Martinus Becanus on the Immensity of God
Contra Vorstius on whether God is ubiquitously present.
Chapter 6: About the Immensity of God
These three questions are accustomed to be disputed. First, whether God, according to his own substance, is ubiquitously present in this world. Second, whether [that substance] is also outside this world. Third, whether some creature is able to be ubiquitously present. We will discuss each separately.
Question 1: Whether God is ubiquitously present in this world?
1. Here Vorstius errs in two ways. First, because he teaches that God, according to his substance, is not everywhere as he is in heaven. Thus, he writes on page 235: “It seems that Scripture clearly affirms that God, by reason of his substance, is only in heaven.” And after citing some testimonies from Scripture, he thus concludes on page 237: “Therefore we simply believe that the holy Scriptures oftentimes insist that God by his own substance inhabits heaven; but he is present on the earth by his power and strength.” Moreover, he cites these witnesses. Psalm 113:16: “The heaven of heaven belongs to the Lord, but he gives the earth to the sons of men.” Psalm 122:1: “To you I lifted my eyes, you who lives in heaven.” And he cites similar texts.
2. Second, he errs because he teaches that the substance of God is divisible, and hence, that it is not entirely in any tiny thing, but only partially. For he thus writes on page 240: “It appears to be a paradox that God lacks all quantity in such a way that he is substantially whole in any thing, even the smallest.” He thinks the same thing about the rational soul, page 241, when he says: “It is generally said of the soul that its whole substance is in whatever part of the body, although it is acknowledged by many at this point that the thing itself proves this to be false. For the essence of the soul is not able to be one in number and indeed whole—to be at the same in the head, hands, feet, and other limbs, truly among them according to their divided places, because it would thus likewise be outside of itself.” And a little afterwards, “indeed the soul is, by its power and operation, diffused throughout all the parts of the body. But its essence is contained in one certain place (think: either in the heart or the brain). For this essence is not able to be diffused except insofar as it is extended and connected through the parts, which, without dimensive quantity, is not able to occur.” Whence also Bodinus makes the soul corporeal, and predicated with real quantity.
3. I give two conclusions against the first error. The first is that God is everywhere present in this world in three ways. First, by his power and operation, because he produces, conserves, and governs everything in this world. 1 Cor. 12:6: “He works all in all.” Wisdom 8:1: “She touches mightily from one end to the other end and sweetly she governs all.” Second, through cognition, because he intuits clearly all things, even the most-hidden. Heb. 4:13: “To his eyes, everything is bare and open.” Third, by way of his own substance and being, because he fills all places and spaces of this world by his immense substance.” Jer. 23:24: “I fill the heaven and earth, says the Lord.” Hence, Cyprian in his book about the vanity of idols says: “the whole world is God’s temple.” And further down: “all of God is everywhere diffused.” And Ambrose in book 7 about the Holy Spirit, ch. 7: “It is of the Lord to fill up all things.” And Jerome on Is. 66: “How will he who fills all, be shut up in a small place?” And Augustine in Ep. 57 to Dardanus: “God is substantially diffuse everywhere.” And book 7 from the City of God, ch. 30: “God is wholly everywhere, filling the heaven and earth by his present power, not by absent nature.
4. Vorstius denies this third way , as I said. But rashly and impiously so. Rashly, because he fights against the cited Scriptures and the testimony of the Fathers. Impiously because he introduces Arianism. For if God, according to his own substance, is not anywhere else than in heaven, as he himself says, it plainly follows that Christ, when he walked on this earth, was not the true God according to his substance. From which it shall be additionally evident that the Arians more rightly deny the divinity of Christ than to affirm it with the Catholics. Where, therefore, is the Christian faith? Certainly, these newbies dash it upon the rocks when, having left behind the footsteps of the ancient Fathers, they pursue their new opinions.