Search

This paper examines Petrus van Mastricht's critique of the Cartesian doctrine of the Trinity in his Novitatum cartesianarum gangraena (1677). Mastricht opposed two types of Cartesian approaches to the Trinity. One was by Nicolaus Smiterus, who claimed that the Trinity could be proven rationally. The other was by Christoph Wittich, who argued that the doctrine could not be discussed rationally. Mastricht rejected both positions as benefiting anti-Trinitarian heretics such as the Socinians. Instead, Mastricht took a middle course between Smiterus and Wittich, arguing that while the Trinity could not be proven rationally, its credibility could be enhanced by rational argument. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The present paper analyzes Petrus van Maistricht's (1630–1706) critique of Baruch Spinoza's Theological-Political Treatise found in his Novitatum cartesianarum gangraena (1677). The paper shows, first, that Mastricht regarded Spinoza's atheism as the inevitable outcome of the Cartesians' denial of philosophy's subordination to theology. Second, Mastricht, in refuting Spinoza, revised his earlier critique of Cartesianism. In his previous work, Mastricht had already pointed out the atheistic implications of Cartesianism, but in the Gangraena he could now clearly identify Spinoza's Theological-Political Treatise as the atheistic consequence of Cartesianism. He was thus able to confirm his distinctive diagnosis of Cartesianism as a gangrene that would gradually worsen and eventually destroy the entire body of theology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The present paper examines the Cartesian theologian Christoph Wittich's Anti-Spinoza (1690). Scholars have observed two opposing orientations in the work. Some have argued that Wittich offered a thoroughly Cartesian refutation of Spinoza. Others have found that he sometimes disagreed with Descartes and adopted a Spinozistic position. This paper reconciles these contrasting interpretations by comparing Wittich's Anti-Spinoza with his earlier work. In general, Wittich tried to refute Spinoza's monism by mobilizing Cartesian principles, which is particularly perspicuous in his discussion of God's being. However, once he turned to the issue of the divine will, he openly contradicted Descartes' teaching and approached Spinoza's necessitarianism. He chose to do so to remain orthodox, evading the accusation of Socinian heresy, which the conservative theologian Petrus van Mastricht had made against his Theologia pacifica (1671). This paper concludes that the widespread fear concerning Socinianism deeply conditioned the way theologians reacted to the Cartesian philosophy in the Netherlands in the late seventeenth century. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Francis Bacon was a major early modern critic of Aristotelianism. In addressing its matter theory, he mainly attacked the concept of prime matter, which, for many Aristotelians, was deprived of any attribute. He denied this doctrine on the basis of the inseparability of matter from its quantity and power. By examining theological and natural philosophical dimensions of this idea, this paper reveals the close interconnection among various fields of knowledge in Bacon's thought. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper examines the theological dimension of Francis Bacon’s atomistic theory of matter. This analysis shows that he was among those early modern atomists who modified the classical atomism from a theological perspective. To achieve this goal, the discussion first focuses on Bacon’s criticism of Bernardino Telesio. Bacon criticized Telesio’s natural philosophy for being theologically false. Trying to avoid the falsity, Bacon developed his atomism in the framework of Biblical Creation story. According to him, God first made the chaotic mass of atoms from nothing and then brought order to the workd by giving divine power to each atom. Consequently, atoms come to be led by divine wisdom. This theory aimed at modifying the purely materialistic aspect of the ancient atomism, according to which God never intervenes in the world. The wording employed by Bacon for this modification has strongly suggested that he relied on the work of the Danish Paracelsian Petrus Severinus in developing this atomistic reading of the Bible. Utilizing Severinus’s theory to harmonize atomism with the Christian doctrine was common among early modern atomists such as Nicholas Hill, Daniel Sennert, and Pierre Gassendi. Therefore, it is on the basis of his reliance on Severinus that we can locate Bacon’s matter theory in the history of atomism in the early modern era. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article presents an introduction to this special issue of "Kagakushi Kenkyu" on Francis Bacon, explaining why the study of Bacon remains relevant, citing the best new historical research published during the previous decade, and proving a preface to the feature articles in this issue.