The Holder of this blog uses no cookies and collects no data whatsoever. He is only a guest on the Blogger platform. He has made no agreements concerning third party data collection and is not provided the opportunity to know the data collection policies of any of the standard blogging applications associated with the host platform. For information regarding the data collection policies of Facebook applications used on this blog contact Facebook. For information about the practices regarding data collection on the part of the owner of the Blogger platform contact Google Blogger.

Friday, May 04, 2018

Bayle on Johannes Sturmius, Note F.

John Calvin
Note F from Bayle's Dictionary Entry on Johannes Sturmius [Link]:

I have mentioned, in another place[1], the encomium he bestowed upon Calvin's Institutions.] And I said that this encomium concerns the edition of the year 1543, which is the third. I went upon two reasons: one is, that it is certain the second edition is that of the year 1539[2]; the other is that these words of Sturmius, ‘Institutio Christianae Religionis quam primo inchoatam, deinde locupletatam, hoc  vero anno absolutam edidit’; [- - - - ‘The Institution of the Christian religion, which he first begun, and afterwards, enlarged; but the compleat edition of it he published this year,’] suit only with the third edition. But to conceal nothing, I ought to mention here what I have read in the second Anti-Pappus, viz. that Calvin being minister at Strasburgh, enlarged his Institution, and published it in the same city, apud Wendelinum Rihelium[3], and that Sturmius prefixed to that book the judgment he made of it.  Ego meam sententiam in fronte eus libri de Calvino affixi[4]. Which does not agree with the third edition, viz. that of the year 1543, for Calvin was not at Strasburgh that year; he returned to Geneva in September 1541.  My conjecture is thus: Sturmius knowing that the book was reprinting at Strasburgh in 1543, inserted some words, in his judgment, which shewed that it was a third edition. And therefore it is true that the words of Sturmius, which I have quoted in the article of CALVIN, (citat. 27.) concern the third edition, and consequently I have said nothing but what is true; but I think I should have observed that Sturmius had prefixed the same encomium[5] to the second edition, 1539. Let those who have this second edition, judge whether my conjecture be right or not.



[1] In the article CALVIN, remark [F].
[2] This appears by a short epistle of Calvin to the reader, dated at Strasburgh, August 1, 1539.
[3] [Additional Editor’s Note] Wendelinum Rihelium was the name of the Strasbourg publisher.]
[4] Sturmius, Anti-Pappo, secondo, p. 111.
[5] Except the words, which signify that it is the third edition.



No comments: