MR BIDDLE'S PEEFACE TO HIS CATECHISM.
I HAVE often wondered and complained that there was no catechism yet extant (that I could ever see or hear of) from whence one might learn the true grounds of the Christian religion, as the same is delivered in the holy Scripture, all catechisms generally being so stuffed with the sup- posals and traditions of men that the least part of them is derived from the word of God : for when councils, convocations, and assemblies of divines, justling the sacred writers out of their place in the church, had once framed articles and confessions of faith according to their own fancies and interests, and the civil magistrate had by his authority ratified the same, all catechisms were afterward fitted to those articles and confessions, and the Scripture either wholly omitted or brought in only for a show, not one quotation amongst many being a whit to the purpose, as will soon appear to any man of judgment, who, taking into his hand the said cate- chisms, shall examine the texts alleged in them ; for if he do this diligently and impartially, he will find the Scripture and those catechisms to be at so wide a distance one from another, that he will begin to question whether the catechists gave any heed at all to what they wrote, and did not only themselves refuse to make use of their reason, but presume that their readers also would do the same. In how miserable a condition, then, as to spiritual things, must Christians generally needs be, when thus trained up, not, as the apostle adviseth, " in the nurture and admonition of the Lord," but in the supposals and traditions of men, having little or no assurance touching the reality of their religion ! which some observing, and not haAdng the happiness to light upon the truth, have quite aban- doned all piety whatsoever, thinking there is no firm ground whereon to build the same. To prevent which mischief in time to come, by bringing men to a certainty (I mean svich men as own the divine authority of the Scripture), and withal to satisfy the just and pious desires of many who would fain understand the truth of our religion, to the end they might not only be built up themselves, but also instruct their children and families in the same, I have here (according to the understanding I have gotten by continual meditation on the word of God) compiled a Scripture Catechism ; wherein I bring the reader to a sure and certain knowledge of the chiefest things pertaining both to belief and practice, whilst I myself assert nothing (as others have done before me), but only introduce the Scripture faitlv fully uttering its own assertions, which all Christians confess to be of un- doubted truth. Take heed, therefore, whosoever thou art that lightest on this book, and there readest things quite contrary to the doctrines that pass current amongst the generality of Christians (for I confess most of the things here displayed have such a tendency), that thou fall not foul upon them ; for thou canst not do so without falling foul upon the holy Scripture itself, inasmuch as all the answers throughout the whole Cate- chism are faithfully transcribed out of it and rightly applied to the ques-
56 MR biddle's preface to his catechism,
tions, as tliou thyself mayst perceive if thou make a diligent inspection into the several texts, with all their circumstances. Thou wilt perhaps here reply, that the texts which I have cited do indeed in the letter hold forth such things as are contrary to the doctrines commonly received amongst Christians, but they ought to have a mystical or figurative inter- pretation put upon them, and then both the doctrines and the texts of Scripture will suit well enough. To which I answer, that if we once take this liberty to impose our mystical or figurative interpretations on the Scripture, without express warrant of the Scripture itself, we shall have no settled belief, but be liable continually to be turned aside by any one that can invent a new mystical meaning of the Scripture, there being no certain rule to judge of such meanings as there is of the literal ones, nor is there any ei"ror, how absurd and impious soever, but may on such terras be accorded with the Scripture. All the abominable idolatries of the Papists, all the superstitious fopperies of the Turks, all the licentious opi- nions and practices of the Ranters, may by this means be not only palliated but defended by the word of God. Cei'tainly, might we of our own heads figuratively interpret the Scripture, when the letter is neither reiDugnant to our senses nor to the scope of the respective texts, nor to a greater number of plain texts to the contrary (for in such cases we must of neces- sity admit figures in the sacred volume as well as we do in profane ones, otherwise both they and it will clash with themselves or with our senses, which the Scripture itself intimates to be of infallible certainty ; see 1 John i. 1—3) ; — might we, I say, at our pleasure impose our figures and allegories on the plain words of Grod, the Scripture would in very deed be, what some blasphemously aflSrm it to be, " a nose of wax." For instance, it is frequently asserted in the Scripture that God hath a similitude or shape, hath his place in the heavens, hath also affections or ]iassions, as love, hatred, mercy, anger, and the like ; neither is any thing to the con- trary delivered there unless seemingly in certain places, which neither for number nor clearness are comparable unto those of the other side. Wliy now should I depart from the letter of the Scripture in these particulars, and boldly affirm, with the generality of Christians (or rather with the generality of such Christians only as, being conversant with the false philo- sophy that reigneth in the schools, have their understandings perverted with wrong notions), that God is without a shape, in no certain place, and incapable of affections ? Would not this be to use the Scripture like a nose of wax, and when of itself it looketh any way, to turn it aside at our pleasure ? And would not God be so far from speaking to our capacity in his word (which is the usual refuge of the adversaries when in these and the like matters concerning God they are pressed with the plain words of the Scripture), as that he would by so doing render us altogethei- incapable of finding out his meaning, whilst he spake one thing and understood the clean contrary ? Yea, Avould he not have taken the direct course to make men substitute an idol in his stead (for the adversaries hold that to con- ceive of God as having a shape, or affections, or being in a certain place, is idolatry), if he described himself in the Scripture otherwise than indeed he is, without telling us so much in plain terms, that we might not con- ceive amiss of him ? Thus we see that when sleep, Avhich plainly argueth weakness and imperfection, had been ascribed to God, Ps. xliv. 2.3, the contrary is said of him, Ps. cxxi. 4. Again, Avhen weariness had been attributed to him, Isa. i. 14, the same is exjn-essly denied of him, Isa, xl. 28. And would not God, think ye, have done the like in those fore- mentioned things, were the case the same in them as in the others ? This