The Theologians of Rostock replied more briefly. Dismissing at once
the charge of blasphemy and heresy as absurd, they treated the
question as purely philosophical, saying, “_Quod de elementari naturâ
animarum brutorum dicitur, de illo nostrum non est disserere.
Arbitramur, hæc non solum Philosophorum, sed et libertati, super his
modestè, veritatis inveniendæ studio, philosophantium permittenda;
quos nimium constringere, et unius hominis, Aristotelis, alteriusve,
velle alligare opinioni, pugnare videtur cum naturâ intellectus
humani, quem nulli opinioni servum Deus esse voluit._” Concerning the
second question, they were not willing, they said, to draw the saw of
contention with any one; “_Si tamen, quod sentimus dicendum est,
respondemus, illum qui cœlum et terram ex nihilo creavit, non eguisse
ullâ materiâ, ex quâ brutorum animas produceret; sed illi placuisse
iis quæ Moses recitat verbis compellare terram et aquam, et ad solius
Omnipotentis nutum et imperium, ex subjectis quæ compellârit, animas
emersisse._” This answer Sennertus obtained through his friend
Lauremberg the Horticulturist and Botanist, who advised him at the
same time to disregard all invidious attacks; “_Turbas tibi dari quòd
liberè philosophari satagis, id ipse nôsti, neque novum esse, neque
insolens, hâc ætate. Eandem tecum sortem experiuntur omnes eleganter
et solidè eruditi, quibus qui paria facere non valet, invidet et
oblatrat. Tu verò noli hoc nomine te quicquam macerare neu
obtrectationem illam gravius vocare ad animum. Nota est orbi tua
eruditio, tua virtus et ingenuitas, quæ ea propter nullam patietur
jacturam. Tu modo, ut hactenus fecisti, pergito bene mereri de
Republicâ literariâ, et mihi favere, certò tibi persuasus, habere te
hîc loci hominem tui amantem, et observantem maxime._”
Zuinger answered more at large for the Faculty at Basle. They bade him
not to marvel that he should be accused of heresy and blasphemy,
seeing that the same charge has been brought against their
Theologians, who when they taught according to Scripture that God
alone was the Father of the spirits as their parents were of their
bodies, and that the reasonable soul therefore was not derived from
their parents, but infused and concreated _θύραθεν à Deo ἀμέσως_ were
accused either of Pelagianism, as if they had denied Original Sin, or
of blasphemy, as if they had made God the author of sin. They
admonished him to regard such calumnies more justly and quietly, for
evil and invidious tongues could never detract from that estimation
which he had won for him in the Republic of Letters. Nevertheless as
he had asked for their opinion, they would freely deliver it.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account