initial commit of ebook 6744HEADmain

5 files changed, 10832 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/.gitattributes b/.gitattributes
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..6833f05
--- /dev/null
+++ b/.gitattributes
@@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
+* text=auto
+*.txt text
+*.md text
diff --git a/6744.txt b/6744.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..6554c66
--- /dev/null
+++ b/6744.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,10816 @@
+The Project Gutenberg EBook of The Apology of the Augsburg Confession
+by Philip Melanchthon
+
+Copyright laws are changing all over the world. Be sure to check the
+copyright laws for your country before downloading or redistributing
+this or any other Project Gutenberg eBook.
+
+This header should be the first thing seen when viewing this Project
+Gutenberg file.  Please do not remove it.  Do not change or edit the
+header without written permission.
+
+Please read the "legal small print," and other information about the
+eBook and Project Gutenberg at the bottom of this file.  Included is
+important information about your specific rights and restrictions in
+how the file may be used.  You can also find out about how to make a
+donation to Project Gutenberg, and how to get involved.
+
+
+**Welcome To The World of Free Plain Vanilla Electronic Texts**
+
+**eBooks Readable By Both Humans and By Computers, Since 1971**
+
+*****These eBooks Were Prepared By Thousands of Volunteers!*****
+
+
+Title: The Apology of the Augsburg Confession
+
+Author: Philip Melanchthon
+
+Release Date: October, 2004 [EBook #6744]
+[Yes, we are more than one year ahead of schedule]
+[This file was first posted on January 20, 2003]
+
+Edition: 10
+
+Language: English
+
+Character set encoding: ASCII
+
+*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK APOLOGY OF THE AUGSBURG CONFESSION ***
+
+
+
+
+Produced for Project Gutenberg by Michael Pullen and David Klinge.
+
+
+
+
+
+The Apology of the Augsburg Confession
+
+by Philip Melanchthon
+
+Translated by F. Bente and  W. H. T. Dau
+
+
+_________________________________________________________________
+This text was converted to ASCII format for Project Wittenberg by
+Allen Mulvey. Please direct any comments or suggestions to:
+Rev. Robert E. Smith of the Walther Library at
+Concordia Theological Seminary.
+
+E-mail: smithre@mail.ctsfw.edu
+
+Surface Mail: 6600 N. Clinton St., Ft.  Wayne, IN 46825 USA
+Phone: (260) 452-3149                     Fax: (260) 452-2126
+________________________________________________________________
+
+
+The Apology of the Augsburg Confession (1531)
+
+Table of Contents
+
+Philip Melanchthon's Introduction to the Apology
+Part One: On Articles I-II of the Augustana
+Part Two: On Articles III-IV of the Augustana
+Part Three: What is Justifying Faith?
+Part Four: That Faith in Christ Justifies
+Part Five: That We Obtain Remission of Sins by Faith Alone in Christ
+Part Six: On Article III: Love and the Fulfilling of the Law
+Part Seven: Reply to the Arguments of the Adversaries
+Part Eight: Continuation of: Reply to the Arguments...
+Part Nine: Second Continuation of: Reply to the Arguments...
+Part Ten: Third Continuation of: Reply to the Arguments...
+Part Eleven: Articles Seven and Eight of the Augustana
+Part Twelve: Article Nine of the Augustana
+Part Thirteen: Article Ten of the Augustana
+Part Fourteen: Article Eleven of the Augustana
+Part Fifteen: Article Twelve of the Augustana
+Part Sixteen: Article Six of the Augustana (Pt. 1)
+Part Seventeen: Article Six of the Augustana (Pt. 2)
+Part Eighteen: Article Seven of the Augustana
+Part Nineteen: Article Fourteen of the Augustana
+Part Twenty: Article Fifteen of the Augustana
+Part Twenty-One: Article Sixteen of the Augustana
+Part Twenty-Two: Article Seventeen of the Augustana
+Part Twenty-Three: Article Eighteen of the Augustana
+Part Twenty-Four: Article Nineteen of the Augustana
+Part Twenty-Five: Article Twenty of the Augustana
+Part Twenty-Six: Article Twenty-One of the Augustana
+Part Twenty-Seven: Article Twenty-Two of the Augustana
+Part Twenty-Eight: Article Twenty-Three of the Augustana
+Part Twenty-Nine: Article Twenty-Four of the Augustana
+Part Thirty: A Definition of the term "Sacrifice"
+Part Thirty-One: What the Fathers Thought About Sacrifice
+Part Thirty-Two: Of the Use of the Sacrament and Sacrifice
+Part Thirty-Three: Of the Term "Mass"
+Part Thirty-Four:Of the Mass for the Dead
+Part Thirty-Five: Of Monastic Vows
+Part Thirty-Six: Of Ecclesiatical Power
+Part Thirty-Seven: End
+
+
+INTRODUCTION
+
+
+THE APOLOGY OF THE CONFESSION.
+
+Philip Melanchthon Presents His Greeting to the Reader.  Wherefore we
+believe that troubles and dangers for the glory of Christ and the
+good of the Church should be endured, and we are confident that this
+our fidelity to duty is approved of God, and we hope that the
+judgment of posterity concerning us will be more just.
+
+For it is undeniable that many topics of Christian doctrine whose
+existence in the Church is of the greatest moment have been brought
+to view by our theologians and explained; in reference to which we
+are not disposed here to recount under what sort of opinions, and how
+dangerous, they formerly lay covered in the writings of the monks,
+canonists, and sophistical theologians.  [This may have to be done
+later.]
+
+We have the public testimonials of many good men, who give God thanks
+for this greatest blessing, namely, that concerning many necessary
+topics it has taught better things than are read everywhere in the
+books of our adversaries.
+
+We shall commend our cause, therefore, to Christ, who some time will
+judge these controversies, and we beseech Him to look upon the
+afflicted and scattered churches, and to bring them back to godly and
+perpetual concord.  [Therefore, if the known and clear truth is
+trodden under foot, we will resign this cause to God and Christ in
+heaven, who is the Father of orphans and the Judge of widows and of
+all the forsaken, who (as we certainly know) will judge and pass
+sentence upon this cause aright.  Lord Jesus Christ, it is Thy holy
+Gospel, it is Thy cause; look Thou upon the many troubled hearts and
+consciences, and maintain and strengthen in Thy truth Thy churches
+and little flocks, who suffer anxiety and distress from the devil.
+Confound all hypocrisy and lies, and grant peace and unity, so that
+Thy glory may advance, and Thy kingdom, strong against all the gates
+of hell, may continually grow and increase.]
+
+
+
+
+Part 1
+
+
+Article I: _Of God._
+
+The First Article of our Confession our adversaries approve, in which
+we declare that we believe and teach that there is one divine essence,
+undivided, etc., and yet, that there are three distinct persons, of
+the same divine essence, and coeternal, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost.
+This article we have always taught and defended, and we believe that
+it has, in Holy Scripture, sure and firm testimonies that cannot be
+overthrown.  And we constantly affirm that those thinking otherwise
+are outside of the Church of Christ, and are idolaters, and insult
+God.
+
+
+Article II (I): _Of Original Sin._
+
+The Second Article, Of Original Sin, the adversaries approve, but in
+such a way that they, nevertheless, censure the definition of
+original sin, which we incidentally gave.  Here, immediately at the
+very threshold, His Imperial Majesty will discover that the writers
+of the _Confutation_ were deficient not only in judgment, but also in
+candor.  For whereas we, with a simple mind, desired, in passing, to
+recount those things which original sin embraces, these men, by
+framing an invidious interpretation, artfully distort a proposition
+that has in it nothing which of itself is wrong.  Thus they say: "To
+be without the fear of God, to be without faith, is actual guilt";
+and therefore they deny that it is original guilt.
+
+It is quite evident that such subtilties have originated in the
+schools, not in the council of the Emperor.  But although this
+sophistry can be very easily refuted; yet, in order that all good men
+may understand that we teach in this matter nothing that is absurd,
+we ask first of all that the German Confession be examined.  This
+will free us from the suspicion of novelty.  For there it is written:
+_Weiter wird gelehrt, dass nach dem Fall Adams alle Menschen, so
+natuerlich geboren werden, in Suenden empfangen und geboren werdenen,
+das ist, dass sie alle von Mutterleibe an voll boeser Lueste und
+Neigung sind, keine wahre Gottesfurcht, keinen wahren Glauben an Gott
+von Natur haben koennen._ [It is further taught that since the Fall
+of Adam all men who are naturally born are conceived and born in sin,
+i.e., that they all, from their mother's womb, are full of evil
+desire and inclination, and can have by nature no true fear of God,
+no true faith in God.] This passage testifies that we deny to those
+propagated according to carnal nature not only the acts, but also the
+power or gifts of producing fear and trust in God.  For we say that
+those thus born have concupiscence, and cannot produce true fear and
+trust in God.  What is there here with which fault can be found?  To
+good men, we think, indeed, that we have exculpated ourselves
+sufficiently.  For in this sense the Latin description denies to
+nature [even to innocent infants] the power, i.e., it denies the
+gifts and energy by which to produce fear and trust in God, and, in
+adults [over and above this innate evil disposition of the heart,
+also] the acts, so that, when we mention concupiscence, we understand
+not only the acts or fruits, but the constant inclination of the
+nature [the evil inclination within, which does not cease as long as
+we are not born anew through the Spirit and faith].
+
+But hereafter we will show more fully that our description agrees
+with the usual and ancient definition.  For we must first show our
+design in preferring to employ these words in this place.  In their
+schools the adversaries confess that "the material," as they call it,
+"of original sin is concupiscence." Wherefore, in framing the
+definition, this should not have been passed by, especially at this
+time, when some are philosophizing concerning it in a manner
+unbecoming teachers of religion [are speaking concerning this innate,
+wicked desire more after the manner of heathen from philosophy than
+according to God's Word, or Holy Scripture].
+
+For some contend that original sin is not a depravity or corruption
+in the nature of man, but only servitude, or a condition of mortality
+[not an innate evil nature, but only a blemish or imposed load, or
+burden], which those propagated from Adam bear because of the guilt
+of another [namely, Adam's sin], and without any depravity of their
+own.  Besides, they add that no one is condemned to eternal death on
+account of original sin, just as those who are born of a bond-woman
+are slaves, and bear this condition without any natural blemish, but
+because of the calamity of their mother [while, of themselves, they
+are born without fault, like other men: thus original sin is not an
+innate evil but a defect and burden which we bear since Adam, but we
+are not on that account personally in sin and inherited disgrace].
+To show that this impious opinion is displeasing to us, we made
+mention of "concupiscence," and, with the best intention, have termed
+and explained it as "diseases," that "the nature of men is born
+corrupt and full of faults" [not a part of man, but the entire person
+with its entire nature is born in sin as with a hereditary disease].
+
+Nor, indeed, have we only made use of the term concupiscence, but we
+have also said that "the fear of God and faith are wanting." This we
+have added with the following design: The scholastic teachers also,
+not sufficiently understanding the definition of original sin, which
+they have received from the Fathers, extenuate the sin of origin.
+They contend concerning the fomes [or evil inclination] that it is a
+quality of [blemish in the] body, and, with their usual folly, ask
+whether this quality be derived from the contagion of the apple or
+from the breath of the serpent, and whether it be increased by
+remedies.  With such questions they have suppressed the main point.
+Therefore, when they speak of the sin of origin, they do not mention
+the more serious faults of human nature, to wit, ignorance of God,
+contempt for God, being destitute of fear and confidence in God,
+hatred of God's judgment, flight from God [as from a tyrant] when He
+judges, anger toward God, despair of grace, putting one's trust in
+present things [money, property, friends], etc. These diseases, which
+are in the highest degree contrary to the Law of God, the scholastics
+do not notice; yea, to human nature they meanwhile ascribe unimpaired
+strength for loving God above all things, and for fulfilling God's
+commandments according to the substance of the acts; nor do they see
+that they are saying things that are contradictory to one another.
+For what else is the being able in one's own strength to love God
+above all things, and to fulfil His commandments, than to have
+original righteousness [to be a new creature in Paradise, entirely
+pure and holy]?  But if human nature have such strength as to be able
+of itself to love God above all things, as the scholastics
+confidently affirm, what will original sin be?  For what will there
+be need of the grace of Christ if we can be justified by our own
+righteousness [powers]?  For what will there be need of the Holy
+Ghost if human strength can by itself love God above all things, and
+fulfil God's commandments?  Who does not see what preposterous
+thoughts our adversaries entertain?  The lighter diseases in the
+nature of man they acknowledge, the more severe they do not
+acknowledge; and yet of these, Scripture everywhere admonishes us,
+and the prophets constantly complain [as the 13th Psalm, and some
+other psalms say Ps. 14, 1-3; 5, 9; 140, 3; 36, 1], namely, of carnal
+security, of the contempt of God, of hatred toward God, and of
+similar faults born with us.  [For Scripture clearly says that all
+these things are not blown at us, but born with us.] But after the
+scholastics mingled with Christian doctrine philosophy concerning the
+perfection of nature [light of reason], and ascribed to the free will
+and the acts springing therefrom more than was sufficient, and taught
+that men are justified before God by philosophic or civil
+righteousness (which we also confess to be subject to reason, and in
+a measure, within our power), they could not see the inner
+uncleanness of the nature of men.  For this cannot be judged except
+from the Word of God, of which the scholastics, in their discussions,
+do not frequently treat.
+
+These were the reasons why, in the description of original sin, we
+made mention of concupiscence also, and denied to man's natural
+strength the fear of God and trust in Him.  For we wished to indicate
+that original sin contains also these diseases, namely, ignorance of
+God, contempt for God, the being destitute of the fear of God and
+trust in Him, inability to love God.  These are the chief faults of
+human nature, conflicting especially with the first table of the
+Decalog.
+
+Neither have we said anything new.  The ancient definition understood
+aright expresses precisely the same thing when it says: "Original sin
+is the absence of original righteousness" [a lack of the first purity
+and righteousness in Paradise].  But what is righteousness?  Here the
+scholastics wrangle about dialectic questions, they do not explain
+what original righteousness is.  Now, in the Scriptures,
+righteousness comprises not only the second table of the Decalog
+[regarding good works in serving our fellow-man], but the first also,
+which teaches concerning the fear of God, concerning faith,
+concerning the love of God.  Therefore original righteousness was to
+embrace not only an even temperament of the bodily qualities [perfect
+health and, in all respects, pure blood, unimpaired powers of the
+body, as they contend], but also these gifts, namely, a quite certain
+knowledge of God, fear of God, confidence in God, or certainly the
+rectitude and power to yield these affections [but the greatest
+feature in that noble first creature was a bright light in the heart
+to know God and His work, etc.].  And Scripture testifies to this,
+when it says, Gen. 1, 27, that man was fashioned in the image and
+likeness of God.  What else is this than that there were embodied in
+man such wisdom and righteousness as apprehended God, and in which
+God was reflected, i.e., to man there were given the gifts of the
+knowledge of God, the fear of God, confidence in God, and the like?
+For thus Irenaeus and Ambrose interpret the likeness to God, the
+latter of whom not only says many things to this effect, but
+especially declares: That soul is not, therefore, in the image of God,
+in which God is not at all times.  And Paul shows in the Epistles to
+the Ephesians, 5, 9, and Colossians, 3,10, that the image of God is
+the knowledge of God, righteousness, and truth.  Nor does Longobard
+fear to say that original righteousness is the very likeness to God
+which God implanted in man.  We recount the opinions of the ancients,
+which in no way interfere with Augustine's interpretation of the
+image.
+
+Therefore the ancient definition, when it says that sin is the lack
+of righteousness, not only denies obedience with respect to man's
+lower powers [that man is not only corrupt in his body and its
+meanest and lowest faculties], but also denies the knowledge of God,
+confidence in God, the fear and love of God, or certainly the power
+to produce these affections [the light in the heart which creates a
+love and desire for these matters].  For even the theologians
+themselves teach in their schools that these are not produced without
+certain gifts and the aid of grace.  In order that the matter may be
+understood, we term these very gifts the knowledge of God, and fear
+and confidence in God.  From these facts it appears that the ancient
+definition says precisely the same thing that we say, denying fear
+and confidence toward God, to wit, not only the acts, but also the
+gifts and power to produce these acts [that we have no good heart
+toward God, which truly loves God, not only that we are unable to do
+or achieve any perfectly good work].
+
+Of the same import is the definition which occurs in the writings of
+Augustine, who is accustomed to define original sin as concupiscence
+[wicked desire].  For he means that when righteousness had been lost,
+concupiscence came in its place.  For inasmuch as diseased nature
+cannot fear and love God and believe God, it seeks and loves carnal
+things.  God's judgment it either contemns when at ease, or hates,
+when thoroughly terrified.  Thus Augustine includes both the defect
+and the vicious habit which has come in its place.  Nor indeed is
+concupiscence only a corruption of the qualities of the body, but
+also, in the higher powers, a vicious turning to carnal things.  Nor
+do those persons see what they say who ascribe to man at the same
+time concupiscence that is not entirely destroyed by the Holy Ghost,
+and love to God above all things.
+
+We, therefore, have been right in expressing, in our description of
+original sin, both namely, these defects: the not being able to
+believe God, the not being able to fear and love God; and, likewise:
+the having concupiscence, which seeks carnal things contrary to God's
+Word, i.e., seeks not only the pleasure of the body, but also carnal
+wisdom and righteousness, and, contemning God, trusts in these as god
+things.  Nor only the ancients [like Augustine and others], but also
+the more recent [teachers and scholastics], at least the wiser ones
+among them, teach that original sin is at the same time truly these
+namely, the defects which I have recounted and concupiscence.  For
+Thomas says thus: Original sin comprehends the loss of original
+righteousness, and with this an inordinate disposition of the parts
+of the soul; whence it is not pure loss, but a corrupt habit
+[something positive].  And Bonaventura: When the question is asked,
+What is original sin?  The correct answer is, that it is immoderate
+[unchecked] concupiscence.  The correct answer is also, that it is
+want of the righteousness that is due.  And in one of these replies
+the other is included.  The same is the opinion of Hugo, when he says
+that original sin is ignorance in the mind and concupiscence in the
+flesh.  For he thereby indicates that when we are born, we bring with
+us ignorance of God unbelief, distrust, contempt, and hatred of God.
+For when he mentions ignorance, he includes these.  And these
+opinions [even of the most recent teachers] also agree with Scripture.
+For Paul sometimes expressly calls it a defect [a lack of divine
+light], as 1 Cor. 2, 14: The natural man receiveth not the things of
+the Spirit of God.  In another place, Rom. 7, 5, he calls it
+concupiscence working in our members to bring forth fruit unto death.
+We could cite more passages relating to both parts, but in regard to
+a manifest fact there is no need of testimonies.  And the intelligent
+reader will readily be able to decide that to be without the fear of
+God and without faith are more than actual guilt.  For they are
+abiding defects in our unrenewed nature.
+
+In reference to original sin we therefore hold nothing differing
+either from Scripture or from the Church catholic, but cleanse from
+corruptions and restore to light most important declarations of
+Scripture and of the Fathers, that had been covered over by the
+sophistical controversies of modern theologians.  For it is manifest
+from the subject itself that modern theologians have not noticed what
+the Fathers meant when they spake of defect [lack of original
+righteousness].  But the knowledge of original sin is necessary.  For
+the magnitude of the grace of Christ cannot be understood [no one can
+heartily long and have a desire for Christ for the inexpressibly
+great treasure of divine favor and grace which the Gospel offers],
+unless our diseases be recognized.  [As Christ says Matt. 9, 12; Mark
+2, 17: They that are whole need not a physician.] The entire
+righteousness of man is mere hypocrisy [and abomination] before God,
+unless we acknowledge that our heart is naturally destitute of love,
+fear, and confidence in God [that we are miserable sinners who are in
+disgrace with God].  For this reason the prophet Jeremiah, 31, 19,
+says: After that I was instructed, I smote upon my thigh.  Likewise
+Ps. 116, 11: I said in my haste, All men are liars, i.e., not
+thinking aright concerning God.
+
+Here our adversaries inveigh against Luther also because he wrote
+that, "Original sin remains after Baptism." They add that this
+article was justly condemned by Leo X. But His Imperial Majesty will
+find on this point a manifest slander.  For our adversaries know in
+what sense Luther intended this remark that original sin remains
+after Baptism.  He always wrote thus, namely, that Baptism removes
+the guilt of original sin, although the material, as they call it, of
+the sin, i.e., concupiscence, remains.  He also added in reference to
+the material that the Holy Ghost, given through Baptism, begins to
+mortify the concupiscence, and creates new movements [a new light, a
+new sense and spirit] in man.  In the same manner, Augustine also
+speaks who says: Sin is remitted in Baptism, not in such a manner
+that it no longer exists, but so that it is not imputed.  Here he
+confesses openly that sin exists, i.e., that it remains although it
+is not imputed.  And this judgment was so agreeable to those who
+succeeded him that it was recited also in the decrees.  Also against
+Julian, Augustine says: The Law, which is in the members, has been
+annulled by spiritual regeneration, and remains in the mortal flesh.
+It has been annulled because the guilt has been remitted in the
+Sacrament, by which believers are born again; but it remains, because
+it produces desires against which believers contend.  Our adversaries
+know that Luther believes and teaches thus, and while they cannot
+reject the matter, they nevertheless pervert his words, in order by
+this artifice to crush an innocent man.
+
+But they contend that concupiscence is a penalty, and not a sin [a
+burden and imposed penalty, and is not such a sin as is subject to
+death and condemnation].  Luther maintains that it is a sin.  It has
+been said above that Augustine defines original sin as concupiscence.
+If there be anything disadvantageous in this opinion, let them
+quarrel with Augustine.  Besides Paul says, Rom. 7, 7. 23: I had not
+known lust (concupiscence), except the Law had said, Thou shalt not
+covet.  Likewise: I see another law in my members, warring against
+the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin
+which is in my members.  These testimonies can be overthrown by no
+sophistry.  [All devils, all men cannot overthrow them.] For they
+clearly call concupiscence sin, which, nevertheless, is not imputed
+to those who are in Christ although by nature it is a matter worthy
+of death where it is not forgiven.  Thus, beyond all controversy, the
+Fathers believe.  For Augustine, in a long discussion refutes the
+opinion of those who thought that concupiscence in man is not a fault
+but an adiaphoron, as color of the body or ill health is said to be
+an adiaphoron [as to have a black or a white body is neither good nor
+evil].
+
+But if the adversaries will contend that the fomes [or evil
+inclination] is an adiaphoron, not only many passages of Scripture
+but simply the entire Church [and all the Fathers] will contradict
+them.  For [even if not entire consent, but only the inclination and
+desire be there] who ever dared to say that these matters, even
+though perfect agreement could not be attained, were adiaphora,
+namely, to doubt concerning God's wrath,: concerning God's grace,
+concerning God's Word, to be angry at the judgments of God, to be
+provoked because God does not at once deliver one from afflictions,
+to murmur because the wicked enjoy a better fortune than the good, to
+be urged on by wrath, lust, the desire for glory, wealth, etc.?  And
+yet godly men acknowledge these in themselves, as appears in the
+Psalms and the prophets.  [For all tried, Christian hearts know, alas!
+that these evils are wrapped up in man's skin, namely to esteem
+money, goods, and all other matters more highly than God, and to
+spend our lives in security; again, that after the manner of our
+carnal security we always imagine that God's wrath against sin is not
+as serious and great as it verily is.  Again, that we murmur against
+the doing and will of God, when He does not succor us speedily in our
+tribulations, and arranges our affairs to please us.  Again, we
+experience every day that it hurts us to see wicked people in good
+fortune in this world, as David and all the saints have complained.
+Over and above this, all men feel that their hearts are easily
+inflamed, now with ambition, now with anger and wrath, now with
+lewdness.] But in the schools they transferred hither from philosophy
+notions entirely different, that, because of passions, we are neither
+good nor evil, we are neither deserving of praise nor blame.
+Likewise, that nothing is sin, unless it be voluntary [inner desires
+and thoughts are not sins, if I do not altogether consent thereto].
+These notions were expressed among philosophers with respect to civil
+righteousness, and not with respect to God's judgment.  [For there it
+is true, as the jurists say, L. cogitationis, thoughts are exempt
+from custom and punishment.  But God searches the hearts; in God's
+court and judgment it is different.] With no greater prudence they
+add also other notions, such as, that [God's creature and] nature is
+not [cannot in itself be] evil.  In its proper place we do not
+censure this; but it is not right to twist it into an extenuation of
+original sin.  And, nevertheless, these notions are read in the works
+of scholastics, who inappropriately mingle philosophy or civil
+doctrine concerning ethics with the Gospel.  Nor were these matters
+only disputed in the schools, but, as is usually the case, were
+carried from the schools to the people.  And these persuasions
+[godless, erroneous, dangerous, harmful teachings] prevailed, and
+nourished confidence in human strength, and suppressed the knowledge
+of Christ's grace.  Therefore, Luther wishing to declare the
+magnitude of original sin and of human infirmity [what a grievous
+mortal guilt original sin is in the sight of God], taught that these
+remnants of original sin [after Baptism] are not, by their own nature,
+adiaphora in man, but that, for their non-imputation, they need the
+grace of Christ and, likewise for their mortification, the Holy Ghost.
+
+Although the scholastics extenuate both sin and punishment when they
+teach that man by his own strength, can fulfil the commandments of
+God; in Genesis the punishment, imposed on account of original sin,
+is described otherwise.  For there human nature is subjected not only
+to death and other bodily evils, but also to the kingdom of the devil.
+For there, Gen. 3, 16, this fearful sentence is proclaimed: I will
+put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her
+seed.  The defects and the concupiscence are punishments and sins.
+Death and other bodily evils and the dominion of the devil, are
+properly punishments.  For human nature has been delivered into
+slavery, and is held captive by the devil, who infatuates it with
+wicked opinions and errors, and impels it to sins of every kind.  But
+just as the devil cannot be conquered except by the aid of Christ, so
+by our own strength we cannot free ourselves from this slavery.  Even
+the history of the world shows how great is the power of the devil's
+kingdom.  The world is full of blasphemies against God and of wicked
+opinions, and the devil keeps entangled in these bands those who are
+wise and righteous [many hypocrites who appear holy] in the sight of
+the world.  In other persons grosser vices manifest themselves.  But
+since Christ was given to us to remove both these sins and these
+punishments, and to destroy the kingdom of the devil, sin and death,
+it will not be possible to recognize the benefits of Christ unless we
+understand our evils.  For this reason our preachers have diligently
+taught concerning these subjects, and have delivered nothing that is
+new but have set forth Holy Scripture and the judgments of the holy
+Fathers.
+
+We think that this will satisfy His Imperial Majesty concerning the
+puerile and trivial sophistry with which the adversaries have
+perverted our article.  For we know that we believe aright and in
+harmony with the Church catholic of Christ.  But if the adversaries
+will renew this controversy, there will be no want among us of those
+who will reply and defend the truth.  For in this case our
+adversaries, to a great extent, do not understand what they say.
+They often speak what is contradictory, and neither explain correctly
+and logically that which is essential to [i.e., that which is or is
+not properly of the essence of] original sin, nor what they call
+defects.  But we have been unwilling at this place to examine their
+contests with any very great subtlety.  We have thought it worth
+while only to recite, in customary and well-known words, the belief
+of the holy Fathers, which we also follow.
+
+
+
+
+PART 2
+
+
+Article III: _Of Christ._
+
+The Third Article the adversaries approve, in which we confess that
+there are in Christ two natures, namely, a human nature, assumed by
+the Word into the unity of His person; and that the same Christ
+suffered and died to reconcile the Father to us; and that He was
+raised again to reign, and to justify and sanctify believers, etc.,
+according to the Apostles' Creed and the Nicene Creed.
+
+
+Article IV (II): _Of Justification._
+
+In the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, and, below, in the Twentieth Article,
+they condemn us, for teaching that men obtain remission of sins, not
+because of their own merits, but freely for Christ's sake, through
+faith in Christ.  [They reject quite stubbornly both these statements.
+] For they condemn us both for denying that men obtain remission of
+sins because of their own merits, and for affirming that, through
+faith, men obtain remission of sins, and through faith in Christ are
+justified.  But since in this controversy the chief topic of
+Christian doctrine is treated, which, understood aright, illumines
+and amplifies the honor of Christ [which is of especial service for
+the clear, correct understanding of the entire Holy Scriptures, and
+alone shows the way to the unspeakable treasure and right knowledge
+of Christ, and alone opens the door to the entire Bible], and brings
+necessary and most abundant consolation to devout consciences, we ask
+His Imperial Majesty to hear us with forbearance in regard to matters
+of such importance.  For since the adversaries understand neither
+what the remission of sins, nor what faith, nor what grace, nor what
+righteousness is, they sadly corrupt this topic, and obscure the
+glory and benefits of Christ and rob devout consciences of the
+consolations offered in Christ.  But that we may strengthen the
+position of our Confession, and also remove the charges which the
+adversaries advance against us, certain things are to be premised in
+the beginning, in order that the sources of both kinds of doctrine, i.
+e., both that of our adversaries and our own, may be known.
+
+All Scripture ought to be distributed into these two principal topics,
+the Law and the promises.  For in some places it presents the Law,
+and in others the promise concerning Christ, namely, either when [in
+the Old Testament] it promises that Christ will come, and offers, for
+His sake, the remission of sins justification, and life eternal, or
+when, in the Gospel [in the New Testament], Christ Himself, since He
+has appeared, promises the remission of sins, justification, and life
+eternal.  Moreover, in this discussion, by Law we designate the Ten
+Commandments, wherever they are read in the Scriptures.  Of the
+ceremonies and judicial laws of Moses we say nothing at present.
+
+Of these two parts the adversaries select the Law, because human
+reason naturally understands, in some way, the Law (for it has the
+same judgment divinely written in the mind); [the natural law agrees
+with the law of Moses, or the Ten Commandments] and by the Law they
+seek the remission of sins and justification.  Now, the Decalog
+requires not only outward civil works, which reason can in some way
+produce, but it also requires other things placed far above reason,
+namely, truly to fear God, truly to love God, truly to call upon God,
+truly to be convinced that God hears us, and to expect the aid of God
+in death and in all afflictions; finally, it requires obedience to
+God, in death and all afflictions, so that we may not flee from these,
+or refuse them when God imposes them.
+
+Here the scholastics, having followed the philosophers, teach only a
+righteousness of reason, namely, civil works, and fabricate besides
+that without the Holy Ghost reason can love God above all things.
+For, as long as the human mind is at ease, and does not feel the
+wrath or judgment of God, it can imagine that it wishes to love God,
+that it wishes to do good for God's sake.  [But it is sheer hypocrisy.
+] In this manner they teach that men merit the remission of sins by
+doing what is in them, i.e., if reason, grieving over sin, elicit an
+act of love to God, or for God's sake be active in that which is good.
+And because this opinion naturally flatters men, it has brought
+forth and multiplied in the Church many services, monastic vows,
+abuses of the mass; and, with this opinion the one has, in the course
+of time, devised this act of worship and observances, the other that.
+And in order that they might nourish and increase confidence in such
+works, they have affirmed that God necessarily gives grace to one
+thus working, by the necessity not of constraint, but of immutability
+[not that He is constrained, but that this is the order which God
+will not transgress or alter].
+
+In this opinion there are many great and pernicious errors, which it
+would be tedious to enumerate.  Let the discreet reader think only of
+this: If this be Christian righteousness, what difference is there
+between philosophy and the doctrine of Christ?  If we merit the
+remission of sins by these elicit acts [that spring from our mind],
+of what benefit is Christ?  If we can be justified by reason and the
+works of reason, wherefore is there need of Christ or regeneration
+[as Peter declares, 1 Pet. 1, 18 ff.]?  And from these opinions the
+matter has now come to such a pass that many ridicule us because we
+teach that an other than the philosophic righteousness must be sought
+after.  [Alas! it has come to this, that even great theologians at
+Louvain, Paris, etc., have known nothing of any other godliness or
+righteousness (although every letter and syllable in Paul teaches
+otherwise) than the godliness which philosophers teach.  And although
+we ought to regard this as a strange teaching, and ought to ridicule
+it, they rather ridicule us, yea, make a jest of Paul himself.] We
+have heard that some, after setting aside the Gospel, have, instead
+of a sermon, explained the ethics of Aristotle.  [I myself have heard
+a great preacher who did not mention Christ and the Gospel, and
+preached the ethics of Aristotle.  Is this not a childish, foolish
+way to preach to Christians?] Nor did such men err if those things
+are true which the adversaries defend [if the doctrine of the
+adversaries be true, the Ethics is a precious book of sermons, and a
+fine new Bible].  For Aristotle wrote concerning civil morals so
+learnedly that nothing further concerning this need be demanded.  We
+see books extant in which certain sayings of Christ are compared with
+the sayings of Socrates, Zeno, and others, as though Christ had come
+for the purpose of delivering certain laws through which we might
+merit the remission of sins, as though we did not receive this
+gratuitously, because of His merits.  Therefore, if we here receive
+the doctrine of the adversaries, that by the works of reason we merit
+the remission of sins and justification, there will be no difference
+between philosophic, or certainly pharisaic, and Christian
+righteousness.
+
+Although the adversaries, not to pass by Christ altogether, require a
+knowledge of the history concerning Christ, and ascribe to Him that
+it is His merit that a habit is given us, or, as they say, _prima
+gratia_, "first grace," which they understand as a habit, inclining
+us the more readily to love God; yet what they ascribe to this habit
+is of little importance [is a feeble, paltry, small, poor operation,
+that would be ascribed to Christ], because they imagine that the acts
+of the will are of the same kind before and after this habit.  They
+imagine that the will can love God; but nevertheless this habit
+stimulates it to do the same the more cheerfully.  And they bid us
+first merit this habit by preceding merits; then they bid us merit by
+the works of the Law an increase of this habit and life eternal.
+Thus they bury Christ, so that men may not avail themselves of Him as
+a Mediator, and believe that for His sake they freely receive
+remission of sins and reconciliation, but may dream that by their own
+fulfilment of the Law they merit the remission of sins, and that by
+their own fulfilment of the Law they are accounted righteous before
+God; while, nevertheless, the Law is never satisfied, since reason
+does nothing except certain civil works, and, in the mean time
+neither [in the heart] fears God, nor truly believes that God cares
+for it.  And although they speak of this habit, yet, without the
+righteousness of faith, neither the love of God can exist in man, nor
+can it be understood what the love of God is.
+
+Their feigning a distinction between _meritum congrui_ and _meritum
+condigni_ [due merit and true, complete merit] is only an artifice in
+order not to appear openly to Pelagianize, For, if God necessarily
+gives grace for the _meritum congrui_ [due merit], it is no longer
+_meritum congrui_, but _meritum condigni_ [a true duty and complete
+merit].  But they do not know what they are saying.  After this habit
+of love [is there], they imagine that man can acquire _merit de
+condigno_.  And yet they bid us doubt whether there be a habit
+present.  How, therefore, do they know whether they acquire merit _de
+congruo_ or _de condigno_ [in full, or half]?  But this whole matter
+was fabricated by idle men [But, good God! these are mere inane ideas
+and dreams of idle, wretched, inexperienced men who do not much
+reduce the Bible to practise], who did not know how the remission of
+sins occurs, and how, in the judgment of God and terrors of
+conscience, trust in works is driven out of us.  Secure hypocrites
+always judge that they acquire _merit de condigno_, whether the habit
+be present or be not present, because men naturally trust in their
+own righteousness, but terrified consciences waver and hesitate, and
+then seek and accumulate other works in order to find rest.  Such
+consciences never think that they acquire merit _de condigno_, and
+they rush into despair unless they hear, in addition to the doctrine
+of the Law, the Gospel concerning the gratuitous remission of sins
+and the righteousness of faith.  [Thus some stories are told that
+when the Barefooted monks had in vain praised their order and good
+works to some good consciences in the hour of death, they at last had
+to be silent concerning their order and St. Franciscus, and to say:
+"Dear man, Christ has died for you." This revived and refreshed in
+trouble, and alone gave peace and comfort.]
+
+Thus the adversaries teach nothing but the righteousness of reason,
+or certainly of the Law, upon which they look just as the Jews upon
+the veiled face of Moses, and, in secure hypocrites who think that
+they satisfy the Law, they excite presumption and empty confidence in
+works [they place men on a sand foundation, their own works] and
+contempt of the grace of Christ.  On the contrary, they drive timid
+consciences to despair, which, laboring with doubt, never can
+experience what faith is, and how efficacious it is; thus, at last
+they utterly despair.
+
+Now, we think concerning the righteousness of reason thus, namely,
+that God requires it, and that, because of God's commandment, the
+honorable works which the Decalog commands must necessarily be
+performed, according to the passage Gal. 3, 24: The Law was our
+schoolmaster; likewise 1 Tim. 1, 9: The Law is made for the ungodly.
+For God wishes those who are carnal [gross sinners] to be restrained
+by civil discipline, and to maintain this, He has given laws, letters,
+doctrine, magistrates, penalties.  And this righteousness reason, by
+its own strength, can, to a certain extent, work, although it is
+often overcome by natural weakness, and by the devil impelling it to
+manifest crimes.  Now, although we cheerfully assign this
+righteousness of reason the praises that are due it (for this corrupt
+nature has no greater good [in this life and in a worldly nature,
+nothing is ever better than uprightness and virtue], and Aristotle
+says aright: Neither the evening star nor the morning star is more
+beautiful than righteousness, and God also honors it with bodily
+rewards), yet it ought not to be praised with reproach to Christ.
+
+For it is false [I thus conclude, and am certain that it is a fiction,
+and not true] that we merit the remission of sins by our works.
+
+False also is this, that men are accounted righteous before God
+because of the righteousness of reason [works and external piety].
+
+False also is this that reason, by its own strength, is able to love
+God above all things, and to fulfil God's Law, namely, truly to fear
+God to be truly confident that God hears prayer, to be willing to
+obey God in death and other dispensations of God, not to covet what
+belongs to others, etc.; although reason can work civil works.
+
+False also and dishonoring Christ is this, that men do not sin who,
+without grace, do the commandments of God [who keep the commandments
+of God merely in an external manner, without the Spirit and grace in
+their hearts].  We have testimonies for this our belief, not only
+from the Scriptures, but also from the Fathers.  For in opposition to
+the Pelagians, Augustine contends at great length that grace is not
+given because of our merits.  And in _De Natura et Gratia_ he says:
+If natural ability, through the free will, suffice both for learning
+to know how one ought to live and for living aright, then Christ has
+died in vain, then the offense of the Cross is made void.  Why may I
+not also here cry out?  Yea I will cry out, and, with Christian grief,
+will chide them: Christ has become of no effect unto you whosoever
+of you are justified by the Law; ye are fallen from grace.  Gal. 5, 4;
+cf. 2, 21. For they, being ignorant of God's righteousness, and
+going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted
+themselves unto the righteousness of God.  For Christ is the end of
+the Law for righteousness to every one that believeth.  Rom. 10 3. 4.
+And John 8, 36: If the Son therefore shall make you free, ye shall be
+free indeed.  Therefore by reason we cannot be freed from sins and
+merit the remission of sins.  And in John 3, 5 it is written: Except
+a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the
+kingdom of God.  But if it is necessary to be born again of the Holy
+Ghost the righteousness of reason does not justify us before God, and
+does not fulfil the Law, Rom. 3, 23: All have come short of the glory
+of God, i.e., are destitute of the wisdom and righteousness of God,
+which acknowledges and glorifies God.  Likewise Rom. 8, 7. 8: The
+carnal mind is enmity against God; for it is not subject to the Law
+of God, neither indeed can be.  So then they that are in the flesh
+cannot please God.  These testimonies are so manifest that, to use
+the words of Augustine which he employed in this case, they do not
+need an acute understanding, but only an attentive hearer.  If the
+carnal mind is enmity against God, the flesh certainly does not love
+God; if it cannot be subject to the Law of God, it cannot love God.
+If the carnal mind is enmity against God, the flesh sins even when we
+do external civil works.  If it cannot be subject to the Law of God,
+it certainly sins even when, according to human judgment, it
+possesses deeds that are excellent and worthy of praise.  The
+adversaries consider only the precepts of the Second Table which
+contain civil righteousness that reason understands.  Content with
+this, they think that they satisfy the Law of God.  In the mean time
+they do not see the First Table which commands that we love God, that
+we declare as certain that God is angry with sin, that we truly fear
+God, that we declare as certain that God hears prayer.  But the human
+heart without the Holy Ghost either in security despises God's
+judgment, or in punishment flees from, and hates, God when He judges.
+Therefore it does not obey the First Table.  Since, therefore,
+contempt of God, and doubt concerning the Word of God and concerning
+the threats and promises, inhere in human nature, men truly sin, even
+when, without the Holy Ghost, they do virtuous works, because they do
+them with a wicked heart, according to Rom. 14, 23: Whatsoever is not
+of faith is sin.  For such persons perform their works with contempt
+of God, just as Epicurus does not believe that God cares for him, or
+that he is regarded or heard by God.  This contempt vitiates works
+seemingly virtuous, because God judges the heart.
+
+Lastly, it was very foolish for the adversaries to write that men who
+are under eternal wrath merit the remission of sins by an act of love,
+which springs from their mind, since it is impossible to love God,
+unless the remission of sins be apprehended first by faith.  For the
+heart, truly feeling that God is angry, cannot love God, unless He be
+shown to have been reconciled.  As long as He terrifies us, and seems
+to cast us into eternal death, human nature is not able to take
+courage, so as to love a wrathful, judging, and punishing God [poor,
+weak nature must lose heart and courage, and must tremble before such
+great wrath, which so fearfully terrifies and punishes, and can never
+feel a spark of love before God Himself comforts].  It is easy for
+idle men to feign such dreams concerning love as, that a person
+guilty of mortal sin can love God above all things, because they do
+not feel what the wrath or judgment of God is.  But in agony of
+conscience and in conflicts [with Satan] conscience experiences the
+emptiness of these philosophical speculations.  Paul says, Rom. 4,15:
+The Law worketh wrath.  He does not say that by the Law men merit the
+remission of sins.  For the Law always accuses and terrifies
+consciences.  Therefore it does not justify, because conscience
+terrified by the Law flees from the judgment of God.  Therefore they
+err who trust that by the Law, by their own works, they merit the
+remission of sins.  It is sufficient for us to have said these things
+concerning the righteousness of reason or of the Law, which the
+adversaries teach.  For after a while, when we will declare our
+belief concerning the righteousness of faith, the subject itself will
+compel us to adduce more testimonies, which also will be of service
+in overthrowing the errors of the adversaries which we have thus far
+reviewed.
+
+Because, therefore, men by their own strength cannot fulfil the Law
+of God, and all are under sin, and subject to eternal wrath and death,
+on this account we cannot be freed by the Law from sin and be
+justified but the promise of the remission of sins and of
+justification has been given us for Christ's sake, who was given for
+us in order that He might make satisfaction for the sins of the world,
+and has been appointed as the [only] Mediator and Propitiator.  And
+this promise has not the condition of our merits [it does not read
+thus: Through Christ you have grace salvation, etc., if you merit it],
+but freely offers the remission of sins and justification, as Paul
+says, Rom. 11, 6: If it be of works, then is it no more grace.  And
+in another place, Rom. 3, 21: The righteousness of God without the
+Law is manifested, i.e., the remission of sins is freely offered.
+Nor does reconciliation depend upon our merits.  Because, if the
+remission of sins were to depend upon our merits, and reconciliation
+were from the Law, it would be useless.  For, as we do not fulfil the
+Law, it would also follow that we would never obtain the promise of
+reconciliation.  Thus Paul reasons, Rom. 4, 14: For if they which are
+of the Law be heirs, faith is made void, and the promise made of none
+effect.  For if the promise would require the condition of our merits
+and the Law, which we never fulfil, it would follow that the promise
+would be useless.
+
+But since justification is obtained through the free promise, it
+follows that we cannot justify ourselves.  Otherwise, wherefore would
+there be need to promise?  [And why should Paul so highly extol and
+praise grace?] For since the promise cannot be received except by
+faith, the Gospel, which is properly the promise of the remission of
+sins and of justification for Christ's sake, proclaims the
+righteousness of faith in Christ, which the Law does not teach.  Nor
+is this the righteousness of the Law.  For the Law requires of us our
+works and our perfection.  But the Gospel freely offers, for Christ's
+sake, to us, who have been vanquished by sin and death,
+reconciliation, which is received, not by works, but by faith alone.
+This faith brings to God not confidence in one's own merits, but only
+confidence in the promise, or the mercy promised in Christ.  This
+special faith, therefore, by which an individual believes that for
+Christ's sake his sins are remitted him, and that for Christ's sake
+God is reconciled and propitious, obtains remission of sins and
+justifies us.  And because in repentance, i.e. in terrors, it
+comforts and encourages hearts it regenerates us, and brings the Holy
+Ghost that then we may be able to fulfil God's Law, namely, to love
+God, truly to fear God, truly to be confident that God hears prayer,
+and to obey God in all afflictions; it mortifies concupiscence, etc.
+Thus, because faith, which freely receives the remission of sins,
+sets Christ, the Mediator and Propitiator, against God's wrath, it
+does not present our merits or our love [which would be tossed aside
+like a little feather by a hurricane].  This faith is the true
+knowledge of Christ, and avails itself of the benefits of Christ, and
+regenerates hearts, and precedes the fulfilling of the Law.  And of
+this faith not a syllable exists in the doctrine of our adversaries.
+Hence we find fault with the adversaries, equally because they teach
+only the righteousness of the Law and because they do not teach the
+righteousness of the Gospel, which proclaims the righteousness of
+faith in Christ.
+
+
+
+
+Part 3
+
+
+_What Is Justifying Faith?_
+
+The adversaries feign that faith is only a knowledge of the history,
+and therefore teach that it can coexist with mortal sin.  Hence they
+say nothing concerning faith, by which Paul so frequently says that
+men are justified, because those who are accounted righteous before
+God do not live in mortal sin.  But that faith which justifies is not
+merely a knowledge of history, [not merely this, that I know the
+stories of Christ's birth, suffering, etc. (that even the devils know,
+)] but it is to assent to the promise of God, in which for Christ's
+sake, the remission of sins and justification are freely offered.
+[It is the certainty or the certain trust in the heart, when, with my
+whole heart, I regard the promises of God as certain and true,
+through which there are offered me, without my merit, the forgiveness
+of sins, grace, and all salvation, through Christ the Mediator.] And
+that no one may suppose that it is mere knowledge we will add further:
+it is to wish and to receive the offered promise of the remission of
+sins and of justification.  [Faith is that my whole heart takes to
+itself this treasure.  It is not my doing, not my presenting or
+giving, not my work or preparation, but that a heart comforts itself,
+and is perfectly confident with respect to this, namely, that God
+makes a present and gift to us, and not we to Him, that He sheds upon
+us every treasure of grace in Christ.]
+
+And the difference between this faith and the righteousness of the
+Law can be easily discerned.  Faith is the _latreia_ [divine service],
+which receives the benefits offered by God; the righteousness of the
+Law is the _latreia_ [divine service] which offers to God our merits.
+By faith God wishes to be worshiped in this way, that we receive
+from Him those things which He promises and offers.
+
+Now, that faith signifies, not only a knowledge of the history, but
+such faith as assents to the promise, Paul plainly testifies when he
+says, Rom. 4, 16: Therefore it is of faith, to the end the promise
+might be sure.  For he judges that the promise cannot be received
+unless by faith.  Wherefore he puts them together as things that
+belong to one another, and connects promise and faith.  [There Paul
+fastens and binds together these two, thus: Wherever there is a
+promise faith is required and conversely, wherever faith is required
+there must be a promise.] Although it will be easy to decide what
+faith is if we consider the Creed where this article certainly stands:
+The forgiveness of sins.  Therefore it is not enough to believe that
+Christ was born, suffered, was raised again, unless we add also this
+article, which is the purpose of the history: The forgiveness of sins.
+To this article the rest must be referred, namely, that for
+Christ's sake, and not for the sake of our merits, forgiveness of
+sins is given us.  For what need was there that Christ was given for
+our sins if for our sins our merits can make satisfaction?
+
+As often, therefore, as we speak of justifying faith, we must keep in
+mind that these three objects concur: the promise, and that, too,
+gratuitous, and the merits of Christ, as the price and propitiation.
+The promise is received by faith; the "gratuitous" excludes our
+merits, and signifies that the benefit is offered only through mercy;
+the merits of Christ are the price, because there must be a certain
+propitiation for our sins.  Scripture frequently implores mercy, and
+the holy Fathers often say that we are saved by mercy.  As often,
+therefore, as mention is made of mercy, we must keep in mind that
+faith is there required, which receives the promise of mercy.  And,
+again, as often as we speak of faith, we wish an object to be
+understood, namely, the promised mercy.  For faith justifies and
+saves, not on the ground that it is a work in itself worthy, but only
+because it receives the promised mercy.
+
+And throughout the prophets and the psalms this worship, this
+_latreia_, is highly praised, although the Law does not teach the
+gratuitous remission of sins.  But the Fathers knew the promise
+concerning Christ that God for Christ's sake wished to remit sins.
+Therefore, since they understood that Christ would be the price for
+our sins, they knew that our works are not a price for so great a
+matter [could not pay so great a debt].  Accordingly, they received
+gratuitous mercy and remission of sins by faith, just as the saints
+in the New Testament.  Here belong those frequent repetitions
+concerning mercy and faith, in the psalms and the prophets, as this,
+Ps. 130, 3 sq.: If Thou Lord, shouldest mark iniquities, O Lord, who
+shall stand?  Here David confesses his sins and does not recount his
+merits.  He adds; But there is forgiveness with Thee.  Here he
+comforts himself by his trust in God's mercy, and he cites the
+promise: My soul doth wait and in His Word do I hope, i.e., because
+Thou hast promised the remission of sins, I am sustained by this Thy
+promise.  Therefore the fathers also were justified, not by the Law
+but by the promise and faith.  And it is amazing that the adversaries
+extenuate faith to such a degree, although they see that it is
+everywhere praised as an eminent service, as in Ps. 50, 15: Call upon
+Me in the day of trouble: I will deliver thee.  Thus God wishes
+Himself to be known, thus He wishes Himself to be worshiped, that
+from Him we receive benefits, and receive them, too, because of His
+mercy, and not because of our merits.  This is the richest
+consolation in all afflictions [physical or spiritual, in life or in
+death as all godly persons know].  And such consolations the
+adversaries abolish when they extenuate and disparage faith, and
+teach only that by means of works and merits men treat with God [that
+we treat with God, the great Majesty, by means of our miserable,
+beggarly works and merits].
+
+
+
+
+Part 4
+
+
+_That Faith in Christ Justifies._
+
+In the first place, lest any one may think that we speak concerning
+an idle knowledge of the history, we must declare how faith is
+obtained [how the heart begins to believe].  Afterward we will show
+both that it justifies, and how this ought to be understood, and we
+will explain the objections of the adversaries.  Christ, in the last
+chapter of Luke 24, 47, commands that repentance and remission of
+sins should be preached in His name.  For the Gospel convicts all men
+that they are under sin, that they all are subject to eternal wrath
+and death, and offers for Christ's sake remission of sin and
+justification, which is received by faith.  The preaching of
+repentance, which accuses us, terrifies consciences with true and
+grave terrors.  [For the preaching of repentance, or this declaration
+of the Gospel: Amend your lives!  Repent!  When it truly penetrates
+the heart, terrifies the conscience, and is no jest, but a great
+terror, in which the conscience feels its misery and sin and the
+wrath of God.] In these, hearts ought again to receive consolation.
+This happens if they believe the promise of Christ, that for His sake
+we have remission of sins.  This faith, encouraging and consoling in
+these fears, receives remission of sins, justifies and quickens.  For
+this consolation is a new and spiritual life [a new birth and a new
+life].  These things are plain and clear, and can be understood by
+the pious, and have testimonies of the Church [as is to be seen in
+the conversion of Paul and Augustine].  The adversaries nowhere can
+say how the Holy Ghost is given.  They imagine that the Sacraments
+confer the Holy Ghost _ex opere operato_, without a good emotion in
+the recipient, as though, indeed, the gift of the Holy Ghost were an
+idle matter.
+
+But since we speak of such faith as is not an idle thought, but of
+that which liberates from death and produces a new life in hearts
+[which is such a new light, life, and force in the heart as to renew
+our heart, mind, and spirit, makes new men of us and new creatures,]
+and is the work of the Holy Ghost; this does not coexist with mortal
+sin [for how can light and darkness coexist?], but as long as it is
+present, produces good fruits as we will say after a while.  For
+concerning the conversion of the wicked, or concerning the mode of
+regeneration, what can be said that is more simple and more clear?
+Let them, from so great an array of writers, adduce a single
+commentary upon the Sententiae that speaks of the mode of
+regeneration.  When they speak of the habit of love, they imagine
+that men merit it through works and they do not teach that it is
+received through the Word, precisely as also the Anabaptists teach at
+this time.  But God cannot be treated with, God cannot be apprehended,
+except through the Word.  Accordingly, justification occurs through
+the Word, just as Paul says, Rom. 1, 16: The Gospel is the power of
+God unto salvation to every one that believeth.  Likewise 10, 17:
+Faith cometh by hearing.  And proof can be derived even from this
+that faith justifies, because, if justification occurs only through
+the Word, and the Word is apprehended only by faith, it follows that
+faith justifies.  But there are other and more important reasons.  We
+have said these things thus far in order that we might show the mode
+of regeneration, and that the nature of faith [what is, or is not,
+faith], concerning which we speak, might be understood.
+
+Now we will show that faith [and nothing else] justifies.  Here, in
+the first place readers must be admonished of this, that just as it
+is necessary to maintain this sentence: Christ is Mediator, so is it
+necessary to defend that faith justifies, [without works].  For how
+will Christ be Mediator if in justification we do not use Him as
+Mediator; if we do not hold that for His sake we are accounted
+righteous?  But to believe is to trust in the merits of Christ, that
+for His sake God certainly wishes to be reconciled with us.  Likewise,
+just as we ought to maintain that, apart from the Law, the promise
+of Christ is necessary, so also is it needful to maintain that faith
+justifies.  [For the Law does not preach the forgiveness of sin by
+grace.] For the Law cannot be performed unless the Holy Ghost be
+first received.  It is, therefore, needful to maintain that the
+promise of Christ is necessary.  But this cannot be received except
+by faith.  Therefore, those who deny that faith justifies, teach
+nothing but the Law, both Christ and the Gospel being set aside.
+
+But when it is said that faith justifies, some perhaps understand it
+of the beginning, namely, that faith is the beginning of
+justification or preparation for justification, so that not faith
+itself is that through which we are accepted by God, but the works
+which follow; and they dream, accordingly, that faith is highly
+praised, because it is the beginning.  For great is the importance of
+the beginning, as they commonly say, _Archae aemioy pantos_, The
+beginning is half of everything; just as if one would say that
+grammar makes the teachers of all arts, because it prepares for other
+arts, although in fact it is his own art that renders every one an
+artist.  We do not believe thus concerning faith, but we maintain
+this, that properly and truly, by faith itself, we are for Christ's
+sake accounted righteous, or are acceptable to God.  And because "to
+be justified" means that out of unjust men just men are made, or born
+again, it means also that they are pronounced or accounted just.  For
+Scripture speaks in both ways.  [The term "to be justified" is used
+in two ways: to denote, being converted or regenerated; again, being
+accounted righteous.] Accordingly we wish first to show this, that
+faith alone makes of an unjust, a just man, i.e., receives remission
+of sins.
+
+The particle alone offends some, although even Paul says, Rom. 3, 28:
+We conclude that a man is justified by faith, without the deeds of
+the Law.  Again, Eph. 2, 8: It is the gift of God; not of works, lest
+any man should boast.  Again, Rom. 3, 24: Being justified freely.  If
+the exclusive alone displeases, let them remove from Paul also the
+exclusives freely, not of works, it is the gift, etc. For these also
+are [very strong] exclusives.  It is, however, the opinion of merit
+that we exclude.  We do not exclude the Word or Sacraments, as the
+adversaries falsely charge us.  For we have said above that faith is
+conceived from the Word, and we honor the ministry of the Word in the
+highest degree.  Love also and works must follow faith.  Wherefore,
+they are not excluded so as not to follow, but confidence in the
+merit of love or of works is excluded in justification.  And this we
+will clearly show.
+
+
+
+
+Part 5
+
+
+_That We Obtain Remission of Sins by Faith Alone in Christ._
+
+We think that even the adversaries acknowledge that, in justification,
+the remission of sins is necessary first.  For we all are under sin.
+Wherefore we reason thus:-To attain the remission of sins is to be
+justified, according to Ps. 32, 1: Blessed is he whose transgression
+is forgiven.  By faith alone in Christ, not through love, not because
+of love or works, do we acquire the remission of sins, although love
+follows faith.  Therefore by faith alone we are justified,
+understanding justification as the making of a righteous man out of
+an unrighteous, or that he be regenerated.
+
+It will thus become easy to declare the minor premise [that we obtain
+forgiveness of sin by faith, not by love] if we know how the
+remission of sins occurs.  The adversaries with great indifference
+dispute whether the remission of sins and the infusion of grace are
+the same change [whether they are one change or two].  Being idle men,
+they did not know what to answer [cannot speak at all on this
+subject].  In the remission of sins, the terrors of sin and of
+eternal death, in the heart, must be overcome, as Paul testifies, 1
+Cor. 15, 56 sq.: The sting of death is sin, and the strength of sin
+is the Law.  But thanks be to God, which giveth us the victory
+through our Lord Jesus Christ.  That is, sin terrifies consciences,
+this occurs through the Law, which shows the wrath of God against sin;
+but we gain the victory through Christ.  How?  By faith, when we
+comfort ourselves by confidence in the mercy promised for Christ's
+sake.  Thus, therefore we prove the minor proposition.  The wrath of
+God cannot be appeased if we set against it our own works, because
+Christ has been set forth as a Propitiator, so that, for His sake,
+the Father may become reconciled to us.  But Christ is not
+apprehended as a Mediator except by faith.  Therefore, by faith alone
+we obtain remission of sins when we comfort our hearts with
+confidence in the mercy promised for Christ's sake.  Likewise Paul,
+Rom. 5, 2, says: By whom also we have access, and adds, by faith.
+Thus, therefore, we are reconciled to the Father, and receive
+remission of sins when we are comforted with confidence in the mercy
+promised for Christ's sake.  The adversaries regard Christ as
+Mediator and Propitiator for this reason, namely, that He has merited
+the habit of love; they do not urge us to use Him now as Mediator,
+but, as though Christ were altogether buried, they imagine that we
+have access through our own works, and, through these, merit this
+habit and afterwards, by this love, come to God.  Is not this to bury
+Christ altogether, and to take away the entire doctrine of faith?
+Paul, on the contrary, teaches that we have access, i.e.,
+reconciliation, through Christ.  And to show how this occurs, he adds
+that we have access by faith.  By faith, therefore, for Christ's sake,
+we receive remission of sins.  We cannot set our own love and our
+own works over against God's wrath.
+
+Secondly.  It is certain that sins are forgiven for the sake of
+Christ, as Propitiator, Rom. 3, 25: Whom God hath set forth to be a
+propitiation.  Moreover, Paul adds: through faith.  Therefore this
+Propitiator thus benefits us, when by faith we apprehend the mercy
+promised in Him, and set it against the wrath and judgment of God.
+And to the same effect it is written, Heb. 4, 14. 16: Seeing, then,
+that we have a great High Priest, etc., let us therefore come with
+confidence.  For the Apostle bids us come to God, not with confidence
+in our own merits, but with confidence in Christ as a High Priest;
+therefore he requires faith.
+
+Thirdly.  Peter, in Acts 10, 43, says: To Him give all the prophets
+witness that through His name, whosoever believeth on Him, shall
+receive remission of sins.  How could this be said more clearly?  We
+receive remission of sins, he says, through His name i.e., for His
+sake; therefore, not for the sake of our merits, not for the sake of
+our contrition, attrition, love, worship, works.  And he adds: When
+we believe in Him.  Therefore he requires faith.  For we cannot
+apprehend the name of Christ except by faith.  Besides he cites the
+agreement of all the prophets.  This is truly to cite the authority
+of the Church.  [For when all the holy prophets bear witness, that is
+certainly a glorious, great excellent, powerful decretal and
+testimony.] But of this topic we will speak again after a while, when
+treating of "Repentance."
+
+Fourthly.  Remission of sins is something promised for Christ's sake.
+Therefore it cannot be received except by faith alone.  For a
+promise cannot be received except by faith alone.  Rom. 4, 16:
+Therefore it is of faith that it might be by grace, to the end that
+the promise might be sure; as though he were to say: "If the matter
+were to depend upon our merits, the promise would be uncertain and
+useless, because we never could determine when we would have
+sufficient merit." And this, experienced consciences can easily
+understand [and would not, for a thousand worlds, have our salvation
+depend upon ourselves].  Accordingly, Paul says, Gal. 3, 22: But the
+Scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of
+Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe.  He takes merit
+away from us, because he says that all are guilty and concluded under
+sin; then he adds that the promise, namely, of the remission of sins
+and of justification, is given, and adds how the promise can be
+received, namely, by faith.  And this reasoning, derived from the
+nature of a promise, is the chief reasoning [a veritable rock] in
+Paul, and is often repeated.  Nor can anything be devised or imagined
+whereby this argument of Paul can be overthrown.  Wherefore let not
+good minds suffer themselves to be forced from the conviction that we
+receive remission of sins for Christ's sake, only through faith.  In
+this they have sure and firm consolation against the terrors of sin,
+and against eternal death and against all the gates of hell.
+[Everything else is a foundation of sand that sinks in trials.]
+
+But since we receive remission of sins and the Holy Ghost by faith
+alone, faith alone justifies, because those reconciled are accounted
+righteous and children of God, not on account of their own purity,
+but through mercy for Christ's sake, provided only they by faith
+apprehend this mercy.  Accordingly, Scripture testifies that by faith
+we are accounted righteous, Rom. 3, 26. We, therefore, will add
+testimonies which clearly declare that faith is that very
+righteousness by which we are accounted righteous before God, namely,
+not because it is a work that is in itself worthy, but because it
+receives the promise by which God has promised that for Christ's sake
+He wishes to be propitious to those believing in Him, or because He
+knows that Christ of God is made unto us wisdom, and righteousness,
+and sanctification, and redemption, 1 Cor. 1, 30.
+
+In the Epistle to the Romans, Paul discusses this topic especially,
+and declares that, when we believe that God, for Christ's sake is
+reconciled to us, we are justified freely by faith.  And this
+proposition, which contains the statement of the entire discussion
+[the principal matter of all Epistles, yea, of the entire Scriptures],
+he maintains in the third chapter: We conclude that a man is
+justified by faith, without the deeds of the Law, Rom. 3, 28. Here
+the adversaries interpret that this refers to Levitical ceremonies
+[not to other virtuous works].  But Paul speaks not only of the
+ceremonies, but of the whole Law.  For he quotes afterward (7, 7)
+from the _Decalog_: Thou shalt not covet.  And if moral works [that
+are not Jewish ceremonies] would merit the remission of sins and
+justification, there would also be no need of Christ and the promise,
+and all that Paul speaks of the promise would be overthrown.  He
+would also have been wrong in writing to the Ephesians, 2, 8: By
+grace are ye saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is
+the gift of God, not of works.  Paul likewise refers to Abraham and
+David, Rom. 4, 1. 6. But they had the command of God concerning
+circumcision.  Therefore, if any works justified these works must
+also have justified at the time that they had a command.  But
+Augustine teaches correctly that Paul speaks of the entire Law, as he
+discusses at length in his book, Of the Spirit and Letter, where he
+says finally: These matters, therefore, having been considered and
+treated, according to the ability that the Lord has thought worthy to
+give us, we infer that man is not justified by the precepts of a good
+life, but by faith in Jesus Christ.
+
+And lest we may think that the sentence that faith justifies, fell
+from Paul inconsiderately, he fortifies and confirms this by a long
+discussion in the fourth chapter to the Romans, and afterwards
+repeats it in all his epistles.  Thus he says, Rom. 4, 4. 5: To him
+that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt.  But
+to him that worketh not, but believeth on Him that justifieth the
+ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.  Here he clearly
+says that faith itself is imputed for righteousness.  Faith,
+therefore, is that thing which God declares to be righteousness, and
+he adds that it is imputed freely, and says that it could not be
+imputed freely, if it were due on account of works.  Wherefore he
+excludes also the merit of moral works [not only Jewish ceremonies,
+but all other good works].  For if justification before God were due
+to these, faith would not be imputed for righteousness without works.
+And afterwards, Rom. 4, 9: For we say that faith was reckoned to
+Abraham for righteousness.  Chapter 5, 1 says: Being justified by
+faith, we have peace with God, i.e., we have consciences that are
+tranquil and joyful before God.  Rom. 10, 10: With the heart man
+believeth unto righteousness.  Here he declares that faith is the
+righteousness of the heart.  Gal. 2, 15: We have believed in Christ
+Jesus that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by
+the works of the Law.  Eph. 2, 8. For by grace are ye saved through
+faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God; not of
+works, lest any man should boast.
+
+John 1, 12: To them gave He power to become the sons of God, even to
+them that believe on His name; which were born, not of blood, nor of
+the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.  John 3, 14.
+15: As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must
+the Son of Man be lifted up, that whosoever believeth in Him should
+not perish.  Likewise, v. 17: For God sent not His Son into the world
+to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved.
+He that believeth on Him is not condemned.
+
+Acts 13, 38. 39: Be it known unto you therefore, men and brethren,
+that through this Man is preached unto you the forgiveness of sins;
+and by Him all that believe are justified from all things from which
+ye could not be justified by the Law of Moses.  How could the office
+of Christ and justification be declared more clearly?  The Law, he
+says, did not justify.  Therefore Christ was given, that we may
+believe that for His sake we are justified.  He plainly denies
+justification to the Law.  Hence, for Christ's sake we are accounted
+righteous when we believe that God, for His sake, has been reconciled
+to us.  Acts 4, 11. 12: This is the stone which was set at naught of
+you builders, which is become the head of the corner.  Neither is
+there salvation in any other; for there is none other name under
+heaven given among men whereby we must be saved.  But the name of
+Christ is apprehended only by faith.  [I cannot believe in the name
+of Christ in any other way than when I hear His merit preached, and
+lay hold of that.] Therefore, by confidence in the name of Christ,
+and not by confidence in our works, we are saved.  For "the name"
+here signifies the cause which is mentioned because of which
+salvation is attained.  And to call upon the name of Christ is to
+trust in the name of Christ, as the cause or price because of which
+we are saved.  Acts 15, 9: Purifying their hearts by faith.
+Wherefore that faith of which the Apostles speak is not idle
+knowledge, but a reality, receiving the Holy Ghost and justifying us
+[not a mere knowledge of history, but a strong powerful work of the
+Holy Ghost, which changes hearts].
+
+Hab. 2, 4: The just shall live by his faith.  Here he says, first
+that men are just by faith by which they believe that God is
+propitious and he adds that the same faith quickens, because this
+faith produces in the heart peace and joy and eternal life [which
+begins in the present life].
+
+Is. 53, 11: By His knowledge shall He justify many.  But what is the
+knowledge of Christ unless to know the benefits of Christ, the
+promises which by the Gospel He has scattered broadcast in the world?
+And to know these benefits is properly and truly to believe in
+Christ, to believe that that which God has promised for Christ's sake
+He will certainly fulfil.
+
+But Scripture is full of such testimonies, since, in some places, it
+presents the Law, and in others the promises concerning Christ, and
+the remission of sins, and the free acceptance of the sinner for
+Christ's sake.
+
+Here and there among the Fathers similar testimonies are extant.  For
+Ambrose says in his letter to a certain Irenaeus: Moreover, the world
+was subject to him by the Law for the reason that, according to the
+command of the Law, all are indicted, and yet, by the works of the
+Law, no one is justified, i.e., because, by the Law, sin is perceived,
+but guilt is not discharged.  The Law, which made all sinners,
+seemed to have done injury, but when the Lord Jesus Christ came, He
+forgave to all sin which no one could avoid, and, by the shedding of
+His own blood, blotted out the handwriting which was against us.
+This is what he says in Rom. 5, 20: "The Law entered that the offense
+might abound.  But where sin abounded, grace did much more abound."
+Because after the whole world become subject, He took away the sin of
+the whole world, as he [John] testified, saying, John 1, 29: "Behold
+the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world." And on this
+account let no one boast of works, because no one is justified by his
+deeds.  But he who is righteous has it given him because he was
+justified after the laver [of Baptism].  Faith, therefore, is that
+which frees through the blood of Christ, because he is blessed "whose
+transgression is forgiven, whose sin is covered," Ps. 32, 1. These
+are the words of Ambrose, which clearly favor our doctrine; he denies
+justification to works, and ascribes to faith that it sets us free
+through the blood of Christ.  Let all the Sententiarists, who are
+adorned with magnificent titles, be collected into one heap.  For
+some are called angelic; others, subtile; and others irrefragable
+[that is, doctors who cannot err].  When all these have been read and
+reread, they will not be of as much aid for understanding Paul as is
+this one passage of Ambrose.
+
+To the same effect, Augustine writes many things against the
+Pelagians.  In f the Spirit and Letter he says: The righteousness of
+the Law, namely, that he who has fulfilled it shall live in it, is
+set forth for this reason that when any one has recognized his
+infirmity he may attain and work the same and live in it,
+conciliating the Justifier not by his own strength nor by the letter
+of the Law itself (which cannot be done), but by faith.  Except in a
+justified man, there is no right work wherein he who does it may live.
+But justification is obtained by faith.  Here he clearly says that
+the Justifier is conciliated by faith, and that justification is
+obtained by faith.  And a little after: By the Law we fear God; by
+faith we hope in God.  But to those fearing punishment grace is
+hidden; and the soul laboring, etc., under this fear betakes itself
+by faith to God's mercy, in order that He may give what lie commands.
+Here he teaches that by the Law hearts are terrified, but by faith
+they receive consolation.  He also teaches us to apprehend, by faith,
+mercy, before we attempt to fulfil the Law.  We will shortly cite
+certain other passages.
+
+Truly, it is amazing that the adversaries are in no way moved by so
+many passages of Scripture, which clearly ascribe justification to
+faith, and, indeed, deny it to works.  Do they think that the same is
+repeated so often for no purpose?  Do they think that these words
+fell inconsiderately from the Holy Ghost?  But they have also devised
+sophistry whereby they elude them.  They say that these passages of
+Scripture, (which speak of faith,) ought to be received as referring
+to a _fides formata_, i.e., they do not ascribe justification to
+faith except on account of love.  Yea, they do not, in any way,
+ascribe justification to faith, but only to love, because they dream
+that faith can coexist with mortal sin.  Whither does this tend,
+unless that they again abolish the promise and return to the Law?  If
+faith receive the remission of sins on account of love, the remission
+of sins will always be uncertain, because we never love as much as we
+ought, yea, we do not love unless our hearts are firmly convinced
+that the remission of sins has been granted us.  Thus the adversaries,
+while they require in the remission of sins and justification
+confidence in one's own love, altogether abolish the Gospel
+concerning the free remission of sins; although at the same time,
+they neither render this love nor understand it, unless they believe
+that the remission of sins is freely received.
+
+We also say that love ought to follow faith as Paul also says, Gal. 5,
+6: For in Jesus Christ neither circumcision availeth anything, nor
+uncircumcision, but faith which worketh by love.  And yet we must not
+think on that account that by confidence in this love or on account
+of this love we receive the remission of sins and reconciliation just
+as we do not receive the remission of sins because of other works
+that follow.  But the remission of sins is received by faith alone,
+and, indeed, by faith properly so called, because the promise cannot
+be received except by faith.  But faith, properly so called, is that
+which assents to the promise [is when my heart, and the Holy Ghost in
+the heart, says: The promise of God is true and certain].  Of this
+faith Scripture speaks.  And because it receives the remission of
+sins, and reconciles us to God, by this faith we are [like Abraham]
+accounted righteous for Christ's sake before we love and do the works
+of the Law, although love necessarily follows.  Nor, indeed, is this
+faith an idle knowledge, neither can it coexist with mortal sin, but
+it is a work of the Holy Ghost, whereby we are freed from death, and
+terrified minds are encouraged and quickened.  And because this faith
+alone receives the remission of sins, and renders us acceptable to
+God, and brings the Holy Ghost, it could be more correctly called
+_gratia gratum faciens_, grace rendering one pleasing to God, than an
+effect following, namely, love.
+
+Thus far, in order that the subject might be made quite clear, we
+have shown with sufficient fulness, both from testimonies of
+Scripture, and arguments derived from Scripture, that by faith alone
+we obtain the remission of sins for Christ's sake, and that by faith
+alone we are justified, i.e., of unrighteous men made righteous, or
+regenerated.  But how necessary the knowledge of this faith is, can
+be easily judged, because in this alone the office of Christ is
+recognized, by this alone we receive the benefits of Christ; this
+alone brings sure and firm consolation to pious minds.  And in the
+Church [if there is to be a church, if there is to be a Christian
+Creed], it is necessary that there should be the [preaching and]
+doctrine [by which consciences are not made to rely on a dream or to
+build on a foundation of sand, but] from which the pious may receive
+the sure hope of salvation.  For the adversaries give men bad advice
+[therefore the adversaries are truly unfaithful bishops, unfaithful
+preachers and doctors; they have hitherto given evil counsel to
+consciences, and still do so by introducing such doctrine] when they
+bid them doubt whether they obtain remission of sins.  For how will
+such persons sustain themselves in death who have heard nothing of
+this faith, and think that they ought to doubt whether they obtain
+the remission of sins?  Besides it is necessary that in the Church of
+Christ the Gospel be retained, i.e., the promise that for Christ's
+sake sins are freely remitted.  Those who teach nothing of this faith,
+concerning which we speak, altogether abolish the Gospel.  But the
+scholastics mention not even a word concerning this faith.  Our
+adversaries follow them, and reject this faith.  Nor do they see that,
+by rejecting this faith, they abolish the entire promise concerning
+the free remission of sins and the righteousness of Christ.
+
+
+
+
+Part 6
+
+
+Article III: _Of Love and the Fulfilling of the Law._
+
+Here the adversaries urge against us: If thou wilt enter into life,
+keep the commandments, Matt. 19, 17; likewise: The doers of the Law
+shall be justified, Rom. 2, 13, and many other like things concerning
+the Law and works.  Before we reply to this, we must first declare
+what we believe concerning love and the fulfilling of the Law.
+
+It is written in the prophet, Jer. 31, 33: I will put My Law in their
+inward parts, and write it in their hearts.  And in Rom. 3, 31 Paul
+says: Do we, then, make void the Law through faith?  God forbid!  Yea,
+we establish the Law.  And Christ says, Matt. 19, 17: If thou wilt
+enter into life, keep the commandments.  Likewise, 1 Cor. 13, 3: If I
+have not charity, it profiteth me nothing.  These and similar
+sentences testify that the Law ought to be begun in us, and be kept
+by us more and more [that we are to keep the Law when we have been
+justified by faith, and thus increase more and more in the Spirit].
+Moreover, we speak not of ceremonies, but of that Law which gives
+commandment concerning the movements of the heart, namely, the
+_Decalog_.  Because, indeed, faith brings the Holy Ghost, and
+produces in hearts a new life, it is necessary that it should produce
+spiritual movements in hearts.  And what these movements are, the
+prophet, Jer. 31, 33, shows, when he says: I will put My Law into
+their inward parts, and write it in their hearts.  Therefore, when we
+have been justified by faith and regenerated, we begin to fear and
+love God, to pray to Him, to expect from Him aid, to give thanks and
+praise Him and to obey Him in afflictions.  We begin also to love our
+neighbors, because our hearts have spiritual and holy movements
+[there is now, through the Spirit of Christ a new heart mind, and
+spirit within].
+
+These things cannot occur until we have been justified by faith, and,
+regenerated, we receive the Holy Ghost: first, because the Law cannot
+be kept without [the knowledge of] Christ; and likewise the Law
+cannot be kept without the Holy Ghost.  But the Holy Ghost is
+received by faith, according to the declaration of Paul, Gal. 3, 14:
+That we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.  Then,
+too, how can the human heart love God while it knows that He is
+terribly angry, and is oppressing us with temporal and perpetual
+calamities?  But the Law always accuses us, always shows that God is
+angry.  [Therefore, what the scholastics say of the love of God is a
+dream.] God therefore is not loved until we apprehend mercy by faith.
+Not until then does He become a lovable object.
+
+Although, therefore, civil works, i.e., the outward works of the Law,
+can be done, in a measure, without Christ and without the Holy Ghost
+[from our inborn light], nevertheless it appears from what we have
+said that those things which belong peculiarly to the divine Law, i.e.,
+the affections of the heart towards God, which are commanded in the
+first table, cannot be rendered without the Holy Ghost.  But our
+adversaries are fine theologians; they regard the second table and
+political works; for the first table [in which is contained the
+highest theology, on which all depends] they care nothing, as though
+it were of no matter; or certainly they require only outward
+observances.  They in no way consider the Law that is eternal, and
+placed far above the sense and intellect of all creatures [which
+concerns the very Deity, and the honor of the eternal Majesty], Deut.
+6, 5: Thou shalt love the Lord, thy God with all thine heart.  [This
+they treat as such a paltry small matter as if it did not belong to
+theology.]
+
+But Christ was given for this purpose, namely, that for His sake
+there might be bestowed on us the remission of sins, and the Holy
+Ghost to bring forth in us new and eternal life, and eternal
+righteousness [to manifest Christ in our hearts, as it is written
+John 16, 15: He shall take of the things of Mine, and show them unto
+you.  Likewise, He works also other gifts, love, thanksgiving,
+charity, patience, etc.].  Wherefore the Law cannot be truly kept
+unless the Holy Ghost be received through faith.  Accordingly, Paul
+says that the Law is established by faith, and not made void; because
+the Law can only then be thus kept when the Holy Ghost is given.  And
+Paul teaches 2 Cor. 3, 15 sq., the veil that covered the face of
+Moses cannot be removed except by faith in Christ, by which the Holy
+Ghost is received.  For he speaks thus: But even unto this day, when
+Moses is read, the veil is upon their heart.  Nevertheless, when it
+shall turn to the Lord, the veil shall be taken away.  Now the Lord
+is that Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.
+Paul understands by the veil the human opinion concerning the
+entire Law, the _Decalog_ and the ceremonies, namely, that hypocrites
+think that external and civil works satisfy the Law of God and that
+sacrifices and observances justify before God _ex opere operato_.
+But then this veil is removed from us, i.e., we are freed from this
+error, when God shows to our hearts our uncleanness and the
+heinousness of sin.  Then, for the first time, we see that we are far
+from fulfilling the Law.  Then we learn to know how flesh, in
+security and indifference, does not fear God, and is not fully
+certain that we are regarded by God, but imagines that men are born
+and die by chance.  Then we experience that we do not believe that
+God forgives and hears us.  But when, on hearing the Gospel and the
+remission of sins, we are consoled by faith, we receive the Holy
+Ghost, so that now we are able to think aright concerning God, and to
+fear and believe God, etc. From these facts it is apparent that the
+Law cannot be kept without Christ and the Holy Ghost.
+
+We, therefore, profess that it is necessary that the Law be begun in
+us, and that it be observed continually more and more.  And at the
+same time we comprehend both spiritual movements and external good
+works [the good heart within and works without].  Therefore the
+adversaries falsely charge against us that our theologians do not
+teach good works, while they not only require these, but also show
+how they can be done [that the heart must enter into these works,
+lest they be mere lifeless, cold works of hypocrites].  The result
+convicts hypocrites, who by their own powers endeavor to fulfil the
+Law, that they cannot accomplish what they attempt.  [For are they
+free from hatred, envy, strife, anger, wrath, avarice, adultery, etc.?
+Why, these vices were nowhere greater than in the cloisters and
+sacred institutes.] For human nature is far too weak to be able by
+its own powers to resist the devil, who holds as captives all who
+have not been freed through faith.  There is need of the power of
+Christ against the devil, namely, that, inasmuch as we know that for
+Christ's sake we are heard, and have the promise, we may pray for the
+governance and defense of the Holy Ghost, that we may neither be
+deceived and err, nor be impelled to undertake anything contrary to
+God's will.  [Otherwise we should, every hour, fall into error and
+abominable vices.] Just as Ps. 68, 18 teaches: Thou hast led
+captivity captive; Thou hast received gifts for man.  For Christ has
+overcome the devil, and has given to us the promise and the Holy
+Ghost, in order that, by divine aid, we ourselves also may overcome.
+And 1 John 3, 8: For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that
+He might destroy the works of the devil.  Again, we teach not only
+how the Law can be observed, but also how God is pleased if anything
+be done, namely, not because we render satisfaction to the Law, but
+because we are in Christ, as we shall say after a little.  It is,
+therefore, manifest that we require good works.  Yea, we add also
+this, that it is impossible for love to God, even though it be small,
+to be sundered from faith, because through Christ we come to the
+Father, and, the remission of sins having been received, we now are
+truly certain that we have a God, i.e., that God cares for us; we
+call upon Him, we give Him thanks, we fear Him, we love Him as John
+teaches in his first Epistle, 4, 19: We love Him he says, because He
+first loved us, namely, because He gave His Son for us, and forgave
+us our sins.  Thus he indicates that faith precedes and love follows.
+Likewise the faith of which we speak exists in repentance i.e., it
+is conceived in the terrors of conscience, which feels the wrath of
+God against our sins, and seeks the remission of sins, and to be
+freed from sin.  And in such terrors and other afflictions this faith
+ought to grow and be strengthened.  Wherefore it cannot exist in
+those who live according to the flesh, who are delighted by their own
+lusts and obey them.  Accordingly, Paul says, Rom. 8, 1: There is,
+therefore, now no condemnation to them that are in Christ Jesus, who
+walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.  So, too, vv. 12. 13:
+We are debtors, not to the flesh, to live after the flesh.  For if ye
+live after the flesh, ye shall die; but if ye, through the Spirit, do
+mortify the deeds of the body, ye shall live.  Wherefore, the faith
+which receives remission of sins in a heart terrified and fleeing
+from sin does not remain in those who obey their desires, neither
+does it coexist with mortal sin.
+
+From these effects of faith the adversaries select one, namely, love,
+and teach that love justifies.  Thus it is clearly apparent that they
+teach only the Law.  They do not teach that remission of sins through
+faith is first received.  They do not teach of Christ as Mediator,
+that for Christ's sake we have a gracious God; but because of our
+love.  And yet, what the nature of this love is they do not say,
+neither can they say.  They proclaim that they fulfil the Law,
+although this glory belongs properly to Christ; and they set against
+the judgment of God confidence in their own works; for they say that
+they _merit de condigno_ (according to righteousness) grace and
+eternal life.  This confidence is absolutely impious and vain.  For
+in this life we cannot satisfy the Law, because carnal nature does
+not cease to bring forth wicked dispositions [evil inclination and
+desire], even though the Spirit in us resists them.
+
+But some one may ask: Since we also confess that love is a work of
+the Holy Ghost, and since it is righteousness, because it is the
+fulfilling of the Law, why do we not teach that it justifies?  To
+this we must reply: In the first place, it is certain that we receive
+remission of sins, neither through our love nor for the sake of our
+love, but for Christ's sake, by faith alone.  Faith alone, which
+looks upon the promise, and knows that for this reason it must be
+regarded as certain that God forgives, because Christ has not died in
+vain, etc., overcomes the terrors of sin and death.  If any one
+doubts whether sins are remitted him, he dishonors Christ, since he
+judges that his sin is greater or more efficacious than the death and
+promise of Christ although Paul says, Rom. 5, 20: Where sin abounded,
+grace did much more abound, i.e., that mercy is more comprehensive
+[more powerful, richer, and stronger] than sin.  If any one thinks
+that he obtains the remission of sins because he loves, he dishonors
+Christ, and will discover in God's judgment that this confidence in
+his own righteousness is wicked and vain.  Therefore it is necessary
+that faith [alone] reconciles and justifies.  And as we do not
+receive remission of sins through other virtues of the Law, or on
+account of these namely, on account of patience, chastity, obedience
+towards magistrates, etc., and nevertheless these virtues ought to
+follow, so, too, we do not receive remission of sins because of love
+to God although it is necessary that this should follow.  Besides,
+the custom of speech is well known that by the same word we sometimes
+comprehend by synecdoche the cause and effects.  Thus in Luke 7, 47
+Christ says: Her sins, which are many, are forgiven for she loved
+much.  For Christ interprets Himself [this very passage] when He adds:
+Thy faith hath saved thee.  Christ, therefore, did not mean that the
+woman, by that work of love, had merited the remission of sins.  For
+that is the reason He says: Thy faith hath sated thee.  But faith is
+that which freely apprehends God's mercy on account of God's Word
+[which relies upon God's mercy and Word, and not upon one's own work].
+If any one denies that this is faith [if any one imagines that he
+can rely at the same time upon God and his own works], he does not
+understand at all what faith is.  [For the terrified conscience is
+not satisfied with its own works, but must cry after mercy, and is
+comforted and encouraged alone by God's Word.] And the narrative
+itself shows in this passage what that is which He calls love.  The
+woman came with the opinion concerning Christ that with Him the
+remission of sins should be sought.  This worship is the highest
+worship of Christ.  Nothing greater could she ascribe to Christ.  To
+seek from Him the remission of sins was truly to acknowledge the
+Messiah.  Now, thus to think of Christ, thus to worship Him, thus to
+embrace Him, is truly to believe.  Christ, moreover, employed the
+word "love" not towards the woman, but against the Pharisee, because
+He contrasted the entire worship of the Pharisee with the entire
+worship of the woman.  He reproved the Pharisee because he did not
+acknowledge that He was the Messiah, although he rendered Him the
+outward offices due to a guest and a great and holy man.  He points
+to the woman and praises her worship, ointment, tears, etc., all of
+which were signs of faith and a confession, namely, that with Christ
+she sought the remission of sins.  It is indeed a great example which,
+not without reason, moved Christ to reprove the Pharisee, who was a
+wise and honorable man, but not a believer.  He charges him with
+impiety, and admonishes him by the example of the woman, showing
+thereby that it is disgraceful to him, that, while an unlearned woman
+believes God, he, a doctor of the Law, does not believe, does not
+acknowledge the Messiah, and does not seek from Him remission of sins
+and salvation.  Thus, therefore, He praises the entire worship [faith
+with its fruits, but towards the Pharisee He names only the fruits
+which prove to men that there is faith in the heart] as it often
+occurs in the Scriptures that by one word we embrace many things; as
+below we shall speak at greater length in regard to similar passages,
+such as Luke 11, 41: Give alms of such things as ye have; and, behold,
+all things are clean unto you.  He requires not only alms, but also
+the righteousness of faith.  Thus He here says: Her sins, which are
+many, are forgiven, for she loved much i.e., because she has truly
+worshiped Me with faith and the exercises and signs of faith.  He
+comprehends the entire worship.  Meanwhile He teaches this, that the
+remission of sins is properly received by faith, although love,
+confession, and other good fruits ought to follow.  Wherefore He does
+not mean this, that these fruits are the price, or are the
+propitiation, because of which the remission of sins, which
+reconciles us to God, is given.  We are disputing concerning a great
+subject, concerning the honor of Christ, and whence good minds may
+seek for sure and firm consolation whether confidence is to be placed
+in Christ or in our works.  Now, if it is to be placed in our works,
+the honor of Mediator and Propitiator will be withdrawn from Christ.
+And yet we shall find, in God's judgment, that this confidence is
+vain, and that consciences rush thence into despair.  But if the
+remission of sins and reconciliation do not occur freely for Christ's
+sake, but for the sake of our love, no one will have remission of
+sins, unless when he has fulfilled the entire Law, because the Law
+does not justify as long as it can accuse us.  Therefore it is
+manifest that, since justification is reconciliation for Christ's
+sake we are justified by faith, because it is very certain that by
+faith alone the remission of sins is received.
+
+Now, therefore, let us reply to the objection which we have above
+stated: [Why does love not justify anybody before God?] The
+adversaries are right in thinking that love is the fulfilling of the
+Law, and obedience to the Law is certainly righteousness.  [Therefore
+it would be true that love justifies us if we would keep the Law.
+But who in truth can say or boast that he keeps the Law, and loves
+God as the Law has commanded?  We have shown above that God has made
+the promise of grace, because we cannot observe the Law.  Therefore
+Paul says everywhere that we cannot be justified before God by the
+Law.] But they make a mistake in this that they think that we are
+justified by the Law.  [The adversaries have to fail at this point,
+and miss the main issue, for in this business they only behold the
+Law.  For all men's reason and wisdom cannot but hold that we must
+become pious by the Law, and that a person externally observing the
+Law is holy and pious.  But the Gospel faces us about, directs us
+away from the Law to the divine promises, and teaches that we are not
+justified, etc.] Since, however, we are not justified by the Law
+[because no person can keep it], but receive remission of sins and
+reconciliation by faith for Christ's sake, and not for the sake of
+love or the fulfilling of the Law, it follows necessarily that we are
+justified by faith in Christ.  [For before we fulfil one tittle of
+the Law, there must be faith in Christ by which we are reconciled to
+God and first obtain the remission of sin.  Good God, how dare people
+call themselves Christians or say that they once at least looked into
+or read the books of the Gospel when they still deny that we obtain
+remission of sins by faith in Christ?  Why, to a Christian it is
+shocking merely to hear such a statement.]
+
+Again, [in the second place,] this fulfilling of the Law or obedience
+towards the Law, is indeed righteousness, when it is complete; but in
+us it is small and impure.  [For, although they have received the
+first-fruits of the Spirit, and the new, yea the eternal life has
+begun in them, there still remains a remnant of sin and evil lust,
+and the Law still finds much of which it must accuse us.] Accordingly,
+it is not pleasing for its own sake, and is not accepted for its own
+sake.  But although from those things which have been said above it
+is evident that justification signifies not the beginning of the
+renewal, but the reconciliation by which also we afterwards are
+accepted, nevertheless it can now be seen much more clearly that the
+inchoate fulfilling of the Law does not justify, because it is
+accepted only on account of faith.  [Trusting in our own fulfilment
+of the Law is sheer idolatry and blaspheming Christ, and in the end
+it collapses and causes our consciences to despair.  Therefore, this
+foundation shall stand forever, namely, that for Christ's sake we are
+accepted with God, and justified by faith, not on account of our love
+and works.  This we shall make so plain and certain that anybody may
+grasp it.  As long as the heart is not at peace with God, it cannot
+be righteous, for it flees from the wrath of God, despairs, and would
+have God not to judge it.  Therefore the heart cannot be righteous
+and accepted with God while it is not at peace with God.  Now, faith
+alone makes the heart to be content, and obtains peace and life Rom.
+5, 1, because it confidently and frankly relies on the promise of God
+for Christ's sake.  But our works do not make the heart content, for
+we always find that they are not pure.  Therefore it must follow that
+we are accepted with God, and justified by faith alone, when in our
+hearts we conclude that God desires to be gracious to us, not on
+account of our works and fulfilment of the Law, but from pure grace,
+for Christ's sake.  What can our opponents bring forward against this
+argument?  What can they invent and devise against the plain truth?
+For this is quite certain, and experience teaches forcibly enough,
+that when we truly feel the judgment and wrath of God, or become
+afflicted, our works and worship cannot set the heart at rest.
+Scripture indicates this often enough as in Ps. 143, 2: Enter not
+into judgment with Thy servant; for in Thy sight shall no man living
+be justified.  Here he clearly shows that all the saints, all the
+pious children of God, who have the Holy Ghost, if God would not by
+grace forgive them their sin, still have remnants of sin in the flesh.
+For when David in another place, Ps. 7, 8, says: Judge me O Lord,
+according to my righteousness, he refers to his cause, and not to his
+righteousness, and asks God to protect his cause and word, for he
+says: Judge, O Lord, my cause.  Again, in Ps. 130, 3 he clearly
+states that no person, not even the greatest saints, can bear God's
+judgment, if He were to observe our iniquity, as he says: If Thou,
+Lord, shouldest mark iniquity, O Lord, who shall stand!  And thus
+says Job, 9, 28: I was afraid of all my works (Engl. vers., sorrows).
+Likewise chap. 9, 30: If I wash myself with snow-water, and make my
+hands never so clean, yet shalt Thou plunge me in the ditch.  And
+Prov. 20, 9: Who can say, I have made my heart clean?  And 1 John 1,
+8: If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth
+is not in us.  And in the Lord's Prayer the saints ask for the
+forgiveness of sins.  Therefore even the saints have guilt and sins.
+Again in Num. 14, 18: The innocent will not be innocent.  And
+Zechariah, 2, 13, says: Be silent O all flesh, before the Lord.  And
+Isaiah 40, 6 sqq.: All flesh is grass, i.e., flesh and righteousness
+of the flesh cannot endure the judgment of God.  And Jonah says, 2, 9:
+They that observe lying vanities forsake their own mercy.  Therefore,
+pure mercy preserves us, our own works, merits, endeavors, cannot
+preserve us.  These and similar declarations in the Scriptures
+testify that our works are unclean, and that we need mercy.
+Wherefore works do not render consciences pacified but only mercy
+apprehended by faith does.] Nor must we trust that we are accounted
+righteous before God by our own perfection and fulfilling of the Law,
+but rather for Christ's sake.
+
+First [in the third place], because Christ does not cease to be
+Mediator after we have been renewed.  They err who imagine that He
+has merited only a first grace, and that afterwards we please God and
+merit eternal life by our fulfilling of the Law.  Christ remains
+Mediator, and we ought always to be confident that for His sake we
+have a reconciled God even although we are unworthy.  As Paul clearly
+teaches when he says [By whom also we have access to God, Rom. 5, 2.
+For our best works, even after the grace of the Gospel has been
+received, as I stated, are still weak and not at all pure.  For sin
+and Adam's fall are not such a trifling thing as reason holds or
+imagines, it exceeds the reason and thought of all men to understand
+what a horrible wrath of God has been handed on to us by that
+disobedience.  There occurred a shocking corruption of the entire
+human nature, which no work of man, but only God Himself, can
+restore], 1 Cor. 4, 4: I know nothing by myself, yet am I not hereby
+justified, but he knows that by faith he is accounted righteous for
+Christ's sake, according to the passage: Blessed are they whose
+iniquities are forgiven, Ps. 32, 1; Rom. 4, 7. [Therefore we need
+grace, and the gracious goodness of God, and the forgiveness of sin,
+although we have done many good works.] But this remission is always
+received by faith.  Likewise, the imputation of the righteousness of
+the Gospel is from the promise; therefore it is always received by
+faith, and it always must be regarded certain that by faith we are
+for Christ's sake, accounted righteous.  If the regenerate ought
+afterwards to think that they will be accepted on account of the
+fulfilling of the Law, when would conscience be certain that it
+pleased God, since we never satisfy the Law?  Accordingly, we must
+always recur to the promise; by this our infirmity must be sustained,
+and we must regard it as certain that we are accounted righteous for
+the sake of Christ, who is ever at the right hand of God, who also
+maketh intercession for us, Rom. 8, 34. If any one think that he is
+righteous and accepted on account of his own fulfilment of the Law,
+and not on account of Christ's promise, he dishonors this High Priest.
+Neither can it be understood how one could imagine that man is
+righteous before God when Christ is excluded as Propitiator and
+Mediator.
+
+Again [in the fourth place], what need is there of a long discussion?
+[If we were to think that, after we have come to the Gospel and are
+born again, we were to merit by our works that God be gracious to us,
+not by faith, conscience would never find rest, but would be driven
+to despair.  For the Law unceasingly accuses us, since we never can
+satisfy the Law.] All Scripture, all the Church cries out that the
+Law cannot be satisfied.  Therefore this inchoate fulfilment of the
+Law does not please on its own account, but on account of faith in
+Christ.  Otherwise the Law always accuses us.  For who loves or fears
+God sufficiently?  Who with sufficient patience bears the afflictions
+imposed by God?  Who does not frequently doubt whether human affairs
+are ruled by God's counsel or by chance?  Who does not frequently
+doubt whether he be heard by God?  Who is not frequently enraged
+because the wicked enjoy a better lot than the pious, because the
+pious are oppressed by the wicked?  Who does satisfaction to his own
+calling?  Who loves his neighbor as himself?  Who is not tempted by
+lust?  Accordingly Paul says, Rom. 7, 19: The good that I would I do
+not; but the evil which I would not that I do.  Likewise v. 25: With
+the mind I myself serve the Law of God, but with the flesh, the law
+of sin.  Here he openly declares that he serves the law of sin.  And
+David says, Ps. 143, 2: Enter not into judgment with Thy servant; for
+in Thy sight shall no man living be justified.  Here even a servant
+of God prays for the averting of judgment.  Likewise Ps. 32, 2:
+Blessed is the man unto whom the Lord imputeth not iniquity.
+Therefore, in this our infirmity there is always present sin, which
+could be imputed, and of which he says a little while after, v. 6:
+For this shall every one that is godly pray unto Thee.  Here he shows
+that even saints ought to seek remission of sins.  More than blind
+are those who do not perceive that wicked desires in the flesh are
+sins, of which Paul, Gal. 5, 17, says: The flesh lusteth against the
+Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh.  The flesh distrusts God,
+trusts in present things, seeks human aid in calamities, even
+contrary to God's will, flees from afflictions, which it ought to
+bear because of God's commands, doubts concerning God's mercy, etc.
+The Holy Ghost in our hearts contends with such dispositions [with
+Adam's sin] in order to suppress and mortify them [this poison of the
+old Adam, this desperately wicked disposition], and to produce new
+spiritual movements.  But concerning this topic we will collect more
+testimonies below, although they are everywhere obvious not only in
+the Scriptures, but also in the holy Fathers.
+
+Well does Augustine say: All the commandments of God are fulfilled
+when whatever is not done, is forgiven.  Therefore he requires faith
+even in good works [which the Holy Spirit produces in us], in order
+that we may believe that for Christ's sake we please God, and that
+even the works are not of themselves worthy and pleasing.  And Jerome,
+against the Pelagians, says: Then, therefore, we are righteous when
+we confess that we are sinners, and that our righteousness consists
+not in our own merit, but in God's mercy.  Therefore, in this
+inchoate fulfilment of the Law, faith ought to be present, which is
+certain that for Christ's sake we have a reconciled God.  For mercy
+cannot be apprehended unless by faith, as has been repeatedly said
+above.  [Therefore those who teach that we are not accepted by faith
+for Christ's sake but for the sake of our own works, lead consciences
+into despair.] Wherefore, when Paul says, Rom. 3, 31: We establish
+the Law through faith, by this we ought to understand, not only that
+those regenerated by faith receive the Holy Ghost, and have movements
+agreeing with God's Law, but it is by far of the greatest importance
+that we add also this, that we ought to perceive that we are far
+distant from the perfection of the Law.  Wherefore we cannot conclude
+that we are accounted righteous before God because of our fulfilling
+of the Law, but in order that the conscience may become tranquil,
+justification must be sought elsewhere.  For we are not righteous
+before God as long as we flee from God's judgment, and are angry with
+God.  Therefore we must conclude that, being reconciled by faith, we
+are accounted righteous for Christ's sake, not for the sake of the
+Law or our works, but that this inchoate fulfilling of the Law
+pleases on account of faith, and that, on account of faith, there is
+no imputation of the imperfection of the fulfilling of the Law, even
+though the sight of our impurity terrifies us.  Now, if justification
+is to be sought elsewhere, our love and works do not therefore
+justify.  Far above our purity, yea, far above the Law itself ought
+to be placed the death and satisfaction of Christ, presented to us
+that we might be sure that because of this satisfaction, and not
+because of our fulfilling of the Law, we have a gracious God.
+
+Paul teaches this in Gal. 3, 13, when he says: Christ hath redeemed
+us from the curse of the Law, being made a curse for us, i.e. the Law
+condemns all men, but Christ, because without sin He has borne the
+punishment of sin, and been made a victim for us has removed that
+right of the Law to accuse and condemn those who believe in Him,
+because He Himself is the propitiation for them for whose sake we are
+now accounted righteous.  But since they are accounted righteous, the
+Law cannot accuse or condemn them, even though they have not actually
+satisfied the Law.  To the same purport he writes to the Colossians,
+2, 10: Ye are complete in Him, as though he were to say: Although ye
+are still far from the perfection of the Law, yet the remnants of sin
+do not condemn you, because for Christ's sake we have a sure and firm
+reconciliation, if you believe, even though sin inhere in your flesh.
+
+The promise ought always to be in sight that God, because of His
+promise, wishes for Christ's sake, and not because of the Law or our
+works, to be gracious and to justify.  In this promise timid
+consciences ought to seek reconciliation and justification, by this
+promise they ought to sustain themselves, and be confident that for
+Christ's sake, because of His promise, they have a gracious God.
+Thus works can never render a conscience pacified, but only the
+promise can.  If, therefore, justification and peace of conscience
+must be sought elsewhere than in love and works, love and works do
+not justify, although they are virtues and pertain to the
+righteousness of the Law, in so far as they are a fulfilling of the
+Law.  So far also this obedience of the Law justifies by the
+righteousness of the Law.  But this imperfect righteousness of the
+Law is not accepted by God, unless on account of faith.  Accordingly
+it does not justify, i.e., it neither reconciles, nor regenerates,
+nor by itself renders us accepted before God.
+
+From this it is evident that we are justified before God by faith
+alone [i.e., it obtains the remission of sins and grace for Christ's
+sake and regenerates us.  Likewise, it is quite clear that by faith
+alone the Holy Ghost is received; again, that our works and this
+inchoate fulfilling of the Law do not by themselves please God.  Now,
+even if I abound in good works like Paul or Peter, I must seek my
+righteousness elsewhere, namely, in the promise of the grace of
+Christ, again, if only faith calms the conscience, it must, indeed be
+certain that only faith justifies before God.  For, if we wish to
+teach correctly, we must adhere to this, that we are accepted with
+God not on account of the Law, not on account of works, but for
+Christ's sake.  For the honor, due Christ, must not be given to the
+Law or our-miserable works.] because by faith alone we receive
+remission of sins and reconciliation, because reconciliation or
+justification is a matter promised for Christ's sake, and not for the
+sake of the Law.  Therefore it is received by faith alone, although,
+when the Holy Ghost is given, the fulfilling of the Law follows.
+
+
+
+
+Part 7
+
+
+_Reply to the Arguments of the Adversaries._
+
+Now, when the grounds of this case have been understood, namely, the
+distinction between the Law and the promises, or the Gospel, it will
+be easy to resolve the objections of the adversaries.  For they cite
+passages concerning the Law and works, and omit passages concerning
+the promises.  But a reply can once for all be made to all opinions
+concerning the Law, namely, that the Law cannot be observed without
+Christ, and that if civil works are wrought without Christ, they do
+not please God.  [God is not pleased with the person.] Wherefore,
+when works are commended, it is necessary to add that faith is
+required, that they are commended on account of faith, that they are
+the fruits and testimonies of faith.  [This our doctrine is, indeed,
+plain; it need not fear the light, and may be held against the Holy
+Scriptures.  We have also clearly and correctly presented it here, if
+any will receive instruction and not knowingly deny the truth.  For
+rightly to understand the benefit of Christ and the great treasure of
+the Gospel (which Paul extols so greatly), we must separate, on the
+one hand, the promise of God and the grace that is offered, and, on
+the other hand the Law, as far as the heavens are from the earth.  In
+shaky matters many explanations are needed, but in a good matter one
+or two thoroughgoing explanations dissolve all objections which men
+think they can raise.] Ambiguous and dangerous cases produce many and
+various solutions.  For the judgment of the ancient poet is true:
+
+"An unjust cause, being In Itself sick, requires skilfully applied
+remedies."
+
+But in just and sure cases one or two explanations derived from the
+sources correct all things that seem to offend.  This occurs also in
+this case of ours.  For the rule which I have just recited, explains
+all the passages that are cited concerning the Law and works [namely,
+that without Christ the Law cannot be truly observed, and although
+external works may be performed, still the person doing them does not
+please God outside of Christ].  For we acknowledge that Scripture
+teaches in some places the Law, and in other places the Gospel, or
+the gratuitous promise of the remission of sins for Christ's sake.
+But our adversaries absolutely abolish the free promise when they
+deny that faith justifies, and teach that for the sake of love and of
+our works we receive remission of sins and reconciliation.  If the
+remission of sins depends upon the condition of our works, it is
+altogether uncertain.  [For we can never be certain whether we do
+enough works, or whether our works are sufficiently holy and pure.
+Thus, too, the forgiveness of sins is made uncertain, and the promise
+of God perishes, as Paul says, Rom. 4, 14: The promise is made of
+none effect, and everything is rendered uncertain.] Therefore the
+promise will be abolished.  Hence we refer godly minds to the
+consideration of the promises, and we teach concerning the free
+remission of sins and concerning reconciliation, which occurs through
+faith in Christ.  Afterwards we add also the doctrine of the Law.
+[Not that by the Law we merit the remission of sins, or that for the
+sake of the Law we are accepted with God, but because God requires
+good works.] And it is necessary to divide these things aright, as
+Paul says, 2 Tim. 2, 15. We must see what Scripture ascribes to the
+Law, and what to the promises.  For it praises works in such a way as
+not to remove the free promise [as to place the promise of God and
+the true treasure, Christ, a thousand leagues above it].
+
+For good works are to be done on account of God's command, likewise
+for the exercise of faith [as Paul says, Eph. 2, 10: We are His
+workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works], and on account
+of confession and giving of thanks.  For these reasons good works
+ought necessarily to be done, which, although they are done in the
+flesh not as yet entirely renewed, that retards the movements of the
+Holy Ghost, and imparts some of its uncleanness, yet, on account of
+Christ, are holy, divine works, sacrifices, and acts pertaining to
+the government of Christ, who thus displays His kingdom before this
+world.  For in these He sanctifies hearts and represses the devil,
+and, in order to retain the Gospel among men, openly opposes to the
+kingdom of the devil the confession of saints, and, in our weakness,
+declares His power.  The dangers, labors, and sermons of the Apostle
+Paul, of Athanasius, Augustine, and the like, who taught the churches,
+are holy works, are true sacrifices acceptable to God, are contests
+of Christ through which He repressed the devil, and drove him from
+those who believed.  David's labors, in waging wars and in his home
+government, are holy works, are true sacrifices, are contests of God,
+defending the people who had the Word of God against the devil, in
+order that the knowledge of God might not be entirely extinguished on
+earth.  We think thus also concerning every good work in the humblest
+callings and in private affairs.  Through these works Christ
+celebrates His victory over the devil, just as the distribution of
+alms by the Corinthians, 1 Cor. 16, 1, was a holy work and a
+sacrifice and contest of Christ against the devil, who labors that
+nothing may be done for the praise of God.  To disparage such works,
+the confession of doctrine, affliction, works of love, mortifications
+of the flesh would be indeed to disparage the outward government of
+Christ's kingdom among men.  Here also we add something concerning
+rewards and merits.  We teach that rewards have been offered and
+promised to the works of believers.  We teach that good works are
+meritorious, not for the remission of sins, for grace or
+justification (for these we obtain only by faith), but for other
+rewards, bodily and spiritual, in this life and after this life
+because Paul says, 1 Cor. 3, 8: Every man shall receive his own
+reward, according to his own labor.  There will, therefore, be
+different rewards according to different labors.  But the remission
+of sins is alike and equal to all, just as Christ is one, and is
+offered freely to all who believe that for Christ's sake their sins
+are remitted.  Therefore the remission of sins and justification are
+received only by faith, and not on account of any works, as is
+evident in the terrors of conscience, because none of our works can
+be opposed to God's wrath, as Paul clearly says, Rom. 5, 1: Being
+justified by faith, toe have peace with God through our Lord Jesus
+Christ, by whom also we have access by faith, etc. But because faith
+makes sons of God, it also makes coheirs with Christ.  Therefore,
+because by our works we do not merit justification, through which we
+are made sons of God, and coheirs with Christ, we do not by our works
+merit eternal life; for faith obtains this, because faith justifies
+us and has a reconciled God.  But eternal life is due the justified,
+according to the passage Rom. 8, 30: Whom He justified, them He also
+glorified.  Paul, Eph. 6, 2, commends to us the commandment
+concerning honoring parents, by mention of the reward which is added
+to that commandment where he does not mean that obedience to parents
+justifies us before God, but that, when it occurs in those who have
+been justified, it merits other great rewards.  Yet God exercises His
+saints variously, and often defers the rewards of the righteousness
+of works in order that they may learn not to trust in their own
+righteousness, and may learn to seek the will of God rather than the
+rewards, as appears in Job, in Christ, and other saints.  And of this,
+many psalms teach us, which console us against the happiness of the
+wicked, as Ps. 37, 1: Neither be thou envious.  And Christ says, Matt.
+5, 10: Blessed are they which are persecuted for righteousness' sake;
+for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.  By these praises of good works,
+believers are undoubtedly moved to do good works.  Meanwhile, the
+doctrine of repentance is also proclaimed against the godless, whose
+works are wicked; and the wrath of God is displayed, which He has
+threatened all who do not repent.  We therefore praise and require
+good works, and show many reasons why they ought to be done.
+
+Thus of works Paul also teaches when he says, Rom. 4, 9 sq., that
+Abraham received circumcision, not in order that by this work he
+might be justified; for by faith he had already attained it that he
+was accounted righteous.  But circumcision was added in order that he
+might have in his body a written sign, admonished by which he might
+exercise faith, and by which also he might confess his faith before
+others, and by his testimony might invite others to believe.  By
+faith Abel offered unto God a more excellent sacrifice, Heb. 11, 4.
+Because, therefore, he was just by faith, the sacrifice which he made
+was pleasing to God, not that by this work he merited the remission
+of sins and grace, but that he exercised his faith and showed it to
+others, in order to invite them to believe.
+
+Although in this way good works ought to follow faith, men who cannot
+believe and be sure that for Christ's sake they are freely forgiven,
+and that freely for Christ's sake they have a reconciled God, employ
+works far otherwise.  When they see the works of saints, they judge
+in a human manner that saints have merited the remission of sins and
+grace through these works.  Accordingly, they imitate them, and think
+that through similar works they merit the remission of sins and grace;
+they think that through these works they appease the wrath of God,
+and attain that for the sake of these works they are accounted
+righteous.  This godless opinion concerning works we condemn.  In the
+first place, because it obscures the glory of Christ when men offer
+to God these works as a price and propitiation.  This honor, due to
+Christ alone, is ascribed to our works.  Secondly, they nevertheless
+do not find, in these works, peace of conscience, but in true terrors,
+heaping up works upon works, they at length despair because they
+find no work sufficiently pure [sufficiently important and precious
+to propitiate God, to obtain with certainty eternal life, in a word,
+to tranquilize and pacify the conscience].  The Law always accuses,
+and produces wrath.  Thirdly, such persons never attain the knowledge
+of God [nor of His will]; for, as in anger they flee from God, who
+judges and afflicts them, they never believe that they are heard.
+But faith manifests the presence of God, since it is certain that God
+freely forgives and hears us.
+
+Moreover, this godless opinion concerning works always has existed in
+the world [sticks to the world quite tightly].  The heathen had
+sacrifices, derived from the fathers.  They imitated their works.
+Their faith they did not retain, but thought that the works were a
+propitiation and price on account of which God would be reconciled to
+them.  The people in the law [the Israelites] imitated sacrifices
+with the opinion that by means of these works they would appease God,
+so to say, _ex opere operato_.  We see here how earnestly the
+prophets rebuke the people: Ps. 50, 8: I will not reprove thee for
+thy sacrifices, and Jer. 7, 22: I spake not unto your fathers
+concerning burnt offerings.  Such passages condemn not works, which
+God certainly had commanded as outward exercises in this government,
+but they condemn the godless opinion according to which they thought
+that by these works they appeased the wrath of God, and thus cast
+away faith.  And because no works pacify the conscience, new works,
+in addition to God's commands, were from time to time devised [the
+hypocrites nevertheless used to invent one work after another, one
+sacrifice after another, by a blind guess and in reckless wantonness,
+and all this without the word and command of God, with wicked
+conscience as we have seen in the Papacy].  The people of Israel had
+seen the prophets sacrificing on high places [and in groves].
+Besides, the examples of the saints very greatly move the minds of
+those, hoping by similar works to obtain grace just as these saints
+obtained it.  [But the saints believed.] Wherefore the people began,
+with remarkable zeal, to imitate this work, in order that by such a
+work [they might appease the wrath of God] they might merit remission
+of sins, grace, and righteousness.  But the prophets had been
+sacrificing on high places, not that by these works they might merit
+the remission of sins and grace, but because on these places they
+taught, and, accordingly, presented there a testimony of their faith.
+The people had heard that Abraham had sacrificed his son.  Wherefore
+they also, in order to appease God by a most cruel and difficult work,
+put to death their sons.  But Abraham did not sacrifice his son with
+the opinion that this work was a price and propitiatory work for the
+sake of which he was accounted righteous.  Thus in the Church the
+Lord's Supper was instituted that by remembrance of the promises of
+Christ, of which we are admonished in this sign, faith might be
+strengthened in us, and we might publicly confess our faith, and
+proclaim the benefits of Christ, as Paul says, 1 Cor. 11, 26: As
+often as ye eat this bread and drink this cup, ye do show the Lord's
+death, etc. But our adversaries contend that the mass is a work that
+justifies us _ex opere operato_, and removes the guilt and liability
+to punishment in those for whom it is celebrated, for thus writes
+Gabriel.
+
+Anthony, Bernard, Dominicus, Franciscus, and other holy Fathers
+selected a certain kind of life either for the sake of study [of more
+readily reading the Holy Scriptures] or other useful exercises.  In
+the mean time they believed that by faith they were accounted
+righteous for Christ's sake, and that God was gracious to them, not
+on account of those exercises of their own.  But the multitude since
+then has imitated not the faith of the Fathers, but their example
+without faith, in order that by such works they might merit the
+remission of sins, grace, and righteousness: they did not believe
+that they received these freely on account of Christ as Propitiator.
+[Thus the human mind always exalts works too highly, and puts them in
+the wrong place.  And this error the Gospel reproves which teaches
+that men are accounted righteous not for the sake of the Law, but for
+the sake of Christ alone.  Christ, however, is apprehended by faith
+alone; wherefore we are accounted righteous by faith alone for
+Christ's sake.] Thus the world judges of all works that they are a
+propitiation by which God is appeased; that they are a price because
+of which we are accounted righteous.  It does not believe that Christ
+is Propitiator; it does not believe that by faith we freely attain
+that we are accounted righteous for Christ's sake.  And, nevertheless,
+since works cannot pacify the conscience, others are continually
+chosen, new rites are performed, new vows made, and new orders of
+monks formed beyond the command of God, in order that some great work
+may be sought which may be set against the wrath and judgment of God.
+Contrary to Scripture, the adversaries uphold these godless opinions
+concerning works.  But to ascribe to our works these things, namely,
+that they are a propitiation, that they merit the remission of sins
+and grace that for the sake of these and not by faith for the sake of
+Christ as Propitiator we are accounted righteous before God, what
+else is this than to deny Christ the honor of Mediator and
+Propitiator?  Although, therefore, we believe and teach that good
+works must necessarily be done (for the inchoate fulfilling of the
+Law ought to follow faith), nevertheless we give to Christ His own
+honor.  We believe and teach that by faith, for Christ's sake, we are
+accounted righteous before God, that we are not accounted righteous
+because of works without Christ as Mediator, that by works we do not
+merit the remission of sins, grace, and righteousness, that we cannot
+set our works against the wrath and justice of God, that works cannot
+overcome the terrors of sin, but that the terrors of sin are overcome
+by faith alone, that only Christ the Mediator is to be presented by
+faith against the wrath and judgment of God.  If any one think
+differently, he does not give Christ due honor, who has been set
+forth that He might be a Propitiator, that through Him we might have
+access to the Father.  We are speaking now of the righteousness
+through which we treat with God not with men, but by which we
+apprehend grace and peace of conscience.  Conscience however, cannot
+be pacified before God, unless by faith alone, which is certain that
+God for Christ's sake is reconciled to us, according to Rom. 5, 1:
+Being justified by faith, we have peace because justification is only
+a matter freely promised for Christ's sake, and therefore is always
+received before God by faith alone.
+
+Now, then, we will reply to those passages which the adversaries cite,
+in order to prove that we are justified by love and works.  From 1
+Cor. 13, 2 they cite: Though I have all faith, etc., and hove not
+charity, I am nothing.  And here they triumph greatly.  Paul
+testifies to the entire Church, they say, that faith alone does not
+justify.  But a reply is easy after we have shown above what we hold
+concerning love and works.  This passage of Paul requires love.  We
+also require this.  For we have said above that renewal and the
+inchoate fulfilling of the Law must exist in us, according to Jer. 31,
+33: 1 will put My Law in their inward parts, and write it in their
+hearts.  If any one should cast away love, even though he have great
+faith, yet he does not retain it, for he does not retain the Holy
+Ghost [he becomes cold and is now again fleshly, without Spirit and
+faith; for the Holy Ghost is not where Christian love and other
+fruits of the Spirit are not].  Nor indeed does Paul in this passage
+treat of the mode of justification, but he writes to those who, after
+they had been justified, should be urged to bring forth good fruits
+lest they might lose the Holy Ghost.  The adversaries, furthermore,
+treat the matter preposterously: they cite this one passage, in which
+Paul teaches concerning fruits, they omit very many other passages,
+in which in a regular order he discusses the mode of justification.
+Besides, they always add a correction to the other passages, which
+treat of faith, namely, that they ought to be understood as applying
+to _fides formata_.  Here they add no correction that there is also
+need of the faith that holds that we are accounted righteous for the
+sake of Christ as Propitiator.  Thus the adversaries exclude Christ
+from justification, and teach only a righteousness of the Law.  But
+let us return to Paul.  No one can infer anything more from this text
+than that love is necessary.  This we confess.  So also not to commit
+theft is necessary.  But the reasoning will not be correct if some
+one would desire to frame thence an argument such as this: "Not to
+commit theft is necessary.  Therefore, not to commit theft justifies."
+Because justification is not the approval of a certain work, but of
+the entire person.  Hence this passage from Paul does not harm us;
+only the adversaries must not in imagination add to it whatever they
+please.  For he does not say that love justifies, but: ["And if I
+have not love"] "I am nothing," namely, that faith, however great it
+may have been, is extinguished.  He does not say that love overcomes
+the terrors of sin and of death that we can set our love against the
+wrath and judgment of God, that our love satisfies God's Law, that
+without Christ as Propitiator we have access, by our love, to God,
+that by our love we receive the promised remission of sins.  Paul
+says nothing of this.  He does not, therefore, think that love
+justifies, because we are justified only when we apprehend Christ as
+Propitiator, and believe that for Christ's sake God is reconciled to
+us.  Neither is justification even to be dreamed of with the omission
+of Christ as Propitiator.  If there be no need of Christ, if by our
+love we can overcome death, if by our love, without Christ as
+Propitiator' we have access to God, then let our adversaries remove
+the promise concerning Christ, then let them abolish the Gospel
+[which teaches that we have access to God through Christ as
+Propitiator, and that we are accepted not for the sake of our
+fulfilling of the Law, but for Christ's sake].  The adversaries
+corrupt very many passages, because they bring to them their own
+opinions, and do not derive the meaning from the passages themselves.
+For what difficulty is there in this passage if we remove the
+interpretation which the adversaries, who do not understand what
+justification is or how it occurs [what faith is, what Christ is, or
+how a man is justified before God], out of their own mind attach to
+it?  The Corinthians, being justified before, had received many
+excellent gifts.  In the beginning they glowed with zeal, just as is
+generally the case.  Then dissensions [factions and sects] began to
+arise among them as Paul indicates; they began to dislike good
+teachers.  Accordingly, Paul reproves them, recalling them [to unity
+and] to offices of love.  Although these are necessary, yet it would
+be foolish to imagine that works of the Second Table, through which
+we have to do with man and not properly with God, justify us.  But in
+justification we have to treat with God; His wrath must be appeased,
+and conscience must be pacified with respect to God.  None of these
+occur through the works of the Second Table [by love, but only by
+faith, which apprehends Christ and the promise of God.  However, it
+is true that losing love involves losing the Spirit and faith.  And
+thus Paul says: If I have not love, I am nothing.  But he does not
+add the affirmative statement, that love justifies in the sight of
+God].
+
+But they object that love is preferred to faith and hope.  For Paul
+says, 1 Cor. 13, 13: The greatest of these is charity.  Now, it is
+reasonable that the greatest and chief virtue should justify,
+although Paul, in this passage, properly speaks of love towards one's
+neighbor, and indicates that love is the greatest, because it has
+most fruits.  Faith and hope have to do only with God; but love has
+infinite offices externally towards men.  [Love goes forth upon earth
+among the people, and does much good, by consoling, teaching,
+instructing, helping, counseling privately and publicly.]
+Nevertheless, let us, indeed, grant to the adversaries that love
+towards God and our neighbor is the greatest virtue, because the
+chief commandment is this: Thou shalt love the Lord, thy God Matt. 22,
+37. But how will they infer thence that love justifies?  The
+greatest virtue, they say, justifies.  By no means.  [It would be
+true if we had a gracious God because of our virtue.  Now, it was
+proven above that we are accepted and justified for Christ's sake,
+not because of our virtue, for our virtue is impure.] For just as
+even the greatest or first Law does not justify, so also the greatest
+virtue of the Law does not justify.  [For, as the Law and virtue is
+higher, and our ability to do the same proportionately lower, we are
+not righteous because of love.] But that virtue justifies which
+apprehends Christ, which communicates to us Christ's merits, by which
+we receive grace and peace from God.  But this virtue is faith.  For
+as it has been often said, faith is not only knowledge, but much
+rather willing to receive or apprehend those things which are offered
+in the promise concerning Christ.  Moreover this obedience towards
+God, namely, to wish to receive the offered promise, is no less a
+divine service, _latreia_, than is love.  God wishes us to believe
+Him, and to receive from Him blessings, and this He declares to be
+true divine service.
+
+But the adversaries ascribe justification to love because they
+everywhere teach and require the righteousness of the Law.  For we
+cannot deny that love is the highest work of the Law.  And human
+wisdom gazes at the Law, and seeks in it justification.  Accordingly,
+also the scholastic doctors, great and talented men, proclaim this as
+the highest work of the Law, and ascribe to this work justification.
+But deceived by human wisdom, they did not look upon the uncovered,
+but upon the veiled face of Moses, just as the Pharisees,
+philosophers, Mahometans.  But we preach the foolishness of the
+Gospel, in which another righteousness is revealed, namely, that for
+the sake of Christ, as Propitiator, we are accounted righteous, when
+we believe that for Christ's sake God has been reconciled to us.
+Neither are we ignorant how far distant this doctrine is from the
+judgment of reason and of the Law.  Nor are we ignorant that the
+doctrine of the Law concerning love makes a much greater show; for it
+is wisdom.  But we are not ashamed of the foolishness of the Gospel.
+For the sake of Christ's glory we defend this, and beseech Christ, by
+His Holy Ghost, to aid us that we may be able to make this clear and
+manifest.
+
+The adversaries, in the Confutation, have also cited against us Col.
+3, 14: Charity, which is the bond of perfectness.  From this they
+infer that love justifies because it renders men perfect.  Although a
+reply concerning perfection could here be made in many ways, yet we
+will simply recite the meaning of Paul.  It is certain that Paul
+spoke of love towards one's neighbor.  Neither must we indeed think
+that Paul would ascribe either justification or perfection to the
+works of the Second Table, rather than to those of the First.  And if
+love render men perfect, there will then be no need of Christ as
+Propitiator, [However, Paul teaches in all places that we are
+accepted on account of Christ, and not on account of our love, or our
+works, or of the Law; for no saint (as was stated before) perfectly
+fulfils the Law.  Therefore since he in all places writes and teaches
+that in this life there is no perfection in our works, it is not to
+be thought that he speaks here of personal perfection.] for faith
+apprehends Christ only as Propitiator.  This, however, is far distant
+from the meaning of Paul, who never suffers Christ to be excluded as
+Propitiator.  Therefore he speaks not of personal perfection, but of
+the integrity common to the Church [concerning the unity of the
+Church and the word which they interpret as perfection means nothing
+else than to be not rent].  For on this account he says that love is
+a bond or connection, to signify that he speaks of the binding and
+joining together, with each other, of the many members of the Church.
+For just as in all families and in all states concord should be
+nourished by mutual offices, and tranquillity cannot be retained
+unless men overlook and forgive certain mistakes among themselves; so
+Paul commands that there should be love in the Church in order that
+it may preserve concord, bear with the harsher manners of brethren as
+there is need, overlook certain less serious mistakes, lest the
+Church fly apart into various schisms, and enmities and factions and
+heresies arise from the schisms.
+
+For concord must necessarily he rent asunder whenever either the
+bishops impose [without cause] upon the people heavier burdens, or
+have no respect to weakness in the people.  And dissensions arise
+when the people judge too severely [quickly censure and criticize]
+concerning the conduct [walk and life] of teachers [bishops or
+preachers], or despise the teachers because of certain less serious
+faults; for then both another kind of doctrine and other teachers are
+sought after.  On the other hand, perfection, i.e., the integrity of
+the Church, is preserved, when the strong bear with the weak, when
+the people take in good part some faults in the conduct of their
+teachers [have patience also with their preachers], when the bishops
+make some allowances for the weakness of the people [know how to
+exercise forbearance to the people, according to circumstances, with
+respect to all kinds of weaknesses and faults].  Of these precepts of
+equity the books of all the wise are full, namely, that in every day
+life we should make many allowances mutually for the sake of common
+tranquillity.  And of this Paul frequently teaches both here and
+elsewhere.  Wherefore the adversaries argue indiscreetly from the
+term "perfection" that love justifies, while Paul speaks of common
+integrity and tranquillity.  And thus Ambrose interprets this passage:
+Just as a building is said to be perfect or entire when all its
+parts are fitly joined together with one another.  Moreover, it is
+disgraceful for the adversaries to preach so much concerning love
+while they nowhere exhibit it.  What are they now doing?  They are
+rending asunder churches, they are writing laws in blood, and are
+proposing to the most clement prince, the Emperor, that these should
+be promulgated; they are slaughtering priests and other good men, if
+any one have [even] slightly intimated that he does not entirely
+approve some manifest abuse.  [They wish all dead who say a single
+word against their godless doctrine.] These things are not consistent
+with those declamations of love, which if the adversaries would
+follow, the churches would be tranquil and the state have peace.  For
+these tumults would be quieted if the adversaries would not insist
+with too much bitterness [from sheer vengeful spite and pharisaical
+envy, against the truth which they have perceived] upon certain
+traditions, useless for godliness, most of which not even those very
+persons observe who most earnestly defend them.  But they easily
+forgive themselves, and yet do not likewise forgive others, according
+to the passage in the poet: I forgive myself, Maevius said.  But this
+is very far distant from those encomiums of love which they here
+recite from Paul, nor do they understand the word any more than the
+walls which give it back.  From Peter they cite also this sentence, 1
+Pet. 4, 8: Charity shall cover the multitude of sins.  It is evident
+that also Peter speaks of love towards one's neighbor, because he
+joins this passage to the precept by which he commands that they
+should love one another.  Neither could it have come into the mind of
+any apostle that our love overcomes sin and death; that love is the
+propitiation on account of which to the exclusion of Christ as
+Mediator, God is reconciled; that love is righteousness without
+Christ as Mediator.  For this love, if there would be any, would be a
+righteousness of the Law, and not of the Gospel, which promises to us
+reconciliation and righteousness if we believe that, for the sake of
+Christ as Propitiator, the Father has been reconciled, and that the
+merits of Christ are bestowed upon us.  Peter, accordingly, urges us,
+a little before, to come to Christ that we may be built upon Christ.
+And he adds, 1 Pet. 2, 4-6: He that believeth on Him shall not be
+confounded.  When God judges and convicts us, our love does not free
+us from confusion [from our works and lives, we truly suffer shame].
+But faith in Christ liberates us in these fears, because we know that
+for Christ's sake we are forgiven.
+
+Besides, this sentence concerning love is derived from Prov. 10,12,
+where the antithesis clearly shows how it ought to be understood:
+Hatred stirreth up strifes; but love covereth all sins.  It teaches
+precisely the same thing as that passage of Paul taken from
+Colossians, that if any dissensions would occur, they should be
+moderated and settled by our equitable and lenient conduct.
+Dissensions, it says, increase by means of hatred, as we often see
+that from the most trifling offenses tragedies arise [from the
+smallest sparks a great conflagration arises].  Certain trifling
+offenses occurred between Caius Caesar and Pompey, in which, if the
+one had yielded a very little to the other, civil war would not have
+arisen.  But while each indulged his own hatred, from a matter of no
+account the greatest commotions arose.  And many heresies have arisen
+in the Church only from the hatred of the teachers.  Therefore it
+does not refer to a person's own faults, but to the faults of others,
+when it says: Charity covereth sins, namely, those of others, and
+that, too, among men, i.e., even though these offenses occur, yet
+love overlooks them, forgives, yields, and does not carry all things
+to the extremity of justice.  Peter, therefore, does not mean that
+love merits in God's sight the remission of sins, that it is a
+propitiation to the exclusion of Christ as Mediator, that it
+regenerates and justifies, but that it is not morose, harsh,
+intractable towards men, that it overlooks some mistakes of its
+friends, that it takes in good part even the harsher manners of
+others, just as the well-known maxim enjoins: Know, but do rot hate,
+the manners of a fiend.  Nor was it without design that the apostle
+taught so frequently concerning this office what the philosophers
+call epieicheia, leniency.  For this virtue is necessary for
+retaining public harmony [in the Church and the civil government],
+which cannot last unless pastors and Churches mutually overlook and
+pardon many things [if they want to be extremely particular about
+every defect, and do not allow many things to flow by without
+noticing them].
+
+From James they cite 2, 24: Ye see, then how by works a man is
+justified, and not by faith alone.  Nor is any other passage supposed
+to be more contrary to our belief.  But the reply is easy and plain.
+If the adversaries do not attach their own opinions concerning the
+merits of works, the words of James have in them nothing that is of
+disadvantage.  But wherever there is mention of works, the
+adversaries add falsely their own godless opinions, that by means of
+good works we merit the remission of sins; that good works are a
+propitiation and price on account of which God is reconciled to us;
+that good works overcome the terrors of sin and of death; that good
+works are accepted in God's sight on account of their goodness; and
+that they do not need mercy and Christ as Propitiator.  None of all
+these things came into the mind of James, which the adversaries
+nevertheless, defend under the pretext of this passage of James.
+
+In the first place, then, we must ponder this, namely, that the
+passage is more against the adversaries than against us.  For the
+adversaries teach that man is justified by love and works.  Of faith,
+by which we apprehend Christ as Propitiator, they say nothing.  Yea
+they condemn this faith; nor do they condemn it only in sentences and
+writings, but also by the sword and capital punishments they endeavor
+to exterminate it in the Church.  How much better does James teach,
+who does not omit faith, or present love in preference to faith, but
+retains faith, so that in justification Christ may not be excluded as
+Propitiator!  Just as Paul also, when he treats of the sum of the
+Christian life, includes faith and love, 1 Tim. 1, 5: The end of the
+commandment is charity out of a pure heart, and of a good conscience,
+and of faith unfeigned.
+
+Secondly, the subject itself declares that here such works are spoken
+of as follow faith, and show that faith is not dead, but living and
+efficacious in the heart.  James, therefore, did not believe that by
+good works we merit the remission of sins and grace.  For he speaks
+of the works of those who have been justified, who have already been
+reconciled and accepted, and have obtained remission of sins.
+Wherefore the adversaries err when they infer that James teaches that
+we merit remission of sins and grace by good works, and that by our
+works we have access to God, without Christ as Propitiator.
+
+
+
+
+Part 8
+
+
+Thirdly, James has spoken shortly before concerning regeneration,
+namely, that it occurs through the Gospel.  For thus he says 1, 18:
+Of His own will begat He us with the Word of Truth, that we should be
+a kind of first-fruits of His creatures.  When he says that we have
+been born again by the Gospel, he teaches that we have been born
+again and justified by faith.  For the promise concerning Christ is
+apprehended only by faith, when we set it against the terrors of sin
+and of death.  James does not, therefore, think that we are born
+again by our works.
+
+From these things it is clear that James does not contradict us, who,
+when censuring idle and secure minds, that imagine that they have
+faith, although they do not have it, made a distinction between dead
+and living faith.  He says that that is dead which does not bring
+forth good works [and fruits of the Spirit: obedience, patience,
+chastity, love]; he says that that is living which brings forth good
+works.  Furthermore, we have frequently already shown what we term
+faith.  For we do not speak of idle knowledge [that merely the
+history concerning Christ should be known], such as devils have, but
+of faith which resists the terrors of conscience, and cheers and
+consoles terrified hearts [the new light and power which the Holy
+Ghost works in the heart, through which we overcome the terrors of
+death, of sin, etc.].  Such faith is neither an easy matter, as the
+adversaries dream [as they say: Believe, believe, how easy it is to
+believe! etc.], nor a human power [thought which I can form for
+myself], but a divine power, by which we are quickened, and by which
+we overcome the devil and death.  Just as Paul says to the Colossians,
+2, 12, that faith is efficacious through the power of God, and
+overcomes death: Wherein also ye are risen with Him through the faith
+of the operation of God.  Since this faith is a new life, it
+necessarily produces new movements and works.  [Because it is a new
+light and life in the heart, whereby we obtain another mind and
+spirit, it is living, productive, and rich in good works.]
+Accordingly, James is right in denying that we are justified by such
+a faith as is without works.  But when he says that we are justified
+by faith and works, he certainly does not say that we are born again
+by works.  Neither does he say this, that partly Christ is our
+Propitiator, and partly our works are our propitiation.  Nor does he
+describe the mode of justification, but only of what nature the just
+are, after they have been already justified and regenerated.  [For he
+is speaking of works which should follow faith.  There it is well
+said: He who has faith and good works is righteous; not, indeed, on
+account of the works, but for Christ's sake, through faith.  And as a
+good tree should bring forth good fruit, and yet the fruit does not
+make the tree good, so good works must follow the new birth, although
+they do not make man accepted before God; but as the tree must first
+be good, so also must man be first accepted before God by faith for
+Christ's sake.  The works are too insignificant to render God
+gracious to us for their sake, if He were not gracious to us for
+Christ's sake.  Therefore James does not contradict St. Paul, and
+does not say that by our works we merit, etc.] And here to be
+justified does not mean that a righteous man is made from a wicked
+man, but to be pronounced righteous in a forensic sense, as also in
+the passage Rom. 2, 13: The doers of the Law shall be justified.  As,
+therefore, these words: The doers of the Law shall be justified,
+contain nothing contrary to our doctrine, so, too, we believe
+concerning the words of James: By works a man is justified, and not
+by faith alone, because men having faith and good works are certainly
+pronounced righteous.  For, as we have said, the good works of saints
+are righteous, and please on account of faith.  For James commends
+only such works as faith produces, as he testifies when he says of
+Abraham, 2, 21: Faith wrought with his works.  In this sense it is
+said: The doers of the Law are justified, i.e., they are pronounced
+righteous who from the heart believe God, and afterwards have good
+fruits which please Him on account of faith, and accordingly, are the
+fulfilment of the Law.  These things, simply spoken, contain nothing
+erroneous, but they are distorted by the adversaries who attach to
+them godless opinions out of their mind.  For it does not follow
+hence that works merit the remission of sins; that works regenerate
+hearts; that works are a propitiation, that works please without
+Christ as Propitiator; that works do not need Christ as Propitiator.
+James says nothing of these things, which, nevertheless, the
+adversaries shamelessly infer from the words of James.
+
+Certain other passages concerning works are also cited against us.
+Luke 6, 37: Forgive, and ye shall be forgiven.  Is. 58, 7 [9]: Is it
+not to deal thy bread to the hungry?...Then shalt thou call, and the
+Lord will answer.  Dan. 4, 24 [27]: Break off thy sins, by showing
+mercy to the poor.  Matt. 5, 3: Blessed are the poor in spirit; for
+theirs is the kingdom of heaven; and v. 7: Blessed are the merciful;
+for they shall obtain mercy.  Even these passages would contain
+nothing contrary to us if the adversaries would not falsely attach
+something to them.  For they contain two things: The one is a
+preaching either of the Law or of repentance, which not only convicts
+those doing wrong, but also enjoins them to do what is right; the
+other is a promise which is added.  But it is not added that sins are
+remitted without faith, or that works themselves are a propitiation.
+Moreover, in the preaching of the Law these two things ought always
+to be understood, namely: First, that the Law cannot be observed
+unless we have been regenerated by faith in Christ, just as Christ
+says, John 15, 5: Without Me ye can do nothing.  Secondly, and though
+some external works can certainly be done, this general judgment:
+Without faith it is impossible to please God, which interprets the
+whole Law, must be retained: and the Gospel must be retained, that
+through Christ we have access to the Father, Heb. 10, 19, Rom. 5, 2.
+For it is evident that we are not justified by the Law.  Otherwise,
+why would there be need of Christ or the Gospel, if the preaching of
+the Law alone would be sufficient?  Thus in the preaching of
+repentance, the preaching of the Law, or the Word convicting of sin,
+is not sufficient, because the Law works wrath, and only accuses,
+only terrifies consciences, because consciences never are at rest,
+unless they hear the voice of God in which the remission of sins is
+clearly promised.  Accordingly, the Gospel must be added, that for
+Christ's sake sins are remitted, and that we obtain remission of sins
+by faith in Christ.  If the adversaries exclude the Gospel of Christ
+from the preaching of repentance, they are judged aright to be
+blasphemers against Christ.
+
+Therefore, when Isaiah, 1, 16. 18, preaches repentance: Cease to do
+evil; learn to do well; seek judgment, relieve the oppressed, judge
+the fatherless, plead for the widow.  Come now and let us reason
+together, saith the Lord; though your sine be as scarlet, they shall
+be white as snow, the prophet thus both exhorts to repentance, and
+adds the promise.  But it would be foolish to consider in such a
+sentence only the words: Relieve the oppressed; judge the fatherless.
+For he says in the beginning: Cease to do evil, where he censures
+impiety of heart and requires faith.  Neither does the prophet say
+that through the works: Relieve the oppressed, judge the fatherless,
+they can merit the remission of sins _ex opere operato_, but he
+commands such works as are necessary in the new life.  Yet, in the
+mean time, he means that remission of sins is received by faith, and
+accordingly the promise is added.  Thus we must understand all
+similar passages.  Christ preaches repentance when He says: Forgive,
+and He adds the promise: And ye shall be forgiven, Luke 6, 37. Nor,
+indeed, does He say this, namely, that, when we forgive, by this work
+of ours we merit the remission of sins _ex opere operato_, as they
+term it, but He requires a new life, which certainly is necessary.
+Yet, in the mean time He means that remission of sins is received by
+faith.  Thus, when Isaiah says, 58, 7: Deal thy bread to the hungry,
+he requires a new life.  Nor does the prophet speak of this work
+alone, but, as the text indicates, of the entire repentance; yet, in
+the mean time, he intends that remission of sins is received by faith.
+For the position is sure, and none of the gates of hell can
+overthrow it, that in the preaching of repentance the preaching of
+the Law is not sufficient, because the Law works wrath and always
+accuses.  But the preaching of the Gospel should be added, namely,
+that in this way remission of sins is granted us, if we believe that
+sins are remitted us for Christ's sake.  Otherwise, why would there
+be need of the Gospel, why would there be need of Christ?  This
+belief ought always to be in view, in order that it may be opposed to
+those who, Christ being cast aside and the Gospel being blotted out,
+wickedly distort the Scriptures to the human opinions, that by our
+works we purchase remission of sins.
+
+Thus also in the sermon of Daniel, 4, 24, faith is required.  [The
+words of the prophet which were full of faith and spirit, we must not
+regard as heathenish as those of Aristotle or any other heathen.
+Aristotle also admonished Alexander that he should not use his power
+for his own wantonness, but for the improvement of countries and men.
+This was written correctly and well; concerning the office of king
+nothing better can be preached or written.  But Daniel is speaking to
+his king, not only concerning his office as king, but concerning
+repentance, the forgiveness of sins, reconciliation to God, and
+concerning sublime, great, spiritual subjects, which far transcend
+human thoughts and works.] For Daniel did not mean that the king
+should only bestow alms [which even a hypocrite can do], but embraces
+repentance when he says: Break off [Redeem, Vulg.] thy iniquities by
+showing mercy to the poor, i.e. break off thy sins by a change of
+heart and works.  But here also faith is required.  And Daniel
+proclaims to him many things concerning the worship of the only God,
+the God of Israel, and converts the king not only to bestow alms, but
+much more to faith.  For we have the excellent confession of the king
+concerning the God of Israel: There is no other God that can deliver
+after this sort Dan. 3, 29. Therefore, in the sermon of Daniel there
+are two parts.  The one part is that which gives commandment
+concerning the new life and the works of the new life.  The other
+part is, that Daniel promises to the king the remission of sins.
+[Now, where there is a promise, faith is required.  For the promise
+cannot be received in any other way than by the heart's relying on
+such word of God, and not regarding its own worthiness or
+unworthiness.  Accordingly, Daniel also demands faith: for thus the
+promise reads: There will be healing for thy offenses.] And this
+promise of the remission of sins is not a preaching of the Law, but a
+truly prophetical and evangelical voice, of which Daniel certainly
+meant that it should be received in faith.  For Daniel knew that the
+remission of sins in Christ was promised not only to the Israelites,
+but also to all nations.  Otherwise he could not have promised to the
+king the remission of sins.  For it is not in the power of man
+especially amid the terrors of sin, to assert without a sure word of
+God concerning God's will, that He ceases to be angry.  And the words
+of Daniel speak in his own language still more clearly of repentance
+and still more clearly bring out the promise.  Redeem thy sins by
+righteousness and thy iniquities by favors toward the poor.  These
+words teach concerning the whole of repentance.  [It is as much as to
+say: Amend your life!  And it is true, when we amend our lives, we
+become rid of sin.] For they direct him to become righteous, then to
+do good works, to defend the miserable against injustice, as was the
+duty of a king.  But righteousness is faith in the heart.  Moreover,
+sins are redeemed by repentance, i.e. the obligation or guilt is
+removed, because God forgives those who repent, as it is written in
+Ezek. 18, 21. 22. Nor are we to infer from this that He forgives on
+account of works that follow, on account of alms, but on account of
+His promise He forgives those who apprehend His promise.  Neither do
+any apprehend His promise, except those who truly believe, and by
+faith overcome sin and death.  These, being regenerated, ought to
+bring forth fruits worthy of repentance, just as John says, Matt. 3,
+8. The promise, therefore, was added: So, there will be healing for
+thy offenses, Dan. 4, 24. [Daniel does not only demand works, but
+says: Redeem thy sins by righteousness.  Now, everybody knows that in
+Scripture righteousness does not mean only external works, but
+embraces faith, as Paul says: _Iustus ex fide vivet_?  The just shall
+live by his faith, Heb. 10, 38. Hence, Daniel first demands faith
+when he mentions righteousness and says: Redeem thy sins by
+righteousness, that is, by faith toward God, by which thou art made
+righteous.  In addition to this do good works, administer your office,
+do not be a tyrant, but see that your government be profitable to
+your country and people, preserve peace, and protect the poor against
+unjust force.  These are princely alms.] Jerome here added a particle
+expressing doubt, that is beside the matter, and in his commentaries
+contends much more unwisely that the remission of sins is uncertain.
+But let us remember that the Gospel gives a sure promise of the
+remission of sins.  And to deny that there must be a sure promise of
+the remission of sins would completely abolish the Gospel.  Let us
+therefore dismiss Jerome concerning this passage.  Although the
+promise is displayed even in the word redeem.  For it signifies that
+the remission of sins is possible that sins can be redeemed, i.e.,
+that their obligation or guilt can be removed, or the wrath of God
+appeased.  But our adversaries, overlooking the promises, everywhere,
+consider only the precepts, and attach falsely the human opinion that
+remission occurs on account of works, although the text does not say
+this, but much rather requires faith.  For wherever a promise is,
+there faith is required.  For a promise cannot be received unless by
+faith.  [The same answer must also be given in reference to the
+passage from the Gospel: Forgive, and you will be forgiven.  For this
+is just such a doctrine of repentance.  The first part in this
+passage demands amendment of life and good works, the other part adds
+the promise.  Nor are we to infer from this that our forgiving merits
+for us _ex opere operato_ remission of sin.  For that is not what
+Christ says, but as in other sacraments Christ has attached the
+promise to an external sign, so He attaches the promise of the
+forgiveness of sin in this place to external good works.  And as in
+the Lord's Supper we do not obtain forgiveness of sin without faith,
+_ex opere operato_, so neither in this when we forgive.  For, our
+forgiving is not a good work, except it is performed by a person
+whose sins have been previously forgiven by God in Christ.  If,
+therefore, our forgiving is to please God, it must follow after the
+forgiveness which God extends to us.  For, as a rule, Christ combines
+these two, the Law and the Gospel, both faith and good works, in
+order to indicate that, where good works do not follow, there is no
+faith either that we may have external marks, which remind us of the
+Gospel and the forgiveness of sin, for our comfort and that thus our
+faith may be exercised in many ways.  In this manner we are to
+understand such passages, otherwise they would directly contradict
+the entire Gospel, and our beggarly works would be put in the place
+of Christ, who alone is to be the propitiation, which no man is by
+any means to despise.  Again, if these passages were to be understood
+as relating to works, the remission of sins would be quite uncertain;
+for it would rest on a poor foundation, on our miserable works.]
+
+But works become conspicuous among men.  Human reason naturally
+admires these, and because it sees only works, and does not
+understand or consider faith, it dreams accordingly that these works
+merit remission of sins and justify.  This opinion of the Law inheres
+by nature in men's minds; neither can it be expelled, unless when we
+are divinely taught.  But the mind must be recalled from such carnal
+opinions to the Word of God.  We see that the Gospel and the promise
+concerning Christ have been laid before us.  When, therefore, the Law
+is preached, when works are enjoined, we should not spurn the promise
+concerning Christ.  But the latter must first be apprehended, in
+order that we may be able to produce good works, and our works may
+please God, as Christ says, John 16; 5: With out Me ye can do nothing.
+Therefore, if Daniel would have used such words as these: "Redeem
+your sins by repentance," the adversaries would take no notice of
+this passage.  Now, since he has actually expressed this thought in
+apparently other words, the adversaries distort his words to the
+injury of the doctrine of grace and faith, although Daniel meant most
+especially to include faith.  Thus, therefore, we reply to the words
+of Daniel, that, inasmuch as he is preaching repentance, he is
+teaching not only of works, but also of faith, as the narrative
+itself in the context testifies.  Secondly, because Daniel clearly
+presents the promise, he necessarily requires faith which believes
+that sins are freely remitted by God.  Although, therefore, in
+repentance he mentions works, yet Daniel does not say that by these
+works we merit remission of sins.  For Daniel speaks not only of the
+remission of the punishment; because remission of the punishment is
+sought for in vain unless the heart first receive the remission of
+guilt.  Besides, if the adversaries understand Daniel as speaking
+only of the remission of punishment, this passage will prove nothing
+against us, because it will thus be necessary for even them to
+confess that the remission of sin and free justification precede.
+Afterwards even we concede that the punishments by which we are
+chastised, are mitigated by our prayers and good works, and finally
+by our entire repentance, according to 1 Cor. 11, 31: For if we would
+judge ourselves, we should not be judged.  And Jer. 15, 19: If thou
+return, then will I bring thee again.  And Zech. 1, 3: Turn ye unto
+Me, and I will turn unto you.  And Ps. 50, 15: Call upon Me in the
+day of trouble.
+
+Let us, therefore, in all our encomiums upon works and in the
+preaching of the Law retain this rule: that the Law is not observed
+without Christ.  As He Himself has said: Without Me ye can do nothing.
+Likewise that: Without faith it is impossible to please God, Heb.
+11, 6. For it is very certain that the doctrine of the Law is not
+intended to remove the Gospel, and to remove Christ as Propitiator.
+And let the Pharisees, our adversaries, be cursed, who so interpret
+the Law as to ascribe the glory of Christ to works namely, that they
+are a propitiation, that they merit the remission of sins.  It
+follows, therefore, that works are always thus praised, namely, that
+they are pleasing on account of faith, as works do not please without
+Christ as Propitiator.  By Him we have access to God, Rom. 5, 2, not
+by works, without Christ as Mediator.  Therefore, when it is said,
+Matt. 19, 17: If thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments, we
+must believe that without Christ the commandments are not kept, and
+without Him cannot please.  Thus in the Decalog itself, in the First
+Commandment Ex. 20, 6: Showing mercy unto thousands of them that love
+Me and keep My commandments, the most liberal promise of the Law is
+added.  But this Law is not observed without Christ.  For it always
+accuses the conscience which does not satisfy the Law, and therefore
+in terror, flies from the judgment and punishment of the Law.
+Because the Law worketh wrath, Rom. 4, 15. Man observes the Law,
+however, when he hears that for Christ's sake God is reconciled to us,
+even though we cannot satisfy the Law.  When, by this faith, Christ
+is apprehended as Mediator, the heart finds rest, and begins to love
+God and observe the Law, and knows that now, because of Christ as
+Mediator, it is pleasing to God, even though the inchoate fulfilling
+of the Law be far from perfection and be very impure.  Thus we must
+judge also concerning the preaching of repentance.  For although in
+the doctrine of repentance the scholastics have said nothing at all
+concerning faith, yet we think that none of our adversaries is so mad
+as to deny that absolution is a voice of the Gospel.  And absolution
+ought to be received by faith, in order that it may cheer the
+terrified conscience.
+
+Therefore the doctrine of repentance, because it not only commands
+new works, but also promises the remission of sins, necessarily
+requires faith.  For the remission of sins is not received unless by
+faith.  Therefore, in those passages that refer to repentance, we
+should always understand that not only works, but also faith is
+required, as in Matt. 6, 14. For if ye forgive men their trespasses,
+your heavenly Father will also forgive you.  Here a work is required,
+and the promise of the remission of sins is added which does not
+occur on account of the work, but through faith, on account of Christ.
+Just as Scripture testifies in many passages: Acts 10, 43: To Him
+give all the prophets witness that through His name, whosoever
+believeth in Him, shall receive remission of sins; and 1 John 2, 12:
+Your sins are forgiven you for His name's sake; Eph. 1, 7: In whom we
+have redemption through His blood the forgiveness of sins.  Although
+what need is there to recite testimonies?  This is the very voice
+peculiar to the Gospel, namely, that for Christ's sake, and not for
+the sake of our works, we obtain by faith remission of sins.  Our
+adversaries endeavor to suppress this voice of the Gospel by means of
+distorted passages which contain the doctrine of the Law, or of works.
+For it is true that in the doctrine of repentance works are
+required, because certainly a new life is required.  But here the
+adversaries wrongly add that by such works we merit the remission of
+sins, or justification.  And yet Christ often connects the promise of
+the remission of sins to good works not because He means that good
+works are a propitiation, for they follow reconciliation; but for two
+reasons.  One is, because good fruits must necessarily follow.
+Therefore He reminds us that, if good fruits do not follow the
+repentance is hypocritical and feigned.  The other reason is, because
+we have need of external signs of so great a promise, because a
+conscience full of fear has need of manifold consolation.  As,
+therefore, Baptism and the Lord's Supper are signs that continually
+admonish, cheer, and encourage desponding minds to believe the more
+firmly that their sins are forgiven, so the same promise is written
+and portrayed in good works, in order that these works may admonish
+us to believe the more firmly.  And those who produce no good works
+do not excite themselves to believe, but despise these promises.  The
+godly on the other hand, embrace them, and rejoice that they have the
+signs and testimonies of so great a promise.  Accordingly, they
+exercise themselves in these signs and testimonies.  Just as,
+therefore, the Lord's Supper does not justify us _ex opere operato_,
+without faith, so alms do not justify us without faith, _ex opere
+operato_.
+
+So also the address of Tobias, 4, 11, ought to be received: Alms free
+from every sin and from death.  We will not say that this is
+hyperbole, although it ought thus to be received, so as not to
+detract from the praise of Christ, whose prerogative it is to free
+from sin and death.  But we must come back to the rule that without
+Christ the doctrine of the Law is of no profit.  Therefore those alms
+please God which follow reconciliation or justification, and not
+those which precede.  Therefore they free from sin and death, not _ex
+opere operato_, but, as we have said above concerning repentance,
+that we ought to embrace faith and its fruits, so here we must say
+concerning alms that this entire newness of life saves [that they
+please God because they occur in believers].  Alms also are the
+exercises of faith, which receives the remission of sins and
+overcomes death, while it exercises itself more and more, and in
+these exercises receives strength.  We grant also this, that alms
+merit many favors from God [but they cannot overcome death, hell, the
+devil, sins, and give the conscience peace (for this must occur alone
+through faith in Christ)], mitigate punishments, and that they merit
+our defense in the dangers of sins and of death, as we have said a
+little before concerning the entire repentance.  [This is the simple
+meaning, which agrees also with other passages of Scripture.  For
+wherever in the Scriptures good works are praised, we must always
+understand them according to the rule of Paul, that the Law and works
+must not be elevated above Christ, but that Christ and faith are as
+far above all works as the heavens are above the earth.] And the
+address of Tobias, regarded as a whole shows that faith is required
+before alms, 4, 5: Be mindful of the Lord, thy God, all thy days And
+afterwards, v. 19. Bless the Lord, thy God, always, and desire of Him
+that thy ways be directed.  This, however, belongs properly to that
+faith of which we speak, which believes that God is reconciled to it
+because of His mercy, and which wishes to be justified, sanctified,
+and governed by God.  But our adversaries, charming men, pick out
+mutilated sentences, in order to deceive those who are unskilled.
+Afterwards they attach something from their own opinions.  Therefore,
+entire passages are to be required, because, according to the common
+precept, it is unbecoming, before the entire Law is thoroughly
+examined, to judge or reply when any single clause of it is presented.
+And passages, when produced in their entirety, very frequently
+bring the interpretation with them.
+
+Luke 11, 41 is also cited in a mutilated form, namely: Give alms of
+such things as ye have; and, behold, all things are clean unto you.
+The adversaries are very stupid [are deaf, and have callous ears;
+therefore, we must so often etc.].  For time and again we have said
+that to the preaching of the Law there should be added the Gospel
+concerning Christ, because of whom good works are pleasing, but they
+everywhere teach [without shame] that, Christ being excluded,
+justification is merited by the works of the Law.  When this passage
+is produced unmutilated, it will show that faith is required.  Christ
+rebukes the Pharisees who think that they are cleansed before God i.e.
+, that they are justified by frequent ablutions [by all sorts of
+_baptismata carnis_, that is, by all sorts of baths, washings, and
+cleansings of the body, of vessels, of garments].  Just as some Pope
+or other says of the water sprinkled with salt that it sanctifies and
+cleanses the people; and the gloss says that it cleanses from venial
+sins.  Such also were the opinions of the Pharisees which Christ
+reproved, and to this feigned cleansing He opposes a double cleanness,
+the one internal, the other external.  He bids them be cleansed
+inwardly [(which occurs only through faith)], and adds concerning the
+outward cleanness: Give alms of such things as ye have; and, behold,
+all things are clean unto you.  The adversaries do not apply aright
+the universal particle all things; for Christ adds this conclusion to
+both members: "All things will be clean unto you, if you will be
+clean within, and will outwardly give alms." For He indicates that
+outward cleanness is to be referred to works commanded by God, and
+not to human traditions, such as the ablutions were at that time, and
+the daily sprinkling of water, the vesture of monks, the distinctions
+of food, and similar acts of ostentation are now.  But the
+adversaries distort the meaning by sophistically transferring the
+universal particle to only one part: "All things will be clean to
+those having given alms." [As if any one would infer: Andrew is
+present; therefore all the apostles are present.  Wherefore in the
+antecedent both members ought to be joined: Believe and give alms.
+For to this the entire mission, the entire office of Christ points;
+to this end He is come that we should believe in Him.  Now, if both
+parts are combined, believing and giving alms, it follows rightly
+that all things are clean: the heart by faith, the external
+conversation by good works.  Thus we must combine the entire sermon,
+and not invert the parts, and interpret the text to mean that the
+heart is cleansed from sin by alms.  Moreover, there are some who
+think that these words were spoken by Christ against the Pharisees
+ironically, as if He meant to say: Aye, my dear lords, rob and steal,
+and then go and give alms, and you will be promptly cleansed, so that
+Christ would in a somewhat sarcastic and mocking way puncture their
+pharisaical hypocrisy.  For, although they abounded in unbelief,
+avarice, and every evil work, they still observed their purifications,
+gave alms, and believed that they were quite pure, lovely saints.
+This interpretation is not contrary to the text.] Yet Peter says,
+Acts 15, 9, that hearts are purified by faith.  And when this entire
+passage is examined, it presents a meaning harmonizing with the rest
+of Scripture, that, if the hearts are cleansed and then outwardly
+alms are added, i.e., all the works of love, they are thus entirely
+clean i.e. not only within, but also without.  And why is not the
+entire discourse added to it?  There are many parts of the reproof,
+some of which give commandment concerning faith and others concerning
+works.  Nor is it the part of a candid reader to pick out the
+commands concerning works, while the passages concerning faith are
+omitted.
+
+Lastly, readers are to be admonished of this, namely, that the
+adversaries give the worst advice to godly consciences when they
+teach that by works the remission of sins is merited, because
+conscience, in acquiring remission through works, cannot be confident
+that the work will satisfy God.  Accordingly, it is always tormented,
+and continually devises other works and other acts of worship until
+it altogether despairs.  This course is described by Paul, Rom. 4, 6,
+where he proves that the promise of righteousness is not obtained
+because of our works, because we could never affirm that we had a
+reconciled God.  For the Law always accuses.  Thus the promise would
+be in vain and uncertain.  He accordingly concludes that this promise
+of the remission of sins and of righteousness is received by faith,
+not on account of works.  This is the true, simple, and genuine
+meaning of Paul, in which the greatest consolation is offered godly
+consciences, and the glory of Christ is shown forth, who certainly
+was given to us for this purpose, namely, that through Him we might
+have grace, righteousness, and peace.
+
+Thus far we have reviewed the principal passages which the
+adversaries cite against us, in order to show that faith does not
+justify, and that we merit, by our works, remission of sins and grace.
+But we hope that we have shown clearly enough to godly consciences
+that these passages are not opposed to our doctrine; that the
+adversaries wickedly distort the Scriptures to their opinions; that
+the most of the passages which they cite have been garbled; that,
+while omitting the clearest passages concerning faith, they only
+select from the Scriptures passages concerning works, and even these
+they distort; that everywhere they add certain human opinions to that
+which the words of Scripture say; that they teach the Law in such a
+manner as to suppress the Gospel concerning Christ.  For the entire
+doctrine of the adversaries is, in part, derived from human reason,
+and is, in part, a doctrine of the Law, not of the Gospel.  For they
+teach two modes of justification, of which the one has been derived
+from reason and the other from the Law, not from the Gospel, or the
+promise concerning Christ.
+
+The former mode of justification with them is, that they teach that
+by good works men merit grace both _de congruo and de condigno_.
+This mode is a doctrine of reason, because reason, not seeing the
+uncleanness of the heart, thinks that it pleases God if it perform
+good works, and for this reason other works and other acts of worship
+are constantly devised, by men in great peril, against the terrors of
+conscience.  The heathen and the Israelites slew human victims, and
+undertook many other most painful works in order to appease God's
+wrath.  Afterwards, orders of monks were devised, and these vied with
+each other in the severity of their observances against the terrors
+of conscience and God's wrath.  And this mode of justification,
+because it is according to reason, and is altogether occupied with
+outward works, can be understood, and to a certain extent be rendered.
+And to this the canonists have distorted the misunderstood Church
+ordinances, which were enacted by the Fathers for a far different
+purpose, namely, not that by these works we should seek after
+righteousness, but that, for the sake of mutual tranquillity among
+men, there might be a certain order in the Church.  In this manner
+they also distorted the Sacraments and most especially the Mass,
+through which they seek _ex opere operato_ righteousness, grace, and
+salvation.
+
+
+
+
+Part 9
+
+
+Another mode of justification is handed down by the scholastic
+theologians when they teach that we are righteous through a habit
+infused by God, which is love, and that, aided by this habit, we
+observe the Law of God outwardly and inwardly and that this
+fulfilling of the Law is worthy of grace and of eternal life.  This
+doctrine is plainly the doctrine of the Law.  For that is true which
+the Law says: Thou shalt love the Lord, thy God, etc., Deut. 6, 5.
+Thou shalt love thy neighbor Lev. 19, 18. Love is, therefore, the
+fulfilling of the Law.
+
+But it is easy for a Christian to judge concerning both modes,
+because both modes exclude Christ, and are therefore to be rejected.
+In the former, which teaches that our works are a propitiation for
+sin, the impiety is manifest.  The latter mode contains much that is
+injurious.  It does not teach that, when we are born again, we avail
+ourselves of Christ.  It does not teach that justification is the
+remission of sins.  It does not teach that we attain the remission of
+sins before we love but falsely represents that we rouse in ourselves
+the act of love, through which we merit remission of sins.  Nor does
+it teach that by faith in Christ we overcome the terrors of sin and
+death.  It falsely represents that, by their own fulfilling of the
+Law, without Christ as Propitiator, men come to God.  Finally, it
+represents that this very fulfilling of the Law, without Christ as
+Propitiator, is righteousness worthy of grace and eternal life, while
+nevertheless scarcely a weak and feeble fulfilling of the Law occurs
+even in saints.
+
+But if any one will only reflect upon it that the Gospel has not been
+given in vain to the world, and that Christ has not been promised,
+set forth, has not been born, has not suffered, has not risen again
+in vain, he will most readily understand that we are justified not
+from reason or from the Law.  In regard to justification, we
+therefore are compelled to dissent from the adversaries.  For the
+Gospel shows another mode; the Gospel compels us to avail ourselves
+of Christ in justification, it teaches that through Him we have
+access to God by faith; it teaches that we ought to set Him as
+Mediator and Propitiator against God's wrath; it teaches that by
+faith in Christ the remission of sins and reconciliation are received,
+and the terrors of sin and of death overcome.  Thus Paul also says
+that righteousness is not of the Law, but of the promise, in which
+the Father has promised that He wishes to forgive, that for Christ's
+sake He wishes to be reconciled.  This promise, however, is received
+by faith alone, as Paul testifies, Rom. 4,13. This faith alone
+receives remission of sins, justifies, and regenerates.  Then love
+and other good fruits follow.  Thus, therefore, we teach that man is
+justified, as we have above said, when conscience, terrified by the
+preaching of repentance, is cheered and believes that for Christ's
+sake it has a reconciled God.  This faith is counted for
+righteousness before God, Rom. 4, 3. 5. And when in this manner the
+heart is cheered and quickened by faith, it receives the Holy Ghost,
+who renews us, so that we are able to observe the Law; so that we are
+able to love God and the Word of God, and to be submissive to God in
+afflictions, so that we are able to be chaste, to love our neighbor,
+etc. Even though these works are as yet far distant from the
+perfection of the Law, yet they please on account of faith, by which
+we are accounted righteous, because we believe that for Christ's sake
+we have a reconciled God.  These things are plain and in harmony with
+the Gospel, and can be understood by persons of sound mind.  And from
+this foundation it can easily be decided why we ascribe justification
+to faith, and not to love; although love follows faith, because love
+is the fulfilling of the Law.  But Paul teaches that we are justified
+not from the Law, but from the promise which is received only by
+faith.  For we neither come to God without Christ as Mediator, nor
+receive remission of sins for the sake of our love, but for the sake
+of Christ.  Likewise we are not able to love God while He is angry,
+and the Law always accuses us, always manifests to us an angry God.
+Therefore, by faith we must first apprehend the promise that for
+Christ's sake the Father is reconciled and forgives.  Afterwards we
+begin to observe the Law.  Our eyes are to be cast far away from
+human reason, far away from Moses upon Christ, and we are to believe
+that Christ is given us, in order that for His sake we may be
+accounted righteous.  In the flesh we never satisfy the Law.  Thus,
+therefore, we are accounted righteous, not on account of the Law but
+on account of Christ because His merits are granted us, if we believe
+on Him.  If any one, therefore, has considered these foundations,
+that we are not justified by the Law because human nature cannot
+observe the Law of God and cannot love God, but that we are justified
+from the promise, in which, for Christ's sake, reconciliation,
+righteousness, and eternal life have been promised, he will easily
+understand that justification must necessarily be ascribed to faith,
+if he only will reflect upon the fact that it is not in vain that
+Christ has been promised and set forth, that He has been born and has
+suffered and been raised again; if he will reflect upon the fact that
+the promise of grace in Christ is not in vain, that it was made
+immediately from the beginning of the world apart from and beyond the
+Law; if he will reflect upon the fact that the promise should be
+received by faith, as John says, 1 Ep. 5, 10 sq.: He that believeth
+not God hath made Him a liar, because he believeth not the record
+that God gave of His Son.  And this is the record that God hath given
+to us eternal life, and this life is in His Son.  He that hath the
+Son hath life, and he that hath not the Son of God hath not life.
+And Christ says John 8, 36: If the Son, therefore, shall make you
+free, ye shall be free indeed.  And Paul, Rom. 5, 2: By whom also we
+have access to God; and he adds: by faith.  By faith in Christ,
+therefore, the promise of remission of sins and of righteousness is
+received.  Neither are we justified before God by reason or by the
+Law.
+
+These things are so plain and so manifest that we wonder that the
+madness of the adversaries is so great as to call them into doubt.
+The proof is manifest that, since we are justified before God not
+from the Law but from the promise, it is necessary to ascribe
+justification to faith.  What can be opposed to this proof, unless
+some one wish to abolish the entire Gospel and the entire Christ?
+The glory of Christ becomes more brilliant when we teach that we
+avail ourselves of Him as Mediator and Propitiator.  Godly
+consciences see that in this doctrine the most abundant consolation
+is offered to them, namely, that they ought to believe and most
+firmly assert that they have a reconciled Father for Christ's sake,
+and not for the sake of our righteousness, and that, nevertheless,
+Christ aids us, so that we are able to observe also the Law.  Of such
+great blessings as these the adversaries deprive the Church when they
+condemn and endeavor to efface, the doctrine concerning the
+righteousness of faith.  Therefore let all well-disposed minds beware
+of consenting to the godless counsels of the adversaries.  In the
+doctrine of the adversaries concerning justification no mention is
+made of Christ, and how we ought to set Him against the wrath of God,
+as though, indeed, we were able to overcome the wrath of God by love,
+or to love an angry God.  In regard to these things, consciences are
+left in uncertainty.  For if they are to think that they have a
+reconciled God for the reason that they love, and that they observe
+the Law, they must needs always doubt whether they have a reconciled
+God, because they either do not feel this love, as the adversaries
+acknowledge, or they certainly feel that it is very small; and much
+more frequently do they feel that they are angry at the judgment of
+God, who oppresses human nature with many terrible evils, with
+troubles of this life, the terrors of eternal wrath, etc. When,
+therefore, will conscience be at rest, when will it be pacified?
+When, in this doubt and in these terrors, will it love God?  What
+else is the doctrine of the Law than a doctrine of despair?  And let
+any one of our adversaries come forward who can teach us concerning
+this love, how he himself loves God.  They do not at all understand
+what they say they only echo, just like the walls of a house, the
+little word "love," without understanding it.  So confused and
+obscure is their doctrine: it not only transfers the glory of Christ
+to human works, but also leads consciences either to presumption or
+to despair.  But ours, we hope, is readily understood by pious minds,
+and brings godly and salutary consolation to terrified consciences.
+For as the adversaries quibble that also many wicked men and devils
+believe, we have frequently already said that we speak of faith in
+Christ, i.e., of faith in the remission of sins, of faith which truly
+and heartily assents to the promise of grace.  This is not brought
+about without a great struggle in human hearts.  And men of sound
+mind can easily judge that the faith which believes that we are cared
+for by God, and that we are forgiven and heard by Him, is a matter
+above nature.  For of its own accord the human mind makes no such
+decision concerning God.  Therefore this faith of which we speak is
+neither in the wicked nor in devils.
+
+Furthermore, if any sophist cavils that righteousness is in the will,
+and therefore it cannot be ascribed to faith, which is in the
+intellect, the reply is easy, because in the schools even such
+persons acknowledge that the will commands the intellect to assent to
+the Word of God.  We say also quite clearly: Just as the terrors of
+sin and death are not only thoughts of the intellect, but also
+horrible movements of the will fleeing God's judgment, so faith is
+not only knowledge in the intellect, but also confidence in the will,
+i.e., it is to wish and to receive that which is offered in the
+promise, namely, reconciliation and remission of sins.  Scripture
+thus uses the term "faith," as the following sentence of Paul
+testifies, Rom. 5, 1: Being justified by faith, we have peace with
+God.  Moreover, in this passage, to justify signifies, according to
+forensic usage, to acquit a guilty one and declare him righteous, but
+on account of the righteousness of another, namely, of Christ, which
+righteousness of another is communicated to us by faith.  Therefore,
+since in this passage our righteousness is the imputation of the
+righteousness of another, we must here speak concerning righteousness
+otherwise than when in philosophy or in a civil court we seek after
+the righteousness of one's own work which certainly is in the will.
+Paul accordingly says, 1 Cor. 1, 30: Of Him are ye in Christ Jesus,
+who of God is made unto us Wisdom and Righteousness, and
+Sanctification, and Redemption.  And 2 Cor. 5, 21: He hath mode Him
+to be sin for us who knew no sin, that we might be made the
+righteousness of God in Him.  But because the righteousness of Christ
+is given us by faith, faith is for this reason righteousness in us
+imputatively, i.e., it is that by which we are made acceptable to God
+on account of the imputation and ordinance of God, as Paul says, Rom.
+4, 3. 5: Faith is reckoned for righteousness.  Although on account of
+certain captious persons we must say technically: Faith is truly
+righteousness, because it is obedience to the Gospel.  For it is
+evident that obedience to the command of a superior is truly a
+species of distributive justice.  And this obedience to the Gospel is
+reckoned for righteousness, so that, only on account of this, because
+by this we apprehend Christ as Propitiator, good works, or obedience
+to the Law, are pleasing.  For we do not satisfy the Law, but for
+Christ's sake this is forgiven us, as Paul says, Rom. 8, 1: There is
+therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus.
+This faith gives God the honor, gives God that which is His own, in
+this, that, by receiving the promises, it obeys Him.  Just as Paul
+also says, Rom. 4, 20: He staggered not at the promise of God through
+unbelief, but was strong in faith, giving glory to God.  Thus the
+worship and divine service of the Gospel is to receive from God gifts,
+on the contrary, the worship of the Law is to offer and present our
+gifts to God.  We can, however, offer nothing to God unless we have
+first been reconciled and born again.  This passage too, brings the
+greatest consolation, as the chief worship of the Gospel is to wish
+to receive remission of sins, grace, and righteousness.  Of this
+worship Christ says, John 6, 40: This is the will of Him that sent Me,
+that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on Him, may have
+everlasting life.  And the Father says, Matt. 17, 5: This is My
+beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased, hear ye Him.  The adversaries
+speak of obedience to the Law; they do not speak of obedience to the
+Gospel, and yet we cannot obey the Law, unless, through the Gospel,
+we have been born again, since we cannot love God, unless the
+remission of sins has been received.  For as long as we feel that He
+is angry with us, human nature flees from His wrath and judgment.  If
+any one should make a cavil such as this: If that be faith which
+wishes those things that are offered in the promise, the habits of
+faith and hope seem to be confounded, because hope is that which
+expects promised things, to this we reply that these dispositions
+cannot in reality be severed, in the manner that they are divided by
+idle speculations in the schools.  For also in the Epistle to the
+Hebrews faith is defined as the substance (_exspectatio_) of things
+hoped for, Heb. 11, 1. Yet if any one wish a distinction to be made,
+we say that the object of hope is properly a future event, but that
+faith is concerned with future and present things, and receives in
+the present the remission of sins offered in the promise.
+
+From these statements we hope that it can be sufficiently understood
+both what faith is and that we are compelled to hold that by faith we
+are justified, reconciled, and regenerated, if, indeed, we wish to
+teach the righteousness of the Gospel, and not the righteousness of
+the Law.  For those who teach that we are justified by love teach the
+righteousness of the Law, and do not teach us in justification to
+avail ourselves of Christ as Mediator.  These things also are
+manifest namely, that not by love, but by faith, we overcome the
+terrors of sin and death, that we cannot oppose our love and
+fulfilling of the Law to the wrath of God, because Paul says, Rom. 5,
+2: By Christ we have access to God by faith.  We urge this sentence
+so frequently for the sake of perspicuity.  For it shows most clearly
+the state of our whole case, and, when carefully considered, can
+teach abundantly concerning the whole matter, and can console
+well-disposed minds.  Accordingly, it is of advantage to have it at
+hand and in sight, not only that we may be able to oppose it to the
+doctrine of our adversaries, who teach that we come to God not by
+faith, but by love and merits, without Christ as Mediator; and also,
+at the same time that, when in fear, we may cheer ourselves and
+exercise faith.  This is also manifest, that without the aid of
+Christ we cannot observe the Law, as He Himself says John 15, 5:
+Without Me ye can do nothing.  Accordingly, before we observe the Law,
+our hearts must be born again by faith.  [From the explanations
+which we have made it can easily be inferred what answer must be
+given to similar quotations.  For the rule so interprets all passages
+that treat of good works that outside of Christ they are to be
+worthless before God, and that the heart must first have Christ, and
+believe that it is accepted with God for Christ's sake, not because
+of its own works.  The adversaries also bring forward some arguments
+of the schools, which are easily answered, if you know what faith is.
+Tried Christians speak of faith quite differently from the sophists,
+for we have shown before that to believe means to rely on the mercy
+of God, that He desires to be gracious for Christ's sake, without our
+merits.  That is what it means to believe the article of the
+forgiveness of sin.  To believe this does not mean to know the
+history only, which the devils also know.  Therefore we can easily
+meet the argument of the schools when they say that the devils also
+believe, therefore faith does not justify.  Aye, the devils know the
+history, but they do not believe the forgiveness of sin.  Again, they
+say: To be righteous is to be obedient.  Now, to perform works is
+certainly obedience; therefore works must justify.  We should answer
+this as follows: To be righteous is a kind of obedience which God
+accepts as such.  Now God is not willing to accept our obedience in
+works as righteousness; for it is not an obedience of the heart,
+because none truly keep the Law.  For this reason He has ordained
+that there should be another kind of obedience which He will accept
+as righteousness, namely, that we are to acknowledge our disobedience,
+and trust that we are pleasing to God for Christ's sake, not on
+account of our obedience.  Accordingly, to be righteous in this case
+means to be pleasing to God, not on account of our own obedience, but
+from mercy for Christ's sake.  Again, to sin is to hate God;
+therefore, to love God must be righteousness.  True, to love God is
+the righteousness of the Law.  But nobody fulfils this Law.
+Therefore the Gospel teaches a new kind of righteousness, namely,
+that we are pleasing to God for Christ's sake, although we have not
+fulfilled the Law; and yet, we are to begin to do the Law.  Again,
+what is the difference between faith and hope?  Answer: Hope expects
+future blessings and deliverance from tribulation; faith receives the
+present reconciliation, and concludes in the heart that God has
+forgiven my sin, and that He is now gracious to me.  And this is a
+noble service of God, which serves God by giving Him the honor, and
+by esteeming His mercy and promise so sure that without merit we can
+receive and expect from Him all manner of blessings.  And in this
+service of God the heart should be exercised and increase, of which
+the foolish sophists know nothing.]
+
+Hence it can also be understood why we find fault with the doctrine
+of the adversaries concerning _meritum condigni_.  The decision is
+very easy: because they do not make mention of faith, that we please
+God by faith for Christ's sake, but imagine that good works, wrought
+by the aid of the habit of love, constitute a righteousness worthy by
+itself to please God, and worthy of eternal life, and that they have
+no need of Christ as Mediator.  [This can in no wise be tolerated.]
+What else is this than to transfer the glory of Christ to our works,
+namely that we please God because of our works, and not because of
+Christ?  But this is also to rob Christ of the glory of being the
+Mediator who is Mediator perpetually, and not merely in the beginning
+of Justification.  Paul also says, Gal. 2, 17, that If one justified
+in Christ have need afterwards to seek righteousness elsewhere, he
+affirms of Christ that He is a minister of sin, i.e., that He does
+not fully justify.  [And this is what the holy, catholic, Christian
+Church teaches, preaches, and confesses, namely, that we are saved by
+mercy as we have shown above from Jerome.] And most absurd is that
+which the adversaries teach, namely, that good works merit _grace de
+condigno_, as though indeed after the beginning of justification, if
+conscience is terrified, as is ordinarily the case, grace must be
+sought through a good work, and not by faith in Christ.
+
+Secondly, the doctrine of the adversaries leaves consciences in doubt,
+so that they never can be pacified, because the Law always accuses
+us, even in good works.  For always the flesh lusteth against the
+Spirit, Gal. 5, 17. How, therefore, will conscience here have peace
+without faith, if it believe that, not for Christ's sake, but for the
+sake of one's own work, it ought now to please God?  What work will
+it find, upon what will it firmly rely as worthy of eternal life, if,
+indeed, hope ought to originate from merits?  Against these doubts
+Paul says, Rom. 5, 1: Being justified by faith, we have peace with
+God; we ought to be firmly convinced that for Christ's sake
+righteousness and eternal life are granted us.  And of Abraham he
+says Rom. 4, 18: Against hope he believed in hope.
+
+Thirdly, how will conscience know when by the inclination of this
+habit of love, a work has been done of which it may affirm that it
+merits _grace de condigno_?  But it is only to elude the Scriptures
+that this very distinction has been devised, namely, that men merit
+at one time _de congruo_ and at another time _de condigno_, because,
+as we have above said, the intention of the one who works does not
+distinguish the kinds of merit; but hypocrites, in their security,
+think simply their works are worthy, and that for this reason they
+are accounted righteous.  On the other hand, terrified consciences
+doubt concerning all works, and for this reason are continually
+seeking other works.  For this is what it means to _merit de congruo_,
+namely to doubt and, without faith, to work, until despair takes
+place.  In a word, all that the adversaries teach in regard to this
+matter is full of errors and dangers.
+
+Fourthly, the entire [the holy, catholic, Christian] Church confesses
+that eternal life is attained through mercy.  For thus Augustine
+speaks On Grace and Free Will, when indeed, he is speaking of the
+works of the saints wrought after justification: God leads us to
+eternal life not by our merits, but according to His mercy.  And
+Confessions, Book IX: Woe to the life of man, however much it may be
+worthy of praise, if it be judged with mercy removed.  And Cyprian in
+his treatise on the Lord's Prayer: Lest any one should flatter
+himself that he is innocent, and by exalting himself, should perish
+the more deeply, he is instructed and taught that he sins daily, in
+that he is bidden to entreat daily for his sins.  But the subject is
+well known, and has very many and very clear testimonies in Scripture,
+and in the Church Fathers, who all with one mouth declare that, even
+though we have good works yet in these very works we need mercy.
+Faith looking upon this mercy cheers and consoles us.  Wherefore the
+adversaries teach erroneously when they so extol merits as to add
+nothing concerning this faith that apprehends mercy.  For just as we
+have above said that the promise and faith stand in a reciprocal
+relation, and that the promise is not apprehended unless by faith, so
+we here say that the promised mercy correlatively requires faith, and
+cannot be apprehended without faith.  Therefore we justly find fault
+with the doctrine concerning _meritum condigni_, since it teaches
+nothing of justifying faith, and obscures the glory and office of
+Christ as Mediator.  Nor should we be regarded as teaching anything
+new in this matter, since the Church Fathers have so clearly handed
+down the doctrine that even in good works we need mercy.
+
+Scripture also often inculcates the same.  In Ps. 143, 9: And enter
+not into judgment with Thy servant; for in Thy sight shall no man
+living be justified.  This passage denies absolutely, even to all
+saints and servants of God, the glory of righteousness, if God does
+not forgive, but judges and convicts their hearts.  For when David
+boasts in other places of his righteousness, he speaks concerning his
+own cause against the persecutors of God's Word, he does not speak of
+his personal purity; and he asks that the cause and glory of God be
+defended, as in Ps. 7, 8: Judge me, O Lord, according to Thy
+righteousness, and according to mine integrity that is in me.
+Likewise in Ps. 130, 3, he says that no one can endure God's judgment,
+if God were to mark our sins: If Thou, Lord, shouldest mark
+iniquities, O Lord, who shall stand?  Job 9, 28: I am afraid of all
+my sorrows [Vulg., opera, works]; v. 30: If I wash myself with
+snow-water, and make my hands never so clean, yet Thou shalt plunge
+me in the ditch.  Prov. 20, 9: Who can say, I have made my heart
+clean, I am pure from my sin? 1 John 1, 8: If we say that we have no
+sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us, etc. And in the
+Lord's Prayer the saints ask for the remission of sins.  Therefore
+even the saints have sins.  Num. 14, 18: The innocent shall not be
+innocent [cf.  Ex. 34, 7].  Deut. 4, 24: The Lord, thy God, is a
+consuming fire.  Zechariah also says, 2, 13: Be silent, O all flesh,
+before the Lord.  Is. 40, 6: All flesh is as grass, and all the
+goodliness thereof is as the flower of the field; the grass withereth,
+the flower fadeth, because the Spirit of the Lord bloweth upon it, i.
+e., flesh and righteousness of the flesh cannot endure the judgment
+of God.  Jonah also says, chap. 2, 8: They that observe lying
+vanities forsake their own mercy, i.e., all confidence is vain,
+except confidence in mercy; mercy delivers us; our own merits, our
+own efforts, do not.  Accordingly, Daniel also prays, 9, 18 sq.: For
+we do not present our supplications before Thee for our
+righteousnesses but for Thy great mercies.  O Lord, hear; O Lord,
+forgive; O Lord, hearken and do it; defer not for Thine own sake, O
+my God; for Thy city and Thy people are called by Thy name.  Thus
+Daniel teaches us in praying to lay hold upon mercy, i.e., to trust
+in God's mercy, and not to trust in our own merits before God.  We
+also wonder what our adversaries do in prayer, if, indeed, the
+profane men ever ask anything of God.  If they declare that they are
+worthy because they have love and good works, and ask for grace as a
+debt, they pray precisely like the Pharisee in Luke 18, 11, who says:
+I am not as other men are.  He who thus prays for grace and does not
+rely upon God's mercy, treats Christ with dishonor, who, since He is
+our High Priest, intercedes for us.  Thus, therefore, prayer relies
+upon God's mercy, when we believe that we are heard for the sake of
+Christ the High Priest, as He Himself says, John 14, 13: Whatsoever
+ye shall ask the Father in My name, He will give it you.  In My name,
+He says, because without this High Priest we cannot approach the
+Father.
+
+[All prudent men will see what follows from the opinion of the
+adversaries.  For if we shall believe that Christ has merited only
+the _prima gratia_, as they call it, and that we afterwards merit
+eternal life by our works, hearts or consciences will be pacified
+neither at the hour of death, nor at any other time, nor can they
+ever build upon certain ground; they are never certain that God is
+gracious.  Thus their doctrine unintermittingly leads to nothing but
+misery of soul and, finally, to despair.  For God's Law is not a
+matter of pleasantry; it ceaselessly accuses consciences outside of
+Christ, as Paul says, Rom. 4, 15: The Law worketh wrath.  Thus it
+will happen that if consciences feel the judgment of God, they have
+no certain comfort and will rush into despair.
+
+Paul says: Whatsoever is not of faith is sin, Rom. 14, 23. But those
+persons can do nothing from faith who are first to attain to this
+that God is gracious to them only when they have at length fulfilled
+the Law.  They will always quake with doubt whether they have done
+enough good works, whether the Law has been satisfied, yea, they will
+keenly feel and understand that they are still under obligation to
+the Law.  Accordingly, they will never be sure that they have a
+gracious God, and that their prayer is heard.  Therefore they can
+never truly love God, nor expect any blessing from Him, nor truly
+worship God.  What else are such hearts and consciences than hell
+itself, since there is nothing in them but despair, fainting away
+grumbling, discontent, and hatred of God, and yet in this hatred they
+invoke and worship God, just as Saul worshiped Him
+
+Here we appeal to all Christian minds and to all that are experienced
+in trials; they will be forced to confess and say that such great
+uncertainty, such disquietude, such torture and anxiety, such
+horrible fear and doubt follow from this teaching of the adversaries
+who imagine that we are accounted righteous before God by our own
+works or fulfilling of the Law which we perform, and point us to
+Queer Street by bidding us trust not in the rich, blessed promises of
+Grace, given us by Christ the Mediator, but in our own miserable
+works!  Therefore, this conclusion stands like a rock, yea, like a
+wall, namely, that, although we have begun to do the Law, still we
+are accepted with God and at peace with Him, not on account of such
+works of ours, but for Christ's sake by faith; nor does God owe us
+everlasting life on account of these works.  But just as forgiveness
+of sin and righteousness is imputed to us for Christ's sake, not on
+account of our works, or the Law, so everlasting life, together with
+righteousness, is offered us, not on account of our works, or of the
+Law, but for Christ's sake as Christ says, John 6, 40: This is the
+Father's will that sent He, that every one which seeth the Son, and
+believeth on Him may have everlasting life.  Again, v. 47: He that
+believeth on the Son hath everlasting life.  Now, the adversaries
+should be asked at this point what advice they give to poor
+consciences in the hour of death: whether they comfort consciences by
+telling them that they will have a blessed departure, that they will
+be saved, and have a propitiated God, because of their own merits or
+because of God's grace and mercy for Christ's sake.  For St. Peter St.
+Paul, and saints like them cannot boast that God owes them eternal
+life for their martyrdom, nor have they relied on their works, but on
+the mercy promised in Christ.
+
+Nor would it be possible that a saint, great and high though he be,
+could make a firm stand against the accusations of the divine Law,
+the great might of the devil, the terror of death, and, finally,
+against despair and the anguish of hell, if he would not grasp the
+divine promises, the Gospel, as a tree or branch in the great flood
+in the strong, violent stream, amidst the waves and billows of the
+anguish of death; if he does not cling by faith to the Word, which
+proclaims grace, and thus obtains eternal life without works, without
+the Law, from pure grace.  For this doctrine alone preserves
+Christian consciences in afflictions and anguish of death.  Of these
+things the adversaries know nothing, and talk of them like a blind
+man about color.
+
+Here they will say: If we are to be saved by pure mercy, what
+difference is there between those who are saved, and those who are
+not saved?  If merit is of no account, there is no difference between
+the evil and the good and it follows that both are saved alike.  This
+argument has moved the scholastics to invent the _meritum condigni_;
+for there must be (they think) a difference between those who are
+saved and those who are damned.
+
+We reply; in the first place, that everlasting life is accorded to
+those whom God esteems just, and when they have been esteemed just,
+they are become, by that act, the children of God and coheirs of
+Christ, as Paul says, Rom. 8, 30: Whom He justified, them He also
+glorified.  Hence nobody is saved except only those who believe the
+Gospel.  But as our reconciliation with God is uncertain if it is to
+rest on our works, and not on the gracious promise of God, which
+cannot fail, so, too, all that we expect by hope would be uncertain
+if it must be built on the foundation of our merits and works.  For
+the Law of God ceaselessly accuses the conscience and men feel in
+their hearts nothing but this voice from the fiery, flaming cloud: I
+am the Lord, thy God; this thou shalt do; that thou art obliged to do;
+this I require of thee.  Deut. 5, 6 ff.  No conscience can for a
+moment be at rest when the Law and Moses assails the heart, before it
+apprehends Christ by faith.  Nor can it truly hope for eternal life,
+unless it be pacified before.  For a doubting conscience flees from
+God, despairs and cannot hope.  However, hope of eternal life must be
+certain.  Now, in order that it may not be fickle, but certain, we
+must believe that we have eternal life, not by our works or merits,
+but from pure grace, by faith in Christ.
+
+In secular affairs and in secular courts we meet with both, mercy and
+justice.  Justice is certain by the laws and the verdict rendered,
+mercy is uncertain.  In this matter that relates to God the case is
+different; for grace and mercy have been promised us by a certain
+word, and the Gospel is the word which commands us to believe that
+God is gracious and wishes to save us for Christ's sake, as the text
+reads, John 3, 17: God sent not His Son into the world to condemn the
+world, but that the world through Him might be saved.  He that
+believeth on Him is not condemned.
+
+Now, whenever we speak of mercy, the meaning is to be this, that
+faith is required, and it is this faith that makes the difference
+between those who are saved, and those who are damned, between those
+who are worthy, and those who are unworthy.  For everlasting life has
+been promised to none but those who have been reconciled by Christ.
+Faith, however, reconciles and justifies before God the moment we
+apprehend the promise by faith.  And throughout our entire life we
+are to pray God and be diligent, to receive faith and to grow in
+faith.  For, as stated before, faith is where repentance is, and it
+is not in those who walk after the flesh.  This faith is to grow and
+increase throughout our life by all manner of afflictions.  Those who
+obtain faith are regenerated, so that they lead a new life and do
+good works.
+
+Now, just as we say that true repentance is to endure throughout our
+entire life, we say, too, that good works and the fruits of faith
+must be done throughout our life, although our works never become so
+precious as to be equal to the treasure of Christ, or to merit
+eternal life, as Christ says, Luke 17, 10: When ye shall have done
+all those things which are commanded you, say, We are unprofitable
+servants.  And St. Bernard truly says: There is need that you must
+first believe that you cannot have forgiveness of sin except by the
+grace of God; next, that thereafter you cannot have and do any good
+work unless God grants it to you; lastly, that you cannot earn
+eternal life with your works, though it is not given you without
+merit.  A little further on he says: Let no one deceive himself; for
+when you rightly consider the matter, you will undoubtedly find that
+you cannot meet with ten thousand him who approaches you with twenty
+thousand.  These are strong sayings of St. Bernard; let them believe
+these if they will not believe us.
+
+In order, then, that hearts may have a true certain comfort and hope,
+we point them, with Paul, to the divine promise of grace in Christ,
+and teach that we must believe that God gives us eternal life, not on
+account of our works, but for Christ's sake, as the Apostle John says
+in his Epistle, 1, 5, 12: He that hath the Son hath life, and he that
+hath not the Son of God hath not life.]
+
+
+
+
+Part 10
+
+
+Here belongs also the declaration of Christ, Luke 17, 10: So likewise
+ye, when ye shall have done all those things which are commanded you,
+say, We are unprofitable servants.  These words clearly declare that
+God saves by mercy and on account of His promise, not that it is due
+on account of the value of our works.  But at this point the
+adversaries play wonderfully with the words of Christ.  In the first
+place, they make an antistrophe and turn it against us.  Much more,
+they say, can it be said: "If we have believed all things, say, We
+are unprofitable servants." Then they add that works are of no profit
+to God, but are not without profit to us.  See how the puerile study
+of sophistry delights the adversaries, and although these absurdities
+do not deserve a refutation, nevertheless we will reply to them in a
+few words.  The antistrophe is defective.  For, in the first place,
+the adversaries are deceived in regard to the term faith; because, if
+it would signify that knowledge of the history which is also in the
+wicked and in devils, the adversaries would be correct in arguing
+that faith is unprofitable when they say: "When we have believed all
+things, say, We are unprofitable servants." But we are speaking, not
+of the knowledge of the history, but of confidence in the promise and
+mercy of God.  And this confidence in the promise confesses that we
+are unprofitable servants; yea, this confession that our works are
+unworthy is the very voice of faith, as appears in this example of
+Daniel, 9, 18, which we cited a little above: We do not present our
+supplications before Thee for our righteousnesses, etc. For faith
+saves because it apprehends mercy, or the promise of grace, even
+though our works are unworthy; and, thus understood, namely that our
+works are unworthy, the antistrophe does not injure us: "When ye
+shall have believed all things, say, We are unprofitable servants";
+for that we are saved by mercy, we teach with the entire Church.  But
+if they mean to argue from the similar: When you have done all things,
+do not trust in your works, so also, when you have believed all
+things, do not trust in the divine promise there is no connection.
+[The inference is wrong: "Works do not help; therefore, faith also
+does not help." We must give the uncultured men a homely illustration:
+It does not follow that because a half-farthing does not help,
+therefore a florin also does not help.  Just as the florins is of
+much higher denomination and value than the half-farthing, so also
+should it be understood that faith is much higher and more
+efficacious than works.  Not that faith helps because of its worth,
+but because it trusts in God's promises and mercy.  Faith is strong,
+not because of its worthiness, but because of the divine promise.]
+For they are very dissimilar, as the causes and objects of confidence
+in the former proposition are far dissimilar to those of the latter.
+In the former, confidence is confidence in our own works.  In the
+latter, confidence is confidence in the divine promise.  Christ,
+however, condemns confidence in our works; He does not condemn
+confidence in His promise.  He does not wish us to despair of God's
+grace and mercy.  He accuses our works as unworthy, but does not
+accuse the promise which freely offers mercy.  And here Ambrose says
+well: grace is to be acknowledged; but nature must not be disregarded.
+We must trust in the promise of grace and not in our own nature.
+But the adversaries act in accordance with their custom, and distort,
+against faith, the judgments which have been given on behalf of faith.
+[Hence, Christ in this place forbids men to trust in their own
+works; for they cannot help them.  On the other hand, He does not
+forbid to trust in God's promise.  Yea, He requires such trust in the
+promise of God for the very reason that we are unprofitable servants
+and works can be of no help.  Therefore, the knaves have improperly
+applied to our trust in the divine promise the words of Christ which
+treat of trust in our own worthiness.  This clearly reveals and
+defeats their sophistry.  May the Lord Christ soon put to shame the
+sophists who thus mutilate His holy Word!  Amen.] We leave, however,
+these thorny points to the schools.  The sophistry is plainly puerile
+when they interpret "unprofitable servant " as meaning that the works
+are unprofitable to God, but are profitable to us.  Yet Christ speaks
+concerning that profit which makes God a debtor of grace to us,
+although it is out of place to discuss here concerning that which is
+profitable or unprofitable.  For "unprofitable servants" means
+"insufficient," because no one fears God as much, and loves God as
+much, and believes God as much as he ought.  But let us dismiss these
+frigid cavils of the adversaries, concerning which, if at any time
+they are brought to the light, prudent men will easily decide what
+they should judge.  They have found a flaw in words which are very
+plain and clear.  But every one sees that in this passage confidence
+in our own works is condemned.
+
+Let us, therefore, hold fast to this which the Church confesses,
+namely, that we are saved by mercy.  And lest any one may here think:
+"If we are to be saved by mercy, hope will be uncertain, if in those
+who obtain salvation nothing precedes by which they may be
+distinguished from those who do not obtain it," we must give him a
+satisfactory answer.  For the scholastics, moved by this reason, seem
+to have devised the _meritum condigni_.  For this consideration can
+greatly exercise the human mind.  We will therefore reply briefly.
+For the very reason that hope may be sure, for the very reason that
+there may be an antecedent distinction between those who obtain
+salvation, and those who do not obtain it, it is necessary firmly to
+hold that we are saved by mercy.  When this is expressed thus
+unqualifiedly, it seems absurd.  For in civil courts and in human
+judgment, that which is of right or of debt is certain, and mercy is
+uncertain.  But the matter is different with respect to God's
+judgment; for here mercy has a clear and certain promise and command
+from God.  For the Gospel is properly that command which enjoins us
+to believe that God is propitious to us for Christ's sake.  For God
+sent not His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the
+world through Him might be saved, John 3, 17. 18. As often, therefore,
+as mercy is spoken of, faith in the promise must be added; and this
+faith produces sure hope, because it relies upon the Word and command
+of God.  If hope would rely upon works, then, indeed, it would be
+uncertain, because works cannot pacify the conscience, as has been
+said above frequently.  And this faith makes a distinction between
+those who obtain salvation, and those who do not obtain it.  Faith
+makes the distinction between the worthy and the unworthy, because
+eternal life has been promised to the justified; and faith justifies.
+
+But here again the adversaries will cry out that there is no need of
+good works if they do not merit eternal life.  These calumnies we
+have refuted above.  Of course, it is necessary to do good works.  We
+say that eternal life has been promised to the justified.  But those
+who walk according to the flesh retain neither faith nor
+righteousness.  We are for this very end justified, that, being
+righteous we may begin to do good works and to obey God's Law.  We
+are regenerated and receive the Holy Ghost for the very end that the
+new life may produce new works, new dispositions, the fear and love
+of God, hatred of concupiscence, etc. This faith of which we speak
+arises in repentance, and ought to be established and grow in the
+midst of good works, temptations, and dangers, so that we may
+continually be the more firmly persuaded that God for Christ's sake
+cares for us, forgives us, hears us.  This is not learned with out
+many and great struggles.  How often is conscience aroused, how often
+does it incite even to despair when it brings to view sins, either
+old or new, or the impurity of our nature!  This handwriting is not
+blotted out without a great struggle, in which experience testifies
+what a difficult matter faith is.  And while we are cheered in the
+midst of the terrors and receive consolation, other spiritual
+movements at the same time grow, the knowledge of God, fear of God,
+hope, love of God; and we are regenerated, as Paul says, Col. 3, 10
+and 2 Cor. 3, 18, in the knowledge of God, and, beholding the glory
+of the Lord, are changed into the same image, i.e., we receive the
+true knowledge of God, so that we truly fear Him, truly trust that we
+are cared for and that we are heard by Him.  This regeneration is, as
+it were, the beginning of eternal life, as Paul says, Rom. 8, 10: If
+Christ be in you, the body is dead because of sin; but the Spirit is
+life because of righteousness.  And 2 Cor. 5, 2. 3: We are clothed
+upon, if so be that, being clothed, we shall not be found naked.
+From these statements the candid reader can judge that we certainly
+require good works, since we teach that this faith arises in
+repentance, and in repentance ought continually to increase; and in
+these matters we place Christian and spiritual perfection, if
+repentance and faith grow together in repentance.  This can be better
+understood by the godly than those things which are taught by the
+adversaries concerning contemplation or perfection.  Just as, however,
+justification pertains to faith, so also life eternal pertains to
+faith.  And Peter says, 1 Pet. 1, 9: Receiving the end, or fruit, of
+your faith, the salvation of your souls.  For the adversaries confess
+that the justified are children of God and coheirs of Christ.
+Afterwards works, because on account of faith they please God, merit
+other bodily and spiritual rewards.  For there will be distinctions
+in the glory of the saints.
+
+But here the adversaries reply that eternal life is called a reward,
+and that therefore it is merited _de condigno_ by good works.  We
+reply briefly and plainly: Paul, Rom. 6, 23, calls eternal life a
+gift, because by the righteousness presented for Christ's sake, we
+are made at the same time sons of God and coheirs of Christ, as John
+says, 3, 36: He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life.  And
+Augustine says, as also do very many others who follow him: God
+crowns His gifts in us.  Elsewhere indeed, Luke 5, 23, it is written:
+Your reward is great in heaven.  If these passages seem to the
+adversaries to conflict, they themselves may explain them.  But they
+are not fair judges; for they omit the word gift.  They omit also the
+sources of the entire matter [the chief part, how we are justified
+before God, also that Christ remains at all times the Mediator], and
+they select the word reward, and most harshly interpret this not only
+against Scripture, but also against the usage of the language.  Hence
+they infer that inasmuch as it is called a reward, our works,
+therefore, are such that they ought to be a price for which eternal
+life is due.  They are, therefore, worthy of grace and life eternal,
+and do not stand in need of mercy, or of Christ as Mediator, or of
+faith.  This logic is altogether new; we hear the term reward, and
+therefore are to infer that there is no need of Christ as Mediator,
+or of faith having access to God for Christ's sake, and not for the
+sake of our works!  Who does not see that these are anacoluthons?  We
+do not contend concerning the term reward.  We dispute concerning
+this matter, namely, whether good works are of themselves worthy of
+grace and of eternal life, or whether they please only on account of
+faith, which apprehends Christ as Mediator.  Our adversaries not only
+ascribe this to works, namely, that they are worthy of grace and of
+eternal life, but they also state falsely that they have superfluous
+merits, which they can grant to others, and by which they can justify
+others, as when monks sell the merits of their orders to others.
+These monstrosities they heap up in the manner of Chrysippus, where
+this one word reward is heard, namely: "It is called a reward, and
+therefore we have works which are a price for which a reward is due;
+therefore works please by themselves, and not for the sake of Christ
+as Mediator.  And since one has more merits than another, therefore
+some have superfluous merits.  And those who merit them can bestow
+these merits upon others." Stop, reader; you have not the whole of
+this sorites.  For certain sacraments of this donation must be added;
+the hood is placed upon the dead.  [As the Barefooted monks and other
+orders have shamelessly done in placing the hoods of their orders
+upon dead bodies.] By such accumulations the blessings brought us in
+Christ, and the righteousness of faith have been obscured.  [These
+are acute and strong arguments, all of which they can spin from the
+single word reward, whereby they obscure Christ and faith.]
+
+We are not agitating an idle logomachy concerning the term reward
+[but this great, exalted, most important matter, namely, where
+Christian hearts are to find true and certain consolation; again,
+whether our works can give consciences rest and peace; again, whether
+we are to believe that our works are worthy of eternal life, or
+whether that is given us for Christ's sake.  These are the real
+questions regarding these matters; if consciences are not rightly
+instructed concerning these, they can have no certain comfort.
+However, we have stated clearly enough that good works do not fulfil
+the Law, that we need the mercy of God, that by faith we are accepted
+with God, that good works, be they ever so precious, even if they
+were the works of St. Paul himself, cannot bring rest to the
+conscience.  From all this it follows that we are to believe that we
+obtain eternal life through Christ by faith, not on account of our
+works, or of the Law.  But what do we say of the reward which
+Scripture mentions?] If the adversaries will concede that we are
+accounted righteous by faith because of Christ, and that good works
+please God because of faith, we will not afterwards contend much
+concerning the term reward.  We confess that eternal life is a reward,
+because it is something due on account of the promise, not on
+account of our merits.  For the justification has been promised,
+which we have above shown to be properly a gift of God; and to this
+gift has been added the promise of eternal life, according to Rom. 8,
+30: Whom He justified, them He also glorified.  Here belongs what
+Paul says, 2 Tim. 4, 8: There is laid up for me a crown of
+righteousness which the Lord, the righteous Judge, shall give me.
+For the crown is due the justified because of the promise.  And this
+promise saints should know, not that they may labor for their own
+profit, for they ought to labor for the glory of God; but in order
+that they may not despair in afflictions, they should know God's will,
+that He desires to aid, to deliver, to protect them.  [Just as the
+inheritance and all possessions of a father are given to the son, as
+a rich compensation and reward for his obedience, and yet the son
+receives the inheritance, not on account of his merit, but because
+the father, for the reason that he is his father, wants him to have
+it.  Therefore it is a sufficient reason why eternal life is called a
+reward, because thereby the tribulations which we suffer, and the
+works of love which we do, are compensated, although we have not
+deserved it.  For there are two kinds of compensation: one, which we
+are obliged, the other, which we are not obliged, to render.  I.e.,
+when the emperor grants a servant a principality, he therewith
+compensates the servant's work; and yet the work is not worth the
+principality, but the servant acknowledges that he has received a
+gracious lien.  Thus God does not owe us eternal life, still, when He
+grants it to believers for Christ's sake, that is a compensation for
+our sufferings and works.] Although the perfect hear the mention of
+penalties and rewards in one way, and the weak hear it in another way;
+for the weak labor for the sake of their own advantage.  And yet the
+preaching of rewards and punishments is necessary.  In the preaching
+of punishments the wrath of God is set forth, and therefore this
+pertains to the preaching of repentance.  In the preaching of rewards,
+grace is set forth.  And just as Scripture, in the mention of good
+works, often embraces faith,--for it wishes righteousness of the
+heart to be included with the fruits,--so sometimes it offers grace
+together with other rewards as in Is. 58, 8 f., and frequently in
+other places in the prophets.  We also confess what we have often
+testified, that, although justification and eternal life pertain to
+faith, nevertheless good works merit other bodily and spiritual
+rewards [which are rendered both in this life and after this life;
+for God defers most rewards until He glorifies saints after this life,
+because He wishes them in this life to be exercised in mortifying
+the old man] and degrees of rewards, according to 1 Cor. 3, 8: Every
+man shall receive his own reward according to his own labor.  [For
+the blessed will have reward, one higher than the other.  This
+difference merit makes, according as it pleases God; and it is merit,
+because they do these good works whom God has adopted as children and
+heirs.  For thus they have merit which is their own and peculiar as
+one child with respect to another.] For the righteousness of the
+Gospel, which has to do with the promise of grace, freely receives
+justification and quickening.  But the fulfilling of the Law, which
+follows faith, has to do with the Law, in which a reward is offered
+and is due, not freely, but according to our works.  But those who
+merit this are justified before they do the Law.  Therefore as Paul
+says, Col. 1, 13; Rom. 8, 17, they have before been translated into
+the kingdom of God's Son, and been made joint-heirs with Christ.  But
+as often as mention is made of merit, the adversaries immediately
+transfer the matter from other rewards to justification, although the
+Gospel freely offers justification on account of Christ's merits and
+not of our own; and the merits of Christ are communicated to us by
+faith.  But works and afflictions merit, not justification, but other
+remunerations, as the reward is offered for the works in these
+passages: He which soweth sparingly shall reap also sparingly, and he
+which soweth bountifully shall reap also bountifully, 2 Cor. 9, 6.
+Here clearly the measure of the reward is connected with the measure
+of the work.  Honor thy father and thy mother, that thy days may be
+long upon the land, Ex. 20, 12. Also here the Law offers a reward to
+a certain work.  Although, therefore, the fulfilling of the Law
+merits a reward, for a reward properly pertains to the Law, yet we
+ought to be mindful of the Gospel, which freely offers justification
+for Christ's sake.  We neither observe the Law nor can observe it,
+before we have been reconciled to God, justified, and regenerated.
+Neither would this fulfilling of the Law please God, unless we would
+be accepted on account of faith.  And because men are accepted on
+account of faith, for this very reason the inchoate fulfilling of the
+Law pleases, and has a reward in this life and after this life.
+Concerning the term reward, very many other remarks might here be
+made derived from the nature of the Law, which as they are too
+extensive, must be explained in another connection.
+
+But the adversaries urge that it is the prerogative of good works to
+merit eternal life, because Paul says, Rom. 2, 5: Who will render to
+every one according to his works.  Likewise v. 10: Glory, honor, and
+peace to every man that worketh good.  John 6, 29: They that have
+done good [shall come forth] unto the resurrection of life.  Matt. 25
+36: I was an hungred and ye gave Me meat etc. In these and all
+similar passages in which works are praised in the Scriptures, it is
+necessary to understand not only outward works, but also the faith of
+the heart, because Scripture does not speak of hypocrisy, but of the
+righteousness of the heart with its fruits.  Moreover, as often as
+mention is made of the Law and of works, we must know that Christ as
+Mediator is not to be excluded.  For He is the end of the Law, and He
+Himself says, John 16, 5: Without Me ye can do nothing.  According to
+this rule we have said above that all passages concerning works can
+be judged.  Wherefore, when eternal life is granted to works, it is
+granted to those who have been justified, because no men except
+justified men, who are led by the Spirit of Christ, can do good works;
+and without faith and Christ, as Mediator, good works do not please,
+according to Heb. 11, 6: Without faith it is impossible to please God.
+When Paul says: He will render to every one according to his works,
+not only the outward work ought to be understood, but all
+righteousness or unrighteousness.  So: Glory to him that worketh good,
+i.e., to the righteous.  Ye gave Me meat, is cited as the fruit and
+witness of the righteousness of the heart and of faith, and therefore
+eternal life is rendered to righteousness.  [There it must certainly
+be acknowledged that Christ means not only the works, but that He
+desires to have the heart, which He wishes to esteem God aright, and
+to believe correctly concerning Him, namely, that it is through mercy
+that it is pleasing to God.  Therefore Christ teaches that
+everlasting life will be given the righteous, as Christ says: The
+righteous shall go into everlasting life.] In this way Scripture, at
+the same time with the fruits, embraces the righteousness of the
+heart.  And it often names the fruits, in order that it may be better
+understood by the inexperienced, and to signify that a new life and
+regeneration, and not hypocrisy, are required.  But regeneration
+occurs, by faith, in repentance.
+
+No sane man can judge otherwise, neither do we here affect any idle
+subtilty, so as to separate the fruits from the righteousness of the
+heart; if the adversaries would only have conceded that the fruits
+please because of faith, and of Christ as Mediator, and that by
+themselves they are not worthy of grace and of eternal life.  For in
+the doctrine of the adversaries we condemn this, that in such
+passages of Scripture, understood either in a philosophical or a
+Jewish manner, they abolish the righteousness of faith, and exclude
+Christ as Mediator.  From these passages they infer that works merit
+grace, sometimes de congruo, and at other times _de condigno_, namely,
+when love is added; i.e., that they justify, and because they are
+righteousness they are worthy of eternal life.  This error manifestly
+abolishes the righteousness of faith, which believes that we have
+access to God for Christ's sake, not for the sake of our works, and
+that through Christ, as Priest and Mediator, we are led to the Father,
+and have a reconciled Father, as has been sufficiently said above.
+And this doctrine concerning the righteousness of faith is not to be
+neglected in the Church of Christ, because without it the office of
+Christ cannot be considered, and the doctrine of justification that
+is left is only a doctrine of the Law.  But we should retain the
+Gospel, and the doctrine concerning the promise, granted for Christ's
+sake.
+
+[We are here not seeking an unnecessary subtilty, but there is a
+great reason why we must have a reliable account as regards these
+questions.  For as soon as we concede to the adversaries that works
+merit eternal life, they spin from this concession the awkward
+teaching that we are able to keep the Law of God, that we are not in
+need of mercy, that we are righteous before God, that is, accepted
+with God by our works, not for the sake of Christ, that we can also
+do works of supererogations namely, more than the Law requires.  Thus
+the entire teaching concerning faith is suppressed.  However, if
+there is to be and abide a Christian Church, the pure teaching
+concerning Christ, concerning the righteousness of faith, must surely
+be preserved.  Therefore we must fight against these great
+pharisaical errors, in order that we redeem the name of Christ and
+the honor of the Gospel and of Christ, and preserve for Christian
+hearts a true, permanent, certain consolation.  For how is it
+possible that a heart or conscience can obtain rest, or hope for
+salvation, when in afflictions and in the anguish of death our works
+in the judgment and sight of God utterly become dust, unless it
+becomes certain by faith that men are saved by mercy, for Christ's
+sake, and not for the sake of their works, their fulfilling of the
+Law?  And, indeed, St. Laurentius, when placed on the gridiron, and
+being tortured for Christ's sake did not think that by this work he
+was perfectly and absolutely fulfilling the Law, that he was without
+sin, that he did not need Christ as Mediator and the mercy of God.
+He rested his case, indeed, with the prophet, who says: Enter not
+into judgment with Thy servant; for in Thy sight shall no man living
+be justified, Ps. 143, 2. Nor did St. Bernard boast that his works
+were worthy of eternal life, when he says: _Perdite vixi_, I have led
+a sinful life, etc. But he boldly comforts himself, clings to the
+promise of grace, and believes that he has remission of sins and life
+eternal for Christ's sake, just as Psalm 32, 1 teaches: Blessed is he
+whose transgression is forgiven, whose sin is covered.  And Paul says,
+Rom. 4, 6: David also describeth the blessedness of the man to whom
+God imputeth righteousness without works.  Paul, then, says that he
+is blessed to whom righteousness is imputed through faith in Christ,
+even though he have not performed any good works.  That is the true,
+permanent consolation, by which hearts and consciences can be
+confirmed and encouraged, namely that for Christ's sake, through
+faith, the remission of sins, righteousness, and life eternal are
+given us.  Now, if passages which treat of works are understood in
+such a manner as to comprise faith, they are not opposed to our
+doctrine.  And, indeed, it is necessary always to add faith, so as
+not to exclude Christ as Mediator.  But the fulfilment of the Law
+follows faith; for the Holy Ghost is present, who renews life.  Let
+this suffice concerning this article.]
+
+We are not, therefore, on this topic contending with the adversaries
+concerning a small matter.  We are not seeking out idle subtilties
+when we find fault with them for teaching that we merit eternal life
+by works, while that faith is omitted which apprehends Christ as
+Mediator.  For of this faith which believes that for Christ's sake
+the Father is propitious to us there is not a syllable in the
+scholastics.  Everywhere they hold that we are accepted and righteous
+because of our works, wrought either from reason, or certainly
+wrought by the inclination of that love concerning which they speak.
+And yet they have certain sayings, maxims, as it were, of the old
+writers, which they distort in interpreting.  In the schools the
+boast is made that good works please on account of grace, and that
+confidence must be put in God's grace.  Here they interpret grace as
+a habit by which we love God, as though, indeed, the ancients meant
+to say that we ought to trust in our love, of which we certainly
+experience how small and how impure it is.  Although it is strange
+how they bid us trust in love, since they teach us that we are not
+able to know whether it be present.  Why do they not here set forth
+the grace, the mercy of God toward us?  And as often as mention is
+made of this, they ought to add faith.  For the promise of God's
+mercy, reconciliation, and love towards us is not apprehended unless
+by faith.  With this view they would be right in saying that we ought
+to trust in grace, that good works please because of grace, when
+faith apprehends grace.  In the schools the boast is also made that
+our good works avail by virtue of Christ's passion.  Well said!  But
+why add nothing concerning faith?  For Christ is a propitiation, as
+Paul, Rom. 3, 25, says, through faith.  When timid consciences are
+comforted by faith, and are convinced that our sins have been blotted
+out by the death of Christ, and that God has been reconciled to us on
+account of Christ's suffering, then, indeed, the suffering of Christ
+profits us.  If the doctrine concerning faith be omitted, it is said
+in vain that works avail by virtue of Christ's passion.
+
+And very many other passages they corrupt in the schools because they
+do not teach the righteousness of faith and because they understand
+by faith merely a knowledge of the history or of dogmas, and do not
+understand by it that virtue which apprehends the promise of grace
+and of righteousness, and which quickens hearts in the terrors of sin
+and of death.  When Paul says, Rom. 10, 10: With the heart man
+believeth unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made
+unto salvation, we think that the adversaries acknowledge here that
+confession justifies or saves, not _ex opere operato_, but only on
+account of the faith of the heart.  And Paul thus says that
+confession saves, in order to show what sort of faith obtains eternal
+life; namely, that which is firm and active.  That faith, however,
+which does not manifest itself in confession is not firm.  Thus other
+good works please on account of faith, as also the prayers of the
+Church ask that all things may be accepted for Christ's sake.  They
+likewise ask all things for Christ's sake.  For it is manifest that
+at the close of prayers this clause is always added: Through Christ,
+our Lord.  Accordingly, we conclude that we are justified before God,
+are reconciled to God and regenerated by faith, which in repentance
+apprehends the promise of grace, and truly quickens the terrified
+mind, and is convinced that for Christ's sake God is reconciled and
+propitious to us.  And through this faith, says Peter, 1 Ep. 1, 5, we
+are kept unto salvation ready to be revealed.  The knowledge of this
+faith is necessary to Christians, and brings the most abundant
+consolation in all afflictions, and displays to us the office of
+Christ because those who deny that men are justified by faith, and
+deny that Christ is Mediator and Propitiator, deny the promise of
+grace and the Gospel.  They teach only the doctrine either of reason
+or of the Law concerning justification.  We have shown the origin of
+this case, so far as can here be done, and have explained the
+objections of the adversaries.  Good men, indeed, will easily judge
+these things, if they will think, as often as a passage concerning
+love or works is cited, that the Law cannot be observed without
+Christ, and that we cannot be justified from the Law, but from the
+Gospel, that is, from the promise of the grace promised in Christ.
+And we hope that this discussion, although brief, will be profitable
+to good men for strengthening faith, and teaching and comforting
+conscience.  For we know that those things which we have said are in
+harmony with the prophetic and apostolic Scriptures, with the holy
+Fathers, Ambrose, Augustine and very many others, and with the whole
+Church of Christ, which certainly confesses that Christ is
+Propitiator and Justifier.
+
+Nor are we immediately to judge that the Roman Church agrees with
+everything that the Pope, or cardinals, or bishops, or some of the
+theologians, or monks approve.  For it is manifest that to most of
+the pontiffs their own authority is of greater concern than the
+Gospel of Christ.  And it has been ascertained that most of them are
+openly Epicureans.  It is evident that theologians have mingled with
+Christian doctrine more of philosophy than was sufficient.  Nor ought
+their influence to appear so great that it will never be lawful to
+dissent from their disputations, because at the same time many
+manifest errors are found among them, such as, that we are able from
+purely natural powers to love God above all things.  This dogma,
+although it is manifestly false, has produced many other errors.  For
+the Scriptures the holy Fathers, and the judgments of all the godly
+everywhere make reply.  Therefore, even though Popes, or some
+theologians, and monks in the Church have taught us to seek remission
+of sins, grace, and righteousness through our own works, and to
+invent new forms of worship, which have obscured the office of Christ,
+and have made out of Christ not a Propitiator and Justifier, but
+only a Legislator, nevertheless the knowledge of Christ has always
+remained with some godly persons.  Scripture, moreover, has predicted
+that the righteousness of faith would be obscured in this way by
+human traditions and the doctrine of works.  Just as Paul often
+complains (cf.  Gal. 4, 9; 5, 7; Col. 2, 8, 16 sq.; 1 Tim. 4, 2 sq.,
+etc.) that there were even at that time those who, instead of the
+righteousness of faith, taught that men were reconciled to God and
+justified by their own works and own acts of worship, and not by
+faith for Christ's sake; because men judge by nature that God ought
+to be appeased by works.  Nor does reason see a righteousness other
+than the righteousness of the Law, understood in a civil sense.
+Accordingly, there have always existed in the world some who have
+taught this carnal righteousness alone to the exclusion of the
+righteousness of faith; and such teachers will also always exist.
+The same happened among the people of Israel.  The greater part of
+the people thought that they merited remission of sins by their works
+they accumulated sacrifices and acts of worship.  On the contrary,
+the prophets, in condemnation of this opinion, taught the
+righteousness of faith.  And the occurrences among the people of
+Israel are illustrations of those things which were to occur in the
+Church.  Therefore, let the multitude of the adversaries, who condemn
+our doctrine, not disturb godly minds.  For their spirit can easily
+be judged, because in some articles they have condemned truth that is
+so clear and manifest that their godlessness appears openly.  For the
+bull of Leo X condemned a very necessary article, which all
+Christians should hold and believe, namely, that we ought to trust
+that we have been absolved not because of our contrition, but because
+of Christ's word, Matt. 16, 19: Whatsoever thou shalt bind, etc. And
+now, in this assembly, the authors of the _Confutation_ have in clear
+words condemned this, namely, that we have said that faith is a part
+of repentance, by which we obtain remission of sins, and overcome the
+terrors of sin, and conscience is rendered pacified.  Who, however,
+does not see that this article that by faith we obtain the remission
+of sins, is most true, most certain, and especially necessary to all
+Christians?  Who to all posterity, hearing that such a doctrine has
+been condemned, will judge that the authors of this condemnation had
+any knowledge of Christ?
+
+And concerning their spirit, a conjecture can be made from the
+unheard-of cruelty, which it is evident that they have hitherto
+exercised towards most good men.  And in this assembly we have heard
+that a reverend father, when opinions concerning our Confession were
+expressed, said in the senate of the Empire that no plan seemed to
+him better than to make a reply written in blood to the Confession
+which we had presented written in ink.  What more cruel would
+Phalaris say?  Therefore some princes also have judged this
+expression unworthy to be spoken in such a meeting.  Wherefore,
+although the adversaries claim for themselves the name of the Church,
+nevertheless we know that the Church of Christ is with those who
+teach the Gospel of Christ, not with those who defend wicked opinions
+contrary to the Gospel, as the Lord says, John 10, 21: My sheep hear
+My voice.  And Augustine says: The question is, Where is the Church!
+What, therefore, are we to do?  Are we to seek it in our own words or
+in the words of its Head our Lord Jesus Christ?  I think that we
+ought to seek it in the words of Him who is Truth, and who knows His
+own body best.  Hence the judgments of our adversaries will not
+disturb us, since they defend human opinions contrary to the Gospel,
+contrary to the authority of the holy Fathers, who have written in
+the Church, and contrary to the testimonies of godly minds.
+
+
+
+
+Part 11
+
+
+Articles VII and VIII: _Of the Church._
+
+The Seventh Article of our Confession, in which we said that the
+Church is the congregation of saints, they have condemned and have
+added a long disquisition, that the wicked are not to be separated
+from the Church, since John has compared the Church to a
+threshing-floor on which wheat and chaff are heaped together, Matt. 3,
+12, and Christ has compared it to a net in which there are both good
+and bad fishes, Matt. 13, 47. It is, verily, a true saying, namely,
+that there is no remedy against the attacks of the slanderer.
+Nothing can be spoken with such care that it can escape detraction.
+For this reason we have added the Eighth Article, lest any one might
+think that we separate the wicked and hypocrites from the outward
+fellowship of the Church, or that we deny efficacy to Sacraments
+administered by hypocrites or wicked men.  Therefore there is no need
+here of a long defense against this slander.  The Eighth Article is
+sufficient to exculpate us.  For we grant that in this life
+hypocrites and wicked men have been mingled with the Church, and that
+they are members of the Church according to the outward fellowship of
+the signs of the Church, i.e., of Word, profession, and Sacraments,
+especially if they have not been excommunicated.  Neither are the
+Sacraments without efficacy for the reason that they are administered
+by wicked men; yea, we can even be right in using the Sacraments
+administered by wicked men.  For Paul also predicts, 2 Thess. 2, 4,
+that Antichrist will sit in the temple of God, i.e., he will rule and
+bear office in the Church.  But the Church is not only the fellowship
+of outward objects and rites, as other governments, but it is
+originally a fellowship of faith and of the Holy Ghost in hearts.
+[The Christian Church consists not alone in fellowship of outward
+signs, but it consists especially in inward communion of eternal
+blessings in the heart, as of the Holy Ghost, of faith, of the fear
+and love of God]; which fellowship nevertheless has outward marks so
+that it can be recognized, namely, the pure doctrine of the Gospel,
+and the administration of the Sacraments in accordance with the
+Gospel of Christ.  [Namely, where God's Word is pure, and the
+Sacraments are administered in conformity with the same, there
+certainly is the Church, and there are Christians.] And this Church
+alone is called the body of Christ, which Christ renews [Christ is
+its Head, and] sanctifies and governs by His Spirit, as Paul
+testifies, Eph. 1, 22 sq., when he says: And gave Him to be the Head
+over all things to the Church, which is His body, the fulness of Him
+that filleth all in all.  Wherefore, those in whom Christ does not
+act [through His Spirit] are not the members of Christ.  This, too,
+the adversaries acknowledge, namely, that the wicked are dead members
+of the Church.  Therefore we wonder why they have found fault with
+our description [our conclusion concerning Church] which speaks of
+living members.  Neither have we said anything new.  Paul has defined
+the Church precisely in the same way, Eph. 6, 25 f., that it should
+be cleansed in order to be holy.  And he adds the outward marks, the
+Word and Sacraments.  For he says thus: Christ also loved the Church,
+and gave himself for it, that He might sanctify and cleanse it with
+the washing of water by the Word, that He might present it to Himself
+a glorious Church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing,
+but that it should be holy and without blemish.  In the Confession we
+have presented this sentence almost in the very words.  Thus also the
+Church is defined by the article in the Creed which teaches us to
+believe that there is a holy Catholic Church.  The wicked indeed are
+not a holy Church.  And that which follows, namely, the communion of
+saints, seems to be added in order to explain what the Church
+signifies, namely, the congregation of saints, who have with each
+other the fellowship of the same Gospel or doctrine [who confess one
+Gospel, have the same knowledge of Christ] and of the same Holy Ghost,
+who renews, sanctifies, and governs their hearts.
+
+And this article has been presented for a necessary reason.  [The
+article of the Church Catholic or Universal, which is gathered
+together from every nation under the sun, is very comforting and
+highly necessary.] We see the infinite dangers which threaten the
+destruction of the Church.  In the Church itself, infinite is the
+multitude of the wicked who oppress it [despise, bitterly hate, and
+most violently persecute the Word, as, e.g., the Turks, Mohammedans,
+other tyrants, heretics, etc. For this reason the true teaching and
+the Church are often so utterly suppressed and disappear, as if there
+were no Church which has happened under the papacy, it often seems
+that the Church has completely perished].  Therefore, in order that
+we may not despair, but may know that the Church will nevertheless
+remain [until the end of the world], likewise that we may know that,
+however great the multitude of the wicked is, yet the Church [which
+is Christ's bride] exists, and that Christ affords those gifts which
+He has promised to the Church, to forgive sins, to hear prayer, to
+give the Holy Ghost, this article in the Creed presents us these
+consolations.  And it says church Catholic, in order that we may not
+understand the Church to be an outward government of certain nations
+[that the Church is like any other external polity, bound to this or
+that land, kingdom, or nation, as the Pope of Rome will say], but
+rather men scattered throughout the whole world [here and there in
+the world, from the rising to the setting of the sun], who agree
+concerning the Gospel, and have the same Christ, the same Holy Ghost,
+and the same Sacraments, whether they have the same or different
+human traditions.  And the gloss upon the Decrees says that the
+Church in its wide sense embraces good and evil; likewise, that the
+wicked are in the Church only in name, not in fact; but that the good
+are in the Church both in fact and in name.  And to this effect there
+are many passages in the Fathers.  For Jerome says: The sinner,
+therefore, who Has been soiled with any blotch cannot be called a
+member of the Church of Christ, neither can he be said to be subject
+to Christ.
+
+Although, therefore, hypocrites and wicked men are members of this
+true Church according to outward rites [titles and offices], yet when
+the Church is defined, it is necessary to define that which is the
+living body of Christ, and which is in name and in fact the Church
+[which is called the body of Christ, and has fellowship not alone in
+outward signs, but has gifts in the heart, namely, the Holy Ghost and
+faith].  And for this there are many reasons.  For it is necessary to
+understand what it is that principally makes us members, and that,
+living members, of the Church.  If we will define the Church only as
+an outward polity of the good and wicked, men will not understand
+that the kingdom of Christ is righteousness of heart and the gift of
+the Holy Ghost [that the kingdom of Christ is spiritual, as
+nevertheless it is, that therein Christ inwardly rules, strengthens,
+and comforts hearts, and imparts the Holy Ghost and various spiritual
+gifts], but they will judge that it is only the outward observance of
+certain forms of worship and rites.  Likewise, what difference will
+there be between the people of the Law and the Church if the Church
+is an outward polity?  But Paul distinguishes the Church from the
+people of the Law thus, that the Church is a spiritual people, i.e.,
+that it has been distinguished from the heathen not by civil rites
+[not in the polity and civil affairs], but that it is the true people
+of God, regenerated by the Holy Ghost.  Among the people of the Law,
+apart from the promise of Christ, also the carnal seed [all those who
+by nature were born Jews and Abraham's seed] had promises concerning
+corporeal things, of government, etc. And because of these even the
+wicked among them were called the people of God, because God had
+separated this carnal seed from other nations by certain outward
+ordinances and promises; and yet, these wicked persons did not please
+God.  But the Gospel [which is preached in the Church] brings not
+merely the shadow of eternal things, but the eternal things
+themselves, the Holy Ghost and righteousness, by which we are
+righteous before God.  [But every true Christian is even here upon
+earth partaker of eternal blessings, even of eternal comfort, of
+eternal life, and of the Holy Ghost, and of righteousness which is
+from God, until he will be completely saved in the world to come.]
+
+Therefore, only those are the people, according to the Gospel, who
+receive this promise of the Spirit.  Besides, the Church is the
+kingdom of Christ, distinguished from the kingdom of the devil.  It
+is certain, however, that the wicked are in the power of the devil,
+and members of the kingdom of the devil, as Paul teaches, Eph. 2, 2,
+when he says that the devil now worketh in the children of
+disobedience.  And Christ says to the Pharisees, who certainly had
+outward fellowship with the Church, i.e., with the saints among the
+people of the Law (for they held office, sacrificed, and taught): Ye
+are of your father, the devil, John 8, 44. Therefore, the Church,
+which is truly the kingdom of Christ is properly the congregation of
+saints.  For the wicked are ruled by the devil, and are captives of
+the devil; they are not ruled by the Spirit of Christ.
+
+But what need is there of words in a manifest matter?  [However, the
+adversaries contradict the plain truth.] If the Church, which is
+truly the kingdom of Christ, is distinguished from the kingdom of the
+devil, it follows necessarily that the wicked, since they are in the
+kingdom of the devil, are not the Church; although in this life,
+because the kingdom of Christ has not yet been revealed; they are
+mingled with the Church, and hold offices [as teachers, and other
+offices] in the Church.  Neither are the wicked the kingdom of Christ,
+for the reason that the revelation has not yet been made.  For that
+is always the kingdom which He quickens by His Spirit, whether it be
+revealed or be covered by the cross; just as He who has now been
+glorified is the same Christ who was before afflicted.  And with this
+clearly agree the parables of Christ, who says, Matt. 13, 38, that
+the good seed are the children of the kingdom, but the tares are the
+children of the Wicked One.  The field, He says, is the world, not
+the Church.  Thus John [Matt. 3,12: He will throughly purge His floor,
+and gather His wheat into the garner; but He will burn up the chaff]
+speaks concerning the whole race of the Jews, and says that it will
+come to pass that the true Church will be separated from that people.
+Therefore, this passage is more against the adversaries than in
+favor of them, because it shows that the true and spiritual people is
+to be separated from the carnal people.  Christ also speaks of the
+outward appearance of the Church when He says, Matt. 13, 47: The
+kingdom of heaven is like unto a net, likewise, to ten virgins; and
+He teaches that the Church has been covered by a multitude of evils,
+in order that this stumbling-block may not offend the pious; likewise,
+in order that we may know that the Word and Sacraments are
+efficacious even when administered by the wicked.  And meanwhile He
+teaches that these godless men, although they have the fellowship of
+outward signs, are nevertheless not the true kingdom of Christ and
+members of Christ; for they are members of the kingdom of the devil.
+Neither, indeed, are we dreaming of a Platonic state, as some
+wickedly charge, but we say that this Church exists, namely, the
+truly believing and righteous men scattered throughout the whole
+world [We are speaking not of an imaginary Church, which is to be
+found nowhere; but we say and know certainly that this Church,
+wherein saints live, is and abides truly upon earth; namely, that
+some of God's children are here and there in all the world, in
+various kingdoms, islands, lands, and cities, from the rising of the
+sun to its setting, who have truly learned to know Christ and His
+Gospel.] And we add the marks: the pure doctrine of the Gospel [the
+ministry or the Gospel] and the Sacraments.  And this Church is
+properly the pillar of the truth, 1 Tim. 3, 15. For it retains the
+pure Gospel, and, as Paul says, 1 Cor. 3, 11 [: "Other foundation can
+no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ"], the foundation,
+i.e., the true knowledge of Christ and faith.  Although among these
+[in the body which is built upon the true foundation, i.e., upon
+Christ and faith] there are also many weak persons, who build upon
+the foundation stubble that will perish, i.e., certain unprofitable
+opinions [some human thoughts and opinions], which, nevertheless,
+because they do not overthrow the foundation are both forgiven them
+and also corrected.  And the writings of the holy Fathers testify
+that sometimes even they built stubble upon the foundation, but that
+this did not overthrow their faith.  But most of those errors which
+our adversaries defend, overthrow faith, as, their condemnation of
+the article concerning the remission of sins, in which we say that
+the remission of sins is received by faith.  Likewise it is a
+manifest and pernicious error when the adversaries teach that men
+merit the remission of sins by love to God, prior to grace.  [In the
+place of Christ they set up their works, orders, masses, just as the
+Jews, the heathen, and the Turks intend to be saved by their works.]
+For this also is to remove "the foundation," i.e., Christ.  Likewise,
+what need will there be of faith if the Sacraments justify _ex opere
+operato_, without a good disposition on the part of the one using
+them? [without faith.  Now, a person that does not regard faith as
+necessary has already lost Christ.  Again, they set up the worship of
+saints, call upon them instead of Christ, the Mediator, etc.] But
+just as the Church has the promise that it will always have the Holy
+Ghost, so it has also the threatenings that there will be wicked
+teachers and wolves.  But that is the Church in the proper sense
+which has the Holy Ghost.  Although wolves and wicked teachers become
+rampant [rage and do injury] in the Church, yet they are not properly
+the kingdom of Christ.  Just as Lyra also testifies, when he says:
+The Church does not consist of men with respect to power, or
+ecclesiastical or secular dignity, because many princes and
+archbishops and others of lower rank have been found to have
+apostatized from the faith.  Therefore, the Church consists of those
+persons in whom there is a true knowledge and confession of faith and
+truth.  What else have we said in our Confession than what Lyra here
+says [in terms so clear that he could not have spoken more clearly]?
+
+But the adversaries perhaps require [a new Roman definition], that
+the Church be defined thus, namely, that it is the supreme outward
+monarchy of the whole world, in which the Roman pontiff necessarily
+has unquestioned power, which no one is permitted to dispute or
+censure [no matter whether he uses it rightly, or misuses it], to
+frame articles of faith; to abolish, according to his pleasure, the
+Scriptures [to pervert and interpret them contrary to all divine law,
+contrary to his own decretals, contrary to all imperial rights, as
+often, to as great an extent, and whenever it pleases him, to sell
+indulgences and dispensations for money]; to appoint rites of worship
+and sacrifices; likewise, to frame such laws as he may wish, and to
+dispense and exempt from whatever laws he may wish, divine, canonical,
+or civil; and that from him [as from the vicegerent of Christ] the
+Emperor and all kings receive, according to the command of Christ,
+the power and right to hold their kingdoms, from whom, since the
+Father has subjected all things to Him, it must be understood, this
+right was transferred to the Pope; therefore the Pope must
+necessarily be [a God on earth, the supreme Majesty,] lord of the
+whole world, of all the kingdoms of the world, of all things private
+and public, and must have absolute power in temporal and spiritual
+things, and both swords, the spiritual and temporal Besides this
+definition, not of the Church of Christ but of the papal kingdom, has
+as its authors not only the canonists, but also Daniel 11 36 ff.
+[Daniel, the prophet, represents Antichrist in this way.]
+
+Now, if we would define the Church in this way [that it is such pomp,
+as is exhibited in the Pope's rule], we would perhaps have fairer
+judges.  For there are many things extant written extravagantly and
+wickedly concerning the power of the Pope of Rome on account of which
+no one has ever been arraigned.  We alone are blamed, because we
+proclaim the beneficence of Christ [and write and preach the clear
+word and teaching of the apostles], that by faith in Christ we obtain
+remission of sins, and not by [hypocrisy or innumerable] rites of
+worship devised by the Pope.  Moreover, Christ, the prophets, and the
+apostles define the Church of Christ far otherwise than as the papal
+kingdom.  Neither must we transfer to the Popes what belongs to the
+true Church, namely, that they are pillars of the truth, that they do
+not err.  For how many of them care for the Gospel or judge that it
+[one little page, one letter of it] is worth being read?  Many [in
+Italy and elsewhere] even publicly ridicule all religions, or, if
+they approve anything, they approve such things only as are in
+harmony with human reason, and regard the rest fabulous and like the
+tragedies of the poets.  Wherefore we hold, according Scriptures,
+that the Church, properly so called, is the congregation of saints
+[of those here and there in the world], who truly believe the Gospel
+of Christ, and have the Holy Ghost.  And yet we confess that in this
+life many hypocrites and wicked men, mingled with these, have the
+fellowship of outward signs who are members of the Church according
+to this fellowship of outward signs, and accordingly bear offices in
+the Church [preach, administer the Sacraments, and bear the title and
+name of Christians].  Neither does the fact that the sacraments are
+administered by the unworthy detract from their efficacy, because, on
+account of the call of the Church, they represent the person of
+Christ, and do not represent their own persons, as Christ testifies,
+Luke 10, 16: He that heareth you heareth Me.  [Thus even Judas was
+sent to preach.] When they offer the Word of God, when they offer the
+Sacraments, they offer them in the stead and place of Christ.  Those
+words of Christ teach us not to be offended by the unworthiness of
+the ministers.
+
+But concerning this matter we have spoken with sufficient clearness
+in the Confession that we condemn the Donatists and Wyclifites, who
+thought that men sinned when they received the sacraments from the
+unworthy in the Church.  These things seem, for the present, to be
+sufficient for the defense of the description of the Church which we
+have presented.  Neither do we see how, when the Church, properly so
+called, is named the body of Christ, it should be described otherwise
+than we have described it.  For it is evident that the wicked belong
+to the kingdom and body of the devil, who impels and holds captive
+the wicked.  These things are clearer than the light of noonday,
+however, if the adversaries still continue to pervert them, we will
+not hesitate to reply at greater length.
+
+The adversaries condemn also the part of the Seventh Article in which
+we said that "to the unity of the Church it is sufficient to agree
+concerning the doctrine of the Gospel and the administration of the
+Sacraments; nor is it necessary that human traditions rites or
+ceremonies instituted by men should be alike everywhere." Here they
+distinguish between universal and particular rites, and approve our
+article if it be understood concerning particular rites, they do not
+receive it concerning universal rites.  [That is a fine clumsy
+distinction!] We do not sufficiently understand what the adversaries
+mean.  We are speaking of true, i.e., of spiritual unity [we say that
+those are one harmonious Church who believe in one Christ, who have
+one Gospel, one Spirit, one faith, the same Sacraments; and we are
+speaking, therefore, of spiritual unity], without which faith in the
+heart, or righteousness of heart before God cannot exist.  For this
+we say that similarity of human rites, whether universal or
+particular, is not necessary, because the righteousness of faith is
+not a righteousness bound to certain traditions [outward ceremonies
+of human ordinances] as the righteousness of the Law was bound to the
+Mosaic ceremonies, because this righteousness of the heart is a
+matter that quickens the heart.  To this quickening, human traditions,
+whether they be universal or particular, contribute nothing; neither
+are they effects of the Holy Ghost, as are chastity, patience, the
+fear of God, love to one's neighbor, and the works of love.
+
+Neither were the reasons trifling why we presented this article.  For
+it is evident that many [great errors and] foolish opinions
+concerning traditions had crept into the Church.  Some thought that
+human traditions were necessary services for meriting justification
+[that without such human ordinances Christian holiness and faith are
+of no avail before God; also that no one can be a Christian unless he
+observe such traditions, although they are nothing but an outward
+regulation].  And afterwards they disputed how it came to pass that
+God was worshiped with such variety, as though, indeed, these
+observances were acts of worship, and not rather outward and
+political ordinances, pertaining in no respect to righteousness of
+heart or the worship of God, which vary, according to the
+circumstances, for certain probable reasons, sometimes in one way and
+at other times in another [as in worldly governments one state has
+customs different from another].  Likewise some Churches have
+excommunicated others because of such traditions, as the observance
+of Easter, pictures, and the like.  Hence the ignorant have supposed
+that faith, or the righteousness of the heart before God, cannot
+exist [and that no one can be a Christian] without these observances.
+For many foolish writings of the Summists and of others concerning
+this matter are extant.
+
+But just as the dissimilar length of day and night does not injure
+the unity of the Church, so we believe that the true unity of the
+Church is not injured by dissimilar rites instituted by men; although
+it is pleasing to us that, for the sake of tranquillity [unity and
+good order], universal rites be observed just as also in the churches
+we willingly observe the order of the Mass, the Lord's Day, and other
+more eminent festival days.  And with a very grateful mind we embrace
+the profitable and ancient ordinances, especially since they contain
+a discipline by which it is profitable to educate and train the
+people and those who are ignorant [the young people].  But now we are
+not discussing the question whether it be of advantage to observe
+them on account of peace or bodily profit.  Another matter is treated
+of.  For the question at issue is, whether the observances of human
+traditions are acts of worship necessary for righteousness before God.
+This is the point to be judged in this controversy and when this is
+decided, it can afterwards be judged whether to the true unity of the
+Church it is necessary that human traditions should everywhere be
+alike.  For if human traditions be not acts of worship necessary for
+righteousness before God, it follows that also they can be righteous
+and be the sons of God who have not the traditions which have been
+received elsewhere.  F.i., if the style of German clothing is not
+worship of God, necessary for righteousness before God, it follows
+that men can be righteous and sons of God and the Church of Christ,
+even though they use a costume that is not German, but French.
+
+Paul clearly teaches this to the Colossians, 2,16.17: Let no man,
+therefore, judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an
+holy-day, or of the new moon, or of the Sabbath days, which are a
+shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ.  Likewise, v. 20
+sqq.: 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; which are to perish with the using),
+after the commandments and doctrines of men?  Which things have,
+indeed, a show of wisdom in will-worship and humility.  For the
+meaning is: Since righteousness of the heart is a spiritual matter,
+quickening hearts, and it is evident that human traditions do not
+quicken hearts and are not effects of the Holy Ghost, as are love to
+one's neighbor, chastity, etc., and are not instruments through which
+God moves hearts to believe, as are the divinely given Word and
+Sacraments, but are usages with regard to matters that pertain in no
+respect to the heart, which perish with the using, we must not
+believe that they are necessary for righteousness before God.  [They
+are nothing eternal, hence, they do not procure eternal life, but are
+an external bodily discipline, which does not change the heart.] And
+to the same effect he says, Rom. 14, 17: The kingdom of God is not
+meat and drink, but righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Ghost.
+But there is no need to cite many testimonies, since they are
+everywhere obvious in the Scriptures, and in our Confession we have
+brought together very many of them, in the latter articles.  And the
+point to be decided in this controversy must be repeated after a
+while, namely, whether human traditions be acts of worship necessary
+for righteousness before God.  There we will discuss this matter more
+fully.
+
+The adversaries say that universal traditions are to be observed
+because they are supposed to have been handed down by the apostles.
+What religious men they are!  They wish that the rites derived from
+the apostles be retained, they do not wish the doctrine of the
+apostles to be retained.  They must judge concerning these rites just
+as the apostles themselves judge in their writings.  For the apostles
+did not wish us to believe that through such rites we are justified,
+that such rites are necessary for righteousness before God.  The
+apostles did not wish to impose such a burden upon consciences; they
+did not wish to place righteousness and sin in the observance of days,
+food, and the like.  Yea, Paul calls such opinions doctrines of
+devils, 1 Tim. 4, 1. Therefore the will and advice of the apostles
+ought to be derived from their writings; it is not enough to mention
+their example.  They observed certain days, not because this
+observance was necessary for justification, but in order that the
+people might know at what time they should assemble.  They observed
+also certain other rites and orders of lessons whenever they
+assembled.  The people [In the beginning of the Church the Jews who
+had become Christians] retained also from the customs of the Fathers
+[from their Jewish festivals and ceremonies], as is commonly the case,
+certain things which, being somewhat changed, the apostles adapted
+to the history of the Gospel as the Passover, Pentecost, so that not
+only by teaching, but also through these examples they might hand
+down to posterity the memory of the most important subjects.  But if
+these things were handed down as necessary for justification, why
+afterwards did the bishops change many things in these very matters?
+For, if they were matters of divine right, it was not lawful to
+change them by human authority.  Before the Synod of Nice some
+observed Easter at one time and others at another time.  Neither did
+this want of uniformity injure faith.  Afterward the plan was adopted
+by which our Passover [Easter] did not fall at the same time as that
+of the Jewish Passover.  But the apostles had commanded the Churches
+to observe the Passover with the brethren who had been converted from
+Judaism.  Therefore, after the Synod of Nice, certain nations
+tenaciously held to the custom of observing the Jewish time.  But the
+apostles, by this decree, did not wish to impose necessity upon the
+Churches, the words of the decree testify.  For it bids no one to be
+troubled, even though his brethren, in observing Easter, do not
+compute the time aright.  The words of the decree are extant in
+Epiphanius: Do not calculate, but celebrate it whenever your brethren
+of the circumcision do; celebrate it at the same time with them, and
+even though they may have erred, let not this be a care to you..
+Epiphanius writes that these are the words of the apostles presented
+in a decree concerning Easter, in which the discreet reader can
+easily judge that the apostles wished to free the people from the
+foolish opinion of a fixed time, when they prohibit them from being
+troubled, even though a mistake should be made in the computation.
+Some, moreover in the East, who were called, from the author of the
+dogma, Audians, contended, on account of this decree of the apostles,
+that the Passover should be observed with the Jews.  Epiphanius, in
+refuting them, praises the decree and says that it contains nothing
+which deviates from the faith or rule of the Church, and blames the
+Audians because they do not understand aright the expression, and
+interprets it in the sense in which we interpret it because the
+apostles did not consider it of any importance at what time the
+Passover should be observed, but because prominent brethren had been
+converted from the Jews who observed their custom, and, for the sake
+of harmony, wished the rest to follow their example And the apostles
+wisely admonished the reader neither to remove the liberty of the
+Gospel, nor to impose necessity upon consciences, because they add
+that they should not be troubled even though there should be an error
+in making the computation.
+
+Many things of this class can be gathered from the histories, in
+which it appears that a want of uniformity in human observances does
+not injure the unity of faith [separate no one from the universal
+Christian Church].  Although, what need is there of discussion?  The
+adversaries do not at all understand what the righteousness of faith
+is, what the kingdom of Christ is, when they judge that uniformity of
+observances in food, days, clothing, and the like, which do not have
+the command of God, is necessary.  But look at the religious men, our
+adversaries.  For the unity of the Church they require uniform human
+observances, although they themselves have changed the ordinance of
+Christ in the use of the Supper, which certainly was a universal
+ordinance before.  But if universal ordinances are so necessary, why
+do they themselves change the ordinance of Christ's Supper, which is
+not human, but divine?  But concerning this entire controversy we
+shall have to speak at different times below.
+
+The entire Eighth Article has been approved, in which we confess that
+hypocrites and wicked persons have been mingled with the Church, and
+that the Sacraments are efficacious even though dispensed by wicked
+ministers, because the ministers act in the place of Christ, and do
+not represent their own persons, according to Luke 10, 16: He that
+heareth you heareth Me.  Impious teachers are to be deserted [are not
+to be received or heard], because these do not act any longer in the
+place of Christ, but are antichrists.  And Christ says Matt. 7, 15:
+Beware of false prophets.  And Paul, Gal. 1, 9: If any man preach any
+other gospel unto you, let him be accursed.
+
+Moreover, Christ has warned us in His parables concerning the Church,
+that when offended by the private vices, whether of priests or people,
+we should not excite schisms, as the Donatists have wickedly done.
+As to those, however, who have excited schisms, because they denied
+that priests are permitted to hold possessions and property, we hold
+that they are altogether seditious.  For to hold property is a civil
+ordinance.  It is lawful, however, for Christians to use civil
+ordinances, just as they use the air, the light, food, drink.  For as
+this order of the world and fixed movements of the heavenly bodies
+are truly God's ordinances and these are preserved by God, so lawful
+governments are truly God's ordinances, and are preserved and
+defended by God against the devil.
+
+
+
+
+Part 12
+
+
+Article IX: _Of Baptism._
+
+The Ninth Article has been approved, in which we confess that Baptism
+is necessary to salvation, and that children are to be baptized, and
+that the baptism of children is not in vain, but is necessary and
+effectual to salvation.  And since the Gospel is taught among us
+purely and diligently, by God's favor we receive also from it this
+fruit, that in our Churches no Anabaptists have arisen [have not
+gained ground in our Churches], because the people have been
+fortified by God's Word against the wicked and seditious faction of
+these robbers.  And as we condemn quite a number of other errors of
+the Anabaptists, we condemn this also, that they dispute that the
+baptism of little children is unprofitable.  For it is very certain
+that the promise of salvation pertains also to little children [that
+the divine promises of grace and of the Holy Ghost belong not alone
+to the old, but also to children].  It does not, however, pertain to
+those who are outside of Christ's Church where there is neither Word
+nor Sacraments because the kingdom of Christ exists only with the
+Word and Sacraments.  Therefore it is necessary to baptize little
+children, that the promise of salvation may be applied to them,
+according to Christ's command, Matt. 28, 19: Baptize all nations.
+Just as here salvation is offered to all, so Baptism is offered to
+all, to men, women, children, infants.  It clearly follows, therefore,
+that infants are to be baptized, because with Baptism salvation [the
+universal grace and treasure of the Gospel] is offered.  Secondly, it
+is manifest that God approves of the baptism of little children.
+Therefore the Anabaptists, who condemn the baptism of little children,
+believe wickedly.  That God, however, approves of the baptism of
+little children is shown--by this, namely, that God gives the Holy
+Ghost to those thus baptized [to many who have been baptized in
+childhood].  For if this baptism would be in vain, the Holy Ghost
+would be given to none, none would be saved, and finally there would
+be no Church.  [For there have been many holy men in the Church who
+have not been baptized otherwise.] This reason, even taken alone, can
+sufficiently establish good and godly minds against the godless and
+fanatical opinions of the Anabaptists.
+
+
+
+
+Part 13
+
+
+Article X: _Of the Holy Supper._
+
+The Tenth Article has been approved, in which we confess that we
+believe, that in the Lord's Supper the body and blood of Christ are
+truly and substantially present, and are truly tendered, with those
+things which are seen, bread and wine to those who receive the
+Sacrament.  This belief we constantly defend as the subject has been
+carefully examined and considered.  For since Paul says, 1 Cor. 10,
+16, that the bread is the communion of the Lord's body, etc., it
+would follow, if the Lord's body were not truly present, that the
+bread is not a communion of the body, but only of the spirit of
+Christ.  And we have ascertained that not only the Roman Church
+affirms the bodily presence of Christ, but the Greek Church also both
+now believes, and formerly believed, the same.  For the canon of the
+Mass among them testifies to this, in which the priest clearly prays
+that the bread may be changed and become the very body of Christ.
+And Vulgarius, who seems to us to be not a silly writer, says
+distinctly that bread is not a mere figure, but is truly changed into
+flesh.  And there is a long exposition of Cyril on John 15, in which
+he teaches that Christ is corporeally offered us in the Supper.  For
+he says thus: Nevertheless, we do not deny that we are joined
+spiritually to Christ by true faith and sincere love.  But that we
+have no mode of connection with Him, according to the flesh, this
+indeed we entirely deny.  And this, we say, is altogether foreign to
+the divine Scriptures.  For who has doubted that Christ is in this
+manner a vine, and we the branches, deriving thence life for
+ourselves?  Hear Paul saying 1 Cor. 10, 17; Rom. 12, 5; Gal. 3, 28:
+We are all one body in Christ; although we are many, we are,
+nevertheless, one in Him; for we are all partakers of that one bread.
+Does he perhaps think that the virtue of the mystical benediction is
+unknown to us?  Since this is in us, does it not also, by the
+communication of Christ's flesh, cause Christ to dwell in us bodily?
+And a little after: Whence we must consider that Christ is in us not
+only according to the habit, which we call love, but also by natural
+participation, etc. We have cited these testimonies, not to undertake
+a discussion here concerning this subject, for His Imperial Majesty
+does not disapprove of this article, but in order that all who may
+read them may the more clearly perceive that we defend the doctrine
+received in the entire Church, that in the Lord's Supper the body and
+blood of Christ are truly and substantially present, and are truly
+tendered with those things which are seen, bread and wine.  And we
+speak of the presence of the living Christ [living body]; for we know
+that death hath no more dominion over Him, Rom. 6, 9.
+
+
+
+
+Part 14
+
+
+Article XI: _Of Confession._
+
+The Eleventh Article, Of Retaining Absolutism in the Church, is
+approved.  But they add a correction in reference to confession,
+namely, that the regulation headed, _Omnis Utriusque_, be observed,
+and that both annual confession be made, and, although all sins
+cannot be enumerated, nevertheless diligence be employed in order
+that they be recollected, and those which can be recalled be
+recounted.  Concerning this entire article, we will speak at greater
+length after a while, when we will explain our entire opinion
+concerning repentance.  It is well known that we have so elucidated
+and extolled [that we have preached, written, and taught in a manner
+so Christian, correct, and pure] the benefit of absolution and the
+power of the keys that many distressed consciences have derived
+consolation from our doctrine, after they heard that it is the
+command of God, nay, rather the very voice of the Gospel, that we
+should believe the absolution, and regard it as certain that the
+remission of sins is freely granted us for Christ's sake, and that we
+should believe that by this faith we are truly reconciled to God [as
+though we heard a voice from heaven].  This belief has encouraged
+many godly minds, and, in the beginning, brought Luther the highest
+commendation from all good men, since it shows consciences sure and
+firm consolation because previously the entire power of absolution
+[entire necessary doctrine of repentance] had been kept suppressed by
+doctrines concerning works, since the sophists and monks taught
+nothing of faith and free remission [but pointed men to their own
+works, from which nothing but despair enters alarmed consciences].
+
+But with respect to the time, certainly most men in our churches use
+the Sacraments, absolution and the Lord's Supper, frequently in a
+year.  And those who teach of the worth and fruits of the Sacraments
+speak in such a manner as to invite the people to use the Sacraments
+frequently.  For concerning this subject there are many things extant
+written by our theologians in such a manner that the adversaries, if
+they are good men, will undoubtedly approve and praise them.
+Excommunication is also pronounced against the openly wicked [those
+who live in manifest vices, fornication, adultery, etc.] and the
+despisers of the Sacraments.  These things are thus done both
+according to the Gospel and according to the old canons.  But a fixed
+time is not prescribed, because all are not ready in like manner at
+the same time.  Yea, if all are to come at the same time, they cannot
+be heard and instructed in order [so diligently].  And the old canons
+and Fathers do not appoint a fixed time.  The canon speaks only thus:
+If any enter the Church and be found never to commune, let them be
+admonished that, if they do not commune, they come to repentance.  If
+they commune [if they wish to be regarded as Christians], let them
+not be expelled; if they fail to do so, let them be excommunicated.
+Christ [Paul] says, I Cor. 11, 29, that those who eat unworthily eat
+judgment to themselves.  The pastors, accordingly, do not compel
+those who are not qualified to use the Sacraments.
+
+Concerning the enumeration of sins in confession, men are taught in
+such a way as not to ensnare their consciences.  Although it is of
+advantage to accustom inexperienced men to enumerate some things
+[which worry them], in order that they may be the more readily taught,
+yet we are now discussing what is necessary according to divine Law.
+Therefore, the adversaries ought not to cite for us the regulation
+_Omnis Utriusque_, which is not unknown to us, but they ought to show
+from the divine Law that an enumeration of sins is necessary for
+obtaining their remission.  The entire Church, throughout all Europe,
+knows what sort of snares this point of the regulation, which
+commands that all sins be confessed, has east upon consciences.
+Neither has the text by itself as much disadvantage as was afterwards
+added by the Summists, who collect the circumstances of the sins.
+What labyrinths were there!  How great a torture for the best minds!
+For the licentious and profane were in no way moved by these
+instruments of terror.  Afterwards what tragedies [what jealousy and
+hatred] did the questions concerning one's own priest excite among
+the pastors and brethren [monks of various orders], who then were by
+no means brethren when they were warring concerning jurisdiction of
+confessions! [for all brotherliness, all friendship, ceased, when the
+question was concerning authority and confessor's fees.] We,
+therefore, believe that, according to divine Law, the enumeration of
+sins is not necessary.  This also is pleasing to Panormitanus and
+very many other learned jurisconsults.  Nor do we wish to impose
+necessity upon the consciences of our people by the regulation _Omnis
+Utriusque_, of which we judge, just as of other human traditions,
+that they are not acts of worship necessary for justification.  And
+this regulation commands an impossible matter, that we should confess
+all sins.  It is evident, however, that most sins we neither remember
+nor understand [nor do we indeed even see the greatest sins],
+according to Ps. 19, 13: Who can understand his errors?
+
+If the pastors are good men, they will know how far it is of
+advantage to examine [the young and otherwise] inexperienced persons
+but we do not wish to sanction the torture [the tyranny of
+consciences] of the Summists, which notwithstanding would have been
+less intolerable if they had added one word concerning faith, which
+comforts and encourages consciences.  Now, concerning this faith
+which obtains the remission of sins, there is not a syllable in so
+great a mass of regulations, glosses, summaries, books of confession.
+Christ is nowhere read there.  [Nobody will there read a word by
+which he could learn to know Christ, or what Christ is.] Only the
+lists of sins are read [to the end of gathering and accumulating sins,
+and this would be of some value if they understood those sins which
+God regards as such].  And the greater part is occupied with sins
+against human traditions, and this is most vain.  This doctrine has
+forced to despair many godly minds, which were not able to find rest,
+because they believed that by divine Law an enumeration was necessary,
+and yet they experienced that it was impossible.  But other faults
+of no less moment inhere in the doctrine of the adversaries
+concerning repentance, which we will now recount.
+
+
+
+
+Part 15
+
+
+Article XII (V): _Of Repentance._
+
+In the Twelfth Article they approve of the first part, in which we
+set forth that such as have fallen after baptism may obtain remission
+of sins at whatever time, and as often as they are converted.  They
+condemn the second part, in which we say that the parts of repentance
+are contrition and faith [a penitent, contrite heart, and faith,
+namely that I receive the forgiveness of sins through Christ].  [Hear,
+now, what it is that the adversaries deny.] They [without shame]
+deny that faith is the second part of repentance.  What are we to do
+here, O Charles, thou most invincible Emperor?  The very voice of the
+Gospel is this, that by faith we obtain the remission of sins.  [This
+word is not our word but the voice and word of Jesus Christ, our
+Savior.] This voice of the Gospel these writers of the _Confutation_
+condemn.  We, therefore, can in no way assent to the _Confutation_.
+We cannot condemn the voice of the Gospel, so salutary and abounding
+in consolation.  What else is the denial that by faith we obtain
+remission of sins than to treat the blood and death of Christ with
+scorn?  We therefore beseech thee, O Charles most invincible Emperor,
+patiently and diligently to hear and examine this most important
+subject, which contains the chief topic of the Gospel, and the true
+knowledge of Christ, and the true worship of God [these great, most
+exalted and important matters which concern our own souls and
+consciences yea, also the entire faith of Christians, the entire
+Gospel, the knowledge of Christ, and what is highest and greatest,
+not only in this perishable, but also in the future life: the
+everlasting welfare or perdition of us all before God].  For all good
+men will ascertain that especially on this subject we have taught
+things that are true, godly, salutary, and necessary for the whole
+Church of Christ [things of the greatest significance to all pious
+hearts in the entire Christian Church on which their whole salvation
+and welfare depends, and without instruction on which there can be or
+remain no ministry, no Christian Church].  They will ascertain from
+the writings of our theologians that very much light has been added
+to the Gospel, and many pernicious errors have been corrected, by
+which, through the opinions of the scholastics and canonists, the
+doctrine of repentance was previously covered.
+
+Before we come to the defense of our position, we must say this first:
+All good men of all ranks, and also of the theological rank
+undoubtedly confess that before the writings of Luther appeared, the
+doctrine of repentance was very much confused.  The books of the
+Sententiaries are extant, in which there are innumerable questions
+which no theologians were ever able to explain satisfactorily.  The
+people were able neither to comprehend the sum of the matter, nor to
+see what things especially were required in repentance, where peace
+of conscience was to be sought for.  Let any one of the adversaries
+come and tell us when remission of sins takes place.  O good God,
+what darkness there is!  They doubt whether it is in attrition or in
+contrition that remission of sins occurs.  And if it occurs on
+account of contrition, what need is there of absolution, what does
+the power of the keys effect, if sins have been already remitted?
+Here, indeed, they also labor much more, and wickedly detract from
+the power of the keys.  Some dream that by the power of the keys
+guilt is not remitted, but that eternal punishments are changed into
+temporal.  Thus the most salutary power would be the ministry, not of
+life and the Spirit, but only of wrath and punishments.  Others,
+namely, the more cautious imagine that by the power of the keys sins
+are remitted before the Church and not before God.  This also is a
+pernicious error.  For if the power of the keys does not console us
+before God, what, then, will pacify the conscience?  Still more
+involved is what follows.  They teach that by contrition we merit
+grace.  In reference to which, if any one should ask why Saul and
+Judas and similar persons, who were dreadfully contrite, did not
+obtain grace, the answer was to be taken from faith and according to
+the Gospel, that Judas did not believe, that he did not support
+himself by the Gospel and promise of Christ.  For faith shows the
+distinction between the contrition of Judas and of Peter.  But the
+adversaries take their answer from the Law, that Judas did not love
+God, but feared the punishments.  [Is not this teaching uncertain and
+improper things concerning repentance?] When, however, will a
+terrified conscience, especially in those serious, true, and great
+terrors which are described in the psalms and the prophets, and which
+those certainly taste who are truly converted, be able to decide
+whether it fears God for His own sake [out of love it fears God, as
+its God], or is fleeing from eternal punishments?  [These people may
+not have experienced much of these anxieties, because they juggle
+words and make distinctions according to their dreams.  But in the
+heart when the test is applied, the matter turns out quite
+differently, and the conscience cannot be set at rest with paltry
+syllables and words.] These great emotions can be distinguished in
+letters and terms; they are not thus separated in fact, as these
+sweet sophists dream.  Here we appeal to the judgments of all good
+and wise men [who also desire to know the truth].  They undoubtedly
+will confess that these discussions in the writings of the
+adversaries are very confused and intricate.  And nevertheless the
+most important subject is at stake, the chief topic of the Gospel,
+the remission of sins.  This entire doctrine concerning these
+questions which we have reviewed, is, in the writings of the
+adversaries, full of errors and hypocrisy, and obscures the benefit
+of Christ, the power of the keys, and the righteousness of faith [to
+inexpressible injury of conscience].
+
+These things occur in the first act.  What when they come to
+confession?  What a work there is in the endless enumeration of sins
+which is nevertheless, in great part, devoted to those against human
+traditions!  And in order that good minds may by this means be the
+more tortured, they falsely assert that this enumeration is of divine
+right.  And while they demand this enumeration under the pretext of
+divine right, in the mean time they speak coldly concerning
+absolution which is truly of divine right.  They falsely assert that
+the Sacrament itself confers grace _ex opere operato_ without a good
+disposition on the part of the one using it; no mention is made of
+faith apprehending the absolution and consoling the conscience.  This
+is truly what is generally called _apienai pro tohn mustehriohn_
+departing before the mysteries.  [Such people are called genuine Jews.]
+
+The third act [of this play] remains, concerning satisfactions.  But
+this contains the most confused discussions.  They imagine that
+eternal punishments are commuted to the punishments of purgatory, and
+teach that a part of these is remitted by the power of the keys, and
+that a part is to be redeemed by means of satisfactions.  They add
+further that satisfactions ought to be works of supererogation, and
+they make these consist of most foolish observances, such as
+pilgrimages, rosaries, or similar observances which do not have the
+command of God.  Then, just as they redeem purgatory by means of
+satisfactions, so a scheme of redeeming satisfactions which was most
+abundant in revenue [which became quite a profitable, lucrative
+business and a grand fair] was devised.  For they sell [without
+shame] indulgences which they interpret as remissions of
+satisfactions.  And this revenue [this trafficking, this fair,
+conducted so shamelessly] is not only from the living, but is much
+more ample from the dead.  Nor do they redeem the satisfactions of
+the dead only by indulgences, but also by the sacrifice of the Mass.
+In a word, the subject of satisfactions is infinite.  Among these
+scandals (for we cannot enumerate all things) and doctrines of devils
+lies buried the doctrine of the righteousness of faith in Christ and
+the benefit of Christ.  Wherefore, all good men understand that the
+doctrine of the sophists and canonists concerning repentance has been
+censured for a useful and godly purpose.  For the following dogmas
+are clearly false, and foreign not only to Holy Scripture, but also
+to the Church Fathers:-I. That from the divine covenant we merit
+grace by good works wrought without grace.
+
+II. That by attrition we merit grace.
+
+III. That for the blotting out of sin the mere detestation of the
+crime is sufficient.
+
+IV. That on account of contrition, and not by faith in Christ, we
+obtain remission of sins.
+
+V. That the power of the keys avails for the remission of sins, not
+before God, but before the Church.
+
+VI. That by the power of the keys sins are not remitted before God,
+but that the power of the keys has been instituted to commute eternal
+to temporal punishments, to impose upon consciences certain
+satisfactions, to institute new acts of worship, and to obligate
+consciences to such satisfactions and acts of worship.
+
+VII. That according to divine right the enumeration of offenses in
+confession, concerning which the adversaries teach, is necessary.
+
+VIII. That canonical satisfactions are necessary for redeeming the
+punishment of purgatory, or they profit as a compensation for the
+blotting out of guilt.  For thus uninformed persons understand it.
+[For, although in the schools satisfactions are made to apply only to
+the punishment, everybody thinks that remission of guilt is thereby
+merited.]
+
+IX. That the reception of the sacrament of repentance _ex opere
+operato_, without a good disposition on the part of the one using it,
+i.e., without faith in Christ, obtains grace.
+
+X. That by the power of the keys our souls are freed from purgatory
+through indulgences
+
+XI. That in the reservation of cases not only canonical punishment,
+but the guilt also, ought to be reserved in reference to one who is
+truly converted.
+
+In order, therefore, to deliver pious consciences from these
+labyrinths of the sophists, we have ascribed to repentance [or
+conversion] these two parts, namely, contrition and faith.  If any
+one desires to add a third namely, fruits worthy of repentance, i.e.,
+a change of the entire life and character for the better [good works
+which shall and must follow conversion], we will not make any
+opposition.  From contrition we separate those idle and infinite
+discussions, as to when we grieve from love of God, and when from
+fear of punishment.  [For these are nothing but mere words and a
+useless babbling of persons who have never experienced the state of
+mind of a terrified conscience.] But we say that contrition is the
+true terror of conscience, which feels that God is angry with sin,
+and which grieves that it has sinned.  And this contrition takes
+place in this manner when sins are censured by the Word of God,
+because the sum of the preaching of the Gospel is this, namely, to
+convict of sin, and to offer for Christ's sake the remission of sins
+and righteousness, and the Holy Ghost, and eternal life, and that as
+regenerate men we should do good works.  Thus Christ comprises the
+sum of the Gospel when He says in the last chapter of Luke, v. 74:
+That repentance and remission of sins should be preached in My name
+among all nations.  And of these terrors Scripture speaks, as Ps. 38,
+4. 8: For mine iniquities are gone over mine head, as a heavy burden
+they are too heavy for me...I am feeble and sore broken; I have
+roared by reason of the disquietness of My heart.  And Ps. 6, 2. 3:
+Have mercy upon me, O Lord; for I am weak; O Lord, heal me; for my
+bones are vexed.  My soul is also sore vexed; but Thou, O Lord how
+long!  And Is. 38, 10.13: I said in the cutting off of my days, I
+shall go to the gates of the grave: I am deprived of the residue of
+my years....I reckoned till morning that, as a lion, so will He break
+all my bones.  [Again, v. 14: Mine eyes fail with looking upward; 0
+Lord, I am oppressed.] In these terrors, conscience feels the wrath
+of God against sin, which is unknown to secure men walking according
+to the flesh [as the sophists and their like].  It sees the turpitude
+of sin, and seriously grieves that it has sinned; meanwhile it also
+flees from the dreadful wrath of God, because human nature, unless
+sustained by the Word of God, cannot endure it.  Thus Paul says, Gal.
+2, 19: I through the Law am dead to the Law, For the Law only accuses
+and terrifies consciences.  In these terrors our adversaries say
+nothing of faith, they present only the Word, which convicts of sin.
+When this is taught alone, it is the doctrine of the Law, not of the
+Gospel.  By these griefs and terrors, they say, men merit grace,
+provided they love God.  But how will men love God in true terrors
+when they feel the terrible and inexpressible wrath of God What else
+than despair do those teach who in these terrors, display only the
+Law?
+
+We therefore add as the second part of repentance, Of Faith in Christ,
+that in these terrors the Gospel concerning Christ ought to be set
+forth to consciences, in which Gospel the remission of sins is freely
+promised concerning Christ.  Therefore, they ought to believe that
+for Christ's sake sins are freely remitted to them.  This faith
+cheers, sustains, and quickens the contrite, according to Rom. 5, 1:
+Being justified by faith, we have peace with God.  This faith obtains
+the remission of sins.  This faith justifies before God, as the same
+passage testifies: Being justified by faith.  This faith shows the
+distinction between the contrition of Judas and Peter, of Saul and of
+David.  The contrition of Judas or Saul is of no avail, for the
+reason that to this there is not added this faith which apprehends
+the remission of sins, bestowed as a gift for Christ's sake.
+Accordingly, the contrition of David or Peter avails because to it
+there is added faith, which apprehends the remission of sins granted
+for Christ's sake.  Neither is love present before reconciliation has
+been made by faith.  For without Christ the Law [God's Law or the
+First Commandment] is not performed, according to [Eph. 2, 18; 3,12]
+Rom. 5, 2: By Christ we have access to God.  And this faith grows
+gradually and throughout the entire life, struggles with sin [is
+tested by various temptations] in order to overcome sin and death.
+But love follows faith, as we have said above.  And thus filial fear
+can be clearly defined as such anxiety as has been connected with
+faith, i.e., where faith consoles and sustains the anxious heart.  It
+is servile fear when faith does not sustain the anxious heart [fear
+without faith, where there is nothing but wrath and doubt].
+
+Moreover, the power of the keys administers and presents the Gospel
+through absolution, which [proclaims peace to me and] is the true
+voice of the Gospel.  Thus we also comprise absolution when we speak
+of faith, because faith cometh by hearing, as Paul says Rom. 10, 17.
+For when the Gospel is heard and the absolution [i.e., the promise of
+divine grace] is heard, the conscience is encouraged and receives
+consolation.  And because God truly quickens through the Word, the
+keys truly remit sins before God [here on earth sins are truly
+canceled in such a manner that they are canceled also before God in
+heaven] according to Luke 10,10: He that heareth you heareth Me
+Wherefore the voice of the one absolving must be believed not
+otherwise than we would believe a voice from heaven.  And absolution
+[that blessed word of comfort] properly can be called a sacrament of
+repentance, as also the more learned scholastic theologians speak.
+Meanwhile this faith is nourished in a manifold way in temptations,
+through the declarations of the Gospel [the hearing of sermons,
+reading] and the use of the Sacraments.  For these are [seals and]
+signs of [the covenant and grace in] the New Testament, i.e., signs
+of [propitiation and] the remission of sins.  They offer, therefore,
+the remission of sins, as the words of the Lord's Supper clearly
+testify, Matt. 26, 26. 28: This is My body, which is given for you.
+This is the cup of the New Testament, etc. Thus faith is conceived
+and strengthened through absolution, through the hearing of the
+Gospel, through the use of the Sacraments, so that it may not succumb
+while it struggles with the terrors of sin and death.  This method of
+repentance is plain and clear, and increases the worth of the power
+of the keys and of the Sacraments, and illumines the benefit of
+Christ, and teaches us to avail ourselves of Christ as Mediator and
+Propitiator.
+
+But as the Confutation condemns us for having assigned these two
+parts to repentance, we must show that [not we, but] Scripture
+expresses these as the chief parts in repentance or conversion.  For
+Christ says Matt. 11, 28: Come unto Me, all ye that labor and are
+heavy laden, and I will give you rest.  Here there are two members.
+The labor and the burden signify the contrition, anxiety, and terrors
+of sin and of death.  To come to Christ is to believe that sins are
+remitted for Christ's sake, when we believe, our hearts are quickened
+by the Holy Ghost through the Word of Christ.  Here, therefore, there
+are these two chief parts, contrition and faith.  And in Mark 1, 15
+Christ says: Repent ye and believe the Gospel, where in the first
+member He convicts of sins, in the latter He consoles us, and shows
+the remission of sins.  For to believe the Gospel is not that general
+faith which devils also have [is not only to believe the history of
+the Gospel], but in the proper sense it is to believe that the
+remission of sins has been granted for Christ's sake.  For this is
+revealed in the Gospel.  You see also here that the two parts are
+joined, contrition when sins are reproved and faith, when it is said:
+Believe the Gospel.  If any one should say here that Christ includes
+also the fruits of repentance or the entire new life, we shall not
+dissent.  For this suffices us, that contrition and faith are named
+as the chief parts.
+
+Paul almost everywhere, when he describes conversion or renewal,
+designates these two parts, mortification and quickening, as in Col.
+2, 11: In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made
+without hands, namely, by putting off the body of the sins of the
+flesh.  And afterward, v. 12: Wherein also ye are risen with Him
+through the faith of the operation of God.  Here are two parts.  [Of
+these two parts he speaks plainly Rom. 6, 2. 4. 11, that we are dead
+to sin, which takes place by contrition and its terrors, and that we
+should rise again with Christ, which takes place when by faith we
+again obtain consolation and life.  And since faith is to bring
+consolation and peace into the conscience, according to Rom. 5, 1:
+Being justified by faith, we have peace, it follows that there is
+first terror and anxiety in the conscience.  Thus contrition and
+faith go side by side.] One is putting off the body of sins; the
+other is the rising again through faith.  Neither ought these words,
+mortification, quickening, putting off the body of sins, rising again,
+to be understood in a Platonic way, concerning a feigned change; but
+mortification signifies true terrors, such as those of the dying,
+which nature could not sustain unless it were supported by faith.  So
+he names that as the putting off of the body of sins which we
+ordinarily call contrition, because in these griefs the natural
+concupiscence is purged away.  And quickening ought not to be
+understood as a Platonic fancy, but as consolation which truly
+sustains life that is escaping in contrition.  Here, therefore, are
+two parts: contrition and faith.  For as conscience cannot be
+pacified except by faith, therefore faith alone quickens, according
+to the declaration, Hab. 2, 4; Rom. 1, 17: The just shall live by
+faith.
+
+And then in Col. 2, 14 it is said that Christ blots out the
+handwriting which through the Law is against us.  Here also there are
+two parts, the handwriting and the blotting out of the handwriting.
+The handwriting, however, is conscience, convicting and condemning us.
+The Law, moreover, is the word which reproves and condemns sins.
+Therefore, this voice which says, I have sinned against the Lord, as
+David says, 2 Sam. 12, 13, is the handwriting.  And wicked and secure
+men do not seriously give forth this voice.  For they do not see,
+they do not read the sentence of the Law written in the heart.  In
+true griefs and terrors this sentence is perceived.  Therefore the
+handwriting which condemns us is contrition itself.  To blot out the
+handwriting is to expunge this sentence by which we declare that we
+shall be condemned, and to engrave the sentence according to which we
+know that we have been freed from this condemnation.  But faith is
+the new sentence, which reverses the former sentence, and gives peace
+and life to the heart.
+
+However, what need is there to cite many testimonies since they are
+everywhere obvious in the Scriptures?  Ps. 118, 18: The Lord hath
+chastened me sore, but He hath not given me over unto death.  Ps. 119,
+28: My soul melteth for heaviness; strengthen Thou me according unto
+Thy word.  Here, in the first member, contrition is contained, and in
+the second the mode is clearly described how in contrition we are
+revived, namely, by the Word of God which offers grace.  This
+sustains and quickens hearts.  And 1 Sam. 2, 6 The Lord killeth and
+maketh alive; He bringeth down to the grave and bringeth up.  By one
+of these, contrition is signified, by the other, faith is signified.
+And Is. 28, 21: The Lord shall be wroth that He may do His work, His
+strange work, and bring to pass His act, His strange act.  He calls
+it the strange work of the Lord when He terrifies because to quicken
+and console is God's own work.  [Other works, as, to terrify and to
+kill, are not God's own works, for God only quickens.] But He
+terrifies, he says, for this reason, namely, that there may be a
+place for consolation and quickening, because hearts that are secure
+and do not feel the wrath of God loathe consolation.  In this manner
+Scripture is accustomed to join these two the terrors and the
+consolation, in order to teach that in repentance there are these
+chief members, contrition, and faith that consoles and justifies.
+Neither do we see how the nature of repentance can be presented more
+clearly and simply.  [We know with certainty that God thus works in
+His Christians in the Church.]
+
+For the two chief works of God in men are these, to terrify, and to
+justify and quicken those who have been terrified.  Into these two
+works all Scripture has been distributed.  The one part is the Law,
+which shows, reproves, and condemns sins.  The other part is the
+Gospel, i.e., the promise of grace bestowed in Christ, and this
+promise is constantly repeated in the whole of Scripture, first
+having been delivered to Adam [I will put enmity, etc., Gen. 3, 15],
+afterwards to the patriarchs; then, still more clearly proclaimed by
+the prophets; lastly, preached and set forth among the Jews by Christ
+and disseminated over the entire world by the apostles.  For all the
+saints were justified by faith in this promise, and not by their own
+attrition or contrition.
+
+And the examples [how the saints became godly] show likewise these
+two parts.  After his sin Adam is reproved and becomes terrified,
+this was contrition.  Afterward God promises grace, and speaks of a
+future seed (the blessed seed, i.e., Christ), by which the kingdom of
+the devil, death, and sin will be destroyed, there He offers the
+remission of sins.  These are the chief things.  For although the
+punishment is afterwards added, yet this punishment does not merit
+the remission of sin.  And concerning this kind of punishment we
+shall speak after a while.
+
+So David is reproved by Nathan, and, terrified, he says, 2 Sam. 12,
+13: I have sinned against the Lord.  This is contrition.  Afterward
+he hears the absolution: The Lord also hath put away thy sin; thou
+shalt not die.  This voice encourages David, and by faith sustains,
+justifies, and quickens him.  Here a punishment is also added, but
+this punishment does not merit the remission of sins.  Nor are
+special punishments always added, but in repentance these two things
+ought always to exist, namely, contrition and faith, as Luke 7, 37.
+38. The woman, who was a sinner, came to Christ weeping.  By these
+tears the contrition is recognized.  Afterward she hears the
+absolution: Thy sins are forgiven; thy faith hath saved thee; go in
+peace.  This is the second part of repentance, namely, faith, which
+encourages and consoles her.  From all these it is apparent to godly
+readers that we assign to repentance those parts which properly
+belong to it in conversion, or regeneration, and the remission of sin.
+Worthy fruits and punishments [likewise, patience that we be
+willing to bear the cross and punishments, which God lays upon the
+old Adam] follow regeneration and the remission of sin.  For this
+reason we have mentioned these two parts, in order that the faith
+which we require in repentance [of which the sophists and canonists
+have all been silent] might be the better seen.  And what that faith
+is which the Gospel proclaims can be better understood when it is set
+over against contrition and mortification.
+
+But as the adversaries expressly condemn our statement that men
+obtain the remission of sins by faith, we shall add a few proofs from
+which it will be understood that the remission of sins is obtained
+not _ex opere operato_ because of contrition, but by that special
+faith by which an individual believes that sins are remitted to him.
+For this is the chief article concerning which we are contending with
+our adversaries, and the knowledge of which we regard especially
+necessary to all Christians.  As, however, it appears that we have
+spoken sufficiently above concerning the same subject, we shall here
+be briefer.  For very closely related are the topics of the doctrine
+of repentance and the doctrine of justification.
+
+When the adversaries speak of faith, and say that it precedes
+repentance, they understand by faith, not that which justifies, but
+that which, in a general way, believes that God exists, that
+punishments have been threatened to the wicked [that there is a hell],
+etc. In addition to this faith we require that each one believe that
+his sins are remitted to him.  Concerning this special faith we are
+disputing, and we oppose it to the opinion which bids us trust not in
+the promise of Christ, but in the _opus operatum_, of contrition,
+confession, and satisfactions, etc. This faith follows terrors in
+such a manner as to overcome them, and render the conscience pacified.
+To this faith we ascribe justification and regeneration, inasmuch
+as it frees from terrors, and brings forth in the heart not only
+peace and joy, but also a new life.  We maintain [with the help of
+God we shall defend to eternity and against all the gates of hell]
+that this faith is truly necessary for the remission of sins, and
+accordingly place it among the parts of repentance.  Nor does the
+Church of Christ believe otherwise, although our adversaries [like
+mad dogs] contradict us.
+
+Moreover, to begin with, we ask the adversaries whether to receive
+absolution is a part of repentance, or not.  But if they separate it
+from confession as they are subtile in making the distinction, we do
+not see of what benefit confession is without absolution.  If,
+however, they do not separate the receiving of absolution from
+confession, it is necessary for them to hold that faith is a part of
+repentance, because absolution is not received except by faith.  That
+absolution, however is not received except by faith can be proved
+from Paul, who teaches Rom. 4, 16, that the promise cannot be
+received except by faith.  But absolution is the promise of the
+remission of sins [nothing else than the Gospel, the divine promise
+of God's grace and favor].  Therefore, it necessarily requires faith.
+Neither do we see how he who does not assent to it may be said to
+receive absolution.  And what else is the refusal to assent to
+absolution but charging God with falsehood, If the heart doubts, it
+regards those things which God promises as uncertain and of no
+account.  Accordingly, in 1 John 5, 10 it is written: He that
+believeth not God hath made Him a liar, because he believeth not the
+record that God gave of His Son.
+
+Secondly, we think that the adversaries acknowledge that the
+remission of sins is either a part, or the end, or, to speak in their
+manner, the _terminus ad quem_ of repentance.  [For what does
+repentance help if the forgiveness of sins be not obtained?]
+Therefore that by which the remission of sins is received is
+correctly added to the parts [must certainly be the most prominent
+part] of repentance.  It is very certain, however, that even though
+all the gates of hell contradict us, yet the remission of sins cannot
+be received except by faith alone, which believes that sins are
+remitted for Christ's sake, according to Rom. 3, 25: Whom God hath
+set forth to be a propitiation through faith in His blood.  Likewise
+Rom. 5, 2: By whom also we have access by faith unto grace, etc. For
+a terrified conscience cannot set against God's wrath our works or
+our love, but it is at length pacified when it apprehends Christ as
+Mediator, and believes the promises given for His sake.  For those
+who dream that without faith in Christ hearts become pacified, do not
+understand what the remission of sins is, or how it came to us.
+Peter, 1 Ep. 2, 6, cites from Is. 49, 23, and 28, 16: He that
+believeth on Him shall not be confounded.  It is necessary, therefore,
+that hypocrites be confounded, who are confident that they receive
+the remission of sins because of their own works, and not because of
+Christ.  Peter also says in Acts 10, 43: To Him give all the prophets
+witness that through His name whosoever believeth in Him, shall
+receive remission of sins.  What he says, through His name, could not
+be expressed more clearly and he adds: Whosoever believeth in Him.
+Thus, therefore, we receive the remission of sins only through the
+name of Christ, i.e., for Christ's sake, and not for the sake of any
+merits and works of our own.  And this occurs when we believe that
+sins are remitted to us for Christ's sake.
+
+Our adversaries cry out that they are the Church, that they are
+following the consensus of the Church [what the Church catholic
+universal, holds].  But Peter also here cites in our issue the
+consensus of the Church: To Him give all the prophets witness, that
+through His name, whosoever believeth in Him, shall receive remission
+of sins, etc. The consensus of the prophets is assuredly to be judged
+as the consensus of the Church universal.  [I verily think that if
+all the holy prophets are unanimously agreed in a declaration ( since
+God regards even a single prophet as an inestimable treasure), it
+would also be a decree, a declaration, and a unanimous strong
+conclusion of the universal, catholic, Christian, holy Church, and
+would be justly regarded as such.] We concede neither to the Pope nor
+to the Church the power to make decrees against this consensus of the
+prophets.  But the bull of Leo openly condemns this article, Of the
+Remission of Sins and the adversaries condemn it in the Confutation.
+From which it is apparent what sort of a Church we must judge that of
+these men to be, who not only by their decrees censure the doctrine
+that we obtain the remission of sins by faith, not on account of our
+works, but on account of Christ, but who also give the command by
+force and the sword to abolish it, and by every kind of cruelty [like
+bloodhounds] to put to death good men who thus believe.
+
+But they have authors of a great name Scotus, Gabriel, and the like,
+and passages of the Fathers which are cited in a mutilated form in
+the decrees.  Certainly, if the testimonies are to be counted, they
+win.  For there is a very great crowd of most trifling writers upon
+the Sententiae, who, as though they had conspired, defend these
+figments concerning the merit of attrition and of works, and other
+things which we have above recounted.  [Aye, it is true, they are all
+called teachers and authors, but by their singing you can tell what
+sort of birds they are.  These authors have taught nothing but
+philosophy, and have known nothing of Christ and the work of God,
+their books show this plainly.] But lest any one be moved by the
+multitude of citations, there is no great weight in the testimonies
+of the later writers, who did not originate their own writings, but
+only, by compiling from the writers before them, transferred these
+opinions from some books into others.  They have exercised no
+judgment, but just like petty judges silently have approved the
+errors of their superiors, which they have not understood.  Let us
+not, therefore, hesitate to oppose this utterance of Peter, which
+cites the consensus of the prophets, to ever so many legions of the
+Sententiaries.  And to this utterance of Peter the testimony of the
+Holy Ghost is added.  For the text speaks thus, Acts 10, 44: While
+Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which
+heard the Word.  Therefore, let pious consciences know that the
+command of God is this that they believe that they are freely
+forgiven for Christ's sake, and not for the sake of our works.  And
+by this command of God let them sustain themselves against despair,
+and against the terrors of sin and of death.  And let them know that
+this belief has existed among saints from the beginning of the world.
+[Of this the idle sophists know little; and the blessed proclamation,
+the Gospel, which proclaims the forgiveness of sins through the
+blessed Seed, that is, Christ, has from the beginning of the world
+been the greatest consolation and treasure to all pious kings all
+prophets, all believers.  For they have believed in the same Christ
+in whom we believe; for from the beginning of the world no saint has
+been saved in any other way than through the faith of the same Gospel.
+] For Peter clearly cites the consensus of the prophets, and the
+writings of the apostles testify that they believe the same thing.
+Nor are testimonies of the Fathers wanting.  For Bernard says the
+same thing in words that are in no way obscure: For it is necessary
+first of all to believe that you cannot have remission of sins except
+by the indulgence of God, but add yet that you believe also this,
+namely, that through Him sins are forgiven thee.  This is the
+testimony which the Holy Ghost asserts in your heart, saying: "Thy
+sins are forgiven thee." For thus the apostle judges that man is
+justified freely through faith.  These words of Bernard shed a
+wonderful light upon our cause, because he not only requires that we
+in a general way believe that sins are remitted through mercy but he
+bids us add special faith, by which we believe that sins are remitted
+even to us; and he teaches how we may be rendered certain concerning
+the remission of sins, namely when our hearts are encouraged by faith,
+and become tranquil through the Holy Ghost.  What more do the
+adversaries require?  [But how now, ye adversaries?  Is St. Bernard
+also a heretic?] Do they still dare deny that by faith we obtain the
+remission of sins, or that faith is a part of repentance?
+
+Thirdly, the adversaries say that sin is remitted; because an attrite
+or contrite person elicits an act of love to God [if we undertake
+from reason to love God], and by this act merits to receive the
+remission of sins.  This is nothing but to teach the Law, the Gospel
+being blotted out, and the promise concerning Christ being abolished.
+For they require only the Law and our works, because the Law demands
+love.  Besides they teach us to be confident that we obtain remission
+of sins because of contrition and love.  What else is this than to
+put confidence in our works, not in the Word and promise of God
+concerning Christ?  But if the Law be sufficient for obtaining the
+remission of sins, what need is there of the Gospel?  What need is
+there of Christ if we obtain remission of sins because of our own
+work?  We, on the other hand call consciences away from the Law to
+the Gospel, and from confidence in their own works to confidence in
+the promise and Christ, because the Gospel presents to us Christ, and
+promises freely the remission of sins for Christ's sake.  In this
+promise it bids us trust, namely, that for Christ's sake we are
+reconciled to the Father, and not for the sake of our own contrition
+or love.  For there is no other Mediator or Propitiator than Christ.
+Neither can we do the works of the Law unless we have first been
+reconciled through Christ.  And if we would do anything, yet we must
+believe that not for the sake of these works, but for the sake of
+Christ, as Mediator and Propitiator, we obtain the remission of sins.
+
+Yea, it is a reproach to Christ and a repeal of the Gospel to believe
+that we obtain the remission of sins on account of the Law, or
+otherwise than by faith in Christ.  This method also we have
+discussed above in the chapter Of Justification, where we declared
+why we confess that men are justified by faith, not by love.
+Therefore the doctrine of the adversaries, when they teach that by
+their own contrition and love men obtain the remission of sins, and
+trust in this contrition and love, is merely the doctrine of the Law
+and of that, too, as not understood [which they do not understand
+with respect to the kind of love towards God which it demands], just
+as the Jews looked upon the veiled face of Moses.  For let us imagine
+that love is present, let us imagine that works are present, yet
+neither love nor works can a propitiation for sin [or be of as much
+value as Christ].  And they cannot even be opposed to the wrath and
+judgment of God, according to Ps. 143, 2: Enter not into judgment
+with Thy servant; for in Thy sight shall no man living be justified.
+Neither ought the honor of Christ to be transferred to our works.
+
+For these reasons Paul contends that we are not justified by the Law,
+and he opposes to the Law the promise of the remission of sins which
+is granted for Christ's sake and teaches that we freely receive the
+remission of sins for Christ's sake.  Paul calls us away from the Law
+to this promise.  Upon this promise he bids us look [and regard the
+Lord Christ our treasure], which certainly will be void if we are
+justified by the Law before we are justified through the promise, or
+if we obtain the remission of sins on account of our own
+righteousness.  But it is evident that the promise was given us and
+Christ was tendered to us for the very reason that we cannot do the
+works of the Law.  Therefore it is necessary that we are reconciled
+by the promise before we do the works of the Law.  The promise,
+however, is received only by faith.  Therefore it is necessary for
+contrite persons to apprehend by faith the promise of the remission
+of sins granted for Christ's sake, and to be confident that freely
+for Christ's sake they have a reconciled Father.  This is the meaning
+of Paul, Rom. 4, 13, where he says: Therefore it is of faith that it
+might be by grace, to the end the promise might be sure.  And Gal. 3,
+22: The Scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by
+faith of Jesus Christ might be given them that believe, i.e., all are
+under sin, neither can they be freed otherwise than by apprehending
+by faith the promise of the remission of sins.  Therefore we must by
+faith accept the remission of sins before we do the works of the Law,
+although, as has been said above, love follows faith, because the
+regenerate receive the Holy Ghost, and accordingly begin [to become
+friendly to the Law and] to do the works of the Law.
+
+We would cite more testimonies if they were not obvious to every
+godly reader in the Scriptures.  And we do not wish to be too prolix,
+in order that this ease may be the more readily seen through.
+Neither, indeed, is there any doubt that the meaning of Paul is what
+we are defending, namely, that by faith we receive the remission of
+sins for Christ's sake, that by faith we ought to oppose to God's
+wrath Christ as Mediator, and not our works.  Neither let godly minds
+be disturbed, even though the adversaries find fault with the
+judgments of Paul.  Nothing is said so simply that it cannot be
+distorted by caviling.  We know that what we have mentioned is the
+true and genuine meaning of Paul, we know that this our belief brings
+to godly consciences [in agony of death and temptation] sure comfort,
+without which no one can in God's judgment.
+
+Therefore let these pharisaic opinions of the adversaries be rejected,
+namely, that we do not receive by faith the remission of sins, but
+that it ought to be merited by our love and works; that we ought to
+oppose our love and our works to the wrath of God.  Not of the Gospel,
+but of the Law is this doctrine, which feigns that man is justified
+by the Law before he has been reconciled through Christ to God, since
+Christ says, John 15, 5: With out Me, ye can do nothing; likewise: I
+am the true Vine; ye are the branches.  But the adversaries feign
+that we are branches, not of Christ, but of Moses.  For they wish to
+be justified by the Law, and to offer their love and works to God
+before they are reconciled to God through Christ, before they are
+branches of Christ.  Paul, on the other hand [who is certainly a much
+greater teacher than the adversaries], contends that the Law cannot
+be observed without Christ.  Accordingly, in order that we [those who
+truly feel and have experienced sin and anguish of conscience must
+cling to the promise of grace, in order that they] may be reconciled
+to God for Christ's sake, the promise must be received before we do
+the works of the Law.  We think that these things are sufficiently
+clear to godly consciences.  And hence they will understand why we
+have declared above that men are justified by faith, not by love,
+because we must oppose to God's wrath not our love or works (or trust
+in our love and works), but Christ as Mediator [for all our ability,
+all our deeds and works, are far too weak to remove and appease God's
+wrath].  And we must apprehend the promise of the remission of sins
+before we do the works of the Law.
+
+Lastly, when will conscience be pacified if we receive remission of
+sins on the ground that we love, or that we do the works of the Law?
+For the Law will always accuse us, because we never satisfy God's Law.
+Just as Paul says, Rom. 4, 15: The Law worketh wrath.  Chrysostom
+asks concerning repentance, Whence are we made sure that our sins are
+remitted us?  The adversaries also, in their "Sentences," ask
+concerning the same subject.  [The question, verily, is worth asking
+blessed the man that returns the right answer.] This cannot be
+explained, consciences cannot be made tranquil, unless they know that
+it is God's command and the very Gospel that they should be firmly
+confident that for Christ's sake sins are remitted freely, and that
+they should not doubt that these are remitted to them.  If any one
+doubts, he charges, as John says, 1 Ep. 5, 10, the divine promise
+with falsehood.  We teach that this certainty of faith is required in
+the Gospel.  The adversaries leave consciences uncertain and wavering.
+Consciences, however do nothing from faith when they perpetually
+doubt whether they have remission.  [For it is not possible that
+there should be rest, or a quiet and peaceful conscience, if they
+doubt whether God be gracious.  For if they doubt whether they have a
+gracious God, whether they are doing right, whether they have
+forgiveness of sins, how can, etc.] How can they in this doubt call
+upon God, how can they be confident that they are heard?  Thus the
+entire life is without God [faith] and without the true worship of
+God.  This is what Paul says, Rom. 14, 23: Whatsoever is not of faith
+is sin.  And because they are constantly occupied with this doubt,
+they never experience what faith [God or Christ] is.  Thus it comes
+to pass that they rush at last into despair [die in doubt, without
+God, without all knowledge of God].  Such is the doctrine of the
+adversaries, the doctrine of the Law, the annulling of the Gospel,
+the doctrine of despair.  [Whereby Christ is suppressed, men are led
+into overwhelming sorrow and torture of conscience, and finally, when
+temptation comes, into despair.  Let His Imperial Majesty graciously
+consider and well examine this matter, it does not concern gold or
+silver but souls and consciences.] Now we are glad to refer to all
+good men the judgment concerning this topic of repentance (for it has
+no obscurity), in order that they may decide whether we or the
+adversaries have taught those things which are more godly and
+healthful to consciences.  Indeed, these dissensions in the Church do
+not delight us; wherefore, if we did not have great and necessary
+reasons for dissenting from the adversaries, we would with the
+greatest pleasure be silent.  But now, since they condemn the
+manifest truth, it is not right for us to desert a cause which is not
+our own, but is that of Christ and the Church.  [We cannot with
+fidelity to God and conscience deny this blessed doctrine and divine
+truth, from which we expect at last, when this poor temporal life
+ceases and all help of creatures fails, the only eternal, highest
+consolation: nor will we in anything recede from this cause, which is
+not only ours, but that of all Christendom, and concerns the highest
+treasure, Jesus Christ.]
+
+We have declared for what reasons we assigned to repentance these two
+parts, contrition and faith.  And we have done this the more readily
+because many expressions concerning repentance are published which
+are cited in a mutilated form from the Fathers [Augustine and the
+other ancient Fathers], and which the adversaries have distorted in
+order to put faith out of sight.  Such are: Repentance is to lament
+past evils, and not to commit again deeds that ought to be lamented.
+Again: Repentance is a kind of vengeance of him who grieves, thus
+punishing in himself what he is sorry for having committed.  In these
+passages no mention is made of faith.  And not even in the schools,
+when they interpret, is anything added concerning faith.  Therefore,
+in order that the doctrine of faith might be the more conspicuous, we
+have enumerated it among the parts of repentance.  For the actual
+fact shows that those passages which require contrition or good works,
+and make no mention of justifying faith, are dangerous [as
+experience proves].  And prudence can justly be desired in those who
+have collected these centos of the "Sentences" and decrees.  For
+since the Fathers speak in some places concerning one part, and in
+other places concerning another part of repentance, it would have
+been well to select and combine their judgments not only concerning
+one part, but concerning both, i.e., concerning contrition and faith.
+
+For Tertullian speaks excellently concerning faith, dwelling upon the
+oath in the prophet, Ezek. 33, 11: As I live, saith the Lord God, I
+have no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but that the wicked turn
+from his way and live.  For as God swears that He does not wish the
+death of a sinner, He shows that faith is required, in order that we
+may believe the one swearing, and be firmly confident that He
+forgives us.  The authority of the divine promises ought by itself to
+be great in our estimation.  But this promise has also been confirmed
+by an oath.  Therefore, if any one be not confident that he is
+forgiven, he denies that God has sworn what is true, than which a
+more horrible blasphemy cannot be imagined.  For Tertullian speaks
+thus: He invites by reward to salvation, even swearing.  Saying, "I
+live," He desires that He be believed.  Oh, blessed we, for whose
+sake God swears!  Oh, most miserable if we believe not the Lord even
+when He swears!  But here we must know that this faith ought to be
+confident that God freely forgives us for the sake of Christ, for the
+sake of His own promise, not for the sake of our works, contrition,
+confession, or satisfactions.  For if faith relies upon these works,
+it immediately becomes uncertain, because the terrified conscience
+sees that these works are unworthy.  Accordingly, Ambrose speaks
+admirably concerning repentance: Therefore it is proper for us to
+believe both that we are to repent, and that we are to be pardoned,
+but so as to expect pardon as from faith, which obtains it as from a
+handwriting.  Again: It is faith which covers our sins.  Therefore
+there are sentences extant in the Fathers, not only concerning
+contrition and works, but also concerning faith.  But the adversaries,
+since they understand neither the nature of repentance nor the
+language of the Fathers, select passages concerning a part of
+repentance, namely, concerning works; they pass over the declarations
+made elsewhere concerning faith, since they do not understand them.
+
+
+
+
+Part 16
+
+
+Article VI: _Of Confession and Satisfaction._
+
+Good men can easily judge that it is of the greatest importance that
+the true doctrine concerning the abovementioned parts, namely,
+contrition and faith, be preserved.  [For the great fraud of
+indulgences, etc., and the preposterous doctrines of the sophists
+have sufficiently taught us what great vexation and danger arise
+therefrom if a foul stroke is here made.  How many a godly conscience
+under the Papacy sought with great labor the true way, and in the
+midst of such darkness did not find it!] Therefore, we have always
+been occupied more with the elucidation of these topics, and have
+disputed nothing as yet concerning confession and satisfaction.  For
+we also retain confession, especially on account of the absolution,
+as being the word of God which, by divine authority, the power of the
+keys pronounces upon individuals.  Therefore it would be wicked to
+remove private absolution from the Church.  Neither do they
+understand what the remission of sins or the power of the keys is, if
+there are any who despise private absolution.  But in reference to
+the enumeration of offenses in confession, we have said above that we
+hold that it is not necessary by divine right.  For the objection,
+made by some, that a judge ought to investigate a ease before he
+pronounces upon it, pertains in no way to this subject; because the
+ministry of absolution is favor or grace, it is not a legal process,
+or law.  [For God is the Judge, who has committed to the apostles,
+not the office of judges, but the administration of grace namely, to
+acquit those who desire, etc.] Therefore ministers in the Church have
+the command to remit sin, they have not the command to investigate
+secret sins.  And indeed, they absolve from those that we do not
+remember; for which reason absolution, which is the voice of the
+Gospel remitting sins and consoling consciences, does not require
+judicial examination.
+
+And it is ridiculous to transfer hither the saying of Solomon, Prov.
+27, 23: Be thou diligent to know the state of thy flocks.  For
+Solomon says nothing of confession, but gives to the father of a
+family a domestic precept, that he should use what is his own, and
+abstain from what is another's, and he commands him to take care of
+his own property diligently, yet in such a way that, with his mind
+occupied with the increase of his resources, he should not cast away
+the fear of God, or faith or care in God's Word.  But our adversaries,
+by a wonderful metamorphosis, transform passages of Scripture to
+whatever meaning they please.  [They produce from the Scriptures
+black and white, as they please, contrary to the natural meaning of
+the clear words.] Here to know signifies with them to hear
+confessions, the state, not the outward life, but the secrets of
+conscience; and the flocks signify men.  [Sable, we think means a
+school within which there are such doctors and orators.  But it has
+happened aright to those who thus despise the Holy Scriptures and all
+fine arts that they make gross mistakes in grammar.] The
+interpretation is assuredly neat, and is worthy of these despisers of
+the pursuits of eloquence.  But if any one desires by a similitude to
+transfer a precept from a father of a family to a pastor of a Church,
+he ought certainly to interpret "state" [V. _vultus_, countenance] as
+applying to the outward life.  This similitude will be more
+consistent.
+
+But let us omit such matters as these.  At different times in the
+Psalms mention is made of confession, as, Ps. 32, 5: I said, I will
+confess my transgressions unto the Lord; and Thou forgavest the
+iniquity of my sin.  Such confession of sin which is made to God is
+contrition itself.  For when confession is made to God, it must be
+made with the heart not alone with the voice, as is made on the stage
+by actors.  Therefore, such confession is contrition, in which,
+feeling God's wrath, we confess that God is justly angry, and that He
+cannot be appeased by our works, and nevertheless we seek for mercy
+because of God's promise.  Such is the following confession, Ps. 51,
+4: Against Thee only have I sinned, that Thou mightest be justified
+and be clear when Thou judgest, i.e., "I confess that I am a sinner,
+and have merited eternal wrath, nor can I set my righteousnesses, my
+merits, against Thy wrath; accordingly, I declare that Thou art just
+when Thou condemnest and punishest us, I declare that Thou art clear
+when hypocrites judge Thee to be unjust in punishing them or in
+condemning the well-deserving.  Yea, our merits cannot be opposed to
+Thy judgment but we shall thus be justified, namely, if Thou
+justifiest us, if through Thy mercy Thou accountest us righteous."
+Perhaps some one may also cite Jas. 5, 16: Confess your faults one to
+another.  But here the reference is not to confession that is to be
+made to the priests, but, in general, concerning the reconciliation
+of brethren to each other.  For it commands that the confession be
+mutual.
+
+Again, our adversaries will condemn many most generally received
+teachers if they will contend that in confession an enumeration of
+offenses is necessary according to divine Law.  For although we
+approve of confession, and judge that some examination is of
+advantage in order that men may be the better instructed [young and
+inexperienced persons be questioned], yet the matter must be so
+controlled that snares are not cast upon consciences, which never
+will be tranquil if they think that they cannot obtain the remission
+of sins unless this precise enumeration be made.  That which the
+adversaries have expressed in the _Confutation_ is certainly most
+false, namely, that a full confession is necessary for salvation.
+For this is impossible.  And what snares they here cast upon the
+conscience when they require a full confession!  For when will
+conscience be sure that the confession is complete?  In the
+Church-writers mention is made of confession, but they do not speak
+of this enumeration of secret offenses, but of the rite of public
+repentance.  For as the fallen or notorious [those guilty of public
+crimes] were not received without fixed satisfactions [without a
+public ceremony or reproof], they made confession on this account to
+the presbyters, in order that satisfactions might be prescribed to
+them according to the measure of their offenses.  This entire matter
+contained nothing similar to the enumeration concerning which we are
+disputing.  This confession was made, not because the remission of
+sins before God could not occur without it, but because satisfactions
+could not be prescribed unless the kind of offense were first known.
+For different offenses had different canons.
+
+And from this rite of public repentance there has been left the word
+"satisfaction." For the holy Fathers were unwilling to receive the
+fallen or the notorious, unless as far as it was possible, their
+repentance had been first examined into and exhibited publicly.  And
+there seem to have been many causes for this.  For to chastise those
+who had fallen served as an example, just as also the gloss upon the
+degrees admonishes, and it was improper immediately to admit
+notorious men to the communion [without their being tested].  These
+customs have long since grown obsolete.  Neither is it necessary to
+restore them, because they are not necessary for the remission of
+sins before God.  Neither did the Fathers hold this, namely, that men
+merit the remission of sins through such customs or such works,
+although these spectacles [such outward ceremonies] usually lead
+astray the ignorant to think that by these works they merit the
+remission of sins before God.  But if any one thus holds, he holds to
+the faith of a Jew and heathen.  For also the heathen had certain
+expiations for offenses through which they imagined to be reconciled
+to God.  Now, however, although the custom has become obsolete, the
+name satisfaction still remains, and a trace of the custom also
+remains of prescribing in confession certain satisfactions, which
+they define as works that are not due.  We call them canonical
+satisfactions.  Of these we hold, just as of the enumeration, that
+canonical satisfactions [these public ceremonies] are not necessary
+by divine Law for the remission of sins, just as those ancient
+exhibitions of satisfactions in public repentance were not necessary
+by divine Law for the remission of sins.  For the belief concerning
+faith must be retained, that by faith we obtain remission of sins for
+Christ's sake, and not for the sake of our works that precede or
+follow [when we are converted or born anew in Christ].  And for this
+reason we have discussed especially the question of satisfactions,
+that by submitting to them the righteousness of faith be not obscured,
+or men think that for the sake of these works they obtain remission
+of sins.  And many sayings that are current in the schools aid the
+error, such as that which they give in the definition of satisfaction,
+namely, that it is wrought for the purpose of appeasing the divine
+displeasure.
+
+But, nevertheless, the adversaries acknowledge that satisfactions are
+of no profit for the remission of guilt.  Yet they imagine that
+satisfactions are of profit in redeeming from the punishments,
+whether of purgatory or other punishments.  For thus they teach that
+in the remission of sins, God [without means, alone] remits the guilt,
+and yet, because it belongs to divine justice to punish sin, that He
+commutes eternal into temporal punishment.  They add further that a
+part of this temporal punishment is remitted by the power of the keys,
+but that the rest is redeemed by means of satisfactions.  Neither
+can it be understood of what punishments a part is remitted by the
+power of the keys, unless they say that a part of the punishments of
+purgatory is remitted, from which it would follow that satisfactions
+are only punishments redeeming from purgatory.  And these
+satisfactions, they say, avail even though they are rendered by those
+who have relapsed into mortal sin, as though indeed the divine
+displeasure could be appeased by those who are in mortal sin.  This
+entire matter is fictitious, and recently fabricated without the
+authority of Scripture and the old writers of the Church.  And not
+even Longobardus speaks in this way of satisfactions.  The
+scholastics saw that there were satisfactions in the Church; and they
+did not notice that these exhibitions had been instituted both for
+the purpose of example, and for testing those who desired to be
+received by the Church.  In a word, they did not see that it was a
+discipline, and entirely a secular matter.  Accordingly, they
+superstitiously imagined that these avail not for discipline before
+the Church, but for appeasing God.  And just as in other places they
+frequently, with great inaptness, have confounded spiritual and civil
+matters [the kingdom of Christ, which is spiritual, and the kingdom
+of the world, and external discipline], the same happens also with
+regard to satisfactions.  But the gloss on the canons at various
+places testifies that these observances were instituted for the sake
+of church discipline [should serve alone for an example before the
+Church].
+
+Let us see, moreover, how in the Confutation which they had the
+presumption to obtrude upon His Imperial Majesty, they prove these
+figments of theirs.  They cite many passages from the Scriptures, in
+order to impose upon the inexperienced, as though this subject which
+was unknown even in the time of Longobard, had authority from the
+Scriptures.  They bring forward such passages as these: Bring forth,
+therefore, fruits meet for repentance, Matt. 3, 8, Mark 1, 15. Again:
+Yield your members servants to righteousness Rom. 6, 19. Again,
+Christ preaches repentance, Matt. 4, 17: Repent.  Again, Christ Luke
+24, 47, commands the apostles to preach repentance, and Peter
+preaches repentance Acts 2, 38. Afterward they cite certain passages
+of the Fathers and the canons, and conclude that satisfactions in the
+Church are not to be abolished contrary to the plain Gospel and the
+decrees of the Councils and Fathers [against the decision of the Holy
+Church]; nay, even that those who have been absolved by the priest
+ought to bring to perfection the repentance that has been enjoined,
+following the declaration of Paul, Titus 2, 14: Who gave Himself for
+us that He might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto Himself
+a peculiar people, zealous of good works.
+
+May God put to confusion these godless sophists who so wickedly
+distort God's Word to their own most vain dreams!  What good man is
+there who is not moved by such indignity?" Christ says, Repent, the
+apostles preach repentance; therefore eternal punishments are
+compensated by the punishments of purgatory; therefore the keys have
+the power to remit part of the punishments of purgatory; therefore
+satisfactions redeem the punishments of purgatory"!  Who has taught
+these asses such logic?  Yet this is neither logic nor sophistry, but
+cunning trickery.  Accordingly, they appeal to the expression repent
+in such a way that, when the inexperienced hear such a passage cited
+against us they may derive the opinion that we deny the entire
+repentance.  By these arts they endeavor to alienate minds and to
+enkindle hatred, so that the inexperienced may cry out against us
+[Crucify! crucify!], that such pestilent heretics as disapprove of
+repentance should be removed from their midst.  [Thus they are
+publicly convicted of being liars in this matter.]
+
+But we hope that among good men these calumnies [and
+misrepresentations of Holy Scripture] may make little headway.  And
+God will not long endure such impudence and wickedness.  [They will
+certainly be consumed by the First and Second Commandments.] Neither
+has the Pope of Rome consulted well for his own dignity in employing
+such patrons, because he has entrusted a matter of the greatest
+importance to the judgment of these sophists.  For since we include
+in the Confession almost the sum of the entire Christian doctrine,
+judges should have been appointed to make a declaration concerning
+matters so important and so many and various, whose learning and
+faith would have been more approved than that of these sophists who
+have written this Confutation.  It was particularly becoming for you,
+O Campegius, in accordance with your wisdom, to have taken care that
+in regard to matters of such importance they should write nothing
+which either at this time or with posterity might seem to be able to
+diminish regard for the Roman See.  If the Roman See judges it right
+that all nations should acknowledge her as mistress of the faith, she
+ought to take pains that learned and uncorrupt men make investigation
+concerning matters of religion.  For what will the world judge if at
+any time the writing of the adversaries be brought to light?  What
+will posterity judge concerning these reproachful judicial
+investigations?  You see, O Campegius, that these are the last times,
+in which Christ predicted that there would be the greatest danger to
+religion.  You, therefore, who ought, as it were, to sit on the
+watch-tower and control religious matters, should in these times
+employ unusual wisdom and diligence.  There are many signs which,
+unless you heed them, threaten a change to the Roman state.  And you
+make a mistake if you think that Churches should be retained only by
+force and arms.  Men ask to be taught concerning religion.  How many
+do you suppose there are, not only in Germany, but also in England,
+in Spain, in France, in Italy, and finally even in the city of Rome,
+who, since they see that controversies have arisen concerning of the
+greatest importance, are beginning here and there to doubt, and to be
+silently indignant that you refuse to investigate and judge aright
+subjects of such weight as these; that you do not deliver wavering
+consciences; that you only bid us be overthrown and annihilated by
+arms?  There are many good men to whom this doubt is more bitter than
+death.  You do not consider sufficiently how great a subject religion
+is, if you think that good men are in anguish for a slight cause
+whenever they begin to doubt concerning any dogma.  And this doubt
+can have no other effect than to produce the greatest bitterness of
+hatred against those who, when they ought to heal consciences, plant
+themselves in the way of the explanation of the subject.  We do not
+here say that you ought to fear God's judgment.  For the hierarchs
+think that they can easily provide against this, for since they hold
+the keys, of course they can open heaven for themselves whenever they
+wish.  We are speaking of the judgments of men and the silent desires
+of all nations, which, indeed, at this time require that these
+matters be investigated and decided in such a manner that good minds
+may be healed and freed from doubt.  For, in accordance with your
+wisdom, you can easily decide what will take place if at any time
+this hatred against you should break forth.  But by this favor you
+will be able to bind to yourself all nations, as all sane men regard
+it as the highest and most important matter, if you heal doubting
+consciences.  We have said these things not because we doubt
+concerning our Confession.  For we know that it is true, godly, and
+useful to godly consciences.  But it is likely that there are many in
+many places who waver concerning matters of no light importance, and
+yet do not hear such teachers as are able to heal their consciences.
+
+But let us return to the main point.  The Scriptures cited by the
+adversaries speak in no way of canonical satisfactions, and of the
+opinions of the scholastics, since it is evident that the latter were
+only recently born.  Therefore it is pure slander when they distort
+Scripture to their own opinions.  We say that good fruits, good works
+in every kind of life, ought to follow repentance, i.e., conversion
+or regeneration [the renewal of the Holy Ghost in the heart].
+Neither can there be true conversion or true contrition where
+mortifications of the flesh and good fruits do not follow [if we do
+not externally render good works and Christian patience].  True
+terrors, true griefs of mind, do not allow the body to indulge in
+sensual pleasures, and true faith is not ungrateful to God, neither
+does it despise God's commandments.  In a word, there is no inner
+repentance unless it also produces outwardly mortifications of the
+flesh.  We say also that this is the meaning of John when he says,
+Matt. 3, 8: Bring forth, therefore, fruits meet for repentance.
+Likewise of Paul when he says Rom. 6, 19: Yield your members servants
+to righteousness; just as he likewise says elsewhere, Rom. 12, 1:
+Present your bodies a living sacrifice, etc. And when Christ says
+Matt. 4, 17: Repent, He certainly speaks of the entire repentance, of
+the entire newness of life and its fruits, He does not speak of those
+hypocritical satisfactions which, the scholastics avail for
+compensating the punishment of purgatory or other punishments when
+they are made by those who are in mortal sin.
+
+Many arguments, likewise, can be collected to show that these
+passages of Scripture pertain in no way to scholastic satisfactions.
+These men imagine that satisfactions are works that are not due
+[which we are not obliged to do]; but Scripture, in these passages,
+requires works that are due [which we are obliged to do].  For this
+word of Christ, Repent, is the word of a commandment.  Likewise the
+adversaries write that if any one who goes to confession should
+refuse to undertake satisfactions, he does not sin, but will pay
+these penalties in purgatory.  Now the following passages are,
+without controversy, precepts pertaining to this life: Repent; Bring
+forth fruits meet for repentance; Yield your members servants to
+righteousness.  Therefore they cannot be distorted to the
+satisfactions which it is permitted to refuse.  For to refuse God's
+commandments is not permitted.  [For God's commands are not thus left
+to our discretion.] Thirdly, indulgences remit these satisfactions,
+as is taught by the Chapter, _De Poenitentiis et Remissione_,
+beginning _Quum ex eo_, etc. But indulgences do not free us from the
+commandments: Repent; Bring forth fruits meet for repentance.
+Therefore it is manifest that these passages of Scripture have been
+wickedly distorted to apply to canonical satisfactions.  See further
+what follows.  If the punishments of purgatory are satisfactions, or
+satispassions [sufferings sufficient], or if satisfactions are a
+redemption of the punishments of purgatory, do these passages also
+give commandment that souls be punished in purgatory?  [The
+above-cited passages of Christ and Paul must also show and prove that
+souls enter purgatory and there suffer pain.] Since this must follow
+from the opinions of the adversaries, these passages should be
+interpreted in a new way [these passages should put on new coats]:
+Bring forth fruits meet for repentance; Repent, i.e., suffer the
+punishments of purgatory after this life.  But we do not care about
+refuting in more words these absurdities of the adversaries.  For it
+is evident that Scripture speaks of works that are due, of the entire
+newness of life, and not of these observances of works that are not
+due, of which the adversaries speak.  And yet, by these figments they
+defend orders [of monks], the sale of Masses and infinite observances,
+namely, as works which, if they do not make satisfaction for guilt,
+yet make satisfaction for punishment.
+
+Since, therefore, the passages of Scripture cited do not say that
+eternal punishments are to be compensated by works that are not due,
+the adversaries are rash in affirming that these satisfactions are
+compensated by canonical satisfactions.  Nor do the keys have the
+command to commute some punishments, and likewise to remit a part of
+the punishments.  For where are such things [dreams and lies] read in
+the Scriptures?  Christ speaks of the remission of sins when He says
+Matt. 18, 18: Whatsoever ye shall loose, etc. [i.e.], sin being
+forgiven, death eternal is taken away, and life eternal bestowed.
+Nor does Whatsoever ye shall bind speak of the imposing of
+punishments, but of retaining the sins of those who are not converted.
+Moreover, the declaration of Longobard concerning remitting a part
+of the punishments has been taken from the canonical punishments; a
+part of these the pastors remitted.  Although, we hold that
+repentance ought to bring forth good fruits for the sake of God's
+glory and command, and good fruits, true fastings, true prayers, true
+alms, etc., have the commands of God, yet in the Holy Scriptures we
+nowhere find this, namely, that eternal punishments are not remitted
+except on account of the punishment of purgatory or canonical
+satisfactions, i.e., on account of certain works not due, or that the
+power of the keys has the command to commute their punishments or to
+remit a portion.  These things the adversaries were to prove.  [This
+they will not attempt.]
+
+Besides, the death of Christ is a satisfaction not only for guilt,
+but also for eternal death, according to Hos. 13, 14: 0 death, I will
+be thy death.  How monstrous, therefore, it is to say that the
+satisfaction of Christ redeemed from the guilt, and our punishments
+redeem from eternal death, as the expression, I will be thy death,
+ought then to be understood, not concerning Christ, but concerning
+our works, and, indeed, not concerning the works commanded by God,
+but concerning some frigid observances devised by men!  And these are
+said to abolish death, even when they are wrought in mortal sin.  It
+is incredible with what grief we recite these absurdities of the
+adversaries, which cannot but cause one who considers them to be
+enraged against such doctrines of demons, which the devil has spread
+in the Church in order to suppress the knowledge of the Law and
+Gospel, of repentance and quickening, and the benefits of Christ.
+For of the Law they speak thus: "God, condescending to our weakness,
+has given to man a measure of those things to which of necessity he
+is bound and this is the observance of precepts, so that from what is
+left, i.e., from works of supererogation, he can render satisfaction
+with reference to offenses that have been committed." Here men
+imagine that they can observe the Law of God in such a manner as to
+be able to do even more than the Law exacts.  But Scripture
+everywhere exclaims that we are far distant from the perfection which
+the Law requires.  Yet these men imagine that the Law of God has been
+comprised in outward and civil righteousness; they do not see that it
+requires true love to God "with the whole heart," etc., and condemns
+the entire concupiscence in the nature.  Therefore no one does as
+much as the Law requires.  Hence their imagination that we can do
+more is ridiculous.  For although we can perform outward works not
+commanded by God's Law [which Paul calls beggarly ordinances], yet
+the confidence that satisfaction is rendered God's Law [yea, that
+more is done than God demands] is vain and wicked.  And true prayers,
+true alms, true fastings, have God's command; and where they have
+God's command, they cannot without sin be omitted.  But these works,
+in so far as they have not been commanded by God's Law, but have a
+fixed form derived from human rule are works of human traditions of
+which Christ says, Matt. 15, 9: In vain they do worship Me with the
+commandments of men, such as certain fasts appointed not for
+restraining the flesh, but that, by this work, honor may be given to
+God, as Scotus says, and eternal death be made up for; likewise, a
+fixed number of prayers, a fixed measure of alms when they are
+rendered in such a way that this measure is a worship _ex opere
+operato_ giving honor to God, and making up for eternal death.  For
+they ascribe satisfaction to these _ex opere operato_, because they
+teach that they avail even in those who are in mortal sin.  There are
+works which depart still farther from God's commands, as [rosaries
+and] pilgrimages; and of these there is a great variety: one makes a
+journey [to St. Jacob] clad in mail, and another with bare feet.
+Christ calls these "vain acts of worship," and hence they do not
+serve to appease God's displeasure, as the adversaries say.  And yet
+they adorn these works with magnificent titles; they call them works
+of supererogation, to them the honor is ascribed of being a price
+paid instead of eternal death.  Thus they are preferred to the works
+of God's commandments [the true works expressly mentioned in the Ten
+Commandments].  In this way the Law of God is obscured in two ways,
+one, because satisfaction is thought to be rendered God's Law by
+means of outward and civil works, the other, because human traditions
+are added whose works are preferred to the works of the divine Law.
+
+
+
+
+Part 17
+
+
+In the second place, repentance and grace are obscured.  For eternal
+death is not atoned for by this compensation of works because it is
+idle, and does not in the present life taste of death.  Something
+else must be opposed to death when it tries us.  For just as the
+wrath of God is overcome by faith in Christ, so death is overcome by
+faith in Christ.  Just as Paul says, 1 Cor. 16, 67: But thanks be to
+God which giveth us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ.  He
+does not say: "Who giveth us the victory if we oppose our
+satisfactions against death." The adversaries treat of idle
+speculations concerning the remission of guilt, and do not see how in
+the remission of guilt, the heart is freed by faith in Christ from
+God's anger and eternal death.  Since, therefore, the death of Christ
+is a satisfaction for eternal death, and since the adversaries
+themselves confess that these works of satisfactions are works that
+are not due, but are works of human traditions, of which Christ says,
+Matt. 16, 9, that they are vain acts of worship, we can safely affirm
+that canonical satisfactions are not necessary by divine Law for the
+remission of guilt, or eternal punishment, or the punishment of
+purgatory.
+
+But the adversaries object that vengeance or punishment is necessary
+for repentance, because Augustine says that repentance is vengeance
+punishing, etc..  We grant that vengeance or punishment is necessary
+in repentance, yet not as merit or price, as the adversaries imagine
+that satisfactions are.  But vengeance is in repentance formally, i.e.,
+because regeneration itself occurs by a perpetual mortification of
+the oldness of life.  The saying of Scotus may indeed be very
+beautiful, that _poenitentia_ is so called because it is, as it were,
+_poenae tenentia_, holding to punishment.  But of what punishment, of
+what vengeance, does Augustine speak?  Certainly of true punishment,
+of true vengeance, namely, of contrition, of true terrors.  Nor do we
+here exclude the outward mortifications of the body, which follow
+true grief of mind.  The adversaries make a great mistake if they
+imagine that canonical satisfactions [their juggler's tricks,
+rosaries, pilgrimages, and such like] are more truly punishments than
+are true terrors in the heart.  It is most foolish to distort the
+name of punishment to these frigid satisfactions, and not to refer
+them to those horrible terrors of conscience of which David says, Ps.
+18, 4; 2 Sam. 22, 5: The sorrows of death compassed me.  Who would
+not rather, clad in mail and equipped, seek the church of James, the
+basilica of Peter, etc., than bear that ineffable violence of grief
+which exists even in persons of ordinary lives, if there be true
+repentance?
+
+But they say that it belongs to God's justice to punish sin.  He
+certainly punishes it in contrition, when in these terrors He shows
+His wrath.  Just as David indicates when he prays, Ps. 6, 1: 0 Lord,
+rebuke me not in Thine anger.  And Jeremiah, 10, 24: 0 Lord, correct
+me, but with judgment; not in Thine anger, lest Thou bring me to
+nothing.  Here indeed the most bitter punishments are spoken of.  And
+the adversaries acknowledge that contrition can be so great that
+satisfaction is not required.  Contrition is therefore more truly a
+punishment than is satisfaction.  Besides, saints are subject to
+death, and all general afflictions, as Peter says, 1 Ep. 4, 17: For
+the time is come that judgment must begin at the house of God; and if
+it first begin at us, what shall the end be of them that obey not the
+Gospel of God?  And although these afflictions are for the most part
+the punishments of sin, yet in the godly they have a better end,
+namely, to exercise them, that they may learn amidst trials to seek
+God's aid, to acknowledge the distrust of their own hearts, etc., as
+Paul says of himself, 2 Cor. 1, 9: But we had the sentence of death
+in ourselves, that we should not trust in ourselves, but in God which
+raiseth the dead.  And Isaiah says, 26, 16: They poured out prayer
+when Thy chastening was upon them i.e., afflictions are a discipline
+by which God exercises the saints.  Likewise afflictions are
+inflicted because of present sin, since in the saints they mortify
+and extinguish concupiscence, so that they may be renewed by the
+Spirit, as Paul says, Rom. 8, 10: The body is dead because of sin, i.
+e., it is mortified [more and more every day] because of present sin
+which is still left in the flesh.  And death itself serves this
+purpose, namely, to abolish this flesh of sin, that we may rise
+absolutely new.  Neither is there now in the death of the believer,
+since by faith he has overcome the terrors of death, that sting and
+sense of wrath of which Paul speaks 1 Cor. 15, 56: The sting of death
+is sin; and the strength of sin is the Law.  This strength of sin,
+this sense of wrath, is truly a punishment as long as it is present;
+without this sense of wrath, death is not properly a punishment.
+Moreover, canonical satisfactions do not belong to these punishments;
+as the adversaries say that by the power of the keys a part of the
+punishments is remitted.  Likewise, according to these very men, the
+keys remit the satisfactions, and the punishments on account of which
+the satisfactions are made.  But it is evident that the common
+afflictions are not removed by the power of the keys.  And if they
+wish to be understood concerning punishments, why do they add that
+satisfaction is to be rendered in purgatory?
+
+They oppose the example of Adam, and also of David, who was punished
+for his adultery.  From these examples they derive the universal rule
+that peculiar temporal punishments in the remission of sins
+correspond to individual sins.  It has been said before that saints
+suffer punishments, which are works of God; they suffer contrition or
+terrors, they also suffer other common afflictions.  Thus, for
+example, some suffer punishments of their own that have been imposed
+by God.  And these punishments pertain in no way to the keys because
+the keys neither can impose nor remit them, but God, without the
+ministry of the keys, imposes and remits them [as He will].
+
+Neither does the universal rule follow: Upon David a peculiar
+punishment was imposed, therefore, in addition to common afflictions,
+there is another punishment of purgatory, in which each degree
+corresponds to each sin.  Where does Scripture teach that we cannot
+be freed from eternal death except by the compensation of certain
+punishments in addition to common afflictions?  But, on the other
+hand, it most frequently teaches that the remission of sins occurs
+freely for Christ's sake, that Christ is the Victor of sin and death.
+Therefore the merit of satisfaction is not to be patched upon this.
+And although afflictions still remain, yet Scripture interprets these
+as the mortifications of present sin [to kill and humble the old
+Adam], and not as the compensations of eternal death or as prices for
+eternal death.
+
+Job is excused that he was not afflicted on account of past evil
+deeds, therefore afflictions are not always punishments or signs of
+wrath.  Yea, terrified consciences are to be taught that other ends
+of afflictions are more important [that they should learn to regard
+troubles far differently, namely, as signs of grace], lest they think
+that they are rejected by God when in afflictions they see nothing
+but God's punishment and anger.  The other more important ends are to
+be considered namely, that God is doing His strange work so that He
+may he able to do His own work, etc., as Isaiah teaches in a long
+discourse, chap. 28. And when the disciples asked concerning the
+blind man who sinned, John 9, 2. 3, Christ replies that the cause of
+his blindness is not sin, but that the works of God should be made
+manifest in him.  And in Jeremiah, 49, 12, it is said: They whose
+judgment was not to drink of the cup have assuredly drunken.  Thus
+the prophets and John the Baptist and other saints were killed.
+Therefore afflictions are not always punishments for certain past
+deeds, but they are the works of God, intended for our profit, and
+that the power of God might be made more manifest in our weakness
+[how He can help in the midst of death].
+
+Thus Paul says, 2 Cor. 12, 5. 9: The strength of God is made perfect
+in my weakness.  Therefore, because of God's will, our bodies ought
+to be sacrifices, declare our obedience [and patience], and not to
+compensate for eternal death, for which God has another price namely,
+the death of His own Son.  And in this sense Gregory interprets even
+the punishment of David when he says: If God on account of that sin
+had threatened that he would thus be humbled by his son, why, when
+the sin was forgiven, did He fulfil that which He had threatened
+against him?  The reply is that this remission was made that man
+might not be hindered from receiving eternal life, but that the
+example of the threatening followed, in order that the piety of the
+man might be exercised and tested even in this humility.  Thus also
+God inflicted upon man death of body on account of sin, and after the
+remission of sins He did not remove it, for the sake of exercising
+justice namely, in order that the righteousness of those who are
+sanctified might be exercised and tested.
+
+Nor, indeed, are common calamities [as war, famine, and similar
+calamities], properly speaking, removed by these works of canonical
+satisfactions, i.e., by these works of human traditions, which, they
+say, _avail ex opere operato_, in such a way that, even though they
+are wrought in mortal sin, yet they redeem from the punishments.
+[And the adversaries themselves confess that they impose
+satisfactions, not on account of such common calamities but on
+account of purgatory; hence, their satisfactions are pure
+imaginations and dreams.] And when the passage of Paul, 1 Cor. 11, 31,
+is cited against us: If we would judge ourselves, we should not be
+judged by the Lord [they conclude therefrom that, if we impose
+punishment upon ourselves, God will judge us the more graciously],
+the word to judge ought to be understood of the entire repentance and
+due fruits, not of works which are not due.  Our adversaries pay the
+penalty for despising grammar when they understand to judge to be the
+same as to make a pilgrimage clad in mail to the church of St. James,
+or similar works.  To judge signifies the entire repentance, it
+signifies to condemn sins.  This condemnation truly occurs in
+contrition and the change of life.  The entire repentance, contrition,
+faith, the good fruits, obtain the mitigation of public and private
+punishments and calamities, as Isaiah teaches chap. 1, 17, 19: Cease
+to do evil; learn to do well, etc. Though your sins be as scarlet,
+they shall be white as snow.  If ye be willing and obedient, ye shall
+eat the good of the land.  Neither should a most important and
+salutary meaning be transferred from the entire repentance, and from
+works due or commanded by God, to the satisfactions and works of
+human traditions.  And this it is profitable to teach that common
+evils are mitigated by our repentance and by the true fruits of
+repentance, by good works wrought from faith, not, as these men
+imagine, wrought in mortal sin.  And here belongs the example of the
+Ninevites, Jonah 3, 10, who by their repentance (we speak of the
+entire repentance) were reconciled to God, and obtained the favor
+that their city was not destroyed.
+
+Moreover, the making mention, by the Fathers, of satisfaction, and
+the framing of canons by the councils, we have said above was a
+matter of church-discipline instituted on account of the example.
+Nor did they hold that this discipline is necessary for the remission
+either of the guilt or of the punishment.  For if some of them made
+mention of purgatory, they interpret it not as compensation for
+eternal punishment [which only Christ makes], not as satisfaction,
+but as purification of imperfect souls.  Just as Augustine says that
+venial [daily] offenses are consumed i.e., distrust towards God and
+other similar dispositions are mortified.  Now and then the writers
+transfer the term satisfaction from the rite itself or spectacle, to
+signify true mortification.  Thus Augustine says: True satisfaction
+is to cut off the causes of sin, i.e., to mortify the flesh, likewise
+to restrain the flesh, not in order that eternal punishments may be
+compensated for but so that the flesh may not allure to sin.
+
+Thus concerning restitution, Gregory says that repentance is false if
+it does not satisfy those whose property we have taken.  For he who
+still steals does not truly grieve that he has stolen or robbed.  For
+he is a thief or robber, so long as he is the unjust possessor of the
+property of another.  This civil satisfaction is necessary, because
+it is written Eph. 4, 28: Let him that stole, steal no more.
+Likewise Chrysostom says: In the heart, contrition; in the mouth,
+confession; in the work, entire humility.  This amounts to nothing
+against us.  Good works ought to follow repentance, it ought to be
+repentance, not simulation, but a change of the entire life for the
+better.
+
+Likewise, the Fathers wrote that it is sufficient if once in life
+this public or ceremonial penitence occur, about which the canons
+concerning satisfactions have been made.  Therefore it can be
+understood that they held that these canons are not necessary for the
+remission of sins.  For in addition to this ceremonial penitence,
+they frequently wish that penitence be rendered otherwise, where
+canons of satisfactions were not required.
+
+The composers of the Confutation write that the abolition of
+satisfactions contrary to the plain Gospel is not to be endured.  We,
+therefore, have thus far shown that these canonical satisfactions, i.
+e., works not due and that are to be performed in order to compensate
+for punishment, have not the command of the Gospel.  The subject
+itself shows this.  If works of satisfaction are works which are not
+due, why do they cite the plain Gospel?  For if the Gospel would
+command that punishments be compensated for by such works, the works
+would already be due.  But thus they speak in order to impose upon
+the inexperienced, and they cite testimonies which speak of works
+that are due, although they themselves in their own satisfactions
+prescribe works that are not due.  Yea, in their schools they
+themselves concede that satisfactions can be refused without [mortal]
+sin.  Therefore they here write falsely that we are compelled by the
+plain Gospel to undertake these canonical satisfactions.
+
+But we have already frequently testified that repentance ought to
+produce good fruits: and what the good fruits are the [Ten]
+Commandments teach, namely, [truly and from the heart most highly to
+esteem, fear, and love God, joyfully to call upon Him in need],
+prayer, thanksgiving, the confession of the Gospel [hearing this
+Word], to teach the Gospel, to obey parents and magistrates, to be
+faithful to one's calling, not to kill, not to retain hatred, but to
+be forgiving [to be agreeable and kind to one's neighbor], to give to
+the needy, so far as we can according to our means, not to commit
+fornication or adultery, but to restrain and bridle and chastise the
+flesh, not for a compensation of eternal punishment, but so as not to
+obey the devil, or offend the Holy Ghost, likewise, to speak the
+truth.  These fruits have God's injunction, and ought to be brought
+forth for the sake of God's glory and command; and they have their
+rewards also.  But that eternal punishments are not remitted except
+on account of the compensation rendered by certain traditions or by
+purgatory, Scripture does not teach.  Indulgences were formerly
+remission of these public observances, so that men should not be
+excessively burdened.  But if, by human authority, satisfactions and
+punishments can be remitted, this compensation, therefore, is not
+necessary by divine Law, for a divine Law is not annulled by human
+authority.  Furthermore, since the custom has now of itself become
+obsolete and the bishops have passed it by in silence, there is no
+necessity for these remissions.  And yet the name indulgences
+remained.  And just as satisfactions were understood not with
+reference to external discipline, but with reference to the
+compensation of punishment, so indulgences were incorrectly
+understood to free souls from purgatory.  But the keys have not the
+power of binding and loosing except upon earth, according to Matt. 16,
+19 : Whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven,
+and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.
+Although as we have said above, the keys have not the power to impose
+penalties, or to institute rites of worship, but only the command to
+remit sins to those who are converted, and to convict and
+excommunicate those who are unwilling to be converted.  For just as
+to loose signifies to remit sins, so to bind signifies not to remit
+sins.  For Christ speaks of a spiritual kingdom.  And the command of
+God is that the ministers of the Gospel should absolve those who are
+converted, according to 2 Cor. 10, 8: The authority which the Lord
+hath given us for edification.  Therefore the reservation of eases is
+a secular affair.  For it is a reservation of canonical punishment;
+it is not a reservation of guilt before God in those who are truly
+converted.  Therefore the adversaries judge aright when they confess
+that in the article of death the reservation of eases ought not to
+hinder absolution.
+
+We have set forth the sum of our doctrine concerning repentance,
+which we certainly know is godly and salutary to good minds [and
+highly necessary].  And if good men will compare our [yea, Christ's
+and His apostles'] doctrine with the very confused discussions of our
+adversaries, they will perceive that the adversaries have omitted the
+doctrine [without which no one can teach or learn anything that is
+substantial and Christian] concerning faith justifying and consoling
+godly hearts.  They will also see that the adversaries invent many
+things concerning the merits of attrition, concerning the endless
+enumeration of offenses, concerning satisfactions, they say things
+[that touch neither earth nor heaven] agreeing neither with human nor
+divine law, and which not even the adversaries themselves can
+satisfactorily explain.
+
+
+
+
+Part 18
+
+
+Article XIII (VII): _Of the Number and Use of the Sacraments._
+
+In the Thirteenth Article the adversaries approve our statement that
+the Sacraments are not only marks of profession among men, as some
+imagine, but that they are rather signs and testimonies of God's will
+toward us, through which God moves hearts to believe [are not mere
+signs whereby men may recognize each other, as the watchword in war,
+livery, etc., but are efficacious signs and sure testimonies, etc.].
+But here they bid us also count seven sacraments.  We hold that it
+should be maintained that the matters and ceremonies instituted in
+the Scriptures, whatever the number, be not neglected.  Neither do we
+believe it to be of any consequence, though, for the purpose of
+teaching, different people reckon differently, provided they still
+preserve aright the matters handed down in Scripture.  Neither have
+the ancients reckoned in the same manner.  [But concerning this
+number of seven sacraments, the fact is that the Fathers have not
+been uniform in their enumeration, thus also these seven ceremonies
+are not equally necessary.]
+
+If we call Sacraments rites which have the command of God and to
+which the promise of grace has been added, it is easy to decide what
+are properly Sacraments.  For rites instituted by men will not in
+this way be Sacraments properly so called.  For it does not belong to
+human authority to promise grace.  Therefore signs instituted without
+God's command are not sure signs of grace, even though they perhaps
+instruct the rude [children or the uncultivated], or admonish as to
+something [as a painted cross].  Therefore Baptism, the Lord's Supper,
+and Absolution, which is the Sacrament of Repentance, are truly
+Sacraments.  For these rites have God's command and the promise of
+grace, which is peculiar to the New Testament.  For when we are
+baptized, when we eat the Lord's body, when we are absolved, our
+hearts must be firmly assured that God truly forgives us for Christ's
+sake.  And God, at the same time, by the Word and by the rite, moves
+hearts to believe and conceive faith, just as Paul says, Rom. 10, 17:
+Faith cometh by hearing.  But just as the Word enters the ear in
+order to strike our heart, so the rite itself strikes the eye, in
+order to move the heart.  The effect of the Word and of the rite is
+the same, as it has been well said by Augustine that a Sacrament is a
+visible word, because the rite is received by the eyes, and is, as it
+were, a picture of the Word, signifying the same thing as the Word.
+Therefore the effect of both is the same.
+
+Confirmation and Extreme Unction are rites received from the Fathers
+which not even the Church requires as necessary to salvation, they do
+not have God's command.  Therefore it is not useless to distinguish
+these rites from the former, which have God's express command and a
+clear promise of grace.
+
+The adversaries understand priesthood not of the ministry of the Word,
+and administering the Sacraments to others, but they understand it
+as referring to sacrifice, as though in the New Testament there ought
+to be a priesthood like the Levitical, to sacrifice for the people,
+and merit the remission of sins for others.  We teach that the
+sacrifice of Christ dying on the cross has been sufficient for the
+sins of the whole world, and that there is no need, besides, of other
+sacrifices, as though this were not sufficient for our sins.  Men,
+accordingly, are justified not because of any other sacrifices, but
+because of this one sacrifice of Christ, if they believe that they
+have been redeemed by this sacrifice.  They are accordingly called
+priests, not in order to make any sacrifices for the people as in the
+Law so that by these they may merit remission of sins for the people;
+but they are called to teach the Gospel and administer the Sacraments
+to the people.  Nor do we have another priesthood like the Levitical,
+as the Epistle to the Hebrews sufficiently teaches.  But if
+ordination be understood as applying to the ministry of the Word, we
+are not unwilling to call ordination a sacrament.  For the ministry
+of the Word has God's command and glorious promises, Rom. 1, 16: The
+Gospel is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth.
+Likewise, Is. 55, 11: So shall My Word be that goeth forth out of
+My mouth; it shall not return unto Me void, but it shall accomplish
+that which I please.  If ordination be understood in this way,
+neither will we refuse to call the imposition of hands a sacrament.
+For the Church has the command to appoint ministers, which should be
+most pleasing to us, because we know that God approves this ministry
+and is present in the ministry [that God will preach and work through
+men and those who have been chosen by men].  And it is of advantage,
+so far as can be done, to adorn the ministry of the Word with every
+kind of praise against fanatical men, who dream that the Holy Ghost
+is given not through the Word, but because of certain preparations of
+their own, if they sit unoccupied and silent in obscure places,
+waiting for illumination, as the Enthusiasts formerly taught, and the
+Anabaptists now teach.
+
+Matrimony was not first instituted in the New Testament, but in the
+beginning, immediately on the creation of the human race.  It has,
+moreover, God's command; it has also promises, not indeed properly
+pertaining to the New Testament, but pertaining rather to the bodily
+life.  Wherefore, if any one should wish to call it a sacrament, he
+ought still to distinguish it from those preceding ones [the two
+former ones], which are properly signs of the New Testament, and
+testimonies of grace and the remission of sins.  But if marriage will
+have the name of sacrament for the reason that it has God's command
+other states or offices also, which have God's command, may be called
+sacraments, as, for example, the magistracy.
+
+Lastly, if among the Sacraments all things ought to be numbered which
+have God's command, and to which promises have been added, why do we
+not add prayer, which most truly can be called a sacrament?  For it
+has both God's command and very many promises and if placed among the
+Sacraments, as though in a more eminent place, it would invite men to
+pray.  Alms could also be reckoned here, and likewise afflictions,
+which are even themselves signs, to which God has added promises.
+But let us omit these things.  For no prudent man will strive greatly
+concerning the number or the term, if only those objects still be
+retained which have God's command and promises.
+
+It is still more needful to understand how the Sacraments are to be
+used.  Here we condemn the whole crowd of scholastic doctors, who
+teach that the Sacraments confer grace _ex opere operato_, without a
+good disposition on the part of the one using them, provided he do
+not place a hindrance in the way.  This is absolutely a Jewish
+opinion, to hold that we are justified by a ceremony, without a good
+disposition of the heart, i.e., without faith.  And yet this impious
+and pernicious opinion is taught with great authority throughout the
+entire realm of the Pope.  Paul contradicts this and denies, Rom. 4,
+9, that Abraham was justified by circumcision, but asserts that
+circumcision was a sign presented for exercising faith.  Thus we
+teach that in the use of the Sacraments faith ought to be added,
+which should believe these promises, and receive the promised things,
+there offered in the Sacrament.  And the reason is plain and
+thoroughly grounded.  [This is a certain and true use of the holy
+Sacrament, on which Christian hearts and consciences may risk to rely.
+] The promise is useless unless it is received by faith.  But the
+Sacraments are the signs [and seals] of the promises.  Therefore, in
+the use of the Sacraments faith ought to be added so that, if any one
+use the Lord's Supper, he use it thus.  Because this is a Sacrament
+of the New Testament, as Christ clearly says, he ought for this very
+reason to be confident that what is promised in the New Testament
+namely, the free remission of sins, is offered him.  And let him
+receive this by faith, let him comfort his alarmed conscience, and
+know that these testimonies are not fallacious, but as sure as though
+[and still surer than if] God by a new miracle would declare from
+heaven that it was His will to grant forgiveness.  But of what
+advantage would these miracles and promises be to an unbeliever?  And
+here we speak of special faith which believes the present promise,
+not only that which in general believes that God exists, but which
+believes that the remission of sins is offered.  This use of the
+Sacrament consoles godly and alarmed minds.
+
+Moreover, no one can express in words what abuses in the Church this
+fanatical opinion concerning the opus operate, without a good
+disposition on the part of the one using the Sacraments, has produced.
+Hence the infinite profanation of the Masses, but of this we shall
+speak below.  Neither can a single letter be produced from the old
+writers which in this matter favors the scholastics.  Yea Augustine
+says the contrary, that the faith of the Sacrament, and not the
+Sacrament justifies.  And the declaration of Paul is well known, Rom.
+10, 10: With the heart man believeth unto righteousness.
+
+
+
+
+Part 19
+
+
+Article XIV: _Of Ecclesiastical Order._
+
+The Fourteenth Article, in which we say that in the Church the
+administration of the Sacraments and Word ought to be allowed no one
+unless he be rightly called, they receive, but with the proviso that
+we employ canonical ordination.  Concerning this subject we have
+frequently testified in this assembly that it is our greatest wish to
+maintain church-polity and the grades in the Church [old
+church-regulations and the government of bishops], even though they
+have been made by human authority [provided the bishops allow our
+doctrine and receive our priests].  For we know that
+church-discipline was instituted by the Fathers, in the manner laid
+down in the ancient canons with a good and useful intention.  But the
+bishops either compel our priests to reject and condemn this kind of
+doctrine which we have confessed, or, by a new and unheard-of cruelty,
+they put to death the poor innocent men.  These causes hinder our
+priests from acknowledging such bishops.  Thus the cruelty of the
+bishops is the reason why the canonical government, which we greatly
+desired to maintain, is in some places dissolved.  Let them see to it
+how they will give an account to God for dispersing the Church.  In
+this matter our consciences are not in danger, because since we know
+that our Confession is true, godly, and catholic, we ought not to
+approve the cruelty of those who persecute this doctrine.  And we
+know that the Church is among those who teach the Word of God aright,
+and administer the Sacraments aright and not with those who not only
+by their edicts endeavor to efface God's Word, but also put to death
+those who teach what is right and true towards whom, even though they
+do something contrary to the canons, yet the very canons are milder.
+Furthermore we wish here again to testify that we will gladly
+maintain ecclesiastical and canonical government, provided the
+bishops only cease to rage against our Churches.  This our desire
+will clear us both before God and among all nations to all posterity
+from the imputation against us that the authority of the bishops is
+being undermined, when men read and hear that, although protesting
+against the unrighteous cruelty of the bishops, we could not obtain
+justice.
+
+
+
+
+Part 20
+
+
+Article XV (VIII): _Of Human Traditions in the Church._
+
+In the Fifteenth Article they receive the first part, in which we say
+that such ecclesiastical rites are to be observed as can be observed
+without sin, and are of profit in the Church for tranquility and good
+order.  They altogether condemn the second part, in which we say that
+human traditions instituted to appease God, to merit grace, and make
+satisfactions for sins are contrary to the Gospel.  Although in the
+Confession itself, when treating of the distinction of meats, we have
+spoken at sufficient length concerning traditions, yet certain things
+should be briefly recounted here.
+
+Although we supposed that the adversaries would defend human
+traditions on other grounds, yet we did not think that this would
+come to pass, namely, that they would condemn this article: that we
+do not merit the remission of sins or grace by the observance of
+human traditions.  Since, therefore, this article has been condemned,
+we have an easy and plain case.  The adversaries are now openly
+Judaizing, are openly suppressing the Gospel by the doctrines of
+demons.  For Scripture calls traditions doctrines of demons when it
+is taught that religious rites are serviceable to merit the remission
+of sins and grace.  For they are then obscuring the Gospel, the
+benefit of Christ, and the righteousness of faith.  [For they are
+just as directly contrary to Christ and to the Gospel as are fire and
+water to one another.] The Gospel teaches that by faith we receive
+freely, for Christ's sake, the remission of sins and are reconciled.
+The adversaries, on the other hand, appoint another mediator, namely
+these traditions.  On account of these they wish to acquire remission
+of sins; on account of these they wish to appease God's wrath.  But
+Christ clearly says, Matt. 15, 9: In vain do they worship Me,
+teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.
+
+We have above discussed at length that men are justified by faith
+when they believe that they have a reconciled God, not because of our
+works, but gratuitously, for Christ's sake.  It is certain that this
+is the doctrine of the Gospel, because Paul clearly teaches Eph. 2, 8.
+9: By grace are ye saved, through faith; and that not of yourselves:
+it is the gift of God; not of works.  Now these men say that men
+merit the remission of sins by these human observances.  What else is
+this than to appoint another justifier, a mediator other than Christ?
+Paul says to the Galatians, 5, 4: Christ has become of no effect
+unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the Law, i.e., if you
+hold that by the observance of the Law you merit to be accounted
+righteous before God, Christ will profit you nothing; for what need
+of Christ have those who hold that they are righteous by their own
+observance of the Law?  God has set forth Christ with the promise
+that on account of this Mediator, and not on account of our
+righteousness, He wishes to be propitious to us.  But these men hold
+that God is reconciled and propitious because of the traditions, and
+not because of Christ.  Therefore they take away from Christ the
+honor of Mediator.  Neither, so far as this matter is concerned is
+there any difference between our traditions and the ceremonies of
+Moses.  Paul condemns the ceremonies of Moses, just as he condemns
+traditions, for the reason that they were regarded as works which
+merit righteousness before God.  Thus the office of Christ and the
+righteousness of faith were obscured.  Therefore, the Law being
+removed, and traditions being removed, he contends that the remission
+of sins has been promised not because of our works, but freely,
+because of Christ, if only by faith we receive it.  For the promise
+is not received except by faith.  Since, therefore, by faith we
+receive the remission of sins since by faith we have a propitious God
+for Christ's sake, it is an error and impiety to declare that because
+of these observances we merit the remission of sins.  If any one
+should say here that we do not merit the remission of sins, but that
+those who have already been justified by these traditions merit grace,
+Paul again replies, Gal. 2, 17, that Christ would be the minister of
+sin if after justification we must hold that henceforth we are not
+accounted righteous for Christ's sake, but we ought first, by other
+observances, to merit that we be accounted righteous.  Likewise Gal.
+3, 15: Though it be but a man's covenant, no man addeth thereto.
+Therefore, neither to God's covenant, who promises that for Christ's
+sake He will be propitious to us ought we to add that we must first
+through these observances attain such merit as to be regarded as
+accepted and righteous.
+
+However, what need is there of a long discussion?  No tradition was
+instituted by the holy Fathers with the design that it should merit
+the remission of sins, or righteousness, but they have been
+instituted for the sake of good order in the Church and for the sake
+of tranquillity.  And when any one wishes to institute certain works
+to merit the remission of sins, or righteousness, how will he know
+that these works please God since he has not the testimony of God's
+Word?  How, without God's command and Word, will he render men
+certain of God's will?  Does He not everywhere in the prophets
+prohibit men from instituting, without His commandment, peculiar
+rites of worship?  In Ezek. 20, 18. 19 it is written: Walk ye not in
+the statutes of your fathers, neither observe their judgments, nor
+defile yourselves with their idols: I Am the Lord, your God.  Walk in
+My statutes, and keep My judgements, and do them.  If men are allowed
+to institute religious rites and through these rites merit grace, the
+religious rites of all the heathen will have to be approved, and the
+rites instituted by Jeroboam, 1 Kings 12, 26 f., and by others,
+outside of the Law, will have to be approved.  For what difference
+does it make?  If we have been allowed to institute religious rites
+that are profitable for meriting grace, or righteousness, why was the
+same not allowed the heathen and the Israelites?  But the religious
+rites of the heathen and the Israelites were rejected for the very
+reason that they held that by these they merited remission of sins
+and righteousness, and yet did not know [the highest service of God]
+the righteousness of faith.  Lastly, whence are we rendered certain
+that rites instituted by men without God's command justify, inasmuch
+as nothing can be affirmed of God's will without God's Word?  What if
+God does not approve these services?  How, therefore, do the
+adversaries affirm that they justify?  Without God's Word and
+testimony this cannot be affirmed.  And Paul says, Rom. 14, 23
+Whatsoever is not of faith is sin.  But as these services have no
+testimony of God's Word, conscience must doubt as to whether they
+please God.
+
+And what need is there of words on a subject so manifest?  If the
+adversaries defend these human services as meriting justification,
+grace, and the remission of sins, they simply establish the kingdom
+of Antichrist.  For the kingdom of Antichrist is a new service of God,
+devised by human authority rejecting Christ, just as the kingdom of
+Mahomet has services and works through which it wishes to be
+justified before God; nor does it hold that men are gratuitously
+justified before God by faith for Christ's sake.  Thus the Papacy
+also will be a part of the kingdom of Antichrist if it thus defends
+human services as justifying.  For the honor is taken away from
+Christ when they teach that we are not justified gratuitously by
+faith, for Christ's sake, but by such services, especially when they
+teach that such services are not only useful for justification, but
+are also necessary, as they hold above in Art.  VII, where they
+condemn us for saying that unto true unity of the Church it is not
+necessary that rites instituted by men should everywhere be alike.
+Daniel, 11, 38, indicates that new human services will be the very
+form and constitution of the kingdom of Antichrist.  For he says thus:
+But in his estate shall he honor the god of forges; and a god whom
+his fathers knew not shall he honor with gold and silver and precious
+stones.  Here he describes new services, because he says that such a
+god shall be worshiped as the fathers were ignorant of.  For although
+the holy Fathers themselves had both rites and traditions, yet they
+did not hold that these matters are useful or necessary for
+justification they did not obscure the glory and office Christ, but
+taught that we are justified by faith for Christ's sake, and not for
+the sake of these human services.  But they observed human rites for
+the sake of bodily advantage, that the people might know at what time
+they should assemble; that, for the sake of example, all things in
+the churches might be done in order and becomingly; lastly, that the
+common people might receive a sort of training.  For the distinctions
+of times and the variety of rites are of service in admonishing the
+common people.  The Fathers had these reasons for maintaining the
+rites, and for these reasons we also judge it to be right that
+traditions [good customs] be maintained.  And we are greatly
+surprised that the adversaries [contrary to the entire Scriptures of
+the Apostles, contrary to the Old and New Testaments] contend for
+another design of traditions, namely, that they may merit the
+remission of sins, grace, or justification.  What else is this than
+to honor God with gold and silver and precious stones [as Daniel
+says], i.e., to hold that God becomes reconciled by a variety in
+clothing, ornaments, and by similar rites [many kinds of church
+decorations, banners, tapers], as are infinite in human traditions?
+
+Paul writes to the Colossians, 2, 23, that traditions have a show of
+wisdom.  And they indeed have.  For this good order is very becoming
+in the Church, and for this reason is necessary.  But human reason,
+because it does not understand the righteousness of faith, naturally
+imagines that such works justify men because they reconcile God, etc.
+Thus the common people among the Israelites thought, and by this
+opinion increased such ceremonies, just as among us they have grown
+in the monasteries [as in our time one altar after another and one
+church after another is founded].  Thus human reason judges also of
+bodily exercises, of fasts, although the end of these is to restrain
+the flesh, reason falsely adds that they are services which justify.
+As Thomas writes: Fasting avails for the extinguishing and the
+prevention of guilt.  These are the words of Thomas.  Thus the
+semblance of wisdom and righteousness in such works deceives men.
+And the examples of the saints are added [when they say: St. Francis
+wore a cap, etc.]; and when men desire to imitate these, they imitate,
+for the most part, the outward exercises; their faith they do not
+imitate.
+
+After this semblance of wisdom and righteousness has deceived men,
+then infinite evils follow; the Gospel concerning the righteousness
+of faith in Christ is obscured, and vain confidence in such works
+succeeds.  Then the commandments of God are obscured; these works
+arrogate to themselves the title of a perfect and spiritual life, and
+are far preferred to the works of God's commandments [the true, holy,
+good works], as, the works of one's own calling, the administration
+of the state, the management of a family, married life, the bringing
+up of children.  Compared with those ceremonies, the latter are
+judged to be profane, so that they are exercised by many with some
+doubt of conscience.  For it is known that many have abandoned the
+administration of the state and married life, in order to embrace
+these observances as better and holier [have gone into cloisters in
+order to become holy and spiritual].
+
+Nor is this enough.  When the persuasion has taken possession of
+minds that such observances are necessary to justification,
+consciences are in miserable anxiety because they cannot exactly
+fulfil all observances.  For how many are there who could enumerate
+all these observances?  There are immense books, yea whole libraries,
+containing not a syllable concerning Christ, concerning faith in
+Christ, concerning the good works of one's own calling, but which
+only collect the traditions and interpretations by which they are
+sometimes rendered quite rigorous and sometimes relaxed.  [They write
+of such precepts as of fasting for forty days, the four canonical
+hours for prayer, etc.] How that most excellent man, Gerson, is
+tortured while he searches for the grades and extent of the precepts!
+Nevertheless, he is not able to fix _epieicheian_ [mitigation] in a
+definite grade [and yet cannot find any sure grade where he could
+confidently promise the heart assurance and peace].  Meanwhile, he
+deeply deplores the dangers to godly consciences which this rigid
+interpretation of the traditions produces.
+
+Against this semblance of wisdom and righteousness in human rites,
+which deceives men, let us therefore fortify ourselves by the Word of
+God, and let us know, first of all that these neither merit before
+God the remission of sins or justification, nor are necessary for
+justification.  We have above cited some testimonies.  And Paul is
+full of them.  To the Colossians, 2, 16. 17, he clearly says: Let no
+man, therefore, judge you in meat or in drink, or in respect of an
+holy-day, or of the new moon, or of the Sabbath-days, which are a
+shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ.  Here now he
+embraces at the same time both the Law of Moses and human traditions
+in order that the adversaries may not elude these testimonies,
+according to their custom, upon the ground that Paul is speaking only
+of the Law of Moses.  But he clearly testifies here that he is
+speaking of human traditions.  However, the adversaries do not see
+what they are saying; if the Gospel says that the ceremonies of Moses,
+which were divinely instituted, do not justify, how much less do
+human traditions justify!
+
+Neither have the bishops the power to institute services, as though
+they justified, or were necessary for justification.  Yea, the
+apostles, Acts 15, 10, say: Why tempt ye God to put a yoke, etc.,
+where Peter declares this purpose to burden the Church a great sin.
+And Paul forbids the Galatians, 5, 1, to be entangled again with the
+yoke of bondage.  Therefore, it is the will of the apostles that this
+liberty remain in the Church, that no services of the Law or of
+traditions be judged as necessary (just as in the Law ceremonies were
+for a time necessary), lest the righteousness of faith be obscured,
+if men judge that these services merit justification, or are
+necessary for justification.  Many seek in traditions various
+_epieicheian_ [mitigations] in order to heal consciences, and yet
+they do not find any sure grades by which to free consciences from
+these chains.  But just as Alexander once for all solved the Gordian
+knot by cutting it with his sword when he could not disentangle it,
+so the apostles once for all free consciences from traditions,
+especially if they are taught to merit justification.  The apostles
+compel us to oppose this doctrine by teaching and examples.  They
+compel us to teach that traditions do not justify; that they are not
+necessary for justification; that no one ought to frame or receive
+traditions with the opinion that they merit justification.  Then,
+even though any one should observe them, let him observe them without
+superstition as civil customs, just as without superstition soldiers
+are clothed in one way and scholars in another [as I regard my
+wearing of a German costume among the Germans and a French costume
+among the French as an observance of the usage of the land, and not
+for the purpose of being saved thereby].  The apostles violate
+traditions and are excused by Christ for the example was to be shown
+the Pharisees that these services are unprofitable.  And if our
+people neglect some traditions that are of little advantage, they are
+now sufficiently excused, when these are required as though they
+merit justification.  For such an opinion with regard to traditions
+is impious [an error not to be endured].
+
+But we cheerfully maintain the old traditions [as, the three high
+festivals, the observance of Sunday, and the like] made in the Church
+for the sake of usefulness and tranquillity, and we interpret them in
+a more moderate way, to the exclusion of the opinion which holds that
+they justify.  And our enemies falsely accuse us of abolishing good
+ordinances and churchdiscipline.  For we can truly declare that the
+public form of the churches is more becoming with us than with the
+adversaries [that the true worship of God is observed in our churches
+in a more Christian, honorable way].  And if any one will consider it
+aright, we conform to the canons more truly than do the adversaries.
+[For the adversaries, without shame, tread under foot the most
+honorable canons, just as they do Christ and the Gospel.] With the
+adversaries, unwilling celebrants, and those hired for pay, and very
+frequently only for pay, celebrate the Masses.  They sing psalms, not
+that they may learn or pray [for the greater part do not understand a
+verse in the psalms], but for the sake of the service as though this
+work were a service, or at feast, for the sake of reward.  [All this
+they cannot deny.  Some who are upright among them are even ashamed
+of this baffle, and declare that the clergy is in need of reformation.
+] With us many use the Lord's Supper [willingly and without
+constraint] every Lord's Day, but after having been first instructed,
+examined [whether they know and understand anything of the Lord's
+Prayer, the Creed, and the Ten Commandments], and absolved.  The
+children sing psalms in order that they may learn [become familiar
+with passages of Scripture], the people also sing [Latin and German
+psalms], in order that they may either learn or pray.  With the
+adversaries there is no catechization of the children whatever,
+concerning which even the canons give commands.  With us the pastors
+and ministers of the churches are compelled publicly [and privately]
+to instruct and hear the youth; and this ceremony produces the best
+fruits.  [And the Catechism is not a mere childish thing, as is the
+bearing of banners and tapers, but a very profitable instruction.]
+Among the adversaries, in many regions [as in Italy and Spain],
+during the entire year no sermons are delivered, except in Lent [Here
+they ought to cry out and justly make grievous complaint, for this
+means at one blow to overthrow completely all worship.  For of all
+acts that is the greatest most holy, most necessary, and highest,
+which God has required as the highest in the First and the Second
+Commandment, namely, to preach the Word of God.  For the ministry is
+the highest office in the Church.  Now, if this worship is omitted,
+how can there be knowledge of God, the doctrine of Christ, or the
+Gospel,] But the chief service of God is to teach the Gospel.  And
+when the adversaries do preach, they speak of human traditions, of
+the worship of saints [of consecrated water], and similar tripes,
+which the people justly loathe, therefore they are deserted
+immediately in the beginning, after the text of the Gospel has been
+recited.  [This practise may have started because the people did not
+wish to hear the other lies.] A few better ones begin now to speak of
+good works, but of the righteousness of faith, of faith in Christ, of
+the consolation of consciences, they say nothing; yea, this most
+wholesome part of the Gospel they rail at with their reproaches.
+[This blessed doctrine, the precious holy Gospel, they call Lutheran.
+] On the contrary, in our churches all the sermons are occupied with
+such topics as these: of repentance, of the fear of God, of faith in
+Christ, of the righteousness of faith, of the consolation of
+consciences by faith, of the exercises of faith; of prayer, what its
+nature should be, and that we should be fully confident that it is
+efficacious, that it is heard of the cross; of the authority of
+magistrates and all civil ordinances [likewise, how each one in his
+station should live in a Christian manner, and, out of obedience to
+the command of the Lord God, should conduct himself in reference to
+every worldly ordinance and law]; of the distinction between the
+kingdom of Christ, or the spiritual kingdom and political affairs, of
+marriage; of the education and instruction of children, of chastity;
+of all the offices of love.  From this condition of the churches it
+may be judged that we diligently maintain church-discipline and godly
+ceremonies and good churchcustoms.
+
+And of the mortification of the flesh and discipline of the body we
+thus teach, just as the Confession states, that a true and not a
+feigned mortification occurs through the cross and afflictions by
+which God exercises us [when God breaks our will, inflicts the cross
+and trouble].  In these we must obey God's will, as Paul says, Rom.
+12, 1: Present your bodies a living sacrifice.  And these are the
+spiritual exercises of fear and faith.  But in addition to this
+mortification which occurs through the cross [which does not depend
+upon our will] there is also a voluntary kind of exercise necessary,
+of which Christ says Luke 21, 34: Take heed to yourselves lest at any
+time your hearts be overcharged with surfeiting.  And Paul, 1 Cor. 9,
+27: I keep under my body, and bring it into subjection, etc. And
+these exercises are to be undertaken not because they are services
+that justify, but in order to curb the flesh, lest satiety may
+overpower us, and render us secure and indifferent, the result of
+which is that men indulge and obey the dispositions of the flesh.
+This diligence ought to be perpetual, because it has the perpetual
+command of God.  And this prescribed form of certain meats and times
+does nothing [as experience shows] towards curbing the flesh.  For it
+is more luxurious and sumptuous than other feasts [for they were at
+greater expense, and practised greater gluttony with fish and various
+Lenten meats than when the fasts were not observed], and not even the
+adversaries observe the form given in the canons.
+
+This topic concerning traditions contains many and difficult
+questions of controversy and we have actually experienced that
+traditions are truly snares of consciences.  When they are exacted as
+necessary, they torture in wonderful ways the conscience omitting any
+observance [as godly hearts, indeed, experience when in the canonical
+hours they have omitted a compline, or offended against them in a
+similar way].  Again their abrogation has its own evils and its own
+questions.  [On the other hand, to teach absolute freedom has also
+its doubts and questions, because the common people need outward
+discipline and instruction.] But we have an easy and plain case,
+because the adversaries condemn us for teaching that human traditions
+do not merit the remission of sins.  Likewise they require universal
+traditions, as they call them, as necessary for justification [and
+place them in Christ's stead].  Here we have Paul as a constant
+champion, who everywhere contends that these observances neither
+justify nor are necessary in addition to the righteousness of faith.
+And nevertheless we teach that in these matters the use of liberty is
+to be so controlled that the inexperienced may not be offended, and,
+on account of the abuse of liberty, may not become more hostile to
+the true doctrine of the Gospel, or that without a reasonable cause
+nothing in customary rites be changed, but that, in order to cherish
+harmony, such old customs be observed as can be observed without sin
+or without great inconvenience.  And in this very assembly we have
+shown sufficiently that for love's sake we do not refuse to observe
+adiaphora with others, even though they should have some disadvantage;
+but we have judged that such public harmony as could indeed be
+produced without offense to consciences ought to be preferred to all
+other advantages [all other less important matters].  But concerning
+this entire subject we shall speak after a while, when we shall treat
+of vows and ecclesiastical power.
+
+
+
+
+Part 21
+
+
+Article XVI: _Of Political Order._
+
+The Sixteenth Article the adversaries receive without any exception,
+in which we have confessed that it is lawful for the Christian to
+bear civil office, sit in judgment, determine matters by the imperial
+laws, and other laws in present force, appoint just punishments
+engage in just wars, act as a soldier, make legal contracts, hold
+property, take an oath when magistrates require it, contract marriage;
+finally, that legitimate civil ordinances are good creatures of God
+and divine ordinances, which a Christian can use with safety.  This
+entire topic concerning the distinction between the kingdom of Christ
+and a political kingdom has been explained to advantage [to the
+remarkably great consolation of many consciences] in the literature
+of our writers, [namely] that the kingdom of Christ is spiritual
+[inasmuch as Christ governs by the Word and by preaching], to wit,
+beginning in the heart the knowledge of God, the fear of God and
+faith, eternal righteousness, and eternal life; meanwhile it permits
+us outwardly to use legitimate political ordinances of every nation
+in which we live, just as it permits us to use medicine or the art of
+building, or food, drink, air.  Neither does the Gospel bring new
+laws concerning the civil state, but commands that we obey present
+laws, whether they have been framed by heathen or by others, and that
+in this obedience we should exercise love.  For Carlstadt was insane
+in imposing upon us the judicial laws of Moses.  Concerning these
+subjects, our theologians have written more fully, because the monks
+diffused many pernicious opinions in the Church.  They called a
+community of property the polity of the Gospel; they said that not to
+hold property, not to vindicate one's self at law [not to have wife
+and child], were evangelical counsels.  These opinions greatly
+obscure the Gospel and the spiritual kingdom [so that it was not
+understood at all what the Christian or spiritual kingdom of Christ
+is; they concocted the secular kingdom with the spiritual whence much
+trouble and seditions, harmful teaching resulted], and are dangerous
+to the commonwealth.  For the Gospel does not destroy the State or
+the family [buying, selling, and other civil regulations], but much
+rather approves them, and bids us obey them as a divine ordinance,
+not only on account of punishment, but also on account of conscience.
+
+Julian the Apostate, Celsus, and very many others made the objection
+to Christians that the Gospel would rend asunder states, because it
+prohibited legal redress, and taught certain other things not at all
+suited to political association.  And these questions wonderfully
+exercised Origen, Nazianzen, and others, although, indeed, they can
+be most readily explained, if we keep in mind the fact that the
+Gospel does not introduce laws concerning the civil state, but is the
+remission of sins and the beginning of a new life in the hearts of
+believers; besides, it not only approves outward governments, but
+subjects us to them, Rom. 13, 1, just as we have been necessarily
+placed under the laws of seasons, the changes of winter and summer,
+as divine ordinances.  [This is no obstacle to the spiritual kingdom.
+] The Gospel forbids private redress [in order that no one should
+interfere with the office of the magistrate], and Christ inculcates
+this so frequently with the design that the apostles should not think
+that they ought to seize the governments from those who held
+otherwise, just as the Jews dreamed concerning the kingdom of the
+Messiah, but that they might know they ought to teach concerning the
+spiritual kingdom that it does not change the civil state.  Therefore
+private redress is prohibited not by advice, but by a command, Matt.
+5, 39; Rom. 12, 19. Public redress which is made through the office
+of the magistrate, is not advised against, but is commanded, and is a
+work of God, according to Paul, Rom. 13, 1 sqq.  Now the different
+kinds of public redress are legal decisions, capital punishment, wars,
+military service.  It is manifest how incorrectly many writers have
+judged concerning these matters [some teachers have taught such
+pernicious errors that nearly all princes, lords, knights, servants
+regarded their proper estate as secular, ungodly, and damnable, etc.
+Nor can it be fully expressed in words what an unspeakable peril and
+damage has resulted from this to souls and consciences], because they
+were in the error that the Gospel is an external, new and monastic
+form of government, and did not see that the Gospel brings eternal
+righteousness to hearts [teaches how a person is redeemed, before God
+and in his conscience, from sin, hell, and the devil], while it
+outwardly approves the civil state.
+
+It is also a most vain delusion that it is Christian perfection not
+to hold property.  For Christian perfection consists not in the
+contempt of civil ordinances, but in dispositions of the heart, in
+great fear of God, in great faith, just as Abraham, David, Daniel,
+even in great wealth and while exercising civil power, were no less
+perfect than any hermits.  But the monks [especially the Barefoot
+monks] have spread this outward hypocrisy before the eyes of men, so
+that it could not be seen in what things true perfection exists.
+With what praises have they brought forward this communion of
+property, as though it were evangelical!  But these praises have the
+greatest danger, especially since they differ much from the
+Scriptures.  For Scripture does not command that property be common,
+but the Law of the Decalog, when it says, Ex. 20, 15: Thor shalt not
+steal, distinguishes rights of ownership, and commands each one to
+hold what is his own.  Wyclif manifestly was raging when he said that
+priests were not allowed to hold property.  There are infinite
+discussions concerning contracts, in reference to which good
+consciences can never be satisfied unless they know the rule that it
+is lawful for a Christian to make use of civil ordinances and laws.
+This rule protects consciences when it teaches that contracts are
+lawful before God just to the extent that the magistrates or laws
+approve them.
+
+This entire topic concerning civil affairs has been so clearly set
+forth by our theologians that very many good men occupied in the
+state and in business have declared that they have been greatly
+benefited, who before, troubled by the opinion of the monks, were in
+doubt as to whether the Gospel allowed these civil offices and
+business.  Accordingly, we have recounted these things in order that
+those without also may understand that by the kind of doctrine which
+we follow, the authority of magistrates and the dignity of all civil
+ordinances are not undermined, but are all the more strengthened [and
+that it is only this doctrine which gives true instruction as to how
+eminently glorious an office, full of good Christian works, the
+office of rulers is].  The importance of these matters was greatly
+obscured previously by those silly monastic opinions, which far
+preferred the hypocrisy of poverty and humility to the state and the
+family, although these have God's command, while this Platonic
+communion [monasticism] has not God's command.
+
+
+
+
+Part 22
+
+
+Article XVII: _Of Christ's Return to Judgment._
+
+The Seventeenth Article the adversaries receive without exception, in
+which we confess that at the consummation of the world Christ shall
+appear, and shall raise up all the dead, and shall give to the godly
+eternal life and eternal joys, but shall condemn the ungodly to be
+punished with the devil without end.
+
+
+
+
+Part 23
+
+
+Article XVIII: _Of Free Will._
+
+The Eighteenth Article, Of Free Will, the adversaries receive,
+although they add some testimonies not at all adapted to this case.
+They add also a declamation that neither, with the Pelagians, is too
+much to be granted to the free will, nor, with the Manicheans, is all
+freedom to be denied it.  Very well; but what difference is there
+between the Pelagians and our adversaries, since both hold that
+without the Holy Ghost men can love God and perform God's
+commandments with respect to the substance of the acts, and can merit
+grace and justification by works which reason performs by itself,
+without the Holy Ghost?  How many absurdities follow from these
+Pelagian opinions, which are taught with great authority in the
+schools!  These Augustine, following Paul, refutes pith great
+emphasis, whose judgment we have recounted above in the article Of
+Justification.  (See p. 119 and 153.) Nor, indeed, do we deny liberty
+to the human will.  The human will has liberty in the choice of works
+and things which reason comprehends by itself.  It can to a certain
+extent render civil righteousness or the righteousness of works; it
+can speak of God, offer to God a certain service by an outward work,
+obey magistrates, parents; in the choice of an outward work it can
+restrain the hands from murder, from adultery, from theft.  Since
+there is left in human nature reason and judgement concerning objects
+subjected to the senses, choice between these things, and the liberty
+and power to render civil righteousness, are also left.  For
+Scripture calls this the righteousness of the flesh which the carnal
+nature, i.e., reason renders by itself, without the Holy Ghost.
+Although the power of concupiscence is such that men more frequently
+obey evil dispositions than sound judgment.  And the devil, who is
+efficacious in the godless, as Paul says Eph. 2, 2, does not cease to
+incite this feeble nature to various offenses.  These are the reasons
+why even civil righteousness is rare among men, as we see that not
+even the philosophers themselves, who seem to have aspired after this
+righteousness, attained it.  But it is false to say that he who
+performs the works of the commandments without grace does not sin.
+And they add further that such works also merit _de congruo_ the
+remission of sins and justification.  For human hearts without the
+Holy Ghost are without the fear of God; without trust toward God,
+they do not believe that they are heard, forgiven, helped, and
+preserved by God.  Therefore they are godless.  For neither can a
+corrupt tree bring forth good fruit, Matt. 7, 18. And without faith
+it is impossible to please God, Heb. 11, 6.
+
+Therefore, although we concede free will the liberty and power to
+perform the outward works of the Law, yet we do not ascribe to free
+will these spiritual matters, namely, truly to fear God, truly to
+believe God, truly to be confident and hold that God regards us,
+hears us, forgives us, etc. These are the true works of the First
+Table, which the heart cannot render without the Holy Ghost, as Paul
+says, 1 Cor. 2, 14: The natural man, i.e., man using only natural
+strength, receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God [That is a
+person who is not enlightened by the Spirit of God does not, by his
+natural reason, receive anything of God's will and divine matters.]
+And this can be decided if men consider what their hearts believe
+concerning God's will, whether they are truly confident that they are
+regarded and heard by God.  Even for saints to retain this faith [and,
+as Peter says (1 Ep. 1, 8), to risk and commit himself entirely to
+God, whom he does not see, to love Christ, and esteem Him highly,
+whom he does not see] is difficult, so far is it from existing in the
+godless.  But it is conceived, as we have said above, when terrified
+hearts hear the Gospel and receive consolation [when we are born anew
+of the Holy Ghost].
+
+Therefore such a distribution is of advantage in which civil
+righteousness is ascribed to the free will and spiritual
+righteousness to the governing of the Holy Ghost in the regenerate.
+For thus the outward discipline is retained, because all men ought to
+know equally, both that God requires this civil righteousness [God
+will not tolerate indecent, wild, reckless conduct], and that, in a
+measure, we can afford it.  And yet a distinction is shown between
+human and spiritual righteousness, between philosophical doctrine and
+the doctrine of the Holy Ghost and it can be understood for what
+there is need of the Holy Ghost.  Nor has this distribution been
+invented by us, but Scripture most clearly teaches it.  Augustine
+also treats of it, and recently it has been well treated of by
+William of Paris, but it has been wickedly suppressed by those who
+have dreamt that men can obey God's Law without the Holy Ghost, but
+that the Holy Ghost is given in order that, in addition, it may be
+considered meritorious.
+
+
+
+
+Part 24
+
+
+Article XIX: _Of the Cause of Sin._
+
+The Nineteenth Article the adversaries receive, in which we confess
+that, although God only and alone has framed all nature, and
+preserves all things which exist, yet [He is not the cause of sin,
+but] the cause of sin is the will in the devil and men turning itself
+away from God, according to the saying of Christ concerning the devil,
+John 8, 44: When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own.
+
+
+
+
+Part 25
+
+
+Article XX: _Of Good Works._
+
+In the Twentieth Article they distinctly lay down these words, namely,
+that they reject and condemn our statement that men do not merit the
+remission of sins by good works.  [Mark this well!] They clearly
+declare that they reject and condemn this article.  What is to be
+said on a subject so manifest?  Here the framers of the _Confutation_
+openly show by what spirit they are led.  For what in the Church is
+more certain than that the remission of sins occurs freely for
+Christ's sake, that Christ, and not our works, is the propitiation
+for sins, as Peter says, Acts 10, 43: To Him give all the prophets
+witness that through His name, whosoever believeth on Him, shall
+receive remission of sins?  [This strong testimony of all the holy
+prophets may duly be called a decree of the catholic Christian Church.
+For even a single prophet is very highly esteemed by God and a
+treasure worth the whole world.] To this Church of the prophets we
+would rather assent than to these abandoned writers of the
+Confutation, who so impudently blaspheme Christ.  For although there
+were writers who held that after the remission of sins men are just
+before God, not by faith, but by works themselves, yet they did not
+hold this, namely, that the remission of sins itself occurs on
+account of our works, and not freely for Christ's sake.
+
+Therefore the blasphemy of ascribing Christ's honor to our works is
+not to be endured.  These theologians are now entirely without shame
+if they dare to bring such an opinion into the Church.  Nor do we
+doubt that His Most Excellent Imperial Majesty and very many of the
+princes would not have allowed this passage to remain in the
+_Confutation_ if they had been admonished of it.  Here we could cite
+infinite testimonies from Scripture and from the Fathers [that this
+article is certainly divine and true, and this is the sacred and
+divine truth.  For there is hardly a syllable, hardly a leaf in the
+Bible, in the principal books of the Holy Scriptures where this is
+not clearly stated.] But also above we have said enough on this
+subject.  And there is no need of more testimonies for one who knows
+why Christ has been given to us, who knows that Christ is the
+propitiation for our sins.  [God-fearing, pious hearts that know well
+why Christ has been given, who for all the possessions and kingdoms
+of the world would not be without Christ as our only Treasure, our
+only Mediator and Redeemer must here be shocked and terrified that
+God's holy Word and Truth should be so openly despised and condemned
+by poor men.] Isaiah says, 53, 6: The Lord hath laid on Him the
+iniquities of us all.  The adversaries, on the other hand, [accuse
+Isaiah and the entire Bible of lying and teach that God lays our
+iniquities not on Christ, but on our [beggarly] works.  Neither are
+we disposed to mention here the sort of works [rosaries, pilgrimages,
+and the like] which they teach.  We see that a horrible decree has
+been prepared against us, which would terrify us still more if we
+were contending concerning doubtful or trifling subjects.  Now, since
+our consciences understand that by the adversaries the manifest truth
+is condemned, whose defense is necessary for the Church and increases
+the glory of Christ, we easily despise the terrors of the world, and
+with a strong spirit will bear whatever is to be suffered for the
+glory of Christ and the advantage of the Church.  Who would not
+rejoice to die in the confession of such articles as that we obtain
+the remission of sins by faith freely for Christ's sake, that we do
+not merit the remission of sins by our works?  [Experience shows--and
+the monks themselves must admit it--that] The consciences of the
+pious will have no sufficiently sure consolation against the terrors
+of sin and of death, and against the devil soliciting to despair [and
+who in a moment blows away all our works like dust], if they do not
+know that they ought to be confident that they have the remission of
+sins freely for Christ's sake.  This faith sustains and quickens
+hearts in that most violent conflict with despair [in the great agony
+of death, in the great anguish, when no creature can help, yea, when
+we must depart from this entire visible creation into another state
+and world, and must die].
+
+Therefore the cause is one which is worthy that for its sake we
+should refuse no danger.  Whosoever you are that has assented to our
+Confession, "do not yield to the wicked, but, on the contrary, go
+forward the more boldly," when the adversaries endeavor, by means of
+terrors and tortures and punishments, to drive away from you that
+consolation which has been tendered to the entire Church in this
+article of ours [but with all cheerfulness rely confidently and
+gladly on God and the Lord Jesus, and joyfully confess this manifest
+truth in opposition to the tyranny, wrath, threatening, and terrors
+of all the world, yea, in opposition to the daily murders and
+persecution of tyrants.  For who would suffer to have taken from him
+this great, yea, everlasting consolation on which the entire
+salvation of the whole Christian Church depends?  Any one who picks
+up the Bible and reads it earnestly will soon observe that this
+doctrine has its foundation everywhere in the Bible].  Testimonies of
+Scripture will not be wanting to one seeking them, which will
+establish his mind.  For Paul at the top of his voice, as the saying
+is, cries out, Rom. 3, 24 f., and 4, 16, that sins are freely
+remitted for Christ's sake.  It is of faith, he says, that it might
+be by grace, to the end the promise might be sure.  That is, if the
+promise would depend upon our works, it would not be sure.  If
+remission of sins would be given on account of our works, when would
+we know that we had obtained it, when would a terrified conscience
+find a work which it would consider sufficient to appease God's
+wrath?  But we spoke of the entire matter above.  Thence let the
+reader derive testimonies.  For the unworthy treatment of the subject
+has forced from us the present, not discussion, but complaint that on
+this topic they have distinctly recorded themselves as disapproving
+of this article of ours, that we obtain remission of sins not on
+account of our works, but by faith and freely on account of Christ.
+
+The adversaries also add testimonies to their own condemnation, and
+it is worth while to recite several of them.  They quote from Peter,
+2. Ep. 1, 10: Give diligence to make your calling sure, etc..  Now
+you see, reader, that our adversaries have not wasted labor in
+learning logic, but have the art of inferring from the Scriptures
+whatever pleases them [whether it is in harmony with the Scriptures
+or out of harmony; whether it is correctly or incorrectly concluded.
+For they conclude thus:] "Make your calling sure by good works."
+Therefore works merit the remission of sins.  A very agreeable mode
+of reasoning, if one would argue thus concerning a person sentenced
+to capital punishment, whose punishment has been remitted: "The
+magistrate commands that hereafter you abstain from that which
+belongs to another.  Therefore you have merited the remission of the
+penalty, because you are now abstaining from what belongs to another."
+Thus to argue is to make a cause out of that which is not a cause.
+For Peter speaks of works following the remission of sins, and
+teaches why they should be done, namely, that the calling may be sure,
+i.e., lest they may fall from their calling if they sin again.  Do
+good works that you may persevere in your calling, that you [do not
+fall away again, grow cold and] may not lose the gifts of your
+calling, which were given you before, and not on account of works
+that follow, and which now are retained by faith, for faith does not
+remain in those who lose the Holy Ghost, who reject repentance, just
+as we have said above (p. 253) that faith exists in repentance.
+
+They add other testimonies cohering no better.  Lastly they say that
+this opinion was condemned a thousand years before, in the time of
+Augustine.  This also is quite false.  For the Church of Christ
+always held that the remission of sins is obtained freely.  Yea, the
+Pelagians were condemned, who contended that grace is given on
+account of our works.  Besides, we have above shown sufficiently that
+we hold that good works ought necessarily to follow faith.  For we do
+not make void the Law, says Paul, Rom. 3, 31; yea, we establish the
+Law, because when by faith we have received the Holy Ghost, the
+fulfilling of the Law necessarily follows, by which love, patience,
+chastity, and other fruits of the Spirit gradually grow.
+
+
+
+
+Part 26
+
+
+The Twenty-first Article they absolutely condemn, because we do not
+require the invocation of saints.  Nor on any topic do they speak
+more eloquently and with more prolixity.  Nevertheless they do not
+effect anything else than that the saints should be honored; likewise,
+that the saints who live pray for others; as though, indeed, the
+invocation of dead saints were on that account necessary.  They cite
+Cyprian, because he asked Cornelius while yet alive to pray for his
+brothers when departing.  By this example they prove the invocation
+of the dead.  They quote also Jerome against Vigilantius.  "On this
+field" [in this matter], they say, "eleven hundred years ago, Jerome
+overcame Vigilantius." Thus the adversaries triumph, as though the
+war were already ended.  Nor do those asses see that in Jerome,
+against Vigilantius, there is not a syllable concerning invocation.
+He speaks concerning honors for the saints, not concerning invocation.
+Neither have the rest of the ancient writers before Gregory made
+mention of invocation.  Certainly this invocation, with these
+opinions which the adversaries now teach concerning the application
+of merits, has not the testimonies of the ancient writers.
+
+Our Confession approves honors to the saints.  For here a threefold
+honor is to be approved.  The first is thanksgiving.  For we ought to
+give thanks to God because He has shown examples of mercy, because He
+has shown that He wishes to save men; because He has given teachers
+or other gifts to the Church.  And these gifts, as they are the
+greatest, should be amplified, and the saints themselves should be
+praised, who have faithfully used these gifts, just as Christ praises
+faithful business-men, Matt. 25, 21. 23. The second service is the
+strengthening of our faith when we see the denial forgiven Peter we
+also are encouraged to believe the more that grace truly superabounds
+over sin, Rom. 5, 20. The third honor is the imitation, first, of
+faith, then of the other virtues which every one should imitate
+according to his calling.  These true honors the adversaries do not
+require.  They dispute only concerning invocation, which, even though
+it would have no danger, nevertheless is not necessary.
+
+Besides, we also grant that the angels pray for us.  For there is a
+testimony in Zech. 1, 12, where an angel prays: O Lord of hosts, how
+long wilt Thou not have mercy on Jerusalem?  Although concerning the
+saints we concede that, just as, when alive, they pray for the Church
+universal in general, so in heaven they pray for the Church in
+general, albeit no testimony concerning the praying of the dead is
+extant in the Scriptures, except the dream taken from the Second Book
+of Maccabees, 15, 14.
+
+Moreover, even supposing that the saints pray for the Church ever so
+much, yet it does not follow that they are to be invoked; although
+our Confession affirms only this, that Scripture does not teach the
+invocation of the saints, or that we are to ask the saints for aid.
+But since neither a command, nor a promise, nor an example can be
+produced from the Scriptures concerning the invocation of saints, it
+follows that conscience can have nothing concerning this invocation
+that is certain.  And since prayer ought to be made from faith, how
+do we know that God approves this invocation?  Whence do we know
+without the testimony of Scripture that the saints perceive the
+prayers of each one?  Some plainly ascribe divinity to the saints
+namely, that they discern the silent thoughts of the minds in us.
+They dispute concerning morning and evening knowledge, perhaps
+because they doubt whether they hear us in the morning or the evening.
+They invent these things, not in order to treat the saints with
+honor, but to defend lucrative services.  Nothing can be produced by
+the adversaries against this reasoning, that, since invocation does
+not have a testimony from God's Word, it cannot be affirmed that the
+saints understand our invocation, or, even if they understand it,
+that God approves it.  Therefore the adversaries ought not to force
+us to an uncertain matter, because a prayer without faith is not
+prayer.  For when they cite the example of the Church, it is evident
+that this is a new custom in the Church; for although the old prayers
+make mention of the saints, yet they do not invoke the saints.
+Although also this new invocation in the Church is dissimilar to the
+invocation of individuals.
+
+Again, the adversaries not only require invocation in the worship of
+the saints, but also apply the merits of the saints to others, and
+make of the saints not only intercessors, but also propitiators.
+This is in no way to be endured.  For here the honor belonging only
+to Christ is altogether transferred to the saints.  For they make
+them mediators and propitiators, and although they make a distinction
+between mediators of intercession and mediators [the Mediator] of
+redemption, yet they plainly make of the saints mediators of
+redemption.  But even that they are mediators of intercession they
+declare without testimony of Scripture, which, be it said ever so
+reverently, nevertheless obscures Christ's office, and transfers the
+confidence of mercy due Christ to the saints.  For men imagine that
+Christ is more severe and the saints more easily appeased, and they
+trust rather to the mercy of the saints than to the mercy of Christ,
+and fleeing from Christ [as from a tyrant], they seek the saints.
+Thus they actually make of them mediators of redemption.
+
+Therefore we shall show that they truly make of the saints, not only
+intercessors, but propitiators, i.e., mediators of redemption.  Here
+we do not as yet recite the abuses of the common people [how manifest
+idolatry is practiced at pilgrimages].  We are still speaking of the
+opinions of the Doctors.  As regards the rest, even the inexperienced
+[common people] can judge.
+
+In a propitiator these two things concur.  In the first place, there
+ought to be a word of God from which we may certainly know that God
+wishes to pity, and hearken to, those calling upon Him through this
+propitiator.  There is such a promise concerning Christ, John 16 23:
+Whatsoever ye shall ask the Father in My name, He will give it you.
+Concerning the saints there is no such promise.  Therefore
+consciences cannot be firmly confident that by the invocation of
+saints we are heard.  This invocation, therefore, is not made from
+faith.  Then we have also the command to call upon Christ, according
+to Matt. 11, 28: Come unto Me, all ye that labor, etc., which
+certainly is said also to us.  And Isaiah says, 11,10: In that day
+there shall be a root of Jesse, which shall stand for an ensign to
+the people; to it shall the Gentiles seek.  And Ps. 45, 12: Even the
+rich among the people shall entreat Thy favor.  And Ps. 72, 11. 16:
+Yea, all kings shall fall down before Him.  And shortly after: Prayer
+also shall be made for Him continually.  And in John 6, 23 Christ
+says: That all men should honor the Son even as they honor the Father.
+And Paul, 2 Thess. 2, 16. 17, says, praying: Now our Lord Jesus
+Christ Himself, and God, even our Father,... comfort your hearts and
+stablish you.  [All these passages refer to Christ.] But concerning
+the invocation of saints, what commandment, what example can the
+adversaries produce from the Scriptures?  The second matter in a
+propitiator is, that his merits have been presented as those which
+make satisfaction for others, which are bestowed by divine imputation
+on others, in order that through these, just as by their own merits,
+they may be accounted righteous.  As when any friend pays a debt for
+a friend, the debtor is freed by the merit of another, as though it
+were by his own.  Thus the merits of Christ are bestowed upon us, in
+order that, when we believe in Him, we may be accounted righteous by
+our confidence in Christ's merits as though we had merits of our own.
+
+And from both, namely, from the promise and the bestowment of merits,
+confidence in mercy arises [upon both parts must a Christian prayer
+be founded].  Such confidence in the divine promise, and likewise in
+the merits of Christ, ought to be brought forward when we pray.  For
+we ought to be truly confident, both that for Christ's sake we are
+heard, and that by His merits we have a reconciled Father.
+
+Here the adversaries first bid us invoke the saints, although they
+have neither God's promise, nor a command, nor an example from
+Scripture.  And yet they cause greater confidence in the mercy of the
+saints to be conceived than in that of Christ, although Christ bade
+us come to Him and not to the saints.  Secondly, they apply the
+merits of the saints, just as the merits of Christ, to others, they
+bid us trust in the merits of the saints as though we were accounted
+righteous on account of the merits of the saints, in like manner as
+we are accounted righteous by the merits of Christ.  Here we
+fabricate nothing.  In indulgences they say that they apply the
+merits of the saints [as satisfactions for our sins].  And Gabriel,
+the interpreter of the canon of the Mass, confidently declares:
+According to the order instituted by God we should betake ourselves
+to the aid of the saints, in order that we may be saved by their
+merits and vows.  These are the words of Gabriel.  And nevertheless
+in the books and sermons of the adversaries still more absurd things
+are read here and there.  What is it to make propitiators if this is
+not?  They are altogether made equal to Christ if we must trust that
+we are saved by their merits.
+
+But where has this arrangement, to which he refers when he says that
+we ought to resort to the aid of the saints, been instituted by God?
+Let him produce an example or command from the Scriptures.  Perhaps
+they derive this arrangement from the courts of kings, where friends
+must be employed as intercessors.  But if a king has appointed a
+certain intercessor, he will not desire that eases be brought to him
+through others.  Thus, since Christ has been appointed Intercessor
+and High Priest, why do we seek others?  [What can the adversaries
+say in reply to this?]
+
+Here and there this form of absolution is used: The passion of our
+lord Jesus Christ the merits of the most blessed Virgin Mary and of
+all the saints, be to thee for the remission of sins.  Here the
+absolution is pronounced on the supposition that we are reconciled
+and accounted righteous not only by the merits of Christ, but also by
+the merits of the other saints.  Some of us have seen a doctor of
+theology dying, for consoling whom a certain theologian, a monk, was
+employed.  He pressed on the dying man nothing but this prayer:
+Mother of grace, protect us from the enemy; receive us in the hour of
+death.
+
+Granting that the blessed Mary prays for the Church, does she receive
+souls in death, does she conquer death [the great power of Satan],
+does she quicken?  What does Christ do if the blessed Mary does these
+things?  Although she is most worthy of the most ample honors,
+nevertheless she does not wish to be made equal to Christ, but rather
+wishes us to consider and follow her example [the example of her
+faith and her humility].  But the subject itself declares that in
+public opinion the blessed Virgin has succeeded altogether to the
+place of Christ.  Men have invoked her, have trusted in her mercy,
+through her have desired to appease Christ, as though He were not a
+Propitiator, but only a dreadful judge and avenger.  We believe,
+however, that we must not trust that the merits of the saints are
+applied to us, that on account of these God is reconciled to us, or
+accounts us just, or saves us.  For we obtain remission of sins only
+by the merits of Christ, when we believe in Him.  Of the other saints
+it has been said, 1 Cor. 3, 8: Every man shall receive his own reward
+according to his own labor, i.e., they cannot mutually bestow their
+own merits, the one upon the other, as the monks sell the merits of
+their orders.  Even Hilary says of the foolish virgins: And as the
+foolish virgins could not go forth with their lamps extinguished,
+they besought those who were prudent to lend them oil; to whom they
+replied that they could not give it because peradventure there might
+not be enough for all; i.e., no one can be aided by the works and
+merits of another, because it is necessary for every one to buy oil
+for his own lamp.  [Here he points out that none of us can aid
+another by other people's works or merits.]
+
+Since, therefore, the adversaries teach us to place confidence in the
+invocation of saints, although they have neither the Word of God nor
+the example of Scripture [of the Old or of the New Testament]; since
+they apply the merits of the saints on behalf of others, not
+otherwise than they apply the merits of Christ, and transfer the
+honor belonging only to Christ to the saints, we can receive neither
+their opinions concerning the worship of the saints, nor the practise
+of invocation.  For we know that confidence is to be placed in the
+intercession of Christ, because this alone has God's promise.  We
+know that the merits of Christ alone are a propitiation for us.  On
+account of the merits of Christ we are accounted righteous when we
+believe in Him, as the text says, Rom. 9, 33 (cf. 1 Pet. 2, 6 and Is.
+28, 16): Whosoever believeth on Him shall not be confounded.  Neither
+are we to trust that we are accounted righteous by the merits of the
+blessed Virgin or of the other saints.
+
+With the learned this error also prevails namely, that to each saint
+a particular administration has been committed, that Anna bestows
+riches [protects from poverty], Sebastian keeps off pestilence,
+Valentine heals epilepsy, George protects horsemen.  These opinions
+have clearly sprung from heathen examples.  For thus, among the
+Romans Juno was thought to enrich, Febris to keep off fever, Castor
+and Pollux to protect horsemen, etc. Even though we should imagine
+that the invocation of saints were taught with the greatest prudence,
+yet since the example is most dangerous, why is it necessary to
+defend it when it has no command or testimony from God's Word?  Aye,
+it has not even the testimony of the ancient writers.  First because,
+as I have said above, when other mediators are sought in addition to
+Christ, and confidence is put in others, the entire knowledge of
+Christ is suppressed.  The subject shows this.  In the beginning,
+mention of the saints seems to have been admitted with a design that
+is endurable, as in the ancient prayers.  Afterwards invocation
+followed, and abuses that are prodigious and more than heathenish
+followed invocation.  From invocation the next step was to images;
+these also were worshiped, and a virtue was supposed to exist in
+these, just as magicians imagine that a virtue exists in images of
+the heavenly bodies carved at a particular time.  In a certain
+monastery we [some of us] have seen a statue of the blessed Virgin,
+which moved automatically by a trick [within by a string], so as to
+seem either to turn away from [those who did not make a large
+offering] or nod to those making request.
+
+Still the fabulous stories concerning the saints, which are publicly
+taught with great authority, surpass the marvelous tales of the
+statues and pictures.  Barbara, amidst her torments, asks for the
+reward that no one who would invoke her should die without the
+Eucharist.  Another, standing on one foot, recited daily the whole
+psaltery.  Some wise man painted [for children] Christophorus [which
+in German means Bearer of Christ], in order by the allegory to
+signify that there ought to be great strength of mind in those who
+would bear Christ, i.e., who would teach or confess the Gospel,
+because it is necessary to undergo the greatest dangers [for they
+must wade by night through the great sea, i.e., endure all kinds of
+temptations and dangers].  Then the foolish monks taught among the
+people that they ought to invoke Chistophorus, as though such a
+Polyphemus [such a giant who bore Christ through the sea] had once
+existed.  And although the saints performed very great deeds, either
+useful to the state or affording private examples the remembrance of
+which would conduce much both toward strengthening faith and toward
+following their example in the administration of affairs, no one has
+searched for these from true narratives.  [Although God Almighty
+through His saints, as a peculiar people, has wrought many great
+things in both realms, in the Church and in worldly transactions;
+although there are many great examples in the lives of the saints
+which would be very profitable to princes and lords, to true pastors
+and guardians of souls, for the government both of the world and of
+the Church, especially for strengthening faith in God, yet they have
+passed these by, and preached the most insignificant matters
+concerning the saints, concerning their hard beds their hair shirts,
+etc., which, for the greater part, are falsehoods.] Yet indeed it is
+of advantage to hear how holy men administered governments [as in the
+Holy Scriptures it is narrated of the kings of Israel and Judah],
+what calamities, what dangers they underwent, how holy men were of
+aid to kings in great dangers, how they taught the Gospel, what
+encounters they had with heretics.  Examples of mercy are also of
+service, as when we see the denial forgiven Peter, when we see
+Cyprian forgiven for having been a magician, when we see Augustine,
+having experienced the power of faith in sickness steadily affirming
+that God truly hears the prayers of believers.  It was profitable
+that such examples as these, which contain admonitions for either
+faith or fear or the administration of the state, be recited.  But
+certain triflers, endowed with no knowledge either of faith or for
+governing states, have invented stories in imitation of poems, in
+which there are nothing but superstitious examples concerning certain
+prayers, certain fastings, and certain additions of service for
+bringing in gain [where there are nothing but examples as to how the
+saints wore hair shirts, how they prayed at the seven canonical hours
+how they lived upon bread and water].  Such are the miracles that
+have been invented concerning rosaries and similar ceremonies.  Nor
+is there need here to recite examples.  For the legends, as they call
+them, and the mirrors of examples, and the rosaries, in which there
+are very many things not unlike the true narratives of Lucian, are
+extant.
+
+The bishops, theologians, and monks applaud these monstrous and
+wicked stories [this abomination set up against Christ, this
+blasphemy, these scandalous, shameless lies, these lying preachers;
+and they have permitted them so long, to the great injury of
+consciences, that it is terrible to think of it] because they aid
+them to their daily bread.  They do not tolerate us, who, in order
+that the honor and office of Christ may be more conspicuous, do not
+require the invocation of saints, and censure the abuses in the
+worship of saints.  And although [even their own theologians], all
+good men everywhere [a long time before Dr. Luther began to write] in
+the correction of these abuses, greatly longed for either the
+authority of the bishops or the diligence of the preachers,
+nevertheless our adversaries in the _Confutation_ altogether pass
+over vices that are even manifest, as though they wish, by the
+reception of the Confutation, to compel us to approve even the most
+notorious abuses.
+
+Thus the _Confutation_ has been deceitfully written, not only on this
+topic, but almost everywhere.  [They pretend that they are as pure as
+gold, that they have never muddled the water.] There is no passage in
+which they make a distinction between the manifest abuses and their
+dogmas.  And nevertheless, if there are any of sounder mind among
+them they confess that many false opinions inhere in the doctrine of
+the scholastics and canonists, and, besides, that in such ignorance
+and negligence of the pastors many abuses crept into the Church.  For
+Luther was not [the only one nor] the first to complain of
+[innumerable] public abuses.  Many learned and excellent men long
+before these times deplored the abuses of the Mass, confidence in
+monastic observances, services to the saints intended to yield a
+revenue, the confusion of the doctrine concerning repentance
+[concerning Christ], which ought to be as clear and plain in the
+Church as possible [without which there cannot be nor remain a
+Christian Church].  We ourselves have heard that excellent
+theologians desire moderation in the scholastic doctrine which
+contains much more for philosophical quarrels than for piety.  And
+nevertheless, among these the older ones are generally nearer
+Scripture than are the more recent.  Thus their theology degenerated
+more and more.  Neither had many good men, who from the very first
+began to be friendly to Luther, any other reason than that they saw
+that he was freeing the minds of men from these labyrinths of most
+confused and infinite discussions which exist among the scholastic
+theologians and canonists, and was teaching things profitable for
+godliness.
+
+The adversaries, therefore, have not acted candidly in passing over
+the abuses when they wished us to assent to the Confutation.  And if
+they wished to care for the interests of the Church [and of Buffeted
+consciences, and not rather to maintain their pomp and avarice]
+especially on that topic, at this occasion they ought to exhort our
+most excellent Emperor to take measures for the correction of abuses
+[which furnish grounds for derision among the Turks, the Jews, and
+all unbelievers], as we observe plainly enough that he is most
+desirous of healing and well establishing the Church.  But the
+adversaries do not act as to aid the most honorable and most holy
+will of the Emperor, but so as in every way to crush [the truth and]
+us.  Many signs show that they have little anxiety concerning the
+state of the Church.  [They lose little sleep from concern that
+Christian doctrine and the pure Gospel be preached.] They take no
+pains that there should be among the people a summary of the dogmas
+of the Church.  [The office of the ministry they permit to be quite
+desolate.] They defend manifest abuses [they continue every day to
+shed innocent blood] by new and unusual cruelty.  They allow no
+suitable teachers in the churches.  Good men can easily judge whither
+these things tend.  But in this way they have no regard to the
+interest either of their own authority or of the Church.  For after
+the good teachers have been killed and sound doctrine suppressed,
+fanatical spirits will rise up, whom the adversaries will not be able
+to restrain, who both will disturb the Church with godless dogmas,
+and will overthrow the entire ecclesiastical government, which we are
+very greatly desirous of maintaining.
+
+Therefore, most excellent Emperor Charles for the sake of the glory
+of Christ, which we have no doubt that you desire to praise and
+magnify, we beseech you not to assent to the violent counsels of our
+adversaries, but to seek other honorable ways of so establishing
+harmony that godly consciences are not burdened, that no cruelty is
+exercised against innocent men, as we have hitherto seen, and that
+sound doctrine is not suppressed in the Church.  To God most of all
+you owe the duty [as far as this is possible to man] to maintain
+sound doctrine and hand it down to posterity, and to defend those who
+teach what is right.  For God demands this when He honors kings with
+His own name and calls them gods, saying, Ps. 82, 6: I have said, Ye
+are gods, namely, that they should attend to the preservation and
+propagation of divine things, i.e., the Gospel of Christ, on the
+earth, and, as the vicars of God, should defend the life and safety
+of the innocent [true Christian teachers and preachers].
+
+
+
+
+Part 27
+
+
+Article XXII (X): _Of Both Kinds in the Lord's Supper._
+
+It cannot be doubted that it is godly and in accordance with the
+institution of Christ and the words of Paul to use both parts in the
+Lord's Supper.  For Christ instituted both parts, and instituted them
+not for a part of the Church, but for the entire Church.  For not
+only the presbyters, but the entire Church uses the Sacrament by the
+authority of Christ, and not by human authority, and this, we suppose,
+the adversaries acknowledge.  Now, if Christ has instituted it for
+the entire Church, why is one kind denied to a part of the Church?
+Why is the use of the other kind prohibited?  Why is the ordinance of
+Christ changed, especially when He Himself calls it His testament?
+But if it is not allowable to annul man's testament, much less will
+it be allowable to annul the testament of Christ.  And Paul says, 1
+Cor. 11, 23 ff., that he had received of the Lord that which he
+delivered.  But he had delivered the use of both kinds, as the text,
+1 Cor. 11, clearly shows.  This do [in remembrance of Me], he says
+first concerning His body; afterwards he repeats the same words
+concerning the cup [the blood of Christ].  And then: Let a man
+examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread and drink of that
+cup.  [Here he names both.] These are the words of Him who has
+instituted the Sacrament.  And, indeed, he says before that those who
+will use the Lord's Supper should use both.  It is evident, therefore,
+that the Sacrament was instituted for the entire Church.  And the
+custom still remains in the Greek churches, and also once obtained in
+the Latin churches, as Cyprian and Jerome testify.  For thus Jerome
+says on Zephaniah: The priests who administer the Eucharist, and
+distribute the Lord's blood to the people, etc. The Council of Toledo
+gives the same testimony.  Nor would it be difficult to accumulate a
+great multitude of testimonies.  Here we exaggerate nothing; we but
+leave the prudent reader to determine what should be held concerning
+the divine ordinance [whether it is proper to prohibit and change an
+ordinance and institution of Christ].
+
+The adversaries in the _Confutation_ do not endeavor to [comfort the
+consciences or] excuse the Church, to which one part of the Sacrament
+has been denied.  This would have been becoming to good and religious
+men.  For a strong reason for excusing the Church, and instructing
+consciences to whom only a part of the Sacrament could be granted,
+should have been sought.  Now these very men maintain that it is
+right to prohibit the other part, and forbid that the use of both
+parts be allowed.  First, they imagine that, in the beginning of the
+Church, it was the custom at some places that only one part was
+administered.  Nevertheless they are not able to produce any ancient
+example of this matter.  But they cite the passages in which mention
+is made of bread, as in Luke 24, 35 where it is written that the
+disciples recognized Christ in the breaking of bread.  They quote
+also other passages, Acts 2, 42. 46; 20, 7, concerning the breaking
+of bread.  But although we do not greatly oppose if some receive
+these passages as referring to the Sacrament, yet it does not follow
+that one part only was given, because, according to the ordinary
+usage of language, by the naming of one part the other is also
+signified.  They refer also to Lay Communion which was not the use of
+only one kind, but of both; and whenever priests are commanded to use
+Lay Communion [for a punishment are not to consecrate themselves, but
+to receive Communion, however, of both kinds from another], it is
+meant that they have been removed from the ministry of consecration.
+Neither are the adversaries ignorant of this, but they abuse the
+ignorance of the unlearned, who, when they hear of Lay Communion,
+immediately dream of the custom of our time, by which only a part of
+the Sacrament is given to the laymen.
+
+And consider their impudence.  Gabriel recounts among other reasons
+why both parts are not given that a distinction should be made
+between laymen and presbyters.  And it is credible that the chief
+reason why the prohibition of the one part is defended is this,
+namely, that the dignity of the order may be the more highly exalted
+by a religious rite.  To say nothing more severe, this is a human
+design; and whither this tends can easily be judged.  In the
+_Confutation_ they also quote concerning the sons of Eli that after
+the loss of the high-priesthood, they were to seek the one part
+pertaining to the priests, 1 Sam. 2, 36 [the text reads: Every one
+that is left in thine house shall come and crouch him for a piece of
+silver and a morsel of bread, and shall say, Put me, I pray thee,
+into one of the priest's offices (German: _Lieber, lass mich zu einem
+Priesterteil_) that I may eat a piece of bread].  Here they say that
+the use of one kind was signified.  And they add: "Thus, therefore,
+our laymen ought also to be content, with one part pertaining to the
+priests, with one kind." The adversaries [the masters of the
+_Confutation_ are quite shameless, rude asses, and] are clearly
+trifling when they are transferring the history of the posterity of
+Eli to the Sacrament.  The punishment of Eli is there described.
+Will they also say this, that as a punishment the laymen have been
+removed from the other party [They are quite foolish and mad.] The
+Sacrament was instituted to console and comfort terrified minds when
+they believe that the flesh of Christ given for the life of the world,
+is food, when they believe that, being joined to Christ [through
+this food], they are made alive.  But the adversaries argue that
+laymen are removed from the other part as a punishment.  "They ought,"
+they say, "to be content." This is sufficient for a despot.  [That,
+surely, sounds proud and defiant enough.] But [my lords, may we ask
+the reason] why ought they?  "The reason must not be asked but let
+whatever the theologians say be law." [Is whatever you wish and
+whatever you say to be sheer truth?  See now and be astonished how
+shameless and impudent the adversaries are: they dare to set up their
+own words as sheer commands of lords, they frankly say: The laymen
+must be content.  But what if they must not?] This is a concoction of
+Eck.  For we recognize those vainglorious words, which if we would
+wish to criticize, there would be no want of language.  For you see
+how great the impudence is.  He commands, as a tyrant in the
+tragedies: "Whether they wish or not, they must be content." Will the
+reasons which he cites excuse, in the judgment of God, those who
+prohibit a part of the Sacrament, and rage against men using an
+entire Sacrament?  [Are they to take comfort in the fact that it is
+recorded concerning the sons of Eli: They will go begging?  That will
+be a shuffling excuse at the judgment-seat of God.] If they make the
+prohibition in order that there should be a distinguishing mark of
+the order, this very reason ought to move us not to assent to the
+adversaries, even though we would be disposed in other respects to
+comply with their custom.  There are other distinguishing marks of
+the order of priests and of the people, but it is not obscure what
+design they have for defending this distinction so earnestly.  That
+we may not seem to detract from the true worth of the order, we will
+not say more concerning this shrewd design.
+
+They also allege the danger of spilling and certain similar things,
+which do not have force sufficient to change the ordinance of Christ.
+[They allege more dreams like these for the sake of which it would
+be improper to change the ordinance of Christ.] And, indeed, if we
+assume that we are free to use either one part or both, how can the
+prohibition [to use both kinds] be defended?  Although the Church
+does not assume to itself the liberty to convert the ordinances of
+Christ into matters of indifference.  We indeed excuse the Church
+which has borne the injury [the poor consciences which have been
+deprived of one part by force], since it could not obtain both parts;
+but the authors who maintain that the use of the entire Sacrament is
+justly prohibited, and who now not only prohibit, but even
+excommunicate and violently persecute those using an entire Sacrament,
+we do not excuse.  Let them see to it how they will give an account
+to God for their decisions.  Neither is it to be judged immediately
+that the Church determines or approves whatever the pontiffs
+determine, especially since Scripture prophesies concerning the
+bishops and pastors to effect this as Ezekiel says, 7, 28: The Law
+shall perish from the priest [there will be priests or bishops who
+will know no command or law of God].
+
+
+
+
+Part 28
+
+
+Article XXIII (XI): _Of the Marriage of Priests._
+
+
+Despite the great infamy of their defiled celibacy, the adversaries
+have the presumption not only to defend the pontifical law by the
+wicked and false pretext of the divine name, but even to exhort the
+Emperor and princes, to the disgrace and infamy of the Roman Empire,
+not to tolerate the marriage of priests.  For thus they speak.
+[Although the great, unheard-of lewdness, fornication, and adultery
+among priests, monks, etc., at the great abbeys, in other churches
+and cloisters, has become so notorious throughout the world that
+people sing and talk about it, still the adversaries who have
+presented the _Confutation_ are so blind and without shame that they
+defend the law of the Pope by which marriage is prohibited, and that,
+with the specious claim that they are defending a spiritual state.
+Moreover, although it would be proper for them to be heartily ashamed
+of the exceedingly shameful, lewd, abandoned loose life of the
+wretches in their abbeys and cloisters, although on this account
+alone they should not have the courage to show their face in broad
+daylight, although their evil, restless heart and conscience ought to
+cause them to tremble, to stand aghast, and to be afraid to lift
+their eyes to our excellent Emperor, who loves uprightness, still
+they have the courage of the hangman, they act like the very devil
+and like all reckless, wanton people, proceeding in blind defiance
+and forgetful of all honor and decency.  And these pure chaste
+gentlemen dare to admonish His Imperial Majesty, the Electors and
+Princes not to tolerate the marriage of priests _ad infamiam et
+ignominiam imperti_, that is, to ward off shame and disgrace from the
+Roman Empire.  For these are their words, as if their shameful life
+were a great honor and glory to the Church.]
+
+What greater impudence has ever been read of in any history than this
+of the adversaries?  [Such shameless advocates before a Roman Emperor
+will not easily be found.  If all the world did not know them, if
+many godly, upright people among them, their own canonical brethren,
+had not complained long ago of their shameful, lewd, indecent conduct,
+if their vile, abominable, ungodly, lewd, heathenish, Epicurean life,
+and the dregs of all filthiness at Rome were not quite manifest, one
+might think that their great purity and their inviolate virgin
+chastity were the reason why they could not bear to hear the word
+woman or marriage pronounced, and why they baptize holy matrimony,
+which the Pope himself calls a sacrament, _infamiam imperil_.] For
+the arguments which they use we shall afterwards review.  Now let the
+wise reader consider this, namely, what shame these good-for-nothing
+men have who say that marriages [which the Holy Scriptures praise
+most highly and command] produce infamy and disgrace to the
+government, as though, indeed, this public infamy of flagitious and
+unnatural lusts which glow among these very holy fathers, who feign
+that they are Curii and live like bacchanals, were a great ornament
+to the Church!  And most things which these men do with the greatest
+license cannot even be named without a breach of modesty.  And these
+their lusts they ask you to defend with your chaste right hand,
+Emperor Charles (whom even certain ancient predictions name as the
+king of modest face, for the saying appears concerning you: "One
+modest in face shall reign everywhere").  For they ask that, contrary
+to divine law, contrary to the law of nations, contrary to the canons
+of Councils you sunder marriages, in order to impose merely for the
+sake of marriage atrocious punishments upon innocent men, to put to
+death priests, whom even barbarians reverently spare, to drive into
+exile banished women and fatherless children.  Such laws they bring
+to you, most excellent and most chaste Emperor, to which no barbarity,
+however monstrous and cruel, could lend its ear.  But because the
+stain of no disgrace or cruelty falls upon your character, we hope
+that you will deal with us mildly in this matter, especially when you
+have learned that we have the weightiest reasons for our belief
+derived from the Word of God to which the adversaries oppose the most
+trifling and vain opinions.
+
+And nevertheless they do not seriously defend celibacy.  For they are
+not ignorant how few there are who practise chastity, but [they stick
+to that comforting saying which is found in their treatise, _Si non
+caste, tamen caue_ (If not chastely, at least cautiously) and] they
+devise a sham of religion for their dominion, which they think that
+celibacy profits, in order that we may understand Peter to have been
+right in admonishing, 2 Ep. 2, 1, that there will be false teachers
+who will deceive men with feigned words.  For the adversaries say,
+write, or do nothing truly [their words are merely an argument _ad
+hominem_], frankly, and candidly in this entire case, but they
+actually contend only concerning the dominion which they falsely
+think to be imperiled, and which they endeavor to fortify with a
+wicked pretense of godliness [they support their case with nothing
+but impious, hypocritical lies; accordingly, it will endure about as
+well as butter exposed to the sun].
+
+We cannot approve this law concerning celibacy which the adversaries
+defend, because it conflicts with divine and natural law and is at
+variance with the very canons of the Councils.  And that it is
+superstitious and dangerous is evident.  For it produces infinite
+scandals, sins, and corruption of public morals [as is seen in the
+real towns of priests, or, as they are called, their residences].
+Our other controversies need some discussion by the doctors; in this
+the subject is so manifest to both parties that it requires no
+discussion.  It only requires as judge a man that is honest and fears
+God.  And although the manifest truth is defended by us, yet the
+adversaries have devised certain reproaches for satirizing our
+arguments.
+
+First.  Gen. 1, 28 teaches that men were created to be fruitful, and
+that one sex in a proper way should desire the other.  For we are
+speaking not of concupiscence, which is sin, but of that appetite
+which was to have been in nature in its integrity [which would have
+existed in nature even if it had remained uncorrupted], which they
+call physical love.  And this love of one sex for the other is truly
+a divine ordinance.  But since this ordinance of God cannot be
+removed without an extraordinary work of God, it follows that the
+right to contract marriage cannot be removed by statutes or vows.
+
+The adversaries cavil at these arguments; they say that in the
+beginning the commandment was given to replenish the earth but that
+now since the earth has been replenished, marriage is not commanded.
+See how wisely they judge!  The nature of men is so formed by the
+word of God that it is fruitful not only in the beginning of the
+creation, but as long as this nature of our bodies will exist just as
+the earth becomes fruitful by the word Gen. 1, 11: Let the earth
+bring forth grass, yielding seed.  Because of this ordinance the
+earth not only commenced in the beginning to bring forth plants, but
+the fields are clothed every year as long as this natural order will
+exist.  Therefore, just as by human laws the nature of the earth
+cannot be changed, so, without a special work of God the nature of a
+human being can be changed neither by vows nor by human law [that a
+woman should not desire a man, nor a man a woman].
+
+Secondly.  And because this creation or divine ordinance in man is a
+natural right, jurists have accordingly said wisely and correctly
+that the union of male and female belongs to natural right.  But
+since natural right is immutable, the right to contract marriage must
+always remain.  For where nature does not change, that ordinance also
+with which God has endowed nature does not change, and cannot be
+removed by human laws.  Therefore it is ridiculous for the
+adversaries to prate that marriage was commanded in the beginning,
+but is not now.  This is the same as if they would say: Formerly,
+when men were born, they brought with them sex; now they do not.
+Formerly, when they were born, they brought with them natural right,
+now they do not.  No craftsman (Faber) could produce anything more
+crafty than these absurdities, which were devised to elude a right of
+nature.  Therefore let this remain in the case which both Scripture
+teaches and the jurist says wisely, namely, that the union of male
+and female belongs to natural right.  Moreover, a natural right is
+truly a divine right, because it is an ordinance divinely impressed
+upon nature.  But inasmuch as this right cannot be changed without an
+extraordinary work of God, it is necessary that the right to contract
+marriage remains, because the natural desire of sex for sex is an
+ordinance of God in nature, and for this reason is a right; otherwise,
+why would both sexes have been created?  And we are speaking, as it
+has been said above, not of concupiscence, which is sin, but of that
+desire which they call physical love [which would have existed
+between man and woman even though their nature had remained pure],
+which concupiscence has not removed from nature, but inflames, so
+that now it has greater need of a remedy, and marriage is necessary
+not only for the sake of procreation, but also as a remedy [to guard
+against sins].  These things are clear, and so well established that
+they can in no way be overthrown.
+
+Thirdly.  Paul says, 1 Cor. 7, 2: To avoid fornication, let every man
+have his own wife.  This now is an express command pertaining to all
+who are not fit for celibacy.  The adversaries ask that a commandment
+be shown them which commands priests to marry.  As though priests are
+not men!  We judge indeed that the things which we maintain
+concerning human nature in general pertain also to priests.  Does not
+Paul here command those who have not the gift of continence to marry?
+For he interprets himself a little after when he says, v. 9: It is
+better to marry than to burn.  And Christ has clearly said Matt. 19,
+11: All men cannot receive this saying, save they to whom it is given.
+Because now, since sin [since the fall of Adam], these two things
+concur, namely, natural appetite and concupiscence, which inflames
+the natural appetite, so that now there is more need of marriage than
+in nature in its integrity, Paul accordingly speaks of marriage as a
+remedy, and on account of these flames commands to marry.  Neither
+can any human authority, any law, any vows remove this declaration:
+It is better to marry than to burn, because they do not remove the
+nature or concupiscence.  Therefore all who burn, retain the right to
+marry.  By this commandment of Paul: To avoid fornication, let every
+man have his own wife, all are held bound who do not truly keep
+themselves continent; the decision concerning which pertains to the
+conscience of each one.
+
+For as they here give the command to seek continence of God, and to
+weaken the body by labors and hunger, why do they not proclaim these
+magnificent commandments to themselves?  But, as we have said above,
+the adversaries are only playing; they are doing nothing seriously.
+If continence were possible to all, it would not require a peculiar
+gift.  But Christ shows that it has need of a peculiar gift;
+therefore it does not belong to all.  God wishes the rest to use the
+common law of nature which He has instituted.  For God does not wish
+His ordinances, His creations to be despised.  He wishes men to be
+chaste in this way, that they use the remedy divinely presented, just
+as He wishes to nourish our life in this way, that we use food and
+drink.  Gerson also testifies that there have been many good men who
+endeavored to subdue the body, and yet made little progress.
+Accordingly, Ambrose is right in saying: Virginity is only a thing
+that can be recommended, but not commanded; it is a matter of vow
+rather than of precept.  If any one here would raise the objection
+that Christ praises those which have made themselves eunuchs for the
+kingdom of heaven's sake, Matt. 19, 12, let him also consider this,
+that He is praising such as have the gift of continence, for on this
+account He adds: He that is able to receive it, let him receive it.
+For an impure continence [such as there is in monasteries and
+cloisters] does not please Christ.  We also praise true continence.
+But now we are disputing concerning the law and concerning those who
+do not have the gift of continence.  The matter ought to be left free
+and snares ought not to be cast upon the weak through this law.
+
+Fourthly.  The pontifical law differs also from the canons of the
+Councils.  For the ancient canons do not prohibit marriage, neither
+do they dissolve marriages that have been contracted, even if they
+remove from the administration of their office those who have
+contracted them in the ministry.  At those times this dismissal was
+an act of kindness [rather than a punishment].  But the new canons,
+which have not been framed in the Synods, but have been made
+according to the private judgment of the Popes, both prohibit the
+contraction of marriages, and dissolve them when contracted; and this
+is to be done openly, contrary to the command of Christ, Matt. 19, 6:
+What God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.  In the
+_Confutation_ the adversaries exclaim that celibacy has been
+commanded by the Councils.  We do not find fault with the decrees of
+the Councils; for under a certain condition these allow marriage, but
+we find fault with the laws which, since the ancient Synods, the
+Popes of Rome have framed contrary to the authority of the Synods.
+The Popes despise the authority of the Synods, just as much as they
+wish it to appear holy to others [under peril of God's wrath and
+eternal damnation].  Therefore this law concerning perpetual celibacy
+is peculiar to this new pontifical despotism.  Nor is it without a
+reason.  For Daniel, 11, 37, ascribes to the kingdom of Antichrist
+this mark, namely, the contempt of women.
+
+Fifthly.  Although the adversaries do not defend the law because of
+superstition, [not because of its sanctity, as from ignorance], since
+they see that it is not generally observed, nevertheless they diffuse
+superstitious opinions, while they give a pretext of religion.  They
+proclaim that they require celibacy because it is purity.  As though
+marriage were impurity and a sin, or as though celibacy merited
+justification more than does marriage!  And to this end they cite the
+ceremonies of the Mosaic Law, because, since under the Law, the
+priests, at the time of ministering, were separated from their wives,
+the priest in the New Testament, inasmuch as he ought always to pray,
+ought always to practise continence.  This silly comparison is
+presented as a proof which should compel priests to perpetual
+celibacy, although, indeed, in this very comparison marriage is
+allowed, only in the time of ministering its use is interdicted.  And
+it is one thing to pray; another, to minister.  The saints prayed
+even when they did not exercise the public ministry; nor did conjugal
+intercourse hinder them from praying.
+
+But we shall reply in order to these figments.  In the first place,
+it is necessary for the adversaries to acknowledge this, namely, that
+in believers marriage is pure because it has been sanctified by the
+Word of God, i.e., it is a matter that is permitted and approved by
+the Word of God, as Scripture abundantly testifies.  For Christ calls
+marriage a divine union, when He says, Matt. 19, 6: What God hath
+joined together [let not man put asunder.  Here Christ says that
+married people are joined together by God.  Accordingly, it is a pure,
+holy, noble, praiseworthy work of God].  And Paul says of marriage,
+of meats and similar things, I Tim. 4, 6: It is sanctified by the
+Word of God and prayer, i.e., by the Word, by which consciences
+become certain that God approves; and by prayer, i.e., by faith,
+which uses it with thanksgiving as a gift of God.  Likewise, 1 Cor. 7,
+14: The unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, etc., i.e..
+the use of marriage is permitted and holy on account of faith in
+Christ, just as it is permitted to use meat, etc. Likewise, 1 Tim. 2,
+16: She shall, be saved in childbearing [if they continue in faith],
+etc. If the adversaries could produce such a passage concerning
+celibacy, then indeed they would celebrate a wonderful triumph.  Paul
+says that woman is saved by child-bearing.  What more honorable could
+be said against the hypocrisy of celibacy than that woman is saved by
+the conjugal works themselves, by conjugal intercourse, by bearing
+children and the other duties?  But what does St. Paul mean?  Let the
+reader observe that faith is added, and that domestic duties without
+faith are not praised.  If they continue, he says, in faith.  For he
+speaks of the whole class of mothers.  Therefore he requires
+especially faith [that they should have God's Word and be believing],
+by which woman receives the remission of sins and justification.
+Then he adds a particular work of the calling, just as in every man a
+good work of a particular calling ought to follow faith.  This work
+pleases God on account of faith.  Thus the duties of the woman please
+God on account of faith, and the believing woman is saved who in such
+duties devoutly serves her calling.
+
+These testimonies teach that marriage is a lawful [a holy and
+Christian] thing.  If therefore purity signifies that which is
+allowed and approved before God, marriages are pure, because they
+have been approved by the Word of God.  And Paul says of lawful
+things, Titus 1, 15: Unto the pure all things are pure, i.e., to
+those who believe in Christ and are righteous by faith.  Therefore,
+as virginity is impure in the godless, so in the godly marriage is
+pure on account of the Word of God and faith.
+
+Again, if purity is properly opposed to concupiscence, it signifies
+purity of heart, i.e., mortified concupiscence, because the Law does
+not prohibit marriage, but concupiscence, adultery, fornication.
+Therefore celibacy is not purity.  For there may be greater purity of
+heart in a married man, as in Abraham or Jacob, than in most of those
+who are even truly continent [who even, according to bodily purity,
+really maintain their chastity].
+
+Lastly, if they understand that celibacy is purity in the sense that
+it merits justification more than does marriage, we most emphatically
+contradict it.  For we are justified neither on account of virginity
+nor on account of marriage, but freely for Christ's sake, when we
+believe that for His sake God is propitious to us.  Here perhaps they
+will exclaim that, according to the manner of Jovinian, marriage is
+made equal to virginity.  But, on account of such clamors we shall
+not reject the truth concerning the righteousness of faith, which we
+have explained above.  Nevertheless we do not make virginity and
+marriage equal.  For just as one gift surpasses another, as prophecy
+surpasses eloquence, the science of military affairs surpasses
+agriculture, and eloquence surpasses architecture, so virginity is a
+more excellent gift than marriage.  And nevertheless, just as an
+orator is not more righteous before God because of his eloquence than
+an architect because of his skill in architecture, so a virgin does
+not merit justification by virginity more than a married person
+merits it by conjugal duties but each one ought faithfully to serve
+in his own gift, and to believe that for Christ's sake he receives
+the remission of sins and by faith is accounted righteous before God.
+
+Neither does Christ or Paul praise virginity because it justifies,
+but because it is freer and less distracted with domestic occupations,
+in praying, teaching, [writing,] serving.  For this reason Paul says,
+1 Cor. 7, 32: He that is unmarried careth for the things which
+belong to the Lord.  Virginity, therefore, is praised on account of
+meditation and study.  Thus Christ does not simply praise those who
+make themselves eunuchs, but adds, for the kingdom of heaven's sake,
+i.e., that they may have leisure to learn or teach the Gospel; for He
+does not say that virginity merits the remission of sins or salvation.
+
+To the examples of the Levitical priests we have replied that they do
+not establish the duty of imposing perpetual celibacy upon the
+priests.  Furthermore, the Levitical impurities are not to be
+transferred to us.  [The law of Moses, with the ceremonial statutes
+concerning what is clean or unclean, do not at all concern us
+Christians.] Then intercourse contrary to the Law was an impurity.
+Now it is not impurity, because Paul says, Titus 1, 15: Unto the pure
+all things are pure.  For the Gospel frees us from these Levitical
+impurities [from all the ceremonies of Moses, and not alone from the
+laws concerning uncleanness].  And if any one defends the law of
+celibacy with the design to burden consciences by these Levitical
+observances, we must strive against this, just as the apostles in
+Acts 15, 10 sqq. strove against those who required circumcision and
+endeavored to impose the Law of Moses upon Christians.
+
+Yet, in the mean while, good men will know how to control the use of
+marriage, especially when they are occupied with public offices,
+which often, indeed, give good men so much labor as to expel all
+domestic thoughts from their minds.  [For to be burdened with great
+affairs and transactions, which concern commonwealths and nations,
+governments and churches, is a good remedy to keep the old Adam from
+lustfulness.] Good men know also this, that Paul, 1 Thess. 4, 4,
+commands that every one possess his vessel in sanctification [and
+honor, not in the lust of concupiscence].  They know likewise that
+they must sometimes retire, in order that there may be leisure for
+prayer, but Paul does not wish this to be perpetual, 1 Cor. 7, 5. Now
+such continence is easy to those who are good and occupied.  But this
+great crowd of unemployed priests which is in the fraternities cannot
+afford, in this voluptuousness, even this Levitical continence, as
+the facts show.  [On the other hand, what sort of chastity can there
+be among so many thousands of monks and priests who live without
+worry in all manner of delights, being idle and full, and, moreover,
+have not the Word of God, do not learn it, and have no regard for it.
+Such conditions bring on all manner of inchastity.  Such people can
+observe neither Levitical nor perpetual chastity.] And the lines are
+well known: The boy accustomed to pursue a slothful life hates those
+who are busy.
+
+Many heretics understanding the Law of Moses incorrectly have treated
+marriage with contempt, for whom, nevertheless, celibacy has gained
+extraordinary admiration.  And Epiphanius complains that, by this
+commendation especially, the Encratites captured the minds of the
+unwary.  They abstained from wine even in the Lord's Supper; they
+abstained from the flesh of all animals, in which they surpassed the
+Dominican brethren who live upon fish.  They abstained also from
+marriage; and just this gained the chief admiration.  These works,
+these services, they thought, merited grace more than the use of wine
+and flesh, and than marriage, which seemed to be a profane and
+unclean matter, and which scarcely could please God, even though it
+were not altogether condemned.
+
+Paul to the Colossians, 2, 18, greatly disapproves these angelic
+forms of worship.  For when men believe that they are pure and
+righteous on account of such hypocrisy, they suppress the knowledge
+of Christ, and suppress also the knowledge of God's gifts and
+commandments.  For God wishes us to use His gifts in a godly way.
+And we might mention examples where certain godly consciences were
+greatly disturbed on account of the lawful use of marriage.  This
+evil was derived from the opinions of monks superstitiously praising
+celibacy [and proclaiming the married estate as a life that would be
+a great obstacle to salvation, and full of sins].  Nevertheless we do
+not find fault with temperance or continence, but we have said above
+that exercises and mortifications of the body are necessary.  We
+indeed deny that confidence should be placed in certain observances,
+as though they made righteous.  And Epiphanies has elegantly said
+that these observances ought to be praised dia tehn egkrateian kai
+dia tehn politeian, i.e., for restraining the body or on account of
+public morals; just as certain rites were instituted for instructing
+the ignorant, and not as services that justify.
+
+But it is not through superstition that our adversaries require
+celibacy, for they know that chastity is not ordinarily rendered
+[that at Rome, also in all their monasteries, there is nothing but
+undisguised, unconcealed inchastity.  Nor do they seriously intend to
+lead chaste lives, but knowingly practise hypocrisy before the
+people].  But they feign superstitious opinions, so as to delude the
+ignorant.  They are therefore more worthy of hatred than the
+Encratites, who seem to have erred by show of religion; these
+Sardanapali [Epicureans] designedly misuse the pretext of religion.
+
+Sixthly.  Although we have so many reasons for disapproving the law
+of perpetual celibacy, yet, besides these, dangers to souls and
+public scandals also are added, which even, though the law were not
+unjust, ought to deter good men from approving such a burden as has
+destroyed innumerable souls.
+
+For a long time all good men [their own bishops and canons] have
+complained of this burden, either on their own account, or on account
+of others whom they saw to be in danger.  But no Popes give ear to
+these complaints.  Neither is it doubtful how greatly injurious to
+public morals this law is, and what vices and shameful lusts it has
+produced.  The Roman satires are extant.  In these Rome still
+recognizes and reads its own morals.
+
+Thus God avenges the contempt of His own gift and ordinance in those
+who prohibit marriage.  But since the custom in regard to other laws
+was that they should be changed if manifest utility would advise it,
+why is the same not done with respect to this law, in which so many
+weighty reasons concur, especially in these last times, why a change
+ought to be made?  Nature is growing old and is gradually becoming
+weaker, and vices are increasing; wherefore the remedies divinely
+given should have been employed.  We see what vice it was which God
+denounced before the Flood, what He denounced before the burning of
+the five cities.  Similar vices have preceded the destruction of many
+other cities, as of Sybaris and Rome.  And in these there has been
+presented an image of the times which will be next to the end of
+things.  Accordingly, at this time, marriage ought to have been
+especially defended by the most severe laws and warning examples, and
+men ought to have been invited to marriage.  This duty pertains to
+the magistrates, who ought to maintain public discipline.  [God has
+now so blinded the world that adultery and fornication are permitted
+almost without punishment, on the contrary, punishment is inflicted
+on account of marriage.  Is not this terrible to hear?] Meanwhile the
+teachers of the Gospel should do both, they should exhort incontinent
+men to marriage, and should exhort others not to despise the gift of
+continence.
+
+The Popes daily dispense and daily change other laws which are most
+excellent, yet, in regard to this one law of celibacy, they are as
+iron and inexorable, although, indeed, it is manifest that this is
+simply of human right.  And they are now making this law more
+grievous in many ways.  The canon bids them suspend priests, these
+rather unfriendly interpreters suspend them not from office, but from
+trees.  They cruelly kill many men for nothing but marriage.  [It is
+to be feared therefore, that the blood of Abel will cry to heaven so
+loudly as not to be endured, and that we shall have to tremble like
+Cain.] And these very parricides show that this law is a doctrine of
+demons.  For since the devil is a murderer, he defends his law by
+these parricides.
+
+We know that there is some offense in regard to schism, because we
+seem to have separated from those who are thought to be regular
+bishops.  But our consciences are very secure, since we know that,
+though we most earnestly desire to establish harmony, we cannot
+please the adversaries unless we cast away manifest truth, and then
+agree with these very men in being willing to defend this unjust law,
+to dissolve marriages that have been contracted, to put to death
+priests if they do not obey, to drive poor women and fatherless
+children into exile.  But since it is well established that these
+conditions are displeasing to God, we can in no way grieve that we
+have no alliance with the multitude of murderers among the
+adversaries.
+
+We have explained the reasons why we cannot assent with a good
+conscience to the adversaries when they defend the pontifical law
+concerning perpetual celibacy, because it conflicts with divine and
+natural law and is at variance with the canons themselves, and is
+superstitious and full of danger, and, lastly, because the whole
+affair is insincere.  For the law is enacted not for the sake of
+religion [not for holiness' sake, or because they do not know better;
+they know very well that everybody is well acquainted with the
+condition of the great cloisters, which we are able to name], but for
+the sake of dominion, and this is wickedly given the pretext of
+religion.  Neither can anything be produced by sane men against these
+most firmly established reasons.  The Gospel allows marriage to those
+to whom it is necessary.  Nevertheless, it does not compel those to
+marry who can be continent, provided they be truly continent.  We
+hold that this liberty should also be conceded to the priests, nor do
+we wish to compel any one by force to celibacy, nor to dissolve
+marriages that have been contracted.
+
+We have also indicated incidentally, while we have recounted our
+arguments, how the adversaries cavil at several of these; and we have
+explained away these false accusations.  Now we shall relate as
+briefly as possible with what important reasons they defend the law.
+First, they say that it has been revealed by God.  You see the
+extreme impudence of these sorry fellows.  They dare to affirm that
+the law of perpetual celibacy has been divinely revealed, although it
+is contrary to manifest testimonies of Scripture, which command that
+to avoid fornication each one should have his own wife, 1 Cor. 7, 2;
+which likewise forbid to dissolve marriages that have been contracted;
+cf.  Matt. 6, 32; 19, 6; 1 Cor. 7, 27. [What can the knaves say in
+reply?  And how dare they wantonly and shamelessly misapply the great,
+most holy name of the divine Majesty?] Paul reminds us what an
+author such a law was to have when he calls it a doctrine of demons,
+1 Tim. 4, 1. And the fruits show their author, namely, so many
+monstrous lusts and so many murders which are now committed under the
+pretext of that law [as can be seen at Rome].
+
+The second argument of the adversaries is that the priests ought to
+be pure, according to Is. 52, 11: Be ye clean that bear the vessels
+of the Lord.  And they cite many things to this effect.  This reason
+which they display we have above removed as especially specious.  For
+we have said that virginity without faith is not purity before God,
+and marriage, on account of faith, is pure, according to Titus 1, 16:
+Unto the pure all things are pure.  We have said also this, that
+outward purity and the ceremonies of the Law are not to be
+transferred hither, because the Gospel requires purity of heart, and
+does not require the ceremonies of the Law.  And it may occur that
+the heart of a husband, as of Abraham or Jacob, who were polygamists,
+is purer and burns less with lusts than that of many virgins who are
+even truly continent.  But what Isaiah says: Be ye clean that bear
+the vessels of the Lord, ought to be understood as referring to
+cleanness of heart and to the entire repentance.  Besides, the saints
+will know in the exercise of marriage how far it is profitable to
+restrain its use, and as Paul says, 1 Thess. 4, 4, to possess his
+vessel in sanctification.  Lastly, since marriage is pure, it is
+rightly said to those who are not continent in celibacy that they
+should marry wives in order to be pure.  Thus the same law: Be ye
+clean that bear the vessels of the Lord, commands that impure
+celibates become pure husbands [impure unmarried priests become pure
+married priests].
+
+The third argument is horrible, namely, that the marriage of priests
+is the heresy of Jovinian.  Fine-sounding words!  [Pity on our poor
+souls, dear sirs; proceed gently!] This is a new crime, that marriage
+[which God instituted in Paradise] is a heresy!  [In that case all
+the world would be children of heretics.] In the time of Jovinian the
+world did not as yet know the law concerning perpetual celibacy.
+[This our adversaries know very well.] Therefore it is an impudent
+falsehood that the marriage of priests is the heresy of Jovinian, or
+that such marriage was then condemned by the Church.  In such
+passages we can see what design the adversaries had in writing the
+_Confutation_.  They judged that the ignorant would be thus most
+easily excited, if they would frequently hear the reproach of heresy,
+if they pretend that our cause had been dispatched and condemned by
+many previous decisions of the Church.  Thus they frequently cite
+falsely the judgment of the Church.  Because they are not ignorant of
+this, they were unwilling to exhibit to us a copy of their Apology,
+lest this falsehood and these reproaches might be exposed.  Our
+opinion, however, as regards the case of Jovinian, concerning the
+comparison of virginity and marriage, we have expressed above.  For
+we do not make marriage and virginity equal, although neither
+virginity nor marriage merits justification.
+
+By such false arguments they defend a law that is godless and
+destructive to good morals.  By such reasons they set the minds of
+princes firmly against God's judgment [the princes and bishops who
+believe this teaching will see whether their reasons will endure the
+test when the hour of death arrives], in which God will call them to
+account as to why they have dissolved marriages, and why they have
+tortured [flogged and impaled] and killed priests [regardless of the
+cries, wails, and tears of so many widows and orphans].  For do not
+doubt but that, as the blood of dead Abel cried out, Gen. 4, 10, so
+the blood of many good men against whom they have unjustly raged,
+will also cry out.  And God will avenge this cruelty; there you will
+discover how empty are these reasons of the adversaries, and you will
+perceive that in God's judgment no calumnies against God's Word
+remain standing, as Isaiah says, 40, 6: All flesh is grass, and all
+the goodliness thereof is as the flower of the field [that their
+arguments are straw and hay, and God a consuming fire, before whom
+nothing but God's Word can abide, 1 Pet. 1, 24].
+
+Whatever may happen, our princes will be able to console themselves
+with the consciousness of right counsels, because even though the
+priests would have done wrong in contracting marriages, yet this
+disruption of marriages, these proscriptions, and this cruelty are
+manifestly contrary to the will and Word of God.  Neither does
+novelty or dissent delight our princes, but especially in a matter
+that is not doubtful more regard had to be paid to the Word of God
+than to all other things.
+
+
+
+
+Part 29
+
+
+Article XXIV (XII): _Of the Mass._
+
+At the outset we must again make the preliminary statement that we do
+not abolish the Mass, but religiously maintain and defend it.  For
+among us masses are celebrated every Lord's Day and on the other
+festivals, in which the Sacrament is offered to those who wish to use
+it, after they have been examined and absolved.  And the usual public
+ceremonies are observed, the series of lessons of prayers, vestments,
+and other like things.
+
+The adversaries have a long declamation concerning the use of the
+Latin language in the Mass, in which they absurdly trifle as to how
+it profits [what a great merit is achieved by] an unlearned hearer to
+hear in the faith of the Church a Mass which he does not understand.
+They evidently imagine that the mere work of hearing is a service,
+that it profits without being understood.  We are unwilling to
+malignantly pursue these things, but we leave them to the judgment of
+the reader.  We mention them only for the purpose of stating in
+passing, that also among us the Latin lessons and prayers are
+retained.
+
+Since ceremonies, however, ought to be observed both to teach men
+Scripture, and that those admonished by the Word may conceive faith
+and fear [of God, and obtain comfort] and thus also may pray (for
+these are the designs of ceremonies ), we retain the Latin language
+on account of those who are learning and understand Latin, and we
+mingle with it German hymns, in order that the people also may have
+something to learn, and by which faith and fear may be called forth.
+This custom has always existed in the churches.  For although some
+more frequently, and others more rarely, introduced German hymns,
+nevertheless the people almost everywhere sang something in their own
+tongue.  [Therefore, this is not such a new departure.] It has,
+however, nowhere been written or represented that the act of hearing
+lessons not understood profits men, or that ceremonies profit, not
+because they teach or admonish, but _ex opere operato_, because they
+are thus performed or are looked upon.  Away with such pharisaic
+opinions!  [Ye sophists ought to be heartily ashamed of such dreams!]
+
+The fact that we hold only Public or Common Mass [at which the people
+also commune, not Private Mass] is no offense against the Church
+catholic.  For in the Greek churches even to-day private Masses are
+not held, but there is only a public Mass, and that on the Lord's Day
+and festivals.  In the monasteries daily Mass is held, but this is
+only public.  These are the traces of former customs.  For nowhere do
+the ancient writers before Gregory make mention of private Masses.
+We now omit noticing the nature of their origin.  It is evident that
+after the mendicant monks began to prevail, from most false opinions
+and on account of gain they were so increased that all good men for a
+long time desired some limit to this thing.  Although St. Francis
+wished to provide aright for this matter, as he decided that each
+fraternity should be content with a single common Mass daily,
+afterwards this was changed, either by superstition or for the sake
+of gain.  Thus, where it is of advantage, they themselves change the
+institutions of the Fathers; and afterwards they cite against us the
+authority of the Fathers.  Epiphanius writes that in Asia the
+Communion was celebrated three times a week, and that there were no
+daily Masses.  And indeed he says that this custom was handed down
+from the apostles.  For he speaks thus: Assemblies for Communion were
+appointed by the apostles to be held on the fourth day, on Sabbath
+eve, and the Lord's Day.
+
+Moreover, although the adversaries collect many testimonies on this
+topic to prove that the Mass is a sacrifice, yet this great tumult of
+words will be quieted when the single reply is advanced that this
+line of authorities, reasons and testimonies, however long, does not
+prove that the Mass confers grace er opere operato, or that, when
+applied on behalf of others, it merits for them the remission of
+venial and mortal sins, of guilt and punishment.  This one reply
+overthrows all objections of the adversaries, not only in this
+_Confutation_, but in all writings which they have published
+concerning the Mass.
+
+And this is the issue [the principal question] of the case of which
+our readers are to be admonished, as Aeschines admonished the judges
+that just as boxers contend with one another for their position, so
+they should strive with their adversary concerning the controverted
+point, and not permit him to wander beyond the case.  In the same
+manner our adversaries ought to be here compelled to speak on the
+subject presented.  And when the controverted point has been
+thoroughly understood, a decision concerning the arguments on both
+sides will be very easy.
+
+For in our Confession we have shown that we hold that the Lord's
+Supper does not confer _grace ex opere operato_, and that, when
+applied on behalf of others, alive or dead, it does not merit for
+them _ex opere operato_ the remission of sins, of guilt or of
+punishment.  And of this position a clear and firm proof exists in
+that it is impossible to obtain the remission of our sins on account
+of our own work _ex opere operato_ [even when there is not a good
+thought in the heart], but the terrors of sin and death must be
+overcome by faith when we comfort our hearts with the knowledge of
+Christ, and believe that for Christ's sake we are forgiven, and that
+the merits and righteousness of Christ are granted us, Rom. 5, 1:
+Being justified by faith, we have peace.  These things are so sure
+and so firm that they can stand against all the gates of hell.
+
+If we are to say only as much as is necessary, the case has already
+been stated.  For no sane man can approve that pharisaic and heathen
+opinion concerning the _opus operatum_.  And nevertheless this
+opinion inheres in the people, and has increased infinitely the
+number of masses.  For masses are purchased to appease God's wrath,
+and by this work they wish to obtain the remission of guilt and of
+punishment; they wish to procure whatever is necessary in every kind
+of life [health riches, prosperity, and success in business].  They
+wish even to liberate the dead.  Monks and sophists have taught this
+pharisaic opinion in the Church.
+
+But although our case has already been stated, yet, because the
+adversaries foolishly pervert many passages of Scripture to the
+defense of their errors, we shall add a few things on this topic.  In
+the _Confutation_ they have said many things concerning "sacrifice,"
+although in our Confession we purposely avoided this term on account
+of its ambiguity.  We have set forth what those persons whose abuses
+we condemn now understand as a sacrifice.  Now, in order to explain
+the passages of Scripture that have been wickedly perverted, it is
+necessary in the beginning to set forth what a sacrifice is.  Already
+for an entire period of ten years the adversaries have published
+almost infinite volumes concerning sacrifice, and yet not one of them
+thus far has given a definition of sacrifice.  They only seize upon
+the name "sacrifices" either from the Scriptures or the Fathers [and
+where they find it in the Concordances of the Bible apply it here,
+whether it fits or not].  Afterward they append their own dreams, as
+though indeed a sacrifice signifies whatever pleases them.
+
+
+
+
+Part 30
+
+
+_What a Sacrifice Is, and What Are the Species of Sacrifice._
+
+[Now, lest we plunge blindly into this business, we must indicate, in
+the first place, a distinction as to what is, and what is not, a
+sacrifice.  To know this is expedient and good for all Christians.]
+Socrates, in the Phaedrus of Plato, says that he is especially fond
+of divisions, because without these nothing can either be explained
+or understood in speaking, and if he discovers any one skilful in
+making divisions, he says that he attends and follows his footsteps
+as those of a god.  And he instructs the one dividing to separate the
+members in their very joints, lest, like an unskilful cook, he break
+to pieces some member.  But the adversaries wonderfully despise these
+precepts, and, according to Plato, are truly _kakoi mageiroi_ (poor
+butchers), since they break the members of "sacrifice," as can be
+understood when we have enumerated the species of sacrifice.
+Theologians are rightly accustomed to distinguish between a Sacrament
+and a sacrifice.  Therefore let the genus comprehending both of these
+be either a ceremony or a sacred work.  A Sacrament is a ceremony or
+work in which God presents to us that which the promise annexed to
+the ceremony offers; as Baptism is a work, not which we offer to God
+but in which God baptizes us, i.e., a minister in the place of God;
+and God here offers and presents the remission of sins, etc.,
+according to the promise, Mark 16, 16: He that believeth and is
+baptized shall be saved.  A sacrifice, on the contrary, is a ceremony
+or work which we render God in order to afford Him honor.
+
+Moreover, the proximate species of sacrifice are two, and there are
+no more.  One is the propitiatory sacrifice, i.e., a work which makes
+satisfaction for guilt and punishment, i.e., one that reconciles God,
+or appeases God's wrath, or which merits the remission of sins for
+others.  The other species is the eucharistic sacrifice, which does
+not merit the remission of sins or reconciliation, but is rendered by
+those who have been reconciled, in order that we may give thanks or
+return gratitude for the remission of sins that has been received, or
+for other benefits received.
+
+These two species of sacrifice we ought especially to have in view
+and placed before the eyes in this controversy, as well as in many
+other discussions; and especial care must be taken lest they be
+confounded.  But if the limits of this book would suffer it, we would
+add the reasons for this division.  For it has many testimonies in
+the Epistle to the Hebrews and elsewhere.  And all Levitical
+sacrifices can be referred to these members as to their own homes
+[genera].  For in the Law certain sacrifices were named propitiatory
+on account of their signification or similitude; not because they
+merited the remission of sins before God, but because they merited
+the remission of sins according to the righteousness of the Law, in
+order that those for whom they were made might not be excluded from
+that commonwealth [from the people of Israel].  Therefore they were
+called sin-offerings and burnt offerings for a trespass.  Whereas the
+eucharistic sacrifices were the oblation, the drink-offering,
+thank-offerings, first-fruits, tithes.
+
+[Thus there have been in the Law emblems of the true sacrifice.] But
+in fact there has been only one propitiatory sacrifice in the world,
+namely, the death of Christ, as the Epistle to the Hebrews teaches,
+which says, 10, 4: It is not possible that the blood of bulls and of
+goats should take away sins.  And a little after, of the [obedience
+and] will of Christ, v. 10: By the which will we are sanctified by
+the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.  And Isaiah
+interprets the Law, in order that we may know that the death of
+Christ is truly a satisfaction for our sins, or expiation, and that
+the ceremonies of the Law are not, wherefore he says, 53, 10: When
+Thou shalt make His soul an offering for sin, He will see His seed,
+etc. For the word employed here, _'shm_, signifies a victim for
+transgression; which signified in the Law that a certain Victim was
+to come to make satisfaction for our sins and reconcile God in order
+that men might know that God wishes to be reconciled to us, not on
+account of our own righteousnesses, but on account of the merits of
+another, namely, of Christ.  Paul interprets the same word _'shm_ as
+sin, Rom. 8, 3: For sin (God) condemned sin, i.e., He punished sin
+for sin, i.e., by a Victim for sin.  The significance of the word can
+be the more easily understood from the customs of the heathen, which,
+we see, have been received from the misunderstood expressions of the
+Fathers.  The Latins called a victim that which in great calamities,
+where God seemed to be especially enraged, was offered to appease
+God's wrath, a _piaculum_; and they sometimes sacrificed human
+victims, perhaps because they had heard that a human victim would
+appease God for the entire human race.  The Greeks sometimes called
+them _katharmata_ and sometimes _peripsehmata_.  Isaiah and Paul,
+therefore, mean that Christ became a victim i.e., an expiation, that
+by His merits, and not by our own, God might be reconciled.
+Therefore let this remain established in the case namely, that the
+death of Christ alone is truly a propitiatory sacrifice.  For the
+Levitical propitiatory sacrifices were so called only to signify a
+future expiation.  On account of a certain resemblance, therefore,
+they were satisfactions redeeming the righteousness of the Law, lest
+those persons who sinned should be excluded from the commonwealth.
+But after the revelation of the Gospel [and after the true sacrifice
+has been accomplished] they had to cease, and because they had to
+cease in the revelation of the Gospel, they were not truly
+propitiations, since the Gospel was promised for this very reason,
+namely, to set forth a propitiation.
+
+Now the rest are eucharistic sacrifices which are called sacrifices
+of praise, Lev. 3, 1 f.; 7, 11 f.; Ps. 56, 12 f., namely, the
+preaching of the Gospel, faith, prayer, thanksgiving, confession, the
+afflictions of saints yea, all good works of saints.  These
+sacrifices are not satisfactions for those making them, or applicable
+on behalf of others, so as to merit for these, ex opere operato, the
+remission of sins or reconciliation.  For they are made by those who
+have been reconciled.  And such are the sacrifices of the New
+Testament, as Peter teaches, 1. Ep. 2, 5: An holy priesthood, to
+offer up spiritual sacrifices.  Spiritual sacrifices, however, are
+contrasted not only with those of cattle, but even with human works
+offered _ex opere operato_, because spiritual refers to the movements
+of the Holy Ghost in us.  Paul teaches the same thing Rom. 12, 1:
+Present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable, which is
+your reasonable service.  Reasonable service signifies, however, a
+service in which God is known and apprehended by the mind, as happens
+in the movements of fear and trust towards God.  Therefore it is
+opposed not only to the Levitical service, in which cattle are slain,
+but also to a service in which a work is imagined to be offered _ex
+opere operato_.  The Epistle to the Hebrews, 13, 15, teaches the same
+thing: By Him, therefore, let us offer the sacrifice of praise to God
+continually; and he adds the interpretation, that is, the fruit of
+our lips, giving thanks to His name.  He bids us offer praises, i.e.,
+prayer, thanksgiving, confession, and the like.  These avail not _ex
+opere operato_, but on account of faith.  This is taught by the
+clause: By Him let us offer, i.e., by faith in Christ.
+
+In short, the worship of the New Testament is spiritual, i.e., it is
+the righteousness of faith in the heart and the fruits of faith.  It
+accordingly abolishes the Levitical services.  [In the New Testament
+no offering avails _ex opere operato, sine bono motu utentis_, i.e.
+on account of the work, without a good thought in the heart.] And
+Christ says, John 4, 23. 24: True worshipers shall worship the Father
+in spirit and in truth, for the Father seeketh such to worship Him.
+God is a Spirit; and they that worship Him must worship Him in spirit
+and in truth [that is from the heart, with heartfelt fear and cordial
+faith].  This passage clearly condemns [as absolutely devilish,
+pharisaical, and antichristian] opinions concerning sacrifices which
+they imagine, avail _ex opere operato_, and teaches that men ought to
+worship in spirit i.e., with the dispositions of the heart and by
+faith.  [The Jews also did not understand their ceremonies aright,
+and imagined that they were righteous before God when they had
+wrought works _ex opere operato_.  Against this the prophets contend
+with the greatest earnestness.] Accordingly, the prophets also in the
+Old Testament condemn the opinion of the people concerning the opus
+operatum and teach the righteousness and sacrifices of the Spirit.
+Jer. 7, 22. 23: For I spake not unto your fathers, nor commanded them,
+in the day that I brought them out of the land of Egypt, concerning
+burnt offerings or sacrifices; but this thing commanded I them,
+saying, Obey My voice, and I will be your God, etc. How do we suppose
+that the Jews received this arraignment, which seems to conflict
+openly with Moses?  For it was evident that God had given the fathers
+commands concerning burnt offerings and victims.  But Jeremiah
+condemns the opinion concerning sacrifices which God had not
+delivered namely, that these services should please Him _ex opere
+operato_.  But he adds concerning faith that God had commanded this:
+Hear Me, i.e., believe Me that I am your God; that I wish to become
+thus known when I pity and aid; neither have I need of your victims;
+believe that I wish to be God the Justifier and Savior, not on
+account of works, but on account of My word and promise, truly and
+from the heart seek and expect aid from Me.
+
+Ps. 50, 13. 15, which rejects the victims and requires prayer, also
+condemns the opinion concerning the opus operatum: Will I eat the
+flesh of bulls? etc. (Call upon Me in the day of trouble; I will
+deliver thee, and thou shalt glorify Me.  The Psalmist testifies that
+this is true service, that this is true honor, if we call upon Him
+from the heart.
+
+Likewise Ps. 40, 6: Sacrifice and offering Thou didst not desire;
+mine ears hast Thou opened, i.e., Thou hast offered to me Thy Word
+that I might hear it, and Thou dost require that I believe Thy Word
+and The promises, that Thou truly desirest to pity, to bring aid, etc.
+Likewise Ps. 51, 16. 17: Thou delightest not in burnt offering.  The
+sacrifices of God are a broken spirit; a broken and a contrite heart,
+O God, Thou wilt not despise.  Likewise Ps. 4, 5: Offer the
+sacrifices of righteousness, and put your trust [hope, V.] in the
+Lord.  He bids us hope, and says that this is a righteous sacrifice,
+signifying that other sacrifices are not true and righteous
+sacrifices.  And Ps. 116, 17: I will offer to Thee the sacrifices of
+thanksgiving, and will call upon the name of the Lord They call
+invocation a sacrifice of thanksgiving.
+
+But Scripture is full of such testimonies as teach that sacrifices
+_ex opere operato_ do not reconcile God.  Accordingly the New
+Testament, since Levitical services have been abrogated, teaches that
+new and pure sacrifices will be made, namely, faith, prayer,
+thanksgiving, confession, and the preaching of the Gospel,
+afflictions on account of the Gospel, and the like.
+
+And of these sacrifices Malachi speaks, 1, 11: From the rising of the
+sun even unto the going down of the same My name shall be great among
+the Gentiles; and in every place incense shall be offered unto My
+name and a pure offering.  The adversaries perversely apply this
+passage to the Mass, and quote the authority of the Fathers.  A reply,
+however, is easy, for even if it spoke most particularly of the Mass,
+it would not follow that the Mass justifies _ex opere operato_, or
+that when applied to others, it merits the remission of sins, etc.
+The prophet says nothing of those things which the monks and sophists
+impudently fabricate.  Besides, the very words of the prophet express
+his meaning.  For they first say this, namely, that the name of the
+Lord will be great.  This is accomplished by the preaching of the
+Gospel.  For through this the name of Christ is made known, and the
+mercy of the Father, promised in Christ is recognized.  The preaching
+of the Gospel produces faith in those who receive the Gospel.  They
+call upon God, they give thanks to God, they bear afflictions for
+their confession, they produce good works for the glory of Christ.
+Thus the name of the Lord becomes great among the Gentiles.
+Therefore incense and a pure offering signify not a ceremony _ex
+opere operato_ [not the ceremony of the Mass alone], but all those
+sacrifices through which the name of the Lord becomes great, namely,
+faith, invocation, the preaching of the Gospel, confession, etc. And
+if any one would have this term embrace the ceremony [of the Mass],
+we readily concede it, provided he neither understands the ceremony
+alone, nor teaches that the ceremony profits _ex opere operato_.  For
+just as among the sacrifices of praise, i.e., among the praises of
+God, we include the preaching of the Word so the reception itself of
+the Lord's Supper can be praise or thanksgiving, but it does not
+justify _ex opere operato_; neither is it to be applied to others so
+as to merit for them the remission of sins.  But after a while we
+shall explain how even a ceremony is a sacrifice.  Yet, as Malachi
+speaks of all the services of the New Testament, and not only of the
+Lord's Supper; likewise, as he does not favor the pharisaic opinion
+of the _opus operatum_, he is not against us, but rather aids us.
+For he requires services of the heart, through which the name of the
+Lord becomes truly great.
+
+Another passage also is cited from Malachi 3, 3: And He shall purify
+the sons of Levi, and purge them as gold and silver, that they may
+offer unto the Lord an offering of righteousness.  This passage
+clearly requires the sacrifices of the righteous, and hence does not
+favor the opinion concerning the _opus operatum_.  But the sacrifices
+of the sons of Levi i.e., of those teaching in the New Testament, are
+the preaching of the Gospel, and the good fruits of preaching, as
+Paul says, Rom. 15, 16: Ministering the Gospel of God, that the
+offering up of the Gentiles might be acceptable, being sanctified by
+the Holy Ghost, i.e., that the Gentiles might be offerings acceptable
+to God by faith, etc. For in the Law the slaying of victims signified
+both the death of Christ and the preaching of the Gospel, by which
+this oldness of flesh should be mortified, and the new and eternal
+life be begun in us.
+
+But the adversaries everywhere perversely apply the name sacrifice to
+the ceremony alone.  They omit the preaching of the Gospel, faith,
+prayer, and similar things, although the ceremony has been
+established on account of these, and the New Testament ought to have
+sacrifices of the heart, and not ceremonials for sin that are to be
+performed after the manner of the Levitical priesthood.
+
+They cite also the daily sacrifice (cf.  Ex. 29, 38 f.; Dan. 8, ll f.,
+12, 11), that, just as in the Law there was a daily sacrifice, so
+the Mass ought to be a daily sacrifice of the New Testament.  The
+adversaries have managed well if we permit ourselves to be overcome
+by allegories.  It is evident, however, that allegories do not
+produce firm proofs [that in matters so highly important before God
+we must have a sure and clear word of God, and not introduce by force
+obscure and foreign passages, such uncertain explanations do not
+stand the test of God's judgment].  Although we indeed readily suffer
+the Mass to be understood as a daily sacrifice, provided that the
+entire Mass be understood, i.e., the ceremony with the preaching of
+the Gospel, faith, invocation, and thanksgiving.  For these joined
+together are a daily sacrifice of the New Testament, because the
+ceremony [of the Mass, or the Lord's Supper] was instituted on
+account of these things, neither is it to be separated from these.
+Paul says accordingly, 1 Cor. 11, 26: As often as ye eat this bread
+and drink this cup, ye do show the Lord's death till He come.  But it
+in no way follows from this Levitical type that a ceremony justifying
+_ex opere operato_ is necessary, or ought to be applied on behalf of
+others, that it may merit for them the remission of sins.
+
+And the type aptly represents not only the ceremony, but also the
+preaching of the Gospel.  In Num. 28, 4 f. three parts of that daily
+sacrifice are represented, the burning of the lamb, the libation, and
+the oblation of wheat flour.  The Law had pictures or shadows of
+future things.  Accordingly, in this spectacle Christ and the entire
+worship of the New Testament are portrayed.  The burning of the lamb
+signifies the death of Christ.  The libation signifies that
+everywhere in the entire world, by the preaching of the Gospel,
+believers are sprinkled with the blood of that Lamb, i.e., sanctified,
+as Peter says, 1. Ep. 1, 2: Through sanctification of the Spirit,
+unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ.  The
+oblation of wheat flour signifies faith, prayer, and thanksgiving in
+hearts.  As, therefore, in the Old Testament, the shadow is perceived,
+so in the New the thing signified should be sought, and not another
+type, as sufficient for a sacrifice.
+
+Therefore, although a ceremony is a memorial of Christ's death,
+nevertheless it alone is not the daily sacrifice; but the memory
+itself is the daily sacrifice, i.e., preaching and faith, which truly
+believes that, by the death of Christ, God has been reconciled.  A
+libation is required, i.e., the effect of preaching, in order that,
+being sprinkled by the Gospel with the blood of Christ, we may be
+sanctified, as those put to death and made alive.  Oblations also are
+required, i.e., thanksgiving, confessions, and afflictions.
+
+Thus the pharisaic opinion of the _opus operatum_ being cast aside,
+let us understand that spiritual worship and a daily sacrifice of the
+heart are signified, because in the New Testament the substance of
+good things should be sought for [as Paul says: In the Old Testament
+is the shadow of things to come but the body and the truth is in
+Christ], i.e., the Holy Ghost, mortification, and quickening.  From
+these things it is sufficiently apparent that the type of the daily
+sacrifice testifies nothing against us, but rather for us, because we
+seek for all the parts signified by the daily sacrifice.  [We have
+clearly shown all the parts that belonged to the daily sacrifice in
+the law of Moses, that it must mean a true cordial offering, not an
+_opus operatum_.] The adversaries falsely imagine that the ceremony
+alone is signified, and not also the preaching of the Gospel,
+mortification, and quickening of heart, etc. [which is the best part
+of the Mass, whether they call it a sacrifice or anything else].
+
+Now, therefore, good men will be able to judge readily that the
+complaint against us that we abolish the daily sacrifice is most
+false.  Experience shows what sort of Antiochi they are who hold
+power in the Church; who under the pretext of religion assume to
+themselves the kingdom of the world, and who rule without concern for
+religion and the teaching of the Gospel; who wage war like kings of
+the world, and have instituted new services in the Church.  For in
+the Mass the adversaries retain only the ceremony, and publicly apply
+this to sacrilegious gain.  Afterward they feign that this work, as
+applied on behalf of others, merits for them grace and all good
+things.  In their sermons they do not teach the Gospel, they do not
+console consciences they do not show that sins are freely remitted
+for Christ's sake, but they set forth the worship of saints, human
+satisfactions, human traditions, and by these they affirm that men
+are justified before God.  And although some of these traditions are
+manifestly godless, nevertheless they defend them by violence.  If
+any preachers wish to be regarded more learned, they treat of
+philosophical questions, which neither the people nor even those who
+propose them understand.  Lastly, those who are more tolerable teach
+the Law, and say nothing concerning the righteousness of faith.
+
+The adversaries in the _Confutation_ make a great ado concerning the
+desolation of churches, namely, that the altars stand unadorned,
+without candles and without images.  These trifles they regard as
+ornaments to churches.  [Although it is not true that we abolish all
+such outward ornaments; yet, even if it were so, Daniel is not
+speaking of such things as are altogether external and do not belong
+to the Christian Church.] It is a far different desolation which
+Daniel means, 11, 31; 12, 11, namely, ignorance of the Gospel.  For
+the people, overwhelmed by the multitude and variety of traditions
+and opinions, were in no way able to embrace the sum of Christian
+doctrine.  [For the adversaries preach mostly of human ordinances,
+whereby consciences are led from Christ to confidence in their own
+works.] For who of the people ever understood the doctrine of
+repentance of which the adversaries treat?  And yet this is the chief
+topic of Christian doctrine.
+
+Consciences were tormented by the enumeration of offenses and by
+satisfactions.  Of faith by which we freely receive the remission of
+sins, no mention whatever was made by the adversaries.  Concerning
+the exercises of faith struggling with despair, and the free
+remission of sins for Christ's sake, all the books and all the
+sermons of the adversaries were silent [worse than worthless, and,
+moreover, caused untold damage].  To these, the horrible profanation
+of the masses and many other godless services in the churches were
+added.  This is the desolation which Daniel describes.
+
+On the contrary, by the favor of God, the priests among us attend to
+the ministry of the Word, teach the Gospel concerning the blessings
+of Christ, and show that the remission of sins occurs freely for
+Christ's sake.  This doctrine brings sure consolation to consciences.
+The doctrine of [the Ten Commandments and] good works which God
+commands is also added.  The worth and use of the Sacraments are
+declared.
+
+But if the use of the Sacrament would be the daily sacrifice,
+nevertheless we would retain it rather than the adversaries, because
+with them priests hired for pay use the Sacrament.  With us there is
+a more frequent and more conscientious use.  For the people use it,
+but after having first been instructed and examined.  For men are
+taught concerning the true use of the Sacrament that it was
+instituted for the purpose of being a seal and testimony of the free
+remission of sins, and that, accordingly, it ought to admonish
+alarmed consciences to be truly confident and believe that their sins
+are freely remitted.  Since, therefore, we retain both the preaching
+of the Gospel and the lawful use of the Sacrament, the daily
+sacrifice remains with us.
+
+And if we must speak of the outward appearance, attendance upon
+church is better among us than among the adversaries.  For the
+audiences are held by useful and clear sermons.  But neither the
+people nor the teachers have ever understood the doctrine of the
+adversaries.  [There is nothing that so attaches people to the church
+as good preaching.  But our adversaries preach their people out of
+the churches; for they teach nothing of the necessary parts of
+Christian doctrine; they narrate the legends of saints and other
+fables.] And the true adornment of the churches is godly, useful, and
+clear doctrine, the devout use of the Sacraments, ardent prayer, and
+the like.  Candles, golden vessels [tapers, altar-cloths, images],
+and similar adornments are becoming, but they are not the adornment
+that properly belongs to the Church.  But if the adversaries make
+worship consist in such matters, and not in the preaching of the
+Gospel, in faith, and the conflicts of faith they are to be numbered
+among those whom Daniel describes as worshiping their God with gold
+and silver, Dan. 11, 38.
+
+They quote also from the Epistle to the Hebrews, 5, 1: Every high
+priest taken from among men is ordained for men in things pertaining
+to God that he may offer both gifts and sacrifices for sins.  Hence
+they conclude that, since in the New Testament there are high priests
+and priests, it follows that there is also a sacrifice for sins.
+This passage particularly makes an impression on the unlearned,
+especially when the pomp of the priesthood [the garments of Aaron,
+since in the Old Testament there were many ornaments of gold, silver,
+and purple] and the sacrifices of the Old Testament are spread before
+the eyes.  This resemblance deceives the ignorant, so that they judge
+that, according to the same manner, a ceremonial sacrifice ought to
+exist among us, which should be applied on behalf of the sins of
+others, just as in the Old Testament.  Neither is the service of the
+masses and the rest of the polity of the Pope anything else than
+false zeal in behalf of the misunderstood Levitical polity.  [They
+have not understood that the New Testament is occupied with other
+matters, and that, if such ceremonies are used for the training of
+the young, a limit must be fixed for them.]
+
+And although our belief has its chief testimonies in the Epistle to
+the Hebrews, nevertheless the adversaries distort against us
+mutilated passages from this Epistle, as in this very passage, where
+it is said that every high priest is ordained to offer sacrifices for
+sins.  Scripture itself immediately adds that Christ is High Priest,
+Heb. 5, 5. 6. 10. The preceding words speak of the Levitical
+priesthood, and signify that the Levitical priesthood was an image of
+the priesthood of Christ.  For the Levitical sacrifices for sins did
+not merit the remission of sins before God; they were only an image
+of the sacrifice of Christ, which was to be the one propitiatory
+sacrifice, as we have said above.  Therefore the Epistle is occupied
+to a great extent with the topic that the ancient priesthood and the
+ancient sacrifices were instituted not for the purpose of meriting
+the remission of sins before God or reconciliation, but only to
+signify the future sacrifice of Christ alone.  For in the Old
+Testament it was necessary for saints to be justified by faith
+derived from the promise of the remission of sins that was to be
+granted for Christ's sake, just as saints are also justified in the
+New Testament.  From the beginning of the world it was necessary for
+all saints to believe that Christ would be the promised offering and
+satisfaction for sins, as Isaiah teaches, 53, 10: When Thou shalt
+make His soul an offering for sin.
+
+Since, therefore, in the Old Testament, sacrifices did not merit
+reconciliation, unless by a figure (for they merited civil
+reconciliation), but signified the coming sacrifice, it follows that
+Christ is the only sacrifice applied on behalf of the sins of others.
+Therefore, in the New Testament no sacrifice is left to be applied
+for the sins of others, except the one sacrifice of Christ upon the
+cross.
+
+They altogether err who imagine that Levitical sacrifices merited the
+remission of sins before God, and, by this example in addition to the
+death of Christ, require in the New Testament sacrifices that are to
+be applied on behalf of others.  This imagination absolutely destroys
+the merit of Christ's passion and the righteousness of faith, and
+corrupts the doctrine of the Old and New Testaments, and instead of
+Christ makes for us other mediators and propitiators out of the
+priests and sacrificers, who daily sell their work in the churches.
+
+Therefore, if any one would thus infer that in the New Testament a
+priest is needed to make offering for sins, this must be conceded
+only of Christ.  And the entire Epistle to the Hebrews confirms this
+explanation.  And if, in addition to the death of Christ, we were to
+seek for any other satisfaction to be applied for the sins of others
+and to reconcile God, this would be nothing more than to make other
+mediators in addition to Christ.  Again, as the priesthood of the New
+Testament is the ministry of the Spirit, as Paul teaches 2 Cor. 3, 6,
+it, accordingly, has but the one sacrifice of Christ, which is
+satisfactory and applied for the sins of others.  Besides it has no
+sacrifices like the Levitical, which could be applied _ex opere
+operato_ on behalf of others, but it tenders to others the Gospel and
+the Sacraments, that by means of these they may conceive faith and
+the Holy Ghost and be mortified and quickened, because the ministry
+of the Spirit conflicts with the application of an _opus operatum_.
+[For, unless there is personal faith and a life wrought by the Holy
+Spirit, the _opus operatum_ of another cannot render me godly nor
+save me.] For the ministry of the Spirit is that through which the
+Holy Ghost is efficacious in hearts; and therefore this ministry is
+profitable to others, when it is efficacious in them, and regenerates
+and quickens them.  This does not occur by the application _ex opere
+operato_ of the work of another on behalf of others.
+
+We have shown the reason why the Mass does not justify _ex opere
+operato_, and why, when applied on behalf of others, it does not
+merit remission, because both conflict with the righteousness of
+faith.  For it is impossible that remission of sins should occur, and
+the terrors of death and sin be overcome by any work or anything,
+except by faith in Christ, according to Rom. 5, 1: Being justified by
+faith, we have peace.
+
+In addition, we have shown that the Scriptures, which are cited
+against us, in no way favor the godless opinion of the adversaries
+concerning the opus operatum.  All good men among all nations can
+judge this.  Therefore the error of Thomas is to be rejected, who
+wrote: That the body of the Lord, once offered on the cross for
+original debt, is continually offered for daily offenses on the altar
+in order that, in this, the Church might have a service whereby to
+reconcile God to herself.  The other common errors are also to be
+rejected, as, that the Mass _ex opere operato_ confers grace upon one
+employing it; likewise that when applied for others, even for wicked
+persons, provided they do not interpose an obstacle, it merits for
+them the remission of sins, of guilt and punishment.  All these
+things are false and godless, and lately invented by unlearned monks,
+and obscure the glory of Christ's passion and the righteousness of
+faith.
+
+And from these errors infinite others sprang, as, that the masses
+avail when applied for many, just as much as when applied
+individually.  The sophists have particular degrees of merit, just as
+money-changers have grades of weight for gold or silver.  Besides
+they sell the Mass, as a price for obtaining what each one seeks: to
+merchants, that business may be prosperous; to hunters, that hunting
+may be successful, and infinite other things.  Lastly, they apply it
+also to the dead; by the application of the Sacrament they liberate
+souls from the pains of purgatory; although without faith the Mass is
+of service not even to the living.  Neither are the adversaries able
+to produce even one syllable from the Scriptures in defense of these
+fables which they teach with great authority in the Church, neither
+do they have the testimonies of the ancient Church nor of the Fathers.
+[Therefore they are impious and blind people who knowingly despise
+and trample under foot the plain truth of God.]
+
+
+
+
+Part 31
+
+
+_What the Fathers Thought concerning Sacrifice._
+
+And since we have explained the passages of Scripture which are cited
+against us, we must reply also concerning the Fathers.  We are not
+ignorant that the Mass is called by the Fathers a sacrifice; but they
+do not mean that the Mass confers grace _ex opere operato_, and that,
+when applied on behalf of others, it merits for them the remission of
+sins, of guilt and punishment.  Where are such monstrous stories to
+be found in the Fathers?  But they openly testify that they are
+speaking of thanksgiving.  Accordingly they call it a eucharist.  We
+have said above, however, that a eucharistic sacrifice does not merit
+reconciliation, but is made by those who have been reconciled, just
+as afflictions do not merit reconciliation, but are eucharistic
+sacrifices when those who have been reconciled endure them.
+
+And this reply, in general, to the sayings of the Fathers defends us
+sufficiently against the adversaries.  For it is certain that these
+figments concerning the merit of the opus operatum are found nowhere
+in the Fathers.  But in order that the whole case may be the better
+understood, we also shall state those things concerning the use of
+the Sacrament which actually harmonize with the Fathers and Scripture.
+
+
+
+
+Part 32
+
+
+Some clever men imagine that the Lord's Supper was instituted for two
+reasons.  First, that it might be a mark and testimony of profession,
+just as a particular shape of hood is the sign of a particular
+profession.  Then they think that such a mark was especially pleasing
+to Christ, namely, a feast to signify mutual union and friendship
+among Christians, because banquets are signs of covenant and
+friendship.  But this is a secular view; neither does it show the
+chief use of the things delivered by God; it speaks only of the
+exercise of love, which men, however profane and worldly, understand,
+it does not speak of faith, the nature of which few understand.
+
+The Sacraments are signs of God's will toward us, and not merely
+signs of men among each other, and they are right in defining that
+Sacraments in the New Testament are signs of grace.  And because in a
+sacrament there are two things, a sign and the Word, the Word, in the
+New Testament, is the promise of grace added.  The promise of the New
+Testament is the promise of the remission of sins, as the text, Luke
+22, 19, says: This is My body, which is given for you.  This cup is
+the New Testament in My blood which is shed for many for the
+remission of sins.  Therefore the Word offers the remission of sins.
+And a ceremony is, as it were, a picture or seal, as Paul, Rom. 4, 11,
+calls it, of the Word, making known the promise.  Therefore, just as
+the promise is useless unless it is received by faith, so a ceremony
+is useless unless such faith is added as is truly confident that the
+remission of sins is here offered.  And this faith encourages
+contrite minds.  And just as the Word has been given in order to
+excite this faith, so the Sacrament has been instituted in order that
+the outward appearance meeting the eyes might move the heart to
+believe [and strengthen faith].  For through these, namely, through
+Word and Sacrament, the Holy Ghost works.
+
+And such use of the Sacrament, in which faith quickens terrified
+hearts, is a service of the New Testament, because the New Testament
+requires spiritual dispositions, mortification and quickening.  [For
+according to the New Testament the highest service of God is rendered
+inwardly in the heart.] And for this use Christ instituted it, since
+He commanded them thus to do in remembrance of Him.  For to remember
+Christ is not the idle celebration of a show [not something that is
+accomplished only by some gestures and actions], or one instituted
+for the sake of example, as the memory of Hercules or Ulysses is
+celebrated in tragedies, but it is to remember the benefits of Christ
+and receive them by faith so as to be quickened by them.  Psalm 111,
+4. 5 accordingly says: He hath made His wonderful works to be
+remembered: the Lord is gracious and full of compassion.  He hath
+given meat unto them that fear Him.  For it signifies that the will
+and mercy of God should be discerned in the ceremony.  But that faith
+which apprehends mercy quickens.  And this is the principal use of
+the Sacrament, in which it is apparent who are fit for the Sacrament,
+namely, terrified consciences and how they ought to use it.
+
+The sacrifice [thank-offering or thanksgiving] also is added.  For
+there are several ends for one object.  After conscience encouraged
+by faith has perceived from what terrors it is freed, then indeed it
+fervently gives thanks for the benefit and passion of Christ, and
+uses the ceremony itself to the praise of God, in order by this
+obedience to show its gratitude; and testifies that it holds in high
+esteem the gifts of God.  Thus the ceremony becomes a sacrifice of
+praise.
+
+And the Fathers, indeed, speak of a twofold effect, of the comfort of
+consciences, and of thanksgiving, or praise.  The former of these
+effects pertains to the nature [the right use] of the Sacrament; the
+latter pertains to the sacrifice.  Of consolation Ambrose says: Go to
+Him and be absolved, because He is the remission of sins.  Do you ask
+who He is?  Hear Him when He says, John 6, 35: I am the Bread of life;
+he that cometh to Me shall never hunger; and he that believeth on Me
+shall never thirst.  This passage testifies that in the Sacrament the
+remission of sins is offered; it also testifies that this ought to be
+received by faith.  Infinite testimonies to this effect are found in
+the Fathers, all of which the adversaries pervert to the _opus
+operatum_, and to a work to be applied on behalf of others; although
+the Fathers clearly require faith, and speak of the consolation
+belonging to every one, and not of the application.
+
+Besides these, expressions are also found concerning thanksgiving,
+such as that most beautifully said by Cyprian concerning those
+communing in a godly way.  Piety, says he, in thanksgiving the
+Bestower of such abundant blessing, makes a distinction between what
+has been given and what has been forgiven, i.e., piety regards both
+what has been given and what has been forgiven, i.e., it compares the
+greatness of God's blessings and the greatness of our evils, sin and
+death, with each other, and gives thanks, etc. And hence the term
+eucharist arose in the Church.  Nor indeed is the ceremony itself,
+the giving of thanks ex opere operato, to be applied on behalf of
+others, in order to merit for them the remission of sins, etc., in
+order to liberate the souls of the dead.  These things conflict with
+the righteousness of faith, as though, without faith, a ceremony can
+profit either the one performing it or others.
+
+
+
+
+Part 33
+
+
+_Of the Term Mass._
+
+The adversaries also refer us to philology.  From the names of the
+Mass they derive arguments which do not require a long discussion.
+For even though the Mass be called a sacrifice, it does not follow
+that it must confer grace _ex opere operato_, or, when applied on
+behalf of others, merit for them the remission of sins, etc.
+_Leitourgia_, they say, signifies a sacrifice, and the Greeks call
+the Mass liturgy.  Why do they here omit the old appellation synaxris,
+which shows that the Mass was formerly the communion of many?  But
+let us speak of the word liturgy.  This word done not properly
+signify a sacrifice, but rather the public ministry, and agrees aptly
+with our belief, namely, that one minister who consecrates tenders
+the body and blood of the lord to the rest of the people, just as one
+minister who preaches tenders the Gospel to the people, as Paul says,
+1 Cor. 4, 1: Let a man so account of us as of the ministers of Christ
+and stewards of the mysteries of God, i.e., of the Gospel and the
+Sacraments.  And 2 Cor. 5, 20: We are ambassadors for Christ as
+though God did beseech you by us; we pray you in Christ's stead, Be
+ye reconciled to God.  Thus the term _Leitourgia_ agrees aptly with
+the ministry.  For it is an old word, ordinarily employed in public
+civil administrations, and signified to the Greeks public burdens, as
+tribute, the expense of equipping a fleet, or similar things, as the
+oration of Demosthenes, _FOR LEPTINES_, testifies, all of which is
+occupied with the discussion of public duties and immunities:
+_Phehsei de anaxious tinas anthrohpous euromenous ateleian
+ekdedukenai tas leitourgias_, i.e.: He will say that some unworthy
+men, having found an immunity, have withdrawn from public burdens.
+And thus they spoke in the time of the Romana, as the rescript of
+Pertinax, _De Iure Immunitatis_, l.  Semper, shows: _Ei kai meh
+pasohn leitourgiohn tous pateras ho tohn teknohn arithmos aneitai_,
+Even though the number of children does not liberate parents from all
+public burdens.  And the Commentary upon Demosthenes states that
+_leitourgia_ is a kind of tribute, the expense of the games, the
+expense of equipping vessels, of attending to the gymnasia and
+similar public offices.  And Paul in 2 Cor. 9, 12 employs it for a
+collection.  The taking of the collection not only supplies those
+things which are wanting to the saints, but also causes them to give
+more thanks abundantly to God, etc. And in Phil. 2, 25 he calls
+Epaphroditus a _leitourgos_, one who ministered to my wants, where
+assuredly a sacrificer cannot be understood.  But there is no need of
+more testimonies, since examples are everywhere obvious to those
+reading the Greek writers, in whom _leitourgia_ is employed for
+public civil burdens or ministries.  And on account of the diphthong,
+grammarians do not derive it from _liteh_, which signifies prayers,
+but from public goods, which they call _leita_, so that _leitourgeoh_
+means, I attend to, I administer public goods.
+
+Ridiculous is their inference that, since mention is made in the Holy
+Scriptures of an altar, therefore the Mass must be a sacrifice; for
+the figure of an altar is referred to by Paul only by way of
+comparison.  And they fabricate that the Mass has been so called from
+_mzbh_, an altar.  What need is there of an etymology so far fetched,
+unless it be to show their knowledge of the Hebrew language?  What
+need is there to seek the etymology from a distance, when the term
+Mass is found in Deut. 16, 10, where it signifies the collections or
+gifts of the people, not the offering of the priest?  For individuals
+coming to the celebration of the Passover were obliged to bring some
+gift as a contribution.  In the beginning the Christians also
+retained this custom.  Coming together they brought bread, wine, and
+other things, as the Canons of the Apostles testify.  Thence a part
+was taken to be consecrated; the rest was distributed to the poor.
+With this custom they also retained Mass as the name of the
+contributions.  And on account of such contributions it appears also
+that the Mass was elsewhere called _agapeh_, unless one would prefer
+that it was so called on account of the common feast.  But let us
+omit these trifles.  For it is ridiculous that the adversaries should
+produce such trifling conjectures concerning a matter of such great
+importance.  For although the Mass is called an offering, in what
+does the term favor the dreams concerning the _opus operatum_, and
+the application which, they imagine, merits for others the remission
+of sins?  And it can be called an offering for the reason that
+prayers, thanksgivings, and the entire worship are there offered, as
+it is also called a eucharist.  But neither ceremonies nor prayers
+profit _ex opere operato_, without faith.  Although we are disputing
+here not concerning prayers, but particularly concerning the Lord's
+Supper.
+
+[Here you can see what rude asses our adversaries are.  They say that
+the term _missa_ is derived from the term _misbeach_, which signifies
+an altar; hence we are to conclude that the Mass is a sacrifice; for
+sacrifices are offered on an altar.  Again, the word _liturgia_, by
+which the Greeks call the Mass, is also to denote a sacrifice.  This
+claim we shall briefly answer.  All the world sees that from such
+reasons this heathenish and antichristian error does not follow
+necessarily, that the Mass benefits _ex opere operato sine bono motu
+utentis_.  Therefore they are asses, because in such a highly
+important matter they bring forward such silly things.  Nor do the
+asses know any grammar.  For missa and liturgia do not mean sacrifice.
+_Missa_, in Hebrew, denotes a joint contribution.  For this may have
+been a custom among Christians, that they brought meat and drink for
+the benefit of the poor to their assemblies.  This custom was derived
+from the Jews, who had to bring such contributions on their festivals,
+these they called _missa_.  Likewise, _liturgia_, in Greek, really
+denotes an office in which a person ministers to the congregation.
+This is well applied to our teaching, because with us the priest, as
+a common servant of those who wish to commune, ministers to them the
+holy Sacrament.
+
+Some think that _missa_ is not derived from the Hebrew, but signifies
+as much as _remissio_ the forgiveness of sin.  For, the communion
+being ended, the announcement used to be made: _Ite, missa est_:
+Depart, you have forgiveness of sins.  They cite, as proof that this
+is so, the fact that the Greeks used to say: _Lais Aphesis (laois
+aphsesis)_, which also means that they had been pardoned.  If this
+were so, it would be an excellent meaning, for in connection with
+this ceremony forgiveness of sins must always be preached and
+proclaimed.  But the case before us is little aided, no matter what
+the meaning of the word _missa_ is.]
+
+The Greek canon says also many things concerning the offering, but it
+shows plainly that it is not speaking properly of the body and blood
+of the Lord, but of the whole service of prayers and thanksgivings.
+For it says thus: _Kai poiehson hemas axious genesthai tou
+prospserein soi deehseis kai hikesias kai thusias anaimaktous huper
+pantos laou._ When this is rightly understood, it gives no offense.
+For it prays that we be made worthy to offer prayers and
+supplications and bloodless sacrifices for the people.  For he calls
+even prayers bloodless sacrifices.  Just as also a little afterward:
+_Eti prospheromen soi tehn logikehn tautehn kai anaimakton latreian_,
+We offer, he says this reasonable and bloodless service.  For they
+explain this inaptly who would rather interpret this of a reasonable
+sacrifice, and transfer it to the very body of Christ, although the
+canon speaks of the entire worship, and in opposition to the _opus
+operatum_ Paul has spoken of _logikeh latreia_ [reasonable service],
+namely, of the worship of the mind, of fear, of faith, of prayer, of
+thanksgiving, etc.
+
+
+
+
+Part 34
+
+
+_Of the Mass for the Dead._
+
+Our adversaries have no testimonies and no command from Scripture for
+defending the application of the ceremony for liberating the souls of
+the dead, although from this they derive infinite revenue.  Nor,
+indeed, is it a light sin to establish such services in the Church
+without the command of God and without the example of Scripture, and
+to apply to the dead the Lord's Supper, which was instituted for
+commemoration and preaching among the living [for the purpose of
+strengthening the faith of those who use the ceremony].  This is to
+violate the Second Commandment, by abusing God's name.
+
+For, in the first place, it is a dishonor to the Gospel to hold that
+a ceremony _ex opere operato_, without faith, is a sacrifice
+reconciling God, and making satisfaction for sins.  It is a horrible
+saying to ascribe as much to the work of a priest as to the death of
+Christ.  Again, sin and death cannot be overcome unless by faith in
+Christ, as Paul teaches, Rom. 5, 1: Being justified by faith, we have
+peace with God, and therefore the punishment of purgatory cannot be
+overcome by the application of the work of another.
+
+Now we shall omit the sort of testimonies concerning purgatory that
+the adversaries have: what kinds of punishments they think there are
+in purgatory, what grounds the doctrine of satisfactions has, which
+we have shown above to be most vain.  We shall only present this in
+opposition: It is certain that the Lord's Supper was instituted on
+account of the remission of guilt.  For it offers the remission of
+sins, where it is necessary that guilt be truly understood.  [For
+what consolation would we have if forgiveness of sin were here
+offered us, and yet there would be no remission of guilt?] And
+nevertheless it does not make satisfaction for guilt, otherwise the
+Mass would be equal to the death of Christ.  Neither can the
+remission of guilt be received in any other way than by faith.
+Therefore the Mass is not a satisfaction, but a promise and Sacrament
+that require faith.
+
+And, indeed, it is necessary that all godly persons be seized with
+the most bitter grief [shed tears of blood, from anguish and sorrow]
+if they consider that the Mass has been in great part transferred to
+the dead and to satisfactions for punishments.  This is to banish the
+daily sacrifice from the Church; this is the kingdom of Antiochus,
+who transferred the most salutary promises concerning the remission
+of guilt and concerning faith to the most vain opinions concerning
+satisfactions; this is to defile the Gospel, to corrupt the use of
+the Sacraments.  These are the persons [the real blasphemers] whom
+Paul has said, 1 Cor. 11, 27, to be guilty of the body and blood of
+the Lord, who have suppressed the doctrine concerning faith and the
+remission of sins, and, under the pretext of satisfactions, have
+devoted the body and blood of the Lord to sacrilegious gain.  And
+they will at some time pay the penalty for this sacrilege.  [God will
+one day vindicate the Second Commandment, and pour out a great,
+horrible wrath upon them.] Therefore we and all godly consciences
+should be on our guard against approving the abuses of the
+adversaries.
+
+But let us return to the case.  Since the Mass is not a satisfaction,
+either for punishment or for guilt, _ex opere operato_, without faith,
+it follows that the application on behalf of the dead is useless.
+Nor is there need here of a longer discussion.  For it is evident
+that these applications on behalf of the dead have no testimonies
+from the Scriptures.  Neither is it safe, without the authority of
+Scripture, to institute forms of worship in the Church.  And if it
+will at any time be necessary, we shall speak at greater length
+concerning this entire subject.  For why should we now contend with
+adversaries who understand neither what a sacrifice, nor what a
+sacrament, nor what remission of sins, nor what faith is?
+
+Neither does the Greek canon apply the offering as a satisfaction for
+the dead, because it applies it equally for all the blessed
+patriarchs, prophets, apostles.  It appears therefore that the Greeks
+make an offering as thanksgiving, and do not apply it as satisfaction
+for punishments.  [For, of course, it is not their intention to
+deliver the prophets and apostles from purgatory, but only to offer
+up thanks along and together with them for the exalted eternal
+blessings that have been given to them and us.] Although they speak,
+moreover, not of the offering alone of the body and blood of the Lord,
+but of the other parts of the Mass, namely, prayers and thanksgiving.
+For after the consecration they pray that it may profit those who
+partake of it, they do not speak of others.  Then they add: _Eti
+prospheromen soi tehn logikehn tautehn latreian huper tohn en pistei
+anapausamenohn propatorohn, paterohn, patriarchohn, prophertohn,
+apostolohn_, etc. ["Yet we offer to you this reasonable service for
+those having departed in faith, forefathers, fathers, patriarchs
+prophets, apostles," etc.] Reasonable service, however, does not
+signify the offering itself, but prayers and all things which are
+there transacted.  Now, as regards the adversaries' citing the
+Fathers concerning the offering for the dead, we know that the
+ancients speak of prayer for the dead, which we do not prohibit, but
+we disapprove of the application _ex opere operato_ of the Lord's
+Supper on behalf of the dead.  Neither do the ancients favor the
+adversaries concerning the _opus operatum_.  And even though they
+have the testimonies especially of Gregory or the moderns, we oppose
+to them the most clear and certain Scriptures.  And there is a great
+diversity among the Fathers.  They were men, and could err and be
+deceived.  Although if they would now become alive again, and would
+see their sayings assigned as pretexts for the notorious falsehoods
+which the adversaries teach concerning the opus operatum, they would
+interpret themselves far differently.
+
+The adversaries also falsely cite against us the condemnation of
+Aerius, who, they say was condemned for the reason that he denied
+that in the Mass an offering is made for the living and the dead.
+They frequently use this dexterous turn, cite the ancient heresies
+and falsely compare our cause with these in order by this comparison
+to crush us.  [The asses are not ashamed of any lies.  Nor do they
+know who Aerius was and what he taught.] Epiphanius testifies that
+Aerius held that prayers for the dead are useless.  With this he
+finds fault.  Neither do we favor Aerius, but we on our part are
+contending with you who are defending a heresy manifestly conflicting
+with the prophets, apostles and holy Fathers, namely, that the Mass
+justifies _ex opere operato_, that it merits the remission of guilt
+and punishment even for the unjust, to whom it is applied, if they do
+not present an obstacle.  Of these pernicious errors, which detract
+from the glory of Christ's passion, and entirely overthrow the
+doctrine concerning the righteousness of faith, we disapprove.  There
+was a similar persuasion of the godless in the Law, namely, that they
+merited the remission of sins, not freely by faith, but through
+sacrifices _ex opere operato_.  Therefore they increased these
+services and sacrifices, instituted the worship of Baal in Israel,
+and even sacrificed in the groves in Judah.  Therefore the prophets
+condemn this opinion, and wage war not only with the worshipers of
+Baal, but also with other priests who, with this godless opinion,
+made sacrifices ordained by God.  But this opinion inheres in the
+world, and always will inhere namely, that services and sacrifices
+are propitiations.  Carnal men cannot endure that alone to the
+sacrifice of Christ the honor is ascribed that it is a propitiation,
+because they do not understand the righteousness of faith, but
+ascribe equal honor to the rest of the services and sacrifices.  Just
+as, therefore, in Judah among the godless priests a false opinion
+concerning sacrifices inhered, just as in Israel, Baalitic services
+continued, and, nevertheless, a Church of God was there which
+disapproved of godless services, so Baalitic worship inheres in the
+domain of the Pope, namely, the abuse of the Mass, which they apply,
+that by it they may merit for the unrighteous the remission of guilt
+and punishment.  [And yet, as God still kept His Church, i.e., some
+saints, in Israel and Judah, so God still preserved His Church, i.e.,
+some saints, under the Papacy, so that the Christian Church has not
+entirely perished.] And it seems that this Baalitic worship will
+endure as long as the reign of the Pope, until Christ will come to
+judge, and by the glory of His advent destroy the reign of Antichrist.
+Meanwhile all who truly believe the Gospel [that they may truly
+honor God and have a constant comfort against sins; for God has
+graciously caused His Gospel to shine, that we might be warned and
+saved] ought to condemn these wicked services, devised, contrary to
+God's command, in order to obscure the glory of Christ and the
+righteousness of faith.
+
+We have briefly said these things of the Mass in order that all good
+men in all parts of the world may be able to understand that with the
+greatest zeal we maintain the dignity of the Mass and show its true
+use, and that we have the most just reasons for dissenting from the
+adversaries.  And we would have all good men admonished not to aid
+the adversaries in the profanation of the Mass lest they burden
+themselves with other men's sin.  It is a great cause and a great
+subject not inferior to the transaction of the prophet Elijah, who
+condemned the worship of Baal.  We have presented a case of such
+importance with the greatest moderation, and now reply without
+casting any reproach.  But if the adversaries will compel us to
+collect all kinds of abuses of the Mass, the case will not be treated
+with such forbearance.
+
+
+
+
+Part 35
+
+
+Article XXVII (XIII): _Of Monastic Vows._
+
+In the town of Eisenach, in Thuringia, there was, to our knowledge, a
+monk, John Hilten, who, thirty years ago, was cast by his fraternity
+into prison because he had protested against certain most notorious
+abuses.  For we have seen his writings, from which it can be well
+understood what the nature of his doctrine was [that he was a
+Christian, and preached according to the Scriptures].  And those who
+knew him testify that he was a mild old man, and serious indeed, but
+without moroseness.  He predicted many things, some of which have
+thus far transpired, and others still seem to impend which we do not
+wish to recite, lest it may be inferred that they are narrated either
+from hatred toward one or from partiality to another.  But finally,
+when, either on account of his age or the foulness of the prison, he
+fell into disease, he sent for the guardian in order to tell him of
+his sickness; and when the guardian, inflamed with pharisaic hatred,
+had begun to reprove the man harshly on account of his kind of
+doctrine, which seemed to be injurious to the kitchen, then, omitting
+all mention of his sickness, he said with a sigh that he was bearing
+these injuries patiently for Christ's sake, since he had indeed
+neither written nor taught anything which could overthrow the
+position of the monks, but had only protested against some well-known
+abuses.  But another one he said, will come in A.D. 1516, who will
+destroy you, neither will you be able to resist him.  This very
+opinion concerning the downward career of the power of the monks, and
+this number of years, his friends afterwards found also written by
+him in his commentaries, which he had left, concerning certain
+passages of Daniel.  But although the outcome will teach how much
+weight should be given to this declaration, yet there are other signs
+which threaten a change in the power of the monks, that are no less
+certain than oracles.  For it is evident how much hypocrisy, ambition,
+avarice there is in the monasteries, how much ignorance and cruelty
+among all the unlearned, what vanity in their sermons and in devising
+continually new means of gaining money.  [The more stupid asses the
+monks are, the more stubborn, furious bitter, the more venomous asps
+they are in persecuting the truth and the Word of God.] And there are
+other faults, which we do not care to mention.  While they once were
+[not jails or everlasting prisons, but] schools for Christian
+instruction, now they have degenerated, as though from a golden to an
+iron age, or as the Platonic cube degenerates into bad harmonies,
+which, Plato says brings destruction.  [Now this precious gold is
+turned to dross, and the wine to water.] All the most wealthy
+monasteries support only an idle crowd, which gluttonizes upon the
+public alms of the Church.  Christ, however, teaches concerning the
+salt that has lost its savor that it should be cast out and be
+trodden under foot, Matt. 5, 13. Therefore the monks by such morals
+are singing their own fate [requiem, and it will soon be over with
+them].  And now another sign is added, because they are in many
+places, the instigators of the death of good men.  [This blood of
+Abel cries against them and] These murders God undoubtedly will
+shortly avenge.  Nor indeed do we find fault with all, for we are of
+the opinion that there are here and there some good men in the
+monasteries who judge moderately concerning human and factitious
+services, as some writers call them, and who do not approve of the
+cruelty which the hypocrites among them exercise.
+
+But we are now discussing the kind of doctrine which the composers of
+the _Confutation_ are now defending and not the question whether vows
+should be observed.  For we hold that lawful vows ought to be
+observed; but whether these services merit the remission of sins and
+justification; whether they are satisfactions for sins, whether they
+are equal to Baptism, whether they are the observance of precepts and
+counsels; whether they are evangelical perfection; whether they have
+the merits of supererogation; whether these merits, when applied on
+behalf of others save them, whether vows made with these opinions are
+lawful; whether vows are lawful that are undertaken under the pretext
+of religion, merely for the sake of the belly and idleness, whether
+those are truly vows that have been extorted either from the
+unwilling or from those who on account of age were not able to judge
+concerning the kind of life, whom parents or friends thrust into the
+monasteries that they might be supported at the public expense,
+without the loss of private patrimony, whether vows are lawful that
+openly tend to an evil issue, either because on account of weakness
+they are not observed, or because those who are in these fraternities
+are compelled to approve and aid the abuses of the Mass, the godless
+worship of saints, and the counsels to rage against good men:
+concerning these questions we are treating.  And although we have
+said very many things in the Confession concerning such vows as even
+the canons of the Popes condemn, nevertheless the adversaries command
+that all things which we have produced be rejected.  For they have
+used these words.
+
+And it is worth while to hear how they pervert our reasons, and what
+they adduce to fortify their own cause.  Accordingly, we will briefly
+run over a few of our arguments, and in passing, explain away the
+sophistry of the adversaries in reference to them.  Since, however,
+this entire cause has been carefully and fully treated by Luther in
+the book to which he gave the title _De Votis Monasticis_, we wish
+here to consider that book as reiterated.
+
+First, it is very certain that a vow is not lawful by which he who
+vows thinks that he merits the remission of sins before God, or makes
+satisfaction before God for sins.  For this opinion is a manifest
+insult to the Gospel, which teaches that the remission of sins is
+freely granted us for Christ's sake, as has been said above at some
+length.  Therefore we have correctly quoted the declaration of Paul
+to the Galatians, Gal. 5, 4: Christ is become of no effect unto you,
+whosoever of you are justified by the Law; ye are fallen from grace.
+Those who seek the remission of sins not by faith in Christ, but by
+monastic works detract from the honor of Christ, and crucify Christ
+afresh.  But hear, hear how the composers of the _Confutation_ escape
+in this place!  They explain this passage of Paul only concerning the
+Law of Moses, and they add that the monks observe all things for
+Christ's sake, and endeavor to live the nearer the Gospel in order to
+merit eternal life.  And they add a horrible peroration in these
+words: Wherefore those things are wicked that are here alleged
+against monasticism.  O Christ, how long wilt Thou bear these
+reproaches with which our enemies treat Thy Gospel?  We have said in
+the Confession that the remission of sins is received freely for
+Christ's sake, through faith.  If this is not the very voice of the
+Gospel, if it is not the judgment of the eternal Father, which Thou
+who art in the bosom of the Father hast revealed to the world, we are
+justly blamed.  But Thy death is a witness, Thy resurrection is a
+witness, the Holy Ghost is a witness, Thy entire Church is a witness,
+that it is truly the judgment of the Gospel that we obtain remission
+of sins, not on account of our merits, but on account of Thee,
+through faith.
+
+When Paul denies that by the Law of Moses men merit the remission of
+sins, he withdraws this praise much more from human traditions, and
+this he clearly testifies Col. 2, 16. If the Law of Moses, which was
+divinely revealed, did not merit the remission of sins, how much less
+do these silly observances [monasticism rosaries, etc.], averse to
+the civil custom of life, merit the remission of sins!
+
+
+The adversaries feign that Paul abolishes the Law of Moses, and that
+Christ succeeds in such a way that He does not freely grant the
+remission of sins, but on account of the works of other laws, if any
+are now devised.  By this godless and fanatical imagination they bury
+the benefit of Christ.  Then they feign that among those who observe
+this Law of Christ, the monks observe it more closely than others, on
+account of their hypocritical poverty, obedience, and chastity, since
+indeed all these things are full of sham.  In the greatest abundance
+of all things they boast of poverty.  Although no class of men has
+greater license than the monks [who have masterfully decreed that
+they are exempt from obedience to bishops and princes], they boast of
+obedience.  Of celibacy we do not like to speak, how pure this is in
+most of those who desire to be continent, Gerson indicates.  And how
+many of them desire to be continent [not to mention the thoughts of
+their hearts]?
+
+Of course, in this sham life the monks live more closely in
+accordance with the Gospel!  Christ does not succeed Moses in such a
+way as to remit sins on account of our works, but so as to set His
+own merits and His own propitiation on our behalf against God's wrath
+that we may be freely forgiven.  Now, he who apart from Christ's
+propitiation, opposes his own merits to God's wrath, and on account
+of his own merits endeavors to obtain the remission of sins, whether
+he present the works of the Mosaic Law, or of the Decalog, or of the
+rule of Benedict, or of the rule of Augustine, or of other rules,
+annuls the promise of Christ, has cast away Christ, and has fallen
+from grace.  This is the verdict of Paul.
+
+But, behold, most clement Emperor Charles behold, ye princes, behold,
+all ye ranks, how great is the impudence of the adversaries!
+Although we have cited the declaration of Paul to this effect, they
+have written: Wicked are those things that are here cited against
+monasticism.  But what is more certain than that men obtain the
+remission of sins by faith for Christ's sake?  And these wretches
+dare to call this a wicked opinion!  We do not at all doubt that if
+you had been advised of this passage, you would have taken [will
+take] care that such blasphemy be removed from the _Confutation._
+
+But since it has been fully shown above that the opinion is wicked,
+that we obtain the remission of sins on account of our works, we
+shall be briefer at this place.  For the prudent reader will easily
+be able to reason thence that we do not merit the remission of sins
+by monastic works.  Therefore this blasphemy also is in no way to be
+endured which is read in
+
+Thomas, that the monastic profession is equal to Baptism.  It is
+madness to make human tradition, which has neither God's command nor
+promise, equal to the ordinance of Christ which has both the command
+and promise of God, which contains the covenant of grace and of
+eternal life.
+
+Secondly.  Obedience, poverty, and celibacy, provided the latter is
+not impure, are, as exercises, adiaphora [in which we are not to look
+for either sin or righteousness].  And for this reason the saints can
+use these without impiety, just as Bernard, Franciscus, and other
+holy men used them.  And they used them on account of bodily
+advantage, that they might have more leisure to teach and to perform
+other godly offices, and not that the works themselves are, by
+themselves, works that justify or merit eternal life.  Finally they
+belong to the class of which Paul says, 1 Tim. 4, 8: Bodily exercise
+profiteth little.  And it is credible that in some places there are
+also at present good men, engaged in the ministry of the Word, who
+use these observances without wicked opinions [without hypocrisy and
+with the understanding that they do not regard their monasticism as
+holiness].  But to hold that these observances are services on
+account of which they are accounted just before God, and through
+which they merit eternal life, conflicts with the Gospel concerning
+the righteousness of faith, which teaches that for Christ's sake
+righteousness and eternal life are granted us.  It conflicts also
+with the saying of Christ, Matt. 15, 9: In vain do they worship Me,
+teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.  It conflicts also
+with this statement, Rom. 14, 23: Whatsoever is not of faith is sin.
+But how can they affirm that they are services which God approves as
+righteousness before Him when they have no testimony of God's Word?
+
+But look at the impudence of the adversaries!  They not only teach
+that these observances are justifying services, but they add that
+these services are more perfect, i.e. meriting more the remission of
+sins and justification, than do other kinds of life [that they are
+states of perfection, i.e., holier and higher states than the rest,
+such as marriage, rulership].  And here many false and pernicious
+opinions concur.  They imagine that they [are the most holy people
+who] observe [not only] precepts and [but also] counsels [that is,
+the superior counsels, which Scripture issues concerning exalted
+gifts, not by way of command but of advice].  Afterwards these
+liberal men, since they dream that they have the merits of
+supererogation, sell these to others.  All these things are full of
+pharisaic vanity.  For it is the height of impiety to hold that they
+satisfy the Decalog in such a way that merits remain, while such
+precepts as these are accusing all the saints: Thou shalt love the
+Lord, thy God, with all shine heart, Deut. 6, 5. Likewise: Thou shalt
+not covet, Rom. 7, 7. [For
+
+as the First Commandment of God (Thou shalt love the Lord, thy God,
+with all thy heart and with all thy soul and with all thy mind ) is
+higher than a man upon earth can comprehend as it is the highest
+theology, from which all the prophets and all the apostles have drawn
+as from a spring their best and highest doctrines, yea, as it is such
+an exalted commandment, according to which alone all divine service,
+all honor to God, every offering, all thanksgiving in heaven and upon
+earth, must be regulated and judged, so that all divine service high
+and precious and holy though it appear if it be not in accordance
+with this commandment, is nothing but husks and shells without a
+kernel, yea, nothing but filth and abomination before God; which
+exalted commandment no saint whatever has perfectly fulfilled, so
+that even Noah and Abraham, David, Peter and Paul acknowledged
+themselves imperfect and sinners: it is an unheard-of, pharisaic, yea,
+an actually diabolical pride for a sordid Barefooted monk or any
+similar godless hypocrite to say, yea, preach and teach, that he has
+observed and fulfilled the holy high commandment so perfectly, and
+according to the demands and will of God has done so many good works,
+that merit even superabounds to him.  Yea, dear hypocrites, if the
+holy Ten Commandments and the exalted First Commandment of God were
+fulfilled as easily as the bread and remnants are put into the sack!
+They are shameless hypocrites with whom the world is plagued in this
+last time.] The prophet says, Ps. 116, 11: All men are liars, i.e.,
+not thinking aright concerning God, not fearing God sufficiently, not
+believing Him sufficiently.  Therefore the monks falsely boast that
+in the observance of a monastic life the commandments are fulfilled,
+and more is done than what is commanded [that their good works and
+several hundredweights of superfluous, superabundant holiness remain
+in store for them].
+
+Again, this also is false, namely, that monastic observances are
+works of the counsels of the Gospel.  For the Gospel does not advise
+concerning distinctions of clothing and meats and the renunciation of
+property.  These are human traditions, concerning all of which it has
+been said, 1 Cor. 8, 8: Meat commendeth us not to God.  Therefore
+they are neither justifying services nor perfection; yea, when they
+are presented covered with these titles, they are mere doctrines of
+demons.
+
+Virginity is recommended, but to those who have the gift, as has been
+said above.  It is, however, a most pernicious error to hold that
+evangelical perfection lies in human traditions.  For thus the monks
+even of the Mohammedans would be able to boast that they have
+evangelical perfection.  Neither does it lie in the observance of
+other things which are called adiaphora, but because the kingdom of
+God is righteousness and life
+
+in hearts, Rom. 14, 17, perfection is growth in the fear of God, and
+in confidence in the mercy promised in Christ, and in devotion to
+one's calling just as Paul also describes perfection 2 Cor. 3, 18: We
+are changed from glory to glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord.
+He does not say: We are continually receiving another hood, or other
+sandals, or other girdles.  It is deplorable that in the Church such
+pharisaic, yea, Mohammedan expressions should be read and heard as,
+that the perfection of the Gospel of the kingdom of Christ, which is
+eternal life, should be placed in these foolish observances of
+vestments and of similar trifles.
+
+Now hear our Areopagites [excellent teachers] as to what an unworthy
+declaration they have recorded in the Confutation.  Thus they say: It
+has been expressly declared in the Holy Scriptures that the monastic
+life merits eternal life if maintained by a due observance, which by
+the grace of God any monk can maintain; and, indeed, Christ has
+promised this as much more abundant to those who have left home or
+brothers, etc., Matt. 19, 29. These are the words of the adversaries
+in which it is first said most impudently that it is expressed in the
+Holy Scriptures that a monastic life merits eternal life.  For where
+do the Holy Scriptures speak of a monastic life!  Thus the
+adversaries plead their case thus men of no account quote the
+Scriptures.  Although no one is ignorant that the monastic life has
+recently been devised, nevertheless they cite the authority of
+Scripture, and say, too, that this their decree has been expressly
+declared in the Scriptures.
+
+Besides, they dishonor Christ when they say that by monasticism men
+merit eternal life.  God has ascribed not even to His Law the honor
+that it should merit eternal life, as He clearly says in Ezek. 20, 25:
+I gave them also statutes that were not good, and judgments whereby
+they should not live.  In the first place, it is certain that a
+monastic life does not merit the remission of sins, but we obtain
+this by faith freely, as has been said above.  Secondly, for Christ's
+sake, through mercy, eternal life is granted to those who by faith
+receive remission, and do not set their own merits against God's
+judgment, as Bernard also says with very great force: It is necessary
+first of all to believe that you cannot have the remission of sine
+unless by God's indulgence.  Secondly, that you can have no good work
+whatever, unless He has given also this.  Lastly, that you can merit
+eternal life by no works, unless this also is given freely.  The rest
+that follows to the same effect we have above recited.  Moreover,
+Bernard adds at the end: Let no one deceive himself, because if he
+will reflect well, he will undoubtedly find that with ten thousand he
+cannot meet Him [namely, God] who cometh against him with twenty
+thousand.  Since however, we do not
+
+merit the remission of sins or eternal life by the works of the
+divine Law, but it is necessary to seek the mercy promised in Christ,
+much less is this honor of meriting the remission of sins or eternal
+life to be ascribed to monastic observances since they are mere human
+traditions.
+
+Thus those who teach that the monastic life merits the remission of
+sins or eternal life, and transfer the confidence due Christ to these
+foolish observances, altogether suppress the Gospel concerning the
+free remission of sins and the promised mercy in Christ that is to be
+apprehended.  Instead of Christ they worship their own hoods and
+their own filth.  But since even they need mercy, they act wickedly
+in fabricating works of supererogation, and selling them [their
+superfluous claim upon heaven] to others.
+
+We speak the more briefly concerning these subjects, because from
+those things which we have said above concerning justification,
+concerning repentance, concerning human traditions, it is
+sufficiently evident that monastic vows are not a price on account of
+which the remission of sins and life eternal are granted.  And since
+Christ calls traditions useless services, they are in no way
+evangelical perfection.
+
+But the adversaries cunningly wish to appear as if they modify the
+common opinion concerning perfection.  They say that a monastic life
+is not perfection, but that it is a state in which to acquire
+perfection.  It is prettily phrased!  We remember that this
+correction is found in Gerson.  For it is apparent that prudent men,
+offended by these immoderate praises of monastic life, since they did
+not venture to remove entirely from it the praise of perfection, have
+added the correction that it is a state in which to acquire
+perfection.  If we follow this, monasticism will be no more a state
+of perfection than the life of a farmer or mechanic.  For these are
+also states in which to acquire perfection.  For all men, in every
+vocation, ought to seek perfection, that is, to grow in the fear of
+God in faith, in love towards one's neighbor, and similar spiritual
+virtues.
+
+In the histories of the hermits there are examples of Anthony and of
+others which make the various spheres of life equal.  It is written
+that when Anthony asked God to show him what progress he was making
+in this kind of life, a certain shoemaker in the city of Alexandria
+was indicated to him in a dream to whom he should be compared.  The
+next day Anthony came into the city, and went to the shoemaker in
+order to ascertain his exercises and gifts, and, having conversed
+with the man, heard nothing except that early in the morning he
+prayed in a few words for the entire state, and then attended to his
+trade. Here Anthony learned that justification is not to be ascribed to
+the kind of life which he had entered [what God had meant by the
+revelation; for we are justified before God not through this or that
+life, but alone through faith in Christ].
+
+But although the adversaries now moderate their praises concerning
+perfection, yet they actually think otherwise.  For they sell merits,
+and apply them on behalf of others under the pretext that they are
+observing precepts and counsels, hence they actually hold that they
+have superfluous merits.  But what is it to arrogate to one's self
+perfection, if this is not?  Again, it has been laid down in the
+_Confutation_ that the monks endeavor to live more nearly in
+accordance with the Gospel.  Therefore it ascribes perfection to
+human traditions if they are living more nearly in accordance with
+the Gospel by not having property, being unmarried, and obeying the
+rule in clothing, meats, and like trifles.
+
+Again, the _Confutation_ says that the monks merit eternal life the
+more abundantly, and quotes Scripture, Matt. 19, 29: Every one that
+hath forsaken houses, etc. Accordingly, here, too, it claims
+perfection also for factitious religious rites.  But this passage of
+Scripture in no way favors monastic life.  For Christ does not mean
+that to forsake parents, wife, brethren, is a work that must be done
+because it merits the remission of sins and eternal life.  Yea, such
+a forsaking is cursed.  For if any one forsakes parents or wife in
+order by this very work to merit the remission of sins or eternal
+life, this is done with dishonor to Christ.
+
+There is, moreover, a twofold forsaking.  One occurs without a call,
+without God's command; this Christ does not approve, Matt. 15, 9. For
+the works chosen by us are useless services.  But that Christ does
+not approve this flight appears the more clearly from the fact that
+He speaks of forsaking wife and children.  We know, however, that
+God's commandment forbids the forsaking of wife and children.  The
+forsaking which occurs by God's command is of a different kind,
+namely, when power or tyranny compels us either to depart or to deny
+the Gospel.  Here we have the command that we should rather bear
+injury, that we should rather suffer not only wealth, wife, and
+children, but even life, to be taken from us.  This forsaking Christ
+approves, and accordingly He adds: For the Gospel's sake, Mark 10, 29,
+in order to signify that He is speaking not of those who do injury
+to wife and children, but who bear injury on account of the
+confession of the Gospel.  For the Gospel's sake we ought even to
+forsake our body.  Here it would be ridiculous to hold that it would
+be a service to God to kill one's self, and without God's command to
+leave the body.  So, too, it is ridiculous to hold that it is a service
+to God without God's command to forsake possessions, friends, wife,
+children.
+
+Therefore it is evident that they wickedly distort Christ's word to a
+monastic life.  Unless perhaps the declaration that they "receive a
+hundredfold in this life" be in place here.  For very many become
+monks not on account of the Gospel but on account of sumptuous living
+and idleness, who find the most ample riches instead of slender
+patrimonies.  But as the entire subject of monasticism is full of
+shams, so, by a false pretext they quote testimonies of Scripture,
+and as a consequence they sin doubly, i.e., they deceive men, and
+that, too, under the pretext of the divine name.
+
+Another passage is also cited concerning perfection Matt. 19, 21: If
+thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the
+poor, and come and follow Me.  This passage has exercised many, who
+have imagined that it is perfection to cast away possessions and the
+control of property.  Let us allow the philosophers to extol
+Aristippus, who cast a great weight of gold into the sea.  [Cynics
+like Diogenes, who would have no house, but lay in a tub, may commend
+such heathenish holiness.] Such examples pertain in no way to
+Christian perfection.  [Christian holiness consists in much higher
+matters than such hypocrisy.] The division, control and possession of
+property are civil ordinances, approved by God's Word in the
+commandment, Ex. 20, 15: Thou shalt not steal.  The abandonment of
+property has no command or advice in the Scriptures.  For evangelical
+poverty does not consist in the abandonment of property, but in not
+being avaricious, in not trusting in wealth, just as David was poor
+in a most wealthy kingdom.
+
+Therefore, since the abandonment of property is merely a human
+tradition, it is a useless service.  Excessive also are the praises
+in the Extravagant, which says that the abdication of the ownership
+of all things for God's sake is meritorious and holy, and a way of
+perfection.  And it is very dangerous to extol with such excessive
+praises a matter conflicting with political order.  [When
+inexperienced people hear such commendations, they conclude that it
+is unchristian to hold property whence many errors and seditions
+follow, through such commendations Muentzer was deceived, and thereby
+many Anabaptists were led astray.] But [they say] Christ here speaks
+of perfection.  Yea, they do violence to the text who quote it
+mutilated.  Perfection is in that which Christ adds: Follow Me.  An
+example of obedience in one's calling is here presented.  And as
+callings are unlike [one is called to rulership, a second to be
+father of a family, a third to be a preacher], so this calling does
+not belong to all, but pertains properly to
+
+that person with whom Christ there speaks, just as the call of David
+to the kingdom, and of Abraham to slay his son, are not to be
+imitated by us.  Callings are personal, just as matters of business
+themselves vary with times and persons; but the example of obedience
+is general.  Perfection would have belonged to that young man if he
+had believed and obeyed this vocation.  Thus perfection with us is
+that every one with true faith should obey his own calling.  [Not
+that I should undertake a strange calling for which I have not the
+commission or command of God.]
+
+Thirdly.  In monastic vows chastity is promised.  We have said above,
+however, concerning the marriage of priests, that the law of nature
+[or of God] in men cannot be removed by vows or enactments.  And as
+all do not have the gift of continence, many because of weakness are
+unsuccessfully continent.  Neither, indeed, can any vows or any
+enactments abolish the command of the Holy Ghost 1 Cor. 7, 2: To
+avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife.  Therefore this
+vow is not lawful in those who do not have the gift of continence,
+but who are polluted on account of weakness.  Concerning this entire
+topic enough has been said above, in regard to which indeed it is
+strange, since the dangers and scandals are occurring before men's
+eyes that the adversaries still defend their traditions contrary to
+the manifest command of God.  Neither does the voice of Christ move
+them, who chides the Pharisees, Matt. 23, 13 f., who had made
+traditions contrary to God's command.
+
+Fourthly.  Those who live in monasteries are released from their vows
+by such godless ceremonies as of the Mass applied on behalf of the
+dead for the sake of gain, the worship of saints, in which the fault
+is twofold, both that the saints are put in Christ's place, and that
+they are wickedly worshiped, just as the Dominicasters invented the
+rosary of the Blessed Virgin, which is mere babbling not less foolish
+than it is wicked, and nourishes the most vain presumption.  Then,
+too, these very impieties are applied only for the sake of gain.
+Likewise, they neither hear nor teach the Gospel concerning the free
+remission of sins for Christ's sake, concerning the righteousness of
+faith, concerning true repentance, concerning works which have God's
+command.  But they are occupied either in philosophic discussions or
+in the handing down of ceremonies that obscure Christ.
+
+We will not here speak of the entire service of ceremonies, of the
+lessons, singing, and similar things, which could be tolerated if
+they [were regulated as regards number, and if they] would be
+regarded as exercises, after the manner of lessons in the schools
+[and preaching], whose design is to teach the hearers, and, while
+teaching, to move some to fear or faith.
+
+But now they feign that these ceremonies are services of God, which
+merit the remission of sins for themselves and for others.  For on
+this account they increase these ceremonies.  But if they would
+undertake them in order to teach and exhort the hearers, brief and
+pointed lessons would be of more profit than these infinite babblings.
+Thus the entire monastic life is full of hypocrisy and false
+opinions [against the First and Second Commandments, against Christ].
+To all these this danger also is added, that those who are in these
+fraternities are compelled to assent to those persecuting the truth.
+There are, therefore, many important and forcible reasons which free
+good men from the obligation to this kind of life.
+
+Lastly, the canons themselves release many who either without
+judgment [before they have attained a proper age] have made vows when
+enticed by the tricks of the monks, or have made vows under
+compulsion by friends.  Such vows not even the canons declare to be
+vows.  From all these considerations it is apparent that there are
+very many reasons which teach that monastic vows such as have
+hitherto been made are not vows; and for this reason a sphere of life
+full of hypocrisy and false opinions can be safely abandoned.
+
+Here they present an objection derived from the Law concerning the
+Nazarites, Num. 6, 2f.  But the Nazarites did not take upon
+themselves their vows with the opinions which, we have hitherto said
+we censure in the vows of the monks.  The rite of the Nazarites was
+an exercise [a bodily exercise with fasting and certain kinds of
+food] or declaration of faith before men, and did not merit the
+remission of sins before God, did not justify before God.  [For they
+sought this elsewhere, namely, in the promise of the blessed Seed.]
+Again, just as circumcision or the slaying of victims would not be a
+service of God now, so the rite of the Nazarites ought not to be
+presented now as a service, but it ought to be judged simply as an
+adiaphoron.  It is not right to compare monasticism, devised without
+God's Word, as a service which should merit the remission of sins and
+justification, with the rite of the Nazarites, which had God's Word,
+and was not taught for the purpose of meriting the remission of sins,
+but to be an outward exercise, just as other ceremonies of the Law.
+The same can be said concerning other ceremonies prescribed in the
+Law.
+
+The Rechabites also are cited, who did not have any possessions, and
+did not drink wine, as Jeremiah writes, chap. 35, 6f.  Yea, truly,
+the example of the Rechabites accords beautifully with our monks,
+whose monasteries excel the palaces of kings, and who live most
+sumptuously!  And the Rechabites, in their poverty of all things,
+were nevertheless married.  Our monks, although abounding in all
+voluptuousness, profess celibacy.
+
+Besides, examples ought to be interpreted according to the rule, i.e.,
+according to certain and clear passages of Scripture, not contrary
+to the rule, that is, contrary to the Scriptures.  It is very certain,
+however, that our observances do not merit the remission of sins or
+justification.  Therefore, when the Rechabites are praised, it is
+necessary [it is certain] that these have observed their custom, not
+because they believed that by this they merited remission of sins, or
+that the work was itself a justifying service, or one on account of
+which they obtained eternal life, instead of, by God's mercy, for the
+sake of the promised Seed.  But because they had the command of their
+parents, their obedience is praised, concerning which there is the
+commandment of God: Honor thy father and mother.
+
+Then, too, the custom had a particular purpose: Because they were
+foreigners, not Israelites, it is apparent that their father wished
+to distinguish them by certain marks from their countrymen, so that
+they might not relapse into the impiety of their countrymen.  He
+wished by these marks to admonish them of the [fear of God, the]
+doctrine of faith and immortality.  Such an end is lawful.  But for
+monasticism far different ends are taught.  They feign that the works
+of monasticism are a service, they feign that they merit the
+remission of sins and justification.  The example of the Rechabites
+is therefore unlike monasticism; to omit here other evils which
+inhere in monasticism at present.
+
+They cite also from 1 Tim. 5, 11ff. concerning widows, who, as they
+served the Church, were supported at the public expense, where it is
+said: They will marry, having damnation, because they have cast off
+their first faith.  First, let us suppose that the Apostle is here
+speaking of vows [which, however, he is not doing]; still this
+passage will not favor monastic vows, which are made concerning
+godless services, and in this opinion that they merit the remission
+of sins and justification.  For Paul with ringing voice condemns all
+services, all laws, all works, if they are observed in order to merit
+the remission of sins, or that, on account of them instead of through
+mercy on account of Christ we obtain remission of sins.  On this
+account the vows of widows, if there were any, must have been unlike
+monastic vows.
+
+Besides, if the adversaries do not cease to misapply the passage to
+vows, the prohibition that no widow be selected who is less than
+sixty years, 1 Tim. 5, 9, must be misapplied in the same way.  Thus
+vows made before this age will be of no account.  But the Church did
+not yet know these vows. Therefore Paul condemns widows, not because
+they marry, for he commands the younger to marry; but because, when
+supported at the public expense, they became wanton, and thus cast
+off faith. He calls this first faith, clearly not in a monastic vow,
+but in Christianity [of their Baptism, their Christian duty, their
+Christianity]. And in this sense he understands faith in the same
+chapter, v. 8: If any one provide not for his own, and specially for
+those of his own house, he hath denied the faith. For he speaks
+otherwise of faith than the sophists. He does not ascribe faith to
+those who have mortal sin. He, accordingly, says that those cast off
+faith who do not care for their relatives. And in the same way he
+says that wanton women cast off faith.
+
+We have recounted some of our reasons and, in passing, have explained
+away the objections urged by the adversaries.  And we have collected
+these matters, not only on account of the adversaries, but much more
+on account of godly minds, that they may have in view the reasons why
+they ought to disapprove of hypocrisy and fictitious monastic
+services, all of which indeed this one saying of Christ annuls, which
+reads, Matt. 15, 9: In vain they do worship Me, teaching for
+doctrines the commandments of men.  Therefore the vows themselves and
+the observances of meats, lessons, chants, vestments, sandals,
+girdles are useless services in God's sight.  And all godly minds
+should certainly know that the opinion is simply pharisaic and
+condemned that these observances merit the remission of sins; that on
+account of them we are accounted righteous, that on account of them,
+and not through mercy on account of Christ, we obtain eternal life.
+And the holy men who have lived in these kinds of life must
+necessarily have learned, confidence in such observance having been
+rejected, that they had the remission of sins freely, that for
+Christ's sake through mercy they would obtain eternal life, and not
+for the sake of these services [therefore godly persons who were
+saved and continued to live in monastic life had finally come to this,
+namely, that they despaired of their monastic life, despised all
+their works as dung, condemned all their hypocritical service of God,
+and held fast to the promise of grace in Christ, as in the example of
+St. Bernard, saying, _Perdite vixi_, I have lived in a sinful way],
+because God only approves services instituted by His Word, which
+services avail when used in faith.
+
+
+
+
+Part 36
+
+
+Article XXVIII (XIV): _Of Ecclesiastical Power._
+
+Here the adversaries cry out violently concerning the privileges and
+immunities of the ecclesiastical estate, and they add the peroration:
+All things are vain which are presented in the present article
+against the immunity of the churches and priests.  This is mere
+calumny; for in this article we have disputed concerning other things.
+Besides, we have frequently testified that we do not find fault
+with political ordinances, and the gifts and privileges granted by
+princes.
+
+But would that the adversaries would hear, on the other hand, the
+complaints of the churches and of godly minds!  The adversaries
+courageously guard their own dignities and wealth; meanwhile, they
+neglect the condition of the churches; they do not care that the
+churches are rightly taught, and that the Sacraments are duly
+administered.  To the priesthood they admit all kinds of persons
+indiscriminately.  [They ordain rude asses; thus the Christian
+doctrine perished, because the Church was not supplied with efficient
+preachers.] Afterwards they impose intolerable burdens, as though
+they were delighted with the destruction of their fellowmen, they
+demand that their traditions be observed far more accurately than the
+Gospel.  Now, in the most important and difficult controversies,
+concerning which the people urgently desire to be taught, in order
+that they may have something certain which they may follow, they do
+not release the minds which are most severely tortured with doubt,
+they only call to arms.  Besides, in manifest matters [against
+manifest truth] they present decrees written in blood, which threaten
+horrible punishments to men unless they act clearly contrary to God's
+command.  Here, on the other hand, you ought to see the tears of the
+poor, and hear the pitiable complaints of many good men, which God
+undoubtedly considers and regards, to whom one day you will render an
+account of your stewardship.
+
+But although in the Confession we have in this article embraced
+various topics, the adversaries make no reply [act in true popish
+fashion], except that the bishops have the power of rule and coercive
+correction, in order to direct their subjects to the goal of eternal
+blessedness; and that the power of ruling requires the power to judge,
+to define, to distinguish and fix those things which are serviceable
+or conduce to the aforementioned end.  These are the words of the
+_Confutation_, in which the adversaries teach us [but do not prove]
+that the bishops have the authority to frame laws [without the
+authority of the Gospel] useful for obtaining eternal life.  The
+controversy is concerning this article.
+
+[Regarding this matter we submit the following:] But we must retain
+in the Church this doctrine, namely, that we receive the remission of
+sins freely for Christ's sake, by faith.  We must also retain this
+doctrine, namely, that human traditions are useless services, and
+therefore neither sin nor righteousness should be placed in meat
+drink, clothing and like things, the use of which Christ wished to be
+left free, since He says, Matt. 15, 11: Not that which goeth into the
+mouth defileth the man; and Paul, Rom. 14, 17: The kingdom of God is
+not meat and drink.  Therefore the bishops have no right to frame
+traditions in addition to the Gospel, that they may merit the
+remission of sins, that they may be services which God is to approve
+as righteousness and which burden consciences, as though it were a
+sin to omit them.  All this is taught by that one passage in Acts, 15,
+9ff., where the apostles say [Peter says] that hearts are purified
+by faith.  And then they prohibit the imposing of a yoke, and show
+how great a danger this is, and enlarge upon the sin of those who
+burden the Church.  Why tempt ye God they say.  By this thunderbolt
+our adversaries are in no way terrified, who defend by violence
+traditions and godless opinions.
+
+For above they have also condemned Article XV, in which we have
+stated that traditions do not merit the remission of sins, and they
+here say that traditions conduce to eternal life.  Do they merit the
+remission of sins?  Are they services which God approves as
+righteousness?  Do they quicken hearts!  Paul to the Colossians, 2,
+20ff., says that traditions do not profit with respect to eternal
+righteousness and eternal life; for the reason that food, drink,
+clothing and the like are things that perish with the using.  But
+eternal life [which begins in this life inwardly by faith] is wrought
+in the heart by eternal things, i.e., by the Word of God and the Holy
+Ghost.  Therefore let the adversaries explain how traditions conduce
+to eternal life.
+
+Since, however, the Gospel clearly testifies that traditions ought
+not to be imposed upon the Church in order to merit the remission of
+sins; in order to be services which God shall approve as
+righteousness; in order to burden consciences, so that to omit them
+is to be accounted a sin, the adversaries will never be able to show
+that the bishops have the power to institute such services.
+
+Besides, we have declared in the Confession what power the Gospel
+ascribes to bishops.  Those who are now bishops do not perform the
+duties of bishops according to the Gospel although, indeed, they may
+be bishops according to canonical polity, which we do not censure.
+But we are speaking of a bishop according to the Gospel.  And we are
+pleased with the ancient division of power into power of the order
+and power of jurisdiction [that is the administration of the
+Sacraments and the exercise of spiritual jurisdiction].  Therefore
+the bishop has the power of the order, i.e., the ministry of the Word
+and Sacraments; he has also the power of jurisdiction, i.e., the
+authority to excommunicate those guilty of open crimes, and again to
+absolve them if they are converted and seek absolution.  But their
+power is not to be tyrannical, i.e., without a fixed law; nor regal,
+i.e., above law; but they have a fixed command and a fixed Word of
+God, according to which they ought to teach and according to which
+they ought to exercise their jurisdiction.  Therefore, even though
+they should have some jurisdiction, it does not follow that they are
+able to institute new services.  For services pertain in no way to
+jurisdiction.  And they have the Word, they have the command, how far
+they ought to exercise jurisdiction, namely, if any one would do
+anything contrary to that Word which they have received from Christ.
+[For the Gospel does not set up a rule independently of the Gospel;
+that is quite clear and certain.]
+
+Although in the Confession we also have added how far it is lawful
+for them to frame traditions, namely, not as necessary services, but
+so that there may be order in the Church, for the sake of
+tranquillity.  And these traditions ought not to cast snares upon
+consciences, as though to enjoin necessary services; as Paul teaches
+when he says, Gal. 5, 1: Stand fast, therefore, in the liberty
+wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with
+the yoke of bondage.  The use of such ordinances ought therefore to
+be left free, provided that offenses be avoided, and that they be not
+judged to be necessary services; just as the apostles themselves
+ordained [for the sake of good discipline] very many things which
+have been changed with time.  Neither did they hand them down in such
+a way that it would not be permitted to change them.  For they did
+not dissent from their own writings, in which they greatly labor lest
+the Church be burdened with the opinion that human rites are
+necessary services.
+
+This is the simple mode of interpreting traditions, namely, that we
+understand them not as necessary services, and nevertheless, for the
+sake of avoiding offenses, we should observe them in the proper place.
+And thus many learned and great men in the Church have held.  Nor
+do we see what can be said against this.  For it is certain that the
+expression Luke 10, 16: He that heareth you heareth Me, does not
+speak of traditions, but is chiefly directed against traditions.  For
+it is not a _mandatum cum libera_ ( a bestowal of unlimited
+authority), as they call it, but it is a _cautio de rato_ (a caution
+concerning something prescribed), namely, concerning the special
+command [not a free, unlimited order and power, but a limited order,
+namely, not to preach their own word, but God's Word and the Gospel],
+i.e., the testimony given to the apostles that we believe them with
+respect to the word of another, not their own.  For Christ wishes to
+assure us, as was necessary, that we should know that the Word
+delivered by men is efficacious, and that no other word from heaven
+ought to be sought.  He that heareth you heareth Me, cannot be
+understood of traditions.  For Christ requires that they teach in
+such a way that [by their mouth] He Himself be heard, because He says:
+He heareth Me.  Therefore He wishes His own voice, His own Word, to
+be heard, not human traditions.  Thus a saying which is most
+especially in our favor, and contains the most important consolation
+and doctrine, these stupid men pervert to the most trifling matters,
+the distinctions of food, vestments, and the like.
+
+They quote also Heb. 13, 17: Obey them that have the rule over you.
+This passage requires obedience to the Gospel.  For it does not
+establish a dominion for the bishops apart from the Gospel.  Neither
+should the bishops frame traditions contrary to the Gospel, or
+interpret their traditions contrary to the Gospel.  And when they do
+this, obedience is prohibited, according to Gal. 1, 9: If any man
+preach any other gospel, let him be accursed.
+
+We make the same reply to Matt. 23, 3: Whatsoever they bid you
+observe, that observe, because evidently a universal command is not
+given that we should receive all things [even contrary to God's
+command and Word], since Scripture elsewhere, Acts 5, 29, bids us
+obey God rather than men.  When, therefore they teach wicked things,
+they are not to be heard.  But these are wicked things, namely, that
+human traditions are services of God that they are necessary services,
+that they merit the remission of sins and eternal life.
+
+They present, as an objection, the public offenses and commotions
+which have arisen under pretext of our doctrine.  To these we briefly
+reply.  If all the scandals be brought together, still the one
+article concerning the remission of sins, that for Christ's sake
+through faith we freely obtain the remission of sins, brings so much
+good as to hide all evils.  And this, in the beginning, gained for
+Luther not only our favor, but also, that of many who are now
+contending against us.  "For former favor ceases, and mortals are
+forgetful," says Pindar.  Nevertheless, we neither desire to desert
+truth that is necessary to the Church, nor can we assent to the
+adversaries in condemning it.  For we ought to obey God rather than
+men.  Those who in the beginning condemned manifest truth, and are
+now persecuting it with the greatest cruelty, will give an account
+for the schism that has been occasioned.  Then, too, are there no
+scandals among the adversaries?  How much evil is there in the
+sacrilegious profanation of the Mass applied to gain!  How great
+disgrace in celibacy!  But let us omit a comparison.  This is what we
+hare replied to the _Confutation_ for the time being.  Now we leave
+it to the judgment of all the godly whether the adversaries are right
+in boasting that they have actually refuted our Concession from the
+Scriptures.
+
+
+
+
+Part 37
+
+
+_THE END._
+
+[As regards the slander and complaint of the adversaries at the end
+of the _Confutation_, namely, that this doctrine is causing
+disobedience and other scandals, this is unjustly imputed to our
+doctrine.  For it is evident that by this doctrine the authority of
+magistrates is most highly praised.  Moreover, it is well known that
+in those localities where this doctrine is preached, the magistrates
+have hitherto by the grace of God, been treated with all respect by
+the subjects.
+
+But as to the want of unity and dissension in the Church, it is well
+known how these matters first happened, and who have caused the
+division, namely, the sellers of indulgences, who shamelessly
+preached intolerable lies, and afterwards condemned Luther for not
+approving of those lies, and besides, they again and again excited
+more controversies, so that Luther was induced to attack many other
+errors.  But since our opponents would not tolerate the truth, and
+dared to promote manifest errors by force, it is easy to judge who is
+guilty of the schism.  Surely, all the world, all wisdom, all power
+ought to yield to Christ and His holy Word.  But the devil is the
+enemy of God, and therefore rouses all his might against Christ, to
+extinguish and suppress the Word of God.  Therefore the devil with
+his members, setting himself against the Word of God, is the cause of
+the schism and want of unity.  For we have most zealously sought
+peace, and still most eagerly desire it, provided only we are not
+forced to blaspheme and deny Christ.  For God, the discerner of all
+men's hearts, is our witness that we do not delight and have no joy
+in this awful disunion.  On the other hand, our adversaries have so
+far not been willing to conclude peace without stipulating that we
+must abandon the saving doctrine of the forgiveness of sin by Christ
+without our merit; though Christ would be most foully blasphemed
+thereby.
+
+And although, as is the custom of the world it cannot be but that
+offenses have occurred in this schism through malice and by imprudent
+people; for the devil causes such offenses, to disgrace the Gospel,
+yet all this is of no account in view of the great comfort which this
+teaching has brought men, that for Christ's sake, without our merit,
+we have forgiveness of sins and a gracious God.  Again, that men have
+been instructed that forsaking secular estates and magistracies is
+not a divine worship, but that such estates and magistracies are
+pleasing to God and to be engaged in them is a real holy work and
+divine service.
+
+If we also were to narrate the offenses of the adversaries, which,
+indeed, we have no desire to do, it would be a terrible list: what an
+abominable, blasphemous fair the adversaries have made of the Mass;
+what unchaste living has been instituted by their celibacy; how the
+Popes have for more than 400 years been engaged in wars against the
+emperors, have forgotten the Gospel, and only sought to be emperors
+themselves, and to bring all Italy into their power how they have
+juggled the possessions of the Church; how through their neglect many
+false teachings and forms of worship have been set up by the monks.
+Is not their worship of the saints manifest pagan idolatry?  All
+their writers do not say one word concerning faith in Christ, by
+which forgiveness of sin is obtained; the highest degree of holiness
+they ascribe to human traditions, it is chiefly of these that they
+write and preach.  Moreover this, too, ought to be numbered with
+their offenses, that they clearly reveal what sort of a spirit is in
+them, because they are now putting to death so many innocent, pious
+people on account of Christian doctrine.  But we do not now wish to
+say more concerning this; for these matters should be decided in
+accordance with God's Word, regardless of the offenses on either aide.
+
+We hope that all God-fearing men will sufficiently see from this
+writing of ours that ours is the Christian doctrine and comforting
+and salutary to all godly men.  Accordingly, we pray God to extend
+His grace to the end that His holy Gospel may be known and honored by
+all, for His glory, and for the peace, unity, and salvation of all of
+us.  Regarding all these articles we offer to make further statements
+if required.]
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+End of the Project Gutenberg EBook of The Apology of the Augsburg Confession
+by Philip Melanchthon
+
+*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK APOLOGY OF THE AUGSBURG CONFESSION ***
+
+This file should be named 6744.txt or 6744.zip
+
+Produced for Project Gutenberg by Michael Pullen and David Klinge.
+
+Project Gutenberg eBooks are often created from several printed
+editions, all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the US
+unless a copyright notice is included.  Thus, we usually do not
+keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition.
+
+We are now trying to release all our eBooks one year in advance
+of the official release dates, leaving time for better editing.
+Please be encouraged to tell us about any error or corrections,
+even years after the official publication date.
+
+Please note neither this listing nor its contents are final til
+midnight of the last day of the month of any such announcement.
+The official release date of all Project Gutenberg eBooks is at
+Midnight, Central Time, of the last day of the stated month.  A
+preliminary version may often be posted for suggestion, comment
+and editing by those who wish to do so.
+
+Most people start at our Web sites at:
+https://gutenberg.org or
+http://promo.net/pg
+
+These Web sites include award-winning information about Project
+Gutenberg, including how to donate, how to help produce our new
+eBooks, and how to subscribe to our email newsletter (free!).
+
+
+Those of you who want to download any eBook before announcement
+can get to them as follows, and just download by date.  This is
+also a good way to get them instantly upon announcement, as the
+indexes our cataloguers produce obviously take a while after an
+announcement goes out in the Project Gutenberg Newsletter.
+
+http://www.ibiblio.org/gutenberg/etext03 or
+ftp://ftp.ibiblio.org/pub/docs/books/gutenberg/etext03
+
+Or /etext02, 01, 00, 99, 98, 97, 96, 95, 94, 93, 92, 92, 91 or 90
+
+Just search by the first five letters of the filename you want,
+as it appears in our Newsletters.
+
+
+Information about Project Gutenberg (one page)
+
+We produce about two million dollars for each hour we work.  The
+time it takes us, a rather conservative estimate, is fifty hours
+to get any eBook selected, entered, proofread, edited, copyright
+searched and analyzed, the copyright letters written, etc.   Our
+projected audience is one hundred million readers.  If the value
+per text is nominally estimated at one dollar then we produce $2
+million dollars per hour in 2002 as we release over 100 new text
+files per month:  1240 more eBooks in 2001 for a total of 4000+
+We are already on our way to trying for 2000 more eBooks in 2002
+If they reach just 1-2% of the world's population then the total
+will reach over half a trillion eBooks given away by year's end.
+
+The Goal of Project Gutenberg is to Give Away 1 Trillion eBooks!
+This is ten thousand titles each to one hundred million readers,
+which is only about 4% of the present number of computer users.
+
+Here is the briefest record of our progress (* means estimated):
+
+eBooks Year Month
+
+    1  1971 July
+   10  1991 January
+  100  1994 January
+ 1000  1997 August
+ 1500  1998 October
+ 2000  1999 December
+ 2500  2000 December
+ 3000  2001 November
+ 4000  2001 October/November
+ 6000  2002 December*
+ 9000  2003 November*
+10000  2004 January*
+
+
+The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation has been created
+to secure a future for Project Gutenberg into the next millennium.
+
+We need your donations more than ever!
+
+As of February, 2002, contributions are being solicited from people
+and organizations in: Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Connecticut,
+Delaware, District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Illinois,
+Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Massachusetts,
+Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New
+Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Ohio,
+Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South
+Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, West
+Virginia, Wisconsin, and Wyoming.
+
+We have filed in all 50 states now, but these are the only ones
+that have responded.
+
+As the requirements for other states are met, additions to this list
+will be made and fund raising will begin in the additional states.
+Please feel free to ask to check the status of your state.
+
+In answer to various questions we have received on this:
+
+We are constantly working on finishing the paperwork to legally
+request donations in all 50 states.  If your state is not listed and
+you would like to know if we have added it since the list you have,
+just ask.
+
+While we cannot solicit donations from people in states where we are
+not yet registered, we know of no prohibition against accepting
+donations from donors in these states who approach us with an offer to
+donate.
+
+International donations are accepted, but we don't know ANYTHING about
+how to make them tax-deductible, or even if they CAN be made
+deductible, and don't have the staff to handle it even if there are
+ways.
+
+Donations by check or money order may be sent to:
+
+Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
+PMB 113
+1739 University Ave.
+Oxford, MS 38655-4109
+
+Contact us if you want to arrange for a wire transfer or payment
+method other than by check or money order.
+
+The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation has been approved by
+the US Internal Revenue Service as a 501(c)(3) organization with EIN
+[Employee Identification Number] 64-622154.  Donations are
+tax-deductible to the maximum extent permitted by law.  As fund-raising
+requirements for other states are met, additions to this list will be
+made and fund-raising will begin in the additional states.
+
+We need your donations more than ever!
+
+You can get up to date donation information online at:
+
+https://www.gutenberg.org/donation.html
+
+
+***
+
+If you can't reach Project Gutenberg,
+you can always email directly to:
+
+Michael S. Hart <hart@pobox.com>
+
+Prof. Hart will answer or forward your message.
+
+We would prefer to send you information by email.
+
+
+**The Legal Small Print**
+
+
+(Three Pages)
+
+***START**THE SMALL PRINT!**FOR PUBLIC DOMAIN EBOOKS**START***
+Why is this "Small Print!" statement here? You know: lawyers.
+They tell us you might sue us if there is something wrong with
+your copy of this eBook, even if you got it for free from
+someone other than us, and even if what's wrong is not our
+fault. So, among other things, this "Small Print!" statement
+disclaims most of our liability to you. It also tells you how
+you may distribute copies of this eBook if you want to.
+
+*BEFORE!* YOU USE OR READ THIS EBOOK
+By using or reading any part of this PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm
+eBook, you indicate that you understand, agree to and accept
+this "Small Print!" statement. If you do not, you can receive
+a refund of the money (if any) you paid for this eBook by
+sending a request within 30 days of receiving it to the person
+you got it from. If you received this eBook on a physical
+medium (such as a disk), you must return it with your request.
+
+ABOUT PROJECT GUTENBERG-TM EBOOKS
+This PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm eBook, like most PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm eBooks,
+is a "public domain" work distributed by Professor Michael S. Hart
+through the Project Gutenberg Association (the "Project").
+Among other things, this means that no one owns a United States copyright
+on or for this work, so the Project (and you!) can copy and
+distribute it in the United States without permission and
+without paying copyright royalties. Special rules, set forth
+below, apply if you wish to copy and distribute this eBook
+under the "PROJECT GUTENBERG" trademark.
+
+Please do not use the "PROJECT GUTENBERG" trademark to market
+any commercial products without permission.
+
+To create these eBooks, the Project expends considerable
+efforts to identify, transcribe and proofread public domain
+works. Despite these efforts, the Project's eBooks and any
+medium they may be on may contain "Defects". Among other
+things, Defects may take the form of incomplete, inaccurate or
+corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other
+intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged
+disk or other eBook medium, a computer virus, or computer
+codes that damage or cannot be read by your equipment.
+
+LIMITED WARRANTY; DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES
+But for the "Right of Replacement or Refund" described below,
+[1] Michael Hart and the Foundation (and any other party you may
+receive this eBook from as a PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm eBook) disclaims
+all liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including
+legal fees, and [2] YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE OR
+UNDER STRICT LIABILITY, OR FOR BREACH OF WARRANTY OR CONTRACT,
+INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE
+OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES, EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE
+POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES.
+
+If you discover a Defect in this eBook within 90 days of
+receiving it, you can receive a refund of the money (if any)
+you paid for it by sending an explanatory note within that
+time to the person you received it from. If you received it
+on a physical medium, you must return it with your note, and
+such person may choose to alternatively give you a replacement
+copy. If you received it electronically, such person may
+choose to alternatively give you a second opportunity to
+receive it electronically.
+
+THIS EBOOK IS OTHERWISE PROVIDED TO YOU "AS-IS". NO OTHER
+WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, ARE MADE TO YOU AS
+TO THE EBOOK OR ANY MEDIUM IT MAY BE ON, INCLUDING BUT NOT
+LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A
+PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
+
+Some states do not allow disclaimers of implied warranties or
+the exclusion or limitation of consequential damages, so the
+above disclaimers and exclusions may not apply to you, and you
+may have other legal rights.
+
+INDEMNITY
+You will indemnify and hold Michael Hart, the Foundation,
+and its trustees and agents, and any volunteers associated
+with the production and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm
+texts harmless, from all liability, cost and expense, including
+legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of the
+following that you do or cause:  [1] distribution of this eBook,
+[2] alteration, modification, or addition to the eBook,
+or [3] any Defect.
+
+DISTRIBUTION UNDER "PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm"
+You may distribute copies of this eBook electronically, or by
+disk, book or any other medium if you either delete this
+"Small Print!" and all other references to Project Gutenberg,
+or:
+
+[1]  Only give exact copies of it.  Among other things, this
+     requires that you do not remove, alter or modify the
+     eBook or this "small print!" statement.  You may however,
+     if you wish, distribute this eBook in machine readable
+     binary, compressed, mark-up, or proprietary form,
+     including any form resulting from conversion by word
+     processing or hypertext software, but only so long as
+     *EITHER*:
+
+     [*]  The eBook, when displayed, is clearly readable, and
+          does *not* contain characters other than those
+          intended by the author of the work, although tilde
+          (~), asterisk (*) and underline (_) characters may
+          be used to convey punctuation intended by the
+          author, and additional characters may be used to
+          indicate hypertext links; OR
+
+     [*]  The eBook may be readily converted by the reader at
+          no expense into plain ASCII, EBCDIC or equivalent
+          form by the program that displays the eBook (as is
+          the case, for instance, with most word processors);
+          OR
+
+     [*]  You provide, or agree to also provide on request at
+          no additional cost, fee or expense, a copy of the
+          eBook in its original plain ASCII form (or in EBCDIC
+          or other equivalent proprietary form).
+
+[2]  Honor the eBook refund and replacement provisions of this
+     "Small Print!" statement.
+
+[3]  Pay a trademark license fee to the Foundation of 20% of the
+     gross profits you derive calculated using the method you
+     already use to calculate your applicable taxes.  If you
+     don't derive profits, no royalty is due.  Royalties are
+     payable to "Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation"
+     the 60 days following each date you prepare (or were
+     legally required to prepare) your annual (or equivalent
+     periodic) tax return.  Please contact us beforehand to
+     let us know your plans and to work out the details.
+
+WHAT IF YOU *WANT* TO SEND MONEY EVEN IF YOU DON'T HAVE TO?
+Project Gutenberg is dedicated to increasing the number of
+public domain and licensed works that can be freely distributed
+in machine readable form.
+
+The Project gratefully accepts contributions of money, time,
+public domain materials, or royalty free copyright licenses.
+Money should be paid to the:
+"Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation."
+
+If you are interested in contributing scanning equipment or
+software or other items, please contact Michael Hart at:
+hart@pobox.com
+
+[Portions of this eBook's header and trailer may be reprinted only
+when distributed free of all fees.  Copyright (C) 2001, 2002 by
+Michael S. Hart.  Project Gutenberg is a TradeMark and may not be
+used in any sales of Project Gutenberg eBooks or other materials be
+they hardware or software or any other related product without
+express permission.]
+
+*END THE SMALL PRINT! FOR PUBLIC DOMAIN EBOOKS*Ver.02/11/02*END*
+
diff --git a/6744.zip b/6744.zip
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..924f6c4
--- /dev/null
+++ b/6744.zip
diff --git a/LICENSE.txt b/LICENSE.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..6312041
--- /dev/null
+++ b/LICENSE.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
+This eBook, including all associated images, markup, improvements,
+metadata, and any other content or labor, has been confirmed to be
+in the PUBLIC DOMAIN IN THE UNITED STATES.
+
+Procedures for determining public domain status are described in
+the "Copyright How-To" at https://www.gutenberg.org.
+
+No investigation has been made concerning possible copyrights in
+jurisdictions other than the United States. Anyone seeking to utilize
+this eBook outside of the United States should confirm copyright
+status under the laws that apply to them.
diff --git a/README.md b/README.md
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..ed63283
--- /dev/null
+++ b/README.md
@@ -0,0 +1,2 @@
+Project Gutenberg (https://www.gutenberg.org) public repository for
+eBook #6744 (https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/6744)