Part 12
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.
Article IX: _Of Baptism._
Part 13
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.
Article X: _Of the Holy Supper._
Part 14
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].
Article XI: _Of Confession._
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
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.
Article XII (V): _Of Repentance._
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, l: 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.