Answer to Book by Romish Priests, Doctrine 5
V. Next he makes us affirm: That a man by his own underſtanding, or private ſpirit, may rightly judge and interpret Scripture.
Anſwer.
THere is no ſuch crude ſaying as this among us: But that which we affirm is, That a man may, in the faithful uſe of ſuch means as God hath appointed, rightly underſtand the Holy Scripture, ſo far as is neceſſary for his Salvation. Who ſhould underſtand or judge for him, but his own underſtanding, we can no more underſtand, than who ſhould ſee for him but his own eyes, if he have any, and be not blind.
And what is there to be found in our Bibles expreſly againſt this? The firſt place is far from expreſs; for the gift of Prophecying doth not to every one expreſly ſignifie the interpreting of Scripture;1 Cor. XII. 8. it having manifeſtly another ſignification in ſome places, viz. Inditing Hymns. Beſides, if this place were pertinent, forbidding all to interpret Scripture, but only ſuch as have the Gift of Prophecy; their Church muſt not meddle with that work, for they have not that Gift, no more than thoſe that follow, diſcerning of Spirits, divers kinds of Tongues, &c.
His ſecond place is as impertinent,2 Pet. 1.20, 21. for it doth not ſpeak at all of interpreting the Scripture, but of the Prophetical Scripture it ſelf. Which was not of private interpretation; that is, the proper invention of them that Prophecied; for the Prophetical Oracles were given forth, not at the will and pleaſure of man, but the Holy Prophets when they laid open ſecret things, or foretold future, were acted by the Spirit of God, and ſpake thoſe things which were ſuggeſted by Him. Theſe are the words of Menochius; which are ſufficient to ſhow the groſs ſtupidity of this mans Gloſſes; who babbles here about a company of men, and thoſe very holy, who are to do he knows not what; which private and prophane men cannot do. As if all private men were prophane, and all companies of men were holy. The Lord help them, who follow ſuch Guides as theſe.
The third place,1 Joh. IV. 1. if it ſay any thing to this purpoſe, is expreſly againſt him. For it is a direction to every Chriſtian, not to be of too haſty belief. But to try the Spirits, that is, Doctrines which pretended to be from the Spirit of God. Now how ſhould Chriſtians try or examine them, but by uſing their own underſtandings, to diſcern between pretended inſpirations and true. If they muſt let others judge for them, they croſs the Apoſtle's Doctrine; for they do not try, but truſt. To tell us, that their Church is infallible, and therefore ought to judg for us; is a pretence that muſt alſo be tried, above all things elſe; and in which every man's particular judgment muſt be ſatisfied, or elſe he cannot with reaſon believe it. And to believe it without reaſon, is to be a fool: Nor doth the Apoſtle leave thoſe to whom he writes, without a plain rule whereby to judge of Spirits; but lays down theſe two in the following words: 1. If any man denied Jeſus Chriſt to come in the fleſh, he was a deceiver, v. 2. And, 2ly, if any man rejected the Apoſtles, and would not hear …hem, he was not to be received himſelf, v. 6. Hereby know we the ſpirit of truth, and the ſpirit of error. This makes it plain, the Apoſtle did not leave them then, without means of judging aright, as he hath not left us now, who are to try all things by the Doctrine of Chriſt and of his Apoſtles.
What this man means by the ſpirit of the whole Church, which cannot be tried by particular men, is paſt my underſtanding; and I believe he did not underſtand it himſelf, but uſed it as a big phraſe, to amuſe poor people withal. Who may eaſily underſtand that St. John ſpeaks of particular perſons, or of the Doctrines vented by certain perſons, who pretended to be inſpired; whom every particular Chriſtian was bound to examine and try by this mark, whether they contradicted what the Apoſtles taught; which was ſufficient, if they did, to diſcover them to be Impoſtors.
His Fathers he only names, and therefor they ſignifie nothing to common Readers; for whoſe ſake I write this confutation of his folly. Which makes him bring in Luther, as ſaying the ſame that he doth; that is, giving him the lye; who accuſes Proteſtants of affirming that, which the very chief of them (according to him) denies. But whether Luther ſay as he makes him, or in what ſenſe, I am not able to affirm, for I cannot find the words.