1 William of Occam, the date of whose birth is unknown, and who died at Munich in 1347, renewed and developed Nominalism in the form of Tcrini- nism, the Termini (concepts) being subjective signs of really existing things, and not mere names — flatus vocis — as so frequently regarded. The relations of his philosophy to subsequent thinking are well set forth by Windelband- Tufts, Hist, of Philos., pp. 312, 315, 325 sq., 342 sq. For Leibnitz's view of his Nominalism, cf. De stilo philos. Nizolii, § 28, Erdmann, (58 b-6!) b; Ger- hardt, 4, 157-158. On his life and philosophy, cf. Stockl, Gesch. d. Philos. d. Mittelalters, II., 2 [Vol. 3], <)8f)-l(>21; Haureau, Hist. d. la Philos. scolavtique, II., 2 [Vol. 3], 35(5-430; Prantl, Gesch. d. Logik, 3, 327-420. — TR.
2 Gerhard t reads: " qnel moyen qu'on employe," etc.; Erdmann, Jacques, and Janet read: " que le moyeu qu'on emploie," etc., i.e. "as the means employed," etc. Schaarschmidt, in his translation, follows the reading of Erdmann, Jacques, and Janet, and says in his note to the passage: "Dass wir mit andern Worten bei unserm Schlussverfahreu uns nothwendig im Cirkel bewegten," i.e. " That we, in other words, in our reasoning, necessarily moved in a circle." The correct reading can be determined only by the exact lan guage of Occam, which thus far I have been unable to find. — Tu.
en. xvin] ON HUMAN UNDERSTANDING 589 pute about certain principles, whether they are logically necessary, or only physically so. Such is the dispute with the Socinians, whether substance can be multiplied when the individual essence does not exist; and the dispute with the Zwinglians, whether a body can be only in one place. Now we must admit that every time that logical necessity is not demonstrated, we can presume in a proposition only physical necessity. But it seems to me that a question remains, which the authors of whom I have just spoken have not sufficiently examined, namely this: Suppose that on one side we find the literal sense of a text of Holy Scripture, and on the other a great appearance of logical impossibility, or at least an ad mitted physical impossibility, is it more reasonable to deny the literal sense or the philosophical principle? It is certain that there are passages where to abandon the letter occasions no difficulty, as when Scripture gives hands to God and attributes to him anger, penitence, and other human affections; other wise it would be necessary to array ourselves on the side of the anthropomorphists, or of certain English fanatics who believe that Herod was really changed into a fox when Jesus Christ called him by that name. It is here that the rules of interpretation are in place, and if they furnish nothing which combats the literal sense in order to favor the philo sophic maxim, and if in addition the literal sense has nothing which attributes to God any imperfection, or entails any danger in the practice of piety, it is safer and indeed more reasonable to follow it. These two authors whom I have just named dispute further upon the undertaking of Keckermann,1 1 Bartholomew Keckermann. 1573-1009, a Semi-Ramist, was Professor of Hebrew at Heidelberg, and, from 1(501, of Philosophy at the Gymnasium at Bantzic. He was the author of many compilations, made for the use of his pupils in the gymnasium, in which he presented all the sciences in a method ical and systematic form. His Opera omnia appeared at Geneva, 1(514, 2 vols., fol. Leibnitz refers to him in the same connection in the Theodicec, Discours prelim., § 59. For further account of him, cf. W. Gass, Gesch. d. protestantischen Dogmatik in ihre.in Zusammerihange mit d. Theoloyie, Vol. 1, pp. 408 sq. Piinjer, Gesch. d. christ. Religionsphilos., 1, 118, 127, 128, Eng. trans., 1, 158, 170, 172, briefly refers to him.
According to Schaarschmidt, Keckermann's proof of the Trinity from reason, which is quite closely connected with that of Lully, as Lully's with the thoughts of Augustine, is found in his Systema.is. theoloc/ise (1st ed., 1(502; 2d ed., Hanovisc, 1607), chap. 3, pp. 20 sq., 3d ed., Hanovias, 1615. In the introduction Keckermann expresses himself very decidedly. " Fateor 590 LEIBNITZ'S CRITIQUE OF LOCKE [BK. iv who wished to demonstrate the Trinity by reason, as Raymond Lully 1 had also tried to do formerly. But Musseus acknowl edged with sufficient fairness that if the demonstration of the Reformed author had been valid and just, he would have Lad nothing to say on the subject; that he would have been right in maintaining as regards this article that the light of the Holy Spirit might be illumined by philosophy. They have also discussed the famous question, whether those who, without any knowledge of the revelation of the Old or Xew Testament, died in the opinions of a natural piety, could have been saved by this means and obtained the remission of their sins? We equidem ultro, circa mysterlum de ss. Triade, ad id esse omnem intellectual humanum, quod est oculus vespertilionis ad solem," etc. Keckermann's de monstration was refuted by Musreus in the " Dissertatio altera," appended to his De usu, princip. rationis et philos. in controversies theolofjicis, 2d ed., Jena?, 1 Raymond Lully, 1234 or 1235-1315, best known as the inventor of the "Great Art," attempted to demonstrate against the assertions of the Aver- roists, the inherent rationality of the doctrines of Christianity. His Opera omnia, 10 vols. (Vols. 7 and 8 probably never printed), fol., appeared at Mainz, 1721-1742. For an account of his life and philosophy, cf. Stockl, Gesch. d. Philos. d. Mittelalters, II., 2 [Vol. 3], 924-952; Erdmann, Grund. d. Gesch. d. Philos., § 206, Vol. 1, pp. 375-393, Eng. trans., 1, 447-468; Neander, Hist, of the Christ. Relig. and Church, 4, G5-71, 420, 435 sq.; for his Logic, c/. Prantl, Gesch. d. Loyik im Abendlandc, 3, 145-177. Cf. also an article by Delecluse in the " R«vue de Deux Mondes," 1840.
Lully occupied himself much with the proof of the Trinity, discussing it, according to Schaarschmidt, in his Qusettioncs [Disputatio Erimitse et Ray- inundi — Erdmann] super lib. Sententiaritm, Lib. I., qusest. (i; Disputatio fidelis (catholici) et in fidelis, pp. 2, 3; and especially in the Disputatio Jidei et intel- lectus, Pt. I., where the question of the demonstrability of the Trinity is con sidered in detail, and Pt. II., where the proof is attempted. Schaarschmidt thinks that Leibnitz probably has in mind this last work. All three works are found in Opera, Vol. 4, ed. Mainz, 1729. Stockl, op. cit., II., 2 [Vol 3], 942- 944, gives an account of Lully's argument on the Trinity, based chiefly on the Articuli fidei sacrosanctse, found in the collection of Lully's works entitled Opera ea quee ad inventam a Lnllo artem universalem pertinent, Argentorati, 1598, 1607, and 1617, and also in Opera, Vol. 2, ed. Mainz, 1722. In his list of Lully's works, Stockl cites the following which discuss the Trinity: Liber con- tradictionis inter Raymundum et Averroistam de centum sylloglsmis circa mysterium Trinitatis; Liber de substantia et accidente in quo probatur Tr'mitas. Cf. also Neander, op. cit., 4, 465.
For Leibnitz's own views on the Trinity, cf. his Defensio Trinitatis per nova rcperta loc/ica, contra Epistolam Ariani, Dutens, Leibnit. op. oin., 1, 10- 16; Duse Epist. ad Lwflerum de Trinitate et Definitionibus Matheinaticis circa Deum, Spiritus, etc., Dutens, op. cit., 1, 17-2-'!; Remarqncs sur le livre d'un Antitrinitaire Anglois, etc., Dutens, op. cit., I, 24-27, and Feller, Leibnit. Miscellanea, No. IV., pp. 8-15; Theodicee, Discours prelim., § 22; Letter to M. B., 1696, Feller, op. cit., No. VIII., pp. 26 sq. — TR.
CH. xvni] ON HUMAN UNDERSTANDING 591 know that Clement of Alexandria, Justin Martyr, and St. Chrysostom to a certain extent were inclined thereto/ and indeed I once showed Pelisson 2 that a number of excellent doctors of the lioman church, far from condemning non-opin- ionative Protestants, even desired to save the heathen and to maintain that the persons of whom I have just spoken could have been saved by an act of contrition, i.e. penitence grounded in the love of benevolence, in virtue of which we love God above everything, because his perfections render him supremely lovable. This brings it about that afterwards AVC are led with all our hearts to conform to His will and to imitate His per fection in order the better to unite ourselves with Him, since it appears right for God not to refuse his grace to those who hold such views. Not to speak of Erasmus and of Ludovicus Vives,3 1 Clement of Alexandria, born c. 150-160, date and place of death unknown. Cf. Stromata (or Miscellanies), Bk. VI., chaps. 5 and (5. — Justin Martyr, c. 114-c. 163. Cf. First Apology, chap. 46; Second Apology, chaps. S and 13. — John Chrysostom, c. 347-407. Clement and Justin entered the Christian church as thinkers trained in Greek philosophy, which they regarded as the gift of God in preparation for the fuller light and life of Christianity — Justin in particular through his view of the "spermatic logos," " the seed of reason implanted in every race of men"; while Chrysostom, trained in Greek rheto ric and oratory, took a similar view of Greek culture as from God and not from the evil one. All three would naturally look upon those who lived up to the light they had as likely to receive more in due time, and to accept it and live in it when it came. — TK.
2 Paul Fontanier-Pellisson, 1624-1693, horn and educated a Protestant, fol lowed at iirst the profession of the law, hut afterwards abandoned it for that of literature. He held several public offices, among others that of histori ographer to Louis XIV. To obtain this position he was obliged to become a Catholic. He published a large number of works, among which was a Latin paraphrase of the first book of the Institutes of Justinian, 1645; Histoire de I' Academic fran<;aisejusqu'en 1632, 1653, 8vo; Trait 4 de I'Eitcharistie, 1694, 12mo, and other religious works. He corresponded extensively with Leibnitz on religious and theological subjects. The correspondence is contained in his Inflexions sur les differ ends en matiere de religion, 1686, and following years, 4 vols., 12mo. Portions of the same in Dutens, Leibnitz op. om., 1, 678 sq.; most complete in Foucher de Careil, (Enures de Leibniz, Vol. 1. For the letter here referred to by Leibnitz, cf. Dutens, op. cit., 1, 681-684, Foucher de Careil, op. cit. 1, 55-66; for Pellisson's replies, cf. Dutens, op. cit., 1, 697, 700- 702, Foucher de Careil, op. cit., 1, 90-92, 96-100. For account of the controversy, cf. Guhrauer, Leibnitz, Einr Biocj., Pt. II.,;>5 sq. — Tn.
3 Juan Luis Vives, 1492-1540, a Spanish scholar and philosopher, a younger contemporary and friend of Erasmus, 1467-1536, and for a time the instructor of the Princess Mary, daughter of Henry VIII., was a persistent and success ful opponent of scholastic Aristotelianism, and, as an advocate of the direct study of Nature by the way of experiment, the precursor of Descartes and Bacon. His Opera onmia appeared at Basle, 1555, 2 vols., fol., and at Valencia, 592 LEIBNITZ'S CRITIQUE OF LOCKE [BK. iv I bring forward the view of Jaques Payva Andradius,3 a Portuguese doctor very celebrated in his time, who was one of the theologians of the Council of Trent, and who said indeed that those who did not agree with this view made God supremely cruel (iieque enim, inquit, immanitas deterior ulla esse potesf). Pelisson found difficulty in finding this book in Paris, an indi cation that authors esteemed in their time are often neglected afterwards. This is what made Bayle think that many cite Andradius only upon the testimony of Chemnitius,2 his antag onist. This may indeed be so, but for myself I had read him before quoting him; and his disputes with Chemnitius made him celebrated in Germany, for he had written in behalf of the Jesuits against this author, and we find in his book some par- 17X2-1790, 8 vols., fol. On his life and philosophy, cf. Stockl, Gesch. d. Phllos. d. Mittelallcrs, III. [Vol. 4], 285-287; Ueberweg-Heinze, Gesch. d. Philos., 7th ed., 1888, Vol. 3, pp. 24, 25; Lange, Gesch. d. Materiulisinus, Vol. 1, p. 106, Iserlolm, 18(>6, Eng. trans., 1, 228, 2d ed., Boston, 1879; and Lange's article on " Vives," iu Encijkl. d. yes. Erzieh.- u. Unterrichtswesen, Vol. 9, pp. 737-814. — TK.
1 Diego Payva d'Andrada, 1528-1575, a celebrated theologian of one of the most noble Portuguese families, who, after completing his studies chiefly in the Scriptures and the Fathers, devoted himself with zeal to missions for instructing the ignorant, and was sent at the age of thirty-three by King Sebastian of Portugal to the Council of Trent to assist as a theologian. There he composed his Orthodoxarum erplicationum de religionis Christianas cupi- tibus lib. A', adversus hsereticos, contra Chemnicium, Venetiis, 1564, 8vo; and his Defensio Tridentinss fidei catholicae et inteyerrimse V. lib. compre- hensa adversus hsereticorttm detc stabiles calumnias et praesertlm Martini Chemnicii Germani, Olyssipone, 1578, 4to, Ingolstadt, 1580, 8vo. In the lat ter book he maintained the opinions of Zwingli and Erasmus on the salvation of the heathen, in consequence of which the book was much quoted by Prot estants. Leibnitz refers to him in this same connection in the Theodictc, Pt. I., §9(1; in an excerpt from a letter to a friend written Nov. 1697, cf. Dutens, Leibnit. op. om,, 1,33; in his letters to Pellisson, Dutens, op. elf., 1, 683, Foucher de Careil, (Euvres de Leibniz, 1, 65-66; and in his letters to Ant.
Magliabechins, No. 28, 26 Nov., 6 — Dec., 1697, Dutens, op. cit., 5, 121, and to Job. Fabricius, Prof, at Helmstadt, No. 16, Sept. 20, 1698, Dutens, op. cit., 2 Martin Chemnitz, 1522-1586, a German Lutheran theologian, a disciple of Melanethon, 1497-1560, and said to be the ablest theologian of the period imme diately succeeding Lnther, was Professor of Theology at Wittemberg, 1551-1554, and then for thirty years pastor at Brunswick. To him more than to any other the Lutheran church owes its purity of doctrine and compact organization. His Loci Theolor/ici, Frankfort, 1591, is one of the best expositions of Lutheran theology as modified by Melanethon. His greatest work, the Eramen Con- cilii Tridentini, appeared at Frankfort in four parts, 15(15-1573, again in 1585, 4 vols., fol., and in later eds. For further account of Chemnitz, cf. Scheukel's article in Herzog, Realencyclop., 2d ed., Leipzig, 1878, Vol. 3, pp. 184-192. Leibnitz refers to him also in the Theodicee, Discours prelim. § 67. — TR.
en. XVHI] ON HUMAN UNDERSTANDING 593 ticulars touching the origin of this famous society. I have remarked that some Protestants called those Andradians, who were of his opinion upon the subject of which I have just spoken. There have been authors who have written expressly upon the salvation of Aristotle upon the basis of these same principles with the approbation of the Censors. The books also of Collins 1 in Latin and La Mothe le Vayer 2 in French on the salvation of the heathen are well known. But a certain Franciscus Puccius 3 1 Francesco Collio — Latin, Collins (" Collins " being a misprint for " Col lins " in all the editions of Leibnitz's text) — was an Italian theologian of great learning, a doctor of the Ambrosian College at Milan, and Grand Peni tentiary oi' the diocese of Milan from 1631 till his death in 1640. In his De ani- in.abuspagano)'um,2vo\s.,<lto, Mediol. 1622-1623, 2ded., 1738-1 7-40, he discussed the question of the eternal salvation of the pagans, deciding as to the fate of individuals on the ground of their knowledge of divine things, their moral life, sentiments and writings, and the testimony regarding them given by eccle siastical and profane writers. He considers Aristotle as unsaved. Dnpin, Bibl. des Aut. eccles., 1711, torn. 17, pp. 109-116 sq., gives along abstract from this work, and an estimate of its character and value. (Jf. also Tiraboschi, Storla della Letteratura Italiana, Vol. 14 [Tomo VIII, Parte Prima, ed. Rome, 1782-178-4], pp. 167-1(58, Milan, 1824. — TR.
2 Francois de La Mothe le Vayer, 1588-1672, a French writer and philos opher, was from 1652-1660 the instructor of Louis XIV. of France, for whom he composed many elementary treatises on various subjects of study. The book here referred to by Leibnitz is his De la vertu des pa'iens, Paris, 1642, 4to., 3d ed., 1647. The subject is treated in the conclusion of Pt. I., cf. (Euvres, Vol. 1, p. 582, Paris, A. Courbe, 1662. The best ed. is that published at Dres den, 175(5-1759, 7 vols. in 14, 8vo. The De la vertu des pa'iens — avec les preuves des citations raises sous le texte — is found in Vol. 5, pp. 1 sq. of this ed. Le Vayer goes back to the Church Fathers and later ecclesiastical writers, and gives much literature. — TR.
3 Francesco Pucci, an Italian theologian (died 1660), was led to devote him self to theology by his participation in religious controversies at Lyons, whither he had gone to learn commerce. Adopting mostly Protestant ideas, he went to England, where he received an Oxford M.A. in 1574. Opposing, in his De jlde in Deum, qute et quails sit, the Calvinism then ruling at Oxford, he went to Basle and joined himself to F. Socinus, but soon returned to England in consequence of persecution on account of his views on universal grace, put forth in theses entitled Universum genus hwnanum in ip.to matris utero cfficaciter particeps esse beneftciorum Christi et vitse immortalis et beatse, etc. He finally became a Catholic, 1588, and secretary of Cardinal Pompei. In his De immortalitate naturali primi hominis ante peccatum he combatted certain ideas of Socinus, and in his De Christi Salvationis efflcacitate omnibus et sin- yulis /tominibus quatenus homines sunt assertio catholiea, Gouda, 1592, 8vo, he maintained the view that all men could be saved through the natural power of reason, or through the natural belief in the Creator. He proposed to prove by Scripture and the Fathers that Christ by his death made satisfaction for all men, so that all having a natural knowledge of God will be saved, although having no knowledge of Jesus Christ. — TR.
2Q 594 LEIBNITZ'S CRITIQUE OF LOCKE [BK. rv went too far. St. Augustine, wholly clever and penetrating as he was, threw himself into another extreme vieAV, even con demning infants dying without baptism,1 and the Scholastics appear to have been right in abandoning it; although persons otherwise clever and some of great merit, but of a disposition a little misanthropic in this respect, desired to revive this doctrine of this Father and have perhaps exaggerated it. This spirit also may have had some influence in the dispute between several excessively vehement doctors and the Jesuit missionaries in China, who had insinuated that the ancient Chinese had had the true religion of their time and the true saints, and that the doctrine of Confucius was in no respect idolatrous or atheistic. It seems that there was more reason in Eome in being unwilling to condemn one of the greatest nations without understanding it. It is well for us that God is more philanthropic than men. I know some persons who, thinking to show their zeal by severe opinions, fancy that we cannot believe in original sin without being of their opinion, but in this they are mistaken. And it does not follow that those who justify the heathen, or others who lack ordinary aid, must attribute it to the forces of nature only (although perhaps some Fathers were of this opinion), since we may maintain that God in giving them the grace exciting an act of contrition gives them also, either explicitly or virtu ally, but always in a supernatural way, before they die, even if 1 On this and the immediate context, cf. Theodic.ee, Pt. I., §§ 02-95, Pt. HI., § 283. Augustine's view is found in his works passim. Cf., among others, Enchir. ad Laurent., chap. 43; De nuptiis et concupiscentia, Bk. I., chap. 22, with which cf. Contra Julianum Pelagiaiuim, Bk. III., chap. 12 (infants under the power of the devil on account of original sin — the "potestas diaboli" is "peccatum originate "), and Bk. V., chap. 44; Contra duas epixt. Pelag., Bk. IV., chap. 4; De peccatorum meritis et Remissione et de Baptismo Parvu- lorum, Bk. I., chap. 25, Bk. III., chap. 7; De peccato oriqinale, chap. 36; De civitate Dei, Bk. XIII., chap. 14. Cf. also Shedd, Hist, of Christ. Doct., 2, 70, note 2, 77, note 1; Hagenbach, Hist, of Doct., ed. H. B. Smith, 1, 3GO, and trans, from later German ed. T. & T. Clark, 1880, 3 vols., Vol. 2, pp. 73 sq. Augustine believed that infants because of hereditary depravity — original sin — belonged to the "massa perditionis," and, unless relieved from the pen alty therein inhering by the sacrament of baptism, which was thus a means of salvation to the infant, must incur the penalty and be lost. Their condemna tion, however, since they were guilty of no personal sin, would be the lightest of all — " in damnatione omnium levissima " (C. Jul. 1'elag., V. 44).
For a brief, but most excellent and satisfactory, discussion of the Salvation of Infants, cf. E. G. Robinson, Christian Theology, § 28, pp. 164-169, Roches ter, N. Y., Press of E. R. Andrews, 1894. — TR.
CH. xvm] ON HUMAN UNDERSTANDING 595 only at the last moment, all the light of faith and all the warmth of love necessary to their salvation. Thus it is that the Reform ers explain with Vedelius the view of Zwingli,1 who had also expressed the same view upon this point of the salvation of the virtuous men of Paganism, as the doctors of the Roman church have done. This doctrine also has nothing in common for that reason with the particular doctrine of the Pelagians or Semi- Pelagians, from which we know that Zwingli was far removed. And since we teach against the Pelagians a supernatural grace in all those who possess faith (in which the three received religions agree, excepting perhaps the disciples of Pajon) 2 and as they allow also either faith or at least similar movements to infants who receive baptism, it is not very extraordinary to allow as much at least in the article of death to persons of good will who have not had the good fortune to be instructed as usual in Christianity.3 But the part of the wisest is to deter mine nothing upon points so little known, and to content him self with the general judgment that God can do nothing which is not full of goodness and justice: melius est dubitare de occultis quam litigare de incertis (Augustine, lib. 8, Genes, ad 1 Ulrieh Zwingli, 1484-1531, introduced the Reformation into Switzerland about the same time that Luther, 1483-lo4<>, introduced it into Germany. His view on the salvation of the heathen, a consequence of his milder view of original sin or innate depravity, is found in his Christ. Fidfi brevis ct clctra expositio, Werke, ed., Schuler u/Schulthess, Ziirich, 1828-1842, 8 vols., Vol. 4, pp. 42-78. In his treatise De Providentia (ibid.,Vo\. 4, pp. 70-144) he advanced the principle that pagans who have acknowledged the true God and have led a good life, such as Socrates and Seneca, are capable of being saved without faith; and he extended this principle to all who have no knowledge of the gospel. — TR.