8 May
1603 A.D. Mr. (Rev.Dr.Prof.) Jacobus Arminius Appointed
Professor of Theology at Un iversity of Leiden.
Christianity.com tells the half-story
at: http://www.christianity.com/church/church-history/timeline/1601-1700/who-is-elect-arminius-differed-from-calvin-11630050.html
After a
lengthy exchange of letters, the curators and burgomasters of Leiden officially
appointed Jacobus Arminius Professor of Theology at their university on this
day, May 8, 1603. When first proposed for the position, Arminius doubted he
would take the job. He had formed loving ties with his flock in Amsterdam.
Furthermore, he found theological research a hindrance to his growth in
personal sanctity. His working relationship with Amsterdam's authorities was
good and he seldom found it necessary to oppose them for the sake of
conscience. Most importantly, he had a lifelong contract with Amsterdam which
he could not simply break.
Arminius was Amsterdam's favorite
minister. He had served there fifteen years. Yet the possibility of appointment
to Leiden raised the question of his orthodoxy. Calvin and Beza taught that
Romans 7 referred to a regenerate man. Arminius held that it was the
description of an unregenerate person. His chief opponent in Leiden, Franciscus
Gomarus, confessed he had never read Arminius' work. After Arminius explained
his views, Gomarus agreed they were defensible if not the interpretation he
preferred. Arminius showed that his position had been held by a score of
eminent theologians from church history. Everyone was appeased.
Amsterdam was persuaded to
release Arminius. The city promised to provide his widow a pension should he
die before her and they gave him a substantial parting gift. His appointment
had cleared its last hurdle.
Arminius had not seen the last of
controversy, however. At Leyden he became embroiled in theological arguments not
of his own choosing. He was compelled by the lecture schedule to speak on
predestination, a topic on which his views were already suspect to strict
Calvinists. His lecture consisted almost entirely of scripture with minimal
comment. Arminius' careful pastiche of scriptural quotes did not follow the
Calvinist line as closely as they desired and the Calvinists challenged him.
Strict Calvinists believe Christ died only for the elect. Arminius held Christ
died for all (although not all would be saved). "Let those who reject the
[teaching that Christ paid the price for the sins of all men] consider how they
can answer the following scriptures, which declare that Christ died for all
men..." He also said people have genuine free will and grace is resistible.
The Calvinist views seemed to preclude free will because they said grace is
irresistible.
Arminius tried hard to keep
peace, even deliberately withholding some of his views. He tested each of his
points to make sure none nullified the doctrine of salvation by faith. Furthermore he was
careful to avoid anything which smacked of Pelagianism. He never denied
predestination. All was by God's choice. God predestined those he knew would
obey him in faith.
After his death, Arminius' views
were condemned by the Calvinist majority at the Synod of Dort. But in 1795 the
Dutch recognized them as a legitimate interpretation of scripture. Many notable
Protestants have held Arminian views, including the Wesleys. Protestant groups
are often divided into Arminians and Calvinists.
Bibliography:
1. "Arminianism," and
"Dort, Synod of," in The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian
Church," edited by F. L. Cross and E. A. Livingstone. (Oxford, 1997).
2. Arminius, James. The Writings of
James Arminius. Translators James Nichols and W. R. Bagnall.(Grand Rapids,
Michigan: Baker Book House, 1956).
3. Bangs, Carl. Arminius.
(Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1971).
4. Hunt, Dave. What Love Is This?
Calvinism's misrepresentation of God. (Sister, Oregon: Loyal, 2002).
5. Loughlin, James F.
"Arminianism. The Catholic Encyclopedia. (New York: Robert Appleton,
1914).
No comments:
Post a Comment