This chapter of the book presents itself as somewhat obscure at first glance but comes together at the end with two characters and a position you are likely to have some familiarity with.
The chapter is
divided into eight subheadings, Roots of the Controversy, Moyse
Amyraut, Other Amyraldians, The Anti-Amyraldians, The Issues,
The Response, Further History, and Conclusions.
Amyraldism is a subgroup of Reformed theology that has variously been called hypothetical universalism, Low Calvinism, four-point Calvinism, Moderate Calvinism, or more precisely, Amyraldism. In this chapter, the author concentrates on the 17th-century controversy surrounding Moyse Amyraut (1596–1664) [pictured].
Roots of the Controversy. Reference is made to the French Calvinists known as Huguenots and their response to the Wars of Religion in France between the Catholics and the Protestants. A Scotsman named John Cameron (1579–1625) taught for a short time at the Theological Academy at Saumur, where he promoted what may be termed “Low Calvinism,” though he was no fan of Arminianism.
Moyse Amyraut. This man, not known to me before reading this book, was a prolific author, influencing the French Protestants through more than 100 publications, including a six-volume Christian Ethics (over 4,600 pages). His most controversial work was A Brief Treatise on Predestination. Displeased with the theological drift taking place in his circle, he wanted a return to Calvin’s more biblically-balanced approach. He was also concerned about the drift of Lutheranism to Arminianism and Semi-Pelagianism.
Other Amyraldians. The first paragraph deals with other French-speaking scholars who agreed with him. In the second paragraph, the author addresses developments in Britain at the same time. The original English Reformers were moderate and not given to extremes, but some Puritans became too scholastic and supralapsarian. Among those who rejected “High Calvinism” in the 17th century in Britain included James Ussher (of Ussher’s Chronology fame), and Richard Baxter [pictured] (the author of The Reformed Pastor, the best pastoral theology ever written according to C. H. Spurgeon). To this day, there is a debate whether British Low Calvinism was Amyraldian or mainstream Moderate Calvinism.
The Anti-Amyraldians. Opposition arose in France, Switzerland, and England, where the issues were debated at the Westminster Assembly. However, most of the controversy was between the French and the Swiss, centered around the academies in Saumur and Geneva.
The Issues. This portion of the chapter contains four paragraphs. The controversy dealt with in the first paragraph is original sin. The second paragraph deals with hypothetical universalism. The third paragraph deals with Amyraut’s system of salvation through three covenants. The fourth paragraph treats his belief that Christ died equally for all men to provide the universal aspect of the covenant of grace. He viewed the atonement as unlimited, but its application was limited to the elect. This was an early stage of the “Calvin versus Calvinism” debate.
The Response. Those opposed to his view responded by teaching the federal theory of the transmission of original sin, denying that any of the divine decrees were conditional, and recoiling at the idea of the hypothetical salvation of heathens who never heard the gospel.
Further History. Amyraut appeared before several French synods to answer charges against him, though he was never condemned. With the situation deteriorating, many Huguenots fled France for religious freedom in England, Holland, and America.
Conclusions. The issues are still debated to this day. Laxness in terminology has resulted in this meaning “four point Calvinism,” in which a person rejects limited atonement but does not necessarily accept the other four points. The author mentions the late Roger Nicole, a Swiss Baptist theologian who spent most of his adult life in the USA, as the foremost authority on the subject [pictured].
“In the 20th century, several leading American dispensationalist theologians such as Lewis Sperry Chafer [pictured] have advocated a theology akin to Amyraldism.
Others such as Norman Geisler [pictured] have defended what they consider moderate Calvinism but in reality is more similar to Arminianism.”
