THE SOVEREIGNTY OF GOD.
Sect. 9.
- THIS, therefore, is also essentially necessary and wholesome for
Christians to know: That God foreknows nothing by contingency, but
that He foresees, purposes, and does all things according to His
immutable, eternal, and infallible will. By this thunderbolt,
"Free-will" is thrown prostrate, and utterly dashed to pieces.
Those, therefore, who would assert "Free-will," must either deny
this thunderbolt, or pretend not to see it, or push it from them.
But, however, before I establish this point by any arguments of my
own, and by the authority of Scripture, I will first set it forth in
your words.
Are you
not then the person, friend Erasmus, who just now asserted, that God
is by nature just, and by nature most merciful? If this be true,
does it not follow that He is immutably just and merciful? That, as
His nature is not changed to all eternity, so neither His justice
nor His mercy ? And what is said concerning His justice and His
mercy, must be said also concerning His knowledge, His wisdom, His
goodness, His will, and His other Attributes. If therefore these
things are asserted religiously, piously, and wholesomely concerning
God, as you say yourself, what has come to you, that, contrary to
your own self, you now assert, that it is irreligious, curious, and
vain, to say, that God foreknows of necessity? You openly declare
that the immutable will of God is to be known, but you forbid the
knowledge of His immutable prescience. Do you believe that He
foreknows against His will, or that He wills in ignorance? If then,
He foreknows, willing, His will is eternal and immovable, because
His nature is so: and, if He wills, foreknowing, His knowledge is
eternal and immovable, because His nature is so.
From
which it follows unalterably, that all things which we do, although
they may appear to us to be done mutably and contingently, and even
may be done thus contingently by us, are yet, in reality, done
necessarily and immutably, with respect to the will of God. For the
will of God is effective and cannot be hindered; because the very
power of God is natural to Him, and His wisdom is such that He
cannot be deceived. And as His will cannot be hindered, the work
itself cannot be hindered from being done in the place, at the time,
in the measure, and by whom He foresees and wills. If the will of
God were such, that, when the work was done, the work remained but
the will ceased, (as is the case with the will of men, which, when
the house is built which they wished to build, ceases to will, as
though it ended by death) then, indeed, it might be said, that
things are done by contingency and mutability. But here, the case is
the contrary; the work ceases, and the will remains. So far is it
from possibility, that the doing of the work or its remaining, can
be said to be from contingency or mutability. But, (that we may not
be deceived in terms) being done by contingency, does not, in the
Latin language, signify that the work itself which is done is
contingent, but that it is done according to a contingent and
mutable will - such a will as is not to be found in God! Moreover, a
work cannot be called contingent, unless it be done by us unawares,
by contingency, and, as it were, by chance; that is, by our will or
hand catching at it, as presented by chance, we thinking nothing of
it, nor willing any thing about it before.
Sect. 10.
- I COULD wish, indeed, that we were furnished with some better term
for this discussion, than this commonly used term, necessity, which
cannot rightly be used, either with reference to the human will, or
the divine. It is of a signification too harsh and ill-suited for
this subject, forcing upon the mind an idea of compulsion, and that
which is altogether contrary to will ; whereas, the subject which we
are discussing, does not require such an idea: for Will, whether
divine or human, does what it does, be it good or evil, not by any
compulsion but by mere willingness or desire, as it were, totally
free. The will of God, nevertheless, which rules over our mutable
will, is immutable and infallible; as Boëtius sings, "Immovable
Thyself, Thou movement giv'st to all." And our own will, especially
our corrupt will, cannot of itself do good; therefore, where the
term fails to express the idea required, the understanding of the
reader must make up the deficiency, knowing what is wished to be
expressed - the immutable will of God, and the impotency of our
depraved will; or, as some have expressed it, the necessity of
immutability, though neither is that sufficiently grammatical, or
sufficiently theological.
Upon this
point, the Sophists have now labored hard for many years, and being
at last conquered, have been compelled to retreat. All things take
place from the necessity of the consequence, (say they) but not from
the necessity of the thing consequent. What nothingness this amounts
to, I will not take the trouble to show. By the necessity of the
consequence, (to give a general idea of it) they mean this - If God
wills any thing, that same thing must, of necessity be done; but it
is not necessary that the thing done should be necessary: for God
alone is necessary; all other things cannot be so, if it is God that
wills. Therefore, (say they) the action of God is necessary, where
He wills, but the act itself is not necessary; that is, (they mean)
it has not essential necessity. But what do they effect by this
playing upon words? Only this, that the act itself is not necessary,
that is, it has not essential necessity. This is no more than
saying, the act is not God Himself. This, nevertheless, remains
certain, that if the action of God is necessary, or if there is a
necessity of the consequence, every thing takes place of necessity,
how much soever the act be not necessary; that is, be not God
Himself, or have not essential necessity. For, if I be not made of
necessity, it is of little moment with me, whether my existence and
being be mutable or not, if, nevertheless, I, that contingent and
mutable being, who am not the necessary God, am made.
Wherefore, their ridiculous play upon words, that all things take
place from the necessity of the consequence, but not from the
necessity of the thing consequent, amounts to nothing more than this
- all things take place of necessity, but all the things that do
take place are not God Himself. But what need was there to tell us
this? As though there were any fear of our asserting, that the
things done were God Himself, or possessed divine or necessary
nature. This asserted truth, therefore, stands and remains
invincible - that all things take place according to the immutable
will of God! which they call the necessity of the consequence. Nor
is there here any obscurity or ambiguity. In Isaiah he saith, "My
counsel shall stand, and My will shall be done." (Isa. xlvi. 10.)
And what schoolboy does not under- stand the meaning of these
expressions, "Counsel," "will," "shall be done," "shall stand?"
Sect. 11.
- BUT why should these things be abstruse to us Christians, so that
it should be considered irreligious, curious, and vain, to discuss
and know them, when heathen poets, and the very commonalty, have
them in their mouths in the most frequent use? How often does Virgil
alone make mention of Fate? "All things stand fixed by law
immutable." Again, "Fixed is the day of every man." Again, "If the
Fates summon you." And again, "If thou shalt break the binding chain
of Fate." All this poet aims at, is to show, that in the destruction
of Troy, and in raising the Roman empire, Fate did more than all the
devoted efforts of men. In a word, he makes even their immortal gods
subject to Fate. To this, even Jupiter and Juno must, of necessity,
yield. Hence they made the three Parcae immutable, implacable, and
irrevocable in decree. [See Note ]
Those men
of wisdom knew that which the event itself, with experience, proves;
that no man's own counsels ever succeeded but that the event
happened to all contrary to what they thought. Virgil's Hector says,
"Could Troy have stood by human arm, it should have stood by mine."
Hence that common saying was on every one's tongue, "God's will be
done." Again, "If God will, we will do it." Again, "Such was the
will of God." "Such was the will of those above." "Such was your
will," says Virgil. Whence we may see, that the knowledge of
predestination and of the prescience of God, was no less left in the
world than the notion of the divinity itself. And those who wished
to appear wise, went in their disputatious so far, that, their
hearts being darkened, they became fools," (Rom. i. 21-22,) and
denied, or pretended not to know, those things which their poets,
and the commonalty, and even their own consciences, held to be
universally known, most certain, and most true.
Sect. 12.
- I OBSERVE further, not only how true these things are (concerning
which I shall speak more at large hereafter out of the Scriptures)
but also how religious, pious, and necessary it is to know them; for
if these things be not known there can be neither faith, nor any
worship of God: nay, not to know them, is to be in reality ignorant
of God, with which ignorance salvation, it is well known, cannot
consist. For if you doubt, or disdain to know that God foreknows and
wills all things, not contingently, but necessarily and immutably,
how can you believe confidently, trust to, and depend upon His
promises? For when He promises, it is necessary that you should be
certain that He knows, is able, and willing to perform what He
promises; otherwise, you will neither hold Him true nor faithful;
which is unbelief, the greatest of wickedness, and a denying of the
Most High God!
And how
can you be certain and secure, unless you are persuaded that He
knows and wills certainly, infallibly, immutably, and necessarily,
and will perform what He promises? Nor ought we to be certain only
that God wills necessarily and immutably, and will perform, but also
to glory in the same; as Paul, (Rom. iii. 4,) "Let God be true, but
every man a liar." And again, "For the word of God is not without
effect." (Rom. ix. 6.) And in another place, "The foundation of God
standeth sure, having this seal, the Lord knoweth them that are
His." (2 Tim. ii. 19.) And, "Which God, that cannot lie, promised
before the world began." (Titus i. 2.) And, "He that cometh, must
believe that God is, and that He is a rewarder of them that hope in
Him." (Heb. xi. 6.)
If,
therefore, we are taught, and if we believe, that we ought not to
know the necessary prescience of God, and the necessity of the
things that are to take place, Christian faith is utterly destroyed,
and the promises of God and the whole Gospel entirely fall to the
ground; for the greatest and only consolation of Christians in their
adversities, is the knowing that God lies not, but does all things
immutably, and that His will cannot be resisted, changed, or
hindered.
Sect. 13.
- Do you now, then, only observe, friend Erasmus, to what that most
moderate, and most peace-loving theology of yours would lead us. You
call us off, and forbid our endeavoring to know the prescience of
God, and the necessity that lies on men and things, and counsel us
to leave such things, and to avoid and disregard them; and in so
doing, you at the same time teach us your rash sentiments; that we
should seek after an ignorance of God, (which comes upon us of its
own accord, and is engendered in us), disregard faith, leave the
promises of God, and account the consolations of the Spirit and the
assurances of conscience, nothing at all! Such counsel scarcely any
Epicure himself would give!
Moreover,
not content with this, you call him who should desire to know such
things, irreligious, curious, and vain; but him who should disregard
them, religious, pious, and sober. What else do these words imply,
than that Christians are irreligious, curious, and vain? And that
Christianity is a thing of nought, vain, foolish, and plainly
impious? Here again, therefore, while you wish by all means to deter
us from temerity, running, as fools always do, directly into the
contrary, you teach nothing but the greatest temerity, impiety, and
perdition. Do you not see, then, that in this part, your book is so
impious, blasphemous, and sacrilegious, that its like is not any
where to be found.
I do not,
as I have observed before, speak of your heart; nor can I think that
you are so lost, that from your heart, you wish these things to be
taught and practiced. But I would shew you what enormities that man
must be compelled unknowingly to broach, who undertakes to support a
bad cause. And moreover, what it is to run against divine things and
truths, when, in mere compliance with others and against our own
conscience, we assume a strange character and act upon a strange
stage. It is neither a game nor a jest, to undertake to teach the
sacred truths and godliness: for it is very easy here to meet with
that fall which James speaks of, "he that offendeth in one point is
guilty of all." (James ii. 10.) For when we begin to be, in the
least degree, disposed to trifle, and not to hold the sacred truths
in due reverence, we are soon involved in impieties, and overwhelmed
with blasphemies: as it has happened to you here, Erasmus - May the
Lord pardon, and have mercy upon you!
That the
Sophists have given birth to such numbers of reasoning questions
upon these subjects, and have intermingled with them many
unprofitable things, many of which you mention, I know and confess,
as well as you: and I have inveighed against them much more than you
have. But you act with imprudence and rashness, when you liken the
purity of the sacred truths unto the profane and foolish questions
of the impious, and mingle and confound it with them. "They have
defiled the gold with dung, and changed the good color," (Lam. iv.
1., as Jeremiah saith.) But the gold is not to be compared unto, and
cast away with the dung; as you do it. The gold must be wrested from
them, and the pure Scripture separated from their dregs and filth;
which it has ever been my aim to do, that the divine truths may be
looked upon in one light, and the trifles of these men in another.
But it ought not to be considered of any service to us, that nothing
has been effected by these questions, but their causing us to favor
them less with the whole current of our approbation, if,
nevertheless, we still desire to be wiser than we ought. The
question with us is not how much the Sophists have effected by their
reasonings, but how we may become good men, and Christians. Nor
ought you to impute it to the Christian doctrine that the impious do
evil. That is nothing to the purpose: you may speak of that
somewhere else, and spare your paper here.
Sect. 14.
- UNDER your third head, you attempt to make us some of those very
modest and quiet Epicureans. With a different kind of advice indeed,
but no better than that, with which the two forementioned
particulars are brought forward:- "Some things (you say) are of that
nature, that, although they are true in themselves, and might be
known, yet it would not be prudent to prostitute them to the ears of
every one." -
Here
again, according to your custom, you mingle and confound every
thing, to bring the sacred things down to a level with the profane,
without making any distinction whatever: again falling into the
contempt of, and doing an injury to God. As I have said before,
those things which are either found in the sacred Writings, or may
be proved by them, are not only plain, but wholesome; and therefore
may be, nay, ought to be, spread abroad, learnt, and known. So that
your saying, that they ought not to be prostituted to the ears of
every one, is false: if, that is, you speak of those things which
are in the Scripture: but if you speak of any other things, they are
nothing to me, and nothing to the purpose: you lose time and paper
in saying any thing about them.
Moreover,
you know that I agree not with the Sophists in any thing: you may
therefore spare me, and not bring me in at all as connected with
their abuse of the truth. You had, in this book of yours, to speak
against me. I know where the Sophists are wrong, nor do I want you
for my instructor, and they have been sufficiently inveighed against
by me: this, therefore, I wish to be observed once for all, whenever
you shall bring me in with the Sophists, and disparage my side of
the subject by their madness. For you do me an injury; and that you
know very well.
Sect. 15.
- NOW let us see your reasons for giving this advice - 'you think,
that, although it may be true, that God, from His nature, is in a
beetle's hole, or even in a sink, (which you have too much holy
reverence to say yourself, and blame the Sophists for talking in
such a way) no less than in Heaven, yet it would be unreasonable to
discuss such a subject before the multitude.' -
First of
all, let them talk thus, who can talk thus. We do not here argue
concerning what are facts in men, but concerning justice and law:
not that we may live, but that we may live as we ought. Who among us
lives and acts rightly? But justice and the doctrine of law are not
therefore condemned: but rather they condemn us. You fetch from afar
these irrelevant things, and scrape together many such from all
quarters, because you cannot get over this one point, the prescience
of God: and since you cannot overthrow it in any way, you want, in
the mean time, to tire out the reader with a multiplicity of empty
observation. But of this, no more. Let us return to the point.
What then
is your intention, in observing that there are some things which
ought not to be spoken of openly? Do you mean to enumerate the
subject of "Free-will" among those things? If you do, the whole that
I have just said concerning the necessity of knowing what
"Free-will" is, will turn round upon you. Moreover, if so, why do
you not keep to your own principles, and have nothing to do with
your Diatribe? But, if you do well in discussing "Free-will," why do
you speak against such discussion? and if it is a bad subject, why
do you make it worse? But if you do not enumerate it among those
things, then, you leave your subject-point; and like an orator of
words only, talk about those irrelevant things that have nothing to
do with the subject.
Sect. 16.
- NOR are you right in the use of this example; nor in condemning
the discussion of this subject before the multitude, as useless -
that God is in a beetle's hole and even in a sink! For your thoughts
concerning God are too human. I confess indeed, that there are
certain fantastical preachers, who, not from any religion, or fear
of God, but from a desire of vain-glory, or from a thirst after some
novelty, or from impatience of silence, prate and trifle in the
lightest manner. But such please neither God nor men, although they
assert that God is in the Heaven of Heavens. But when there are
grave and pious preachers, who teach in modest, pure, and sound
words; they, without any danger, nay, unto much profit, speak on
such a subject before the multitude.
Is it not
the duty of us all to teach, that the Son of God was in the womb of
the Virgin, and proceeded forth from her belly? And in what does the
human belly differ from any other unclean place? Who, moreover, may
not describe it in filthy and shameless terms? But such persons we
justly condemn; because, there are numberless pure words, in which
we speak of that necessary subject, even with decency and grace. The
body also of Christ Himself was human, like ours. Than which body,
what is more filthy? But shall we, therefore, not say what Paul
saith, that God dwelt in it bodily? (Col. ii. 9.) What is more
unclean than death? What more horrible than hell? Yet the prophet
glorieth that God was with him in death, and left him not, in hell.
(Ps. xvi 10, Ps. cxxxix. 8.)
The pious
mind, therefore, is not shocked at hearing that God was in death and
in hell: each of which is more horrible, and more loathsome, than
either a hole or a sink. Nay, since the Scripture testifies that God
is every where, and fills all things, such a mind, not only says
that He is in those places, but will, of necessity learn and know
that He is there. Unless we are to suppose that if I should at any
time be taken and cast into a prison or a sink, (which has happened
to many saints,) I could not there call upon God, or believe that He
was present with me, until I should come into some ornamented
church. If you teach us that we are thus to trifle concerning God,
and if you are thus offended at the places of His essential
presence, by and by you will not even allow that He dwells with us
in Heaven. Whereas, "the Heaven of Heavens cannot contain Him," (1
Kings viii. 27.); or, they are not worthy. But, as I said before,
you, according to your custom, thus maliciously point your sting at
our cause, that you may disparage and render if hateful, because you
find it stands against you insuperable, and invincible.
Sect. 17.
- IN the example concerning confession and satisfaction, it is
wonderful to observe with what dexterous prudence you proceed.
Throughout the whole, according to your custom, you move along on
the tiptoe of caution, lest you should seem, neither plainly to
condemn my sentiments nor to oppose the tyranny of the Popes: a path
which you found to be by no means safe. Therefore, throwing off, in
this matter, both God and conscience, (for what are these things to
Erasmus? What has he to do with them? What profit are they to him?)
you rush upon the external bugbear, and attack the commonalty.
- 'That
they, from their depravity, abuse the preaching of a free confession
and of satisfaction, to an occasion of the flesh. But, nevertheless,
(you say) by the necessity of confessing, they are, in a measure,
restrained.' -
O
memorable and excellent speech! Is this teaching theology? To bind
souls by laws, and, (as Ezekiel saith, xiii. 18,) to hunt them to
death, which are not bound by God! Why, by this speech you bring
upon us the universal tyranny of the laws of the Popes, as useful
and wholesome; because, that by them also the depravity of the
commonalty is restrained.
But I
will not inveigh against this place as it deserves. I will descant
upon it thus briefly - A good theologian teaches, that the
commonalty are to be restrained by the external power of the sword,
where they do evil: as Paul teaches. (Rom. xiii. 1-4.) But their
consciences are not to be fettered by false laws, that they might be
tormented with sins where God wills there should be no sins at all.
For consciences are bound by the law of God only. So that, that
intermediate tyranny of Popes, which falsely terrifies and murders
the souls within, and vainly wearies the bodies without is to be
taken entirely out of the way. Because, although it binds to
confession and other things, outwardly, yet the mind is not, by
these things restrained, but exasperated the more into the hatred
both of God and men. And in vain does it butcher the body by
external things, making nothing but hypocrites. - So that tyrants,
with laws of this kind, are nothing else but ravening wolves,
robbers, and plunderers of souls. And yet you, an excellent
counselor of souls, recommend these to us again: that is, you are an
advocate for these most barbarous soul-murderers, who fill the world
with hypocrites, and with such as blaspheme God and hate Him in
their hearts, in order that they may restrain them a little from
outward sin. As though there were no other way of restraining, which
makes no hypocrites, and is wrought without any destroying of
consciences.
Sect. 18.
- HERE you produce similitudes (in which you aim at appearing to
abound, and to use very appropriately); that is, - 'that there are
diseases, which may be borne with less evil than they can be cured:
as the leprosy, &c.' You add, moreover, the example of Paul, who
makes a distinction between those things that are lawful, and those
that are not expedient. "It is lawful (you say) to speak the truth;
but, before every one, at all times, and in every way, it is not
expedient." -
How
copious an orator! And yet you understand nothing of what you are
saying. In a word, you treat this discussion, as though it were some
matter between you and me only, about the recovering of some money
that was at stake, or some other trivial thing, the loss of which,
as being of much less consideration than the general peace of the
community, ought not so to concern any one, but that he may yield,
act and suffer upon the occasion, in any way that may prevent the
necessity of the whole world being thrown into a tumult. Wherein,
you plainly evince, that this peace and tranquillity of the flesh,
are, with you, a matter of far greater consideration than faith,
than conscience, than salvation, than the Word of God, than the
glory of Christ, than God Himself! Wherefore, let me tell you this;
and I entreat you to let it sink deep into your mind - I am, in this
discussion, seeking an object solemn and essential; nay, such, and
so great, that it ought to be maintained and defended through death
itself; and that, although the whole world should not only be thrown
into tumult and set in arms thereby, but even if it should be hurled
into chaos and reduced to nothing. - If you cannot receive this, or
if you are not affected by it, do you mind your own business, and
allow us to receive it and to be affected by it, to whom it is given
of God.
For, by
the grace of God, I am not so great a fool or madman, as to have
desired to sustain and defend this cause so long, with so much
fortitude and so much firmness, (which you call obstinacy) in the
face of so many dangers of my life, so much hatred, so many traps
laid for me; in a word, in the face of the fury of men and devils -
I have not done this for money, for that I neither have nor desire;
nor for vain-glory, for that, if I wished, I could not obtain in a
world so enraged against me, nor for the life for my body, for that
cannot be made sure of for an hour. - Do you think, then, that you
only have a heart that is moved by these tumults? Yet, I am not made
of stone, nor was I born from the Marpesian rocks. But since it
cannot be otherwise, I choose rather to be battered in temporal
tumult, happy in the grace of God, for God's word's sake, which is
to be maintained with a mind incorrupt and invincible, than to be
ground to powder in eternal tumult, under the wrath of God and
torments intolerable! May Christ grant, what I desire and hope, that
your heart may not be such - but certainly your words imply, that,
with Epicurus, you consider the Word of God and a future life, to be
mere fables. For, in your instructions, you would have us, for the
sake of the Popes, the heads, and the peace of the community, to put
off, upon an occasion, and depart from the all-certain word of God:
whereas, if we put off that, we put off God, faith, salvation and
all Christianity together. How far different from this is the
instruction of Christ: that, we should rather despise the whole
world!
Sect. 19.
- BUT you say these things, because you either do not read or do not
observe, that such is most constantly the case with the word of God,
that because of it, the world is thrown into tumult. And that Christ
openly declares: "I came not (says He) to send peace but a sword."
(Matt. x. 34.) And in Luke, "I came to send fire upon the earth."
(Luke xii. 49.) And Paul, (2 Cor. vi. 5,) "In tumults," &c. And the
Prophet, in the Second Psalm, abundantly testifies the same:
declaring, that the nations are in tumult, the people roaring, the
kings rising up, and the princes conspiring against the Lord and
against His Christ. As though He had said, multitude, height,
wealth, power, wisdom, righteousness, and whatever is great in the
world, sets itself against the word of God.
Look into
the Acts of the Apostles, and see what happened in the world on
account of the word of Paul only (to say nothing of the other
apostles): how he alone throws both the Gentiles and Jews into
commotion: or, as the enemies themselves express it, "turns the
world upside down." (Acts xvii. 6.) Under Elijah, the kingdom of
Israel was thrown into commotion: as king Ahab complains. (1 Kings
xviii. 17.) What tumult was there under the other prophets, while
they are all either killed at once or stoned to death; while Israel
is taken captive into Assyria, and Judah also to Babylon! Was all
this peace? The world and its god (2 Cor. iv. 4,) cannot and will
not bear the Word of the true God: and the true God cannot and will
not keep silence. While, therefore, these two Gods are at war with
each other, what can there be else in the whole world, but tumult?
Therefore, to wish to silence these tumults, is nothing else, than
to wish to hinder the Word of God, and to take it out of the way.
For the Word of God, wherever it comes, comes to change and to renew
the world. And even heathen writers testify, that changes of things
cannot take place, without commotion and tumult, nor even without
blood. It therefore belongs to Christians, to expect and endure
these things, with a stayed mind: as Christ says, "When ye shall
hear of wars and rumours of wars, be not dismayed, for these things
must first come to pass, but the end is not yet." (Matt. xxiv. 6.)
And as to myself, if I did not see these tumults, I should say the
Word of God was not in the world. But now, when I do see them, I
rejoice from my heart, and fear them not: being surely persuaded,
that the kingdom of the Pope, with all his followers, will fall to
the ground: for it is especially against this, that the word of God,
which now runs, is directed.
I see
indeed, my friend Erasmus, that you complain in many books of these
tumults, and of the loss of peace and concord; and you attempt many
means whereby to afford a remedy, and (as I am inclined to believe)
with a good intention. But this gouty foot laughs at your doctoring
hands. For here, in truth, as you say, you sail against the tide;
nay, you put out fire with straw. Cease from complaining, cease from
doctoring; this tumult proceeds, and is carried on, from above, and
will not cease until it shall make all the adversaries of the word
as the dirt of the streets. Though I am sorry that I find it
necessary to teach you, so great a theologian, these things, like a
disciple, when you ought to be a teacher of others.
Your
excellent sentiment, then, that some diseases may be borne with less
evil than they can be cured applies here: which sentiment you do not
appositely use. Rather call these tumults, commotions,
perturbations, seditions, discords, wars, and all other things of
the same kind with which the world is shaken and tossed to and fro
on account of the Word of God, - the diseases. These things, I say,
as they are temporal, are borne with less evil than inveterate and
evil habits; by which all souls must be destroyed if they be not
changed by the word of God: which being taken away, eternal good,
God, Christ, and the Spirit, must be taken away with it.
But how
much better is it to lose the whole world, than to lose God the
Creator of the world, who can create innumerable worlds again, and
is better than infinite worlds? For what are temporal things when
compared with eternal? This leprosy of temporal things, therefore,
is rather to be borne, than that every soul should be destroyed and
eternally damned, and the world kept in peace, and preserved from
these tumults, by their blood and perdition: whereas, one soul
cannot be redeemed with the price of the whole world!
You
certainly have command of elegant and excellent similitudes, and
sentiments: but, when you are engaged in sacred discussions, you
apply them childishly, nay, pervertedly: for you crawl upon the
ground, and enter in thought into nothing above what is human.
Whereas, those things which God works, are neither puerile, civil,
nor human, but divine; and they exceed human capacity. Thus, you do
not see, that these tumults and divisions increase throughout the
world, according to the counsel, and by the operation of God; and
therefore, you fear lest heaven should tumble about our ears. But I,
by the grace of God, see these things clearly; because, I see other
tumults greater than these that will arise in the age to come in
comparison of which, these appear but as the whispering of a breath
of air, or the murmuring of a gentle brook.
Sect. 20.
- BUT, the doctrine concerning the liberty of confession and
satisfaction, you either deny, or know not that there is the Word of
God. - And here arises another inquiry. But we know, and are
persuaded, that there is a Word of God, in which the Christian
liberty is asserted, that we might not suffer ourselves to be
ensnared into bondage by human traditions and laws. This I have
abundantly shewn elsewhere. But if you wish to enter the lists, I am
prepared to discuss the point with you, and to fight it out. Though
upon these subjects I have books extant not a few.
But, -
"the laws of the Popes (you say,) may at the same time be borne with
and observed, in charity; if perchance thus, eternal salvation by
the word of God, and the peace of the world, may together consist,
without tumult." -
I have
said before, that cannot be. The prince of this world will not allow
the Pope and his high priests, and their laws to be observed in
liberty, but his design is, to entangle and bind consciences. This
the true God will not bear. Therefore, the Word of God, and the
traditions of men, are opposed to each other with implacable
discord; no less so, than God Himself and Satan; who each destroy
the works and overthrow the doctrines of the other, as regal kings
each destroying the kingdom of the other. "He that is not with Me (saith
Christ) is against Me." (Luke xi. 23.)
And as to
- "a fear that many who are depravedly inclined, will abuse this
liberty" -
This must
be considered among those tumults, as a part of that temporal
leprosy which is to be borne, and of that evil which is to be
endured. But these are not to be considered of so much consequence,
as that, for the sake of restraining their abuse, the word of God
should be taken out of the way. For if all cannot be saved, yet some
are saved; for whose sake the word of God is sent; and these, on
that account, love it the more fervently, and assent to it the more
solemnly. For, what evils did not impious men commit before, when
there was no word? Nay, what good did they do? Was not the world
always drowned in war, fraud, violence, discord, and every kind of
iniquity? For if Micah (vii. 4) compares the best among them to a
thorn hedge, what do you suppose he would call the rest?
But now
the Gospel is come, men begin to impute unto it, that the world is
evil. Whereas, the truth is, that by the good Gospel, it is more
manifest how evil it was, while, without the Gospel, it did all its
works in darkness. Thus also the illiterate attribute it to
learning, that, by its flourishing, their ignorance becomes known.
This is the return we make for the word of life and salvation! - And
what fear must we suppose there was among the Jews, when the Gospel
freed all from the law of Moses? What occasion did not this great
liberty seem to give to evil men? But yet, the Gospel was not, on
that account, taken away; but the impious were left, and it was
preached to the pious, that they might not use their liberty to an
occasion of the flesh. (Gal. v. 13.)
Sect. 21.
- NOR is this part of your advice, or your remedy, to any purpose,
where you say - "It is lawful to speak the truth but it is not
expedient, either before every one, or at all times, or in every
manner." And ridiculously enough, you adduce Paul, where he says,
"All things are lawful for me, but all things are not expedient." -
(1 Cor. vi. 12.)
But Paul
does not there speak of teaching doctrine or the truth; as you would
confound his words, and twist them which way you please. On the
contrary, he will have the truth spoken every where, at all times,
and in every manner. So that he even rejoices that Christ is
preached even through envy and strife. Nay, he declares in plain
words, that he rejoices, let Christ be preached in any way. (Phil. i.
15-18.)
Paul is
speaking of facts, and the use of doctrine: that is, of those, who,
seeking their own, had no consideration of the hurt and offence
given to the weak. Truth and doctrine, are to be preached always,
openly, and firmly, and are never to be dissembled or concealed; for
there is no offence in them; they are the staff of uprightness. -
And who gave you the power, or committed to you, the right, of
confining the Christian doctrine to persons, places, times, and
causes, when Christ wills it to be proclaimed, and to reign freely,
throughout the world? For Paul saith, "the Word of God is not
bound," (2 Tim. ii. 9,) but Erasmus bounds the word. Nor did God
give us the word that it should be had with respect of places,
persons, or times: for Christ saith, "Go ye out into the whole
world,": He does not say, as Erasmus does, - go to this place and
not to that. Again, "Preach the Gospel to every creature." (Mark
xvi. 15.) He does not say - preach it to some and not to others. In
a word, you enjoin, in the administration of the word of God, a
respect of persons, a respect of places, a respect of customs, and a
respect of times: whereas, the one and especial part of the glory of
the word consists in this, - that, as Paul saith, there is, with it,
no respect of persons; and that God is no respecter of persons. You
see therefore, again, how rashly you run against the Word of God, as
though you preferred far before it, your own counsel and
cogitations.
Hence, if
we should demand of you that you would determine for us, the times
in which, the persons to whom, and the manner in which, the truth is
to be spoken, when would you come to an end? The world would sooner
compute the termination of time and its own end, than you would
settle upon any one certain rule. In the meantime, where would
remain the duty of teaching? Where that of teaching the soul? And
how could you, who know nothing of the nature of persons, times, and
manner, determine upon any rule at all? And even if you should know
them perfectly, yet you could not know the hearts of men. Unless,
with you, the manner, the time, and the person be this: - teaching
the truth so, that the Pope be not indignant, Caesar be not enraged,
and that many be not offended and made worse! But what kind of
counsel this is, you have seen above. - I have thus rhetorically
figured away in these vain words, lest you should appear to have
said nothing at all.
How much
better is it for us wretched men to ascribe unto God, who knoweth
the hearts of all men, the glory of determining the manner in which,
the persons to whom, and the times in which the truth is to be
spoken. For He knows what is to be spoken to each, and when, and how
it is to be spoken. He then, determines that His Gospel which is
necessary unto all, should be confined to no place, no time; but
that it should be preached unto all, at all times and in all places.
And I have already proved, that those things which are handed down
to us in the Scriptures, are such, that they are quite plain and
wholesome, and of necessity to be proclaimed abroad; even as you
yourself determined in your Paraclesis was right to be done; and
that, with much more wisdom than you advise now. But let those who
would not that souls should be redeemed, such as the Pope and his
adherents - let it be left to them to bind the Word of God, and
hinder men from life and the kingdom of heaven, that they might
neither enter in themselves nor suffer others to enter: - to whose
fury you, Erasmus, by this advice of yours, are perniciously
subservient.
Sect. 22.
- OF the same stamp with this, is that prudence of yours also, with
which you next give it as your advice - 'that, if any thing were
settled upon, in the councils, that was wrong, it ought not to be
openly confessed: lest, a handle should be thereby afforded, for
contemning the authority of the fathers.' -
This,
indeed, is just what the Pope wished you to say! And he hears it
with greater pleasure than the Gospel itself, and will be a most
ungrateful wretch, if he do not honor you in return, with a
cardinal's cap together with all the revenues belonging to it. But
in the mean time, friend Erasmus, what will the souls do that shall
be bound and murdered by that iniquitous statute? Is that nothing to
you? But however, you always think, or pretend to think, that human
statutes can be observed together with the Word of God, without
peril. If they could, I would at once go over to this your
sentiment.
But if
you are yet in ignorance, I tell you again, that human statutes
cannot be observed together with the Word of God: because, the
former bind consciences, the latter looses them. They are directly
opposed to each other, as water to fire. Unless, indeed, they could
be observed in liberty; that is, not to bind the conscience. But
this the Pope wills not, nor can he will it, unless he wishes his
kingdom to be destroyed and brought to an end: for that stands only
in ensnaring and binding those consciences, which the Gospel
pronounces free. The authority of the fathers, therefore, is to be
accounted nought: and those statutes which have been wrongly
enacted, (as all have been that are not according to the Word of
God) are to be rent in sunder and cast away: for Christ is better
than the authority of the fathers. In a word, if it be concerning
the Word of God that you think thus, you think impiously; if it be
concerning other things, your verbose disputing about your sentiment
is nothing to me: I am disputing concerning the Word of God!
Sect. 23.
- IN the last part of your Preface, where you deter us from this
kind of doctrine, you think your victory is almost gained.
"What
(you say) can be more useless than that this paradox should be
proclaimed openly to the world - that whatever is done by us, is not
done by Free-will, but from mere necessity. And that of Augustine
also - that God works in us both good and evil: that He rewards His
good works in us, and punishes His evil works in us." (You are
mightily copious here in giving, or rather, in expostulating
concerning a reason.) "What a flood-gate of iniquity (you say) would
these things, publicly proclaimed, open unto men! What bad man would
amend his life! Who would believe that he was loved of God! Who
would war against his flesh!"
I wonder,
that in so great vehemency, and contending zeal, you did not
remember our main subject, and say - where then would be found
"Free-will."
My
friend, Erasmus! here, again, I also say, if you consider that these
paradoxes are the inventions of men, why do you contend against
them? Why are you so enraged? Against whom do you rail? Is there any
man in the world, at this day, who has inveighed more vehemently
against the doctrines of men, than Luther! This admonition of yours,
therefore, is nothing to me! But if you believe that those paradoxes
are the words of God, where is your countenance, where is your
shame, where is, I will not say your modesty, but that fear of, and
that reverence which is due to the true God, when you say, that
nothing is more useless to be proclaimed than that Word of God!
What! shall your Creator, come to learn of you His creature, what is
useful, and what not useful to be preached? What! did that foolish
and unwise God, know not what is necessary to be taught, until you
His instructor prescribed to Him the measure, according to which He
should be wise, and according to which He should command? What! did
He not know before you told Him, that that which you infer would be
the consequence of this His paradox? If, therefore, God willed that
such things should be spoken of and proclaimed abroad, without
regarding what would follow, - who art thou that forbiddest it?
The
apostle Paul, in his Epistle to the Romans, discourses on these same
things, not "in a corner," but in public and before the whole world,
and that with a freely open mouth, nay in the harshest terms,
saying, "whom He will He hardeneth." (Rom. ix. 18.) And again, "God,
willing to shew forth His wrath," &c. (Rom ix. 22.) What is more
severe, that is to the flesh, than that word of Christ "Many are
called but few chosen?" (Matt. xxii. 14.) And again, "I know whom I
have chosen?" (John xiii. 18.) According to your judgment then, all
these things are such, that nothing can be more uselessly spoken;
because that by these things, impious men may fall into desperation,
hatred, and blasphemy.
Here
then, I see, you suppose that the truth and the utility of the
Scripture are to be weighed and judged of according to the opinion
of men, nay, of men the most impious; so that, what pleases them or
seems bearable, should be deemed true, divine, and wholesome: and
what has the contrary effect upon them, should at once be deemed
useless, false, and pernicious. What else do you mean by all this,
than that the words of God should depend on, stand on, and fall by,
the will and authority of men? Whereas the Scripture, on the
contrary saith, that all things stand and fall by the will and
authority of God: and in a word, that "all the earth keeps silence
before the face of the Lord." (Hab. ii. 20.) He who could talk as
you do, must imagine that the living God is nothing but a kind of
trifling and inconsiderate pettifogger declaiming on a certain
rostrum, whose words you may if you be disposed, interpret,
understand, and refute as you please, because He merely spoke as He
saw a set of impious men to be moved and affected.
Here you
plainly discover how much your advice above, - 'that the majesty of
the judgments of God should be reverenced,' - was from your heart!
There, when we were speaking of the doctrines of the Scripture only,
where there was no need of reverencing things abstruse and hidden,
because there were no such doctrines, you awed us, in the most
religious terms, with the darkness of the Corycian cavern, lest we
should rush forward with too much curiosity; so that, by the awe,
you well nigh frightened us from reading the Scriptures altogether;
(to the reading of which Christ and His apostles urge and persuade
us, as well as you do yourself elsewhere.) But here, where we are
come not to the doctrines of the Scripture, nor to the Corycian
cavern only, but to the very, and greatly to be reverenced secrets
of the divine Majesty, viz., why He works thus? - here, as they say,
you burst open all bars and rush in; all but, openly blaspheming!
What indignation against God do you not discover, because you cannot
see His reason why, and His design in this His counsel! Why do you
not here frame, as an excuse, obscurity and ambiguity? Why do you
not restrain yourself, and deter others from prying into these
things which God wills should be hidden from us, and which He has
not delivered to us in the Scriptures? It is here the hand is to be
laid upon the mouth, it is here we are to reverence what lies
hidden, to adore the secret counsels of the divine Majesty, and to
exclaim with Paul, "Who art thou, O man, that contendest with God?"
(Rom. ix. 20.)
Sect. 24.
- "WHO (you say) will endeavour to amend his life?" - I answer, No
man! no man can! For your self-amenders without the Spirit, God
regardeth not, for they are hypocrites. But the Elect, and those
that fear God, will be amended by the Holy Spirit; the rest will
perish unamended. Nor does Augustine say, that the works of none ,
nor that the works of all are crowned, but the works of some.
Therefore, there will be some, who shall amend their lives.
"Who will
believe (you say) that he is loved of God? "- I answer, no man will
believe it! No man can! But the Elect shall believe it; the rest
shall perish without believing it, filled with indignation and
blaspheming, as you here describe them. Therefore, there will be
some who shall believe it.
And as to
your saying that - "by these doctrines the flood-gate of iniquity is
thrown open unto men" - be it so. They pertain to that leprosy of
evil to be borne, spoken of before. Nevertheless, by the same
doctrines, there is thrown open to the Elect and to them that fear
God, a gate unto righteousness, - an entrance into heaven - a way
unto God! But if, according to your advice, we should refrain from
these doctrines, and should hide from men this Word of God, so that
each, deluded by a false persuasion of salvation, should never learn
to fear God, and should never be humbled, in order that through this
fear he might come to grace and love; then, indeed, we should shut
up your flood-gate to purpose! For in the room of it, we should
throw open to ourselves and to all, wide gates, nay, yawning chasms
and sweeping tides, not only unto iniquity, but unto the depths of
hell! Thus, we should not enter into Heaven ourselves, and them that
were entering in we should hinder.
- "What
utility therefore (you say) is there in, or necessity for
proclaiming such things openly, when so many evils seem likely to
proceed there from?" -
I answer.
It were enough to say - God has willed that they should be
proclaimed openly: but the reason of the divine will is not to be
inquired into, but simply to be adored, and the glory to be given
unto God: who, since He alone is just and wise, doth evil to no one,
and can do nothing rashly or inconsiderately, although it may appear
far otherwise unto us. With this answer those that fear God are
content. But that, from the abundance of answering matter which I
have, I may say a little more than this, which might suffice; -
there are two causes which require such things to be preached. The
first is, the humbling of our pride, and the knowledge of the grace
of God. The second is, Christian faith itself.
First,
God has promised certainly His grace to the humbled: that is, to the
self-deploring and despairing. But a man cannot be thoroughly
humbled, until he comes to know that his salvation is utterly beyond
his own powers, counsel, endeavors, will, and works, and absolutely
depending on the will, counsel, pleasure, and work of another, that
is, of God only. For if, as long as he has any persuasion that he
can do even the least thing himself towards his own salvation, he
retain a confidence in himself and do not utterly despair in
himself, so long he is not humbled before God; but he proposes to
himself some place, some time, or some work, whereby he may at
length attain unto salvation. But he who hesitates not to depend
wholly upon the good-will of God, he totally despairs in himself,
chooses nothing for himself, but waits for God to work in him; and
such an one, is the nearest unto grace, that he might be saved.
These
things, therefore, are openly proclaimed for the sake of the Elect:
that, being by these means humbled and brought down to nothing, they
might be saved. The rest resist this humiliation; nay, they condemn
the teaching of self desperation; they wish to have left a little
something that they may do themselves. These secretly remain proud,
and adversaries to the grace of God. This, I say, is one reason -
that those who fear God, being humbled, might know, call upon, and
receive the grace of God.
The other
reason is - that faith is, in things not seen. Therefore, that there
might be room for faith, it is necessary that all those things which
are believed should be hidden. But they are not hidden more deeply,
than under the contrary of sight, sense, and experience. Thus, when
God makes alive, He does it by killing; when He justifies, He does
it by bringing in guilty: when He exalts to Heaven, He does it by
bringing down to hell: as the Scripture saith, "The Lord killeth and
maketh alive, He bringeth down to the grave and raiseth up, " (I
Sam. ii. 6.); concerning which, there is no need that I should here
speak more at large, for those who read my writings, are well
acquainted with these things. Thus He conceals His eternal mercy and
loving-kindness behind His eternal wrath: His righteousness, behind
apparent iniquity.
This is
the highest degree of faith - to believe that He is merciful, who
saves so few and damns so many; to believe Him just, who according
to His own will, makes us necessarily damnable, that He may seem, as
Erasmus says, 'to delight in the torments of the miserable, and to
be an object of hatred rather than of love.' If, therefore, I could
by any means comprehend how that same God can be merciful and just,
who carries the appearance of so much wrath and iniquity, there
would be no need of faith. But now, since that cannot be
comprehended, there is room for exercising faith, while such things
are preached and openly proclaimed: in the same manner as, while God
kills, the faith of life is exercised in death. Suffice it to have
said thus much upon your PREFACE.
In this
way, we shall more rightly consult for the benefit of those who
dispute upon these paradoxes, than according to your way: whereby,
you wish to indulge their impiety by silence, and a refraining from
saying any thing: which is to no profit whatever. For if you
believe, or even suppose these things to be true, (seeing they are
paradoxes of no small moment,) such is the insatiable desire of
mortals to search into secret things, and the more so the more we
desire to keep them secret, that, by this admonition of yours, you
will absolutely make them public; for all will now much more desire
to know whether these paradoxes be true or not: thus they will, by
your contending zeal, be so roused to inquiry, that not one of us
ever afforded such a handle for making them known, as you yourself
have done by this over-religious and zealous admonition. You would
have acted much more prudently, had you said nothing at all about
being cautious in mentioning these paradoxes, if you wished to see
your desire accomplished. But, since you do not directly deny that
they are true, your aim is frustrated: they cannot be concealed:
for, by their appearance of truth, they will draw all men to search
into them. Therefore, either deny that they are true altogether, or
else hold your own tongue first, if you wish others to hold theirs.
Sect. 25.
- AS to the other paradox you mention, - that, 'whatever is done by
us, is not done by Free-will, but from mere necessity' -
Let us
briefly consider this, lest we should suffer any thing most
perniciously spoken, to pass by unnoticed. Here then, I observe,
that if it be proved that our salvation is apart from our own
strength and counsel, and depends on the working of God alone,
(which I hope I shall clearly prove hereafter, in the course of this
discussion,) does it not evidently follow, that when God is not
present with us to work in us, every thing that we do is evil, and
that we of necessity do those things which are of no avail unto
salvation? For if it is not we ourselves, but God only, that works
salvation in us, it must follow, whether or no, that we do nothing
unto salvation before the working of God in us.
But, by
necessity, I do not mean compulsion; but (as they term it) the
necessity of immutability, not of compulsion; that is, a man void of
the Spirit of God, does not evil against his will as by violence, or
as if he were taken by the neck and forced to it, in the same way as
a thief or cut-throat is dragged to punishment against his will; but
he does it spontaneously, and with a desirous willingness. And this
willingness and desire of doing evil he cannot, by his own power,
leave off, restrain, or change; but it goes on still desiring and
craving. And even if he should be compelled by force to do any thing
outwardly to the contrary, yet the craving will within remains
averse to, and rises in indignation against that which forces or
resists it. But it would not rise in indignation, if it were
changed, and made willing to yield to a constraining power. This is
what we mean by the necessity of immutability:- that the will cannot
change itself, nor give itself another bent; but rather the more it
is resisted, the more it is irritated to crave; as is manifest from
its indignation. This would not be the case if it were free, or had
a "Free-will." Ask experience, how hardened against all persuasion
they are, whose inclinations are fixed upon any one thing. For if
they yield at all, they yield through force, or through something
attended with greater advantage; they never yield willingly. And if
their inclinations be not thus fixed, they let all things pass and
go on just as they will.
But
again, on the other hand, when God works in us, the will, being
changed and sweetly breathed on by the Spirit of God, desires and
acts, not from compulsion, but responsively, from pure willingness,
inclination, and accord; so that it cannot be turned another way by
any thing contrary, nor be compelled or overcome even by the gates
of hell; but it still goes on to desire, crave after, and love that
which is good; even as before, it desired, craved after, and loved
that which was evil. This, again, experience proves. How invincible
and unshaken are holy men, when, by violence and other oppressions,
they are only compelled and irritated the more to crave after good!
Even as fire, is rather fanned into flames than extinguished, by the
wind. So that neither is there here any willingness, or "Free-will,"
to turn itself into another direction, or to desire any thing else,
while the influence of the Spirit and grace of God remain in the
man.
In a
word, if we be under the god of this world, without the operation
and Spirit of God, we are led captives by him at his will, as Paul
saith. (2 Tim. ii. 26.) So that, we cannot will any thing but that
which he wills. For he is that "strong man armed," who so keepeth
his palace, that those whom he holds captive are kept in peace, that
they might not cause any motion or feeling against him; otherwise,
the kingdom of Satan, being divided against itself, could not stand;
whereas, Christ affirms it does stand. And all this we do willingly
and desiringly, according to the nature of will : for if it were
forced, it would be no longer will . For compulsion is (so to speak)
unwillingness. But if the "stronger than he" come and overcome him,
and take us as His spoils, then, through the Spirit, we are His
servants and captives (which is the royal liberty) that we may
desire and do, willingly, what He wills.
Thus the
human will is, as it were, a beast between the two. If God sit
thereon, it wills and goes where God will: as the Psalm saith, "I am
become as it were a beast before thee, and I am continually with
thee." (Ps. lxxiii. 22-23.) If Satan sit thereon, it wills and goes
as Satan will. Nor is it in the power of its own will to choose, to
which rider it will run, nor which it will seek; but the riders
themselves contend, which shall have and hold it.
Sect. 26.
- AND now, what if I prove from your own words, on which you assert
the freedom of the will, that there is no such thing as "Free-Will"
at all! What if I should make it manifest that you unknowingly deny
that, which, with so much policy, you labor to affirm. And if I do
not this, actually, I vow that I will consider all that I advance in
this book against you, revoked; and all that your Diatribe advances
against me, and aims at establishing, confirmed.
You make
the power of "Free-will" to be - 'that certain small degree of
power, which, without the grace of God, is utterly ineffective.'
Do you
not acknowledge this? - Now then, I ask and demand of you, if the
grace of God be wanting, or, if it be taken away from that certain
small degree of power, what can it do of itself? 'It is ineffective
(you say) and can do nothing of good.' Therefore, it cannot do what
God or His grace wills. And why? because we have now separated the
grace of God from it; and what the grace of God does not, is not
good. And hence it follows, that "Free-will," without the grace of
God is, absolutely, not FREE; but, immutably, the servant and
bond-slave of evil; because, it cannot turn itself unto good. This
being determined, I will allow you to make the power of "Free-
will," not only a certain small degree of power, but to make it
evangelical if you will, or, if you can, to make it divine: provided
that, you add to it this doleful appendage - that, without the grace
of God, it is ineffective. Because, then you will at once take from
it all power: for, what is ineffective power, but plainly, no power
at all?
Therefore, to say, that the will is FREE, and that it has indeed
power, but that it is ineffective, is what the sophists call 'a
direct contrariety.' As if one should say, "Free-will" is that which
is not free. Or as if one should term fire cold, and earth hot. For
if fire had the power of heat, yea of the heat of hell, yet, if it
did not burn or scorch, but were cold and produced cold, I should
not call it fire, much less should I term it hot; unless, indeed,
you were to mean an imaginary fire, or a fire represented in a
picture. - But if we call the power of "Free-will" that, by which a
man is fitted to be caught by the Spirit, or to be touched by the
grace of God, as one created unto eternal life or eternal death, may
be said to be; this power, that is, fitness, or, (as the Sophists
term it) 'disposition-quality,' and 'passive aptitude,' this I also
confess. And who does not know, that this is not in trees or beasts?
For, (as they say) Heaven was not made for geese.
Therefore, it stands confirmed, even by your own testimony, that we
do all things from necessity, not from "Free-will:" seeing that, the
power of "Free-will" is nothing, and neither does, nor can do good,
without grace. Unless you wish efficacy to bear a new signification,
and to be understood as meaning perfection: that is, that
"Free-will" can, indeed, will and begin, but cannot perfect: which I
do not believe: and upon this I shall speak more at large hereafter.
It now
then follows, that Free-will is plainly a divine term, and can be
applicable to none but the divine Majesty only: for He alone "doth,
(as the Psalm sings) what He will in Heaven and earth." (Ps. cxxxv.
6.) Whereas, if it be ascribed unto men, it is not more properly
ascribed, than the divinity of God Himself would be ascribed unto
them: which would be the greatest of all sacrilege. Wherefore, it
becomes Theologians to refrain from the use of this term altogether,
whenever they wish to speak of human ability, and to leave it to be
applied to God only. And moreover, to take this same term out of the
mouths and speech of men; and thus to assert, as it were, for their
God, that which belongs to His own sacred and holy Name.
But if
they must, whether or no, give some power to men, let them teach,
that it is to be called by some other term than Free-will";
especially since we know and clearly see, that the people are
miserably deceived and seduced by that term, taking and
understanding it to signify something far different from that which
Theologians mean and understand by it, in their discussions. For the
term, "Free-will," is by far too grand, copious, and full: by which,
the people imagine is signified (as the force and nature of the term
requires) that power, which can freely turn itself as it will, and
such a power as is under the influence of, and subject to no one.
Whereas, if they knew that it was quite otherwise, and that by that
term scarcely the least spark or degree of power was signified, and
that, utterly ineffective of itself, being the servant and
bond-slave of the devil, it would not be at all surprising if they
should stone us as mockers and deceivers, who said one thing and
meant something quite different; nay, who left it uncertain and
unintelligible what we meant. For "he who speaks sophistically (the
wise man saith) is hated," and especially if he does so in things
pertaining to godliness, where eternal salvation is at stake.
Since,
therefore, we have lost the signification of so grand a term and the
thing signified by it, or rather, never had them at all, (which the
Pelagians may heartily wish had been the case, being themselves
illuded by this term,) why do we so tenaciously hold an empty word,
to the peril and mockery of the believing people? There is no more
wisdom in so doing, than there is in kings and potentates retaining,
or claiming and boasting of, empty titles of kingdoms and countries,
when they are at the same time mere beggars, and any thing but the
possessors of those kingdoms and countries. But however, this is
bearable, since they deceive and mock no one thereby, but only feed
themselves on vanity without any profit. But here, is a peril of
salvation, and the most destructive mockery.
Who would
not laugh at, or rather hold up to hatred, that most untimely
innovator of terms, who, contrary to all established use, should
attempt to introduce such a mode of speaking, as by the term
'beggar,' to have understood, 'wealthy;' not because such an one has
any wealth himself, but because some king may, perchance, give him
his wealth? And what if such an one should really do this, not by
any figure of speech, as by periphrasis or irony, but in plain
serious meaning? In the same way, speaking of one 'sick unto death,'
he may wish to be understood as meaning, one in 'perfect health:'
giving this as his reason, because the one may give the other his
health. So also, he may, by 'illiterate idiot,' mean 'most learned;'
because some other may perchance give him his learning. Of precisely
the same nature is this:- man has a "Free-will:" for this reason, if
perchance God should give him His. By this abuse of the manner of
speaking, any one may boast that he has any thing: that He is the
Lord of heaven and earth - if perchance God should give this unto
him. But this is not the way in which Theologians should proceed,
this is the way of stage-players and public informers. Our words
ought to be proper words, pure and sober; and, as Paul saith, "sound
speech that cannot be condemned." (Titus ii. 7-8.)
But, if
we do not like to leave out this term altogether, (which would be
most safe, and also most religious) we may, nevertheless, with a
good conscience teach, that it be used so far as to allow man a
"Free-will," not in respect of those which are above him, but in
respect only of those things which are below him: that is, he may be
allowed to know, that he has, as to his goods and possessions the
right of using, acting, and omitting, according to his "Free-will;"
although, at the same time, that same "Free-will" is overruled by
the Free- will of God alone, just as He pleases: but that, God-ward,
or in things which pertain unto salvation or damnation, he has no
"Free-will," but is a captive, slave, and servant, either to the
will of God, or to the will of Satan.
Sect. 27.
- THESE observations have I made upon the heads of your PREFACE,
which, indeed, themselves, may more properly be said to embrace the
whole subject, than the following body of the book. But however, the
whole of these observations in reply, might have been summed up and
made in this one short compendious answer to you. - Your Preface
complains, either of the Words of God, or of the word of men. If of
the words of men, the whole is written in vain; if of the Words of
God, the whole is impious. Wherefore, it would have saved much
trouble, if it had been plainly mentioned, whether we were disputing
concerning the Words of God, or the words of men. But this, perhaps,
will be handled in the EXORDIUM which follows, or in the body of the
discussion itself.
But the
hints which you have thrown together in the conclusion of your
Preface, have no weight whatever.
Such as,
your calling my doctrines 'fables, and useless:' and saying, 'that
Christ crucified should rather be preached, after the example of
Paul: that wisdom is to be taught among them that are perfect that
the language of Scripture is tempered to the various capacities of
hearers: and your therefore thinking, that it should be left to the
prudence and charity of the teacher, to teach that which may be
profitable to his neighbor
All this
you advance senselessly, and away from the purpose. For rather do we
teach anything but Christ crucified. But Christ crucified, brings
all these things along with Himself, and that 'wisdom also among
them that are perfect:' for there is no other wisdom to be taught
among Christians, than that which is 'hidden in a mystery:' and this
belongs to the 'perfect,' and not to the sons of the Jewish and
legal generation, who, without faith, glory in their works, as Paul,
1 Cor. ii., seems to think! Unless by preaching Christ crucified,
you mean nothing else but calling out these words - Christ is
crucified!
And as to
your observing - 'that, God is represented as being angry, in a
fury, hating, grieving, pitying, repenting, neither of which,
nevertheless, ever takes place in Him' -
This is
only purposely stumbling on plain ground. For these things neither
render the Scriptures obscure, nor necessary to be tempered to the
various capacities of hearers. Except that, many like to make
obscurities where there are none. For these things are no more than
grammatical particulars, and certain figures of speech, with which
even school-boys are acquainted. But we, in this disputation, are
contending, not about grammatical figures, but about doctrines of
truth.
Note for Sect. 11. - It is important to observe that the Doctrine of
Predestination, or of God's Decree, is a doctrine very different in
comparison to the doctrine of Fate held by many of the Pagan
Philosophers and Luther's Necessity of Immutability is not to be
confused with the Absolute Necessity which they imposed upon their
own God or gods. In this century, an infamous hyper-calvinist
theologian has propounded a new doctrine of divine necessity
implying not only that things decreed are thereby made necessary but
also that it was necessary for God to decree certain events, thus
imposing a necessity upon God, not unlike the Fate of the Ancients.
Such dreamers have need to learn again that the Decree is an
internal & immanent act of God, both Absolute and Free - otherwise,
something else is God.
Back to TOC-> |