Ever wonder where that whole "Arminianism versus Calvinism" thing came from?
John Calvin died in 1564. Then came Jacobus Arminius. Born in 1560, he became a professor of theology at the University of Leiden in the Netherlands in 1603 until his death in 1609. By his day, Reformed Theology was the theology of the Protestant Church, especially in the Netherlands. Arminius studied under Beza, Calvin's successor, and generally agreed with Calvin's positions. There were, however, a few points with which he disagreed. Primarily, he thought that Predestination and Unconditional Election made God out to be the author of evil. He argued that Election was about believers and was, as such, conditioned on faith (a position that has become known as "Middle Knowledge"). He questioned the Perseverance of the Saints but agreed with Total Depravity. However, he had promised to remain true to the doctrines of the Church and never taught publicly against them. He did, on the other hand, share his concerns privately with some of his students. These followers grew restless and, after his death, filed what is called a "Remonstrance." This was a formal statement of grievances for the Church.
In 1618 the Church called a synod in the city of Dordrecht to address the official grievances of the followers of Arminius. The gathering was known as the Synod of Dort. The Remonstrants listed five points with which they differed with Calvin's theology and the official doctrines of the Reformed Church of the Netherlands. Mixed in the fray were governmental issues. The students of Arminius were also concerned about an issue similar to "states' rights" and sought to decentralize the government. Another issue was what is called "anti-confessional humanism," the disagreement with Total Depravity and the certainty of the ultimacy of Man's Free Will. They wanted to eliminate confessions as the rule of the Church and replace it with individualism. This tended to confuse rather than clarify the questions.
The synod met with more than 100 church leaders in attendance from all over Europe and held some 180 sessions to discuss the issues. The Remonstrants were ultimately defeated and expelled from their churches. The resulting Canons of Dort became part of the confessional standards of the Dutch Reformed Church. The affirmation of the five issues that have since become known as "The Five Points of Calvinism" provided a coherent position for the Church. The model of the synod, in fact, was seen so favorably that it was the same model used by the makers of the Westminster Confession of Faith (1646).
Two important points I see in this little historical account. First, the questions were asked and answered. I've been told by more than one person, "If they couldn't solve this in all this time, what makes you think you can figure it out now?" The notion is mistaken in two areas. In the first place, it was solved. The Church met, examined the issues, and came to a conclusion. The fact that some people don't like the conclusion doesn't mean that there is none. The other problem is this: The lack of an "acceptable conclusion" doesn't mean that we should either stop looking for answers or assume there are none.
The second point -- and very important -- is in those who point to the controversy and say, "See? You Christians can't agree!" The truth is that the primary source of this particular conflict was Calvin's Institutes of Religion, a four-volume work on the doctrines of Christianity. There is a massive amount of information in these volumes. To argue "You Christians can't agree" is to completely ignore the vast quantity of agreement. Arminius disagreed with three or four issues. The Remonstrants disagreed with five. Just five. Where else are you going to find a large group of individuals who agree on everything except five points?
The roar of the debate is sometimes loud. The apparent anger from folks on both sides of the issue is sometimes hot. The truth, however, is that, with the exception of fringe folk, both sides agree with the other on most issues, and both sides agree that the other side is likely in the fold, even if the other guys are slightly confused on a couple of areas. So when you go to debate the issues, remember that charity is important, that respect is required, and that there is far more on which you agree than you disagree. It might help to decrease the heat and shed more light.
4 comments:
Would you mind if I used this...I'll be certain to give you credit, of course, thought I'm sure you're not worried about it. I still thought it appropriate to ask.
Go right ahead! Always happy to share with friends.
Hear, here!! Never could decide which of those two words go in that phrase, so as someone who sort of sits on the fence regarding Calvinism, I will use both. In any case, thanks for that last paragraph. May we all remember what's most important. Blessings to you, Stan. ~ 10km
You sit on the fence regarding Calvinism??? Are you even saved???? (I intend that as humor. Those that make this discussion much more than it should be wouldn't ... in both directions. What a shame!)
Post a Comment