Primary source material
Primary source material Theodore Beza: true faith in Christ We define faith as a sure knowledge which, by God's pure grace and goodness, the Holy Spirit carves ever more deeply into the hearts of God's elect (1 Cor. 2:6-8). By this knowledge, they are assured each one in their hearts of their election, taking and applying to themselves personally the promise of their salvation in Jesus Christ.
Now faith does not just believe that Jesus Christ has died and risen again for sinners; rather, faith actually embraces Jesus Christ (Rom. 8:16, 39;
Heb. 10:22, 23; 1 John 4:13; 5:19, etc). Whoever truly believes thereby trusts in Christ alone and is assured of personal salvation, so that there is no more doubting it (Eph. 3:12). That is why Saint Bernard [of Clairvaux] said, in keeping with all Scripture: "If you believe your sins cannot be wiped away except by the One against whom alone you have sinned, this is good.
But add this: believe also that He has indeed forgiven your sins. This is the witness that the Holy Spirit bears to our hearts, saying, 'Your sins are forgiven you.'"40
Jesus Christ is the object of faith, as He is set forth to us in the Word of God. Since this is so, two consequences should be observed carefully. On the one hand, where the Word of God is not found, but only a human word
(whoever may speak it), there is no faith there—only a dream or a mere opinion which will surely deceive us (Rom. 10:2-4; Mark 16:15, 16; Rom.
1:28; Gal. 1:8-9). On the other hand, faith embraces and takes hold of Jesus Christ and all His treasures, since He has been given to us on condition that we believe in Him (John 17:20, 21; Rom. 8:9). One of two things must follow: everything necessary for our salvation is not in Jesus Christ, or if everything is really there, those who have Jesus Christ by faith have everything! But to say that everything necessary for our salvation is not in Jesus Christ is a very foul blasphemy; it would make Him a merely partial
Saviour (Matt. 1:21). So we are shut up to the other alternative: having Jesus Christ by faith, we have in Him everything necessary for our salvation
(Rom. 5:1). As the apostle says, 'There is no condemnation for those who are in Jesus Christ' (Rom. 8:1)… We have established that for a person to be assured of salvation, through faith, is neither presumption nor bluster. On the contrary, this is the only
way of tearing off all the garments of pride, and to give all the glory to God (Rom. 8:16, 38; Eph. 3:12; Heb. 10:22, 23; 1 John 4:13; 5:19; Rom. 3:27;
4:20; 1 Cor. 4:4; 9:26, 27). This is because it is only faith that teaches us to go outside of ourselves, forcing us to confess most fervently that we have nothing in ourselves except materials for utter damnation.
So then, faith sends us off to Jesus Christ, teaching and assuring us that only through His righteousness will we find salvation before God. Indeed, everything that is in Jesus Christ, all His righteousness and perfection (for in Him was no sin, and He fulfilled the entire righteousness of the Law), is credited to our account—granted to us as though we had done it ourselves, on condition that we embrace Christ by faith. This is why Saint Bernard said, "The witness of our conscience is our glory: not the witness given to itself by a deluded mind, such as the boastful Pharisee gave himself (Luke
18:11, 12); this witness is not true. But the witness that the Holy Spirit bears to our spirit is true."
Theodore Beza Confession of the Christian Faith
William Ames: theology is a practical science 1. Theology is the doctrine being alive to God. John 6:68, The words of eternal life. Acts 5:20, The words of this life. Romans 6:11, Consider yourselves alive to God.
2. The word "doctrine" is used, not to distinguish it from "understanding", "knowledge", "wisdom", "art", or "prudence", since these belong to every systematic body of knowledge, and they characterize theology above all. Rather the word "doctrine" is used to signify that theology is a body of knowledge that does not originate in nature and human investigation as others do. It originates in divine revelation and authorization. Isaiah 51:4, Doctrine shall proceed from Me. Matthew 21:25, From heaven. Why then did you not believe him?
John 9:29, We know that God spoke to Moses. Galatians 1:11–12, The gospel is not according to man. For I did not receive it from man, nor was I taught it, but it came through a revelation. John 6:45.
3. Where other arts are concerned, their principles are innate to our nature, and can be cultivated through sensory awareness, observation, experience, and logical argument. In these ways we perfect the various human arts. But the foundational principles of theology are not innate to our nature, although we can make progress in them by studious labour. Matthew 16:17, Flesh and blood have not revealed this to you.
4. Every art has its laws, and the art's practitioner conforms his work to those laws. The most excellent of all works is living; therefore no study can be more fitting than to study the art of living.
5. The highest human life is that which comes closest to the living God, the giver of life. Living to God is therefore the nature of theological life.
6. People live to God when they live in harmony with God's will, to God's glory, and by God's enabling energy. 1 Peter 4:2, 6, That he may live by the will of God, according to God. Galatians 2:19-20, That I may live to God. Christ lives in me. 2 Corinthians 4:10, That the life of Jesus may be manifest in our bodies. Philippians 1:20, Christ will be glorified in my body, whether by life or by death.
7. This life continues the same in essence from its commencement to eternity. John 3:36 and 5:24, Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life. 1 John 3:15, Eternal life abiding in him.
8. Although it is possible in this world to live both a happy life and a good life, living a good life is more excellent than living a happy life.
The supreme and final goal of our labours should not be happiness (which concerns our own pleasure), but goodness (which looks to God's glory). Therefore, a better definition of theology is the good life by which we live to God, rather than the happy life by which we live to ourselves. The apostle therefore called it by synecdoche,41 The doctrine that accords with godliness, 1 Timothy 6:3.
9. On top of this, this life involves the spiritual work of the whole person, in which he is brought to share in God and to act according to His will.
Since this life surely concerns the human will, it follows that theology applies firstly and most fittingly to the will. Proverbs 4:23, From the heart flow the issues of life; and 23:26, Give me your heart.
10. Since this life, pursued by the will, is truly and fittingly our supremely important practice, it is plain to see that theology is not a speculative system of knowledge but a practical one. This is the case, not only in the sense that all systems of knowledge have good practice as their goal, but in a special and distinctive way in theology above all else.
11. There is nothing in theology that fails to refer to the final goal or the means concerned with that goal—all of which relate directly to practice.
12. Theology embodies this practice of life so completely that theology has something to say about all universally true rules concerning living aright, in domestic economy, ethics, politics, or lawmaking.
13. Theology, therefore, is our ultimate and most excellent of all the arts of systematic teaching. It is a guide and blueprint for our highest goal, sent in a special way from God, dealing with divine things, directed toward God, and leading us to God. In addition to the name of "theology", it may therefore rightly be called a living to God, or a labouring towards God.
William Ames Marrow of Theology, Book 1, Chapter 1
Johannes Wollebius: the sin of Adam and Eve.
1. The cause of Adam and Eve's sin was not God, nor any decree of God, nor His withholding any special grace, nor His permission of the fall, nor any motive arising naturally, nor God's providential sovereignty over the fall itself. It was not God, because He had most rigidly forbidden humanity to eat the fruit of that tree. It was not His decree, because the "necessity" involved in the decree is only the necessity of immutability, not the necessity of compulsion. God's decree never forces anyone to sin.42 It was not God's withholding of some special grace by which humanity might have stayed innocent, for God was under no obligation to give even the grace that He did give to humanity; Adam was given the possibility of willing to remain innocent, but not the actual will inclining him to that possibility. It was not God's permission of the fall, for He was under no obligation to hinder it. It was not any motive arising naturally, for a natural motive in itself is not a sin. It was not God's providential sovereignty over the fall, because bringing good out of evil makes Him the author of good rather than of evil.
2. God both willed, and did not will, the first sin. He did not will it, in its nature as sin. But He willed it by His decree, insofar as it was a means to manifest His glory, mercy, and justice.
3. The external cause of original sin was the incitement and persuasion of that subtle serpent, the devil.
4. Its internal cause was the human will, which by itself was impartially suspended between good and evil, but, when persuaded by Satan, was turned toward evil.
5. When humanity fell from God, the fall went through five stages, one at a time rather than all at once: (i) a careless and meddlesome attitude when Eve spoke with the serpent in her husband's absence; (ii) unbelief, as by degrees she began to agree with Satan's lies, when he called into question God's goodness toward humanity, so that she came to mistrust God; (iii) a desire for the forbidden fruit and for divine glory; (iv) the actual deed; (v) the seducing of Adam and the kindling of unruly desire in him too.
6. If all the parts of this sin are reckoned up, it is correctly called a violation of the entire law of nature.
Humanity sinned by unbelief, mistrust, unthankfulness, and also idolatry by falling from God and making an idol of self. Humanity also sinned by contempt for God's word, by rebellion, by murder,43 by lack of self-control, by secretly stealing what was not humanity's without the Owner's permission, by assenting to false statements, and finally by the craving for a more glorious position, indeed, for the glory that belongs only to God. Therefore it is too limited a definition to call this sin merely lack of self-control, or ambition, or pride.
7. Correctly, therefore, in the words of the blessed apostle, we call this sin transgression, offence, and disobedience (Rom. 5:14, 18, 19).
8. In this whole matter, we must look upon Adam not simply as a private individual, but also as a public person, and in this way as the parent, head, and root of the entire human race.
9. Therefore, whatever Adam gained and lost, he gained and lost both for himself and for all his descendants.
Just as the head contains reason both for itself and for the body, and a nobleman may lose or preserve his privileges for both himself and his descendants, so Adam lost this blessedness for himself and his descendants. Nothing healthy will grow from a poisoned root; likewise, whatever is descended by nature from Adam is born in the guilt of this first sin.
10. Therefore, this first sin is not only a personal sin, but also a sin of nature, because human nature in its totality has been corrupted by it.
That is why the descendants of Adam—that is, all who are naturally sprung from Adam—are held captive in sin.
Christ is not included in this guilt. He was born of Adam, but not through Adam: not by natural birth, but by the power of the Holy
Spirit.
11. Therefore, as a person corrupted the nature, so now the nature corrupts persons.
12. It is our pious belief that Adam and Eve were taken by God into His grace.44
Johannes Wollebius
Compendium of Christian Theology, Book 1, Chapter 10 Gisbert Voetius: The necessity of practical theology, in which the English have excelled all others Is practical theology necessary and useful in schools and churches? And should those training for the ministry be encouraged or required to study it?
We reply, yes, against those who have little care for this aspect of theological study, whether they are opposed to godliness, or not much concerned for morality, or glory in their own barren ability, or devote themselves to laziness and ignorance. In heated strife over the ingredients and requirements of theology, they denigrate its practical aspect with illsounding words like scriptural literalism, factiousness, wise folly,
Precisianism, Puritanism, Anabaptism, legalistic and anti-gospel theology, and superstition.
Maybe the words casuistry, morality, patristic, historical, ascetic, scholastic, church polity, scare them away from studying this challenging branch of theology. Well, we should be relaxed about mere words, as long as there is agreement about the underlying reality… Before our own time, this issue was set forth by our most outstanding theologians through the whole of their writings. Look at Luther, Melanchthon, Calvin, Beza, Martyr,
Hyperius,45 Danaeus,46 Aretius,47 Francis Junius,48 Zanchius,49 Lavater,50 etc. Later on, these matters were then gathered up to a new standard (as it were) by more contemporary writers, using the words previously mentioned. The word casuistry was used by Perkins, Ames, Baldwin,51 and Alstedt.52 Consequently, this word is utilized in Reformed schools and churches, together with the phrase Christian ethics and politics, which means the same thing… The word ascetic, which means athletic training, or exercise, or practice, or to exercise in godliness, is well-known among the lovers of true religion, because of the practical works of Johann Gerhard53 and Lewis Bayly.54
Indeed, Bayly has been translated from English into French, Dutch, and German, and possibly into Hungarian (I think the translation was begun, at any rate), and is known in virtually all the Reformed churches…
We demonstrate the necessity and usefulness of practical theology, and the worth of its study, from Scripture. See 1 Timothy 6:3, Titus 1:1, Acts
24:16, and 1 Timothy 4:7, where all theology is called truth and teaching according to godliness and discipline. Therefore we do not deviate from
Scripture and the goal of theology, when we hold up the practice of godliness, faith, repentance, conscience, and the application of encouragement, comfort, and exhortation, through all our theology, especially where the topics are themselves practical, and are even called practical. Alternatively, we hold up particular items from the theological topics like a signpost. Either of these approaches can be used. We shall not pursue this argument to a conclusion, but refer students to the oration of Ames that is printed together with his Cases of Conscience…
Another argument for practical theology derives from the example of our foremost theologians, mentioned earlier in this essay and in our Bibliotheca.
The English undertook more labours than other Reformed people in this aspect of theology prior to their Civil War, when popery was extinguished among them and other sects were outlawed. Perkins, the genius of practical
English divines to this very day, stands pre-eminent. Some of our own Dutch writers have followed the English example.
Gisbert Voetius Select Theological Disputations, Volume Johann Heinrich Heidegger: The efficacious merit of Christ
To Christ the Mediator, Arminians credit little or even nothing in the matter of people actually being reconciled and saved. Indeed, they destroy the merit of Christ, because they will not accept that Christ has merited forgiveness of sins, the Holy Spirit, and life everlasting for anyone in particular. They stubbornly affirm that Christ has merely acquired for His
Father the right and authority to show compassion to human beings in general, and set down for them whatever conditions He pleases for their being saved. Yet they declare raucously and bluntly that Christ's merit has no direct application to persons, and that all people could be lost without harming His merit at all, should no one fulfil the conditions God sets down.
Further, they do not accept any effective power in Christ's merit, because they ascribe calling, faith, and the new obedience, to human choice; that is, the human will is the sole cause why some persons repent and believe, while others do not. The efficacy of salvation, then, depends on the human will, not the grace of Christ; moreover, this efficacy relates to salvation as distinct from faith, since they say that the efficacy follows on from faith, but does not go before it—faith itself is not born in us as a result of Christ's merit or efficacious power.
But Christ is the Saviour by merit, because He has procured our salvation by His blood; and He is also the Saviour by efficacious power, because He imparts the salvation He has procured, and keeps it in being after it is imparted. Justification, forgiveness of sins, and salvation gush from Christ's merit, as the appropriate effect from the appropriate cause. Further, Christ bestows and applies forgiveness of sins, the Holy Spirit, and everlasting life on all those for whom He has merited these gifts.
Johann Heinrich Heidegger Body of Christian Theology, Book 1, Topic 19.
John Davenant: The universal and particular aspects of redemption Through the merit of the death of Christ, a new covenant was entered into between God and the human race. By this covenant we understand that which is urged by the Apostle, Gal. 3, Believe, and you shall live, and is opposed to the legal command, Do this and you shall live. This agreement, which promises salvation to every sinner under the condition of faith, has no foundation or confirmation anywhere else than in the blood of the Mediator; without the effusion of which no mortal man could aspire to eternal life, not even though believing. But through the death of Christ having been accepted by God as a ransom, now it is lawful for any man indiscriminately to ascend into heaven by believing, as the Apostle shows in Romans 3:21 to 26; and Christ Himself, Mark 16:15, Go into all the world, and preach the Gospel to all creatures. Therefore in this evangelical covenant, confirmed by the death of Christ, which the Apostles published to the whole world, and the ministers of the Gospel preach at the present time, there is no difference of persons made. As well Esau shall be saved, if he should believe in the Messiah, as Jacob shall be condemned if he should not believe.
But it is to be confessed, that there is also another ordination of God, secret and absolute, regarding certain definite persons, and founded likewise on the death of Christ, which obtains the name of the new covenant. But this is understood rather as agreed upon between God the Father and Christ, than between God and us. For it is that which is related by the Prophet Isaiah (53:10), When You make His soul a sin-offering, He shall see His seed; and is explained by the Apostle, Hebrews 8:10, This is the Testament that 1 will make with the house of Israel, after those days, says the Lord, I will put My laws into their mind, and write them in their
hearts, and I will be their God, and they shall be My people, etc. As if he should say, That Christ by His death not only established that conditional covenant which may be published to all men individually in this form, If you shall believe, whoever you are, you shall be saved through the death of Christ, but also that secret and absolute covenant concerning the giving of faith to certain persons and infallibly saving them through Christ and for His sake.
But it is to be observed that this latter covenant is known to Christ alone, nor can it be opened to anyone by the ministers of Christ, as to the individual persons whom it embraces. For the Apostles themselves could, and we can preach to every man that conditional and revealed covenant, If you shall believe, you shall be saved. But neither could they, nor can we promise infallibly to any one, You art one of those whom God gave to Christ the Mediator, and to whom, through Christ and for His sake, He will give persevering faith, and will infallibly lead to eternal life. For this would be the same as if we should declare that we were in the councils of God before the foundations of the world were laid, and could point out with our finger the elect and the non-elect. Without this latter covenant, which is more properly understood to be established between God and men, that first conditional covenant would be in vain to all men through human depravity, and the precious and infinitely meritorious blood of Christ would flow in vain. But since, as it was said, God alone knows them to whom this covenant has regard, it is our business to urge and press that first conditional covenant, which is revealed to us; and this is that which we contend was confirmed by the death of Christ with the whole human race.55
John Davenant A Dissertation on the Death of Christ, Chapter 4 Moise Amyraut: Christ, not God's mysterious decrees, the object of faith I know full well that Calvin has said many things about the impelling causes of God's decrees. But I do not find that he has ever said a thing about their order. Calvin asserts that the only reason why God has created humanity for the hope of eternal blessedness is God's goodness. Once humanity had fallen into sin and condemnation, Calvin asserts that the only reason why God chose to send His Son into the world to redeem human beings by His death is the wonderful love of God for humankind. Calvin
also asserts that the only reason why God has chosen some, and passed by others, in bestowing the grace of faith, is the divine mercy and severity.
Further, Calvin does not acknowledge any other reason than purely the perfect freedom of God's will, concerning why God has chosen one person rather than another in the apportioning of this grace. Why He has chosen to save believers and to condemn unbelievers to everlasting punishment,
Calvin thinks the reason for the latter must be found in God's justice, whereas the reason for the former must be found in His mercy… But concerning the sequence in which God's eternal wisdom set out all these things—I mean the question of His proposing in thought or will one thing or another first or last—Calvin never offers any account of this, nor does he show the smallest interest in doing so… We must ever recall to our minds that God is God—that is, He has an infinite mind whose wisdom is wondrously complex and measureless, whose will we cannot fathom completely, and whose majesty we should revere with the utmost wonder and submission. We should accept the things
He has revealed to us, take hold of them, and with all our heart convert them into the practice of godliness and sanctification. But the things about which He has chosen that we remain without knowledge (and, O sovereign
Lord! how many, how great, are these?), we should not ask questions about them over-curiously. Concerning these things, it does not matter what view our hearts and sentiments embrace, there will always be a huge abyss whose breadth, and length, and depth, and height incalculably transcend our intellects. Abject little human beings that we are, we need not feel humiliated merely because we do not know everything…
In fact nobody at a banquet wonders whether, in the secret counsel of God, it has been decreed whether he will eat or not. If he is wise, he will consult his stomach to see whether he has any appetite; he will look at the meats to know whether they are agreeable to him; he will listen to the praises and the advice of the person who invited him, and find out whether it is sensible to take that advice; and then, when he has thought it over, he will finally decide to have what he judges most appropriate. Thus, in the preaching of the Gospel, whether it is a question of receiving the faith of Christ or rejecting it, nobody bothers to work out what the secret will of God is. Everybody tends to be attracted by hunger and thirst for righteousness, or else put off by the disgust and revulsion caused (so to speak) by bad inner influences which fill and penetrate the soul…
A person, then, must simply fasten his spiritual eyes upon the Lord Jesus; he must focus all the energy of his soul upon Him; he must contemplate every facet of this Object, and reflect how very true He is, how very profitable He is, how very needful He is, how utterly worthy of admiration, and overflowing with contentment, comfort, and joy. In short, he should reflect how divine Christ is, from whatever angle He is seen. This a person must do, so that in Christ he acknowledges and takes hold of the infinite compassion that is made known to us.
Moise Amyraut Defence of the Doctrine of Calvin on the Subject of Election and Reprobation (1644)
Herman Witsius: classical covenant theology In Scripture, we discover two covenants of God with humanity: the covenant of works, otherwise called the covenant of nature, or the legal covenant; and the covenant of grace. The apostle teaches us this distinction in Romans 3:27, where he speaks about the law of works, and the law of faith. By the law of works, he means the doctrine which points out the way in which salvation is obtained by means of works; and by the law of faith, he means the doctrine that directs us to obtain salvation by faith. The form of the covenant of works is, "The man that does these things shall live by them," Romans 10:5. The form of the covenant of grace is, "Whosoever believes in Him shall not be ashamed," Romans 10:11. These covenants of compassion agree in the following particulars:
1. The covenanting parties are the same in both, viz. God and humankind.
2. The same promise of eternal life is present in both, consisting in the immediate enjoyment of God.
3. The condition is the same in both, viz., perfect obedience to the law. It would not have been worthy of God to give humanity an entry into a blessed communion with Him, except by way of a spotless holiness.
4. The same goal is aimed at in both, viz. the glory of the supremely perfect goodness of God.
But in the following particulars the covenants differ:
1. In the covenant of works, the character or relationship between God and humanity is different from what we find in the covenant of grace.
In the former, God deals with humanity as the Supreme Lawgiver, and the Supreme Blessedness, rejoicing to make His innocent creature share in His own happiness. In the latter, God deals with us on a basis of infinite mercy, bestowing life on the elect sinner in a way that harmonizes with His wisdom and justice.
2. In the covenant of works there was no mediator. In that of grace, the mediator is Christ Jesus.
3. In the covenant of works, the condition of perfect obedience had to be performed by the human race itself, which had consented to it. In the covenant of grace, the same condition is proposed, as a condition to be performed, or as having already been performed, by a mediator. In this substitution of the persons resides the chief and essential difference between the covenants.
4. In the covenant of works, humanity is considered as working, and the reward is to be given as something owed; therefore, human glorying is not excluded, but humanity may glory, as a faithful servant may do, upon the right discharge of duty, and may claim the reward promised to the work. In the covenant of grace, humanity, ungodly in itself, is considered in the covenant as believing; and eternal life is considered as the merit of the mediator, but as given to humanity out of free grace.
This excludes all human boasting, except the glorying of the believing sinner in God, as his or her merciful Saviour.
5. In the covenant of works, something is required of humanity as a condition which, when performed, entitles us to the reward. The covenant of grace, as it bears on us, consists in the absolute promises of God, in which the mediator, the life He will procure, the faith by which we may be made partakers of Him, the benefits purchased by Him, and perseverance in that faith, in a word, the whole of salvation, and all that is necessary to it, are absolutely promised.
6. The special goal of the covenant of works was the manifestation of the holiness, goodness, and justice of God, shining forth in His most perfect law, His most generous promise, and in the recompense of reward to be given to those who seek Him with their whole heart. The special goal of the covenant of grace is "the praise of the glory of his
grace", Ephesians 1:6, and the revelation of His unsearchable and many-splendored wisdom. These divine perfections shine forth radiantly in the gift of a mediator, by whom the sinner is admitted to complete salvation, without any dishonour to the holiness, justice, and truth of God. There is also a demonstration of the all-sufficiency of God, by which not only humanity per se, but even sinful humanity
(which is more surprising) may be restored to union and communion with God. But all this will be more fully explained in what follows.
Herman Witsius The Economy of the Covenants between God and Man, Book 1, Chapter 15
1 For non-British readers: the island of Britain, located off the north-west coast of Europe, includes
England, Scotland, and Wales. "British" could therefore mean English, Scottish, or Welsh.
2 See VolumeThree: Renaissance and Reformation, Chapter 4, section 3.
3 See VolumeThree: Renaissance and Reformation, Chapter 6, section 4 for the French wars of religion.
4 See Chapter 3, section 4.2.
5 From the Latin supra (above or before) and lapsus (fall).
6 From the Latin infra (beneath or after) and lapsus (fall).
7 See Chapter 1, section 1.
8 See Chapter 6, section 3.1.
9 For Aristotle's philosophy of fourfold causation, see Chapter 1, section 2, where Aristotle's influence on Lutheran Orthodoxy is examined.
10 For Perkins, see Chapter 3, section 2.4.
11 Bellarmine was once again cardinal Robert Bellarmine, the most formidable theologian of Counter-Reformation Catholicism. See Chapter 6, section 3.1.
12 Let us hope the story is apocryphal.
13 See Chapter 3, section 4.3.
14 For Milton, see Chapter 4 section 1.6.
15 Questions 1–38 of the Shorter Catechism relate to the knowledge of God; questions 39–107 relate to the service of God. Yet the two parts of the Catechism are organically connected. This is certainly Wollebian, whether or not he was a direct influence. See Chapter 3, section 5.6 for the Westminster Assembly.
16 See Chapter 1, section 2.
17 See Chapter 1, section 4.
18 For Thomas a Kempis see VolumeTwo: The Middle Ages, Chapter 10, section 6.
19 See VolumeThree: Renaissance and Reformation, Chapter 6, section 3.
20 See section 3 on Amyraldianism for more about des Marets.
21 A modern reprint of this edition had an enthusiastic preface by J.I.Packer.
22 The distinctive stance of Amyraldianism was a view of God's saving purpose in Christ as having a hypothetical or potential universality: Christ died to save all sinners on condition that they believe. For more, see section 3.
23 Helvetic is Latin for "Swiss".
24 See Chapter 7, section 3 for the revocation of the Edict of Nantes and its consequences.
25 An east German city on the borders with Poland. Not to be confused with the larger and more famous Frankfurt in Hesse.
26 Arminian must not be confused with Armenian. The first refers to a theological viewpoint. The second refers to a nationality—the nation of Armenia, on the eastern borders of Turkey. There is of course no necessary connection between being an Arminian and being an Armenian!
27 Walloon refers to a people-group with a distinct language in the Dutch Republic, the Spanish
Netherlands, and northern France. The Walloon language was spoken quite widely among them in the 17th century; it has now largely been replaced by French.
28 See Chapter 1, section 3, on the Thirty Years' War. Since Spain was part of the Habsburg empire, the Spanish-Dutch war naturally got snarled up in the wider anti-Habsburg war by Europe's Protestants in alliance with France. The treaties that ended the Thirty Years' War thus also ended the Spanish-Dutch war.
29 To borrow the famous description of the effect produced by the second edition of Karl Barth's commentary on Romans in 1922.
30 See section 1.2.
31 Some may recognize the natural-spiritual inability distinction from the later influential theology of the English Reformed Baptist Andrew Fuller, who popularized it in the Anglo-Saxon world in the 18th century.
32 Fools and scholars rush in where angels fear to tread; I shall not venture into this particular minefield with my own ill-digested opinions.
33 See Chapter 6, section 3.1.
34 See also section 1.7.
35 For Owen, see Chapter 3, section 6.3.
36 The Isidorian Decretals were documents from the 9th century granting allegedly historic powers to the papacy in the government of the Catholic Church, which later popes used as proof of the papacy's supremacy from earliest times. Because of Blondel's exposé, the documents are now universally admitted to be spurious, and are referred to as the Pseudo-Isidorian Decretals.
37 Five of these—Marshall, Vines, Calamy, Arrowsmith, and Seaman—were members of the Westminster Assembly. See Chapter 3, section 5.6.
38 See Chapter 3, section 5.6.
39 It should be noted that there is an alternative interpretation of the synod of Charenton, which does not think it was condemning any of de la Place's views. According to this interpretation, de la Place's enemies seized on the synod's condemnation of the denial of original guilt and fastened it onto de la Place's theology, illegitimately, as a pretext for denouncing him.
40 For Bernard, see VolumeTwo: The Middle Ages, Chapter 5, section 3, under The Second
Crusade.
41 The part standing for the whole.
42 In other words, the decree did not psychologically coerce Adam to sin. What the decree did was to make his sin an unchangeably foreknown fact. Given that God had decreed to permit Adam to sin, it follows that in relation to the decree, Adam's sin had become an immutable part of the unfolding of world-history (if it had not happened, God's permission and foreknowledge would have been falsified). In relation to Adam's own will, however, his sin was perfectly free—he had the psychological ability to choose otherwise. Philosophers would distinguish between "It is necessarily true that this will happen" and "It is true that this will necessarily happen." Ordinary non-philosophical people might get a headache.
43 Eve spiritually murdered her husband.
44 Adam and Eve were saved. "Pious belief" means something lower than a dogma. A dogma is a public teaching to be proclaimed in the church to all, so that all may believe it. A pious belief is something the individual is entitled to believe personally, but it is not binding on the church collectively.
45 For Hyperius, see section 1 under Johannes Cocceius and covenant theology.
46 Lambertus Danaeus (c.1535–c.1590).
47 Benedictus Aretius (1522–74).
48 Francis Junius (1545–1602).
49 Jerome Zanchius (1516–90).
50 Ludwig Lavater (1527–86).
51 Frederick Baldwinus or Balduinus (1575–1627): a Lutheran divine.
52 Johann Heinrich Alstedt (1588–1638).
53 See Chapter 1, section 2 for Johann Gerhard.
54 See Chapter 3, section 4.3.
55 For the opposing Reformed Orthodox view of particular redemption, see Francis Turretin's
Institutes of Elenctic Theology (Phillipsburg, New Jersey: P&R, 1992–7), vol. 2, p. 455ff.