On this page
- Text (2)
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.
breatltes through fcvfcry page . To bur shfti « e \ Be * it $ p 6 fce * i , that , although from the qirteumstahqies under which it « You ask me first for Castalio ' s sentiments . If , as I conjecture , the work eutituled De Htereticis an sfoitpersequendi , &c . y which purports to be compiled by Martin Beliius , and to which Beza ' s
celebrated treatise , De Hcereticis a Civili Magistrate , puniendis , &c . y was an answer , was drawn up by Castalio , it seems to have been his opinion that Turks and Unbelievers ought not to be molested by the civil magistrate on account of their
principles , though he appears to think differently with respect to Atheists : € Si quis ( as he writes in the work referred to ) Deum negat e is impius et atheus est et omnium jitdicio meritd abominandus * Having noticed the agreement of the Turks and Christians in their belief of
Oue God , and afterwards the diversity of their opinions respecting Christ , he proceeds , * Quid igitur in tantis dissidiis superest ? Ut fiat quod docet Paulus—QUI NON COMEDIT , COMEDENT NE CONTEMNAT , NAM UTERO . UE SUO DOMINO STAT aut cadit . Ne damnent Judcei aut Turcce Christianas , rurstmique ne contemnant Christiani et Turcas aut
Judtsossed potius doceani et pietate alliciant * Itemque inter Christianas ne damnemus alii altos , sed si doctiores sumus , simw etiam meliores et misericordiores j " There is some reason to suspect
that the Unitarian writers of this period wished to evade the question respecting the toleration of Unbelievers , lest by opposing it they should weaken their defence of religious liberty , or by advocating it increase the odium which their
religious tenets had drawn upon them , Laelius Socinus , if ( as I suppose ) he was the author of the work entitled Contra Libellum Calvini ; in quo ostendere cona-Lur ^ Hareticos jure gladn ' coercendos esse , 1554 , seems liable to this suspicion . Thus in one place he writes , < Si quis wangelium , quod ante professus fuisset , Plane negaret , et de Christo aut de Deo
v wediceret , ac petulanter blasphemaret , pro eo loqui equidem minime vellem ? And again , « Qui negant Sacras Literas , ii nan ^ retiefy sed infideles et impii habendi su nt , de quibus nos Me nan agimu& . ' In another part of the work , however , where < o P rofesses to discuss the question , slmdfit hesreticus et quonam modo traclandus ; he speaks out more explicitl
y : vuomam CaMnus de hcereticis disputims ' , i °° nfun ^ et mado blasphemos , modo lrn % ? De ° rv ™ cultores , modo fateos n ^ Z . w <* nda 9 Hasreticos horum ontnum tnvidiQ gravarit . Ostendam eos vui
was written , it is peculiarly connected with England , it had never been translated ( at lejast in a complete state ) into qui Jusretici habentur mm esse tales . Imptos ttlos et Sucrarum Lzterarum contemptores ac blasphemos Hcereticorum nomine non comprehendo . Sed &t hnpios
tractandos judico . Si Deum negant , si blasphemant > si palam de sancta Christianorum doctrina maledicunt , sanctam piorum vitam detestantury eos ego relinquo magistratibus puniendoSy non propter religmnem quant nullarn habent , sed propter irreligionem * Quod si quis magistrates eos in vinculis
teneret si forte se corrtgerent ( quwniam immense est J > ei misericordiq ) is mini magistrdtus non alienus esse videtur a Christiana dementia * The object of CreJlius ' s book , Vindicice pro Religionism Libert at ey was to obtain for the Unitarians of Poland a toleration of the public
profession of their religion . He argues principally on the ground that no injury could arise from their opinions to the civil interests of the community . He notices the Turks and Mahometans , but only to shew that ^ as the Catholic
government tolerated both these bodies without suffering any civil injury , they might , with at least equal safety , tolerate Unitarians . He states , that in the case of neither would the government be charged with countenancing or approving . their peculiar and distinguishing tenets .
" Schlichtingius , in his work , Apologia pro f ^ eritate accusata , 1663 , had nearly the same object as to the Unitarians of Holland , as Crellius had respecting those of Poland . He mentions Turks and Jews only for the purpose of refuting a charge which had been alleged against the system of the Unitarians , as resembling Judaism and Mahometanism . He seems to have
entertained the most liberal views of religious liberty . ' Quid enim f he writes )' aliud est conscientice uni vero Deo adstricto , libertas quant in religione sentire quce velisy et quce sentias libere
pranunciare" The principle which you referred to , of distinguishing between the * modest worship * of heretics , or the privately holding of heretical opinions , and the public profession and promulgation of their sentiments , is frequently noticed incidentally by the early Unitarian writers
in their controversies with the orthodox of their day . But I am unable at this moment to give you any extracts from , the writers you specify on the subject . It was acted upbn by L . Socinas and Blandrata in the affair of Francis David * whom they would have allowed to remain unmolested if he had abstained from the
Th ^ Nonconform ht . No .-XXI * 45 ? .
-Xyi . 3 o
Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), Aug. 2, 1821, page 457, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2503/page/17/