True religion demonstrated after the method of geometers (1734)

[irichc]

Hi everyone.

Recently I bought a 1734 edition of a philosophy treatise in Latin entitled “Vera religio geometrica methodo demonstrata”, which seems to be totally unknown for the internet and cannot be found in the world catalogue neither. Its author, Francisco Gazzerro, an Italian probably from Naples, seems to be unknown too. Given its interest, I immediately prepared a Spanish translation and then an English one, which I present here.

As you can see from the title, this work’s purpose is to prove the Christian religion against Atheists and Deists in the fashion of Spinoza’s Ethics, that is, through an “a priori” method based upon definitions, axioms, propositions and corollaries. In this translation I have only chosen the central arguments of the first part of the work.

Best regards,

Daniel

---

TRUE RELIGION DEMONSTRATED AFTER THE METHOD OF GEOMETERS

FIRST PART

AGAINST ATHEISTS

PREFACE

So, have them miserable little men rised against You, Lord? So, has the work of Your hands conspired against Your majesty, in Your presence, while You watch it patiently? So, my God, such despicable and criminal men have stood forth (if only they didn’t exist!) and try to set You aside and get rid of You, most powerful creator of everything and most wise preserver of the universe? Not even the soul, that locked up in the dungeon of a body, weakened by passions, made dull by mistakes and sins, still against its will acknowledges You and calls upon You; not even all creatures, the most beautiful among the beautiful, the strongest among the strong, the sweetest among the sweet, that give witness of You, could move them? Don’t the donkeys themselves teach them when they are asked, don’t the fowls of the air show it to them, doesn’t the earth answer them and don’t the fish of the sea speak to them? Don’t the heavens illustrate Your glory and doesn’t the firmament proclaim to be the work of Your hands? Lastly, is such a multitude of species and creatures unable to behold the creator? Certainly, my God, they have become vain in their reasonings, but the judgement of the wicked will arrive and they will fear the avenger; and the light of every truth will ascend so that their foolishness is extinguished and they may see their deformity. Thus, against this plague of men so evil, so horrible, so harmful, I beg You. Lead the smallness of my poor wit, inspire my arguments to the truth of such a formidable proof.

DEFINITIONS

1. By cause I mean that from which something is, bringing it to existence; and that whose origin is brought by it I call it an effect.
2. By being in itself (Ens a se) I understand that which has not and cannot have a beginning.
3. By an absolutely infinite being I mean that which cannot be increased in any sense.
4. Thus, by a being which can be increased I understand that which goes from less to more and, after receiving an addition, is therefore changed.
5. Thus, by being changed I understand ceasing to be in one way and beginning to be another.
6. By God I understand the being which is infinite in every sense.

SOME REMARKS TO THE DEFINITIONS

(…)

AXIOMS

1. Some being exists.
2. That which lacks of any beginning cannot have any end.

REMARKS

These two axioms are so certain and evident that no one, however obstinate, can doubt them. As for the first one, who will deny that some being exists? But let it be that someone dared to doubt or deny it: by doubting or denying it he confesses his existence. Of course, if he didn’t exist, he wouldn’t be able to doubt or deny anything.

As for the second true axiom, who ignores that it is a blatant contradiction that which lacks of any beginning can have any end? That’s why it is a beginning, since it is the beginning of some end. Beginning and end presuppose necessarily a mutual intercourse and relationship. Thus, as the father and the son refer to each other in such a way, so that if there is a son, then there must be some father for that one to become his son; and if there is not a father, for this very reason there cannot be a son neither; so, also, if there is an end, any beginning is necessary for this end to be, and if there is no beginning, there cannot be any end.

Thus Saint Hilary elegantly:

You will always be because You have always been, You don’t need death;
That who lacks of birth doesn’t know the end of times.

 

[irichc]

PROPOSITIONS

PROP. I

There is no possible effect without a cause.

PROOF

If there was an effect without a cause, there would be an effect whose origin would be brought by a cause (by definition I) and wouldn’t be brought by a cause.

But this implies a contradiction.

Therefore, there is no possible effect without a cause, which was to be demonstrated.

PROP. II

All that exists is either in itself or by another.

PROOF

It is impossible to think that something exists but by itself, by another one or by nothing, as it is evident.

But nothing can exist from nothing, since there is no possible effect without a cause, by the previous proposition.

Therefore, all that exists is either in itself or by another, which was to be demonstrated.

PROP. III

There is no possible being existing by another unless there is a being existing by itself.

PROOF

There is no possible effect without a cause (by proposition I).

However, the set of beings that exist by another (tota collectio Entium ab alio) are effects, by definition I.

Nevertheless, the set of beings that exist by another cannot have as a cause a being existing by another, since this one should be equally included in the set of beings that exist by another.

Thus, it must have a being in itself as a cause, given that there are no more classes of entities but the ones in itself and the ones by another.

Therefore, there is no possible being existing by another unless there is a being existing by itself, which was to be demonstrated.

PROP. IV

There is some being in itself.

PROOF

Some being exists, by axiom I.

However, all that exists is either in itself or by another, by proposition II.

Therefore, it exists some being that it is either in itself or by another.

If it is in itself, then the being in itself exists.

If it is by another, the being in itself exists equally, since there is no possible being existing by another unless there is a being existing by itself, by proposition III.

Therefore, there is some being in itself, which was to be demonstrated.

PROP. V

The being in itself is changeless.

PROOF

All that is changed has a beginning and an end, by definition V.

However, the being in itself cannot have neither any beginning, by definition II, nor any end, by axiom II.

Therefore, the being in itself cannot change, and thus it is changeless.

PROP. VI

The being in itself is absolutely infinite.

PROOF

The being in itself is changeless, by the previous proposition.

However, what is changeless cannot be increased in any sense, since being increased is being changed, by definition IV.

Therefore, the being in itself cannot be increased in any sense.

However, the being that cannot be increased in any sense is an absolutely infinite being, by definition III.

Thus, the being in itself is absolutely infinite, which was to be demonstrated.

PROP. VII

God exists.

PROOF

An absolutely infinite being exists, by the previous proposition.

However, an absolutely infinite being is God, by definition VI.

Therefore, God exists, which was to be demonstrated.

COROLLARY I

God is one, since a a plurality of beings infinite in every sense is repugnant to our reason, whenever none of them would be infinite.

COROLLARY II

God is eternal, since if He is infinite in every sense, He is also infinite in His permanence, in which eternity consists.

COROLLARY III

God is immense, since if He is infinite in any sense, He is also infinite in His presence, in which immensity consists.

COROLLARY IV

God is intelligent. Otherwise, He wouldn’t be infinite in every sense, since He would lack intelligence.

COROLLARY V

God acts freely. Since, if He didn’t, He would lack the power of acting in the opposite way; and, thus, He wouldn’t be infinite in every sense.

COROLLARY VI

God is omnipotent. Otherwise, He wouldn’t be infinite in power.

COROLLARY VII

God is infinitely good. Otherwise, He wouldn’t be infinite in goodness.

PROP. VIII

Whatever that exists in God is God.

PROOF

Whatever that exists in God is infinite, given that, if it is not infinite, then it is finite, and therefore God is not infinite in every sense, which is against proposition VI.

Nonetheless, whatever that is infinite is God, by definition VI.

Thus, whatever that exists in God is God, which was to be demonstrated.

COROLLARY

There are no mixtures or passions in God, given that whatever that exists in God is God, by the previous proposition.

PROP. IX

The universe is not God.

PROOF

Whatever that exists in God is God, by proposition VIII.

However, whatever that exists in this universe is not God, as it is evident.

Therefore, the universe is not God.

PROP. X

This universe and everything in it is by God.

PROOF

This universe is not God, by the previous proposition.

Therefore, it is not a being in itself. Since, if it was a being in itself, it would be changeless, by proposition V, and absolutely infinite, by proposition VI, and thus it would be God, by proposition VII.

If, therefore, it is not a being in itself, it must be by another, since all that exists is either by itself or by another, by proposition II.

However, it doesn’t exist by another which in turn is by another, by the sam reason.

Therefore, it exists by another which is in itself, that is, God.

Therefore, the universe and everything in it is by God, which was to be demonstrated.