Page images
PDF
EPUB

1618.

ministers.

Chap. VI. however, such as baiting animals, interludes, and especially that which was "prohibited at all times to the meaner sort of people"-bowling-were forbidden. This declaration, called the Book of Sports, was addressed to the people of Lancashire, but understood to apply to the whole of England, and Excitement was directed to be read in churches. The Puritan of the Puritan ministers were in an agony. The strict observance of the Lord's Day had been their favourite doctrine, and as being something tangible and definite, the part of religion most readily accepted by the people. They had invested the Christian festival with an absurd and extra-Judaical gloom, and by creating a new class of sins, had brought men's consciences into a deeper subjection to themselves. But these extravagances should have been met by Scriptural argument and reasonable teaching, not by a proclamation enjoining dissipation, which needed not much forcing to make it plead the cause of levity and irreligion against Christian gravity, and devout earnestness. It was met accordingly at once by a most violent opposition. Archbishop Abbot forbade its being read at Croydon, where he was staying at the time; and the utmost point to which the Judaical observance of the Sunday could be pushed, was advocated in a book written by John Trask, a "( pretended minister," as Howes calls him, and who for his unfortunate publication was "set in the pillory

*Fuller's Church History, x., iv., 58, sq.; Nicholls's Progresses, iii., 397. The statute-laws prescribed penalties against bowling, lest it should hinder more warlike exercises, such as archery, &c.-See Morton's Defence of the Ceremonies, p. 192.

1618.

controversy.

at Westminster, and whipt to the Fleet, and there Chap. VI. to remain prisoner."* King James having thus involved his subjects at home in the hopeless mazes Sabbatarian of a Sabbatarian controversy, was now preparing to take part, by means of chosen representatives, in the determined attempt to put down Arminianism in Holland, at the synod, which the Prince of Orange and the States-General had resolved to convene at Dort.

*Howes's continuation of Stow's Chronicle, p. 929. It is remarkable that the chronicler says that Trask was punished for teaching that men "ought not to keep the Christian Sabbath," Trask afterwards recanted.-See Disraeli's Charles I., ii., 37.

Chap. VII. 1618.

Disputes between Calvinists and Arminians in Holland.

CHAPTER VII.

Disputes between Calvinists and Arminians in Holland-The Five Points of the Arminians-Quarrel between Maurice, Prince of Orange, Barneveldt and Grotius-Synod summoned to meet at Dort-The English Deputies-Their instructions-They are handsomely treated by the States-Late arrival of the Arminian divines-Preliminary discussions in the Synod-Speech of Episcopius-Reproof by the President-A crafty design of the Calvinists-Calvinists wish to avoid the discussion of " Reprobation"-Violence of Gomarus-Foreign divines unfairly made use of in the dismissal of Arminians-The Arminian opinions condemned-English divines form a College-The way of making canons in the Synod-The Arminians banished-Decisions at Dort in no way affect the English Church-Bishop Carlton protests against the Presbyterian platform-Rewards of the English Deputies.

FTER the death of Arminius at Leyden, the combat was carried on for some time between his disciples and the partisans of Gomar, with varying success. The demands of the Arminians were moderate: they required no more than a bare toleration of their religious creed; and the great names of Barneveldt and Grotius lent a sanction and weight to their opinions. The points in question had not been determined by the Belgic Confession of Faith, so that it was clear each individual had a right to judge

[graphic]

1618.

for himself; more than this, there was no public Chap. VII. confession of faith of any of the reformed churches which enunciated Calvin's views on Predestination

*

and election. Evidently therefore the Arminians were entitled to expect moderation and Christian forbearance from their opponents. Maurice, Prince of Orange, first favoured them. A conference was held at the Hague in 1611, another at Delft in 1613, and a pacific edict was issued from the States of Holland to exhort both parties to charity and mutual forbearance. The Calvinists now became seriously alarmed. They attacked and censured the unworthy toleration of their magistrates, and laboured incessantly to crush the Arminians. At this time the controversy between the two was confined to the doctrines relating to predestination and grace. The famous five points of the Arminians, containing their views on these subjects, were—

Arminians.

(1.) That God from all eternity determined to The five bestow salvation on those whom he foresaw would points of the persevere unto the end in their faith in Christ Jesus; and to inflict everlasting punishment on those who should continue in their unbelief, and resist unto the end His divine succours.

(2.) That Jesus Christ by His death and sufferings made an atonement for the sins of all mankind. in general, and of every individual in particular; that, however, none but those who believe in Him can be partakers of their divine benefit.

(3.) That true faith cannot proceed from the exercise of our natural faculties and powers, nor Mosheim, Cent. XVII., c. ii., 10.

Chap. VII. from the force and operation of free will; since

1618.

man in consequence of his natural corruption is incapable of thinking or doing any good thing; and that therefore it is necessary to his conversion and salvation, that he be regenerated and renewed by the operation of the Holy Ghost, which is the gift of God through Jesus Christ.

(4.) That this divine grace or energy of the Holy Ghost which heals the disorders of a corrupt nature, begins, advances, and brings to perfection everything that can be called good in man, and that consequently all good works, without exception, are to be attributed to God alone, and the operation of His grace; that nevertheless this grace does not force a man to act against his inclination, but may be resisted and rendered ineffectual by the perverse will of the impenitent sinner.

(5.) That they who are united to Christ by faith are thereby furnished with abundant strength, and with succours sufficient to enable them to triumph over the seductions of Satan, and the allurements of sin and temptation; but that the question whether such may fall from their faith, and forfeit finally this state of grace, has not yet been resolved with sufficient perspicuity, and must therefore be yet more carefully examined by an attentive study of what the Holy Scriptures have declared on this important point.*

Such were the famous five points of Arminius,

* Mosheim, Cent. XVII., chap. iii., § 4. With regard to the last article, the Arminians afterwards adopted the positive sentiment that "A man may fall from a state of grace."

« PreviousContinue »