The present essay addresses Paul Helm's most recent attempt to assimilate the thought of such Reformed scholastics as Francis Turretin to the 'compatibilism' of Jonathan Edwards. Helm has misunderstood a series of important scholastic distinctions concerning the relationship of intellect and will in the older faculty psychology, and the relationship of foundational or, as I identified it, 'root' indifference in the will to its multiple potencies. He has, accordingly, failed to register how Reformed orthodox understandings of free choice outlined in recent scholarship affirm both a simultaneity or synchronicity of potencies or capacities of the will and a diachronicity of actual effects and events. The Reformed orthodox writers certainly thought that human freedom was not incompatible with the divine determination of all things-their resolution of the issue does not, however, coincide with modern compatibilism.