Sect. II. - BUT
what will you say to these your declarations, when, be it
remembered, they are not confined to "Free-will" only, but apply to all
doctrines in general throughout the world - that, "if it were permitted you by
the inviolable authority of the sacred Writings and decrees of the church, you
would go over to the sentiments of the Sceptics?" -
What an all-changeable Proteus is there in these
expressions, "inviolable authority" and "decrees of the church!" As though you
could have so very great a reverence for the Scriptures and the church, when
at the same time you signify, that you wish you had the liberty of being a
Sceptic! What Christian would talk in this way? But if you say this in
reference to useless and doubtful doctrines, what news is there in what you
say? Who, in such things, would not wish for the liberty of the sceptical
profession ? Nay, what Christian is there who does not actually use this
liberty freely, and condemn all those who are drawn away with, and captivated
by ever opinion? Unless you consider all Christians to be such (as the term is
generally understood) whose doctrines are useless, and for which they quarrel
like fools, and contend by assertions. But if you speak of necessary things,
what declaration more impious can any one make, than that he wishes for the
liberty of asserting nothing in such matters? Whereas, the Christian will
rather say this - I am so averse to the sentiments of the Sceptics, that
wherever I am not hindered by the infirmity of the flesh, I will not only
steadily adhere to the Sacred Writings every where, and in all parts of them,
and assert them, but I wish also to be as certain as possible in things that
are not necessary, and that lie without the Scripture; for what is more
miserable than uncertainty.
What shall we say to these things also, where you add - "To
which authorities I submit my opinion in all things; whether I follow what
they enjoin, or follow it not." -
What say you, Erasmus? Is it not enough that you submit
your opinion to the Scriptures? Do you submit it to the decrees of the church
also? What can the church decree, that is not decreed in the Scriptures? If it
can, where then remains the liberty and power of judging those who make the
decrees? As Paul, I Cor. xiv., teaches "Let others judge." Are you not pleased
that there should be any one to judge the decrees of the church, which,
nevertheless, Paul enjoins? What new kind of religion and humility is this,
that, by our own example, you would take away from usthe power of judging the
decrees of men, and give it unto men without judgment? Where does the
Scripture of God command us to do this?
Moreover, what Christian would so commit the injunctions of
the Scripture and of the church to the winds, - as to say "whether I follow
them, or follow them not?" You submit yourself, and yet care not at all
whether you follow them or not. But let that Christian be anathema, who is not
certain in, and does not follow, that which is enjoined him. For how will he
believe that which he does not follow? - Do you here, then, mean to say, that
following is understanding a thing certainly, and not doubting of it at
all in a sceptical manner? If you do, what is there in any creature which any
one can follow, if following be understanding, and seeing and knowing
perfectly? And if this be the case, then it is impossible that any one should,
at the same time, follow some things, and not follow others: whereas, by
following one certain thing, God, he follows all things; that is, in Him, whom
whoso followeth not, never followeth any part of His creature.
In a word, these declarations of yours amount to this -
that, with you, it matters not what is believed by any one, any where, if the
peace of the world be but undisturbed; and if every one be but allowed, when
his life, his reputation, or his interest is at stake, to do as he did, who
said, "If they affirm, I affirm, if they deny, I deny:" and to look upon the
Christian doctrines as nothing better than the opinions of philosophers and
men: and that it is the greatest of folly to quarrel about, contend for, and
assert them, as nothing can arise therefrom but contention, and the
disturbance of the public peace: "that what is above us, does not concern us."
This, I say, is what your declarations amount to. - Thus, to put an end to our
fightings, you come in as an intermediate peace-maker, that you may cause each
side to suspend arms, and persuade us to cease from drawing swords about
things so absurd and useless.
What I should cut at here, I believe, my friend Erasmus,
you know very well. But, as I said before, I will not openly express myself.
In the mean time, I excuse your very good intention of heart; but do you go no
further; fear the Spirit of God, who searcheth the reins and the heart, and
who is not deceived by artfully contrived expressions. I have, upon this
occasion, expressed myself thus, that henceforth you may cease to accuse our
cause of pertinacity or obstinacy. For, by so doing, you only evince that you
hug in your heart a Lucian, or some other of the swinish tribe of the
Epicureans; who, because he does not believe there is a God himself, secretly
laughs at all those who do believe and confess it. Allow us to be
assertors, and to study and delight in assertions: and do you favour your
Sceptics and Academics until Christ shall have called you also. The Holy
Spirit is not a Sceptic, nor are what he has written on our hearts doubts or
opinions, but assertions more certain, and more firm, than life itself and all
human experience.
Sect. III: - Now I come to the next head, which is
connected with this; where you make a "distinction between the Christian
doctrines," and pretend that some are necessary, and some not necessary." You
say, that "some are abstruse, and some quite clear." Thus you merely sport the
sayings of others, or else exercise yourself, as it were, in a rhetorical
figure. And you bring forward, in support of this opinion, that passage of
Paul, Rom xi. 33, "O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and goodness
of God!" And also that of Isaiah xl. 13, "Who hath holpen the Spirit of the
Lord, or who hath been His counselor?"
You could easily say these things, seeing that, you either
knew not that you were writing to Luther, but for the world at large, or did
not think that you were writing against Luther: whom, however, I hope you
allow to have some acquaintance with, and judgment in, the Sacred Writings.
But, if you do not allow it, then, behold, I will also twist things thus. This
is the distinction which I make; that I also may act a little the rhetorician
and logician - God, and the Scripture of God, are two things; no less so than
God, and the Creature of God. That there are in God many hidden things which
we know not, no one doubts: as He himself saith concerning the last day: "Of
that day knoweth no man but the Father." (Matt. xxiv. 36.) And (Acts i. 7.)
"It is not yours to know the times and seasons." And again, "I know whom I
have chosen," (John xiii. 18.) And Paul, "The Lord knoweth them that are His,"
(2 Tim. ii. 19.). And the like.
But, that there are in the Scriptures some things abstruse,
and that all things are not quite plain, is a report spread abroad by the
impious Sophists by whose mouth you speak here, Erasmus. But they never have
produced, nor ever can produce, one article whereby to prove this their
madness. And it is with such scare-crows that Satan has frightened away men
from reading the Sacred Writings, and has rendered the Holy Scripture
contemptible, that he might cause his poisons of philosophy to prevail in the
church. This indeed I confess, that there are many places in the
Scriptures obscure and abstruse; not from the majesty of the thing, but from
our ignorance of certain terms and grammatical particulars; but which do not
prevent a knowledge of all the things in the Scriptures. For what
thing of more importance can remain hidden in the Scriptures, now that the
seals are broken, the stone rolled from the door of the sepulchre, and that
greatest of all mysteries brought to light, Christ made man: that God is
Trinity and Unity: that Christ suffered for us, and will reign to all
eternity? Are not these things known and proclaimed even in our streets?
Take Christ out of the Scriptures, and what will you find remaining in them?
All the things, therefore, contained in the
Scriptures; are made manifest, although some places, from the words not
being understood, are yet obscure. But to know that all things in the
Scriptures are set in the clearest light, and then, because a few words are
obscure, to report that the things are obscure, is absurd and impious.
And, if the words are obscure in one place, yet they are clear in another.
But, however, the same thing, which has been most openly declared
to the whole world, is both spoken of in the Scriptures in plain words, and
also still lies hidden in obscure words. Now, therefore, it matters not if the
thing be in the light, whether any certain representations of it be in
obscurity or not, if, in the mean while, many other representations of the
same thing be in the light. For who would say that the public fountain is not
in the light, because those who are in some dark narrow lane do not see it,
when all those who are in the Open market place can see it plainly?
Sect. IV. - WHAT
you adduce, therefore, about the darkness of the Corycian
cavern, amounts to nothing; matters are not so in the Scriptures. For those
things which are of the greatest majesty, and the most abstruse mysteries, are
no longer in the dark corner, but before the very doors, nay, brought forth
and manifested openly. For Christ has opened our understanding to understand
the Scriptures, Luke xxiv. 45. And the Gospel is preached to every creature.
(Mark xvi. 15, Col. i. 23.) "Their sound is gone out into all the earth."
(Psalm xix. 4.) And "All things that are written, are written for our
instruction." (Rom. xv. 4.) And again, "All Scripture is inspired from above,
and is profitable for instruction." (2 Tim. iii. 16.)
Therefore come forward, you and all the Sophists together,
and produce any one mystery which is still abstruse in the Scriptures. But, if
many things still remain abstruse to many, this does not arise from obscurity
in the Scriptures, but from their own blindness or want of understanding, who
do not go the way to see the all-perfect clearness of the truth. As Paul saith
concerning the Jews, 2 Cor. iii. 15. "The veil still remains upon their
heart." And again, "If our gospel be hid it is hid to them that are lost,
whose heart the god of this world hath blinded." (2 Cor. iv. 3-4.) With the
same rashness any one may cover his own eyes, or go from the light into the
dark and hide himself, and then blame the day and the sun for being obscure.
Let, therefore, wretched men cease to impute, with blasphemous perverseness,
the darkness and obscurity of their own heart to the all-clear Scriptures of
God.
You, therefore, when you adduce Paul, saying, "His
judgments are incomprehensible," seem to make the pronoun His (ejus)
refer to Scripture (Scriptura). Whereas Paul does not say, The
judgments of the Scripture are incomprehensible, but the judgments of God. So
also Isaiah xl. 13, does not say, Who has known the mind of the Scripture,
but, who has known "the mind of the Lord?" Although Paul asserts that the mind
of the Lord is known to Christians: but it is in those things which are freely
given unto us: as he saith also in the same place, 1 Cor. ii. 10, 16. You see,
therefore, how sleepily you have looked over these places of the Scripture:
and you cite them just as aptly as you cite nearly all the passages in defense
of "Free-will."
In like manner, your examples which you subjoin, not
without suspicion and bitterness, are nothing at all to the purpose. Such are
those concerning the distinction of Persons: the union of the Divine and human
natures: the unpardonable sin: the ambiguity attached to which, you say, has
never been cleared up. - If you mean the questions of Sophists that have been
agitated upon those subjects, well. But what has the all-innocent Scripture
done to you, that you impute the abuse of the most wicked of men to its
purity? The Scripture simply confesses the Trinity of God, the humanity of
Christ, and the unpardonable sin. There is nothing here of obscurity or
ambiguity. But how these things are the Scripture does not say, nor is
it necessary to be known. The Sophists employ their dreams here; attack and
condemn them, and acquit the Scripture. - But, if you mean the reality of the
matter, I say again, attack not the Scriptures, but the Arians, and those to
whom the Gospel is hid, that, through the working of Satan, they might not see
the all-manifest testimonies concerning the Trinity of the Godhead, and the
humanity of Christ.
But to be brief. The clearness of the Scripture is
twofold; even as the obscurity is twofold also. The one is external,
placed in the ministry of the word; the other internal, placed in
the understanding of the heart. If you speak of the internal clearness, no man
sees one iota in the Scriptures, but he that hath the Spirit of God. All have
a darkened heart; so that, even if they know how to speak of, and set forth,
all things in the Scripture, yet, they cannot feel them nor know them: nor do
they believe that they are the creatures of God, nor any thing else: according
to that of Psalm xiv, 1. "The fool hath said in his heart, God is nothing."For
the Spirit is required to understand the whole of the Scripture and every part
of it. If you speak of the external clearness, nothing whatever is left
obscure or ambiguous; but all things that are in the Scriptures, are by the
Word brought forth into the clearest light, and proclaimed to the whole world.
Sect. V. - BUT
this is still more intolerable, - Your enumerating this
subject of "Free-will" among those things that are "useless, and not
necessary;" and drawing up for us, instead of it, a "Form" of those things
which you consider "necessary unto Christian piety." Such a form as,
certainly, any Jew or any Gentile utterly ignorant of Christ, might draw up.
For of Christ you make no mention in one iota. As though you thought, that
there may be Christian piety without Christ, if God be but worshipped with all
the powers as being by nature most merciful.
What shall I say here, Erasmus? To me, you breathe out
nothing but Lucian, and draw in the gorging surfeit of Epicurus. If you
consider this subject "not necessary" to Christians, away, I pray you, out of
the field; I have nothing to do with you. I consider it necessary.
If, as you say, it be "irreligious," if it be "curious," if
it be "superfluous," to know, whether or not God foreknows any thing by
contingency; whether our own will does any thing in those things which pertain
unto eternal salvation, or is only passive under the work of grace; whether or
not we do, what we do of good or evil, from necessity, or rather from being
passive; what then, I ask, is religious; what is grave; what is useful to be
known? All this, Erasmus, is to no purpose whatever. And it is difficult to
attribute this to your ignorance, because you are now old, have been
conversant with Christians, and have long studied the Sacred Writings:
therefore you leave no room for my excusing you, or having a good thought
concerning you.
And yet the Papists pardon and put up with these enormities
in you: and on this account, because you are writing against Luther:
otherwise, if Luther were not in the case, they would tear you in pieces tooth
and nail. Plato is a friend; Socrates is a friend; but Truth is to be honoured
above all. For, granting that you have but little understanding in the
Scriptures and in Christian piety, surely even an enemy to Christiansought to
known what Christians consider useful and necessary, and what they do not.
Whereas you, a theologian, a teacher of Christians, and about to draw up for
them a "Form" of Christianity, not only in your sceptical manner doubt of what
is necessary and useful to them, but go away into the directly opposite, and,
contrary to your own principles, by an unheard of assertion, declare it to be
your judgment, that those things are "not necessary:" whereas, if they be not
necessary, and certainly known, there can remain neither God, nor Christ, nor
Gospel, nor Faith, nor any thing else, even of Judaism, much less of
Christianity! In the name of the Immortal God, Erasmus, what an occasion, yea,
what a field do you open for acting and speaking against you! What could you
write well or correctly concerning "Free-will," who confess, by these your
declarations, so great an ignorance of the Scripture and of Godliness? But I
draw in my sails: nor will I here deal with you in my words (for that perhaps
I shall do hereafter) but in your own.
Sect. VI. - THE "Form" of
Christianity set forth by you, among other things, has this - "That we should
strive with all our powers, have recourse to the remedy of repentance, and in
all ways try to gain the mercy of God; without which, neither human will, nor
endeavour, is effectual." Also, "that no one should despair of pardon from a
God by nature most merciful." -
These statements of yours are without Christ, without the
Spirit, and more cold than ice: so that, the beauty of your eloquence is
really deformed by them. Perhaps a fear of the Popes and those tyrants,
extorted them from you their miserable vassal, lest you should appear to them
a perfect atheist. But what they assert is this - That there is ability in us;
that there is a striving with all our powers; that there is mercy in God; that
there are ways of gaining that mercy; that there is a God, by nature just, and
most merciful, &c. - But if a man does not know what these powers are; what
they can do, or in what they are to be passive; what their efficacy, or what
their inefficacy is; what can such an one do? What will you set him about
doing?
"It is irreligious, curious, and superfluous, (you say) to
wish to know, whether our own will does any thing in those things which
pertain unto eternal salvation, or whether it is wholly passive under the work
of grace." - But here, you say the contrary: that it is Christian piety to
"strive with all the powers;" and that, "without the mercy of God the will is
ineffective."
Here you plainly assert, that the will does something in
those things which pertain unto eternal salvation, when you speak of it as
striving: and again, you assert that it is passive, when you say, that without
the mercy of God it is ineffective. Though, at the same time, you do not
define how far that doing, and being passive, is to be understood: thus,
designedly keeping us in ignorance how far the mercy of God extends, and how
far our own will extends; what our own will is to do, in that which you
enjoin, and what the mercy of God is to do. Thus, that prudence of yours,
carries you along; by which, you are resolved to hold with neither side, and
to escape safely through Scylla and Charybdis; in order that, when you come
into the open sea, and find yourself overwhelmed and confounded by the waves,
you may have it in your power, to assert all that you now deny, and deny all
that you now assert.
