Calvinists condemning Arminians/Remonstrants teaching heresy re. Universal Atonement:
That the doctrine of the universal extent
of the atonement of Christ was taught by some of the reformers long before the
time of Arminius, will be seen by the two following extracts from Bullinger,
whose writings, according to Le Vassor, contributed so much to the spread of
the Reformation in Holland. They are taken from the French edition of his
works, the preface of which is dated 1549. We shall retain the orthography of
the text:--“Jesus Christ nous ait oste par sa mort, la couple de nos pechez et
qi’il áit este fait satisfaction pour tout le monde,” p. 32. “Le Fils de Dieu,
nostre seigneur Jesus, a abondanment satisfait, pour la couple le monde,” p.
33. By the moderate Calvinists of the present day the doctrine of Jesus Christ
having tasted death for every men is very generally admitted; yet such admission
in the days of Arminius and Episcopius, would have subjected them to the charge
of Socinianism; not, perhaps, for asserting this doctrine itself, but under the
pretence of their holding others which they were unwilling to acknowledge; for
in this disingenuous manner did the Dutch divines of the Geneva school constantly
attempt to render the advocates of universal redemption suspected of
Socinianism. Should it be said that they had good reasons for this, on the
ground of the system of Arminius tending to it, as was evident from several of
those who afterward bore his name becoming Socinians; yet it should be
recollected that, by the same mode of arguing, it might be shown that the opinions
of Calvin also tended to Socinianism, seeing that the Churches of Geneva, which
had formerly received this doctrine, had, still of late, universally embraced
the errors of Socinius. In cases of this kind we ought rather to adopt the sentiments
of a modern writer on ecclesiastical history, who says, “He is not to be made answerable
for all the sentiments adopted by those who, in after ages, become his professed
followers.”—Sabine’s History of the Christian Church, p. 224. (Frederick
Çalder, Memoirs of Simon Episcopius, The Celebrated Pupil of Arminius, and
Subsequently Doctor of Divinity, and Professor of Theology in the University of
Leyden [New York: T. Mason and G. Lane, 1837], 57)
[The Remonstrants] were considered
heterodox on this point by many of their Calvinists opponents, who, for the most
part, adopted the doctrine of the imputation of a twofold righteousness, in
order to our justification, as it was first propounded by Zuinglius. The one
which he called the active righteousness of Christ, he said, was the
effect of his having fulfilled the whole law for us, and therefore our
obedience is perfect and complete in him. The other he designated the passive
of righteousness of Christ, the result of his obedience unto death. By the
latter, he asserted the guilt of sin was taken away, and by the former, we were
entitled to eternal life. This opened the door to Antinomianism, which maintained
“that the personal acts of obedience of Christ to the law being put to the
account of believers, they are therefore reckoned righteous in him for which
reason God sees no sin in them; and they are not bound to confess sin, mourn
for it, or pray that it may be forgiven. They need not fear either their own
sins or the sins of others, since neither can do them any injury.”—Boone’s
Book of Churches and Sects.
For demurring at this, and other
opinions equally strange, connected with this subject, Arminius and his
followers were counted heretical by the Calvinists; hence one o them
expostulated with a Remonstrant, because he hesitated to admit “that a sinner
is justified by that faith that believes that Christ had endured for him, by name,
eternal death and all the punishment of the damned,” a doctrine in relation to
which Dwight says, “If the atonement of Christ consisted in suffering what
those, for whose sins he atoned, deserved to suffer his mediation did not
lessen the evils of the apostasy, and of course there is, in the Divine
kingdom, just as much misery with the mediation of Christ as there would have
been without it; and nothing is gained by this wonderful work but the transfer
of this misery from the guilty to the innocent.” And yet this was the doctrine
of the Belgic divines, and on this they founded the right of acquittal from
punishment of those for whom Christ died; holding those to be Socinians who
hesitated to receive it, inasmuch as they saw that any other interpretation of
the atonement would open the way for the admission of the university of the
death of Christ. This will be seen by quotations from their works.
Maccovius says: “If Christ died for
all, then he was a surety and ransome for all, even for those that perish
everlastingly. And this will brand God with injustice for taking a twofold
punishment for the same offences, when the first satisfaction might have
suffered.”—Mac. Distinct. c. 10, Disp. 18, p. 35
D. Damman, who was scribe to the Synod
of Dort, speaks to the same effect: “It is repugnant to God’s justice that he
should constitute Christ to bear the sins of all men and make full satisfaction
for them, and yet ordain some men to bear their own sins in their own persons,
and so make satisfaction for them themselves; then he should punish one sin
twice, that is to say, both in his Son and in them that perish.”—Consene,
p. 63.
Vogelius says, “If Christ tasted death
for unbelievers, he drank that bitter cup in vain, or else unbelievers must
taste eternal death twice, contrary to God’s justice, to the dignity of Christ’s
death, and to possibility;” and therefore this man says, “The Remonstrants who
believe in the universality of Christ’s death are to be suspected of
Pelagianism, Socinianism, and other filthy heresies.”—Contra Ministros
Campens, pp. 125, 135.—From Dr. Womack, bishop of St. David’s, as quoted
in his Arcana Dogmatum, Anti-Remonstrantium. (Frederick Çalder, Memoirs
of Simon Episcopius, The Celebrated Pupil of Arminius, and Subsequently Doctor
of Divinity, and Professor of Theology in the University of Leyden [New
York: T. Mason and G. Lane, 1837], 69-70)
On
infant damnation and reprobation:
To prove that this horrible doctrine
was espoused by many Calvinist divines of that day, we shall give a few extracts
from their writings, as copied by the Remonstrants and presented to the synod
of the 14th of January, 1619. In this paper, they first give a lengthened statement
of their own sentiments on the subject of predestination, and then proceed to
object to the opinions of those who ranged themselves under the name of Calvin,
many of whom were the writers of these passages, and were to be their judges.
The section containing these quotations may be found in the Acta
Remonstrantium, at page 44, part 2. That the reader may see that we deal
fairly with these passages, we shall present the original in opposite columns
to our translation:--
. . .
The condition of those infants who die
in Christ before that they have been able to perform any act is different, for
they will, as others, either be saved merely as the result of grace, or damned
according to nature as children of wrath.
For, since this promise is not so
general as to comprehend all, therefore I dare not positively say that any, so
dying [without baptism] will obtain eternal salvation. For there are some
children of holy people, who do not belong to those who are predestinated to
eternal life.
There are many infants of pious
parents, who, dying before they have the use of their reason, nevertheless, on
account of original sin, will be damned.
The execution of the decree of God
against reprobate infants is this:--As soon as they are born they are
reprobated to eternal death; being left to themselves when dying, on account of
the guilt of native and original sin.
Many more passages to the same effect
might be selected from this MALIGN THEOLOGY, but we judge the above will
satisfy the reader. (Frederick Çalder, Memoirs of Simon Episcopius, The
Celebrated Pupil of Arminius, and Subsequently Doctor of Divinity, and
Professor of Theology in the University of Leyden [New York: T. Mason and G.
Lane, 1837], 176-77)
Belief
of Remonstrants ("1618 Opinions of the Remonstrants with a Memorial to
James Arminius"):
9. All the children of believers are
sanctified in Christ; so that not one of them perishes who departs out of this
life prior to the use of reason. But no children of believers who depart out of
this life in their infancy, and before they have in their own persons committed
any sin, are on ay account to be reckoned in the number of the reprobate: so as
that neither the sacred laver of baptism is, nor are the prayers of the Church,
by any means capable of profiting them to salvation.
10. No children of believers who have
been baptized in the name of the Father, of the Son, of the Holy Ghost, and
while in the state of infancy, are by an absolute decree numbered among the
reprobate. (Frederick Çalder, Memoirs of Simon Episcopius, The Celebrated
Pupil of Arminius, and Subsequently Doctor of Divinity, and Professor of Theology
in the University of Leyden [New York: T. Mason and G. Lane, 1837], 474)
