The title of the chapter is The Synod of Dort. The subheadings of this chapter are as follows: Jacob Arminius, the Arminians, The Remonstrance, The Anti-Remonstrants, the Synod of Dort, the Canons of Dort, the Aftermath, and Conclusion. I have only a bare familiarity with the material dealt with in this chapter, so for the most part, I will only rehearse the highlights of each chapter subheading.
The 17th century saw the rise of two phenomena in the Dutch
Republic, the tulip (flowers) craze of 1633–37 and the emergence of T U L I P,
referring to Total depravity, Unconditional election, Limited atonement, Irresistible
grace, and Perseverance of the saints.
Jacob Arminius.
The author points out that several men in the Dutch Republic objected to the Augustinian view of grace. He indicates most Anabaptists were like the fifth-century Semi-Pelagians. The leading protester was Jacob Arminius, who studied theology under Beza and taught theology from 1603 until he died in 1609. Though he was initially a Calvinist, doubts arose about the doctrine of total depravity. His view was that the sinner is sick, not dead. Although Arminius denied being a Pelagian and claimed to be Reformed, his theology was remarkably similar to some Semi-Pelagian men.
The Arminians. Notice
the spelling of the term Arminian, which labels a theological position instead
of Armenian, which identifies an ethnic/linguistic identity. Spending three
paragraphs under this subheading, the author mentions several theological
issues related to Arminianism without fleshing out with any precision what
Arminianism entails. Most interesting to me is his remark about the most
well-known Arminian at that time being Hugo Grotius (1583–1645), often credited
with the so-called Governmental Theory of the atonement.
The Remonstrance. The Arminian position is best summarized by a five-point document known
as the Remonstrance, or “The Protest.” Here is the author’s summary:
1. God decreed to save believers
who persevere to the end and to leave unbelievers to go to Hell. This implied
that election is based on foreseen faith.
2. Christ died equally for all
men, but only believers benefit from its efficacy.
3. Fallen man is not able of
himself to do any good without God’s assistance. This implies that God assists
all men, a view developed at length later.
4. God’s saving grace is
resistible.
5. Unless a believer perseveres
to the end, he will not finally be saved, though it is not certain from
Scripture whether all who believe will in fact persevere to the end.
If the author’s summary of Arminianism is accurate, except for the
possibility of losing one’s salvation, most Baptist pastors I have ever known
are essentially Arminian in their theology, though they would vigorously deny
this and prefer to identify as what they term Biblicists.
The Anti-Remonstrants. Two paragraphs develop this subheading, describing
the responses of several notable Calvinists to the Remonstrance.
The Synod of Dort. This was the largest international gathering
of Reformed theologians to date and one of the most prestigious and influential
in history. The Synod met for 154 sessions from November 1618 to May 1619. The primary
purpose of the Synod was to answer the Remonstrance and the Remonstrants.
The Canons of Dort. The Synod produced its decisions in a series
of canons. It is worth remembering that these “five points of Calvinism” were
prepared to answer what may be termed the “five points of Arminianism,” not vice
versa. I suspect the sequences of these two sets of “five points” would surprise
many who wrongly and ignorantly imagine the “five points of Calvinism” were developed
by Calvin himself. The author expands on what is meant by the “five points of
Calvinism” in four paragraphs under this subheading.
The Aftermath. The Remonstrants suffered for their departure from Calvinism, with the
pastors being dismissed from their churches. Grotius and others would be exiled
or imprisoned. After 1625 the Arminians were allowed a measure of liberty.
Later Arminians tended to go much farther than Arminius. A more conservative
and evangelical Arminianism was developed in the 18th century under John
and Charles Wesley in England. Keep in mind that none of these men were
Baptists and had no concept of the separation of church and state.
Conclusion. The debate over the five points of Arminianism versus the five points
of Calvinism continues to this day. The author asserts, “The debate is
basically that of the Semi-Pelagians and Arminians on one side and the
Augustinians and Calvinists on the other. With some justification it could be
said to come down between free will and free grace.”
