115. However, because there are some people who assert and have confirmed in themselves that people could have known of the existence of God without the Word, and also of heaven and hell, as well as something of whatever else the Word teaches, and because they consequently weaken the authority and sanctity of the Word, if not by what they say, still at heart, therefore we cannot deal with them from the Word, but in accord with their rational sight. For they do not believe in the Word, but in themselves.

Inquire in accord with your rational sight and you will find that everyone has in him two faculties of life, called his intellect and his will. You will also find that the intellect is subject to the will, and not the will to the intellect. For the intellect only informs and shows the way.

Inquire further and you will find that a person’s will is his native self, that regarded in itself it is nothing but evil, and that it produces falsity in the intellect.

[2] When you discover this, you will see that of himself a person is unwilling to comprehend anything that does not accord with the native character of his will, and that it is impossible for him to do so unless he has some other impetus that causes him to see it.

Prompted by the native character of his will, a person is unwilling to comprehend anything that does not have to do with himself and the world. Anything higher than that is for him shrouded in darkness. So, for example, when he sees the sun, the moon and the stars, if by chance he were to think about their origin, he would be unable to think other than that they came into being by themselves. Could he possibly think more deeply than many of the learned in the world, who, even though they know from the Word of the creation of everything by God, still ascribe it to nature? What then would these same people have thought if they had known nothing from the Word?

[3] Do you suppose that ancient philosophers such as Aristotle, Cicero, Seneca, and others who wrote about the immortality of the soul arrived at this in the first place on their own? They did not. Rather they learned it from others by its being handed down from people who first knew about it from the Ancient Word.

Writers of natural theology do not derive anything of the kind on their own, either, but only confirm with rational arguments what they know from the church where the Word is found. There may even be some among them who confirm these things and yet do not believe them.

76. The Church Is Formed by the Word, and Its Character Is Such as Its Understanding of the Word

That the church is formed by the Word is not something to be doubted, for the Word is Divine truth itself (see nos. 1-4). The Word is the source of the church’s doctrine (nos. 50-61). And the Word makes possible a conjunction with the Lord (nos. 62-69).

But that it is an understanding of the Word that forms the church — this may be doubted, since there are people who believe they are part of the church because they possess the Word, read it or hear it from a preacher, and know something of its literal sense. But they do not know how this or that in the Word is to be understood, and some people place little value in it.

We must show here, therefore, that it is not the Word that forms the church, but people’s understanding of it, and that the character of the church is such as the understanding of the Word among the people in the church.

Confirmation of this is as follows: