The Synod of Dordt

— continued —

In this situation of things, when the very pillars of society seemed to be shaken, when the ruling powers of the State were seen to be more and more favorable to the erroneous party, and when everything portended the approach of a tremendous crisis, it pleased God to employ an instrument for promoting the advancement of His cause who by no means loved that cause, and who yet was placed in circumstances which at once prompted and enabled him to favor it. James I, king of England, a man of very small mind, and of still less moral or religious principle, having been born and bred in a Calvinistic community, and coming to the throne of England when the leading clergy of that part of his dominions, as well as of the North, were almost unanimously Calvinistic, he fell in with the fashionable creed, and was disposed, as his manner was, in everything, officiously to exert his royal power in its favor. He, therefore, in the year 1617, addressed a friendly, but admonitory letter to the States General, in which he earnestly recommended the calling of a national synod to vindicate the genuine doctrines of the Reformation and to restore tranquillity to the agitated Belgic churches. About the same time, Maurice, the prince of Orange and the Head of the United Provinces, took the same ground and urged the same thing.

When the Arminian party perceived that the popular current was beginning to run in this direction and that there was some prospect of a national synod being called, they were filled with uneasiness, and strove by all the means in their power to prevent it. But their evasive and intriguing arts were now in vain; and although they began to manifest a spirit more like revolt and sedition than before, yet now the state of the public mind was such, that their violence only served to show the greater necessity of some efficient measure for meeting and subduing their turbulence.

At length a decree was issued by the States General in 1618, ordering that a National Synod should convene in the following November, at Dordt, a considerable city of South Holland. The method prescribed for the convocation of this synod was that a provincial synod should meet in each of the provinces, from which six persons should be delegated to attend the General Synod. And, in most cases, the plan adopted was to appoint four ministers and two ruling elders from each of the provincial synods, together with at least one professor from each of the universities.

It had been originally intended that this Synod should be formed of delegates from the Belgic churches only; but at the pointed request of James I, king of England, seconded, at his suggestion, by Maurice, prince of Orange, it was determined to invite eminent divines from foreign churches to sit and vote in the Synod. Accordingly letters were addressed to the king of Great Britain; to the deputies of the Reformed Churches of France; to the Electors of the Palatinate and Brandenburgh; to the Landgrave of Hesse; to the four Protestant Cantons of Switzerland, viz., Zurich, Berne, Basle, and Schaffhausen; and to the Republics of Geneva, Bremen, and Embden, whom they entreated to delegate some of their most pious, learned, and prudent theologians, who, in conjunction with the deputies of the Belgic churches, should labor to compose the differences and decide the controversies which had arisen in those churches.

The Reformed churches of France, in compliance with the request made to them, appointed Andrew Rivet and Peter du Moulin, as their delegates to attend this Synod; but just as they were about to set out for Dordt in pursuance of their appointment, the king of France issued an edict forbidding their attendance. In consequence of this interdict, the churches of France were not represented in the Synod.

It would be wrong to omit stating that before the Synod came together, a day of solemn prayer and fasting was appointed, to deprecate the wrath of God and to implore His gracious presence and blessing on the approaching Assembly. This day was appointed by the States General and observed with great solemnity.

The Synod convened, agreeably to the call of the States General, in the city of Dordt, on the 13th day of November, A. D. 1618. It consisted of thirty-nine Pastors and eighteen Ruling Elders delegated from the Belgic churches, together with five Professors from the Universities of Holland; and also of Delegates from all the foreign Reformed churches which had been invited to send them, excepting those of France, before spoken of. The delegates from the foreign Reformed churches on the Continent, all of whom were Presbyterian, were nineteen. The delegates from Great Britain were five, viz., George Carleton, bishop of Llandaff; Joseph Hall, Dean of Worcester, and afterwards Bishop, successively, of Exeter and Norwich; John Davenant, Professor of Divinity in the University of Cambridge, and afterwards Bishop of Salisbury; Samuel Ward, Archdeacon of Taunton and Theological Professor in the University of Cambridge; and Walter Balcanequal, of Scotland, representing the Established Church of North Britain. The Synod thus constituted, consisted, in all, of eighty-six members. No Arminians, it would appear, were elected members of the Synod, excepting three from the Province of Utrecht; and of these only one was admitted to a seat.

It is perfectly evident from the foregoing statement, that the leading divines, and the governing policy of the Church of England, at the date of this Synod, were very far from sanctioning the spirit which has since risen in that establishment, and which has manifested itself, for a number of years past, among many of that denomination of Christians in the United States. Here we see a prelatical bishop and three other dignitaries of the Church of England, two of whom were afterwards bishops, sitting in a solemn ecclesiastical body, and, for months together, deliberating, praying, and preaching with an assembly, all of whom but themselves, were Presbyterians. This was a practical recognition, of the strongest kind, of the Presbyterian Church as a true Church of Christ; and demonstrated that the great and learned and good men who directed the counsels of the Church of England at that time never thought of denying, either in word or act, her just claim to this character. Some high churchmen, indeed, of modern times, either ignorant of facts or so prejudiced as to be totally blind to the lights of history, have alleged that the States General pointedly requested the king of England to send delegates to this Synod; and that he, unwilling to reject their solicitation, was over persuaded to depart, on one occasion, from the principles which ordinarily governed him and his Church. This statement is altogether incorrect. The solicitation was all the other way. The king of England, though he had nothing, strictly speaking, to do with the business, seemed fond of meddling with it; interposed from time to time in a way in which no other than a weak, officious, pedantic, and arrogant man would have thought of doing; and pressed the States General to adopt a plan which would open the way for the admission of delegates from his Church to the Synod.

And to his wishes and policy in this matter his leading divines acceded. It would have been difficult to select men of more respectable character for talents, learning, piety, and ecclesiastical influence than those who were nominated and commissioned to take their seats in that Synod. They deliberated for months with Presbyterians; preached in Presbyterian pulpits; united in Presbyterian devotions; recognized Presbyterian churches as sister churches and their ministers as brethren in office and in hope. O how different the language of many prelatists of later times — many of them, it must be confessed, indeed, pygmies in talents, learning, and piety, when compared with the giants who acted their parts on the occasion of which we speak!

— to be continued —

“All Scripture Is Given”

(2 Timothy 3:16)

First, Paul commends the Scripture on account of its authority; and secondly, on account of the utility which springs from it. In order to uphold the authority of the Scripture, he declares that it is divinely inspired; for, if it be so, it is beyond all controversy that men ought to receive it with reverence. This is a principle which distinguishes our religion from all others, that we know that God hath spoken to us, and are fully convinced that the prophets did not speak at their own suggestion, but that, being organs of the Holy Spirit, they only uttered what they had been commissioned from heaven to declare. Whoever then wishes to profit in the Scriptures, let him, first of all, lay down this as a settled point, that the law and the prophets are not a doctrine delivered according to the will and pleasure of men, but dictated by the Holy Spirit.

— John Calvin

Deze tekst is geautomatiseerd gemaakt en kan nog fouten bevatten. Digibron werkt voortdurend aan correctie. Klik voor het origineel door naar de pdf. Voor opmerkingen, vragen, informatie: contact.

Op Digibron -en alle daarin opgenomen content- is het databankrecht van toepassing. Gebruiksvoorwaarden. Data protection law applies to Digibron and the content of this database. Terms of use.

Printen