Arminianism is a set of reformed doctrines that attempt to interpret the Bible and make sense of important theological questions. The teachings were formed, taught, and defended by Jacobus Arminius (1560-1609), which he articulated clearly in his Declaration of Sentiments (1607). Unfortunately, Arminius died without any publications and very few documents that detailed his beliefs.
The teachings of Arminius are what some might call Classic Arminianism. After his death followers began to evolve his views, some of which are incorrectly attributed to him. A year after his death, followers of his work wrote a document to the State General summarising his views in what is now known as the Five Articles of Remonstrance. Each article is detailed below with the following headings:
Conditional Election
Unlimited Atonement
Total Depravity
Prevenient Grace
Conditional Perseverence of the Saints
Within the reformed churches of the Netherlands, these teachings became contentious and began to divide many churches. The escalating controversy in the years that followed his death led to a gathering of church leaders from across Europe, which is known as the Synod of Dort. Their goal was to settle disputes between the Remonstrance and their opposition, the Gomarists.
Starting in November 1618 and finishing in May of the following year, this council of reformed churches published their rebuttal known as the Canons of Dort. It covers each of the five articles of Remonstrance, but is broken down into many easy-to-understand beliefs. It is from this Canon of Dort that we get the Five Points of Calvinism, despite it containing more than five points.
Despite popular misconception, Arminius did not position himself as an opponent to the teachings of John Calvin (1509 - 1564). His motivation for writing the Declaration of Sentiments was to defend the goodness of God and overcome any associations with Pelagianism by clarifying his views of Predestination, the Fall of Adam, Free-will, Original Sin, and Eternal Salvation of Infants.
Conditional Election
The first article of the remonstrance details who are the elect. The Remonstrants made clear that salvation is by a free gift of grace, for Christ's sake, and through faith in Christ. They affirm that the elect are 'those who, through the grace of the Holy Ghost, shall believe on this his Son Jesus, and shall persevering this faith and obedience of faith, through this grace, even to the end.'
Based on this view, detractors accused Arminius of believing election is merely God's foreknowledge of an individuals freewill choice, thereby nullifying God's sovereignty and exhalting man's choice. However, a more accurate representation would be that humans had free-will and chose sin; by sin they are enslaved and incapable of choosing good, therefore sinners require an injunction by God to restore freedom of thought and will necessary to establish saving faith.
Reading through the sentiments of Jacobus Arminius, his primary concern is the teaching of predestination in regard to the reprobate. He held no disagreement about God's predestination or act of grace and its accompanying gifts. Despite this, detractors feared a wave of semi-Pelagianism that emphasised man's free-will.
"In his primitive condition as he came out of the hands of his creator, man was endowed with such a portion of knowledge, holiness and power, as enabled him to understand, esteem, consider, will, and to perform the true good, according to the commandment delivered to him... But in his lapsed and sinful state, man is not capable, of and by himself, either to think, to will, or to do that which is really good"
Unlimited Atonement
The second article focuses on how the elect are saved; through the atoning sacrifice of Jesus Christ. The Remonstrants clearly believed it is 'by his death on the cross' that those with a saving faith have 'redemption and the forgiveness of sins'.
Their belief states that 'Jesus Christ, the Saviour of the world, died for all men and for every man' and that 'no one actually enjoys this forgiveness of sins except the believer'. It could be summarised that the sacrifice of Jesus was sufficient for all, but efficient only for those with a saving and persevering faith—known as the elect.
Arminianism is therefore not the same as universalism. Arminians do not believe that all people will be saved, never denying the existence of Hell or the eternal damnation. Furthermore, they do not believe that the atoning death could be rejected by all, such that it was sufficient for all but effecient for nobody. In both these regards it is the same as limited atonement as taught by John Calvin.
The subtle distinction between limited and unlimited atonement is whether Jesus died for an elect of his choosing, or for an elect he foreknew would respond to his grace. Today, the doctrine of limited atonement is the least supported within modern Calvinism; many now refer to themselves as four-point Calvinists.
"This decree has its foundation in the foreknowledge of God, by which he knew from all eternity those individuals who would, through his preventing grace, believe, and, through his subsequent grace would persevere, according to the before described administration of those means which are suitable and proper for conversion and faith"
Total Depravity
The third article affirms the totally depraved state of humanity and the need for God's prevening grace to attain a saving faith. Despite clear sentiments of Arminius that man in his sinful state is incapable of choosing good, many believe that he held a view of partial depravity.
However, Arminius undoubtedly agreed with the teachings of John Calvin that humans are totally depraved and in their sinful state remain incapable of good.
The Remonstrance authors summarised his view 'that man has not saving grace himself, nor of the energy of his free will, inasmuch as he, in the state of apostasy and sin, can of and by himself, neither think, will, nor do any thing that is truly good (such as saving Faith eminently is).
It is clear that Arminius had no agreement with Pelagianism. He states "I account this sentiment of Pelagius to be heretical, and diametrically opposed to these words of Christ" and "it is likewise very destructive, and inflicts a most grievous wound on the glory of Christ". Contrary to popular belief, Classic Arminianism is not based on freewill.
"In this manner, I ascribe to grace the commencement, the continuance and the consummation of all good, and to such an extent do I carry its influence, that a man, though already regenerate, can neither conceive, will, nor do any good at all, nor resist any evil temptation, without this preventing and exciting, this following and co-operating grace."
Prevenient Grace
The fourth article affirms the nature of God's grace, but contends that our resistance to grace explains why some remain sinners, or why some who are at once believers might abandon their faith. Arminius attempted to show that his estimation of grace and its importance did not differ, only that the mode in which it operates was not irresistible.
Irresistible grace is truly irresistible. It is not merely desirable, it is non-withstandable. When grace is deemed irresistible, then all of the elect are given by the Father to the Son, and none could ever choose for themselves.
To Arminius, a conflict arises with passages such as Acts 7:51 where it is written that 'you always resist the Holy Spirit' and an observation that so many hearers of the word do not accept it.
Instead, Arminius believed that grace precedes faith. This order is essential and it is solely because of God's grace that there is a beginning, continuation, and accomplishment of any and all good in the life of a regenerate man. But while we have all been given grace to respond freely to the invitation, many refuse and resist said grace.
"That is, the controversy does not relate to those actions or operations which may be ascribed to grace... but it relates solely to the mode of operation, whether it be irresistible or not. With respect to which, I believe, according to the scriptures, that many persons resist the Holy Spirit and reject the grace that is offered."
Conditional Perseverence of the Saints
The fifth and final article is titled the conditional perseverance of the saints, which states the importance of continuously trusting in God and resisting evil through the continued grace of God.
Some people accuse Arminianism of lacking eternal security. However, Arminius and the Remonstrants made clear that Jesus 'keeps them from falling, so that they, by no craft or power of Satan, can be misled nor plucked out of Christ’s hands'. Therefore, a better expression of their view is such: a believer can never lose salvation, but any person that willingly abandons their faith, ceasing to believe, also surrenders their salvation.
Their view resonates with some of scripture: that those who taste the heavenly gifts and abandon their faith are unable to crucify him a second time (Hebrews 6:4-6).
Many Calvinists unwittingly diminish this verse and their eternal security by suggesting that a person who ceases to believe was never truly elect. The appearance of election is by no means a guarantee of election, but only the elect are saved. Unfortunately, it is necessary for Calvinists to make these claims to maintain that election is unconditional and that grace is irresistible.
"With regard to the certainty [or assurance] of salvation, my opinion is, that it is possible for him who believes in Jesus Christ to be certain and persuaded, and, if his heart condemn him not, he is now in reality assured, that he is a son of God, and stands in the grace of Jesus Christ."
Is Arminianism Biblical?
Yes, classical Arminianism as taught by Jacobus Arminius or John Wesley is rooted deeply in scripture. Both are reformed in their beliefs. However, like all systems of doctrine, neither satisfy all the mysteries of God.
There are some mutations of Arminianism that are closer to Pelagianism, a belief that is neither biblical nor conforms to the teaching of Arminius. Throughout his Declaration of Sentiments, Arminius makes clear that he agrees with Augustine in condemning the Pelagian views, and wholeheartedly denounced it as heresy.
Is Arminianism Heretical?
No, the teaching of Jacobus Arminius was not heretical. However, it can easily be misunderstood and quickly mutate into heresy. Perhaps the easiest explanation is that he [Arminius] was a university professor and held robust, academic, intellectual views that ordinary people struggle to finely articulate or nuance.
An important decision in the construction of the Canon of Dort was to target their declaration towards ordinary believers as opposed to university professors. Hence, the five points of Calvinism might not be without flaw, but their rigidity make it much harder to mutate into heretical views.
Comentários