Reformed Churchmen

We are Confessional Calvinists and a Prayer Book Church-people. In 2012, we remembered the 350th anniversary of the 1662 Book of Common Prayer; also, we remembered the 450th anniversary of John Jewel's sober, scholarly, and Reformed "An Apology of the Church of England." In 2013, we remembered the publication of the "Heidelberg Catechism" and the influence of Reformed theologians in England, including Heinrich Bullinger's Decades. For 2014: Tyndale's NT translation. For 2015, John Roger, Rowland Taylor and Bishop John Hooper's martyrdom, burned at the stakes. Books of the month. December 2014: Alan Jacob's "Book of Common Prayer" at: January 2015: A.F. Pollard's "Thomas Cranmer and the English Reformation: 1489-1556" at: February 2015: Jaspar Ridley's "Thomas Cranmer" at:

Saturday, November 1, 2014

1 November 1676 A.D. Dutch Calvinistic Theologian, Dr. Gisbertus Voetius, Passes to the Next World

1 November 1676 A.D. Dutch Calvinistic Theologian, Dr. Gisbertus Voetius, passes to the next world. Of note, he taught the future King  of England, William III, a good hearty Calvinist.

Gisbertus Voetius

Gisbertus Voetius (Latinized version of the Dutch name Gijsbert Voet) (3 March 1589 – 1 November 1676) was a Dutch Calvinist theologian.



He was born at Heusden, Holland, studied at Leiden, and in 1611 became Protestant pastor of Vlijmen, whence in 1617 he returned to Heusden. In 1619, he played an influential part in the Synod of Dort, at which he was the youngest delegate.[1] In 1634, Voetius was made professor of theology and Oriental science at the University of Utrecht. Three years later he became pastor of the Utrecht congregation. He was an advocate of a strong form of Calvinism (Gomarism) against the Arminians. The city of Utrecht perpetuated his memory by giving his name to the street in which he had lived.

Utrecht controversy with Descartes

In March 1642, while serving as rector of the University of Utrecht, Voetius persuaded the university's academic senate to issue a formal condemnation of the Cartesian philosophy and its local defender, Henricus Regius. According to the senate's statement, Cartesian philosophy was to be suppressed because:

1.      it was opposed to 'traditional' (i.e. Scholastic/Aristotelian) philosophy;

2.      young people taught Cartesian philosophy would be unable to understand the technical terminology of Scholasticism; and

3.      it had consequences contrary to orthodox theology.[2]

Descartes countered with a personal attack on Voetius, in a letter to Jacques Dinet, which he made public in the second edition (1642) of his Meditations. Voetius was provoked into getting Martin Schoock to produce a book-length assault on Descartes and his work, the Admiranda methodus (1643). Descartes associated the quarrel with the part Voetius was playing with another controversy with Samuel Maresius, who was at least sympathetic to some Cartesian ideas. Legal and diplomatic moves followed (the protagonists were in different provinces in the Netherlands); and Maresius at the University of Groningen was able to extract some admissions from Schoock that were quite damaging to Voetius.[3]

In his long letter to Voetius (Epistola ad Voetium), Descartes mentioned Aristotelianism only twice; by contrast, the topics of theology, faith, and atheism were put on the table hundreds times. Both Descartes and Voetius acknowledged that the issue they treated was most of all theological.

Voetius pursued the faith-seeking-understanding program whereas Descartes repudiated the faith-lacking-understanding project. The primary concern of Voetius was not to preserve Aristotelianism but to keep the biblical truth that, as he put it, was received from orthodox tradition.

Descartes insisted that the article of faith did not fall under the regime of human reason because faith was something one could not fully grasp with reason. He argued that whoever embraced the articles of faith for incorrect reasoning would commit a sin no less grave than those who rejected them. What Descartes desperately defended was the autonomy of human reason and its proper use. In his philosophical enterprise, faith seemed to hinder the autonomy and the use of reason. He believed that his method of doubt would provide a firm road to perfect knowledge.

Voetius, however, argued that human reason was surrounded by error and sin, so that perfect knowledge was impossible for humans. He maintained that human beings would be able to learn the truth from divine revelation, which was the only principle in the pursuit of truth. Therefore, for Voetius, Cartesianism was primarily confronted with scriptural truth, not with Aristotelianism.[4]


  • A. C. Duker, Gysbertus Voetius, I—III (1893-1914).
  • Reinhard Breymayer: Auktionskataloge deutscher Pietistenbibliotheken [...]. In: Bücherkataloge als buchgeschichtliche Quellen in der frühen Neuzeit. Hrsg. von Reinhard Wittmann. Wiesbaden (1985) (Wolfenbütteler Schriften zur Geschichte des Buchwesens, Bd. 10), S. 113-208; hier S. 150-154 zur Privatbibliothek des orthodoxen Theologen G. Voetius.
  • Andreas J. Beck: Zur Rezeption Melanchthons bei Gisbertus Voetius (1589-1676), namentlich in seiner Gotteslehre. In: Günter Frank, Herman Selderhuis (Hrsg.): Melanchthon und der Calvinismus. Melanchthon-Schriften der Stadt Bretten, 9. Frommann-Holzboog, Stuttgart-Bad Cannstatt 2005, S. 319-344.
  • Andreas J. Beck: Gisbertus Voetius (1589-1676). Sein Theologieverständnis und seine Gotteslehre. Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, Göttingen 2007 (FKDG, 92).
  • Andreas J. Beck: "Gisbertus Voetius (1589-1676): Basic Features of His Doctrine of God." In: Willem J. van Asselt und Eef Dekker (ed.). Reformation and Scholasticism: An Ecumenical enterprise. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Academic, 2001, 205-226.
  • Erich Wenneker (1997). "Voetius, Gisbert". In Bautz, Traugott. Biographisch-Bibliographisches Kirchenlexikon (BBKL) (in German) 12. Herzberg: Bautz. cols. 1549–1554. ISBN 3-88309-068-9. 
  • Aza Goudriaan: Die Bedeutung der Trinitätslehre nach Gisbert Voetius. In: Harm Klueting, Jan Rohls (Hrsg.): Reformierte Retrospektiven: Vorträge der zweiten Emder Tagung zur Geschichte des Reformierten Protestantismus. Emder Beiträge zum reformierten Protestantismus, 4. Foedus Verlag, Wuppertal 2001, S. 137-145.
  • Aza Goudriaan: Reformed Orthodoxy and Philosophy, 1625-1750. Gisbertus Voetius, Petrus van Mastricht, and Anthonius Driessen. Brill’s Series in Church History, 26. Leiden [etc.]: Brill, 2006.
  • Christian Möller: Einführung in die Praktische Theologie, Tübingen 2004 (UTB 2529).
  • Andreas Mühling: Zwischen Puritanismus, Orthodoxie und frühem Pietismus - Gisbert Voetius und die 'Nadere Reformatie'. In: Monatshefte für Evangelische Kirchengeschichte des Rheinlandes 52 (2003), S. 243-254.
  • Andreas Mühling: Art. Voetius, Gisbert. In: Theologische Realenzyklopädie 35 (2003), S. 181-184.
  • W. J. van Asselt, E. Dekker (Hrsg.): De scholastieke Voetius: Een luisteroefening aan de hand van Voetius' Disputationes Selectae. Boekencentrum, Zoetermeer 1995.
  • Han van Ruler: The Crisis of Causality. Voetius and Descartes on God, Nature and Change. Brill, Leiden/New York/Köln 1995.
  • B. Hoon Woo: "The Understanding of Gisbertus Voetius and René Descartes on the Relationship of Faith and Reason, and Theology and Philosophy," Westminster Theological Journal 75, no. 1 (2013): 45-63.


1.      Jump up ^ van Asselt, Willem J. (2011). Introduction to Reformed Scholasticism. p. 146. 

2.      Jump up ^ René Descartes, "Letter to Father Dinet", first published in the second (1642) edition of his Meditations on First Philosophy. Translated in John Cottingham, Robert Stoothoff, and Dugald Murdoch, trs., The Philosophical Writings of Descartes (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1984): 2:384-397. See especially pp. 393-394.

3.      Jump up ^ Wiep van Bunge et al. (editors), The Dictionary of Seventeenth and Eighteenth-Century Dutch Philosophers (2003), Thoemmes Press (two volumes), article Descartes, René, p. 254–60.

No comments: