Part 24 (1/2)
Would to God this hly threshed out and decided, so that counsel iven in the infinite perils of those ithout any fault of their own, are nowadays compelled to remain unmarried, that is, of those whose wives or husbands have run away and deserted them, to come back perhaps after ten years, perhaps never
This matter troubles and distresses me; I meet cases of it every day, whether it happen by the special lect of the word of God
I, indeed, who, alone against all, can decide nothing in this e in I Corinthians vii to be applied here,--”But if the unbeliever depart, let him depart For a brother or sister is not under servitude in such cases” [1 Cor 7:15]
Here the Apostle gives permission to put away the unbeliever who departs and to set the believing spouse free to ain Why should not the same hold true when a believer--that is, a believer in name, but in truth as much an unbeliever as the one Paul speaks of--deserts his wife, especially if he never intends to return? I certainly can see no difference between the two But I believe that if in the Apostle's day an unbelieving deserter had returned and had beco wife, he would not have been taken back, but he too would have been given the right to , as I have said,”[165] although there is nothing I would rather see decided, since nothing at present rievously perplexesdecided here on the mere authority of the pope or the bishops; but if two learned and pious reed in the name of Christ and published their opinion in the spirit of Christ [Matt 18:19 f], I should prefer their judgment even to such councils as are nowadays assembled, famous only for numbers and authority, not for scholarshi+p and saintliness
Herewith I hang up my harp[166][Ps 137:2], until another and a better man shall take up this matter with me
ORDINATION
Of this sacra; it is an invention of the church of the pope Not only is there nowhere any prorace attached to it, but there is not the least mention of it in the whole New Testament Now it is ridiculous to put forth as a sacrament of God that which cannot be proved to have been instituted by God I do not hold that this rite, which has been observed for so s I aht to give out as divinely instituted as not divinely instituted, lest we becoht to see to it that every article of faith of which we boast be certain, pure, and based on clear passages of Scripture But that we are utterly unable to do in the case of the sacrament under consideration
[Sidenote: The Church Cannot Institute Sacraments]
The Church has no power to make new divine promises, as some prate, who hold that what is decreed by the Church is of no less authority than what is decreed by God, since the Church is under the guidance of the Holy Spirit But the Church owes its life to the word of proh faith, and is nourished and preserved by this same word That is to say, the promises of God make the Church, not the Church the promise of God For the Word of God is incomparably superior to the Church, and in this Word the Church, being a creature, has nothing to decree, ordain or ets his own parent? Who first brings forth his own uish the Word of God froustine confesses that he believed the Gospel, moved thereto by the authority of the Church, which proclaimed, this is the Gospel[167] Not that the Church is, therefore, above the Gospel; if that were true, she would also be above God, in Whom we believe because she proclaiustine elsewhere says,[168] the truth itself lays hold on the soul and thus renders it able to judge e, but is forced to say with unerring certainty that it is the truth For exa certainty that three and seven are ten, and yet it cannot give a reason why this is true, although it cannot deny that it is true; it is taken captive by the truth and does not so ed by the truth Thus it is also with the htenes and approves doctrines; she is unable to prove it, and yet is es general conceptions, but all are judged by them, so it is in the Church with the ed by none, as the Apostle says [1 Cor 2:15] But of this another time[169]
[Sidenote: Ordination not a Sacraive no prorace; that is the work of God alone Therefore she cannot institute a sacrament But even if she could, it yet would not follow that ordination is a sacrament For who knohich is the Church that has the Spirit? since when such decisions are made there are usually only a few bishops or scholars present; it is possible that these may not be really of the Church, and that all may err, as councils have repeatedly erred, particularly the Council of Constance[170], which fell into the most wicked error of all Only that which has the approval of the Church universal, and not of the Roman church alone, rests on a trustworthy foundation I therefore admit that ordination is a certain churchly rite, on a par with many others introduced by the Church Fathers, such as the blessing of vases, houses, vestments, water, salt, candles, herbs, wine, and the like No one calls any of these a sacrament, nor is there in them any promise In the same manner, to anoint a man's hands with oil, or to shave his head, and the like, is not to adiven to those things; he is simply prepared, like a vessel or an instrument, for a certain work
But you will reply: ”What do you say to Dionysius,[171] who in his _Ecclesiastical Hierarchy_ enu which he also includes orders?” I answer: I am well aware that this is the one writer of antiquity who is cited in support of the seven sacrae and thus has only six We read si about these ”sacraments” in the other Fathers, nor do they ever refer to them as sacraments; for the invention of sacraments is of recent date Indeed, to speak reat store by this Dionysius, whoever he reatly displeases me, for there is scarce a line of sound scholarshi+p in him Prithee, by what authority and hat reasons does he establish his hotch-potch about the angels, in his _Celestial Hierarchy_?--a book over which eled their brains If one were to read and judge fairly, is not all shaken out of his sleeve and very like a dreanorant theologians greatly puff, he is downright dangerous, being more of a Platonist than a Christian; so that, if I had ive the least attention to these books So far fro Christ in them, you will lose even what you know of Him I knohereof I speak Let us rather hear Paul, that we may learn Jesus Christ and Him crucified [1 Cor 2:2] He is the way, the life and the truth; He is the ladder by which we come unto the Father, as He saith: ”No man cometh unto the Father but by ories]
And in the _Ecclesiastical Hierarchy_, what does this Dionysius do but describe certain churchly rites and play round the us the author of the book entitled _Rationale divinoruorical studies are the work of idle ories round anything in creation? Did not Bonaventure[173]
by allegory draw the liberal arts into theology? And Gerson even converted the sian[173] It would not be a difficult task for me to compose a better hierarchy than that of Dionysius, for he knew nothing of pope, cardinals and archbishops, and put the bishop at the top Nay, who has so weak a ories? I would not have a theologian give hirammatical and literal interpretation of the Scriptures; otherwise his theology will bring hien discovered[175]
Therefore a thing does not need to be a sacrament simply because Dionysius describes it Otherwise, why not also make a sacrament of the processions, which he describes in his book, and which continue to this day? There will then be as many sacraments as there have been rites and cere on so unsteady a foundation, they have nevertheless invented ”characters”[176] which they attribute to this sacrament of theirs and which are indelibly impressed on those who are ordained Whence do such ideas come? By what authority, hat reasons, are they established? We do not object to their being free to invent, say and give out whatever they please; but we also insist on our liberty and deht to turn their ideas into articles of faith, as they have hitherto presuh that we accommodate ourselves to their rites and ceremonies for the sake of peace; but we reuse to be bound by such things as though they were necessary to salvation, when they are not Let them put by their despotic demands, and we shall yield free obedience to their opinions, and thus live at peace with them It is a shameful and wicked slavery for a Christian man, who is free, to be subject to any but heavenly and divine traditions
[Sidenote: The Alleged Scriptural Basis of Ordination]
We coument It is this: Christ said at the Last Supper: ”Do this in remembrance of me” [1 Cor 11:24] Here, they say, Christ ordained the apostles to the priesthood Fros, that both kinds are to be administered to the priests alone[177] In fine, they have drawn out of this passage whatever they pleased, as ate to the whatever from any words of Christ, nothe words of God? Pray, answer ives us no promise here, but only commands that this be done in remembrance of Him Why do they not conclude that He also ordained priests when He laid upon the, ”Go ye into all the world, and preach the Gospel to every creature, baptising them in the name,”
[Mark 16:15; Matt 28:19] etc? For it is the proper duty of priests to preach and to baptise Or, since it is nowadays the chief and, as they say, indispensable duty of priests to read the canonical hours,[178] why have they not discovered the sacraes in which Christ, in arden, coht not enter into teuh to _read_ the canonical hours Then it follows that this priestly work can be proved nowhere in the Scriptures, and thus their praying priesthood is not of God, as, indeed, it is not
But which of the ancient Fathers claie priests were ordained? Whence coht by this device to set up a nursery of implacable discord, whereby clerics and laymen should be separated from each other farther than heaven frorace of baptism and the confusion of our fellowshi+p in the Gospel
Here, indeed, are the roots of that detestable tyranny of the clergy over the laity; trusting in the external anointing by which their hands are consecrated, in the tonsure and in vestments, they not only exalt themselves above lay Christians, who are only anointed with the Holy Spirit, but regard thes and unworthy to be included with them in the Church Hence they are bold to dee, to oppress, as much as they please In short, the sacrament of ordination has been and is aof all the horrible things that have been wrought hitherto and will yet be wrought in the Church Here Christian brotherhood has perished, here shepherds have been turned into wolves, servants into tyrants, churchs
[Sidenote: The Priesthood of All Christians]
If they were forced to grant that as many of us as have been baptised are all priests without distinction, as indeed we are, and that to them was committed the ministry only, yet with our consent, they would presently learn that they have no right to rule over us except in so far as we freely concede it For thus it is written in i Peter ii, ”Ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, and a priestly kingdom”
[1 Peter 2:9] Therefore we are all priests, as many of us as are Christians[179] But the priests, as we call the us, who do all that they do in our na but a ministry, as we learn from I Corinthians iv, ”Let a man so account of us as of the ministers of Christ, and the dispensers of the mysteries of God” [1 Cor 4:1]
It follows herefrom that whoever does not preach the Word, called by the Church to this very thing, is no priest at all And further, that the sacra else than a certain rite of choosing preachers in the Church For thus is a priest defined in Malachi ii, ”The lips of the priest shall keep knowledge, and they shall seek the law at his el of the Lord of hosts” [Mal 2:7] You el of the Lord of hosts, or whoever is called to anything else than such angelic service--if I may so term it--is never a priest; as Hosea says, ”Because thou hast rejected knowledge, I will reject thee, that thou shalt not do the office of priesthood to me” [Hosea 4:6] They are also called pastors because they are to pasture, that is, to teach Therefore, they who are ordained only to read the canonical hours and to offer masses are indeed papist, but not Christian, priests, because they not only do not preach, but are not called to preach; nay, it comes to this, that such a priesthood is a different estate altogether fro Thus they are hour-priests andthe name of priest, while they are in reality such priests as Jeroboa of the people, and not of the tribe of Levi[180][1 Kings 12:31]
Lo, whither hath the glory of the Church departed! The whole earth is filled with priests, bishops, cardinals and clerics, and yet not one of them preaches by virtue of his office, unless he be called to do so by another and a different call besides his sacra full justice to his sacra the vain repetitions of his prescribed prayers and by celebratingthose hours[181], or if he does pray the his ht of perversity!--whereas the mass consists in the use of the sacrament It is clear, therefore, that the ordination which, as a sacra but aabout the Church, the priesthood, the ministry of the Word, or the sacraments And as is the sacrament, so are the priests it makes To such errors and such blindness has come a still worse captivity; in order to separate themselves still farther from other Christians, whom they deem profane, they have unmanned themselves, like the priests of Cybele, and taken upon theh for this hypocrisy and error to forbid biga of tives at the same time, as it was forbidden in the law, and as is the accepted ains, one after the other, or if he married aNay, so holy is the holiness of this most holy sacra as his wife lives And--here we reach the very su the priesthood, ithout his knowledge or by an unfortunate chance married a fallen woman But if one have defiled a thousand harlots, or ravished countless ins, or even kept nu bishop or cardinal or pope Moreover, the Apostle's word, ”the husband of one wife,” [1 Tim 3:2] must be interpreted to iven rise to the ”incompatible benefices”[182] At the same time the pope, that munificent dispenser, may join to one man three, twenty, one hundred wives--I should say churches--if he be bribed with money or power--I should say, moved by Godly charity and constrained by the care of the churches
O pontiffs worthy of this holy sacrament of ordination! O princes, not of the catholic churches, but of the synagogues, nay, the black dens, of Satan! [Rev 2:9] I would cry out with Isaiah: ”Ye scornful men, who rule over my people that is in Jerusalem” [Isa 28:14]; and with Amos: ”Woe to you that are wealthy in Sion, and to you that have confidence in the o in with state into the house of Israel” [A upon the Church of God!
Where are there any bishops or priests who know the Gospel, not to speak of preaching it? Why then do they boast of being priests? Why do they desire to be regarded as holier and better and htier than other Christians, who are merely laymen? To read the hours--what unlearned ues, cannot do that? [1 Cor 14:23] But to _pray_ the hours--that belongs to monks, hermits, and men in private life, all of them laymen The duty of the priest is to preach, and if he does not preach he is assuch babbling priestschurches and bells? Or confir boys? Certainly not Any deacon or layman could do as much