Gottschalk of Orbais

[Baptist Renegade]

Very interesting Character! He was Calvinist long before Calvinism was cool!

https://sb.rfpa.org/gods-servant-gottschalk-of-orbais-double-predestinarian-and-martyr/

Been doing research on my thesis and this guy came up. What do y'all know about him? They say he was a "Double-Predestinarian" so I wonder if he was a "Hyper?"

From other sources I have looked at, he seemes to have been quite solid regarding the doctrine of justification and was trying to get the Church to return to Augustinian doctrine during a time when the Roman Catholic church was turning "Semi-Pelagian" at break-neck speed!

 

[Ransom]

Basically I know what you know: Gottschalk was an early "Calvinist" before Calvin trying to revive Augustinian theology.

True of many proto-Reformers. Wycliffe, too, was a strong predestinarian.

 

[RedeemedAbby]

From other sources I have looked at, he seemes to have been quite solid regarding the doctrine of justification and was trying to get the Church to return to Augustinian doctrine during a time when the Roman Catholic church was turning "Semi-Pelagian" at break-neck speed!

Was he a supralapsarian who denied the free offer? I would guess that the author of that piece is, since "Hanko" is a very PRCA-coded name. The PRCA does have some very good theological work to their name.
Gottschalk ('God's slave' in old High German) is in the tradition of Augustin, so the overlap with Jean Cauvin is predictable.

 

[Baptist Renegade]

Was he a supralapsarian who denied the free offer? I would guess that the author of that piece is, since "Hanko" is a very PRCA-coded name. The PRCA does have some very good theological work to their name.
Gottschalk ('God's slave' in old High German) is in the tradition of Augustin, so the overlap with Jean Cauvin is predictable.

According to my understanding, his views were likely supralapsarian and his views of double predestination was pretty much "Hyper" but of course he is predating Calvin by over 700 years! If you look at Remigius's writings, it seems as if he was trying to moderate Gottschalk's views somewhat.

Another thing that is quite intriguing is that there is no evidence that Calvin ever referred to or even knew of Gottschalk! Therefore, each of these men came up with their similar view completely separate one from another - Aside from each having the works of Augustine at their disposal.

 

[Ransom]

According to my understanding, his views were likely supralapsarian and his views of double predestination was pretty much "Hyper" but of course he is predating Calvin by over 700 years!

Calvin believed in double predestination, but not in a way that there was symmetry between the two decrees. The decree of election is accompanied by a work of grace in which God puts faith in the hearts of the elect. There's no corresponding work in the decree of reprobation to work unbelief in the hearts of unbelievers.

Gottschalk was declared a heretic because of his views on double predestination, leading me to wonder whether he actually believed in equal ultimacy. Unfortunately, there's only one (recently) published translation of his works that I'm aware of, and I don't have access to it. I imagine only a few theologians, and those need to be literate in Latin, who know precisely what he actually taught.

 

[Baptist Renegade]

Calvin believed in double predestination, but not in a way that there was symmetry between the two decrees. The decree of election is accompanied by a work of grace in which God puts faith in the hearts of the elect. There's no corresponding work in the decree of reprobation to work unbelief in the hearts of unbelievers.

Gottschalk was declared a heretic because of his views on double predestination, leading me to wonder whether he actually believed in equal ultimacy. Unfortunately, there's only one (recently) published translation of his works that I'm aware of, and I don't have access to it. I imagine only a few theologians, and those need to be literate in Latin, who know precisely what he actually taught.

I found some information in Geoffery Bromiley's "Historical Theology: An Introdiction" where he gets fairly detailed about the "Predestinarian Controversy." The Response of Remigius to both Gottschalk and Rabanus tells quite a bit IMO. Remigius ultimately had the condemnation reversed.

I'm inclined to believe that Remigius leaned towards equal ultimacy but then again, so did Beza who was a strict supralapsarian and took Calvin's view to a further extreme than what he had intended. During this time in history, any vestige of "Free-Willy-ism" was seen as being sympathetic towards or perhaps even a collaborator with the Jesuits! This was the setting in which Jacobus Arminius and the Remonstrants emerged.