The Canons of Dort — The Riddleblog

A Brief Introduction to the Canons of Dort

There are a number of misconceptions about the Canons voiced by critics of Reformed doctrine, as well as a general ignorance of them on the part many professing Reformed Christians. Here a few of the issues surrounding them . . .

The Canons have an unjustified reputation for sterility
The Canons are often considered speculative and not sufficiently biblical
They supposedly present a “cold” and stern God who is capricious in electing some, by-passing others, and unloving by not seeking to save all
The Canons of Dort are pastoral, thoroughly grounded in the biblical text, and offer comfort and assurance to the people of God.
Such misunderstandings are easily cleared up by merely going through the Canons. Christians will profit greatly by reading and reflecting upon them.

A helpful introduction to the Synod of Dort and the “Canons” can be found here: An Introduction to the Canons of Dort

The So-Called “Five Points of Calvinism” and the Canons of Dort

The Canons are a polemical response to a number of specific doctrinal errors (Arminianism) arising within the Reformed churches of the Netherlands (1610), and should not be seen as a comprehensive statement of the Christian faith (i.e., a “confession of faith”).

In the Three Forms of Unity (the doctrinal standards of the Reformed Churches), the Belgic Confession sets out the faith confessed by the Reformed Churches
The Heidelberg Catechism was adopted as the basic text to instruct children and new converts in the essential doctrines of the Christian faith. Due to its warm and pastoral tone, the “Catechism” as it is known, establishes the ethos of the Reformed churches
The Canons, on the other hand, were written to respond to specific errors (taught by the followers of Jacobus Arminius—the Arminians) that had arisen in the Dutch Reformed church
Here are suggested readings on the Three Forms of Unity: What Should I Read to Learn About the Three Forms

The Canons are surprisingly relevant today since many of these same errors and the “new teaching” that they were written to refute (i.e., a synergistic notion of salvation, a denial of perseverance, etc.), are now mainstream evangelical doctrines. This explains why confessional Reformed and Presbyterian Christians will be at odds with many American evangelicals on these doctrinal matters

A Brief History of the Synod of Dort

The Arminian controversy began with opposition to the doctrine of absolute decrees (in election/predestination), and moved into doctrines related to anthropology (the doctrine of man) and soteriology (the doctrine of salvation). Their doctrinal affirmation and rejections were set forth in the five points or articles which the Arminians presented to governing authorities of Holland in 1610 (the so-called “Remonstrance”). Their objections relate to predestination, the extent of the atonement, the nature of faith, the resistibility of grace and the perseverance of the saints.
The Canons were written in 1618-19 by an assembly of mostly Dutch theologians, pastors, and elders in response to Arminianism, which had grown as an internal threat to the Reformed churches since the publication of the Remonstrance of 1610. There were also twenty-seven foreign delegates (including Great Britain and the Palatinate) present as witnesses and participants.
The Remonstrance (the Arminian Articles) were written after the death in 1609 of the key figure in the movement, Jacob Arminius. The Remonstrance championed a universal atonement, conditional election, and denied that Christians necessarily persevere to the end. This system of thought was closely akin to classic semi-Pelganism, but came to be known as Arminianism.
Those championing the Remonstrance were, in effect, on trial during the proceedings, and were subsequently banned from teaching and preaching.

“The Remonstrance” — What Did the Arminians Believe? [1]

The Remonstrance is first negative, and then positive. It rejects five Calvinistic/Reformed propositions, and then asserts the five Arminian propositions. Their teaching eventually spread to England as seen in the teaching of John Welsey and the Methodist movement.

The Calvinistic doctrines rejected by the Remonstrance are:

That God has, before the fall, and even before the creation of man, by an unchangeable decree, foreordained some to eternal life and others to eternal damnation, without any regard to obedience or disobedience, and simply because it so pleased him, in order to show the glory of his righteousness to the one class and his mercy to the other. (The supralapsarian view.)
That God, in view of the fall, and in just condemnation of our first parents and their posterity, ordained to exempt a part of mankind from the consequences of the fall, and to save them by his free grace, but to leave the rest, without regard to age or moral condition, to their condemnation, for the glory of his righteousness. (The infralapsarian view.)
That Christ died, not for all men, but only for the elect.
That the Holy Spirit works in the elect by irresistible grace, so that they must be converted and be saved; while the grace necessary and sufficient for conversion, faith, and salvation is withheld from the rest, although they are externally called and invited by the revealed will of God.
That those who have received this irresistible grace can never totally and finally lose it, but are guided and preserved by the same grace to the end.

These doctrines, the Remonstrants declare, are not contained in the Word of God nor in the Heidelberg Catechism, and are unedifying, dangerous, and should not be preached to Christian people.

The Remonstrance (The Arminian Articles) sets forth the five positive articles (summarized by Schaff) as follows:

FIRST ARTICLE
Conditional Predestination—God has immutably decreed, from eternity, to save those men who, by the grace of the Holy Spirit, believe in Jesus Christ, and by the same grace persevere in the obedience of faith to the end; and, on the other hand, to condemn the unbelievers and unconverted (John 3:36).
Election and condemnation are thus conditioned by foreknowledge, and made dependent on the foreseen faith or unbelief of men.
SECOND ARTICLE
Universal Atonement—Christ, the Savior of the World, died for all men and for every man, and his grace is extended to all. His atoning sacrifice is in and of itself sufficient for the redemption of the whole world, and is intended for all by God the Father. But its inherent sufficiency does not necessarily imply its actual efficiency. The grace of God may be resisted and only those who accept it by faith, are actually saved. He who is lost, is lost by his own guilt (John 3:16 ; 1 John 2:2).
The Arminians agree with the orthodox in holding the doctrine of a vicarious or expiatory atonement, in opposition to the Socinians; but they soften it down, and represent its direct effect to be to enable God, consistently with his justice and veracity, to enter into a new covenant with men, under which pardon is conveyed to all men on condition of repentance and faith. The immediate effect of Christ’s death was not the salvation, but only the salvability of sinners by the removal of the legal obstacles, and opening the door for pardon and reconciliation. They reject the doctrine of a limited atonement, which is connected with the supralapsarian view of predestination, but is disowned by moderate Calvinists, who differ from the Arminians in all other points. Calvin himself says that Christ died sufficinter pro omnibus, efficaciter pro electis [”sufficient for all, but efficient for the elect”].
THIRD ARTICLE
Saving Faith-Man in his fallen state is unable to accomplish any thing really and truly good, and therefore also unable to attain to saving faith, unless he be regenerated and renewed by God in Christ through the Holy Spirit (John xv. 5).
FOURTH ARTICLE
Resistible Grace-Grace is the beginning, continuation, and end of our spiritual life, so that man can neither think nor do any good or resist sin without prevening, co-operating, and assisting grace. But as for the manner of co-operation, this grace is not irresistible, for many resist the Holy Ghost (Acts vii.)
FIFTH ARTICLE
The uncertainty of perseverance-Although grace is sufficient and abundant to preserve the faithful through all trials and temptations for life everlasting, it has not yet been proved from the Scriptures that grace, once given, can never be lost.
On this point the disciples of Arminius went further, and taught the possibility of a total and final fall of believers from grace. They appealed to such passages where believers are warned against this very danger, and to such examples as Solomon and Judas. They moreover denied, with the Roman Catholics, that any body can have a certainty of salvation except by special revelation.
These five points the Remonstrants declare to be in harmony with the Word of God, edifying, and, as far as they go, sufficient for salvation. They protest against the charge of changing the Christian Reformed religion, and claim toleration and legal protection for their doctrine.