Epistle to a Good Friend in Italy

...gives his account, he was ordered by an advocate from the Lords of the States to answer clearly to all the following questions.

1. Whether he secretly advised his students and disciples to teach the writings of Socinus, or allowed and handed them over to be read of their own volition. To this he answered craftily that he did not share them with his disciples, but with some of his friends who were somewhat experienced in theological matters.

2. Whether he ever let it be heard (which the Rector of Herderwis Harderwijk strongly pushed) that he knew as certainly as God is in Heaven that Christ had not made satisfaction for our sins.

He claimed that people falsely attributed such an opinion and words to him, yet he added a cold and poor explanation, from which the sufficient sense of his godlessness appears.

3. Whether and why he used so many æquivocationum equivocations/double meanings and divisions in the interpretation of Divine properties, as well as in other mysteries of faith, which had not pleased the King and other scholars at all. Here he acknowledged some æquivocationes equivocations as his own, yet claimed that the rest were falsely attributed to his books: he had only used some for the sake of better divisions or distinctiones distinctions.

4. Whether he taught at times that it was forbidden for Christendom to wage war, [or] before, when one began such a thing for the preservation of the true exercise of religion, he denied this, with the added words that he recognized no war as right and fair except one that was absolutely necessary at the highest level.

After he stopped speaking, the Lords of the States declared in a certain and customary form that they wish to be...