[Sanctorum Theologiæ Problemata: Hoc Est Loci Communes Christianæ Religionis Methodice Explicati; (Bern, 1604)]
Benedictus Aretius, born circa 1522 in Bätterkinden, within the canton of Bern, was a distinguished Swiss theologian, reformer, and natural philosopher. Originally bearing the surname Marti, he adopted the Hellenized name “Aretius” to reflect his scholarly pursuits. His early education in Latin schools paved the way for advanced studies in theology, astronomy, mathematics, and botany at the universities of Bern, Strasbourg, & Marburg. In Marburg, he served as a professor of logic and dialectics. In 1548, Aretius returned to Bern as a schoolteacher, ascending to the position of rector by 1549. By 1553, he was appointed professor of Greek and Hebrew at the High School in Bern, and in 1563, he succeeded Wolfgang Musculus as professor of theology. His tenure was marked by a steadfast commitment to Reformed orthodoxy and the promotion of ecclesiastical unity. Notably, in 1566, he authored a defense justifying the execution of the antitrinitarian Valentin Gentilis, upholding the traditional doctrine of the Trinity. Aretius's scholarly contributions were extensive. His “Theologiae Problemata” (1573) offered a systematic exploration of Christian doctrines, while his “Examen Theologicum” (1557) underwent multiple editions, reflecting its widespread influence. He produced commentaries on the New Testament (1580), the Pentateuch (1602), and the Psalms (1618), as well as a commentary on Pindar (1587). His interest in natural philosophy led to the “Stocc-Hornii et Nessi Descriptio” (1561), detailing the flora of the Stockhorn and Niesen mountains. Additionally, he authored a Hebrew instructional text for schools (Basel, 1561). Benedictus Aretius passed away on March 22, 1574, in Bern, likely due to the plague. His legacy endures through his theological works and contributions to natural science, exemplifying the integration of faith and reason characteristic of Reformed scholasticism.
Table of Contents:
<aside>
</aside>
The light of nature, and the sharpness of human wit, hath declared in heathens how much they might accomplish. For the Grecians had a law, unto which error they were justified in acquiescing, without scrupulous inquiry. But the Gentiles, having received no word of God concerning Deity, gave themselves to the aid of their wits to make judgments about nature, which stand imperfect. Hence among them was philosophy born, the accomplishment whereof their books declare (and the Apostle in Romans, chapter 1, verse 19): verily he doubteth not to attribute knowledge of God to them, neither putteth he it as casually offered but as God himself revealing his divinity, eternal might and power, which are not to be divided in divine matters. And in chapter 2, verse 14 - nature endowed even them with a law, and he saith they were a law unto themselves. From this followeth the present question - how much did they profit in knowledge, and could they by this means obtain salvation? This question, at present as far as may be done, we shall explain. And verily, though obscure in itself, we shall set it forth with sufficient clarity in four places.
In the beginning, we shall weigh the very knowledge of the Heathens that it may be established how great it was. Secondly, whence they attained it, lest it be thought they had enough through chance or natural inclination alone, whatsoever they attained. Thirdly, that which pertaineth to their own demonstration of righteousness and worship, and what was set before them to pursue, we shall likewise briefly explain. Fourthly, why therefore were such great gifts bestowed upon them, if through the same they ought not to obtain salvation? Of these we shall speak, in the most fitting manner, clearly and concisely.
And concerning the knowledge of the Gentiles, as is sufficiently evident from the Apostle himself, it must be acknowledged that they had excellent and very distinct knowledge: not only of human things and this sublunary world, but of God and divine matters, insofar as was possible to the mind of man, they came to the highest understanding. This indeed may be abundantly confirmed from their own books; yea from those letters also and the sense of the scriptures this same matter of the notion of religion shall be declared. For what some say, that the Heathen lacked all knowledge of God because they lacked idolatry and were estranged from the people of God, this indeed is sin, but not likewise poison. Nor doth it avail more than if it were said today, that a good part of Christians have not true knowledge of God and Christ, because they worship images or gallows, because they are estranged from Christ. It is not observed that that which is known is one thing, and to act according to what is known is another. The Apostle doth not hesitate to attribute to the Gentiles knowledge of divinity and power; and indeed so much as would suffice to condemn the Heathen at the tribunal of God. Therefore it is not to be too much extenuated; but that which God hath granted them, and which the sacred scriptures attribute to them, is to be given, so that they may be without excuse. But let us return to the division that hath been received. From their writings it may be gathered what they knew of God.
Plato speaketh most sacredly everywhere of God, according to whom God is living, immortal, self-sufficient in felicity, eternal substance, and the cause of good in nature. Which also Xenocrates and others thought of God. Aristotle, in book 12 of Metaphysics, chapter 8, openly placeth God as one in number and reason, immovable; and a little before confesseth Him to be everlasting, most good, and so forth. That Trismegistus Mercury saith: “God is one, and he who is one needeth no name,” that is, God is unique, and he that is unique needeth no name. For he who is, lacketh a name. How greatly did the Sibyl sing of God to the Gentiles? Not only as the cause of all, and one, and provident, but also proclaimed the redeemer of mankind, insomuch that she uttered the name of the Son of God in her verses, which because they are known, I willingly pass over here. Apollo of Colophon being once asked what God was, answered “self-begotten, untaught, without mother, indivisible, his name not comprehended in word, dwelling in fire: that is God.” The Latin Heathen also knew God sufficiently, if they had wished to adhere to what they knew. The author of the moral distichs confesseth Him to be a spirit, and His body to be worshipped with a pure mind; Cicero, a mind separated from all blemish. But I will not be more prolix in these matters. A good part of them also sufficiently understood the true worship of God. It is Plato’s opinion: that God is not rightly worshipped with sacrifices, since we receive all good things from Him; yet He from us nothing, as though He were in need. Therefore to Him alone we owe honor and gratitude; concerning which also in the second Alcibiades - In the second book of Politics he saith that God is good by nature, not the author of evil; and elsewhere the author of salvation. They have spoken not obscurely about the image of God in man. Plato saith that the form of man is “theoeides,” that is, like unto God, and that a good and just man cometh very near to God. In the Sibyl is read the sentence of God concerning man, “Man is mine image, having right reason.” Of God’s providence all philosophy beareth witness: Plato in Phaedrus and the tenth book of laws most sweetly discourseth on it. Holy also is the opinion of Hermes concerning God’s care for the pious: “Piety is a guard: for neither evil demon nor fate overcometh a pious man. For God delivereth the pious from all evil.” Which last sentence is plainly taken from divine sources. Lactantius chapter 16 could have known, no less than Plato, that God created all things by Himself. Whose judgment about the origin of all things is extant in the Sophist and book 10 of Politics; in Timaeus also he maketh God the maker and father of the whole world. And among his epistles is the sixth, which hath a pious conclusion about God the Father. I pass over that he speaketh most sacredly of the fated, saying it is, if God willeth, with God’s favor it is easy to speak; and what occurs everywhere in him regarding similar things, as is befitting. Of the immortality of souls the testimonies of Plato are manifest in Phaedo. In Phaedrus he also treateth the same argument. In Gorgias he likewise toucheth upon the same. In book ten of the Politics concerning laws and in the twelfth he copiously pursueth the same, which I here wisely only touch upon. He toucheth upon the resurrection of bodies from the earth elsewhere in the political writings, which seemed more absurd to Aristotle; nevertheless he saith the soul is immortal according to what, it is true, that is as pertaining to the mind, namely in book 12 of Metaphysics.
That death is not to be feared Plato declareth sufficiently in the Apology, nor is the post wherein God hath placed each one here to be deserted for fear of it. The same he bringeth forth in Phaedo and elsewhere; and Socrates confirmed this sufficiently by his own example. Of good things and rewards after this life all tragedies speak, not to mention philosophers. In Plato the rewards are known, he recounteth them also in Gorgias, in book 10 of Politics, in Phaedo. In Laches he teacheth that life ought to respond to doctrine and profession. In Critias he saith that Genii are the governors of provinces. Elsewhere we have said that virtue is inspired, not acquired by nature or art. Justice is the agreement of reason and affections and so forth.
But I cease to pursue each thing, lest I seem to admire these things too much. Let us hear the censure of the Holy Scriptures concerning these. The Apostle in Romans 1, verses 19, 20 manifestly saith that God revealed to them that which ought and could be known of God. Then he indicateth the manner of revelation, that through the visible creation they knew the invisible things of God: that is, His power and divinity: they knew His power from the fabric of the world; His divinity from the reasoning of causes; although there are not wanting those who interpret this of the Son of God. Which I do not pursue at present, it is enough that there was a distinguished knowledge of divinity in general, this which I will show by yet one more argument. The Apostle in the same place saith they were inexcusable because they glorified not God, as they knew Him, nor were grateful. From which it followeth that the knowledge was sufficient for damnation; therefore it cannot be but that it was excellent. And in Acts 14, 7, 17 Paul among the Lystrians saith that God among the Gentiles was not without witnesses and arguments from which the Heathen might have recognized Him.
The Fathers also saw this. Hence it is that they seek almost all the secrets of the Christian faith among philosophers after the Gentiles, as it were, and have found some not badly. And I speak not of those civil and physical things which are proper to philosophy but those proper to our religion: such as eternal life, resurrection, God, the creation of the world and man and other similar things. For Lactantius Firmianus proveth everything from the Heathen, resurrection in book 7, chapter 10, 15; the punishments of the impious in book 7 chapter 7; that God is one in book chapter 6, 7; that sin entered into the world through the devil’s envy in book 2 chapter 9 and infinite others. Augustine doth the same in the books on the city of God, see book 23 chapter 28 and others. Tertullian also in his Apologetic proveth almost all things from the Heathen, see chapter 46. That Justin Martyr and philosopher bringeth forth infinite things from Orpheus, the Sibylline books and others in the Exhortatory and others. In the first defense of Christians which he wrote to the Roman Senate, he doth not hesitate to say that Christ was known to Socrates himself. And in the second defense he saith that this same Socrates was killed by the work of demons, because he wanted to abolish their worship. Well known is that place of Augustine where he saith he found the beginning of the Gospel of John among the Platonists. What doth Eusebius not bring forth from the Heathen in the Preparation for the Gospel? Almost all theology except Plato he produceth. Let those things which we once studiously collected from Plato be compared especially with book 12 that he bringeth forth, and if thou compareth all these with ours, thou wilt truly say Plato is not far from being a Christian.
There were certain vestiges of the Trinity among them, although badly understood as all other matters. In Philebus these three are joined: “royal soul, royal mind, and causal faculty,” that is royal soul, royal mind and causal faculty; in book 4 of the laws. The beginning, middle, and end of all things is in God: and he saith “ancient,” that is, that this ancient saying is true, which Justin interpreteth to be said by Plato of the doctrine of Moses, whom he dared not name. In Timaeus there is often mention of the Triad, but they are badly applied, “archetype, imitation, and word,” that is, exemplar, imitation, and word, below is Father, Mother, offspring. How the Platonists explain this, see Proclus who affirmeth that the Triad effecteth all things from itself. In book 6 of Politics, he saith that the son of the Good is inexplicable, since no allegory can express the good per se. That Hermes, or truly in the perfect sermon, saith that God begat another equally invisible and sensible, as Lactantius reporteth in book 4 chapter 6; and the Sibyl in the same place singeth “Know thy God, who is the Son of God.”
And the answer of Serapis given to Thule in Egypt is also cited, “First God, then the Word and Spirit with them; all were born together and come together into one;” which manifestly and in apt names expresseth the Trinity.
Those things are more obscure among the Peripatetics. Aristotle indeed hath, and the Venetians, the notion of mind and what is perceived by the mind which he placeth in God, but they are remote from the truth. The doctrine of the Platonists, Sibyls and Pythagoreans was more open, which lest anyone should think vain, let him read Augustine on the city of God chapter 21.