DiotimosReading Desk

Christological analogy

Biblical and macrocosmic theology

THEOLOGIAE Biblicæ & Macrocosmicæ; Biblischer Theologia; grossen Weldtbuch der Natur; Cognitio THEOLOGIAE

The p. 151 margin joins the knowledge of biblical and macrocosmic theology and speaks of doctors of both: two ways in which theology is divinely written and delivered.

From the book

Heinrich Khunrath’s Magnesia Catholica Philosophorum

Heinrich Khunrath · Diotimos Editions · 2026

Browse this book’s lexicon →

Orientation

At a Glance

  • The wordThe p. 151 margin joins the knowledge of biblical and macrocosmic theology and speaks of doctors of both: two ways in which theology is divinely written and delivered.
  • In KhunrathThe relation is prepared long before it is named.
  • In this editionKeep “biblical” and “macrocosmic” as distinct adjectives.
  • A reading distinctionKhunrath himself gives Romans 1:18–20 in the p. 150 margin and refers there to chapter 8 of his Confessio.

Meaning

The p. 151 margin joins the knowledge of biblical and macrocosmic theology and speaks of doctors of both: two ways in which theology is divinely written and delivered. “Macrocosmic” refers to the great World as a divine book. It does not mean that all claims about Nature automatically become theology; the body specifies knowledge of the Creator from created visible things, together with recognition of his sent Son.

Use in the book

The relation is prepared long before it is named. At pp. 43–442 Genesis is offered as a source from which the first matter of the material World might be demonstrated. At pp. 57–582 the projected books on Magnesia and its harmony with Christ are grounded together in Nature's World-book and holy biblical Scripture. At pp. 138–14023 Magnesia bears witness to Christ, and John's injunction to search the Scriptures is transferred to the natural book under an explicit symbolic qualification.

This movement is not simply a collection of parallel images. At pp. 150–1512 Khunrath ranks the recognitions available through Magnesia: the Creator, the Son, the beginning of the World, oneself and Nature. Such recognitions are preferable to silver- and gold-making. He then calls physics, in a certain respect, a part and servant of theology, and appeals to Paul and Tertullian. The marginal conjunction of the two theologies names the larger intellectual claim that this ranked account makes possible.

The two books also regulate each other's interpreters. On pp. 110–1112 the Fathers' and theologians' writings count as authoritative insofar as they agree with Scripture, just as philosophical books must agree with Nature. This is an analogy of tests, not a licence to treat every human authority as infallible. The later Prognosticon predicts that natural theology will be adduced beside biblical theology as visible proof against disputants.

The p. 176 margin belongs to this comparative logic. It says that outside catholic Magnesia there is no attaining the highest natural good through Art, just as there is no eternal salvation outside the Church. The ecclesial formula is affirmed as the model of the natural claim. It neither declares Nature a replacement Church nor turns catholic into an attack upon the Church. The text's boldness lies in assigning comparable necessity to the due natural subject in its own domain.

Places to read

  1. 1599 p. 44Genesis provides a proposed demonstration of the first matter; the sentence begins on p. 43
  2. 1599 p. 58World-book and biblical Scripture ground the projected works together
  3. 1599 p. 111Agreement with Scripture tests theological authorities as agreement with Nature tests philosophical ones
  4. 1599 p. 151 · marginThe two divinely delivered theologies are explicitly joined
  5. 1599 p. 176 · marginThe necessity of Magnesia is compared to the affirmed necessity of the Church for eternal salvation
  6. 1599 p. 183 · marginNatural theology is predicted to be cited beside biblical theology as ocular proof

Translation in this edition

Keep “biblical” and “macrocosmic” as distinct adjectives. The latter is not a euphemism for a modern scientific discipline. The modern note 1599 p. 176 · note 237 still describes the ecclesial formula as turned “against the Church,” although its own translation and the primary margin say otherwise; the edition's corrected glossary withdraws that reading. The article follows the primary Sicuti nec construction.

Source note

Khunrath himself gives Romans 1:18–20 in the p. 150 margin and refers there to chapter 8 of his Confessio. The theological rank of natural knowledge is therefore supported by a printed reference, not only by the modern commentator. The phrase “in a symbolic sense” at p. 139 belongs to Khunrath’s marginal direction for John 5:39; it is not a qualification invented by the translator.