From Reformation to Reformation

We are obliged, at last, to charge the Socinians, who set themselves above all other Christians as Unitarians, because they multiply...

This error of the Manicheans in the Third Century and thereafter was more well known than the others, that there are two eternal and...

Neither is the Trinity any hindrance, β. to this Unity of Persons in One divine Essence. For the Trinity does not assert a divine Nature...

Now, this Unity is not only Specific, just as many things that are actually plural are sometimes said to be One, to the extent that they...

2. A posteriori, from the Stable Government of all things and Direction of them to One End; whence also one may gather the protection of...

Simplicity follows, which again is a more Negative term, since one calls that Simple which is without composition; Positively it is...

Now, with all these Limitations of the divine Power passed over, or with certain of these omitted, which our AUTHOR set forth in this §,...

With this Independence of the divine Power not withstanding, nevertheless it is to be said that God is not able to do; not from any...

To confirm what our AUTHOR asserts concerning the Absolute Power of God, he also appeals to Matthew 3:9, following many other Theologians, both Ancient and more Recent; see our AUTHOR’S Exercitationes Textuales XXVI, Part III, § 1, 2. Nevertheless, this argument for the Absolute Power of God, dealing with those things that are never done or are future, is denied by many others that either of old or in more recent times have expounded this text concerning that which actually h

This Power of God is divided into Actual and Absolute; from which distinction one and the same thing is able sometimes to be said to be possible and impossible to God. The Actual Power of God denotes the divine Sufficiency, insofar as by it what things by the eternal Decree were determined for the state of existence are actually created in the fullness of time; or it denotes the determination of the divine Virtue to actualize those certain sorts of possible things that God by

Then, γ. in the Faculties and Operations hence proceeding: since what in one regard is Independent is in every regard Independent; and the mode of operation follows upon the mode of being. Hence the divine Intellect is not instructed from another source; which here in advance our AUTHOR observes against the patrons of Middle or Conditional Knowledge, whereby God knows Free and Contingent Future Things conditionally before the Decree; which error our AUTHOR painstakingly refut

God is Independent, α. in Existence, whence He is said Necessarily to Exist. Which Necessary Existence of God we prove, 1. a priori, a. From the Infinite Perfection of God. For, what exists as infinitely Perfect exists necessarily; because the Necessity of existence is a simple and absolute Perfection. That is, what thing exists in such a way that it is not able not to exist is Necessary with respect to Existence. To this is opposed a Contingent thing; which exists in such a

Among the Incommunicable Attributes in the first place God’s Independence is treated. He is Independent, because He is of Himself sufficient unto Himself, in such a way that He requires nothing except Himself for His existence. And so, when we speak of God’s Independence, absolute Independence is to be understood, which removed dependence of every sort: but not relative Independence, which some observe in the order of creatures among themselves, and which only denies a certa

ε. Finally, the Attributes are distinguished into Communicable and Incommunicable. Thus we speak improperly, and this distinction is able easily to be drawn unto harmful sense: but if you understand Communicability very broadly of a certain very obscure similitude, even certain things that are commonly called Incommunicable are able to be called Communicable: thus the Most Illustrious WITTICH in his Theologia Pacifica, § 194. But we ourselves do not think that this distinctio

Descartes δ. Into Internal and External, which division was accommodated to the Philosophy of Descartes, according to which the whole nature of God is mere Thought, to the exclusion, as we were hearing Poiret say above, § 16, of all other things that are able to be conceived of besides thought. From this principium it is deduced that there are only two internal Attributes of God, Intellect and Will, because there are only two general modes of thought, perception or the operat

γ. Into Absolute and Relative, which imply a Relation to the creatures with Himself, and are founded in Absolutes. Thus an Absolute Attribute of God is Goodness, but a Relative Attribute is Mercy, which pertains to the Goodness of God, but additionally involves a regard to a miserable creature. Immensity is an Absolute Attribute, but Omnipresence is Relative, because it indicates a relation to created things, in all which it asserts the presence of God. Vindictive Justice is

β. Into Negative and Positive: thus Infinity, Immensity, Independence, Invisibility, etc., are called Negative: Wisdom, Goodness, Justice, etc., are called Positive. We form a conception of the Negative Attributes by way of Negation; of the Positive Attributes by way of Eminence. But the Negative Attributes for the most part are so called in relation, not to the very Attributes of God, but to the Mode of our Conception and the Names by which they are expressed; while Infinity

The Attributes of God are divided in various ways: α. Into Proper and Metaphorical. Unto the Metaphorical Attributes human Affections ought to be referred; it will be demonstrate below in § 26 that such do not properly apply to God. Unto the Metaphorical Attributes are also referred other metaphors from created things, under which God comes, when He is called a Rock, a roaring Lion, a consuming Fire. But the Proper Attributes are expressed concerning God in a proper sense, wh

But, that thus God in a manner agreeing with Himself possesses an Infinity of Perfections, and is not merely called and conceived of by us as Infinite according to our impotence, while actually He is not such in Himself, as Hobbes maintains, see COCQUIUS’ Anatomen Hobbesianismi, locus VI, chapter XII, page 125; our AUTHOR proves, α. From the enumeration of the individual Perfections made in the Scripture; β. And from the exclusion of all Imperfections. γ. Especially from the

[Of all the divine Attributes or Perfections there is a certain Complex/ Inclusion in Infinity, as it is stated negatively, or with Consummate Perfection, as it is stated positively:] Indeed, this is not so much to be called an Attribute, as rather a certain Complex of all the Attributes, whereby as a brief compendium, as it were, but a conception less distinct and obscure enough, our mind strives to apprehend whatever comes to be understood concerning God. Now, although Infi