and apostles, been committed to her, are by her further dispensed to her children. For this reason, the Church is called "the pillar and ground of the truth,” (1 Tim. iii, 15,) but only secondarily after the apostles, who, on account of the primary tradition, are distinguished by the title of "pillars," (Gal. ii, 9,) and "foundations," (Rev. xxi, 14,) before those epithets were bestowed on the church.

X. With regard to the SECOND question, [§ VI,] we say, that the canonical Scriptures of the Old and New Testament perfectly contain all doctrines which are necessary to the salvation of believers and the glory of God. This is manifest, (1.) From express testimonies of Scripture, [see Disputation II, Thesis XIX,] forbidding any addition to be made to those things which have been commanded, and commanding that "no man be wise above what is written," (1 Cor. iv, 6,)—though in the former of these, it is evident from the text that Moses is speaking about those precepts which were comprised in writing. (2.) From the very substance of the doctrines; and this in various ways. The Scriptures contain in a complete form the doctrine of the Law and of the Gospel; they also perfectly embrace the doctrine of Faith, Hope, and Charity. They deliver the full knowledge of God and of Christ, in which is placed life eternal. They are called, and truly so, "the Scriptures of the Old and New Testament ;" but to a Testament nothing ought to be added. (3.) From the end at which they aim and which they attain. "These things are written, that ye may believe; and that, believing, ye may have life." (John xx, 31.) "Search the Scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life." (v, 39.)-(4.) From their efficacy: Because, without [the aid of] any other doctrine, they sufficiently hinder any man from going into the place of torment; (Luke xvi, 28, 29;) and they render "the man of God wise unto salvation through faith, and throughly furnished unto all good works." (2 Tim. iii, 15-17.)-(5.) From the manner of speech usually employed in the Scriptures, by which "the prophets" are understood to mean the writings of the prophets, "the prophets" and "the word of prophecy" signify the prophecies of Scripture. (2 Pet. i, 19-21.) What God said and did is ascribed to the Scriptures: Thus, "For the Scripture saith unto Pharaoh ;" (Rom. ix, 17;) "the Scripture, foreseeing, &c., preached before the Gospel unto Abraham ;" (Gal. iii, 8;) "the Scripture hath concluded all under sin." (iii, 22.)

XI. The Papists assert, on the contrary, that all things necessary to salvation are not contained in the Scriptures; but partly

in the Scriptures, and partly in unwritten traditions. This their opinion they endeavour to establish, not only by the Scriptures themselves, but by the testimonies of Popes, Councils, and Fathers, nay, by certain examples which they produce of necessary doctrines which are not comprehended within the limits of Scripture. As we shall examine the strength of each of these arguments separately in the discussion which we have now commenced, we may remark by way of anticipation, that the passages of Scripture which they usually quote for this purpose, are either forcibly wrested from their correct signification, or do not determine the proposition; that the testimonies of Popes, Councils, and Fathers, being those of mere men, do not operate to our prejudice; that the instances which they adduce are either confirmed from the Scriptures, or are not necessary to salvation: This separation we consider of such necessity, that when it is once granted that they are necessary to salvation, it follows that they can and that they must be confirmed by the Scriptures; and when it is granted that they cannot be confirmed by the Scriptures, it follows that they are not necessary to salvation. So immovable and certain is this truth to our minds, that all doctrines necessary to salvation are contained in the Scriptures!

XII. To the THIRD question [§ VI] we reply: As one [traditio] DELIVERY of Divine doctrine is primary, and another secondary; so likewise one ATTESTATION [witnessing] respecting the Divinity of the docrine is primary, while another is secondary. (John v, 36, 37; 1 John v, 7.) The PRIMARY attestation is that of God himself, to whom it appertains properly, originally, and per se to bear witness to his own doctrine. But he employs a two-fold mode of bearing witness: One external, which is presented to the senses of those to whom the doctrine is proposed, (John iii, 2; Heb. ii, 4; 1 Cor. i, 6-8,) and is a preparative for creating faith in the doctrine, even when this doctrine is not understood. Another internal, which impresses on the mind a true understanding of the doctrine, and an undoubted approval of it, which is the necessary, proper, and immediate cause of that faith which God requires to be given to his word, and which alone is saving.-The SECONDARY attestation is that of the Church: For having been herself certified, by means of the primary attestation, (which is that of God,) of the Divinity of this doctrine, she both [obsignat] gives her hand and seal as a witness that God is true, (John iii, 33,) and she bears her testimony to the doctrine received from the God of truth: This testimony is pleasing to God, due to the doctrine, honourable to

the church, and useful to men. (1 John v, 9; John v, 34-36.) But it is to be observed, that this testimony of the church is human and not Divine, and is less than the preceding, which is potent only in preparing the hearts, by a sort of reverence that it obtains for the doctrine, that the hearts so prepared may with sincerity, by the internal witnessing of God, yield their assent to it. (John xv, 26, 27.) Under that part of the PRIMARY testimony which is external, we comprise the testimony of prophets, apostles, evangelists, pastors, and teachers, who are "workers together with God," provided they have been immediately called [by God himself]: But we refer it to the SECONDARY testimony, if they have been called mediately by the church. The Papists, who ascribe less to the internal attestation, and more to that which is secondary, than what we have explained, are deservedly rejected by us.

XIII. Having explained these matters, we grant, that the apostles delivered to the churches some things relating to order, decency, and the rites to be observed in them, which they did not commit to writing; (1 Cor. xi, 34;) but those things do not concern the substance either of the Law or the Gospel, are not necessary to salvation, are neither immutable, perpetual, nor universal, but are accommodated to the existing condition of the church, and the circumstances in which she is placed. We further grant, that either single churches, or many by mutual consent, or that all churches, provided they could so agree, may frame certain ritual canons for their good order and decency, and for such direction in those duties which must of necessity be performed in them, as may contribute to their present edification. (1 Cor. xiv, 40.) But these conditions must be observed respecting them: (1.) That these rites be not repugnant to the Written Word. (Col. ii, 18-23.)-(2.) That they neither have superstition intermixed with them, nor encourage it. (3.) That they neither be accounted as Divine worship, nor cast a snare upon consciences. (4.) That they be neither more numerous, nor more burdensome in practice, than may render them easy of observance. (Acts xv, 10, 28.)-(5.) That the church do not deprive herself of the liberty of changing, adding, or taking away, as she shall consider her present edification to require. Such rites as these being usefully established in a church, it is unlawful for any one, of his own private authority, to gainsay or attack them, unless he be ambitious of having his name emblazoned in the list of disorderly persons, and among the disturbers of the peace of the church. (1 Cor. xiv, 32, 33; 2 Thess. iii, 6.)

DISPUTATION IV.

ON THE NATURE OF GOD.

Respondent, JAMES ARMINIUS, when he stood for his Degree of D.D. For an account of the circumstances attending this Disputation, consult vol. i, p. 338.

I. THE very nature of things and the Scriptures of God, as well as the general consent of all wise men and nations, testify that a nature is correctly ascribed to God. (Gal. iv, 8; 2 Pet. i, 4; Aristot. De Repub. 1. 7, c. 1; Cicero De Nat. Deor.)

II. This nature cannot be known a priori: For it is the first of all things, and was alone, for infinite ages, before all things. It is adequately known only by God, and God by it; because God is the same as it is. It is in some slight measure known by us, but in a degree infinitely below what it is [in] itself; because we are from it by an external emanation. (Isai. xliv, 6; Rev. i, 8; 1 Cor. ii, 11; 1 Tim. vi, 16; 1 Cor. xiii, 9.)

III. But this nature is known by us, either immediately through the unclouded vision of it as it is: This is called "face to face," (1 Cor. xiii, 12,) and is peculiar to the blessed in heaven: (1 John iii, 2:) Or mediately through analogical images and signs, which are not only the external acts of God and his works through them, (Psalm xix, 1-8; Rom. i, 20,) but likewise his word, (Rom. x, 14-17,) which, in that part in which it proposes Christ, "who is the Image of the Invisible God," (Col. i, 15,) as "the Brightness of his glory, and the express Image of his person," (Heb. i, 3,) gives such a further increase to our knowledge, that "we all, with open face beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image from glory to glory." (2 Cor. iii, 18.) This is called "through a glass in an enigma," or "darkly," and applies exclusively to travellers and pilgrims who "are absent from the Lord." (2 Cor. v, 6; Exod. xxxiii, 20.)

IV. But there are two modes of this second perception from the works and the word of God. The FIRST is that of Affirmation, (which is also styled by Thomas Aquinas, "the mode of Causality and by the habitude of the principle,") according to which the simple perfections which are in the creatures, as being the productions of God, are attributed analogically to God according to some similitude. (Psalm xciv, 9, 10; Matt. vii, 11; Isai. xlix, 15.)—The SECOND is that of Negation or Removal, according to which the [secundum quid] relative perfections and

all the imperfections which appertain to the creatures, as having been produced out of nothing, are removed from God. (Isai. lv, 8, 9; 1 Cor. i, 25.) To the mode of Affirmation, (because it is through the habitude of the cause and principle, to the excellence of which no effect* ever rises,) that of Pre-eminence must be added, according to which the perfections that are predicated of the creatures are understood [to be] infinitely more perfect in God. (Isai. xl, 15, 17, 22, 25.) Though this mode be affirmative and positive in itself, (for as the nature of God necessarily [est] exists, so it is necessarily known,) in [positione] positivity and not in negation ; yet it cannot be enunciated or expressed by us, except through a Negation of those modes according to which the creatures are partakers of their own perfections, or the perfections in creatures are circumscribed: Those modes, being added to the perfections of the creatures, produce this effect, that those which, considered without them, were simple perfections, are [secundum quid] relative perfections, and by that very circumstance are to be removed from God. Hence it appears, that the mode of Pre-eminence does not differ in species from the mode of Affirmation and Negation.

V. Besides, in the entire nature of things and in the Scriptures themselves, only two [substantialia] substances are found, in which is contained every perfection of things: They are Essence and Life, the former of them constituting the perfection of all existing creatures; the latter, that of only some of them, and those the most perfect. (Gen. i; Psalm civ. 29; cxlviii; Acts xvii, 28.) Beyond these two, the human mind cannot possibly comprehend any substance, indeed it cannot raise its conceptions to any other: For it is itself circumscribed within the limits of created nature, of which it forms a part; it is therefore incapable of passing beyond the circle which incloses the whole. (Rev. i, 8; iv, 8; Dan. vi, 26.) Wherefore in the nature of God himself, only these two [momenta] causes of motion,† Essence and Life, can become objects of our consideration.

LET THE FOLLOWING BE OUR PROBLEMS:

HAVE a corporeal Essence, and a vegetative and sensitive Life, any analogy to the Essence and Life of God, though such analogy be less than a spiritual Essence and an intellectual Life?

• In this passage, the edition of 1610 has effectus, all the others have affectus. + The word "momentum" seems to be used throughout this Disputation in no other sense than that of "the cause of motion.”