V–VI. Philosophical names of habits are alien if taken strictly; theology's principles are from revelation, method from industry
V. Is the appellation of intelligence, science, wisdom, art, or prudence alien from the nature and definition of sacred theology? Altogether, if one prefers to speak of these habits agreeably to their philosophical definitions with Aristotle, the prince of philosophers — except for one spiritual prudence or faith, by which properly there is cognition of things pertaining to the kingdom of God, which is truly a practical habit and the genus of theology — also by the suffrage of him who writes publicly that theology is practical, not speculative, not by that common reason by which all arts and disciplines have their activity for an end, but especially concerning practice. But whoever attributes all these appellations to one sacred theology not popularly but properly in an accurate and philosophical kind of speech, by the same work attributes contradictory differences to the same defined thing, which we taught to be absurd in question 2 number 4. Nor does the contrary reason bind — namely that all these things are in any accurate discipline. For both the nature of disciplines distinguished from one another by opposite differences, and the whole chorus of the best philosophers, refute this. Otherwise, when the object of theology is taken in such breadth that it embraces whatever things are in the nature of things created and ordered by God, insofar as they are to be referred to God as to their principle and end, even Physics, Ethics, Politics, and other disciplines are contained within the terms of theology — as the most celebrated theologian of the Leiden Academy, Doctor Johannes Polyander, observes from Augustine's letter to Volusianus (Synopsis of purer theology, disputation 1 thesis 12).
VI. Whether sacred theology is from nature and human habit of inquiry, as the remaining disciplines, or rather from divine revelation and institution? A distinction must be made between the principles, the things underlying sacred theology, and the methodical explanation, demonstration, and disposition of principles, things, and conclusions deduced from them.
As to the former: the principles of other disciplines, innate to us, can be expressed and brought to perfection by sense, observation, induction, and experience, as among others Verulam shows eruditely in many places in the Great Instauration. But the solid and native principles of sacred theology, which by human study and industry can be advanced to perfection, are not in us by nature, nor are they found by the powers of nature (Matthew 16:17); but they are learned from divine revelation and institution (Isaiah 54:13; Matthew 11:27; John 6:45; Galatians 1:11–12). Compare chapter 2 aph. 5.
As to the latter: it hangs upon human industry and reasoning applied more or less according to the measure of grace, after the manner of the other disciplines, as is abundantly plain enough from the most published methods of sacred theology, of which some are more, others less, exact.
Latin
V. An a natura et definitione sacrae theologiae aliena sit intelligentiae, scientiae, sapientiae, artis aut prudentiae appellatio? Omnino, si libeat horum habituum philosophicis definitionibus convenienter cum Aristotele, philosophorum principe, loqui: extra unam prudentiam spiritualem sive fidem, per quam proprie fit cognitio rerum ad regnum Dei pertinentium, quae revera est habitus practicus et genus Theologiae, illius quoque suffragio, qui publice scribit, Theologiam non communi illa ratione, qua omnes artes et disciplinae pro fine habent suam energeian, sed praecipue de praxi diisomnibus esse practicam non speculativam, patere ex se. Qui vero non populariter, sed proprie accurato et philosophico sermonis genere has appellationes omnes uni sacrae Theologiae tribuit, is eadem opera eidem definito contradictorias tribuit differentias, id quod quaest. 2. num. 4. absurdum esse docuimus. Neque stringit ratio contraria: hac nempe omnia cuilibet accuratae disciplinae inesse. Hanc enim refutat et natura disciplinarum oppositis differentiis a se invicem distinctarum, et universus optimorum philosophorum chorus. Caeteroquin, quando objectum Theologiae in tanta latitudine accipitur, ut complectatur quaecunque sunt in rerum natura a Deo creata et ordinata, quatenus ad Deum, tanquam ad suum principium et finem sunt referenda, ipsam quoque Physicam, Ethicam, Politicam aliasque disciplinas terminis Theologiae contineri, ex Augustini epistola ad Volusianum observat celeberrimus Theologus Academiae Leidensis, D. Johannes Polyander, synopsi purioris Theologiae, disp. 1. th. 12. VI. Utrum sacra Theologia sit e natura et indagine habitu humana, ut reliquae disciplinae, an vero e revelatione et institutione divina? Distinguendum est inter principia, res sacrae Theologiae substratas, et principiorum, rerum, conclusionumque ex iis deductarum methodicam explicationem, demonstrationem ac dispositionem. Quantum ad prius, aliarum disciplinarum principia, nobis innata, sensu, observatione, inductione et experientia possunt exprimi et ad perfectionem deduci, ut inter alios Verulamius in Instauratione magna multis erudite ostendit: At sacrae Theologiae principia solida et vernacula, quae studio et industria humana possint ad perfectionem promoveri, nobis non insunt a natura, neque viribus naturae inveniuntur Matth. 16.17. sed ex revelatione et institutione divina discuntur Es. 54.13. Matth. 11.27. Joh. 6.45. Gal. 1.11.12. Confer cap. 2. aph. 5. Quantum ad posterius, ab humana industria et ratiocinatione secundum gratiae mensuram magis minusve adhibita, in morem aliarum disciplinarum pendet, ut ex editissimis sacrae theologiae methodis, quarum aliae magis, aliae minus sunt exquisitae, abunde satis manifestum est.