I have got the permission to bring the
translation of the CA Graeca into English - made by Dr. Wayne James Jorgenson as
an APPENDIX to his dissertation:
The Augustana Graeca and the correspondence
between the Tübingen Lutherans and patriarch Jeremias:
Scripture and tradition in theological methodology
(Submitted as partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, Boston University, 1979)
åååå© Dr. Wayne James Jorgenson
(The pagination
follows the ASThW - compare the "Facsimile")
THE GREEK VERSION OF THE AUGSBURG CONFESSION1
(Words
which are found only in the Greek text have a blue colour; words which involve a
noteworthy variation between the Greek text and the Latin variatissima
text have a red colour. The pagination of the ASThW text is indicated in the
left margin.)
p. 5
CONFESSION OF THE ORTHODOX FAITH, that
is, of the Christian teaching, presented to Charles, the most invincible
emperor of the Romans, in
the city of Germany derived from the name of the emperor, in the year
1530 from the birth of Christ, translated by Paul
Dolscius of Plauen. Chapters or articles
chosen from the sound and saving faith.
The churches among us, being of the same mind, teach that the decree of
the Synod of Nicea about the unity of the divine essence and of the three hypostases
or persons is true, and that it is to be believed without any doubt that
there is clearly one divine essence, which is called and is God eternal,
bodiless, undivided, having created and preserving all things, both seen and
unseen, by immeasurable strength, wisdom, and goodness. Yet there are three
persons, of the same essence and of the same power, and coeternal, that
is to say, the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit. They use the name
of person in that meaning according to which the ecclesiastical writers have
also used it in the same method, lest it signify a part or a quality lying in
another, but that the distinctive character and
unique substance may be apparent.
They condemn all heresies which blasphemed this article of the Orthodox
Faith: such as that of the Manichaeans, who fabricate two principles, the
one good and the other evil: and that of the Valentinians, of the Arians, of the
Eunomians, and of the Mahometans, and, briefly speaking,
all the heresies of the others similar to these; moreover, the heresy of those
relating to Paul of Samosata, both the old and the new, who contend that there
p.
6
is only one person of the Word and of the Holy Spirit and who
treacherously and impiously pro claim and contrive that
the persons are not distinguished, but that the Word signifies the Word uttered
vocally and that the Spirit signifies a certain movement created in
things.
II.
They
also teach that, after the transgression of Adam the
first-formed,
all men from father and mother are born sinners
by nature, that is, without fear of God, without trust in Him, but
with concupiscence and disorder, and that they are
clothed in innate worthlessness and wretchedness. In consent and in
accordance with the opinion and teaching of the holy Fathers and all the
orthodox and pious in the Church, they state that
the innate worthlessness and wretchedness of human nature is the liability
and subjection to eternal damnation for all men, through the transgression of
the first-formed, in which every man by nature is born a child of the wrath of
God, subject to and under the power of eternal death; moreover, they
teach that the corruption of human nature is implanted in everyone from Adam,
and it comprises the deprivation or the deficiency
of original justice, and of integrity or of obedience, and concupiscence.
This
deficiency is a terrible blindness, and ignorance
of God, an obscuring
or overshadowing of divine illumination and knowledge of God, which would
have radiated in human nature were it still undamaged
and unstumbled, and it is a distortion
of rectitude: that is, a corruption of the unchangeable
and uninterrupted obedience, and of the undisguised and unmixed and
unsurpassed love of God, and of things similar to these
impressed by God on the untarnished human
nature before the fall. They say that
this affliction or wickedness of
the corrupted human nature is truly
sin, sentencing to eternal death all men up to the present who have not been
born again through baptism and the Holy Spirit.
Thinking and teaching in this way, they
condemn the so-called Pelagians and the others,
moreover, who, to the
p.
7
dishonour
of the redemption and
the good works of Christ, deny that wretchedness
and worthlessness from birth is sin, and
they contend and say that man by his own
powers of the soul can fulfil the law of God and
be justified before Him.
III.
In addition to what has been said, one
of the things - taught among us is this, that the
Word, that is to say, the Son of God, assumed human nature in the womb of
the blessed ever-virgin Mary, so that two
natures, namely the divine and the human, are inseparately joined in the
hypostatic union and they continue forever. So
then one Christ, truly God and truly man, born of the ever-virgin
Mary, truly suffered, was crucified, died, and was buried, in order to reconcile
the Father to us, and to be a sacrifice, not only for the ancient transgression and
the calling to account of the human race, but also for all things
whichsoever are worthy of condemnation which are done by man in transgressing
the law. The same also descended to Hades and truly rose on the third
day, and then He ascended to heaven, sitting at the right hand of the Father, ceaselessly
and endlessly reigning and ruling every creature, and sanctifying those
who believe in Him, sending into their hearts the Holy Spirit, who sets
aright, consoles! and vivifies them, who also shields them against the devil and
the power of sin. The same Christ is going to return manifestly
and gloriously to judge the living and the dead, according to the
Apostles' Creed. Herein are condemned, as in the
previous chapters, the heresies which attack
this article of faith.
In
order that we might attain to the good deeds of Christ, that is, the remission
of sins and justification and eternal life, Christ instituted the
preaching of the Gospel, through which the munificences of the Redeemer
are applied to us. As it is written in the gospel
narrative according
p.
8
to
Luke, in the last chapter, that repentance and the remission of sins for all
nations should be preached in His name. Since all men, as
it has been fore ordained, have clothed themselves with the unhealthy and
unclean nature, and they became sinners from
their father
and mother, and they transgressed
the divine law, and they are able neither to keep His
commandments nor to love God with their whole heart, now the Gospel has
argued sins, and it shows us the Mediator and Redeemer
Christ, and it teaches us about the remission of transgressions.
Since
sins are searched out and discovered by the
Gospel, it is necessary that the terrified and
heart-stricken rely on the promises and believe without ambiguity and
without doubt that we attain to the remission of all sins and are justified
before God freely through Christ, who has become a sacrifice for us and has
propitiated the Father for us. If therefore the Gospel demands repentance, still
that the remission of sins might be certain, it teaches us that it is brought
to us freely and as a gift, that is, not through the worthiness of our
good deed nor through our previous or subsequent right actions. The remission of
sins becomes precarious and uncertain if it
would be esteemed that we attain to it whenever we merit it for previous good
deeds, or when ever the repentance happens to be worthy enough for the
remission of sins.
Since
the anguished and distressed conscience
can find no work which might stand against the wrath of God, for this cause God
offered to us His Son, that He alone may be a
propitiator. Wherefore it is necessary that this honor and glory
of propitiation due and fitting to Christ
alone be assigned in no way to our
works. Thus Paul wrote to the Ephesians: "By grace you are saved through
faith, and this not of yourselves; it is a gift of God not from works,
lest anyone should boast" [Eph. 2:8-9]. And
to the Romans.
P.
9
Wherefore
this is from, faith, that according to grace the promise be certain. Then,when
the conscience hears about the belief in the remission of sins,
it steadfastly and immovably holds that this does
not depend upon our worthiness, but that it is a
charism and a gift of God, given to us through
Christ. This consolation is firm and it is necessary for those who are
exceedingly sorrowful and afflicted at soul on account of sins; and
it agrees with the teachings of the holy Fathers. Thus Ambrose says: "This
is arranged by God, that he who believes in Christ might be saved, who without
work by faith alone attains to the remission of sins."
This
way of speaking about faith shows not only historical knowledge, but it also
signifies trust and assent, assigning to us the promise about the remission of
sins, and justification and eternal life, and this promise belongs to
those who learn by inquiry about Christ. Wherefore in the Apostles' Creed
this article is joined to the historical narrative "I believe in the
remission of sins," which is the chief point of all the others. One would
not fail of the truth in saying that this grace is the end and goal of
the entire historical narrative. Christ suffered and rose on account of this, so
that through Him the remission of sins and eternal life might be given to us.
V
Thus
Christ instituted the ministry of the Gospel, which proclaims repentance and the
remission of sins. The universal preaching is both: for it has argued all
sins of all men, and it promises their remission to all who believe, lest
it be precarious and lest anyone suspect it to be
doubtful or uncertain, but in ordor that all the distressed
and heart-broken should know by the full
knowledge of sins that it is to be believed that they are set free by
grace through Christ, and not through their own satisfaction or worthiness. Thus
consoling ourselves by the promises of the Gospel, and being roused by faith, we
undoubtedly attain to the remission of sins, and at the same time God grants us
the Holy Spirit.
p.
10
Thus through the word of God, and the Sacraments, the Holy Spirit is
present to men and works within those who hearken to and care for the Gospel
teaching and who use the fellowship of the
Sacraments and who encourage themselves by faith. Of a truth Paul says in the
third [chapter] of the Epistle to the Galatians: "that the promise by faith
of Jesus Christ might be given to those who believe" [Gal. 3: 22]. The
same writing to the Corinthians calls the
Gospel the ministry of the Spirit [2 Cor. 3:8]. Writing to the Romans he says:
"faith is from hearing, and hearing is by the word
of God" [Rom. 10:17]. Wherefore being encouraged by faith and being
set free from the troubles and travails of sin
by the Holy Spirit, who is begotten and introduced in
our hearts along with the other virtues, truly we
know the compassionate and philanthropic [God] and
the mercy of God, and we love and fear Him, producing by the spirit trust, eager
expectance of the help of God, invocation of Him
alone, and other [virtues] similar to these.
So teach our theologians, and they
condemn all those who do not teach this faith which alone clearly lays hold of
the remission of sins but who bid consciences to doubt and
to be uncertain, and who say that this doubt about the remission of sins
is not sin, and those who teach that men attain to the remission of sins not
according to grace but according to one's own worthiness, and who do not
say that it is to be believed that they are justified
freely through Christ.
In addition to these, [they condemn} both
the Anabaptists and all others like them who think and
teach that men receive the Holy Spirit by their own preparations and good
deeds separate from and
without
the
external word and the preaching of the Gospel.
Of
what has been said, it is held that this faith needs to be not
ineffective and fruitless, but especially operative and productive. The
believers ought to complete the good works which have been enjoined by God, on
account of the will and command or God; but not
that by them [good works] they might have confidence that they are deemed worthy
or righteousness before God, for the remission of sins
p.
11
and
righteousness is apprehended by faith, as even the very voice of Christ
witnesses, saying: "When you have done all
that is commanded you, say 'we are unprofitable servants'" [Lk. 17:l0}. The
human conscience is not able to set itself pure
from sin and unreproached and guiltless against the
just judgment of God, just as Psalm 142 says: "Enter not into
judgment with thy servant, for before thee shall no living man be
justified."
285
And
John in the first [Epistle] says: “If
we say we do not have sin, we
deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, He is
faithful and just to take away our sins" [1 Jn. 1:8-9].
of
Christ: “The scribes and the Pharisees sat on Moses' seat,” etc. [Mt. 23:2].
For in the Gospel and in the Sacraments the operation
is from the arrangement and command of Christ, even
p.
12
if
they are conveyed to us by evil [ministers].
Thus our teaching condemns the Donatists and others like them, who
falsely teach that it is not right to use the ministry of unholy
[ministers] in the Church, and who suppose that it is useless and
ineffective.
XI.
p.
13
Repentance,
that is, the return of the impious or
sinners to God, consists rightfully of two parts: first is contrition, or
the pains and troubles put in the conscience by
the full knowledge of sins, through which we perceive the wrath of God and we
suffer at heart; we turn away from these sins and we loath them. Just as Joel says
in chapter two: "Rend your hearts, and not your garments, and turn
to the Lord your God" [Joel 2:13]. The other is faith, which is
produced in us by the Gospel or by the absolution,
which believes that through Christ the sins really and
truly are remitted, and which consoles the conscience and frees it once
again from griefs and anguishes.
Concerning faith, Paul teaches, saying:
"Being justified by faith, we have peace with God" [Rom. 5:1]. It is
also necessary that good works follow and succeed upon
these, bearing fruit by repentance.
Here
our [theologians] condemn the Anabaptists, who maintain that those once
justified can not fall away or lose the Holy
Spirit, and they affirm that some can attain to so great integrity
or perfection in this life that it is not possible for them to sin.
Also[our theologians condemn] the Novatians, heretics
who heed the [teachings] of one named Novatus, once a presbyter of the church in
Rome, to whom it seemed that, for those who have
committed a mortal sin after baptism and do
penance again, concession should not be made about their transgressions.
[Our
theologians condemn] those who teach that we have control over the remission of
sins not through faith but through our love and good deed.
Also
rejected are those who say that canonical appointed
satisfactions are necessary for the deliverance from eternal punishments or from
those [the punishments] of the purifying fire.
p.
14
faith
in those who share in them.
Therefore one must use them in such a way that faith, which embraces
the promises manifested and assigned to us
through the Sacra-
ments, might accede.
Therefore they condemn those who speak
falsely about the Sacraments, that rhey justify through the very accomplishment
of the work [ex opere opera to] without faith,
and those who do not teach that faith, which believes in the remission of sins,
to which we attain not from the work itself, but by faith alone, might be
present in the use of the Sacraments.
Concerning
ecclesiastical order, they teach that no one should publicly minister
the Gospel or administer the Sacraments in the Church, unless they
are lawfully called to the service.
Openly speaking the truth,
our [theologians] say
that human traditions for the propitiation of God, for the earning of grace and
satisfaction for sins, are opposed to the Gospel and to the teaching of grace
and faith. Therefore, monastic vows, and
traditions about the distinction of foods
and the distinguishing of days, and
such similar things for the purpose of earning grace and making
satisfaction for transgressions, are in no way useful,
rather it is manifest and indisputable that they
harm the health of the
Gospel and the teaching about salvation.
p.
15
God;
and governing others and rendering just judgments according to imperial laws and
other customs is not to be renounced by Christians. It is also allowed
to correct and to punish evildoers
and the lawless according to the command of the laws. Moreover, [it is
allowed] to wage war, to lead an army, to conduct
business, to buy and sell, to hold
property, to give oaths, if the magistrates bid, to marry and to be married.
They condemn
here, as previously, the Anabaptists, who talk folly
that none of the things mentioned above befit Christians.
Moreover,
[they condemn] the others who teach that evangelical integrity
and perfection lie not in the fear of God and in faith, but in
the renunciation of property, in the giving up of children and wives, and,
briefly speaking, in doing none of the things just now spoken of.
For the Gospel does not speak
about external and temporal things, but about internal and eternal things, and
it proclaims the everlasting righteousness
of the heart: and it dissolves neither governmental nor family affairs, but it
requires that these be kept and preserved,
as things truly appointed by God, and in these it
commands that each one according to his proper calling practice love which
befits Christians and genuine good works.
Wherefore it is proper and necessary that
Christians listen to and obey the magistrates
and maintain the things lawfully ordained by them,
which can be maintained without sin. If
one is not able to do the commands of the magistrates without sinning,
one must obey God rather than men, according to what is
written in the Acts of the Apostles,
chapter five.
In
addition to what has been said, it is also taught among us that in the consummation of the world
Christ will return to judge all
men, and He will raise the dead; He will give eternal life and endless
joy to the pious and elect of men, and He will condemn the impious and the
devils to unceasing and
unabating punishment and
torment in
hell.
Again
in this chapter our [theologians] refute the Anabaptists who assume and
teach that a certain end of
p.
16
punishments
and of condemnation will be set forth for the
devils and condemned men, and they censure those who now disseminate certain
Jewish opinions, especially legends and fooleries,
that, before the resurrection of the dead, the saints
and the godly will rule in the world, while the godless will be utterly
destroyed.
Of
those holding in this way,
rejected are the Pe1agians and all
others who say that without the
Holy Spirit and
grace we are able by our natural powers alone to love God above all
things and to keep His commandments. For if nature can also accomplish
externally apparent works, such as to subdue the hands lest they steal what
is another's or murder, yet it is altogether unable
to make earnest and blameless the interior
impulses and dispositions of the intellect and heart, such
as the fear of God, firm
and unswerving trust in
Him, purity, and forbearance or patience,
and the rest.
they
are beginning to make mention of faith, of which they were formerly quite
silent.
Although
they suppress and do not speak about the doctrine of faith, for the purpose of
leaving consciences wavering and doubtful and
urging men to earn the remission of sins by their
own good deeds, yet they do not teach that by faith alone through Christ
we undoubtedly attain the remission of sins.
Since
the doctrine about faith, which must always be pre-eminent in the Church, has
been neglected until this time, so that no one might deny that nothing at all
was said about righteousness by faith in ecclesiastical
sermons, and since only the false teaching about works prevailed in the
churches, our [theologians] therefore have taught about
faith in this way:
That
through it we attain to the remission of sins, earning this by neither previous
nor subsequent works, but receiving it by the
grace and
mercy of God through Christ, - and that it is to be believed without any doubt that
through Christ we have been justified before God;
that ls, we are accounted just, and in no way might
we appear especially earnest and without reproach by the worthiness of [our own
good deed, and might we accomplish good
works, and Christ, the one Mediator and Propitiator, by whom we have
become partakers of grace and the Father is reconciled again to
us, is set before us by God. Therefore
he who trusts that he earns grace by his own right actions is heedless of and
overlooks the redemption and munificence of Christ the
Saviour, and it is evident that he seeks some
way to God by human works without Christi and this,
while the Redeemer says about Himself: "I am the way, and the truth, and
the life" [Jn. 14:6].
This doctrine about faith is revealed and
observed everywhere in the writings of Paul; such
as in (chapter) two of [the Epistle] to the Ephesians: "For
by grace you are saved by faith, and that not of yourselves; [it is] the gift
p.
19
of
God, not of works, lest any man should boast"
[Eph. 2:8-9]. And in the fourth [chapter] of the
Epistle to the Romans: "therefore [it is] of faith, that [it might be] by
grace; to the end that the promise might be sure" [Rom. 4: 16] . If
we need to be deemed worthy of the re- mission of sins through our own good
deeds, in no way might the conscience be able to
be sure and certain about it. Since we always
find something lacking in our works, it is necessary to doubt about the
remission of transgressions, and therefore
the
promises would be useless, having been founded upon our noble and good deeds.
Lest there be anyone to accuse
us that we contrive some new unfamiliar
interpretation, foreign to the thought of
Paul, let him know that this treatment is not
scarce in additional witnesses from the holy Fathers. For in many books
Augustine advocates grace and righteousness by faith, defending it against the
earning from works. Ambrose is in harmony with these in
many ways and in different places, and in the [book] about the calling of
the nations he teaches and speaks in this way:
"The redemption by the blood of Christ would be set at naught, and the
privilege of human works would submit to the mercy of God, if the justification
by grace were owed to previous good deeds, so that it would not be a gift of the
giver, but a certain earning of the
worker."
If the inexperienced despise this teaching, the pious and crushed
consciences perceive that it furnishes as much consolation as possible to
those who are tempted, that without doubt and
without distinction they are reconciled to God by Christ, and they believe that
they will be freed from the condemnation of their binding transgressions.
They would never be able to be certain and at rest, if
it were necessary that we be justified by the things accomplished by us.
Wherefore already regenerated and doing good deeds, still it is necessary that
we always cleave to the Mediator and Redeemer, and believe
that God is gracious to us and that we are accounted just by Him, not that we
fulfill the law, but we understand that God is propitiated to us through
Christ, through Him and this promise. Therefore,
in the fifth [chapter] of the Epistle to the Romans, Paul writes: “Being
justified by faith, we have peace with God through our
Lord Jesus Christ: by whom also we have access by faith into this grace,” and
the rest [Rom. 5: 1-2] . All the holy Scripture
is full of such very plain words. It is fitting that this whole doctrine
be brought back to a struggle and conflict of
the confused and frightened conscience, lest it
be able to be understood in another way [without this struggle]. Wherefore,
profane and inexperienced men incorrectly know what is needful about it, nothing
other than Christian righteousness, unless they are dreaming about political or
philosophical [righteousness] .
p.
20
Since
it would be necessary for the frightened conscience to
do something, with God judging it, they who despised the doctrine
about faith in Christ are incapable of perceiving the wrath of God and of being
in anguish, and so they flee to works as to some place of refuge, to propitiate
by their own good deeds God who is angered against them, endeavoring to be
deemed worthy of eternal life. Therefore they undertake both the course
of monastic life and certain other practices for earning grace and rendering
satisfaction for sins. Lacking the ability for the conscience to be calm and
firm in these things, they murmured against God, until they entirely despaired
of the end. For this reason it was most necessary that this renewed
teaching about faith in Christ be handed over to the people, lest they
not know what to do. But the exceeding sorrowful and
frightened and broken consciences should
discern that by faith they ought to apprehend consolation, grace, and the
remission of sins, and righteousness.
This also is taught, that the expression "faith" signifies not
only history, such as might be found in the ungodly
and in the devil, but in addition to the knowledge of history it also signifies
the accomplishment of history, namely this article, the remission of sins, that
clearly through Christ we have grace and righteousness, being
set free from the condemnation of sins.
Whoever therefore has trusted that by Christ he
is reconciled to God and that He is gracious to him, he truly knows God
and he knows that He cares about him; once again he loves and calls upon Him,
and, briefly speaking, he does not live without
God, as do the heathen. For neither the demons nor godless men believe this
article, namely the remission of sins, wherefore they hate God as some enemy and
most hostile foe, neither calling upon Him nor expecting anything good
from Him. According to this way, Augustine also advises the readers about the
meaning of faith and teaches that this expression in the holy
Scriptures implies not knowledge such as it might
be allowed for even the ungodly to have, but trust which consoles and
restores the prostrate conscience. This is also
one of the things taught by us:
p.
21
that
it is necessary for us to do good works, not that we might be confident that, we
will earn grace by them, but on account of the will of God. For the remission of
sins and peace of conscience is obtained by faith alone. Since the Holy Spirit
is given us by faith, hearts are renewed by
Him, and they are disposed to do good, as
Ambrose also says that faith is the mother of good free
choice and of just action, and Paul says in the
[Epistle] to the Romans, chapter eight: "For as many as are led by the
Spirit of God, they are the sons of God" [Rom 8:14]. For.
the Holy Spirit accomplishes within us faith and the full knowledge of sin, so
that more and more each day we might fully know how great and how much is the
grace promised to us through Christ, and progressing in faith, we might gain
eternal life and con- solation. The Holy Spirit is working and producing in us
the remaining virtues, enjjoined by God in the Decalogue, namely, fear of God as
befits His sons, love, thanksgiving, invocation, praise, brotherly love,
patience, purity, obedience, and the like. Without the Holy Spirit, human
powers are full of godless passions and desires, and
alone they fall very short of accomplishing the things
good and pleasing to God; but they are subject to the devil, who
becomes master and exercises authority over them, and who drives men taken
captive by him to various sins and to false opinions about
God, and to manifest lawless and evil deeds, as it is possible to
observe for one who wishes in the
lives of the philosophers, who in all earnestness devoted
themselves to decent and noble living, yet they
fell far short, defiled by many manifest and most
shameful sins. For such is the weakness of
men who lack faith and the Holy Spirit and who govern themselves by their own
human powers alone. From these things it is thus clear
and manifest to all that this
doctrine must not be accused of forbidding the doing of good works, but it must
be deemed worthy of the greatest approval since it shows and
discloses how one might do such things. For without faith human nature
can in no way do the works either of the first or of the second commandments of
the Decalogue. Without faith no one calls upon God, no one expects
anything from Him, no one patiently carries the
cross, but he seeks aid and help from men and
he trusts in them. So therefore in the absence of faith and trust
in
p.
22
God,
all fleshly desires and human considerations
reign in the heart. Wherefore Christ Himself says in the
Gospel according to John, chapter 15: "Without me you can do
nothing" [In 15:5]. In the church hymns there is also this:
"Without your divine power and support, nothing
is in man, nothing harmless in human nature."
With that having been said, this is also expressly
taught by us: How things well done might be acceptable to God, not in our
fulfilling the law (for except for Christ no man ever did this), but rather
through doing good works man is reconciled to God, and he is accounted just by
Him through Christ, through whom that which is wretched and defective, which
still abides in all the saints, is locsed from us. Therefore let no one
suppose, albeit he was regenerated, that he is just through his own purity or
in the fulfilling of the law: but let him always stand close to God through
Christ, as Mediator and Redeemer, trusting that on account of Him God is
gracious and favorable to him, and let him know that the things earnestly done
by us lack mercy, and in no way are they sufficient and worthy tor God to accept
them as perfect and non-defective righteousness. To owe us eternal life as to
render payment equivalent to them, but in this they please God, that He is
affectionately and kindly disposed to the man doing good works, becoming
gentle and propitious to him through Christ, each one might assign something
to himself by faith alone. Good works therefore become acceptable to God only in
the believers, according to the teaching of Paul: "Everything that is not
of faith is sin" [Rom 14:23]. For the heart
doubts and is at a loss whether God is propitious, whether He hears those who
invoke [Him], and in the meantime it is hostile and most angry at God, which on
the exterior and in appearance is most noble and worthy of the greatest honor
by the man so disposed and thinking, yet it is abominable to God,
they are sins through the rotten and impure of heart.
Therefore without faith good.works would not be pleasing to God, but the heart
should have peace towards God before, having trusted and considering that God
assists us and is gracious to us, and accounts us just, not because of the
worthiness of the things done by us, but because of grace through Christ. This
then is befitting Christians, and it echoes in our churches - the teaching about
good works.
p.
23
even
the Propitiator Jesus Christ, as is
written in the second [chapter] of the first [Epistle] to Timothy [1 Tim
2:5]. He is the only Savior and
high priest and intercedes for us, according
to what is written in the Epistle to the Romans, chapter eight [Rom
8:34]. He alone is to be invoked who alone promised that He wills to hear our
entreatings. This would be the chosen and
supreme divine worship, according to the Scripture,
in all circumstances and afflictious to
seek and entreat Jesus Christ with the whole heart,
according to the saying in the first of
the Epistles of John, chapter two: "If any man sin, we have an
advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous"
[l Jn 2: l] .
This is nearly the principal content of
the things taught by us, to the exhortation of
consciences desiring it and to the edification of the Church, and to the common
benefit of the believers, just as none of us would choose to risk to lose his
soul by the misuse of the name and word of God, or would wish to entrust to his
children and successors any other religion beside that which accords with the
pure and unmixed Word of God, and the Christ-reverencing truth. Since
this doctrine has been founded upon the Holy Scriptures and
it has nothing discordant with the
orthodoxy of the catholic Church
of Christians, and
it is even in harmony with
the Roman Church, in so far as it is known to us from the ecclesiastical
writers, we do not suppose that it is fitting or seemly
for our opponents to strive against us in the chapters which have been recounted.
Therefore, unfairly and unworthily of Christian
continuous love and harmony, some wish to call those from among our
churches protestant heretics and
to reject them from the catholic Church, commonly reporting them on impiety
about divine things. The dissension is about certain abuses which without
the authority of the Church slipped into it, albeit in these things there is
some dissimilarity, yet it was fitting for the bishops, on account of the
confession of the orthodox doctrine
which we divulged beforehand, to bear our [theologians] tolerably and
philanthropically, since the canons are not so strict that they harshly
and exactly demand the same usages everywhere, and they were never
completely similar in all the churches. Moreover, the old usages are for the
most part preserved by us. For it is a false slander that all the ceremonies and
all the old things in the churches are abolished by us. Since all are discontent
in public and they deem unhappy the things of the
Church because the abuses are despicable and
not slight in the
customs of the usages, it was necessary that there be some correction of
those which could not be kept without loss and harm to the conscience.
p.
24
Articles
in which are recounted the alterations of the abuses.
Since the churches arnong us in all articles of the orthodox
and saving faith agree with the catholic [Church], and since they innovate
nothing and leave behind only certain small abuses, received in time
contrary to the canons, we beg the emperor's majesty to listen kindly to what
has been changed: why the people are not forced to observe those abuses contrary
to conscience: and that in no way he believe those who disparage
us and spread calumnies among the people
against us so that they inflame the dislike of men and popular hatred against
us. In this way and from the beginning some good
men were provoked, and they gave occasion to
this dissension, and now using this same skill they are determined to
heighten and to increase contentions with the
greatest haste. The emperor's majesty will clearly see how much more
bearable are the teachings and more becoming are the
rites and ceremonies among us, than according to the description of those
who bear us ill-will and hate us. No one should affirm that the truth can be
known from the words of the people or from the calumny and
endless talking of enemies. It is most understandable that there is
nothing more useful and contributive for the
preservation of the dignity of ecclesiastical
ceremonies and of reverence among the people than that they be done in a becoming
way and with order in the churches: the
things which have been related will show that this is of the utmost concern
to us.
Concerning
both kinds of Communion, that
is, the entirety of the Lord's Supper.
To
the laity, as they are customarily called, both
kinds, so to speak, that is the Body and the Blood, are
given in the Lord's Supper. For Christ Himself instituted mmunion in this way, and
He announced to all Christians that this is the way to use it, saying according
to Matthew, chapter 26: "Drink of it, all of you" [Mt 26 :27]. In
this saying He expressly speaks about the cup, bidding that all drink of it. Yet
lest there be someone to contrive and to impose on this
saying, insisting that this was
p.
25
only
declared for priests, Paul testifies in the eleventh
[chapter] of the first Epistle to the Corinthians that the whole church in Corinth used both kinds. Even the
ecclesiastical writers narrate that for a long time this custom was
maintained in the Church, and so it is unknown and unestablished by whom
this was ever changed. In different places Cyprian says that both
kinds were given to the people. St. Jerome also affirms the same thing,
where he writes that the priests administer the Eucharist and distribute the
Blood of Christ to the people. Besides these,
even Gelasius, who a very long time ago was archbishop
in Rome, forbade this mystical Supper to
be divided, in distinction two about the consecration, in the chapter having
the Latin heading “comperimus." Not
one canon - may be found enjoining that only one kind be used, and so
yesterday and the day before (they say) this
custom had entered upon the Church unnoticed.
It is not to be contradieted
that every custom opposed to the commands of God ought to be set aside and
rejected, according to the testimony of the same canons, in distinctiion
81, chapter "veritate" and thereafter. Since this usage, concerning
which is is present consideration, agrees with neither Holy Scripture nor
with the ancient canons nor with the precedent of the Church, it
did not seem good to us that those
wishing to use the Lord's Supper according to the institution of Christ should
be forced to do otherwise: contrary to the instruction
of Christ and harmful. to their own conscience.
Because the division of the Lord's Supper is contrary to the ordinance of
Christ, the procession which was the custom before no longer occurs among us.
p.
26
first
that Paul says in writing to the Corinthians:
"To avoid fornication, let each one have his own wife" [1 Cor 7: 2],
and then" it is better to marry than to burn" [1 Cor 7: 9] .
Moreover, when Christ Himself says "All men can not receive this
saying" [Mt 19:11], He shows that not all are suited for the unmarried
life, because God created man and woman for the generating
and begetting of children, as it is written in
the first chapter of Genesis. No one should say that it is the business
of any man to change the creation of God without some special God-given gift of
continence. Wherefore for those who are unsuited for preserving virginity
it is marry, since no human law and no vow should be able to abolish what has
been ordained by God. Thus relying on these reasons, they
among us who have been entrusted with the diaconate
and priesthood of
the Gospel teach that it is
possible
for them to marry. We know that in the ancient Church the priests have been
married. Wherefore Paul also enjoins that a bishop be appointed who is a
husband. In Germany four hundred years ago the priests for the first time were
excluded by force from marriage: thus
discontented against this command, as the archbishop of Mainz endeavored to make
public the decree of the Roman archbishop about
celibacy he scarecely missed being killed by priests who were excessively
hostile to him in a certain uproar
and crowd formed by them. This action was accomplished with such
unfairness that not only marrying in the future was forbidden to priests, but
also earlier and present unions were dissolved
--against all divine and human laws, and against the very canons which had been
made not only by the archbishops (popes], but also by the universally
praised synods.
Of the things said, this also is held, being not
the least of the reasons for marrying: that, as the world grows old,
human nature daily becomes more weak and inclines to
the worthless, one must apply
the mind and be on guard
in every way lest a greater number of evils enter our fatherland Germany and
escape our notice. For the more the things of
nature slip into the more weak and languid, so much the more they are wont to
abound in the knavish and pleasure-seeking.
God has ordained marriage as a certain treatment
and remedy for human weakness. The canons
themselves enjoin that the former strict compliance ought now and then in later
time to be relaxed on account of the weakness of men -- the very
p.
27
thing
which should be most prayed for and desired in
this present affair. It appears that the things of the
Church will be unshepherded and after a short time there will be insufficient
teachers, unless marriage is conceded to the priests.
Since therefore the commandment of God is exposed and it is evident what
was accustomed very long ago in the Church, and
since the licentious life of those living in the
unmarried state engenders most numerous scandals, adultery I say and
other obscenities worthy of retribution by the magistrates, it should not appear
unreasunably amazing to
anyone that those who
prevent marriage use such harshness against nothing else as against the
marriage of priests. God ordains that marriage be honored, and the laws in all
nations keep it in the greatest honor. Now those who are priests, who among the
first should be spared, are punished against the canons with oppressive
retributions because of nothing else than that [they are] not against marriage.
Paul calls the forbidding to marry the teaching of demons, in the fourth
[chapter] of the first [Epistle] to Timothy. This is most easy to under stand,
when the forbidding of marriage is protected with such punishments and
honors.
Just as no human law can
abolish what has been com manded by God, so neither should vows be able to do
this. Wherefore Cyprian also advises women to marry who are not exercising
control and being chaste according to [their] promise. For thus it is
written by him in book one, letter eleven: "If they are neither able nor
willing to persevere, it is better that they marry than that they fall into fire
through their pleasures: let them in no way scandalize their brothers or
sisters." The canons themselves practice a certain leniency towards those
who made their vows before a proper age -- the very thing which was the custom
to occur until the present.
Concerning
the Mass.
They falsely accuse our [theologians], saying
that they have abolished the Mass. Yet among us the Mass occurs with much more
devotion and piety than among our opponents, and the
people frequently are advised about Communion: why and by whom it was instituted,
and how one ought to use it. Namely, for the encouragement of the despondent
conscience, and nearly all the customary ceremonies are
p.
28
preserved,
except where certain German hymns are added to the Latin responses, so that they
contribute to teaching in order that the people learn instruction
about Christianity. For this is the true
purpose of ceremonies, to teach the more simple
men, and through the study of the divine word to arouse some of
those present either to the fear of God or to faith and invocation. Not
only Paul en joins the use of a language known and
understood by the people, but so it is ordered also by humaa law. Among us the
people are accustomed to use Communion in assembly, there being some prepared to
partake of it. This very [participation] by
those who are united is for the increase of piety and of reverence for
ceremonies. For our [theologians] admit no one who is not first examined, and
men are instructed about the dignity and use of the Lord's Supper, how much
encouragement it clearly brings to crushed and
disquieted consciences, in order to teach them to believe in God, and to look
for and to seek all good things from Him alone.
This is the service acceptable to God, and such use of Communion nourishes piety
towards God.
This also is especially manifest, that all religious men were extremely
discontent and publicly objected to the profanation and perversion of the Mass
for profit. For it is not hidden to what extent the misuse of the Mass reaches
in all prayer houses, and what manner of men they are who officiate the Sacrament,
only for the sake of some profit, and how much of those doing this is against
the canons. Paul clearly threatens
those who administer the Eucharist unworthily, saying in
the eleventh [chapter] of the first [Epistle] to the Corinthians: "Whosoever
shall eat this bread and drink [this] cup of the Lord unworthily, shall be
guilty of the Body and Blood of the Lord" [1 Cor 11:27]. Therefore
advised about this sin, our priests ceased from private Masses, nearly all of
them done for no other reason than for profit. The bishops were not
unaware of these abuses; if they had made them known
and in time corrected them, there would now have been less
disagreement. Pretending that they did not see these things, they allowed many
evils and errors to
p.
29
enter
the Church secretly, after a long time now, they are beginning to be discontent,
to inveigh bitterly,
and to deem unhappy the things of the Church because of the
uproars made in it, which took occasion from no other place than from these
abuses, which are so very manifest that they are unbearable
and no longer. tolerable. Wherefore some of the greatest disagreements
arose over the Mass, and the world, heavy laden with so
great! burden of misfortunes and sufferings, seems to suffer punishment
for the profanation of Masses, which we know prevailed in the Church for so long
a time against the disposition of Christ, while
they were silent and quiet towards this -- those bound
to correct and to cure were the ones who turned aside
and were not sound. For it is written in the Decaloque: "The Lord
will not acquit him that takes His name in vain" [Ex 20:7]. Certainly from
the beginning of the world no divine thing appears to be so perverted for
profit as the Mass.
Also this impiety was brought about by those who end lessly increased
private Masses, that by His passion Christ made satisfaction for the
ancient mutilation, that is, for the sin derived
from the first-formed who had already fallen and transgressed the command of God
which is implanted in and transmitted to all men: He instituted the Mass
so that by it there might be offering for our daily transgressions, mortal and
pardonable [venial]. From this false opinion as if from
some root that supposition also is
begotten, that the Mass and ceremony is some
work, which through itself having be8n accomplished [ex opere operato] takes
away the sins ot the living and the dead. Taking occasion from this, some began
to wonder whether une Mass done for all has the same power as those done
singularly. This dispute engendered ths inexpressible
and boundless number of Masses.
Concerning such opinions, our
[theologians] advised those being instructed in
Christian orthodoxy, saying that these are not in harmony with the holy God-inspired
Scrip tures, rather they mutilate the glory of tne suffering of Christ.
For the suffering of Christ was offering and satisfaction not only for the
ancient debt, that is,
the wickedness which is from father and mother, but also for all
remaining
p.
30
sins.
So it is written in the Epistle to the Hebrews,
chapter ten: "We are sanctified through the offering of the body of
Jesus Christ once for all" [Heb 10:10]. And a little later: "For by
one offering He has perfected forever those who are sanctified"
[Heb 10:14]. Still, Scripture teaches that we are sanctified before God by faith
in Christ, believing namely that sins are taken away for us through Christ
alone. If the Mass takes away the sins of the living and the dead, because the
work itself is accomplished (ex
opere operato], it is necessary for us to attain to justification, through the
same work of the Mass, and not by faith -- the very thing which is most hostile
to the Scripture.
Yet Christ bids to do this in
His remembrance. Wherefore Communion was
instituted, so that faith be remembered in those communing of this Sacrament, of
which good deeds it partakes through Christ, and so that it might arouse and en
courage the prostrate and exceedingly sorrowful
conscience. For to remember Christ is nothing other than to have in memory His
munificences and good works, and to think that
they are truly applied and presented to us who
receive [them] through faith. For the remembrance or history is not
sufficient, of which it is possible that Jews and the impious be learned and
mindful. The Mass should therefore be held for this reason, that the Sacrament
might be given to those who have need of encouragement, just as St. Ambrose
said: "Since I always sin, I always ought to take medicine. "
Since the Mass is such a
communion of the Sacrament, one common Mass is said among us, on each of the
feast days, and on other [days], if there are some who wish to make use of
Communion, the Sacrament is given to those requesting it. No one should accuse
us of an innovation because of this custom. For the ancient writers in the
Church, who flourished before Gregory, make no mention of there being a private
Mass, speaking very often about the common [Massl.
Chrysostom says that every day the priest stood at the altar, calling
some to Communion and preventing others.
p.
31
It
is apparent from the ancient canons that some one person officiated, from whom
the remaining presbyters and deacons received the Body of the Lord. The canon
according to Nicea holds in this way: "Let the deacons receive Holy
Communion in order after the presbyters, either from the bishop or from the
presbyter." Paul himself, writing about
Communion, bids that they expect one another, so that there be a cornmon reception
and participation.
Once
the Mass has been established among us on
the example and usage of the Church, by the
Scripture and by the holy Fathers or ecclesiastical
writers, we have been persuaded that this can in no way be rejected,
especially since the ceremonies and usages in usage among us are in public, as
kept similar in general to those used of old; except the number of Masses, which
we lessened bacause of the greatest and manifest abuses of those who derive
profit therefrom. Daily Masses were not held of old in the most populated
churches, as the history called Ecclesiastical
Tripartite shows in book nine, chapter 38, saying again, in Alexandria on the
fourth and sixth day the Scriptures
are read, and the teachers interpret them, and everything happens except the
accustomed offering.
should
bring to frightened and distressed consciences;
and [the people are taught] that God demands
faith, so that we might believe this absolution, just as a certain voice from
heaven heard in our ears, and that this faith which
is in Christ verily attains to the pardon and
remission of sins. For beforehand satisfactions immoderately were extolled
with praises and commended, and no mention was made of faith and of the
good work of Christ and of right- eousness by faith. Wherefore about this part
our churches should in no way be blamed; for our opponents ought not deny that
repentance was treated and explained altogether care fully by our
[theologians].
Concerning confession or
the exposing of sins, they teach that the recounting,
as an enumeration of each
one of the faults, is not necessary, nor should consciences be
burdened with the care of narrating and
of speaking from memory all offences, since he ivulging of all sins is impossible,
according to that [saying] of the psalm: "Who knew his sins?" [Ps
19:12]; and Jeremiah says: "The human heart is evil and unsearchable"
[Jer 17: 9] .
For if no other sins are forgiven except those which are confessed, in no
way should the conscience possibly be without confusion
and free from care, for the greatest number of sins can be neither seen
nor remembered. The ancient writers also testify that the narrating of sins is
not necessary. For in the Decretals Chrysostom is summoned as a witness, where
he says: "I do not tell you to betray yourself publicly, nor to accuse
yourself before others, but I wish that you obey the prophet who says make your
way known before God' [ps 36/37:5]. Confess therefore that you have sinned
before God, who judges truly, with prayer: and divulge your offences not with
your tongue, but with the remembrance of your conscience, etc." The marginal
note about repentance, distinction five, where the chapter reading is "let
him consider [consideret] ," admits that confession is something
human, which is preserved by us for the sake of both the greatest good
deed of the release of sins and also certain other advantages of consciences.
Concerning
the distinction of foods.
p.
33
It
seemed not only to the people, but also to other leaders of the churches, that
the distinction of foods, and other
such like human traditions, were certain works useful for pardoning
our liability to eternal judgment and our punishments. That
the world also held this opinion is evident from the fact that daily some new
ceremonies, new orders, new feasts and fasts were contrived. While the teachers
in the temples demanded these works, as some service necessary for earning
justification, and while with fearful threats
they frightened and terrified consciences, if
they omitted anything, many greatly damaging things resulted within the Church
by this opinion about traditions.
First,
the teaching about grace and righteousness by faith has been obscured, being the
part chosen from the Gospel which is uppermost
and ought especially to practiced in the Church, so that the munificence of
Christ might be fully known, and so hat faith, which believes that sins are remitted
unto us through Christ, and
not through our good and noble deeds whichsoever, might be by far
preferred in honour to works. Wherefore even Paul is as especially earnest as
possible about this main point of the teaching,
separating the law and the traditions from it, in order to show that Christian
righteousness is something other than such kind of works: namely faith, which
believes that sins are freely remitted unto us
through Christ. This teaching of Paul was almost entirely hidden, and
was forgotten, by the prevailing false teaching
of human precepts, the impiety of which
holds that we need the distinction of foods and other such services to
be worthy of the pardon and forgiveness of sins and to attain
justification. In repentance entirely nothing is said about faith, but only
about enfeebled works of satisfaction, in which all of repentance seems to lie and
to subsist. Moreover, these traditions obscured the commandments of God,
having been made of more consequence than the precepts of God, so that all of
Christianity seems to be nothing other than some observance of stated feasts,
ceremonies,
p.
34,
fasts
and clothing. These observances were honored with most glorious titles, being
named the spiritual life, the perfect life, in the meantime leading into
dishonor the things commanded by God. That the husband rears children, that the
wife bears them, and that the magestrate governs, are considered to be something
worldly and imperfect and very much less than
those brilliant and illustrious works
of perfection. This error especially rendered pious and
devout consciences very sad, indescribably
sorrowful and discontented by the leading of an imperfect life, such as
in marriages, in political and other such civil appointments, and admiring those
men who lead the monastic and eremitic life,
namely the monks, and others like them, falsely supposing their
observances to be an acquiring of the forgiveness of
sins and of righteousness before God. In addition
to these things which have been said, traditions add great dangers to
consciences. For it was impossible that they all be observed, and yet men
supposed that they were some necessary service. Gerson narrates that many fell
into despair, some slew themselves, perceiving that they could not sufficiently
keep all the traditions, and having heard no consolations about righteousness
from faith or about grace.
Formerly we saw theologians,
and those called summists in
the Roman fashion, collect the traditions and seek some mitigations [έπιεικείας]
for the relief of consciences, but still they did not free them sufficiently
from these snares, and at times they even entrapped [them] all the more. We know
these teachings about the gathering of traditions, and the ecclesiastical
sermons were busied in this way, and they could not put their hands to the occupation
of the holy and God-inspired Scripture and to the seeking of some more
profitable teaching, about faith, about care of
the cross and of patience, about hope, about the
dignity of civil affairs, about the consolation of consciences in most
ter-
p.
35
rible
temptations; wherefore Gerson and some other theologians are very much annoyed,
en- tangled by these quarrels over traditions, that they can not go towards
some better kind of teaching. Augustine also forbids burdening consciences with
such kind of observances, and he prudently warns Januarius that he should know
that they are to .be observed indifferently.
Let no one assume that our [theologians] have put their hands of
these affairs rashly, or out of hatred for bishops, as some falsely suspicious
men, for it was entirely necessary to advise the churches about such impieties,
of which the causes were traditions not correctly understood. For the Gospel
compels us to urge the doctrine about grace and
righteousness from faith, neither of which someone may be able to understand if
he trusts that the remission of sins is
attained through self-chosen observances.
They have therefore taught that no one is freed
of his offences and justified
before God through the observance of human usages. Wherefore it is
binding on no one burdened
by
deceit
to think that such kind of observances are some necessary service.
Our [theologians] believe and fortify the things
said above, placing beside them testimonies
from the holy Scriptures. According to Mattew, chapter 15, Christ defends His
disciples the apostles, who were not keeping the tradition being in usage among
the Jews, albeit it seems to
be not about an unlawful, but some midnle and
indifferent matter, appearing to be akin to the baptismal things enjoined
in the law. For He says: "In vain do they worship me, teaching as doctrines
the precepts of men" [f4t 15: 9] . From which it
is clear that it is a useless and vain
service, that in no way He demands, nor
can it be necessary.
Not 1ong afterwards, He says:
"Not what goes into the mouth defiles a man, but
what comes out of the mouth, this defiles a man" [Mt 15:11]. In the
fourteenth [chapter] of the [Epistle] to the Romans, Paul says: "For the
Kingdom of God is not food and drink [Rom 14:17]. In the second [chapter]
of the [Epistle] to the Colossians: "Let no man therefore judge you in
food, or in drink, or in respect
of a holy day, or of the new moon, or of
the Sabbath days" [Col 2:16].
And again: "Therefore if you died with Christ from the rudiments of
the world, why as though living in the world, are you subject to ordinances:
touch not, taste not, handl not?" [Col 2:20,21].
p.
36
And
in the Acts of the Apostles, Chapter 15: "Why do you tempt God," says
Peter, "by putting a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which meither our
fathers nor we were able to bear, but we believe that by the grace of the Lord
Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even
as they" [Acts 15: 10,11] . In this passage Peter forbids burdening
consciences with many rites, whether of Moses or by any others.
In the first [Epistle] to Timothy chapter
four, Paul calls the prohibition of foods a
doctrine of demons. The passage goes in this way:
"The Spirit speaks expressly, that in latter times
some shall depart seducing spirits and doctrines of demons, speaking
lies in hypocrisy, having their consciences seared, forbidding to marry, (and
commending) to abstain from foods, which God has created to be received with
thanksgiving by those who believe and know the truth" [1 Tim 4:1-3].
For either to enjoin or to do such works, so that through them we might be
deemed worthy of the remission of sins and of justification, and (to
believe] that no one is able to be a Christian without
this service, lies thoroughly opposite to
the staunch teaching of the Gospel.
In this way our opponents venture to accuse our teachers
of the prohibition of discipline and of mortification of the flesh, as
Jovinian did. But the writings and books given
out by our (theologians] will make manifest the opposite. For in these it will
be found that they always taught about the care of
the cross, saving that Christians ought to persevere in afflictions. (The true
and unfeigned and undisguised mortification of the
flesh is that one who is crushed and beaten
by various afflictions and difficulties is chastened
and crucified with Christ.)
Also (they teach] that each one so working hard needs to practice with
discipline for the body and with certain bodily exercises as
to contract the emptiness of passion and desires, lest by satiety
and laziness he be provoked to sin, but in no way that by these excercises might
he be loosed from the condemnation of sins and of
eternal death. It is necessary
that this bodily discipline be exercised, not only on certain
few and stated days, but always. According to
that precept of Christ: "Take heed to yourselves, lest your heart be
weighed down with dissipation and drunkenness"
[Lk 21: 34] . And elsewhere He says: “This kind can not be
p.
37
cast
out, except in prayer and fasting” [11k 9:29]. And in
the ninth [chapter] of the first [Epistle] to the Corinthians Paul says:
"I afflict and subdue my body" [1 Car 9:27]. Distinctly showing
through these that the affliction of the body in no way is the acquiring of the
remission of sins, it is profitable for this, that the body might be attentive
and well-disposed to spiritual things and to the things which are one's duty by
his calling. Thus these fasts are not condemned in themselves, but rather the
laws enjoining certain stated days and stated foods precariously to conscience,
as if such works are necessary for the true and
God-pleasing religion.
Yet many traditions are
preserved affiong us, which are clearly conducive to everything being in order
in the Church: such as, the order of readings in the Mass, and chosen feasts. The
people are taught that such service should
justify no one before God, and that one who neglects them without scandal
does not sin. The holy Fathers were not unaware
of this freedom from fear in human rites. For many of
the churches in the East have been accustomed to celebrate the day of
pascha not at the same time as in Roma, and while the Romans accused the Easterners
of schism, others advised them that it is not necessary that these customs be
the same and be in accord at
all times. Even Irenaeus said: "Discord of fasting does not dissolve
accord of faith." As also in distinction twelve pope Gregory points out
that such dissimilarity inflicts no harm or damage
on the unity of the Church. The ecclesiastical Tripartite History, in book nine,
gathers many examples of dissimilar rites, and declaring
this most useful maxim it says: "The mind of the apostles was
not to establish feast days, but to proclaim good con version and piety."
Concerning
the vows of monks.
p.
38
opposition
to the canons. In the time of Augustine, certain associations and
ways of life were free: then after the corruption of excellent
discipline vows were devised, so that the restoration of it [discipline] and
the correction of customs would occur as if
by some prison of
confined monastic life. With the passage of time a great quantity of some
other human precepts were slowly added to the vows, and against the canons such
fetters were lain on not a few who had not yet attained to the full measure of
age. By some error many also fell into this monastic
and anchoretic and world-departing life, who although they had maturity
still did not know their weakness. So entrapped at the
neck they were compelled to remain in the
monastic life which renounces the association of men, even though they
were able to be freed from it according
to the leniency of the canons. Wherefore it happened more in monasteries of
virgins than in those of monks, [though it would
have been] proper especially to spare the female gender as more feeble by
nature. This rigor and harshness scarcely
pleased many good and upright men in early
times, seeing girls and boys, only they say on
account of subsistence, that is, on account of means of
support, shut up within cenobitic
solitudes and still this design did not prosper. For
the most shameful scandals blossomed therefrom,
and consciences were en tangled with
indissoluble knots. Wherefore, while they
clearly endured it with much difficulty,
those who exercise authority over monastic retreat with so little leniency
advanced too much in cruelty and tyranny, so that in a most
precarious matter not only were they thoughtless of the
Gospel but also they neglected the authority of the canons.
So then the perverse opinion
about vows increased the already mentioned evils, and it was clear beforehand
that it (the perverse opinionj was not pleasing to the more sensible monks: (the
teaching that) monastic vows are clearly equal to baptism, and that through
the monastic and ascetic and patient life the monks are deemed worthy of
the remission of sins and of righteousness before God. They were not
ashamed to attribute to monastic discipline not only that it is a
justification before God and its reward and payment,
but also certain other things more, that it
closely guards not only those things enjoined by God in
the law but also those things counseled in the Gospel. Thus speaking
falsely in this way they misled the people that the leading of monastic life is
something more authorized; that it much surpasses baptism itself, that it
is worthy of greater reward than political, ecclesiastical, and
domestic (life], and briefly speaking,
than
p.
39
all
men whosoever remain and serve in their calling
according to the disposition of God without some self-chosen service. The monks
are able to deny none of these things, which are exposed in the books and
constitutions written by them.
After these things were said, what happened in cenobitic dwellings? Let
us see. Of old they were schools of the holy writings and of other
sciences useful to the Church, and (monasteries] supplied pastors and bishops
for the churches, but now no one is unaware that
in no way is there harmony with these things in them
[monasteries], so that it is superfluous to speak at length about things
wellknown to everyone. of old they gathered to
learn, now this course of life is altered to service of
God and acquiring remission of sins and righteouness, commonly reported
to be a certain order and institution of perfect
work and perfection, and preferred in honour to all other ways of life.
We related these things, exaggerating nothing hatefully, so that our
instructions should be better under stood. First about those who
do not remain in the monastic mode of life, but who marry, it is taught
among us in this way. Marriage is
allowed for all those who are unsuited for the keeping
of virginity. For vows are not able to dissolve
and set aside what has been appointed and enjoined by God. One of God's
commandments is this: On account of immorality, let each one have his own wife
[1 Cor 7:2]. Not only the precept, but also this arrangement and creation of God
compels all of the unyoked [state] to choose
the marital yoke, who have not received from God a certain chosen gift
of living chastely, according to that
saying: “The Lord God said 'it is not good that man be alone'” [Gen
2:18]. Therefore they do not sin, who listen to this command and order of God and
marry.
What should someone have to speak against these things? Let whoever
wishes defend vows, and let him extol their authority
with all his might; still vows can not cancel and set aside what has been ordained by God.
p.
40
chosen,
command of God in vows. Wherefore in no way are the
vows binding which are against the previous proclamation of the divine precepts.
Yet if the knot of vows were entirely indissoluble, it could not nave been
allowed for the archbishops in Rome to dissolve
it. For it is not allowable for any man whosoever to abolish the things of
divine law. Since God enjoined nothing about monastic vows, they
who conceded to their dispensation judged not
unreasonably and entirely sensibly and prudently that such things need
leniency, which was imparted not seldom to those who asked: we recognize
and find these things written of old.
For the story about the king of Aragon is known to
everyone: while he was once a monk, then he was
released from the monastic rule and way
of life: and moreover about some others born later, during our times.
In addition to theee, why do
our adversaries magnify so
much with words and increase the knot, that is, the obligation and
debt of those who made vows, as an effect of the vow,
while keeping the nature of it secret, that the vow must clearly be possible,
voluntary, self-chosen, and deliberate? Who should say whether perpetual
chastity throughout all the life is possible for
man? How great now is the number of those who made vows of their own will and
from deliberation? For they were both misled and
compelled when it was the custom for girls and boys to make vows when they did
not yet know beforehand what was possible in their
life. life. Therefore it is less proper for our adversaries to contend
obstinately about the knot of vows, since it is
not to be contradicted that very
thing not promised readily and deliberately is opposed to the nature of vows.
The greatest number of canons
annuls vows which are made by those who have not yet
advanced to the fifteenth year of age. For one who is younger than this
age does not seem to be resolved on anything about
himself and to be able to choose some direction of his whole life. Another
canon is brought which grants more to human weakness and concedes a greater
age to monks. It forbids the making of vows
before the eighteenth year. But if we follow either this or the aforesaid canon,
the greatest number of those who have left
p.
42
the
anchoretic life, the monasteries, I say,
are without reproach; they will have made their vows generally before the stated
appointed times. Finally even if the violation
of vows should appear worthy of some reproach, still it would not necessarily
follow immediately that the marriage of such persons ought to be
dissolved. For Augustine, who bears the greatest
dignity, does not agree with this opinion.
On the contrary, he is disposed towards the marital yoke of those who
have made vows, and he teaches that it is to be left unbroken,
in question 27 of the first chapter of his Nuptiarum, and the rest. Even if
it seemed otherwise to some of those afterwards.
But if the divine commandment about rnarriage is able to release
and free nearly all from their vows, not less
still because of another reason the [theologians] among us make manifest the uselessness
and invalidity of vows: namely, that every service, intended and
undertaken by men apart from and without the
ordinance of God, for earning the remission of sins and justification, is
impious; our Savior Christ Himself
said: "In vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the
precepts or men" (Mt 15:9]. Paul teaches each time
and continues: one is not to seek
righteousness from our observances or services invented by human reasoning, but
that we attain [to it] by faith, believing that we are reconciled again to God
by Christ, and that He is gracious to us through Him, and not through our noble
and good deeds whichsoever.
It is known and manifest to all that
monks taught that the recompense of self-chosen services is the remission of
offences and justification and that they render satisfaction for transgressions.
What else might we say that such a
false teaching is, if not the overshadowing and the covering with mud of
the glory of Christ, and the denial of righteousness by faith? So then the
usages of vows are impious, as it follows upon what has been said, of
necessity they were made void; for an impious vow, contrary to the
commandments of God, has no power. It is not fitting, certain of the canons
said, that a vow be a fetter of iniquity.
p.
42
Paul
explicitly says, writing
to the Galatians: "You are severed from Christ, whosoever of you are
justified by the law; you are fallen away from grace" [Gal 5:4]. That is,
those who assume to earn the
remission of sins through their doing noble and good deeds, and to be
well-pleasing to God through the fulfillment of the law and
complete obedience, and who do not trust that through Christ they receive
by faith it [remission of sins] freely given from the merciful God and that
through Christ they are acceptable to God, they lose Christ, transferring the
trust in Him and the promises to their good deeds, opposing to the wrath of God
not the Redeemer and Propitiator Christ, but
their own right actions, and assigning the honor due to Christ to their own good
needs. Let no one deny that the monks have taught that their observances earn
the remission of sins and that God is propitiated to them through those
[observances]. Where fore they urged the people
to trust in their own observances and good
deeds, and not in the redemption and
propitiation of Christ. This trust, being impious, fights against the Gospel,
and it will be detected to be vain and useless
at the just judgment of God. For our right actions, whatever
they are, should not endure the wrath of God and His judgment which
is without respecto of persons; but only without works, which we have done,
He who was indescribably angry becomes again
gracious and favorable through Christ to
us who receive in faith the promised grace and
mercy of God. They therefore rob themselves of Christ, and
they cast out grace, as many as apply their trust not to Christ, but to
their own just deeds. This also was one of the things taught falsely
and impiously by the monks, that their ascetical:
life of piety is a state of perfection, namely
that they keep not only the commandments of the law,
but also the evangelical maxims and counsels.
This error is most terrible and especially hostile to the Gospel, and through it
they deceive themselves and others; they testify for
themselves so much integrity and perfection that they are able not only
to
p.
43
keep
all the things commanded by God in the law but
also to do more than these. From this deceit
something else new, ill-named,
and still more horrible took occasion, about the
fellowship and sharing from the abundance of monastic good deeds [opera
supereroga- tionis] . For the monks seem to
themselves to have more than enough of good works, and not to need [them] for
buying of eternal life; they applied to others the
things above measure
superfluous as certain satisfactions for
another's sins. These and so many other things similar
to them, if one at enmity wished to disparage with
words, he would have numberless things
to recount, of which even the monks them selves are now ashamed to
hear.
One must not suppose that it is a contemptible
to deliver to the Church a certain service of God,
contrived by men, without and apart from
divine command, and to teach that such an observance should justify him
who seeks after it. For righteousness of faith
in Christ, which ought especially to be made quite
manifest and to shine in the Church,
is altogether suppressed, when eyes are obscured
by these wondrous observances of angels, and by specious
pretenses of begging, and
of poverty, humility, and chastity.
Besides these things, the
commands and the true service of God are made dim when men hear that the monastic
practice alone is the perfecting of Christian
piety. For Christian
perfection is really this: the undisguised fear of God, and full conviction of
faith, and trust because of Christ who has appeased the
Father for us, and calling upon God, and expectation of help from Him,
in all things which will be accomplished according to each one's calling in
life, with care and eagerness to
complete good works, and with patient industry to
serve in [one's] calling without hesitation. In
these then is Christianity perfected,
and the true service of God well-pleasing to Him is
encompassed, not by chastity or begging, and by some dirty clothing.
There are very many and
very hurtful infamies in tho3e who hear those solemn speeches about
monastic perfection which flow entirely around the
truth. For when the people hear celibacy praised excessively, not without
scandal of conscience do they endure the marriage in
which they have been bound. When they hear that only mendicants have
perfect piety, the conscience is wounded
that they keep possessions and conduct business. Hearing that not to avenge is
one of the evangelical suggestions, and maxims they
go astray by the maxim and are induced by
this error: either
p.
44
as
a private person they avenge, as if vengeance has not been renounced by command,
but only counseled in the evangelical teaching to
abstain from it, or the conduct of government and deeds befitting a
magistrate are deemed un worthy of the deliberately
chosen Christian living.
Some narrated about those who left [their] spouses and civil
administrations and who have shut themselves up in monastic
cages, and this they called solitude, departure
from home, going out of the world, and the seeking of some life better
and more pleasing to God; [but] they do not realize that one is to serve
God in the things He enjoins, and not in certain observances contrived by men.
For the good and perfect life is really when one lives according to what God has
enjoined. It is especially necessary to advise
men about this. Before us in former times even Gerson found fault with the monks
about the false opinion concerning perfection, showing that this new and
unaccustomed title is found first at this particular time, [namely]
that this monastic pursuit or discipline is a state of perfection.
Therefore the greatest number
of impious and distorted opinions is associated
with the vows of monks, namely, the earning of
the remission of sins and of justification, the perfection of Christianity, the
keeping not only of the precepts of the law but
also of the evangelical counsels, and what is
more, the communication and
sharing of the good deeds of abundance -- all of which are surely false
and foolish, and they make vows void and useless.
p.
45
give
the kingdoms of the world to somc and to take them from others, and to overcome
these emperors in war and to eject them from sovereignty. Some in the Church who
excelled in piety and learning exposed these injustices which flowed on for many
years. Thus, for the consolation of oppressed consciences, our [theologians]
have been compelled to make clear and to make quite
manifest the distinction of the ecclesiastical power and of the political
sovereignty, teaching that, on account of the
command of God, it is necessary to assign what is due of respect and honor to
each, as the [two] topmost of the beneficences and
munificences of God on earth.
They think in this way: the power of the keys, or the power of the
bishops, is, according to the Gospel, a power or ordinance of God, of preaching
the Gospel about Christ, of remitting and retaining sins, and of managing the
Sacraments. For in this way our Lord Jesus Christ enjoined and sends His disciples,
saying according to John, chapter 20: "As the Father has sent me,
even so I send you" [Jn 20:21].
And a little later: "Receive the Holy
Spirit. Whose sins you forgive, they are forgiven; whose sins you retain, they
are retained" [In 20:22,23]. And in those [words]
according to Mark in the final chapter:
"Going forth into all the world, preach
the Gospel to every creature," etc. [Mk 16:15].
This power is practiced only by teaching, or by pro claiming the
Gospel, and distributing the Sacraments, either to many or to each one,
according to [one's] calling. For not bodily and
temporal, but spiritual and eternal
things are entrusted to those who have received it
[power] from Christ: namely, everlasting righteousness, the Holy Spirit,
eternal life, and things resembling these, to
which no one should be able to attain, unless through the ministry of the Word of
God, and of the Sacraments. As Paul says writing
to the Romans: "The Gospel is the power or God for salvation to
everyone who believes" [Rom 1:16]. Therefore ecclesiastical power is only
of heavenly and everlasting things, and it is
practiced by the ministry of the divine Word; it
does not impede the political power, just as music does
not impede any other art or skill.
For neither the ecclesiastical nor the
p.
46
political
power should pursue the same things. He who conducts civil affairs lays claim not to souls,
but to bodies, and to those things with relation to them, being
disposed to and guarding them, shutting out
violence and force, and correcting with the sword and bodily punishments those
who are disobedient and not persuaded by laws, so that civil justice and
peace are preserved.
In no way, therefore, ought there to be a blending
and commixture of the civil and ecclesiastical power. The ecclesiastical
has its own command, to teach the Gospel and to minister the Sacraments.
Therefore let it not give itself up to meddling [in the affairs] of others. Let
it neither give to one nor take from another kingdoms in the world. Let
it not set aside what has been ordained by law by magistrates; let it not
abolish lawful obedience; let it not disturb law suits of the things
which have been arranged according to the state, of whatever things, or of
contracts. Let it not make laws for those who conduct civil affairs, how they
ought to conduct civil affairs. Just as Christ said: "My kingdom is not of
this world" [Jn 18:36]. And again: "Man,
who made me a judge or divider over you?" [Lk 12:14]. And Paul in the third
[chapter] of the [Epistle] to the Philippians says: "For our citizenship is
in heaven" [Phil 3:20]. And in
the second [Epistle] to the Corinthians, chapter ten: "For the weapons of
our warfare are not carnal, but mighty through God to
the destruction of strongholds, destroying arguments" [2 Cor 10:4].
Our [theologians] therefore distinguish the manner proper to each power,
urging to hold each in honer and to
recognize these gifts of God to be of the greatest good deeds.
If the bishops have any power
of the sword, they do not have this
in so far as they attain to it as bishops, that is to say, from evangelical
injunction, but by some human law given to them by kings or. errors, for
the civil management of their goods. This management is something other than the
ministry of the Gospel.
When there is therefore an
inquiry about the jurisdiction of bishops, it is necessary to mark off the civil
dominion or jurisdiction from the ecclesiastical
power. For
p.
47
according
to the Gospel no civil jurisdiction belongs to
the bishops, as bishops, that is to those who have been entrusted with the
ministry of the Word of God and of the Sacraments. It has been committed to them
only to forgive sins and to examine teachings, and to reject and
to set aside teaching not in accord with the Gospel, and to exclude the profane
and impious, whose impiety is manifest, from ecclesiastical communion,
not by human force, but by word. In these things necessarily and by reason of
divine command the churches ought to obey them. according to that saying
disclosed by Luke: "He who hears you, hears me" [Lk 10:16].
When the bishops teach or enjoin anything against the Gospel, the
churches have the divine command to renounce obeying them. For
it is written according to Matthew seven: "Beware of false
prophets" [Nt 7:15]. And in the [Epistle] to the
Galatians chapter one: "But even if we or
an angel from heaven preach any other gospel to you
than that which we have preached to you, let him be accursed" [Gal
1:8]. And again in the second [Epistle} to the
Corinthians chapter 13: "For we can not do anything against the truth, but
for the truth" [2 Cor 13:8]. And a little later: "The
Lord has given me power to edification, and not to destruction" [2
Cor 13 :10] . Thus even the canons enjoins in [part] two, question seven,
chapter "Priests [Sacerdotes]," and the rest. And in the chapter
"Sheep [Oves]," etc. Also Augustine says against the letter of
Petilian that even the catholic bishops should not be submitted to, if anywhere
they fail from the truth and fall or if they
counsel something against the canonical writings of God.
Even
if the bishops have some other power or jurisdiction,
of giving judgment in matters concerning marriage, or tithes, or some other
things similar to these, they have it by human law, not
by these things having been conferred upon the episcopate by Christ.
Therefore, when the bishops receive
this power from men, and do
not use it properly, necessity is set upon the princes and
magistrates, even if they should not wish, to
administer justice for their subjects so that peace might be preserved.
p.
48
Concerning this question, our
theologians teach that the bishops in no way
have power to arrange or to decree something not
in accord with the Gospel, as in the things which have been pointed out above.
Indeed the canons also teach this, in distinction nine. It is not in accord with
the Scripture to arrange or to demand certain traditions, so that through their
observance men might be deemed worthy of the remission of sins, and make
satisfaction for offences~ for the good deed of Christ
which saves and redeems all men is depreciated and is dishonored, and
His glory is covered with mud, when we endeavor to the earning of the remission
of transgressions and of righteousness through
such observances. It is not unknown that through this estimation and
false teaching traditions have increased boundlessly in the Church, while
in the meantime the teaching about faith and righteousness from it
has been hidden. For the number of feasts and fasts was multiplied daily,
new ceremonies were invented,
certain new honors of the saints were devised, because it appears to those who
contrived such things that they are deemed worthy of the remission of sins,
and having
trusted that these things have foreordained righteousness,
duly and long ago have the canons about repentance become full, the
vestiges of which we still perceive in satisfactions.
p.
49
Many
ecclesiastical writers reason falsely and assume that in the New Testament there
should be some service resembling the Levitical [service], and that the arrangement
of it was entrusted by God to the apostles and bishops. It seems that they were
utterly deceived by the example of the Mosaic Law, and
they entirely strayed from the truth, as if righteousness
according to the New Testament is some external observance, of certain
stated rites, just as righteousness in the law was some external observance of
certain stated rites. As therefore
in the law to eat pork meat was a sin, just so in the New Testament they place
the sinning in foods, in feasts, in garments, ~nd in other such kind of things,
assuming that these things are necessarily yoked with the
righteousness of the New Testament, so that there
is no longer able to be [righteousness] separated from these things.
Whence those burdens of the souls, that
defilements of the consciences are
certain foods, that it is a mortal sin to omit one of
- the canonical hours. That
the faster through fasting attains to the
remission of sins, and that fasts are necessary for the righteousness or the New
Testament, and that the reserved sin can not be forgiven, unless the authority
of he one who reserves it assents; and this, while the canons themselves speak
only about the reservation of account ability.
Who gave this power to the
bishops, who bade them to burden consciences and to impose these traditions on
the churches? There are very manifest and incontestable
testimonies forbidding the establishing of such observances, whether for earning
the remission of sins, or as being necessary for the righteousness of the New
Testament and for salvation.
Paul in the second [chapter]
of the [Epistle] to the Colossians says: "Therefore let no one judge you in
food, or in drink, or in respect of a feast, or of a new moon or of a
Sabbath" [Col 2:16] And again: "If therefore you died with Christ from
the rudiments of the world, why as living in the world are you subject to
ordinances: handle not, taste not, touch not, which are all to perish with the
using, according to the commandments and
doctrines of men? Which things have a pretense of wisdom" [Co12:20-23}.
Just as in the first [chapter) of the Epistle to Titus he expressly forbids
p.
50
human
traditions,
saying in this way: "Not giving heed to
Jewish myths and commandments of men who turn from the truth" [Tit 1:14].
And Christ Himself in Matthew chapter 15 speaks about such service: "Every
plant which my heavenly Father has not planted shall be rooted up" (Mt
15:13]. And about those demanding traditions as
necessary for salvation, thereupon [He says]: "Let them alone; they
are blind leaders of the blind" [Mt 15:14].
If it is in the power of
bishops to burden the churches with innumerable traditions, and to ensnare consciences,
why does Scripture so often forbid that any tradition be invented or obeyed? Why
does it name them the doctrine of demons? Is it that the Holy Spirit interprets
and warns us about these things in vain?
Therefore it is clear that, since the assertion that the injunctions of men as
necessary for true and God-pleasing service or
as certain payments appointed for the remission of sins lies diametrically
opposed to the Gospel, it is not in the power of bishops to enjoin such things:
for it is necessary in the Church to guard the pure teaching
about freedom of Christians and always to know that bondage to the law is not
necessary for righteousness. According to what is written to the Galathians, chapter
five: "Be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage" [Gal
5:1]. This also is necessary: that that foremost before
others and chief point taken out of the
Gospel, the article of the saving and staunch faith,
be retained, [namely] that we receive the remission of sins and righteousness
freely by faith in Christ, not through some stated observances or
services established by men. What ought [we] to understand about the Lord's Day
and other similar rites accustomed in the temples? To these things our [theologians] reply
that it is in the power of bishops and pastors to regulate them, so that
everything in the Church should be in good
order, but not that by them we might be deemed worthy of the remission of
transgressions, or we might render satisfaction for sins. Or
that certain snares might be added to consciences to seem that
these are necessary services, or that they sin who transgress them without
scandal to others. So Paul ordains that women
p.
51
cover
[their] heads in the assembly and that the interpreters be heard in order.
It is proper to keep such
traditions in the Church, for the sake of love and peace, until
no one gives scandal to no one, so that everything occur becomingly and
undisturbedly in the churches, in this way still, lest consciences be
burdened, being led [to believe] that these are necessary for salvation, and
that the transgression of them without others being scandalized is sin. Just as
no one would say that a woman sins through, without scandalizing men, going into
the temple with head uncovered.
Such a one is the observance
of the Lord's Day, and of Pascha, and of Pentecost, and of the remaining
feasts and rites. For they err who esteem that the observance of the Lord's Day
in place of the Sabbath was instituted as necessary by the absolute
sway of the Church, since the Scripture agrees that the observation
of the day of the
Sabbath is of indifferent and neutral things, and teaches that Mosaic
ceremonies, after the revelation of the Gospel
ought not be kept of necessity. Because it
was necessary to choose some stated day so that the people might know when it
should be necessary to assemble, it is fitting that the Church chose the Lord's
Day for this necessity, and because of
this to choose in addition the remaining days,
that there might be a proof to men of Christian freedom; and that they might
know that the observation neither of the [day] of the Sabbath nor of any other
day is necessary.
Certain marvelous disputes
are exposed about the transformation of the law, about ceremonies of the new
law, about the transposition of the Sabbath, all budding from that false opinion
that there ought to be some service in the Church like the Levitical [service],
and that it was entrusted by Christ to the apostles and bishops to discover
certain ceremonies necessary for salvation. These faults entered secretly into
the Church, when the righteousness from faith was not taught clearly as it
should. Some affirm confidently that the observance of the Lord's Day is not of
the divine law, but still most near to it, and
as of the divine law, and they prescribe about feasts how much it
should be permitted to work. What else should someone say chat these foolish
talks are, if not traps and
p.
52
snares
of consciences? For even if they under take to mitigate certain traditions,
still nothing equitable should ever be found, while the false idea about
necessity remains, that it remains necessary, while the righteousness by faith
and the freedom of Christians is not known.
The apostles bade to abstain from
what is strangled and from blood. But who now observes this
tradition?
- Yet one says says that those who do
not observe it do not sin, because the apostles themselves did no t wish to
burden consciences with such bondage, but they forbade for a time, because of
scandal to the Jews still weak in faith. For
it is necessary that the mind of the apostles and the things taught elsewhere by
hem be compared with this prohibition. Nearly no one of the canons is
kept carefully and strictly, and many day
by day become obsolete and forgotten, even by
those who are exceedingly fond of traditions, and it is impossible to counsel
consciences, unless this equity is maintained, so that men know that they are
kept without necessity, and that the abolition of
traditions inflicts no damage on the conscience.
It might not
be difficult for the bishops to retain the obedience due to them from
their subjects if they do not compel them
to keep those traditions, which it is impracticable and
impossible to keep without damage of conscience. Now they enjoin
unmarried living on the ministers of the churches, and
they entrust the
ministry to no one except those who swear
not to teach the pure and unmixed doctrine of
the Gospel. The churches do not seek that the bishops restore the
bond of concord by being fined of their honor and
dignity, which still was binding that good and
Christ-reverencing pastors do, but only that they might lighten
the unjust burdens, which are new, and against the accepted custom of the
catholic Church. Perhaps some of the arrangements at first were intended because
of certain mentionable reasons, but not adapted for later times: and it is clear
that not a few of them were received which were then
led into error.
p.
53
Therefore
it is fitting for the leniency of
the archbishop in Rome to temper them, since such a change in no way relaxes the
unity of the Church, since even the canons themselves show that many traditions
have been changed in time. If the
bishops do not wish to agree to slacken those observances, which no one is able
to keep without sin, necessity is lain upon our [theologians] to follow the
apostolic canon which says: one ought to obey God rather than men. Peter forbids
the bishops to have dominion over the clergy: now this is not to be sought, that
sovereignty ought to be taken away from the bishops. But that only, that they
agree, that the Gospel be taught unmixedly and
purely, and to relax some few traditions, wn~ch they who C~ not wish to sin are
unable to keep. If they wish to agree to nothing altogether, let them consider,
what reason they are going to give at some time to God, exciting schisms by
their stubbornness and hardness of heart.
The
end.