, in which he had undertaken to defend what was at once the general and the orthodox opinion on this pre-eminently important doctrine of the Christian faith, that some one of the students urged, in opposition to the theses he had exposed to public scrutiny, that 'the Son of God was autotheos, and therefore had his essence from himself, and not from the Father.' Arminius replied that the word autotheos was not contained in the sacred volume; still, considering that it had been employed by Epiphanius and others, of the ancient as well as modern orthodox divines, it was not to be utterly rejected, provided only it were rightly understood. But according to its etymology it might be taken in a twofold sense, to denote either one who is truly God, or such a one as is God of himself. According to the former signification, it could be admitted; but taken in the latter sense, it stood opposed to the sacred volume, and to orthodox antiquity.

On the other hand, however, the student tenaciously held to his point; boldly asserting that according to the second signification pre-eminently the term in question was applicable to the Son of God; and that the essence of the Father could not, except improperly, be said to be communicated to the Son and to the Holy Spirit; but that rightly and properly could it be said that the essence of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit was common. This position, too, he maintained with the more confidence and spirit that he had as an authority for his opinion the celebrated Trelcatius; for in his Common-places, lately published, he had expounded to the same effect his sentiments respecting the Sacred Trinity. Wherefore, Arminius, deeming it his duty not to leave the truth unvindicated, by virtue of the authority of the office with which he had been invested, spiritedly rejoined, that 'The opinion thus advanced was one altogether new and unheard of in the ancient Greek as well as Latin Church. The ancients had always maintained that the Son had his deity from the Father by eternal generation. The opinion now advanced laboured under most serious difficulties. From it there followed not only Sabellianism [Sabellius, who lived about the middle of the third century, denied all distinction of persons in the Trinity, allowing only a distinction of modes and manifestations.—TR.], the Son being made to occupy the place of the Father, as having his essence from none; but it further followed that the way was thereby paved to Tritheism, and that there were just as many Gods held as there were collateral persons supposed. The Unity in Trinity of the Deity had been maintained by the ancient divines of the Church against anti-Trinitarians, solely on the ground of origin, and of order according to origin. On the contrary, to have deity from himself was repugnant to the definition of son; and that no relation could be involved in any thing which was contrary to the definition of that thing.' [Vide sis fusius de hoc negotio disserentem Armin. in declar. sua coram Ord. Item Arm. Resp. ad 31. Artic.]

Thus far reasoned Arminius, who, by the production of these and other arguments of the same kind, flattered himself that he was defending the Catholic opinion on this question, and consulting best for the glory both of the Father and of the Son. Nay, more; he had stirred this affair with the greater confidence that he had rather persuaded himself of the entire concurrence with him on this point of Gomarus, who, not long after the publication of the Common-places of Trelcatius, had, in a public disputation, impugned his forms of expression respecting the Sacred Trinity, and further refuted his opinion in his own private class. Nevertheless, this very disputation of Arminius furnished fresh occasion and material for the unjust suspicions which malevolent parties entertained concerning him; and the rumour everywhere spread that he entertained erroneous views respecting the Sacred Trinity and the Divinity of the Son. But this he accounted his peculiar infelicity; and he lamented that prejudice should prevail to such an extent that, if any discussion arose, forthwith the entire blame was heaped upon him, even when asserting the views most thoroughly received; while those, on the other hand, were excused and commended who had furnished occasion of strife by their novel and most extravagant modes of expression. To him this appeared nothing less than monstrous; nor did there seem to exist any ground on which, in consequence of the above-named disputation, he could justly and reasonably be suspected of hatching aught that was heretical. So far from this, he testifies (in one of his letters, dated 1st September, 1606) that he had taught nothing whatever on the doctrine in question but what rested on the authority of the Sacred Scriptures, and of the ancient as well as modern divines; and, moreover, that on this point there was nothing which he wished corrected in the opinion received by the Reformed Churches in the Netherlands. Nay more; in this matter he could adduce as on his side the guide and teacher of his youth, Beza; who, in his preface to the Dialogues of Athanasius concerning the Trinity, makes an excuse for Calvin for not having observed with sufficient accuracy the distinction between these two statements: the Son is by himself (per se) and the Son is from himself (a se).

Much about the same time the subject of our memoir was subjected to a calumny not unlike the one we have just narrated. It arose from the following circumstance:— In a public disputation On the person of the Son, in the course of which he very learnedly showed how the economy of our salvation was administered by the Father through the Son and the Holy Spirit, Arminius made the admonitory remark that strict regard ought to be paid to that order which is everywhere observed in the Holy Scriptures; and that it ought to be distinctly considered what proper parts in that economy are ascribed to the Father, what to the Son, and what to the Holy Ghost. The spirit of detraction, besides, had gathered boldness from the fact that several passages of the Old and New Testaments usually cited in support of the consubstantial or co-essential Trinity had more than once been explained by him as having another reference. But he trusted that it would be no difficult matter to persuade all who were capable of forming a candid judgment, that from such data nothing could with any semblance of truth be inferred that was really at variance with the Christian faith. For in regard to the first of these occasions of calumniating him [Vid. epist. Arm. ad Hyppol. a Collib.], he deemed it a vain handle, seeing that to all who had learned from the Sacred Word that the Father had in the Son reconciled the world to himself, and was administering through the Holy Spirit the word of reconciliation, it could not fail to be super-abundantly evident that, in the scheme of human salvation, an order must be discerned among the persons of the Trinity, and care taken not to confound the parts severally attributed to them, — unless any one chooses to step into the heresy of the Patripassionists [Those who denied all distinction between the persons of the Trinity, were called Patripassiptoi (Patripassionists) in the west, and Sabilliatoi (Sabellians) in the east.' Hagenbach's Hist. Doct. Vol. I. p. 245—Edinb. 1846.—TR.]. Nor, on the other hand, did he think that greater pains were called for in refutation of what was objected to him about explaining somewhat differently a few passages of Holy Writ. For even if in this respect he had sinned, there stood convicted of the same crime Calvin himself, who, in this direction, had used great freedom, if ever man had, and yet had been defended by the celebrated Paraeus against the treatise of Hunnius entitled Calvin a Judaizer. But what the opinion of Arminius was on the sacred Trinity, and how unfairly some accused him about that period of Arianism, Socinianism, and other crimes of the same description, the candid reader may judge for himself from his very scholarly theses on this article of the Christian Faith. The aim and method, moreover, which, in the treatment of this subject, he proposed to himself, he (in his reply to the 31 articles) declares in the following terms:— 'Of those who know me, the most part know with how great fear and how anxious a. conscience I handle that sublime doctrine of a Trinity of Persons. How little, in explaining this article, I delight, either in inventing for myself, or in adopting as already invented by others, novel modes of expression, unknown to Scripture and orthodox antiquity, my entire method of teaching demonstrates. How cheerfully I even bear with those who speak differently, provided the meaning they intend be just, my hearers are prepared to testify.' Still further, with the view of dissipating entirely all suspicion of Socinianism, he openly declared in the course of that period (in s letter dated 1st September 1606), that 'so far was he from being obnoxious to this charge, that he rather cherished the hope, if the Synod would only lend him a willing ear, of being able to contribute certain arguments which made for the more effectual confutation of the Samosetans [Or Anti Trinitarians. Paul of Samoseta held views similar to those of Sabellius, and lived about the same period.—TR.], or at least for the more easy liquidation of their objections and reasonings.' Nay more, Arminius, as his disciple John Narsius testifies, subjected, not long after, certain of the leading and most celebrated doctrines of Socinus, but particularly his book concerning the Saviour, to public and formal 'refutation, and that so vigorously, so elaborately, so solidly, that probably no one before or after him, ever did so with more effect [Vid. Narsii Epist. ad J. Sandium x. sept. 1612 script. inter Epist. Eccles. p. 327.].

But, dismissing these things, let us now revert to the delegates of the Gorcum Synod, and to the part they played with Arminius and his colleagues. Uitenbogaert, then, having returned from the camp at Wesel, the four men appointed to this business proceeded to Leyden in the month of December, and having read in due form the Synodal decree to each of the professors, they courteously asked them to comply with the petition of the Church. Gomarus was the first on whom they waited: he expressed his thanks for the pains expended on this business, and lavished the highest laudations on the Synod for having consulted for the tranquillity of the churches and for the maintenance of pure doctrine. But he declared that he felt reluctant to give any full or definite reply to the principal head of the Synod's demand, until he had taken counsel on this business with his colleagues; and therefore it seemed to him advisable that through their Dean (Arminius) the Theological Faculty ought to be convened. The answer of Trelcatius was to the same effect. On the other hand, the delegates rejoined, that to summon the Faculty just named appeared to them, to be altogether unnecessary; and pressed them for a further reply. At length, having given them time for deliberation, they next waited on Arminius, who, after hearing their petition, with great confidence replied, that he 'gave thanks to the eternal God for having suggested to the assembled brethren a decree of this description, — so thoroughly salutary and Christian. He had for his part hitherto given himself, and would still give himself, with all diligence, to the investigation of the Confession and Catechism of the Belgic churches, as to a duty to which he acknowledged himself bound not only in the name of God, but also, at this time more particularly, by the requirement of this illustrious assembly. Further, as to handing in animadversions, if he had any such, he would at the fit time deliberate and do what the occasion and the state of affairs would permit.' [Uitenb. Hist.]. On receiving this answer, the delegates next told Arminius the suggestion of Gomarus about convening the Theological Faculty, and asked his mind on this matter. Arminius then inquired 'if the Synod wished them to examine the above-named documents together, and at once, in full college assembled, and to signify to the Synod their opinion respecting them in name of the entire Faculty; or if, on the other hand, they wished each of the Professors to submit his opinion and observations singly and apart?' To this the delegates replied, that their impression was that the latter and not the former was the wish of the Synod; on which Arminius straightway rejoined 'that there was no propriety in calling the entire Faculty together about a business the charge of expediting which had been committed by the Synod to each of them apart.' Accordingly, the others, his colleagues, not deeming it expedient to give further trouble, at length intimated, both of them, 'that they would not fail to pay all respect to the petition of their brethren, and would subject to a renewed examination those formularies of consent, — not as if they cherished any doubt concerning any article contained in them, but solely on the principle of complying with the mandate of the Synod.' At last they began to treat with the regents also of both colleges— Peter Bertius, and Daniel Colonius [Bertius was the Regent of the Dutch, and Colonius of the Walloon (or French) College.—TR.]. The former briefly replied 'that he would yield compliance with the Synod's decree to the best of his ability.' The other, however, declared, 'that he would follow the decision decreed — or yet to be decreed — by the Walloon Synod.'

In the meantime the rumour of these growing contentions in the Netherlands reached the ears also of foreigners, including men of great name. Nor were there wanting those in France, England, and other countries, who expressed their solicitude for the peace of the Church in Holland. Deserving of special mention on this account is that illustrious light of France and champion of the Reformed cause, Philip De Mornay, Lord of Plessis, a man most zealous, if ever man was, for the interests of Christianity and the promotion of peace. This shows itself in a brief letter written by that most distinguished man to the very learned Tilenus, on the first of January, 1607, into which, also, he introduces a reference to Arminius himself in the following terms, which we translate from the French:— 'As for Doctor Arminius, I have certainly heard men the most noble and honoured pronounce his praise in the highest and most cordial terms. Doctor Buzenvallius has promised to furnish me with that treatise a compend of which you have presented in your letter. Would to God that each of us may contain himself within the bounds of Scripture, and not travel beyond it, that we may be able with combined energy to assault the idolatry, superstition, and tyranny of Rome. Let us, at all events, bear with one another in these profound mysteries, in which there is always room to learn, and doubtless also to take exception, expound them with as scrupulous circumspection as you may. Opinions of this sort, accordingly, I maintain with moderation and sobriety; and I hold that those who propound them, if they only proceed in their investigation of them according to the rule of our religion, ought to be treated with prudence and lenity.' [Vid. Epist. Eccles. p. 179. Ep. xcvii.]. Thus far writes the most noble Lord of Plessis. Had his counsels, so singularly pacific, been only complied with at that time, it would certainly have fared better at a subsequent period with the Church and Academy of Holland.

But at this critical conjuncture, when most of all Arminius stood in need of the counsel of friends, he sustained, early in the spring, a severe calamity in the much lamented and premature decease of John Halsberg, one of the ministers of Amsterdam, whom for many years he had loved most ardently, and as if he had been a brother. How heavily at the time this trial pressed upon his spirits, the following words will show:— 'I had previously, indeed (writes Arminius, 3d May, 1607), received intelligence of the illness of John Halsberg, that most eminent brother in Christ, and faithful friend; but the vigour of his nature, and the season of the year, led me to cherish the hope of his recovery, which made me the less anxious on his account; If, however, I could on any ground have foreboded that he was so suddenly to depart from this life, I should not have omitted to render him the last personal offices of Christian regard. But this God has not granted me, — a circumstance which, over and above the grief I justly feel for the death of that most affectionate man, affects my mind in no small degree. But justly do you remark that he has gone before: we shall every one of us follow, each in his own order, — the thought of which is constantly impressed upon my mind by a catarrh which now assails me at no rare intervals, affecting sometimes the chest, and sometimes other internal parts. He who is ready to administer final judgment on all mortals has sent this as a warning; and thereby he orders me to moderate the grief I feel for the decease of my friend, whom, perhaps, after not many years I shall follow.' [Ex Epist. Arm. ad Seb. Egb. 3 Maii. 1607. script.].

These words of Arminius we the more readily introduce as containing not only a testimony of his singular affection for Halsberg, and of a friendship never interrupted by a single difference; but also a sort of prophecy, or rather presentiment, of his own death, which happened in the course of two years after.

Chapter 9 Part 2

The Life of James Arminius
Chapter 9, 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.
--------------------

Amid all this excitement Arminius prosecuted his Academic prelections with unabated activity; and having brought to a close the exposition of Jonah, he entered upon a course of lectures on Malachi about the commencement of the year ensuing, 1606.

On the 8th of February, he resigned his Rectorate according to the [Ex. Epist. Arm.] usual order; on which occasion he delivered that celebrated oration on 'Religious Dissension,' in which he unfolds its nature and effects, causes and remedies, with such freedom of speech as the weight of the subject itself, and the agitated circumstances of the church seemed to require; In particular, as the remedy commonly considered to be the most efficacious for allaying theological dissensions was a convention of the parties at variance, (which the Greeks call a synod, the Latins, a council,) he unfolded, on that same occasion, fully and piously, the principle on which a council of the kind referred to, ought to be constituted, so as to warrant the just and rational expectation that it will issue in results of the most salutary character.

Nor could he charge himself, by any means, with having causelessly selected this as the theme of his oration; for he had long been aware that with the great majority of the clergy, and at this very time, nothing was more an object of desire than that the States-General should permit to be again summoned a National Synod, which, in former times, was wont to be convened once every three years, but had now for a very considerable time been suspended. For (to trace this matter a little further back) it was already turned twenty years since the Earl of Leceister, despising, and all but trampling under foot, the authority of the fathers of our country, had ordered a council of this description to be convoked at the Hague. On that occasion, when the great body of the clergy had lent their most zealous aid to those who were hatching revolutionary schemes, and aiming a deadly blow at the liberty of the Dutch Republic, they had, not without reason, been rebuked and admonished by the public voice of the States, 'that, content with having lost Flanders, by traducing and calumniating the administration of the rulers, under the deceptive show of religion, and throwing a cloak over perfidy, they should abstain from bringing about the loss of Holland in the same way.' [Vid. Em. Meterani Hist. Belgice conscript. et Hoofdii Hist.]. It was the recollection, indeed, of that calamitous period, and the apprehension lest, perchance, certain turbulent zealots, under pretext of religion, should attempt anything anew that might detract from public authority, which long restrained the illustrious and mighty States from afterwards giving their assent to the renewed petition of the ecclesiastics for a National Synod. About the year 1597, however, when controversies had arisen in various places, particularly at Gouda, Hoorn, and Medenblick, not only respecting Divine Predestination, but also concerning the authority of the Belgic Confession, and Palatine Catechism, and the right and orthodox interpretation of certain phrases, the States of the province of Holland at length took the lead in granting the pastors under their jurisdiction permission to hold a synod;—for this end, in particular, 'that the Belgic Confession of Faith should be revised, and that it should be carefully considered in what way, most fitly, according to the word of God, the true doctrine and concord of the Reformed Church of the Netherlands, might be vindicated, preserved, and promoted, and the dissensions that had arisen be allayed.'

But although, so many years before the name of Arminius had begun to acquire celebrity in the Leyden Academy, the rulers of Holland had consented to the synod, still the States of the other provinces resisted the project — those of Utrecht being the stoutest and the longest to hold out. But seeing that the Dutch professors and pastors who differed at this time on the subject of predestination sought some support, each for his own opinion, in the words of the Confession and Catechism; and that these same formularies of consent did not define with sufficient clearness the questions agitated on either side; and that this present exigency of the Reformed cause seemed, in consequence, to require a more formal convention of the churches, by the effort and intervention of the men of greatest influence (including the name of Uitenbogaert, as he himself cheerfully owns) it was brought about that these rulers of Utrecht also subscribed to the wish so generally entertained. Leave, accordingly, was at length obtained (on the 15th March) from the States-General to convoke a National Synod on the selfsame terms as those on which, eight years previously, the rulers of Holland and Westfriesland had given their sanction to its being held. But here is the very decree, in express terms:—

'The States-General of the United Provinces of the Netherlands, having considered and carefully weighed the reasons proposed and exhibited in their assembly both orally and in writing, in name of the Christian Reformed churches of the Netherlands, in order that permission should be granted to them for convening a National Synod of the said churches on the grounds set forth in the written petition referred to, after mature deliberation, have granted permission that it should be held, and by this same instrument they hereby grant permission. Wherefore, also, it hath pleased them that said National Synod be convoked in name of their illustrious Lords, as being the lawful magistrates — the protectors and defenders in these realms of the Christian Reformed religion — and to whom, in consequence, that right belongs; and that, as soon as said illustrious Lords, with the pastors of churches (whom it has been resolved to summon for this object on the very first opportunity) shall have communicated among themselves, and deliberated respecting the mode of holding the synod, and concerning the fit place and time, the said National Synod, with the revision of the Confession and Catechism of said churches, and of the ecclesiastical constitution heretofore in use among them shall (as has been wont every time to be done in such assemblies) be so instituted and conducted, in the name and fear of the Lord, that the fruit thence to be expected — namely, the confirmation of true piety among the inhabitants of these realms — may be abundantly realised. And all these things according to the rule and pattern of God's Sacred Word, to His glory, and for the safety of the Republic and the Church.'

We have thought it proper to introduce into our narrative this, the express form of the public decree, in order that the origin of the contentions with Arminius and his followers that arose respecting it, and the main reason why this convention of the churches was deferred, may be the more readily discerned. For the deputies of the churches took it very much amiss, that in the missive containing the public decree of the illustrious States special mention should be made of a contemplated revision of the Confession, Catechism, and ecclesiastical canons. Nay, more; even prior to its publication, and towards the close of the preceding year (30th November, 1605) they had begged, in a written petition, that the convocation of this synod should be instituted in the manner sanctioned by former usage and in general terms. They affirmed 'that by that single clause the entire doctrine comprehended in these summaries was called in question; that by this edict injury was done to these sacred canons of the Reformed faith, which were formerly received with so great applause; that the term revision was forensic, nor was the act of revision ever insisted on unless when the authorised sentiment was not acquiesced in, but rather a demand made for its being retracted or changed; that by the insertion of the clause referred to there was reason to fear that those who were striving after a change of doctrine would be rendered more daring, and would conclude that power was conceded to them by public authority to press innovation to any extent.' [Vid praefat. Act. Synod Dord.].

But a variety of reasons, on the other hand, and these of the gravest character, were advanced by not a few in vindication of the decree of the States. Thus it was contended, 'that it was idle to dispute about the word revision, since, taken not in its forensic but in its more general acceptation, it denoted any kind of re-examination. But taking the word in this stricter sense, it was not the case that the once authorised opinion was always changed by revision, but, on the contrary, it was sometimes thereby confirmed. The illustrious States of Holland had inserted in their decree, passed eight years before, the word resumption. In most acts of synods, even prior to the public decree of the year 1597, mention was made of a repetition. Nay, more; that distinguished defender of the Reformed doctrine, Caspar Heidanus, was not afraid to put on the title of that Catechism which he published at Antwerp in the year 15—, the words correction and emendation. At all events, the thing itself denoted by this word was of right and with good reason demanded by the fathers of their country and the supreme patrons of the Church. The sacred Scripture alone was placed beyond the liability of revision; nor was it right to arrogate this privilege to human writings. This, Beza, Zanchius, Olevianus, and other leaders of the Reformed religion — yea, and the very authors, too, of the Belgic Confession — openly professed. Even now there were extant, and could easily be produced, letters of the distinguished Saravia, celebrated among the original compilers of the Confession, who testifies that of those who applied their hand to this work it never came into the mind of one to make of it a rule of faith. In all the synods held in France a commencement was made by re-reading the Confession and soliciting expressions of opinion upon it [Press. Declar. p. 41. 42.—Vid Grot. Piet. Ord. p. 52]. The Augustan, yea and the Anglican and Helvetic Confessions, had been changed; and much more reasonable were it to try whether nothing could be amended in that Confession which was originally composed by no Synod whatever, but had been put together by some pious men, at a pre-eminently troublous time, in great haste, and for this end only, that it should serve the purpose of an apology to a hostile king. The same remark applied to the Catechism, inasmuch as the very leaders themselves of the Belgic Church had not drawn it up, but (as is wont to be done in cases of sudden necessity) had borrowed it from others. None otherwise did the famous Piscator judge; for certain strictures and animadversions of his on several questions of the Palatine Catechism were still extant [Vid. has stricturas inter Epist. Eccles. p. 166.]. Even granting that after the scrutiny of forty years and more, nothing could be detected in the writings above-named which was either deficient or redundant, and which admitted of being expressed if not more truly, at least more fitly, and in a way better adapted to promote ecclesiastical peace; still the lawful examination of them would be attended with this benefit, that it would be evident to the world that the Reformed Churches in the Netherlands had not slid into that form of doctrine which they followed by accident or fashion, but in the exercise of reason and discrimination. At the name time they would, by an illustrious testimony, give publicity to the fact that these formularies were estimated by them at their true value, and not more; and what was of prime importance, the liberty thug admitted in its own place and time, and restrained within the limits of order, would interpose an obstacle to the license of private contradiction.'

But these and other reasons of the like kind by no means availed to prevent the great mass of the adversaries of Arminius from vehemently assailing, on every opportunity, the above form of convening the Synod. Nay, the ecclesiastical deputies transmitted a copy of it, with an accompanying letter (dated 19th April), to the churches of each several province, in which they signified how strenuously they had exerted themselves to get the above-named clause omitted [Via. Praefat. Act. Synod. Dord.]. From that time, it began to be carped at, and to be criticised by the churches with more acrimony than was meet. Foremost, however, in zeal to take up this business was the Synod of South Holland, held three months after, in the month of August, at Gorcum. For when the deputies of the churches had reported to it what steps they had taken in the matter of the National Synod, and what had been determined by the illustrious States, it seemed good to this assembly to enjoin on these deputies, 'that, duly weighing the heads of the public decree respecting the Synod, they should not only see to it that justice be done to the decision of the illustrious States, but should also take care that nothing be done to the prejudice of the churches.' The Synod moreover declared, 'that even if it were judged proper to revise the Confession and Catechism in the way and mode hitherto in use in a National Synod, they nevertheless wished that those who were to be summoned to that meeting at which the place and manner of holding the National Synod would necessarily fall to be considered, should be instructed to ask of the States-general, in name of the churches, that, for reasons above specified, the forementioned clause be struck out of the circulars of convocation, and that other words of milder import, and less likely to beget offence, might be substituted in its place.

This same Synod besides resolved, that injunction be laid on all the pastors of the churches of South Holland, nay also, on the professors of sacred literature in the Academy of Leyden, to peruse and examine with all diligence the Confession and Catechism hitherto in use in those realms. It was further matter of deliberation whether it would be expedient that the strictures of the ministers on the above named books should be brought up, in the first instance, before this particular Synod and its deputies, or whether these had better be reserved to the National Synod [Act. Synod. Gorcom. Art. 4.]. Sufficient reasons were not wanting to have induced the persuasion that such anticipatory judgments of particular synods were altogether vain, and would not be free of hazard; and Uitenbogaert himself, in a very earnest discussion on that subject into which he entered with the president of this assembly, John Becius, showed, in many ways, under how great difficulties that ill-timed investigation which many were urging did labour, and how much it militated against the express decree and intention of the States [Vid. Resp. ad Epist. Minist. Walach. p. 16.—Epist. Eccles. p. 170.]. Notwithstanding all this, it was decreed in the same Synod, that, 'if, in these writings of the Confession and Catechism, any one had observed aught worthy of remark, he should signify the same, and set it forth in good and solid reasons and arguments, as speedily as practicable; and that if possible, before the next meeting of the classis.' This decision, in spite of the objections of those who thought it wrong that the fulfilment of that ecclesiastical decree should be circumscribed within so small a portion of time, remained fixed and valid. By and by, too, this same Synod resolved to advise, by letter, the other particular churches and synods of the United Provinces, to watch with all diligence over this business, the care of which it had itself undertaken, and to urge every one of the ministers of their respective classes to the serious and thorough examination of the Confession and Catechism [Vid. Epist. Eccles.]. And finally, the province of communicating on this subject with the professors of sacred literature, and the regents of the theological college, was, in name of this Synod, consigned to John Uitenbogaert, William Coddaeus, Nathaniel Marlandus, and Egbert AEmilius.

Chapter 9 Part 1

The Life of James Arminius
Chapter 9, Part 1 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.
--------------------

CHAPTER IX.

ECCLESIASTICAL EXCITEMENT, AND PROCEEDINGS WITH A VIEW TO A NATIONAL SYNOD; FRESH CALUMNIES AGAINST ARMINIUS. A.D 1605-1607.

A few weeks after the curators of the University had, by convening the professors of theology, succeeded in maintaining Academic peace, the Synod of South Holland, which met at Rotterdam on the 30th August, 1605, proceeded to agitate measures in connexion with this business, of a much more impetuous description. After the delegates from the Classis of Dort had put them in possession of the grounds on which the above-named gravamen had been transmitted, and the deputies of the Synod had in like manner made them aware of the state of the Leyden Academy, and of their interview with Arminius and the rest of the professors, they decided, after mature deliberation, that a timely check ought to be opposed to this growing evil, and that the appropriate remedy ought not to be delayed under the uncertain hope of a National Synod. It was accordingly concluded to institute, by means of their deputies, a very strict inquiry into what articles in particular furnished matter of debate among the theological students in the Leyden Academy; and to request the honourable curators to make it imperative on the professors of theology to declare openly and sincerely their own opinions respecting the same [Vid. prefat. Act. Synod. Dord.].

In fulfilment of this decree, the synodical deputies, Francis Lansbergius, Festus Hommius, and their associates, set out for Leyden, and on the 2nd November handed in nine questions to the curators respecting the points which, as they understood, constituted at this time the main subjects of discussion. They at the same time requested that, in virtue of their authority, the curators would render it imperative on the professors of theology fully to unfold their own opinion on these points. But the honourable curators looked upon this demand as preposterous, inasmuch as the professors themselves had informed them in writing, not long before, of the state and weight of the controversies referred to. They therefore openly declared 'that to this mode of procedure they could by no means lend their sanction;' and added 'that there was no small ground for the hope that a National Synod would be obtained; on which account they judged it to be more advisable to reserve these questions to it, than by further investigation of them to furnish occasion for strife.' [Vid. Declar. Arm. coram, Ord.]. On receiving this answer the deputies further insisted, that by the kind permission of the curators they might be at liberty to put these questions to the professors concerned, in order to discover what answers each of them would voluntarily and spontaneously give; but here they encountered the same repulse.

All these transactions, however, were managed with such secrecy, as respects Arminius, that he was for some time ignorant of the arrival of these deputies in the city, and was only subsequently made aware of it through his friends. By the diligence of these friends he also succeeded in laying his hands upon the very questions which the deputies of the churches had handed in to the curators; and thence snatched occasion to draw up, for the benefit of his disciples, brief answers to these, and to array in opposition to them as many questions in return [Vide sis has quaestiones et Arminii responsa in ejus Eperibus.].

Circumstanced as he was at such a conjuncture, he could not suppress his feelings, but gave vent to them in the following complaint in regard to his position, which occurs in a letter to Uitenbogaert, dated 27th October, 1605:— 'How difficult is it in these inauspicious times, when such vehemence of spirit prevails, to be thoroughly devoted at once to truth and to peace! Were it not that the consciousness of integrity, the favourable judgments of some good men, yea, and the palpable and manifest fruits which I see arising from my labours, reanimate my spirits, I should scarcely at times be able to bear myself erect. But thanks be to God who imparts strength and constancy to my spirit, and makes me comparatively easy whatever may be the issue.' [Arm. Epist. ad J. Uitenb. 27 Octob. 1605.]

Notwithstanding these annoyances, Arminius [Via Ep. Eccles. p. 149.] strenuously discharged the duties of his office; and endeavoured, above all, to propagate increasingly the truth, as far as known by him, without noise or contention, to the utmost of his power. For this end he made it his study, on all occasions, to keep himself within the terms of the Confession and Catechism — at least not to advance anything which might be confuted by these standards, nay which was not fairly and plainly reconcilable therewith. For although in these formularies of consent he had probably observed some things which at times appeared to favour the sentiments opposed to those he had embraced, and which he could have wished to find expressed in terms more closely harmonising with his own opinion, he yet thought he could continue within these terms; and that, under the privilege of a mild interpretation, he ought to soften the harshness of certain phrases, and wait until a fuller interpretation and revision should be applied to them by a National Synod. For he thought that he could act thus in the exercise of the same right as that by which all those followers of Calvin who were subjects of the Emperor of Germany judged that they could lawfully, and with a good conscience, subscribe to the entire Confession of Augsburg, and to all and sundry of the articles it contained [Vid. Epiat. Examen contra Capel. in Oper. ejus i. Tom. 2. part. p. 168.]. This, however, without the aid of a liberal interpretation was more than they could well do; for between the Augsburg and other Confessions there was so great an air of contradiction that the Genevan divines did not think it advisable to publish them without the antidote of their own interpretations and cautions. Treading in their foot-prints, and rejoicing in the same right, he felt that he was doing nothing whatever unworthy of a Reformed divine if, for the confirmation of his own opinion on Divine predestination, and other heads of the Christian faith, he should call to his aid not only the Sacred Oracles, but also the above-named formularies of consent. It was for this reason that, when about to hold a disputation at one time in his own regular class on the subject of predestination, he ordered the student who was to undertake the part of respondent to shape his theses on this subject in the very words of the Confession [Ex Declar. Arm. coram Ord.].

About that same period he held a very learned disputation on the comparison between the law and the gospel, and on the agreement and difference between the Old Testament and the New; the part of respondent, under his presidency, having fallen on that highly-cultivated youth, and distinguished ornament at an after period to the Leyden Academy and to literature — Peter Cunaeus. Towards the close of this disputation some one happened to object 'that man could not but transgress the law, seeing that the decree of God, which determined that he should transgress, could not be resisted.' Although Arminius was under the necessity of replying to this objection, yet he made it imperative that in future no such statement should be advanced without this or the like protestation: Let no blasphemy be supposed! So offensive, moreover, was that audacious proposition of this student of divinity to some who had been present at the disputation, that one of them, a man of no small authority, shortly after expressed his loathing of it in the presence of Arminius; and gave it as his counsel that things of that sort ought to be checked, and authority interposed against such disgraceful objections. Arminius, however, somewhat excused the deed, declaring that the objector had been so instructed by certain divines; and that authoritative interference was scarcely practicable, on account of the vehemence of some who were of a different, mind [Ex Epist. Arm.].

Meanwhile he was inspired with a greatly increased measure of firmness and confidence by the very large number of auditors whom the singular grace of his style, both of speaking and teaching, and his lucid interpretation of the Sacred Writings, daily attracted to his public lectures. His private class, moreover, flourished at this time to such a degree, that one class would not have sufficed but for the fear which had taken possession of many, that too much familiarity with him might turn out, at some future period, to be prejudicial to their interests. Hence, as envy is proverbially the evil genius, for the most part, not only of virtue but also of genuine erudition, it can hardly appear surprising to any one if Arminius, by reason of his daily increasing renown for learning, was obliged, in his turn, to encounter this hydra. The extent, at all events, to which, in that particular, Gomarus shared in the infirmity of our common nature, may be inferred from this circumstance: accosting Arminius one day as he was passing out of the academic hall, he threw this in his teeth with abundant bitterness and bile — 'They say you are more learned than Junius.'

About the same time, Peter Plancius, pastor of the church in Amsterdam, inveighed from the pulpit in the most virulent strain against Arminius and his friends and followers, running them down under the name of Coornhertians, Neo-Pelagians, and as far worse than Pelagius himself. So effervescent was he, that he appeared, even to vulgar minds, to have excited himself into extravagance, so as to connect things together which bore to each other no just relation of sequence or coherence. Others, too, after his example, either incensed by an inveterate hatred against Arminius, or impelled by the sort of pious solicitude with which they embraced the received doctrine, began to agitate before the people, in the vernacular tongue, those questions which had furnished themes of more subtle disputation in the benches of the Academy: and this they did with egregious departures from the truth, and with minds as little as possible attuned to the work of meekly edifying the Christian people [Ex Epist. Arm.—Vid. Respons. ad Epist. Minist. Walachriens. p. 9.]. Some assiduously impressed it upon the promiscuous multitude that the doctrine of the Belgic Confession, sealed with the blood of many martyrs, was being called in question; others that a motley religion was in the course of being drawn up, and that it was in contemplation to introduce a system of libertinism. On the other hand, Arminius, finding himself under the imperative necessity of vindicating his own innocence, both publicly and privately, pleaded his cause at this conjuncture, in a remarkably calm and placid spirit; for (to use his own words) he 'reckoned this to be by far the noblest kind of revenge, to bring it about, by means of well-doing, that they should have the worse who spurned at proffered friendship and fraternity.' Moreover, in order to possess the minds of the students with the genuine love of peace, he judged that nothing ought more to be impressed upon them than that they should endeavour to distinguish, according to the standard of the Sacred Word, not only between truth and falsehood, but also between the greater and less degrees in which different articles of religion are to be held as essential [Ex. Epist. Arm.].