Books: The Apology of the Augsburg Confession

P >> Philip Melanchthon >> The Apology of the Augsburg Confession

Pages:
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25

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.

Pages:
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25