Occasion. No copy of Arminius's Latin text of this disputation is known. This English is translated from the Dutch translation by Johannes Lydius, printed in 1610, which is the only form in which the disputation survives. It is therefore two translations removed from what Arminius wrote, and no reading in it can be checked against his own words. The Dutch half-title names the respondent as G. Wirtzeus de Bergomo and dates the theses 1608. Lydius, minister at Oudewater, printed them first of the "three little tracts" on calling and conducting synods that make up his volume.
Authorship. By the convention of the Leiden faculty the theses are the presiding professor's; the student defended them. Stanglin argues the case for Arminius's authorship of the disputations at length, and it is his argument, not ours.
The doctrinal move. A preface places the council among the guards God sets over a Church he leaves exposed to strife. The theses then clear the word (I), set aside civil councils (II), justify the name "holy" (III), and give the definition (IV). After two schemes of division (V) the argument climbs the orders one by one: diocesan (VI), provincial (VII), national (VIII), then the council of the whole earth (X–XII). Limits are set along the way (IX). The right to convoke is left "arbitrary", and the Papists are faulted for giving it to a patriarch (VIII). After a word on the council's fruit (XIII), the second half changes method. Each thesis takes one disputed question, states the Papist position, and answers it with numbered reasons (Ten eersten, Ten tweeden …) drawn from Scripture, the ancient councils and the canonists. The questions are: who convokes (XIV–XV), who may sit and vote (XVI), who presides and with what office (XVII–XIX), whether the Pope is above the council (XX), and whether councils can err (XXI). XXII then grants the lawful council its authority, and makes that authority hang on Scripture.
Where it is answered. In the same volume. Lydius, "door den oversetter" (title page), prints Een corte ontdeckinghe der grove fauten begrepen inde Godlijcke stellinghen vande Concilien D. D. Iacobi Armini straight after the theses (p. 25 ff., PDF p. 33). Thesis 20 was partly translated again in Lijsbet Reael's preface to the Verclaringhe and in Gomarus's Proeve. Neither is collated here. No answer by Wesley has been identified.