Renato Camillo

Renato Camillo (Camillius Siculus) 1500-1575

 Camillus Siculus, who took the name of Renatus on his conversion to Protestantism, was a man of extraordinary acuteness, and of deep and extensive learning. It has been said, that he was one of the members of a celebrated society at Vicenza, of which a more particular account will be given under the article Lelius Socinus ; but Camillus had certainly left Italy before the year 1546, when that society was broken up. Switzerland served as a retreat to many, who fled from that priest-ridden country, on account of their religion, about this time; and among these were not a few who were inclined to the opinions of Servetus. Some of them were men of first-rate talents and attainments, as well as exemplary in all the relations of social and domestic life. Such were Camillus Siculus, Bernardine Ochinus, Coelius Secundus Curio, Laelius Socinus, Matthew Gribaldus, John Paul Alciati, Valentine Gentilis, George Blandrata, and Peter Paul Vergerius. They did not all tread in exactly the same path: but all departed more or less from the common faith, even as received among Protestants. They were known by the name of Anabaptists, because they agreed with that sect on the subject of Baptism ; but their opinions were entitled to much more weight, and were the result of more deliberate and profound thought, than those of the German and Dutch Anabaptists. They objected to the doctrine of the Trinity, and said that the usual mode of explaining that doctrine was such, as to render it inconsistent, absurd and contradictory ; and on many other subjects, their opinions differed widely from the recognized orthodox standard of the time.

A body of these men having been obliged to quit their country between the years 1540 and 1543, and having settled in the Valteline, in the hope of being useful among a people, who were entirely destitute of the means of religious knowledge, Camillus joined them, and took up his residence at Caspan, where the sons of several of the gentry were placed under his charge. He came into the Valteline about the year 1542, and Curio arrived there nearly at the same time. They accidentally met, and contracted a friendship, which, in spite of their diversities of opinion on some subjects, did not terminate but with their lives. Curio went to Easle, where he had no difficulty in obtaining employment as a Teacher; but Camillus remained for some time at Caspan, and procured a subsistence, by instructing the children of Raphael Paravacino, and some other wealthy neighbours.

About the year 1547, he was induced, by the prospect of improving his worldly circumstances, to remove to Chiavenna, where he continued to follow the profession of a Tutor, with diligence and success. But he was cautious in disseminating his opinions, and ventured to communicate them only to a few particular friends. Nor did he impart them even to these friends in a free and unreserved manner, but cautiously and clandestinely ; insinuating them in the shape of doubts, rather than laying them down in the form of direct propositions. He was a frequent correspondent of Bullinger's, but never appeared, in his letters, to dissent from the doctrines taught in the church at Zurich, although secretly opposed to some of them.

His zeal for the spread of his own sentiments had not been so great at Caspan, as it afterwards became at Chiavenna. Yet the family of Paravacino, and probably some others, embraced them, during his residence at the former place. At Chiavenna he found a much wider field for his exertions; but his efforts did not escape the vigilance of Mainardi, the Protestant Minister of that town, who, as soon as he obtained an intimation of what was going on, watched the movements of Camillus, and endeavoured to counteract his designs. He remonstrated with Camillus in private; but finding his representations ineffectual, he put his hearers upon their guard, and drew up a Confession of Christian Doctrine, consisting of twenty heads, in the tenth of which he enumerated, and condemned, all the peculiar opinions of Camillus, but without mentioning him by name. This Confession he submitted to the members of his Church, for their consideration. But when he urged subscription to it, he found, that he had only been throwing an apple of discord among them; for none, who either openly or secretly approved of the opinions of Camillus, could be induced, by any consideration, to affix their names to it. The original of this Confession is no longer in existence ; but Peter Leonis, a follower of Camillus, inserted the Articles, condemnatory of his master's opinions, in an apologetical treatise, which he published at Milan, in 1561.

These Articles are twenty-two in number, and are given at length by De Porta. Many of the opinions condemned in them were afterwards held by Faustus Socinus and his followers, particularly those relating to the natural immortality of the soul, and its sleep, after the death of the body, till the last day ; the new and spiritual body with which the pious will hereafter return to life (Art. i,—iii.); the annihilation of the wicked (Art. xii.); the sacraments (Art.  vii. ix. xiii. xv. xviii.—xxii.) ; the merits of Christ (Art. x.); and justification by faith (Art. xvi.). The Socinians also taught, that all religion must have its origin in revelation, and that human reason, when left to itself, is incapable of arriving at a knowledge of God, or the Divine Will; —a sentiment, which Camillus had before expressed, when he said (Art. iv. cf. xvii.), " there is no natural law to man, by which he is able to distinguish between right and wrong." But his opinion concerning the obligation of the Decalogue upon Christians slightly differed from that of the followers of F. Socinus. He taught that the Decalogue was not binding upon Christian believers, because they were not under the law ; and that the pious have no need of any other law than that of the Spirit (Art. v.). The Socinians, on the contrary, though they allowed that the ceremonial law was abolished by Christ, nevertheless contended, that the Decalogue, as explained and enlarged by him, was binding ; but only so far as he himself had confirmed it. Camillus further taught, that, by Adam's sin, death entered into the world ; but that Adam and his posterity would nevertheless have died, if he had not sinned (Art. vi.). The Socinians held precisely the same doctrine. They denied, too, with Camillus (Art. xiv.), that Baptism was substituted for Circumcision ; or that the two rites had anything in common. On some points, however, the Socinians did not adopt the same views as Camillus. For instance; he held the doctrine of Original Sin, and taught that Christ was conceived in sin, and therefore inherited a sinful nature (Art. viii.). They, on the other hand, rejected the doctrine of Original Sin, and contended, that Jesus was conceived of the Holy Spirit, and free from all stain of sin. Nor did they approve of the sentiment of Camillus, that Christ despaired upon the cross, and gave up his trust in God, when he said, "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me ?" (Art. xi.).

But notwithstanding these differences, it has been thought that Laelius Socinus, who was the steady and zealous friend of Camillus throughout the whole of his disputes with Mainardi, was indebted to the former for the groundwork of that theological system, which he bequeathed to his nephew Faustus, and which was afterwards known by the name of Socinianism. Vergerius, writing to Bullinger, Oct. 11th, 1553, says, "It is the opinion of all, that the whole Anabaptism of Italy depends upon Camillus alone." Of all those who were called Anabaptists, indeed, Camillus was accounted the leader, and the patron, by his contemporaries. By the orthodox he was deemed the pest of all the Churches, and of all heretics the most heretical. Some of his disciples, who enjoyed a large share of his confidence, made no scruple of openly avowing themselves Antitrinitarians ; and Bock tells us, that Camillus himself disbelieved the doctrine of the Trinity, and denied that there were three persons in the Divine Essence. Yet he was so wary in instilling his opinions, that it was a difficult matter to fix upon him a direct charge of heresy. When he was hardly pressed by Mainardi to say, whether he believed the soul to be immortal, he generally escaped by some such evasive answer as the following:—"Camillus does not know whether the soul is mortal or not." If he perceived that this reply was deemed unsatisfactory to those who were present, he would say, "I do not affirm that the soul of man is mortal: I only say so for argument's sake." When about to dispute, therefore, with Mainardi, he did not bring into prominent view the main questions at issue between them, respecting the immortality of the soul, the resurrection of the body, and the merits of Christ, but wished the whole controversy to hinge upon the doctrine concerning the Sacraments ; and it was on the questions relating to the nature and efficacy of Baptism and the Lord's Supper, that he and his followers ultimately withdrew from the ministry of Mainardi, and formed themselves into a separate religious community.

"Camillo," says M'Crie, "complained loudly of the conduct of Mainardi. He held up his opponent as at once ignorant and intolerant. In this he was encouraged by Stancari and Negri. The consequence was, that Mainardi incurred the censures of some of his countrymen, who occasionally visited the place, such as Vergiero and Altieri ; and received letters from the Grisons and Switzerland, admonishing him to conduct himself with greater moderation. From the time that Camillo came to the Valteline, he had kept up a correspondence with Bullinger by letters, in which he endeavoured to ingratiate himself with him, by professing his agreement with the Church at Zurich ; but when his opponent offered to submit the controversy between them to the judgment of that venerable Divine, he declined the proposal. The Grison Synod, which met in 1547, called the parties before them, but Camillo neither attended, nor sent a letter of excuse, upon which they enjoined him to desist from opposing his Minister, and disturbing the peace of the Church. As he disregarded this injunction, a deputation consisting of four of the principal Ministers of the Grisons, was sent to Chiavenna in the close of the year 1549, to inquire into the affair. The deputation found all the charges brought against Camillo proved, and declared that Mainardi had acted the part of a faithful and vigilant Minister; but with a view of restoring harmony they drew up certain Articles to which they required both parties to agree. Although Camillo subscribed this agreement, the deputies had scarcely left the place when he resumed his former practices, in consequence of which the Consistory of Chiavenna suspended him from Church privileges, and, on his proving contumacious, publicly pronounced the sentence of excommunication against him.— After this we hear little of Camillo. That he was alive, and in Chiavenna or the neighbourhood of it, in 1555, appears from a letter of Julio da Milano to Bullinger, in which he speaks of him as requiring still to be narrowly watched."

In Simler's Collection, Vol. 83, there is a spirited Latin poem, consisting of 357 hexameter verses, composed by Camillus, and containing an indignant remonstrance, addressed "To John Calvin, on the unjust burning of Servetus." This poem is dated Sept. 1554.

(Vidend. Bock, Hist. Ant. T. II. pp. 581, 582, et passim. Trechsel, Mich. Servet und seine Vorganger, Beilage IV. S. 321—328. Be Porta, Hist. Ref. Eccles. Ratio. T. I. L. ii. C. iv. Illgen, Symbolee ad Vitam et Doctrin. LteL Socini illustrandam, Partic. i. pp. 62—64. M'Crie's Hist, of the Ref. in Italy, Ch. vi. pp. 408—412, and passim.)

DidierLe Roux

Retour page d'accueil
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

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 ".