The following are excerpts from:
Synopsis of a Purer Theology, ed. William Den Boer and Remer A. Faber, 2 vols.
(trans. Riemer A. Faber; Davenant Press, 2024)
It is based on disputations held between 1620-1625 by four Reformed
Protestant professors at Leiden University, shortly after the Synod of Dort
(1618-1619).
Disputation 7:
41. Yet although ‘Elohim
occasionally is expressed for only one person of the Trinity (as in Ps 45:7),
nevertheless the title does not function exclusively, but inclusively through a
synecdochical expression, whereby the other persons are included within the
name of one person by metonymy—sometimes on account of the unity of essence
that is common to the three persons, sometimes on account of the mutual interexistencse
of the persons. (1:75)
Disputation 8:
18. From the
fundamental observations that were put forth previously it is clear whether or
not the Son of God is rightly called “God of himself.” Certain Jesuits, in line
with that scurrilous Génébrard, maliciously accused Calvin of holding to the
latter view, even though Bellarmine pleased in his defense. For we assert that,
if one considers his deity or essence as absolute, the Son of God rightly is
and is called autotheos [God of himself] as some of the church-fathers also
called him in this regard. Yet, if you consider the same essence as existence
in the Son under a certain and distinct mode of subsistence, then He is God of
God, light of light, as defined in the Nicene Creed. (1:82)
Disputation 15:
19. Since this miraculous
mode of conception is unique to Christ and applies to no-one besides him, we
exempt no other person from the stain of original sin, nor even the chosen
blessed virgin, bearer of God, whom we (with Epiphanius) “do not consider to
have been generated outside of human nature, but, like all people, from the
seed of a man and the womb of a woman” (Epiphanius, Collyridian Heresy,
79). Accordingly, she was subject to the law that is common to all, as she was
in need of Christ the Redeemer, whom she acknowledged as her Savior (Luke 1:47).
She was subject to the hardships of the body and ultimately death, and she is
to be found in the company of all who have sinned in Adam, who are all mortal,
for all of whom Christ died (Rom 5:12; 2 Cor 5:15). (1:148)
Disputation 28:
34. And this
intercession, or appeal, by Christ consists of these three features: 1) that Christ
brought his atoning sacrifice into the very sanctuary of heaven to sanctify it
for us, and there to appear before the face of God on our behalf (Heb.
9:23-24). 2) that by his will and burning desire, just as he had done earlier
while on earth (John 17:11, 15, 24), etc.) so also in heaven with the Father he
asks earnestly that the power and efficacy of his death be applied to us for
our salvation, as can be seen from Zech 1:12 and John 14:16 as well as Acts
2:33. Finally, 3) that by what he has merited and his own desire, he causes the
prayers that we pour out in his name to be pleasing and acceptable to God the
Father (John 14:6 and 13, likewise 1 John 2:1, 2). (1:325)
38. However, though
we are accused of it, we do not deny the fact that saints are able to fall from
time to time, and through the weakness of their flesh they can fall seriously
into trivial and even very grievous sins. Or, we state positively that in an
absolute sense it is impossible for saints to lose their faith; but it is
possible in a limited way, only as much as he is allowed within the gracious
promises of Christ, the faithful safekeeping of the Holy Spirit, and God’s unchangeable
decree concerning their salvation. For we openly admit that, considering Satan’s
powers and the infirmities of believers, if they should be left to themselves
then they could fall away and perish at any moment. But we deny that believers
also lose their faith, or fall away from grace to the point that they actually
become unbelievers and enemies of God, like sinners who have not been born
again. For God does not treat them strictly according to the Law, even though
they incur his fatherly displeasure, and they bring upon themselves a liability
to damnation and lose their present aptitude for entering the kingdom of heaven
if they are considered only in and of themselves. And we grant that in that interval,
before the act of faith and repentance is renewed, such a sinner, although he
is elect, does go about deserving damnation, even though by God’s firm decree
in Christ he will be declared innocent. But after, by God’s decree and grace,
he will have returned to the right way, through a renewed, second act of faith and
obedience—the first act of which is the seed of regeneration--, he is preserved
fully restored with those fundamental gifts without which the spiritual life
does not exist. And this renewal comes not by the decision or will of believers
but by the special love of God and the divine operation and the intercession
and safekeeping of Christ. (1:368)
Disputation 43:
No sacraments are absolutely necessary for salvation.
(2:560)
No unbelieving person becomes a partaker of the thing
that is signified in the sacrament. (2:560)
Disputation 44:
14. Moreover, all members of the orthodox church must in
every way strive to seek baptism for themselves or for their children from none
other than the pastors of the orthodox church, lest they be seen to have a part
in the false teaching and unjust works of darkness. Nevertheless, if some
people have been baptized already by false teachers who employ the form for
baptism directly upside down, we state that orthodox shepherds should not
perform their baptism all over again. But there is a different reason for
others who do deny those teachings directly or who do change the form for
baptism, as it was judged concerning the Paulinists at the Synod of Nicaea. For
in this case the true baptism is not repeated, but a false baptism which is no
baptism—conferred by a church which is no church—replaces the true and genuine
one in the church of Christ. (2:565)
43. Moreover, when we say “men” we mean living men, not
deceased ones, as opposed to the Corinthians who used to baptize even the dead,
making abuse of the apostle’s passage: “otherwise what would those people do
who are baptized on behalf of the dead?” (1 Cor 15:29). But it is something
quite different to be baptized on behalf of the dead than to baptize the dead.
For they can be said to be baptized on behalf of the dead who are being
baptized unto the mortification of the flesh, or even unto the fate of being
subjected to the slandering and persecutions of this world and carry about in
their bodies the nekrōsis, that is, the dying of the Lord Jesus, as the
apostle says in 2 Cor 4:10. (2:572-73)
Disputation 46:
46. It is to no avail also that Bellarmine based the
sacrifice of Christ in the sacrament of the Eucharist on the slaying of the
Paschal lamb in 1 Cor 5:7, and also on the prophecy of Mal 1:11 about the minhah,
or pure offering, that is to be offered to God throughout the world under the
new covenant. Malachi could not have meant hereby that the expiatory offering
of the mass corresponds to that of the Jews, since the hypothesis of Bellarmine
and the other Romanists, the mass is a bloodless offering. But all the
expiatory offerings under the Old Testament were bloody ones, not to mention
the fact that the Jewish offerings were expiatory only in a typical and
denotative sense, while in the blasphemous meaning of the papal teachers and
mass is truly, properly expiatory. Therefore, it remains that if by the
teaching of holy Scripture there is but one unique sacrifice of the cross (in
the proper sense of the word) that was prefigured by the Jewish expiatory
sacrifices, it must be that what Malachi foretold about the spiritual and
eucharistic worship of God that would be established among the nations by the
preaching of the Gospel should be taken in a metaphorical sense. (2:624)
Disputation 48:
27. And at this point the question arises whether it is permitted,
if the number of those who sin in doctrine or in manner of life is a large one,
to make use of excluding them from the sacraments, or of excommunicating them.
The cause of the doubt here is that, although this authority was given to build
up, and not to break down, from this sort of separation one should expect the
breaking down rather than the upbuilding of the church. And therefore,
Augustine maintained that this spiritual sword should not be drawn against the
drunkards in Africa because of the large number of those who sinned.
28. We, however, answer this question by posing a distinction:
if a larger part of the church is led astray into a fundamental error or heresy
and cannot be recalled to the way despite every attempt at remedy, the
following remedy still remains for the pious pastors who preside over the sounder
part, namely that they may, together with those who are right-minded, separate themselves
from the community of those who are heterodox. And although they do not have
the power to use this discipline against them by condemning them openly because
of the strength of those who mislead, yet at least by acting openly they can
secede from them and condemn the heresy. In this manner Christ gives the
warning in Matt 7:15, “Beware the false prophets,” and in John 10:5, “Christ’s
sheep do not know the voice of a stranger and therefore they flee from him.” Similarly,
Rom 16:17: “I warn you, brothers, that you watch carefully those who cause
discord or scandals contrary to the doctrine which you have learned, and stay
away from them.” And in the same manner in the old church the orthodox seceded
from the Arians, and our ancestors and forefathers in previous ages seceded
from the superstition and synagogue of the Antichrist.
29. But if a wicked lifestyle infects a large part of the
flock, in the way that the prophets everywhere lament over the Israelite
church, then here again a distinction must be made. For their this great number
defends its wicked manner of life by means of doctrine, or if it does not make
a defense by means of doctrine, then at least it pursues that doctrine by its
evil actions. And if it does defend its wicked manner of life by means of doctrine, as formerly the Nicolaitans and that Jezebel did, who by means of
prophecy seduced Christ’s servants to prostitution, then concerning them we
should decide in the same way whereby we previously taught that heretics out to
be treated, i.e., either by means of a public sentencing of excommunication,
or, if because of their great number and strength this cannot be done, to secede
from them. [That is what] Christ commanded the angel of the church at Thyatira
and Ephesus concerning the Nicolaitans and that Jezebel (Rev 2:6 and 20), on
the basis of Christ’s declaration in Matt 5:19: “Whoever breaks one of the
least of these commandments, and teaches other man so, will be called least in
the kingdom of heaven.” (2:664-65)
To Support this Blog: