Dispute between Ames and Maccovius?

Status
Not open for further replies.
RamistThomist

RamistThomist

Puritanboard Clerk
I keep seeing a dispute between the two men referenced but nothing specific turns up. What was the controversy between Ames and Maccovius?
 
The Synod of Dort had a committee that reconciled Maccovious to Lubbertus, and Maccovius was advised to be more cautious, but other than that few details are readily available. After that, according to the New Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia, there was conflict with Ames because Maccovius had some odd notions about faith - as that some things that must be believed are not necessarily true. However, there was also a moral element to it: when Ames and others brought charges against Maccovius to get him fired, it was about lifestyle.

If you can get the book, Revisiting the Synod of Dordt, Willem van Asselt has a chapter "On the Maccovius Affair." Also Jan Van Vliet's The Rise of Reformed System has some discussion of Maccovius.
 
Last edited:
I don't know exactly. Van Vliet suggests that it was the difference between the Puritan/Nadere Reformatie strain represented in Ames vs. the not-as-strict line of the broader Reformed world. Maccovius was from Poland and a member of the nobility, so he might well have been used to a style of life that would seem self-indulgent to others.
 
That "problem" still is affecting Christians even today, as there is a variety of opinions on that issue.
 
Know that there are some who say no drinking allowed period, while sayin moderation, both sides would agree no drunkness allowed.
 
Dachaser said:
Know that there are some who say no drinking allowed period, while sayin moderation, both sides would agree no drunkness allowed.
Click to expand...

The no drinking at all crowd owes a lot to the semi-Pelagian revivals in American history. Mind you, I am bothered by the excesses one sees at places like "Reformed Pub" on Facebook.
 
I have had discussions with those very firm against the use of it, and they have yet to provide a scripture that states none is what God decided on this issue, as Jesus turned it into wine, not grape Juice. like my fellow Baptists would believe!
 
Last edited:
In Kuyper's Thesis on Maccovius, "The Controversy between Maccovius and Amesius" is found on pp. 315-396, and gives a good overview of the points in dispute.

Introduction, 315-317.
What every one is bound to believe, 317-339.
Preparatory grace before regeneration, 339-352.
The Word of God before regeneration, 352-356.
The primacy of the intellect in regeneration, 357-365.
Whether Christ should be worshiped as Mediator, 366-396.

According to Kuyper some of the controversy grew out of the Aristotelian views of Maccovius coming into conflict with the Ramist views of Ames. Others see dissension arising mostly because of issues with practical theology, but that could also be the result of the Aristotelian-Ramist differences. Ramism was useful to the Puritans because it allowed a type of dialectic which could distinguish faith and obedience without making a sharp separation between them.

See also, Keith L. Sprunger, The Learned Doctor William Ames, chapter on the University of Franeker.

[It is important to distinguish the earlier Maccovius-Lubbertus debate at the time of the Synod of Dort, in which Ames sought Maccovius' acceptance, and the latter debate between Maccovius and Ames over the issues mentioned by Kuyper.]
 
That was indeed heavy reading material, so there basic disagreements concerned the very nature of how do we know and live out truth?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top