The
Augsburg Confession
Philip Melanchthon (1530)
Introduction
In 1530, Charles V, Emperor of the Holy
Roman Empire, called together the princes and cities of his german territories
in a Diet at Augsburg. He sought unity among them to fend off the attacks
of Turkish armies in Eastern Austria. He called upon the Lutheran nobility
to explain their religious convictions, with the hope that the controversy
swirling around the challenge of the Reformation might be resolved. To
this end, Philip Melanchthon, a close friend of Martin Luther and a Professor
of New Testament at Wittenberg University, was called upon to draft a
common confession for the Lutheran Lords and Free Territories. The resulting
document, the Augsburg Confession was presented to the emperor on June
25, 1530.
The confession was presented to Charles
V in both Latin and German. Minor differences between the two texts exist.
Some editions published today print english translations from both. Our
texts come from an edition published in 1930s by the Lutheran Church --
Missouri Synod, under the title: Concordia Triglotta Back
to top
Preface to the
Emperor Charles V.
Most Invincible Emperor, Caesar Augustus,
Most Clement Lord: Inasmuch as Your Imperial Majesty has summoned a Diet
of the Empire here at Augsburg to deliberate concerning measures against
the Turk, that most atrocious, hereditary, and ancient enemy of the Christian
name and religion, in what way, namely, effectually to withstand his furor
and assaults by strong and lasting military provision; and then also concerning
dissensions in the matter of our holy religion and Christian Faith, that
in this matter of religion the opinions and judgments of the parties might
be heard in each other's presence; and considered and weighed among ourselves
in mutual charity, leniency, and kindness, in order that, after the removal
and correction of such things as have been treated and understood in a
different manner in the writings on either side, these matters may be
settled and brought back to one simple truth and Christian concord, that
for the future one pure and true religion may be embraced and maintained
by us, that as we all are under one Christ and do battle under Him, so
we may be able also to live in unity and concord in the one Christian
Church. Back to top
And inasmuch as we,
the undersigned Elector and Princes, with others joined with us, have
been called to the aforesaid Diet the same as the other Electors, Princes,
and Estates, in obedient compliance with the Imperial mandate, we have
promptly come to Augsburg, and -- what we do not mean to say as boasting
-- we were among the first to be here.
Accordingly, since even here at
Augsburg at the very beginning of the Diet, Your Imperial Majesty caused
to be proposed to the Electors, Princes, and other Estates of the Empire,
amongst other things, that the several Estates of the Empire, on the strength
of the Imperial edict, should set forth and submit their opinions and
judgments in the German and the Latin language, and since on the ensuing
Wednesday, answer was given to Your Imperial Majesty, after due deliberation,
that we would submit the Articles of our Confession for our side on next
Wednesday, therefore, in obedience to Your Imperial Majesty's wishes,
we offer, in this matter of religion, the Confession of our preachers
and of ourselves, showing what manner of doctrine from the Holy Scriptures
and the pure Word of God has been up to this time set forth in our lands,
dukedoms, dominions, and cities, and taught in our churches.
And if the other Electors, Princes,
and Estates. of the Empire will, according to the said Imperial proposition,
present similar writings, to wit, in Latin and German, giving their opinions
in this matter of religion, we, with the Princes and friends aforesaid,
here before Your Imperial Majesty, our most clement Lord are prepared
to confer amicably concerning all possible ways and means, in order that
we may come together, as far as this may be honorably done, and, the matter
between us on both sides being peacefully discussed without offensive
strife, the dissension, by God's help, may be done away and brought back
to one true accordant religion; for as we all are under one Christ and
do battle under Him, we ought to confess the one Christ, after the tenor
of Your Imperial Majesty's edict, and everything ought to be conducted
according to the truth of God; and this it is what, with most fervent
prayers, we entreat of God. Back to top
However, as regards the rest of
the Electors, Princes, and Estates, who constitute the other part, if
no progress should be made, nor some result be attained by this treatment
of the cause of religion after the manner in which Your Imperial Majesty
has wisely held that it should be dealt with and treated namely, by such
mutual presentation of writings and calm conferring together among ourselves,
we at least leave with you a clear testimony, that we here in no wise
are holding back from anything that could bring about Christian concord,
-- such as could be effected with God and a good conscience, -- as also
Your Imperial Majesty and, next, the other Electors and Estates of the
Empire, and all who are moved by sincere love and zeal for religion, and
who will give an impartial hearing to this matter, will graciously deign
to take notice and to understand this from this Confession of ours and
of our associates.
Your Imperial Majesty also, not
only once but often, graciously signified to the Electors Princes, and
Estates of the Empire, and at the Diet of Spires held A. D. 1526, according
to the form of Your Imperial instruction and commission given and prescribed,
caused it to be stated and publicly proclaimed that Your Majesty, in dealing
with this matter of religion, for certain reasons which were alleged in
Your Majesty's name, was not willing to decide and could not determine
anything, but that Your Majesty would diligently use Your Majesty's office
with the Roman Pontiff for the convening of a General Council. The same
matter was thus publicly set forth at greater length a year ago at the
last Diet which met at Spires. There Your Imperial Majesty, through His
Highness Ferdinand, King of Bohemia and Hungary, our friend and clement
Lord, as well as through the Orator and Imperial Commissioners caused
this, among other things, to be submitted: that Your Imperial Majesty
had taken notice of; and pondered, the resolution of Your Majesty's Representative
in the Empire, and of the President and Imperial Counselors, and the Legates
from other Estates convened at Ratisbon, concerning the calling of a Council,
and that your Imperial Majesty also judged it to be expedient to convene
a Council; and that Your Imperial Majesty did not doubt the Roman Pontiff
could be induced to hold a General Council, because the matters to be
adjusted between Your Imperial Majesty and the Roman Pontiff were nearing
agreement and Christian reconciliation; therefore Your Imperial Majesty
himself signified that he would endeavor to secure the said Chief Pontiff's
consent for convening, together with your Imperial Majesty such General
Council, to be published as soon as possible by letters that were to be
sent out. Back to top
If the outcome, therefore, should
be such that the differences between us and the other parties in the matter
of religion should not be amicably and in charity settled, then here,
before Your Imperial Majesty we make the offer in all obedience, in addition
to what we have already done, that we will all appear and defend our cause
in such a general, free Christian Council, for the convening of which
there has always been accordant action and agreement of votes in all the
Imperial Diets held during Your Majesty's reign, on the part of the Electors,
Princes, and other Estates of the Empire. To the assembly of this General
Council, and at the same time to Your Imperial Majesty, we have, even
before this, in due manner and form of law, addressed ourselves and made
appeal in this matter, by far the greatest and gravest. To this appeal,
both to Your Imperial Majesty and to a Council, we still adhere; neither
do we intend nor would it be possible for us, to relinquish it by this
or any other document, unless the matter between us and the other side,
according to the tenor of the latest Imperial citation should be amicably
and charitably settled, allayed, and brought to Christian concord; and
regarding this we even here solemnly and publicly testify. Contents
Article
I: Of God. Our Churches, with common consent,
do teach that the decree of the Council of Nicaea concerning the Unity
of the Divine Essence and concerning the Three Persons, is true and to
be believed without any doubting; that is to say, there is one Divine
Essence which is called and which is God: eternal, without body, without
parts, of infinite power, wisdom, and goodness, the Maker and Preserver
of all things, visible and invisible; and yet there are three Persons,
of the same essence and power, who also are coeternal, the Father the
Son, and the Holy Ghost. And the term "person" they use as the Fathers
have used it, to signify, not a part or quality in another, but that which
subsists of itself. They condemn
all heresies which have sprung up against this article, as the Manichaeans,
who assumed two principles, one Good and the other Evil- also the Valentinians,
Arians, Eunomians, Mohammedans, and all such. They condemn also the Samosatenes,
old and new, who, contending that there is but one Person, sophistically
and impiously argue that the Word and the Holy Ghost are not distinct
Persons, but that "Word" signifies a spoken word, and "Spirit" signifies
motion created in things.Contents
Article
II: Of Original Sin. Also they teach that since the fall of Adam
all men begotten in the natural way are born with sin, that is, without
the fear of God, without trust in God, and with concupiscence; and that
this disease, or vice of origin, is truly sin, even now condemning and
bringing eternal death upon those not born again through Baptism and the
Holy Ghost. They Condemn the Pelagians and others who deny that original
depravity is sin, and who, to obscure the glory of Christ's merit and
benefits, argue that man can be justified before God by his own strength
and reason. Contents
Article
III: Of the Son of God. He also descended
into hell, and truly rose again the third day; afterward He ascended into
heaven that He might sit on the right hand of the Father, and forever
reign and have dominion over all creatures, and sanctify them that believe
in Him, by sending the Holy Ghost into their hearts, to rule, comfort,
and quicken them, and to defend them against the devil and the power of
sin.The same Christ shall openly come again to judge
the quick and the dead, etc., according to the Apostles' Creed. Contents
Article
IV: Of Justification. Also they teach that
men cannot be justified before God by their own strength, merits, or works,
but are freely justified for Christ's sake, through faith, when they believe
that they are received into favor, and that their sins are forgiven for
Christ's sake, who, by His death, has made satisfaction for our sins.
This faith God imputes for righteousness in His sight. Rom. 3 and 4. Contents
Article
V: Of the Ministry. That we may obtain this faith, the Ministry
of Teaching the Gospel and administering the Sacraments was instituted.
For through the Word and Sacraments, as through instruments, the Holy
Ghost is given, who works faith; where and when it pleases God, in them
that hear the Gospel, to wit, that God, not for our own merits, but for
Christ's sake, justifies those who believe that they are received into
grace for Christ's sake.They condemn the Anabaptists
and others who think that the Holy Ghost comes to men without the external
Word, through their own preparations and works. Contents
Article
VI: Of New Obedience. Also they teach that this faith is bound
to bring forth good fruits, and that it is necessary to do good works
commanded by God, because of God's will, but that we should not rely on
those works to merit justification before God. For remission of sins and
justification is apprehended by faith, as also the voice of Christ attests:
When ye shall have done all these things, say: We are unprofitable servants.
Luke 17, 10. The same is also taught by the Fathers. For Ambrose says:
It is ordained of God that he who believes in Christ is saved, freely
receiving remission of sins, without works, by faith alone.
Contents
Article
VII: Of the Church. Also they teach that
one holy Church is to continue forever. The Church is the congregation
of saints, in which the Gospel is rightly taught and the Sacraments are
rightly administered. And to the true unity of the Church it is enough
to agree concerning the doctrine of the Gospel and the administration
of the Sacraments. Nor is it necessary that human traditions, that is,
rites or ceremonies, instituted by men, should be everywhere alike. As
Paul says: One faith, one Baptism, one God and Father of all, etc. Eph.
4, 5. 6. Contents
Article
VIII: What the Church Is. Although the
Church properly is the congregation of saints and true believers, nevertheless,
since in this life many hypocrites and evil persons are mingled therewith,
it is lawful to use Sacraments administered by evil men, according to
the saying of Christ: The Scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat,
etc. Matt. 23, 2. Both the Sacraments and Word are effectual by reason
of the institution and commandment of Christ, notwithstanding they be
administered by evil men. They condemn the
Donatists, and such like, who denied it to be lawful to use the ministry
of evil men in the Church, and who thought the ministry of evil men to
be unprofitable and of none effect. Contents
Article
IX: Of Baptism. Of Baptism they teach that it is necessary to
salvation, and that through Baptism is offered the grace of God, and that
children are to be baptized who, being offered to God through Baptism
are received into God's grace.They condemn the Anabaptists,
who reject the baptism of children, and say that children are saved without
Baptism. Contents
Article X: Of the Lord's
Supper. Of the Supper of the Lord they teach
that the Body and Blood of Christ are truly present, and are distributed
to those who eat the Supper of the Lord; and they reject those that teach
otherwise. Contents
Article
XI: Of Confession. Of Confession they teach
that Private Absolution ought to be retained in the churches, although
in confession an enumeration of all sins is not necessary. For it is impossible
according to the Psalm: Who can understand his errors? Ps. 19, 12. Contents
Article
XII: Of Repentance. Of Repentance they teach that for those who
have fallen after Baptism there is remission of sins whenever they are
converted and that the Church ought to impart absolution to those thus
returning to repentance. Now, repentance consists properly of these two
parts: One is contrition, that is, terrors smiting the conscience through
the knowledge of sin; the other is faith, which is born of the Gospel,
or of absolution, and believes that for Christ's sake, sins are forgiven,
comforts the conscience, and delivers it from terrors. Then good works
are bound to follow, which are the fruits of repentance. They
condemn the Anabaptists, who deny that those once justified can lose the
Holy Ghost. Also those who contend that some may attain to such perfection
in this life that they cannot sin. The
Novatians also are condemned, who would not absolve such as had fallen
after Baptism, though they returned to repentance. They
also are rejected who do not teach that remission of sins comes through
faith but command us to merit grace through satisfactions of our own.
Contents
Article
XIII: Of the Use of the Sacraments. Of the Use of the Sacraments
they teach that the Sacraments were ordained, not only to be marks of
profession among men, but rather to be signs and testimonies of the will
of God toward us, instituted to awaken and confirm faith in those who
use them. Wherefore we must so use the Sacraments that faith be added
to believe the promises which are offered and set forth through the Sacraments.
They therefore condemn those who teach that
the Sacraments justify by the outward act, and who do not teach that,
in the use of the Sacraments, faith which believes that sins are forgiven,
is required. Contents
Article
XIV: Of Ecclesiastical Order. Of Ecclesiastical Order they teach
that no one should publicly teach in the Church or administer the Sacraments
unless he be regularly called. Contents
Article XV: Of Ecclesiastical
Usages. Of Usages in the Church they teach that those ought to
be observed which may be observed without sin, and which are profitable
unto tranquility and good order in the Church, as particular holy-days,
festivals, and the like. Nevertheless, concerning such things men
are admonished that consciences are not to be burdened, as though such
observance was necessary to salvation. They
are admonished also that human traditions instituted to propitiate God,
to merit grace, and to make satisfaction for sins, are opposed to the
Gospel and the doctrine of faith. Wherefore vows and traditions concerning
meats and days, etc., instituted to merit grace and to make satisfaction
for sins, are useless and contrary to the Gospel.
Contents
Article
XVI: Of Civil Affairs. Of Civil Affairs
they teach that lawful civil ordinances are good works of God, and that
it is right for Christians to bear civil office, to sit as judges, to
judge matters by the Imperial and other existing laws, to award just punishments,
to engage in just wars, to serve as soldiers, to make legal contracts,
to hold property, to make oath when required by the magistrates, to marry
a wife, to be given in marriage. They condemn the Anabaptists who forbid
these civil offices to Christians.They condemn also
those who do not place evangelical perfection in the fear of God and in
faith, but in forsaking civil offices, for the Gospel teaches an eternal
righteousness of the heart. Meanwhile, it does not destroy the State or
the family, but very much requires that they be preserved as ordinances
of God, and that charity be practiced in such ordinances. Therefore, Christians
are necessarily bound to obey their own magistrates and laws save only
when commanded to sin; for then they ought to obey God rather than men.
Acts 5, 29. Contents
Article
XVII: Of Christ's Return to Judgment. Also
they teach that at the Consummation of the World Christ will appear for
judgment and will raise up all the dead; He will give to the godly and
elect eternal life and everlasting joys, but ungodly men and the devils
He will condemn to be tormented without end.They
condemn the Anabaptists, who think that there will be an end to the punishments
of condemned men and devils.They condemn also others
who are now spreading certain Jewish opinions, that before the resurrection
of the dead the godly shall take possession of the kingdom of the world,
the ungodly being everywhere suppressed.
Contents
Article
XVIII: Of Free Will. Of Free Will they
teach that man's will has some liberty to choose civil righteousness,
and to work things subject to reason. But it has no power, without the
Holy Ghost, to work the righteousness of God, that is, spiritual righteousness;
since the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God, 1
Cor. 2,14; but this righteousness is wrought in the heart when the Holy
Ghost is received through the Word. These things are said in as many words
by Augustine in his Hypognosticon, Book III: We grant that all men have
a free will, free, inasmuch as it has the judgment of reason; not that
it is thereby capable, without God, either to begin, or, at least, to
complete aught in things pertaining to God, but only in works of this
life, whether good or evil. "Good" I call those works which spring from
the good in nature, such as, willing to labor in the field, to eat and
drink, to have a friend, to clothe oneself, to build a house, to marry
a wife, to raise cattle, to learn divers useful arts, or whatsoever good
pertains to this life. For all of these things are not without dependence
on the providence of God; yea, of Him and through Him they are and have
their being. "Evil" I call such works as willing to worship an idol, to
commit murder, etc.They condemn the Pelagians and
others, who teach that without the Holy Ghost, by the power of nature
alone, we are able to love God above all things; also to do the commandments
of God as touching "the substance of the act." For, although nature is
able in a manner to do the outward work, (for it is able to keep the hands
from theft and murder,) yet it cannot produce the inward motions, such
as the fear of God, trust in God, chastity, patience, etc. Contents
Article
XIX: Of the Cause of Sin. Of the Cause of Sin they teach that,
although God does create and preserve nature, yet the cause of sin is
the will of the wicked, that is, of the devil and ungodly men; which will,
unaided of God, turns itself from God, as Christ says John 8, 44: When
he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own. Contents
Article XX: Of Good Works.
Our teachers are falsely accused of forbidding good Works. For
their published writings on the Ten Commandments, and others of like import,
bear witness that they have taught to good purpose concerning all estates
and duties of life, as to what estates of life and what works in every
calling be pleasing to God. Concerning these things preachers heretofore
taught but little, and urged only childish and needless works, as particular
holy-days, particular fasts, brotherhoods, pilgrimages, services in honor
of saints, the use of rosaries, monasticism, and such like. Since our
adversaries have been admonished of these things, they are now unlearning
them, and do not preach these unprofitable works as heretofore. Besides,
they begin to mention faith, of which there was heretofore marvelous silence.
They teach that we are justified not by works only, but they conjoin faith
and works, and say that we are justified by faith and works. This doctrine
is more tolerable than the former one, and can afford more consolation
than their old doctrine. Forasmuch, therefore, as the doctrine concerning
faith, which ought to be the chief one in the Church, has lain so long
unknown, as all must needs grant that there was the deepest silence in
their sermons concerning the righteousness of faith, while only the doctrine
of works was treated in the churches, our teachers have instructed the
churches concerning faith as follows: --First, that our works cannot reconcile
God or merit forgiveness of sins, grace, and justification, but that we
obtain this only by faith when we believe that we are received into favor
for Christ's sake, who alone has been set forth the Mediator and Propitiation,
1 Tim. 2, 6, in order that the Father may be reconciled through Him. Whoever,
therefore, trusts that by works he merits grace, despises the merit and
grace of Christ, and seeks a way to God without Christ, by human strength,
although Christ has said of Himself: I am the Way, the Truth, and the
Life. John 14, 6.This doctrine concerning faith is everywhere treated
by Paul, Eph. 2, 8: By grace are ye saved through faith; and that not
of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works, etc. And lest any
one should craftily say that a new interpretation of Paul has been devised
by us, this entire matter is supported by the testimonies of the Fathers.
For Augustine, in many volumes, defends grace and the righteousness of
faith, over against the merits of works. And Ambrose, in his De Vocatione
Gentium, and elsewhere, teaches to like effect. For in his De Vocatione
Gentium he says as follows: Redemption by the blood of Christ would become
of little value, neither would the preeminence of man's works be superseded
by the mercy of God, if justification, which is wrought through grace,
were due to the merits going before, so as to be, not the free gift of
a donor, but the reward due to the laborer.
But, although this doctrine is despised
by the inexperienced, nevertheless God- fearing and anxious consciences
find by experience that it brings the greatest consolation, because consciences
cannot be set at rest through any works, but only by faith, when they
take the sure ground that for Christ's sake they have a reconciled God.
As Paul teaches Rom. 5, 1: Being justified by faith, we have peace with
God. This whole doctrine is to be referred to that conflict of the terrified
conscience, neither can it be understood apart from that conflict. Therefore
inexperienced and profane men judge ill concerning this matter, who dream
that Christian righteousness is nothing but civil and philosophical righteousness.
Back to top
Heretofore consciences were plagued
with the doctrine of works, they did not hear the consolation from the
Gospel. Some persons were driven by conscience into the desert, into monasteries
hoping there to merit grace by a monastic life. Some also devised other
works whereby to merit grace and make satisfaction for sins. Hence there
was very great need to treat of, and renew, this doctrine of faith in
Christ, to the end that anxious consciences should not be without consolation
but that they might know that grace and forgiveness of sins and justification
are apprehended by faith in Christ.
Men are also admonished that here
the term "faith" does not signify merely the knowledge of the history,
such as is in the ungodly and in the devil, but signifies a faith which
believes, not merely the history, but also the effect of the history --
namely, this Article: the forgiveness of sins, to wit, that we have grace,
righteousness, and forgiveness of sins through Christ. Back
to top
Now he that knows that he has a
Father gracious to him through Christ, truly knows God; he knows also
that God cares for him, and calls upon God; in a word, he is not without
God, as the heathen. For devils and the ungodly are not able to believe
this Article: the forgiveness of sins. Hence, they hate God as an enemy,
call not upon Him, and expect no good from Him. Augustine also admonishes
his readers concerning the word "faith," and teaches that the term "faith"
is accepted in the Scriptures not for knowledge such as is in the ungodly
but for confidence which consoles and encourages the terrified mind.
Furthermore, it is taught on our
part that it is necessary to do good works, not that we should trust to
merit grace by them, but because it is the will of God. It is only by
faith that forgiveness of sins is apprehended, and that, for nothing.
And because through faith the Holy Ghost is received, hearts are renewed
and endowed with new affections, so as to be able to bring forth good
works. For Ambrose says: Faith is the mother of a good will and right
doing. For man's powers without the Holy Ghost are full of ungodly affections,
and are too weak to do works which are good in God's sight. Besides, they
are in the power of the devil who impels men to divers sins, to ungodly
opinions, to open crimes. This we may see in the philosophers, who, although
they endeavored to live an honest life could not succeed, but were defiled
with many open crimes. Such is the feebleness of man when he is without
faith and without the Holy Ghost, and governs himself only by human strength.
Back to top
Hence it may be readily seen that
this doctrine is not to be charged with prohibiting good works, but rather
the more to be commended, because it shows how we are enabled to do good
works. For without faith human nature can in no wise do the works of the
First or of the Second Commandment. Without faith it does not call upon
God, nor expect anything from God, nor bear the cross, but seeks, and
trusts in, man's help. And thus, when there is no faith and trust in God
all manner of lusts and human devices rule in the heart. Wherefore Christ
said, John 16,6: Without Me ye can do nothing; and the Church sings: Lacking
Thy divine favor, There is nothing found in man, Naught in him is harmless.
Contents
Article
XXI: Of the Worship of the Saints. Of the
Worship of Saints they teach that the memory of saints may be set before
us, that we may follow their faith and good works, according to our calling,
as the Emperor may follow the example of David in making war to drive
away the Turk from his country; For both are kings. But the Scripture
teaches not the invocation of saints or to ask help of saints, since it
sets before us the one Christ as the Mediator, Propitiation, High Priest,
and Intercessor. He is to be prayed to, and has promised that He will
hear our prayer; and this worship He approves above all, to wit, that
in all afflictions He be called upon, 1 John 2, 1: If any man sin, we
have an Advocate with the Father, etc.This is about
the Sum of our Doctrine, in which, as can be seen, there is nothing that
varies from the Scriptures, or from the Church Catholic, or from the Church
of Rome as known from its writers. This being the case, they judge harshly
who insist that our teachers be regarded as heretics. There is, however,
disagreement on certain Abuses, which have crept into the Church without
rightful authority. And even in these, if there were some difference,
there should be proper lenity on the part of bishops to bear with us by
reason of the Confession which we have now reviewed; because even the
Canons are not so severe as to demand the same rites everywhere, neither,
at any time, have the rites of all churches been the same; although, among
us, in large part, the ancient rites are diligently observed. For it is
a false and malicious charge that all the ceremonies, all the things instituted
of old, are abolished in our churches. But it has been a common complaint
that some abuses were connected with the ordinary rites. These, inasmuch
as they could not be approved with a good conscience, have been to some
extent corrected. Back to top
ARTICLES IN WHICH
ARE REVIEWED THE ABUSES WHICH HAVE BEEN CORRECTED.
Inasmuch, then, as our churches dissent
in no article of the faith from the Church Catholic, but only omit some
abuses which are new, and which have been erroneously accepted by the
corruption of the times, contrary to the intent of the Canons, we pray
that Your Imperial Majesty would graciously hear both what has been changed,
and what were the reasons why the people were not compelled to observe
those abuses against their conscience. Nor should Your Imperial Majesty
believe those who, in order to excite the hatred of men against our part,
disseminate strange slanders among the people. Having thus excited the
minds of good men, they have first given occasion to this controversy,
and now endeavor, by the same arts, to increase the discord. For Your
Imperial Majesty will undoubtedly find that the form of doctrine and of
ceremonies with us is not so intolerable as these ungodly and malicious
men represent. Besides, the truth cannot be gathered from common rumors
or the revilings of enemies. But it can readily be judged that nothing
would serve better to maintain the dignity of ceremonies, and to nourish
reverence and pious devotion among the people than if the ceremonies were
observed rightly in the churches. Contents
Article
XXII: Of Both Kinds in the Sacrament. To the laity are given
Both Kinds in the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper, because this usage has
the commandment of the Lord in Matt. 26, 27: Drink ye all of it, where
Christ has manifestly commanded concerning the cup that all should drink.
And lest any man should craftily say that this refers only to priests,
Paul in 1 Cor. 11,27 recites an example from which it appears that the
whole congregation did use both kinds. And this usage has long remained
in the Church, nor is it known when, or by whose authority, it was changed;
although Cardinal Cusanus mentions the time when it was approved. Cyprian
in some places testifies that the blood was given to the people. The same
is testified by Jerome, who says: The priests administer the Eucharist,
and distribute the blood of Christ to the people. Indeed, Pope Gelasius
commands that the Sacrament be not divided (dist. II., De Consecratione,
cap. Comperimus). Only custom, not so ancient, has it otherwise. But it
is evident that any custom introduced against the commandments of God
is not to be allowed, as the Canons witness (dist. III., cap. Veritate,
and the following chapters). But this custom has been received, not only
against the Scripture, but also against the old Canons and the example
of the Church. Therefore, if any preferred to use both kinds of the Sacrament,
they ought not to have been compelled with offense to their consciences
to do otherwise. And because the division of the Sacrament does not agree
with the ordinance of Christ, we are accustomed to omit the procession,
which hitherto has been in use. Contents
Article
XXIII: Of the Marriage of Priests. There has been common complaint
concerning the examples of priests who were not chaste. For that reason
also Pope Pius is reported to have said that there were certain causes
why marriage was taken away from priests, but that there were far weightier
ones why it ought to be given back; for so Platina writes. Since, therefore,
our priests were desirous to avoid these open scandals, they married wives,
and taught that it was lawful for them to contract matrimony. First, because
Paul says, 1 Cor. 7, 2. 9: To avoid fornication, let every man have his
own wife. Also: It is better to marry than to burn. Secondly Christ says,
Matt. 19,11: All men cannot receive this saying, where He teaches that
not all men are fit to lead a single life; for God created man for procreation,
Gen. 1, 28. Nor is it in man's power, without a singular gift and work
of God, to alter this creation. [For it is manifest, and many have confessed
that no good, honest, chaste life, no Christian, sincere, upright conduct
has resulted (from the attempt), but a horrible, fearful unrest and torment
of conscience has been felt by many until the end.] Therefore, those who
are not fit to lead a single life ought to contract matrimony. For no
man's law, no vow, can annul the commandment and ordinance of God. For
these reasons the priests teach that it is lawful for them to marry wives.
It is also evident that in the ancient
Church priests were married men. For Paul says, 1 Tim. 3, 2, that a bishop
should be chosen who is the husband of one wife. And in Germany, four
hundred years ago for the first time, the priests were violently compelled
to lead a single life, who indeed offered such resistance that the Archbishop
of Mayence, when about to publish the Pope's decree concerning this matter,
was almost killed in the tumult raised by the enraged priests. And so
harsh was the dealing in the matter that not only were marriages forbidden
for the future, but also existing marriages were torn asunder, contrary
to all laws, divine and human, contrary even to the Canons themselves,
made not only by the Popes, but by most celebrated Synods. [Moreover,many
God-fearing and intelligent people in high station are known frequently
to have expressed misgivings that such enforced celibacy and depriving
men of marriage (which God Himself has instituted and left free to men)
has never produced any good results, but has brought on many great and
evil vices and much iniquity.] Back to top
Seeing also that, as the world is
aging, man's nature is gradually growing weaker, it is well to guard that
no more vices steal into Germany .Furthermore, God
ordained marriage to be a help against human infirmity. The Canons themselves
say that the old rigor ought now and then, in the latter times, to be
relaxed because of the weakness of men; which it is to be wished were
done also in this matter. And it is to be expected that the churches shall
at some time lack pastors if marriage is any longer forbidden.But while
the commandment of God is in force, while the custom of the Church is
well known, while impure celibacy causes many scandals, adulteries, and
other crimes deserving the punishments of just magistrates, yet it is
a marvelous thing that in nothing is more cruelty exercised than against
the marriage of priests. God has given commandment to honor marriage.
By the laws of all well-ordered commonwealths, even among the heathen,
marriage is most highly honored. But now men, and that, priests, are cruelly
put to death, contrary to the intent of the Canons, for no other cause
than marriage. Paul, in 1 Tim. 4,3, calls that a doctrine of devils which
forbids marriage. This may now be readily understood when the law against
marriage is maintained by such penalties. But as no law of man can
annul the commandment of God, so neither can it be done by any vow. Accordingly,
Cyprian also advises that women who do not keep the chastity they have
promised should marry. His words are these (Book I, Epistle XI ): But
if they be unwilling or unable to persevere, it is better for them to
marry than to fall into the fire by their lusts; they should certainly
give no offense to their brethren and sisters.And even the Canons show
some leniency toward those who have taken vows before the proper age,
as heretofore has generally been the case. Contents
Article XXIV: Of the
Mass. Falsely are our
churches accused of abolishing the Mass; for the Mass is retained among
us, and celebrated with the highest reverence. Nearly all the usual ceremonies
are also preserved, save that the parts sung in Latin are interspersed
here and there with German hymns, which have been added to teach the people.
For ceremonies are needed to this end alone that the unlearned be taught
[what they need to know of Christ]. And not only has Paul commanded to
use in the church a language understood by the people 1 Cor. 14,2. 9,
but it has also been so ordained by man's law. The people are accustomed
to partake of the Sacrament together, if any be fit for it, and this also
increases the reverence and devotion of public worship. For none are admitted
except they be first examined. The people are also advised concerning
the dignity and use of the Sacrament, how great consolation it brings
anxious consciences, that they may learn to believe God, and to expect
and ask of Him all that is good. [In this connection they are also instructed
regarding other and false teachings on the Sacrament.] This worship pleases
God; such use of the Sacrament nourishes true devotion toward God. It
does not, therefore, appear that the Mass is more devoutly celebrated
among our adversaries than among us. Back
to top
But it is evident that for a long
time this also has been the public and most grievous complaint of all
good men that Masses have been basely profaned and applied to purposes
of lucre. For it is not unknown how far this abuse obtains in all the
churches by what manner of men Masses are said only for fees or stipends,
and how many celebrate them contrary to the Canons. But Paul severely
threatens those who deal unworthily with the Eucharist when he says, 1
Cor.11,27: Whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord,
unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. When, therefore
our priests were admonished concerning this sin, Private Masses were discontinued
among us, as scarcely any Private Masses were celebrated except for lucre's
sake.
Neither were the bishops ignorant
of these abuses, and if they had corrected them in time, there would now
be less dissension. Heretofore, by their own connivance, they suffered
many corruptions to creep into the Church. Now, when it is too late, they
begin to complain of the troubles of the Church, while this disturbance
has been occasioned simply by those abuses which were so manifest that
they could be borne no longer. There have been great dissensions concerning
the Mass, concerning the Sacrament. Perhaps the world is being punished
for such long-continued profanations of the Mass as have been tolerated
in the churches for so many centuries by the very men who were both able
and in duty bound to correct them. For in the Ten Commandments it is written,
Ex. 20, 7: The Lord will not hold him guiltless that taketh His name in
vain. But since the world began, nothing that God ever ordained seems
to have been so abused for filthy lucre as the Mass. Back
to top
There was also added the opinion
which infinitely increased Private Masses, namely that Christ, by His
passion, had made satisfaction for original sin, and instituted the Mass
wherein an offering should be made for daily sins, venial and mortal.
From this has arisen the common opinion that the Mass takes away the sins
of the living and the dead by the outward act. Then they began to dispute
whether one Mass said for many were worth as much as special Masses for
individuals, and this brought forth that infinite multitude of Masses.
[With this work men wished to obtain from God all that they needed, and
in the mean time faith in Christ and the true worship were forgotten.]
Concerning these opinions our teachers
have given warning that they depart from the Holy Scriptures and diminish
the glory of the passion of Christ. For Christ's passion was an oblation
and satisfaction, not for original guilt only, but also for all other
sins, as it is written to the Hebrews, 10, 10: We are sanctified through
the offering of Jesus Christ once for all. Also, 10, 14: By one offering
He hath perfected forever them that are sanctified. [It is an unheard-of
innovation in the Church to teach that Christ by His death made satisfaction
only for original sin and not likewise for all other sin. Accordingly
it is hoped that everybody will understand that this error has not been
reproved without due reason.]
Scripture also teaches that we are
justified before God through faith in Christ, when we believe that our
sins are forgiven for Christ's sake. Now if the Mass take away the sins
of the living and the dead by the outward act justification comes of the
work of Masses, and not of faith, which Scripture does not allow.
But Christ commands us, Luke 22,
19: This do in remembrance of Me; therefore the Mass was instituted that
the faith of those who use the Sacrament should remember what benefits
it receives through Christ, and cheer and comfort the anxious conscience.
For to remember Christ is to remember His benefits, and to realize that
they are truly offered unto us. Nor is it enough only to remember the
history; for this also the Jews and the ungodly can remember. Wherefore
the Mass is to be used to this end, that there the Sacrament [Communion]
may be administered to them that have need of consolation; as Ambrose
says: Because I always sin, I am always bound to take the medicine. [Therefore
this Sacrament requires faith, and is used in vain without faith.] Back
to top
Now, forasmuch as the Mass is such
a giving of the Sacrament, we hold one communion every holy-day, and,
if any desire the Sacrament, also on other days, when it is given to such
as ask for it. And this custom is not new in the Church; for the Fathers
before Gregory make no mention of any private Mass, but of the common
Mass [the Communion] they speak very much. Chrysostom says that the priest
stands daily at he altar, inviting some to the Communion and keeping back
others. And it appears from the ancient Canons that some one celebrated
the Mass from whom all the other presbyters and deacons received the body
of he Lord; for thus the words of the Nicene Canon say: Let the deacons,
according to their order, receive the Holy Communion after the presbyters,
from the bishop or from a presbyter. And Paul, 1 Cor. 11, 33, commands
concerning the Communion: Tarry one for another, so that there may be
a common participation.
Forasmuch, therefore, as the Mass
with us has the example of the Church, taken from the Scripture and the
Fathers, we are confident that it cannot be disapproved, especially since
public ceremonies, for the most part like those hitherto in use, are retained;
only the number of Masses differs, which, because of very great and manifest
abuses doubtless might be profitably reduced. For in olden times, even
in churches most frequented, the Mass was not celebrated every day, as
the Tripartite History (Book 9, chap. 33) testifies: Again in Alexandria,
every Wednesday and Friday the Scriptures are read, and the doctors expound
them, and all things are done, except the solemn rite of Communion. Contents
Article
XXV: Of Confession. Confession in the churches is not abolished
among us; for it is not usual to give the body of the Lord, except to
them that have been previously examined and absolved. And the people are
most carefully taught concerning faith in the absolution, about which
formerly there was profound silence. Our people are taught that they should
highly prize the absolution, as being the voice of God, and pronounced
by God's command. The power of the Keys is set forth in its beauty and
they are reminded what great consolation it brings to anxious consciences,
also, that God requires faith to believe such absolution as a voice sounding
from heaven, and that such faith in Christ truly obtains and receives
the forgiveness of sins. Aforetime satisfactions were immoderately extolled;
of faith and the merit of Christ and the righteousness of faith no mention
was made; wherefore, on this point, our churches are by no means to be
blamed. For this even our adversaries must needs concede to us that the
doctrine concerning repentance has been most diligently treated and laid
open by our teachers. Back to top
But of Confession they teach that
an enumeration of sins is not necessary, and that consciences be not burdened
with anxiety to enumerate all sins, for it is impossible to recount all
sins, as the Psalm testifies, 19,13: Who can understand his errors? Also
Jeremiah, 17 9: The heart is deceitful; who can know it; But if no sins
were forgiven, except those that are recounted, consciences could never
find peace; for very many sins they neither see nor can remember. The
ancient writers also testify that an enumeration is not necessary. For
in the Decrees, Chrysostom is quoted, who says thus: I say not to you
that you should disclose yourself in public, nor that you accuse yourself
before others, but I would have you obey the prophet who says: "Disclose
thy self before God." Therefore confess your sins before God, the true
Judge, with prayer. Tell your errors, not with the tongue, but with the
memory of your conscience, etc. And the Gloss (Of Repentance, Distinct.
V, Cap. Consideret) admits that Confession is of human right only [not
commanded by Scripture, but ordained by the Church]. Nevertheless, on
account of the great benefit of absolution, and because it is otherwise
useful to the conscience, Confession is retained among us. Contents
Article XXVI: Of the
Distinction of Meats. It has been the general persuasion, not of
the people alone, but also of those teaching in the churches, that making
Distinctions of Meats, and like traditions of men, are works profitable
to merit grace, and able to make satisfactions for sins. And that the world
so thought, appears from this, that new ceremonies, new orders, new holy-days,
and new fastings were daily instituted, and the teachers in the churches
did exact these works as a service necessary to merit grace, and did greatly
terrify men's consciences, if they should omit any of these things. From
this persuasion concerning traditions much detriment has resulted in the
Church. First, the doctrine
of grace and of the righteousness of faith has been obscured by it, which
is the chief part of the Gospel, and ought to stand out as the most prominent
in the Church, in order that the merit of Christ may be well known, and
faith, which believes that sins are forgiven for Christ's sake be exalted
far above works. Wherefore Paul also lays the greatest stress on this
article, putting aside the Law and human traditions, in order to show
that Christian righteousness is something else than such works, to wit,
the faith which believes that sins are freely forgiven for Christ's sake.
But this doctrine of Paul has been almost wholly smothered by traditions,
which have produced an opinion that, by making distinctions in meats and
like services, we must merit grace and righteousness. In treating of repentance,
there was no mention made of faith; only those works of satisfaction were
set forth; in these the entire repentance seemed to consist. Back
to top
Secondly, these traditions have
obscured the commandments of God, because traditions were placed far above
the commandments of God. Christianity was thought to consist wholly in
the observance of certain holy-days, rites, fasts, and vestures. These
observances had won for themselves the exalted title of being the spiritual
life and the perfect life. Meanwhile the commandments of God, according
to each one's calling, were without honor namely, that the father brought
up his offspring, that the mother bore children, that the prince governed
the commonwealth, -- these were accounted works that were worldly and
imperfect, and far below those glittering observances. And this error
greatly tormented devout consciences, which grieved that they were held
in an imperfect state of life, as in marriage, in the office of magistrate;
or in other civil ministrations; on the other hand, they admired the monks
and such like, and falsely imagined that the observances of such men were
more acceptable to God.
Thirdly, traditions brought great
danger to consciences; for it was impossible to keep all traditions, and
yet men judged these observances to be necessary acts of worship. Gerson
writes that many fell into despair, and that some even took their own
lives, because they felt that they were not able to satisfy the traditions,
and they had all the while not heard any consolation of the righteousness
of faith and grace. We see that the summists and theologians gather the
traditions, and seek mitigation's whereby to ease consciences, and yet
they do not sufficiently unfetter, but sometimes entangle, consciences
even more. And with the gathering of these traditions, the schools and
sermons have been so much occupied that they have had no leisure to touch
upon Scripture, and to seek the more profitable doctrine of faith, of
the cross, of hope, of the dignity of civil affairs of consolation of
sorely tried consciences. Hence Gerson and some other theologians have
grievously complained that by these strivings concerning traditions they
were prevented from giving attention to a better kind of doctrine. Augustine
also forbids that men's consciences should be burdened with such observances,
and prudently advises Januarius that he must know that they are to be
observed as things indifferent; for such are his words. Back
to top
Wherefore our teachers must not
be looked upon as having taken up this matter rashly or from hatred of
the bishops, as some falsely suspect. There was great need to warn the
churches of these errors, which had arisen from misunderstanding the traditions.
For the Gospel compels us to insist in the churches upon the doctrine
of grace, and of the righteousness of faith; which, however, cannot be
understood, if men think that they merit grace by observances of their
own choice.
Thus, therefore, they have taught
that by the observance of human traditions we cannot merit grace or be
justified, and hence we must not think such observances necessary acts
of worship. They add hereunto testimonies of Scripture. Christ, Matt.
15, 3, defends the Apostles who had not observed the usual tradition,
which, however, evidently pertains to a matter not unlawful, but indifferent,
and to have a certain affinity with the purifications of the Law, and
says, 9: In vain do they worship Me with the commandments of men. He,
therefore, does not exact an unprofitable service. Shortly after He adds:
Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth a man. So also Paul, Rom.
14, 17: The kingdom of God is not meat and drink. Col. 2, 16: Let no man,
therefore, judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holy-day,
or of the Sabbath-day; also: If ye be dead with Christ from the rudiments
of the world, why, as though living in the world, are ye subject to ordinances:
Touch not, taste not, handle not! And Peter says, Acts 15, 10: Why tempt
ye God to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our
fathers nor we were able to bear? But we believe that through the grace
of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they. Here Peter forbids
to burden the consciences with many rites, either of Moses or of others.
And in 1 Tim. 4,1.3 Paul calls the prohibition of meats a doctrine of
devils; for it is against the Gospel to institute or to do such works
that by them we may merit grace, or as though Christianity could not exist
without such service of God. Back to top
Here our adversaries object that
our teachers are opposed to discipline and mortification of the flesh,
as Jovinian. But the contrary may be learned from the writings of our
teachers. For they have always taught concerning the cross that it behooves
Christians to bear afflictions. This is the true, earnest, and unfeigned
mortification, to wit, to be exercised with divers afflictions, and to
be crucified with Christ.
Moreover, they teach that every
Christian ought to train and subdue himself with bodily restraints, or
bodily exercises and labors that neither satiety nor slothfulness tempt
him to sin, but not that we may merit grace or make satisfaction for sins
by such exercises. And such external discipline ought to be urged at all
times, not only on a few and set days. So Christ commands, Luke 21, 34:
Take heed lest your hearts be overcharged with surfeiting; also Matt.
17, 21: This kind goeth not out but by prayer and fasting. Paul also says,
1 Cor. 9, 27: I keep under my body and bring it into subjection. Here
he clearly shows that he was keeping under his body, not to merit forgiveness
of sins by that discipline, but to have his body in subjection and fitted
for spiritual things, and for the discharge of duty according to his calling.
Therefore, we do not condemn fasting in itself, but the traditions which
prescribe certain days and certain meats, with peril of conscience, as
though such works were a necessary service. Back
to top
Nevertheless, very many traditions
are kept on our part, which conduce to good order in the Church, as the
Order of Lessons in the Mass and the chief holy-days. But, at the same
time, men are warned that such observances do not justify before God,
and that in such things it should not be made sin if they be omitted without
offense. Such liberty in human rites was not unknown to the Fathers. For
in the East they kept Easter at another time than at Rome, and when, on
account of this diversity, the Romans accused the Eastern Church of schism,
they were admonished by others that such usages need not be alike everywhere.
And Irenaeus says: Diversity concerning fasting does not destroy the harmony
of faith; as also Pope Gregory intimates in Dist. XII, that such diversity
does not violate the unity of the Church. And in the Tripartite History,
Book 9, many examples of dissimilar rites are gathered, and the following
statement is made: It was not the mind of the Apostles to enact rules
concerning holy-days, but to preach godliness and a holy life [,to teach
faith and love]. Content
Article XXVII: Of Monastic
Vows. What is taught on our part concerning
Monastic Vows, will be better understood if it be remembered what has been
the state of the monasteries, and how many things were daily done in those
very monasteries, contrary to the Canons. In Augustine's time they were
free associations. Afterward, when discipline was corrupted, vows were everywhere
added for the purpose of restoring discipline, as in a carefully planned
prison. Gradually, many
other observances were added besides vows. And these fetters were laid
upon many before the lawful age, contrary to the Canons. Back
to top
Many also entered into this kind
of life through ignorance, being unable to judge their own strength, though
they were of sufficient age. Being thus ensnared, they were compelled
to remain, even though some could have been freed by the kind provision
of the Canons. And this was more the case in convents of women than of
monks, although more consideration should have been shown the weaker sex.
This rigor displeased many good men before this time, who saw that young
men and maidens were thrown into convents for a living. They saw what
unfortunate results came of this procedure, and what scandals were created,
what snares were cast upon consciences! They were grieved that the authority
of the Canons in so momentous a matter was utterly set aside and despised.
To these evils was added such a persuasion concerning vows as, it is well
known, in former times displeased even those monks who were more considerate.
They taught that vows were equal to Baptism; they taught that by this
kind of life they merited forgiveness of sins and justification before
God. Yea, they added that the monastic life not only merited righteousness
before God but even greater things, because it kept not only the precepts,
but also the so-called "evangelical counsels."
Thus they made men believe that
the profession of monasticism was far better than Baptism, and that the
monastic life was more meritorious than that of magistrates, than the
life of pastors, and such like, who serve their calling in accordance
with God's commands, without any man-made services. None of these things
can be denied; for they appear in their own books. [Moreover, a person
who has been thus ensnared and has entered a monastery learns little of
Christ.] Back to top
What, then, came to pass in the
monasteries? Aforetime they were schools of theology and other branches,
profitable to the Church; and thence pastors and bishops were obtained.
Now it is another thing. It is needless to rehearse what is known to all.
Aforetime they came together to learn; now they feign that it is a kind
of life instituted to merit grace and righteousness; yea, they preach
that it is a state of perfection, and they put it far above all other
kinds of life ordained of God. These things we have rehearsed without
odious exaggeration, to the end that the doctrine of our teachers on this
point might be better understood.
First, concerning such as contract
matrimony, they teach on our part that it is lawful for all men who are
not fitted for single life to contract matrimony, because vows cannot
annul the ordinance and commandment of God. But the commandment of God
is 1 Cor. 7, 2: To avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife.
Nor is it the commandment only, but also the creation and ordinance of
God, which forces those to marry who are not excepted by a singular work
of God, according to the text Gen. 2, 18: It is not good that the man
should be alone. Therefore they do not sin who obey this commandment and
ordinance of God.
What objection can be raised to
this? Let men extol the obligation of a vow as much as they list, yet
shall they not bring to pass that the vow annuls the commandment of God.
The Canons teach that the right of the superior is excepted in every vow;
[that vows are not binding against the decision of the Pope;] much less,
therefore, are these vows of force which are against the commandments
of God. Back to top
Now, if the obligation of vows could
not be changed for any cause whatever, the Roman Pontiffs could never
have given dispensation for it is not lawful for man to annul an obligation
which is simply divine. But the Roman Pontiffs have prudently judged that
leniency is to be observed in this obligation, and therefore we read that
many times they have dispensed from vows. The case of the King of Aragon
who was called back from the monastery is well known, and there are also
examples in our own times. [Now, if dispensations have been granted for
the sake of securing temporal interests, it is much more proper that they
be granted on account of the distress of souls.]
In the second place, why do our
adversaries exaggerate the obligation or effect of a vow when, at the
same time, they have not a word to say of the nature of the vow itself,
that it ought to be in a thing possible, that it ought to be free, and
chosen spontaneously and deliberately? But it is not unknown to what extent
perpetual chastity is in the power of man. And how few are there who have
taken the vow spontaneously and deliberately! Young maidens and men, before
they are able to judge, are persuaded, and sometimes even compelled, to
take the vow. Wherefore it is not fair to insist so rigorously on the
obligation, since it is granted by all that it is against the nature of
a vow to take it without spontaneous and deliberate action. Back
to top
Most canonical laws rescind vows
made before the age of fifteen; for before that age there does not seem
sufficient judgment in a person to decide concerning a perpetual life.
Another Canon, granting more to the weakness of man, adds a few years;
for it forbids a vow to be made before the age of eighteen. But which
of these two Canons shall we follow? The most part have an excuse for
leaving the monasteries, because most of them have taken the vows before
they reached these ages.
Finally, even though the violation
of a vow might be censured, yet it seems not forthwith to follow that
the marriages of such persons must be dissolved. For Augustine denies
that they ought to be dissolved (XXVII. Quaest. I, Cap. Nuptiarum), and
his authority is not lightly to be esteemed, although other men afterwards
thought otherwise.
But although it appears that God's
command concerning marriage delivers very many from their vows, yet our
teachers introduce also another argument concerning vows to show that
they are void. For every service of God, ordained and chosen of men without
the commandment of God to merit justification and grace, is wicked, as
Christ says Matt. 16, 9: In vain do they worship Me with the commandments
of men. And Paul teaches everywhere that righteousness is not to be sought
from our own observances and acts of worship, devised by men, but that
it comes by faith to those who believe that they are received by God into
grace for Christ's sake.
But it is evident that monks have
taught that services of man's making satisfy for sins and merit grace
and justification. What else is this than to detract from the glory of
Christ and to obscure and den |