reShe Imtate" and assert that potentially all believers partakers of bliss; it can be achieved by those who wish to realize the possibility of salvation revealed by revelation. In other words, they propagated the idea of gaya parguea!z, which was at odds with the aristocracy of the Catholic perquisite and its complex cult. The individual is not just a passive instrument of the church for its eschatological purpose, &
1) TAbodote To1sata Sotyetv gen. October 20, 1590. His works were published in 1630. in 3 volumes w No. The zealous defender of freedom of conscience of this era condemned Luther and Calvin for becoming popes of the new churches. The Amsterdam Consistory commissioned Arminio to refute his writings against the dogma of predestination, but he recognized this as impossible.
[fragment illegible in the scan of the first edition]
[fragment illegible in the scan of the first edition]
artem < E m re = zhk al U. owl Ai aaa contain a self-initiating moral capacity. This radically undermined the obedience of the letters of writing from the ethical norms of understanding.
Echoes of such ideas, imbued with individualism, spread throughout other European countries. We meet them in Germany, and in France, and in England among the latitudinarlevs (the English expression of Armintanism), the Independents, the Levellers, the Quekers and other minor dissenters (although only the Quekers (and not all of them) deny the doctrine of the Trinity). They supported and were supported by German, Italian and Swiss sectarians, known under the general name of anti-Trinitarians, and in the Netherlands, Poland and some other Slavic lands under the name Socinan.
If we turn to the outstanding, purely secular moralists of the same era, for example. Montaigne (Moschet 1533 - 1592. His "Ezzals" - 1588) or Peter Charron (1541 - 1603. Pe 1a Zasezze 1601. Bordeaux), then we will find ethical motives in the spirit of individualism in them. Moreover, issues of morality are interpreted with much greater freedom among them than among theologizing moralists. Montaigne creates a cult of personality in the spirit of Epicureanism, and Charron sharply and clearly raises the question of separating religion from ethics. He argues that morality arises in a person naturally, while religion is given by revelation. The religions are different. He develops Averroes's thought about comparative religions (see 1 T.. Sh p. 1. Oe 1tos ubgIez). He often supports himself by external means, while morality rests solely on the knowledge of virtue and on the emotional nature of a person.
Catholicism understood the precariousness of its position in morality. due to the refusal of thinkers to be guided by his traditions and counter-schemes in ethical issues. And representatives of the church immediately proclaimed such thinkers atheists. This same epithet is used, for example, by Garras, his Catholic critic, Peter Charron.
If we ignore the differences in terms and specific additions to all these developments, then, in essence, the same oppositional aspirations to superior authority make their teachings related. This is anti-traditionalism, anti-formalism, which desires broad religious and moral freedom and tolerance in matters of faith and worship, simplified to the minimum.
The question of freedom of faith, actually resolved by the obvious opposition to the ruling church in the named sects, also affected the very essence of understanding the rights of state power in relation to the individual. Conservative writers could not help but react to it, just like representatives of the authorities, in those cases where subjects of heterodox confession were instilled with fear as an opposing element to absolutism, which, however, was quite natural. Thus, recognizing or allowing even one personal right violated the entire iron-clad system of absolutism.
But nowhere were the political postulates of the liberation movement found so clearly expressed in religious form as on the islands of Great Britain and its American colonies. Here we can see the process of unfolding that single and coherent tangle of individual rights that we talked about in the first part, highlighting the significance of Protestantism in the doctrines of Luther and even Calvin