To the extent possible under law, the Text Creation Partnership has waived all copyright and related or neighboring rights to this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above, according to the terms of the CC0 1.0 Public Domain Dedication (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/). This waiver does not extend to any page images or other supplementary files associated with this work, which may be protected by copyright or other license restrictions. Please go to http://www.textcreationpartnership.org/ for more information.
OƲR Religion is our Faith; Faith either saves or con∣demns; justly ought we there∣fore to be able to understand and prove our Faith.
But now there ariseth a great doubt to me, and other of the simpler sort of Christians, Whether it be possible for us to have an infallible certainty of our Faith out of the holy Scriptures,
and so consequently to rely on and trust to this faith, as to an unshaken foundation?
The reason of our doubting is this, Both Papists and Calvinists holding contrary opinions, do maintain and prove by the holy Scriptures (as they suppose) the contrary to that which the Lutherans hold; seriously affirm∣ing, that in the Scriptures the Luthe∣ran Religion is condemned, and theirs confirmed. Which thing no man will deny to be an evident Argument of the obscurity of the holy Scriptures. If there be two Physicians of equall learning, and of the same intent in cu∣ring the sick, that is, alike desirous to cure the disease, and if these Physi∣cians should out of one and the same Book gather, the one that a Fever is cured with wine, and the other, that wine is as bad as poyson to them that have the Fever, how, I pray, shall we know which of these two to take part withall? A man can gather nothing, but that the remedy for that disease is
obscurely expressed in that Book.
Some may object, The Sects doe not follow the Scriptures onely, but they add their traditions; the Calvinists add their reason, the Anabaptists their dreams.
I answer: They do so, in those things which are not cleerly taught in the holy Scriptures, but in the contro∣versies between them and Lutherans, they proceed not so, but by Scriptures they fight against Lutheran Tenents, which are confirmed by the Scriptures, and indeavour by the help of the Scriptures to sight for, and defend their own, which the Lutherans by Scriptures doe condemn. Nay more, there are some (viz. the Anabaptists) that urge the Scriptures in the very Letter more than the rest. The Cal∣vinists use their reason, and out of the Scriptures draw Arguments, which thing the Lutherans also doe, never suffering any of theirs to reason a∣gainst the Scriptures.
2. If it be objected unto them, that
they wilfully, and against their con∣sciences doe condemn the Lutheran Tenents, and confirm their own: They will answer, That this were a very grievous sin, and that men ought not to presume that they would falsifie and corrupt the Letters and Commands of their Lord to his sons and subjects, much less that they do maliciously erre and lead themselves and others into the danger of their salvation; and to say the truth, it is not likely that so many hundred thousands of men would come to that pitch of malice, though one should, especially seeing they dare confirm their honest meaning with an Oath; wherefore unless they be convinced of maliciously-wilfull error, we shall seem injuriously to slan∣der them.
3. It may be objected, Perhaps they be fore-stalled with preconceived opinions. I answer. How? You will say they accustom themselves from their cradles to their own Religion, forsaking the Bible and other Books.
I answer. This is true in Popery, but not in Calvinists, and others which urge the Bible more than we do. These have more freedom than we have to the other Religions. Do not the chil∣dren of the Lutherans also inure themselves to their Religion from their childhood? Do they learn a Po∣pish or Calvinisticall Catechism, be∣fore they have learned a Lutheran one? Is not that a mans Religion to which he accustoms himself? How doth a child or a Lay-man, that hath been taught no Religion, know what is Lutheranism, or Calvinism? Doth he not take that Religion which is first offered to him? Besides, no fore-con∣ceited Opinion is so fast rooted, but that it will give place to clear demon∣strations, which is confessed among all. Therefore we shall never be able to confute any Religion with the Obje∣ction of fore-conceived opinions.
What shall I say more? Doe other Religions want civill learning? There are found amongst them sufficiently
learned and ingenious men, and of∣tentimes they have much better and fitter means for the advancement of Learning, than the Lutherans have; especially the Papists, who make choice of the best wits, whom they imploy in a manner from their cradles to their full age in nothing else but study, me∣ditation, and continuall exercises, and do abundantly supply them with all things which serve or seem to serve for their furthering and forwarding, and with all care and diligence do re∣move and take away whatsoever cau∣seth, or seems to cause any hindrance of their course. They study the Scrip∣tures and Fathers night and day, and refuse no labour in learning the foun∣dation of their own Religion, and in knowing and understanding the Er∣rors of others. Nay, the method and manner of learning, of compa∣ring the Scriptures, of interpreting according to the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 of Faith, of bringing no sense to the Scriptures, and such other rules, cannot be un∣known to them.
Obj. But perhaps God hath not granted them his Spirit and this grace.
I answer: God being sought unto and solicited by prayers, denies to no man his grace and Spirit of Truth. Now men of other Religions crave of God the inlightning of their minde and direction in a right way, no less than our selves, nay (as far as we can discern) perhaps with a greater fer∣vency and zeal, neither are we to think that they ask it out of hypocri∣sie and with dissimulation, and that so they would mock God. Therefore it is to be taken for granted, that the Spirit is where the fruits of the Spi∣rit are found, of which none ought to boast above others. Nay more, the knowlege of understanding the Scrip∣tures is a peculiar gift of the Spirit, which is granted no less to others than to us. It is true indeed that he onely understands the Scriptures, which hath the Spirit that dictated them; and (as it is in worldly Laws)
no Doctors interpretation or deciding doth justifie, till the Law-giver ap∣prove that deciding. Yet he that boast∣eth of such approbation of the Spirit is bound to shew it, unless he will be counted but an ordinary Doctor.
Obj. If any should here object, that the Scriptures themselves bear witness of their own cleerness, ac∣cording to that, Thy Word is a Lanthorn to my feet, &c. and you have a more sure Word, &c.
I answer: All the Commands of God are his Word, and so are all his Works which are through his Word; for it is confessed by all, that God sets forth his Word by Nature, the Crea∣ture, Signs, Wonders, beneath, above, and by infinite wayes; also the Scrip∣tures witness that many things nei∣ther are nor can be written. There∣fore the VVord of his Voice is taken diversly in the Scriptures, and so by consequence, all that is called Gods Word is not necessarily to be under∣stood of the Scriptures. Hereunto
add, that at that time many parts of Scripture were not yet written; wherefore the evidence of the thing manifestly proveth, that this is not spoken of the whole Argument and Letter of the Scripture, for as much as the Figures of the Prophecy of the Apocalyps, and infinite other things belonging to the fulfilling of those Prophecies, were hidden from the Pro∣phets themselves, and the Fathers, (much more then from others) and are yet hidden. Christ himself speaks in parables, to the end that men may hear with their ears and not under∣stand. The Scripture it self in very many places witnesseth that the Word of God is secret, obscure, hidden, and discovered onely to the Spirit, or to the Godly onely, to whom God reveals it, so that in the Scriptures there are more testimonies of their obscuritie, than of their clearness; yet is not the Scripture hereby either rejected, or slighted. For even before the Law was given and written, men had a
certain light, by the help whereof they might (if they would) have found out the truth more clearly than we; and although in the New Testament a great light be risen, yet must we not think that in the Old Testament there was a meer blindness. Whence we may rea∣son, that God thought it not usefull for us to reveal all things to us, but though all things perhaps be not ne∣cessary to be known, yet nevertheless there may be had a certain and infal∣lible way of interpreting, by the help whereof the most, and most necessary Controversies may be decided; of which if triall be made, a cleer light and meer harmony may be shown, in such Scriptures, as according to the o∣pinion of many, are obscure. It is pos∣sible also, that there should be not a few other wayes of illustrating that which is obscure, although this ill tri∣ed way be not used alone, for there may both be admitted and used, agree∣ments coming from the same Spirit and word, sometimes where there is no demonstration.
Nor am I moved with that Objecti∣on, that it is enough for the Luthe∣rans, that they are assured of the truth of Lutheranism, though others can∣not see and believe it. For this is not that which I would have. I en∣quire, how a man may be sure not of his own opinion, but of the truth: Now if I believe and determine that such a thing is true, this is my opinion, yet is it not therefore the truth, seeing truth and opinion have nothing in them alike. A stedfast perswasion changeth not the essence of the thing whereof a man is perswaded. For then might melancholick persons, whose opinion is unmovable, work miracles, and make all their conceits essentiall. The nature of true knowledge is this, to be demonstrable, not to me, or some men, but to all, and to win a consent from any man, as two and three makes five. A thing controverted, and which some understand one way, some another, can never make me certain and free from doubt, whether I have
the truth or no; and he that knowes no other than what he determines may be excused of malice and hypocrisie. But this reasoning, I and my follow∣er are sure of this thing, therefore it is true, is unreasonable reasoning.
Lastly, If we build our Religion onely upon the Scripture, the learned shall have a great Prerogative above the unlearned in the matter of Faith and Religion, and shall be more inga∣ged in thankefulness to God than they; and so Religion shall favour and cleave to good wits. Also many have their senses exercised in the Scrip∣ture, or are more inventive and inge∣nious than others; therefore if a man could by disputing and reasoning confute some Thesis, and as it were take away a mans opinion from him, and become Conqueror, he should al∣so take away his Religion, and the other should be constrained either to take up this Conquerors Religion, or against his conscience to keep his own.
Nor will that Answer serve the turn, Our Divines and Pastors can answer you, though I cannot: for then should I believe with another mans saith; but faith must bee mine, not another mans, else should salvation also be another mans. If Religion be the service of God, sure∣ly it is necessary that I understand that service which I must perform to my Lord. Seeing God will not reckon another mans service for mine, and cannot be served by a Substitute, it remains that wee conclude, Controversies are to be left to learned men, and are not so very necessary. It may be an∣swered, Then also Religion is to be left to learned men; for Con∣troversies are our very Religion, for (saving the consideration of them) there is no difference, but Papists are Protestants, and Pro∣testants are Papists; look how much a man knowes of Controver∣sies,
so much doth he know of his own Religion. The state of a mans salvation is such as is his Religi∣on and his Faith: Now there is but one salvation, nor but one faith. But if Controversies belong to the learned onely, wherefore have the Lay-men indured so many afflicti∣ons, distresses, nay and death it self, for those Controversies sake?
I know indeed that a Calvinist Doctor, one Doctor Bergius, a Prea∣cher at Bremen, affirms in his late published Sermons, that Contro∣vrsies are not meerly necessary to salvation; That the Scripture is plain and clear in those things which are necessary to salvation, and that there was never any contrariety between the Religions themselves. At which also the Leipsich-Collation between the Lutherans and Calvinists seems to aim.
This I am perswaded is very true, that had the Holy Ghost judged
those Controverted Questions neces∣sary to salvation, it would have expressed and propounded them in the holy Scripture clearly and plain∣ly, seeing those Epistles were sent to simple and Lay-men especially. Nor doth it seem likely to be true, that ever there were so many Arti∣cles of Faith drawn out of them as are now to be read in the Cate∣chisms, Common-places, and Com∣pends of Divines. As yet there is no certain number of them deter∣mined, seeing some Divines have propounded more, and some fewer; and some Religions have in process of time, either added or abated whole Articles, and after many mi∣series indured for the defence of some of them, entring a way of mo∣deration, they have determined that for tolerable and indifferent, which before they thought damnable. But howsoever, there are so many of them, that a man may deservedly call in
question the precise necessity of them. And this seems the best Solution to disintangle and appease perplexed, doubtfull, and erring Consciences.
But could so many thousand Di∣vines of former Ages be ignorant of this? Have there not so many Wars been undertaken for this cause? Could those learned men suf∣fer so many thousands of men to run headlong, both by doing and suffering, into the hazard of body and soul for Religions sake? and so many un∣speable mischiefs to arise, whenas it is possible for a man to be saved with∣out the Controversies of Religion? But if this be the command of God under pain of temporall and ever∣lasting punishment, to fight for those Controversies, how can we excuse those shuffling agreements of Faith, Religion, and Gods Worship? A Servant may not abate any thing of his Lords due.
Let this thing be considered, seeing
it is so intricate, and leads me and many others into disquiet of minde; for which perplexities of Conscience, none will deny that a remedy is to be sought at the hands of those that have Christian fellow-feeling, and might be found if all the Divines of those sides that have left Popery, would vouchsafe to afford me a wise, milde, and solid Answer in writing, not sa∣vouring of partiality, prejudice, or passion.