Excerpt from The Names of God and Meditative Summaries of the Divine Perfections Hence following the example of St. Denis the Areopagite whose works have for fifty years ex ercised on me a most marvellous charm, I have resolved to explain very briefly the divine perfec tions or attributes ascribed to God by the Holy Books. In this short exposition I omitted de signedly the testimony of the Scriptures and the Fathers and also all theological proofs in order that the (...) reader may more readily form a clear idea of these divine attributes, excite in his heart affections worthy of such sublime considerations and by this exercise, as St. Denis says, make his soul deiform, or like unto God. About the Publisher Forgotten Books publishes hundreds of thousands of rare and classic books. Find more at www.forgottenbooks.com This book is a reproduction of an important historical work. Forgotten Books uses state-of-the-art technology to digitally reconstruct the work, preserving the original format whilst repairing imperfections present in the aged copy. In rare cases, an imperfection in the original, such as a blemish or missing page, may be replicated in our edition. We do, however, repair the vast majority of imperfections successfully; any imperfections that remain are intentionally left to preserve the state of such historical works. (shrink)

1516 saw the publication of three important works. First of all, it is the year of Thomas More’s Utopia. But it is also the year in which Erasmus published his major political work The Education of the Christian Prince. The third work even appeared with the same publisher as More’s Utopia, viz. Nicolaas Everaerts’s Topica or legal commonplaces. All three works are remarkable in their own way. Erasmus represents a tradition that goes back to Petrarch and that saw the well-being (...) of society as totally dependent on the virtuousness of its prince. For Thomas More this was far too risky and therefore he sketched a radical alternative that was based on a reorganisation of society as a whole. However appealing his imaginary island was, it is remarkable that within the domain of political theory it did not attract too much attention. Most authors focused on another work, that was conceived in the very same period, viz. Machiavelli’s Prince. The present article will shed light on these developments by focusing on the work of two further early-modern intellectuals active in the Netherlands. Both Justus Lipsius and Leonardus Lessius, whose work bears a strong resemblance to that of Everaerts, looked for the ideal society. And this was not a society after the model of More, but a society modelled after a well-defined form of Machiavellism. (shrink)

By now it has been pretty well established that the Flemish Jesuit Leonardus Lessius was an economist of the highest grade. Joseph A. Schumpeter, perhaps the 20th century’s most important historian of economics, afforded Lessius more than ample mention in his monumental work, History of Economic Analysis. In Interest and Usury, Schumpeter’s pupil, Bernard W. Dempsey, likewise gave Lessius generous attention. The Belgian historian Raymond de Roover, however, who considered Lessius to be primarily a deserving epigone of the famous (...) ‘Salamanca School’, did not completely share their enthusiasm, at least initially. De Roover’s somewhat lukewarm attitude was, nevertheless, drowned out by the laudatory contribution of Barry T. Gordon on the subject in his Economic Analysis Before Adam Smith. Robert Beutels brought respect to Lessius’ work in his bio-bibliographical essay published in 1987 and restored something of the honour due to Lessius which, according to Beutels, he had been unjustly denied, certainly in his own land.The image of Lessius presented by all these authors is uncommonly fresh, yet at the same time surprisingly familiar. In their works they have shown him to be a modern thinker who merits comparison with contemporary economists. His analyses give witness to his profound insight into the economy of his day and are still relevant, thought not directly applicable, for economists today. The market principle, portfolio theory, the quantity theory of money, and much more can, according to the authors we have mentioned, be found in Lessius. But does this rather trendy image of Lessius agree with the historical reality?An appropriate way to begin answering this question would be to examine his discussion on the lending of money and the taking of interest in his monumental tractate of 1605, On Justice and Law . Did Lessius endorse or reject the traditional proscription against usury? When did he consider it permissible to claim interest? To what extent did his moral judgment depend on an economic analysis of the phenomenon of interest? Perhaps the answers to these questions will enable us to judge Lessius as both economist and ethicist, as he rightly deserves. (shrink)

In my paper I discuss some historical and thematic problems interesting in so far as the apologetic aspects of Cartesian philosophy are concerned. My main subject is a popular figure of late sixteenth and early seventeenth century Catholic apology, the Jesuit Leonardus Lessius. Analysing his arguments as presented in the De providentia numinis, we can gain insight into his philosophically-based apologetics. Following this study, I summarize the main Cartesian statements regarding the apologetic import of his philosophy and define the (...) main characteristics of this Cartesian “theological puzzle”. Finally, I argue that in spite of significant differences, Descartes’s post-Aristotelian apology can be taken in parallel with certain tendencies essential to then-contemporary late-Scholastic Aristotelian apology. (shrink)