I will not refuse to place myself before any assembly whatsoever, whether it be composed of all the ministers in our United Netherlands, or of some to be convoked from each of the seven provinces, or even of all the ministers of Holland and West Friesland, to which province our university at Leyden belongs, or of some ministers to be selected out of these, provided the whole affair be transacted under the cognizance of our lawful magistrates. Nor do I avoid or dread the presence of learned men, who may be invited from other countries, provided they be present at the conference on equitable conditions, and subject to the same laws as those under which I must be placed.

To express the whole matter at once-let a convention be summoned, consisting of many members or of few, provided some bright hope of success be afforded [to them], a hope, I repeat it, which I shall be able, by sound arguments, to prove destitute of good foundation. Behold me, this day, nay, this very hour, prepared and ready to enter into it. For I am weary of being daily aspersed with the filthy scum of fresh calumnies, and grieved at being burdened with the necessity of clearing myself from them. In this part of my conduct, I am assuredly dissimilar from heretics, who have either avoided ecclesiastical assemblies, or have managed matters so as to be able to confide in the number of their retainers, and to expect a certain victory.

But I have finished. For I have occupied your attention, most honorable sir, a sufficient length of time; and I have made a serious encroachment on those valuable moments which you would have devoted to matters of greater imporYour excellency will have the condescension to forgive the liberty which I have taken to address this letter to you, as it has been extorted from me by a degree of necessity -and not to disdain to afford me your patronage and protection, just so far as divine truth and the peace and concord of the Christian church will allow you to vouchsafe.

I pray and beseech Almighty God long to preserve your excellency in safety, to endue you yet more with the spirit of wisdom and prudence, by which you may be enabled to dis

charge the duties of the embassy which has been imposed upon you, and thus meet the wishes of the most illustrious prince, the Elector Palatine. And, after you have happily discharged those duties, may he benignantly and graciously grant to you a prosperous return to your own country and kindred.

Thus prays your excellency's most devoted servant,
JAMES ARMINIUS,

Professor of Theology in the
University of Leyden.

LEYDEN, April 5, 1608.

CERTAIN ARTICLES

TO BB

DILIGENTLY EXAMINED AND WEIGHED.

BECAUSE SOME CONTROVERSY HAS ARISEN CONCERNING THEM AMONG EVEN THOSE WHO PROFESS THE REFORMED RELIGION.

THESE articles are partly either denied or affirmed in a decisive manner, and partly either denied or affirmed in a doubting manner, each of which methods is signified by certain indicative signs which are added to the different articles.

I. ON THE SCRIPTURE AND HUMAN TRADITIONS.

1. THE rule of theological verity is not two-fold, one primary and the other secondary; but it is one and simple, the Sacred Scriptures.

2. The Scriptures are the rule of all divine verity, from themselves, in themselves, and through themselves; and it is a rash assertion, "that they are indeed the rule, but only when understood according to the meaning of the confession of the Dutch churches, or when explained by the interpretation of the Heidelberg Catechism."

3. No writing composed by men-by one man, by few men, or by many-(with the exception of the Holy Scriptures,) is either αυτοπίζον “ creditable of itself," or αξιοπιςον, “ of itself deserving of implicit credence," and, therefore, is not exempted from an examination to be instituted by means of the Scrip

tures.

4. It is a thoughtless assertion, "that the Confession and Catechism are called in question, when they are subjected to

examination;" for they have never been placed beyond the hazard of being called in doubt, nor can they be so placed.

5. It is tyrannical and popish to bind the consciences of men by human writings, and to hinder them from being submitted to a legitimate examination, under what pretext soever such tyrannical conduct is adopted.

II. ON GOD CONSIDERED ACCORDING TO HIS NATURE.

1. God is good by a natural and internal necessity, not freely; which last word is stupidly explained by the terms [incoacte] "unconstrainedly" and "not slavishly."

2. God foreknows future things through the infinity of his essence, and through the pre-eminent perfection of his understanding and prescience, not as he willed or decreed that they should necessarily be done, though he would not foreknow them except as they were future, and they would not be future. unless God had decreed either to perform or to permit them.

3. God loves righteousness and his creatures, yet he loves righteousness still more than the creatures, from which, two consequences follow:

4. The FIRST, that God does not hate his creature, except on account of sin.

5. The SECOND, that God absolutely loves no creature to life. eternal, except when considered as righteous, either by legal or evangelical righteousness.

6. The will of God is both correctly and usefully distinguished into that which is antecedent, and that which is consequent.

7. The distinction of the will of God into that which is secret or of his good pleasure, and that which is revealed or signified, cannot bear a rigid examination.

8. Punitive justice and mercy neither are, nor can they be "the inly moving" or final causes of the first decree, or of its first operation.

9. God is blessed in himself and in the knowledge of his own perfection. He is, therefore, in want of nothing, neither does he require the demonstration of any of his properties by

external operations: Yet if he do this, it is evident that he does it of his pure and free will; although in this declaration [of any of his properties] a certain order must be observed according to the various egresses or "goings forth" of his goodness, and according to the prescript of his wisdom and' justice.

III. ON GOD, CONSIDERED ACCORDING TO THE RELATION
BETWEEN THE PERSONS IN THE TRINITY.

1. The Son of God is not called by the ancient fathers" God from himself," and this is a dangerous expression. For, Aurodeos, [as thus interpreted, God from himself,] properly signifies that the Son has not the divine essence from another. But it is by a catach resis, or improperly, that the essence which the Son has is not from another; because the relation of the subject is thus changed: for "the Son," and "the divine essence," differ in relation.

2. The divine essence is communicated to the Son by the Father, and this properly and truly. Wherefore it is unskillfully asserted "that the divine essence is indeed properly said to be common to the Son and to the Father, but is improperly said to be communicated:" For it is not common to both except in reference to its being communicated.

3. The Son of God is correctly called Aurosos, "very God," as this word is received for that which is God himself, truly God. But he is erroneously designated by that epithet, so far as it signifies that he has an essence not communicated by the Father, yet has one in common with the Father.

4. "The Son of God, in regard to his essence, is from himself," is an ambiguous expression, and, on that account, dangerous. Neither is the ambiguity removed by saying"The Son, with respect to his absolute essence, or to his essence absolutely considered, is from himself." Besides, these modes of speaking are not only novel, but are also mere prattle.

5. The divine persons are not spowos vaapžews, or modes of being or of existing, or modes of the divine essence; for they are things with the mode of being or existing.