Arminianism. The doctrine of Arminius, a famous minister from Amsterdam and later Professor of Theology at the Academy of Leiden, and of the Arminians, his followers. See Arminians. What mainly distinguishes the Arminians from the other Reformed is the conviction that Calvin, Beze, [1] Zanchius, [2] and others that were regarded as the pillars of Calvinism, had established dogmas that were too severe regarding free will, predestination, justification, perseverance, and grace; they [3] took more moderate positions on all these points, and in some respects even approached those of the Roman Church. Gomar, [4] a Professor of Theology in the Academy of Groningen and a rigid Calvinist, opposed the doctrine of Arminius. After many disputes that began in 1609 and that threatened the United Provinces with civil war, the matter was discussed and decided in favor of the Gomarists by the synod of Dordrecht, [5] held in 1618 and 1619, which was composed of, besides the Theologians of Holland, deputies of all the Reformed Churches, except those of Francis, who were prevented from participating for political reasons. It is through the exposition of Arminianism made at this synod that we can best judge it. [6] The dispute between the two parties was reduced to five main points: the first regarded predestination; the second, the universality of redemption; the third and the fourth, which were always treated together, concerned the corruption of man and conversion; the fifth was perseverance.

On the subject of predestination, the Arminians said that “it was not necessary to recognize in God any absolute decree by which he had resolved to give Jesus Christ to the elect alone, nor to give to them alone, through a true calling, faith, justification, perseverance and glory; but that he had offered Jesus Christ as the common redeemer to all and resolved by this decree to justify and save all those who believed in him and at the same time to give them all the means necessary to be saved; that no one should perish for not having these means, but for having abused them; that the absolute and precise election of individuals was made in view of their faith and their future perseverance, and that there was only a conditional election; and that reprobation was done in the same way: for unfaithfulness and for persevering in a great evil.” This was directly opposed to Calvin's system, which decrees absolute and positive predestination for a few, and reprobation for all others, beyond any prediction of their future merits or demerits. See Predestination, Decree, Merit, Demerit, Rejection, Prediction, etc. Regarding the universality of redemption, the Arminians taught, “that the price paid by the Son of God was not only sufficient for all but now offered for all, and for every man; that none were excluded from the fruit of redemption by an absolute decree, nor other than through his own fault”; a doctrine quite different from that of Calvin and the Gomarists, who posited as incontestable dogma that Jesus Christ died solely for the predestined, and in no way for the reprobate. On the third and fourth points, after having said that grace is necessary to all good, not only to complete it, but to begin it, they added that grace was not irresistible; that is to say, that one can resist it; and they maintain that “even though grace was given unequally, God gave it or gave a sufficient amount to all those to whom the Gospel was announced, even to those who did not convert; and offered it with a sincere and serious desire to save them all, without being two faced, pretending to want to save, and yet not wanting to, and secretly pushing men towards the sins he openly forbade,” two monstrous opinions introduced by the first reformers. Regarding the fifth, that is to say, perseverance, they decreed “that God gave to the truly faithful, regenerated by his grace, means to remain in this state; [7] that they could lose the true justifying faith and fall into sins incompatible with justification, even into atrocious crimes; to persevere in sin, even to die in sin, or to lift themselves up through repentance, without grace compelling them to do either;” [8] and through this meaning they destroyed the rigid Calvinist doctrine that man, once justified, could no longer lose grace, either totally or finally; that is to say, not entirely for a certain time or forever. Acta et Documenta Synodi Nationalis Dordrechtanae , Sessiones 31 et 34. [9] Bossuet, Histoire des variations des églises protestantes, livre 14, note 23, 24, 25, 26, et 27. [10] See Gomarists.

Notes

1. Theodore Beza (1519-1605) was a French theologian and follower of Calvin.

2. Girolamo Zanchi (1516-1519) was an Italian Protestant reformer.

3. The Arminians.

4. François Gomaer (1563-1641) was a Dutch theologian.

5. Also commonly referred to as the Synod of Dort.

6. That is, judge Arminianism itself.

7. That is, in a state of grace

8. The source of the passage is Bossuet,  Histoire des variations des églises protestantes , vol. 2, book 14, section 27 (p. 425 in the 1688 edition). In transcribing the passage, however, the  Encyclopédie  has left out a word. « s’en relever par la pénitence » should read: « s’en relever aussi par la pénitence ». That is, they can either die in sin, or lift themselves out of it, without God forcing them to do either one. [This entire footnote was contributed by Dr. Thomas Luckett].

9. A modern version has been published: Acta et Documenta Synodi Nationalis Dordrechtanae (1618–1619), Donald Sinnema, Christian Moser, Herman Selderhuis (eds.) Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, Göttingen (2014).

10. The abbreviation in French is “not.” which I have translated as “note.” In fact, these numbers refer to sections in the book. The hyperlink goes to section 23 (image 430); the full quotations through section 27 go to image 434.