Canons of Dorte and TULIP

The Highway

Hi
I read something recently that I want to check the facts out first before I comment (if I comment) on.

What I have noticed is nobody on the Reformed site seems to have challenged it; though they have challenged other things the person said.

Quote

A comment by a friend is relevant here.
There's no historic Calvinist denomination that requires anyone to subscribe to TULIP. TULIP is first developed in 1905 but doesn't become popular until the 1930s. It's a poor summary of the conclusions of the Canons of Dordt which is popular because it's easy to remember and sounds like a pretty flower.
The Canons of Dordt themselves were not written to define Calvinism or Calvinist thought but were written as a reaction against the 5 Articles of the Remonstrance written by what are now called Arminians. The Arminians were not some outsider group but a group that developed within the Calvinist churches. Calvinism and Arminianism aren't opposites. Arminianism is a type of Calvinism.
A sane and reasonable person who wanted to instruct someone in Calvinism would probably take them through the Heidelberg Catechism and then through the Belgic Confession and then the Canons of Dordt. But people on Facebook who have never even bothered to read their own Confessional documents are yelling at people for not being consistent with TULIP and evaluating everything around them based on this stupid flower that doesn't even accurately summarize the Canons of Dordt. I realized most of this ... by reading stuff by Richard Muller.

Understand here, I realize that the Canons of Dordt, are not spelt out as TULIP; however as I look at them, I do not see anything in TULIP that goes against the Canons of Dorte either.
The person who wrote this is a Lutheran and seems to have a penchant against Calvinism. Some of it rings true, but I perceive it may be written in a manner to be deceptive.

Jacob Arminius if understand properly, came out of the Reformed tradition, but went against them, which eventually ended up showing in the 5 Articles of the Remonstrance; which the Canons of Dorte specifically answered.

Also, the Lutherans I have been running into a lot lately, seem to be very much against Limited Atonement.

I thought of one other thing, concerning the Lutheran who gave me the quote. In the past, he has also vehemently said that the traditional Reformed view that states that: (relying on memory here)

Quote

Salvation is by grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone; but not by a faith that is alone.

is error because the words

Quote

but not by a faith that is alone.

because it makes the works of the person, part of salvation. When one, tries to show them, the last part is sanctification, not justification. Of which where there is justification, it is shown in sanctification. That Lutheran and apparently all Lutherans disagree.

It seems to me then that this makes them Antinominians.
Yet, I do not want to misrepresent anyone.

Any facts people can give me, would be very much appreciated.

Tom

Don't know what "facts" you are wanting?

1. Yes, the Canons of Dordt were written as a rebuttal to the Remonstrance which consisted of five points of doctrine which disagreed with the Belgic Confession.
2. The writers of the Arminian doctrine were followers/students of Jacobus Arminius who departed from the established doctrines of the Reformation while professor in theology at the University of Leiden. He died in 1609 and thus was not part of the proceedings.
3. The infamous "Five Points of Calvinism" are part and parcel of the Canons of Dordt. One would have to be blind or mentally incapacitated to not see the obvious acrostic of TULIP in the Canons of Dordt. Just look at the "Heads of Doctrine" that begin each of the five sections of rebuttal followed by the rejection of errors submitted in the Remonstrance.
4. As to the accusation that "but not by a faith that is alone" = "justification by works" is equally untrue and an equivocation on its face. This accusation is 100% unwarranted and incontrovertible for the Reformers in their perpetual defense of the faith once delivered to the saints against the Roman State Church constantly insisted that true saving faith is EVIDENCED by good works (cf. James 2:17ff). Lutherans have historically always had issues with where good works fits into the Gospel, and have in essence denied that faith & works are antithetical. If, of course, as some Lutherans will admit, that justification is totally of grace through faith alone in Christ alone and good works show Spirit-wrought faith is genuine which Calvinism concurs. Today, the vast majority of Protestant churches espouse semi-Pelagianism which makes faith a work since it is man who brings that faith in and of himself, albeit with a little bit of God's help; aka: synergistic salvation.

As is my advice with the majority of your encounters with others of this type,

Don't waste your time other than perhaps providing some links to article and/or books that contain the truth of the matter.

Thanks Pilgrim

That is exactly the kind of information I was looking for and are in line with my thoughts on the issue.

You might have noticed I included in brackets

Quote

if I comment

. I wrestle sometimes with whether or not it is worth commenting on matters like this.
Sometimes I do comment and other times, I end up just do a little research myself and do not use it to comment.

I find sometimes, when I do comment it falls on deaf ears, yet some of the ones following the thread end up thanking me.

During my research into this matter. I came upon some information that I had not noticed before.

Quote

The canons were not intended to be a comprehensive explanation of Reformed doctrine, but only an exposition on the five points of doctrine in dispute.[4] The five points of Calvinism, remembered by the mnemonic TULIP[a] and popularized by a 1963 booklet,[5] are popularly said to summarize the 1618 Canons of Dort.[6] While related to the 1618 Canons of Dort, the Five Points of Calvinism do not actually come from the 1618 document itself but from an earlier document and correction against the Arminians during the same controversy. The Five Points of Calvinism comes from the Counter Remonstrance of 1611[7]

Yet because the source, I am not completely sure of its accuracy.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canons_of_Dort

Tom

Why go to Wikipedia for information on theological matters? :scratch2: when you could possibly find reliable information right on The Highway here: The Canons of Dortrecht

Quote

The Decision of the Synod of Dort on the Five Main Points of Doctrine in Dispute in the Netherlands is popularly known as the Canons of Dort (or the Five Articles Against the Remonstrants). It consists of statements of doctrine adopted by the great Synod of Dort which met in the city of Dordrecht in 1618-1619. Although this was a national Synod of the Reformed Churches of the Netherlands, it had an international character, since it was composed not only of sixty-two Dutch delegates, but also of twenty-seven foreign delegates representing eight countries.

The Synod of Dort was held in order to settle a serious controversy in the Dutch churches initiated by the rise of Arminianism. Jacob Arminius (1560-1609), a theological professor at Leiden University, departed from the Reformed faith on a number of important points. After Arminius's death, forty-three of his ministerial followers drafted and presented their heretical views to the States General of the Netherlands on five of these points in the Remonstrance of 1610. In this document and even more explicitly in later writings, the Arminians, who came to be called "Remonstrants," taught:

1. Election based on foreseen faith

2. the universal merits of Christ

3. the free will of man due to only partial depravity

4. the resistibility of grace, and

5. the possibility of a lapse from grace.

They desired the Reformed church's doctrinal standards to be revised and their own minority views to be protected by the government. The Arminian-Calvinism conflict became so severe that it led the Netherlands to the brink of civil war. Finally in 1617 the States General voted four to three to call a national Synod to address Arminianism.

The Synod held 154 formal sessions over a period of seven months (November 1618 to May 1619). Thirteen Remonstrant theologians, led by Simon Episcopius, used various tactics to delay the work of Synod and to divide the delegates tactics which proved to be unsuccessful. Under the leadership of Johannes Bogerman, the Remonstrants were dismissed. The Synod then developed the Canons which thoroughly rejected the Remonstrance of 1610 and scripturally set forth the Reformed doctrine on these debated points, now popularly called "the five points of Calvinism": unconditional election, limited atonement, total depravity, irresistible grace, and the perseverance of saints.

Though these points do not embrace the full scope of Calvinism and are better regarded as Calvinism's five answers to the five errors of Arminianism, they certainly lie at the heart of the Reformed faith, particularly Reformed soteriology, for they flow out of the principle of absolute divine sovereignty. They may be summarized as follows:

Pilgrim

I like to research quite a few sources; the Highway has become very valuable in this.
The reason I asked about the legitimacy of the above link is because it indicates that TULIP predates even the Canon of Dorte. I had not heard that before.

I do agree with you, that the reference of TULIP being in the Canons of Dorte is fairly obvious.

Tom

From my studies, TULIP originated at the Synod of Dordtrecht. The "Five Points" as mentioned above came first from the Remonstrance which consisted of 5 major doctrines contained in the Belgic Confession and which were rejected by the followers of Arminius. The response and judgment by the Synod held at Dortrecht was formulated using 5 main points to refute the 5 points of contention of the Remonstrants' document. The original order of the points was rearranged thereafter from U-L-T-I-P using the acrostic T-U-L-I-P. But, I repeat myself.