Third, Scripture alone is the voice of the principal judge and the norm of the ministerial judge.
Third, Scripture alone is the voice of the principal judge and the norm of the ministerial judge.
§ 456. We demonstrate the third part with these foundations: (1) In whatever writing and through whatever writing God speaks to us and reveals to us His judgment with regard to controversies of faith, that is the voice of the judge and, in a sound sense, is also the judge in controversies of faith. However, it is in and through canonical Scripture that God speaks to us, and in it alone He explains to us His judgment concerning controversies of faith. Therefore. The major premise shines with its own light and can be illustrated by a comparison with civil law. Aristotle, Politic., bk. 5, c. 7: “To go to the judge is to go to justice, for the judge wishes to be like living justice.” We can also illustrate it by a comparison with human writing. Whoever reads a letter from a friend believes that he is listening to the voice and judgment of his friend. Whoever listens to a statement of the emperor read from something written states that he is listening to the judgment of the emperor. The minor premise is also one of obvious truth. If the Word of God is presented to us in canonical Scripture, surely God is speaking to us in and through the Scriptures. Consequently, to Scripture itself we attribute such speaking because it is the voice of God. If God were addressing us immediately today, He would use no other voice in handing down the dogmas of faith than that which is extant in Scripture. Matt. [1]:22: “… the Lord had spoken by the prophet.” Matt. 22:43: “David, inspired by the Spirit, calls the Messiah ‘Lord.’ “Luke 16:[29]: “Let them hear Moses and the prophets.” Rom. 3:19: “The Law speaks.” Gal. 4:30: “What does the Scripture say?” etc. However, that divine “saying,” that “calling,” that “speaking,” that divine voice sounded forth nowhere except in the prophetic Scriptures. Therefore God also speaks to us in and through Scripture.
(2) Therefore we set up the following comparison. God or, what is the same, Christ, the interpreter of the heavenly Father, and the Holy Spirit, who examines the depths of God and reveals to humans the counsel of God concerning salvation, today no longer address us immediately but speak to us in and through the Word, which is embraced in the prophetic and apostolic books. Therefore they also no longer give their judgment immediately in controversies of faith but offer that judgment in and through the written Word. Consequently, it is the same whether I say the Holy Spirit is the judge of controversies or Scripture is the judge of controversies, because the Holy Spirit declares His judgment in the Word, not immediately. Scripture is called the judge of controversies because it is the voice of the Holy Spirit. So, too, the same effect is attributed to the principal and instrumental causes because the principal cause acts through the instrumental, and the instrumental acts in the power of the principal cause.
We prove the antecedent in this way. Rom. 11:32: “God has consigned all to unbelief.” Gal. 3:22: “Scripture consigned all things to sin.” From this, there emerge the following axioms: With the accusing voice of the Law, God consigns all to unbelief. Scripture, or the written Law of God, consigns all to the sin of unbelief.
Thus John 5:22 and Acts 17:31. Christ is the judge whom God has established. Yet He also sends us back to Scripture (John 5:39) and says expressly: “He who … does not receive My sayings has one that judges him. The Word that I have spoken will judge him on the Last Day” (John 12:48). Here the Word of Christ is said to judge both in the present and in the future. From this come these axioms: Christ judges through the Word. And the Word of Christ judges as the voice of the Judge.
John 16:8: “The Holy Spirit will convinct the world of sin.” Rom. 3:19: “Whatever the Law says, it speaks to those who are under the Law so that every mouth may be stopped and the whole world may be held accountable to God.” From this comes these axioms: The Holy Spirit convicts the world by the ministry of the Law. The Law convicts the world because it is the voice of God that He has published and promulgated.
(3) Whatever it is to which God Himself has assigned the office of judging, that cannot be excluded from judgment in controversies of faith. But God Himself has assigned the office of judging to His Word. Therefore. We prove the minor premise from the following statements. [a] Ps. [149]:9 mentions 
(“the judgment written”), but what else is the “judgment written” than Holy Scripture, which contains the Word of God, which is that “two-edged sword” mentioned in [Ps. 149]:6 and Eph. 6:17, through which they can attack and assail all their foes?
** The words of the Lord contained in the Scriptures are called “the judgments of the Lord” (Exod. 24:3; Lev. 18:4, etc.); “the judgments of the mouth of the Lord” (Ps. 105:5; 119:3). “The Word of the Lord shall judge the nations” (Isa. 2:4). “All who sinned under the Law will be judged by the Law” (Rom. 2:12). **
[b] Dan. 7:10 and Rev. 20:12: “The books are opened,” according to which the dead will be judged. [c] John 12:48: “The Word that I have spoken will judge him on the Last Day.” Yet if we can correctly attribute the judgment of condemnation on the Last Day to the speech of Christ and the Word of God that are presented in Scripture, we can also correctly attribute the judgment of discernment concerning controversies of faith occurring in this life to the written speech of Christ and the written Word of God. [d] Rom. 2:16: “God will judge the world according to the Gospel” that the apostles preached. [e] Heb. 4:12: “For the Word of God is living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword, a judge of thoughts.”
Some of the ancients, such as Athanasius (Contra Arian., orat. 3, vol. 1, p. 242), Jerome (on Isaiah 66), Ambrose (De fide, bk. 4, c. 3), Cyril (on John, bk. 2, c. 37), and Fulgentius (Epistle 2 ad Gallam de statu viduit., p. 446) take this to mean the hypostatic and essential Word [de 
et 
], namely, God’s Son. Their opinion is followed by Ribera, commentary on Hebrews 4, no. 15. He confirms this interpretation with the following arguments: [a] Because the phrase is general, not restricted. [b] The contrary cannot be shown by firm logic. [c] He is called the 
[“living Word”], which we must understand not only effectively but also formally. [d] The apostle is dissuading from unbelief with an argument taken from life and the vision of the Word. [e] He attributes to the Word sight and eyes, and adds 
(“the Word with whom we have to do”) [Heb. 4:13]. [f] The conclusion that is added signifies that this was said of Christ: “Therefore, having a great High Priest” [Heb. 4:14].
Others, however, such as Augustine (Epistle 58), Ambrose (De virgin., bk. 3), Arethas and Primasius on Revelation 1, and most of our people take this to mean the external, spoken Word [de 
) et externo]: [a] Because in preceding verses the author says many things about a word that is heard. [b] Because it says that it is “active, sharper than a sword,” and this is a description of the power connected with the Word. Augustine, De civ. Dei, bk. 20, c. 21: “Scripture calls the speech of God a sword twice sharp because of the twin edges of the two Testaments.” [c] Christ, among other things, is called the “Word” because of the preaching of the Word. Therefore both explanations can be joined together because they are not contrary but subordinate.78
(4) And, finally, to confirm this third part, we produce the following argument. Whatever is the unique, immovable, and infallible norm according to which the ministerial judge should judge controversies of faith, that is correctly called, in this sense and respect, “the judge of controversies in the Church.” This is the explanation: when we call Scripture the judge of controversies, we intend nothing else than that the Church—that is, both the ministers of the Church as well as the rest of her members—should pass judgment on controversies of faith according to no other norm than the norm of Scripture. But Scripture is the unique, immovable, and infallible norm according to which the ministerial judge should judge controversies of faith, as we have demonstrated in the chapter immediately preceding this. Therefore.