Fathers

A Candid Inquiry into the Controversies among Evangelicals · §62

First falsehoods on grace: forced motion, denying all resistibility, and clearing the reprobate of willing rebellion

Click or tap any sentence to jump there. The side buttons skip a paragraph.

So whatever is left of the controversy on whether grace can be resisted or not — and whether it is effective or ineffective — rests mostly on a false reading of the Reformed view, which was Luther's view too, from what we noted before.

They therefore assume on a shaky basis, and these are the first falsehoods:

1. That by insurmountable grace we want a forced, violent motion, like a log or a stone.

2. That we deny grace can be resisted as to corrupted nature and flesh hostile to God — which for its part resists all too much; or as to outward calling grace, or prevenient grace through the Gospel Word, which we also grant is resisted (and daily), with many examples even in Holy Scripture; or that we refuse to admit an early resistance of reluctant nature even toward inward effectual grace — we who only want nature finally overcome by grace, and flesh by the Spirit, in the elect.

3. That they would clear the reprobate — to whom this effectual grace is denied, without which they cannot be converted — of willing rebellion, stubbornness, and broad guilt on the Reformers' view; or, against us, put the cause of that stubbornness in God, not in the reprobate's malice, fault, and will.

The Confessions, the theologians, and the preachers all speak the other way — and so do we at Remonstrant Articles III and IV, and in the Controversy with R. Pajon, at his Hypothesis, sections VI and VII.

Latin

QUICQUID igitur superest Controversiae de resistibilitate vel irresistibilitate Gratiae, hujus efficacia vel inefficacia, nititur fere falsa interpretatione sententiae Reformatae, quae eadem Lutheri fuit, ex ante observatis: Supponunt igitur precario, suntque haec Πρῶτα ψεύδη, 1. Nos velle per Gratiam insuperabilem motionem coactam, violentam, qualis trunci, lapidis, &c. 2. Negare nos resistibilitatem Gratiae respectu naturae corruptae, & carnis Deo inimicae, quae sane quantum in se est nimis resistit; Vel respectu gratiae externe vocantis, seu praevenientis per Verbum Evangelii, cui etiam (& quotidiano usu) resisti largimur, frequentibus & in Scriptura Sacra exemplis; Vel non agnoscere nos resistentiam inchoatam naturae reluctantis, etiam quoad Gratiam internam, & efficacem, qui modo volumus, ultimo & finaliter superari Naturam a Gratia, Carnem a Spiritu, in Electis. 3. Vellent Reprobos, quibus haec efficax Gratia negata est, absque qua converti non possunt, non esse (ex mente Reformatorum) reos ultroneae rebellionis, contumaciae, latae culpae: Aut juxta nos, hujus contumaciae causam in Deo esse, non in reproborum malitia, culpa, voluntate, &c. Loquuntur in contrarium quicquid Confessionum est, quidquid Theologorum, ac Concionatorum, & quae diximus ad Articul. III. & IV. Remonstr. etiam ad Controv. cum R. Pajono, ad Hypoth. ejus v. VI. VII.

About this text

Samuel Strimesius — Prefatio through Controversiae Post Lutherum Controv. III-XIII + XV Tolerantia, Hexades Annotationum Prooemium and Annotatio I through Decem Theses / Francus plus Annotatio II §.I-§.VI and Annotatio III §.I–§.VII (through Cassellanum 1661) from Ingenua in Controversias Evangelicorum (Frankfurt an der Oder, 1708). Honest partial; Prefatio silence reasons, Annotatio III §.VIII+ fruits / §.IX+, Hexades theses body, deeper Controversiae / Part II remain.

English follows the locked 1708 Francofurti ad Viadrum Latin of Prefatio §I–II, Crimina defenses through III, Part I Protheoria through Controversiae Obices/Historia/Varii gradus, Formula Discord/Disparitas, Ulterius confirmatur / Classes / Formula protest / triplex differentia, Coena Domini Controversiae Priores through Precariae Hypotheses (Controv. print pp. 34–40), Controversiae Post Lutherum Natae Controv. III–XV tip (providence through De Tolerantia mutua; Controv. print pp. 40–78), Hexades Annotationum Prooemium H.I–§.III (Hexades print pp. 1–4 / PDF ~182–185), and Annotatio I De Augustana Confessione §.I–§.VIII tip (Hexades print pp. 5–24+ / PDF ~186–205+), reconstructed from Google Books PDF page images (ONB copy, id 3epYAAAAcAAJ) with pdftotext as check. No modern English was copied. Sister Halle digitization of Ingenua in Arminianismum (DOI 10.25673/65287) remains Anubis-blocked — skipped; Controversias only. Prefatio silence reasons, Annotatio I §.IX+, Hexades theses body beyond §.VIII, and remainder of Controversiae / folio remain.

Witnesses

This is an AI-assisted study translation. Source fidelity and completeness have not been independently certified. Open Latin on each section (or the Latin source witness link) for the source text. This is not a complete critical edition.