Path: christian Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian From: mss2@midway.uchicago.edu (Michael S. Schiffer) Subject: Arminianism (was Re: Policies for soc.religion.christian) Organization: University of Chicago Approved: christian@aramis.rutgers.edu In article christian@geneva.rutgers.edu writes: >I have characterized my theology in that area as supralapsarian Arminianism. What precisely is Arminianism? I first ran into the term in a history course covering 17th century England, where it was implied that while Arminianism was widespread it was also not well understood. (Leading to quips like, "What do Arminians hold? All the best bishoprics in the country." :-) ) So far I haven't run across a comprehensible explanation. Thanks in advance for any information. Mike -- Michael S. Schiffer, LHN "Well, _I_ believe in solipsism-- aq578@cleveland.freenet.edu but that's just one man's Mike_Schiffer@ub.cc.umich.edu opinion." -- Craig Neumeier, LHN mss2@usite-next.uchicago.edu [There is a spectrum of opinion on the free will issue. The extremes are Calvinists, who (warning: this is not fair characterization of their position) say that humans have no choice, and God decides in advance who is going to be saved and who is going to be damned, and Pelagians, who believe that people are completely responsible for what they do, and that God acts primarily as a judge. Arminianism is an attempt at a middle position. It attempts to combine the strengths of both positions. Like the Calvinists, it accepts that people are helpless without God, that God initiates the process of salvation, and that any righteousness we have comes completely from God. However it rejects the concept that God decided in advance who is going to be saved and damned. So while God starts the process of salvation by giving his grace, Arminians believe that this grace is available to all, and that those who are not saved are those who reject God's grace. Arminius himself was a 17th Cent. (I think) Dutch theologian. He did not necessarily invent these views -- similar compromises had been attempted by various people (including the Council of Trent, in my view). But he was one of the leaders of a group that introduced these views into the Protestant tradition. Arminius was part of the Reformed (i.e. Calvinist) tradition, and in fact was an admirer of Calvin's. He believed his views were consistent with Reformed thought in general, though he certainly did realize that some of his views did not agree with Calvin's. He influenced John Wesley (founder of the Methodist Church), who (with his colleagues) I believe was largely responsible for spreading this position in England and the U.S. The term Arminianism is now used to refer to a class of views that is slightly broader than Arminius' exact beliefs. I would apply it to anyone who attempts to combine an appreciation of original sin and salvation by grace alone with the belief that God gives all people the opportunity to be saved and he is not responsible for deciding who is going to be damned. There are several detailed explanations that fit this general characterization. The Calvinist critique of this position is that when you look at it in detail, it is self-contradictory. At this point I'm trying to give a definition rather than a treatise on free will, so I'm not giving enough detail of either side for you to be able to judge whether this critique is valid. I suspect the quip you are quoting is based on the concept that Arminianism isn't coherent. One thing that lends weight to this impression is that by the 17th Cent, Calvinism was quite well worked-out. Probably too well worked-out. It had become a sort of scholastic orthodoxy with quite well defined views that in my opinion lose some of the spiritual insight of Calvin himself. Arminianism was still in formation, and different exponents held slightly different versions of it. This is not necesarily a disadvantage. I'd say that most American Protestants are Arminian. I'd also say that modern Calvinists have reread the Reformers, and show more spiritual insight than the 17th and 18th Cent. variety. --clh]