The present paper analyzes Petrus van Maistricht’s (1630–1706) critique of Baruch Spinoza’s Theological-Political Treatise found in his Novitatum cartesianarum gangraena (1677). The paper shows, first, that Mastricht regarded Spinoza’s atheism as the inevitable outcome of the Cartesians’ denial of philosophy’s subordination to theology. Second, Mastricht, in refuting Spinoza, revised his earlier critique of Cartesianism. In his previous work, Mastricht had already pointed out the atheistic implications of Cartesianism, but in the Gangraena he could now clearly identify Spinoza’s Theological-Political Treatise as the atheistic consequence of Cartesianism. He was thus able to confirm his distinctive diagnosis of Cartesianism as a gangrene that would gradually worsen and eventually destroy the entire body of theology.

中文翻译：

---

笛卡尔无神论的诊断

本文分析了彼得鲁斯·范·迈斯特里赫特（Petrus van Maistricht，1630-1706）对巴鲁克·斯宾诺莎的批评神学政治论文发现在他的坏疽新维塔藻（1677）。该论文首先表明，马斯特里赫特认为斯宾诺莎的无神论是笛卡尔学派否认哲学从属于神学的必然结果。其次，马斯特里赫特在反驳斯宾诺莎时，修正了他早期对笛卡尔主义的批判。马斯特里赫特在他之前的著作中已经指出了笛卡尔主义的无神论含义，但在冈格拉埃纳他现在可以清楚地识别斯宾诺莎的神学政治论文作为笛卡尔主义的无神论后果。因此，他能够证实他对笛卡尔主义的独特诊断：笛卡尔主义是一种坏疽，会逐渐恶化并最终摧毁整个神学体系。