Brenius Daniel, (or De Breen,) was born at Haarlem, in 1594 ; and sent, as an exhibitioner from his native city, to study Theology in the University of Leyden. Immediately after the Synod of Dort, and before the expulsion of the Students who were known to entertain Arminian sentiments, he left the University of his own accord, not choosing to remain in a place of education, where his conscience would be fettered ; or to avail himself of the exhibition granted to him by his benefactors, on such terms as were about to be imposed upon the alumni in that institution. 

From Leyden, Brenius appears to have gone back to Haarlem, where he secretly attended upon the ministry of Hermann Montanus. On the breaking up of the Remonstrant congregation, Nov. 19th, 1621, fiveand-twenty of Montanus's hearers were detained, and a list of their names was made out. The day after, Brenius was dragged, between two constables, from the house in which he lodged, and conveyed to the House of Correction. On the 24^th of the same month, the Pensionary, De Glargis, went to examine him, by order of the Magistrates, and told him, that the Burgomasters were exceedingly sorry, and much displeased, to find that he had been present at a forbidden meeting on the preceding Friday ; and that they had expected better things from him, on account of the favours which he had received from them, and which he might have continued to enjoy, if he had chosen. The Pensionary added, that Brenius had written to the Burgomasters of Strasburg, assuring them that he would behave like an honest burgher, and a good Christian ; but that he had not kept his word, having been found at a Conventicle, which was set up for no other purpose, than to disturb the peace of the country. But the point upon which he most insisted was, that the Remonstrants were permitted to enjoy their own opinions in private, and in the bosom of their own families. He then required Brenius to give an account of those who were present at the meeting, and to mention the name of the Minister. Brenius, requesting that he might be allowed to express himself freely, replied, that the assembly at which he was present was not designed to excite tumults, but rather to prevent and quell them ; that the exhortations of the Minister to peace and quietness had much more influence over his hearers, than the violence and fury of the soldiers ; that to the injunctions of the States he opposed those of a much more powerful Lord, who tells us not to forsake the assembling of ourselves together ; that the Proclamations of the States were properly levelled against seditious and riotous persons, but that he was not a person of that description ; that, as to the liberty allowed to the Remonstrants, of which such a boast was made, it was in reality no liberty at all, but a snare, and an incitement to commit sin ; that, if he was persuaded he had the truth on his side, it was his duty to profess it before the congregation, and to do one of these two things,—either follow his own opinion in this respect, or not, and, by pursuing the former course, transgress the injunctions of the States, or by forbearing to do so, violate his own conscience; and that, under these circumstances, he left the Pensionary to judge, whether he had deserved, merely for being present at the meeting which he had attended, to be dragged forcibly away, and led between two thief-takers, in the sight of great crowds of people, and committed to the House of Correction, like a public malefactor, with express orders, that none of his friends should have liberty of access to him. 

When Brenius had finished stating his case, a conversation ensued, in which the Officer required him to give the names of those who were present at the meeting, together with that of the Minister, both of which he strenuously refused to do. On this the Pensionary left him ; and two days after, he was taken before the Burgomasters at the Stadthouse, where the Heer Vocht proposed to him questions, of a nature similar to those which had been put to him by the Pensionary. But Brenius persisted in giving the same answers as before, and proved by many arguments, that he was not guilty either of sedition against the government, or of ingratitude and unfaithfulness towards those, to whom he acknowledged that he was under numerous obligations. 

Many subsequent attempts were made to shake his purpose, and exact from him a confession that he had done wrong ; but they proved unavailing. At length the Magistrates conferred together, and the Burgomaster said to him, in the name of his brother Magistrates, "If the gentlemen were disposed to be as severe upon you as the Proclamation warrants, they might compel you to pay the fine, because you will not inform against any one ; but they are disposed to act with lenience towards you." On this he was released from his imprisonment, with a promise, that he would appear again whenever he was summoned; and on being admonished not to frequent such meetings any more, he replied, that he would act in that matter, so as to be able to answer it to God. 

Of the subsequent personal history of Daniel Brenius little is known. It does not appear that he filled any public office ; but Zeltner, in his notes on the Epistles of Ruarus, gives it as his opinion, that he was employed as a corrector of the press. He lived many years at Amsterdam, and corresponded with Ruarus. Sandius states that he died in the year 1664. He was a pupil of Episcopius ; and although he never openly professed Socinianism, there is no doubt that he was a confirmed Antitrinitarian. The following works have been attributed to his pen.

1. An Examination of Simon Episcopius's Treatise on the Question, Whether it is lawful for a Christian to sustain the Office of a Magistrate? Lat. This was written about the year 1620, and printed in the 2^nd Vol. of the Works of Episcopius. A fuller, and more perfect refutation in Dutch appeared in 1640.

2. On the Quality of the Kingdom of Christ. Amst. 1641, 8vo.; 1657, 8vo. Belg. To the second edition were added, A View of the Controversy, Whether and in what Manner it is lawful for a Christian to sustain the Office of a political Magistrate? proposed in Two Letters of Daniel Brenius ; A Brief Explanation of the fifth, sixth and seventh Chapters of Matthew, and An Explanation of the sixth Chapter of Luke, from the seventeenth Verse to the End. 

3. The Mirror of Christian Virtues ; or a Description of the Causes, Attributes and essential Parts of the Christian Religion, illustrated and confirmed by plain Testimonies of Scripture. 

4. The Theological Works of Daniel Brenius. Amst. 1664, Fol. This forms the ninth Volume of the "Bibliotheca Fratrum Polonorum." A copy of that work is deemed incomplete without this volume, and another containing the works of Przipcovius. Francis Kuyper, the nephew of Brenius, edited it, and prefixed an Admonition to the Reader on Daniel Brenius's Treatise, inserted in the second Part of the Works of Episcopius. To this were added Two Letters on the Question concerning the Magistrate, of which the former was addressed to Francis Oudaan. These Letters, together with the forementioned "Admonition to the Reader," were first printed in 1666, two years after the rest of the volume, the contents of which were as follow, a. The Editor's Preface, containing a necessary Admonition to the Christian Reader, b. A Brief Introduction for the Understanding of the Scriptures, c. Notes on the Old Testament, with the Exception of Solomon's Song. (Fol. 1—284.) This book was excepted, not because Brenius had any doubts of its divine authority, but because no citations from it are found in the New Testament, which might serve as a key to its interpretation. The annotator does not profess to explain the whole of the text of Scripture, but those passages only, which appear to him to stand in need of illustration and comment. He borrows largely from Wolfgang Musculus. Father Simon charges him with having no other design, in the composition of his brief notes on the Old Testament, than to favour the views of the Socinians ; and says that, in explaining Scripture, he has not consulted the light of nature, free from all passion, as the Socinians allege that it is necessary to do, but having taken for granted the truth of his new system of religion, he has made that the standard, by which he judges of everything. (Hist. Crit. du Vieux Test. L. iii. Chap. xvi. p. 507.) d. Notes on the former Part of the New Testament, containing the Four Evangelists, and the Acts of the Apostles. (Fol. 1—127.) e. Notes on the latter Part of the New Testament, namely, the Apostolical Epistles, and the Revelation of John. (Fol. 1—169.) A Treatise on the glorious Reign of the Church to be established on Earth by Christ. (Fol. 1—48.) This Treatise had been published anonymously before, with some other things, under the following title. "Tractatus de Regno Ecclesiae glorioso, per Christum in Terris erigendo: e Belgico ab Auctore, nonnullis mutatis, in Latinum Sermonem conversus, etc. Amstel. Sumptibus Henrici Dendrini, 1G57," 8vo. g. A Treatise on the Quality of Christ's Kingdom. (Fol, 49—62.) This was written in reply to a work of Simon Episcopius, entitled, "Whether it is consistent with the Character of a Christian Man to sustain the Office of a Magistrate?" The Treatise itself, which was originally published in Dutch, (vide No. 2,) consists only of eight Chapters ; but there are three supplementary ones, containing an answer to objections, which had been made to it by a certain learned writer, whose name does not appear. h. A Friendly Disputation against the Jews, containing an Examination of a certain Jewish Writing, translated from Portuguese into Latin ; and an Answer to certain Questions therein proposed to Christians. (Fol. 63—96.) This Disputation was originally published in 1644, 4 to., with an Exposition of some difficult Passages in the latter Part of the Book of Revelation. Przipcovius, as we learn from Bock, (Hist. Ant. T. I. P. i. p. 75,) had written underneath the title-page of his copy, "Auctore Dan. Brenio;" but Reinhart and others attribute it to Martin Ruarus. An outline of this work is given by Bock (ubi supra), i. A Dialogue on the Truth of the Christian Religion. (Fol. 97—99.) k. A brief Demonstration of the Truth of the Christian Religion. (Fol. 100—105.) Although this is printed with the Theological Works of Brenius, Sandins informs us, that it was written by Joachim Stegmann, Jun. (B. A. p. 136) ; and the editor himself professes to have inserted it, as the production of an uncertain author, merely on account of the affinity of its subject to that of the preceding treatise. I. Addenda on the Books of Job, Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, &c. (Fol. 106—116.) 

5. An Explanation of the Book of Job, and the Revelation of John, translated by Francis Kuyper from the Latin [into Dutch], and revised by the Author and Translator, besides being enlarged by more than one-third. Also, The Book of the same Author concerning the spiritual, triumphant Reign of Christ, 2^nd Ed. Amst. 1666, 4to. 

6. A Compendium of the Theology of Erasmus, 1677, 24mo. Lat. A Dutch translation of this, by Francis de Haas, was printed at Rotterdam by Isaac Naeranus in 1679, 12 mo., with a Preface by Joachim Oudaan. 

7. A Letter to Martin Ruarus, dated Amsterdam, August 27^th, 1627. This Letter was printed in the Second Century of Ruarus's Epistles, No. 35. 

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 ".