Tuesday, March 3, 2026

It is the 3rd of March 2026. Welcome to the Christian History Almanac, brought to you by 1517 at 1517.org; I’m Dan van Voorhis.

Coming from an organization called “1517,” you shouldn’t be that surprised that this show tends to lean into the Early Modern world. A brief word on terminology- perhaps you had a “Renaissance and/or Reformation” class or section in school. This might be followed by the so-called “Enlightenment” and the Age of Revolutions. When we say “Early Modern” in the context of Europe and the New World, we are taking into account the whole thing- the seismic changes in art, science, theology, politics, philosophy, and culture.

 

This is the era that made the modern world- debates over how to build or rebuild institutions make this age. And today, I’d like to introduce you to a major figure who, through the march of time, has been overlooked. He was the wonderfully Dutch-named Gisbertus Voetius, whose legacy marks the Reformed churches, questions of church government, piety, and missions in the second generation of Reformers.

 

Voetius was born on the 3rd of March in 1589 to a Reformed family- his father would be killed in the wars against the Spanish. He would attend the University of Leiden from 1604 to 1610. These were foundational years in the great division amongst the Reformed between the Remonstrants and Counter-Remonstrants- or “Calvinists and Arminians”- over the perennial issue of God’s predestination and the limits of Human Free Will. Voetius would take the side of the “Calvinists” or “Counter Remonstrants,” arguing for… wait for the big word- Supralapsarianism. This is the argument for God’s decree of election and damnation being made- logically- before the creation of the world and the fall of Adam and Eve. You can do with that what you wish.

 

In his day, Voetius would also be a critic of René Descartes- he was the “I Think therefore I Am” philosopher who argued for a kind of subjectivism that made many uncomfortable. Voetius arguments against “Cartesianism” can still hold up today. He is perhaps seen as less of a luminary for his arguments against Copernicus and a heliocentric model that he believed caused too many problems for biblical interpretation.

 

Where Voetius should be held up as a trailblazer was in his church polity- that is, what the church does, how it does it, and who is in charge. These are key questions in this second generation of Reformers who found themselves needing to create new institutions. The (very large) book is the Politics Ecclesiastica, or “Church Politics”.

 

In it, he lays the foundation for the “Regulative Principle,” or the idea that what may be done in the church service must be “regulated” by only those things explicitly commanded. His argument from this and for “Reformed simplicity” led to the banning of instruments in worship and the exclusive singing of the Psalms.

 

He argued for a slim line of separation between “church” and “state” with some place for freedom of Conscience but within the church was a proponent of church discipline as a key marker of the true church (something found in Calvin). Church discipline would touch upon the issue of churches being bound to one another through a national system- a kind of synod or Presbytery that allowed for churches that had some independence but were united by a shared bond of doctrine and discipline.

 

As a major figure in the Reformed church as a pastor and professor at Utrecht, he was also involved in the new questions of world missions with the Dutch East Indies Company making its way into non-Christian territories. A chief question was whether or not the children of unbelieving parents should be baptized. If infant baptism is assumed, is it valid if the parents are not already part of the covenant community? Voetius’ position made the baptized children of unbelievers, if taken into a local church, “half members” of a sort and under discipline- in this case, instruction and observation to ensure they come to personal faith. His thoughts on this would bleed into the conversation of slaves and what was due to them if they were also brought into a local church. His conclusions might not have reached a consensus, but he’s a fascinating character trying to answer new questions about the church and covenant community in a world adapting to the new modern, or “Early Modern” church and state situation post-Reformation.

 

Gisbertus Voetius would teach well into his 80’s- dying in 1676. Born on this day in 1589, Voetius was 87 years old.

 

 

The Last word for today comes from the daily lectionary and Romans 4:

6 David says the same thing when he speaks of the blessedness of the one to whom God credits righteousness apart from works:

7 “Blessed are those
 whose transgressions are forgiven,
 whose sins are covered.

8 Blessed is the one
 whose sin the Lord will never count against them.”

9 Is this blessedness only for the circumcised, or also for the uncircumcised? We have been saying that Abraham’s faith was credited to him as righteousness. 10 Under what circumstances was it credited? Was it after he was circumcised, or before? It was not after, but before! 11 And he received circumcision as a sign, a seal of the righteousness that he had by faith while he was still uncircumcised. So then, he is the father of all who believe but have not been circumcised, in order that righteousness might be credited to them.

 

This has been the Christian History Almanac for the 3rd of March 2026, brought to you by 1517 at 1517.org.

The show is produced by a man who wonders what to call someone who used to deny the divinity of Christ but has really fallen away from that… he is Christopher Gillespie.

The show is written and read by a man with the answer: a Super lapsed Arian- I’m Dan van Voorhis.

You can catch us here every day- and remember that the rumors of grace, forgiveness, and the redemption of all things are true…. Everything is going to be ok.