Some theologians of Delft having attacked the sentiments of Calvin and Beza upon predestination, and given great offence by it, they defended themselves by a book, entitled; “An Answer to certain Arguments of Beza and Calvin, in the treatise concerning Predestination; or upon the ninth Chapter of the Epistle to the Romans.”  They transmitted their defence to Martin Lydius, a partisan of the divines whom it attacked; he sent it to Arminius, with a request that he would answer it.  Arminius undertook the task, and attentively examined and weighed the arguments on each side; the result was, that he embraced the opinions which he had been called upon to confute, and even went further than the ministers of Delft.  Upon this account, the friends of the rejected principles raised a great clamour against him; but were quieted by the intervention of the magistrates.  The opinions, which Arminius adopted, he endeavoured to propagate.  They are contained in the Remonstrance of his disciples, which we shall afterwards transcribe.

[Sidenote:  CHAP.  V. 1610-1617.]

As the language of Arminius seemed to express notions, more consonant than those of Calvin, to the sentiments entertained by rational Christians, of the goodness and justice of the Deity, it is not surprising that they found many advocates among the learned and moderate; but some ardent spirits were offended by them, and instilled their dislike of them into the populace.  This, Arminius was soon made to feel.  In 1603, he was appointed, on the death of Francis Junius, to a professorship of theology in the university of Leyden:  great efforts were made, first to prevent, and afterwards to procure a recision of his appointment.  He was accused of having said in a sermon, that “God had not yet sent his letter of divorce to the church of Rome;” but his friends produced a work of Francis Junius, his predecessor in the theological chair, in which that celebrated theologian had used the same expression.  Arminius was also accused by his adversaries, of elevating the action of reason in the choice of good, at the expense of grace.  To this Arminius replied, by accusing his adversaries of sacrificing reason entirely to grace.  But the greater number of the enemies of Arminius supported their charges against him, by making it a question of authority:  “the States,” they said, “had decided the question, by adopting Calvin’s doctrine at the union; so that the gainsayers of it were guilty of treason.”  The friends of Arminius replied, that he did not deny Calvin’s doctrine, but merely explained it.

[Sidenote:  Arminius.]

Thus they disputed;

        “And found no end, in wandering mazes lost.” 
                        Milton.

In fact, the subject,—­as the writer has more than once observed,—­is above human reason:  the day will come, “when the Almighty will be judged, and will overcome;”—­when the secret of his councils will be unfolded, and their justice and goodness made manifest to all.[020]