After his appointment to the theological chair at Leyden, he thought it his duty to avow and vindicate the principles which he had embraced; and ⚫ the freedom with which he published and defended them, exposed him to the resentment of those that adhered to the theological system of Calvin, which then prevailed in Holland; but his principal opponent was Gomar his colleague.-The controversy, thus begun, became more general after the death of Arminius, and threatened to involve the United Provinces in civil discord. Disputes ran high, and on each side considerable talents and learning were displayed. The Arminian tenets, however, gained ground, under the mild and favourable treatment of the Magistrates of Holland, and were adopted by several persons of merit and distinction; but the Calvinists, or Gomarists, as they were now called, appealed to a national Synod, and accordingly a Synod was convened by order of the States General at Dordrecht or Dort.* It was composed of ecclesiastical and lay-deputies from the United Provinces, and also of ecclesiastical deputies from the reformed Churches of England, Switzerland, Bremen, Hesse, and the Palatinate, and it sat from 1st Nov. 1618, to 26th April 1619. 100

In this Synod, in which politics got mixed with religion, the principal advocate in favour of the

* It was not, however, with the unanimous consent of the States that this Synod assembled; for three of the Seven Provinces protested against the holding of it, viz. Holland, Utrecht, and Overyssel.

Arminians was Episcopius, who was then professor of divinity at Leyden. It had scarcely commenced its proceedings, when a dispute arose on the mode of proceeding, which drove the Arminian party from the assembly; they having insisted on beginning with a refutation of the Calvinistic doctrines, especially that of reprobation, whilst the other party determined, that, as the remonstrants were accused of departing from the reformed faith, they ought first to justify themselves by scriptural proof of their own opinions.

All means to persuade the Arminians to submit to this procedure having failed, they were banished the Synod for their refusal;—their cause was tried in their absence;-and they were pronounced guilty of pestilential errors, and condemned as corrupters of the true religion. In consequence of this decision, which Mosheim seems to think was premeditated and determined even before the meeting of the Synod, they were considered as enemies to their country, and its established religion, and were exposed to much persecution.-They were treated with great severity, and deprived of all their posts and employments;-their ministers were silenced, and their congregations suppressed. The great Barneveldt lost his life on a public scaffold; and the learned Grotius, being condemned to perpetual imprisonment, made his escape and took refuge in France.

But the authority of this Synod was far from being universally acknowledged, either in Holland

or in Britain; for the provinces of Friesland, Zealand, Utrecht, Guilderland, and Groningen, could not be persuaded to adopt their decisions; and they were opposed by King James I. and Archbishop Laud, in England. Nor would the Churches of Bremen and Brandenburg, which made a considerable figure among the Reformed in Germany, ever suffer their doctors to be tied down to the opinions and tenets of the Dutch divines, as maintained in this assembly. But whether in condemning the opinions, and excommunicating the persons of the Arminians, it acted justly or unjustly, yet surely few will be found who can approve of the persecution which followed, and which drove these men from their churches and their country into exile and poverty. However, after the death of Prince Maurice, A. D. 1625, who had been a violent partisan in favour of the Gomarists, the Arminian exiles were restored to their former reputation and tranquillity; and, under the toleration of the States, which was granted them in 1630, they erected churches, and founded a college at Amsterdam, appointing Episcopius the first theological professor. This seminary has from time to time produced some able divines and excellent scholars; and among others may be mentioned the names of Courcelles, Poelenburg, Limborch, Le Clerk, Cattenburgh, and Wetstein, all of them his successors in the theological chair. But the Arminians there have been exposed to occasional persecutions; and the external lustre of their community is said to have been long on the decline. This,

however, cannot be said of the credit and influence of their religious principles even in Holland; for they have "insinuated themselves more or less into the bosom of the established Church, and infected the theological system of many of those pastors who are appointed to maintain the doctrine and authority of the Synod of Dort;"* and, it may be added, of the Westminster Assembly.

The early introduction of Arminian principles into various other countries, as Britain, France, Geneva, and many parts of Switzerland, is abundantly known; but their progress is said to have been somewhat retarded of late, more especially in Germany and several parts of Switzerland, by the prevalence of the Leibnitian and Wolfian Philosophy, which is more favourable to Calvinism.†

See an interesting work entitled, "An abridg ment of Gerard Brandt's History of the Reformation in the Low Countries," in 2 vols. 8vo. 1725.

A curious account of the proceedings of the Synod of Dort may also be seen in a series of Letters, written by the ever-memorable John Hales of Eaton, who was present on the occasion, and relates with candour and simplicity what he saw and heard.

DISTINGUISHING DOCTRINES.-The original

* Mosheim's Eccles. Hist. vol. v. p. 464.

+ See Mosheim's Eccles. Hist. vol. v. p. 464.-Note (ee).

difference between the Arminians and the Calvinists was entirely confined to the five points,* relative to the doctrines of Predestination and Grace; and it was the doctrine of the former concerning these points alone that occasioned their condemnation in the Synod of Dort.

The distinguishing tenets of the Arminians may therefore be said to consist chiefly in the different light in which they view the subjects of those points, or in the different explanation which they give to them, and are comprised in the five following articles; relating to-Predestination-Universal Redemption-the Corruption of Human Nature -Conversion, and Perseverance.

1. With respect to the first, they maintained,That God, from all eternity, determined to bestow salvation on those whom he foresaw would persevere unto the end in their faith in Christ Jesus, and to inflict everlasting punishments on those who should continue in their unbelief, and resist to the end his divine assistance:-so that election was conditional, and reprobation, in like manner, the result of foreseen infidelity and persevering wickedness."

2. On the second point, they taught,—“ That Jesus Christ by his sufferings and death, made an atonement for the sins of all mankind in general, and of every individual in particular; that, however, none but those who believe in him, can be partakers of their divine benefit.”

See above, p. 232, 3.