The anatomy of Arminianisme: or The opening of the controuersies lately handled in the Low-Countryes, concerning the doctrine of prouidence, of predestination, of the death of Christ, of nature and grace. By Peter Moulin, pastor of the church at Paris. Carefully translated out of the originall Latine copy

About this Item

The anatomy of Arminianisme: or The opening of the controuersies lately handled in the Low-Countryes, concerning the doctrine of prouidence, of predestination, of the death of Christ, of nature and grace. By Peter Moulin, pastor of the church at Paris. Carefully translated out of the originall Latine copy
Du Moulin, Pierre, 1568-1658.
London :: Printed by T[homas] S[nodham] for Nathaniel Newbery, and are to be sold at the signe of the Starre vnder Saint Peters Church in Cornehill, and in Popes head Alley,

To the extent possible under law, the Text Creation Partnership has waived all copyright and related or neighboring rights to this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above, according to the terms of the CC0 1.0 Public Domain Dedication ( This waiver does not extend to any page images or other supplementary files associated with this work, which may be protected by copyright or other license restrictions. Please go to for more information.

Subject terms
Synod of Dort (1618-1619) -- Early works to 1800.
Arminianism -- Early works to 1800.
Cite this Item
"The anatomy of Arminianisme: or The opening of the controuersies lately handled in the Low-Countryes, concerning the doctrine of prouidence, of predestination, of the death of Christ, of nature and grace. By Peter Moulin, pastor of the church at Paris. Carefully translated out of the originall Latine copy." In the digital collection Early English Books Online 2. University of Michigan Library Digital Collections. Accessed May 23, 2024.



Whether Christ be the cause and foundation of Election.

I. WE say that no man is saued but by and for Christ, and that Christ is the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and price of our redemption, the foun∣dation and meritorious cause of our sal∣uation: But we doe not say that he is the cause of election, or the cause why of two considered in the corrupted masse, one is preferred before another. There are not wanting examples of most wicked men to one whereof (God so dispensing) the Gospell hath beene preached, whence it came to passe that he was conuerted and did beleeue, but to the other the Gos∣pell hath not beene preached: The Scripture doth not say that the death of Christ is the cause of this, but doth fetch the cause from the good pleasure of God, who hath mercy on whom he will: For the loue of the father doth alwaies goe before the media∣tion of the sonne, seeing that the loue of the father

Page 200

to the world, was the cause why he sent his sonne.

Yea truely, seeing Christ himselfe, as he is man, is elected, and the head of the elect, hee cannot be the foundation and cause of election: For as hee is the head of men, as he is a man; so is he the head of them that are predestinated, as he is a man predestinated to so great honour, which came to him by the meere grace of God.

II. Wherefore the Apostle calleth Christ 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the price of our redemption, and, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the pro∣pitiation, Coloss. 1. Rom. 3. but he doth not say that he is the cause why some men should be elected ra∣ther then others.

III. Reason it selfe doth consent. For as the recouery of the sicke-man doth in the intention al∣waies goe before the vsing of the Phisitian; so it must needes be, that in the minde of God, the thought of sauing men was (not in time, but in order) before the thought of sending the Sauiour.

IV. Adde to these, that the mediation and re∣demption of Christ, is an action whereby the iustice of God is satisfied, which is not signified by the word Election; for it is one thing to be a mediator, and a∣nother thing to be the cause of Election, or of the preferring of one before another in the secret coun∣sell of God: Whence it is, that Christ is the meritori∣ous cause of our saluation, but not of our election; which is as much as if I should say, that Christ is the foundation and cause of the execution of the de∣cree of Election, but not the cause of Election it selfe.

V. It is of no small moment that Christ, Iohn 15.13.

Page 201

saith, That he layeth downe his life for his friends: & chap. 10. v. 11. he calleth himselfe the good shepheard, that layeth downe his life for his sheepe: And if Christ be dead for his friends, and for his sheepe, it must needs be, that when he died for them, he did consider them as being already friends and sheepe, although many of them were not then called, as Christ himselfe doth testifie, who in the sixteenth verse of the same chap∣ter doth call those also his sheepe, who were not yet conuerted. And if Christ dying for vs, considered vs as his friends and sheepe, it is plaine, that before the death of Christ, there was already destinction made betweene his friends and enemies, betweene the sheep and goates, and therefore that the decree of Election was in order, before the death of Christ, and that the opinion of Arminius, is to be hissed out, as an opini∣on subuerting the Gospell, whereby hee thinkes that the election had not place when Christ died. Certain∣ly he that died for his sheepe, died for the elect, and not for them who were to be elected after hee was dead.

By these things it is plaine, that by those friends and sheepe for which Christ died, are not vnderstood those, onely, who loue God and follow Christ, but all those whom God loueth, and whose saluation hee decreed: for whom Christ died when they did not yet loue God, and when they were enemies to him. And therefore they are called enemies, Rom. 5.10. because they did not loue God, but yet euen then they were highly loued by God, and were appointged to salua∣tion in Christ: For in a diuers respect they were both friends and enemies, sheepe and goates: Friends

Page 202

because God loued them, enemies because they did not yet loue God.

VI. Neither is iniurie done to Christ, if the loue of the Father, and his good pleasure be said to goe in order before the decree of sending his sonne, seeing Christ himselfe doth witnesse it Iohn, 3.16. God so lo∣ued the world, that he gaue his onely begotten sonne, &c. where the loue of the father is manifestly set before the sending of the sonne, which is so to be vnderstood, as that the sonne is not excluded from the act of ele∣ction it selfe; seeing that he also is one God with the father, but this was done by him, not as hee is media∣tor, but as he is God.

VII. Neither is any iniury done to Christ, if the will of the father concerning the sauing of men, be said to goe before the redemption of Christ, seeing that this redemption is also after sinne: for the dis∣ease is before the medicine.

VIII. Nor is any thing detracted from the greatnesse of the price of our redemption, if his will who offered the price, be said to goe before it.

IX. The very definition of the decree of election, doth proue this thing; for election is the decree of sa∣uing certaine men by Christ, in which definition, Christ is laid downe, not as the cause of election, but as the meanes of the execution of it, and as the meri∣torious cause of saluation.

X. It is maruailous, how much the Arminians insult here: For because wee make the loue of God to goe (not in time, but in order) before the mediati∣on of the sonne, they so deale with vs, as if we taught,

Page 203

that God loued vs without Christ, and as being con∣sidered without faith in Christ, which doth differ as much from our opinion, as that which doth differ most. Be it farre from vs, that wee should say, that God would euer bestow saluation vpon vs, but that together and in the same moment he considered vs in Christ, as being to be saued by him: Nor was there a∣ny cause why we for that thing should be accused of Sicianisme; we haue nothing to doe with that Alastor and hellish monster, which doth altogether ouer∣throw the benefit of Christ: But it is one thing to say that the loue of the father doth, in order, goe before the mediation of the sonne; and another thing to say that God loueth vs without the sonne. It is one thing to dispose the thoughts of God in order, and another thing to separate them, and pull them asunder. Ar∣minius who in the beginning of his booke against Per∣kins, calleth himselfe a wirty fellow, doh craftily, yea wickedly catch at and hunt after points of priority in order, to pull asunder those things which cannot be seperated. Hee doth therefore as much as if one should say, that the thought of creating man, was first in order, in God, before the thought of ador∣ning him with holinesse and righteousnes, and would thence inferrre that God would first create man not iust, or first to haue considered him as not holy. If a∣ny man saith that in the decree of God, the thought of ouerthrowing of the world, was before the thought of ouerthrowing it by fire, hee doth not therefore say, that God first thought of ouer∣throwing it without fire. All the purposes of God are eternall, although there be a certaine order

Page 204

and dependency betweene them.

XI. That place of Saint Iohn, Chap. 3. vexeth Arminius: God so loued the world, that hee gaue his onely begotten sonne, &c. where the loue of God is laide downe, as the cause by which it came to passe, that he gaue the sonne: He doth therefore endeauour to de∣lude so direct a place by a witlesse cauell, That loue (saith he) is not that by which he will giue eternall life; which appeareth by the very words of Iohn, who doth ioyne faith betweene this loue and eternall life. The Rea∣der therefore shall obserue, that Arminius himselfe doth acknowledge, that there is a kinde of loue of God towards men, which doth goe before his decree of sending his sonne. But hee saith that God by that loue is not willing to giue eternall life. What then will hee doe by it? For this thing hee ought to shew. Will God by that loue, leaue men in death? Is it pos∣sible that God should loue the creature, created by him to life, but he must needes by the same loue, will that it should liue? I am ashamed of so weake a sub∣tilty. Yea truely, in that he sent his sonne, by that loue it is sufficiently manifest, that by that loue he was willing man should be restored to life: But (saith he) faith commeth betweene that loue and eternall life: What then? Cannot I will the recouery of him that is sicke, although the Phisition come betweene my will and his recouery. Surely he maketh those things opposite and contrary, which are appolite, and ioy∣ned together. But I doe not see how he rather fauou∣reth Socinus, who saith that Christ is not the cause of Election, then he that saith that Christ is not the cause of the loue whereby God would send Christ

Page 205

into the world, and prouide for vs a redeemer: Or why there should be a greater offence in making the redemption of Christ to be the medium, and meane betweene the loue of God, by which hee elected vs, and betweene our saluation, then if it be made the medium, a meane betweene the loue of God, by which he will giue Christ for vs, and betweene our saluati∣on: For on both sides redemption is made the meanes, and not the first cause. Let vs not therefore enuy God the father this praise, that his good plea∣sure thould be made the fountaine and first originall of our Election.

XII. Obserue moreouer that that Election whereof Arminius will haue Christ to be the founda∣tion, is that generall election, whereby all men are conditionally elected, which seeing wee haue largely consuted, Chap. 18. whatsoeuer the Arminians doe bring to proue that Christ is the foundation of ele∣ction, doth vanish away. Surely there was no cause why they should so earnestly labour to proue that Christ was the foundation of that election, by which Pharaoh and Iudas were elected: Of which imagina∣ry election, he shall haue the true character and por∣traiture, who hath brought in God speaking thus: I decreed to send my sonne to saue all men who shall beleeue, but who and how many they shall be, I haue not determined; onely I will giue to all men sufficient power to beleeue, but he shall belecue who will himselfe.

XIII. Arminius doth defend himselfe against so euident a truth, by one little word of the Apostle, Ephes. 1.4. He hath elected vs in Christ: But it is one thing to be elected in Christ, and another thing to be

Page 206

elected for Christ, so that Christ should be the cause why one is elected rather then another. The mea∣ning of the Apostle is cleere: To elect, is nothing else then to appoint to saluation. Therfore to elect in Christ, is to appoint to saluation, to be obtained in or by Christ: For whosoeuer God hath decreed to saue he hath giuen them to Christ, and hath considered them as ioyned to Christ. Hee seeketh a knot in a bulrush, who by farre fetched interpretations would darken that which is perspicuous and plaine.

XIV. For a foundation of this their opinion, Arminius, and after him Arnoldus, doth lay this pro∣position: That Predestination is the foundation of Chri∣stianity. This demand he will haue to be granted him, for he doth not proue it; no otherwise then if one in the beginning of a disputation, would obtaine by suite, and would desire that it might be granted him, that a circle hath corners. This is a great demand, and that which I thinke no man would grant him, who knoweth what predestination is, and what is the foun∣dation of Christian Religion. The foundation, of Christian Religion is, to acknowledge that Christ, the onely sonne of God, is sent from the fa∣ther, that whosoeuer beleeueth in him might not pe∣rish but haue euerlasting life. It must needes be that the foundation of Christianity be the rule of faith, on which the faith of Christians must rest; but prede∣stination is not the rule of faith, but the action of God, whereby bee determined to saue certaine men by Christ. Farre be it from vs that wee should say, that the secret decree, by which seuerall men, as Peter or Charles, &c. are elected, is the foundation of Chri∣stianity.

Page 207

Whosoeuer would from thence beginne to teach Religion, and would beginne the elements of Christian faith at this decree of Predestination, hee should eyther, by the darkenesse cast before him, tremble at the very entrance, or should fall downe right, as being taken with giddinesse. Whatsoeuer things therfore Arnoldus doth build on so false a pro∣position, doe of themselues fall to the ground, so that we neede not ouerthrow those things, which of them∣selues will fall downe. Further also he doth impugne and striue against that thing which is not beleeued by vs, to wit, that we are loued by God without Christ; onely the ambiguity wherewith he would deceiue the Reader, is to be noted, when he saith, Page 171. That Christ is the foundation of our receining into grace, and in∣to the loue of God. If by receiuing into grace and loue, he vnderstand the reconciliation by his satisfaction performed for vs; I confesse that Christ is the foun∣dation of that receiuing into grace, and of that loue: But if by receiuing into grace and loue, be vnderstood that loue of the father, by which hee would send his sonne to saue vs (which is the greatest loue of all, and the fountaine of all good) certainely Arminius himselfe would not haue Christ to be the foundation of that loue; and yet by that very same loue, God chose from eternity whom he would.

XV. I doe not search into that which Armi∣nius boldly and rashly hath dared to say, that God could not saue vs otherwise then by Christ, nor had he any other meanes for the saluation of man. God could not (saith he) will eternall life to any one without the respect of a mediator: And the Arminian conferrers

Page 208

at the Hage; It is impossible for God to decree saluation to sinners, but that he must before haue decreed the satisfacti∣on of his iustice: Now they speake of the satisfaction of Christ. Surely they doe boldly and rashly con∣taine the wisedome of God within limits, and if this thing were true, yet it were not for man to speake such things: It is sufficient that God hath followed the most conuenient way, and then which none is better. By the way it is to be obserued, that this opi∣nion hath not pleased Vorstius. He, Page 33. disput. de Deo, doth affirme, That it was lawfull for God to relent or yeelde somewhat of his owne right, no lesse then to re∣taine or pursue that which is his right. And Page 399. It is false to say, that no sinne could be let passe vnpunished by the iustice of God.

XVII. The conferrers at the Hage doe thus argue: If the decree of Christ the Sauiour, be after the de∣cree of the election of some particular persons to saluation, then God decreed the saluation of some particular persons, in order before he decreed the satisfaction of his iustice.

Here is a manisold deceite: For the decree of sauing certaine men, and the decree of sending Christ to saue them, they make two decrees, when it is but one; for election is the decree of sauing certaine men in Christ. It is not one decree by which God hath appointed man to life, and another, by which he hath appointed him to breathing. There is another fraud in that they compare the saluation of seuerall men with the satisfaction of Gods iustice, when the com∣parison was to be made, of the manifestation of the goodnesse of God, by which hee doth saue seuerall men, with the satisfaction of his iustice. It is not in∣conuenient

Page 209

if God be said first to haue decreed the manifestation of his goodnesse, before the satisfaction of his iustice. Adde to these that they doe craftily vse these words, the election of some particular persons, to extenuation and contempt; for these some particular persons, are the Church of the Elect, whose saluation is of so great account with God, that for the saluati∣on thereof, he would satisfie his owne iustice: Whence it followeth, that God, that he might declare his good∣nesse, did first intend their saluation, before the satis∣faction of his iustice.

Do you have questions about this content? Need to report a problem? Please contact us.