1. The only complete biography on Jean-Alphonse Turrettini is Eugène de Budé, Turrettini Vie de, J. A., théologien genevois (1671–1737) (Lausanne, 1880).Google ScholarTheological analyses include Beardslee, John W., “Theological Developments at Geneva under Francis and Jean-Alphonse Turretin” (Ph.D. diss.: Yale University, 1956);Google ScholarKlauber, Martin I., “The Context and Development of the Views of Jean-Alphonse Turrettini (1671–1737) on Religious Authority” (Ph.D. diss.: University of Wisconsin-Madison, 1987).Google ScholarSee also Heyd, Michael, “Un role nouveau pour la science: Jean Alphonse Turrettini et les débuts de la théologie naturelle à Genève,” Revue de théologie et philosophie 112 (1982): 25–42.Google Scholar

2. The Helvetic Formula Consensus was initiated in 1675 primarily by three Swiss Reformed theologians, Gernler, Lucas, Heidegger, Johann Heinrich and Turrettini, François in response to the modified position of the Academy of Saumur to the canons of the Synod of Dort.Google ScholarThe most notable of the Saumur theologians was Moyse Amyraut (1596–1664) who proposed a concept called “hypothetical universalism” which maintained that Christ died to pay for the sins of the entire human race, not merely for the elect. Only the elect, however, would partake of the benefits of Christ's vicarious atonement.Google ScholarSee Grohman, Donald D., “The Genevan Reaction to the Saumur Doctrine of Hypothetical Universalism: 1635–1685” (Ph.D. diss., Knox College, Toronto, 1971).Google Scholar

3. The term “fundamental article” should not be confused with the fundamentalism of American Protestantism which was restrictive in scope in response to the development of liberal theology and biblical criticism. Fundamental articles in the Reformation and post- Reformation period, by contrast, were primarily intended to be nonrestrictive and make possible a pan-Protestant union. The term is used in a technical sense by virtually all of the major theologians of the period. Muller, Richard defines it as follows: “In the complex sense, the fundamenlum refers to the truths that must be believed by all; in short, to the foundation of faith (fundamentum fidei). ‘Complex’ here refers to the series of discrete truths belonging to the foundation of faith, in contrast to the simple or uncompounded principal truth that is Christ. This latter sense of fundamentum, moreover, is understood either loosely (late) or strictly (stride). Loosely, the fundamentum fidei or articuli fundamentals refers to the ‘primary rudiments of Christian religion’ taught to catechumens: to the Decalogue, the Apostles’ Creed, the Lord's Prayer, the sacraments, and the power of the keys. These texts and topics contain all the doctrines necessary to salvation. Strictly speaking, however, the fundamental articles are precisely those teachings necessary to salvation, the underlying beliefs which cannot be ignored or denied.”Google ScholarMuller, Richard A., Post-Reformation Reformed Dogmatics. Volume 1, Prolegomena to Theology (Grand Rapids, 1987), p. 284.Google ScholarFor more on Reformed scholastic approaches to the fundamental articles see Althaus, Paul, Die Prinzipien der deutschen refomierten Dogmatik in Zeitalter der aristotelischen Scholastik (Leipzig, 1914.)Google ScholarOn the Lutheran approach see Preus, Robert, The Theology of Post-Reformation Lutheranism, 2 vols. (St. Louis, 1970–1972).Google ScholarThe definition of the term “Protestant scholasticism” has been the subject of considerable debate among historians in recent years. On the Reformed side, the debate centers on the alleged deviation of the “scholastics” from the central aspects of Calvin's theology. One school argues that the Reformed scholastics were essentially rationalists who exchanged Calvin's christological focus for one based on the divine decrees. A second view, espoused by Richard A. Muller, among others, defines it primarily in its organizational pattern that made Reformed theology more precise in response to the Counter-Reformation polemic. Part of the confusion comes as a result of the term's use in the seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries by its opponents, such as J. A. Turrettini, who used it as a pejorative expression to designate an outdated form of theology.Google ScholarFor more on this issue see Muller, Richard A., Christ and the Decree: Christology and Predestination in Reformed Theology from Calvin to Perkins (Grand Rapids, 1988). Lutheran scholasticism had almost a parallel development. For more on this subject see Preus, , The Theology of Post-Reformation Lutheranism.Google Scholar

4. The Remonstrants were the followers of Jacob Arminius who opposed several aspects of Calvinist theology. The Remonstrance (1610) stated the five points of Arminianism and included the doctrines of universal atonement, resistable grace, and the possibility of losing one's salvation.Google ScholarSee Harrison, A. W., The Beginnings of Arminianism to the Synod of Dort (London, 1926).Google Scholar

5. On the Saumur Academy see Bourchenin, Pierre D., Etude sur les académies protestants en FranceauxXVIe et XVIIesiècles (Paris, 1882);Google ScholarMerzeau, E., L'Academieprotestante de Saumur (1604–1685) (Alençon, 1908);Google ScholarProst, Joseph, La philosophic à L'Académie protestante de Saumur (Paris, 1933);Google ScholarArmstrong, Brian, Calvinism and the Amyraut Heresy: Protestant Scholasticism and Humanism in Seventeenth Century France (Madison, 1969);Google ScholarLaPlanche, François, L'Ecriture, le sacré el l'histoire: érudits et politiques protestantes devant la Bible en France au XVIIe siècle (Amsterdam, 1986).Google Scholar

6. Schmidt, Martin includes an excellent summary of Leibniz and Dury's contribution to ecumenical efforts during this period. He also includes a brief bibliography.Google ScholarSchmidt, Martin, “Ecumenical Activity on the Continent of Europe in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries” in Rouse, Ruth and Neill, Stephen C., eds., A History of the Ecumenical Movement: 1517–1948 (Philadelphia, 1967), pp. 73–167.Google Scholar

7. Beza placed his discussion of fundamental articles within the framework of his treatise on the true marks of the Church. In his Traicté des vrayes essencielles et visibles marques de la vraye Eglise Catholique (1592), Beza denned the fundamental articles as being summarized in the Ten Commandments, the Apostles Creed, and the Lord's Prayer. He argued further that such fundamental articles such as the Trinity and the two natures of Christ are essential marks of the true Church.Google Scholar

8. On François Turrettini's use of fundamental articles see Phillips, Timothy R., “Francis Turretin's Idea of Theology and its Bearing Upon His Doctrine of Scripture” (Ph.D. diss., Vanderbilt University, 1986).Google Scholar

9. Hunnius charged that the Reformed theologians were eliminating articles that really belonged among the fundamentals. As a result, they were ignoring the true differences that separated the two camps. Hunnius categorized sacramental theology as a major stumbling block and considered Christ's physical presence in the Eucharist as a secondary point which one could not explicitly deny without risking separation. On Hunnius see Preus, , The Theology of Post-Reformation Lutheranism, 1.49.Google Scholar

10. Preus, , The Theology of Post-Reformation Lutheranism, 1.151.Google Scholar

11. On the ecumenical efforts of Calixtus see Wallmann, Johannes, Der Theologiebegriff bei Johann Gerhard und Georg Calvixt (Tubingen, 1961).Google Scholar

12. Ritschl, Otto, Dogmengeschichte des Protestantismus, Volume 4, Orthodoxie und Synkretismus in der altprotestantischen Theologie (Göttingen, 1927), pp. 243–306.Google ScholarSee also Phillips, Timothy, “Francis Turretin,” pp. 434–435. Although it is not fair to lump the Remonstrants and the Socinians into one category as if there were no differences between them, the distinctions between the two groups were often blurred during the period. Furthermore, the Socinians often claimed such great Arminian champions as Simon Episcopius, Etienne de Courcelles, and Hugo Grotius as their own. Pierre Bayle in 1685 labeled the Arminians as “l'égout de tous les Athées, Déistes et Sociniens de l'Europe,”Google ScholarGuy Dodge, H., The Political Theory of the Huguenots of the Dispersion with Special Reference to the Thought and Influence of Pierre Jurieu (New York, 1947), p. 168 n.;Google ScholarLettre de M. Bayle à M. Lenfant, dated 6 07 1685 in Bayle, , Oeuvres, 4 vols. (La Haye, 1737), 4.623.Google Scholar

13. Schmidt, , “Ecumenical Activity,” pp. 75–78;Google ScholarPhillips, , “Francis Turretin,” pp. 442–443;Google ScholarAcontius, , Stratagemata Satanae (Amsterdam, 1652), pp. 53–54.Google Scholar

14. Schmidt, , “Ecumenical Activity,” pp. 93–96.Google Scholar

15. Phillips, , “Francis Turretin,” p. 481.Google Scholar

16. The French national synods of Gap (1603) and La Rochelle (1607) were prime examples of this. Philippe du Plessis-Mornay (1549–1623), the advisor to Henry of Navarre, used fundamental articles in his Traité de l'Eglise (1578) as a basis for suggesting an accord with the Church of England. James I responded to the French Reformed initiative by sending a letter to the Synod of Toniens (1614) expressing his own desire for union. The Synod went on to adopt a series of procedures designed to set up an international synod which would formulate procedures for establishing a common Reformed-Anglican-Lutheran statement of faith based on the fundamental articles. McNeill, John T., “The Ecumenical Idea and Efforts to Realize It,” in Rouse, and Neill, , The Ecumenical Movement, pp. 65–67;Google ScholarLaPlanche, , L'Ecriture, p. 14.Google ScholarMornay also used fundamental articles in his description of the true church. Plessis-Mornay, Philippe du, Traité de l'Eglise, 2d ed. (La Rochelle, 1599), pp. 75–77; 172–175.Google Scholar

17. D'Huisseau, Isaac, La Réunion du christianisme; ou La Manière de rejoindre les Chrétiens en une seule confession defoi (Saumur, 1670).Google ScholarSee also Stauffer, Richard, L'Affaire d'Huisseau: Une controverse protestante au sujet de la réunion des Chrétiens (1670–1671) (Paris, 1969), p. 14.Google ScholarFrench theologian Jean Daillé also included his discussion of fundamental articles within the context of defining the true church and even provided a list of fundamental articles which included the mediatorial ministry of Christ and his sacrifice on the cross for sin, the necessity of baptism, and the Lord's Supper, scriptural authority, and the proper worship of God. Daillé even pointed out the errors of the Roman Catholic church on each point. René Voeltzel points out that Daillé did not share the same optimism of D'Huisseau concerning the possibility of the Roman Catholic church reforming itself on any of these points.Google ScholarVoeltzel, René, Vraie et fausse Eglise selon les théologiens protestants français du XVIIe siécle (Paris, 1956), p. 41.Google ScholarSaumur was by no means the sole center for French Protestant opinions concerning the fundamental articles. Pierre du Moulin, professor of theology at Sedan, opposed Saumur on a number of theological topics and emphasized the importance of the fundamental articles on the issue of biblical perspicuity against the Counter-Reformation charge of the obscurity of Scripture. Du Moulin feared that the Salmurian approach compromised too much of orthodoxy by admitting that many distinctive Reformed doctrines were not fundamentals because they are not clearly revealed in the Bible.Google ScholarSee Robinson, John, “The Doctrine of Holy Scripture in Seventeenth Century Reformed Theology” (Ph.D. diss., Université de Strasbourg, 1971), p. 140.Google Scholar

18. D'Huisseau rejected those “doctrines qui établissent l'ordre des décrets éternels de Dieu, qui disent précisement quel est l'objet de la prédestination, qui exposent comment les deux natures sont unies en la personne de Jesus Christ, qui approfondissent le mystére de la Trinité, qui prétendent découvrir le moyen par lequel le Saint-Esprit agit [dans l]es coeurs des fidelles, et autres choses de pareille nature” (“doctrines which establish the order of the eternal decrees of God, which state precisely what is the object of divine predestination, which explain how the two natures are united in the person of Jesus Christ, which fathom the mystery of the Trinity, which claim to discover the means by which the Holy Spirit acts in the hearts of the faithful, and other things of similar nature”). D'Huisseau, Réunion, p. 55; Stauffer, Richard, L'Affaire D'Huisseau, p. 14;Google ScholarStauffer, , The Quest for Church Unity from John Calvin to Isaac D'Huisseau (Allison Park, 1986), pp. 64–66.Google Scholar

19. Soman, Alfred, “Arminianism in France: The D'Huisseau Incident,” Journal of the History of Ideas 31 (1967): 599–600;Google Scholarsee also Stauffer's, response, “D'Huisseau a-t-il plagié Arminius?” Bulletin de la Société de l'histoire du protestantisme français 118 (1972): 335–348.Google ScholarOther treatments of D'Huisseau include Frank Puaux, Les Précurseurs français de la tolérance au XVIIe siècle (Paris, 1881), pp. 75–81;Google ScholarVoeltzel, , Vraie et fausse Eglise, pp. 45–50.Google Scholar

20. On Werenfels see Good, James I., History of the Swiss Reformed Church Since the Reformation (Philadelphia, 1913).Google ScholarOn Ostervald see Grétillat, Robert, Jean-Frédéric Osterwald: 1663–1747 (Neuchâtel, 1904) andGoogle ScholarVon Allmen, Jean-Jacques, L'Eglise et ses fonctions d'après Jean-Frédéric Ostervald: Le Problème de la théologie pratique du début du XVIlIe siècle (Neuchâtel, 1947).Google Scholar

21. On Jean LeClerc see Barnes, Annie, Jean LeClerc et la République des Letters (Geneve, 1938);Google ScholarPitassi, Maria C., Entre Croire et Savoir: Le problème de la méthode critique chez jean LeClerc (Leiden, 1987).Google Scholar

22. On the impact of Chouet and Tronchin see Heyd, Michael, Between Orthodoxy and the Enlightenment: Jean-Robert Chouet and the Introduction of Cartesian Science in the Academy of Geneva (The Hague, 1982);Google ScholarRex, Walter, Essays on Pierre Bayle and Religious Controversy (The Hague, 1965);CrossRefGoogle ScholarRex, , “Pierre Bayle, Louis Tronchin et la querelle des donatistes: Etude d'un document inédit du XVI le siècle,” Bulletin de la Société de l'histoire du protestantisme français 105 (1959): 97–121;Google ScholarKlauber, Martin I., “Reason, Revelation, and Cartesianism: Louis Tronchin and Enlightened Orthodoxy in Late Seventeenth-Century Geneva,” Church History 59 (1990): 326–339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

23. Turrettini, Jean-Alphonse, Nubes testium pro moderato et pacifico de rebus theologicis judicio, et instituenda inter protestantes concordia. Praemissa est brevis & pacifica de articulis fundamentalibus disquisitio (Geneve, 1719).Google ScholarThis essay was translated into English and published in 1823 under the title “On Fundamentals in Religion” in Sparks, Jared, ed. Collection of Essays and Tracts in Theology (Boston, 1823), vol. 1. The Nubes testium is contained in Turrettini's three volume Dilucidationes philosophico-theologico-dogmatico-morales, quibus praecipua capita tarn theologiae naturalis, quam revelate demonstrantur et adpraxin christianam commendantur accedunt, I. Orationes panegyricae et varii argumenti item henoticae de pace ecclesiae II. Commercium epistolicum inter regent borussiae Frideric I. et Pastores Genevenses de syncrelismo protestantium, 3 vols. (Basel, 1748).Google Scholar

24. The correspondence between Wake and Turrettini is housed in the library of Christ Church, Oxford University and is catalogued under Archbishop Wake Epist. 31.Google ScholarOn both Turrettini and Wake's ecumenical efforts see Sykes, Norman, William Wake: Archbishop of Canterbury, 1657–1737, 2 vols. (Cambridge, 1957).Google Scholar

25. LeClerc pointed out that the English church would need an archbishop of Canterbury who would work tirelessly for such a union in order for the plan to have any success. Even when such a man, Wake, became archbishop in 1716, LeClerc noted that Wake's influence would be limited because of the factions within the English church. LeClerc was also pessimistic about the chances of accord with the Lutherans primarily because they “do not have enough prudence or charity, and because the Princes are not sufficiently enlightened.” Barnes, Jean LeClerc, p. 199. The majority of the correspondence between LeClerc and Turrettini is housed in the Bibliothèque publique et universitaire under the “Collection de manuscrits français, Vol. 481. “There are also two letters from Turrettini to LeClerc at the Universiteitsbibliothek von Amsterdam under “Correspondence fr. Turrettini à LeClerc.”Google Scholar

26. Beardslee, , “Theological Developments,” p. 67.Google Scholar

27. Heidegger, Johann Heinrick, Corpus Theologiae Christianae (Zürich, 1700), 1.1.53–54;Google ScholarTurrettini, François, Institutio Theologiae Elenctiae, 3 vols. (Edinburgh, 1847), 1.14.4, 22.Google Scholar

28. Turrettini, Jean-Alphonse, Dilucidationes, 2.3.13. Turrettini was an ardent opponent of Enthusiasm primarily on the issue of extrabiblical revelation. In addition, Turrettini did not believe in extrabiblical miracles. In his De Scripturae Sacrae interprelandae methodo tractatus, Turrettini attacked the Quakers for their dependence on internal light. François LaPlanche notes that, on this point, Turrettini argued that the Enthusiasts contradicted the clarity and sufficiency of Scripture, thus preventing all rational discussion with unbelievers and subverting both church and civil order.Google ScholarTurrettini, , Opera omnia, theologica, philosophica et philogica 3 vols. (Leuwarden and Franeker, 1774–1776), vol. 2, De Scripturae Sacrae interpretandae methodo tractatus, part 1, ch. 3, p. 17;Google ScholarLaPlanche, , L'Ecriture, p. 692.Google Scholar

29. Turrettini, , Nubes testium in Dilucidationes, 3.30–31.Google Scholar

30. Ibid., p. 42.

31. Ibid., pp. 34, 44.

32. Ibid., p. 42.

33. LeClerc, Jean, Liberii de Sancto Amore Epistolae Theologicae, in quibus varii scholasticorum errores castigantur (Saumur, 1681). Annie Barnes argues that LeClerc influenced Turrettini on a number of topics, an assertion which is supported by the correspondence between the two which lasted from 1705 to 1728. Barnes writes: “One can see how much his [Turrettini's] spirit and his ideas came from LeClerc whom he had admired since his youth, when under the direction of his tutor he read the Bibliothèque universelle [edited by LeClerc, ]. The two men were made for a mutual understanding.” Barnes, Jean LeClerc, p. 199. In addition, an interesting article by J. J. V. M. De Vet shows that LeClerc, in turn, was quite influenced by Grotius. LeClerc edited and republished Grotius's De Verilate Religionis Christianae (1629) in several editions starting in 1709. LeClerc included his own marginalia in which he updated Grotius's arguments on a number of points relative to discoveries in science. In addition, according to De Vet's description, LeClerc's position on fundamental articles was almost the mirror image of Turrettini's stance.Google ScholarSee Vet, J. J. V. M. De, “Jean Leclerc, an Enlightened Propagandist of Grotius' De Veritate Religionis Christianae,” Nederlands Archief voor Kerkgeschiedenis 64 (1984): 160–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

34. Turrettini, , Nubes testium in Dilucidationes, 3:46, 50, 42.Google Scholar

35. Ibid., p. 42.

36. Ibid., p. 48.

37. John Calvin: Institutes of the Christian Religion, 2. vols., ed. McNeil, John T., trans. Ford Lewis Battles (Philadelphia, 1960), 2.ix.l; 2.xi.l–5.Google Scholar

38. Dodge, , The Political Theory of the Huguenots, pp. 165–197.Google Scholar

39. Turrettini, , Nubes testium in Dilucidationes, 3:43.Google Scholar

40. Ibid., pp. 50–51.

41. Ibid., pp. 42–43, 59–60.

42. Turrettini, , Nubes testium in Dilucidationes, 3:37–38.Google Scholar

43. Ibid., p. 38.

44. Ibid., p. 68.

45. See Schmidt, , “Ecumenical Activity,” pp. 86–87.Google Scholar

46. Ibid.

47. Budé, , Vie de J.A. Turrettini, p. 88.Google Scholar

48. Turrettini, , Nubes testium in Dilucidationes, 3:73.Google Scholar

49. Turrettini to Wake, n.d., Manuscrits français, Vol. 491, fol. 60r. The Manuscrits français contain Turrettini's correspondence and are housed at the Bibliothèque publique et universitaire at the University of Geneva.Google Scholar

50. Turrettini, , Nubes testium in Dilucidationes, 3:76.Google Scholar

51. Ibid., pp. 78–80.