Sharp Resolution
The Sharp Resolution (Dutch: Scherpe Resolutie[Note 2]) was a resolution taken by the States of Holland and West Friesland on 4 August 1617 on the proposal of the Land's Advocate of Holland, Johan van Oldenbarnevelt, in the course of the Arminian-Gomarist, or Remonstrant/Counter-Remonstrant controversy that was disturbing the internal politics of the Dutch Republic during the Twelve Years' Truce.
Article XIII of the Union of Utrecht stipulated that the regulation of religion was a matter of policy for the individual provinces (so not of the "Generality").
But the fact that the parties in the debate between the followers of two rival theologians, Jacobus Arminius and Franciscus Gomarus at the University of Leiden about the doctrine of Predestination asked for the intervention of the public authorities made it inevitable that the government became involved.
Similarly, the stadtholder Prince Maurice, who was ex officio commander-in-chief of the Dutch States Army, was sympathetic to the Counter-Remonstrants, and refused to let his troops intervene to restore order.
Nevertheless, in itself the decision to formally reject the convocation of a National Synod (as advocated by the Counter-Remonstrants) was certainly within the remit of the States, even though it might be considered imprudent to abandon the putative neutrality of the Holland authorities in the conflict.
[6] The fact that the States reserved the adjudication of conflicts arising out of the Resolution for themselves, thereby taking the highest courts of Holland "out of the loop," may seem objectionable to modern eyes, but the Separation of Powers doctrine had not yet been invented by this time and (like in most European countries) the courts acted in name of the sovereign power, who could take certain matters in its own hand, if it so desired.
But the assertion of absolute sovereignty in the decision to authorise the recruitment of mercenary troops to help in maintaining public order clearly was.
[Note 9] His opponents, especially stadtholder Maurice, on the other hand, held the view that the States General were supreme in matters of defense and foreign policy.
They therefore condemned this part of the Resolution as a breach of the Union of Utrecht, even though it could be argued that the authorization to employ Waardgelders was not a matter of external defense, but of maintenance of internal security.
But after a while Maurice started to undermine the Oldenbarnevelt party by "turning" city governments in Holland and Gelderland (like Nijmegen and Brielle, both garrison towns) that supported the Remonstrant cause, by intimidation with the help of States-Army troops, thereby reducing Oldenbvarnevelt's majority in the States[8] Also the States-Army garrisons of several towns refused to obey the Holland Gecommitteerde Raden (Executive of the States).
The decision to convene a National Synod was then reaffirmed by a stronger majority in the States General, over the objection of the Holland delegation, led by Grotius.
Grotius objected to the fact that the decision was not unanimous in a matter that the Union of Utrecht explicitly reserved for the individual, sovereign, provinces.
The States General passed a secret resolution on 28 August 1618, authorizing the stadtholder to arrest Oldenbarnevelt and his colleagues, which he did the next day.
