Arminius

The locus on the Church, both the whole Church which is called catholic and that part of it which is named visible and militant in these lands, is followed by another locus, on the marks of the Church. It must be examined the more diligently, since it is not only more necessary to be known, but is also attacked more and more every day by the enemies of the truth.

But before we come to the matter, we must know, first, of which Church we are inquiring into the marks; and next, what we understand by the marks of the Church. As to the first: since the disputation so far has concerned not only the Church catholic but also the Church militant, we here understand the Church taken not in the former but only in the latter way, and it is of this Church alone that we inquire into the marks.

By marks we understand nothing other than certain external accidents, presented to the senses of all, which mark a thing so clearly that by the perception of them the thing which has come into question is recognized.

We say accidents to show that these marks are nothing essential to the thing, but only certain accidental things; and therefore that neither the matter, nor the form, nor the whole composed of matter and form, is the mark of a thing. For matter is the common subject of all material things, and therefore cannot be a sure mark of a thing. Form, although it informs, and therefore marks and describes the thing most surely, is nevertheless not known to everyone, since it is not exposed to the senses; and so it is by no means reckoned among these marks. And to call the whole composed of matter and form the mark of a thing would be quite absurd, because in this way the substance of a thing would be asserted to be an accident.

And we say external accidents, exposed to the senses of all, to distinguish these marks from internal and by no means conspicuous accidents, through which no knowledge of the thing is reached. For since these lie hidden, and are concealed in the inmost bowels of the thing, so far are we from coming to the knowledge of the thing through accidents of that kind, that on the contrary we should never recognize the thing at all, if we looked to these alone.

And when we say that they are accidents which mark a thing so clearly that by the perception of them the thing which has come into question is recognized, we describe the marks by their use and end, by which all kinds of instruments are customarily described; and the marks of things are also reckoned among these. To the use of marks belongs what is said, that they mark the thing, and that clearly: of which the former is required for the being of marks (as the etymology of the word itself shows), the latter for their well-being.

The end of marks is expressed when it is added that by the perception of them the thing about which there was before a controversy becomes known to us. And it becomes known not only probably but also certainly: probably, through common accidents; certainly, through proper accidents, which flow from the very form of things. Of these, the former are commonly named probable signs (εἰκότα), the latter certain signs (τεκμήρια).

And about those which are named probable signs (εἰκότα) we shall not labour much: not only because there are a good many of them about which there is no great controversy, provided that, according to the truth of the matter, they are recognized only as common accidents and not as certain signs (τεκμηρίοις); but also because by them the thing is demonstrated not so much certainly as probably. We shall investigate more diligently only those which they call certain signs (τεκμήρια), by which the thing is certainly known.

Now since we have called these above the proper accidents of a thing, they must flow from the very form of the thing. And we set down no other form of the Church than the relation by which Christ as head is related to the several members of the Church, and the members in turn to Christ as head. Therefore only such things are to be set down as certain signs (τεκμήρια) as flow from this form; the rest are by no means to be held as certain signs (τεκμηρίοις).

From the relation by which Christ is related to his members these things flow: namely, that Christ sets forth to them the word as the food of eternal life, and appends seals to the word, by which he makes his word valid. And from the relation by which the members of the Church are related to their head these things issue: namely, that whoever wish to be held members of the Church recognize and embrace that food and those seals, applied by divine institution.

The sum, then, comes back to this: that the revealed word of God and its appendages are the true marks of the Church, by which the Church of God is certainly distinguished from every other assembly; so that, just as it is rightly said that wherever the Church is, there the word and its appendages are, so it may also rightly be said that wherever the word of God and its appendages are, there too is the true Church of God. All the others, therefore, which are put forward by the Pontificians besides these, we cast out as less agreeable to the truth.

And when we say that the word of God is the certain sign (τεκμήριον) of the Church, we wish the word to be taken not only as it was at one time pronounced immediately by God with the living voice, not only as it was passed down to posterity through traditions, not only as it was written down in letters in the progress of time, but as it was communicated and revealed by God to men. Taken in this way, the word embraces under itself not some one particular mode among these, but all of them together.

And it must by all means be taken in this way if it is to be a proper mark of the Church, because only when taken in this way does it belong not only to every visible Church and to the visible Church alone, but also always.

Yet according to the measure of the Church's age, this revealed word has had some particular mode of itself joined to it. For at the very beginning of the Church the word was only pronounced immediately by God with the living voice; afterwards it was propagated to posterity through traditions; at length it was written down in writings, first by Moses, then, in the succession of time, by the rest of the Prophets and by the Apostles.

In the same way also, when we set down the seals of the word as the other proper mark of the Church, we do not take them as restricted to some particular time (for in that way they are not perpetual, since there were seals under the Old Testament which are not under the New, and there are likewise seals under the New which were not under the Old); but we wish them to be understood in general, so that we include not only the seals of the word which exist now, but also all those which existed formerly: both those which existed before the Gospel, and those which exist under the Gospel.

Before the Gospel, sensible symbols of God's presence were added to the revealed word of God, some of them transient, some permanent until the time of the Gospel. Under the Gospel, the old having been abrogated, new symbols were added to the word, and these permanent only, and not to be ended before the consummation of the age.

We set down, therefore, the revealed word of God, comprehending indefinitely under itself all the modes subordinate to it, and likewise the symbols appended to the word, considered in general, as the certain signs (τεκμήρια) of the visible Church, taken according to all its ages and all times.

But if the visible Church is considered according to the particular times of its whole age, then nothing will stand in the way of what we have said if some particular mode is added to the word and those symbols according to the measure of the times; because the mode does not vary the substance of a thing, and the substance can remain intact while the modes vary among themselves. This only needs to be observed: when the Church is distinguished according to the measure of the times, what is to be sought is not so much the marks of the visible Church as the marks of the visible Church militant at this or that time. And so much for the marks which are proper to the Church.

From these things it is clear what is to be determined about the grades of churches: namely, that those which have all the marks, not only the common but also the proper, are to be held in the first place; those which have the proper only, in the second; those which have the common only, in the third; and those which have none at all, in none. The Roman Church, therefore, since it has only some probable signs (εἰκότα) and only a single certain sign (τεκμήριον), and both are so depraved that they are almost nothing, although it is to be held a Church, is nevertheless to be placed not in the first place, as it falsely arrogates to itself, but in almost the last, until the Lord shall have had further mercy on it.

But the purity and impurity of churches, too, becomes conspicuous from these marks. For as to purity, some churches are said to be absolutely pure, according to their measure: such are those which have all the marks purely. Others are less pure: such are those which have some marks, yet not purely. And these differ among themselves in degrees of purity, so that some, compared with others, are pure, purer, purest. For those which have their probable signs (εἰκότα) less pure than their certain signs (τεκμήρια) are certainly to be called purer than those churches whose probable signs have more purity than their certain signs; and so on, judgment is to be made about the other grades.

The reasoning about impurity is the same. For some churches are said to be absolutely impure, others impure in a certain respect and comparatively. Those are absolutely impure which have impurely all the marks they have, whether they really and actually have them all, or, some being neglected, only some; and among these the latter are far more impure than the former. Those are impure in a certain respect which still have something of purity. The Roman Church, therefore, besides being held in almost the lowest place, is also most impure.

It is clear also what is to be thought about the clarity of churches. For those whose marks shine out beyond the marks of the rest are to be called clearer than those which have marks less bright. The Roman Church, therefore, although it vaunts itself as most clear, we hold to be a very obscure Church, which beyond many others has need of illumination. May God, best and greatest, of his infinite mercy strike that Church with the solar rays of the grace of Christ, and for the merit of Christ graciously wipe away the filth and mists that still lie hidden among us too, so that at length we may triumph together with him. To him, with the Father and the Holy Spirit, be all praise, honour, and glory for ever. Amen.