Voetius to Robert Baillie (April, 1655)

To the Reverend and Most Illustrious Man, Robert Baillie, Most Worthy Professor of Theology in the University of Glasgow.

Reverend and most illustrious Sir, Brother in Christ, worthy of respect,

I at last received your letter, written on the Ides of September of the previous year, around the 13th or 14th of March, together with a letter from our mutual friend, Mr. William Spang, dated March 8th. I now finally respond, in order, to each point contained in your letter.

As for the copies of both little books, published by you for the benefit of students, I owe you thanks—and offer the greatest I can—for the gift and the effort expended.

I see that the Elenctic Catechism, proposed briefly from the sources of Scripture, is especially necessary for your English and Scottish countrymen. And if opponents begin to attack it (which, given these embittered times, I can scarcely doubt), a remarkable opportunity will be given to you to enrich this little work of yours by means of replies to objections and exceptions. I think your Analytical Manual will abundantly satisfy all the industrious (φιλεργοῖοις). Nothing, therefore, will remain in that kind of study except that they read and reread the Biblical text daily, and make it as familiar to themselves as possible, consulting, when necessary, Buxtorf’s Epitome of Roots and his incomparable Grammatical Thesaurus. Once someone has won over this mother, he will not with much difficulty court the daughter as well. These are in general six, or, if you prefer, seven: Rabbinic, Talmudic, Chaldaic, Samaritan, Syriac, Arabic, Ethiopic.

1. A guide to the understanding of Rabbinism, which is used by textual or grammatical commentators (whose reading is most useful, and almost necessary, for theologians), will soon be published by our most illustrious colleague Johannes Leusden, professor of the Hebrew language in this university. For he is working at the press on the prophet Jonah, with the commentaries of the Rabbis, as well as both Masoras, pointed and translated into Latin, with accompanying grammatical analysis and notes. With the guidance of that little book alone, and without a teacher, any ordinary student will be able to proceed at will in reading all the Rabbinic commentaries of that kind which they are accustomed to call Perouschin. As for the allegorical Rabbinic commentaries, which they call Derashim, anyone curious about these matters will be able to investigate them on their own, provided they have at hand Buxtorf’s abbreviations and his Rabbinic Lexicon.

2. The understanding of Talmudic studies has now been made much easier by the edition of the Mishnayot with vowel points added at Amsterdam; and it will be made very easy indeed by a Latin interlinear or marginal translation of at least some tractate with some chapter of the Gemara, along with grammatical analysis and notes. This task will readily be undertaken by the colleague just now mentioned. In this way, a path will be opened to students of Talmudic doctrine toward the entire Talmud, with the aid of Buxtorf’s never-praised-enough Rabbinic Lexicon.

3. The Chaldean dialect has already been illuminated for me by Buxtorf in his Grammar of the Chaldean and Syriac Languages, to which an exercise is appended. If anyone should desire more, they will be able to make use of the Chaldean paraphrase by Jones, with the translation, grammatical analysis, and notes, which our colleague will be publishing. Perpetual aids here will be Buxtorf's Rabbinic Lexicon (which also explains all the Targumic texts) and Buxtorf's son’s Syro-Chaldean Lexicon, in quarto.

4. The Samaritan dialect, although it differs little from Hebrew and Chaldean, nevertheless appears difficult at first sight, because it uses a completely different character. I have begun to work and will continue with Mr. Nisselio, who privately carries the banner of Eastern languages in Leiden, so that he may take care to have a few sections of the Samaritan Pentateuch, extracted from the great Parisian Bibles, published with notes and translation.

5. Buxtorf has also provided information about the Syriac dialect in the recently mentioned Grammar, where an exercise also appears. There is only one fault, that the printer was lacking the Syriac character; but recently this defect has been supplied by Dilcherus, who published the Grammar of this language, with exercises, and words expressed in the Syriac character, under the title Eclogarum Syriacarum. If anyone requires a Syriac Lexicon, I recommend those of Crinesius and Buxtorf's son; but both are collected only from the New Testament and the Ritual of Severus. Now, since the Old Testament has also been published in Syriac in Paris, the lexicons will need to be expanded.

6. Erpenius has provided the Grammar and exercises of the Arabic dialect, which seems to be sufficient. Afterwards, those who are eager may read the letters of James, John, and Jude in Arabic, with punctuation and Latin translation, by Mr. Nistelius. After completing this work, they should proceed with steady progress to the remaining sacred books, or other books they may be able to acquire, accompanied by Mr. Goli’s Arabic Lexicon.

7. The Ethiopic dialect, formed from Chaldean and Arabic, can hardly be acquired with any great difficulty, and indeed by those who are not completely unskilled in Arabic and Chaldean. Books of it have previously been difficult to obtain. I myself have only used the Ethiopic Psalter, along with the Greek, Hebrew, and Latin versions, published in Cologne by John Potkens. To this point, I have used it in such a way that I could retain and expand what I had begun to alphabetize with the guidance of a friend well-versed in the language for just a few hours. But recently, Mr. Nistelius has provided us with the Epistles of James, John, and Jude in Ethiopic, with a Latin translation, and he has given hope that the Epistles of Peter will soon follow. Therefore, let those who are eager acquire this little book and place their studies in it as a foundation for the practice of this learning.

   
   

   Two grammatical works are extant in Rome, and therefore not easily obtainable. The Harmonic Grammar of Ernest John Gerhard, son of the famous Lutheran theologian Johann Gerhard, covering Hebrew, Chaldean, Syriac, Arabic, and Ethiopic, in quarto, will be more than sufficient for those eager to move on to other subjects. The Ethiopic Lexicon of Wenmer is not found in the bookstores of the continent, except that it is much more desired; and much more, the Ethiopic writers, whether of any value there, or even the complete Bibles, could not yet be known. It is said that liturgical writings are extant; but as once with the Greeks, so today with the Romans, little or nothing should be attributed to their faith. There have been learned men who have classified certain other Eastern languages as daughters, branches, or dialects of Hebrew, but improperly, since all are distinct languages. Therefore, with regard to Hebrew or in relation to it and sacred philology, such things need not be attributed by theologians. Among these, three languages use the Arabic script: Persian, Turkish, and Malay; which perhaps led learned men into error. Two languages, both in vocabulary and character, are most distinctly separate from Hebrew and its other dialects: namely, Armenian and ancient Coptic, or Egyptian. The modern Egyptian, introduced about 400 years ago, or rather made common, is very similar to Arabic. If someone should greet these five Eastern languages from the abundance of sources, they would not have worked in vain; but I do not think it would be worth the effort for any theologian to immerse themselves in their depths before they have seen rarer and more prominent writers making use of them for their purpose in some manner. Much has been said about Coptic by Athanasius Kircher in his Coptico Prodrome, much about Persian by others, more about Armenian some proclaim; but they are eyewitnesses, believing what they see. The parenetical or moral, liturgical, rhythmic-poetical, papistic catechisms, and mythological works are worth little in terms of time. It was enough for me to acquire the ability to read, and after studying the grammars, to review a portion of the writings, both to satisfy my curiosity and to discern with my own judgment, and with my own eyes, whether these languages were distinct from Hebrew, with its dialects or daughters, or whether they were closer or more distant in relation to it. Thus far, more than enough has been said about these languages.

   
   

   I am not so concerned with chronology, since we are more burdened here with the abundance of writers than with their scarcity. One thing, in my judgment, remains: that a professor of history, or rather a minister, one or two vicars (for they in smaller churches are less pressed by the weight of business), should, from all the chronological writers, both papal and our own, gather a great portion, indicated by me in the Theological Library, to compile the method of the chronological art, through definitions and divisions, after the example of Alsted in Praecognita Theologica and Scaliger in Canonibus Isagogicis; with questions and controversies added to each chapter, with reasons for each side usually brought forward, and the books and names of any authors indicated. In the second part of this art, which is called canonical, I would like only the years from the beginning of the world up to the present day to be distributed by ages, intervals, articles, and centuries, as it might appear in a table, and for each to be subjected to questions and controversies, with reasons brought forward on both sides. I will see if this work can be recommended to one or two of our familiar ministers.

   
   

   Let us now proceed to the course of philosophy, which is the focus of much labor. I leave to you the systems, summaries, and synopses. Certainly, in these, more than enough seems to have been accomplished. It remains only that the logical, physical, and metaphysical controversies, especially, and also ethical and political ones (which, however, if rejected, will commit no absurdities in relation to theology), be thoroughly, briefly, and clearly examined, and the arguments and exceptions of each side be scrutinized; and finally, the truth, that is, philosophy, in harmony with sacred scriptures and orthodoxy, should be determined, against the more recent philosophers such as Suarez, the Coimbra School, Ruvius, Telesius, Baranzano, Oviedo, Mendoza, Vázquez, and especially the obstinate paradoxical and innovative sophist Ariaga, and against Taurellius, Gorlaeus, Cartesianism, Socinianism, Remonstrants, and Libertines. Whether the text of Aristotle should be published in its original form with brief and clear notes, and a general analysis of books and chapters, or rather with the course of questions or controversies, I have not yet decided. Certainly, those lengthy books of the Metaphysics, scarcely written in any order and containing a mixture of many things, do not seem suitable for presentation to youth dedicated to sacred study. The concrete branches of mathematics—namely, music, mechanics, optics, astronomy, geography—should have more illustrious questions collected in a bundle from the most prominent authors, with only the necessary elements from arithmetic, geometry, spherical geometry, and music gathered beforehand. The systems themselves of mechanics, astronomy, geography, and optics, once imbued with the study of their elementary principles, should be read without further guidance at their proper time. This, indeed, would be our plan.

   
   

   But as for those who should be entrusted with such a useful task in this tempest, and from whom it should be expected, I admit that I do not yet see it. For if such an excellent institution of your four Academies has been reduced to nothing, what hope can we have for our Belgian ones? Some of them have been gravely shaken by Cartesian philosophy; others, though severely disturbed by the same philosophy, are still vacillating and fluctuating, with no stability, no peace, never fixed by storms or resting in calm, philosophizing soberly against opposing forces, and doing this only to hold the helm and not be overwhelmed by the waves. Unless God from above had looked upon us, a very present danger would have been looming, pulling us into the realms of theology; thus, it would have been fulfilled in us what Bernard once said about the slowly collapsing church: 'In my peace, there is the bitterest bitterness,' etc. But if this storm ever ceases, and the new philosopher-priests and foolish, petulant youths are no longer thrust into the philosophical chairs, then at last we should think of the work of the academies, united with philosophical studies, to be revered. We speak in vain about the Palatinate, Hasse, and other parts of Germany; since in schools not yet or barely established, veteran and experienced philosophers do not suffice there, as I know, who would be able to handle the most difficult controversies skillfully and learnedly, and adapt them to the foundation of theology. At present, renowned among the French and Swiss is Derodo, a professor of philosophy from Arausio, who is said to be preparing a course in logic, physics, metaphysics, and ethics. He is said to be quite subtle and well-versed in both papal philosophy and our own. I will inquire further into his academic theses and a certain French book on the Eucharist, published against the pseudo-philosophical papist ideas, so that I may recognize the lion from its claw. Indeed, as I casually review certain disputations of his published in 1648, I find him to be rather paradoxical in all of physics. And this is what I have to say about the restoration of philosophy in the Academies

   
   

   I have arranged the copy of your book for Mr. Golius, and I have also indicated to him, in my own writing, your advice and request regarding the support of the Oriental languages; but I have received no response yet. I will send the second copy to Mr. Buxtorf, unless some scholar who is planning to travel offers it. Regarding the state of your church in particular, we know very little or nothing for certain here; however, we do not cease to commend it to God in our prayers. After darkness, we hope for light. This must be done by all of you, that you may religiously safeguard the purity of the reformed doctrine with simplicity of rites and governance, and together diligently promote the practice of piety, both publicly and privately. May each of us, in his own station, wish and act from the heart in this way, and I humbly beseech our God in Christ.

Your observer,

Gisbertus Voetius

Utrecht. April, 1655.