Curione Celio Secondo (Italie, Curione,) was born at San Chirico, in Piedmont, May 1st, 1503 ; and was the youngest son in a family of twenty-three children. He lost both his parents, before he had completed his ninth year. His father, who was allied to some of the first families in Piedmont, held a distinguished civic office at Moncaglieri, and superintended his son's education, till the period of his own death. Celius was the favourite child of both his parents ; and his father, who always regarded him as the hope and stay of the family, besides leaving him an equal share in his personal property with the rest of his children, bequeathed to him the family mansion at Moncaglieri, together with an estate in the country, and a beautifully embellished Bible.

After the death of his parents he was sent to a public school, where he made a rapid proficiency in classical knowledge; but the course of education pursued in this seminary being too narrow to satisfy his aspiring mind, he removed to the University of Turin, and devoted himself to the study of Oratory, Poetry, History and Jurisprudence, under the Professors who then had charge of those departments.

He had scarcely completed his twentieth year, when the names of Luther and Zwingle began to be the general topics of conversation: and deeming it unjust to join in the prevailing outcry against them, without allowing them an opportunity of defending themselves, he resolved to procure their writings, and make himself thorough master of the controversy. By the assistance of some friends he obtained a sight of Luther's treatises on Indulgences, and on the Babylonish Captivity, Zwingle's Essay on true and false Religion, and some of the writings of Melanchthon and Erasmus; and his curiosity was so much excited by the perusal of these, that he felt an ardent desire to become acquainted with their authors. With this view he invited James Cornelli and Francis Guarini, two of his fellow-students, who afterwards became eminent Protestant Ministers, to be his companions on a tour into Germany;—an invitation, which neither of them was slow to accept.

Before they had proceeded many miles on their way, these sanguine youths, with buoyant spirits and light hearts, to beguile the tedium of their journey, entered into a friendly religious discussion; but being reported to Boniface, Cardinal Bishop of Ivrea, by some of the country people, as men of suspicious character, he caused them to be apprehended, and lodged in prison. Curio was now separated from his companions, and conducted to the castle of Capriano: but after a confinement of about two months, he was liberated at the request of some influential friends, and discharged with a gentle admonition.

The Bishop, who saw that he was a young man of considerable promise, took him under his own protection, and sent him to prosecute his studies at the monastery of San Benigno. But here his contempt for the Catholic superstitions soon began to display itself, and was carried to a length, which, but for the good fortune that ever accompanied him, might, even in more enlightened times, have been attended with very serious consequences. Having clandestinely obtained access to the shrine, where certain relics were deposited, he abstracted them from their hidingplace, and left in their stead a copy of the Bible, which he had taken from the library of the monastery, and in a blank leaf of which he wrote these words:—" This is the ark of the covenant, from which the genuine oracles of God may be learned, and in which are contained the true relics of the saints." All this was done with so much tact and cleverness, that for a long time no suspicion was entertained of what had taken place. The relics which Curio had removed were only allowed to see the light on particular occasions, and on the eve of one of these, apprehending that the suspicion of having purloined them would fall upon himself, he absconded, and travelled on foot, by way of Milan and Rome, into the Neapolitan territory.

After visiting most of the principal cities in Italy, he returned to Milan, where he resided for some years. As he was endowed by nature with talents of the highest order, which he had improved by assiduous cultivation, he was at no loss for the means of obtaining a comfortable livelihood, which he did by devoting himself to the office of an instructor of youth. During his residence at Milan, he was noticed by some of the principal families of the place ; and conducted himself so as to secure the esteem and good-will of all parties. At that time the Milanese was occupied by Spanish troops, and the country was ravaged by famine and pestilence, and all the horrors which usually follow in the train of war, Curio was unwearied in his attention to the sufferers. He not only distributed to the poor what he obtained from the liberality of many persons of distinction, but, cooperating with the noble family of the Isacci in the suburbs, to which he had retired, he induced the clergy, when all other resources failed, to apply the Church revenues to the relief of the poor; and when all besides fled, and left their friends and relations to provide for themselves, he remained at his post, and not only administered consolation to those who stood in need of it, but, with the aid of a single companion, buried those who had fallen victims to famine or disease.

By his noble and disinterested conduct on this occasion, Curio so far ingratiated himself into the favour of Margherita Bianca Isacca, an elegant and accomplished young lady of illustrious family, as to obtain her hand in marriage. Wishing now to settle in some quiet part of Italy, where he and his bride would be free from the hostile incursions of the Spanish troops, he removed to Casale, in the neighbouring Duchy of Monferrat. This was in 1530 ; but after the lapse of a few years, his brothers being then all dead, he was urged by friends to return to his native place, where a married sister, the only surviving member of the family beside himself, had possessed herself of his patrimony. On his arrival, he met with a hospitable reception from his sister and her husband, who thought that he had come merely for the purpose of visiting his friends. But when they found, that his object was to recover what they had dishonestly appropriated to their own use, his sister, pretending that his life was in danger, on account of his heretical opinions, urged him to seek safety, by flight to a neighbouring town, then in the occupation of Claude of Savoy. Curio thought that he might there settle his affairs without danger; and, in process of time, when the rumours against him had died away, might return, and take possession of his property. Meanwhile, however, that he might not remain unemployed, he undertook the education of some youths of noble family, and by his learning and acquirements, combined with a happy mode of imparting instruction, obtained the patronage and friendship of most of the neighbouring nobility.

At this period of his life, he chanced to be one day on a visit with some friends in a certain place, where a Dominican Friar, of Turin, was zealously declaiming against Luther ; and telling his hearers that this great light of the Reformation not only permitted his followers to indulge in every species of licentious gratification, but even went so far as to deny the Divinity of Christ, and his birth of the Virgin Mary. At the close of the discourse, Curio requested the Preacher to point out any passage in Luther's writings, from which these grave charges could be substantiated ; to which the Friar replied, that he would not then discuss the matter with him, but that if Curio would accompany him to Turin, he would convict Luther of having advanced far more dangerous opinions than these. Upon this, Curio took out of his pocket Luther's "Commentary on the Galatians," and proved the utter falsity of the Friar's charge, by quoting the Reformer's own words. This exposure completely discomfited the Preacher ; and the people would have wreaked their vengeance upon him in a summary way, had he not made a precipitate retreat to Turin. Safely arrived in that city, he applied to the Chief Inquisitor to arrest Curio, whose lot it was again to suffer imprisonment on a charge of heresy. The old story of the relics was now revived; and he was reminded of the heretical conversation, which had brought him under the displeasure of the Bishop of Ivrea. All things, in short, seemed to conspire against him; and his friends were upon the point of giving him up as lost. At this critical conjuncture he dexterously eluded the vigilance of his keepers ; and effected his escape in the following curious manner.

The Bishop of Turin had undertaken a journey to Rome, for the purpose of obtaining the Pope's sanction to the proceedings against him. In the mean time, Curio was consigned to the custody of the Bishop's colleague, David, brother of Cardinal Cibo, who, for greater security, had caused him to be placed in fetters, and removed by night to a private apartment, enclosed within strong walls, and guarded by two sentinels. It so happened that Curio, when a boy, had been confined in this very room, so that he had a perfect recollection of every part of the premises ; and as his feet were much swollen by the tightness of the shackles which were fastened upon them, (the debilitating effects of which he continued to feel through the remainder of his life,) he requested that one foot might be set at liberty, and when the swelling was removed, that this might be bound, and the other liberated. This request being granted, it occurred to him, after he had been in confinement for some days, to try whether he could not make a false leg, and get it fettered instead of the true one. With this view he took off the stocking of the leg which was at liberty, and stuffed it full of linen rags ; and when he had succeeded in completing his ingenious contrivance, he begged that he might be allowed to have the convalescent foot bound, and the other set at liberty. His request was granted: the true foot was liberated ; the pretended one was fettered; and he was now comparatively a free man again.

One stormy night, while the sentinels were asleep, he opened the door of his place of confinement, slipped down , stairs unperceived by them, and finding the outer door securely bolted and barred, made his escape through the window. In the morning, when the guards saw that their prisoner was gone, and that the fetters by which he had been bound were still locked, and had not been forced asunder by violence, they came to the conclusion that he had effected his escape by the aid of magical arts ; and when this rumour concerning him got abroad, that the Christian name might not he under so odious an imputation, he published a humorous dialogue, under the title of "Probus," in which he gave a detailed account of the whole matter, and expressed his gratitude to- God for so remarkable a deliverance.

He had now become so obnoxious to the Catholic clergy, that his only means of safety lay in flight ; and taking with him his wife and children, he made the best of his way to Sale, a town of Milan, which lay at some distance from the high road. Here he was soon recognized by some gentlemen, who usually spent their summer months at their country houses near this place, and by whom he was prevailed upon, almost against his will, to accept of a Professorship in the University of Pavia ; and although the Inquisitors had strict orders to seize him, he was enabled for a long time to set them at defiance by the vigilance of his pupils, who escorted him daily backwards and forwards, between the University and the place of his residence, for the space of three whole years. At length the Pope threatening to excommunicate the whole senate of Pavia, if Curio was not delivered up, he was allowed to make his escape, and took refuge in the Venetian territory. The vengeance of his enemies still pursuing him, he sought the protection of Renata, Duchess of Ferrara, by whose interest he obtained a Professor's chair in the University of Lucca: but before the expiration of a twelvemonth, a papal order for his apprehension, and removal to Rome, was received by the Senate, and he once more found it expedient to consult his safety by flight.

Curio now saw, that he could remain no longer in Italy, without being daily in imminent hazard of his life; and came to the determination of seeking that asylum in a foreign country, which was denied to him in his native land. Having therefore procured letters of recommendation from the Duchess of Ferrara, he went to Switzerland, and was appointed Rector of the College of Lausanne, an office which he discharged with great credit and acceptance for about four years.

Soon after his settlement at Lausanne, he returned into Italy in quest of his family, and narrowly escaped being taken by the Pope's emissaries at Pisa. While seated at dinner, the Bargello, or Prefect of the Inquisition, unexpectedly made his appearance; and having previously secured the approach to the house by a strong guard, he entered the room in which Curio was regaling himself, and arrested him in the name of the Chief Pontiff. Curio rose from the table, and was in the act of surrendering himself ; but happening still to have in his hand the knife which he had been using at dinner, and being a robust and powerful man, the Prefect was in his turn alarmed, and fainted. Curio, with remarkable presence of mind, now seized his opportunity. He left the room, went down stairs, passed, without being recognized, through the midst of the guard which was stationed at the door, entered the stable, mounted his horse, and rode off. On the recovery of the Bargello from his fainting fit, the alarm was given, and the hue and cry raised. But Curio was now beyond the reach of his pursuers. A violent storm soon compelled them to take shelter, and the delay thus occasioned, while it favoured his flight, rendered further pursuit on their part hopeless.

Having thus once more escaped the jaws of death, he returned to Lausanne, where he was shortly joined by his wife and children ; and finally removed to Basle, A. D. 1547, during the Rectorship of Sebastian Munster. His original intention was not to have settled in that city; but some of the most eminent Professors of the University, among whom was Martin Borrhaus, and the celebrated printers, Jerome Froben and Nicholas Episcopius, together with others who knew the extent of his erudition, requested him to take up his abode among them. With this request he was induced to comply ; and he had not been long resident in Basle, before he was appointed Professor of Eloquence and Belles-lettres in the University, an office for which he was eminently qualified, and which he discharged, with uninterrupted satisfaction, till the end of his life.

The Pope now solicited him to return into Italy, and made him a very liberal offer, together with the promise of a free pardon, on the sole condition of his abstaining, in future, from the discussion of religious subjects. The Duke of Savoy, on hearing of this, made him a still more flattering proposal. The Emperor Maximilian was likewise anxious to secure his literary services in the University of Vienna ; and the Waiwode of Transylvania offered him a valuable appointment in the newly-established College of Weissenberg. But he declined all these inviting proposals, and continued, for the space of three and twenty years, to devote himself, with unwearied assiduity, to the discharge of his official duties in the University of Basle, preferring the society of such men as that seat of learning afforded, to all the splendid allurements held out to him by foreign courts. He died at Basle on Tuesday, November 22nd, A.D. 1569, in the sixty-seventh year of his age.

A few months before he was attacked by the complaint which carried him to the grave, he had his likeness taken ; and when he was asked the reason by a friend, his reply was, that the period of his dissolution was not far distant, and he was anxious that his family, when they saw that representation of him, should remember him, and call to mind the pious precepts, which he had inculcated upon them during his life. From that time, he ceased not to meditate upon his approaching end ; and when it arrived, he met it with the calmness and composure of a Christian.

Curio left behind him, in his works, many splendid monuments of genius and erudition. His Introductory Address, prefixed to Valdez's " Considerations on a Religious Life," has been already mentioned. (Vide Art. 9.) Besides editing that work, he translated into Latin Guicciardini's " History of the Wars of Italy," and some of Ochinus's " Sermons;" and published a collection of " Pasquinades" in French and Italian, which were remarkable for the pungency of their wit. Among his original writings, an imperfect list of which is given by Stupanus, in his " Panegyrical Oration on the Life and Death of C. S. Curio," were many on the subjects of Education, Philosophy, Grammar, Logic, History, Antiquities, and other topics connected with General Literature. His Theological and Metaphysical Works comprise

1. An Essay on the Providence of God ;

2. An Essay on the Immortality of the Soul;

3. A Paraphrase on the Proem of John's Gospel;

4. Dialogues on the Extent of God's Kingdom; and

5. Christian Institutes.

It has been customary to represent the subject of this memoir simply in the light of an Italian Reformer ; but judging from a variety of well known, and incontestable facts, there appears to be ample ground for the conclusion, that he was, what numbers beside have been, who have lived and died with a fair reputation for orthodoxy, a Crypto-Unitarian. Sandius, it is true, has not inserted an account of him in his "Bibliotheca Antitrinitariorum." But Sandius, it should be recollected, died before he had completed that work, and left it in so unfinished a state, that Benedict Wissowatius, on whom the labour of editorship devolved, inserted nearly seventy additional biographical notices ; and, after all, by no means held it up to view as a finished production. In his prefatory remarks, he requests the reader to correct any errors which may have crept into the work ; and particularly desires, that, if he should detect any omissions, or acquire any additional information, he will not scruple to imitate the example of Sandius and himself, in communicating the result of his inquiries to the literary world. The indefatigable Fred. Sam. Bock, acting upon this principle, has made considerable additions to the list of Antitrinitarians contained in the "Bibliotheca" of Sandius. Yet, fully conscious of the almost insuperable difficulties attendant upon his Herculean undertaking, he sent his elaborate history into the world, not as a perfect work, but only as an improvement upon what Sandius and others had done before him ; and there can be little doubt, that future inquiries will enable us still further to extend the catalogue. Unless, therefore, more substantial reasons than the above can be assigned, for excluding Curio from among the number of Antitrinitarians, there is little probability of his name being ultimately lost to the Unitarian cause, particularly as many Trinitarian writers have not been backward in laying his character under a suspicion of heresy. This has been done by Lampe, in his Ecclesiastical History; by Peter Jaenichi, in his Animadversions upon a Catechism published by Samuel Crellius ; by Michael De la Roche, in his Memoirs of the Literature of Great Britain ; and by Allwoerden, in his History of Servetus.

We learn from the last of these writers, that a copy of the "Christianismi Restitutio," in its original shape, written out by Servetus himself, once belonged to our Curio ; and that it afterwards passed into the hands of M. Du Fay, at the sale of whose library, in the year 1725, it was purchased by the Count De Hoym, the Polish Ambassador at the French Court. This celebrated manuscript appears, from the account given of it by Allwoerden, to have had the name of Celius Horatius Curio written in the titlepage. It differed in many respects from the edition published by Servetus in 1553; and Allwoerden adopts M. Du Fay's conjecture, that it was the embryo of Servetus's larger work, and written out by himself. The same writer intimates, that Celius Secundus Curio, the father of Horatius, was once the possessor of this book ; and pledges himself, on some future occasion, to prove that the elder Curio was a friend and follower of Servetus. This pledge was given in the year 1728 ; and that it was not given without due consideration, all will be disposed to admit, who have read the elaborate treatise on the life of Servetus. Schelhorn, however, writing only two years later, attempted to prove that Curio lived and died a firm believer in the Trinitarian faith ; and by Bock and others his arguments have been deemed unanswerable. But the religious views of Curio have been represented to the world through a false medium by Schelhorn ; and many important circumstances have been overlooked by him, which tend to shew, that the suspicions thrown out by Lampe, Jaenichi, De la Roche and Allwoerden, are worthy of more attention, than it has hitherto been their lot to receive.

Schelhorn mainly rests his defence of Curio's orthodoxy respecting the Trinity upon three passages, taken from his "Opuscula," an octavo volume published at Basle, A.D. 1544. These Opuscula are small detached pieces, or tracts, written upon different subjects, and at different periods of the author's life ; and exhibiting those shades of opinion, which it is natural to expect in the intellectual history of a man like Curio. Most of them appear to have been composed before the views of their author became confirmed, and therefore assume a character more or less orthodox; but a Paraphrase on the Proem of John's Gospel, which occupies the last place in the volume, and may therefore be regarded as containing the author's mature thoughts, is of a heterodox complexion, and has been adduced for the purpose of proving, that Curio had ceased to be a believer in the doctrine of the Trinity, at the period of its composition.

The first piece, to which our attention will be directed, is an Essay "on the Providence of God," called by its author " Araneus." In Schelhorn's first extract, which is taken from this Essay, (p. 81,) Curio speaks of "Jesus Christ as the Eternal Wisdom of the Father; as redeeming us from the curse of the law; and as becoming a victim, as well as sin and a curse for us." In his second extract, which is taken from a letter "On the pious Education of Children," (p. 132,) addressed to Fulvio Pelligrino Morato, Curio rises in his orthodoxy, and says, that "God made all things by his Word, whom the sacred oracles designate by the terms Jesus Christ, and Son of God ; and that he sent his Son, Jesus Christ, who was at once true God and true man, begotten of the Holy Ghost, and born of the Virgin Mary." Judging from these passages, without reference to the probably early date of their composition, or without taking into account the circumstances attendant upon the publication of the volume of which they form a part, we should find it difficult to arrive at any other conclusion, than the one, to which it is the object of Schelhorn to lead us ; namely, that the volume in which they occur was the production of a Trinitarian. But knowing, as we do, that, at the end of the collection of pieces from which the preceding extracts are taken, was printed, for the first time, aParaphrase on the Proem of John's Gospel, expressed in such terms as to lead one orthodox writer, (Jaenichi,) to infer, that its author was "entangled in the errors of Servetus;" and another, (Gerdesius,) to absolve him from the charge of heresy, solely on the ground of his not being "a theologian by profession:" knowing further, that, according to Schelhorn's own admission, Curio has, in this instance, transgressed the legitimate bounds of orthodoxy: our curiosity is excited to learn, what motive could have actuated him in the composition of this Paraphrase, and its publication in a volume of tracts, containing sentiments and expressions of a decidedly orthodox character.

The passages already quoted from the "Opuscula," it must be acknowledged, are far from being of a nature to excite suspicion ; and Schelhorn has therefore adduced them as proofs of their author's soundness in the faith, in spite of his own admission, as to the heretical tendency of some expressions, introduced by Curio into his Paraphrase on the Proem of John's Gospel. The same line of argument has been adopted by Gerdesius, who says, "Although we will not deny, that in his brief Paraphrase upon the beginning of the Gospel of John, he has laid down some things incautiously, which might bring upon him the suspicion of heresy, yet his remaining writings teach and evince, on the contrary, that he acknowledged Jesus Christ to be the true Son of God, and true God." But what are the "remaining writings" to which allusion is here made ? Evidently those, which were composed before the above Paraphrase, and which have therefore nothing to do with the subject of our present investigation.

That Curio was a Trinitarian, when he first embraced the principles of the Reformation, is highly probable ; but that he continued a Trinitarian to the end of his life, there is no evidence to prove. Schelhorn, however, would fain persuade us, in spite of his own admission respecting the latitude of Curio's interpretations, that expressions at variance with the sentiments of Servetus and the early Unitarians, are to be found in an exhortation subjoined to the Paraphrase so often mentioned ; and, in proof of this, he has adduced the following passage, which forms the third and last extract from the "Opuscula" of Curio." What can be more delightful, or more becoming the character of a Christian man, than a mind which entertains correct views concerning God and Christ, and is instructed in all kinds of heavenly wisdom ? Jews, philosophers and Mahometans can speak of God at once ingeniously, eloquently and profoundly, without mentioning the name of Christ, the Son of God, or having any fixed belief in him. But inasmuch as they do not acknowledge Christ, they build without a foundation: for Christ is the true, sole and permanent image, likeness and representation of God. Let them say or think as they please, therefore, their reasoning is all to no purpose. We receive and worship one God in Christ, and one Lord Jesus Christ in God."

Now this passage, though not perhaps such as a modern Unitarian, of the school of Priestley or Lindsey, would have penned, contains nothing at variance with the sentiments of Socinus and his followers ; for while Socinianism agrees with Judaism, Theism and Mahometanism, in maintaining the sole and undivided Unity of God, it inculcates a belief in Jesus Christ as the Son of God ; recognizes him as the appointed Mediator between God and men ; holds him up to view as the brightness of God's glory, and the express image of his perfections ; represents the most intimate union as subsisting between him and his heavenly Father ; and teaches us, that, as Christians, it is incumbent upon us to "receive and worship one God in Christ, and one Lord Jesus Christ in God." These were the sentiments held by the majority of Antitrinitarians at the period of the Reformation, and taught in the Catechisms and Confessions of Faith published by their successors, of which the following extract from the Racovian Catechism affords sufficient evidence.

Q. " What has the Lord Jesus added to the first commandment ?

A. " That we are required to acknowledge the Lord Jesus Christ himself as one who has divine authority over us, and in that sense as God; that we are bound, moreover, to put our trust in him, and pay him divine honour."

Q. " Is not the first commandment of the Decalogue altogether changed by this addition ; that we are bound to acknowledge Jesus Christ as God, in the stated sense, and to approach him with divine worship ?

A. " That commandment is in no respect changed; for it only requires that we have no other Gods before God. But Christ is not another God, since God has communicated to him of his divine and celestial majesty, and has so far made him one and the same with himself.—-The command therefore to have and worship but one God only, remains in force; the mode alone of worshiping him is changed, in so far as that the only God was formerly worshiped Without Christ, but is now worshiped Through Christ." (The Racovian Catechism, with Notes and Illustrations, translated from the Latin, by Dr. Thomas Rees, Sect. v. Chap. i. pp. 189. 194.)

This is but an echo of the sentiment, quoted with an air of triumph, by Schelhorn, from Curio, as an evidence of the belief of the latter in the Trinitarian faith ; and yet the authors and editors of the Racovian Catechism, and the members of the Churches for whose instruction that Catechism was originally drawn up, are to this day reckoned among the warmest, and ablest advocates of the Unitarian doctrine.

From a letter of Curio, inserted in the Works of Olympia Fulvia Morata, and, though without date, probably written after the publication of his Paraphrase, it appears that he had fallen under a suspicion of heresy ; and when urged by the friend, to whom that letter was addressed, to publish a reply to the charge brought against him, he says that he deems it "a sufficient reply, if his life corresponds with his profession," and alludes to his published writings as vindicating him from the charge of heresy, and proving that he " worships one God in one Jesus Christ." Here he obviously refers to the language employed by him in the passage from which Schelhorn's third extract is taken ; and that language, as we have seen above, is in perfect accordance with the principles advocated by the Polish Socinians. But if Curio still retained the sentiments expressed in his letter to Olympia's father, why did he not repeat the stronger terms which he had there used ? Let those who claim him as an orthodox believer consider this ; and say whether they, as Trinitarians, would have contented themselves with stating, as Curio does, that they were worshipers of "one God in one Jesus Christ," if their faith had laboured under a similar imputation.

The circumstance of Curio's publishing the Paraphrase, which seems first to have brought him under the suspicion of heresy, in the same volume with other writings of a more orthodox cast, is one which will excite little surprise, when we recollect the character of the age in which he lived. Incredible are the artifices, to which men of liberal principles were at that time compelled to have recourse, for the purpose of disseminating their opinions. Sometimes an obnoxious author's name was concealed under an anagram, or an acrostic: sometimes a work was published, professing to be on the orthodox side of a question, but intentionally sustained by weak and trifling arguments, with a view to excite doubts: sometimes the language of truth insinuated itself into the mind under the form of a dialogue, when it could make its way through no other channel ; and sometimes an heretical sentiment was promulgated under the cover of a work, which was otherwise of a character not to excite suspicion. These were the methods, by which the abuses in the Church of Rome were attacked, before the time of Luther ; by which the remaining errors of the Reformed Churches were covertly undermined, before the friends of rational Christianity found an asylum in Poland and Transylvania; and of which, indefensible as they are in themselves, persecution affords some palliation. It was thus that Curio acted, when, in accordance with the spirit of the times, regarding his own safety, he published his volume of "Opuscula," and made it the instrument, by which the seeds of Unitarianism were first disseminated among the rocks and valleys of Switzerland. In this volume the Paraphrase on the beginning of John's Gospel occupies the last place; and it was, no doubt, intended as an expression of the mature and deliberate opinion of its author, on an important subject, to which he had only slightly and incidentally adverted in the former pieces. It was sent into the world at a time, when Unitarianism had not dared to shew itself under any shape, among the Reformed Churches of Switzerland ; and although Curio survived its publication a full quarter of a century, no circumstance appears to have occurred, during the whole of that time, to weaken the doubts which had arisen as to his soundness in the faith, but many to strengthen and confirm them.

The first of these, which it falls in our way to mention is the confidential nature of Curio's intimacy with Laelius Socinus.—Laelius left Italy on the dispersion of the celebrated society at Vicenza, A. D. 1546 ; and after wandering over a great part of Switzerland, arrived safely at Basle in the year following, where he was kindly received, and hospitably entertained by Curio. This fact, which might in itself be deemed unimportant, is far otherwise, as connected with the subject of our present inquiry. Curio thought highly of the mental and moral qualities of Laelius; nor was the connexion which subsisted between them a mere casual intimacy, but a friendship founded upon mutual esteem. At the time that Laelius became Curio's guest, his religious opinions were perfectly formed, and never afterwards underwent any change of the slightest importance. He is said to have taken the lead among the followers of Servetus in Italy, and to have disbelieved the doctrine of the Trinity before he had any thoughts of quitting that country. But he had the prudence to conceal his heretical opinions ; and was in the habit of proposing them in the shape of doubts, for the solution of those, with whom he happened to converse. Some have thought it not improbable, that B. Ochinus, with whom Laelius was also upon terms of strict intimacy, was indebted to him for the objections, which form the basis of his celebrated " Dialogues on the Trinity." But however this may be, Laelius seems to have been upon a more friendly footing with Curio, than any of the persons with whom he associated, after his flight out of Italy ; and probably opened his mind more freely on religious subjects to him, than to any one else. Hence it has been thought, and not without reason, that, though the opinions of these friends might not coincide on all points, there must yet have been a great similarity in their views, and modes of thinking; and that Curio must at least have been acquainted with the heterodox notions of Laelius on the subject of the Trinity. Of this circumstance Schelhorn professes to make light ; observing, that Melanchthon and Bullinger, whose names stood in such high repute among orthodox Protestants, have both spoken in honourable terms concerning Laelius. It should not be forgotten, however, that with these two great men, his intercourse was of a far less confidential nature than with Curio, and that, in despite of all his caution, both of them were led to express doubts as to the soundness of his orthodoxy: whereas Curio never breathed the most distant hint respecting the heretical tendency of the religious views of Laelius, but on all occasions spoke of him in terms of the greatest endearment and affection.

The next circumstance, to which we shall advert, appears still more conclusive, as to the fact of Curio's heterodoxy on the subject of the Trinity. In the year 1540, he published a work, entitled, "Christianae Religionis Institutio;" and in such a work it might very reasonably be expected, that an orthodox believer would dilate upon the subject of the Trinity, and represent it as a necessary and fundamental article of the Christian Faith. But not a syllable of the kind occurs in this treatise. Its author, on the contrary, explains the articles of the Christian Religion, without saying one word about the doctrine of three persons in the Godhead ; whence it has been inferred, by M. De la Roche and others, that he was not a believer in that doctrine: and indeed it would seem in the highest degree improbable, that a believer in the doctrine of the Trinity should have published a work, the express object of which was to unfold the principles of the Christian Faith, without allowing a single observation of a decidedly Trinitarian character to escape him. It is not thus that the principles of Christianity are taught by Trinitarians in the present day : it was not thus that they were set forth by learned divines and theologians in the days of Curio : nor, it may be presumed, would Curio have laid himself open to the charge of so palpable an omission, had he entertained a conscientious persuasion, that the doctrine of the Trinity is taught in the books of Scripture.

But silence is not the only offence, which has been laid to the charge of Curio. M. Dav. Clement, a French writer, has accused him of having purposely had recourse to tortuous modes of expression, with a view to conceal his heterodoxy ; and even of having so artfully disguised his language, as to give it an apparently orthodox sense. The author of the present work has not the means of verifying this accusation by a collation of the writings of Curio, which are exceedingly scarce ; but it may easily be imagined, that, surrounded as he was by such men as Calvin and Beza, he would express himself in precisely the terms attributed to him. He had a general character for liberality, and was, on that account, an object of great suspicion to Calvin, who would not have hesitated to immolate him upon the altar of persecution, had he been as unguarded in his expressions, and as confiding in his conduct, as the illfated Servetus. But the long series of indignities and sufferings, to which he had been exposed during his residence in Italy, had taught him a lesson of prudence, and put him upon his guard against the wily reformer.

The author of the celebrated "Dialogue between Calvin and Vaticanus," includes Curio in a long list of authors, quoted by Minus Celsus, in his treatise "De Hareticis, an sint persequendi;" and adds, "qui omnes contra Calvinum pugnant, quos omnes nunc Calvinus uno in fasce colligates conjecit una secum in cineres Serveti." (Calv. 22.) The above Dialogue was originally published A. D. 1544, with the following title: "Contra Libellum Calvini, in quo ostendere conatur, Haereticos jure gladii coercendos esse.—Nolite ante tempus quicquam judicare, donee veniat Dominus, qui illustraturus est occulta tenebrarum, et patefaciet consilia cordium. 1 Cor. iv. 5." A second edition of this Dialogue was published by the Arminians, A. D. 1612, with an Appendix, containing some remarks on the history of Servetus, and two vindicatory epistles by Castalio, one of which is addressed to our Edward VI., and the other to the Council and Senate of Basle. Two copies of this edition are in the possession of the present writer. To one of these the original title-page is prefixed. The other is called, "Dissertatio qua. disputatur, quo jure, quove fructu Haeretici sunt coercendi gladio vel igne;" and instead of the original motto, from 1 Cor. iv. 5, the following is subjoined from Deut. xiii." Si frater tuus incitaverit te, dicens, Eamus et serviamus diis alienis, non parcet ei oculus tuus ut occultes eum, quin potius occides eum, et manus tua prima sit ut ilium interficiat." In the remarks on the history of Servetus, subjoined to this edition, Curio is mentioned as one of those, whom Calvin would not have scrupled to persecute unto death, if he had happened to possess the power, and to hold intercourse with whom was a mortal sin.

Of the prudent course which Curio found it necessary to steer, in the disclosure of his opinions, respecting controverted points of doctrine, some idea may be formed from the circumstances attendant upon the publication of his work, entitled, "De Amplitudine Beati Regni Dei Dialogi sive Libri duo, 1554," 8vo. The main peculiarity in the religious system of Calvin is a belief that God has destined to eternal happiness a comparatively small number of his rational creatures, and consigned the larger portion of the human race to everlasting misery. Upon this doctrine a covert attack is made in these Dialogues, in which Curio and Augustine Mainardi are the speakers ; the former proposing questions, and the latter undertaking to answer them, and to prove that the number of the elect exceeds that of the reprobated, or damned. By thus representing himself under the character of an inquirer, and putting into the mouth of another person all that was likely to be deemed obnoxious, Curio hoped to avoid giving offence, and at the same time to excite attention to a subject, on which the Helvetic Church appeared to have pronounced a hasty, as well as an arbitrary decision. These Dialogues were written at least seven years before they were published ; and the publication of them was delayed solely by prudential considerations. "While Curio was residing at Lausanne, he placed them in the hands of Martin Cellarius, whom he consulted as to the expediency of their publication. He was aware that they would excite a sensation in the religious world ; and wished to fortify himself with the opinion of that learned and excellent man. What the advice of Cellarius was is not known ; but, judging from the delay which occurred in the publication of these Dialogues, it seems reasonable to infer, that he recommended a cautious mode of procedure. Curio afterwards submitted them to the inspection of the censors of the press, and Ministers of the Reformed Church at Basle, who pronounced them unfit to meet the public eye ; and when, notwithstanding this formal decision, they surreptitiously made their appearance, it required all the sagacity of their ingenious author, combined with some degree of duplicity, to avert the consequences of so daring a violation of public authority. Curio, in his Apology, addressed to the Senate of Basle, says, that his son Horatius published them, in some town in the North of Italy ; but the latter part of this assertion is directly contradicted by the testimony of John Oporinus, an eminent printer at Basle, who has included them in a Catalogue of Works, printed by himself. " The author," says Schelhom, (Amcen. Lit. Tom. XII. p. 626,) " was afraid of bringing himself into trouble, by an open declaration of the truth, because he published this work without the consent and knowledge of the censors of Basle." Bayle assures us, that the first edition of these Dialogues made its appearance at Basle, A. D. 1554, and if this be true, the other part of Curio's assertion is rendered extremely dubious ; for his son, Horatius, upon whom he charges the act of publication, died on the 15th of February in that very year. But the truth is, that Curio had a violent struggle to maintain, between his love of truth and a regard to his own safety; and if he was sometimes led to prevaricate with his conscience, and to conceal his real sentiments, we must attribute it to the temper of the times in which he lived, and to the dread of falling a victim to that persecuting spirit, which had recently consigned the unhappy Servetus to the flames.

But we come now to notice, in the last place, the part which Curio took in the publication of Ochinus's Dialogues; and which, it may safely be affirmed, could not have been the act of a conscientious Trinitarian. A manuscript copy of these Dialogues, in the Italian language, was submitted, by Peter Perna, the printer, to the inspection of Basil Amersbach, Rector of the University of Basle, who, being unacquainted with the Italian, referred it to the judgment of Curio. When Curio had perused it, he returned it to the printer, and gave it as his opinion, that it contained nothing, which need operate as a bar to its publication. Upon this, the printer ventured to commit to the press, not the Italian copy, which Curio had examined, but a Latin version of it by Castalio ; and thus made it accessible to the learned throughout Europe. But notwithstanding Curio's favourable opinion of the contents of these Dialogues, they were found, on examination, to contain much that was objectionable, on the subject of the Trinity ; which brought upon their author a summary sentence of banishment from the city and territory of Zurich, where he was residing at the time of their publication. Here, then, arises an interesting question for the casuists. The printer could say, that he did his duty in submitting the manuscript to the inspection of Basil Amersbach, the censor ; and that, if the work was fit for publication, it mattered little whether it was printed in Latin, or Italian: the censor might plead ignorance of the language in which the manuscript was written, and refer to the high character of Curio, in justification of the part, which he took in the transaction: while Curio would hold himself exonerated upon the plea, that he was answerable only for the contents of the original manuscript, which might have undergone a thousand changes in the process of translation. We find, accordingly, that the whole burden of the blame ultimately fell upon Castalio, the translator, who thus attempts to exculpate himself, and the printer who employed him: "With regard to the charge of my having translated the Dialogues of B. Ochinus, that, I think, cannot in fairness be imputed to me as a fraud. For I rendered them into Latin, as I had before rendered other works of the same writer, not as a judge, but simply as a translator by profession, with a view to obtain something for the support of my family: and the printer informed me, that he had submitted the book to the censorship, and that it had been regularly approved, according to the laws of the city of Basle." Who does not see, then, that, if responsibility attaches to any one, it must be to the person, who pronounced these Dialogues fit for publication ? Curio could not fail to know, that they contained a great deal of matter at variance with the creed of the Reformed Church, particularly on the subject of the Trinity ; and, knowing this, how shall we free him from the suspicion of secretly favouring the sentiments of their author ? The whole affair, it must be confessed, has very much the appearance of an ingenious plot, invented for the purpose of introducing these Dialogues into the world, without directly implicating any of the parties concerned.

(Vidend. Stupani Oratio Panegyrica de Coelii Secundi Curionis Vita atque Obitu, habita Basileae Anno 1570; apud Schelhornii Amcen. Lit. T. XIV. pp. 325—402. Hist. Dialogor. C. S. Curionis de Amplitud. beati Regni Dei; apud Schelh. Aoen. Lit. T. XII. pp. 592—627. Bock, Hist. Ant. T. II . pp. 308—313. 457. 498. 502. 584. 588. AUwoerden, Hist. Mich. Serveti, p. 194. Bayle, Diet. Hist. et. Crit. Art. Cueion. Aikin's General Biography, Art. Cubio. Trechsti, Michael Servet und seine Vorganger, S. 214—217. M'Crie's Hist, of the Ref. in Italy, Ch. iii. pp. 129—133, etc.)

Le Roux Didier - Unitariens - © Since 2006 -  All rights reserved " No reproduction, even partial, other than those planned in the article L 122-5 of the code of the intellectual property, can be made by this site without the express authorization of the author ".

Curcellaeus Stephen, (Gal. Courcelles,) was born at Geneva, May 2nd, 1586, and died at Amsterdam, May 22nd, 1658. He was first a Preacher among the French Protestants, and afterwards Professor of Theology in the Remonstrant College at Amsterdam, in which office he succeeded the celebrated Episcopius. He composed many works on theological subjects, which were collected, and published in the year 1675, under the superintendence of Philip a Limborch. Sandius has been blamed for mentioning Curcellaeus in conjunction with Antitrinitarian writers, and representing his sentiments as Unitarian ; and Jonathan Edwards, in his "Preservative against Socinianism," (p. 11,) has endeavoured to shew, that he believed in the doctrine of the Trinity. But the tenor of his correspondence with Ruarus leads to the opposite conclusion ; and John Gottl. Moller, in his Dissertation "De Stephano Curcellaeo, in Editione originalis N. T. Textus, etc. Socinizante," (C. i. § 19, p. 19,) maintains it to have been the opinion of Curcellaeus, that all Christian sects, not excepting the Unitarians, agree in fundamentals ; and that his edition of the New Testament is favourable to Socinianism. Bock also says, that too great an affection for Socinianism misled him ; that he defended the frigid conceptions of the Socinians concerning God and Christ ; and that, in the opinion of Weissmann, it was doubtful, whether any Schlichtingius, or Ruarus, had a much worse Theology than Curcellaeus. When, in addition to these strong presumptions, it is remembered, that Curcellaeus, in writing to Ruarus about John Stoinius, adopts the nomenclature of the Crypto-Socinians of Altorf, no rational doubt can remain, that he ought to be ranked among Antitrinitarians. Sandius gives the following Catalogue of his works.

1. Advis d'un Personnage desinteresse, &c. In this work, published in 1638, Curcellaeus acts the part, as it were, of a mediator between Moses Amyraut and Peter du Moulin, in their dispute about Predestination.

2. A Vindication of the Sentiments of Arminius on the Right of God over his innocent Creatures, against Moses Amyraut, Professor of Theology at Saumur. Amst. 1645, Blaeu.

3. Preface to the first Volume of the Works of Simon Episcopius. Amst. 1650, Fol.

4. An Edition of the Greek Translation of Comenius's "Janua Linguarum." Sandius and Moreri both speak of this translation as the work of Curcellaeus: but this is a mistake. The Greek version was made by Theodore Simonis, under the superintendence, and at the expense of the Polish Unitarians; and published at Amsterdam in 1642. An improved edition of it was prepared by Curcellaeus, and published at the same place in 1644 ; and in this amended form it has often been since reprinted.

5. A Letter to Samuel Sorbiere on the Abuses or Errors of the Church of Rome. This Letter, which is in French, was written at Amsterdam, Dec. 24th, 1655, and published in 8vo., without any specification of time or place Subjoined to it is a letter addressed by Sorbiere to Pope Alexander VII.

6. A Letter to Adrian Paet, Advocate, of Rotterdam, on the Superstitions of the Romish Church ; written at Amsterdam in 1656, and published along with the preceding Letter in 8vo. This Letter, which is in French, was translated into Latin, and inserted in Curcellaeus's Theological Works.

7. An Edition of the New Testament, in Greek, with Various Readings, collected both from Manuscripts and printed Editions. Amst. 1658, 12mo., and 1675, 12mo. Elzev.

8. A Defence of the Ecclesiastical History of David Blondel, Professor in the Athenaeum at Amsterdam, against the Charges of Maresius. Amst. 1657, Blaeu. This Defence was prefixed, in lieu of a Preface, to Blondel's Dissertation, in which he shews, that the well-known story about Pope Joan ought to be rejected as a fiction.

9. A Diatribe on the eating of Blood among Christians. Amst, 1659. This was translated into Dutch, and published in 12mo.

10. A Quaternion of Theological Dissertations against Samuel Maresius, treating upon the following Subjects, i. On the Words Trinity, Hypostatis, Person, Essence, Consubstantial, and the like ; with an Appendix on the Sense in which the Ancients said that the Father, Son and Holy Ghost are One God, and taught that they are of the same Substance. This is followed by a letter of James Arminius to J. Uitenbogaerdt, written Feb. 18th, 1599, in which he discusses the question, Whether Jesus Christ may properly be called God of himself, ii. On Original Sin. iii. On the Necessity of a Knowledge of Christ to Salvation, iv. On the Justification of Man by Faith and Works. Subjoined is the Judgment of a learned anonymous Writer, [Daniel Zwicker,] on Maresius's "Pope Joan restored." Amst. 1659, 8vo. This work, as the date shews, was posthumous.

11. A Letter to Martin Ruarus, written Oct. 9th, 1641, on the Racovian Books burnt at Leeuwarden.

12. Another Letter to Ruarus, dated Feb. 8th, 1642, in which the writer laments, that a similar burning of books has taken place at Amsterdam.

13. A third Letter to Ruarus on the reparation made for that act by the newly elected Magistrates. Amst. April 12th, 1642. These three Letters were printed in the first Century of Ruarus's Select Epistles. Amst. 1677, 8vo.

14. A Treatise on Predestination in French. A manuscript copy of this was preserved by Curcellaeus's unmarried daughter, Mary.

15. An Introduction to Chronology. MS.

16. Brief Notes on F. Burgersdicius's Metaphysics, extending to Chap, xxiii. § 4.

17. Encomium on Astronomy and Geography. MS.

Le Roux Didier - Unitariens - © Since 2006 -  All rights reserved " No reproduction, even partial, other than those planned in the article L 122-5 of the code of the intellectual property, can be made by this site without the express authorization of the author ".

Crusius Florian, (Germ. Kraus,) was a Physician of great eminence, and of all the Antitrinitarians perhaps the most distinguished as a Philosopher. According to some, he was born at Stettin, the capital of Pomerania: according to others, at Dantzic. Sandius is altogether silent respecting the place of his birth ; but Bock calls him a Samogete, because, in the Acts of the Philosophical Faculty of the University of Konigsberg, and in some Poems published by him, he is expressly called a Samogete, or Lithuanian.

He was educated in the Provincial Lyceum of Tilsit, a Prussian town on the borders of Lithuania ; and speaks in the highest terms of his instructors, in the Dedication of his treatise "De Enunciationis Divisione" to Adrian de Wendt, Rector, and George Hartwich, Co-rector of the School of Tilsit.

He removed to the University of Konigsberg in 1611, where, after prosecuting his literary studies with the greatest care and diligence, and paying particular attention to the Greek language, he devoted himself wholly to Philosophy and Medicine. During his stay at Konigsberg, he was an inmate in the house of John Papius, Professor of Medicine, whom he calls his patron and protector, and for whom he entertained almost a filial affection. This appears, from the Dedication of his "Dissertatiuncula de Morbi Ungarici Caussis et Curatione ; Lintz, 1616," 8vo.; in which he mentions, with gratitude, three cases of hospitality, from which he derived great pleasure and advantage ; namely, that of Ehrenreich, Free Baron of Saurau, in Styria ; that of John Papius, of Konigsberg, in Prussia ; and that of the Provincial States of Upper Austria, on whose munificence he passes a high encomium. To this Brief Dissertation are annexed some Latin Verses of John Strauss, then Public Preceptor of a celebrated Provincial School at Ens, but afterwards one of the Professors in the University of Konigsberg. Crusius likewise wrote a congratulatory Greek Elegy, which was subjoined to Strauss's "Logistica Astronomica, Lintz, 1616," 8vo. He had given several specimens of his proficiency while at the University, by publicly disputing, under the presidency of Sigismund Weyer, Mathematical Professor, "De Figura, Situ et Motu Cceli, necnon de Figura et Situ Terrae," on the 22^nd of August, 1614 ; by the delivery of his Disputation, "De Enunciationis Divisione, ejusque Adfectationibus," under the presidency of George Meier, August 3^rd, 1611, on taking his Master's degree ; by the composition of a Greek Elegy, which was appended to George Meier's Disputation "De Predicamentis," held July 20^th, 1611, when George Kolb acted as respondent; and by another Greek Poem, subjoined to Meier's Disputation "De Definitione et Divisione," held Sept. 28^th, 1611, when Laurence Neresius acted as respondent. But when he had finished his studies at the University of Konigsberg, he led a wandering and unsettled kind of life for some time ; and chose rather to engage himself as tutor to some young men of noble rank, than to enter at once upon his professional duties as a Physician. He continued, however, to apply himself to the study of Medicine ; and, with this view, attended lectures at several of the German Universities. For some time he lived on the most friendly terms with Kepler, the celebrated Astronomer, at Lintz, the capital of Upper Austria. When he left that city, he went into France, with his patient, Gotthard Carl Von Miilbach, and visited Strasburg, where he remained till 1619, and published his Dissertation "On Head-Ache." Till this time his religious sentiments appear to have been quite orthodox, as far as the doctrine of the Trinity is concerned ; but meeting with Martin Ruarus at Strasburg, and conversing with him on theological subjects, his orthodoxy was shaken, and he soon became a decided and zealous Antitrinitarian. The doubts raised in his mind by Ruarus were confirmed by personal intercourse with Wolzogenius, and by reading the Works of Faust Socin and Valentine Smalcius. He states, in a letter to Ruarus, that by a diligent perusal of the "Theological Lectures" of the former of these writers, he has made himself master of the controversy, which he had before but imperfectly understood. Calovius, however, on the authority of Crusius's own unpublished Confession, asserts, that he did not go along with Socin, in denying the doctrine of the Atonement. 

On his return from Strasburg into Austria, he was entertained at the Castle of Rastenburg by the kindness of Michael Zelter, who had fonnerly been Chamberlain to Rudolph II. But having no settled occupation, he now resolved to undertake the tour of Germany. He went first into Saxony, and remained some time at Erfurt. After this, we find him at Stettin, in Pomerania, where he made a much longer stay, and married the sister of Wolzogenius. From Stettin he went to Bobelwitz, the residence of Caspar Sack, near Meseritz, in Prussian Poland. At length he settled at Dantzic, where he acquired considerable property by practising as a Physician, and built himself a house. During his residence in that city, he gained over to the Unitarian party, by conversation and argument, Daniel Zwicker, a gentleman of his own profession ; and he is supposed to have been instrumental in the conversion of others. Had he confined himself to his professional pursuits, he would probably have met with no molestation ; but making common cause with Ruarus, who was stationed at Dantzic, for the express purpose of teaching Socinianism, he was ordered, by a decree of the Senate, in 1643, to leave the city, but was allowed a year, to enable him to settle his affairs, and dispose of his house. Where he went afterwards, and when he died, neither Sandius nor Bock informs us. That he was living in the year 1645, and probably somewhere in Poland, or Lithuania, a letter of Marinus Mersennus, addressed to him from Paris, testifies. In this letter Mersennus urges him not to withhold from the public his "Collectanea contra Atheos." Bock thinks, that this is the same work, which Ruarus was commissioned by the Synod of Racow, in 1636, to request that Crusius would prepare, "On Divine Providence." But whether it is the same as the one which Sandius mentions, (B. A. p. 177,) under the title of "Brief Reasons, or rather Steps towards the Attainment of True Religion, against the Atheists," cannot with certainty be determined.

The writings of Crusius display great erudition, much philosophical acuteness, and no small degree of mathematical skill, especially his letters to Kepler, inserted in the correspondence of that eminent Astronomer. (Epist. Kepplerianae, Lips. 1718, Fol. 629, seqq., N.399, seqq.) Hence, the Socinians, who have been charged with carrying the study of Philosophy to excess, held him in high estimation, and regarded him as the Prince of Philosophers; being justly proud of the accession of such a man to their body. In addition to the works already incidentally mentioned, the following are enumerated, as having proceeded from his pen.

1. On True Freedom of Will. MS.

2. A Treatise on Religious Liberty. Crusius himself alludes to this, in a letter to Joachim Peuschel, written in 1628 ; and Bock thinks it probable, that it is the same treatise, which Sandius mentions, in his list of the writings of anonymous authors, under the title of "Reasons why Liberty in Sacred Things ought to be granted to us" (Unitarians).

3. On the Efficacy of the Death of Christ. Lat. and Germ. MS.

4. A Letter to Marinus Mersennus On the true Knowledge of God. MS. Crenius refers to this Letter, in his "Animadv. Philol.," P. iii. pp. 93, seqq., where Mersennus's Letter to Crenius is inserted at full length.

5. On the Origin and Essence of the Son of God. MS.

6. A Treatise on the Trinity. Crusius speaks of this Treatise as half finished, in his letter to Peuschel mentioned above. (Zeltneri Hist. Crypto-Soc. p. 806.)

7. On the Nature and Power of Man. Germ. MS.

8. On the Church of Christ. Germ. MS.

9. On the Satisfaction of Christ. Germ. MS. Sandius mentions a treatise, bearing this title, in his list of anonymous authors. (B. A. p. 177.)

10. A Reply to Paul Felgenhauer's "Probbiichlein." Germ. This title has a reference to Felgenhauer's "Priifebuchlein auf das Photinianische Buch: Kennzeichen der falschen Lehrer;" and the Photinian Book alluded to, by Felgenhauer, is, a German tract, entitled, "Zwolff Kennoder Mahl-Zeichen der falschen Lehrer," appended to the first of Ernest Sohner's "Three Theological Problems." (VideArt. 145, No. 13; and Bock, Hist. Ant. T. I. P. i. p. 213; P. ii. pp. 706 and 902.)

11. An open Confession of Faith concerning the infallible Knowledge of divine Things. Germ. MS. Sandius mentions this in his catalogue of anonymous writings ; but intimates that Florian Crusius is probably its author. (B. A. p. 177.) Bock thinks that it is the Confession mentioned by Calovius, in his Inaugural Oration, "De Haeresi Socin." (Hist. Ant. T. I. P. i. p. 214.)

12. A Refutation of the Opinion of those Socinians, who deny the Personality of the Holy Spirit. This Refutation is added, by way of Appendix, to Sandius's "Problema Paradoxum de Spiritu Sancto."

13. Animadversions of N. N. upon certain Passages in the Writings of Faust Socin, in which Faust seems to have refuted the Arguments of his Opponents in an unsatisfactory Manner, or to have given erroneous Interpretations of Passages of Scripture ; and a brief Explanation of Isaiah liii. These Animadversions were pubbshed, with the Works of Socinus, in the "Bibliotheca Fratrum Polonorum," (T. I. Fol. 801 — 805,) and are attributed by Sandius to F. C, (B. A. p. 80,) which are no doubt intended for the initial letters of the name of Florian Crusius. The Explanation of Isaiah liii. follows (Fol. 806*— 809). It has been thought, that an Explanation of this passage in Dutch, purporting to have been written by Theophilus Eleutherius, which Sandius mentions, (B. A. p. 179,) is only a version of that of Crusius.

14. Two Notes on the Racovian Catechism. Ed. 1681, 4to.; 1684, 8vo. The former of these editions was appended to Crellius's "Ethica Aristotelica."

15. A Letter to Martin Ruarus, dated Erfurt, May 1st, 1625.

16. Another Letter of considerable length, addressed to the same individual, about the year 1628.

17. A third Letter, in Defence of the Sentiments contained in No. 16, dated Stettin, February 21st, 1629. These three Letters are inserted in the Second Century of Ruarus's Correspondence, and are numbered 29, 32 and 38 respectively.

18. A Letter to Joachim Peuschel, written July 21^st, 1628. The object of this Letter was to bring back his correspondent to the Antitrinitarian party, which he had deserted some years before. It contained a long series of arguments in favour of the Unitarian doctrine, which are set forth by Zeltner, in his " Historia Crypto-Socinismi" (pp. 802—805). Zeltner also gives the concluding portion of the Letter in full (pp. 805—808). John Paul Felwinger inserted Crusius's Letter, and submitted its contents to an examination, in his "Disceptatio Theologica Anti-Photiniana de Ratione in Theologia. Helmst. 1671," 4to.

19. Animadversions on a Letter of the Authorities of Dantzic to the Illustrious Castellan of Cracow, and General-in-chief of the Polish Army, (Koniekpolski,) written January 29^th, 1639. These Animadversions are inserted in the Correspondence of Ruarus, (Cent. ii. Ep. 55,) and were intended as a reply to a letter of the Magistrates of Dantzic, contained in the same collection. (Ep. 50.) In the edition of 1681, David Ruarus has ascribed them to his father, but by mistake ; for Zeltner has assigned reasons, in his edition, why they should rather have been attributed to Crusius. 

20. On the Soul. This is a reply to a writing of an anonymous adversary, and is mentioned by N. N. in a letter to Ruarus. (Cent. ii. Ep. 43.)

21. An Explanation of the Beginning of John's Gospel. MS. Crusius is said to have given an interpretation of this passage, different from the Socinian one.

22. A Reply to Felwinger's "Disceptatio de Ratione in Theologia." (Vide No. 18.)

23. A Letter to Nathanael Dilger, Senior Minister of Dantzic, dated April 11^th, 1643. The autograph of this Letter came into the hands of Bock ; and appended to it were, A Paper, the Object of which was to procure Peace and Security for the Socinian Church, and A Confession of Faith.

24. Crusius's Writings on philosophical and mathematical Subjects, e. g. On Place, the infinite Divisibility of Matter, Space, Motion, &c, are said to be full of learning, talent and judgment.

Le Roux Didier - Unitariens - © Since 2006 -  All rights reserved " No reproduction, even partial, other than those planned in the article L 122-5 of the code of the intellectual property, can be made by this site without the express authorization of the author ".

Le Roux Didier - Unitariens - © Since 2006 -  All rights reserved " No reproduction, even partial, other than those planned in the article L 122-5 of the code of the intellectual property, can be made by this site without the express authorization of the author ".

Crellius Samuel, (Germ. Krell,) and his brother Paul, were the last descendants of the Polish-Brethren, who attained to any considerable distinction in the theological world. Had it been compatible with the design of the present work to extend it beyond the seventeenth century, a later position might have been assigned to them; for Samuel's death did not take place till 1747, and Paul was living as late as the year 1760. Both, however, had arrived at man's estate before the close of the seventeenth century; and Samuel had by that time distinguished himself as an author. They were the grandchildren of the celebrated John Crellius; and some account of them will form a suitable close to that venerable list of names, which the Socinian Church has contributed to these pages. John Crellius, the elder, had three sons, Theophilus, Christopher and John ; and the second of these was the father of Samuel and Paul.

Crellius Samuel was born in the month of March, 1660. Little is known of the first few years of his life, except that he spent part of his childhood in England, to which his father Drought him at the early age of seven, for the purpose of placing him under the charge of Mrs. Stuckey, who had kindly offered to he at the expense of his education. How long he remained with this benevolent woman is unknown; but it was probably no great length of time, for Bock, who passes over this incident in his life, informs us, that he pursued the studies of his youth in the gymnasium of the Arminians at Amsterdam. In 1680, he went to Berlin, and after having spent some time there, proceeded to Prussia. He then removed to Kcenigswald, near Frankfort on the Oder, where he lived many years, discharging the duties of the Christian ministry among the Unitarians, after the death of Preussius, to whom he was a son-in-law, and indeed in his life-time, after he was laid aside. In 1687, at the Synod of Zullichau, he was chosen into the number of Elders of the Synod. From this place he made occasional journeys to Frankfort and Berlin. During one of these journeys he appears to have gone to Holland, and passed over thence into England; for he is mentioned as having enjoyed a personal acquaintance with Archbishop Tillotson, in reference to which Jortin says, "Tillotson printed the Sermons on the Divinity of Christ to vindicate himself from the charge of Socinianism, that is, from an accusation entirely groundless. I have been told that Crellius, a Socinian, and a descendant of the more celebrated Crellius, used, when he came over hither, to visit the Archbishop, and to converse with him on this head, and declared that Tillotson had often disputed with him in a friendly way upon the subject of the Trinity, and that he was the best reasoner, and had the most to say for himself, of any adversary he had ever encountered." If Jortin was rightly informed on this subject, and referred to Samuel Crellius, which there seems little reason to doubt, Bock must have overlooked this journey, for Tillotson died in 1694, and Bock alludes to no visit to this country till 1697. In that year, he informs us, Samuel Crellius went to Holland, and from Holland made a voyage to England, and published in London his work on "The Faith of the Primitive Christians proved from Barnabas, Hernias and Clemens Romanus, in Opposition to Bishop Bull's Defence of the Nicene Faith." (Vide No. 3.) During his stay in England he was favoured with the patronage of the Earl of Shaftesbury; and from this country he probably returned to Holland, where he published his work, entitled, "A Compendium of New Thoughts concerning the first and second Adam." He then went back to Germany, and again visited Berlin, where he was courteously received by Ancillon, to whom he carried letters of recommendation from Reinier Leers, the bookseller. John Conrad Dippel, the Physician, who is better known as an author by the designation of the Christian Democritus, once told Pfaff, that he reduced Crellius to silence, in a disputation which he held with him at Berlin. Crellius, after his return into Germany, took up his residence a second time at Kcenigswald, where he lived for some years, and exercised the ministerial office among the Antitrinitarians of the March of Brandenburg, and Silesia; making frequent visits to Berlin, where he contracted a friendship with some learned men, particularly with La Croze, to whom he addressed several letters between the years 1710 and 1725, which were published in the "Thesaurus Epistolicus La-Crozianus."

Crellius applied for admission into the University of Halle during the Rectorship of Stryckius, but met with a refusal. In later times the Rectors of the German Universities have been less scrupulous.

About the end of the year 1725, Crellius again visited England, where he published his remarks on "The Proem of John's Gospel" : and towards the end of April, 1727, he returned to Holland. He wrote thus on the 17^th of July, 1727, from Amsterdam, to La Croze. "I am now, for cogent reasons, fixed here ; though I leave Germany with reluctance, and am very unwilling to lose your learned and interesting society." In the same letter he gives some particulars respecting the English Unitarians of that day, mentioning the most eminent by name, and describing his intercourse with their great opponent, Waterland, in whom we see a fine example of politeness, candour and moderation. This part of the letter has been translated by James Yates, Esq., and was inserted in the first volume of the New Series of the "Christian Reformer," from which the following extract is borrowed. "Having been chiefly intent in England on editing my book, I have become acquainted with only Theologians of the English Church,—Bennett; Reading, the librarian of Sion College, which I used to frequent; Venn, the Minister of the parish in which I lived thirteen months; and the very celebrated Daniel Waterland, who was there the chief defender of Athanasianism. If from these four we may form a judgment of the other orthodox Theologians of England, you will scarcely find any where upon earth any so affable and kind to those who are heterodox. Venn took me to Waterland. We had a pleasant conversation together; I spent some hours with him; he kept me to supper. When on my departure from England I called to take leave of him, although he had then looked through my book, he received me with the same, if not with greater kindness than before, and continued to talk with a serene countenance concerning my book with one or two of his friends. He said, notwithstanding the difference between us on an important subject, that others of my observations in the book pleased him much, and that he wished to see published my other unedited writings, of which I had made mention in the book. He said, that I had done well in publishing such things in Latin, that they might be entirely settled by learned men. 'If,' said he, Doctor Samuel Clarke had also published his book (the Scripture Trinity) in Latin, he would not have so offended the English clergy.' He asked me, if ever I should return to England, to visit him; and thus I departed from him, after I had prayed for all good things for him, and he for me. Neither Photinus, nor even Arius, would have departed thus from Athanasius. Of the London Unitarians, the greater part, unless I am mistaken, are Arians, except one or two whom I know, and who maintain the sentiments of Photinus, or of Socinus. And those who are in London remain partly in the Church of England, partly among the Presbyterians and Anabaptists, except a very few, to whom William Whiston administers the Lord's Supper four times a year in the house of his son-in-law. But at Exeter the Presbyterians do not allow Arians in their body, on which account the Arians, to the number of about three hundred, have formed a separate congregation, and have their own Preachers. There they meet openly and in peace to attend sermons and their sacred rites without being disturbed by the Magistrate. James Peirce, a man of first-rate learning, who died last year, was their Minister. Daniel Whitby, who died about the same time, almost ninety years of age, left a book of 'Retractations,' in which he corrects various passages of his own books which were not sufficiently heretical, and clearly shews his Unitarianism. That book was going through the press at London, when I came away at the end of April. I also conversed sometimes with the illustrious Newton, who died in the month of March of the current year, aged eighty-five. He wished to read my book while it was passing through the press, because it seemed to contain something new, and he did read it." On taking his leave, Sir Isaac made Crellius a very handsome present; but whether in money, or not, is doubtful.

During Crellius's stay in Holland, as well as in England, he enjoyed the friendship of several men of eminence. The Earl of Shaftesbury noticed him in England; and in Holland he formed the acquaintance of Reinier Leers, Bayle and others. In the epistolary correspondence of Bayle, there is extant a letter of his to Crellius; which, as it is a proof of his great regard for him, and explains some circumstances of his history, may be inserted here.

"Illustrious Sir,—I acknowledge myself unequal to express the great obligations, which I owe to you, for the luminous and copious observations and collections about * * * with which you have enriched me. I will endeavour, by the aid of them, to illustrate this topic of history in the Supplement of my Dictionary, which I do not know when we shall begin to print: nor shall I omit to avail myself of the additions you propose, which are truly excellent, and which shew the man of judgment, and penetrating genius. I say this, not for the sake of flattery, but with perfect sincerity. It was particularly grateful to me, illustrious Sir, to receive such a mark of your friendship and diligence; but I am ashamed and grieved, that no opportunity has presented itself, of testifying my gratitude. Should any offer, I shall cheerfully embrace it.

"I hear that your brother, Paul Crellius, who does honour to his name, is at Cambridge, and labours assiduously to improve himself in the higher branches of learning. Great advantage will hence accrue to the love of his patron, the Earl of Shaftesbury, towards ancient literature.

"Our friend Leers begs his respects, and wishes you all happiness. Accept the same fervent wishes from myself. Farewell, eminent Sir, and continue to favour with your regard, Your affectionate

"Rotterdam, 21^st June, 1706."Bayle."

Crellius was acquainted with Grabe in England, and had frequent conversations with him. Grabe admired his honesty and straight-forwardness, and bore a strong testimony to his assiduous investigation of antiquity. John Christopher Wolfius, in a letter to La Croze, dated Hamburgh, Oct. 6^th, 1716, mentions the circumstance of his having heard, that the celebrated Hudson, who had learnt from others to what religious party Crellius belonged, refused him admission to the Bodleian Library, fearing lest, after the example of Sandius, he should make extracts from the manuscripts and books, which he thought would illustrate and set off what Dr. Hudson deemed a very bad cause. But his affability of manners, and singular erudition, procured him patrons and friends of great distinction: for he had applied himself to sacred and profane literature from his earliest years, and particularly to Biblical Antiquities, and Ecclesiastical History.

In Germany he was highly esteemed by La Croze, who, however, let no opportunity escape, in the course of their correspondence, of alluding to their difference of opinion, and expressing the grief which Crellius's religious sentiments gave him. For instance, he writes thus in his fourth letter, dated April, 1727. "I do not at all wonder, that Artemonius differs from me; for I am now acquainted with the inmost feelings of his mind, and earnestly pray that they may not affect his eternal salvation. I love him, and highly prize the excellent endowments of his mind. We will talk more upon this subject when you return hither, for I can hardly think that you will remain in Holland for ever, although you seem to say so." In the fifth letter, written June 20^th, 1729, La Croze expresses himself thus. "I have taken care that your Defence should be deposited in the Royal Library." "My own opinion of it I will not obtrude here: for what weight would that have with you? I wish to spend the remainder of my life in peace: but I greatly pity you, who employ your good abilities, and uncommon learning, in lessening the dignity of our Saviour. I know that you see the matter in a different light; but I would have you reflect, that, in studies of this nature, your eternal salvation is at stake, the loss of which I deem the most formidable of all things. In my own orthodox opinion I shall be firm and constant unto death: yet I will neither dispute, nor quarrel. The truth of my own religious sentiments is with me a matter of so much certainty, that it cannot be destroyed by any change of the sacred text, or by any sophistical objection." In the sixth letter, he says, "I have always loved you, and it is with great reluctance that I differ in opinion, on the most important points, from so moderate and good a man. As you are such, I wish you were of our party. Some time, perchance, it will be so; and I heartily pray to God, that he may accomplish it as soon as possible. Then there will be joy in heaven, and in the minds of your friends, among whom I may, with reason, claim almost the first place." In a letter to Mosheim, written in October, 1718, La Croze describes Crellius as "a man, than whom, if you except his incurable heresy, there is no one better, or more serious;" adding, that he sometimes came from his retreat to Berlin, and visited him.

It seems highly probable, that Crellius's chief support arose from the sums which he received from the booksellers, as copyright money for his works, which gained him a great name, and procured him the rank of a leader among the Socinians. All the writings which he published, are entitled, by the learning and literary application which they display, to great praise. He died at Amsterdam, May 12^th, 1747, in the eighty-seventh year of his age.

In a literary periodical, published at Hamburgh in 1747, it is said, that Crellius repented of his errors towards the close of his life, and gave plain proofs of the sincerity of this repentance. In the same periodical, Paul Burger, Archdeacon of Herspruck, in the year following, endeavoured to confirm the probability of this rumour, by stating, that, when he lived at Amsterdam, in 1731, Crellius declared to him, that in some conversations with the celebrated Schaaf, at Leyden, he had been led to doubt on some points, and was still unsettled in his judgment respecting them. But in the same periodical, for 1749, we are informed, that Crellius remained a Unitarian to his last breath; and an assurance to the same effect was repeatedly given to Bock by Paul, the brother of Samuel Crellius. In vain, therefore, has Dr. Richter, the Moravian Physician, under the feigned name of Aletophilus Tacitus, endeavoured to claim Crellius, as one of the sect of Herrnhutters; although we can readily admit, that, for eleven years, as the same writer informs us, he was acquainted with the Herrnhutters, and conversed with them, and for the last two years of his life outwardly joined their religious society, and attended their public services.

In a note, by the Rev. B. Latrobe, to Crantz's "History of the Moravian Brethren," occurs the following paragraph, relating to Crellius's alleged renunciation of the Unitarian faith. "Samuel Crellius was a Socinian, and a leader of that party. He is still quoted as one of their strongest advocates: but the endless mercy of our Lord was also manifest in him. He not only rejoiced to see his daughters bow their knees to the crucified; but he himself turned to the Lord, called upon him as his Lord and his God, and found at the end of his life no consolation but in the atonement by the blood of Jesus, and wished that all his books could die with him. This has been testified, not only by his daughters, but by all that were with him before his end." This note was transferred to the Eclectic Review for April, 1810. But the statements which it contains, though circumstantial and even plausible, must have originated in a misconception of Crellius's true sentiments. In reference to this subject, Mr. Frederick Adrian Vander Kemp, of Oldenbarneveld, (N. Y.,) a native of Holland, thus writes. "I do not hesitate in the least to declare that note in the Eclectic Review without any truth. I am persuaded I must have heard of the fact, if it were as it is asserted. Venema, who wrote against Crellius, and respected him; La Croze, who loved him, and was his constant correspondent, and bewailed his errors, as is evident from their correspondence,—never suspected it. Till his death, Crellius was a member and a patron of the Collegiants at Amsterdam, who were generally Unitarians. He went to their place of meeting with his sister every Sabbathday, when they were the only remaining members, and she proposed to serve their God at home, which he declined, full in hope of a revival, and he lived till he did see the congregation again increased to seventy. This I have often been told by respectable members of that congregation, who at that time could not suspect that Crellius's religious opinions would stand in need of their evidence. I know all this is negative proof. I shall therefore copy you the opinion of Bockius, whose orthodoxy as a Trinitarian was, as far as I know, never doubted." He then quotes what Bock says upon this subject, and the substance of which is given above; adding, from the same writer, "Stosch, in his History of the Eighteenth Century, which Jablonski has made the third volume of his Ecclesiastical History, page 424, says, 'I remember that Crellius, when I visited him at Amsterdam, in 1742, and we conversed much on various doctrines of Christianity, declared to me with some warmth, that he did not adopt the system of Socinus, but rather with his whole heart believed the doctrine of the satisfaction of Jesus Christ, in the same sense in which it is taught by the Remonstrants, and that he was persuaded that through Jesus Christ all men would at some time be saved, and delivered from the pains of hell.' He added that he was certain that there were now to be found few or no Socinians, properly so called.' In Strodman's Europ. Litter., Tom. I. p. 283, Crellius himself thus writes. 'I have at all times as well among the Unitarians as the Remonstrants, taught the expiatory sacrifice of Christ, and my instructions have not been contradicted.'" (Fred. Sam. Bock, Hist. Antitrin. Lips. 1774, Tom. I. Pt. i. pp. 167, 168.) From these statements it would appear, that Crellius's views resembled those of Martin Ruarus and Jonas Schlichtingius, who agreed with the main body of the Socinians in their views respecting the person of Christ, but with the Remonstrants, as regards the doctrine of our Lord's vicarious satisfaction. Stosch, mentioned above by Bock, says, "It seems to me to be asserted without good reason, that Crellius renounced his errors before his death." The joint testimony of two such writers as Stosch and Bock, on a subject of this nature, is peculiarly valuable; for both are well known to have been Trinitarians, and persons whose orthodoxy was above suspicion. The learned Mosheun corroborates their testimony; for he says, "Crellius, though he was a professor of Theology among the Socinians, yet differed in his opinions, about many points of doctrine, from the sentiments of Socinus and the Racovian Catechism, and would not be called a Socinian, but an Artemonite, from Artemon, who lived under the reign of the Emperor Severus, and denied the pre-existence of Jesus Christ." But Mosheim is altogether silent respecting any change of opinion which Crellius underwent, towards the close of his life; and we may rest assured, that this would not have been the case, had there been any truth in the statement of the Rev. B. Latrobe.

Crellius himself has explained, in a letter to a friend, which we meet with in the correspondence of La Croze, what a review of his works will more fully shew, the difference of his sentiments from those of the Socinians, and the points of agreement between them. (Thesaur. Epist. La Crozianus, T. I. p. 110.) He begins thus: "You will not be displeased, I think, with my addressing you as a Brother; since even the Rev. James Abbadie, that determined antagonist of the Unitarians, than whom no one has made a bolder attack upon Socinus, does not hesitate to call the followers of Socinus 'erring Brethren,' at the beginning of his 'Treatise on the Divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ.' You know, that I avowedly leave Socinus, where he was Socinus, that is, where he held peculiar opinions of his own. In the doctrine of One God, the Father, I persist without wavering. As regards other points, held in common by the orthodox of different parties, I think with them, or approach nearly to them. Not only I, but the strict followers of Socinus, have always detested and held in abomination the doctrine of Mahomet. Nor do I see how those, who believe that Christ is not only a prophet superior to all others, but Lord of heaven and earth, united as closely as possible with the Father, and actually a partaker of his government, can become obnoxious to the charge of Mahometanism, more than other Christians. I confess, that those monsters of Unitarians, who deny the invocation of Christ, or regard him only as a prophet, who is to reign for a thousand years, may easily arrive at such a pitch of insanity; as Neuser, the father of that impious doctrine, is said to have done. I say the father, for Francis Davidis, at the time when, along with George Blandrata, he refuted George Major, the Wittenherg Professor, laid it down, that the Lord Jesus was an object of invocation, as appears from more than one part of that work. Neuser, in no obscure terms, ascribes to himself the invention of this doctrine, and therefore seems to have seduced Francis. Nay, the orthodox not unfrequently go directly over to the camp of the Turks, and sometimes of the Jews; nor, when about to do so, have they any occasion to turn aside to Socinus in their way. "Whereas, on the contrary, it does not appear from any example, as far as I know, that any follower of Socinus in the invocation of Christ, ever went over to the Turks, not even when, in 1658 and 1660, they were banished from Poland, which borders upon Turkey. And how could they, who invoke the Lord Jesus speedily to destroy the abominable doctrine of the impure Mahomet, and do this both in public and in private, as appears from the books of prayers and discourses, published by them at different times, easily go over to the Turks?"

In another letter to La Croze, (1. c. T. I. p. 103,) he says, "I have really found out scarcely anything that is new. I have corrected the Christology of Socinus from Unitarian Ecclesiastical Antiquity; I have rendered it, if I do not deceive myself, more sublime, and rather more acceptable to the moderate orthodox party; and I have endeavoured to bring back Christian Theology to that state, in which it seems to me to have been, when Justin Martyr began to innovate. Would that Divines, wearied out with so many abstruse conceptions and disquisitions concerning the Trinity, would come back to the same point! Let the modes of expression invented by men be discarded: let us dismiss the terms hypostasis, (in the metaphysical sense,) three persons, generation, eternal procession, perichoresisor circumincession, personal union, &c.: let us not urge, or obtrude upon our neighbour, matters which we ourselves do not understand, and which he does not see laid down in Scripture; and there will remain to us a Theology, intelligible even to a clown, or any illiterate person, namely, God the Father; the man Christ Jesus, intimately and inseparably united to God the Father; and the Holy Spirit, proceeding from the Father and the Son (that is, immediately receiving commands and instructions); whom the Father alone and the Son send and dispatch to us. Let those terms, I say, which the Holy Spirit has not uttered, be discarded; and let those doctrines not be obtruded upon others, but let us have charity as a grain of mustard-seed; and how easy will then be a union, with ecclesiastical toleration, of Athanasius with Socinus, as reformed and corrected by me! But let the Platonic Logos, and the Arian preexistent spirit, created before the world, and monstrously and fatally united with the son of man, without a human soul, in the womb of the Virgin, be banished to the Utopia from which it came."

Crellius, on all occasions, declined taking his denomination from Socinus, as he did not think with him on all points. Although, in adopting and defending Unitarianism, he may be classed in general with Socinians, yet he embraced the principles of the Artemonites in particular, and thought that these would in process of time obtain the assent of the whole world. The Artemonites, among whom Crellius was so anxious to be classed, took their name from Artemon, or Artemas, who flourished towards the close of the second century. According to Theodoret, Artemon agreed with the orthodox in acknowledging a Supreme Deity, and owning him to be the Creator of the universe: but he said, that our Lord was a mere man, born of a virgin, and superior in virtue to the prophets. He said also, that this was the doctrine of the Apostles; and affirmed that, since the time of the Apostles, some had taught the divinity of Christ without reason. (Lardner's Hist, of Heretics, Chap. xvi. Sect, i.)

Perhaps we cannot sum up what has now been said, respecting the religious opinions of Samuel Crellius, in more appropriate terms than the following, extracted from a communication of Dr. T. Rees to the "Christian Reformer" (N. S. Vol. II. 1835, p. 30). "It has been sometimes doubted whether Samuel Crellius ought to be ranked with the Socinian writers, partly from the peculiarity of some of his opinions, and partly on account of his own assertion that he was not a Socinian. But on referring to his writings it will be seen, that all that he really meant by this denial was, that he had not adopted the whole of the proper Socinian scheme. But though there might be some tenets held by his Polish ancestors and brethren which formed no part of his creed, yet with respect to the great leading principles of Unitarianism, as they relate to the unity of God and the person of Christ, he was decidedly of the Socinian school,—it being the main object of his printed works to state and defend its distinguishing dogmas."

If we are to believe Bock, however, Samuel Crellius burnt with an ardent desire of conviction respecting the orthodox faith; as a proof of which he states, that Crellius once went to Halle, in Saxony, and sought a conference with the theological faculty, which was held respecting the first chapter of John with such success, that all present were confirmed in their belief of the essential Deity of Christ. Bock also informs us, that Crellius once declared, with many tears, that it was the greatest grief to him, that he could not relinquish the opinion he had formed respecting the person of Christ. Among other singular opinions was the one held by him concerning the bodies of those, who are said to have risen from the dead with Christ. He thought that it was not a complete resurrection, but that the bodies only of some saints came out of the grave, and went to Jerusalem, and that, being again deposited in the tomb, their souls were translated to heaven.

Crellius had two sons, Stephen and Joseph, who were both married, but had no male issue. They settled in Georgia, one of the British colonies of North America. Stephen was a Justice of the Peace in that country; and Joseph gained a livelihood by farming. It is not improbable that they emigrated to America, by the advice, or with the sanction, of the Earl of Shaftesbury, who was one of the original proprietors of the state of Georgia. Crellius had also two daughters, one of whom, named Theophila, became the wife of I. A. Leddius, M. D., and survived her husband; and the other, named Dorothy, remained single. Both the daughters were present with their father at Amsterdam, at the time of his death.

The last-mentioned fact was communicated to Bock by Paul Crellius, who survived his brother Samuel many years, and died at Andreaswalde, Nov. 18^th, 1760, in the eighty-third year of his age. Both the brothers supplied articles to the literary journals of the day; and were contributors to Bayle's Critical Dictionary. From a letter written by Bayle, and addressed to Samuel Crellius, we learn that Paul was studying at the University of Cambridge in the year 1706, to which he had been sent by the liberality of the Earl of Shaftesbury. He had spent the previous year at Leyden, at his Lordship's expense, to whom he had been introduced by Mr. Arent Furly, son of Mr. Benjamin Furly, an English merchant resident at Rotterdam, and the friend and correspondent of Locke, Algernon Sidney and Lord Shaftesbury. He accompanied his Lordship to Italy ; was present at his death; and is said to have received a pension from the family during the rest of his life. Bock acknowledges his obligations to Paul Crellius for much valuable information respecting the Polish Unitarians. But Samuel was most distinguished as an author. He was one of the most learned men of his time ; and enjoyed a great reputation in the literary world. His favourite study was Ecclesiastical History, in which his knowledge was both extensive and profound. Bock enumerates twenty-seven of his productions, with some account of which we shall close the present Article.

1. Observations on Phil. J. Spener's Sermon concerning the Eternal Generation of Jesus Christ. Germ. Spener's Sermon was published at Berlin, in 1694, 12mo.; and he replied to the " Observations" of Crellius in a "Defence" of his " Sermon," published at Frankfort on the Maine in 1706, 4to.

2. The True and Ancient Faith concerning the Divinity of Christ asserted, against Dr. George Bull's "Judgment of the Church," &c, by Anon. A.D. 1695, 8vo. This is the last of three treatises in Latin, of which the following is the general title. "Tractatus Tres; quorum qui Prior Ante-Nicenismu s dicitur; is exhibet Testimonia Patrum Ante-Nicenorum: in quibus elucet Sensus Ecclesiae Primaevo-Catholicae, quoad Articulum de Trinitate. In Secundo, Brevis Responsio ordinatur ad D. G. Bulli ' Defensionem Synodi Nicenae.' Authore Gilberto Clerke Anglo. Argumentum Postremi: Vera et Antiqua Fides de Divinitate Christi, explicata et asserta, contra D. Bulli 'Judicium Ecclesiae Catholicae,' &c, per Anonymum. A. D. 1695." These three rare treatises were printed in England. The first and second have been generally regarded as the productions of Gilbert Clerke, and were in all probability written by him. (Vide Art. 351, No. 5 and 6.) The last is commonly attributed to Samuel Crellius. It professes to contain an assertion of the true and ancient faith concerning the Divinity of Christ, in opposition to Dr. Bull's "Judicium Ecclesiae Catholicae." It is short, but ably written. The editor, who took great pains to learn by whom it was composed, declares that his efforts to ascertain this point proved unsuccessful (p. 140); but that its author was no ordinary proficient in Ecclesiastical literature, the treatise itself sufficiently testifies. It is not unworthy of the pen of Samuel Crellius. Bock admits, that the difference of style in these treatises affords ground for suspecting, that they were not all written by the same person; and yet positively asserts that they all proceeded from the pen of Samuel Crellius. But in proof of this assertion we have nothing but his own bare word. Walchius observes, that "the second of these treatises is attributed in the title to Gilbert Clerke, whom some think also to have been the author of the first; but others persuade themselves that Samuel Crellius wrote all three." (Bibl. Theol. T. I. pp. 970, 971.) Vogt, on the other hand, seems to think, that Gilbert Clerke was the author of all three treatises. After giving the title of the first, he mentions the number of pages in the whole volume, and says, "this very scarce book consists of three treatises." (Catal. Libr. Rar. pp. 35, 36.) His copy seems to have wanted the general titlepage. Bock states, that not a few authors have attributed the first and second treatises to Gilbert Clerke. Among these he mentions Pfaff, Vogt and Stoll. He might have added Bull, Nelson, and the author of "the Grounds and Occasions of the Controversy concerning the Unity of God" (p. 17). They were certainly both written by one and the same person, whoever that person may have been (Brevis Responsio, &c. p. 69); and the third and last treatise in the volume was as certainly written by a different person. In addition to the difference of style, there is a peculiarity of orthography in the third treatise, which renders the supposition that it came from the same pen as the two preceding ones, in the very last degree improbable. The author of the "Ante-Nicenismus," and of the "Brevis Responsio," always writes quis, qui, qua/is, guantus, &c, in the usual way; and the editor does the same. But the author of the third treatise invariably omits the u after the q, and writes antiqa, antiqitatis, haudqaqam, atqi. For these reasons it seems probable, that the editor has done rightly, in claiming the first and second treatises as the productions of Gilbert Clerke; while the author of the third, whose name was unknown to him, was in all probability Samuel Crellius.

3. The Faith of the Primitive Christians proved from Barnabas, Hermas and Clemens Romanus, in Opposition to Dr. George Bull's "Defence of the Nicene Faith;" by Lucas Mellierus, V. D. M. London, 1697, 8vo. The "Defence of the Nicene Faith" was published at Oxford in 1685, 4to. It was reprinted at Amsterdam in 1686, 4to.; and another edition of it was published at Oxford in 1688, 4to. Grabe replied to Crellius's attack, in his notes upon the Works of Bishop Bull; but Crellius deemed Grabe's defence of the Bishop unworthy of a reply.

4. A Compendium of New Thoughts on the first and second Adam; or the Nature of the Salvation lost through the former, and recovered through the latter. Amst. 1700, 8vo. This treatise consists of Five Parts. In the first, the author discusses the fall of Adam, and the promise of a Redeemer: the second treats of our liberation from the power of the devil by Christ: the third, of the nature of the passions, and of obedience: the fourth, of the new creation: and the fifth, of the priesthood of Christ. The Appendix contains some remarks on the efficacy of the sufferings and death of Christ, which had previously appeared in German, A.D. 1698. In addition to those authors who have incidentally noticed this work of Crellius's, John Schmidt, a Leipzic Divine, published "Strictures" upon it in Latin, A.D. 1702, 4to., of which a German translation appeared in 1766, 8vo.

5. A Short Dissertation, proving, that the Lord's Supper is no Sign, or Part of private Union and Fellowship, and therefore that the Declaration is altogether superfluous, by which some Persons profess, that, in eating the sacred Bread, they have no Wish to testify their Agreement with Persons holding different Opinions, and explaining and setting forth certain Laws of Christ in a different Manner. Amst., S. Pezold. Crellius claims this Dissertation as his own in a letter to La Croze. In reply to it, Godfrey Olearius published "A Theological Dissertation on Communion with Heretics, and especially with Socinians, by the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper, opposed to a Dissertation of an anonymous Writer. Leipz. 1710," 4to.

6. The Beginning of the Gospel of John restored from Ecclesiastical Antiquity, and illustrated from the same Source, by a new Method. In this Work it is proved particularly that John did not write, "and the Word was God," but, "and the Word was God's" The whole of the first eighteen Verses of that Gospel, and many other Texts of Scripture are also illustrated; and not a few Passages of ancient Ecclesiastical Writers and Heretics are sifted and amended: by L. M. Artemonius. In Two Parts. 1726, 8vo. The author states, in a letter to Joachim Lange, that this work was printed in London ; which, indeed, is evident from the typography. It was published at the expense of some friends, and particularly of Matthew Tindal. The letters "L. M." are the initials of the assumed name, Lucas Mellierus,which is formed by transposition out of the author's real name, Samuel Crellius. The epithet " Artemonius" is intended to designate the author as a follower of Artemon, rather than Socinus. The first Part of the work contains 48 Chapters; and the second, 47. Four Dissertations are subjoined to Part II. The first of these contains the author's explanation of Micah v. 2. In the second he proves, that the ancient Christians, and some Heretics in the first, second, fourth and sixth centuries, believed that Christ, in the beginning of the Gospel, after his birth, and before his death, ascended to heaven, and descended thence to earth again. The third contains the author's explanation of Heb. i. 10—12. In the fourth, he undertakes to prove, that the words, "before Abraham was I am," John viii. 58, cannot be explained in the Socinian sense. The work, which, at the same time that it abounds in bold speculations, shews the author's extensive learning, was attacked by the Rev. John Jackson, B.A., Rector of Rossington, and Master of Wigston's Hospital, Leicester. Other attacks were made upon it by John Phil. Baratier, John Francis Buddeus, John Christopher Wolfius, and John Laurence Mosheim. The author replied to the work of Jackson (vide No. 7); and in a letter to La Croze, written at Amsterdam, Feb. 17^th, 1730, he says, "I will reply to Buddeus and Mosheim this year, if I live and God permit; and will shew, that they are not more successful than Jackson in refuting Artemonius, provided I can find a printer."

7. L. M. Artemonius's Defence of the Emendations made in Novatian against the celebrated John Jackson; with some Additions to be made to the work of Artemonius. 8vo. The place of publication is not given in the title-page; but this work is known to have been printed in London, A.D. 1729. Jackson, in his edition of the works of Novatian, London, 1728, 8vo., had undertaken to refute Crellius's treatise on the Proem of John's Gospel ; and Crellius here attempts to shew, that Novatian quoted the last clause of John i. 1, "et Dei erat Verbum," and that the passage was subsequently corrupted.

8. Explanation of the disputed Passage, 1 John v. 7. This appeared in the "Bibliotheca Anglicana" (Tom. VII. P. i. p. 271); and replies to it were published by Mosheim, and John Francis Bern. De Rubeis.

9. Some Objections relating to the Passage, 1 John v. 7, and the Antiquity of the Nicene Faith respecting the Trinity. These Objections were inserted in the " Thesaurus La-Crozianus" (T. I. p. 89); and OEder attempted to give a solution of most of them in a letter to Christopher Briickmann, Pastor of Nuremberg, which was subjoined to the "Agenda" of Peter Morscovius, published by OZder, pp. 333, et seq.

10. Christliches Glaubensbekanntniss von einigen Unitariis ans Licht gegeben, 1716. The place where this Confession of Faith was published is not mentioned; but that Crellius was the author of it is placed beyond all doubt by himself: for he not only undertook a " Defence" of it, but claimed it as his own production in a letter to Joachim Lange, dated July 23^rd, 1740. Reinbeck attacked it in the "Berlin Heave-Offerings" (Vol. I. p. 851); and Crellius replied to this attack in a separate work, entitled,

11. Berthadigung des Unitarischen in denen Berlinischen Hebopfern angefochtenen Glaubcnsbekanntnisses; oder eine Zugabe zu dem X. Beytrag derselbigen Hebopfern. Im Jahr 1720, 8vo. This "Defence" contains four short treatises. The first Part of it had previously been published in a separate form, A.D. 1718; for Crellius appeals to his Apology for the Unitarian Confession, in a letter to La Croze, written at Kcenigswald in the year 1718, and inserted in the "Thesaurus Epistolicus La-Crozianus" (T. l.y. 91).

12. Unpartheyische Erwag-und Betrachtung des beyderseitigen Hauptgrundes derer Trinitarier und Unitarier, u. s. f. 1719, 8vo. This tract is usually attributed to John Christ. Seitzius; but Bock was told, that it came from the pen of Crellius. An anonymous reply to it was published in the "Berlin Heave-Offerings" (Vol. III. p. 153).

13. Der seine eigene Erfindungen als gottliche Ausspriiche canonisirende Trinitarius, u. s. f. 1722, 8vo. A review of this little work appeared in the "Berlin HeaveOfferings" (Vol. IV. pp. 208. 222. 234).

14. Kurtzer Unterricht in der Christlichen Religion: u. s. f. (1717) 8vo. A common report among the Unitarians affirms, that Samuel Crellius was the author of this little work, and that he was exercising his ministry at Kcenigswald, at the time of its composition. But he himself states, in John Christopher Strodtmann's "Nov. Erud. Europa," (T. I. p. 218,) that this Catechism, drawn up in the Polish language by some Unitarians of the March, and printed at Amsterdam, was translated by him into German, with slight alterations. Peter Jaenichi, Rector of the Gymnasium of Thorn, published some Strictures upon Crellius's German translation of this Catechism in 1722, 4to.

15. Untersuchung auf was Weise der Herr Jesus das Brodt gebrochen und seinen Jiingern gegeben. 1694, 4to. The place of publication is not mentioned. This Inquiry is attributed to Crellius in Walchius's "Bibliotheca Theologica Selecta," and is claimed by Crellius himself, as his own production, in the Manuscript, of which an account will be given below, under No. 24. In the 15^th Dissertation (§ xx.) of that Manuscript, he appeals to it, and, among other things, professes to have shewn, that Christ so instituted the rite of the Lord's Supper, that, as we take the cup ourselves, so we should help ourselves to the Dread hroken, and publicly exposed, and not require that it should be handed to us by another: because our Lord seems to have broken the bread first, and to have placed a quantity of it, thus broken, before the disciples, and then to have said, "Take, eat, this is my body."

16. Kurtze und einfaltige Untersuchung, ob, und warum, die Reformirte Evangelische Kirche die also genannte Socinianer mit gutem Gewissen dulden, oder auch in ihre Gemeinschaft aufnehmen konne und solle. 1700, 4to. No place, or author's name is given; but Bock was informed, that this work was from the pen of Crellius. Its object is to prove, that the Reformed may, with a safe conscience, and ought, not only to bear with the Socinians, and receive them into their communion, but also not to condemn them, and accuse them of heresy, unless they are prepared to act contrary to their own principles. This he endeavours to shew by five separate arguments, in the course of which he has brought together all that can be said upon the subject; and shewn, that the Reformed ought to tolerate the Socinians, if they do not hold communion with them.

17. Samuel Crellius's Geistlichen Opfers schuldige Zugabe. Amst. 1684, 8vo. This is mentioned in Daniel Salthenius's "Catalogue of Rare Books," p. 530, No. 2666.

18. A Letter to the Venerable Joachim Lange. Amst. July 23rd, 1740. In this Letter Crellius complains, that the Unitarians in Holland were not allowed to print any theological work of a controversial nature; and that, with the exception of London, the presses were everywhere closed against them. He adds, that the works of the Unitarian party in Holland, which still saw the light, were clandestinely printed; and that the risk of detection was so great, that it was necessary to take and hide the sheets, as they came wet from the press.

19. Twelve Letters to La Croze, inserted in the "Thesaurus Epistolicus La-Crozianus."

20. A Letter to the Minister of a Church in Berlin, written Oct. 11th, 1731, in which Crellius, among other things, intimates his conviction, that Joachim Lange is about to undertake a refutation of Artemonius.

21. A Letter to Wetstein, to which John Christopher Wolfius refers in another, addressed to La Croze, and inserted in the "Thes. Epist. La-Croz." (T. II. p. 257).

22. Some Annotations concerning Michael Servetus, to illustrate De la Roche's Account of him, lately published in his "Bibliotheca Anglicana," T. II. P. i. These Annotations were inserted in the "Bibliotheca Bremensis" (CI. i. Fasc. v. N. iv. p. 739); and we learn from the "Thes. La-Croz.," (T. III. p. 210,) that Crellius vas the author of them.

23. Contributions to a new Edition of Bayle's Dictionary. Bock was informed by Paul Crellius, in conversation and by letter, that both his brother Samuel and himself assisted in supplying materials for that learned and curious work.

24. Antiquities and Monuments of the first Ages of Christianity, and Illustrations of those in particular which relate to the Ebionites and Nazarenes, and their Evangelical Histories. MS. The autograph of this work was once in the library of Theod. Lielenthal. It extended over about seven hundred closely-written pages, and contained fifteen Dissertations on the following subjects. Diss. i. How long did the Apostle John live, and when did he write? Diss. ii. On Cerinthus and the Nicolaitans, adversaries of John. Diss. iii. On the Alogi, who ascribed the Gospel and Revelation of John to Cerinthus. Diss, iv. Whether or not the Proem of John's Gospel was prefixed by another person, or at least whether it has not been falsified? Diss. v. Whether the last chapter in the Gospel of John, or at least the last two verses, were added by others? Diss. vi. The words concerning the three heavenly witnesses, 1 John v. 7, are proved not to be John's. Diss. vii. Who were the Ebionites, against whom John is said to have written? Diss. viii. Concerning the Nazarenes, another kind of Ebionites, as some have thought. Diss. ix. A reply to objections, which may be urged against the Assertions contained in the preceding Dissertation, respecting the Nazarenes. Diss. x. John is proved not to have written against the Ebionites. Diss. xi. On the Gospel according to the Hebrews, or of the Twelve Apostles, which the Nazarenes used. Diss. xii. On the Gospel of the Ebionites, which was called the Gospel according to Matthew. Diss. xiii. On the Gospel according to the Egyptians. Diss. xiv. On the sayings of Christ, which formerly existed in certain Gospels or Books of orthodox Writers, now unknown or doubtful. Diss. xv. This was added, by way of Appendix, and was only an enlarged copy of the "Short Dissertation," of which an account is given under No. 5.—The preceding Dissertations were followed by another work, under the title of "Part ii. of Ecclesiastical Antiquity illustrated," which was divided into five Chapters. The subjects of these Chapters were as follow. Chap. i. On the Epistle of Agbarus, (not Abgarus,) King of Edessa, to Jesus Christ, and this to Agbarus. Chap. ii. On the preaching of Thaddaeus. Chap. iii. On Hernias. Chap. iv. On Polycrates. Chap. v. On the writing, bearing the title of " The second Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians."

25. Ancient and Modern Unitarianism. Germ. MS. This work, entitled, "Alte und Neue Unitariana," u. s. f., filled at least two volumes of considerable size. It was left to Paul Crellius by his brother Samuel, but never reached him. Bock entertained hopes of being able to recover it, when he published his " Historia Antitrinitariorum."

26. On the Words alwv, ai&va, aiwv rSiv aliivuv, and D^W, which have been hitherto badly explained by the Interpreters of Scripture, but of which an anonymous Author maintains the true and genuine, in Opposition to the false Sense. In this work Crellius advocates the doctrine of Universal Restoration.

27. A Letter to the Messrs. Widavii, Unitarians, and Officers in the Prussian

(Vidend. Bock, Hist . Ant. T. I. pp. 161—203. Monthly Repository, Vol. V. (1810) pp. 49—53. 169, 170; Vol. XI. (1816) pp. 639, 640. Jortin'sTracts, 8vo., 1790, Vol . I. p. 366. Birch'* Life of Tillotson, App. iii. pp. 426, 427. Christian Reformer, N. S., Vol . I. (1834) pp. 821, 822; Vol. II. (1835) pp. 27—31. Thesaurus Epistolicus La-Crozianus, passim. Moshemii Inst. Hist. Eccles. Ssec. xviL Sect. ii. Pars ii. § T. Not . e. p. 895; Ssec xviii. § xxvii. p. 911. Krasinski's Hist. Sketch of the Ret in Poland, Vol . II. Chap. xiv. pp. 383, 384. Original Letters of Locke, Algernon Sidney, and Lord Shaftesbury, edited by T. Foster, M. B., F. L. S., M. A. S. &c. Lond. 1830,8vo. pp. 214,215. 223. 272—274.Walchii Bibl. Theol. Sel . T. I. pp. 297,298. 545. 914. 970, 971. Vogt, Catal . Historico-Crit . Libr. Rax. && Hamb. 1747, p. 221.)

Le Roux Didier - Unitariens - © Since 2006 -  All rights reserved " No reproduction, even partial, other than those planned in the article L 122-5 of the code of the intellectual property, can be made by this site without the express authorization of the author ".

Crellius John, (Germ. Krell,) was born July 26^th, O. S., 1590, on a farm, called Heimetzheim, between Nuremberg and Frankfort, and not far from the town of Kitzingen. His father, John Crellius, was a Lutheran Minister, who exercised the pastoral office during a period of twenty years, first at Helmetzheim, where the subject of this article was born, and afterwards at Winterhausen, on the Maine. His mother, whose maiden name was Anne Grinewald, was of a good family ; and a woman of singular accomplishments, and great excellence of character. Their son was blest with superior talents, and a good memory, which induced them to bestow particular attention on his education; and on the 15^th of June, 1600, at the early age of ten, he was sent to a public school at Nuremberg. Here he spent three years very profitably, and succeeded in gaining the approbation of his Tutors, and his relation, John Klingius, with whom he lived, and who held the office of public Secretary. He afterwards studied two years at Stolberg am Hartz, a town of Prussian Saxony; and after spending a short time at Marienberg, in the circle of Meissen, returned, on the 27^th of August, 1606, bringing back with him, from both these places, satisfactory testimonials of his proficiency and good conduct.

Crellius had now attained the age of sixteen ; and his relative and patron, John Klingius, thinking him sufficiently advanced to enter upon his collegiate studies, sent him to the University of Altorf, which at that time afforded peculiar literary advantages, from the number and eminence of its Professors. Here his capacious mind ranged over the wide field of literature and science. His first care was to acquire a competent knowledge of Greek and Hebrew, and to perfect himself in the Latin. He then proceeded to study the higher branches of Philosophy ; and when he had made more than common proficiency in the different branches of academical study, he turned his attention to the Scriptures.

He had become gradually more and more dissatisfied with the theological system in which he was educated, and could never thoroughly reconcile himself to some of its doctrines; but now, assisted by the hints which he received from Ernest Sohner, and Michael Gittichius, two of his fellow-students, he pursued his inquiries on religious subjects with greater freedom.

About the year 1610, the Senatus Academicus nominated him to the office of Inspector of Youth ; but this office he declined, from a deliberate conviction, that it would operate as a restraint upon the freedom of his inquiries. Some of his fellow-students, who were candidates for the same office, threw out suspicions, that he was tainted with Calvinism ; and endeavoured, by this means, to lower him in the estimation of the Senators and Curators of the University. They were not aware, that there were grounds for fixing upon him a still more unpopular name than that of Calvinist, and one which would have operated far more to his disadvantage. It happened, at that time, to be debated among the theological students of the University, whether Christ, as man, was an object of adoration. Crellius took the affirmative side of this question ; but some of the arguments, which he employed on this occasion, were such as the Lutherans were not in the habit of using, and were intended to serve what he esteemed a better cause than theirs. His real views, however, being known only to those, who held the same opinions as himself, he was acquitted of the charge of Calvinism ; and the Curators of the University resumed the design of making him President of the Youth, which office he again respectfully declined.

One obstruction to the wishes of Crellius was now removed, but not the fear of others ; for he had attained to that point, at which other titles of honour, customary in the Universities of Germany, awaited him, and his learning opened the way for him to various public offices, which he nevertheless thought it his duty to avoid, as he knew that he could not accept them, without swearing to human Formularies, or Confessions of Faith. Other impediments to the enjoyment of liberty arose from the entreaties and remonstrances of his family connexions, particularly of his mother, and of that relation, whose patronage he had enjoyed from his childhood, and whose anxiety and care respecting his young protege would seem to be rendered fruitless, if, after all, he should abandon the Lutheran Church, for which he had been expressly educated. It greatly distressed the mind of this excellent youth, to find that he could not please both God, and those friends, to whom, next to God, his attachment and obedience were due. He thought it wrong, however, to yield to man the freedom of his mind, which ought to be dedicated to God alone ; and therefore came to the conclusion, that the favour or resentment of his dearest friends was, in such a case, to be disregarded, and that every objection was either to be deliberately set aside, or resolutely combated.

When he saw that he could not remain where he was, and continue to enjoy liberty of conscience, he began to consider, to what other place he could go, where he might be allowed to think as he pleased, and to give utterance to his thoughts. Poland appeared both to himself, and those of his fellow-students who enjoyed his confidence, to offer the most eligible retreat, although he had never seen that country, and knew that he had no friends there, except that he thought those might in time become his friends, who were already the friends of truth. Accordingly he left Nuremberg about the 1st of November, 1612, and travelled on foot, through the most inclement weather, and unattended by a single companion, to beguile the tedium of his journey, till he arrived at Cracow. There he was hospitably entertained by an illustrious Italian exile, John Baptist Cettis, to whom he brought letters of recommendation from John George Leuchsner, a legal friend residing at Nuremberg. On the 13^th of December, in the same year, he reached Racow, where he fixed his residence, and spent the remainder of his life.

About a fortnight after his settlement at Racow, Crellius was formally received into the communion of the Unitarian Church, and admitted to an intimate friendship with some of its most eminent Pastors. Nor did any long time elapse, before he was introduced to the Court of James Sieninius, Palatine of Podolia. But he did not abuse the liberality of this Nobleman, by indulging in luxury and idleness, nor did he busy himself at all about courtly matters ; but whatever time he had, (and he always had as much as he pleased,) he devoted to theological studies, to an attendance on the lectures of Valentine Smalcius, and to personal intercourse with Jerome Moscorovius, who was not less distinguished by his varied erudition, than by the attractiveness of his conversation.

In the month of May, 1613, Crellius was appointed, by a resolution of the Synod of Racow, corrector of the press for German and Latin publications, and Professor of Greek in the College of that town. He preached privately, for two years, in the German, Latin and Polish languages. In the year 1615, Smalcius introduced him in a public character ; and in the month of July in that year, he preached his first sermon in the Church, in a language which was vernacular to the majority of his audience, but which he had not acquired without hard labour. In 1616, he was chosen Rector of the College. Paul Krokier, his predecessor in this office, had retired for the purpose of travelling, and was expected to resume his professional duties on his return ; but failing to do this, and no person being better fitted for the vacant office than Crellius, he consented to undertake it, and retained it for the space of five years, to his own improvement, and the public advantage.

In the same year in which he undertook the office of Rector, Crellius married Rosina, daughter of Simon Pistorius, Minister of the Church at Czarcow, by whom he had three sons, and three daughters, who survived him. The names of his sons were Theophilus, Christopher and John ; of whom Christopher, the second, and John, the youngest, were not altogether unknown to fame.

In 1621, Crellius resigned the Rectorship of the College, and resumed the ministerial character ; but an infectious disease breaking out about this time, which carried off a great number of the inhabitants of Racow, he retired from the town with many others, and, during this temporary absence, prepared his celebrated work on Christian Ethics, and began his Explanations of the more difficult Passages of Scripture.

On the death of Smalcius, which took place towards the end of the same year, he was chosen colleague in the government of the Church at Racow, with his successor, Christopher Lubieniecius. It is unnecessary to follow him through the occurrences of the next ten years, during which he faithfully discharged the duties of the pastoral office. He was so assiduous in the performance of these duties, that he scarcely allowed himself lawful recreation; and his friends found it necessary to lay some restraint upon his labours. Scarcely a day passed, in which he did not preach, or was not engaged in giving advice ; or administering comfort; or encouraging some to virtue ; or reproving others; or clearing up some difficult passage of Scripture. These labours might have been easily discharged, by one free from other engagements. But to Crellius these duties were only a change of his usual, and daily employment. He expounded the Scriptures to Students in Divinity ; and his lectures were often attended by persons, well skilled in theological subjects, who, if the lecturer was desirous that they should renew their attendance, were not to be dismissed with trite and common-place remarks. But these hearers were so well pleased with what they learnt from Crellius, that they deemed it worthy of the public eye. Hence, whatever he expressly unfolded, or even briefly touched upon, they digested, and committed to writing on their return home. In this manner originated his Commentaries on the Epistles to the Galatians, and to the Hebrews ; the former published during his life, and the latter after his death, from the notes of Schlichtingius, his colleague. The Commentary upon the two Epistles to the Thessalonians were prepared, in the same way, from notes taken by Peter Morscovius. He expounded all the other books of the New Testament in the same manner ; and the Expositions were afterwards published from the notes of those who attended his class. Indeed, very few of his works were published from manuscripts, which he had drawn up with his own hand; but most of them were dictated from memory, or the suggestion of the moment, without the assistance of notes, or memoranda of any kind.

Death removed this great man, in the full vigour of his age, and amidst his varied schemes of usefulness. On the 2nd of May, 1633, when, on the festival of Whitsuntide, there were assembled, from the remotest parts, the principal members of the Unitarian Church, after having preached by request from 2 Cor. iii. 17, 18, he began to complain of illness. It soon appeared, that he was seized with an infectious fever, then prevalent at Racow, with which one of his sons was at the time confined to his bed. At the beginning of his sickness, as though he had a presentiment of his approaching death, in the presence of one of his friends, he fervently prayed to God, entreating him, with many tears, to forgive his sins, and to preserve him from the delirium attendant on that kind of fever. In the progress of his disorder, his respiration was impeded, and his articulation often rendered, indistinct, by an accumulation of phlegm, with which he found it difficult to part ; but his friends were able to collect, from his indistinct and broken sentences, that he was perfectly resigned to the will of God, and full of pious and holy aspirations. On the 11th of June, when there remained no prospect of a continued existence in this world, his friends assembled round his dying bed, to take their last farewell. On their entrance, he was raised up, to express, as well as he could, his gratitude for this proof of their affection, and to bestow upon them his last blessing. The whole company, including the Minister, then fell upon their knees ; and, while they were engaged in the act of prayer to God, he calmly breathed his last, in the forty-third year of his age.

A short time before his death his sight began to fail, and it was resolved, by a vote of the Synod, that the Brethren should assist him in writing out his works, and, at stated hours every day, take down what he should dictate. With this view, Krzyskievicius was appointed, by the Synod, to act as amanuensis to him. This office he undertook ; but as dispatch was required, he was superseded by Ruarus, whom the Racovian Elders thought better adapted for this employment than any one else.

Underneath the portrait of Crellius, prefixed to his works, are these Latin verses.

Crellius hos oculos, haec ora modesta gerebat:

Sic animo mitis cum pietate fuit.
Hunc cito mors rapuit nimis; at per viva manebit Scripta, quibus vivos post sua fata docet.
Heec lege, qui mores, qui Sacra volumina nosse, Qui cupis accenso ccelitus igne frui.

The allusions in the last distich are to his Ethics, his Commentaries, and his Treatise on the Holy Spirit. His works, which fill four volumes of the "Bibliotheca Fratrum Polonorum," are usually bound in three. The 1^st, 2^nd and 3^rd comprise his exegetical, and the 4^th his didactic and polemical writings. The contents of these volumes are as follow.

Vol. I.—1. Commentary on Matthew i—v. 4, dictated by Crellius. (Fol. 1—64.)

2. Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans, taken down by Jonas Schlichtingius from the Lectures of Crellius ; but not revised by their author beyond Chap. iv. 4. (Fol. 65—-202.) This Commentary and the preceding one were first printed by S. Sternacki, and published in 1636, 8vo., with a Preface by John Stoinski.

3. Paraphrase on the Epistle to the Romans. (Fol. 203—246.)

4. Commentary on the first ten Chapters of the first Epistle to the Corinthians, written by Crellius ; and on the fifteenth Chapter, dictated by him. (Fol. 247—371.) The Commentary on 1 Cor. xv. was his last work, and was printed by Paul Sternacki, in 1635, 8vo. Crellius entered upon it, at the repeated and earnest solicitations of his friends, to give them satisfaction on the doctrine of the resurrection of the body. He had begun to revise it a short time before his death.

5. Commentary on the Epistle to the Galatians, written down by Jonas Schlichtingius from the Lectures of Crellius. (Fol. 372—450.) This Commentary was first printed at the press of S. Sternacki, Racow, 1628, 8vo.

6. Paraphrase on the Epistle to the Galatians. (Fol. 451 —471.)

7. 8. Commentary on the Epistle to the Ephesians ; and Paraphrase on the same. (Fol. 472—500.)

9, 10. Commentary on the Epistle to the Philippians ; and Paraphrase on the same. (Fol. 501—524.)

11, 12. Commentary on the Epistle to the Colossians ; and Paraphrase on the same. (Fol. 525—543.) These three Commentaries and Paraphrases were written down from the dictation of Crellius.

13. Commentary on the first and second Epistles to the Thessalonians, (Fol. 544—604,) prepared from the Notes of Peter Morscovius, and first printed by Paul Sternacki at Racow, in 1636, 8vo.

14. Declaration of the Opinion of John Crellius on the Causes of the Death of Christ. (Fol. 605—615.) This treatise contains a summary of Crellius's answer to Grotius, and was first published at Racow in 1618, 8vo. After the author's death, it was revised by Stoinius and Schlichtingius, and published a second, and a third time, in the years 1635 and 1637. It was translated into Dutch; and mention is also made of a French translation.

Vol. II.—1. Commentary on the first Epistle of Paul to Timothy. (Fol. 1—40.) This Commentary is imperfect; but the parts which are wanting here are inserted in Vol. III.

2. Commentary on the Epistle to Titus. (Fol. 41—54.)

3. Commentary on the Epistle to Philemon. (Fol. 55— 59.) These three Commentaries were taken down from the lectures of Crellius by Peter Morscovius.

4. Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews. (Fol. 60 —230.) This was the work of Schlichtingius, but he says, in the Preface to the Reader, "in investigating the sense of this Epistle, Crellius was associated with me, and that too in such a way, that I am bound to ascribe the chief merit to him."

5. Paraphrase on the Epistle to the Hebrews, dictated by Crellius. (Fol. 231—267.)

6. Commentary on the first and second Chapters of the first Epistle of Peter, written out by Crellius. (Fol. 268— 284.)

7. Explications of difficult Passages of the New Testament, also written out by him. (Fol. 285—321.)

8. Answers to certain Questions. (Fol. 321—327.) Vol. III.—

1. Explanation of various Passages of the Gospels of Matthew, Mark and Luke; and a great Part of that of John. (Fol. 1—122.)

2. Commentary on a great Part of the Acts of the Apostles, and numerous Passages of the Epistles of Paul ; with Fragments upon the first Epistle to Timothy, which were omitted in Vol. II. (Fol. 123—264.)

3. Commentary on the second Epistle to Timothy ; also upon Passages in the Catholic Epistles, and the Book of Revelation; and a Synopsis of Sermons on various Texts. (Fol. 265—416.)

Vol. IV.—1. Reply to Grotius's "Work on the Satisfaction of Christ," (Fol. 1—231,) first printed at the press of Sternacki, Racow, in 1623, 4to. Subjoined to this Reply, in the Bibl. Fratr. Polon., is Grotius's own work, with two letters addressed by him to Crellius. (Fol. 232—234, 1— 34.)

2. Two Books concerning the One God, the Father. (Fol. 1—110.) This treatise was first printed at Racow, by Seb. Sternacki, in 1631, 8vo. It was reprinted, with a Refutation, by John Henry Bisterfeld, at Leyden, in 1639, 4to. Wolzogenius translated it into German, in 1645, 4to. A Dutch version of it was printed at Racow, in 1649, 4to.; and an English version appeared in 1665, 4to. The latter professes to have been "printed in Kosmoburg, at the Sign of the Sun-beams." Dr. Toulmin supposes Kosmoburg to mean Amsterdam (Memoirs of F. Socinus, p. 422) ; but he probably had no other reason for this supposition, than the fact, that Cosmopoli frequently appears on the titlepages of works, printed in that city, during the seventeenth century. A correspondent, in the Monthly Repository, (1808, p. 142,) says, that he has "a copy, with the titlepage printed in red letters;" but in other copies the titlepage is in black. A translation of this work of Crellius into Greek was repeatedly determined upon at different Synods, and sums of money were voted to defray the expense of printing it ; but the design appears not to have been carried into execution.

3. A Book on God and his Attributes. (Fol. 1—16.) This valuable work was originally published, as a kind of introduction to Volkelius's treatise "On true Religion." Racow, Seb. Sternacki, 1630, 4to.

4. The Elements of Ethics, for the Use of Students, (Fol. 117—148,) first printed at Racow, in 1635, 8vo. This edition is extremely rare.

5. Christian Ethics, preceded by the Ethics of Aristotle, amended after the Standard of Scripture. (Fol. 149—454.) This work was begun at the desire of a noble and ingenious friend ; but Crellius's various engagements prevented him from revising and completing those notes, which were taken from his lips as he dictated, without any previous composition. In his last illness he expressed a wish that they might be transcribed. A learned friend, at the request of many, procured and collated different copies of the work, to form one that should be as correct as, under all the circumstances, it was capable of being made. Ruarus, Stoinius and Stegmann, by the direction of the Synod in 1635, had the charge of publishing it. The first edition, which was in 4to., was without date, and purports to have been printed "at Selenoburg, at the expense of the Asterii." By Selenoburg is probably meant Amsterdam; and the Asterii appear to have been the brothers Blaeu. The printers were John and Henry Sterns, of Lunenburg ; and Curcellaeus is said to have corrected the press. Another edition made its appearance in 1681, 4to. To this was prefixed a life of the author by Joachim Pistorius, M.D.; and in the same volume was printed a new edition of the Catechism of the Polish Churches, revised, amended, and illustrated with Notes, by John Crellius, Jonas Schlichtingius, Martin Ruarus, and Andrew Wissowatius. It purports to have been printed at Cosmopolis, by Eugenius Philalethes; but was really printed at Amsterdam, by Christopher Pezold.

6. A Treatise on the Holy Spirit, (Fol. 455—520,) first published at Frankfort in 1640, and afterwards in Holland, 1650, 8vo. But the place of publication is not mentioned in either of these editions. A Dutch translation of it appeared in 1664, 8vo.

7. A Vindication of Religious Liberty, (Fol. 521—532,) first published under the feigned name of Junius Brutus Polonus, Eleutherop. 1650, 4to., and again, 1681, 4to. A Dutch version of it appeared in 1649; and a French one by Le Cene in 1687, 12mo.

8. Problems with Solutions. (Fol. 533, 534.)

9. Extracts from Letters. (Fol. 534—542.)

10. A Treatise on Piety, (Fol. 542—551,) of which a Dutch translation was printed in 1673, 12mo., which came to a second edition in 1678, 12mo.

Le Roux Didier- Unitariens - © Since 2006 -  All rights reserved " No reproduction, even partial, other than those planned in the article L 122-5 of the code of the intellectual property, can be made by this site without the express authorization of the author ".

Crellius Christopher, (or Krell,) surnamed Spinovius, was the second son of John Crellius, the elder ; and the brother of Theophilus, and John Crellius, the younger. He was living at Dantzic in 1642, with Ruarus, who had the superintendence of his education; and was maintained, during his stay there, out of the funds of the Socinian Church. In 1646, when Baumgartus was about to remove into Transylvania, Christopher Crellius was appointed his successor in the School of Luclavice: but this office he resigned, after holding it about two years. In 1648, when John Arcissevius went abroad on business affecting the interests of the Church, Christopher Crellius accompanied him as an assistant Missionary. At the Synod of Raszcow, in 1650, he was appointed Preacher to the Unitarian Church at Krzelow; and in the year following to that of Raszcow. While at the former place, he was urged to prepare a defence of his father's treatise "De Uno Deo Patre," against the attacks which had been made upon it; and for this purpose the works of John Bottsaccus and Abraham Calovius were procured by Ruarus, at the public expense. The same injunction was repeated the year following; and all, who possessed manuscript copies of his father's writings, were requested to forward them to him, in order that he might prepare them for publication. In 1653, he was ordained along with John Preussius; and in 1654, he succeeded Andrew Wissowatius, as Minister of Robcow. On the expulsion of the Unitarians from Poland, he went to preside over the Church at Kreutzburg, in Silesia, consisting of Polish exiles; and in 1663, he undertook the joint charge of another Church of Polish exiles at Fredericksburg, with his brother John. He made two voyages to England, and when he came the second time, (which was in 1668,) he obtained leave of absence for a twelvemonth, on condition that he should return at the expiration of the year, and resume his pastoral duties in the Silesian Church. He was induced to undertake this second voyage, in the hope of obtaining an education in England for his children, a hope, which had been held out to him by some of his transmarine friends, on his former visit to this country. Sandius states, that Christopher Crellius officiated as Minister to the Polish exiles in Silesia ten years, and the same number of years to those in Prussia. He died on the 12th of December, 1680, on his way from Poland into Silesia; and was buried privately at Raciborsk, an estate belonging to the family of the Morstinii. He left two sons, Samuel and Paul, of whom further notice will be taken in a subsequent part of this work. (Vide Art. 358.)

The writings of Christopher Crellius, particularly specified by Sandius and Bock, are,

1. A Dissertation on Christian and Heathen Virtue, prefixed to his Father's "Christian Ethics," 1650, 4to., and 1681, 4to.; Cosmopolis (that is, Amsterdam);

2. A Manuscript Letter respecting the State of the Unitarians in England; and

3. A Letter to the Baron N. N., containing an account of a Conference held at Roznow, between some Roman Catholics and Unitarians. This Letter was written April 19th, 1660. The Conference, to which it relates, lasted from the 10th to the 16th of the preceding month, and has been already mentioned.

4. Sandius alludes to other manuscript letters; and adds, that the subject of this Article left not a few unpublished compositions of other kinds.

(Vidend. Sandii B. A. pp. 162, 163. Bock, Hist. Ant. T. I. pp. 158— 160.)

Le Roux Didier- Unitariens - © Since 2006 -  All rights reserved " No reproduction, even partial, other than those planned in the article L 122-5 of the code of the intellectual property, can be made by this site without the express authorization of the author ".

Le Roux Didier- Unitariens - © Since 2006 -  All rights reserved " No reproduction, even partial, other than those planned in the article L 122-5 of the code of the intellectual property, can be made by this site without the express authorization of the author ".

Coq John, (Lat. Coquus or Coquius,) was a Frenchman, of the city of Rouen, whom Smalcius describes, in his Diary, as "Homo levior, quam religiosior." He visited the Polish Socinians in 1612, professing himself an inquirer after truth; but having strong Arian prepossessions, he returned as he came. There is no reason, however, to doubt, that he afterwards professed himself a Socinian. He entered into a correspondence with Martin Ruarus about the year 1630; and in the Second Century of Ruarus's Letters, (p. 421,) is inserted the fragment of a very friendly epistle, addressed to him hy Ruarus, in reply to two others written by himself. His personal history is involved in great obscurity; and Bock acknowledges his inability to furnish any account of the place of his residence, or the incidents of his life.  

(Vidend. Bock, Hist. Ant. T. I. pp. 110, 111. Smalcii Diar. A.D. 1612, apud Zeltn. p. 1195. Ruari Epp. Cent . ii. N. 91.)

Le Roux Didier- Unitariens - © Since 2006 -  All rights reserved " No reproduction, even partial, other than those planned in the article L 122-5 of the code of the intellectual property, can be made by this site without the express authorization of the author ".