New Page

Rozdzial Starego Testamentu od Nowego is without doubt the most instructive work of Grzegorz
Pawel, one which tells us perhaps most about the ideas of the radical preachers of the ecclesia minor in
Poland active during this period. It will be considered in a different context later; for the time being we
merely want an answer to the question whether and to what extent the intent to synthesize or, to put it
more modestly, to put ideas into one work, as observed in De vera et falsa, is present. The question is
undoubtedly justified by the view, established in the literature on the subject by Konrad Górski's monograph,
that this work is in no way related to Christianismi restitutio.78
If our earlier statements are correct, it can be established right away that at most the direct influence
can be questioned since Górski himself admits that the text of the Polish Antitrinitarian is not
unrelated to the chapter De discrimine legis et euangelii of the famous Transylvanian publication. What
has to be particularly emphasized is that the concluding part of the work contains the +duplex" series
from the appendix of the chapter in question of De falsa et vera. The two texts are not perfectly identical
because Grzegorz Pawel is again rather talkative here, and there are other differences interpretable from
an ideological aspect. These latter can plainly be described by the fact that the Polish version places a
greater emphasis on the importance of the moral superiority of the gospel. Thus in the antitheses of duos
filios and duo regna the Polish text does not fail to stress that the sons of the Old Testament are the
children of wrath and darkness, while those of the New Testament belong to meekness and light.
These theses are also important because they cover nearly all the topics discussed in the first part,
providing the theological grounding, of the work consisting of three chapters. After the preface, to be
mentioned later, he commences discussing the two kinds of creation, which is followed by a full
description of the two worlds, the two kinds of life in the spirit of the new interpretation of the Gospel of
John. This also indicates that Grzegorz Pawel does not start with the commencing thought of the chapter
De discrimine but works entirely independently. The same goes for the rest where the dichotomy of the
giving of the soul means the appearance of a completely new element, absent from the assumed sources.
By the way, the modus operandi of Grzegorz Pawel is best characterized by his not being satisfied with
merely stating the differences but also trying to represent them very vividly, while admonishing his
readers on nearly every page. Thus, for instance, he does not merely record that the Levite priests were
carnal and performed outward ceremonies, but often and repeatedly describes these at length. The just
noted Anabaptist element is at the same time also rather forcefully present: it is emphasized with equal
frequency that meekness and toleration should rule in the New Testament, that the faithful here bless and
love even their enemies. All this amplifies the autonomous nature of the work. No doubt, it would be useless
to try to find such a close following of the text of Restitutio as in the case of De vera et falsa. At the
same time, I would not claim that it is entirely independent of the Servet's work. For although it is true
that the contrasts demonstrating the differences between the Old and the New Testaments (letter--soul,
slave--son, shadow--truth, etc.) do not in themselves refer to Servet, the fact that the concluding part of
the work displays a close connection with the chapter De discrimine, which made maximal use of Restitutio,
is a serious argument against dismissing these contrasts as simply topical.
In the subsequent chapters written with great dynamism the whole system of the Catholic church
is mercilessly criticized, but the Protestant denominations and the Jews also get their share of criticism.
According to the notion elaborated in the preface and repeated ad nauseam, the +present-day Babylon" is
the result of Satan's confusing perfect evangelical knowledge with the old Jewish Testament. On the other
hand, what had happened earlier to the Old Testament has been repeated after Christ: Satan has totally
turned the true learning inside out with pagan inventions and the introduction of new gods like Baal,
Moloch, Dagon, and so on. This latter element may remind us of Servet, but it is important to point out
that the Antichrist does not assume cosmic dimensions, nor are his earlier forms of manifestation
discussed, in the work of the Polish Antitrinitarian, but the more traditional image of the false prophet
rising among the heathen in the days of the apostles is dominant instead. In that respect there is a great
difference between Grzegorz Pawel's infinitely simple, easy to grasp, one might even say simplified,
conception and that of Servet, complicated and elaborated with great refinement. As it is well-known, ac-
28