Thank you. You point out that Article 5 is "non-commital. That is probably the reason why not all Arminians agree with each other on the point that those who believe and are saved can lose their salvation by failing to keep up their faith. Some Arminians hold that believers are eternally secure in Christ and that once a sinner is regenerated, he can never be lost.
I would say that most Arminians hold to the view that they can lose their salvation, however, since most of them believe their will is involved.
If I had posted the Steel/Thomas summary of Arminianism and Calvinism instead of the one I did post, it would have avoided your objections, I think.
Note in article 1 the Remonstrants base election on the condition of foreseen faith and perseverance to the end!
This implies someone may be truly be a believer and yet not be elect. No elect person, in this view, can be lost. I think their "need for further study" in article 5 was an unwillingness for 2 + 2 to equal 4.
Historically, the Remonstrants were in danger of losing their "livings" from the Dutch government. They were also unwilling to embrace the views of the Anabaptists and Radicals in the area (Coornhert, DeRies, et al.) -- whose views Arminius was initially commissioned by the Dutch Reformed Church to refute. Arminius kept stalling year after year and died without ever making a official response. In researching the radicals of the area Arminius did not embrace these views but found he no longer affirmed the Reformed understanding of these issues. Thus he was hesitant to make his report.
The writings of Dirk Coornhert and Hans DeRies reflect views held by many of today's Arminians. Perfectionism has Coornhert for a Patriarch. DeRies said the universal death of Christ removed original sin's taint in Adam's descendants, etc. Waterlanders (deRies' group) didn't baptize babies cause they did not consider them contaminated by Adam's sin.
The point is that historic Arminians (Remonstrants) were less "Arminian" than Arminians today.
BTW, the group I did my dissertation on (the English General Baptists) have by recent historians been wrongly called 'Arminian' Baptists almost by all. John Robinson, the Five Point Calvinist pastor of the Pilgrims while in Holland, wrote against both the Remonstrants and the General Baptists and clearly understood the difference. The anti-Calvinistic impact on the General Baptists was primarily Hans de Ries and the Waterlander Mennonites not Arminius. -- drstevej, "The Soteriology of John Robinson" Westminster Theological Journal [Spring, 1982].