his bowels torn out and scattered around the streets, and his corpse dragged by his Aristotelian adversaries, and thrown into the Seine. Philosophy, it would seem, has her bigots, as well as religion; and the dispute, moreover, about quisquis, is highly indicative of the pulse of the times, and worthy of those who believed that nothing remained to be done in philosophy since the days of Aristotle.

When or where Arminius became acquainted with the philosophy of Ramus, does not appear. But a mind so ardent and inquiring as his, could not fail to read every thing which came in his way. That he found difficulty in the philosophy of Aristotle, will not be put to the score of heresy in these times; at least it will not, in this country.— That he could find such difficulty, shows an inquiring, curious mind ; perhaps some proneness to take pleasure in new things. Beza saw, as he thought, this characteristic of mind in him. He accordingly advertised one of Arminius' friends to warn him against it. "It is a thing," said this wise and experienced instructor, "which Satan often makes use of in order to mislead distinguished men. Do not engage.

in vain subtilties. If certain thoughts which are new, suggest themselves to your mind, do not approve them at once, without having thoroughly investigated them, whatever pleasure they may at first afford you. Calvin gave me this advice; I have followed it, and always found it exceedingly good."

Nothing could be more opportune, or more judicious and sound, than this advice. Had Arminius taken it as he should have done, and reduced it to practice, he would have never been the head of a party which is called by his name; and he would have avoided many a scandal and sorrow, and much disturbance to the Church of God.

It is to be deeply regretted, that all the ministers of religion have not put in practice such principles as Calvin and Beza have thus recommended. They do not stand in the way of any real improvement whatever, in the manner of representing or teaching religion; they only stand in the way of hasty and crude speculations being thrown out, before they are in any good measure examined or digested.

Grynaeus himself, pleased as he was with Arminius while at Basle, seems to have entertained views of his temperament like those of Beza. Philip Paraeus, in his life of David Paraeus, avers that Grynaeus Arminium graviter admonuisse, against his ardor and love of novelty.

I am indebted for these particulars to Bayle; for Bertius, the partial friend of Arminius, has wholly omitted them in his account of him. I cannot refrain from adding Bayle's own reflections; not only for their distinguished acuteness, but for their usefulness. "The cautions of

Beza," says he, "are fitted to furnish reflections profitable to many persons, and quite necessary for some readers. Remember the maxim of St. Paul, Knowledge puffeth up; but be on your guard against another talent, which puffs up more still. A man of boundless memory and reading applauds himself for his knowledge, and becomes proud. But one applauds himself still more, and is still more proud, when he thinks himself to have invented a new method of explaining or treating any subject. One is not so apt to consider himself the father of a science which he has learned from books, as he is to regard himself as

the parent of some new explanation or doctrine which he has invented. It is for one's own inventions that a man cherishes the strongest partiality and affection; here he finds the most captivating charms; this is what dazzles him, and makes him lose sight of every thing else. It is a quicksand, of which the young, who are possessed of distinguished talents, cannot be too much admonished, nor too cautious to shun."

These sentiments are not the less true nor the less important, because they come from a man who is known to have been somewhat skeptical on the subject of religion. They are worthy of all approbation and good heed on the part of every man, engaged in the solemn and highly responsible office of teaching the principles of the Gospel. Let us return to Arminius at Geneva. How long he remained here, during his second residence, is not well ascertained; but as he came here in 1583, and went into Italy in 1586-7, it seems probable that his stay was three or more years,

He was attracted to Italy, by the philosophic fame of James Zabarella at Padua. Thither he went, attended by a young Hollander, his constant and friendly companion. After attending a course of lectures here, he travelled through Italy, visited Rome, then returned to Geneva for a short time, and soon after to Holland. While on his travels, he and his companion carried with them a Greek Testament and a Hebrew Psalter, which they did not fail daily to read, in their exercises of devotion. In 1587 Arminius returned to Holland; and, on repairing to Amsterdam, he found that reports had been circulated there greatly to his disadvantage, respecting his favorable views of the Roman Catholic religion. Among other things, it was said that he had kissed the pope's feet; that he was intimate with Jesuits; that he was introduced to Cardinal Bellarmine; and that he had renounced the Protestant religion. "All this was false," says Bertius, "for he never saw the pope, except as one of the crowd who gazed on him as he passed by, nor does the beast admit any except kings and princes to the honor of kissing his feet; of the Jesuits he knew nothing; Bellarmine he never saw; and as to the Protestant religion, he has ever been ready to shed his blood in its defence." "Bertius is wrong," says Bayle, "in averring that the pope admits none to kiss his feet but kings aud princes; private individuals are sometimes admitted to this honor!"

The probability is, that Arminius had been a little profuse of compliments and politeness to the Italians, while he travelled in their country; and it is also probable, that he had ventured to express his admiration of some things which he found in the consecrated land of classical study. This, in the view of some of his fellow Protestants, was "paying homage to the, beast." They began spargere voces ambiguas, at first; these, like Virgil's Fama, soon magnified; every day's journey which they took, added new strength; and by the time they reached Amsterdam, they had assumed the definite shape which has been stated above. It is thus that a little more than ordinary civility toward one's opponents, can be transformed by party zeal, and withal a little of jealousy or envy, into downright heresy.

The reflections of Bayle on this subject are so just and striking, that I cannot forbear to transcribe them. "Among the popular dis

eases of the human mind, I know not whether any are more worthy of blame, or more productive of evil consequences, than the habit of giving a loose rein to suspicion. It is a very slippery road; and one very soon finds himself at a great distance from the point where he set out. He passes easily from one suspicion to another. He begins with possibility, but does not stop there. He passes on to probability; then to an almost certainty. In a short time, what was possible or probable, becomes matter of incontestable certainty; and this certainty is spread over a whole town. Large cities are most of all exposed to this evil."

It may be true that large cities are more prolific in such offspring; because the means of multiplying them are so much more facile and convenient. But human nature is every where substantially the same; and one of the most conspicuous evidences of its degraded and sinful condition, is, its proneness to suspicion and detraction, and the gratification which it experiences in indulging or fostering this spirit.

Arminius found his Mecaenases, at Amsterdam, cold and suspicious when he first returned. He succeeded, however, in satisfying them entirely that he had been slandered. He soon received an invitation to a place as minister in one of the Churches at Amsterdam, over which he was installed in 1588, being then twenty-eight years of age. On his return from Italy, he had passed through Geneva, where Beza gave him a letter to his patrons, in which he speaks of him as "animo ad faciendum officium optime comparatus, si Domino Deo placeret, ipsius uti ad opus suum in ecclesia suâ ministerio."

Arminius soon became exceedingly popular as a preacher at Amsterdam. His slender, but sweet and sonorous voice, his manner, his ardor, his distinguished talents and finished education, all combined to give him extensive popularity and influence. The rumors which had been set afloat concerning his inclination to become a Catholic, gradually died away, and all classes of men united in extolling his talents as a preacher and a pastor.

This season of popularity and peace, however, was soon in a measure interrupted, by an occurrence unforeseen, and altogether without design, on the part of Arminius. There lived, at Amsterdam, a man of distinguished talents and learning, by the name of Theodore Koornhert, who was strongly opposed to the doctrine of predestination as held at Geneva and in Holland, and who had written and spoken much against it. Two of the ministers at Delft, Arnold Cornelius and Renier Dunteklok had undertaken, by conference and by writing, to oppose Koornhert. In order to do this, however, as they thought to the best advantage, they had relinquished the views of Calvin and Beza in respect to the decretum absolutum, viz. the doctrine that the decree of election and reprobation preceded all respect to the fall of man, and to his obedience or disobedience. This is what has since been called Supralapsarianism. On the other hand, the ministers at Delft maintained, not only that God in his decree regarded man as created, but also that he had respect to his lapsed condition. This is what has since been called Sublapsarianism. It was the work which the Delft ministers published at this time, entitled Answer to some VOL. IV.-January, 1833.

2

Arguments of Calvin and Beza on the subject of Predestination, which first gave rise to these denominations in the Church of Christ.

Whether the ministers of Delft did not misunderstand the views of Calvin and Beza, it may be of some importance here briefly to show. Calvin says, "Predestination we call the eternal decree of God, by which he hath determined, in himself, what he would have to become of every individual of mankind. For they are not all created with a similar destiny; but eternal life is foreordained for some, and eternal damnation for others. Every man, therefore, being created for one or other of these ends, we say, he is predestinated either to life or to death." (Institut. Lib. iii, c. 21. § 5.*) "In conformity with the clear doctrine of Scripture, we assert, that by an eternal and immutable counsel, God hath once for all determined, both whom he would once for all admit to salvation, and whom again he would condemn to destruction." (Ib. § 7.†) "Now with respect to the reprobate . . . . Esau, while yet unpolluted with any crime, is accounted an object of hatred. If we turn our attention to works, we insult the apostle, as though he saw not what is clear to us. Now that he saw none [i. e. no works] is evident, because he expressly asserts the one [Jacob] to have been elected, and the other [Esau] rejected, while they had not yet distinguished any good or evil, to prove the foundation of Divine predestination not to be in works. . . . The reprobate are raised up for this purpose, that the glory of God may be displayed by their means. When God is said to harden, or show mercy to whom he pleases, men are taught by this declaration to seek no cause beside his will." (Lib. iii, c. 22. § 11.1) "Let them [the wicked] not accuse God of injustice, if his eternal decree has destined them to death, to which they feel themselves, whatever be their desire or aversion, (velint nolint,) spontaneously led forward by their own nature." (Lib. iii, c. 23. § 3.§) "But though I should a hundred times admit God to be the author of it, [the perverseness of the wicked,] which is perfectly correct, (verissimum,) yet this does not abolish the guilt impressed on their consciences, and from time to time recurring to their view." (Ibid.) "All things being at God's disposal. . . . he orders

...

* Praedestinationem vocamus aeternum Dei decretum, quo apud se constitutum habuit, quid de unoquoque homine fieri vellet. Non enim pari conditione creantur omnes; sed aliis vita aeterna, aliis damnatio aeterna praeordinatur. Itaque prout in alterutrum finem quisque conditus est, ita vel ad vitam vel ad mortem praedestinatum dicimus.

† Quod ergo Scriptura clare ostendit, dicimus, aeterno et immutabili consilio Deum semel constituisse, quos olim semel assumere vellet in salutem, quos rursum exitio devovere.

Nunc de reprobis . . . . Esau, nullo adhuc scelere inquinatus, odio habetur. Si ad opera convertimus oculos, injuriam irrogamus apostolo, quasi id ipsum quod nobis perspicuum est non viderit. Porro non vidisse convincitur, quando hoc nominatim urget, quum nihildum boni aut mali designassent, alterum electum, alterum rejectum; ut probet divinae praedestinationis fundamentum in operibus non esse

...

quod in hunc finem excitentur reprobi, ut Dei gloria per illos illustretur. . . Quum enim Deus dicitur vel indurare, vel misericordia prosequi quem voluerit, eo admonentur homines nihil causae quaerere extra ejus voluntatem.

§ Ne ergo Deum iniquitatis insimulent, si aeterno ejus judicio morti destinati sint, ad quam a suâ ipsorum naturâ sponte se perduci, velint nolint, ipsi sentiunt.

Atqui ut centies Deum auctorem confitear, quod verissimum est, non protinus tamen crimen eluunt, quod eorum conscientiis insculptum subinde eorum oculis

recurrit.

all things by his counsel and decree in such a manner, that some men are born, devoted from the womb to certain death, that his name may be glorified in their destruction." (Ib. § 6.*)

As a more thorough-going passage still, in some respects, I quote once more from Lib. iii, c. 24. § 13. Calvin is commenting on the passage in Isa. vi, 9, 10, Hear ye, indeed, but understand not, etc. "Observe," says he, "that he [Jehovah] directs his voice to them, [the Jews;] but it is that they may become more deaf; he kindles a light, but it is that they may become more blind; he publishes his doctrine, but it is that they may be more besotted; he applies a remedy, but it is that they may not be healed. . . . Nor can it be disputed, that to such persons as God determines not to enlighten, he [God] delivers his doctrine in enigmatical obscurity, that its only effect may be, to increase their stupidity."+

These passages, all taken from the Institutiones of Calvin, a work that was published while he was yet a youth, could hardly be assumed as the certain index of his riper opinions, were it not that we find them confirmed in his Commentary, a work accomplished in his mature years. Let us then hear the same author, when commenting on Rom. ix, 18, Therefore he hath mercy on whom he will, and whom he will he hardeneth. "We must insist," says he, "on the words whom he will; beyond which we cannot go. As to the word harden, when this is used concerning God in the Scriptures, it means not only permission, (as some drivelling moderates would say,) but it also means the action of Divine indignation; for all external means which conduce to the blinding of the reprobate, are instruments of the Divine indignation. Yea, Satan himself, who acts with efficiency internally, is in such a sense his minister, that he acts only under his control, (nonnisi ejus imperio agat.) That pitiful subterfuge of the schoolmen, then, about foreknowledge, falls to the ground. Paul does not teach here that the ruin of the impious was foreseen by God, but that it was ordained by his will and counsel; in the same manner as Solomon teaches, not only that God foreknew the destruction of the impious, but that the impious were, by his decree, created in order that they might perish, Prov. xvi, 4."I

Again, in commenting on Rom. ix, 10-13, he says, “Although

* Ecce, quum rerum omnium dispositio in manu Dei sit, quum penes ipsum resideat salutis ac mortis arbitrium, consilio nutuque suo ita ordinat, ut inter homines nascantur, ab utero certae morti devoti, qui suo exitio ipsius nomen glorificent.

Ecce, vocem ad eos, dirigit, sed ut magis obsurdescant; lucem accendit, sed ut reddentur caeciores; doctrinam profert, sed qua magis obstupescant; remedium adhibet; sed ne sanetur.... Neque hoc quoque controverti potest, quos Deus illuminatos non vult, illis doctrinam suam aenigmatibus involutam tradere, ne quid inde proficiunt, nisi ut in majorem hebetudinem tradantur.

Insistere enim debemus in istas particulas, Cujus vult et quem vult; ultra quas procedere nobis non permittit. Caeterum indurandi verbum, quum Deo in Scripturis tribuitur, non solum permissionem, (ut volunt diluti quidam moderatores,) sed divinae quoque irae actionem significat. Nam res omnes externae quae ad excaecationem reproborum faciunt, illius irae sunt instrumenta. Satan autem ipse, qui intus efficaciter agit, ita ejus est minister, ut nonnisi ejus imperio agat. Corruit ergo frivolum illud effugium, quod de praescientiâ Scholastici habent. Neque enim praevideri ruinam impiorum a Domino Paulus tradit, sed ejus consilio et voluntate ordinari. Quemadmodum et Salomo docet, non modo praecognitum fuisse interitum, sed impios ipsos fuisse destinato creatos ut perirent, Prov. xvi, 4.