How Did The Rise Of Arminianism

Lake’s assertion that religious conflict in early Stuart England being the result of a pursuit of traditional conformity by the Puritans holds true to a large extent. It should not, however, go as far as to proclaim that there was no ‘rise of Arminianism’ as there was indeed an ostensible influx of Arminianism during the reign of Charles I. Arminianism did burgeoned under the policies of Charles I and innovations William Laud took with the Church. However, with or without the antagonistic ideological differences of Arminianism and Calvinism, there was always the constant seeking of reforms by the Puritans for a more traditional Church, to move as far away from Catholicism as possible. The introduction of Arminianism merely ‘created a politically
The former was very conscious in their efforts of identifying who amongst them is elected by god, believing that they could do so through a series of experiments. The credal predestinarians, however, ‘had no impulse to take the doctrine into the popular pulpit or to derive a view of the Christian community from it’. They did not and could not actively seek out other elects. What this suggests is that experimental predestinarians and their methods of determining the elects from the reprobates, could potentially lead to the destruction of the Church should they start to ostracise members that they deemed to be destined for hell. It implied that the experimental predestinarians, would end up distancing themselves from the church, unwilling to conform. The Calvinist themselves could not find common ground on the one belief that was supposed to bring them together. The cause of the religious conflicts were thus stemmed from the Puritans’ own pursuit of traditional conformity away from those that had becoming willing to conform. The influx of Arminianism merely channelled the religious distaste that the Puritans had into a political arena where the Puritans used their presence as an excuse to impose greater
A series of actions and changes Charles I took such as placing the Arminian Richard Montagu under his own personal protection and empowerment and trust placed in William Laud only made it clearer that the monarch was sympathising with Arminianism. The attempted imposition of an Arminian prayer book in England and Scotland further fuelled fears that the Church would become increasingly Arminian. In 1633, Laud, who had just assumed the title of Archbishop of Canterbury months ago, managed to convince Charles I in establishing the ‘precedent that all parochial churches should follow the by then cathedral practice of placing communion table altar wise at the east end of chancels’ via the privy council. Such was the demonstration of popish practices that the Calvinists loathed. Hence, there was definitely a pronounced rise in Arminianism under Charles I and the extent of its impact on the religious frictions happening in early Stuart England should not be overlooked as it definitely created more tension and worry amongst the Calvinists. It was such extreme changes that radicalised Puritanism, bringing about a more wanton