Pernicious Pelagian Poison

Introduction

The title of this article is borrowed from the sixth error and rejection of the second head of the Canons of Dordt, in which the Synod of Dordt (and the church) rejected the error of those

who use the difference between meriting and appropriating, to the end that they may instill into the minds of the imprudent and inexperienced this teaching, that God, as far as He is concerned, has been minded of applying to all equally the benefits gained by the death of Christ; but that, while some obtain the pardon of sin and eternal life and others do not, this difference depends on their own free will, which joins itself to the grace that is offered without exception, and that it is not dependent on the special gift of mercy, which powerfully works in them, that they rather than others should appropriate unto themselves this grace.

Rejection: For these, while they feign that they present this distinction in a sound sense, seek to instill into the people the destructive poison of the Pelagian errors. (Confessions and Church Order, 166)

Before getting to the article proper, I will say a few words about the sixth error and rejection made by the synod. To start, we ought to understand the difference between meriting and appropriating. The verb merit means to earn something through actions. The verb appropriate means to take to oneself. The sixth error speaks of the difference between meriting and appropriating salvation, the benefits of salvation, and specifically justification, or “the pardon of sin.” To merit salvation means that one earns it for himself by his works. He earns justification, sanctification, preservation, and whatever else belongs to the benefits of salvation. To appropriate salvation means that one receives these benefits and applies them to himself, which means that he consciously enjoys these benefits of his salvation.

This appropriation is by faith only. The Heidelberg Catechism refers to this in Lord’s Day 23, answer 61: “I cannot receive and apply the same [Christ’s righteousness, which is the elect sinner’s righteousness before God] to myself any other way than by faith only” (Confessions and Church Order, 107). As such, appropriation stands absolutely antithetical to all merit, to the will of man, and to the activity of man. The reason for this is simple. Faith and works are antithetical. Christ merited all the benefits of salvation at the cross. We appropriate Christ’s merits. We ourselves do not merit anything. Moreover, faith in its entirety is the work of the Holy Ghost. We must remember this especially when we speak of applying salvation to ourselves. This application is not our activity, but it is divine activity. When the Holy Ghost works faith, he lays hold of a man’s heart, mind, and soul, so that the man consciously, experientially, and subjectively knows and is assured that Christ’s righteousness is his own. That knowledge and assurance is not man’s activity but the Spirit’s act of working faith in the elect sinner’s heart. The elect sinner’s appropriating Christ and his righteousness is what the Spirit’s work of applying Christ to that sinner looks like.

Thus there is a vast difference between meriting and appropriating. The sixth error refers to false teachers, Arminians, who perniciously use this difference to make room for the free will of man in salvation. They do this, first, by teaching that God is minded to apply equally to all men the benefits gained by Christ. What is immediately striking is the well-meant offer of the gospel, that is, God desires to save all men. However, we must note that Arminians speak of the merits of Christ; they speak of “the benefits gained by the death of Christ,” and they say that Christ merited “the pardon of sin and eternal life.” They speak glowingly of Christ and his cross. They say, “Of course, we never merit; we cannot merit; we all fall short; Christ alone merits!” Arminians very obviously have to say these things; otherwise, they would be exposed immediately as heretics who contradict the scriptures. However, it becomes clear that they mean by these things only that Christ objectively merited salvation. Or to put it another way, Christ made salvation a possibility, and that for all men. Christ established a completely general righteousness—not a particular righteousness for certain, definite persons. But there is still something that has to be done before man is actually saved. Just because Christ merited does not mean that his merits automatically will be applied to the sinner. The Arminians’ cross is one of limitless possibility but nothing more—salvation is possible for all men.

But how is this possibility realized? To put it in other words, why do some obtain the pardon of sin and others do not?

Arminians teach, second, that the difference between meriting and appropriating depends on the free will of man. Again, Arminians have faith in view. How does a man appropriate Christ? How do the merits of Christ actually become one’s conscious possession? Everyone knows that the answer is faith. The elect receive Christ and his righteousness by faith, of course. But Arminians say that faith is man’s activity. Faith is nothing more than the product of man’s will and of grace—the available grace that God offers to men without exception. However, the cross of limitless possibility and available grace is always wholly dependent on the careful hand of man’s will on the rudder to guide him into the harbor of salvation. This, now, is man’s part. This is always the conclusion when Christ’s cross is made a cross of limitless possibility.

You might ask the Arminians, “Well, does that not mean that man merits salvation at that point? If there is that which man must do to receive Christ’s merits, is that not merit? Do you not say that man has some form of righteousness by his activity, whereby he earns something from God, namely, the application of salvation? Is that not merit?”

Here is where Arminians employ their tricks. They say, “Not at all. We are not talking about merit. We are talking only about the application of salvation.”

We might be more familiar with this language: “We are not talking about salvation in the objective sense, but we refer to salvation only in the subjective sense, namely, the conscious experience of salvation, the application of Christ’s merits to our hearts, minds, and souls. Of course, man cannot earn righteousness. Men are sinners, and they all fall short. Man needs Christ; man needs Christ’s righteousness; that is the only righteousness whereby man is saved. However, man only must believe.”

By this Arminians mean that faith is wholly within the grasp of man’s will and power. Man cannot merit his salvation, but there is that which man can do to get Christ’s merits. Man’s act of faith—not the death of Christ—makes all the difference between the saved and the unsaved.

This, the sixth error says, stands opposed to the “special gift of mercy, which powerfully works in them.” The “special gift of mercy” refers to the efficacious, irresistible operation of God according to his mercy to save elect sinners. And I note that this “special gift of mercy” implies that God both merits and applies salvation to elect sinners. In other words, when elect sinners appropriate salvation by faith, that belongs to the special gift of God’s mercy; that is, it is God’s work by his Spirit in mercy for sinners and not man’s work. I note also that this “special gift of mercy” belongs to Christ’s saving work on the cross, which is, after all, the subject of the second head of the Canons. The point of the Canons is that the cross of Christ saves to the uttermost. This means that Christ’s death did not produce a mere possibility of salvation. It is not as though Christ merited for all men everything they need, but then those men must tap into Christ for salvation. Not at all, for Christ merited salvation for definite persons, the elect and them only. To put this simply: At the cross Christ earned for the elect their salvation and its application to them. Belonging to the merits of Christ for the elect is the gracious application of their salvation through time and history.

The all-important fact is that Christ actually justified definite persons at the cross. Remember that lying at the heart of Arminianism is the denial of sovereign double predestination. To put this in different terms, Arminians deny that the matters of salvation and damnation are settled already in eternity in God’s decree of election and reprobation. Here specifically we might remember that Arminians apply their denial of predestination to the cross—Christ did not lay down his life for definite persons but for men generally. This makes all the difference. If Christ made satisfaction for a definite number of persons, that is to say, justified them, then those persons have the right to every blessing of God and to eternal life. And indeed, they must be blessed by God with every benefit of salvation, as the psalmist says, “Thou, Lord, wilt bless the righteous” (Ps. 5:12).

All of this leads to the conclusion that Arminians feign to present a sound distinction between meriting and appropriating. This means that Arminians actually do teach that man must merit; man must get for himself the merits of Christ. Man must make himself worthy to receive those benefits. This he does by some activity, that is, by doing faith. According to the Arminian conception, faith does not belong to the gifts of salvation that Christ merited, but faith belongs to the will of the sinner. The Arminian conception of salvation does in fact teach that man merits, but Arminians cover this up by saying, “We are talking only about the appropriation of salvation, of Christ’s merits, and of Christ’s righteousness. Thus it is with sly craft that Arminians administer Pelagian poison into men.

And we ought to notice that the sixth rejection calls it “Pelagian” poison. Pelagianism is about man. Negatively, it is the teaching that man is not totally depraved; positively, it is the teaching that man is wholly good, or at least he has some goodness remaining in him. As such, man is able to will and to do the good. Man is able to do what he needs to do to get saved. Remember that man can do this only with the assistance of divine grace that is readily available to him, which grace he only must seek, pray for, and employ to do what he must do to receive a blessing from God. But very basically, Pelagianism is all about man. It makes salvation dependent not upon God but upon man. Salvation is not about God’s eternal decree; election and reprobation; the limited atonement of Christ; the special gift of God’s mercy; the irresistible, efficacious, and at the same time, most delightful, astonishing, mysterious, and ineffable operations of the Holy Ghost. Oh, Arminians might talk about these things, but they do not matter—man matters. All these things are subjected to man, and man must bring them to fruition. All these things must cross the final checkpoint of man’s will and decision. Without man’s input, God is brought to ruin. That is Pelagianism. That is Arminianism.

Pelagianism, and by extension Arminianism, is poison. To use the words of the Canons’ rejection, Pelagianism is “destructive.” Pelagianism kills souls, robs comfort, and leaves desolate, “for vain is the help of man” (Ps. 108:12). Pelagianism certainly is no medicine that gently heals, sweetly comforts, and binds wounds. That is not to say that Pelagian physicians do not promote their poison as medicine. Certainly, they do this. They feign themselves to be good physicians, preachers of good news, and comforters of souls. They proclaim their poison as the finest medicine in all the world with the sweetest, most pleasant effect. It is not obvious that their patients are prey. The physicians are pleasant fellows; their medicine seems harmless, even good; and the medicine is administered in the gentlest manner. Yet with feigned words, they make merchandise of their patients and profiteer their patients’ sicknesses. They use sly, slow-acting poison whose deadly characteristics and effects are not immediately apparent. But that poison never heals, and it always makes their patients come back for more, until at last they pine away and die.

Keeping the Hearers Unwary

Now, I turn to the occasion of my article. These Pelagian physicians and their pernicious poison are everywhere. This often amazes me. There are many about whom I could write. This holds true even in the small place where I live—Wingham, Ontario. It is no big city. One is not met with hordes of hedonists. One is not met with much foul behavior and language. One is not met with the sheer ungodliness of men. Rather, to all appearances, the place is greatly religious. There is a church on well-nigh every street in the town. Moreover, there are many so-called Reformed churches in the general area. Many of these churches speak of God, Jesus Christ, salvation, godliness, and love, but what you will find in their pulpits are Pelagian physicians. However, these physicians are amateurs in this devilish, Pelagian practice of medicine. To find the best, professional Pelagian physicians, you must go to the Protestant Reformed Churches (PRC). These physicians are the finest of this sort. They all received their doctorates of medicine from the finest Pelagian medical school. There they have learned their practice and the ins and outs of medicine—what to say, what not to say, how to present their poison, how to administer it craftily, and how to ensure that their patients remain unwary and are never the wiser to the fact that their physicians are angels of death and that their medicine is a pernicious poison.

Such a doctor there is in Wingham, Ontario. He practices medicine at Wingham Protestant Reformed Church. He is Rev. Daniel Holstege. Let us examine his practice and see that he is a Pelagian physician who administers the pernicious Pelagian poison. One could pick from his sermons at random, but the one I will examine is titled “The Righteousness of God Manifested.”¹ Reverend Holstege’s text is Romans 3:21–22, and he develops his theme according to these three divisions: Manifested in Christ, Imputed Through Faith, To Believers of All Nations. From the outset I note that he preaches this sermon in connection with Reformation Day. He speaks rather extensively about Martin Luther; the truth of justification by faith alone, which was recovered and developed in 1517; and the greatness of this event. For the most part I will pass over these sections. I note only that this belongs to his general craftiness, as though he (and the PRC) actually believes what justification by faith alone means and as though he (and the PRC) actually cares and rejoices in God and thanks the Holy Spirit for giving his people this marvelous truth. Be that as it may, let us turn to his explanation of the text.

Romans 3:21–22 reads as follows:

21. But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets;

22. Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference.

Reverend Holstege begins at the proper place by explaining what “the righteousness of God” means. He says that “righteousness” does not refer to God’s attribute of righteousness, nor to an infused righteousness into man (man himself becomes a better, righteous person). Holstege says,

Rather, the apostle Paul means the righteousness which comes from God and which is granted to sinners as a free and gracious gift. He means the righteousness that God gives to those who have no righteousness of our own.

Later, Holstege states,

When Paul says “the righteousness of God…is manifested,” he’s talking about that righteousness which is a verdict of the high judge of heaven and earth. He’s talking about that righteousness which is coming from God and is imputed to us who have no righteousness.

So far, there is not much on which to comment. Righteousness is perfect harmony with God’s will according to God’s own judgment. The words “of God” is an absolute qualifier of this righteousness. It means that this righteousness has nothing to do with its object. This righteousness is conceived of by God, decreed by God, worked out by God, given by God to the object, and all this strictly for the glory of God.

And this “righteousness of God,” the text says, “is manifested.” To manifest something means to reveal it. However, this revelation is always more than a mere disclosure, that is, that something is made known. We must always remember that when God reveals something, he reveals that which is real according to God’s own eternal conception. God reveals that which is real. As such, when God manifests something in time, he always realizes that thing. We could express the idea in these terms: God not only makes known his righteousness, but he also brings that righteousness into the conscious possession of his elect.

This righteousness is manifested by God in Jesus Christ. This means several things. First, the righteousness of God is the righteousness of Jesus Christ, which is wholly worked out by him. Second, the righteousness of God saves to the uttermost, for it is the righteousness of Jesus Christ. That is no small point of the text. The point is that the righteousness of God is not an isolated blessing, but it implies all our salvation. For the purpose of this article, I note that the manifestation of this righteousness implies the gift of faith. The righteousness of God cannot be manifested in only an objective way at the cross, but it must be manifested also subjectively in one’s heart. And this manifestation is by faith, which is Christ’s business; it belongs to his work of manifesting the righteousness of God to his people to work faith effectually in their hearts. Third, the righteousness of God in Jesus Christ is strictly particular. Christ is a corporation, a limited corporation. Not all belong to him. All men do not have a possibility to become members of him. This righteousness of God is particular to the elect and to them only. Fourth, this righteousness of God in Jesus Christ, and by extension in the elect, is an eternal reality. God reveals in time what is eternally true of Christ and his elect corporation. As such, this righteousness of God could be witnessed in the law and prophets, that is, in the old dispensation. This righteousness was real for the elect of the old dispensation long before Christ hung on the accursed tree. This righteousness is an eternal reality that is manifested in time.

But does Holstege teach this? He says,

The apostle says, “Now, that righteousness of God is manifested”…God has manifested his righteousness by sending and raising up that righteous Branch. God has manifested his righteousness by sending the long-awaited Messiah into the world…Because, you see, the righteousness of God in the text is the righteousness of Christ.

Later, Holstege says, “But what we have in Jesus is the righteous one who wasn’t righteous for himself, but was righteous for us.” This is alright, I suppose. However, it is not difficult to perceive that this righteousness always stands aloof to God’s people. In the interest of fairness, I quoted where Holstege states that Christ was righteous for us, but he does not continue along those lines throughout his sermon. Holstege is not governed by the truths of eternal justification and election and reprobation, and as such, what he says throughout the sermon does not strike those notes. Just a little later when talking about Jesus as the spotless lamb, Holstege says that Christ is merely “the perfect sacrifice for the sins of others.” Certainly, Christ died for others. I do not object to that. But Holstege’s statement is revelatory that an actual atonement, and certainly a limited atonement, is far from his mind.

This is proved by the conclusion of his first point:

God now stands there at the cross, and through the gospel he manifests to us: “Here is my righteousness; you have no righteousness; you are unrighteous, but here is my righteousness. Look at Jesus…I present to you,” God says, “the one only, perfect righteousness that there is for wicked sinners like you who have no righteousness of your own—Jesus Christ, the righteous one.”

Now, this is wholly wrong. I wonder how he can get across his lips that God can stand at the cross and through the gospel proclaim to his people, “You are unrighteous,” and the only crumbs of comfort that God can scrounge up for his people is this: “Here is my righteousness.” God proclaims at the cross, “Behold, I, even I, have made my people righteous!” Moreover, Holstege ends completely generally: At the cross there is righteousness for wicked sinners. There is not righteousness at the cross for wicked sinners. There is righteousness at the cross for wicked, elect sinners—but that is all.

The Feigned Distinction

However, Holstege simply is priming his hearers for the introduction of man’s will into the text, but he has a little more work to do before they are fully prepared to hear what they must do. He first calms any notion that man gets this righteousness by the works of the law.
Holstege says, 

“This righteousness of God,” Paul says, “is imputed to us through faith. This righteousness of God,” he says, “is manifested without the law.” 

Holstege does some more explaining and talks rather extensively about Martin Luther before saying,

“The righteousness of God is manifested,” he says, “even the righteousness of God, which is unto and upon all them that believe.” Not those who work; those who believe.

Here it becomes increasingly clear that Holstege is an Arminian. He is still in the second point of his sermon, which deals with how this righteousness is manifested, especially now in a man’s heart. To put it another way, his point is, how does one receive this righteousness? Yet, Holstege takes it upon himself to discuss here already the objects of this righteousness, that is, who receives it. This righteousness of God is not unto and upon “those who work” but is unto and upon “those who believe.”

What we have to understand, however, is that Holstege is explaining how to get this righteousness. His answer is simple: One must believe. This is clear from what he says before this. Before he makes the statements that I have quoted above, he talks about how it is a temptation to think that we are righteous by works, how the whole world is guilty, and how no one can be justified by the works of the law. How does one rise out of this? How does one get out of this mess and get the righteousness of God? Well, do not work, stop trusting in your works, and start believing. I will translate that: Get busy! Get active! I will tell you what Holstege really means, though he does not say it: This righteousness of God is actually manifested with the law. There is actually that which you must do. You, even you, must believe.

Holstege puts faith wholly within the will and power of man. Faith, for Holstege, is nothing more than the activity of man. After saying, “Not those who work; those who believe,” he follows with this question: “Do you believe in the Lord Jesus?” I suppose one may ask this question, but it ought to be entirely out of place in a sermon on this text. The point of the text is that God manifests his righteousness in the fullest sense of the word. Again, this implies God’s work of faith. But Holstege left his hearers with a general righteousness of Christ at the cross, with only a possibility of righteousness, and so therefore, in his sermon the question is entirely fitting. The crux of Holstege’s sermon is not the cross of Christ, but the crux of the matter is whether or not man believes. All of this righteousness of God waits for man’s decision by his will and power to believe. Holstege brought the sermon to this point. Now, he asks the urgent, all-important question: “Do you believe in the Lord Jesus?”

And then Holstege explains to the listeners what they have to do:

Believing in Christ means, first of all, that you know him…It’s a knowledge of who Jesus truly is, that he’s the Son of God. He’s the Messiah. He’s come into this world. He had no sin. He was righteous. He died on the cross for sinners [notice how Holstege makes the cross of Christ general for sinners, not the elect]. He rose from the dead…

But it [believing in Christ] is also the assured confidence in Christ so that you don’t just know him, but you cling to him. You rely on him. You place your confidence in Jesus, not in yourself, not in anyone or anything else, but in Jesus Christ alone. That’s faith.

Never once does Holstege mention that faith is a bond. It is very clear, then, what he means when he says,

Paul says, “The righteousness is unto you who believe.” That means God imputes it to you; he reckons it to your account; he considers it yours. That’s justification by faith.

All Holstege means is that by doing faith, God will give you his righteousness. Faith makes you worthy to receive God’s righteousness. How else can we understand it? Unless you explain faith as a bond, you cannot talk about righteousness through faith. But if you explain faith as a bond that unites elect sinners to Christ, like a graft that unites a branch to a tree, then you can talk about through faith. Through the graft the branch receives the life of the tree. So also through faith the elect receive the righteousness of Christ. But when faith is man’s activity, you cannot talk about through faith. You can talk only about on account of. Man’s act of faith becomes the condition of salvation, that act whereby man earns (merits) for himself the right to be saved from among the fallen mass of humanity.

Perhaps you think that I am being overly harsh of Holstege, that I am reading into what he is saying. Again, I will let him speak for himself. In the interest of fairness, I quote what he says after explaining faith as believing:

That faith, that too is the gift of God. It’s all the gift of God. The righteousness is a gift of God; the faith is a gift of God; it’s all God’s gift. Having chosen us, having sent Christ for us, he gives us that faith; he calls us to it, and he gives it to us, and through that faith he makes us to have that righteousness. He imputes it to us, and it becomes ours. And this is the great gospel recovered in the Reformation.

I would be inclined to receive these words as honest if he actually explains the text in these terms. But he does not. Moreover, this is nothing new for Arminians. Arminians speak about election, God’s choosing, God’s sending Christ for men, and the gift of faith. They use the language, not because they believe it but to sound in harmony with scripture and the Reformed confessions. I will not take the time to quote and explain all this, but you can read all about it in the Canons of Dordt. My comments are nothing more than a passing notice.

It is also important to remember that the sixth rejection says that the Pelagian physicians who administer this poison “feign” to present soundly the distinction between meriting and appropriating. These physicians are pretenders and liars. Holstege says the correct words, but his sermon thus far has proved that he does not believe them, and he certainly has not taught them. However, it is fitting that he takes the time to say the correct words at this point. Arminians pretend to be sound in the interest of instilling Pelagian poison into men. Holstege has proceeded perhaps a little too radically into Arminianism, and he must reel himself back a bit. He is also preparing to pour into his sermon the final dregs of the Pelagian poison. The hearers must remain unwary; they must receive the poison, thinking that they are receiving the sincere milk of the word.

The Last Dregs

Hear now the presentation of the final dosage of poison: “‘This inexpressibly sweet gift of God, this righteousness, finally,’ Paul says, ‘is unto all who believe—all.’” I add the emphasis in order to convey how Holstege says it. He emphatically stresses the word “all.” He does this later as well, saying, “God grants this righteousness to all who believe, to all who believe.” Now, Holstege does this because he is an Arminian, and he believes in the well-meant offer of the gospel. But, you know, delivery can be difficult sometimes when preaching a sermon. So I will deal with him according to his words. It is clear now that he has moved into his third point: Who are the objects of this righteousness of God that is manifested? Well, first Holstege informs his congregation of a reality:

You know, there are many in this world who will never receive that righteousness of God. They’re going about to establish their own righteousness. They’re ignorant of God’s righteousness. They reject God’s righteousness. In their pride they want to establish their own. They think they can make their own way to heaven. They’ll perish.

What? If men perish, not receiving the righteousness of God, because they seek their own righteousness and seek not God or his righteousness, then nobody is saved. Hear the words of the same chapter in Romans:

9. What then? are we better than they? No, in no wise: for we have before proved both Jews and Gentiles, that they are all under sin;

10. As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:

11. There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God.

12. They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one. (Rom. 3:9–12)

Certainly, men perish in unbelief. Certainly, the unbeliever trusts his works and seeks not the righteousness of God. But men perish because according to the decree of reprobation, God sovereignly appointed them to perish. According to reprobation God excluded them from Christ, his righteousness, and thus also from faith. Men are wholly excluded from this manifestation of the righteousness of God, and they perish, not because they are obstinate, unbelieving, and darkened in their understanding but because God excluded them and appointed them to perish.

Predestination is wholly lacking from Holstege’s entire sermon. And just as he makes man’s perishing about what man does or does not do, so also he makes man’s salvation dependent on the individual:

“But God imputes his righteousness,” Paul says, “to everyone who believes.” Everyone, no matter who he or she is, no matter what their background, no matter what color of skin they have, no matter what nation they come from, no matter what their economic status is—God does not distinguish. He is not a respecter of persons.

Alright, so God is not a respecter of persons, but what explains the difference that some receive this righteousness and others do not? Holstege says,

“There is no difference,” Paul says. There is no difference, except for faith. The only thing that distinguishes humanity, ultimately, is faith.

Faith is the ultimate difference? Not election and reprobation? What about Acts 13:48, which says that “as many as were ordained to eternal life believed”? Does not that clearly explain that faith is not the ultimate difference, but predestination is the difference?

Holstege continues,

We look around us, and we see all kinds of differences…But God ultimately only sees one difference—those who believe and those who don’t…The fundamental difference is faith, no faith.

Now it is all clear. God sees faith, and God sees no faith. That is what makes the difference between God’s granting his righteousness to one and not to another. The difference is man’s act of faith or the lack of man’s act of faith. Note how God is entirely reactive. God sees, and God acts according to what he sees (not according to what he eternally decrees). And that is not to mention the sheer Pelagianism of man’s ability to will and to do faith.

Oh, but I will give the fellow a fair presentation. Mixed into this section of Holstege’s sermon are some true statements. They are, however, quite hilarious and nonsensical. One gets the sense that Holstege realizes that he has dug himself so deeply into the pit of Arminianism that he frantically throws in some Reformed statements in order to free himself. After saying that God ultimately only sees the difference between those who believe and those who do not, Holstege says, “That faith is his gift to his chosen ones. God makes the difference.” And after saying that the fundamental difference is faith or no faith, he quickly adds, “God grants his righteousness to all those whom he gives faith.” This is all jibber-jabber. How can Holstege speak of “chosen ones” when the ultimate difference is who does or does not believe? How can Holstege talk about God’s making the difference when God has to see what man does and then react? How can Holstege talk about faith being a gift when throughout the entire sermon he has described faith as man’s act? In fact, he did not even say that God has available grace for man so that he can believe! Arminians at least would say, “Man does this by grace!” And in that way Arminians could at least somewhat explain how faith can be a gift.

Thus Holstege is revealed to be a Pelagian physician and a peddler of poison. He has performed the Arminian trick. Christ’s merits have disappeared in a vanishing act; God’s hands are tied behind his back; and by clever sleight of hand, appropriation has turned into merit. And what is the hearer left with? Death. His physician has given him man, man’s will, man’s vital activity—the poison of the Pelagians.

“Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin” (Rom. 3:20).