Hypothetical universalism

Hypothetical Universalism is a Reformed limited atonement variant doctrine which states that Jesus died sufficiently for every person, thus being sent to the whole world as a sacrifice for sins, however, his death is only efficient for those who are elect, or predestined for salvation.^[1] Hypothetical Universalism systems, such as those held by Zacharias Ursinus,^[2] John Calvin,^[3][4] William Twisse,^[5] John Davenant,^[6] and the Heidelberg Catechism^[7] are commonly accepted as being proper to the Reformed Tradition, especially amongst the Dutch Reformed Churches and the Reformed Anglican faction in the Church of England.^[8]

History

Overview

The earlier Christian tradition especially the patristic period had a major influence on the Reformed theological tradition in the early modern period.^[9][10] The desire for doctrinal catholicity is especially evident in early modern English Protestantism. The Church of England's 1571 Canons of Church Discipline expressly stated that preachers:

“[...] shall take heede, that they teach nothing in their preaching . . . but that which is agreeable to the doctrine of the olde Testament, or the newe, and that which the catholicke fathers, and auncient Bishops have gathered out of that doctrine.”^[11]

The judgements and the teachings of the Early Church Fathers were held in high authority due to their chronological closeness to the life of Jesus Christ and the Apostolic Era and were hotly debated during the Reformation as both the Hypothetical Universalists and those against, commonly referred to as Owenians, fought to defend their interpretation of the early sources as correct.^[12]

Richard Muller rightly says that

“[t]he Reformers and the Protestant orthodox held the tradition in relatively high esteem and continued to cite the councils of the first five centuries and church Fathers generally as authorities in doctrinal matters”^[13]

The topic of Christ's atoning sacrifice and the extent of his death were from the start an intensely debated point, with Johann Windeck writing against Jacobus Kimedoncius and Theodore Beza in his Controversiae de mortis Christi efficacia^[14] in which he provides over 25 pages of apologetic for his view on Christ's atonement. Bishop John Davenant also set out to defend his view of Hypothetical Universalism through a survey of the 5th century, regarding Augustine he notes that Vincentians accused him of teaching that the Lord Jesus did not "suffer for the salvation and redemption of all human beings.”^[15] This claim was often levied at the Augustinians by their opponents and later interpreters of Augustine would presume this as true.^[16] The question of what Augustine truly believed regarding Christ's death remained a question in the 17th century, Cornelius Jansen, an expert on Augustine, who was said to have read through all of Augustine ten times, wrote in his famous Augustinus that there's no place in Augustine's writings where he writes that Christ was said to die for all human beings, none excepted, or that Christ gave himself as a ransom for all, or was crucified or died for all.^[17]

Richard Baxter presents a different argument, he argues in Catholick Theologie that Augustine denies that Christ's death redeems any but the faithful, however, he asserts that the way Augustine uses the term "redemption" concerns the liberation of the captive sinner.^[18] This argument became a key hermeneutical tool in the particularist language of the early and medieval church Fathers. So according to Baxter's argument, when Augustine seems to deny universal redemption, he denies only the "actual deliverance" for all by the death of Christ.^[19]