Morning Coffee with Gomarus

Entries categorized as ‘Related History’

The Lambeth Articles, A.D. 1595

April 5, 2007 · Leave a Comment

The following is taken from Schaff’s Creeds Of Christendom, Volume 1, pp. 658-661:

The Lambeth Articles have never had full symbolical authority in the Church of England, but they are of historical interest as showing the ascendency of the predestinarian system of Calvin in the last decade of the sixteenth century. . .

The University of Cambridge was a stronghold of the Calvinistic system. It was taught there by Thomas Cartwright, the Margaret Professor of Divinity (who, however, was deposed in 1571 for Puritanic sentiments—d. 1603); William Perkins, Fellow and Tutor of Christ’s College (d. 1602); and especially by Dr. William Whitaker (Whittaker), the Regius Professor of Divinity (d. 1595).

But in the same University there arose an opposition which created great stir. It began with Baro (Baron), a French refugee, who, by the favor of Burghley, was promoted to the Margaret Professorship of Divinity (1574). He inferred from the history of the Ninevites that God predestinated all men to eternal life, but on condition of their faith and perseverance. For this opinion, which he more fully explained in a sermon, he was cited before Dr. Goade, the Vice-Chancellor of the University; and although the proceedings were stopped by the interposition of Burghley, he retired to London (1596), where he died a few years afterwards. The same cause was taken up more vigorously by William Barrett, a fellow of Caius College, who, in a concio ad clerum, preached in Great St. Mary’s Church, April 29, 1595, indulged in a virulent attack on the honored names of Calvin, Beza, Peter Martyr, and Zanchius, and their doctrine of irrespective predestination. The academic controversy was carried by both parties first to the Vice-Chancellor and heads of Colleges, and then to Archbishop Whitgift, of Canterbury. Whitgift, a High-Churchman and an enemy of Puritanism, seemed at first inclined to take part with Barrett, but yielded to the pressure of the University. Barrett was obliged to admit his ignorance and mistake, and to modify his dogmatic statements. He left England and joined the Church of Rome.

To settle this controversy, and to prevent future trouble, the heads of the University sent Dr. Whitaker and Dr. Tyndal (Dean of Ely) to London, to confer with the Archbishop and other learned divines. The result was the adoption of Nine Articles, at Lambeth, Nov. 20, 1595. They contain a clear and strong enunciation of the predestinarian system, by teaching –

1. The eternal election of some to life, and the reprobation of others to death.

2. The moving cause of predestination to life is not the foreknowledge of faith and good works, but only the good pleasure of God.

3. The number of the elect is unalterably fixed.

4. Those who are not predestinated to life shall necessarily be damned for their sins.

5. The true faith of the elect never fails finally nor totally.

6. A true believer, or one furnished with justifying faith, has a full assurance and certainty of remission and everlasting salvation in Christ.

7. Saving grace is not communicated to all men.

8. No man can come to the Son unless the Father shall draw him, but all men are not drawn by the Father.

9. It is not in every one’s will and power to be saved.

The Articles were drawn up by Whitaker (who died soon afterwards), and somewhat modified by the Bishops to make them less objectionable to anti-Calvinists. Thus the fifth Article originally stated that true faith could not totally and finally fail ‘in those who had once been partakers of it;’ while in the revision the words ‘in the elect’ (i.e., a special class of the regenerated) were substituted. The Articles thus amended were signed by Archbishop Whitgift, Dr. Richard Fletcher, Bishop of London, Dr. Richard Vaughan, Bishop elect of Bangor, and others. They were also sent to Dr. Hutton, Archbishop of York, and Dr. Young, Bishop of Rochester. Hutton indorsed the first Article with ‘verissimum,’ and approved the rest with the remark that they could all be plainly collected or fairly deduced from the Scriptures and the writings of St. Augustine.

Whitgift sent the Lambeth Articles to the University of Cambridge (Nov. 24), not as new laws and decrees, but as an explanation of certain points already established by the laws of the land. But inasmuch as they had not the Queen’s sanction (though he states that the Queen was fully persuaded of the truth of them, which is inconsistent with her conduct), they should be used privately and with discretion.

Queen Elizabeth, who had no special liking for Calvinism and dogmatic controversies, was displeased with the calling of a Synod without her authority, which subjected the Lambeth divines to prosecution. She commanded the Archbishop to recall and suppress those Articles without delay. At the Hampton Court Conference of King James and several prelates with the leaders of the Puritans (Jan., 1604), Dr. Reynolds made the request that ‘the nine orthodoxal assertions concluded on at Lambeth might be inserted into the Book of Articles.’ It is stated that they were exhibited at the Synod of Dort by the English deputies, as the judgment of their Church on the Arminian controversy. But the anti-Calvinistic reaction under the Stuarts gradually deprived them of their force in England, while in Ireland they obtained for some time a semi-symbolical authority.

Categories: Related History · Theology

Protestant Scholasticism

February 22, 2007 · Leave a Comment

The following article is an overview of Protestant Scholasticism extracted from a larger article by Dr. Sam Storms at Enjoying God Ministries, which may be found HERE.  I found it interesting because Storms notes (1) the rather popular scholarly view that the 17th century scholastic Calvinists represent a “radical divergence and departure” from the earlier “more biblically sensitive and pastorally oriented” 16th century Reformers and (2) points to a needed corrective to that notion represented in Richard Muller’s work.
————————–

Protestant Scholasticism/Orthodoxy has longed been viewed as an era of theological systematization and spiritual stagnation following the vibrant creativity of the 16th century reformers. In the years following the reformation (principally, 1559-1622), Calvinists, Lutherans, and Roman Catholics found themselves occupying the same geographical territory and competing for the same followers. Each began to feel the pressure to identify itself and explain how it differed from and surpassed its theological rivals. Distinctive doctrinal criteria, logically deduced and carefully articulated, became the principal means by which each group set itself apart from the others. One of the principal catalysts for the development among protestants was the work of the RC Cardinal Robert Bellarmine (1542-1621), whose theological assault on the principles of the reformation required a careful response. According to van Asselt,

 ”Bellarmine’s offensive was scholastic in nature, so in order to combat him and the other Roman Catholic polemical theologians, use had to be made of the same scholastic apparatus. In the course of this debate an increasingly detailed elaboration of the Protestant theological position came into being” (Willem J. van Asselt, “Scholasticism, Protestant,” in The Dictionary of Historical Theology [Eerdmans, 2000], 513).

As Alister McGrath explains, “the insights of the reformers were codified and perpetuated through the development of a series of systematic presentations of Christian theology” (Historical Theology, 169). On this view, the principal aim of 17th century Reformed (Calvinistic) and Lutheran thinkers was to demonstrate the internal logical consistency and theological coherence of their respective systems.

(more…)

Categories: Related History · Theology

1646 WCF vs. 1689 LBCF

January 12, 2007 · Leave a Comment

There is substantial agreement between the 1646 Westminster Confession of Faith and the 1689 London Baptist Confession of Faith.  It is obvious the WCF was used as a guide by the formulators of the LBCF and was designed to foster acceptance by the reformed community based on this agreement.  Many sections or paragraphs are virtually verbatim the same.  The most obvious difference is seen in the treatment of Baptism as one would expect.  However, a side by side comparison is most helpful in highlighting other differences — and such a comparison is available online.

A tabular comparison of the 1646 WCF and the 1689 LBCF may be found here as provided by James Anderson.  Significant wording differences are highlighted in red to facilitate the reader.  Enjoy!

Categories: Related History · Theology

The Synod of Dort

November 1, 2006 · Leave a Comment

dort2.jpgThe convocation and proceedings of the Synod of Dort (1618- 1619) may be considered “among the most interesting events of the seventeenth century. The Westminster Assembly was indeed more immediately interesting to British and American Presbyterians, yet the Synod of Dort had a species of importance peculiar to itself and altogether pre-eminent. It was not merely a meeting of select divines of a single nation, but a convention of the Calvinistic world, to bear testimony against a rising and obtrusive error; to settle a question in which all the Reformed churches of Europe had an immediate and deep interest. The question was whether the opinions of Arminius, which were then agitating so many minds, could be reconciled with the confession of the Belgic churches.” ^1

The following is a brief introduction to the theological conflict which occurred in Holland during the early 1600’s and some background comments regarding the Synod which will help provide an historical context for the reading of the Canons of Dort. (more…)

Categories: Related History

Post Tenebras Lux

October 31, 2006 · Leave a Comment

reformation-wall.jpgA motto of the Protestant Reformation, Post Tenebras Lux is a Latin phrase which may be translated After Darkness, Light.  There is an international monument to the Reformation, commonly known as Reformation Wall in the grounds of the University of Geneva, which was founded by John Calvin.  The Wall, inaugerated in 1909, was built to commemorate the 400th anniversary of John Calvin’s birth and the 350th anniversary of the university’s establishment.  During the Reformation, Geneva was the center of Calvinism, and its history and heritage since the sixteenth century has been closely linked to that of Protestantism. 

central-figures.jpgAt the center of the monument, four 5-meter tall statues of the main early proponents of Calvinism are depicted – In the photo, they are left to right:  Theodore Beza (1519–1605), John Calvin (1509–1564), William Farel (1489–1565), and John Knox (c.1513–1572).  Along the wall, to either side of these central statues, is engraved the motto of both the Reformation and Geneva: POST TENEBRAS LUX.


Categories: Quotes · Related History