Troubles After Dort

Chapter 4 surveys a significant debate that Richard Montagu stirred in the aftermath of Dort. This debate has been largely classified, both then and now, as one between Arminians and Calvinists. However, a reanalysis of the debate suggests that Montagu’s argument better fits the profile of a previously permitted minority opinion within the Reformed tradition that followed a different reading of Augustine on perseverance. The chapter argues that Montagu was not a genuine Arminian and that his repudiation of an irrespective divine decree did not propose a view of election caused by foreseen faith. By better understanding Montagu’s context and arguments, one can see that Montagu’s denial of the perseverance of all saints was not presented on semi-Pelagian grounds. The chapter also demonstrates the way Dort’s narrowing tendencies created difficulties for the Church of England’s broad-church approach to being Reformed.