Skip to content

The 'Eodem Modo' (in the same manner) clause in the "Conclusion of the Synod of Dort"

May 16, 2008

(If it helps, read the underlined portion in the second paragraph as as it was a complete single sentence, and the point will become clear.)

The famous, but not so well known, Eodem Modo (in the same manner) clause of Dort:

And this is the perspicuous, simple, and ingenuous declaration of the orthodox doctrine respecting the five articles which have been controverted in the Belgic Churches; and the rejection of the errors, with which they have for some time been troubled. This doctrine the Synod judges to be drawn from the Word of God, and to be agreeable to the confession of the Reformed Churches. Whence it clearly appears that some, whom such conduct by no means became, have violated all truth, equity, and charity, in wishing to persuade the public:

That the doctrine of the Reformed Churches concerning predestination, and the points annexed to it, by its own genius and necessary tendency, leads off the minds of men from all piety and religion; that it is an opiate administered by the flesh and the devil; and the stronghold of Satan, where he lies in wait for all, and from which he wounds multitudes, and mortally strikes through many with the darts both of despair and security; that it makes God the author of sin, unjust, tyrannical, hypocritical; that it is nothing more than an interpolated Stoicism, Manicheism, Libertinism, Turcism; that it renders men carnally secure, since they are persuaded by it that nothing can hinder the salvation of the elect, let them live as they please; and, therefore, that they may safely perpetrate every species of the most atrocious crimes; and that, if the reprobate should even perform truly all the works of the saints, their obedience would not in the least contribute to their salvation; that the same doctrine teaches that God, by a mere arbitrary act of his will, without the least respect or view to any sin, has predestinated the greatest part of the world to eternal damnation, and has created them for this very purpose; that in the same manner in which the election is the fountain and cause of faith and good works, reprobation is the cause of unbelief and impiety; that many children of the faithful are torn, guiltless, from their mothers’ breasts, and tyrannically plunged into hell: so that neither baptism nor the prayers of the Church at their baptism can at all profit them; and many other things of the same kind which the Reformed Churches not only do not acknowledge, but even detest with their whole soul.

Wherefore, this Synod of Dort, in the name of the Lord, conjures as many as piously call upon the name of our Savior Jesus Christ to judge of the faith of the Reformed Churches, not from the calumnies which on every side are heaped upon it, nor from the private expressions of a few among ancient and modern teachers, often dishonestly quoted, or corrupted and wrested to a meaning quite foreign to their intention; but from the public confessions of the Churches themselves, and from this declaration of the orthodox doctrine, confirmed by the unanimous consent of all and each of the members of the whole Synod. Moreover, the Synod warns calumniators themselves to consider the terrible judgment of God which awaits them, for bearing false witness against the confessions of so many Churches; for distressing the consciences of the weak; and for laboring to render suspected the society of the truly faithful.

Finally, this Synod exhorts all their brethren in the gospel of Christ to conduct themselves piously and religiously in handling this doctrine, both in the universities and churches; to direct it, as well in discourse as in writing, to the glory of the Divine name, to holiness of life, and to the consolation of afflicted souls; to regulate, by the Scripture, according to the analogy of faith, not only their sentiments, but also their language, and to abstain from all those phrases which exceed the limits necessary to be observed in ascertaining the genuine sense of the Holy Scriptures, and may furnish insolent sophists with a just pretext for violently assailing, or even vilifying, the doctrine of the Reformed Churches.

May Jesus Christ, the Son of God, who, seated at the Father’s right hand, gives gifts to men, sanctify us in the truth; bring to the truth those who err; shut the mouths of the calumniators of sound doctrine, and endue the faithful ministers of his Word with the spirit of wisdom and discretion, that all their discourses may tend to the glory of God, and the edification of those who hear them. Amen.

Advertisements
5 Comments leave one →
  1. May 17, 2008 7:55 am

    This is good. Is this your translation? I wrote my case study for Dr. Hoff’s class on the Synod of Dort. I used Milton’s resourceful book. This is an issue that all Calvinists should study. Most still identify themselves through a minimalist understanding of the five points. One area I thought interesting is the political side of the Synod. This has been neglected. We tend to view colloquies/synods of the past anachronistically, as if there existed a radical separation between church and State. The delegates at Dort had more on their plate than theology. Oldenbarnevelt was executed based on the outcome. There were riots in Remonstrant towns and the threat of Spain in the south. It was much more complicated than we make it. Thanks,

    Eric

  2. CalvinandCalvinism permalink*
    May 18, 2008 4:53 pm

    Hey Eric,

    Naa I am not qualified to translate a whole document. I can work with words and such. :-) Whats happening is that TULIP has supplanted Dort and so TULIP is seen as the true representation and window in to Calvinism.

    So you are right, we have lifted so much out of its historical context.

    What is interesting, tho, the classic supralapsarians like Gomarus and Beza affirmed permission of sin and denied that God “causes” sin in a symmetrical way in which he causes ‘righteousness”. However, it is only in modern terms that some hypercalvinists have denied permission of sin, such as Hoeksema, and Gordon Clark. It is these hypercalvinists who have done the most damage to modern Calvinists; these two and their followers. And many today are fusing John Gill with modern hypercalvinism. Its getting to be a bad mix. We need another Boston or Fuller to make the necessary correctives.

    Thanks for dropping by,
    David

  3. July 16, 2008 6:08 pm

    I’m curious to know is there a resource dealing with an actual history of the TULIP.

  4. CalvinandCalvinism permalink*
    July 16, 2008 7:33 pm

    Hey Donald,

    Not really. There are works on the history of Calvinism. You can search for titles on Amazon. Curt Daniel has a huge work on the history of Calvinism from a moderate and classic perspective–as he is a scholar operating from this perspective I mean.

    Again, Tony knows the links to Daniels’ audio series on the history of Calvinism would come the closest to speaking to some of the issues we are addressing.

    I know you are right on this, there needs to be something in print.

    Thanks,
    David

  5. July 17, 2008 1:31 pm

    Great, I’ll chekc out the link on Tony’s website.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: